Research on Second Language Learning Strategies

THE ROLE OF THE LANGUAGE LEARNER

Annual Review of Applied Linguistics (1993) 13, 175-187. Printed in the USA.Copyright © 1993 Cambridge University Press 0267-1905/93 $5.00 + .00

RESEARCH ON SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING STRATEGIES

Rebecca L. Oxford

INTRODUCTION

Second language (L2) learning strategies are specific actions, behaviors,steps, or techniques that students employ—often consciously—to improve theirown progress in internalizing, storing, retrieving, and using the L2 (Oxford1990b, after Rigney 1978). Strategies are the tools for active, self-directedinvolvement that is necessary for developing L2 communicative ability (O'Malleyand Chamot 1990, Wenden 1991, Wenden and Rubin 1987). Hundreds of L2learning strategies exist and many are well recognized and used regularly bystudents. In a given class of students, for example, Lazl(5 will seek outconversation partners. like will group words to be learned and then label eachgroup. Marijke will give herself encouragement through positive self-talk beforegetting up to give a speech in the target language. Ahmed will use gestures tocommunicate in the classroom when the words do not come to mind. Mai Qi willlearn words by breaking them down into their components. Asraf will draw"semantic maps" with lines and arrows pictorially showing the linkages betweennew words according to their meanings. Omneya will find an American pen pal.Tomas will consciously use guessing while reading as many books as he can inthe second language. L2 learning strategies like these are very important, andresearch has repeatedly shown that the conscious, "tailored" use of thesestrategies is related to language achievement and proficiency.

In order to provide an overview of the various issues associated withsecond language learning strategies, this article surveys a number of importantresearch studies. It also examines existing research findings outside of thelanguage instruction field. Finally, it explores the implications of currentresearch both in terms of instruction and future research needs. Because of spacelimitations, this article does not describe individual studies in detail. For moredetailed information, see Cohen (1990), Galloway and Labarca (1991), O'Malley

175

176 REBECCA L. OXFORD

and Chamot (1990), Oxford and Crookall (1989), Skehan (1989), and Wendenand Rubin (1987).

INVESTIGATING L2 LEARNING STRATEGIES

Techniques often used for assessing students' L2 strategies includeinformal observation, formal observational rating scales, informal or formalinterviews, group discussions, think-aloud procedures, language learning diaries,dialogue journals between student and teacher, open-ended narrative-type surveys,and structured surveys of strategy frequency. Each of these techniques hasstrengths and weaknesses.

Observational methods—while useful for certain obvious kinds oflearning strategies like asking questions or working with others—are sometimesdifficult. Many L2 learning strategies, such as analyzing or reasoning, areinternal operations and are not open to external observation. Informal and formalinterviews and group discussions are often employed because they offer aninterpersonal touch. They also allow for "probing" important strategies that arisewhile students discuss their typical learning behavior; yet these techniquesproduce results that are sometimes hard to summarize objectively. Think-aloudprocedures are a kind of oral interview encouraging the student to report veryspecifically what he or she is doing while a given learning task is underway. Anabundance of accurate detail is produced, but these procedures are costly andtime-consuming. Language learning diaries are increasingly employed becausethey let students report their own strategies freely in their own words. Diaries,however, are so individualized that they usually do not allow the teacher orresearcher to make a clear summary of group behaviors. Dialogue journals aresomewhat similar to language learning diaries but include a substantive responsefrom the teacher, thus turning a diary-type monologue into a dialogue. Open-ended strategy surveys allow the same freedom of expression offered by diariesand dialogue journals but (also like diaries and journals) do not lend themselves tostatistical analysis of groups. Structured strategy surveys do not leave muchroom for the individual's creative responses. However, they are very useful forstatistical treatment and group summaries.

Most of these assessment techniques involve some type of learner self-report, either retrospectively (asking the learner to look back at strategies used) orconcurrently (asking the learner to comment on strategies while actually doing alanguage task). Thus, much of the research on language learning strategiesdepends on learners' willingness and ability to describe their internal behaviors,both cognitive and affective/emotional (Galloway and Labarca 1991, Harlow1988). This situation has led some people to question learning strategy researchbecause of possible reliability problems in self-reporting. Nevertheless, byconducting studies with clear instructions in nonthreatening circumstances—especially when course grades will not be influenced—investigators have found

RESEARCH ON SECOND LANGUAGE LEARNING STRATEGIES 177

that most L2 learners can identify and report their learning strategies accurately(Chamot and Kupper 1989, O'Malley and Chamot 1990, Oxford and Crookall1989).

FINDINGS OF RELEVANT STRATEGY RESEARCH OUTSIDE OF THE L2FIELD

Strategy investigations outside of the L2 field have shown that effectivelearners actively associate new information with existing information in long-termmemory. Such a process of association builds increasingly intricate and differen-tiated mental structures or schemata. The use of well-chosen strategies whichcontribute to schematic development distinguishes experts from novices in manylearning areas.

At a more specific level of analysis, it is possible to distinguish amongdifferent types of strategies which assist learning. According to research,successful learners often use metacognitive (i.e., "beyond the cognitive")strategies such as organizing, evaluating, and planning their learning. Use ofthese behaviors—along with cognitive strategies like analyzing, reasoning,transferring information, taking notes, and summarizing—might be consideredpart of any definition of truly effective learning (Brown, Bransford, Ferrara andCampione 1983). Additionally, competent learners often use compensationstrategies such as guessing or inferencing, and memory strategies like groupingand structured reviewing—all of which have been included as cognitive strategiesby most researchers. (But Oxford 1990b notes that these strategies have theirown special functions.)

Strategy research outside of the L2 field has also studied the emotionaland social side of learning. To date, results have shown that some of the bestlearners use affective and social strategies to control their emotional state, to keepthemselves motivated and on-task, and to get help when they need it (Dansereau1985, McCombs 1982; 1988). Yet many students are largely unaware of thepotential of affective and social strategies. In addition, strategy training studiesoutside of the L2 area—like those in the L2 field—have shown that the mosteffective training approaches are explicit rather than implicit; that is, learnersare told overtly that a particular behavior or strategy is likely to be helpful.Moreover, effective training shows learners how to use a particular strategy andhow to transfer it to new situations.


RESULTS OF RESEARCH ON L2 LEARNING STRATEGIES

1. Good language learners

Early researchers tended to make lists of strategies and other featurespresumed to be essential for all "good L2 learners." For instance, Rubin (1975)offered the following list of characteristics of such learners:

1. they are willing and accurate guessers;2. they have a strong drive to communicate;3. they are often uninhibited and willing to make mistakes;4. they focus on form by looking for patterns and analyzing;5. they take advantage of all practice opportunities;6. they monitor their own speech and that of others;7. they pay attention to meaning.

These characteristics have generally been validated by subsequent research exceptfor the "uninhibited" aspect. Because of language anxiety, many potentiallyexcellent L2 learners are naturally inhibited rather than uninhibited; they combatinhibition by using positive-self talk, by extensive use of practicing in private,and by putting themselves in situations where they have to participate communica-tively (Horwitz and Young 1990).

Much like Rubin's study, Naiman, Frohlich and Todesco (1975) alsodeveloped a list of strategies used by good L2 learners. Their list added thenotions that good learners learn to think in the language and attend to the affec-tive aspects of language learning. Stern (1975) also offered an alternative set ofstrategies of good L2 learners; this set was followed by a revised list in 1983.

2. Effectiveness and orchestration of L2 learning strategies

L2 research has supported the effectiveness of using learning strategiesand has shown that successful language learners often use strategies in an orches-trated fashion. The most general finding is that the use of appropriate languagelearning strategies leads to improved proficiency or achievement overall or inspecific skill areas (see Chamot and Kupper 1989, Cohen 1990, O'Malley andChamot 1990, Oxford and Crookall 1989, Oxford, Park-Oh, Ito and Sumrallforthcoming, Wenden and Rubin 1987). A second major finding is that successfullanguage learners in general use more and better learning strategies than dopoorer learners. This result has appeared consistently in L2 learning strategystudies (Hosenfeld 1977, Naiman, Frohlich and Todesco 1975, Papalia andZampogna 1977, Ramirez 1986, Rubin 1975, Stern 1983, Tyacke andMendelsohn 1986). A third finding is that good learners are able to combineeffective strategies. Successful language learners tend to select strategies thatwork well together in a highly orchestrated way, tailored to the requirements of


the language task (Chamot and Kupper 1989, Vann and Abraham 1989). Theselearners can rather easily explain the strategies they use and the reasons why theyemploy them, as documented in diary studies by Lavine and Oxford (1990) and inthink-aloud procedures reported by O'Malley and Chamot (1990). A fourthconsistent finding is that cognitive strategies (e.g., translating, analyzing, takingnotes) and metacognitive strategies (e.g., self-evaluating, planning, organizing)are often used together, supporting each other (Oxford and Crookall 1989).

There has been much less research done on social and affective strategiesin general. This limitation may help explain why social and affective strategiesare far less frequently found. It is also possible that learners are not familiar withpaying attention to their own feelings and social relationships as part of the L2learning process (Oxford 1990b).

3. Less skilled L2 learners

Three distinct points of view exist in studies with respect to strategies ofless effective L2 learners. The first view is that such learners use fewerstrategies than those of more successful learners and that these strategies arehighly restricted as to type (Nyikos 1987). Strategies of less effective learnersoften involve noncommunicative or rather mundane behaviors such as translationwith heavy use of dictionaries, rote memorization, folding papers into columns tocreate vocabulary self-tests, and uncreative forms of repetition. The secondperspective is that less effective L2 learners do not really know what strategiesthey use; they cannot readily describe their strategies (Nyikos 1987). The thirdviewpoint is that many ineffective L2 learners are indeed aware of their strategiesand use just as many as do the more effective learners. The major difference instrategy use is that less skilled learners do not demonstrate the carefulorchestration and creativity shown by more effective learners (Lavine and Oxford1990, Vann and Abraham 1989).

It may be that each of the three findings is true for at least some lesseffective learners. It is likely that L2 learners who are less successful are not alljust alike in their uses of learning strategies. Some of these learners might bevery limited in the number and quality of their strategies, others might beunaware or out of touch, and still others might use large numbers of strategiesthat lack coherence. More research is needed comparing less effective learnerswith their more successful counterparts.

4. Factors influencing the choice of L2 learning strategies

Oxford (1989) synthesizes existing research on factors influencing thechoice of learning strategies among L2 students. The following summaryhighlights the major findings:


• Motivation: More motivated students tend to use more strategies than lessmotivated students, and the particular reason for studying the language(motivational orientation, especially as related to career field) is importantin the choice of strategies (Oxford and Nyikos 1989; see also McGroarty1987, Politzer n.d.).

• Gender: Females report greater strategy use than males in several studies(Green 1991, Oxford and Nyikos 1989, Oxford, Nyikos and Ehrman1988, Oxford, Park-Oh, Ito and Sumrall forthcoming, Politzer 1983).

• Cultural background: Some Asian students use strategies that are differ-ent from those of students from other cultural backgrounds, such asstudents from a Hispanic background (Politzer n.d., Politzer andMcGroarty 1985, Reid 1987, Russo and Stewner-Manzanares 1985).

• Type of task: The nature of the task—conversation vs. letter writing,listening for details vs. listening for the main idea—helps determine thestrategies students naturally employ to do the task (Bialystok 1981,O'Malley and Chamot 1990, Tyacke and Mendelsohn 1986).

• Age and L2 stage: Students of different ages and different stages of L2learning use different strategies; more sophisticated strategies often areemployed by older or more advanced students (Bialystok 1981, Chamot,O'Malley, Kupper and Impink-Hernandez 1987, Politzer 1983, Tyackeand Mendelsohn 1986).

• Learning style: Students' learning styles often determine the choice of L2learning strategies (Ehrman and Oxford 1989, Ely 1989). For example,analytic-style students prefer strategies such as contrastive analysis, rule-learning, and dissecting words and phrases. Globally-oriented studentsuse strategies to find the big picture (guessing, scanning, predicting) andto converse without knowing all the words (paraphrasing, gesturing).Visual students use visually-based strategies like taking notes and writingword groups while auditory students like to work with tapes and practicealoud. Students are sometimes able to stretch beyond their learning styleboundaries to use new strategies unrelated to their style (Ehrman andOxford 1989).

These factors undoubtedly influence the choice of learning strategies. However,another factor—L2 strategy training—can also have a powerful effect.

5. L2 strategy training

Considerable research has accrued on how to improve L2 students'learning strategies. In many L2 investigations, attempts to teach students to uselearning strategies have indeed produced good results. However, not all L2strategy training studies have been uniformly successful or conclusive; in fact, L2strategy training has been effective in certain skill areas but not in others, evenwithin the same study. (For specific details on strategy training or learnertraining, see Chamot and Kupper 1989, Cohen 1990, O'Malley and Chamot


1990, O'Malley, Chamot, Stewner-Manzanares, Kupper and Russo 1985, Oxfordand Crookall 1989, Wenden 1991.)

A careful examination of the research in which strategy training seemedto have little effect often reveals methodological problems that might haveobscured some potentially important findings. Such problems include the follow-ing:

• too short a period for L2 strategy training,• a disproportionate ease or difficulty of the training task,• an overemphasis on the more purely intellectual aspects of language

learning,• a lack of attention to affective and social strategies that are potentially

important to language learning,• a lack of integration of the training into normal language class work and

the perceived irrelevance of the training, and• an inadequate pre-training assessment of learners' current strategy use,

learning styles, and needs.

Less formal L2 strategy training investigations, such as those reported byOxford, Crookall, Cohen, Lavine, Nyikos and Sutter (1990), suggest a morepositive approach to strategy training. These studies have focused on a moreeven balance of cognitive, metacognitive, affective, and social strategies and havedemonstrated how the "whole learner" can be taken into account during learning-strategy training.

Based on L2 strategy training research to date, a number of trainingprinciples can be gleaned, subject to further investigation. First among these isthat L2 strategy training should be based clearly on students' attitudes, beliefs,and stated needs; that is, affective factors need to be accounted for in strategytraining. Similarly, issues like anxiety, motivation, and interests should bedirectly addressed by L2 strategy training. Second, strategies should be chosenso that they mesh with and support each other. These groups of strategies shouldalso fit the requirements of the language task, the learners' goals, and thelearners' styles of learning. Students need to see how strategies can be mutuallysupporting and also serve specific learning goals. Third, strategy training should,if possible, be integrated into regular L2 activities over a long period of time (asemester or a year) rather than taught as a separate, short intervention. Fourth,strategy training should be explicit, overt, and relevant, and it should provideplenty of practice with varied L2 tasks involving authentic materials. Transfer ofstrategies to new contexts is a crucial, but difficult, process. Explicit training,practice, and authentic contexts provide the necessary support for such transfer.Finally, L2 learners should help evaluate the success of the training and the valueof the strategies in multiple tasks. This process raises learner-awareness andimproves motivation to continue effective strategy use.


Obviously more research is essential in the area of L2 strategy training.Another area in which investigation is needed is with the issue of identifying andclassifying learning strategies. On one level, it is important to decide whichstrategies are amenable to training. On another level, it is necessary to sort outthe differing approaches used in research for assessing strategy training. Atpresent, the various research approaches for identifying learning strategies aresomewhat problematic.

6. Problems in classifying strategies

A review of research on learner strategies reveals almost two dozen L2strategy classification systems. These systems can be sorted into the followingfive overall groupings:

1. Systems related to successful language learners such as the typologiescited above by Naiman, et al. (1975), Rubin (1975) and Stern (1975;1983);

2. Systems based on psychological functions such as cognitive, metacog-nitive, and affective (e.g., taxonomies by Carver 1984, Marton 1983,O'Malley and Chamot 1990, Seliger 1982);

3. Linguistically-based strategy systems dealing with inferencing, languagemonitoring, formal practicing, and functional practicing (Bialystok 1978;1981), or with various types of communication strategies like paraphras-ing or borrowing (Tarone 1977; 1983);

4. Systems based largely on particular language skills such as oral produc-tion, vocabulary learning, reading comprehension, or writing (Cohen1990);

5. Systems based on different types of learners such as the style-basedsystem of Sutter (1989) or the strategy-style linkages made by Ehrmanand Oxford (1989; 1990) and Ely (1989).

The existence of these five distinct kinds of strategy typologies indicate a majorproblem in the research on L2 learning strategies. Specifically, these typologiessuggest the lack of a coherent, well accepted system for describing strategies. Forthis reason, results of investigations are sometimes difficult to compare.

IMPLICATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH AND INSTRUCTION

There are a number of issues which will require further investigation iflearning strategy instruction is to fulfill its potential. Some of these issues areprimarily conceptual in nature, requiring new frameworks for contextualizinglearning strategies as well as more effective taxonomies of the strategies them-selves. Other issues involve methods of research and procedures for strategytraining.


L2 learners as whole people. Researchers must reconceptualize L2learning strategies in a way that includes the social and affective sides of learningalong with the more intellectual sides. The L2 learner is not just a cognitive andmetacognitive machine but instead is a.whole person. When strategy trainingoccurs, teachers should help learners develop affective and social strategies aswell as intellectually related strategies.

Classification of L2 strategies. Many questions should be resolved aboutterminology and the classification of language learning strategies. L2 learningstrategy research cannot reach its greatest effectiveness or instructional impact ifresearchers continue to use different and conflicting strategy definitions orconcepts. A more coherent, more understandable system of L2 strategies, ifcommonly accepted by researchers, would also be useful for teachers andadministrators who want to help their students "learn how to learn."

Replication of research. Investigations should be replicated so that moreconsistent information becomes available within and across groups of learners.Particularly important is information on how students from different culturalbackgrounds use language learning strategies. L2 teachers need to feel confidentthat the research is applicable to their students, and this can only be assuredthrough adequate replications.

More studies on how students choose strategies and on strategy training.Increased research would be helpful on factors that affect strategy choice as wellas on the effectiveness of different types of strategy training. This whole realmof investigation is open to further study although some tentative conclusions havealready been suggested.

Teacher training about how to identify and improve students' strategies.Given that researchers have already discovered useful information about learningstrategies, this information must be made available to L2 teachers in the mostattractive and most understandable way possible. Teachers must have appropriatetraining (relevant to their own instructional situations—formal, informal,intensive, non-intensive) in three areas: 1) identifying students' current L2learning strategies through surveys, interviews, or other means; 2) helpingindividual students to discern which strategies are most relevant to their learningstyles, tasks, and goals; and 3) aiding students in developing orchestrated strategyuse rather than following a scattered approach.

SUMMARY

This article has focused on research in L2 learning strategies. It firstreviewed relevant research outside the L2 field that can influence investigations ofhow students learn new languages. The findings of this research were thensupported and extended by strategy research within the L2 field. Specific


discussions of L2 research included studies of the good language learners,strategy effectiveness and the orchestration of learning strategies, the performanceof less successful language learners, factors influencing strategy choice, issues instrategy training, and difficulties in classifying strategies. Further research andinstruction should provide additional insights into L2 learning strategies. Whilethere are many unanswered questions involving learning strategies, the on-goingresearch and increasing interest in strategy training point to exciting researchdirections for the future.

UNANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bialystok, E. 1978. A theoretical model of second language learning. LanguageLearning. 28.69-83.

1981. The role of conscious strategies in second language profi-ciency. Modern Language Journal. 65.24-35.

Brown, A. L., J. D. Bransford, R. A. Ferrara and J. C. Campione. 1983.Learning, remembering, and understanding. In J. H. Flavell and E. M.Markham (eds.) Carmichael's Manual of Child Psychology, Volume 3.New York: John Wiley. 77-166.

Carver, D. 1984. Plans, learner strategies, and self-direction in language learn-ing. System. 12.123-133.

Chamot A. U. and L. Kupper. 1989. Learning strategies in foreign languageinstruction. Foreign Language Annals. 22.13-24.

, J. M. O'Malley, L. Kupper and M. Impink-Hernandez. 1987. Astudy of learning strategies in foreign language instruction: First yearreport. Arlington, VA: InterAmerica Research Associates.

Cohen, A. D. 1990. Language learning: Insights for learners, teachers, andresearchers. New York: Newbury House.

Dansereau, D. 1985. Learning strategy research. In J. W. Segal, S. F. Chipmanand R. C. Glaser (eds.) Thinking and learning skills: Relating learning tobasic research. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. 209-240.

Ehrman, M. E. and R. L. Oxford. 1989. Effects of sex differences, careerchoice, and psychological type on adult language learning strategies.Modern Language Journal. 73.1 -13.

1990. Adult language learning styles andstrategies in an intensive training setting. Modern Language Journal.74.311-327.

Ely, C. 1989. Tolerance of ambiguity and use of second language learningstrategies. Foreign Language Annals. 22.437-445.

Galloway, V. and A. Labarca. 1991. From student to learner: Style, process, andstrategy. In D. W. Birchbichler (ed.) New perspectives and new direc-


tions in foreign language education. Lincolnwood, IL: National TextbookCo. and the American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages.111-158.

Green, J. 1991. Language learning strategies of Puerto Rican university students.Paper presented at the annual meeting of Puerto Rico Teachers of Englishto Speakers of Other Languages. San Juan, PR, November 1991.

Harlow, L. 1988. The effects of the yellow highlighter—Second-language learnerstrategies and their effectiveness: A research update. Canadian ModernLanguage Review. 45.91-102.

Horwitz, E. K. and D. J. Young. 1990. Language anxiety: From theory andresearch to classroom practice. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Hosenfeld, C. 1977. A preliminary investigation of the reading strategies ofsuccessful and unsuccessful second language learners. System. 5.116-123.

Lavine, R. A. and R. L. Oxford. 1990. Language learning diaries: Let thelearners tell us. Paper presented at the 24th Annual TESOL Convention.San Francisco, CA, March 1990.

Marton, W. 1983. Second language acquisition tactics and language pedagogy.System. 11.313-323.

McCombs, B. L. 1982. Enhancing student motivation through positive self-control strategies. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the AmericanPsychological Association. Washington, DC, April 1982.

1988. Motivational skills training: Combining metacognitive,cognitive, and affective learning strategies. In C. Weinstein, E. T. Goetzand P. A. Alexander (eds.) Learning and study strategies: Issues inassessment, instruction, and evaluation. New York: Academic Press.141-169.

McGroarty, M. 1987. Patterns of persistent second language learners: ElementarySpanish. Paper presented at the 21st Annual TESOL Convention. Miami,FL, April 1987.

Naiman, N., M. Frohlich and A. Todesco. 1975. The good second languagelearner. TESL Talk. 6.58-75.

Nyikos, M. 1987. The effect of color and imagery as mnemonic strategies onlearning and retention of lexical items in German. West Lafayette, IN:Purdue University. Ph.D. diss.

O'Malley, J. M. and A. U. Chamot. 1990. Learning strategies in secondlanguage acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

, G. Stewner-Manzanares, L. Kupper and R.Russo. 1985. Learning strategies used by beginning and intermediate ESLstudents. Language Learning. 33.21-46.

Oxford, R. L. 1989. Use of language learning strategies: A synthesis of studieswith implications for strategy training. System. 11.235-241.

1990a. Language learning strategies and beyond: A look at strate-gies in the context of styles. In S. S. Magnan (ed.) Shifting the instruc-tional focus to the learner. Middlebury, VT: Northeast Conference on theTeaching of Foreign Languages. 35-55.


Oxford, R. L. 1990b. Language learning strategies: What every teacher shouldknow. New York: Newbury House.

and D. Crookall. 1989. Research on language learning strategies:Methods, findings, and instructional issues. Modern Language Journal.73.404-419.

, A. D. Cohen, R. Z. Lavine, M. Nyikos and W.Sutter. 1990. Strategy training for language learners: Six situational casestudies and a training model. Foreign Language Annals. 23.197-216.

, M. E. Ehrman, and R. Z. Lavine. 1991. Style wars: Teacher-student style conflicts in the language classroom. In S. S. Magnan (ed.)Challenges in the 1990s for college foreign language programs. Boston,MA: Heinle & Heinle. 1-25.

and M. Nyikos. 1989. Variables affecting choice of languagelearning strategies: A pilot study. Modern Language Journal.73.291-300.

and M. E. Ehrman. 1988. Vive la difference?Reflections on sex differences in use of language learning strategies.Foreign Language Annals. 21.321-329.

, Y. Park-Oh, S. Ito and M. Sumrall. Forthcoming. Learning alanguage by satellite: What influences student achievement? System. 21.1.

Papalia, A. and J. Zampogna. 1977. Strategies used by foreign language studentsin deriving meaning from a written text and in learning vocabulary.Language Association Bulletin. 7-8.

Politzer, R. n.d. Motivation, language learning behavior, and achievement in anintensive ESL course. Stanford, CA: Stanford University. Unpublishedmanuscript.

1983. An exploratory study of self-reported language learningbehaviors and their relation to achievement. Studies in Second LanguageAcquisition. 6.54-65.

and M. McGroarty. 1985. An exploratory study of learning behav-iors and their relationship to gains in linguistic and communicativecompetence. TESOL Quarterly. 19.103-124.

Ramirez, A. G. 1986. Language learning strategies used by adolescents studyingFrench in New York schools. Foreign Language Annals. 19.131-141.

Reid, J. 1987. The learning style preferences of ESL students. TESOL Quarterly.21.87-111.

Rigney, J. W. 1978. Learning strategies: A theoretical perspective. In H. F.O'Neil, Jr. (ed.) Learning strategies. New York: Academic Press.165-285.

Rubin, J. 1975. What the "good language learner" can teach us. TESOLQuarterly. 9.41-51.

1981. Study of cognitive processes in second language learning.Applied Linguistics. 1.118-131.

Russo, R. and G. Stewner-Manzanares. 1985. The training and use of learningstrategies for English as a second language in a military context. Paper


presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational ResearchAssociation. Chicago, IL, 198S.

Seliger, H. W. 1982. Strategy and tactic in second language acquisition. Paperpresented at the Summer School of Linguistics. Jyvaskyla, Finland, July1982.

Skehan, P. 1989. Individual differences in second-language learning. London:Edward Arnold.

Stern, H. H. 1975. What can we learn from the good language learner? CanadianModern Language Review. 31.304-318.

1983. Fundamental concepts in language teaching. Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press.

Sutter, W. 1989. Strategies and styles. Aalborg, Denmark: Danish RefugeeCouncil.

Tarone, E. 1977. Conscious communication strategies in inter-language: Aprogress report. In H. D. Brown, C. A. Yorio and R. Crymes (eds.) OnTESOL '77: Teaching and learning ESL. Washington, DC: TESOL.194-203.

1983. Some thoughts on the notion of "communication strategy." InC. Faerch and G. Kasper (eds.) Strategies in interlanguage communica-tion. London: Longman. 61-74.

Tyacke, M. and D. Mendelsohn. 1986. Student needs: Cognitive as well ascommunicative. TESL Canada Journal. 171-183. [Special Issue 1.]

Vann, R. and R. Abraham. 1990. Strategies of unsuccessful language learners.Paper presented at the 24th Annual TESOL Convention. San Francisco,CA, March 1990.

Wenden, A. 1991. Learner strategies for learner autonomy: Planning and imple-menting learner training for language learners. Englewood Cliffs, NJ:Prentice-Hall.

and J. Rubin (eds.) 1987. Learner strategies for language learning.Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Documents

Research on Second Language Learning Strategies