Learner+Strategies

= In answering the question, I think it would be useful to define the term. Oxford (1989), as quoted by Ellis (1994, p. 531), provides a useful and clear definition. She defines them as such, “Language learner strategies are behaviours or actions which learners use to make language learning more successful, self directed, and more enjoyable.” Ellis (1994, p. 530) distinguishes between two types of learning strategy: language learning strategies and skill learning strategies. He cites Tarone as defining language learning strategies as where the learner is dealing with both linguistic and sociolinguistic knowledge about the new language. Skill learning strategies focus on a learner attempting to become a more competent user in the main language skills of listening, speaking, reading, and writing. There are multiple taxonomies of learning strategies and Skehan as quoted by Ellis (1994, p. 535) claims there are three areas in which most overlap. The first relates to the learners own level of engagement in the process. Does the learner show an active approach to learning the new language? The second Ellis calls ‘technical predispositions’, where the learner takes a systematic approach to the task of acquiring a new language. For example, they may make comparisons between L1 and L2, analyze the target language and infer hypotheses about it. The third is centered on the learner’s ability to make evaluations about their own performance. This is akin to monitoring and the learner experiments, makes adjustments, and identifies problem areas. Ellis (1994, p. 536) describes one of the more important and influential learner strategy taxonomies. The first is that of O’Malley and Chamot. They have three broad categories of strategies. The first is cognitive strategies. They are closely tied to the performance of specific learning tasks, and can include such things as repetition where the learner imitates a model of the language, note taking where the learner records new information about the target language, and elaboration where the learner attaches new knowledge to their framework of previously acquired knowledge. The second are meta-cognitive strategies. This involves the learner planning, monitoring, and evaluating their L2 acquisition. For example, the learner may, in what is termed as ‘direct attention’, identify a need to improve their use of a particular verb tense and pay special attention when it is covered in class. Additionally, they may also employ ‘self management’ strategies. This is where the learner has an understanding of what conditions aid acquisition and seeks them out. For instance, the learner may consciously decide not to use the L1 when at school. The third are social affective strategies and looks at how the learner interacts with other learners and native speakers. This may include such things as collaborating in class with other learners in a written composition, or seeking clarification from an instructor or native speaker. Krashen & Brown (2007) discuss strategies that pertain directly to academic English programs such as the one I teach in. They discuss these within the context of ‘academic proficiency’. They maintain that academic proficiency comprises of two main aspects: Knowledge of academic language and knowledge of a specialized subject matter. The former relates to language used at school and in professional situations. This is language of ‘story’ problems in maths, social studies, and science texts. At work, it is the language of business and finance, science, and politics. According to studies, although differences occur in specific areas, many similarities in language exist. In the latter (specialized subject matter), knowledge consists of maths, science, and history etc. Krashen & Brown (2007) explain that academic proficiency comes through competent use of strategies that facilitate the attainment of academic language and academic subject learning.  According to Krashen & Brown (2007), academic proficiency assumes that both the ‘comprehension hypothesis’ and ‘problem solving hypothesis’ are true. The comprehension hypothesis states that language and literacy are not acquired explicitly but implicitly. Accordingly, it is suggested that reading is a powerful medium whether it be heavy or light of comprehensible input which allows for the acquisition of academic language. Those who read do better in all areas of academic language. The problem solving hypothesis states that subject matter is not learnt through study but it is acquired as a result of problem solving. As I specialize in teaching reading and writing I will present Krashen and Brown’s recommended strategies for these two skills. For reading, they initially suggest ‘narrow reading’, where learners read texts by one author or on only a single subject. This they believe allows for better comprehension and repetition of vocabulary and grammar. They do not suggest permanent attachment to this strategy. Readers should broaden their reading as they read more and develop further interests. In addition, readers need to access background knowledge. When students develop background knowledge through such things as discussions, easier readings, video etc it helps make texts more comprehensible. This, they claim, is backed by research that shows that texts that are on familiar topics are more easily comprehended. Krashen and Brown also point out that narrow reading incorporates background knowledge i.e. as students read on one focused topic they build up background knowledge making subsequent texts easier to understand. Where reading strategies relate to the comprehension hypothesis, writing strategies are linked to the problem solving hypothesis. These strategies are aimed at developing ‘expert’ writers and help students keep their place in their work and generate new ideas. Firstly, good writers plan. Plans are flexible and can change upon formulation of new ideas. Additionally, competent writers revise. As they go through new drafts they develop new ideas and find new links among existing ideas. It gives the composer more clarity. Thirdly, students should delay editing. It is better to focus on expression of ideas in the first instance than on form and grammatical correctness. Moreover, good writers re-read. They should stop frequently and review what they have written. Regular daily writing in small amounts is recommended over writing in large blocks. Finally, in what they describe as incubation they suggest short breaks which allows for formulation of new ideas and solutions to problems. Cook (1991, p. 81) implies that when thinking about which strategies learners should use that the decision should be the learner’s and not the teacher’s. It is the learner’s active involvement in the learning process and using strategies that are right for them which aids successful acquisition. In conclusion, in deciding which strategies to introduce to my students I believe it is better to provide a range of strategies. This relates to Cook’s position where he states that ultimately it’s the learner’s choice as to which they employ. Taking individual learner differences into account, I think it would be unwise to prescribe as small set of specific strategies. Language acquisition is mainly directed by the learner themselves and so, they need to make use of strategies that they feel comfortable with. With that in mind, it is important that I, as the teacher, allow them to make an informed choice by designing activities which encourage a range of strategy use. The strategies I have outlined above have been shown to have merit. Therefore I would not hesitate to expose these to my students. In particular, I chose to outline Krashen and Brown strategies as they pertain more specifically to the skills I currently teach. However, the remaining strategies are not to be ignored as they are applicable to SLA in a more general sense.