JfQ;^;^OyvdBlg TapchiKHOAHOC & CONG NGHE I ^ " w ^ ^ " ™ '''' '''' L A N G U A G E L E A R N I N G S T O A T E G Y U S E S 152(07/2) 171 177 AN O V E R V I E W ABSTRACT ^ Z '''' n ; '''' i S l '''' " i ; t '''' l T „ ™[.]
JfQ;^;^OyvdBlg I ^ " w ^ ^ " ™ ' ' AN O V E R V I E W TapchiKHOAHOC & CONG NGHE 152(07/2): 171 - 177 L A N G U A G E LEARNING S T O A T E G Y USES: ABSTRACT ^ Z ' n ; ' i S l ' " i ; t ' l T „ ™ " t l f ' " " * - " " ' "f " " ^ S e leaming sttalegy (LLS) learning s4.gierTh':nmrfaX;:s^s:t°s:t"^f"zrr'^^^^^^^ discussed whh Uie hope to provide inforT^T™ l ^ language leammg snategy will be which will enhance EnglSiTaTtaE f ™ „ f ° ' ^ * ' ""= "'' ' " S ™ s e learning Sategies language leaming s t t a S t T g i h " i r c l S ^ , : ; ; ? " • , * = ' ' " " ^dcSlandhifof develop ttieir leanung autonomy To Uiis e n i iW^ ™™ f ^ ' ° " ° ™ " successfully and the field of l a n g u a i leammg'^ s n ^ t f g T e s t f t m E o ' " , t ° "7° " " "'^'^ " ' " ^ ' >" ^elatioiisUp between gender, n l j o T ^ r ^ f i T ™ " " " ' ^ " ^ ^ n " " ^ ' ^ ' " " ' " " " ' ^ "•= leanung styles and Uie use of sttategy " ^ « ' proficiency, motivation and ^ g e p r X Z Z i Z Z : " " " ' ' " ™ ' " ^ ' * ' - ^ ^ - ^ ^ ™ v - y ' = « < / , ^ level Of INTRODUCTION Research tesults over ttie past decades have indicated fliat a key reason why many second language leamers fail, while some learners better witti less efTort, lies m various learner attributes such as personality bails educattonal perspectives, motivation, culttnal backgrounds, or language aptittide It is also TOifli mentioning fliat types of sttategies used by diHbiem learners vaiy due to stage of earamg, teacher expectations, general iMmmg styles, degree of awaipness, teachmg methods, text-books iraiovatiou, purpose for ^ m g flie language, and nationality or « W « « y [1] To put it difftrently, a learner's mdmdual feetora can influence which leammg sttategy flie leameis will use for flieir foreign language learning Once wellmanaged, ttiese variables can significantly conttibute to a leamer's success in language leammg Many researchers (e.g [34]- nev m my [35]; [29] and [37]) suggest fli« aiategies of successful language leamers can supply a basis for aidmg language leamers and flie conscious use of language leaming sttategies makes good language leamers • Tel: 0913 'J mS: Email: Udang.cft^Ji^g^ Still wittiii flic field of LLS and gender, some studies show fliat fliere is difference of LLSs use based on ttie gender ([5]; [46]; [35]- [4S]) to such related sttidies, it was found fliat female sttidents reporting all or some of sbi groups of LLSs more fieqoently Uian male m [ I l l ; [12]; [19]; [25]; [46]) However, the oflier smdies prove fliat gender docs not affect Uie use of LLS ([14]; [48]) Alongside the field of LLS, personality of individuals are affecKid Uuough various variables such as culnire ([28]), genetic and environmental factors ([7]), sex differences ([2]) and ethnicity ([13]; [16] and [35]) LANGUAGE LEARNING STRATEGY DEFINITIONS Difficulties in definmg LLS remain even at ttie basic level of tenninology, each mdividual researchers define LLS in different ways such as 'technique', 'tactic' and 'skill' These definitions arc sometimes overlap and conflict to each oflier Just as [31] defines flie tenn as 'behaviours' or actions This means LLS IS observable, whereas [29] argues LLS mvolve bofli behaviours and Uioughts (unobservable) The nattne of what is LLS is also an argument among researchers [36] describes the nattire IA Quang Dung vd Dig Tap chi KHOA HpC & CON&NGH5 of leaming strategies as general and overall v/henhe defines that "strategy is best reserved for general tendencies or " overall characteristics of the approach employed by the language learners, leaving techniques as the term to refer to particular forms of observable leaming behavior" vs'hile [40] argues that LLS is not about general approach of learners He claims that LLS refers "specific actions or techniques" It appears that all these researchers identify language leaming strategies as techniques used to acquire knowledge, gain success and enjoy the leaming ofa second language They are self-controlled, can be general or specific, cognitive or affective Nevertheless, up to date, the definitions are still very ambiguous, broad and lack clarity LANGUAGE LEARNING STRATEGY CLASSIFICATIONS [31] describes language leaming strategies as specific, self-directed steps taken by leamers to enhance their O\TO leamjng She separates strategies into two strategy orientations and six strategies groups; (1) direct leaming orientation, consisting of (a) memory, (b) cognitive, and (c) linguistic deficiency compensation strategy groups, and (2) an indirect leaming orientation, consisting of (a) metacognitive, (b) affective, and (c) social strategy groups There are some other ways of classifying language leaming strategies ([42]; [27]; [17]; [6]) [31] presents three major classes of strategies: (a) metacognitive, (b) cognitive, and (c) socio-affective Language leaming strategies have been classified as (a) meta-cognitive, cognitive, or socio-affective (eg- [2]; [9]; [27]) or (b) direct or indirect (e.g., [31]; [27]) However, all these classifications have some notions in common as follows: (i) Meta-cognitive strategies are those which "involve thinking about the leaming process, planning for leaming, monitoring of leaming while it is taking place, and self-evaluation of leaming after the leaming activity" [40] -•2 IS2(Q7/2): 171 - 17^1 (ii) "Co^itive strategies invol^ manipulation of transformation of material to be learned; in otiier wortls,* \ leamer interacts directly with what is to I leamed" [40] (iii) 'Affective' means "of the fMlinsL^ emotional" and affective leaming utVol^^ attitudes, values and behaviours, while social behaviour involves two-way interac&tffil between two or more people Socio-affeetive strategies are behaviours employed so fliati social interaction and the leamer's affe