Transcript
  • 8/2/2019 The Use of Language Learning Strategies: Turkish vs. Iranian EFL Learners

    1/16

  • 8/2/2019 The Use of Language Learning Strategies: Turkish vs. Iranian EFL Learners

    2/16

    The Use of Language Learning,S tr at eg ies : Turk ish vs. Ira nia n E FL

    LearnersI k ll Y G i J ol ll lj u g lulJ:~t>e.rrrM'editermn;;an U~ilJl?l',~#)r,Cypru~inkay,gil l l l l l [email protected]. 'tr

    ~ Ik ay OIJanl l 'Oglu i!l Ac:1q I Ch oW ' (,rth~EL T I lepar l ims.nt , EaJ: ;WInI !. I' ecM er ra n ea n U n iv e JS 'i ly . H I: i ~ s t au g ht E fU E SI P r ou rS (l $. (I 1'he MiCldle' u.S'! T i3d r. n ica l Un r " '9 ' f sl t y , Tui'fl....y..He d id Ills Ph.D.~ a ~lf ed I tll9 uis 1ic s; at Ih ~ lM1!l1ute o r Etfuoal i (}n. Uni'l '8rsi~of l O Ol do n . H is a r: ad Bmt c lintE!Jeet6 InililUd'e It imgLlag9 ~Bar l ' l ln~:Wa~ies, vocabulary IDal'fli~. BAdIlHPguag~a cq ulsillo n_ -...- L--

    SeYi('>dA li o.,Ul'iinii. .Kalaj:alliUni'li'fl'si'ty Putra ,MtI/:aJ'skt, Mamysla~ J L I ' e l V a : l i 1 J i 8 5 -@ gm 1 i i J . .o o r n

    Seyed Al i R ez v :m I K a l a .l a 'h ! I~

  • 8/2/2019 The Use of Language Learning Strategies: Turkish vs. Iranian EFL Learners

    3/16

    ,.. .. _ IUM .HlltlIlIC~ k l " " . . p~ 111L:II I k L ' l hy lh u h mru Cl r (1l1lW! , IHmI". .. I I,hiM 1~Inu I fi ll ~ . U,Yi l hill,!l~lr tlln:~~!:'~I,lInrl' d~I;I,:Uv ""UIIlU ~I rHuiNh'I ',l jh~~h) I!~W "hulllU . D m ~m l l: ! .l ; l ! . :umll l loL1rn~L'IIJ~'lIIllh,' jl,ltj H I I I 1 I 1 I L IiI! iflw'l h t l W :l'cmflll.!~N I I f l I 1 1 " IW : 'l k ! l lor p r o ' b l ~ T f I ~ I:lU:t11l1lh'q d 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ' . 1 , ( ' pll'!.;C!l~lf bllil~lIlll:~ ,'"rlll"_1111 ; 1 purpose g f tl us ~llId~ ' I~ hi 1I1~' tt tat~g;ies(LLS.!l)have emerged mot oa~y3 S i inll~~rul cumponents , ofv,ari01,S t heoret i ca lmodels : of Ja l lgl1]age profieh: l icy (Aill!l~ll1k, I 97 8~ C.m31e ' and! Svva in.1'980; EUjs, 1 9 3 5 ; B~mM . u r a d l~ aln 1e r'. 1 9 96 ) b ut a ls o a s a meanso f achievlng lia_mlllr~tiJ I ! J J l u nO l ' J 1 ,Y In th e precess (IfI ao gn ag e ~ .e aD :W J 'S .(O xf o. rd ! ] 9 9 0~ F ! .~ rw o n : ll in d Vo ll l: r , I ILI'n). N ! .~~rl l ie l.ess.,re.!!earchinlhisarea ha s R l l o W I ! ' thal ' U I I l H [III l 4 ' m I I < L n ~ 1 1 ' 1 & ' L S s in th e same fa sh ien .. A

    "mhl- I ul v U IlIhlcli, I i I II I :hu rrul u:~!.!IU.l)lI~IIIH hl('tl ~ hnwu IH fin!.;..t th e type l I Iu l lroqutM

    u~lultlt,rd~1I htnMUU~~'I~llt'tcr~(O'MnIlI'V Itt ItN~tkp~. It",,:t)'; H rn u nn , [m dO:r.fnnl. lIJt)(I; "mu"MuU, I I ,I hIW~\lr:r,existif1gll::S:ilrd1 on L l 'S: i' l lm" I l (j jl ( lI \ I I I lL, \ ulIlL',lUKrt\h ..tql ,Y i ~~C in seeend lill'lguElge CClTlLol l l f i o , l t il Ih~ 01111.hlm(l. j L:l~1 . !1 l .w~1. ( ' IU 'II I Sfl,~1lI~mostly been cenductcd in A~hl wh.:-n IlIl' t 1IIIIl ' ' !.l ld 1~[I.sI.!~lge'I U t i N 111Ss q i l~te dH f ( ; ; ! 1 . . l n ' [ f rom t h s t o r !iUIIl'l." I ~ lhr I A ~.III~countnes : : ;!.!chM ~hl:C ' o n t e '. ]' ;. t o f ' th i s study. Northern ('YPlu~. M U l 1 l ;u w c : r, ~ ~ g u . ': il @ e

    d ' . 11 . . ' I .. . " . .. .1.001 Y e '! Jn l i i ; o \ m('1~I~lIj I " J u r m l i : ~ r - h n ! i ~ ( f t Wtth l i u l e.. ~ H hi II l J ! , I1fil1g u,~gtl"",,:![I.. .. _ . ~ r'. . _ ,_,_ ".'~I . , ~""'rr...,.,{t.. u se T he re fO re l!1 iv cl[ ]Ith e c~a.mClle:iI:!;ji.M'. es..h'llllnfil pmu ~....! ;L U e - - ~ " " . . . , - _ .1 ; ;1 . _ _ "I lh~ rurk_i~llEFLcon' lext, further roSNI! lC11,m t n t hc ., iL L ~ US~ of~hi~~IIIIII'uf em, k~unlers is needed, 10 is study ~s'~ !it~ U~s ~lrn~t~o~.1IIIIhln,:sflt!S the prob lemth rou .gh a eemprehensive mvt"l;i~(g~b~Iil.f ~e\l~'ahh:s !hat ca best predict theuse ( ! i f LL& bythe 1 f i t d l l l ] d ! J : I a i s m1111 ~j r oup , o f E fL lea rn ers.L nguage learning Strategies,I L' I Iming s~mregies h a ve b ee n definedin venous ways in ~:l : i~ru~:1llllllh~y are connected to several ar:~ of l( ln~ag~ le~mmg,,[n Lhl~_ t : CUOll1 s o m e o f t h e d i f f e r e m d ef in li tRm s, o f l e : i 1 l r o U l i g sb1lte!pes a rchuruduced . PurltlelDlore t some adler impOIItMltapects re~alted lu~l 'utni;~' tr nte gi .~ a re d is eu ss ed in d . eta ill ,T h e se j [! lc lu d ej fo r e x a m p l l . i l .~,.'lLlss:ificatlQn f i~iDg stra tegies a nd th e.ir ro le in I>uc~,}es&(ulLangll i lgCI l l ! l l l l ' l l i , o g - . . . _ . . .Then; a re di.fftren,t d6fi 'n iu~oru ; for]

  • 8/2/2019 The Use of Language Learning Strategies: Turkish vs. Iranian EFL Learners

    4/16

  • 8/2/2019 The Use of Language Learning Strategies: Turkish vs. Iranian EFL Learners

    5/16

    h l k l l l t - ! . u m l ~ l" n lh n . . I"lnlll2. ~t!lW.:uglllh'o'~ IIlr"Il~Mj~1tUldhtlt t ~ 1H1' Il~,,-d I l1 lfUI lHiH,C Ole leu

    process, fbt;lY mehule 1 I I l i : t H IiV I I I " "Iwl~ p n.d !. : r c nC C 5 I .U ld nrooa ,p:~filnni"g. mQni~u.iill~. amll'\'uIIlUllll~ lhr I m r r n i l 1 ! : J pruecss.

    3. Memory~re1!1. lcd ~lJ';b! l~lJ,i!. l-

  • 8/2/2019 The Use of Language Learning Strategies: Turkish vs. Iranian EFL Learners

    6/16

    iiiree tl'~ (liN l ) ('I'" IImln.1')I .hl lt)l III .,11!oIitaJcrlllj lLI I 'liClln ~rrivCr!l',ly : q ;h u w ~ ' d t l ll li (I1l1~Ultt1.IIII~~~Y'tll~WIf1'.,ml'hl"O~"stmteg!c.s. W~1 5 !,l~'Cd(11_u,hi~h r~' lH~' , ",'Idh lilt' oiller Cnl4.l tJ~lr I!>1~used al a m~l'l:il.fn k\l'I;jIWIL~ HUrd i"'L' i111t! IW;Hl1my t:at(Jg,!,ll' i~~~R'lnu.IreDl$~ teqlllerLlly used , i li l l' i .t ie9 lC! I , O!"tl'I'LIIi. 'flU) I)a"icip:nlll~ of Lhill ~ j u d Yl .un l_cd out t @ b e m ed an n slrn tc gy lI!ole!!>.

    Ob (l99~) C o .! ld lN . :: te d ~ . ~tudy w~lh :59 EF- fitudoots !iitmlyin~ 'na Koreaa I1n~""""'"""...".:1 . ; o " ' . n - . . 1 "i. ..n d Il st. " . - _ ~"'''''ILJ """Ill n" .. U 1!di~!II_~l!i::y 1 1 : 0 0 ovc:r,a BtrB:~cslcsn l m ~d u.un I.evet W i 1lh Iespec1;~~)stF.1wgy Ga1~gorie~. (fru,ecl1~y~fmt('1O'ca'tegory~Jt wasused ata mp frequency was metacognj1iV'l.!" wh~t~lt.~CJompe>ns~n~O] ] .f fe ct iv e .and social stra.tegies were 'wiled a~ it! m.cd iumleveland cogn~tiv,e and memory strategies were used at 3J low IC~(. 'I,

    . Anuthe:rstudyrn:vesi l' igatin,g m e mategY l l Se ' nf .KoreMiSiluclcnt)! il lP~rk OSl In) . In his :!lm:dywith Kore!llMluD1V'ernhy sl1'i.idents. he :foIJ il ld thlll: E 1 1 1 ~l Ie,

  • 8/2/2019 The Use of Language Learning Strategies: Turkish vs. Iranian EFL Learners

    7/16

    n n i.:l~~imull'wcd:ll no d v l l lu . .f J : l i L l i l r d , ~ F}I,!U}, h L l I I I .h o l l VlIII1I~llUlhB~' HIT~Cll ' l l ln :d~lh '~ .

    (I!{ e n e's D vem l 1l rk'ihflliJ'Y III)"~. 1 1 1 1 1ti l I I II i ln ~ l! , I l" ip H dCiL!'I ltI I I iC.]earl'iler:;:? tfb@ici;~ 'of U-'S ~ . h J " " Ihl'tl'lll!"(. 1l!.rp(lJ~ !n , rc 'Vh :w h . i c osome ot 't l le s t u c i i > e 8 l h j .J t h j j " "~ ~1llll"lUll'lllllllhoe gcnetflJ ieiMimitig teal l .TI lc f. l ~ ar m e rs f ro . l l1 A s ia ! 1 i C O U Il (r iC H U .' r:wel l n ~ " f u r i. :( ': y tu h Q i J ! ) us d cvc lu .8 .genera] P ' ]C hllre oflhek ~l! ! r ~ L l n dd~ ' l l . . : rcm::eJt

    The Importal1ce of language learningStrategieSFn Language EducationLanguage i : e . a . r n i l 1 g ~tr.aJ legieg ;are good ~ndicalorso f ln o w , le ~ .r tle rNa ,pproach lasb o .r p ro b Jtl: n1 's e nc o un te re d d l.! :r in ,g l iM:lpt 'o(l,ess 01~Mlgl!age]OOir"rlimg.LarJ.giLiI.ageleam:in:g Slr.i:teg~esgJive j~~gc t~lI:lhcrijva ]~ah l ( i clues aheut haw thelr st1..:iI~n1sas[ ieS8th '~8i t li l i l io r .)~ plan,& ( l] eo t a p pw p ria le ! 1ih U s s o a sto u .n d en ;1 a nd , lesrn, Otre;member ncwi npu t p r e se ll re a : m t h e ' la l l .guagt : ; d~s." 'rrJQm. Fed d e r h o l d t (1(98) : s~tedtb

  • 8/2/2019 The Use of Language Learning Strategies: Turkish vs. Iranian EFL Learners

    8/16

    "I\lhl

    -~urkLi!hCypnlnl

    Dato CoUeetioli , In s t ru :men tS~LL (Strategy Innntory lor Language Lea'nUng)L a ns ua ge ~ ea m in g strllegy usc w a s examined in terms nf memo r y .cognitive, compensation, metacognitive, affeotive, and !u)c'ilul~lflllegief1, T h e imurumenl used m.1 th j s s tu d y wa s S ' tr ,;Uegy Inven to r y fo rL a o gW l g eL c a - rn in g ( S IL L ) . SILL que5ltionnaire ESUEFLVe r s i o n 7 .nI ) : ) 1 ; r ord , 1 1 98 9 )m ea su re s th e type ( m em o r y , c o g ni tiv e , c om p en sa n e ,melac;:ngIl!itj--\~f\~ffec-ti:ve. IIDd social) and Rlequlency of strategy PSt,The 'insllillmentconsists of 50 statements. Items #]9 CO:lu::.ern thee I ectiveness of me~ i I l (l zy(m!ml .o ry strategies]; iilterns'# 1 0-23 represent~1 l I , , , I J Is eo f me nt al precessee (cl:l 'gnltive strategies); items #24-29 ar eth e oonl)}en~tio8 f or m is s- lo g k n o w 1e .d g e ( com p en sa tio n Bnategies)~uems #30 ,38 d,eOj/]with . th e o rga niza tio n a mi, evaluat ion o f ]earnmg(metacogr r i1 ive s tra t eg ies ) .; i item.:; #39 -44 concern emotlon Qlamia&' \ lnw,n l( aF fec ti ve s t ra t eg ie s ] : Mid ! i r e - m s #45-50 c once rn . Iearn ing wi l.h otbers(s.oeial. strategies), Stude-nm. answered. eaeh ~tem, statement using a5 -p oin t L ik ert S ca le :th a t m11lged f rom I . (N ~ vu r Of a lmos t n ev er ! :ru eo fm e ) i, h_ f( lu gb5 ( A I- w ay s o r a ,~ m () st. a lways tnle of m e), T h e mternaleons ls teney reliability Cronbaeh's a lp ha is ,0 .9 6 for a . 1200~pt!rnQn! .! niv cr ni: ty s am p ,le a nd 0 .9 5 f or a 483-person milimry !iMtrple. Con l en t\'a b d ity is , 0.9 5 ( O xf o rd . 1(90) ( S ee A p :p en illx A ) ,

    Re ults - _ f 'T ' L S " ~oo [ d i 'f ) ( !tD t i raph"., . ir f h e e x t. cn t o f& 4, ; u s e 0 L - . . . . . . . i : : o T h IH e su l :l 8 c o : ncernm _ , I .le i _ . w ere berter users o f s t l r . , U e g l C ' s ; t han1 ,....,.1~d that Turk lm oodeutlii . - ' h : J ! J; ~M fie" "',,"'" ' . - .' " ,.' . f . .. .. .t..p'V. .... f..ur:hs WQS ,J'Th ""- mean 0 :!l,lita ' '' -~J .,._., . .. .I ran ian s tuden ts . . , eO'ti,cm , I _ 'th -- " "I'''P~b " rod .e l' lW were, _' ~... t .. ... S31d S it I WAlS " . --- . . 'e d with t \ ' l l J S mean , 1 1 1 : _ . iJ v . --, _ . . - . . d - (C om p:a r ... _ I ,.'l ! rm um stud ents w efe me tumhigh ( = usual) strategy lLSers, Wllill e - '._ .' , n . .....,...gy users with : t i l m ea n o f J.41.OCCilSiona . . :! Iu . . ,v., _ . .

    IJo lumE 6, N ot. 1 ~ 7 ,

  • 8/2/2019 The Use of Language Learning Strategies: Turkish vs. Iranian EFL Learners

    9/16

    jiM I~10MJ!AiII~LiiiiUIi

    ~I--I

    T a b le 3 displays t il e f re qn eney o h t r a uegy use aMong ' I'ux l tis li l a ndila~llLm ~ Lu d ~ n i5 . i U us .t ta tr ng tl il a l Tw k i ~ 1 'n participants were good ..tI I I ' IU I ! ; : seela l ~tr.aregi.es witll 3 . m ea n o f3 .7 3 e nd ;:ui~dard deviational'Uh~. wb~h . : t hemeen I ) ft l: li s s lf u: a tt e- gy ur k . I_ l li an s~l)ld~.ntliwas :1 Al i wi thI I Nj l~ IUlud dev iat inn Qf>O,76 , m C o [ 1 . t m ; s ! t , Iranisnsusedmeteeognit iveIIlhll-ugie!S w itba m ean o fJ J :6 and a s ta nd a rd d le via tiO iiiLe f 0 .5 3, b uttill' mean o f th e S lI m e :: rtra w gy u se f (j r T u rk is h s ru d en ts was 3.63 withII ~(l1ndard devi

  • 8/2/2019 The Use of Language Learning Strategies: Turkish vs. Iranian EFL Learners

    10/16

    III (.1 rph "I. It P.:M b o t IM ~ t h 1.11H~h pm hdllmli~ llrrllodthe h1UU\\Irl!;l ~II nlM.It'~ in urd , I , h i ' l u l ' 1.:!l!!lpCfll'jmllln ,m~lU~ngfilU r\H~. . t ; .n"mi l lvC ' ,.c, IIItlIIIIIP, t, n 11C'~ill;ie. nil mh l ' olh"H hnlld,I r { I I I ] l l n , a < l p p h ed t ~!: 1 1 I I Iw . ' I o1Ii).l: h ll .1 1q!l~'ru uule r : I. m e l d L :: o fI ltfl i~jv e , 1cumpe'nsal inn. 3. ~odul, 4. l 'I 1J .1 i1 11 11 ,1 ~. " ', m,,:mO!) ' t 6, !lj'fccH!j,I~,

    B ! I ~ Q d ' I lnLf.u:a i ! J t J v , " l 1 n ( 1 ill!:\~. l ' l ' , 1 1 1 he L i U i H : : i u d ~ d J thai, both ,~ l\mflN;we re v ir lu a Jl y , j ' t 'pplying tln~ .':ltJJJW!slrHll.'~i~!'i,Table 4 Peroe ]) :t age o f Th ,Tus h and h< lI ll ioo l :. L fi eo f ~b_~gles1}'pe 'If StrategyUII~r [f5ed- Alwa}'s

    o.ralmost 4 . 5 ~o 5 . 2 . : 8 6 % I) 0%!'t]waysU1l:lIaUy 3.5 to J44..- 40% 10 28.$8%

    : S o m e t i m e ! ' : 2,5 to 20: 3 . , 4 :)7'.14% 25 7l.4Z%

    .. .--.~UM_-_+"~-_...l I : !'~-_.14~_' _~G=~ .~-

    00r.p!J ....~ .1\B ' "

    As Tahh~4 Sh()'W8. 2.86% ofthe ' i r H J r r k i s h students were high ( :=frequent) 8 1 l " - a t g e y Users, wMk none of th e b ~m~ aDsfmoieilmitsekmged

    ~ n 1 1 1 1 l'lltcML~ry In ".\h h llo ll W I X . t il lilt ' I u r k l li h IIlml~lIh.YoWl' hjl!!n~ u r> iu w il " I m t ~ ~ v U~!. : ' I ,hm I h l ' pl'rc"'~IIfUMl'il II mlUlHI1llllll~ U1h."hryw n 2~, 5~j/'1t!, 1 1 ' l m l l l y . I ~ I I : 'Il~~!o;iij;'nhil;!,c!:onllh~~1 lu l h 'l p m U ~ ~ 1 I 1 ' ~ l l h i'lll~J~hi lu1lmni:m g rim l' ~ ' w h u I ' J i o d u n l ! l e d o o lil'h;d~~~1II LI~'l'IIi>.mmll ! . l J 1 t l l ' I ! ! YUM;H~were 57,14% : 'I u d 71 , 42% l L - . e b P C c t ~vl.ll

    DiscussionThl.l ' r e s u l t s del:l l ' ! !}nsinlle ti:ll.i.l a l U m 1 l ,l .g h _u:rn \! ,~lf , ;. i ly smdel l ll ts l ISC ' til !V~ictyu f . ~ h : 'a t eg I eE i in learning londgn 'languages, th e m ost eummunlyuperuionalized strategy bclwcC~ the tw o groups ! I, pp 6 a rs H I bec om p ~s :a :t iO ~ 1J . .iI:ru9pective of l l hoel~am~ng e f I L ' V : i r omn ~ : I ' 1 , t and th e 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1r'o f acquisition. ComP~ l i 18 a J t ~ on str3Jlegie-s~whit]] involve gUl"H"'irlMintenig~nlly in Uslenimg 3l:1dre.ading aswen ~ s .QWiiOQil!inl;! IlI1Ih'llhmllin speakisg and wrirtmg,are used a s c . nl (: ~ ! !i ]m:eans of~nnll1llmll'lIlll!ne ml oo d (y in g a ll f ou r skills. They a re r ep o rt ed t o o be u~c l l 1r~ '~ I I I ( , I I ' I) 'j'[I fmma J 1ngllage l ea e a in g ~OV ir o ]) 1 fI 1 .e nUBr:emn"f. I~~'~I'~'h~Il e a r n e r s r u n i n t o oommull~cation ooeakdOiwJiiS d 1 : m C ilO ~nlldl..HIlr.h . t ,m issin g k no w led ge. h is; c lea r fro m th e fi]] ;din gs o f lh i~,lm l ~t \ ~1111 !h ~ ~are ~quall.y (ifootmoro) i nd i ts pem< ib1 e f o r leamers aoqll lJim~I ' ."hm."I~1!langu~gc natum]ist icaUy, as&el'e: is linle ,ox ]],0 tut~ri'!'!!!l wvnlV~tl'"r ep a ir t he commoolcatiM hreakdown,

    c.e ne t uefo n, Implications, and,Recommandatio'nsh i sum, ~e resu:U,sof i l i e : pn:se'fi~ :s tudy showedthat Th: rl ldsbs 'l .l :l lh : I' IL : .wea:beJtietus(lf's, Q fLL ' S s 1 h fm !~ l 'W l i: a .H ow ~ v er , one stria~ 'Cg:yatoegof) ' .i.c.~oda~ a a d me ta c o : gn it i, vc ~tegozy~was used a t a high f requemi:Yas the mQlst : fr - .e q u e l 1 D .t iy u ~ o o : ;: tm t c g y ca,te'gD1y. Alf'eclive;'ind r n c l T h o r y, s ,t ra t :egie~ were ' used a s t he [ ea :s t f rc q uem d y !U is o o c st eg o ne s by t~~~p r u t i . d p a 1 r n ! t s o f t he 's t: ~ d y, .1 "h e re su lt "lm l a te d kI s:trategy , c a t e g o r y ~ seapproKi : Jna ' r o~y r es em b le d th o se o : f o the r similar s:tudics C(](l:ldltcted W ILIlAsian. s t tu : i sn["S . i ]owev~. fQr l iJ 'ne ! 'i lraLe .SY c a te go ry , tile results were

  • 8/2/2019 The Use of Language Learning Strategies: Turkish vs. Iranian EFL Learners

    11/16

    u n 'fenl. L inlik e m o 0 I i tn,I"ncwc Igt1IlI\l'1: IIU\oll'l4HIwe'r e t .l M1 nUK th e fntlllt f l' tqV ln tt y uMtJ IIItJ1,t"'(I,ir.! ' l. ' ! ' tHP! nll~hl b e(II I h . 1 l l li , :n : r li ;! 1 J h c:lw t'c n I hll u lllIml hIll Ie !: \ 'IUlul nnd U U ' IlUIlI""lm~ Jn ol'rurki:ltlh~ILitlclliPi IIltl th t IrLUlhlll imklll!,HS d i l j. c !I~~d he l lM.,.1roover, tile ~ludi.e:i I 'cVl.'-ul~(' Ihlll IIIl' ~"IIJLlriLy D r ::ttU!JCIH~ In 11ll.1dIgmlllp! i Wllre medium US!i::n.III }lU'IIIC~W'l,~Ihill,.~it !.1il1i.;red hlpC'fcl~nt II~1I!dnumber .

    T h e nil ldmgs ohhl!! s tudy in dic a te d !: hu 'lt here was m o o t n Ompl~ ' l l l(:o flIh rrnH y b etw een 1 1'1 .6Fn~quency o f stralegy cue-go ry lise end the'it ~ nr individua l sttat.egie:s. [0 s ome cases so m e h nd iv id ua l i r c = m ah du I1 g1 11 g to a m e re h.:ighlyn-cquel'ldy used ciJ'te-gory 'WC [ t ) used with ILlower In.:qmlflcy a n d v ic e v er sa , T I I ,i s: i: mp ~ .i est O O . ! in 51udying , IOOgUHgI 'UUlL!rt-l,' strategy use, att'entioEi should be paid no,t ou ly to Qvcn,UII II J . . ! . ) ' u se a nd .' ll .r ate gy 'C l l , t egor i~ .hu t. a l so , to th e lea rners' im it vid ua I.. u Iq~yU ! : S O ,

    1 1 U I !to v ar io us fa cto rs sn cb 1IS impropt lr l e a c h i n g ; l a ck 0 fr e x p o s u rit! I lllll.n~h.andthe cultural background of the bMtafl learners, someIlIIpurtalH strategy c ilte gq )r i'~ s.i.e . s oc ia l a ud rnemery stra:l::eglC!I"",,W' f i t } ' 1 reported to be used as frequently as others. Thus, E l l g , l i H hJ n l o l i r u dun lmay pu t m o re e m ph a sis o n these s.trategies b y m ak ing th e1[ J l Igua~e l e a r n e r s a w a re o : ft h em 1 . l 1 l . dprov.idLng a p p I ' o p , r i , a t e situation!!l ind I ;u: th 'i ti 'es iII language: classes so that th e Iearners use 'IDe:!l'e.herI!~glec.tedmateg.ies_

    L a ng ua ge le -a mm g s tra te gie s, b ein g s pe cif ic act ions, beba'!l ' i .cr6,L& : : t i , ! ' ; s , . r techn.iques, facilitate th e learning o f t f u e Unget l a n g u a g e b :y t h el a ug u a gu 1 " "" tIm ~ r .U language lC m ll~ , need less to sa y, I,lliC lia.ngua,gel e O ; ' li m I D g!itr.th;:~es i.ll the l e a r n i n g p r o c ~~ . S in c e f a c t o rs h i lu : ~ , . gender ,perscnality, motivatien, self-concept, l i fe e l (per ie :nce , learning style.InC.c i l ement . anxie ty. e tc , a ,f fe c t the way in whidl la ug na ge I es me rslearn i l h e target language,. it is n o rre as en a ble to s up po rt th e id e a t l b . a 4 .li n l anguulgel ,eame' I l i us e th e sa m e: g o od , I angua~g;el eeming strat,egies,o r sh ould be: trained to lls:ing a nd d evelo ping H u: s am e 5tmte,gies tobecome successful learners.

    In terms of th~ podagogica1 : i m p l i c l l l i o f H l . of the present ~t~dy.even though i l hete~{ , :habmty .o f o omn lUH ic 8 ti tl n s tr a te g ie s such a s

    ':"lUr~llilIlIIUfI I & r a t . o a i o '14!tIll I a m ~\U ar Df (. fo rcN.L lm[ l I~, t h e I tr tl o \~ 1 i 111 lU ll" I IUtl K ~ tlcn11' I1hu u ~ h Ih ellll'l:l'hon nt C llsahl), Hi h'llIhllllio IUI1lf ,Unll r m n I nc y IUhl IrntC'~yu C remains ~ l l 1 r c~nh ' i ~ d . he I ;r li !. :~ l fn:hllllll1lhlP 1~lwlo: I I p ru ll l, u .. -ncykv d l n nl t l. !t J fT l llm ' perceived sUru.h.:~y UPi-Cuuml in lh l (lilly UllllcrllncIhl.: hnpurlanceof trnt~g)' u:9,hiI18 IIll:.1'I.l:UIlIt:'I' I I Itecnvc usc nf! .t ul le r ie s i s l i k e l y to i : I J L f l u t : m : e h m g u u g . r . : IB;hl~'''L'1II1!11l n n d c a n l e a d l l : . ll~n~mp[uvem",-nt of ' seccnd langtl.l\gc pwnciul lcv < VIJ!lU Lind Ahml'anm.It) U),

    What learners kn ow othO'U'l lhl!lmiClvl:S end about ~.l:ie~,'!"wnh :o o rH :f 1g pr oc ess em a ffe cL llie :ir use uf Wanguage Ie.:a:ming strru.egics( W c m le Ot.1 (9 1) . C O w II ot a nd h er c ~1 1eagueiS (1 9 & 1) diseavered thlrllTcc 'l ive leerners reponed

  • 8/2/2019 The Use of Language Learning Strategies: Turkish vs. Iranian EFL Learners

    12/16

    ,. U k. ly c h i l i there jx I ' " U"rcgresslun Illwllrtllllt'~n' Clfftq~1 '1 UldhM t h . ., ~IIIH~~ltymVt'nlllty,mil i :~11 Ili~IC:QlIL~nlldity Wt: . I hl1 t' t.' lu r ! 4 1 1 ~ B " ' ' ' i 1 other rOl 'ClIt - .:ht ' l f l6Lher i .n!' ! tt : l i.1 f1]cn~so l lnd nullrlht,y ~'UIII~ IjC'lt):.;J.i the iil1fihl t'(.:!liuhllseeend H1UI.tat ion o f i~ ' c ~ t ~ l ll ;yt ~ r U I C . ~ h 'lh~'luc~U~ . ; J t ~\'ICditJllot n~ a rr b' l1 9 g~ ~ r af ic k nc y O f L h ~ pIlH!dllfl!llH. us II v iI ldmb lu_ The . .~ Imll.( ~r e1a ;r nonsh~p bem 'eeJ li l :9ituG:(:rIll:s'levci nf h]lm~Hg(l pwflc.ie~I~;'fnn dr~po'ned use oflan,guio'fge 1t;~amiIisti"alL);:gi~.

    References.Bachmm,. L, f.nd Palmer, A. S _ (1996),La'~1P4()ge l '~St iMg in Prm. 'IttN ew Y o r k: O x .f ord U :liv e: rsio / Psess,~'flauqui~, C. (2000). Languag~ leaming s ld !' at eg i,e s: A P a nd o ra ,' s " blm: k

    bo..\" '? Should the use of lmguagele c lasses? T h~ W e ;j Ur n Joumal o f G ra du at e R e: .s eQ rr h 9 .51-62.

    Bensen, If:. a n d V .o lle r. P. (eds.) (] 991)\,Auto'1omyand buie.petU/.eru'(.inLanlP~a.ge / .earning. L o E t d o : n : l.(lng1lrl~Ul.Bl~Jy s t ( ! k .E. (1 9 7 S ) . A llieOl)etlcaJmode~ of second J ooguage ] e amlng .L a~ ag-t L ea 'r:rr lng28"69~83.B rem ner, S . (.I 9 '9 9) , L a ngu age i~ a Jm in g strategi~s a nd la ng ua gt:

    p l o [i :e ]mcy~ hwes t ig3 J f ing dJ:~rela;lto[lshipi n H o ogKo : n :g , Callarifa"M i : J i : ll ! 1 ' l ' l l LaRgl1a&

  • 8/2/2019 The Use of Language Learning Strategies: Turkish vs. Iranian EFL Learners

    13/16

    , . F r .lclIrmriK an d [ " I t C h ' " . I " tMfh'JI " , (',~/"'n r1U~1 ( ......

  • 8/2/2019 The Use of Language Learning Strategies: Turkish vs. Iranian EFL Learners

    14/16

    'Plwndt'Worksheet for An w rln nd SCDring the SI

    I. Th.e b l r u ; U \ t A lL)' l I u f I l h 'I~'ll0 1 ruc h k ern un) II I : - I f f I2. W rit~ your r~pon~ to each Ih.'rl! ('thul is. wtiUil 1.2.3,4, (Ir ~) I

    ea cb o f th e b la nk s.3 . A d d up e ae h w l nm n .. P ut the result on !b e linemu.k!:d S UM4. D~ vid e by ilie num ber u.l1lda S UM Ito ge t t he a v er ag e I~rrc u ;h

    ce lemn , Ro ~Ddthis ,a ve ra ge o ff It O th e n e< l! re st te nt h. a s il 1 3. fJ5 , F igure out yom OVeTlIlU average. T o do this, ad d . up a ll O le S IIM ~

    fu r th e d iff'e r,e ntp ru ts o f th e S I L L . .T h en . divide by 50.6. W hen y o u have finished, yom t c ac 'h e rw il l g iv e y o u tIDe Pm' i l l '

    of Results, Co p y Y01 \ J] f averages: (for each part

  • 8/2/2019 The Use of Language Learning Strategies: Turkish vs. Iranian EFL Learners

    15/16

    Parte'2 4 10 understand unfamiliar Ebglish w o r ds , ~ m a k e gu es se ~ .25 M.en [ca:l'I'l lhlnk o f 8. word during a conv~OOOI1 in Englidl, 1us e gfisl:In"es,10 I. mak e up new wON S " if jd o 1 '101know th e right ones w Emgl isb .27 !e a L l E _ n ; g L i s lt w i l l i ( ) ' 1 U J ~ o . k i l l g Illp every word.28 I try 10 gu~s.s w ha t th e o th er perso n w ill ~y l1ext i n E n gl is h .29

    II I C81Il't t bi Dk o f a n E n gl is h w o rd , J 1 ,! sea w o r d o r p h ra s e t h a t m e a ns, the S I D i 1 ' l C thi.ng.

    30 .~IIy to f iDd a .s m any w ay s a s J '3010 USI.1my iEng t i~ h_~~~--------~31 llil,otic~my Engliilllmistam end usc that i nf o nn B ti o ll i o help medo bettcl'.31 1 p ay a tW n t io t1 w be n so m oo ne is

    rudE_ .' 1 r e i afmid orUlsing EngLl l i I l .3'l B ry to relax whenGvcr'lj; . ' fm'!.I r l J ,I o t n ll. '. . ". Engl~sh ~ ' W h e n Im ,II U

    401 e nOOU ra ge m y 5f ;l [w s pe ak~lish. Lf . rd nhrealI when 1 d o 'Well in English.4L Igwemy:lt: I l l 'O 'WB, gllldyln or u III~ , 'f~ tense o r nervo llil w hen. I a m ii i11l0tUc1 am.42 _ :ti h ______"Hog, II , .' 'B !.IiaI- I write d ow n my feelif\gi'l m . a la pg uQ ge le ar om I

    f O '3 h I f C i J l wnen \ 1 1 m 44 L t o ll k . t o I lo me on e else a'liH:l11t ow ' .English,rartF1 . .d etsta nd someltlililg in E nglish , 1 ask i h t : ' lllhcr ~nT f1' iilo [lot un'l.< . .

    45 t(islowdoM, . kEl1 U t l h ,4 6 - ,'I ask E ng ltsh sp ea ke nl to CO( lEc1 me whm 1 :!lip eb l . g. E r h ' !' .1 t b o the r s l: 1 id . en t s. --.41 Iprac'l.lce ,llg1!'l ..~4~ ] a sk fo r bell1 front En:glislb, ~paakers.

    ~ I a sk questiuilS illE ngH SR. . ~ .' .. ' SI 1.1m the cuJt ur~ ~f-Png]lSbwea:\t;.l !rSO l tt Y 10 .e : : rm a 11 -

  • 8/2/2019 The Use of Language Learning Strategies: Turkish vs. Iranian EFL Learners

    16/16

    'fu ~OOllfJ~~ lliid:ptI)!lIe. ' !l"ti .Mfl#'yttw: ,"'CIl3~ f < : ! r !!Wjl.nrt~flhc Sill.,IIIld ,~OOT'C~,!


Top Related