A new approach to Assessing A new approach to Assessing

Strategic Learning : Strategic Learning :

The Case of Self-Regulation in The Case of Self-Regulation in

Vocabulary AcquisitionVocabulary Acquisition

by Winnie & Mavis

TESOL of NCTU

Outline

Introduction Background Principles and objectives of the study Overview of the instrument development Statistical analysis of the instrument Conclusion and implication

Introduction

Language learning strategy

Strategic learning

Self-regulation instrument

New strategic learning measure

Focus on vocabulary learning

Background

Learning strategy ?

How to distinguish strategic learning from

ordinary learning ?

goal-orientated, intentionally invoked, effortful (Weinstein et al.(2000)

Choice (Cohen)

Background

past

present

Focus on the product , the actual techniques employed

to the self-regulatory process and the specific learner capacity underlying

Assessing strategic learning

Past self-report questionnaires MSLQ SILL(SLA) Rebecca Oxford Problems

not justifiable psychometrically

Assessing strategic learning

The same problems of vocabulary learning strategy

What can we do ?

In need of an instrument which is truly psychometrically

Principles and objectives of the study

Research project to conceptualize , develop and test a new instrument.

New instrument :

a) should target the learner trait of self-regulation capacity

b) should based on theoretically

A system of self-regulatory strategy Developed by Dörnyei(2001) Five facets

a) Commitment control

b) Metacognitive control

c) Satiation control

d) Emotion control

e) Environmental control

Principles and objectives of the study To increase the validity of the construct

one particular learning domain

Intention to this study :

Develop a self-report instrument that explicitly

targets this self-regulatory capacity in the area

of E vocabulary learning.

First phase of the study

To write scale items targeting five facet Develop item pool : conduct three focus

group interviews

Total 36 ideas were translated into instrument items + 9 items (literature review) = 45 items

Six-point likert scales

Pilot the instrument. Details of the pilot study－1.Participants:

a) 192 Taiwanese university students.

b) At 1st, 2nd, or 3rd grades.

c) From private or national universities.

d) No proficiency measures.

Second phase of the study

2.Procedures:

a) No randomization.

b) Concerns for the informed consent.

c) Participants received Chinese version of the questionnaire.

d) No time constraint to complete it.

Second phase of the study

3.Item-analysis:

a) Extreme Group Method & Corrected Item-Total Correlation were conducted.

b) EGM t-test

c) CITC = Correlation < 0.40

Second phase of the study

45 items – 4 items = 41 items

4.Reliability:

Cronbach Alpha Coefficients were computed.

Second phase of the study

4 items x 5 subscales = 20 items

CAC (mean) = 0.78

Good internal consistency reliability

Evaluate the final instrument. Administer this instrument to a different

population. Details of the study－1. Participants:

a) 172 senior high school students.

b) At the 3rd grade.

c) From two similar public schools. d) No proficiency measures. (pre-intermediate level)

Third phase of the study

2.Procedures:

3.Reliability:

Third phase of the study

Follow the procedures of the pilot study!

CAC (mean) = 0.77

“SRCVOC” is a reliable instrument.(Self-Regulating Capacity in Vocabulary Learning)

Confirmatory factor analysis

To test the validity. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) Use the software AMOS 4.0 The fit structure of the model was examined

from 3 aspects:

1.Preliminary Fit Criteria

2.Overall Model Fit

3.Fit of Internal Structure of Model

Confirmatory factor analysis

1.Preliminary Fit Criteria Outcomes of measurement Level of

acceptance

0.95> ג > 0.50 Good

p < 0.95 Very good

No very large standard errors Good

Good acceptability of the construct validity

Confirmatory factor analysis

Outcomes of measurement Level of acceptance

p-value > 0.05 Poor

x²/df < 3 Poor

GFI > 0.90 Very good

AGFI > 0.90 Marginal

IFI > 0.90 Very good

NFI > 0.90 Very good

2.Overall Model Fit

Confirmatory factor analysis

2.Overall Model Fit

Outcomes of measurement Level of acceptance

CFI > 0.90 Very good

TLI > 0.90 Very good

0.050 < RMSEA < 0.80 Poor

Hoelter’s 0.05 & 0.01 indexes Good

Ration (sample size-free parameters) > 5 : 1 Very good

The model explain the data well !

Confirmatory factor analysis

3.Fit of Internal Structure of Model

Outcomes of measurement Level of acceptance

Pi > 0.50 Good

Pc > 0.60 Very good

Average variance > 0.50 Good

Test statistic > or < -1.96 Very good

Normalized residuals < 2 Very good

Good overall reliability

Exploratory Factor Analysis

To examine the relationships between these 5 indicators & the common underlying theme.

Commitment

Emotion

Metacognitive

Satiation

Environment

Self-regulatory capacity

0.880.87

0.86

0.85

0.69

Conclusion & Implication

Five aspects of self-regulation

A diagnostic measure

Empowering learners

A model of Instrument

development

SRCSRCVOCVOC

Possibility of self-report measure