Copyright is owned by the Author of the thesis. Permission is given for
a copy to be downloaded by an individual for the purpose of research and
private study only. The thesis may not be reproduced elsewhere without
the permission of the Author.
M ETACOG NITIVE, COG N ITIVE, SOCIAL AND AFFECTIVE STRATE G Y USE I N FOREI G N LAN G UAGE LEARN I N G : A COMPARATIVE STUDY
A thesis presented in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree
of PhD.
in Applied Linguistics at Massey University
Cynthia Joan White
1 99 3
ii ABSTRACT
This study e xami nes the metacog nitive, cog nitive , social and affective strategy use of fo reig n lang uage learners who a re studying either in classroom situ atio ns o r at a d i stance. The i m pact on learn i n g strategy use of a nu m be r of variables is co nsid e red , re lati ng to 1 ) the languag e learning co ntext (mode of study, targ et lang uag e , l evel of study and langu age use o pportu nities) and
2)
learne r charact e ristics (ag e , gender, language learning experience , p ri o r expe rie nce i n learni n g t h e targ et language, motivation, proficiency) .The strategy use o f learners i s m easu red b y means o f 1 ) a se lf-report question n ai re (N=4 1 7) which also elicits relevant biog raphical i nformati on and
2)
a ve rbal report p rocedure , the yoked su bject tech niqu e , ad min iste red to a su bsample of the questionnai re g ro u p (N=37). Canonical variate an alysis was applied to the questi on naire data, and instances of strategy use were identified and classified in the verbal protoco ls usi ng two i ndependent raters.
Resu lts i nd icated that the mai n i nfluences on strategy use we re mode of study and t h e ag e of l earners; that distance learners were set fu rthe r apart fro m classroo m learn e rs o n m etacog nitive strategy use measu res when t h e influence of the targ et lang uag e , p rofici e ncy , p rior target language expe rience and level of study was conside red; that learn e rs who had had prior expe rie n ce i n learning the target languag e before e n rolling in a u nive rsity lang uage cou rse we re maximally disti ng uish ed i n their cog nitive strategy use fro m learners without such p rior expe ri e nce ; that mode of study exerted some influe nce on cogn itive strategy use, but this was less than the influe nce of p rior target lang uage experience ; that diffe re nces i n cog nitive strategy use betwee n learners of Fre nch and learners of Japanese i n the ve rbal repo rt procedure cou ld not be attributed solely to the influe nce of the targ et languag e ; and that distance learne rs make less use of social strateg ies and g reater use o f affective strategies than their class roo m cou nt e rp a rts.
iii
M ethodological and theoretical i m plicati o n s of the study are p rese nted , and an appraisal is m ade of the usefu lness of particu lar strategy use m odels for the investigati o n of lang uage learn ing strategies. A nu mber of te ntative, practical reco m m e nd ations fro m the study are proposed tog ether with suggestions for fu rther research .
iv
ACKNOWLEDG EMENTS
I wish to e xpress my appreciation to D r. N . R. Watts, P rof. W. E . Tu n mer and P rof.
G . M . C ro p p for thei r g uidance and assi stance t h roughout this research process.
I am also g ratefu l to P rof. K. Howe fo r the e ncou rag ement and constructive advice he p rovided o n seve ral occasi ons. Special thanks are due to Dr.
Ganeshanandam who acted as the statistical consultant to this study; to Pamela Easto n who acted as an assistant rater in the yoked subject p rocedu re; and to the language teachi ng staff at Massey U niversity fo r thei r co-operatio n , i n particu lar Myrei l le Pawliez and D r. J ean Ande rso n . I am particu larly i ndebted to the lan g u age learn e rs who participated in this project, and whose enthusiasm, i nterest and support p roved a reward i ng aspect of the study. I also wish to recog nise t h e co ntri bution of the Massey U n ive rsity Research Fund who provided the fu nds with which this research was carri ed out. Finally , I want to thank my family, particularly B ruce , Joan , Doug l as and Maggie , fo r their g e nerous support , a n d Caro l i n e and Rebecca, f o r the many lively and happy diversions they p rovided through all of this.
CONT ENTS
ABSTRACT
ACKN OW L E DG E M ENTS LIST O F FI G URES
LIST OF TAB L ES
1 INT ROD U CTION
2
1 . 1 Backg rou nd
1 .2 Learni ng Strateg ies 1 . 3 Distance Educatio n 1 . 4 T h e Research P roblem
LITERATU RE REVIEW 2 . 1 I ntroducti on 2 .2 E arly Studies 2 . 3 Metacognition
2 . 3. 1 The I nvestigation of Metacog nition in Language Learning
2 . 4 Defi nition and Classificatio n
2 . 4 . 1 Th e Deve lop m e nt o f Classification Sche mes 2 .5 Facto rs I nflue nci ng Strategy Choice
2 .5. 1 Mode of Study 2 .5 .2 Target Languag e 2 .5. 3 Level of Study
2 .5 .4 Lang uag e Use Opportunities 2 .5 .5 Age
2.5 .6 Gender
2.5.7 Lang uage Learning Experi e nce
2 .5 . 8 P rior Experi e nce i n the Target Languag e 2.5. 9 Motivation
2.5 .1 0 Proficiency
ii iv xii xiv
1 4 6 1 0
1 2
1 3 16
1 9 22 22 25 26 26 2 8 31 32 32 34 35 35 38
3
2 .6 Conclusion
M ETHODOLOGY
3. 1 Popu lation and Setting 3.2 Subjects
3.2 . 1 Selection
3.2 .2 Ch aracteristics of Subjects Questionnaire Study Verbal Report Study 3 . 3 The Research Desi g n
3.3. 1 Variables
Strategy Use Variables
Context of L earning Variables Learning Characteristic Variables 3.3.2 Research Qu estio ns
3.4 Instrume ntation
3. 4 . 1 Choice of I n stru m ent 3 .5 The Questionnai re
3.5 . 1 Strengths and Li mitatio n s of the Instru m e nt 3.5.2 Developme nt of the I n stru m e nt
3.5. 3 Pi lot Study
3 .5. 4 Question nai re Revisio n 3.5 .5 Instructions and Procedu res
Time
Instructions
Procedures: Classroom Learners Procedures: Distance L earners 3 .5 .6 Methods of P rocessi ng Data 3.6 The Ve rbal Report P rocedu re
3.6. 1 Limitati ons of Verbal Repo rts 3 .6 .2 The Yoked Su bject Technique 3.6. 3 Pi lot Study
3 .6. 4 Instructions and P rocedu res
41
45 45 46 46 48 48 5 3 5 3 5 3 55 60 6 1 62 64 64 67 67 68 70 7 1 7 3 7 3 7 4 7 4 7 4 75 75 76 7 8 7 9 7 9
4
Time
Instructions Procedures
3.6 .5 Methods of P rocessing Data 3. 7 Vali dity and Reliability
3. 7 . 1 I ntern al Validity Subject Selection Instrumentation Task Directions Adequate Data Base 3.7.2 E xte rnal Val idity
Subject Selection
Data Collection Methodology Ecological Validity
3 .7.3 Reliabi lity
Internal Consistency Reliability lnterrater Reliability
3. 8 Li m itations 3. 9 Sum mary
R E SU LTS: QU ESTIONNAI R E STUDY 4. 1 M ethods of Analysi ng Data 4 .2 Metacog nitive Strategy Use
4.2. 1 Freque ncy of Metacogn itive Strategy Use
79 79 81 81 82 82 83 83 84 84 85 85 85 86 86 86 87 87 89
90 90 93 93 4 .2 .2 I nfluences o n M etacog n itive Strategy Use 94 4.2 . 3 The I nfluence of Mode of Study on MSU Variables 98
4.2 . 4 The I nfluence of Age on MSU Variables 103
4 .2 .5 S u m mary 107
4. 3 I nte raction of Variables with MSU and Mode of Study
4.3.1 Level of Study 4.3.2 P roficie ncy
4. 3. 3 Targ et Languag e
109 1 10 1 1 4 1 1 7
4.3.4 P ri o r Target Lan g uage Experi ence 1 20
4. 3 .5 Summary 1 2 3
4 . 4 Cog nitive Strategy Use 1 2 4
4. 4. 1 Freque ncy o f Cog nitive Strategy Use 1 2 4
4.4.2 I nfluences o n Cog nitive Strategy Use 1 25
4. 4. 3 The Influence of P rior Target Lang uag e
Expe rie nce on CSU Vari ables 1 26
4.4.4 The Influence of Mode of Study o n
C S U Variables 1 2 9
4. 4.5 Summary 1 33
4 .5 S ocial Strategy Use 1 34
4.5 . 1 Freque ncy of Social Strategy Use 1 34
4.5 .2 Influences on Social Strategy Use 1 36
4.5 . 3 Summary 1 38
4 .6 Affective Strategy Use 1 39
4.6 . 1 Freque ncy of Affective Strategy Use 1 39 4 .6.2 Influences o n Affective Strategy Use 1 39
4.7 S u m m ary 1 40
5 R ESU LTS : VERBAL REPORT STU DY 1 42
5 . 1 Method for Analysing Verbal Report Data 1 42
5.2 P roductivity of the Yoked Subject Tech niqu e 1 45
5 .2 . 1 Range of Strateg ies 1 46
5. 3 The Classification of Strategies 1 47
5 .3. 1 Metacog nitive Strategies 1 47
5. 3.2 Cog nitive Strateg ies 1 5 1
5 .3. 3 Social Strategies 1 56
5. 3 . 4 Affective Strategies 1 56
5 .3 .5 Strategy Co m bi nations 1 57
5 . 4 T h e I nfluence of Mode o f Study o n Strategy Use 1 5 9 5 . 4 . 1 The I nfluence of Mode o f Study
o n MSU Repo rts 162
Summary 1 6 8
5 .4.2 The I nfluence of M ode of Study
on CSU Repo rts 1 6 8
5 .4 . 3 The I nfluence of M ode of Study
on SSU Reports 1 72
5 . 4.4 The I nfluence o f Mode of Study
on SSU Reports 1 73
5.5 The I nfluence of the Target Languag e o n
Strategy Use 1 74
5 .5 . 1 The I nfluence of the Target Languag e
on M S U Reports 1 76
5 .5 .2 The I nflue nce of the Target Lang uage
o n CSU Repo rts 1 80
·Summary 1 82
5 .5 . 3 The I nfluence of the Target Languag e
on S S U Repo rts 1 83
5 .5 .4 The I nfluence of the Targ et Languag e
o n AS U Reports 1 84
5 .6 Sum mary 1 85
6 DISCUSSION 1 87
6. 1 Classification of Strategy Use 1 87
6 .2 Freque ncy of Strategy Use 1 9 1
6 .2 . 1 Metacog n itive Strategy Use 1 9 1
6 .2.2 Cog nitive Strategy Use 1 92
6 .2 . 3 Social Strategy Use 1 93
6 .2 . 4 Affective Strategy Use 1 93
6. 3 The I nfluence of Mode of Study 1 94
6.3. 1 Mode of Study and Metacognitive
Strategy Use 1 95
6. 3.2 Mode of Study and Cog nitive
Strategy Use 1 99
6.3.3 Mode of Study and Social
Strategy Use 200
6.3.4 Mode of Study and Affective
Strategy Use 20 1
6. 4 Further I nfluences o n Mode and Strategy Use 202
6 .5 The Target Lang uag e and Strategy Use 205
6 .6 The I nfluence of the Learni ng Context 209
6 .6 . 1 Leve l of Study and Strategy Use 209
6 .6 .2 Lang uag e Use Opportu nities and
Strategy Use 209
6 .7 The I nflue nce of Learn e r Characte ristics 2 1 0
6 .7 . 1 Age and Metacog nitive Strategy Use 2 1 0 6 .7.2 P ri o r TL Experi e nce and Cog nitive
Strategy Use 2 1 4
6 .7.3 P roficie ncy and Strategy Use 2 1 6
6 . 7 . 4 The I nfluence of Fu rther Learner
Characte ristics on Strategy Choice 2 1 6
Gender 2 16
Language Learning Experience 2 1 7
Motivation 2 1 7
6 . 8 S u m mary 2 1 8
7 CONCLUSION 220
7. 1 Theo retical I m plications 220
7.2 M ethodological I m plicati ons 222
7.3 P ractical Applications of the Study 224
7. 4 Additio nal Research 226
8 S U MMARY 2 3 1
APPENDICES Appendix A
Sam ple Pi lot Questi o n naire (G erman) Appe ndix B
Sam ple Qu estionnai re (Chinese ) : Mai n Study Appe ndix C
Lette r to Questionnai re Subjects Appe ndix D
Sam ple Yoked Subject I nstructi ons Appendix E
Sample Transcri pts of Yoked Subject Verbal Reports
B I B LI O G RAPHY
2 39
253
267
268
270
275
LIST O F FIG U R ES
3 . 1 Age Distributio n o f Subjects.
3.2 Distribution of Subjects by TL and Leve l of Study.
3.3 Lan g u age Learn i ng Experie nce of Subjects. TL as G roups.
3.4 Lan g u age Learn i ng Experie nce of Subjects. Leve l of Learn i ng as G roups.
3.5 C o ntext of P rior TL Experie nce.
4 . 1 CVA o f M S U Variables. Mode of Study a s Groups.
4.2 CVA of MSU Variables. Ag e as G ro u ps .
4 . 3 F reque ncy of U s e o f Se lf-Manag e m e nt. Classroom and Distance Learners.
4.4 F reque ncy of Use of Advance Organisatio n . Class roo m and Distance Learn ers.
4.5 F reque ncy of Use of Revisio n . Classroom a nd Distance Learne rs.
4.6 CVA of MSU Variables. Learn e rs u nder thirty and over thirty as G rou ps.
4.7 CVA of MSU Variables. 200-level Classroom and Distance Learn ers as G roups.
4.8 A Comparison of Metacog nitive Strategy Use. 200-leve l Classroom and Distance Learners.
4.9 CVA of MSU Variables. G rade B Classroom and Distance Learners as G ro ups.
4. 1 0 A Compariso n of Metacog n itive Strategy Use. G rade ' B' Classroom and Distance Learne rs.
4. 1 1 CVA of MSU Variables. Classroom and Di stance Learne rs of Japanese as G roups.
4. 1 2 A Co mpariso n of Metacog n itive Strategy U se. C lassroom and Distance Learners of J apanese as G roups.
4 . 1 3 CV A of MSU Variables. C lassroom and Distance Learners with No Prior TL Experie nce as G roups.
4 . 1 4 A C o mparison of Metacog nitive Strategy Use. Classroom and Distance Learn e rs with No Prior TL Experie nce as G roups.
4 . 1 5 CVA of CSU Vari ables. P rior TL E xpe rience as G roups .
4. 1 6 A C o m pariso n of Cog nitive Strategy Use. P rior TL Expe rie nce as G roups.
4. 1 7 CVA of CSU Variables. Mode of Study as G roups.
4 . 1 8 A C o m parison of CSU Variables. Mode of Study as G roups.
4. 1 9 F reque ncy of Use of Questi o n i n g . 4.20 Frequ e ncy of Use of Co-operati o n .
4.21 Fre q u e ncy of Use of Questio n i n g . C lassroom and Distance Learne rs as G roups.
4.22 Fre q u e ncy of Use of Co-o peratio n . Classroom and Distance Learners as G ro ups.
5. 1 M e an Scores for Reported Strategy Use. Class room and Distance Learn ers.
5.2 Categ ori es of Repo rted Strategy Use. Class room and Di stance Learners.
5.3 Mean Sco res for MSU Categ o ries. Classroom and Distance Learners.
5.4 A C o m pari son of Categ o ries of Strategy U se. Learne rs of French and J apanese .
5 . 5 Mean Sco res f o r Repo rted Strategy U s e . Learn e rs o f Fre nch and J apanese.
5 . 6 Mean Sco res f o r M S U Categ o ries. Learners o f Fre nch and Japanese.
LIST O F TAB LES
3. 1 Distribution of Ve rbal Report Subjects . 3.2 Metacog nitive Strategy Descriptions.
3.3 Cog nitive Strategy Descri ptions.
3.4 Social Strategy Descri pti ons.
3.5 Affective Strategy Descri ptio ns.
3.6 Distri bution of Subj ects i n Questionnai re Pi lot Study.
4. 1 Freque ncy of Metacog nitive Strategy Use.
4.2 Influe nces on Metacog nitive Strategy Use.
4.3 Standardised Coeffici e nts and Co rre lation Coefficients for MSU Variables. Mode of Study as G roups.
4.4 Standardised Coeffici e nts and Corre lation Coefficie nts for MSU Variables. Age of Lea rn e rs as G roups.
4.5 Mean Scores fo r Use of Metacognitive St rategies by Ag e G roups.
4.6 Mean Sco res fo r Use of Metacog nitive Strategies by Ag e Groups.
4.7
4.8
Classroom Learners.
Mean Scores fo r Use of Metacognitive Strategies by Age G rou ps.
Distance Learne rs.
Du ncan's test fo r the Com parison of Mean s. Age G roups fo r the Fi rst Canonical Vari ate .
4.9 Values fo r Variables I nteracting with Mode of Study and MSU Variables.
4. 1 0 Standardised Coefficie nts and Co rre lation Co efficients for MSU Variables. 200- level Classroom and Distance Learne rs as G roups.
4. 1 1 Standardised Coefficie nts and Co rre lation Coeffi cie nts for MSU Variables. Grade 'B' Classroom and Distance Le arn e rs as G roups.
4. 1 2 Standardised Coefficie nts and Co rrelation C oefficie nts fo r MSU Variables. Classroom and Distance Learn e rs of J apanese as G roups.
