臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

摘要

本研究之目的在於探究綜合高中學生之語言學習策略，由於相關的研究較少注意到綜合高中學生所使用的語言學習策略，因此本研究即嘗試探究高雄市綜合高中學生EFL之學習策略。本研究對象包括255名綜合高中學生，主要研究問題有四：綜合高中學生最常使用之語言學習策略、學生之英語成就與語言學習策略間之關係、精熟的與非精熟的學生間所使用的語言學習策略之差異，以及男女學生間所使用的語言學習策略之差異。
學生使用的語言學習策略整體的資料來自Likert五點量表所組成的「語言學習策略量表」（SILL）。而學生們的英語成就則是蒐集自學生在基本能力測驗上所得之英語分數；並以信度分析、描述與推論統計、皮爾森積差相關、多元迴歸、單因子組內變異數分析（含事後考驗），以及獨立樣本t檢定等方法所計算與分析所蒐集的資料。
本研究之主要發現如下：
一、 綜合高中學生最常使用理解策略，而後依序是：認知策略、記憶策略、後設認知策略、情感策略，而最後則是社會策略。
二、 根據本研究發現，語言學習策略對預測學生之英語成就，具有獨特與統計上顯著的貢獻。在語言學習策略上之得分，應可做為預測學生英語成就之因素。
三、 精熟的學生較非經熟的學生，較常使用全部的學習策略（六組的策略種類與41項策略）。
四、 就本研究而言，在六組種類中，受試之52位男學生與203位女學生間並無顯著差異。而在六組種類中，女學生較男學生常使用語言學習策略。
基於本研究之結論，可提出以下之建議與教學上之應用：
一、 綜合高中學生最常使用理解策略，而後依序是認知策略、記憶策略、後設認知策略、情感策略，最後則是社會策略。但Graham（1997）指出，能使學生去計畫、控制與評估自己的學習的後設認知策略，在提升學習中，才是佔有最重要角色的策略。也因此，教師們應該在其課堂中更加著重於認知與後設認知策略之訓練，並且嘗試去將學生們較常使用理解策略之情形，轉換為使用更多的後設認知與認知策略。
二、 由於語言學習策略是可教的。根據Chamot（2004）的CALLA模式，教師應選擇明確的學習策略指導方式，並且盡可能將該指導方式融入日常教學工作之中。此外，教師也應把語言學習策略，教給在第二或外國語言課程上屬於L1的初學者，而不要等到在中級或是高級課程時才教授。如此，初學者才能把語言學習得更成功並且增加其後續學習的動機。
三、 根據本研究發現，語言學習策略對預測學生之英語成就，有著獨特且統計上顯著的貢獻。易言之，在語言學習策略上之得分，應可做為預測學生英語成就之一項因子。因此，教師可使用Oxford’s SILL 為工具來測量學生語言學習策略之使用，並試著將教師自己的語言學習策略轉換給學生。

Abstract

The purpose of the study was to investigate comprehensive high school students’ use of language learning strategies. Since research paid little attention on Language strategy use in Comprehensive High School students, therefore, the current research tried to investigate EFL learning strategies used by the students of a Comprehensive High School in Kaohsiung City. There were 255 comprehensive high school students participating in the study. There are four research questions focusing on what are the most often used language learning strategies by comprehensive high school students, the relation between students’ English achievement and language learning strategy use, the differences of language learning strategies use between proficient and non-proficient students, as well as the differences of language learning strategies used between male and female students.
General data about the students’ language learning strategy use were obtained from a Likert 5-scale, composed of Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL). Moreover, the students’ English scores of Basic Competence Test were collected as their English achievement. Data from the students’ responses were computed and analyzed by means of Reliability analysis, Descriptive and inferential statistics, Pearson Correlation, Multiple Regression, One way between-groups ANOVA with post-hoc tests and An Independent t-test.
The findings of the study are summarized as follows:
1. Comprehensive high school students used compensation strategies most often, then followed by cognitive strategies, memory strategies, metacognitive strategies, affective strategies and the least, social strategies.
2. According to our finding language learning strategy made a unique and statistically significant contribution to the prediction of Students’ English Achievement. Scores on the language learning strategy use could be served as a predictor to predict success in students’ English achievement.
3. Proficient students reported higher frequency of usage of overall strategy use, all six groups of strategy categories, and 41 strategies than did non-proficient students ( Appendix C ).
4. In terms of the present study indicated that there was no significant difference in the six categories between 52 male and 203 female students.
However, female students reported to use language learnig strategies more often than did non-proficient students among the six categories.
Based on the results of the study, some recommendation and pedagogical implications are provided in the following section:
1. Comprehensive high school students used compensation strategies most often, then followed by cognitive strategies, memory strategies, metacognitive strategies, affective strategies and the least, social strategies. However, Graham (1997) stated that metacognitive strategies, that allowed students to plan, control, and evaluate their learning, had the most central role to play in improvement of learning. Therefore, the teachers should emphasize more training on cognitive and metacognitive strategies in their courses and tried to transfer their students’ use of strategies from more comprehensive strategies to more metacognitive and cognitive strategies.
2. According to our finding language learning strategy made a unique and statistically significant contribution to the prediction of Students’ English Achievement. Therefore, scores on the language learning strategy use could be served as a predictor to predict success in students’ English achievement. For this reason, teachers could use Oxford’s SILL as an instrument to measure their student’s use of language learning strategies and tried to transfer their experiences of LLS use to their students.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION 1
Motivation 1
Purpose of this Study 2
Research Questions 3
Significance of this Study 3
Limitations of this study 4
Terms 4
Overview of this study 5

CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW 7
Language learning strategies 7
The identification of language learning strategies 8
Definition and classification of language learning strategies 11
Correlation of strategies used and language proficiency 17
Research on sex differences and language learning strategy use 19
Summary 20

CHAPTER III METHODOLOGY 22
Participants 22
Instrument 22
The Students’ Proficiency Criteria 24
Pilot Study 25
Procedures 26
Data Analysis 28
Summary 30

CHAPTER IV RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 31
Reliability Coefficients for the Six Strategy Categories 32
Pearson Correlation 36
Multiple Regression 38
One-way between- groups ANOVA with post-hoc tests 39
An Independent t-test 41
Memory Strategies 42
Cognitive Strategies 43
Compensation Strategies 45
Metacognitive Strategies 46
Affective strategies 48
Social Strategies 49
Summary 54

CHAPTER V FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS 55
Summary of the Findings 55
Findings of the study 56
Conclusions 61
Pedagogical Implications of the Study 63
Suggestions for Further Research 65

REFERENCES 66
APPENDIX 74
APPENDIX A : Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL) 75
APPENDIX B : 英語學習策略量表 79
APPENDIX C : Descriptive Analysis of Proficient and Non-Proficient Students 83
APPENDIX D : 問卷使用同意書 consent form 85

REFERENCES
Abraham, R. G., & Vann, R. J. (1987). Strategies of two language learners: A case study. In Wenden and Rubin (Eds.), Learner strategies in language learning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Afflerbach, P. (2000). Verbal reports and protocol analysis. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.), Handbook of reading research, volume III (pp. 163-179). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Anderson, N. J. (2002). The role of metacognition in second language teaching and learning. ERIC Digest. Education Resources Information Center.
Bialystok, E. & Frohilich, M. (1978). Variables of classroom achievement in second language learning. Modern Language Journal, 62, 327-336.
Bialystok, E. (1979). The role of conscious strategies in second language proficiency. Canadian Modern Language Review, 35, 372-394.
Bialystok, Ellen (1978). A theoretical model of second language learning, Language Learning, 28(1), 69-83.
Bialystok, Ellen (1991). Achieving proficiency in a second language: a processing description. In R. Philipson, E. Kellerman, L. Selinker, M. Sharwood Smith & M. Swain (Eds.), Foreign / second language pedagogy research. A commemorative volume for claus faerch (Vol. 64, pp. 63-78). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Brown, H. D. (1980). Principles and practices of language learning and teaching. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Brown, H. D. (1994). Principles of language learning and teaching. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Chamot, A.U. (2004). Issues in language learning strategy research and teaching. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 1 (1), 14-26.
Chamot, A.U., & El-Dinary, P.B. (1999). Children's learning strategies in immersion classrooms. The Modern Language Journal, 83(3), 319-341.
Chang, S. Y. (2003). The effects of the English learning strategies teaching on learning performance and self-efficacy among junior high school students. Unpublished Master’s Thesis, Tzu Chi University.
Chang, Y. J. (1996). A Study of English Learning Motivation and Strategies in Relation to the English Learning Achievement of Junior High School Students in Taiwan. Unpublished Master’s Thesis, National Kaohsiung Normal University.
Chen, I. J. (2002). Language Learning Strategies Used by High and Low English Proficiency Students in a Technology College. Unpublished Master’s Thesis, National Changhua University of Education.
Chi, F. M. (紀鳳鳴). (1997). 探討並比較良好與不良高中閱讀者的閱讀過程. Proceedings of the Fourteenth Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China. (pp. 19-33). Taipei: The Crane Publishing Co.
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Ehrman, M. & Oxford, R. (1989). Effects of sex differences, career choice, and psychological type on adults’ language learning strategies. Modern Language Journal, 73, 3-13.
Ehrman, M., & Oxford, R. (1990). Adult language learning styles and strategies in an intensive training setting. The modern language journal, 74(3), 311-327.
Ehrman, M., & Oxford, R. (1995). Cognitive plus: correlations of language learning success. Modern Language Journal, 79, 67-89.
Ellis, G., & Sinclair, B. (1994). Learning to learn English. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ellis, R. (1986). Understanding second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. London: Oxford University Press.
Graham, S. (1997). Effective language learning. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.
Green, J, M., & Oxford, R. (1995). A closer look at learning strategies, L2 Proficiency and Gender. TESOL Quarterly, 29(2), 261-297.
Griffiths, Carol (2003). Patterns of language learning strategy use. System, 31, 367-383.
Griffiths, Carol (2004). Language learning strategies: Theory and research. Occasional Paper,1, 1-30.
Ho, I. P. (1999). Relationship between motivation, attitude, effort, and English proficiency and Taiwan technological university students’ English learning strategy use. 台北科技大學學報，第三十二之一期，頁611-667.
Hosenfield, C. (1976). Learning about learning: Discovering our students’ strategies. Foreign Language Annals, 9, 117-129.
Hsu F. C. & Tuan W. J. (1997). Language learning strategy choice among Chinese EFL junior college students in regular and advanced classes. Paper Published at the Twelve National Conference on Technical and Vocational Education (pp. 361-370). Taipei, Taiwan, R. O. C.
Huang, L. S. (1999). Promoting English listening proficiency through summary and dictation methods. Papers from the Sixteenth Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China. (pp. 453-463). Taipei: The Crane Publishing Co.
Ku, P. Y. (1995). Strategies associated with proficiency and predictors of strategy choice: A study on language learning strategies of EFL students at three educational levels in Taiwan. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, Indiana.
Kuo, H. W. (1999). The Effects of English Strategy Training on English Underachievers in Senior High School. Unpublished Master’s Thesis, National Chung Cheng University.
Liu, M. L. (2004). A study of beliefs about language learning and learning strategies of senior high school students. Unpublished Master’s Thesis, National Kaohsiung Normal University.
Mullins, P. Y. (1992). Successful English language learning strategies of students enrolled at the faculty of arts, Chulaongkorn University, Bankok, Thailand. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, United States International University.
Naiman, N., Frohlich, M., & Todesco, A. (1975). The good second language learner. TESL Talk, 6, 58-75.
Naiman, N., Frohlich, M., Stern, H. H. & Todesco, A. (1978). The Good Language Learner. Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education.
Nyikos, Martha & Rebecca Oxford (1993). A factor Analytic Study of Language- Learning Strategy Use: Interpretations from Information-Processing Theory and Social Psychology, The Modern Language Journal, 77, 11-22.
O’Malley, J Michael, Anna Uhl Chamot, Gloria Stewner-Manzanares, Lisa Kupper & Rocco P Russo (1985a). Learning strategies used by beginning and intermediate ESL students, Language Learning, 35(1), 21-46.
O’Malley, J. M. (1987). The effects of training in the use of learning strategies on learning English as a second language. In Anita Wenden & Joan Rubin (eds) Learner strategies in language learning (pp.133-143). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice/Hall.
O'Malley, J. M., & Chamot, A. U. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
O'Malley, J. M., Chamot, A.U., Stewner-Manzanares, G., Kupper, L., & Russo, R. P. (1985b). Learning strategy applications with students of English as a second language. TESOL Quarterly, 19, 557-584.
Oxford, R. & Crookall, D. (1989). Research on language learning strategies: Methods, findings, and instructional issues. Modern Language Journal, 73(4), 404-419.
Oxford, R. & Nyikos, M. (1989). Variables affecting choices of language learning strategies by university students. Modern Language Journal, 73, 291-300.
Oxford, R. L (1990a). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. New York: Newbury House Publishers.
Oxford, R. L. (1990b). Styles, strategies, and aptitude: Connections for language learning. In Parry, T.S. and C.W. Stansfield (Eds.) Language aptitude reconsidered. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall Regents.
Oxford, R.L. (1994). Language learning strategies: An updated. Eric Clearinghouse on Languages and Linguistics, (online).
Politzer, R. (1983). Research notes: An exploratory study of self reported language learning behaviors and their relation to achievement. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 6, 54-68.
Politzer, R. L., & McGroarty, M. (1985). An exploratory study of learning behaviors and their relationship to gains in linguistic and communicative competence. TESOL Quarterly, 19, 103-123.
Porte, Graeme (1988). Poor language learners and their strategies for dealing with new vocabulary, ELT Journal, 42(3), 167-171.
Reiss, M. (1983). Helping the unsuccessful language learner. Forum, 21 (2), 1-8.
Rigney, J.W. (1978). Learning strategies: A theoretical perspective. In H F O’Neil (Jr) (ed) Learning strategies, 165-205.
Robbins, J. (1996). Between “Hello” and “See you Later”: Development of strategies for interpersonal communication in English by Japanese EFL students. Published Ph.D. Dissertation. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan (University Microfilms, International. UMI number: 9634593).
Rubin, J. (1975). What the "good language learner" can teach us. TESOL Quarterly, 9, 41-51.
Rubin, J. (1981). Study of cognitive process in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11, 118-131.
Stern, H. H. (1975). What can we learn from the good language learner? Canadian Modern Language Review, 31, 304-318.
Stern, H. H. (1983). Fundamental concepts of language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Stern, H. H. (1992). Issues and options in language teaching (edited posthumously by Patrick Allen & Birgit Harley). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sy, B. & Liu, S. (1996). Sex differences And Language Learning Strategies. Proceedings of the 11th conference on English teaching and learning in R.O.C. (pp. 19-51). Taipei: The Crane Publishing Co.
Tarone, Elaine (1980). Communication strategies, foreigner talk, and repair in interlanguage, Language Learning, 30/2, 417-429.
Teng, H. (2000). An investigation of EFL learning strategies used by technology college students. Proceedings of the 12th national conference on technical and vocational education. (pp. 361-370), Taipei, Taiwan.
Tseng, C. S. (2001). Language Learners’ Preferences in Language Learning Strategies: Focus on Personality Differences. Unpublished Master’s Thesis, National Changhua University of Education.
Tseng, S. W. (2004). The Relationship between Foreign Language Anxiety and English Learning Strategy of Elementary School Students. Unpublished Master’s Thesis, National Taichung Normal University.
Tuan, H. T & Hsu, C. F. (1996). Language proficiency as a variable influencing language learning strategy choice. The Proceedings of the Fifth International Symposium on English Teaching. (pp. 91-107). Taipei: The Crane Publishing Co.
Tuan, J. H. (1995). A study on the relationship between communication strategies and language proficiency. Paper published at the tenth National Conference on Technical and Vocational Education, Taipei, Taiwan, R. O. C.
Wenden, A. L. (1987). How to be a successful language learner: Insights and prescriptions from L2 Learners. In Wenden, A. and Rubin, J. (Eds.), Learner Strategies in Language Learning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Wenden, A. L. (1991). Learner strategies for learner autonomy. UK: Prentice Hall.
Yang, N. D. (1994). A study of factors affecting college EFL students' use of learning strategies. Papers from the eleventh conference on English teaching and learning in the Republic of China, 53-82.
Yang, N. D. (1999). The relationship between EFL learners beliefs and learning strategy use. System, 27, 515-535.
Yang, Nae-Dong (1998). An interviewing study of college students’ English learning strategy use, Studies in English language and literature, 4, 1-11.
Yang, P. L. (1992). Learning strategies and techniques among high-achieving students of English as a foreign language in ROC’s high schools. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Kaohsiung Normal University.
Yang, Y. F. & Kuo, H. S. (2000). Vocabulary comprehension strategies employed by proficient and less-proficient readers in NYUST (National Yunlin University of Science and Technology). The Ninth International Symposium and Book Fair on English Teaching.