- ข้อความ
- ประวัติศาสตร์
Language learning strategies are id
Language learning strategies are identified through self-report. Although self-report may be inaccurate
if the learner does not report truthfully, it is still the only way to identify learners’ mental
processing. As Grenfell and Harris (1999) have so aptly stated:
[…] it is not easy to get inside the ‘black box’ of the human brain and find out what is going on there. We
work with what we can get, which, despite the limitations, provides food for thought […]
(p. 54)
Learning strategies are for the most part unobservable, though some may be associated with an
observable behavior. For example, a learner could use selective attention (unobservable) to focus
on the main ideas while listening to a newscast and could then decide to take notes (observable) in
order to remember the information. In almost all learning contexts, the only way to find out
whether students are using learning strategies while engaged in a language task is to ask them.
Verbal report data are used to identify language learning strategies because observation does not
capture mental processes (Cohen, 1998; O’Malley & Chamot, 1990; Rubin, 1975; Wenden, 1991).
Researchers have asked language learners to describe their learning processes and strategies
through retrospective interviews, stimulated recall interviews, questionnaires, written diaries and
journals, and think-aloud protocols concurrent with a learning task. Each of these methods has
limitations, but each provides important insights into unobservable mental learning strategies.
In retrospective interviews, learners are asked to describe what they were thinking or doing
during a recently completed learning task (see O’Malley & Chamot, 1990). The limitation is that
students may forget some of the details of their thought processes or may describe what they perceive
as the “right” answer. A stimulated recall interview is more likely to accurately reveal students’
actual learning strategies during a task because the student is videotaped while performing
the task, and the interviewer then plays back the videotape, pausing as necessary, and asking the
student to describe his or her thoughts at that specific moment during the learning task (see Robbins,
1996).
The most frequent and efficient method for identifying students’ learning strategies is through
questionnaires. The limitations are that students may not remember the strategies they have used in
the past, may claim to use strategies that in fact they do not use, or may not understand the strategy
descriptions in the questionnaire items. For these reasons, some studies have developed questionnaires
based on tasks that students have just completed, reasoning that students will be more likely
to remember and to report accurately if little time has elapsed (see Chamot & El-Dinary, 1999;
Chamot & Küpper, 1989; Ellis & Sinclair, 1989; Fan, 2003; Kojic-Sabo & Lightbown, 1999; National
Capital Language Resource Center [NCLRC], 2000a, 2000b; O’Malley & Chamot, 1990;
Oxford et al., 2004; Ozeki, 2000; Rubin & Thompson, 1994; Weaver & Cohen, 1997). The limita16
Anna Uhl Chamot
tions of this approach are that, to date, there has been no standardization of either tasks or followup
questionnaires, so that it is impossible to make comparisons across studies.
The greatest numbers of descriptive studies have utilized a questionnaire developed by Oxford
(1990), the Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL). This instrument has been used extensively
to collect data on large numbers of mostly foreign language learners (see Cohen, Weaver
& Li, 1998; Nyikos & Oxford, 1993; Olivares-Cuhat, 2002; Oxford, 1990; 1996; Oxford & Burry-
Stock, 1995; Wharton, 2000). The SILL is a standardized measure with versions for students of a
variety of languages, and as such can be used to collect and analyze information about large numbers
of language learners. It has also been used in studies that correlate strategy use with variables
such as learning styles, gender, proficiency level, and culture (Bedell & Oxford, 1996; Bruen,
2001; Green & Oxford, 1995; Nyikos & Oxford, 1993; Oxford & Burry-Stock, 1995; Wharton,
2000). Oxford and her colleagues are currently working on a task-based questionnaire to complement
the SILL (Oxford et al., 2004).
Diaries and journals have also been used to collect information about language learners’ strategies.
In these, learners write personal observations about their own learning experiences and the
ways in which they have solved or attempted to solve language problems (see, for example, Carson
& Longhini, 2002). Student learning strategy diaries have also been used to collect data about
pronunciation strategies (Peterson, 2000). As with other verbal reports, learners may not necessarily
provide accurate descriptions of their learning strategies. Rubin (2003) suggests using diaries
for instructional purposes as a way to help students develop metacognitive awareness of their own
learning processes and strategies.
Another research tool is the think-aloud individual interview in which the learner is given a
learning task and asked to describe his or her thoughts while working on it. The interviewer may
prompt with open-ended questions such as, “What are you thinking right now? Why did you stop
and start over?” Recordings of think-aloud interviews are analyzed for evidence of learning strategies.
Verbal protocols have been used extensively in reading research in first language contexts,
where they have provided insights not only into reading comprehension processes but also into
learners’ affective and motivational states (Afflerbach, 2000). The rich insights into languagelearning
strategies provided through think-aloud protocols tend to reveal on-line processing, rather
than metacognitive aspects of planning or evaluating (see Chamot & Keatley, 2003; Chamot,
Keatley, Barnhardt, El-Dinary, Nagano, & Newman, 1996; Cohen et al., 1998; O’Malley, Chamot
& Küpper, 1989).
The instructional applications of the tools that researchers have used to identify language learning
strategies are especially valuable for teachers who wish to discover their students’ current
learning strategies before beginning to teach learning strategies. For example, teachers can ask
students to complete a language task, and then lead a classroom discussion about how students
completed the task and point out the learning strategies that students mention. Teachers could also
develop a questionnaire appropriate for the age and proficiency level of their students and have
students complete it immediately after completing a task. For a more global picture of their students’
learning strategies in general, teachers might want to use the SILL. When strategy instruction
is underway and students show evidence that they understand and are using some of the
strategies independently, teachers could ask them to keep a diary or journal about their use of
strategies in the language class and in other contexts, thus encouraging transfer. Teachers can
make their own thinking public by “thinking aloud” as they work on a task familiar to students,
commenting on their own learning strategies as they go. All of these approaches can help students
develop their own metacognition about themselves as strategic learners.
if the learner does not report truthfully, it is still the only way to identify learners’ mental
processing. As Grenfell and Harris (1999) have so aptly stated:
[…] it is not easy to get inside the ‘black box’ of the human brain and find out what is going on there. We
work with what we can get, which, despite the limitations, provides food for thought […]
(p. 54)
Learning strategies are for the most part unobservable, though some may be associated with an
observable behavior. For example, a learner could use selective attention (unobservable) to focus
on the main ideas while listening to a newscast and could then decide to take notes (observable) in
order to remember the information. In almost all learning contexts, the only way to find out
whether students are using learning strategies while engaged in a language task is to ask them.
Verbal report data are used to identify language learning strategies because observation does not
capture mental processes (Cohen, 1998; O’Malley & Chamot, 1990; Rubin, 1975; Wenden, 1991).
Researchers have asked language learners to describe their learning processes and strategies
through retrospective interviews, stimulated recall interviews, questionnaires, written diaries and
journals, and think-aloud protocols concurrent with a learning task. Each of these methods has
limitations, but each provides important insights into unobservable mental learning strategies.
In retrospective interviews, learners are asked to describe what they were thinking or doing
during a recently completed learning task (see O’Malley & Chamot, 1990). The limitation is that
students may forget some of the details of their thought processes or may describe what they perceive
as the “right” answer. A stimulated recall interview is more likely to accurately reveal students’
actual learning strategies during a task because the student is videotaped while performing
the task, and the interviewer then plays back the videotape, pausing as necessary, and asking the
student to describe his or her thoughts at that specific moment during the learning task (see Robbins,
1996).
The most frequent and efficient method for identifying students’ learning strategies is through
questionnaires. The limitations are that students may not remember the strategies they have used in
the past, may claim to use strategies that in fact they do not use, or may not understand the strategy
descriptions in the questionnaire items. For these reasons, some studies have developed questionnaires
based on tasks that students have just completed, reasoning that students will be more likely
to remember and to report accurately if little time has elapsed (see Chamot & El-Dinary, 1999;
Chamot & Küpper, 1989; Ellis & Sinclair, 1989; Fan, 2003; Kojic-Sabo & Lightbown, 1999; National
Capital Language Resource Center [NCLRC], 2000a, 2000b; O’Malley & Chamot, 1990;
Oxford et al., 2004; Ozeki, 2000; Rubin & Thompson, 1994; Weaver & Cohen, 1997). The limita16
Anna Uhl Chamot
tions of this approach are that, to date, there has been no standardization of either tasks or followup
questionnaires, so that it is impossible to make comparisons across studies.
The greatest numbers of descriptive studies have utilized a questionnaire developed by Oxford
(1990), the Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL). This instrument has been used extensively
to collect data on large numbers of mostly foreign language learners (see Cohen, Weaver
& Li, 1998; Nyikos & Oxford, 1993; Olivares-Cuhat, 2002; Oxford, 1990; 1996; Oxford & Burry-
Stock, 1995; Wharton, 2000). The SILL is a standardized measure with versions for students of a
variety of languages, and as such can be used to collect and analyze information about large numbers
of language learners. It has also been used in studies that correlate strategy use with variables
such as learning styles, gender, proficiency level, and culture (Bedell & Oxford, 1996; Bruen,
2001; Green & Oxford, 1995; Nyikos & Oxford, 1993; Oxford & Burry-Stock, 1995; Wharton,
2000). Oxford and her colleagues are currently working on a task-based questionnaire to complement
the SILL (Oxford et al., 2004).
Diaries and journals have also been used to collect information about language learners’ strategies.
In these, learners write personal observations about their own learning experiences and the
ways in which they have solved or attempted to solve language problems (see, for example, Carson
& Longhini, 2002). Student learning strategy diaries have also been used to collect data about
pronunciation strategies (Peterson, 2000). As with other verbal reports, learners may not necessarily
provide accurate descriptions of their learning strategies. Rubin (2003) suggests using diaries
for instructional purposes as a way to help students develop metacognitive awareness of their own
learning processes and strategies.
Another research tool is the think-aloud individual interview in which the learner is given a
learning task and asked to describe his or her thoughts while working on it. The interviewer may
prompt with open-ended questions such as, “What are you thinking right now? Why did you stop
and start over?” Recordings of think-aloud interviews are analyzed for evidence of learning strategies.
Verbal protocols have been used extensively in reading research in first language contexts,
where they have provided insights not only into reading comprehension processes but also into
learners’ affective and motivational states (Afflerbach, 2000). The rich insights into languagelearning
strategies provided through think-aloud protocols tend to reveal on-line processing, rather
than metacognitive aspects of planning or evaluating (see Chamot & Keatley, 2003; Chamot,
Keatley, Barnhardt, El-Dinary, Nagano, & Newman, 1996; Cohen et al., 1998; O’Malley, Chamot
& Küpper, 1989).
The instructional applications of the tools that researchers have used to identify language learning
strategies are especially valuable for teachers who wish to discover their students’ current
learning strategies before beginning to teach learning strategies. For example, teachers can ask
students to complete a language task, and then lead a classroom discussion about how students
completed the task and point out the learning strategies that students mention. Teachers could also
develop a questionnaire appropriate for the age and proficiency level of their students and have
students complete it immediately after completing a task. For a more global picture of their students’
learning strategies in general, teachers might want to use the SILL. When strategy instruction
is underway and students show evidence that they understand and are using some of the
strategies independently, teachers could ask them to keep a diary or journal about their use of
strategies in the language class and in other contexts, thus encouraging transfer. Teachers can
make their own thinking public by “thinking aloud” as they work on a task familiar to students,
commenting on their own learning strategies as they go. All of these approaches can help students
develop their own metacognition about themselves as strategic learners.
0/5000
Language learning strategies are identified through self-report. Although self-report may be inaccurateif the learner does not report truthfully, it is still the only way to identify learners’ mentalprocessing. As Grenfell and Harris (1999) have so aptly stated:[…] it is not easy to get inside the ‘black box’ of the human brain and find out what is going on there. Wework with what we can get, which, despite the limitations, provides food for thought […](p. 54)Learning strategies are for the most part unobservable, though some may be associated with anobservable behavior. For example, a learner could use selective attention (unobservable) to focuson the main ideas while listening to a newscast and could then decide to take notes (observable) inorder to remember the information. In almost all learning contexts, the only way to find outwhether students are using learning strategies while engaged in a language task is to ask them.Verbal report data are used to identify language learning strategies because observation does notcapture mental processes (Cohen, 1998; O’Malley & Chamot, 1990; Rubin, 1975; Wenden, 1991).Researchers have asked language learners to describe their learning processes and strategiesthrough retrospective interviews, stimulated recall interviews, questionnaires, written diaries andjournals, and think-aloud protocols concurrent with a learning task. Each of these methods haslimitations, but each provides important insights into unobservable mental learning strategies.In retrospective interviews, learners are asked to describe what they were thinking or doingduring a recently completed learning task (see O’Malley & Chamot, 1990). The limitation is thatstudents may forget some of the details of their thought processes or may describe what they perceiveas the “right” answer. A stimulated recall interview is more likely to accurately reveal students’actual learning strategies during a task because the student is videotaped while performingthe task, and the interviewer then plays back the videotape, pausing as necessary, and asking thestudent to describe his or her thoughts at that specific moment during the learning task (see Robbins,1996).The most frequent and efficient method for identifying students’ learning strategies is throughquestionnaires. The limitations are that students may not remember the strategies they have used inthe past, may claim to use strategies that in fact they do not use, or may not understand the strategydescriptions in the questionnaire items. For these reasons, some studies have developed questionnairesbased on tasks that students have just completed, reasoning that students will be more likelyto remember and to report accurately if little time has elapsed (see Chamot & El-Dinary, 1999;Chamot & Küpper, 1989; Ellis & Sinclair, 1989; Fan, 2003; Kojic-Sabo & Lightbown, 1999; NationalCapital Language Resource Center [NCLRC], 2000a, 2000b; O’Malley & Chamot, 1990;
Oxford et al., 2004; Ozeki, 2000; Rubin & Thompson, 1994; Weaver & Cohen, 1997). The limita16
Anna Uhl Chamot
tions of this approach are that, to date, there has been no standardization of either tasks or followup
questionnaires, so that it is impossible to make comparisons across studies.
The greatest numbers of descriptive studies have utilized a questionnaire developed by Oxford
(1990), the Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL). This instrument has been used extensively
to collect data on large numbers of mostly foreign language learners (see Cohen, Weaver
& Li, 1998; Nyikos & Oxford, 1993; Olivares-Cuhat, 2002; Oxford, 1990; 1996; Oxford & Burry-
Stock, 1995; Wharton, 2000). The SILL is a standardized measure with versions for students of a
variety of languages, and as such can be used to collect and analyze information about large numbers
of language learners. It has also been used in studies that correlate strategy use with variables
such as learning styles, gender, proficiency level, and culture (Bedell & Oxford, 1996; Bruen,
2001; Green & Oxford, 1995; Nyikos & Oxford, 1993; Oxford & Burry-Stock, 1995; Wharton,
2000). Oxford and her colleagues are currently working on a task-based questionnaire to complement
the SILL (Oxford et al., 2004).
Diaries and journals have also been used to collect information about language learners’ strategies.
In these, learners write personal observations about their own learning experiences and the
ways in which they have solved or attempted to solve language problems (see, for example, Carson
& Longhini, 2002). Student learning strategy diaries have also been used to collect data about
pronunciation strategies (Peterson, 2000). As with other verbal reports, learners may not necessarily
provide accurate descriptions of their learning strategies. Rubin (2003) suggests using diaries
for instructional purposes as a way to help students develop metacognitive awareness of their own
learning processes and strategies.
Another research tool is the think-aloud individual interview in which the learner is given a
learning task and asked to describe his or her thoughts while working on it. The interviewer may
prompt with open-ended questions such as, “What are you thinking right now? Why did you stop
and start over?” Recordings of think-aloud interviews are analyzed for evidence of learning strategies.
Verbal protocols have been used extensively in reading research in first language contexts,
where they have provided insights not only into reading comprehension processes but also into
learners’ affective and motivational states (Afflerbach, 2000). The rich insights into languagelearning
strategies provided through think-aloud protocols tend to reveal on-line processing, rather
than metacognitive aspects of planning or evaluating (see Chamot & Keatley, 2003; Chamot,
Keatley, Barnhardt, El-Dinary, Nagano, & Newman, 1996; Cohen et al., 1998; O’Malley, Chamot
& Küpper, 1989).
The instructional applications of the tools that researchers have used to identify language learning
strategies are especially valuable for teachers who wish to discover their students’ current
learning strategies before beginning to teach learning strategies. For example, teachers can ask
students to complete a language task, and then lead a classroom discussion about how students
completed the task and point out the learning strategies that students mention. Teachers could also
develop a questionnaire appropriate for the age and proficiency level of their students and have
students complete it immediately after completing a task. For a more global picture of their students’
learning strategies in general, teachers might want to use the SILL. When strategy instruction
is underway and students show evidence that they understand and are using some of the
strategies independently, teachers could ask them to keep a diary or journal about their use of
strategies in the language class and in other contexts, thus encouraging transfer. Teachers can
make their own thinking public by “thinking aloud” as they work on a task familiar to students,
commenting on their own learning strategies as they go. All of these approaches can help students
develop their own metacognition about themselves as strategic learners.
Oxford et al., 2004; Ozeki, 2000; Rubin & Thompson, 1994; Weaver & Cohen, 1997). The limita16
Anna Uhl Chamot
tions of this approach are that, to date, there has been no standardization of either tasks or followup
questionnaires, so that it is impossible to make comparisons across studies.
The greatest numbers of descriptive studies have utilized a questionnaire developed by Oxford
(1990), the Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL). This instrument has been used extensively
to collect data on large numbers of mostly foreign language learners (see Cohen, Weaver
& Li, 1998; Nyikos & Oxford, 1993; Olivares-Cuhat, 2002; Oxford, 1990; 1996; Oxford & Burry-
Stock, 1995; Wharton, 2000). The SILL is a standardized measure with versions for students of a
variety of languages, and as such can be used to collect and analyze information about large numbers
of language learners. It has also been used in studies that correlate strategy use with variables
such as learning styles, gender, proficiency level, and culture (Bedell & Oxford, 1996; Bruen,
2001; Green & Oxford, 1995; Nyikos & Oxford, 1993; Oxford & Burry-Stock, 1995; Wharton,
2000). Oxford and her colleagues are currently working on a task-based questionnaire to complement
the SILL (Oxford et al., 2004).
Diaries and journals have also been used to collect information about language learners’ strategies.
In these, learners write personal observations about their own learning experiences and the
ways in which they have solved or attempted to solve language problems (see, for example, Carson
& Longhini, 2002). Student learning strategy diaries have also been used to collect data about
pronunciation strategies (Peterson, 2000). As with other verbal reports, learners may not necessarily
provide accurate descriptions of their learning strategies. Rubin (2003) suggests using diaries
for instructional purposes as a way to help students develop metacognitive awareness of their own
learning processes and strategies.
Another research tool is the think-aloud individual interview in which the learner is given a
learning task and asked to describe his or her thoughts while working on it. The interviewer may
prompt with open-ended questions such as, “What are you thinking right now? Why did you stop
and start over?” Recordings of think-aloud interviews are analyzed for evidence of learning strategies.
Verbal protocols have been used extensively in reading research in first language contexts,
where they have provided insights not only into reading comprehension processes but also into
learners’ affective and motivational states (Afflerbach, 2000). The rich insights into languagelearning
strategies provided through think-aloud protocols tend to reveal on-line processing, rather
than metacognitive aspects of planning or evaluating (see Chamot & Keatley, 2003; Chamot,
Keatley, Barnhardt, El-Dinary, Nagano, & Newman, 1996; Cohen et al., 1998; O’Malley, Chamot
& Küpper, 1989).
The instructional applications of the tools that researchers have used to identify language learning
strategies are especially valuable for teachers who wish to discover their students’ current
learning strategies before beginning to teach learning strategies. For example, teachers can ask
students to complete a language task, and then lead a classroom discussion about how students
completed the task and point out the learning strategies that students mention. Teachers could also
develop a questionnaire appropriate for the age and proficiency level of their students and have
students complete it immediately after completing a task. For a more global picture of their students’
learning strategies in general, teachers might want to use the SILL. When strategy instruction
is underway and students show evidence that they understand and are using some of the
strategies independently, teachers could ask them to keep a diary or journal about their use of
strategies in the language class and in other contexts, thus encouraging transfer. Teachers can
make their own thinking public by “thinking aloud” as they work on a task familiar to students,
commenting on their own learning strategies as they go. All of these approaches can help students
develop their own metacognition about themselves as strategic learners.
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..
Language learning strategies are identified through self-report. Although self-report may be inaccurate
if the learner does not report truthfully, it is still the only way to identify learners’ mental
processing. As Grenfell and Harris (1999) have so aptly stated:
[…] it is not easy to get inside the ‘black box’ of the human brain and find out what is going on there. We
work with what we can get, which, despite the limitations, provides food for thought […]
(p. 54)
Learning strategies are for the most part unobservable, though some may be associated with an
observable behavior. For example, a learner could use selective attention (unobservable) to focus
on the main ideas while listening to a newscast and could then decide to take notes (observable) in
order to remember the information. In almost all learning contexts, the only way to find out
whether students are using learning strategies while engaged in a language task is to ask them.
Verbal report data are used to identify language learning strategies because observation does not
capture mental processes (Cohen, 1998; O’Malley & Chamot, 1990; Rubin, 1975; Wenden, 1991).
Researchers have asked language learners to describe their learning processes and strategies
through retrospective interviews, stimulated recall interviews, questionnaires, written diaries and
journals, and think-aloud protocols concurrent with a learning task. Each of these methods has
limitations, but each provides important insights into unobservable mental learning strategies.
In retrospective interviews, learners are asked to describe what they were thinking or doing
during a recently completed learning task (see O’Malley & Chamot, 1990). The limitation is that
students may forget some of the details of their thought processes or may describe what they perceive
as the “right” answer. A stimulated recall interview is more likely to accurately reveal students’
actual learning strategies during a task because the student is videotaped while performing
the task, and the interviewer then plays back the videotape, pausing as necessary, and asking the
student to describe his or her thoughts at that specific moment during the learning task (see Robbins,
1996).
The most frequent and efficient method for identifying students’ learning strategies is through
questionnaires. The limitations are that students may not remember the strategies they have used in
the past, may claim to use strategies that in fact they do not use, or may not understand the strategy
descriptions in the questionnaire items. For these reasons, some studies have developed questionnaires
based on tasks that students have just completed, reasoning that students will be more likely
to remember and to report accurately if little time has elapsed (see Chamot & El-Dinary, 1999;
Chamot & Küpper, 1989; Ellis & Sinclair, 1989; Fan, 2003; Kojic-Sabo & Lightbown, 1999; National
Capital Language Resource Center [NCLRC], 2000a, 2000b; O’Malley & Chamot, 1990;
Oxford et al., 2004; Ozeki, 2000; Rubin & Thompson, 1994; Weaver & Cohen, 1997). The limita16
Anna Uhl Chamot
tions of this approach are that, to date, there has been no standardization of either tasks or followup
questionnaires, so that it is impossible to make comparisons across studies.
The greatest numbers of descriptive studies have utilized a questionnaire developed by Oxford
(1990), the Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL). This instrument has been used extensively
to collect data on large numbers of mostly foreign language learners (see Cohen, Weaver
& Li, 1998; Nyikos & Oxford, 1993; Olivares-Cuhat, 2002; Oxford, 1990; 1996; Oxford & Burry-
Stock, 1995; Wharton, 2000). The SILL is a standardized measure with versions for students of a
variety of languages, and as such can be used to collect and analyze information about large numbers
of language learners. It has also been used in studies that correlate strategy use with variables
such as learning styles, gender, proficiency level, and culture (Bedell & Oxford, 1996; Bruen,
2001; Green & Oxford, 1995; Nyikos & Oxford, 1993; Oxford & Burry-Stock, 1995; Wharton,
2000). Oxford and her colleagues are currently working on a task-based questionnaire to complement
the SILL (Oxford et al., 2004).
Diaries and journals have also been used to collect information about language learners’ strategies.
In these, learners write personal observations about their own learning experiences and the
ways in which they have solved or attempted to solve language problems (see, for example, Carson
& Longhini, 2002). Student learning strategy diaries have also been used to collect data about
pronunciation strategies (Peterson, 2000). As with other verbal reports, learners may not necessarily
provide accurate descriptions of their learning strategies. Rubin (2003) suggests using diaries
for instructional purposes as a way to help students develop metacognitive awareness of their own
learning processes and strategies.
Another research tool is the think-aloud individual interview in which the learner is given a
learning task and asked to describe his or her thoughts while working on it. The interviewer may
prompt with open-ended questions such as, “What are you thinking right now? Why did you stop
and start over?” Recordings of think-aloud interviews are analyzed for evidence of learning strategies.
Verbal protocols have been used extensively in reading research in first language contexts,
where they have provided insights not only into reading comprehension processes but also into
learners’ affective and motivational states (Afflerbach, 2000). The rich insights into languagelearning
strategies provided through think-aloud protocols tend to reveal on-line processing, rather
than metacognitive aspects of planning or evaluating (see Chamot & Keatley, 2003; Chamot,
Keatley, Barnhardt, El-Dinary, Nagano, & Newman, 1996; Cohen et al., 1998; O’Malley, Chamot
& Küpper, 1989).
The instructional applications of the tools that researchers have used to identify language learning
strategies are especially valuable for teachers who wish to discover their students’ current
learning strategies before beginning to teach learning strategies. For example, teachers can ask
students to complete a language task, and then lead a classroom discussion about how students
completed the task and point out the learning strategies that students mention. Teachers could also
develop a questionnaire appropriate for the age and proficiency level of their students and have
students complete it immediately after completing a task. For a more global picture of their students’
learning strategies in general, teachers might want to use the SILL. When strategy instruction
is underway and students show evidence that they understand and are using some of the
strategies independently, teachers could ask them to keep a diary or journal about their use of
strategies in the language class and in other contexts, thus encouraging transfer. Teachers can
make their own thinking public by “thinking aloud” as they work on a task familiar to students,
commenting on their own learning strategies as they go. All of these approaches can help students
develop their own metacognition about themselves as strategic learners.
if the learner does not report truthfully, it is still the only way to identify learners’ mental
processing. As Grenfell and Harris (1999) have so aptly stated:
[…] it is not easy to get inside the ‘black box’ of the human brain and find out what is going on there. We
work with what we can get, which, despite the limitations, provides food for thought […]
(p. 54)
Learning strategies are for the most part unobservable, though some may be associated with an
observable behavior. For example, a learner could use selective attention (unobservable) to focus
on the main ideas while listening to a newscast and could then decide to take notes (observable) in
order to remember the information. In almost all learning contexts, the only way to find out
whether students are using learning strategies while engaged in a language task is to ask them.
Verbal report data are used to identify language learning strategies because observation does not
capture mental processes (Cohen, 1998; O’Malley & Chamot, 1990; Rubin, 1975; Wenden, 1991).
Researchers have asked language learners to describe their learning processes and strategies
through retrospective interviews, stimulated recall interviews, questionnaires, written diaries and
journals, and think-aloud protocols concurrent with a learning task. Each of these methods has
limitations, but each provides important insights into unobservable mental learning strategies.
In retrospective interviews, learners are asked to describe what they were thinking or doing
during a recently completed learning task (see O’Malley & Chamot, 1990). The limitation is that
students may forget some of the details of their thought processes or may describe what they perceive
as the “right” answer. A stimulated recall interview is more likely to accurately reveal students’
actual learning strategies during a task because the student is videotaped while performing
the task, and the interviewer then plays back the videotape, pausing as necessary, and asking the
student to describe his or her thoughts at that specific moment during the learning task (see Robbins,
1996).
The most frequent and efficient method for identifying students’ learning strategies is through
questionnaires. The limitations are that students may not remember the strategies they have used in
the past, may claim to use strategies that in fact they do not use, or may not understand the strategy
descriptions in the questionnaire items. For these reasons, some studies have developed questionnaires
based on tasks that students have just completed, reasoning that students will be more likely
to remember and to report accurately if little time has elapsed (see Chamot & El-Dinary, 1999;
Chamot & Küpper, 1989; Ellis & Sinclair, 1989; Fan, 2003; Kojic-Sabo & Lightbown, 1999; National
Capital Language Resource Center [NCLRC], 2000a, 2000b; O’Malley & Chamot, 1990;
Oxford et al., 2004; Ozeki, 2000; Rubin & Thompson, 1994; Weaver & Cohen, 1997). The limita16
Anna Uhl Chamot
tions of this approach are that, to date, there has been no standardization of either tasks or followup
questionnaires, so that it is impossible to make comparisons across studies.
The greatest numbers of descriptive studies have utilized a questionnaire developed by Oxford
(1990), the Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL). This instrument has been used extensively
to collect data on large numbers of mostly foreign language learners (see Cohen, Weaver
& Li, 1998; Nyikos & Oxford, 1993; Olivares-Cuhat, 2002; Oxford, 1990; 1996; Oxford & Burry-
Stock, 1995; Wharton, 2000). The SILL is a standardized measure with versions for students of a
variety of languages, and as such can be used to collect and analyze information about large numbers
of language learners. It has also been used in studies that correlate strategy use with variables
such as learning styles, gender, proficiency level, and culture (Bedell & Oxford, 1996; Bruen,
2001; Green & Oxford, 1995; Nyikos & Oxford, 1993; Oxford & Burry-Stock, 1995; Wharton,
2000). Oxford and her colleagues are currently working on a task-based questionnaire to complement
the SILL (Oxford et al., 2004).
Diaries and journals have also been used to collect information about language learners’ strategies.
In these, learners write personal observations about their own learning experiences and the
ways in which they have solved or attempted to solve language problems (see, for example, Carson
& Longhini, 2002). Student learning strategy diaries have also been used to collect data about
pronunciation strategies (Peterson, 2000). As with other verbal reports, learners may not necessarily
provide accurate descriptions of their learning strategies. Rubin (2003) suggests using diaries
for instructional purposes as a way to help students develop metacognitive awareness of their own
learning processes and strategies.
Another research tool is the think-aloud individual interview in which the learner is given a
learning task and asked to describe his or her thoughts while working on it. The interviewer may
prompt with open-ended questions such as, “What are you thinking right now? Why did you stop
and start over?” Recordings of think-aloud interviews are analyzed for evidence of learning strategies.
Verbal protocols have been used extensively in reading research in first language contexts,
where they have provided insights not only into reading comprehension processes but also into
learners’ affective and motivational states (Afflerbach, 2000). The rich insights into languagelearning
strategies provided through think-aloud protocols tend to reveal on-line processing, rather
than metacognitive aspects of planning or evaluating (see Chamot & Keatley, 2003; Chamot,
Keatley, Barnhardt, El-Dinary, Nagano, & Newman, 1996; Cohen et al., 1998; O’Malley, Chamot
& Küpper, 1989).
The instructional applications of the tools that researchers have used to identify language learning
strategies are especially valuable for teachers who wish to discover their students’ current
learning strategies before beginning to teach learning strategies. For example, teachers can ask
students to complete a language task, and then lead a classroom discussion about how students
completed the task and point out the learning strategies that students mention. Teachers could also
develop a questionnaire appropriate for the age and proficiency level of their students and have
students complete it immediately after completing a task. For a more global picture of their students’
learning strategies in general, teachers might want to use the SILL. When strategy instruction
is underway and students show evidence that they understand and are using some of the
strategies independently, teachers could ask them to keep a diary or journal about their use of
strategies in the language class and in other contexts, thus encouraging transfer. Teachers can
make their own thinking public by “thinking aloud” as they work on a task familiar to students,
commenting on their own learning strategies as they go. All of these approaches can help students
develop their own metacognition about themselves as strategic learners.
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..
กลวิธีการเรียนรู้ภาษาที่ระบุด้วยตนเอง . ถึงแม้ว่าตนเองอาจไม่ถูกต้อง
ถ้าผู้เรียนไม่ได้รายงานความจริง ยังคงเป็นวิธีเดียวที่จะระบุผู้เรียนจิต
การประมวลผล เป็นเกรนเฟลล์แฮร์ริส ( 1999 ) และได้ถูกระบุไว้ :
[ . . . ] มันไม่ง่ายที่จะได้รับภายใน ' กล่องดำ ' ของมนุษย์สมองและดูสิ่งที่เกิดขึ้นมี เรา
ทำงานกับสิ่งที่เราจะได้รับ ซึ่งแม้จะมีข้อ จำกัด ให้บริการอาหารสำหรับความคิด [ . . . ]
( หน้า 54 ) กลยุทธ์การเรียนรู้ส่วนใหญ่ unobservable , แม้ว่าบางคนอาจจะเกี่ยวข้องกับพฤติกรรมที่สังเกตได้ ตัวอย่างเช่น ผู้เรียนสามารถใช้เลือกสนใจ ( unobservable ) โฟกัส
บนหลักคิด ในขณะที่ฟังเนื้อ และอาจตัดสินใจที่จะจดบันทึก ( สังเกต )
เพื่อที่จะจำข้อมูล ในเกือบทุกการเรียนรู้บริบท วิธีเดียวที่จะหา
ไม่ว่านักเรียนจะใช้กลวิธีการเรียนรู้ภาษา ในขณะที่ร่วมในงานคือการขอให้พวกเขา .
ข้อมูลรายงานทางวาจาจะใช้เพื่อระบุกลยุทธ์การเรียนภาษา เพราะสังเกตไม่ได้
จับกระบวนการทางจิต ( Cohen , 2541 , โอมาลลี่& chamot 1990 ; Rubin , 1975 ;
เว็นเด็น , 1991 )นักวิจัยได้ถามผู้เรียนภาษาเพื่ออธิบายกระบวนการการเรียนรู้และกลยุทธ์
ผ่านการสัมภาษณ์การเรียกคืน , สัมภาษณ์ และเขียนไดอารี่
วารสาร และกำลังคิดโปรโตคอลพร้อมกันกับการเรียนรู้งาน แต่ละวิธีการเหล่านี้มี
ข้อจำกัด แต่ให้ข้อมูลเชิงลึกที่สำคัญในแต่ละ unobservable จิต
กลยุทธ์การเรียนรู้ในการสัมภาษณ์ ผู้เรียนจะถูกถามเพื่ออธิบายสิ่งที่พวกเขาคิดหรือทำอะไร
ในระหว่างที่เพิ่งเสร็จสิ้นการเรียนรู้งาน ( เห็นโอมาลลี่& chamot , 2533 ) เป็นที่
นักเรียนอาจลืมบางส่วนของรายละเอียดของกระบวนการคิดของตนเอง หรืออาจจะอธิบายสิ่งที่พวกเขารับรู้
เป็นคำตอบที่ " ใช่ " เป็นการกระตุ้นให้นึกถึงสัมภาษณ์มีแนวโน้มที่จะถูกต้องเปิดเผยนักเรียน
กลยุทธ์การเรียนรู้ที่แท้จริงในงาน เพราะนักเรียนถ่ายคลิปขณะปฏิบัติ
งานและสัมภาษณ์แล้วเล่นเทปในการหยุดการเท่าที่จำเป็น และขอให้
นักเรียนบรรยายความคิดของเขา หรือเธอในช่วงเวลาที่เฉพาะเจาะจงในการเรียนรู้งาน ( Robbins ,
1996 ) .
บ่อยและมีประสิทธิภาพมากที่สุดวิธีการ สำหรับการระบุกลยุทธ์การเรียนรู้ของนักเรียนผ่าน
ถ้าผู้เรียนไม่ได้รายงานความจริง ยังคงเป็นวิธีเดียวที่จะระบุผู้เรียนจิต
การประมวลผล เป็นเกรนเฟลล์แฮร์ริส ( 1999 ) และได้ถูกระบุไว้ :
[ . . . ] มันไม่ง่ายที่จะได้รับภายใน ' กล่องดำ ' ของมนุษย์สมองและดูสิ่งที่เกิดขึ้นมี เรา
ทำงานกับสิ่งที่เราจะได้รับ ซึ่งแม้จะมีข้อ จำกัด ให้บริการอาหารสำหรับความคิด [ . . . ]
( หน้า 54 ) กลยุทธ์การเรียนรู้ส่วนใหญ่ unobservable , แม้ว่าบางคนอาจจะเกี่ยวข้องกับพฤติกรรมที่สังเกตได้ ตัวอย่างเช่น ผู้เรียนสามารถใช้เลือกสนใจ ( unobservable ) โฟกัส
บนหลักคิด ในขณะที่ฟังเนื้อ และอาจตัดสินใจที่จะจดบันทึก ( สังเกต )
เพื่อที่จะจำข้อมูล ในเกือบทุกการเรียนรู้บริบท วิธีเดียวที่จะหา
ไม่ว่านักเรียนจะใช้กลวิธีการเรียนรู้ภาษา ในขณะที่ร่วมในงานคือการขอให้พวกเขา .
ข้อมูลรายงานทางวาจาจะใช้เพื่อระบุกลยุทธ์การเรียนภาษา เพราะสังเกตไม่ได้
จับกระบวนการทางจิต ( Cohen , 2541 , โอมาลลี่& chamot 1990 ; Rubin , 1975 ;
เว็นเด็น , 1991 )นักวิจัยได้ถามผู้เรียนภาษาเพื่ออธิบายกระบวนการการเรียนรู้และกลยุทธ์
ผ่านการสัมภาษณ์การเรียกคืน , สัมภาษณ์ และเขียนไดอารี่
วารสาร และกำลังคิดโปรโตคอลพร้อมกันกับการเรียนรู้งาน แต่ละวิธีการเหล่านี้มี
ข้อจำกัด แต่ให้ข้อมูลเชิงลึกที่สำคัญในแต่ละ unobservable จิต
กลยุทธ์การเรียนรู้ในการสัมภาษณ์ ผู้เรียนจะถูกถามเพื่ออธิบายสิ่งที่พวกเขาคิดหรือทำอะไร
ในระหว่างที่เพิ่งเสร็จสิ้นการเรียนรู้งาน ( เห็นโอมาลลี่& chamot , 2533 ) เป็นที่
นักเรียนอาจลืมบางส่วนของรายละเอียดของกระบวนการคิดของตนเอง หรืออาจจะอธิบายสิ่งที่พวกเขารับรู้
เป็นคำตอบที่ " ใช่ " เป็นการกระตุ้นให้นึกถึงสัมภาษณ์มีแนวโน้มที่จะถูกต้องเปิดเผยนักเรียน
กลยุทธ์การเรียนรู้ที่แท้จริงในงาน เพราะนักเรียนถ่ายคลิปขณะปฏิบัติ
งานและสัมภาษณ์แล้วเล่นเทปในการหยุดการเท่าที่จำเป็น และขอให้
นักเรียนบรรยายความคิดของเขา หรือเธอในช่วงเวลาที่เฉพาะเจาะจงในการเรียนรู้งาน ( Robbins ,
1996 ) .
บ่อยและมีประสิทธิภาพมากที่สุดวิธีการ สำหรับการระบุกลยุทธ์การเรียนรู้ของนักเรียนผ่าน
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..
ภาษาอื่น ๆ
การสนับสนุนเครื่องมือแปลภาษา: กรีก, กันนาดา, กาลิเชียน, คลิงออน, คอร์สิกา, คาซัค, คาตาลัน, คินยารวันดา, คีร์กิซ, คุชราต, จอร์เจีย, จีน, จีนดั้งเดิม, ชวา, ชิเชวา, ซามัว, ซีบัวโน, ซุนดา, ซูลู, ญี่ปุ่น, ดัตช์, ตรวจหาภาษา, ตุรกี, ทมิฬ, ทาจิก, ทาทาร์, นอร์เวย์, บอสเนีย, บัลแกเรีย, บาสก์, ปัญจาป, ฝรั่งเศส, พาชตู, ฟริเชียน, ฟินแลนด์, ฟิลิปปินส์, ภาษาอินโดนีเซี, มองโกเลีย, มัลทีส, มาซีโดเนีย, มาราฐี, มาลากาซี, มาลายาลัม, มาเลย์, ม้ง, ยิดดิช, ยูเครน, รัสเซีย, ละติน, ลักเซมเบิร์ก, ลัตเวีย, ลาว, ลิทัวเนีย, สวาฮิลี, สวีเดน, สิงหล, สินธี, สเปน, สโลวัก, สโลวีเนีย, อังกฤษ, อัมฮาริก, อาร์เซอร์ไบจัน, อาร์เมเนีย, อาหรับ, อิกโบ, อิตาลี, อุยกูร์, อุสเบกิสถาน, อูรดู, ฮังการี, ฮัวซา, ฮาวาย, ฮินดี, ฮีบรู, เกลิกสกอต, เกาหลี, เขมร, เคิร์ด, เช็ก, เซอร์เบียน, เซโซโท, เดนมาร์ก, เตลูกู, เติร์กเมน, เนปาล, เบงกอล, เบลารุส, เปอร์เซีย, เมารี, เมียนมา (พม่า), เยอรมัน, เวลส์, เวียดนาม, เอสเปอแรนโต, เอสโทเนีย, เฮติครีโอล, แอฟริกา, แอลเบเนีย, โคซา, โครเอเชีย, โชนา, โซมาลี, โปรตุเกส, โปแลนด์, โยรูบา, โรมาเนีย, โอเดีย (โอริยา), ไทย, ไอซ์แลนด์, ไอร์แลนด์, การแปลภาษา.
- General
- Soak salted stems in water for 1 hour.
- อุตสาหกรรม
- เพราะเป็นอาหารที่นิยมของคนไทยและชางต่างช
- But there are concerns about the friend.
- Studying the wild cat and coming up with
- คุณจะเป็นไกด์นำเที่ยวจีนให้ฉันหรือเปล่า
- The youngest pig built a house made of s
- การสร้างรากฐานองค์กรให้มีความมั่นคงด้วย
- ถ้ายังคุณคิดจะมีแฟนแล้วหรือ
- rubber necking
- ปีที่ผ่านมาฉันประสบอุบัติเหตุ ฉันกู้ยืมเ
- กลองแอว เป็นกลองพื้นบ้านมีในภาคเหนือ มีล
- finally my baby
- ฉันจะเป็นเพื่อนคุณตลอดไป
- What places can to visit in Cuba?
- คำถามในข้อนี้ฉันมีคำตอบให้คุณอยู่ใน
- He is wears glasses
- and many transgender are showing their a
- shredder
- Lost
- by removing the fused silica envelope. T
- ผู้จัดทำ
- Eat rice porridge on the side of the roa
