UNIVERSITY OF EXETER

GRADUATE SCHOOL OF EDUCATION

EFPM 266: PRINCIPLES OF LANGUAGE LEARNING

How can motivational strategies be used in Box Hill College Kuwait to improve students’ appreciation of a curriculum focused on language learning strategies?

Student ID

620033084

14 January 2013

Submitted to Gabriela Meier


Introduction

English is used extensively in Kuwait to conduct everyday business, and this is due in large part to the extremely high number of expatriates making their home in the country. Though the majority of expats do not speak English as an L1, it is the unofficial second language of the country (CIA, 2009), and is sometimes preferred over Arabic as the ‘international language’ used in interaction between speakers of different L1s. The extensive use of English, coupled with inclusion of the language English instruction at all levels of education, mean that most Kuwaiti students obtain a certain degree of proficiency with English prior to beginning college. It is important to note however, that “the ‘academic’ English required from them in their college studies differ[s] from the English required from them in their everyday lives” (Ed-Dib, 2004), and this situation can prove problematic for Kuwaiti students who choose to attend universities where English is the language of instruction.

Box Hill College Kuwait (BHCK) is a private Australian college for girls in southern Kuwait. The Foundation programme at BHCK consists of three levels meaning that students attend up to three semesters of English study prior to entry into their mainstream programmes. Each level includes Writing, Reading, and Listening/Speaking classes, while upper levels also attend Maths and Computers. The primary function of the Foundation programme is to prepare students for their mainstream classes which are Bachelors level classes taught by L1 English speakers using Bachelors level English textbooks. The short duration of English study coupled with the impracticality of grouping Foundation students according to mainstream subject areas means that there is insufficient time to teach students discipline-specific English. Thus, the focus of the curriculum has been on the teaching of language learning strategies (LLS), or ‘learning to learn’. It is this focus, and its subsequent effect on student motivation that is proving problematic.

BHCK caters primarily to more conservative families who wish to educate their daughters and, as it has set lower English proficiency and high school GPA entry requirements than other colleges in the country, has a reputation for accepting students who ‘aren’t good enough’ to attend more prestigious schools. During my two years as an instructor at BHCK, I observed that this reputation often means that students beginning at the school are already poorly motivated by past failure and subsequent development of the belief that they are ‘not good students’ or ‘unable to learn’. This lack of motivation is no doubt compounded when students are unable to activate much of their previously used functional English to aid them in their Foundation level studies. I also noted that motivation is affected by a number of cultural and contextual factors including cultural clashes with foreign teachers, discrepancies between their previous learning experience and the expectations of their teachers, family focus on obtaining a degree rather than support during the learning process, and the failure of students to form a student identity because of cultural norms that minimize the importance of a degree for girls. Students are often open in explaining that their attendance and degree are a means to a better marriage and that neither they nor their families have any real expectation of the use of their degree in a future career; this is a cultural norm that has changed little despite advances for education of women over the last 30 years (Meleis, El-Sanabary, & Beeson, 1979).

These cultural and contextual factors alone present a significant challenge to both students and teachers, and this challenge is further complicated when students become frustrated with LLS instruction which is often unclear and presented without an apparent rationale. Thus, in this paper I will explore theories of LLS and ways that theories of motivation can be applied to LLS instruction in an attempt to answer the question ‘How can motivational strategies be used in Box Hill College Kuwait to improve students’ appreciation of a curriculum focused on language learning strategies?’ I will begin with a literature review where I will summarize historical and current theories of LLS and motivation. Next, I will evaluate different approaches to each and outline the theoretical framework to be applied to the essay question. Finally, I will apply the theoretical framework to the specific context of BHCK and offer suggestions for addressing the problem.

Literature Review

This literature seeks to provide an overview of the relevant literature on both language learning strategies and motivation. I will first look at theories of and studies on LLS and LLS instruction before moving onto a review of theories of motivation and motivation strategies. I will conclude this section by summarizing the theoretical framework that I will apply to the problem outlined above.

Language Learning Strategies

Definitions of LLS have been put forth by nearly every prominent academic researching in the field (Chamot & O'Malley, 1990; Stern, 1983; Wenden, 1987; Cohen A. D., 1990). However, one of the most widely used definitions, and the one used for this paper, comes from Oxford who defines language learning strategies as “specific actions taken by the learner to make learning easier, faster, more enjoyable, more self-directed, more effective and more transferable to new situations” (Oxford, 1990, p. 8).

Research on LLS dates from the 1970s and was initially carried out with successful students (Chamot, Barnhardt, El-Dinary, & Robbins, 1996) with researchers hoping to better identify what strategies contributed to their success (Naiman, Frolich, Stern, & Todesco, 1978; Rubin, 1975; Rubin & Thompson, 1982; Stern, 1975). This focus on successful students eventually led researchers to compare strategy use between successful and less successful learners (Chamot, O'Malley, Küpper, & Impink-Hernandez, 1987; Chamot, Küpper, & Impink-Hernandez, 1988). A significant number of studies showed, perhaps not surprisingly, that higher student proficiency was positively related to more frequent and varied use of LLS (Cohen A. D., 1998; Park, 1997; Wharton, 2000).

One primary goal of LLS researchers has been to define, identify, and categorize specific strategies, and Ellis suggests that the resulting range of differing and sometimes overlapping sets and categories is an impediment to clearly defined LLS research (Ellis, 1985). However, three basic categories including metacognitive, cognitive, and socioaffective strategies have been widely recognized and are mentioned repeatedly in various research. (Chamot et al., 1996) Oxford also recognizes these three categories (in addition to memory and compensation categories) and provides examples of each type. Metacognitive strategies include learner behaviours such as activating previous knowledge and planning and evaluating learning. Cognitive strategies include learner behaviours such as practicing including repetition, analyzing language, and taking notes. The final category, socioaffective strategies, include learner behaviours such as creating favourable physical and emotional learning conditions, asking questions, and working with others to draw on their expertise (Oxford, 1990:17)

However, it is important to note that Oxford does point out that most research has focused heavily on the cognitive and metacognitive strategies with socioaffective strategies being largely neglected (Oxford, 1990). This neglect is apparent not only a review of the literature, but also in the focus of LLS instruction. In my experience, materials often focus on LLS that improve learning efficiency with less regard paid to the learning environment and cooperative learning. This is reflected in the importance many teachers and schools place on assignment deadlines and the ability to work independently. I would suggest that a stronger focus on socioaffective strategies in the research and literature could lead to a greater focus on them in practice where more favourable learning conditions would likely prove helpful to students.

In addition to defining and categorizing LLS, researchers have analyzed the implications of various methods of LLS instruction in the classroom. A number of researchers have argued that it is useful and even necessary to provide students with strategies training (Wenden, 1986; Cohen & Macaro, 2007; Oxford, Cohen, Crookall, Lavine, Nyikos, & Sutter, 1990), but disagreements arise over methods including informed or blind (Oxford et al., 1990; Flaitz, Feyten, Fox, & Mukherjee, 1995).

Informed LLS instruction is an explicit method sometimes referred to as awareness training (Oxford, 1990) and is distinguished by the characteristic of providing students with a rationale for strategy use (Nyikos, 1996) and an explanation of why they are needed/useful (Flaitz et al., 1995). Though this approach is useful in providing students with a concrete rationale for the use of LLS, I believe it fails to provide students with a chance to apply the LLS in practice where, in my experience, students often equate the importance of a particular skill with the amount of time they are required to spend practising it. It also places a large amount of responsibility on the student to conduct their own research into the use of specific LLS, and this may be less successful than guided explanations by teachers. In addition, Chamot cautions that in this type of LLS instruction can lead to over teaching strategies which provides learners with too many choices, many of which they will not use, and this causes frustration (Chamot A. U., 1993).

Blind LLS instruction is a more implicit method sometimes referred to as long-term training (Oxford, 1990), and is achieved through the completion of activities which require the use of specific strategies. In this type of instruction, students are not provided with a rationale for strategy use (Nyikos, 1996), and strategies are practiced without discussion of how they are used or transferred (Flaitz et al., 1995). Brown describes one of the major flaws of this type of instruction by suggesting that blind instruction leads to success with specific tasks used in practice but fails to develop a student’s ability to generalize the use of the strategy to other learning situations (as cited in Flaitz et al., 1995) because it leaves them largely unaware that a LLS was being used at all.

Because of the general consensus that LLS are useful to students, a number of studies have been conducted to assess student use of LLS and the connection to proficiency and student success. However, it is worth noting at this point that there is a deficiency of literature relating specifically to the education situation in Kuwait, and little (if any) is related specifically to higher education of women in this context. Nevertheless, a review of research conducted in a number of other Arabic EFL contexts can shed light on Kuwait as a similar context.

The importance of fairly rigid traditional gender roles in many Arabic speaking countries means that the role of gender and its relation to LLS has been of particular interest. Yet looking at the research, a number of contradicting results arise. Several researchers outside the Arabic EFL context found that females use a wider variety of LLS than males do (Oxford, Nyikos, & Ehrman, 1988; Green & Oxford, 1995). However, one study in Saudi Arabia found little difference in LLS use between males and females with the exception of higher reported use of social strategies by females (Alhaisoni, 2012). Additionally, a rare study from Kuwait as well as one in Egypt both found that in fact male students are likely to use a broader range of LLS including social strategies like naturalistic practice (Ed-Dib, 2004), while girls rely more on repetition and memorization strategies (Daif-Allah, 2012). Both of these studies point out that in this case, it is not only gender, but more specifically the gender roles assigned and promoted by the culture that shape the results with girls having less opportunity for and higher levels of social anxiety related to natural social interaction.

Another interesting area of LLS research is teacher education in LLS training. A number of studies have pointed out that, while it is widely agreed that LLS instruction improves student success (Chamot A. U., 1993; Oxford, 1990), many teachers have little formal training in this type of instruction and are therefore uncomfortable using it (Flaitz et al., 1995). In addition, a lack of solid theory around LLS instruction means that methods are “based largely on convenience, intuition, and/or some level of idiosyncrasy” (Plonsky, 2011)

Motivation

There is no one agreed definition of motivation present in the literature, and this is due in part to the various disciplines across which motivation is research and evaluated. However, in turning to Dörnyei as one of the most influential researchers on motivation in SLA, I will define motivation as the reasons “why people decide to do something, how long they are willing to sustain the activity and how hard they are going to pursue it” (2001:8)

Theories of motivation in second language acquisition (SLA) find their beginnings in social psychology research from the 1950s which looks at motivation in relation to the interaction of different communities. However, SLA motivation theory differs from motivation theory in other disciplines as L2 learners have to acquire not only linguistic knowledge, but knowledge of the identity of L2 speakers (Gardner R. C., 1979). Gardner and Lambert pioneered thinking in this area with their idea of integrative motivation, or a person’s desire and willingness to integrate and interact with the L2 community, and instrumental motivation, or a person’s practical need to learn a new language (1972). This theory and continued research by Gardner in which he expands the levels and types if integrative motivation (Gardner R. , 2001) continue to influence L2 motivation research, but in 1991, Crookes and Schmidt were among a number of researchers to call for a revitalization of SLA motivation research (1991), and subsequent research shows a move to more cognitive situated theories.

Cognitive theories of motivation shift the focus from macro perspectives of motivation in relation to community interaction to theories of motivation in specific learning contexts (Dörnyei & Ushioda, 2012) and incorporate ideas of self-determination which look at both intrinsic (internal) and extrinsic (external) motivation. This period of SLA motivation research is also characterized by the inclusion of theories of attributions or “perceived reasons for success and failure resulting from self-questioning” (Peacock, 2012) which ask learners to assess what drives their success or failure in L2 and includes internal motivational factors like love of L2 and external factors like teacher praise. However, as researchers began to consider the myriad of factors affecting motivation including not only the context but time, research moved into a process-oriented phase.