INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES AMONG PREPARATORY SCHOOL STUDENTS: LEARNING ORIENTATIONS AND STRATEGIES

Yıl 2019, Cilt: 22 Sayı: 41, 1 - 20, 15.06.2019

Burak Aydın Feryal Çubukçu

https://doi.org/10.31795/baunsobed.580583

Öz

This
study investigated the language learning strategies and motivational
orientations, along with their correlations with each other among university
students who study English preparatory year. A group of 195 students were
surveyed on orientations by using Gardner’s (1985) Attitude/Motivation Test Battery (AMTB) on two domains: a)
integrative orientation and b) instrumental orientation; and on learner
strategies by using Oxford’s (1990) Strategy
Inventory for Language Learning (SILL) for ESL/EFL learners on three
domains: a) cognitive strategy, b) metacognitive strategy, c) social strategy. The
data collected were analyzed in descriptive and correlative figures. The
results showed that students used all strategies with metacognitive ones being the
most preferred. Furthermore, the students seemed to employ both integrative and
instrumental orientations, with instrumentality being slightly more preferred. The
data also proved a positive and significant correlation between learner
strategies and orientations. The study aims to inspire further studies on
strategies and orientations with different contexts and levels of students.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Learning strategies, motivational orientations, correlation

ÜNİVERSİTE HAZIRLIK OKULU ÖĞRENCİLERİNİN BİREYSEL ÖĞRENME FARKLILIKLARI: DİL ÖĞRENME YÖNELİMLERİ VE STRATEJİLERİ

Öz

Bu çalışma İngilizce
hazırlık eğitimi alan üniversite öğrencilerinin benimsediği dil öğrenme yönelimleri
ile öğrenme stratejilerini incelemek ve bu iki faktör arasındaki korelasyonu
saptamak amacıyla yapılmıştır. Çalışmadaki veriler iki ölçek yardımıyla
toplanmıştır. Öğrenme yönelimlerini saptamak amacıyla Gardner’ın (1985) Motivasyon ve Tutum Ölçeği “bütünleyici yönelim”
ve “araçsal yönelim” kısımlarıyla kullanılmıştır. Öte yandan Oxford’un (1990) geliştirdiği
Dil öğrenme Stratejiler Envanteri üç
bölümüyle (üstbilişsel, bilişsel, sosyal stratejiler) kullanılmıştır. Çalışma
örneklemine 195 üniversite öğrencisi dahil edilmiştir. Toplanan veriler
betimsel analiz ve korelasyon analizi yöntemleriyle incelenmiştir. Çalışma
sonucunda öğrencilerin belirtilen üç öğrenme stratejisinden de yararlandığı fakat
en çok üstbilişsel stratejileri kullandığı görülmüştür. Ayrıca öğrencilerin hem
bütünleyici hem de araçsal yönelimlerle dil öğrendiği saptanmış fakat araçsal yönelimin
daha çok tercih edildiği görülmüştür. Korelasyon verileri ise öğrencilerin
kullandığı dil öğrenme stratejileri ve yönelimleri arasında pozitif ve yüksek korelasyon
olduğunu ortaya koymuştur. Yapılan çalışmanın farklı seviye ve eğitim
bağlamlarında yer alan öğrencilerle yapılabilecek diğer çalışmalara örnek
teşkil edeceği düşünülmüştür. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

Öğrenme stratejileri, dil öğrenme yönelimleri, korelasyon

Kaynakça

• Al-Ahdal, A. A. M. H., & Al-Ma’amari, A. A. H. (2015). Learning strategies of the Arab EFL learners: Finding correlation with outcomes. Advances in Language Literary Studies, 6 (5), 230-241.
• Agor, J. T. (2014). Language-learner strategy instruction and English achievement: Voices from Ghana. English Language Teaching, 7 (6), 175-192.
• Badib, A. A. N., & Guru, S. (2011). Exploring international student orientation and attitude towards learning English in Malaysia. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 2 (2), 219-231.
• Baker, C. (1992). Attitudes and language. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd. Bialystock, E. (1978). A theoretical model of second language learning. Language Learning, 28 (1), 69-83.
• Choubsaz, Y., & Choubsaz, Y. (2014). Motivational orientation and EFL learning: A study of Iranian undergraduate students. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 392-397.
• Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition. London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
• Ellis, R. (2004). Individual differences in second language learning. In A. Davies & C. Elder (Eds.). The handbook of applied linguistics. (p.525 – 551). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.
• Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York: Basic Books.
• Gardner, R. C. & Lambert, W. E. (1959). Motivational variables in second language acquisition. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 13 (4), 266-272.
• Gardner, R. C. (1985a). Social psychology and second language learning: The role of attitudes and motivation. London: Edward Arnold.,
• Gardner, R. C. (1985b). The attitude/motivation test battery: Technical report. Retrieved from publish.uwo.ca/~gardner/docs/AMTBmanual.pdf; on December 20, 2018.
• Gardner, R. C. (2006). Motivation and second language acquisition (Manuscript). Retrieved from publish.uwo.ca/~gardner/docs/SPAINTALK.pdf; on December 23, 2018.
• Gardner, R. C. (2010). Motivation and second language acquisition: The socio-educational model. New York: Peter Lang Publishing.
• Huang, I. (2015). Language learner strategies and English proficiency of college freshman in Taiwan: A mixed-methods study. Asia-Pacific Edu Res, 24 (4), 737-741.
• Jurkovic, V. (2010). Language learner strategies and linguistic competence as factors affecting achievement test scores in English for specific purposes. TESOl Journal, 1 (4), 449-469.
• Khan, N. (2007). Motivational orientation and English language proficiency of students of the department of English of Brac University. BA Thesis, BRAC University, Bangladesh. Masgoret, A. R., & Gardner, R. C. (2003). Attitudes, motivation and second language learning: a meta-analysis of studies conducted by Gardner and associates. Language Learning, 53, 123-163.
• McEown, M. S., Noels, K. A., & Saumure, K. D. (2014). Students’ self-determined and integrative orientations and teachers’ motivational support in a Japanese as a foreign language context. System, 45, 227-241.
• Mohammadi, H., & Alizadeh, K. (2014). An investigation of reliability and validity of strategy inventory for language learning among Iranian university students. International Journal of English Language Teaching, 1 (2), 53-64.
• O’Malley, J. M., & Chamot, A. U. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Oxford, R. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. New York: Newbury House/Harper & Row.
• Oxford, R. (2003). Language learning styles and strategies: An overview. GALA, 1-25. Retrieved from web.ntpu.edu.tw/~language/workshop/read2.pdf; on December 21, 2018.
• Oxford, R., & Burry-Stock, J. (1995). Assessing the language learning strategies worldwide with the ESL/EFL version of the strategy inventory for language learning (SILL). System, 1, 1-23.
• Robinson, P. (Ed.) (2002). Individual differences and instructed language learning. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
• Rubin, J. (1981). Study of cognitive progresses in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11 (2), 117-131.
• Scrivener, J. (2005). Learning teaching: A guidebook for English language teachers (2nd ed.). Oxford: Macmillan.
• Skehan, P. (1991). Individual differences in second language learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 13 (2), 275-298.
• Şener, S., & Erol, I. K. (2017). Motivational orientations and self-efficacy beliefs of Turkish students towards EFL learning. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 67, 251-267. Torres, G. (2013). Empowering the language learner: Language learning strategy training and self-regulation in an EFL classroom. Journal of International Education Research, 9 (3), 267-276.