An investigation into language learning strategies used by ethnic non english major students at a university in the north of vietnam

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES & INTERNATIONAL STUDIES

LE QUANG DUNG

AN INVESTIGATION INTO LANGUAGE LEARNING
STRATEGIES USED BY ETHNIC NON-ENGLISH MAJOR
STUDENTS AT A UNIVERSITY IN THE NORTH
OF VIETNAM

A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF
REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR
OF PHILOSOPHY

HANOI - 2018


ĐẠI HỌC QUỐC GIA HÀ NỘI
TRƯỜNG ĐẠI HỌC NGOẠI NGỮ

LÊ QUANG DŨNG

AN INVESTIGATION INTO LANGUAGE LEARNING
STRATEGIES USED BY ETHNIC NON-ENGLISH MAJOR
STUDENTS AT A UNIVERSITY IN THE NORTH
OF VIETNAM
Chuyên ngành: Lý luận và Phương pháp giảng dạy bộ môn tiếng Anh
Mã số: 62140111

Cán bộ hướng dẫn:
1. PGS. TS. Nguyễn Văn Trào

2. TS. Dương Thị Nụ

HANOI - 2018


Statement of Authorship

The thesis entitled “An Investigation into Language Learning Strategies
Used by Ethnic Non-English Major Students at a University in the North of
Vietnam” has been submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
I, the undersigned, hereby declare that I am the sole author of this thesis. I
have fully acknowledged and referenced the ideas and work of others, whether
published or unpublished, in my thesis.
My thesis does not contain work extracted from a thesis, dissertation or
research paper previously presented for another degree or diploma at this or any
other universities.
Signed

Le Quang Dung
January, 2018

i


Acknowledgements

I am deeply indebted to the individuals that provided support for the
completion of this study.
Associate Professor Dr. Nguyen Van Trao and Dr. Duong Thi Nu
supervised the entire study and, most importantly, read and discussed every

aspect and section of this dissertation with assiduity. Their recommendations
also helped to shape the form and contents of the final version. I am equally
indebted to them for the exceptional friendliness, kindness, and patience that
they demonstrated during my study at ULIS-VNU and my research.
My sincere thanks also go to the former Dean Assoc. Prof. Dr. Le Hung
Tien and the current Dean - Dr. Huynh Anh Tuan as well as the staff members at
the Faculty of Postgraduate Studies, The University of Languages and
International Studies (ULIS), Vietnam National University (VNU), who are
always so kind and supportive during my study time.
In addition, I would like to express my thankfulness to all the participating
teachers at the 4 universities within Thai Nguyen University who helped me in
my preliminary research, especially the teachers who accompanied me during a
long time of my data collection time. The results I have achieved today partially
belong to them. I also thank all my informants for giving me the responses I
needed to illustrate the views expressed in this study.
Last but not least, I would like to thank my fellows at Thai Nguyen University
for their dedication and support, my family members for their motivation for me to
overcome all the difficulties and to become a better me now.
Thanking you all
Le Quang Dung
January, 2018
ii


Abstract

The present research focused on identifying the types and frequency of
language learning strategies used by a group of 527 ethnic students studying
English at Thai Nguyen University, and then determined whether there is a
relationship between language learning strategies and factors affecting the

choices of LLS by ethnic TNU EFL learners. In other words, the purpose is to
examine whether the factors such as; (i) gender, (ii) English language
proficiency, (iii) major fields of study, and (iv) learning styles have any
influence on their use of language learning strategies. The researcher employed a
mixed-method design, involving both quantitative and qualitative approaches.
The quantitative part was two questionnaire surveys (LLSQ and PLPQ) and the
qualitative component was a semi-structured interview. The mixed-method study
conducted demonstrated that students used all the learning strategies, but at
different frequency rates. This result allowed the researcher to reach the
conclusion that there are no particular preferences in students‟ utilization of
LLSs, since they drew on the entire set of strategy types which were medium
use. The overall analysis of the participants‟ LLSQ scores and through the semistructured interview did not take into consideration student‟s factors which are
language proficiency, major field of study, gender or learning styles impact.

iii


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Statement of Authorship ............................................................................................. i
Acknowledgements .................................................................................................... ii
Abstract ..................................................................................................................... iii
List of Abbreviations................................................................................................ vii
List of Tables........................................................................................................... viii
List of Figures ........................................................................................................... ix
INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................................1
1. Background to the Study .........................................................................................1
2. Scope of the study ...................................................................................................4
3. Aims of the study ....................................................................................................5
4. Research questions ..................................................................................................5

5. Definitions of terms.................................................................................................5
6. Significance of the study .........................................................................................7
7. Structure of the study ..............................................................................................8
8. Summary ...............................................................................................................10
CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW ..............................................................11
1.1. Introduction ........................................................................................................11
1.2. Language Learning Strategies Definitions .........................................................13
1.3. Language Learning Strategy Classifications......................................................16
1.4. Factors Influencing Language Learning Strategy Choice .................................19
1.4.1. Language Learning Strategies and Gender .....................................................21
1.4.2. Language Learning Strategies and English Language Proficiency ................22
1.4.3. Language Learning Strategies and Major Field of Study ...............................24
1.4.4. Language Learning Strategies and Learning Styles ........................................26
1.5. Language Learning Strategy Research in Vietnam............................................30
1.6. Theoretical Framework of the Present Study .....................................................33
1.7. Conclusion..........................................................................................................36
iv


CHAPTER 2: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY .................................................37
2.1 Context of the study ............................................................................................37
2.2. Qualitative Research ..........................................................................................38
2.3. Quantitative Research ........................................................................................39
2.4. Research Design for the Present Study ..............................................................40
2.5. Mixed-Methods Research ..................................................................................46
2.6. Data Collection Methods....................................................................................50
2.7. Research Questions ............................................................................................52
2.8. Data Collection Instruments ...............................................................................53
2.8.1. Language Learning Strategy Questionnaire ....................................................53
2.8.2. Perceptual Learning Style Preference Questionnaire......................................56

2.8.3. Semi-structured Interview ...............................................................................60
2.8.4 Students‟ level of Proficiency ..........................................................................62
2.9. Data Collection Procedures ................................................................................63
2.9.1. Participants ......................................................................................................63
2.9.2. Characteristics of Participants in the Quantitative Phase ...............................64
2.9.3. Characteristics of the participants in the Qualitative Phase ............................66
2.9.4. Data Collection................................................................................................68
2.10. Data Analysis ...................................................................................................75
2.11. Synthesizing Quantitative and Qualitative Data ..............................................77
2.12. Conclusion........................................................................................................78
CHAPTER 3: RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS ..................................................79
3.1. Operational and Measurement Levels of the Variables .....................................79
3.2. Results and Discussions of the Quantitative Phase ...........................................81
3.2.1. Research question 1: What English language learning strategies do TNU
ethnic students employ for their EFL learning? ........................................................81
3.2.2. Research Question 2: What English language learning strategies are
frequently used by the TNU ethnic students? ...........................................................86
3.2.3. Research Question 3: To what extent, do the students‟ choices of language
learning strategies vary significantly with their gender, major fields of study, levels
v


of proficiency and learning styles? If so, what are the main patterns of variation? .97
3.3. Results and Discussions of the Qualitative Phase ............................................115
3.3.1. Data Analysis and Results of the Interviews ................................................115
3.3.2. Level of Language Proficiency .....................................................................125
3.3.3. Loosing Faces................................................................................................127
3.3.4. Learning Environment and Learning Opportunities .....................................128
3.3.5. Learning Styles from Secondary Teachers‟ Teaching Styles .......................130
3.3.6. Language Learning Strategies Training Necessity .......................................132

3.3.7. Cultural Boundary .........................................................................................133
3.3.8. Conclusion .....................................................................................................135
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION ..................................................137
1. Summary of Research Findings ..........................................................................137
2. Limitations of the Study ......................................................................................141
3. Implications and Recommendations of the Study...............................................142
LIST OF PUBLICATIONS ..................................................................................147
REFERENCES ......................................................................................................148
APPENDICES .......................................................................................................166

vi


List of Abbreviations

LLS:

Language Learning Strategy

LLSs:

Language Learning Strategies

EFL:

English as a Foreign Language

TNU:

Thai Nguyen University

TNUS:

Thai Nguyen University of Sciences

TUAF:

Thai Nguyen University of Agriculture and Forestry

TNUT:

Thai Nguyen University of Technology

TNUE:

Thai Nguyen University of Education

SILL:

Strategy Inventory for Language Learning

LLSQ:

Language Learning Strategy Questionnaire

L2:

Second Language

M:

Mean score

PLPQ:

Perceptual Learning Styles Preference Questionnaire

S.D.:

Standard Deviation

SLA:

Second Language Acquisition

vii


List of Tables
Table 2.1: The Reliability of the Vietnamese/English Version of the LLSQ ...........55
Table 2.2 The Reliability of the Vietnamese/English Version of the PLPQ ............59
Table 2.3 Details of the participants‟ background ....................................................64
Table 2.4: Characteristics of the interviewees. .........................................................66
Table 3.1: Dependent Variables ................................................................................79
Table 3.2: Independent Variables .............................................................................80
Table 3.3: Descriptive Language Learning Strategies ..............................................81
Table 3.4: Frequency of Students‟ Overall Strategy Use..........................................87
Table 3.5: Frequency of Use of Strategies in the Six Main Categories ....................87
Table 3.6 Compare Means of six Main Categories ...................................................90
Table 3.7: Reported Strategies Use by High Usage ..................................................92

Table 3.8: Gender Difference in Language Learning Strategy Use .......................100
Table 3.9: Strategy use in Categories by Major Fields of Study ............................101
Table 3.10: Strategy use in Categories by levels of proficiency.............................104
Table 3.11: Overall Students Learning Style Preferences ......................................110

viii


List of Figures
Figure 1: LLS classification of the present study .....................................................19
Figure 2: Theoretical Framework based on the Empirical Research ........................34
Figure 3: Theoretical Framework of the Present Study ............................................35
Figure 4: Research Design for the Present Study .....................................................43
Figure 5: The flow chart of the Research design ......................................................45
Figure 6: Group averages of the LLSQ scores ..........................................................68

ix


INTRODUCTION
1. Background to the Study
Language learning strategies (LLSs) play a vital role in learning a second
language (L2). They are specific actions or techniques that learners use to assist
their progress in developing language skills. Use of appropriate learning strategies
help learners to assimilate new information into their own learning and enables
them to develop their understanding in mastering the forms, functions and culture
required for the reception in the second language (Oxford, 1990).
Research results over the past decades have indicated that a key reason why
many second language learners fail, while some learners do better with less effort,
lies in various learner attributes such as personality traits, educational

perspectives, motivation, cultural backgrounds, or language aptitude. It is also
worth mentioning that types of strategies used by different learners vary due to
stages of learning, teacher expectations, general learning styles, degree of
awareness, teaching methods, text-books innovation, purposes for learning the
language, and nationality or ethnicity (Bedell, 1993). To put it differently, a
learner‟s individual factors can influence which learning strategy the learners will
use for their foreign language learning. Once well-managed, these variables can
significantly contribute to a learner‟s success in language learning. Many
researchers (e.g., Reid, 1995; Wharton, 2000; Zhang, 2005; Rahimi and Riazi,
2005; Yang, 2010, Minh, 2012; Zeynali, 2012; and Salahshour and Sharifi, 2013)
suggest that strategies of successful language learners can supply a basis for
aiding language learners, and the conscious use of language learning strategies
makes good language learners.
From my own experience as a teacher of English for many years at Thai
Nguyen University (TNU), I am aware of the fact that students in general and
ethnic minority group students in particular are often confused to use their own
strategies and abilities to transform their failing situations into successful learning

1


experiences. In addition, I found that students with different individual identities
study English in different ways and have different levels of proficiency. It seems
that they are not what so called “lazy” and “not motivated”. Their language
achievement may be affected by many individual factors and the culture which
they inherited.
A large number of studies have focused on L2 learning with the main focus
on individual differences in language learners as the work by Rubin (1975) who
has considered LLS as one individual difference variable which gained increased
popularity among positivist researchers in understanding how languages are

learnt. Rubin (1975) identifies the strategies that the „good language learner‟ uses
and draws on this information to help less-effective learners. Learning strategies,
in her opinion, have been in the centre of attention and gained great importance in
the teaching-learning environment. Griffiths (2004) defines learning strategies as
the specific actions taken by the learner to make learning easier, faster, more
enjoyable, more self-directed, more effective and more transferrable to new
situations. Griffiths has a great concern with the relationship between LLSs and
gender, which show language use and have mixed results.
Still within the field of LLS and gender, some studies show that there is
difference of LLSs use based on the gender (Ehraman & Oxford, 1989; Green &
Oxford, 1995; Oxford & Nyikos, 1989; Zeynali, 2012; Salahshoura, Sharifib &
Salahshour, 2013; Zarei, 2013). In such related studies, it was found that female
students reporting all or some of six groups of LLSs more frequently than male
(Dreyer & Oxford, 1996; Ghasedy, 1998; Goh & Foong, 1997; Green & Oxford,
1995; Hong-Nam & Learvell, 2006; Lan & Oxford, 2003; Lee & Oxford, 2008;
Oxford, 1989; Oxford & Nyikos, 1989; Politzer,1983; Zeynali, 2012). However,
the other studies prove that gender does not affect the use of LLS (Griffiths, 2003;
Lee & Oxford, 2008; Ziahossein & Salehi, 2008). Alongside the field of LLS,
personality of individuals are affected through various variables such as culture
(Markus & Kitayama, 1998), genetic and environmental factors (Eysenck, 1985),
2


sex differences (Budaev, 1999; Costa & McCare, 1992), and ethnicity (Griffiths,
1991; Hess & Azuma, 1991; Reid, 1995).
Although many research works with great effort in the LLS field was carried
out, “LLS research is still quite an immature field” (Grenfell & Erler, 2007, p. 28).
With this enormous aspiration, researchers in the field are faced with huge
challenges, and this field seems to be struggling to "define its parameters."
(Grenfell & Erler, 2007, p.28). In addition, through the comprehensive review of

literature in the field has revealed that there is a need for more updated tools to
measure the range and patterns of LLS use of language learners. Especially in this
age of technologically assisted language learning, new teaching and learning
modes are constantly created, which require learners to adapt themselves in terms
of learning approaches and strategies. Learning resources are much more
accessible thanks to the internet and the teachers are more approachable too. In
this learning context, the modern language learner constantly experiments with
new strategies in the new learning environment and these newly adopted strategies
need to be reflected in LLS measurements. Another gap in the field which needs
to be addressed is that the relationship between learner variables and LLS use has
not been firmly established. There are cases when studies with the same interests
have created conflicting results, which may be confusing to researchers and
practitioners alike. Besides, LLS use has not been thoroughly explored in relation
to the ethnic minority group learners. Further research should be directed to the
investigation of how various learner and learning variables influence the adoption
as well as the effectiveness of LLSs.
Studies conducted in Vietnamese teaching and learning contexts are
surprisingly rare. Important issues like LLSs have such an obvious significance
that their rarity may seem odd. In fact, Vietnamese context-specific research into
different aspects of LLSs is still in its infancy stage with only a few published

3


studies (e.g., Duong & Nguyen (2006); Bui and Intaraprasert (2012); Cao (2009).
This lack of related publications indicates a shortage of research-based activities
or a lack of concern about this issue and presents a big gap of knowledge that
needs to be filled. The portrait of the Vietnamese language learner is consequently
no more than a few distorted sketches, most of which are based on the
stereotypical notion of “Asian learners” rather than on scientific premises. When

social and cultural backgrounds can partially determine the set of strategies
students choose to adopt, the generalisations about “Asian learners” apparently
cannot cover all learners in this enormously diverse area. In the EFL context of
Viet Nam with its own distinctive features, there are grounds to believe that using
the generalizations as a theoretical basis for our educational system can be very
misleading. (Hoang, 2013).
This lack of research has rendered any attempts to weave strategy training
into the curriculum premature and unsystematic, which albeit well-meant, may
produce counter-productive results. The reason for this is conceivable. Without
proper examination and assessment of the LLSs adopted by students, teachers can
hardly accommodate their teaching to meet the learning strategies and needs of
their students. The possible mismatch between teaching and learning strategies
thus can be detrimental to the learning process, causing learning failure,
frustration and demotivation (Peacock & Ho, 2003). In this regard, in order to
assist the language learning process, it is imperative that teachers identify and
comprehend LLSs used by learners, promote awareness of them, and foster their
appropriate uses.
2. Scope of the study
The present study is carried out among the 2nd year students, who have
enrolled at least 6 credits for general English at TNU. The participants of the
study include students of different ethnic minority groups, who are studying for

4


their BA degree at TNU. The focus of the investigation is on learning strategies,
and the relationship between the choice of language learning strategies and the
TNU ethnic students in terms of gender, English language proficiency, major
fields of study and learning styles.
3. Aims of the study

This study attempts to examine types and frequency of LLSs that TNU
ethnic students reported employing and then determine whether there is a
relationship between language learning strategies and (i) gender, (ii) English
language proficiency, (iii) major fields of study, and (iv) learning styles.
4. Research questions
This study addresses the following research questions:
1. What English language learning strategies do TNU ethnic students employ
for their EFL learning?
2. What English language learning strategies are frequently used by TNU
ethnic students?
3. To what extent do the students‟ choices of language learning strategies
vary significantly with their gender, major fields of study, levels of proficiency
and learning styles? If so, what are the main patterns of variation?
5. Definitions of terms
Language Learning Strategies in the present study refers to behaviours or
thought processes whether observable or unobservable, or both, that TNU students
generate and use to enhance their specific skills or general knowledge in learning
the English language.
The Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL) refers to an
instrument which has been developed by Oxford (1990). It is designed to
investigate learners‟ language learning strategies and to assess the frequency of
use of language learning strategies. The SILL has two versions including version
5.1 (80 items) and version 7.0 (50 items). Version 5.1 is designed to gather
information about how native-speaking English students learn a foreign or second

5


language and version 7.0 is designed for non-native speakers of English who are
learning English as a second or foreign language.

Strategy categories as defined by Oxford (1990) and used in the SILL
Memory strategies: memory strategies (items 1 to 9 on the SILL) help with the
storage and retrieval of new information. Examples include using sounds and mental
pictures in association with new information. Another example is using flashcards.
Cognitive strategies: cognitive strategies (items 10 to 23 on the SILL) are
techniques involving transformation, direct analysis or synthesis of the language.
Examples include reasoning, translating, analysing and practicing functions in
natural situations.
Compensation strategies: compensation strategies (items 24 to 29 on the
SILL) allow learners to fill in gaps of information by predicting from context,
using gestures, native language use and using descriptions.
Metacognitive strategies: metacognitive strategies (items 30 to 38 on the
SILL) include establishing goals and objectives, self-monitoring, evaluation of
progress, planning how and when to learn.
Affective strategies: affective strategies (items 39 to 44 on the SILL) are
actions that enable the learner to maintain stable attitudes, emotions and
motivations helpful for consistent language learning. Examples include selfencouragement and talking with others.
Social strategies: social strategies (items 45 to 50 on the SILL) include
interacting with others in various social environments.
Learning

styles

refers

to

cognitive

characteristic,

effective,

and

psychological behaviours that serve as relatively stable indicators of how learners
perceive, interact with, and respond to the learning environment.
Ethnic refers to the ethnic minority groups the students belong to. In this
study, the participants consist of minority groups of Thai, Tay, Nung, Dao and
H‟mong.

6


English Language Proficiency Levels refer to their proficiency levels
graded into „high‟, „moderate‟ or „low‟. These levels are based on the students‟
end-of-semester test scores.
Major field of study refers to the academic discipline to which
an undergraduate student formally commits (e.g. Social Sciences and Natural
Sciences)
6. Significance of the study
A review of the literature shows that there have been no studies conducted in
the Vietnamese context or with Vietnamese participants especially with the ethnic
participants from mountainous areas which is similar to the present research. This
study systematizes the theoretical concepts and empirical evidence which are
believed to underpin learners‟ LLSs and utilises this foundation to inform the
whole research process. In fact, there is extremely limited literature on LLSs
among Vietnamese learners. Particularly, the relationship between learner
variables and LLS use or the issue of LLSs in relation to the mentioned factors
has not been explored in any depth. Therefore, the first significance is that this

research extends the literature on the issues surrounding LLSs of Vietnamese EFL
learners.
Secondly, students can benefit most in terms of their awareness of LLSs
as an important aspect in the English learning process. Traditionally develo ped
on a try-and-error basis among Vietnamese students, LLSs are usually
considered a self-regulated domain and very often taken for granted. However,
it should be noted that in order to be effectively used in enhancing learning of
all kinds, strategies as a kind of procedural knowledge need to be learnt
initially (Griffiths, 2004). Being more aware of this need to learn LLSs, ethnic
students at TNU will develop a more positive and serous attitude towards
LLSs, which directs their actual learning process as independent learners.
Therefore, this study is highly informative regarding the current patterns of
LLS use among their own students. Knowledge of possible correlations
7


between LLS use and learner variables, with gender or English ability being
the major LLS indicators, also provides teachers with more information about
how their students should or need to regulate their English learning process. In
this way, English teachers can facilitate the learning process by promoting
appropriate use of LLSs through implicit or explicit strategy training.
This study can also be of value to language educators, educational
administrators and policy makers regarding appropriate approaches to enhancing
the language learning experience for TNU ethnic students. Aspects of material
design, educational objectives, learning opportunity provision, support services
and the like can be adjusted or modified to better accommodate the LLSs of TNU
ethnic students. Furthermore, findings of this empirical research study present a
valuable reference and resource for other researchers and scholars in the field,
both locally, nationally and internationally. It presents one of the initial efforts to
build the scientific foundation for more effective instructional designs in teaching

English as a foreign language, with special regard to independent learning through
the orchestration of appropriate LLSs.
7. Structure of the study
This thesis is organized into three parts: Introduction, Content, and
Conclusions and Recommendations.
The Introduction part introduces the context of research, providing its
background and formulating the problem statements. The research questions as
well as the significance of the study for the overall EFL research fields are also
included in this part. This part also provides clarification of operational
definitions, of the nature and scope of the study, and the aims and objectives of
the study.
In the Content part, a comprehensive literature review follows the
introduction part in Chapter 1. In addition, in the first chapter, the conceptual
framework guiding the research is discussed, and a summary of the relevant
theoretical and empirical literature is provided. The literature review section aims
8


at providing a comprehensive insight into previous research conducted in this
field, delineating the context of this research, gaps in existing EFL research, and
the place of the present study in the overall theoretical framework of foreign
language acquisition.
Chapter 2 clarifies the methodological considerations and procedures
involved in the research process. The research design, research method, and
research instruments used in the study will be discussed in detail in the second
chapter. It will also include a rationale for choosing the SILL inventory, the semistructured interviews, and the two questionnaires as the tools of the research
design. The data collection and analysis procedures will also be delineated, and
the ethical considerations and limitations of the chosen research design will be
discussed. Also, the chapter will include information on the population and
sampling used for the study.

The third chapter presents the results of the study. The results of the SILL
and perceptual learning styles questionnaires will be presented and analysed
quantitatively with the purpose of finding trends linking language proficiency,
gender, major field of study and learning styles. The qualitative insights of
students that effect the choices of LLSs will also be discussed, these findings
elicited from semi-structured interviews in which the respondents will be asked to
share their attitudes, perceptions, and ideas about the EFL study they are
undergoing.
The third chapter also presents a discussion of the findings with proper
relevance to the prior theoretical research. The findings will be related to the
previous studies on the same subject, with the comparison and contrast of findings
with those of other researchers. The implications of the research findings will also
be properly revealed in regard to the theoretical and empirical research in the field
of language learning strategy.
The Conclusions and Recommendations part is dedicated to the
conclusions elicited from the present research and also contains recommendations
9


for further research. The conclusion section is dedicated to the summary of
findings and the identification of the research progress that could be achieved by
means of conducting this research. The recommendations section is dedicated to
the delineation of further directions of research in this field, and to the
demarcation of gaps still remaining in the field.
8. Summary
This part has introduced the topic of this research which aims to explore the
types, frequency and patterns of variations between the four mentioned factors
and language learning strategies used by TNU students when learning English as a
foreign language. The part introduced the study through exploring existing
literature with the aim of identifying language learning strategies used by ethnic

students at Thai Nguyen University.
This part has also introduced the rationale for this study in order to justify
why this study is important. To do this, this section examined the work of other
researchers in order to evaluate their contribution to the topic of the research, and
to identify gaps in existing research in order to justify the reason for undertaking
this research. The section revealed that little research has been carried out to
explore the relationship between language learning strategies used and the factors
affecting the choices of LLSs of TNU students. This part has also addressed the
research questions and significance of this study.
The first part concluded by offering a definition of key terms used in the
study and also included a structure of the study, setting out the organization of the
study from the introduction to the conclusion. Having established the background
of this study, the next part will present a review of the literature related to this
topic of research, which aims to explore the types, frequency and possible patterns
of variations between the use of language learning strategies and factors such as
gender, major fields of study, level of English proficiency and learning styles of
ethnic students at Thai Nguyen university.

10


CONTENT
CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW

1.1. Introduction
There is general agreement that researchers in the world have paid attention
to research works in the field of LLSs in the mid-seventies. From the very first
purpose of LLS studies to “identify what good language learners report they do to
learn a second or foreign language, or, in some cases, are observed doing while
learning a second or foreign language” (Rubin, 1987, p. 19), and to identify the

characteristics of "good language learners" and “poor language learners", research
in the LLS area has shown that LLSs have the potential to be “an extremely
powerful learning tool” for language learners (O‟Malley et al., 1985, p. 43).
Researchers have considered many aspects: e.g., what makes a good
language learner; how learners process new information; what kind of strategies
they employ to understand; to learn or to retrieve the information; and what
factors affect the learners‟ choice of LLS use. There have been many research
works concerning what makes a good language learner: e.g., Stern (1975); Rubin
(1975); Naiman, Fröhlich, Stern and Todesco (1978); Ramirez (1986); Chamot
and Küpper (1989); O‟Malley and Chamot (1990); Oxford and Cohen (1992); and
Griffiths (2008).
Although the research into language learning strategies used by successful
and unsuccessful language learners has produced some interesting insights, the
picture which emerges is far from unified (Griffiths, 2004). According to
Hismanoglu (2000), there has been a prominent shift in the field of language
learning and teaching with more emphasis on learners and learning processes
rather than on teachers and teaching processes.
Some researchers have not been convinced that LLSs are as beneficial as the
literature might have us believed. Macaro (2006) argues there is not enough
rigorous research to show a definitive causality so the notion that gets into
11


people‟s heads is: use of strategies leads to proficiency, achievement and success;
i.e., causality. But we just do not know that. Taguchi (2002) also raises concerns
about adopting a general approach to good language learners since we can
somehow observe the good language learner and copy the strategies employed.
This idea excludes all other variables such as learning styles, sex, age and culture,
to name a few.
Although there are numbers of important criticisms over the research done

on language learning strategies (Macaro, 2007; Oxford, 1994; Rees-Miller, 1993;
Oxford & Nyikos, 1998; Takeuchi, 2003, and Griffiths, 2007), there are still
irrefutable benefits of the use of LLSs in teaching. According to Macaro (2003),
learner strategy instruction appears to be effective in promoting successful
learning if it is carried out over lengthy periods of time and if it includes a focus
on metacognition. In addition to the benefits of consistent and focused strategy
training, Fewel (2010) asserts that the strategy training provided for the learners,
to some degree, may contribute to the success of learners. From a slightly
different perspective, Ehrman et al., (2003) state that training has a significant
impact on motivation, aptitude, knowledge of strategies, and the perceived
usefulness of directly applying strategies to language learning and use. Cohen
(2003), in agreement with these statements, suggests that learning will be
facilitated by making the learners aware of range of strategies from which they
can choose during the language learning and use. Chamot (2001), in one of his
research works, points out the features of learners who can employ various LLSs,
states that they also gain the ability to orchestrate the strategies that best meet both
the task demands and their own learning strengths. Finally, Oxford (2003) states
that in other subject areas learners enjoy the benefits of learning strategy used in
their academic studies and it is not surprising that L2 learners when carefully
choose and use the relevant strategies become successful.
Many research works have then explored the types and the nature of strategy
use, the effectiveness (if any) of LLS training. However, as stated by Phakiti
12


(2003, p.7), “To date, there is little empirical evidence to show how language
learning strategies are related to actual strategy use in context.” This opinion was
also asserted by Rees-Millers (1993, p.11) “Until empirical data, particularly in
the form of empirical studies are gathered to answer questions about the
usefulness of learner training, teachers should approach the implementation of

learner training in the classroom.” Therefore, it is necessary to conduct more
research work in the field of LLS of EFL language learners in the specific context
in order to help learners choose the proper LLSs in acquiring the target language,
especially in the settings of mountainous areas.
1.2. Language Learning Strategies Definitions
Difficulties in defining LLS remain even at the basic level of terminology.
Researchers define LLS in different ways such as „technique‟, „tactic‟ and „skill‟.
These definitions sometimes overlap and conflict to each other. Oxford (1989)
defines the term as „behaviours‟ or actions. This means LLS is observable,
whereas Weinstein and Mayer (1986) argue LLS involve both behaviours and
thoughts, that means unobservable.
Schmeck (1988, p.5) makes the clear distinction between “strategies” and
“tactics” when he stated the distinction is a subtle, but important one. He pointed
out the origins of the word “strategy” as a military term used to describe plans for
executing military operations. He saw strategies as “basic abstract categories of
processing by which information perceived in the outside world is organized and
categorized into cognitive structures as a part of a conceptual network”, while
tactics are “variable and idiosyncratic learning activities, which learners use to
organize a learning situation, respond to the learning environment, or cope with
input and output demands” (Ellis 2008, p.704).
The nature of what is LLS is also an argument among researchers. Stern
(1983, as cited in Ellis, 1994, p. 531) describes the nature of learning strategies as
general and overall when he defines that “strategy is best reserved for general

13


tendencies or overall characteristics of the approach employed by the language
learners, leaving techniques as the term to refer to particular forms of observable
learning behavior” while Wenden (1987) argues that LLS is not about general

approach of learners. He claims that LLS refers to “specific actions or
techniques”. (Wenden, 1987, p.7)
Although “there is little consensus in the literature concerning either
definition or the identification of LLS” (Wenden and Rubin, 1987, p.7),
language learning strategies have been variously defined over the years.
Outstanding definitions include:
 “Particular forms of observable learning behavior, more or less
consciously employed by the learner”. (Stern 1983, p. 405)
 “The behaviors and thoughts that a learner engages in during learning that
are intended to influence the learner‟s encoding process”. (Weinstein and Mayer
1986, p. 315)
 “Techniques, approaches or deliberate actions that students take in order
to facilitate the learning and recall of both linguistic and content area
information”. (Chamot 1987, p. 71)
 “The behaviors and thought processes that learners use in the process of
learning including any sets of operations, steps, plans, routines used by the learner
to facilitate the obtaining, storage, retrieval, and use of information”. (Wenden
and Rubin 1987, p. 19)
 “Strategies which contribute to the development of the language system
which the learner constructs and affects learning directly”. (Rubin 1987, p. 23)
 “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)
 “The mental process which learners employed to learn and use the target
language”. (Nunan 1991, p. 168)
14