How
can all learning styles be best catered for in a class of 50 minutes - via
a series of short varied activities or by a multi-faceted project?
Both
ways can be used to cater for different learning styles. The choice of what
to include in the lesson plan depends on the lesson`s objectives. If the
objectives require a series of short activities, that`s fine, but if the
objectives require a multi-faceted project that goes throughout the period
or over several days, that is fine, too. The basic point is that providing
variety must be a high priority, and this can be done through short tasks
or through a multi-faceted project.
Have you come across any strong evidence of gender
differences in learning styles?
Some gender differences do exist in learning styles, with about 60% of males
tending to be more objectively-thinking oriented (Thinking on the Myers-Briggs
Type Indicator) and about 60% of females being more subjectively-thinking
oriented (Feeling on the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator). That is not a huge
difference. On other style dimensions, gender differences are often far
smaller. However, I would like to have data from many more cultures before
making a firm statement about this!
In your research, have you found any evidence that
CALL is a satisfying and beneficial activity for tactile learners?
I have found that many tactile learners love the feel of the keyboard
and are very excited to work with CALL. However, CALL does not have just
one activity-type. The range of tasks available via CALL is immense. Some
are truly boring, while others are challenging and interesting, so I cannot
say that all CALL tasks will be appealing to tactile learners just because
they love the keyboard.
Which types of learning strategy tend to be most successful
with young learners - if it is possible to generalise?
My friend and colleague Pamela Gunning of Canada has studied the strategies
of young Francophone learners of ESL in Montreal. Gunning found that the
more proficient the young learners, the more they used affective strategies
to help them handle anxiety and keep their motivation high. In her study,
proficiency had a direct relationship to the use of affective strategies,
but not to the use of other types of strategies. Gunning also found that
young learners in her study used certain strategies more often than others,
regardless of proficiency level. For instance, among the compensation strategies
(those that compensate for missing knowledge), guessing and asking for help
were used significantly more often than using gestures and employing circumlocution.
Among the metacognitive strategies, listening attentively was used more
often than analyzing the reason for errors, self-evaluating, planning study
time, or creating practice opportunities.
My doctoral student Rae Lan conducted research on the learning strategies
of elementary school children learning English as a foreign language in
Taiwan. She found that high-proficiency learners used four types (cognitive,
compensation, metacognitive, and affective) of the six broad types of strategies
significantly more often than did medium- or low-proficiency learners. An
interaction of proficiency level and liking of English occurred for the
use of social strategies. To make a long story short, more proficient students
were strong users of many types of learning strategies.
Anna Uhl Chamot has done a lot of research with learning strategies with
young learners, and you should refer to her research.
Is there a 'best way' in your experience to encourage
learners to give honest answers to learning strategies questionnaires rather
than telling us what they think we want them to say?
I have not had problems with students falsifying their answers on strategy
questionnaires, because I have made it very clear that their responses have
absolutely no effect on their course grades. Also, I make certain to let
them know that I will be coding their surveys with an ID number rather than
their name. When I give a background questionnaire (about age, gender, motivations,
interests, etc.), I make sure that the ID number is the same as the one
on the strategy questionnaire, so that I can link the results of both without
destroying student confidentiality. When students know that the results
will be used to help them and not hurt them, and when they recognize that
confidentiality is the rule, then they are very happy to answer honestly.
How can learners stuck in an enforced learning mode such as rote learning
be best weaned onto other strategies?
I am not sure what you mean by "enforced." Probably you don't
mean required, but you might mean culturally supported. At any rate, the
research my students and I have done with learners from Asia has shown that
"rote-memory" strategies are not as uncreative as thought at first.
In fact, we discovered a wide range of different mental-association-making
techniques (schema-building strategies) involved in what we thought were
purely low-level "rote-memory" strategies. Therefore, we must
not demean those strategies, consider that they are worthless, or try to
wean students away from them entirely. They do have a useful function, especially
in vocabulary learning and especially if teachers probe to find out what
associations students are making mentally.
Ask students what is going on behind the seemingly rote strategies. Help
learners see a much wider range of strategies from which to choose, rather
than trying to wean them away from something they consider useful and that
in fact might be more creative than you think. When they see that they have
strategy choices, and when they realize that these choices can make them
more proficient in English, they tend to try out the new strategies as long
as the situation is supportive. Don't ever expect or force them to give
up all their rote-memory strategies, though, because this would not help.
To help students the most, offer strategy instruction that is woven into
regular language teaching. Strategy instruction can really be quite simple
and is necessitated by ordinary language tasks. Teachers recognize when
a task is difficult for some or all students in the class; at that point,
strategy instruction might be warranted. The most effective strategy instruction
includes (a) demonstrating how to use a given strategy to make the task
at hand easier and (b) encouraging students to employ the strategy while
doing the task. For instance, the teacher teaches students to make mental
pictures of English prepositions of place when they are doing early tasks
with these prepositions. Another example is teaching students to analyze
unfamiliar words to get the meaning while reading an English newspaper or
short story. Effective strategy instruction also includes (c) helping students
check whether the strategy has aided them (not every strategy is equally
valuable to all students) and (d) reminding students when to transfer a
useful strategy to other language tasks. The goal is for a new, useful strategy
to become automatic and virtually effortless.
What advice would you
give to independent learners who need to prepare for high-stakes exams such
as TOEFL or IELTS? What strategies might they use to maximize their independent
learning strategies while still having very narrow learning goals?
Standardized-test-takers would benefit from many vocabulary-learning strategies,
such as grouping and labeling related words, semantic mapping, using visual
images of words, and (for hands-on learners) using flash cards or posting
word-labels on a "word wall." They would also benefit from many
reading-related strategies involving guessing from context, predicting,
reviewing questions before reading the passage, and analyzing words and
phases to understand the meaning. Strategies such as planning one`s time
and checking one`s work would also be helpful. There are many books available
on how to take standardized tests, and shrewd test-takers consult these
books to find the best strategies for such tests.
In terms of your own theories of second language acquisition,
what is the relationship between developing a very conscious knowledge of
your own learning strategies, on the one hand, and simply acquiring language
unconsciously through exposure, enjoyment, engagement, etc.?
Some students are able to absorb language less consciously than others;
that is, they can "acquire" language rather than "learn"
it, to use Krashen`s terminology. The youngest learners fall into this category.
However, many learners from upper elementary school through adulthood tend
to need more conscious, structured language instruction, and for them the
use of (conscious) learning strategies is essential. By structured language
instruction I certainly do not mean grammar-based, but I do mean organized
and intentional. I just read an article about adult advanced-proficiency
language learners living in the target (host) country. It said that only
a small percentage actually improved their language proficiency merely through
exposure and involvement; the majority needed real instruction (conscious,
intentional teaching and learning) in order to improve. One would assume
that those who required real instruction in the host country would also
benefit from the conscious use of learning strategies. Also, from personal
experience, learning strategies help in travel situations as much as in
the classroom.