The Impact of Technology on Language Strategy Development
Ewa Wasniewski
Dept. of Educational Psychology
University of Alberta
Canada
ewaw@ualberta.ca
Patricia M. Boechler
Dept. of Educational Psychology
University of Alberta
Canada
patricia.boechler@ualberta.ca
Abstract: This preliminary study examines the influence of teaching an assistive
technology to English as Second Language adult students in a small group. Vocabulary
Learning Strategies, as proposed by Oxford (1990) are, “specific actions taken by the
learner to make learning easier, faster, more enjoyable, more self directed, more
effective, and more transferable to new situations” (p. 8). In this study, the traditional
VLS schema informed the new application of using an assistive technology as a strategy
for ESL language development. Student self reported strategies in pre and post
questionnaires to identify the differences in strategic choice after training sessions with a
technology were provided.
Learning strategies have been considered an inherent act of learning and research has explored
what students are trying to address when they apply a strategy (Rubin, 2013). The objective of this study is
to investigate the potential impact that an assistive technology may have for self-identified English as a
Second Language (ESL) adult learners as strategic support.
Language Learning Strategies
Vocabulary Learning Strategies (VLS) have been identified as key skills for ESL student success
(Oxford, 1990, 1996, 2008). Oxford identified a classification scheme to distinguish two broad categories
of learning strategies (direct and indirect) that are implemented in education. Direct strategies are any
strategies that directly involve the language being learned (Hsiao & Oxford, 2002). Examples include
using a dictionary, mnemonic device, flash cards, or other techniques that can support lexical development.
Indirect strategies are subdivided into metacognitive, affective, and social categories (Hsiao & Oxford,
2002). Oxford and Scarcella (1994) stated, “students are usually expected to learn vocabulary on their own
without much guidance” (p. 231). Hence, it is important for ESL instructors to assist students in
developing their own understanding and approaches to vocabulary learning (Oxford & Scarcella, 1994).
Language learning skills are typically developed individually with limited success; therefore it is
imperative for instructors to incorporate a social context for language development (Reid, 2012). More
specifically, VLS can be a starting point for ESL students to build their independent academic autonomy.
“Learning strategies are 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 transferability of language learning strategies beyond language courses will not only provide
course success but also increase overall student independence.
Lessard-Clouston (1994) applied and researched Oxford’s VLS taxonomy and applied it to two
different courses. The first course was preparing students to write a Test of English as a Foreign Language
(TOEFL). At the start of the course, students were asked to fill in a questionnaire about how much time
they spend on self-initiated learning. The following week students were asked to fill in a Vocabulary
Knowledge Questionnaire (VKQ) adapted from Sanaoui (1992) followed by a time-spent questionnaire
(Lessard-Clouston, 1994). The researcher was trying to understand what strategies students were using and
how much time they were spending studying the new language. “On the VKQ, the average score for the
class was 63.7%, indicating that many students had learned many of the words they said they had. Overall,
the class median score was 70%, suggesting general success among students in their self-stated vocabulary
learning,” (Lessard- Clouston, 1994, p. 73). For the second course Lessard-Clouston reproduced the first
study with the addition of using the Approach to Vocabulary Learning Questionnaire (AVQ) adapted from
Sanaoui (1995) and Lessard-Clouston (1996). The AVQ provided insight into individual participants’ use
of VLS. “It is concluded that while more and less successful participants are represented across language
backgrounds and approaches to technical vocabulary acquisition, students in academic contexts may
nonetheless want to incorporate some structure into their approaches to technical vocabulary learning in
order to gain greater depth knowledge of the specialized vocabulary in their field,” (Lessard-Clouston,
2008, p 52). Overall, the researcher noted that the results were mixed about the success of structured
versus unstructured courses but did note the need to teach in both dimensions.
The research overall indicates that VLS does play a positive role in the lexical development of
ESL adult learners. The current study represents a preliminary exploration of the impact of learning a new
technology as a strategic tool for direct and indirect language development.
Methods
Participants for this study were in their first semester of taking the Practical Nurse Diploma for
Internationally Educated Nurses (PNDIEN) at a community college. Data was collected from four selfidentified ESL adults registered in the English course as part of the PNDIEN program. The participants
moved to Canada from their respective countries within the last five years and had achieved a level 8 on the
CLB entrance exam. The purpose of this study was to first identify preexisting strategies that students used
in learning a new language.
In addition to their regular class time, the researcher provided six one-hour group sessions, which
ran throughout the fall semester. The sessions taught how to use the College’s computer system, and then
the Read and Write Gold (R&WG) assistive technology program. Data was collected using two
questionnaires. The first questionnaire, the Pre-Vocabulary Questionnaire (Pre-VQ) collected information
and establish a benchmark of individual participants strategy use. The second questionnaire, the PostVocabulary Questionnaire (Post-VQ) consisted of closed and open questions about the strategic choices the
participants made during the study with the addition of two questions about the R&WG program.
Results
Data collected from both the Pre-VQ and Post-VQ are first reported followed by a comparison of
both questionnaires to confirm the differences and similarities of strategies use by the participants over the
research period.
Table 1. An Overview of Data Collected from the Pre-VQ as Reported by Each Individual Participant
Participant
Female 1
Student
Descriptors:
Participants
SelfReported
Average
Time Spent
Studying
per Week
Student
Descriptors:
Participant
Identification
of Language
Type for
Learning
Student
Descriptors:
Participants
Identified in
which
Setting they
Acquire
Health Care
Language
Strategies
Previously
Used by the
Participants
for English
Vocabulary
Acquisition
Participants
Identification
of Note
Taking
Strategies
for Studying
Purpose
Participants
Identification
of Strategy
use for
Health Care
Vocabulary
and if for
Class Work
or Self
Directed
Activities
2-3 Hours
General
Academic
Reading and
Class
28%
Yes,
occasional
notes on
reading and
Yes, Class
Activities
c1ass lecture
Female 2
4-5 Hours
General
Academic
Reading and
Class
71%
Yes,
occasional
notes on
reading and
c1ass lecture
Yes, Class
Activities
Male 1
4-5 Hours
Health Care
Specific
Reading and
Class
42%
Yes,
occasional
notes on
reading and
c1ass lecture
Yes, Class
Activities
Male 2
2-3 Hours
General
Academic
Reading and
Class
14%
Yes, Mental
Notes
Yes, Class
Activities
Mean
38.75%
Based on the results from the Pre-VQ, participants studied vocabulary between two/five hours per
week at the start of this research study. Three fourths of the participants identified that they study using
general academic vocabulary language; therefore, it can be inferred that most of the participants have not
acquired a working level of language. All of the participants identified that they are only learning the new
vocabulary in class or by reading course materials. This could limit the transferability of vocabulary as this
limits the participants’ interaction with new vocabulary to the classroom. From a list of seven different
strategies, participants were asked to indicate which strategies they use. The seven strategies were; 1)
making mental notes, 2) asking an English native speaker, 3) using a paper dictionary, 4) using an
individual notebook, 5) applying to writing assignments, 6) using a computer to assist in finding new
meaning, and, 7) applying to conversations. Participants indicated they use 38.75% of the strategies listed.
This data provided the researcher with an understanding of the strategies that participants have used prior to
the study.
Table 2. An Overview of Data Collected from the Post-VQ as Reported by Each Individual Participant
Participant
Student
Descriptors:
Participants
SelfReported
Average
Time Spent
Studying
per Week
Student
Descriptors:
Participant
Identification
of Language
Type for
Learning
Student
Descriptors:
Participants
Identified in
which
Setting they
Acquire
Health Care
Language
Strategies
Previously
Used by the
Participants
for English
Vocabulary
Acquisition
Participants
Identification
of Note
Taking
Strategies
for Studying
Purpose
Female 1
1 Hour
Health Care
Specific
Outside
Involvement
57%
Female 2
4-5 Hours
General
Academic
Reading and
Class
57%
Male 1
1 Hour
General
Academic
Reading and
Class
57%
Yes,
occasional
notes on
reading and
c1ass lecture
Yes, I keep
detailed
written notes
Yes,
occasional
Participants
Identification
of Strategy
use for
Health Care
Vocabulary
and if for
Class Work
or Self
Directed
Activities
Yes, Class
Activities
Yes, Class
Activities
Yes, Class
Activities
Male 2
2-3 Hours
Health Care
Specific
Reading and
Class
Mean
43%
notes on
reading and
c1ass lecture
Yes, Mental
Notes
Yes, Class
Activities
53.5%
The results from the Post-VQ were very interesting because two of the participants identified that
they spent less than an hour each week studying new words. One participant reported studying new
vocabulary words for about two-three hours per week and the final participant studied four-five hours per
week. Comparing these results to the Pre-VQ, two of the participants decreased the time they spent each
week studying new vocabulary words. One participant identified that they started to learn more vocabulary
outside of the classroom but still benefited from readings and class activities. Overall, the participants used
53.3% of all the possible strategies out of seven possible choices. This is an increase of 17.75% from the
Pre-VQ, although a dependent T-test (Wilcoxin) indicated this was not a significant difference, t(4) =
0.141, p < .001.
Figure 1. Number of Participants using Each Strategy Pre-VQ and Post-VQ Sessions
Figure 2. Bar Graph Representation of Pre-VQ to Post-VQ Strategies Used by the Participants for English
Vocabulary Acquisition
60
Percentage out of Seven Strategies
50
40
Pre-VQ
30
PostVQ
20
10
0
Female 1
Female 2
Male 1
Questionnaire
Male 2
As demonstrated in the bar graph above, two of the participants increased strategy use over the
duration of the term; one maintained strategy use and one decreased strategy use. The original strategies
identified on the Pre-VQ were still used and retained by participants as reposted on the Post-VQ. This
demonstrates the overlapping nature of strategy use as new strategies overlapped the continued use of the
original strategies.
Additionally, two specific questions pertaining to the R&WG program were included in the PostVQ. Overall, the participants reported using 32% of seven different R&WG features of the program.
Three out of four of the participants identified that they used the features because it was; “time saving,”
“understand,” and “learn more.”
Secondly, participants were asked to identify which features out of the seven different they used for
strategic support. The most used R&WG feature reported by all participants was the text-to-speech feature.
Next, half of the participants reported using the speaking dictionary and one fourth reported using the word
prediction, pronunciation tutor as well as spelling support features. The homonyms, and fact finder features
were not reported to be used at all by the participants.
Overall, all of the above figures show the different strategies used by the different participants as
reported on the Pre-VQ and the Post-VQ. It can be concluded that the participants increased their strategic
awareness and used new strategies to assist with lexical knowledge but the use of a computer, as a strategic
support remained constant and needs to be maximized as an educational tool. The feature that best
supported students in vocabulary development was the Text-to-Speech feature.
Conclusions
The findings of this study expand the work of previous researchers in the area of VLS by applying
the use of an Assistive Technology as a language strategy. This investigation revealed that ESL adult
students would structure their studying and apply technological strategies to acquire lexical knowledge if
taught how to use the strategy and how to use the technology. In addition, most students are already using
some form of technology to support language acquisition. Further research into the different tools and
applications used by adult ESL learners will inform strategic support for differentiated instruction.
References
Lessard-Clouston, M. (1996). ESL vocabulary learning in a TOEFL preparation class: A case study.
Canadian Modern Language Review, 53, 97-119.
Lessard-Clouston, M. (2008). Strategies and success in technical vocabulary learning: Students’ approaches
in one academic context. Indian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 34(1-2), 31-63.
Oxford, R. L. (1990, 1996, 2008). Language Learning Strategies: What Every Teacher Should Know. New
York: Newbury House.
Oxford, R.L., & Scarcella, R.C. (1994). Second language vocabulary learning among adults: State of the art
in vocabulary instruction. System, 22(2), 231-243.
Reed, B. S. (2012). Teaching and Researching Language Learning Strategies. By Rebecca L. Oxford.
British Journal of Educational Studies, 60(2), 193-194.
Rubin, J. (2013). Teaching Language‐Learning Strategies. The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics.
Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Ruutmets, K. (2005). Vocabulary learning strategies in studying English as a foreign language. Master’s
thesis. [online]. Retrieved from http://www.utlib.ee/ekollekt/diss/mag/2005/b17557100/ruutmets.pdf
Sanaoui, R (1992). Vocabulary learning and teaching in French as a second language classrooms.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Toronto: University of Toronto, OISE.
Sanaoui, R. (1995). Adult learners’ approaches to learning vocabulary in second languages. The Modern
Language Journal, 79(1), 15-28.
textHELP (2012). Read and Write Gold (Version 8.0) [Computer Software], Antrim: textHELP Systems.
(Access date: 5 November 2012).