Individual Differences in SLA: Styles / Strategies
Learning styles – our preferred (natural, habitual,
“without thinking”) way of learning.
• global v. analytic
• field in / dependence
• feeling v. thinking
• impulsive v. reflective
• intuitive-random v. concrete-sequential
• closure-oriented v. open
• extroverted v. introverted
• visual v. auditory v. tactile/kinesthetic
Oxford & Anderson. (1995). A cross-cultural view of
learning styles. Language Teaching, 28, 201–215. 1
Individual Differences in SLA: Styles / Strategies
Learning styles – our preferred (natural, habitual,
“without thinking”) way of learning.
For the most part, scholars determine learners’
styles through use of instruments, often—but not
always—questionnaires.
Field In / Dependence has been studied widely. It is
“the extent to which a person perceives part of a
field as discrete from the surrounding field as a
whole, rather than embedded” (p. 121).
Jamieson, J. (1992). The cognitive styles of
reflection / impulsivity and field independence /
dependence and ESL success. Modern Language
Journal, 76, 491–501.
2
Individual Differences in SLA: Styles / Strategies
Field In / Dependence
In studies of Field
In / Dependence
learner style is
determined by two
tests: the
Matching Familiar
Figures Test
(MFFT). Match
the figures …
3
Individual Differences in SLA: Styles / Strategies
Field In / Dependence
… and the Group
Embedded
Figures Test
(GEFT). Find the
embedded figure
in the more
complex graphic
…
4
Individual Differences in SLA: Styles / Strategies
Field In / Dependence
… and the Group
Embedded
Figures Test
(GEFT). What
embedded
figures to you see
here?
5
Individual Differences in SLA: Styles / Strategies
Field In / Dependence
There is complex empirical evidence on the impact
of field in / dependence on language learning. What
do you think it might be?
If we are field dependent (more holistically oriented;
focusing on the comprehensive field) …
FD people are more socially oriented, and may
have more success in SLA in communicative,
naturalistic situations.
If we are field independence (oriented more toward
discrete parts than the whole) …
FI people are more self reliant (independent), and
6
may succeed in analytical SLA situations.
Individual Differences in SLA: Styles / Strategies
Learning strategies – the conscious decisions we
make about the learning task (strategies).
1. cognitive strategies, involving the manipulation or
transformation of learning materials / input (e.g.,
repetition, summarizing, using images);
2. metacognitive strategies, involving higher-order
strategies aimed at analyzing, monitoring,
evaluating, planning, and organizing one’s own
learning process;
7
Individual Differences in SLA: Styles / Strategies
Learning strategies – the conscious decisions we
make about the learning task (strategies).
1. cognitive strategies;
2. metacognitive strategies;
3. social strategies, involving interpersonal
behaviors aimed at increasing the amount of L2
communication and practice the learner
undertakes (e.g. initiating interaction with native
speakers, cooperating with peers);
4. affective strategies, involving taking control of the
emotional conditions and experiences that shape
one’s subjective involvement in learning.
8
Individual Differences in SLA: Styles / Strategies
Learning strategies – the conscious decisions we
make about the learning task (strategies).
1. cognitive strategies;
2. metacognitive strategies;
3. social strategies;
4. affective strategies.
Dörnyei & Skehan. (2003). Individual differences in
SLA. In Doughty & Long (Eds.), Handbook of SLA
(pp. 589–630). Blackwell.
(Note the slightly different taxonomy of strategies
than in Carson and Longhini.)
9
Individual Differences in SLA: Styles / Strategies
Learning strategies
O’Malley, Chamot, Küpper. (1989). Listening
comprehension strategies in SLA. Applied
Linguistics, 10, 418–437.
11 high school students; Spanish as first language.
8 “effective learners” and 3 “ineffective learners,” as
categorized by their teacher
“think aloud strategy” – students described what
they were thinking during 8 pauses in taped
passages. Student comments on their own
processes / strategies were taped, coded, and
analyzed.
10
Individual Differences in SLA: Styles / Strategies
O’Malley, Chamot, Küpper
Effective listeners:
•monitored attention
lapses; redirected
attention as necessary;
•listened for larger
“chunks” of text; shifted
attention to individual
words only when there
was a breakdown in
comprehension;
•related new information
to prior information.
Ineffective listeners:
•approached texts on
a word-by-word basis;
•were unaware of
inattention; did not
redirect attention to
the oral text when
needed;
•did not make
connections between
new information and
their own lives.
11
Individual Differences in SLA: Styles / Strategies
O’Malley, Chamot, Küpper
How would we characterize this research? Is it
correlation research, involving the use of an
instrument and performance data?
Qualitative research, maybe a case study.
What do we gain in understand individual
differences in SLA from this kind of research?
thick description provides nuances in how people
differ (i.e., beyond the static categories that orient
instruments -- integrative v. instrumental motivation,
e.g.); we get a clearer sense of the process of SLA.
12
Individual Differences in SLA: Styles / Strategies
O’Malley, Chamot, Küpper
How would we characterize this research? Is it
correlation research, involving the use of an
instrument and performance data?
Qualitative research, maybe a case study.
What do we lose?
parsimony; neatness; generalizability. More?
Into which group does Carson and Longhini (2002)
fall?
13