A Critical Review of Research on Language Learning Strategies used by Arab Learners of English

IF 0.4 Q4 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Studies in Self-Access Learning Journal Pub Date : 2019-09-01 DOI:10.37237/100303
Anas Hajar
{"title":"A Critical Review of Research on Language Learning Strategies used by Arab Learners of English","authors":"Anas Hajar","doi":"10.37237/100303","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"More than four decades have passed since the language learning strategy (LLS) concept was first brought to wide attention by Joan Rubin (1975). Although LLS research is prolific, it has faced challenges regarding its conceptual and methodological nature. These apparent weaknesses have encouraged some proponents of LLS research (e.g. Oxford, 2011; Rose et al, 2018) to conduct a systematic review of previous LLS research, with the aim of identifying the nature of the vigorous attempts to abandon the construct of LLS in research studies. Surprisingly, perhaps, these reviews did not include any LLS research studies concerning Arab learners. Therefore, this paper examines previous research into the LLSs used by Arab learners of English taken from different databases. The analysis has indicated that the majority (22 out of 27) of studies discovered were exclusively quantitative, using Oxford’s (1990) Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL). These quantitative studies correlated the Arab participants’ LLS use with other individual learner variables, especially those related to gender and language proficiency. The other five were qualitative studies, and no study had adopted a mixed-method approach. This paper concludes by suggesting some areas that deserve further investigation in future research.","PeriodicalId":43678,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Self-Access Learning Journal","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studies in Self-Access Learning Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.37237/100303","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

More than four decades have passed since the language learning strategy (LLS) concept was first brought to wide attention by Joan Rubin (1975). Although LLS research is prolific, it has faced challenges regarding its conceptual and methodological nature. These apparent weaknesses have encouraged some proponents of LLS research (e.g. Oxford, 2011; Rose et al, 2018) to conduct a systematic review of previous LLS research, with the aim of identifying the nature of the vigorous attempts to abandon the construct of LLS in research studies. Surprisingly, perhaps, these reviews did not include any LLS research studies concerning Arab learners. Therefore, this paper examines previous research into the LLSs used by Arab learners of English taken from different databases. The analysis has indicated that the majority (22 out of 27) of studies discovered were exclusively quantitative, using Oxford’s (1990) Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL). These quantitative studies correlated the Arab participants’ LLS use with other individual learner variables, especially those related to gender and language proficiency. The other five were qualitative studies, and no study had adopted a mixed-method approach. This paper concludes by suggesting some areas that deserve further investigation in future research.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
阿拉伯英语学习者语言学习策略研究述评
自从Joan Rubin(1975)首次提出语言学习策略(LLS)的概念以来,已经过去了40多年。虽然LLS研究是多产的,但它面临着关于其概念和方法性质的挑战。这些明显的弱点鼓励了LLS研究的一些支持者(例如Oxford, 2011;Rose et al, 2018)对以往的LLS研究进行了系统回顾,目的是确定在研究中放弃LLS结构的强烈尝试的性质。也许令人惊讶的是,这些评论没有包括任何关于阿拉伯学习者的LLS研究。因此,本文从不同的数据库中对阿拉伯英语学习者使用的法律语言表进行了研究。分析表明,大多数(27项研究中的22项)都是完全定量的,使用的是牛津大学(1990年)的语言学习策略清单(SILL)。这些定量研究将阿拉伯参与者的LLS使用与其他个体学习者变量,特别是与性别和语言熟练程度有关的变量联系起来。其他5项为定性研究,没有一项研究采用混合方法。文章最后提出了一些值得进一步研究的领域。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Studies in Self-Access Learning Journal
Studies in Self-Access Learning Journal EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
50.00%
发文量
32
审稿时长
8 weeks
期刊最新文献
Shadow Education in Hong Kong: An Insight From Local Private Tutors Book Review: Self-Regulated Learning and Second Language Writing, Springer 2022 An Overview of Web Assisted Learning and Teaching of Tamil (WALTT) at the Penn Language Center The Impact of the FlipGrid Application Within the Genre-Based Framework on Students’ Writing Skills and Self-Regulation of Learning Awareness Student Perceptions of Language Advising as a Complement to the Flipped Classroom
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1