Imam Khomeini International University
Faculty of Humanities
Department of English language
Subject:
The Effects of Self-esteem and Critical Thinking on Iranian EFL Learners’ Language Learning Strategies Use
By:
Soghra Karami Zarandi
A proposal submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for MA degree in Teaching English as a Foreign Language (TEFL)
Fall, 2013
Introduction
The important role that learners can play in the process of language learning has been frequently confirmed in the area of second and foreign language learning. Research has also gone acrossdrastic changes from teacher-oriented methods towards learners and learning-centered techniques to show that it has been in line with these fundamental movements during the past decade (Lee, 2003). So, when learners receive more attention during language learningprocess,they employ strategies and techniques to learn the language better and to overcome its obstacles. From among these techniques, language learning strategies have received particular attention since the late 1970s (Oxford, 1990).
Undoubtedly, learning strategies can have crucial effects on second and foreign language learning. Also there are a range of different factors including anxiety, proficiency level, attitude, motivation, aptitude, amount of exposure, etc., which affectthe choice of language learning strategies (Guilloteax & Dornyei, 2008; Ortega, 2003;Vandergrift, 2005; Zarei & Elekaei, 2013).
According to Brown (2000) the acquisition of a new language includes a set of variables that may be stemmed from neurological, psychological, cognitive and affective variables.Also, Krashen (1981) states that there are a range of psychological variables, which may either facilitate or inhibit the language learners' efforts in English language learning.From another point of view, Bernat, Carter and Hall (2009) declare that learners’ affective contributions to language learning have been on the spotlight for over three decades, both for shedding light on the learning process and also the impact they have on the learning outcomes.
Among those psychological variables or individual differences, self-esteem is one factor whichhas long been the subject of research among educators, psychologists, and sociologists and also has been investigated for many years in the field of language learning.Self-esteem is always a significant variable in the level of accomplishment of all students (Reasoner, 1992). According to Brown (2000)students with high global self-esteem most likely believe themselves to be significant and worthy individuals as well as capable of learning another language.
Besides psychological variables like self-esteem,thinking styles of students also have a crucial impact on language learning.One of theimportant thinking abilities that should be acquired by the learners is criticalthinking.Over the last 20 years, a number of educators and psychologists (e.g.,Schafersman, 1991) havehighlighted the inclusion of critical thinking skills in curriculum; since the major purpose of education is believed to teach learners how to think critically in order to be effective and competent citizens in the real world. (IdoJones, 1991)
Atkinson (1997) asserts that critical thinking has been mostly usedfor first language education in the United States, buttoday its role in second and foreign languagelearning and teaching is of great significance,too.
Accordingly, the present study will investigate the effects of self-esteem and critical thinking on the choice of L2 learners’ language learning strategies.
Definition of the key terms
Global or Trait self-esteem
Brown(2000) defines global self-esteem as "relatively stable in a mature adult, and is resistant to change except by active and extended therapy. It is general or prevailing assessment one makes of one’s own worth over time and across a number of situations."(p.145). For the purpose of the present study, global self-esteem is operationally defined and measured as the participants' performance on anespecially designed questionnaire.
State self-esteem
Many researchers use the term stateself-esteem to refer to the emotions which relate to the feelings of self-worth(Leary, Tambor, Terdal, &Downs, 1995). The essential difference is that global self-esteem persists while feelings of self-worth are temporary(Heatherton & Polivy, 1991).In this study, state self-esteem is operationally defined and measured as the participants' performance on anespecially designed questionnaire.
Critical thinking
Dewey (1933)the father of modern critical thinking, defines critical thinking as: “active, persistent, andcareful consideration of a belief or supposed form of knowledge in the light of the grounds which support it and thefurther conclusions to which it tends” (p. 9).Like self-esteem, critical thinking will be measured using an especially designed test.
Language learning strategies
Chamot (2004) defines learning strategies as “the conscious thoughts and actions that learners take in order to achieve a learning goal"(p. 14).In the present study, language learning strategies will be measured through anespecially designed strategies questionnaire.
According to Oxford (1990), language learning strategies fall in two main categories. Direct and indirect strategies. Direct strategies include cognitive, memory, compensation and indirect strategies contain metacognitive, affective and social strategies.
Oxford and Crookall (1989) define strategies as follows:
Cognitive strategies:They definecognitive strategies as “skills thatinvolve manipulation or transformion the language in some direct way.” (p.1)
Memory strategies:memory strategies are defined as “techniques specifically tailored to help the learner store new information in memory and retrieve it later.” (p.1)
Compensation strategies:are“behaviors used to compensate for missing knowledge of some kind.” (p.1)
Metacognitive strategies:metacognitive strategiesare “behaviors usedfor centering, arranging, planning and evaluating one's learning.” (p.1)
Affective strategies:affective strategies include “techniques like self-reinforcement and positive self-talk which help learners gain better control over emotions, attitudes and motivations related to language learning.” (p.1)
Social strategies:social strategiesrefer to “actions involving other people in the language learning process.”(p.1)
Statement of the problem
There have been a number of studies dealing with the effect of affective variables such as motivation, attitude, autonomy, anxiety, etc. on the choice of language learning strategies. (Guilloteax & Dornyei, 2008; Ortega, 2003; Vandergrift, 2005; Zarei Elekaie, 2013). But the effects of self-esteem and critical thinking ability as crucial factors in language learning and especially choosing language learning strategies havebeen partially examined. Also, on the part of critical thinking,schools and curriculums, especially in East Asia, are blamed for focusing excessively on memorizing for exams or stuffing knowledge into students without developing the cognitive abilities to critically evaluate arguments (Zhang, 1999). As a result, studies on the effects of self-esteem and critical thinking in the field of language learning are highly needed in order to develop the performance of language learners in pedagogical contexts. In this regard, the present study attempts to study the effects of self-esteem and critical thinking on the choice of language learning strategies, and hopes to fill the existing gap in the field of language learning studies.
Significance of the study
Oxford and Ehrman (1992) believe that in order to offer efficient instructions, teachers should learn to identify and comprehend significant individual differences amongtheir students. This is especially important to speed up second and foreign language learning. So,it is obvious that self-esteem is a very significant factor in language learning because no successful cognitive or affective activity can be carried out without some degree of it. Students perform well when they have high global self-esteem, or they may have a high global self-esteem because they perform well.Furthermore, identifying the effect of critical thinking on language learning can provide instructors and authorities with useful information,so they canapply appropriate methods, based on student's individual differences, in order to develop criticalthinking in the students. From another perspective, the betterunderstanding of language learning strategies for English teachers can help students tolearn more successfully and develop their learning autonomy.
Accordingly, the present study will attempt to help teachers and learners to have a better understanding of self-esteem, critical thinking and language learning strategies in an educational context.
Research questions
The purpose of the present study is to answer the following research questions:
RQ1: Are there any significant differences among the effects of different levels of global self-esteem on the choice of memory strategies?
RQ2: Are there any significant differences among the effects of different levels of global self-esteem on the choice of cognitive strategies?
RQ3:Are there any significant differences among the effects of different levels of global self-esteem on the choice of compensation strategies?
RQ4:Are there any significant differences among the effects of different levels of global self-esteem on the choice of meta-cognitive strategies?
RQ5:Are there any significant differences among the effects of different levels of global self-esteem on the choice of affective strategies?
RQ6:Are there any significant differences among the effects of different levels of global self-esteem on the choice of social strategies?
RQ7:Are there any significant differences among the effects of different levels of state self-esteem on the choice of memory strategies?
RQ8:Are there any significant differences among the effects of different levels of state self-esteem on the choice of cognitive strategies?
RQ9:Are there any significant differences among the effects of different levels of state self-esteem on the choice of compensation strategies?
RQ10:Are there any significant differences among the effects of different levels of state self-esteem on the choice of meta-cognitive strategies?
RQ11:Are there any significant differences among the effects of different levels of state self-esteem on the choice of affective strategies?
RQ12:Are there any significant differences among the effects of different levels of state self-esteem on the choice of social strategies?
RQ13:Are there any significant differences among the effects of different levels of critical thinking on the choice of memory strategies?
RQ14: Are there any significant differences among the effects of different levels of critical thinking on the choice of cognitive strategies?
RQ15:Are there any significant differences among the effects of different levels of critical thinking on the choice of compensation strategies?
RQ16: Are there any significant differences among the effects of different levels of critical thinking on the choice of meta-cognitive strategies?
RQ17: Are there any significant differences among the effects of different levels of critical thinking on the choice of affective strategies?
RQ18: Are there any significant differences among the effects of different levels ofcritical thinking on the choice of social strategies?
Research hypotheses
Based on the above research questions, the following null hypotheses are formulated:
H1: There are no significant differences among the effects of different levels of global self-esteem on the choice of memory strategies.
H2: There are no significant differences among the effects of different levels of global self-esteem on the choice of cognitive strategies.
H3:There are no significant differences among the effects of different levels of global self-esteem on the choice of compensation strategies.
H4:There are no significant differences among the effects of different levels of global self-esteem on the choice of meta-cognitive strategies.
H5:There are no significant differences among the effects of different levels of global self-esteem on the choice of affective strategies.
H6:There are no significant differences among the effects of different levels of global self-esteem on the choice of social strategies.
H7: There are no significant differences among the effects of different levels of state self-esteem on the choice of memory strategies.
H8: There are no significant differences among the effects of different levels of state self-esteem on the choice of cognitive strategies.
H9: There are no significant differences among the effects of different levels of state self-esteem on the choice of compensation strategies.
H10: There are no significant differences among the effects of different levels of state self-esteem on the choice of meta-cognitive strategies.
H11: There are no significant differences among the effects of different levels of state self-esteem on the choice of affective strategies.
H12: There are no significant differences among the effects of different levels of state self-esteem on the choice of social strategies.
H13: There are no significant differences among the effects of different levels of critical thinking on the choice of memory strategies.
H14: There are no significant differences among the effects of different levels of critical thinking on the choice of cognitive strategies.
H15: There are no significant differences among the effects of different levels of critical thinking on the choice of compensation strategies.
H16: There are no significant differences among the effects of different levels of critical thinking on the choice of meta-cognitive strategies.
H17: There are no significant differences among the effects of different levels of critical thinking on the choice of affective strategies.
H18: There are no significant differences among the effects of different levels of critical thinking on the choice of social strategies.
Limitationsand delimitations of the study
There will be a number of limitations in this study. One of the most important ones will be finding homogenous students at the same level of language proficiency. The participants will be homogenized in terms of their language proficiency based on their obtained score on the proficiency test. Other elements affecting their proficiency level will not be considered here.In addition, the effect of other variables like sex, cultural and social factors, which may influence the findings, will not be considered in this study.
Furthermore, for manageability reasons, the participants will be selected from among senior B.A. and M.A. students majoring in TEFL and translation. Therefore, generalizing the results to other learners must be treated with care. Also, the participants of the present study will include both female and male learners; but gender will not be included as a variable.
Literature review
Language learning strategies
Over the last twenty years,there has been aburgeoning amount of research into language learning strategies, inan attempt to discover which of the language learning strategies that students use arethe most effective for the particular type of language learning involved.
Many researchers and experts have defined language learning strategies fromdifferent points of view. According to Wenden (1987a), language learning strategiescan be defined from the aspect of language learning behaviors, such as learning andregulating the meaning of a second or foreign language, cognitive theory, such aslearners’ strategic knowledge of language learning, and the affective view, such aslearners’ motivation, attitude, etc.
Furthermore, Chamot (1987) studied the use of learning strategiesby ESL learners in the US. Based on his research, language learning strategies are divided into three main categories, metacognitive, cognitive, and socio-affectivewhich refer to learners’ planning their learning, thinking about the learning process,monitoring their own comprehension or production, and evaluating the outcomes of their own learning. From a theoretical perspective, Rigney (1978) defines language learningstrategies as behaviors, steps, or techniques that language learners apply to facilitatelanguage learning. From another point of view, the definition of Oxford (1990) includes two main classifications: directstrategies and indirect strategies. Direct strategies are specific ways that involve use oflanguage, sub-divided into memory, cognitive and compensation strategies. Indirectstrategies do not directly involve using the language, but they support languagelearning also included cognitive,emotional, and social aspects of language learning strategies.
Studies regarding variables affecting language learning strategies
Many factors influence students using language learning strategies: age, sex,attitude, motivation, aptitude, anxiety, task requirements,learning styles, individual differences, cultural differences, beliefs aboutlanguage learning, and language proficiency (Abraham& Vann, 1987,1990; Bialystok, 1979; Chamot & Kupper 1989;Ehrman Oxford, 1995;Oxford, 1989; Oxford & Nyikos 1989;Radwan, 2011; Sheorey, 1999; Yang, 2007; Zarei & Elekaie, 2013).
In a study, Bialystok (1979) studied the role of language learning strategies in second language proficiency and concluded that using language learning strategies had positive effects on language learners’ accomplishment.
Furthermore, Oxford and Nyikos (1989) discovered the relationship between language learners’ proficiency and their use of strategy as well. They used Strategy Inventory for Language Learning(SILL) to investigate 1200 students ofuniversity who studied five different foreign languages, and found that differentbackground affected use of language learning strategies. Moreover, students’self-rating of proficiency levels was closely connected to their use of language learning strategies; for instance, students who considered themselves to be proficient inspeaking, listening or reading were more interested in employing language learning strategies.
In a case study by Abraham and Vann (1987, 1990), they carried out research into two successful and unsuccessful language learners. The results revealed that successful and unsuccessful learners oftenemployed the same strategies. However, the difference is that successful learners used strategies more appropriate in different situations than unsuccessful learners, and used a larger range of strategies in language learning more regularly and appropriately.
Ehrman and Oxford (1995) found that only cognitive strategies had a significant relationship with language proficiency in the SILL category. Other strategies, (memory, compensation, metacognitive, affective, and social strategies) had no significant relationship with proficiency. On the other hand, only cognitive strategies significantly influenced ESL/EFL learners’ proficiency results.
In a study, Sheorey (1999) examinedlanguage learning strategy use among Indian college students who studying English in the environment of an indigenized variety of English. The findings revealed that meta-cognitive strategies were used most frequently. It was reported that the cultural background and the educational patterns influenced some of the strategies which Indian students used. Moreover, results showed the effect of sex variable and indicated that female learners used strategies more frequently than male learners.