KOREAN ESL LEARNERS' LEARNING STYLES BASED ON THEIR PERSONALITY, ORAL ...

116 Pages·2009·1 MB·English

KOREAN ESL LEARNERS’ LEARNING STYLES BASED OM

THEIR PERSONALITY, ORAL PROFICIENCY, AND NAVISNAL ORIGIN

Acthesis

Presented in F:

ial Pulgiiiment of the Reg

the dogroe Master of arte in the

Graduate School of The Ohio State University

by

Eunyoung KL, B.A.

whe Ohio state University

Peer

master's Rxamination Committe:

Approved by

Keiko Sanimy

Charles Hancoce

av ioE ze
coliege 0: sducation’/
‘To my husband
ACRNOWLEDCIIEGTS

I express appreciation to of the instructors uno

participated in this study. My deep gratitude is expressed
to Professor Keiko Saminy, my adviser, for hor unfailing
support, veluable comments, and especially her confidence in
me. I would like to extend ay gratitude to Professor Charles
Hancock for hie patient guidance and encouragement: throughout
‘the period of my graduate studies. I woud also like to thank
for theix generoun cooperation my fellow Korean graduate

students whe participated, Kindly and sincer

) as the
subjects in this study. Most of all, I give my neartreit
thanks to my husband and my family in Korea for their support

and encouragement during all the years of my education,

aa
vara,

November 18, 1965

Born - Seoul, Korea

1967 B.A. in English Education
korea University
Seoul, Korea

1987 — English Examination congultant

Joongang Educational Institute
Seoul, Korea

FIELDS OF STUDY

Major Field: Education

Minor Field: Foreign Language Education
studies in TESOL
TABLE OF CONTENTS

DEDICATION ii
ACKNOWLEDGMENT iii
VITA iv

LIS? OF TABIRS

LIS? OF FIGIRES

CHAPTER, PAGE

I. THE PROBLEM =:

Introduetian — 1
Purpose of the study 5
Research Questions | — 6
Theorotical Bases 7
Definitions of Terms ~ wy
Agnamptions = 16
Significance of the Study an

II. LETERATURE REVIEW = 20
introduction = 20
sone Characteristics and Taxoncnies
of Learner strategies 20
Learnor Factors and the choice of
Stratogies 2
The Characteristics of Successful
Learner Strategies 3
Negative Aspects of Learner
strategies 43
Sumtary a8
TIT. DESIGN & PROCKDURES

Population
Sample

Desion
Ingtrunents
Procedures
Data analysis
Pilot study —

IY. ANALYSTS OF THE DATA ~

overview of the Data
statistical Analysis of the Data
A. The Characteristics of
104 Subjects =
B. The Characteristics of
105 Subjects —
c. Similarities and Differences
batween 104 and 105 Subjects

¥. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS & DISCUSSIONS

overview
Discussion of Findings
Implications
Recommendations tor
Further Research —
Limitations —

APPENDICES

umopmy

LIST OF REFERENCES

STILL Questionnaire
Reductive Strategy Questionnaire
Persona} ity Questionnaire
Background Quee tionnaire
Language Questionnaire
ALetter —
1.189 OF TABLES

‘TABLE PACH
1. The Frequency of Reductive Strategy Scores Bl
2. The Frequency of Menory Strategy Scores 52
2. The Frequency ef Cognitive Strategy Scores 52
4. The Frequency of compensation Strategy Scores --- 53
5. The Yrequency of Metacognitive strategy Scores -- 53
6. The Frequency of Affective Strategy Scares 53
7. The Frequency of Social Strategy Scores sa
8. ‘Te Frequency of SILL strategy Scores — 54
9. The Froquency of Risk-Taking Scores 54
10. the Frequency of Sociability Scores oo
11. the Frequency of Discomfort Scores ~ 28
12, The Frequency of Personality Scores ~- oo
13, Ridit analysis tor the Tendency of

Wisk-Taking, Seciability, and Discomfort 57
14. Ridit Analysis for the Tendency of

soclanility and Discomfort 56
15. Kidit Analysie for the Use of Reductive

Strategy and Discomfort Tendency 59
16, Ridit Analysis for the Use of Reductive

Strategy and Sociability Tendency 6a
17. Ridit analysis tor the Use of Keductive

Strategy and SILL strategy -

62

ih
te.

as.

20.

al.

22.

22.

Ridit Analysia for the Tendency of

Risk-Taking and Discomfort ~

Ridit analysis for the Tesdency of

Sociability and Bisconfort —

Ridit Analysis for the Use of Reductive
Strategy and Discomfort Variable

Ridit Analysia for the Use of Reductive

Strategy and SILL strategy ~~

Ridit analysia for the Use of

SILL Strateay ~

Ridit Analysis for the Use of

Reductive strategy

oo

os

5

6

67

oe
LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE PAGE

a

‘The Intermix of Learner status,
Practice, and strategy Variables
in the Learning process

stern’s Model for Examination of

Second Language Learning 25
‘the Comparison of Parsonality Traits ~ 60
‘The Comparison of SILL Use ~ 63
CHAPTER I

‘THE PROBLEM

Tntreduct ion
‘he conmunicative approach to second Language Learning

has encouraged learners to take greater responsibility for

their cun learning, and its principles have stimulated the
use of appropriate, positive learning strategies. varallel

with the focus of research, there is growing intorest in

identifying learning behaviors and thought processes used by
language learners.

Tae idea that students con be Laught to be more
effective and creative leamers has pean explored in
relation to recent advances in cognitive psychology and
other principles. with the advent of Interlanguage theory
as well as the enexgenco of cognitive paycholoay, the
importance of learner strategy has been demonstrated by a
growing body of strategy reseerch studies. There have peen
nunerous books and articles discussing the identification,
importance, impl cations, and teachability of learner

strategies. Instrumente for measuring then have peen