THE RELATIONSHIPS AMONG STRATEGY USE, SELF-EFFICACY, AND LANGUAGE ABILITY IN ...

195 Pages·2007·0.76 MB·English

THE RELATIONSHIPS AMONG STRATEGY USE, SELF-EFFICACY, AND
LANGUAGE ABILITY IN FOREIGN LANGUAGE LEARNERS

By Olive N. Gahungu

A Dissertation
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the
Degree of
Doctor of Education
In Curriculum and Instruction

Northern Arizona University
May 2007

Approved:

Jon A. Reyhner, Ed. D., Chair

Mary Dereshiwsky, Ph.D.

Randi Reppen, Ph. D.

Frances Riemer, Ph. D.
2
ABSTRACT
THE RELATIONSHIPS AMONG STRATEGY USE, SELF-EFFICACY, AND
LANGUAGE ABILITY IN FOREIGN LANGUAGE LEARNERS
Olive N. Gahungu
This study investigated the interrelationships among language learning strategy
use, self-efficacy, and language ability. The study participants were thirty-seven college
students studying French at a midwestern, medium-size, university. The students’ use of
language learning strategies was a measured through a forty-item questionnaire that was
an adaptation of Oxford’s (1990) Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL).
Their self-efficacy was also measured through a forty-item questionnaire in which they
expressed their levels of certainty that they could perform learning tasks at desired levels
of proficiency. Their language ability in French was measured through a cloze test.
Qualitative data were also obtained from open-ended questions, interviews with the
participants and their instructor, as well as class observations.
The results of the study revealed the existence of positive and significant
relationships among the three variables. It was also found that the majority of the
participants did not have a clear rationale for studying French, but had undertaken its
study to fulfill programmatic requirements, which affected their strategic behavior.
Recommendations for second language students, programs, and instructors were
suggested to help students achieve higher communicative competence.
3
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Completing this project and achieving a doctorate would not have been possible
without the contribution of several individuals to whom I wish to express my heartfelt
gratitude.
The list is long, but I would like to thank, first and foremost, my sister Primitive
Ndayiragije and her husband Paul Gahungu, who selflessly gave of themselves to send
me to school. Together with my brothers and sisters, they sacrificed so much to afford me
an education. Although thousands of miles away, their warmth, support, hope, and
concern have always been close. I would also like to thank Athanase, my husband, for
being my friend, mentor, counselor, proofreader, nurse, and for the tremendous amount
of expertise, support and strength that he has displayed, especially during the last two
years. To our children, Jessica, Clive, and Colin, thank you for understanding the
sacrifices you have had to endure for my education.
I would like to express my gratitude to Dr. Jon Reyhner, Dr. Mary Dereshiwsky,
Dr. Randi Reppen, and Dr. Frances Riemer of Northern Arizona University who
spontaneously accepted to serve on my dissertation committee and offered much needed
guidance, motivation, and support. I will always be indebted to them for their expertise,
advice, and contributions. Dr. Lapan, thank you for being so student-centered.
I would also like to express my appreciation to my professors in the MA TESL
and the College of Education, Curriculum and Instruction at Northern Arizona
University. Thanks also go to everybody in the Department of Educational Leadership,
Curriculum and Foundations, as well as the students and faculty of the Modern Language
Department at Chicago State University for allowing me to serve in their departments.
4
Dr. Norris-Delgado, thank you for your availability and contribution. I would also like to
express my gratitude to the administrators, teachers, staff and students of Homewood
School District 153. It’s been a very supportive environment in which to work. To all the
students I have taught, thank you for challenging my intellect, asking the tough questions,
and deepening my understanding of curriculum issues and education.
Thanks also go to all the individuals who, in different capacities, have contributed
to the completion of this work. I would like to thank Dr. Jeanine Ntihirageza, Dr. Marie
Mayoya, Jessica Gahungu, Nina Nirema, Léonce Hakizimana, Annonciate Nduwimana,
and all my friends and relatives who once in a while called to encourage me.
To my team of doctors, Dr. White, Dr. Swenson, Dr. Gopi, Dr. Wade, Dr. Share,
Dr. Yalavarthi, Dr. Sanwalani, and their staff, thank you for your outstanding care.
Finally, this work is offered in precious memory of several relatives who lost their
lives in the political struggle the country of Burundi has experienced during the last
several decades, or its aftermath: Jean Baptiste Ndayiragije and Eulalie Ntiharirizwa, my
parents; Paul Gahungu, my brother-in-law and guardian; Déogratias Nininahazwe, my
brother; Mélas Kida and Gloriose Ntakiyica, my parents-in-law; and all departed uncles,
cousins, in-laws, other relatives and friends, you went too soon and we miss you very
much.
5
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT ......................................................................................................................... 2
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................................................................................... 3
LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................... 8
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................... 9
Background of the Problem ............................................................................................ 9
Purpose of the Study ..................................................................................................... 12
Statement of the Problem .............................................................................................. 13
Research Questions and Related Alternative Hypotheses ............................................ 13
Definition of Terms, Abbreviations and Acronyms Used ............................................ 14
Delimitations ................................................................................................................. 17
Assumptions .................................................................................................................. 18
Significance of the Study .............................................................................................. 19
Chapter Summary ......................................................................................................... 20
CHAPTER II: LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................................... 21
Overview of Language Teaching Approaches .............................................................. 22
Language Learning Strategies ....................................................................................... 36
Self-Efficacy ................................................................................................................. 68
Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 93
CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY ................................................................................... 94
Introduction ................................................................................................................... 94
Restatement of the Problem .......................................................................................... 94
Research Questions and Related Alternative Hypotheses ............................................ 94
6
Research Design and Procedures .................................................................................. 95
Research Methodology ................................................................................................. 97
Chapter Summary ....................................................................................................... 104
CHAPTER IV: ANALYSIS AND RESULTS ................................................................ 105
Study Participants ....................................................................................................... 105
Beta Test and Pilot Study ............................................................................................ 107
Results ......................................................................................................................... 108
Focus Group Interview ............................................................................................... 112
Interview with the Instructor ....................................................................................... 117
Conclusion .................................................................................................................. 124
CHAPTER V: SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND
IMPLICATIONS ................................................................................................ 127
Introduction ................................................................................................................. 127
Summary of the Study ................................................................................................ 127
Summary of Findings and Conclusions ...................................................................... 128
Conclusions ................................................................................................................. 143
Recommendations ....................................................................................................... 144
Implications of the Study ............................................................................................ 157
REFERENCES ................................................................................................................ 161
APPENDIX A: IRB DOCUMENTS ............................................................................... 171
APPENDIX B: QUESTIONNAIRE ................................................................................ 176
APPENDIX C: FOCUS GROUP INTERVIEW PROTOCOL ....................................... 182
APPENDIX D: CLASS OBSERVATION RUBRIC ...................................................... 183
7
APPENDIX E: CLOZE TEST ......................................................................................... 184
APPENDIX F: INSTRUCTOR INTERVIEW PROTOCOL .......................................... 188
APPENDIX G: ALPHA TEST ........................................................................................ 190
APPENDIX H: BETA TEST ........................................................................................... 192
APPENDIX I: QUANTITATIVE DATA ....................................................................... 195
8
LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 Summary of Classification of Language Learning Strategies by Author ........... 43
Table 2 A Proposed Classification of Language Learning Strategies ............................. 47
Table 3 Research Design and Procedures Paradigm .......................................................... 1
Table 4 Matrix of Bivariate Correlations ....................................................................... 103
Table 5 Characteristics of Study Participants ................................................................ 106
Table 6 Means, Standard Deviations, and Intercorrelations: Strategy Use,
Self-efficacy, and Language Ability ................................................................... 108
Table 7 Reasons and Frequencies Why Participants Were Learning French ................ 111
Table 8 Language Learning Strategies that Students Report Using and Frequencies ... 115
Table 9 Language Learning Strategies the Instructor Reported Students Use. ............. 119
Table 10 Strategies Students Were Observed Using During Classroom Observations .. 123
9
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this research was to investigate the relationships among language
learning strategy use, self-efficacy, and language ability in a foreign language
environment at Chicago State University. This chapter contains (1) the background of the
problem, (2) the purpose of the study, (3) the statement of the problem, (4) the definitions
of important terms, abbreviations and acronyms used, (5) the delimitations of the study,
(6) the limitations of the study, (7) the significance of the study, and (8) a summary of the
chapter.

Background of the Problem
Most language teaching approaches, such as the cognitive approach, the
comprehension-based approach, the direct approach, and the situational approach, lack an
emphasis on learner autonomy, feelings, and attitudes (Celce-Murcia, 2001). They view
language teaching as an enterprise where the teachers’ role is to provide learners with the
knowledge and skills they think students need and to assess whether the learners have
met the expectations. The students’ role is to learn the material taught to them, and,
during assessment, to demonstrate what they know. These two roles seem very
simplified. Effective teachers ought to look for and find ways to motivate their students,
encourage them, teach them learning skills, and also teach them ways to continue
learning outside the classroom and away from the teacher (Rubin & Thompson, 1994;
Wenden, 1991). It is necessary for teachers to help students learn to recognize their
emotional temperature and lower their affective filter when it is interfering with learning
10
(Krashen & Terrell, 1983; De Serres & LaFontaine, 2005; Oya, Manalo & Greenwood,
2004).
The theory of an affective filter states that successful second or foreign language
learning depends on the learners’ feelings and attitudes. A negative attitude acts as a
filter, and prevents the learner from making use of input, thus limiting success in
language learning (Richards, Platt & Platt, 1996; Krashen & Terrell, 1983). In an effort to
make the language learning experience as successful as possible, language practitioners
have to look for concrete ways to assist their students to learn more effectively by
empowering them to take responsibility and to manage their own learning. Successful
language learners have acquired the skills necessary to enhance learning and to develop
autonomy and a sense of personal agency.
What kind of input, environment, motivation, and learner characteristics are
associated with higher levels of language learning? This is a very important question that
includes language learning strategies and self-efficacy, two constructs that have been
received different levels of attention in the research in second language acquisition.
Teachers and other language practitioners are increasingly aware of the existence of
learning strategies and self-efficacy. But the extent to which these two constructs might
play a role in foreign language learning has not been fully investigated. In fact, they have
been either unknown, ignored, or neglected by many language teaching approaches.
Second and foreign languages have been taught through at least nine approaches (the
grammar-translation approach, the direct approach, the reading approach, the situational
approach, the cognitive approach, the affective-humanistic approach, the comprehension-
based approach, and the communicative approach, as discussed by Celce-Murcia (1991;