1. 1 LANE 622 APPLIED LINGUISTICS Prepared by Dr. Abdullah S. Al Shehri Email asalshehri@hotmail.com

2. 2 LECTURE V STYLES & STRATEGIES

3. 3 In the previous lecture.. We discussed a number of learning theories, types of learning and learning processes that attempted to describe universal human traits in learning. These were: Pavlov’s Classical Behaviorism. Skinner’s Operant Conditioning. Ausubel’s Meaningful Learning. Roger’s Humanistic Psychology. Gagne’s Eight Types of Learning. Transfer, Interference, and Overgeneralization. Inductive and Deductive Reasoning. Aptitude and Intelligence. All seek to explain how people perceive, filter, store, and recall information.

4. 4 However.. These theories and processes by no means account for the many differences that exist across individuals, let alone intraindividually, in the way they learn. In this lecture, we will discuss cognitive variations in learning: Variations in learning styles across individuals. Variations in strategies employed by individuals in dealing with particular problems in particular contexts.

5. 5 PROCESS, STYLE, AND STRATEGY

6. 6 Process A universal human concept. All humans of normal intelligence engage in certain levels or types of learning. All humans engage in association, transfer, generalization, and attrition. All humans make stimulus-response connections and are driven by enforcement. All human possess varying degrees of the seven forms of intelligence.

7. 7 Style Consistent and enduring tendencies or preferences within an individual. Characteristics of intellectual functioning and personality type that differentiate individuals from one another.

8. 8 Strategies Specific methods of approaching a problem or task. Modes of operation for achieving a particular goal. Planned designs for controlling and manipulating information. Contextualized “battle plans” that might vary from time to time.

9. 9 LEARNING STYLES

10. 10 What is a learning style? Keefe’s (1979:4) definition of ‘learning styles’: “Cognitive, affective, and physiological traits that are relatively stable indicators of how learners perceive, interact with, and respond to the learning environment”. Skehan (1991:288) also defined ‘learning styles’ as: A general predisposition, voluntary or not, toward processing information in a particular way”.

11. 11 Learning styles (continued) Learning styles mediate between emotion and cognition. Physical, affective, and cognitive domains merge in learning styles. A reflective style grows out of a reflective personality. An impulsive style usually arises out of an impulsive emotional state.

12. 12 Learning styles (continued) Our solutions to problems we are faced with are based to a great extent on our styles. For example: We are tolerant of ambiguity if we are not easily flustered by our unfortunate circumstances. We are reflective if we exercise patience and not jump quickly to a conclusion about how to approach the situation. We are field independent if we focus on the necessary and relevant details and not be distracted by irrelevant ones.

13. 13 Learning styles (continued) The way we learn things in general and the way we approach solutions for our problems appear to depend on a rather amorphous link between personality and cognition. This link is referred to as cognitive style. When a cognitive style is specifically related to an educational context, where affective and physiological factors are intermingled, they are usually more generally referred to as learning styles.

14. 14 Learning styles (continued) Research in the area of learning styles brings important variables to the study of second language learning, one that deeply involves affective factors. Such learning styles can contribute significantly to the construction of a unified theory of second language acquisition.

15. 15 Learning styles (continued) Dozens of different learning styles have been identified. These include cognitive, affective, communicative, cultural, intellectual, and sensory factors. A select number of these learning styles have emerged in second language learning research as potential contributors to successful L2 acquisition.

16. 16 Learning styles (continued) The following are some of those learning styles which have contributed to our understanding of the L2 acquisition: Field Independence Left and Right-Brain Functioning Ambiguity Tolerance Reflexive and Impulsivity Visual and Auditory Styles

17. 17 Field Independence/Dependence (FI/FD) Field independence (FI) is the ability to perceive a particular, relevant item or factor in a “field” of distracting items. That “field” may be perceptual or it may be abstract such as thoughts, ideas and feelings. Field dependence (FD) is, conversely, the tendency to be “dependent” on the total field where the parts embedded within the field are not easily perceived. Instead, the total field is more clearly perceived as a unified whole.

18. 18 Field Independence/Dependence (continued) FI style enables one to distinguish parts from a whole and to analyze separate variables without the contamination of neighboring variables. Too much FI may result in cognitive “tunnel vision” where one sees only the parts and not their relationship to the whole (or the whole picture). Both FI and FD are necessary for most of the cognitive and effective problems we face.

19. 19 Field Independence/Dependence (continued) Authoritarian or agrarian societies, which are usually highly socialized and use strict rearing practices, tend to produce more FD. A democratic, industrialized, competitive society with freer rearing norms tends to produce more FI persons.

20. 20 Field Independence/Dependence (continued) Persons who are more predominantly FI tend to be generally more independent, competitive, and self-confident. FD persons tend to be more socialized, to derive their self-identity from persons around them, and are usually more empathetic and perceptive of the feelings and thoughts of others.

21. 21 Field Independence/Dependence Relationship of FI/FD to L2: Hypotheses How does all this relate to L2 learning? First hypothesis: FI is closely related to classroom learning that involves analysis, attention to details, and mastering of exercises, drills and other focused activities. Second hypothesis: Because of their empathy, social outreach, and perception of other people, FD persons are more successful in learning L2 communicatively. (Mainly anecdotally supported – little empirical evidence)

22. 22 Field Independence/Dependence Relationship of FI/FD to L2: Research Findings FI correlated positively and significantly with L2 success in class. Strong relation between FI and close tests performance, which require analytical abilities. Correlation of FI style with L2 success measured by traditional, analytical, paper-and-pencil tests and by an oral test. FI learners of L2 performed better in deductive lessons, while FD persons were more successful with inductive lesson designs.

23. 23 Field Independence/Dependence Relationship of FI/FD to L2: Conclusion FI and FD styles are equally important. The two hypotheses deal with two different kinds of learning: 1. Natural, face-to-face communication. 2. Classroom activities: drills, exercises, tests. Natural L2 learning in the “field” requires FD style. Classroom L2 learning requires FI style.

24. 24 Left & Right Brain Functioning and L2 Learners Left hemisphere is associated with logical, analytical thought, mathematical/linear processing of information. Left-brain-dominant L2 learners preferred deductive style of teaching. Left-brain-dominant L2 learners are better at producing separate words, gathering specifics, carrying out sequences of operations, and dealing with abstraction, classification, labeling, reorganization. Right hemisphere perceives and remembers visual, tactile and auditory images. Right-brain-dominant L2 learners are more successful with inductive style teaching. Right-brain-dominant learners deal better with whole images, with generalizations, with metaphors, and with emotional reactions and artistic expressions.

25. 25 Left- & Write Brain Characteristics Left-Brain Dominance Intellectual Remembers names Responds to verbal instructions Experiments systematically Makes objective judgments Planned / Structured Prefers established information. Analytic reader Reliance on language in thinking Prefers talking / writing Prefers MCQ tests Controls feelings Not good at interpreting body lang. Rarely uses metaphor Favors logical problem solving Right-Brain Dominance Intuitive Remembers faces Responds to demonstrated instructions Experiment randomly Makes subjective judgments Fluid and spontaneous Prefers illusive information Synthesizing reader Reliance on images in remembering and thinking Prefers drawing Prefers open-ended questions More free with feelings Good interpreter of body language Uses more metaphor Favors intuitive problem solving

26. 26 Ambiguity Tolerance/Intolerance Ambiguity-tolerant people are open-minded and more accepting of ideologies, events, facts that contradict their own views; they are more content to entertain and internalize contradictory propositions. Ambiguity-intolerant people are close-minded and dogmatic; they tend to reject items that are contradictory with their existing system. They wish to see everything fit into their cognitive organization.

27. 27 Ambiguity Tolerance Advantages: A tolerant-of-ambiguity person is free to entertain innovative and creative possibilities and not be cognitively or affectively disturbed by ambiguity. In L2 learning a great amount of contradictory information is usually encountered; and successful L2 learners are usually more tolerant of such ‘ambiguities’. Disadvantages: An ambiguity-tolerant person can become “wishy-washy”, accept virtually every proposition and not efficiently subsuming necessary facts into their cognitive organizational structure. Such excess tolerance can prevent meaningful subsuming of ideas. In L2 learning, linguistic rules might be acquired by rote learning and not be effectively integrated into a whole system.

28. 28 Ambiguity Intolerance Advantages: Ambiguity intolerance may enable one to guard against “wishy- washiness”, to close off avenues of hopeless possibilities, to reject contradictory material, and to deal with reality of the system that one has built. Disadvantages: Ambiguity intolerance can close the mind too soon, especially if ambiguity is perceived as a threat, and the result will be a rigid, dogmatic, brittle mind that is too narrow to be creative. This may be particularly harmful in L2 learning.

29. 29 Reflectivity and Impulsivity Reflective: A slower and more calculated decision. Systematic (reflective) thinkers weight all considerations in a problem and work out all the loopholes before venturing a solution. Impulsive: A quick or gambling (impulsive) guess at an answer to a problem. An (impulsive) person makes successive gambles on the basis of “hunches” before a solution is achieved.

30. 30 Reflectivity and Impulsivity Implications for Language Acquisition Conceptually reflective children make less mistakes in reading than impulsive children. Impulsive children are faster readers. Reflective persons may benefit more from inductive learning situations. Reflective students were found to be slower but more accurate than impulsive students in reading.

31. 31 Visual and Auditory Styles Visual learners tend to prefer reading and studying charts, drawings, and other graphic information. Auditory learners prefer listening to lectures and audiotapes. Most successful learners utilize both visual and auditory input with slight preference. Significant cross-cultural differences in visual and auditory styles were found. Korean students were found to be more visual oriented than native English-Speaking Americans. Japanese students were found to be the least auditory oriented.

32. 32 STRATEGIES Techniques that learners employ to solve problems posed by second language input and output.

33. 33 Types of Strategies Learning strategies: This type relates to input – to processing, storage, and retrieval, that is, to taking in messages from others. Communication strategies: This type pertain to output, how we productively express meaning, and how we deliver messages to others.

34. 34 Learning Strategies Metacognitive Metacognitive is a term used in information- processing theory to indicate an “executive” function, strategies that involve: Planning for learning. Thinking about the learning process as it is taking place. Monitoring of one’s production or comprehension. Delaying speaking in order to learn initially through listening comprehension. Evaluating learning after an activity is completed.

35. 35 Learning Strategies Cognitive Cognitive strategies are more limited to specific learning tasks and involve more direct manipulation of the learning material itself. They involve tasks such as: Repetition Resourcing Translation Grouping Note Taking Deduction Contextualization Transfer Inferencing

36. 36 Learning Strategies Socioaffective Socioaffective strategies have to do with social-mediating activity and interacting with others. They involve tasks such as Cooperation Questions for clarification

37. 37 Communication Strategies Avoidance Strategies: Message abandonment: Leaving a message unfinished because of language difficulties. Syntactic or lexical avoidance. Phonological avoidance. Topic avoidance.

38. 38 Communication Strategies (continued) Compensatory Strategies: Circumlocution Approximation Use of all-purpose words Word coinage Prefabricated patterns Nonlinguistic signals Literal translation Foreignizing Code-switching Appeal for help Stalling or time-gaining strategies

39. 39 In this lecture.. We looked at a number of cognitive variables in the learning of a foreign language. We saw that cognitive variables alone represent a complex system of factors that contribute to our understanding of the total L2 acquisition process. We also saw that not all learners are alike, and with many styles and strategies operating within a learner, many cognitive “profiles” can be identified. We learned that teachers need to recognize and understand a multiplicity of cognitive variables in the L2 process in order to make appropriate judgments about individual learners.