by Kirstie Jackson Wilms
What are learning strategies?
All learners engage in activities of one form or another to help them remember the material they have been presented with, or to assist them in manipulating it in use.
The choice of which activities to use at a particular time and for a particular task may be conscious or unconscious. Although an unconsciously-selected activity may contribute to overall learning, it cannot be termed strategic: it is “learners’ proactive contribution to enhancing the effectiveness of their own learning” (Dörnyei 2005:166), i.e. voluntarily choosing and employing a learning activity in a specific context (Dörnyei 2005:165 citing Cohen, 1998) which can be thought of in these terms.
Learning strategies as conscious behaviours therefore differ from learning (or cognitive) styles as they are commonly defined: hard-wired acquisitional preferences for the way an individual takes in, organises, and manipulates information (Fleming 2005), and which therefore cannot be altered or consciously controlled. Such preferences are part of an individual’s mental make-up, and so will be present irrespective of teacher-intervention. Bearing in mind Coffield et al’s (2005:135) caveat that an over-focus on learning styles in the classroom may result in a ‘content-free pedagogy’ where the mode of transmission of the material (e.g. to appeal to a ‘visual’ or ‘kinaesthetic’ learner) takes precedence over the product of learning itself, I will focus on learning strategies, and what we, as teachers, could do to support learners in strengthening and extending their strategy use.
Why is a knowledge of learning strategies helpful?
From the teacher’s point of view, gaining some insight into how our learners are processing the material we present them with, and going beyond labels such as ‘the quiet one’, ‘good at vocabulary’, etc. can only be beneficial. It allows us to ‘get behind’ the labels and present learners with activities that both play to their strategic strengths and support them in trying out new ways of tackling the material.
For the learners themselves, knowing that there are different ways of approaching an activity, and that some of these are more effective than others – in other words, that it’s a matter of approach and not just raw linguistic talent – can be liberating.
In addition, as Wenden and Rubin (1987, quoted in Harris, 2024:11) point out, such strategies are not limited to language learning in the classroom alone, but can be applied in real-world situations such as conversations ‘in the field’ with peers or L1 speakers.
Classes of learning strategy
Oxford (1990), in her Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL) model, identifies six classes of learning strategy:
- Cognitive (e.g. analysing unknown language)
- Memory (e.g. creating mental linkages, applying images and sounds to lexis)
- Metacognitive (e.g. setting goals and objectives, planning and evaluating learning)
- Compensatory (e.g. guessing intelligently in conversation, overcoming communication difficulties or breakdowns)
- Affective (e.g. lowering anxiety, self-encouraging)
- Social (e.g. asking questions, cooperating and empathising)
Analysis of these six categories (Dörnyei 2005:168) suggests that they fall into two groups: those predominantly concerned with language learning, and (for the compensatory strategies) those predominantly concerned with language use.
I would also argue that metacognitive strategies for evaluating learning or understanding, as well as the social strategies, while being primarily concerned with learning, also have applications as strategies for language use. A learner who has received explicit strategy training as well as having the opportunity to practise strategy use in naturalistic situations (Nunan 1997:131) may be a more successful communicator than one who has not benefitted from such training.
Therefore, giving learners the opportunity to combine overt language learning strategy training with communicative practice such as is standard in the EFL classroom may result in better language learning outcomes than would otherwise be the case.
Broadening strategy use
Oxford (2003:3) notes that strategy preferences may be culturally dependent, with certain cultures valuing certain learning behaviours over others; that is to say, “conscious strategy use is [...] linked to learner beliefs, since learners will [...] select strategies for themselves on the basis of what they believe is the most appropriate approach” to language learning (Dörnyei 2005:173).
This raises an interesting question for mixed-nationality classrooms, where a range of strategies may therefore be chosen by learners depending on their cultural backgrounds.
Again, focused strategy instruction (and presenting a range of strategies for learner experimentation and evaluation) can serve to raise learners’ awareness of strategies beyond those of their cultural norms, promoting effective learning in the (new) context of the classroom. For the learner, such strategy “stretching” (Oxford 2003:9) has the advantage of equipping them with ‘more tools for the job’, thus allowing greater opportunities for something akin to “strategy chaining” (Murphy 1985:38) where learners combine, in coordinated sequence, a number of strategies from different categories to maximise learning effect. Nevertheless, explicit instruction (see Nunan 1997 above) and awareness-raising activities in class have been shown to be necessary if learners are to make the step towards deliberate, targeted, and coordinated employment of learning strategies.
Assessing learners’ strategy use
To support learners in broadening their strategy use, we as teachers must first determine their strategic preferences and then assist them in ‘filling the gaps.’ One way to do this is via Oxford’s (1990:293-300) comprehensive SILL questionnaire.
For me, the SILL has the advantage of inviting learners to record the strategic learning behaviours they are aware of on a scale from ‘never or almost never true for me’ to ‘always or almost always true for me’ for sub-strategies in each of the six categories described above, rather than asking them to state subjective learning preferences (which, I feel, may be more open to manipulation according to learners’ beliefs about what is or is not socially acceptable).
Once learners have recorded their behaviours, each answer is scored according to frequency of use, and an overall category score can be determined by dividing the sum of the individual answer scores for each category by the number of questions in that category.
However, it is also worthwhile to examine individual sub-strategy scores in detail, as a learner who ‘almost always’ uses a very limited number of strategies in one category may have a cumulative strategy score that is equal to or higher than that of a learner who records less frequent use of a broader range of sub-strategies for the same category. The former learner may need intervention to help extend overall strategy deployment while the latter would benefit from support in evaluating which strategies are more suitable for which contexts and applying them more consistently.
Learners can then discuss the results of the questionnaire (as a class or individually with the teacher) and the teacher can use the questionnaire findings to plan strategy support for a class or individual.
Admittedly, the level of detail you wish to go into depends very much on class size! It may also be worthwhile to offer a broader-based strategy training as those learners who have experience in using a particular strategy successfully will be able to act as models for the rest of the class (see below).
Strategy training: adapting procedures and materials
Oxford (1990:203) and Macaro (2006, cited in Harris 2024:11) suggest that strategy training is likely to be more effective when carried out over the length of a course or sequence of lessons than as an individual intervention. Nevertheless, single interventions, linked to a particular activity and exploring a very limited number of strategies, can also be beneficial. Macaro (2001:176, reproduced in Dörnyei 2005:176) proposes a nine-step Learning Strategies Training Cycle which can be applied either to single lessons or iteratively over a course:
- Raising learners’ awareness
- Brainstorming possible strategies for a given task/context
- Peer/Teacher modelling of strategy use
- Combining strategies for a given task
- Learners apply strategies with scaffolded support
- Initial evaluation by learners
- Gradual removal of scaffolding
- Evaluation by learners/teacher
- Monitoring of strategy use (by learners/teacher)
In terms of materials and procedures, we as teachers may need to build in lexical and strategic brainstorming prior to e.g. a listening activity, and monitoring learners may involve noting not only language use or pragmatic competence but also examples of strategic behaviours to use in modelling or peer teaching.
Encouraging learners to think and talk about which strategies they were aware of using as part of a process-approach and reflecting on the product of this strategy choice (e.g. Could I understand/make myself clear? Why (not)?) in pairs or groups may also be fruitful. Procedural tweaks (e.g. from ‘tell your partner...’ to ‘listen to/ask your partner about…’ (Harris 2024:15)) could also be used to support learners in practising strategy use after the initial awareness-raising stages.
Many classroom activities and procedures familiar from CELTA (such as mingling activities, using magazines or websites, think-pair-share procedures, and encouraging peer correction/teaching) lend themselves to extension or adaptation in order to incorporate strategy training: often, I believe, it is not a case of reinventing the procedural wheel, but rather of adding an extra supporting spoke on occasion.
Conclusion
In her article on learner autonomy, Julia Ochocinska Ochocińska (2024) makes the case for the long term benefits of learner autonomy within and outside the classroom. Gomes and Tomkins (2024) offer some activity types for encouraging learners to take more responsibility for their learning, all of which they note can be applied in real-life contexts. By raising awareness among both teachers and learners about language learning strategies, we can help take learner autonomy even further - because an informed, knowledgeable learner will know how to take responsibility for their learning. The strategies described in this article will help them to do precisely that.
References & Bibliography
Coffield F., Moseley, D., Hall, E. and Ecclestone, K., (2004) Learning styles and pedagogy in post-16 learning: a systematic and critical review. London: Learning & Skills Research Centre http://hdl.voced.edu.au/10707/64981.
Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Laurence Erlbaum Associates Inc. https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/chiuni-ebooks/
Fleming, N.D. (2005). Teaching and Learning Styles: VARK Strategies (2nd edn.). Christchurch, New Zealand: The Digital Print and Copy Center.
Gomes, P. and Tomkins, M. (2024). ‘Getting Into Learner Autonomy’ in the IH Journal #52
Harris, R. (2024). Activities for developing learning strategies. Stuttgart, Germany: Delta Publishing
Murphy, J.M. (1985). An investigation into the listening strategies of ESL college students. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED27875) https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED278275.pdf
Nunan, D. (1997). ‘Does learner strategy training make a difference?’ in Lenguas Modernas 24 (1997) pp. 123-142
Ochocińska, J. (2024). ‘The Case for Learner Autonomy’ in the IH Journal #52
Oxford, R.L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. Boston, MA: Heinle
Oxford, R.L. (2003) ‘Language learning styles and strategies: an overview’ in GALA (2003) pp. 1-25
Author Biography
Kirstie Jackson Wilms qualified as a teacher of EFL (CELTA) in 2007 and completed DELTA certification with IH London in 2022. She taught (mostly) General and Academic English in Oxford, UK before moving to Germany in 2010 to work first as an online teacher of Business English and then in the Publishing department of an online training provider before moving back into teaching in April 2024. She is currently working towards the MA in Professional Development for Language Education with NILE/University of Chichester.
When not teaching, studying or trying to blog, Kirstie enjoys hiking, crime fiction and watching cricket.