This chapter covers the background of linguistic communication acquisition schemes ( LLS ) , the literature reappraisal including the definitions of cardinal footings, categorizations of LLS, the features of LLS, the factors act uponing the pick of LLS, evidences from old research surveies, the instructors ‘ function in LLS preparation, and theoretical constructs.
2.1 Background of Language Learning Schemes
Research on linguistic communication acquisition schemes has been conducted since the sixtiess. Williams and Burden ( 1997, p. 149 ) stated that developments in cognitive psychological science influenced much of research done on linguistic communication acquisition schemes. In most of the research on linguistic communication acquisition schemes, the principal concern has been on “ placing what good linguistic communication scholars report they do to larn a 2nd or foreign linguistic communication, or, in some instances, are observed making while larning a 2nd or foreign linguistic communication ” ( Rubin & A ; Wenden 1987, p. 19 ) . In 1966, Carton published “ The Method of Inference in Foreign Language Study ” , which was the initial attempt to depict 2nd linguistic communication scholars ‘ schemes. Then in 1971, Rubin began to carry on research sing the schemes of successful scholars and affirmed that, one time acknowledged, such schemes could be made available to less successful scholars. Rubin ( 1975 ) categorized schemes in footings of procedures lending straight or indirectly to linguistic communication larning. Wong-Fillmore ( 1976 ) , Tarone ( 1977 ) , Naiman et Al. ( 1978 ) , Bialystok ( 1979 ) , Cohen and Aphek ( 1981 ) , Wenden ( 1982 ) , Chamot and O’Malley ( 1987 ) , Politzer and McGroarty ( 1985 ) , Conti and Kolsody ( 1997 ) , and many others have besides researched schemes employed by linguistic communication scholars during foreign linguistic communication acquisition.
2.2 Literature Review
2.2.1 Specifying constructs
There have been many research workers seeking to give a definition of the term “ linguistic communication acquisition schemes ” . In the ancient Grecian linguistic communication, ‘Strategy = strategia ‘ means generalship or the bent of contending ( Yi et al. , 2007 ) . In a more precise intelligence, scheme entails the most favorable supervising of military personnels, ships or aircraft in a designed operation while “ tactic ” is diverse, but is associated with sub-strategies which are the setup to carry through the accomplishment of schemes. In non-military scenes, the construct of scheme has been applied to the non-adversarial state of affairss, where it has come to connote an agreement, motion or an act is used for achieving a elaborate intent ( Oxford, 1990 ) . Oxford ( 1990 ) stated that schemes are peculiarly of import for linguistic communication acquisition “ because they are tools for active, autonomous engagement, which is indispensable for developing communicative competency ” ( p. 1 ) . Because they are really notable, larning schemes have been loosely employed in the learning field. Many research workers have tried to give definitions to ‘language larning scheme ‘ utilizing different footings and different constructs of their ain which will be discussed in the undermentioned paragraphs.
Many research workers have conceptualised diversely the term “ linguistic communication acquisition schemes ” . “ Strategy ” originates from ancient Grecian linguistic communication ‘strategia ‘ , which implies contending capableness ( Yi et al. , 2007 ) . Sing military field, ‘strategy ‘ is cardinal to parade surveillance, while ‘tactic ‘ is a tool to accomplish the strategic end. Apart from militarism, ‘strategy ‘ has been defined as readiness to carry through a mark ( Oxford, 1990 ) . To develop communicative competency, schemes are indispensable to linguistic communication acquisition ( Oxford, 1990, p.1 ) . For this ground, most research workers have viewed ‘language larning scheme ‘ variously as follows.
Schemeck ( 1988 ) defined scheme as the public presentation of a set of actions ( tactics ) for carry throughing some end and larning scheme as a concatenation of actions for carry throughing acquisition ( p. 5 ) . Weinstein and Mayer ( 1986 ) explained that larning schemes are “ behaviors and ideas that a scholar engages in during acquisition and that are projected to carry the scholar ‘s encoding procedure ” ( p. 315 ) . More specifically, Rigney ( 1978 ) gave a definition of a acquisition scheme as “ cognitive scheme ” which is “ used to bespeak operations and processs that the pupil may utilize to get, retain, and recover different sorts of cognition and public presentation ” ( p. 165 ) .
Rubin ( 1975 ) defined schemes as “ the techniques or devices, which a scholar may utilize to get cognition ” ( p. 43 ) . Later, Rubin ( 1981 ) did a survey to detect cognitive schemes in 2nd linguistic communication acquisition and got to cognize the differentiation between direct and indirect linguistic communication larning schemes. In 1987, Rubin proposed linguistic communication larning schemes as schemes which lead to the betterment of the linguistic communication construction which the scholar physiques and which shapes larning from so on ( p. 23 ) . She besides recommended that linguistic communication acquisition schemes consist of any set of operations, stairss, programs, modus operandis used by the scholar to ease the obtaining, storage, retrieval and usage of information ( p. 19 ) .
Bialystock ( 1978 ) defined larning schemes as “ optional agencies for working available information to better competency in a 2nd linguistic communication ” ( p. 71 ) . He so identified four sorts of linguistic communication larning schemes: ( a ) formal practising ; ( B ) functional practising ; ( degree Celsius ) monitoring ; and ( vitamin D ) inferencing. Harmonizing to O’Malley et Al. ( 1985 ) , “ linguistic communication acquisition schemes have been loosely defined as any set of operations or stairss used by a scholar that will ease the acquisition, storage, retrieval or usage of information ” ( p. 23 ) . In this survey, they classified 26 schemes into three subgroups: metacognitive, cognitive, and social-affective. In the same manner, Chamot ( 1987 ) said learning schemes are techniques, attacks, or consider actions that pupils take in order to ease the acquisition and callback of both lingual and content country information ( p. 71 ) . She proposed that some linguistic communication acquisition schemes are discernible, but some may non be. In a cognitive position, O’Malley and Chamot idea of linguistic communication larning schemes as “ the particular ideas or behaviors that persons used to assist them grok, larn, or retain new information ” ( p. 1 ) .
Nisbet ( 1986 ) gave another account of linguistic communication larning schemes as “ ever determined and goal-oriented, but possibly non ever accepted at a witting or calculated degree. They can be durable or so rapid in execution that it is impracticable for the scholar to convey back, callback or even be antiphonal that one has utilized a scheme ” ( p. 25 ) . Oxford and Crookall ( 1989 ) defined linguistic communication larning schemes as “ stairss taken by the scholar to help the acquisition, storage, and retrieval of information ” ( p. 404 ) . They noted that schemes may be used consciously but they can besides go accustomed and automatic with pattern. Similarly, Oxford ( 1990 ) claimed that “ learning schemes are stairss taken by pupils to heighten their ain acquisition ( p. 1 ) , and she said they were specific actions taken by the scholar to do larning easier, faster, more gratifying, more autonomous, more effectual, and more movable to new state of affairss ( p. 8 ) . Scrella & A ; Oxford ( 1992 ) found that larning schemes were specific actions, behaviors, stairss, or techniques-such as seeking out conversation spouses, or giving oneself encouragement to undertake a hard linguistic communication task-used by pupils to heighten their ain acquisition ( p. 63 ) .
MacIntyre ( 1994 ) argued that the term scheme implied active planning in chase of some end, which was non something that would automatically happen. He emphasised the scholars ‘ calculated action of linguistic communication acquisition schemes. He provided a different position of specifying linguistic communication larning schemes as “ the actions chosen by linguistic communication pupils that are intended to ease linguistic communication acquisition and communicating ” ( p. 190 ) . The definition focuses more on scholars ‘ purpose and pick in utilizing linguistic communication acquisition schemes. In 1999, Nunan gave the definition of larning schemes as mental and communicative processs scholars use in order to larn and utilize linguistic communication ( p. 171 ) . Four research workers, Chamot, Barnhadt, El-Dinary & A ; Rubbins ( 1999 ) , defined larning schemes as the ideas and actions engaged in, consciously or non, to larn new information ( p. 1 ) . Last, Hall ( 2001 ) referred larning schemes to purposive actions that were used by scholars to intercede their ain acquisition ( p. 92 ) .
Research workers have recognized and illustrated linguistic communication larning schemes which linguistic communication scholars use when they process new information and perform duties ( Hismanoglu, 2000 ) . In the subsequent subdivision, how different research workers have classified linguistic communication larning schemes will be shortly summarized.
Language scholars should cognize precisely the schemes to be used in order to better their accomplishment. Cohen, Weaver, Li ( 1996 ) argued that:
Schemes for linguistic communication acquisition and linguistic communication usage have been having ever-growing attending in the countries of foreign linguistic communication instruction and acquisition ( Oxford 1990, Cohen 1990, O’Malley & A ; Chamot 1990, Wenden 1991, Brown 1991, Rubin & A ; Thompson 1994, Mendelsohn 1994, Mc Donough 1995 ) . It is just to state that linguistic communication pedagogues in many different contexts have been seeking ways to assist pupils go more successful in their attempts to larn and pass on in foreign linguistic communications. The application of foreign linguistic communication acquisition and usage schemes is viewed as one vehicle for advancing greater success. A scheme is considered to be “ effectual ” if it provides positive support to the pupils in their efforts to larn or utilize the foreign linguistic communication. ( p. 3 )
The Qualifications and Curriculum Development Agency ( 2009 ) defines ‘successful scholars ‘ as:
people who own indispensable literate acquisition accomplishments, numeracy and information and engineering of communicating.
people who have good sense of creativeness, are resourceful in placing and job resolution.
people who process information, ground, inquiry and carry out rating by themselves.
people who communicate in many agencies.
people who understand how they learn and learn from their errors.
people who are able to larn separately and work in groups.
people who have universe cognition.
people who enjoy larning and are motivated to accomplish the best they can now and in the hereafter.
2.2.2 Taxonomy of Language Learning Schemes
Since the 1960s, the research of linguistic communication acquisition schemes has been conducted by many linguistic communication research workers ( Wenden & A ; Rubin, 1987 ; O’Malley et al. , 1985 ; Oxford, 1990 ; Stern, 1992 ; Ellis, 1994 ) . Most of these efforts to categorise linguistic communication acquisition schemes are a mark of more or less the same categorizations of linguistic communication acquisition schemes without any cardinal alterations. As below, O’Malley ‘s ( 1985 ) , Rubin ‘s ( 1987 ) , Stern ‘s ( 1992 ) , and Oxford ‘s ( 1990 ) taxonomies of linguistic communication larning schemes will be described:
22.214.171.124 O’Malley ‘s ( 1985 ) Categorization of Language Learning Schemes
O’Malley et Al. ( 1985, pp. 582-584 ) divide linguistic communication larning schemes into three chief subcategories:
A. Metacognitive Schemes
It can be stated that metacognitive is a term to show executive map, schemes which require planning for acquisition, believing about the acquisition procedure as it is taking topographic point, monitoring of one ‘s production or comprehension, and measuring acquisition after an activity is complete. Among the chief metacognitive schemes, it is possible to include progress organisers, directed attending, selective attending, self-management, functional planning, self-monitoring, delayed production, self-evaluation.
B. Cognitive Schemes
Cognitive schemes are more limited to specific larning undertakings and they involve more direct use of the larning stuff itself. Repetition, resourcing, interlingual rendition, grouping, note-taking, tax write-off, recombination, fanciful, audile representation, cardinal word, contextualization, amplification, transportation, act uponing are among the most of import cognitive schemes.
C. Socioaffective Schemes
As to the socioaffective schemes, it can be stated that they are related with social-mediating activity and transacting with others. Cooperation and oppugning for elucidation are the chief socioaffective schemes ( Brown, 1987, pp. 93-94 ) .
126.96.36.199 Rubin ‘s ( 1987 ) Categorization of Language Learning Schemes
Rubin, who pioneered much of the work in the field of schemes, makes the differentiation between schemes lending straight to larning and those lending indirectly to larning. Harmonizing to Rubin ( 1987 ) , there are three types of schemes used by scholars that contribute straight or indirectly to linguistic communication acquisition. These are:
A. Learning Schemes
They are of two chief types, being the schemes lending straight to the development of the linguistic communication system constructed by the scholar:
Cognitive Learning Schemes
Metacognitive Learning Schemes
A.1 Cognitive Learning Schemes
They refer to the stairss or operations used in larning or problem-solving that requires direct analysis, transmutation, or synthesis of larning stuffs. Rubin identified six chief cognitive acquisition schemes lending straight to linguistic communication acquisition:
A.2 Metacognitive Learning Schemes
These schemes are used to supervise, modulate or self-direct linguistic communication larning. They involve assorted procedures as planning, prioritising, puting ends, and self-management.
B. Communication Schemes
They are less straight related to linguistic communication larning since their focal point is on the procedure of take parting in a conversation and acquiring significance or clear uping what the talker intended. Communication schemes are used by talkers when faced with some trouble due to the fact that their communicating terminals outrun their communicating agencies or when confronted with misinterpretation by a co-speaker.
C. Social Schemes
Social schemes are those activities scholars engage in which afford them chances to be exposed to and pattern their cognition. Although these schemes provide exposure to the mark linguistic communication, they contribute indirectly to larning since they do non take straight to the obtaining, hive awaying, recovering, and utilizing of linguistic communication ( Rubin & A ; Wenden, 1987, pp. 23-27 ) .
188.8.131.52 Stern ‘s ( 1992 ) Categorization of Language Learning Schemes
Harmonizing to Stern ( 1992, pp. 262-266 ) , there are five chief linguistic communication larning schemes as follows:
Management and Planning Schemes
A. Management and Planning Schemes
These schemes are related to the scholar ‘s purpose to direct his ain acquisition. A scholar can take charge of the development of his ain programme when he is helped by a instructor whose function is that of an advisor and resource individual. This is to state that the scholar must ”
make up one’s mind what committedness to do to linguistic communication acquisition
set himself sensible ends
decide on an appropriate methodological analysis, choice appropriate resources, and proctor advancement,
measure his accomplishment in the visible radiation of antecedently determined ends and outlooks ( Stern, 1992, p. 263 ) .
B. Cognitive Schemes
They are stairss or operations used in larning or job resolution that require direct analysis, transmutation, or synthesis of larning stuffs. In the followers, some of the cognitive schemes are exhibited:
C. Communicative-Experiential Schemes
Communication schemes, such as periphrasis, gesturing, paraphrasis, or inquiring for repeat and account are techniques used by scholars so as to maintain a conversation traveling. The intent of utilizing these techniques is to avoid disrupting the flow of communicating ( Stern, 1992, p. 265 ) .
D. Interpersonal Strategies
They should supervise their ain development and measure their ain public presentation. Learners should reach with native talkers and cooperate with them. Learners must go acquainted with the mark civilization ( Stern, 1992, pp. 265-266 ) .
E. Affective Schemes
It is apparent that good linguistic communication scholars employ distinguishable affectional schemes. Language acquisition can be thwarting in some instances. In some instances, the feeling of unfamiliarity can be evoked by the foreign linguistic communication. In some instances, L2 scholars may hold negative feelings about native talkers of L2. Good linguistic communication scholars are more or less witting of these emotional jobs. Good linguistic communication scholars try to make associations of positive affect towards the foreign linguistic communication and its talkers every bit good as towards the acquisition activities involved. Learning preparation can assist pupils to confront up the emotional troubles and to get the better of them by pulling attending to the possible defeats or indicating them out as they arise ( Stern, 1992, p. 266 ) .
184.108.40.206 Oxford ‘s ( 1990 ) Categorization of Language Learning Schemes
Oxford ( 1990, p. 9 ) sees the purpose of linguistic communication larning schemes as being oriented towards the development of communicative competency. Oxford divides linguistic communication larning schemes into two chief categories, direct and indirect, which are further subdivided into six groups ( cognitive, memory, and compensation under the direct ; metacognitive, affectional, and societal under the indirect category ) ( see Figure 1 ) .
Each of six groups shown supra has some more concrete schemes, as shown in Table 1 and Table 2. Some linguistic communication acquisition schemes which relate with larning straight are called direct schemes. All direct schemes require mental processing of the mark linguistic communication, but the three groups of direct schemes ( cognitive, memory and compensation ) do this processing otherwise and for different procedure ( Oxford, 1990 ) . Cognitive schemes, such as practising or analysing, enable scholars to understand and bring forth new linguistic communication by many different agencies. Memory schemes, such as grouping or utilizing fanciful, have extremely specific maps. They help pupils hive away and recover new information. Compensation schemes, like thinking or utilizing equivalent word, allow scholars to utilize the linguistic communication despite their frequently big spreads in cognition.
Other linguistic communication acquisition schemes are called indirect schemes because they support and manage linguistic communication acquisition without, in many cases, straight affecting the mark linguistic communication ( Oxford, 1990 ) . Indirect schemes are divided into metacognitive, affectional and societal. Metacognitive schemes allow scholars to command their ain knowledge ; that is, scholars can organize their ain acquisition procedures by utilizing survey wonts such as focus, set uping, planning and measuring. Affectional schemes help modulate emotions, motives and attitudes. Social schemes help pupils to larn through interaction with others. Indirect schemes are utile in virtually all linguistic communication larning state of affairss and are applicable to all four linguistic communication accomplishments: hearing, reading, speech production and authorship.
2.2.3 Features of Language Learning Schemes
Clouston ( 1997 ) maintains that the nomenclature is given otherwise by research workers, some use the footings “ learner schemes ” ( Wendin & A ; Rubin, 1987 ) , others “ larning schemes ” ( O’Malley & A ; Chamot, 1990 ; Chamot & A ; O’Malley, 1994 ) , and others still use “ linguistic communication acquisition schemes ” ( Oxford, 1990a, 1996 ) , but there are a figure of cardinal features in the normally acknowledged analysis of LLS. First, scholars generate LLS which are stairss taken by scholars of the linguistic communication. Second, LLS improve linguistic communication acquisition and ease enlarge linguistic communication competence, as feedback in the scholar ‘s accomplishments in hearing, speech production, reading or composing the L2 or FL. Third, LLS might be able to be seen ( behaviors, stairss, techniques, etc. ) or unobserved ( ideas, mental procedures ) . Four, LLS engage information and memory ( vocabulary cognition, grammar regulations, etc. ) .
Reading the LLS literature, extra facets of LLS are less systematically acknowledged. Oxford ( 1990a ) and others such as Wenden and Rubin ( 1987 ) separate an aspiration for control and independency of larning on the portion of the scholar all the manner through LLS. Cohen ( 1990 ) persists that merely aware schemes are LLS, and that there must be a choice about the portion of the scholar. Strategy reassigning from one linguistic communication or linguistic communication accomplishment to another is an associated intent of LLS, as Pearson ( 1988 ) and Skehan ( 1989 ) have argued. In her teacher-oriented text, Oxford sums up her sentiment of LLS by mentioning 12 critical qualities. Additionally, she states that LLS:
Lashkar-e-Taiba scholars go more autonomous
enlarge the duties of linguistic communication instructors
include many points of position, non merely the cognitive
can be educated
are manipulated by a broad scope of factors
( Oxford, 1990a, p. 9 )
2.2.4 Factors Influencing Strategy Choice
There are several factors which affect the 2nd linguistic communication scholar with respect to types of schemes she or he chooses to utilize. Oxford ( 1994 ) concluded available research on how the