Notas y mapas

Navarro, D., & Thornton, K. (2011) “Investigating the relationship between belief and action in self-directed language learning”. (Journal article)

This case-study addresses the relationship between learning beliefs and learning behaviours. The participants were two Japanese undergraduate students enrolled in an elective English department course. The duration of the course was four months, and it combined classroom-based instruction with periods of self-directed learning. However, this is considered a contextual study, because the learning beliefs and actions studied are framed in the context of self-directed learning exclusively. In consequence, the study relies mostly on the reflections of the students reported in their journals.

This research seems to respond to several works presented in the issue 27 of Systems. The authors accept the concept of metacognition and its components as presented by Wenden (1999). But they criticize early approaches to learner beliefs –such  as Sakui and Gaies (1999)-  that “presented beliefs as essentially stable factors which influence action in a cause and effect relationship” (emphasis added, p.291). They also criticize White’s work (1999) for concentrating in the description of the nature of the learner’s emergent beliefs without offering details of the process through which expectations about language self-instruction (beliefs) changed (p.291).

Consequently, a contribution of this longitudinal study to learner beliefs research, lays in its objective. The study aimed to detect the consistency between the attested beliefs of the students and their actions, as well as, possible belief development caused by the teacher assessment of students’ progress. The weekly reflection on their own practice (action), as well as two meetings with their advisors (interaction) triggered modifications in student’s beliefs.  Successful practices influenced emergent beliefs, and reinforced them or refined them. This implies the cyclical role of action, because it is shaped by beliefs, but it also can lead to belief development.

Psaltou-Joycey, A., & Kantaridou, Z., (2011)  “Major, minor, and negative learning style preferences of university students”. (Journal article)

In this study Psaltou-Joycey and Kantaridou attempt to link learning styles to the disciplines of the participants. Specifically, they intend to describe statistically the preferred learning styles of language students enrolled in different disciplines, namely, Humanities, Foreign Languages, Engineering, Sciences, Medicine, Economics, Education, and Computer Science.

Again, the participants were undergraduate Greek students (N= 1616) of two universities in Greece, attending foreign language courses in English, French, German and Italian. The instrument was the Style Analysis Survey (SAS), a 110 item questionnaire that assesses individuals’ general approaches to learning, grouping them in five dimensions: 1) visual, auditory, hands-on; 2) extraversion vs. introversion; 3) intuitive-random vs. concrete-sequential; 4) closure-oriented vs. open; and 5) global vs. Analytic (p.105).

The researchers also adopted “Reid’s (1987) distinction into major, minor and negative learning styles preferences” to enrich the description of statistical results. Major preference refers to “any learning method that comes natural, ‘normal’ to the learner”. Minor preference “signifies any learning method in which the learner can function adequately according to the demand of the tasks”. Negative preference “indicates a learning method that may cause the learner difficulty, so they will not opt for it spontaneously” (p.107).  The authors use this classification to describe the flexibility of the students, that is, their ability to use a larger number of learning methods.

This study recommends teachers to prepare lessons plans that respond to the attested learning preferences of the students, and includes a guide of learning strategies and teaching activities suggested for each learning style mentioned in the report.

Psaltou-Joycey, A., & Kantaridou, Z.,  (2009) “Plurilingualism, language learning strategy use and learning style preferences”. (Journal article)

Psaltou-Joycey and Kantaridou bring to the discussion of learning autonomy the notion of multilingualism or plurilingualism. They adopt the definition of bi/multilingualism as the “ability to function in more than one language, without reaching the same degree of perfection in all the languages known by the individual” (p.461). The authors developed a study to explore the differences between monolinguals and plurilinguals in the use of learning strategies. The level of proficiency in different languages, and the learning styles of the participants were taken into account.

The study was run at two Greek universities, with undergraduate students (N=1555) from various fields of study. The participants were classified by the number and level of the proficiency certificates they held in any European language. The instruments were two self-report questionnaires: the Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL) by Oxford (1990), and the Styles Analysis Survey (SAS) by Oxford (1995).

The results confirmed two hypotheses: 1) trilingual students use more strategies, more frequently than bilingual students; and 2) more advanced trilingual students use different strategies and they use them more frequently than less advance trilinguals (p.466). A third hypothesis was only “partially confirmed”: 3) trilingual students differ from bilingual students in sensory, personality and cognitive styles.

Despite the result regarding learning styles, the research suggests that learning autonomy increases with the number of languages an individual learns.