the relationship between efl learners' beliefs and...

The relationship between EFL learners' beliefsand learning strategy use

Nae-Dong Yang

Department of Foreign Languages and Literatures, National Taiwan University, Taipei 10617, Taiwan, ROC

Abstract

How are foreign language/second language learners' beliefs about language learning relatedto their learning strategy use? The present study addresses this question by investigating therelationship between college EFL (English as a foreign language) students' beliefs about lan-

guage learning and their use of learning strategies. This study found that language learners'self-e�cacy beliefs about learning English were strongly related to their use of all types oflearning strategies, especially functional practice strategies. Also, learners' beliefs about thevalue and nature of learning spoken English were closely linked to their use of formal oral-

practice strategies. The results of this study suggested cyclical relationships between learners'beliefs and strategy use. A theoretical construct of learners' beliefs was then proposed andpedagogical implications were discussed. # 1999 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Beliefs about language learning; Learning strategies; Second language learning; English,

Second language; Metacognition; Motivation

1. Introduction

In¯uenced by previous experiences as language learners, or shaped by their owncultural backgrounds, second language learners often hold di�erent beliefs or notionsabout language learning (Horwitz, 1987). Many researchers have suggested thatlearners' preconceived beliefs about language learning would likely a�ect the waythey use their learning strategies and learn a second language (Abraham and Vann,1987; Horwitz, 1987, 1988; Wenden, 1986a, 1987a). Knowledge of the relationship oflearners' beliefs about language learning and strategy use should provide teacherswith better understandings of their students' ``expectation of, commitment to, successin, and satisfaction with their language classes'' (Horwitz, 1988, p. 283). Yet, how,speci®cally, are second language learners' beliefs about language learning related totheir use of learning strategies? The purpose of this paper is, therefore, to report on astudy which investigates the relationship between college EFL (English as a foreignlanguage) students' beliefs about language learning and their strategy use.

System 27 (1999) 515±535

www.elsevier.com/locate/system

0346-251X/99/$ - see front matter # 1999 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

PI I : S0346-251X(99 )00048 -2

2. Review of the literature

2.1. Learners' beliefs about second language learning

Wenden (1986a, b) used learners' retrospective reports to investigate and classifylearners' metacognitive knowledge about their language learning experiences.1 Inher interviews with 25 adult ESL students about their English learning in variedsocial settings, Wenden (1986b) found that, in addition to their own languagelearning strategies, the interviewees were able to discuss the following ®ve aspects oftheir language learning:

1. the language, including its grammar, phonology, vocabulary, discourse, andfunction;

2. their pro®ciency and progress in the language, areas of di�culty, and com-parisons with others;

3. the outcome of using a selected strategy;4. their reactions to the learning process and views on language aptitude, learning

style, personality, and age; and5. explicit and implicit beliefs about how best to learn a second language.

Horwitz developed an instrument, Beliefs About Language Learning Inventory(BALLI) to assess students' beliefs about language learning in ®ve major areas: (1)foreign language aptitude, (2) the di�culty of language learning, (3) the nature oflanguage learning, (4) learning and communication strategies, and (5) motivationsand expectations (Horwitz, 1987, 1988).Recent researchers have examined learners' beliefs and metacognitive knowledge

about language learning for di�erent purposes. Cotterall (1995), for example,explored how those learners' beliefs about language learning re¯ect learners' readi-ness for autonomy. Victori (1992) expanded Wenden's (1987b, 1991) classi®cationsof second language learners' metacognitive knowledge and developed a ques-tionnaire to measure students' metacognitive knowledge in language learning (Vic-tori, 1992, cited in Victori and Lockhart, 1995). Victori and Lockhart (1995) usedthe questionnaire for learner training in a self-directed program. They focused onlearners' beliefs about strategy e�ectiveness

2.2. Beliefs and strategy use

Researchers (Abraham and Vann, 1987; Horwitz, 1987, 1988; Wenden, 1986a,1987a) have suggested connections between learners' metacognitive knowledge orbeliefs about language learning and their choice of language learning strategies. Inher interviews, Wenden (1987a) found that, in many instances, students could not

1 Metacognitive knowledge (or knowledge about cognition) is concerned with ``relatively stable,

statable. . . information that human thinkers have about their own cognitive processes and those of

others'' (Brown et al., 1983, p. 87). Wenden (1987b, 1991) adapted Flavell's (1979) classi®cation of meta-

cognitive knowledge, i.e. person, task, and strategic knowledge, to describe second language learners'

metacognitive knowledge.

516 Nae-Dong Yang / System 27 (1999) 515±535

only distinctly describe their beliefs about language learning but also adoptconsistent learning strategies. Wenden (1986a) indicated that these learners' explicitbeliefs about how best to learn a language seemed to provide the logic for theirchoice of learning strategies. Based on her survey of university foreign languagestudents, Horwitz (1988) argues that some preconceived beliefs are likely to restrictlearners' range of strategy use. In addition, Abraham and Vann (1987) have alsosuggested that learners' beliefs about how language operates and, consequently, howit is learned may a�ect the variety and ¯exibility of their strategy use.

2.3. Motivation, beliefs and strategy use

While there has been some mention of motivation (Horwitz, 1987) and motivationand strategy use (e.g. Oxford and Nyikos, 1989) in the ®eld of second languageacquisition, one must turn to the ®eld of cognitive psychology for information onthe relationship between motivation, beliefs, and strategy use. Theories of self-e�cacy and attribution, as the basis of cognitive studies on motivation, will bereviewed ®rst.

2.3.1. Theories of self-e�cacy and attribution

Self-e�cacy refers to ``personal judgments of performance capabilities in a givendomain of activities'' (Schunk, 1985, p. 208). According to Bandura (1986), per-ceived self-e�cacy may in¯uence one's choice of activities. People undertake andperform con®dently activities that they judge themselves capable of managing, butthey avoid those they believe exceed their ability. These judgments also help peopleto determine how much e�ort they will spend and how long they will persist in theface of obstacles or di�culties. When beset with di�culties, people who have astronger sense of self-e�cacy tend to exert greater e�orts to meet challenges,whereas those who entertain serious doubts about their capabilities slacken theire�orts or give up altogether (Bandura and Schunk, 1981; Stipek, 1993).A basic assumption in attribution theory is that people seek to explain the causes

of events in their lives. Weiner (1976) notes that students' attributions in¯uence theirexpectancy of future performance, persistence, emotional reactions, and task choice.Palmer and Goetz (1988) have argued that these ``achievement-related variables'' inturn, a�ect students' decisions about when and how to use strategies. According tocognitive psychologists, such attribution judgments provide an important sourceof information on self-e�cacy beliefs that in¯uence performance (Schunk, 1983;McCombs, 1988).

2.3.2. Studies of beliefs, motivation and strategy use

Based on their research with children (e.g. Elliott and Dweck, 1988; Licht andDweck, 1984) as well as other studies of adults (e.g. Brunson and Matthews, 1981),Dweck and Leggett (1988) present a model that accounts for major patterns ofadaptive and maladaptive behavior in terms of underlying psychological processes.It is postulated that learners' beliefs about their ability will a�ect their goalsand motivational patterns, which in turn will in¯uence their learning behaviors and

Nae-Dong Yang / System 27 (1999) 515±535 517

strategy use. A recent study with elementary school children by Dweck and hercolleague has supported the relation between motivational patterns and beliefsabout ability and achievement (Cain and Dweck, 1995).Pintrich and his colleagues studied the relationships between students' motivation

and strategy use (e.g. Pintrich, 1989; Pintrich and De Groot, 1990). Based on ageneral expectancy-value framework,2 Pintrich (1989) proposed that students''motivation consists of three components: expectancy, value, and a�ect. The expec-tancy component refers to students' beliefs about their ability to perform a task (i.e.self-e�cacy) and the value component includes students' goals for the task as well astheir beliefs about the importance, utility, and interest of the task. The a�ectivecomponent includes students' emotional reactions to the task, such as test anxiety(Garcia and Pintrich, 1995). Pintrich and his colleagues found that self-e�cacybeliefs (the expectancy component of motivation) and intrinsic values (the valuecomponent) are both positively related to the use of cognitive strategies (e.g.rehearsal and elaboration), metacognitive strategies (e.g. planning and monitoring),and e�ort management (e.g. persistence and working diligently), whereas test anxi-ety (an important a�ective component) is negatively related to the three aspects ofself-regulated learning (Pintrich, 1989; Pintrich and De Groot, 1990). In otherwords, students who are more con®dent in their ability (i.e. have stronger self-e�cacy beliefs) to do course work are also more likely to be cognitively engaged intheir work and more likely to report attempts to control their thinking and e�orts.Students also tend to use all kinds of learning strategies if they believe the coursematerial is interesting and valuable. Yet, those students who are more anxious abouttests are less likely to persist at their course work and use fewer cognitive andmetacognitive strategies.

2.4. Summary

To summarize, the cognitive literature reviewed (e.g. Dweck and Leggett, 1988;Pintrich and De Groot, 1990) has indicated that there are links among beliefs,motivation, and strategy use. Second language researchers (e.g. Abraham and Vann,1987; Horwitz, 1988; Wenden, 1986a, 1987a) have also suggested the connectionsbetween learners' metacogitive knowledge or beliefs about language learning andtheir choice of learning strategies. Wenden's exploratory case study supplies pre-liminary evidence of how learners' metacognitive beliefs may in¯uence theirapproaches to language learning and their use of learning strategies. Furtherresearch is still needed in the ®eld of second language acquisition to systematicallyinvestigate the relationship between second language learners' beliefs about lan-guage learning and their strategy use. Therefore, the objective of this study is toinvestigate this issue.

2 Expectancy-value theories (e.g. Atkinson, 1964) stress the idea that motivation is a joint function of

beliefs about the outcomes of actions and the value placed upon those outcomes. Thus, people are more

motivated to learn when they believe learning will lead to positive outcomes and when they value positive

outcomes.


3. The study

3.1. Instrumentation

In this study, an English Learning Questionnaire (Yang, 1992), which was com-posed of Horwitz's (1987) Beliefs About Language Learning Inventory (BALLI),Oxford's (1990) Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL), and author-designed questions, was administered to collect information on language learners'beliefs, learning strategies, and individual background. The questionnaire wastranslated into Chinese, pilot tested, and modi®ed for the current study. Both theBALLI and SILL were found to have content validity and weak non-signi®cantcorrelations with the Marlowe±Crowne Social Desirability Scale (Yang, 1992). TheChinese BALLI had a Cronbach alpha of 0.69, while the Chinese SILL had aCronbach alpha of 0.94 for internal-consistency reliability.The English Learning Questionnaire had three sections. The ®rst section con-

tained 35 items from the BALLI (Horwitz, 1987).3 In this section, the subjects wereasked to read a statement and decide if they: (1) strongly disagree, (2) disagree, (3)neither agree nor disagree, (4) agree, or (5) strongly agree with each statement. Atthe end of this section, the author added an extra item, ``What else do you thinkabout English learning which is not included above'', to elicit additional beliefs fromthe students. The second section contained 49 items of statements adaptedfrom Oxford's (1990) SILL and one open-ended question to survey additionalstrategy use. The students were asked to rate the statements on a ®ve-point scalefrom, ``I never do this'' to ``I always do this.'' The third section included questionsabout students' background information as well as their perceived motivations,e�orts, and pro®ciency in learning English as indicated on a ®ve-point Likert scale.

3.2. Subjects

Five hundred and ®ve university students in Taiwan participated in the study. Allthe subjects had studied English formally for 6 years in junior and senior highschools and for at least one more year as university freshmen. Less than 4% of thesubjects had lived abroad or visited foreign countries for a very short time. Of the 505students, 194 were male and 311 were female. The majority of the students (73%)were freshmen; 9% were sophomores; 11% were juniors; and 7% were seniors.

3.3. Data collection and analysis

A sample of 14 college English classes from six public and private universities werechosen. The survey was conducted by the author during the students' regular Eng-lish classes in the ®rst 2 months of a new semester.

3 The original BALLI (ESL version) contained 34 items. In a later version, Horwitz added one

item (item 35) which concerns the role of memorization in language learning (Horwitz, 1990, personal

communication).


Quantitative and qualitative data analyses were performed in this study. Thequantitative analysis involved several statistical procedures: (1) descriptive statistics,including frequencies, means, and standard deviations, were computed to summar-ize the students' responses to the belief and strategy items as well as the backgroundinformation of the sample; (2) principal-components analysis and factor analysis(Varimax rotation) were performed to discern the underlying factors for the beliefand strategy items; (3) Pearson correlations and canonical correlation analysis wereconducted to examine the relationships between the belief and the strategy factors.A content analysis for recurring themes was conducted on students' responses to thetwo open-ended questions which assessed their additional beliefs and strategy use.The results of content analysis were mainly used to supplement the statistical resultsfor better understanding.

4. Results

The following section presents the results of factor analyses on BALLI items andSILL items as well as the results of Pearson correlations and canonical correlationanalysis of belief and strategy factors. The results of the analyses on open-endedquestions and the third section of the questionnaire will be included in discussingeach factor when related.4

4.1. Results of factor analysis on BALLI items

Factor analysis on BALLI items identi®ed four factors that constitute learners'beliefs about language learning, namely:

1. self-e�cacy and expectation about learning English (0.71);2. perceived value and nature of learning spoken English (0.63);3. beliefs about foreign language aptitude (0.52); and4. beliefs about formal structural studies (0.55).

The numbers in parentheses next to the four belief factors above represent theinternal consistency reliability value for each factor. Table 1 presents the BALLIitems that constitute each factor and the response frequency (in percentages) foreach item. Some of the items (e.g. items 8 and 24) appeared to be factored counter-intuitively. However, these items had very low factor loadings.5 Also, this factoranalysis is an exploratory one. It does not explain why certain items fall into onefactor instead of another. A later study using con®rmatory factor analysis with thesame data corroborated the four-factor model in this study (Hsiao and Lin, 1998).

4 See Yang (1992) for details of all data analyses and their results.5 This study only considered those items with factor loadings above 0.30 after factor analysis. The

items with factor loadings below 0.30 were listed in the section of ``others'' in Tables 1 and 2 for reference.

Stevens (1986) suggests researchers focus on items whose loading is about or above 0.40 when interpreting

factor analysis so that the variable shares at least 15% of its variance with the factor and is thus con-

sidered to be practically signi®cant.


Table 1

Response frequency (in percentage) for the BALLI items that constitute each factor

No. Item description 1a 2 3 4 5

Factor 1ÐSelf-e�cacy and expectation about learning English

16. I have a special ability for learning foreign languages. (0.78)b 6c 20 43 27 5

5. I believe that I will learn to speak English very well. (0.64) 1 4 16 58 22

21. I feel timid speaking English with other people. (ÿ0.64) 10 28 23 32 7

4. English isd (di�culty scale) (0.62) 2 14 45 37 2

13. I enjoy practicing English with the Americans I meet. (0.53) 1 6 27 42 24

6. People from my country are good at learning foreign languages. (0.46) 2 19 56 18 4

Factor 2ÐPerceived value and nature of learning spoken English

31. I want to learn to speak English well. (0.61) 1 0 1 28 71

18. It is important to repeat and practice a lot. (0.58) 0 1 1 39 59

20. People in my country feel that it is important to speak English. (0.54) 1 2 7 50 40

12. It is best to learn English in an English-speaking country. (0.49) 2 3 6 43 47

32. I would like to have American friends. (0.47) 0 2 20 49 29

7. It is important to speak English with an excellent pronunciation. (0.37) 0 1 2 34 63

33. Everyone can learn to speak a foreign language. (0.35) 1 5 16 56 22

29. If I learn English very well, I will have better opportunities for a good

job. (0.35)

1 2 9 56 32

9. You shouldn't say anything in English until you can say it correctly.

(ÿ0.33)55 37 4 2 2

Factor 3ÐBeliefs about foreign language aptitude

30. People who speak more than one language are very intelligent. (0.60) 8 29 41 20 3

2. Some people have a special ability for learning foreign languages. (0.54) 1 6 8 61 24

19. Women are better than men at learning foreign languages. (0.52) 10 26 34 26 4

11. People who are good at mathematics or science are not good at learning

foreign languages. (0.43)

25 50 20 6 1

10. It is easier for someone who already speaks a foreign language to learn

another one. (0.40)

2 16 29 44 10

8. It is necessary to know about English-speaking cultures in order to speak

English. (0.33)

1 19 26 39 15

24. I would like to learn English so that I can get to know Americans better.

(0.33)

8 39 33 17 4

Factor 4ÐBeliefs in formal structural studies

23. The most important part of learning a foreign language is learning the

grammar. (0.69)

7 38 29 21 4

17. The most important part of learning a foreign language is learning vocab-

ulary words. (0.52)

3 20 22 42 13

28. The most important part of learning English is learning how to translate

from my native language. (0.50)

18 54 17 10 1

35. Language learning involves a lot of memorization. (0.49) 0 3 7 59 32

34. It is easier to read and write English than to speak and understand it.

(0.45)

4 18 21 45 11

22. If beginning students are permitted to make errors in English without

correction, it will be di�cult for them to speak correctly later on. (0.33)

1 8 11 57 23

25. It is easier to speak than understand a foreign language. (0.31) 4 33 22 35 7

(Table continued on next page)


4.1.1. Self-e�cacy and expectation about learning EnglishThis study found that the subjects had a strong sense of self-e�cacy about learn-

ing English. Approximately 80% of the students believed that they would learn tospeak English very well. Nearly one-third (32%) of the students felt that they had aspecial ability to learn foreign languages, though about one-quarter disagreed.While about one-®fth of the students (22%) agreed that Chinese are good at learn-ing foreign languages, over one-half (56%) selected a neutral response. They alsobelieved that English, the language they were learning, was not so di�cult. Forty-®ve percent of the students judged English as a language of medium di�culty whileover one-third (37%) called it ``an easy language.'' Only 2% each judged Englisheither a ``very di�cult'' or a ``very easy'' language to learn.How students judged the di�culty of learning a language likely in¯uences

their expectations and commitment to the learning task (Horwitz, 1988). A cross-tabulation of the responses revealed that the majority of students who judgedEnglish to be an easy language expected to ``learn to speak English very well.'' Intheir response to the Likert-type questions in the third section of the questionnaire,these students also indicated that they spent at least moderate e�ort in learningEnglish in contrast to less e�ort invested by those who rated English as di�cult.The literature in self-e�cacy and attribution has suggested that students' self-

e�cacy beliefs will likely in¯uence their emotional reactions (Weiner, 1976; Schunk,1985). In this study, it was found that these students generally expressed positivereactions toward learning English. About two-thirds of the students (68%) agreedthat they enjoyed practicing English with the Americans they meet, whlle less than7% disagreed with that statement. A cross-tabulation of the responses also revealedthat the majority of students who believed they would learn to speak English well

Table 1 (continued)


Others e

1. It is easier for children than adults to learn a foreign language. (F3, 0.26) 1 8 8 56 27

3. Some languages are easier to learn than others. (F2, 0.19) 1 10 22 59 8

14. It's OK to guess if you don't know a word in English. (F3, 0.30) 1 5 9 67 18

15. If someone spent one hour a day learning a language, how long would it

take him/her to become ¯uent? f (F2, ÿ0.12)34 39 14 6 7

26. It is important to practice with cassettes or tapes. (F2, 0.25) 1 7 22 59 12

27. Learning a foreign language is di�erent than learning other academic

subjects. (F3, 0.26)

2 10 23 55 11

a 1, Strongly disagree; 2, disagree; 3, neither disagree nor agree; 4, agree; 5, strongly agree.b Factor loading of the item on the factor is given in parentheses.c The percentage has been rounded to the nearest whole number.d 1, A very di�cult language; 2, a di�cult language; 3, a language of medium di�culty; 4, an easy

language; 5, a very easy language.e Items with factor loadings below 0.30 were excluded from the canonical correlation analysis. Such

items are listed as ``others'' for reference. Their respective factor loadings are given in parentheses with

their corresponding factors. F2, Factor 2; F3, Factor 3.f 1, 1±2 years; 2, 3±5 years; 3, 6±10 years; 4, over 10 years; 5, he can never learn a language well.


agreed that they enjoyed practicing English. Furthermore, the more they believedthey had a special ability to learn foreign languages, the more likely they tended toagree that they enjoyed practicing English with American friends.In addition, although 39% of the students felt timid about speaking English with

other people, a similar number of students (38%) rejected that statement. The cross-tabulation of the responses also revealed that most students who believed that theywould learn to speak English very well, who felt that they had a special ability forlearning foreign languages, and who considered English easy to learn tended to dis-agree that they felt timid when speaking English with other people.

4.1.2. Perceived value and nature of learning spoken English

The students generally believed in the importance and usefulness of speakingEnglish and expressed a strong interest in learning spoken English (e.g. items 20, 29,31, and 32 in Table 1). Almost all of these students (99%) felt (71% strongly) thatthey wanted to speak English well. Many of the students (90%) in this study agreedwith the statement that ``people in my country feel that it is important to speakEnglish.'' In response to the open-ended question about additional beliefs, about 20students wrote: `Ènglish is an international language''; `Ènglish is an importanttool to communicate with other people in the world''; and `èveryone should knowit.'' A large number of these students (88%) also associated the ability to speakEnglish with better job opportunities; whereas over three-quarters (78%) of themassociated the intention to speak English well with their interest in having Americanfriends. In brief, many students in the study placed a very high value on learningspoken English.As to the nature of learning to speak English (e.g. items 7, 9, 12, 18, and 33), 78%

of the students agreed that everyone can learn to speak a foreign language. Manystudents (92%) rejected the statement that ``you shouldn't say anything in Englishuntil you can say it correctly,'' though 97% believed that it is important to speakEnglish with excellent pronunciation. The vast majority of the students (98%)agreed that it is important to ``repeat and practice a lot.'' Many of these studentsalso considered environment as an important factor for successful language learn-ing, with 90% agreeing that it is best to learn English in an English-speakingcountry.

4.1.3. Beliefs about foreign language aptitude

These EFL students generally endorsed the concept of special abilities for foreignlanguage learning. Eighty-®ve percent either strongly agreed or agreed with thestatement: ``Some people have a special ability for learning foreign languages.''Nearly two-thirds (64%) of the students agreed that people who speak more thanone language are very intelligent. Many students (83%) also believed that `ìt iseasier for someone who speaks a foreign language to learn another one.'' Nearlythree-quarters rejected the statement that people who are good at mathematics orscience are not good at learning languages. When asked whether women or men arebetter language learners, these students felt di�erently. About one-third each eitheragreed, disagreed, or stayed neutral when asked if women are better than men at


learning foreign languages, though slightly more students (36%) disagreed thanthose who agreed (30%).

4.1.4. Beliefs about formal structural studies

Unlike the previous belief factors, there seemed to be an overwhelming di�erencein the frequencies between the two views (i.e. pro and con) concerning formalstructural studies. On the one hand, some of these students, in¯uenced by traditionalteaching methods which emphasize teaching grammar and translation, held strongbeliefs concerning formal structural studies of English. More than half the students(55%) agreed that ``the most important part of learning a foreign language islearning vocabulary words.'' About one-quarter considered learning grammar to bethe most important part of foreign language learning. While less than 11% of thegroup felt that learning translation was important, the majority of the students(91%) agreed that ``language learning involves a lot of memorization.'' Only 3%disagreed with that statement. Fifty-six percent felt that ``It is easier to read andwrite English than to speak and understand it,'' though 22% disagreed with thatstatement. These students were concerned with the correctness of English, for over80% agreed that it would be di�cult to get rid of their errors later on if beginningstudents were allowed to make errors in English without correction.On the other hand, a substantial number of students rejected the formal structural

approach. They either disagreed or strongly disagreed that ``learning how to trans-late from my native language'' (72%), learning grammar (45%), or learning voca-bulary (23%) is the most important part of learning a foreign language. In addition,several students expressed beliefs rejecting a formal structural approach whenanswering the open-ended question about additional beliefs: ``Listening and speak-ing is more important (than reading and writing)'' (®ve students); ``Current Englishclasses need to place more emphasis on conversation (listening and speaking) prac-tice, not on English±Chinese translation of the text, nor on grammar study'' (15students); ``Learning languages should emphasize all four skills (i.e. listening,speaking, reading, and writing), not just one'' (two students); and ``An importantpart of learning a foreign language is learning to use it in daily life'' (nine students).

4.2. Results of factor analysis on SILL items

Factor analysis on SILL items identi®ed six factors for learners' language learningstrategies. The six strategy factors were:

1. functional practice strategies;2. cognitive-memory strategies;3. metacognitive strategies;4. formal oral-practice strategies;5. social strategies; and6. compensation strategies.

Table 2 presents the SILL items that constitute each factor and the response fre-quency for each item in percentages. Table 3 presents rank ordering of the strategy


Table 2

Response frequency (in percentage) for the SILL items that constitute each factor


Factor 1ÐFunctional practice strategies

67. I write notes, messages, letters, or reports in English. (0.72)b 29c 38 27 5 1

66. I read for pleasure in English. (0.66) 17 37 29 15 2

64. I start conversations in English. (0.65) 7 24 43 19 7

68. I try to think in English. (0.62) 37 32 22 8 1

85. I look for people I can talk to in English. (0.58) 16 38 30 13 4

86. I look for opportunities to read as much as possible in English. (0.55) 7 21 40 25 7

65. I watch TV shows or movies spoken in English or listen to the English

radio program. (0.53)

4 12 38 32 14

98. I ask questions for clari®cation and veri®cation about English. (0.51) 9 28 37 20 6

99. I try to learn about the culture of English speakers. (0.51) 13 29 32 23 3

63. I use the English words I know in di�erent ways. (0.49) 8 32 38 19 4

80. I try to ®nd as many ways as I can to use my English. (0.48) 5 29 39 22 6

73. I make summaries of information that I hear or read in English. (0.45) 15 37 33 13 2

90. I encourage myself to speak even when I am afraid of making a mistake.

(0.42)

4 15 35 35 11

81. I notice my Englsh mistakes and use that information to help me do

better. (0.41)

3 14 41 35 7

72. I try not to translate word-for-word. (0.35) 3 18 38 33 8

Factor 2ÐCognitive-memory strategies

69. I look for similarities and contrasts between English and my own lan-

guage. (0.61)

15 32 33 19 2

51. When learning a new word, I create associations between new material

and what I already know. (0.61)

3 17 41 33 6

54. I remember a new English word by making a mental picture of a situation

in which the word might be used. (0.59)

11 23 31 31 5

53. I connect the sound of a new English word and an image or picture of the

word to help me remember the word. (0.58)

15 32 24 24 6

57. I memorize new English words by grouping them into categories (e.g.

synonym, antonym, noun, verb). (0.56)

21 42 24 12 2

55. I use rhymes to remember new English words (e.g. rice and ice; no and

know). (0.53)

20 35 30 13 3

70. I try to ®nd patterns in English. (0.51) 8 24 35 29 4

52. I use new English words in a sentence so I can remember them. (0.51) 10 36 34 17 3

71. I ®nd the meaning of an English word by dividing it into parts that I

understand. (0.48)

6 16 33 35 10

Factor 3ÐMetacognitive strategies

88. I think about my progress in learning English. (0.63) 7 24 35 29 4

84. I plan my schedule so I will have enough time to study English. (0.63) 11 35 37 12 5

87. I have clear goals for improving my English skills. (0.54) 10 35 35 15 5

92. I notice if I am tense or nervous when I am studying or using English.

(0.52)

5 20 27 39 9

83. I try to ®nd out a better way to learn English. (0.51) 1 8 23 48 19

58. I review English lessons often. (0.49) 4 23 49 20 4

93. I talk to someone else about how I feel when I am learning English. (0.48) 9 22 40 22 7

91. I give myself a reward or treat when I do well in English. (0.45) 9 23 30 28 11

89. I try to relax whenever I feel afraid of using English. (0.37) 6 18 34 36 7

(Table continued on next page)


factors according to their frequency of usage. The following discussion will followthe rank order of usage of these strategy factors.

4.2.1. Formal oral-practice strategies

Formal oral-practice strategies focus on formal practice for speaking English,such as practicing the sounds of English, trying to imitate native English speakers,repeating saying new English words, and paying attention when someone is speak-ing English (cf. Bialystok, 1979). As noted in Table 1 (Factor 2), the majority ofthese EFL students endorsed the importance of excellent pronunciation (97%) andthe need to repeat and practice a lot (98%). Therefore, it is not surprising to ®ndthat almost 86% of the students reported practicing pronunciation (over one-halfpracticed usually or always); 75% tried to talk like native English speakers; 94%would pay attention when someone was speaking English; and about 80% of the

Table 2 (continued)


Factor 4ÐFormal oral-practice strategies

62. I practice the sounds of English. (0.61) 2 12 28 42 16

61. I try to talk like native English speakers. (0.58) 9 17 28 35 12

82. I pay attention when someone is speaking English. (0.53) 2 5 25 54 15

79. If I can't think of an English word, I use a word or phrase that means the

same thing. (0.50)

1 4 21 57 18

60. I say or write new English words several times. (0.39) 1 19 38 33 10

Factor 5ÐSocial strategies

97. I ask for help from English speakers. (0.68) 11 28 34 22 4

96. I practice English with other students. (0.64) 10 30 42 16 2

95. I ask English speakers to correct me when I talk. (0.60) 7 24 37 26 6

94. If I do not understand something in English, I ask the other person to

slow down or say it again. (0.47)

2 8 25 46 18

Factor 6ÐCompensation strategies

75. When I can't think of a word during a conversation in English, I use

gestures. (0.61)

6 16 25 42 12

76. I make up new words if I do not know the right ones in English. (0.56) 9 21 34 28 8

74. To understand unfamiliar English words, I make guesses. (0.51) 2 5 28 53 12

77. I read English without looking up every new word. (0.40) 2 19 31 37 12

78. I try to guess what the other person will say next in English. (0.39) 13 32 35 16 4

56. I use ¯ashcards to remember new English words. (ÿ0.34) 16 34 30 16 4

Others d

59. I remember new English words or phrases by remembering their location

on the page, on the board, or on a street sign. (F4, 0,28)

14 24 34 23 5

a 1, I never do this; 2, I seldom do this; 3, I sometimes do this; 4, I usually do this; 5, I always do this.b Factor loading of the item on the factor is given in parentheses.c Percentage has been rounded to the nearest whole number.d Items with factor loadings below 0.30 were excluded from the latter canonical correlation analysis.

Such items are listed as ``others'' for reference. Their respective factor loadings are provided in par-

entheses with their corresponding factors. F4, Factor 4.


students reported saying or writing new English words several times. In addition,96% of the students in this study would use a synonym or similar phrase when theycould not think of the exact English word. This strategy helped them to stay in theconversation and thus increased their chances for oral practice.

4.2.2. Compensation strategies

Compensation strategies enable students to make up for missing knowledge in theprocess of comprehending or producing the target language. Speci®cally, many stu-dents read English without looking up every new word (80%), and they madeguesses to understand unfamiliar English words (93%). When they had di�cultyproducing the language, they used gestures (79%) or made up new words (70%) toget their meaning across. They also tried to guess what the other person would saynext (55%) or used ¯ashcards to remember new English words (50%).

4.2.3. Social strategies

Social strategies are actions that involve other people. The data showed that 90%of the students tried to ask other people to slow down or repeat when they did notunderstand something during an English conversation. Seventy percent of thestudents would ask English speakers to correct them when they talked and 60%reported asking help from English speakers. Three out of ®ve of the students in thestudy reported having practiced English with other students

4.2.4. Metacognitive strategies

Metacognitive strategies involve exercising `executive control' over one's languagelearning through planning, monitoring, and evaluating. Some a�ective strategieswere also included in this metacognitive group because these strategies would gen-erally help learners to gain control over their emotions and motivations relatedto language learning through self-monitoring, self-reinforcement, and relaxation.Speci®cally, the metacognitive strategies included: ®nding out a better way to learnEnglish (90%), monitoring their learning process for errors (83%), reviewingEnglish lesson frequently (73%), evaluating their progress (68%), setting goalsfor improving English (55%), and planning schedules for English study (54%).

Table 3

Rank ordering of the strategy factors according to frequency of usage

Factor

number

Factor name Average frequency

of usage

Rank order

of usage

1 Functional practice strategies (� � 0:90)a Low to medium (M � 2:82)b 5

2 Cognitive-memory strategies (� � 0:79) Low to medium (M � 2:80) 6

3 Metacognitive strategies (� � 0:81) Medium (M � 3:06) 4

4 Formal oral-practice strategies (� � 0:71) Medium to high (M � 3:56) 1

5 Social strategies (� � 0:70) Medium (M � 3:07) 3

6 Compensation strategies (� � 0:55) Medium (M � 3:26) 2

a Internal consistency reliability.b M, mean.


Three-quarters of these students also monitored their emotional reactions andnoticed if they were tense or nervous when they were studying or using English.About 77% of them tried to relax and 69% each would reward themselves for goodperformance or share their feelings about learning English.

4.2.5. Functional practice strategies

Functional practice strategies involve actively seeking or creating opportunities touse or practice English functionally. These strategies enable learners to increase theirexposure to the second language outside the formal classroom. Some of the popularfunctional practice strategies used by students were: watching TV shows or moviesspoken in English or listening to English radio programs (84%), encouragingthemselves to speak (81%) and starting conversations in English (69%), askingquestions for clari®cation and veri®cation (63%), noticing their English mistakes(83%), avoiding word-for-word translation (79%), reading as much as possible inEnglish (72%), seeking chances to use English (67%), and using English words indi�erent ways (61%). On the other hand, the strategy of thinking in English wasused least often. Over one-third (37%) of the students did not try this strategy at all.More than two-thirds of the students said that they never or seldom wrote notes,messages, letters, or reports in English. Other less popular functional practice stra-tegies included looking for conversation partners, reading for pleasure, makingsummaries from listening and reading, and trying to learn about the culture.

4.2.6. Cognitive-memory strategies

As the name suggests, cognitive-memory strategies involve direct analysis, trans-formation, association, or synthesis of the target language, which, whether inten-tionally or not, will consequently facilitate the memory process. In this study, someof the cognitive-memory strategies which were used more frequently by the studentsincluded: creating associations between new material and what they already knew(80%), dividing words for meaning (78%), ®nding patterns in English (68%), andusing mental images to remember new English words (67%). There were also severalrarely cited cognitive-memory strategies, such as remembering English by grouping,by using rhymes, by connecting the sound and image of the word, by making com-parisons between English and Chinese, and by using new words in sentences.

4.3. Results of Pearson correlations

The Pearson product±moment correlations between the four belief factors and thesix strategy factors provided some insight into their relationships (see Yang, 1992,for details). The ®rst two belief factorsÐself-e�cacy and expectation about learningEnglish, and perceived value and nature of learning spoken EnglishÐwere closelyrelated to the use of all six groups of learning strategies, while the third belief fac-torÐbeliefs about foreign language aptitudeÐwas connected with the ®rst threestrategy factors, i.e. functional practice strategies, cognitive-memory strategies, andmetacognitive strategies. The fourth belief factorÐbeliefs about formal structuralstudiesÐhad a signi®cant, negative correlation with the ®rst strategy factor. In other


words, the beliefs about formal structural studies were likely to discourage the use offunctional practice strategies by the language learners. When students believed thatlearning the grammar, vocabulary, and translation were the most important part oflearning a foreign language and felt overwhelmingly that language learning involvesa lot of memorization, they would be unlikely to seek or create opportunities to useor practice English functionally by trying to write, read, speak, or think in English.This result supports Horwitz's (1988) argument that certain students' beliefs wouldlikely restrict the range of language learning strategy used.

4.4. Results of canonical correlation analysis

Canonical correlation analysis is a multivariate analytic method that investigatesthe degree of relationship between two sets of variables. In this study, the belief andstrategy factors were analyzed and four canonical correlations were produced. Theywere found to be multivariate sigi®cant at the 0.0001 level by Wilks' Lambda, Phil-lai's Trace, Hotelling±Lawey Trace, and Roy's Greatest Root tests. The follow-upBartlett's test checked the signi®cance of individual canonical correlations, andfound three signi®cant ones (Table 4). The ®rst canonical correlation R1 and thesecond R2 accounted for about 50 and 14% of the total variance. The third canonicalcorrelation R3 accounted for little variance (4%) and its correlation coe�cient wasalso very weak. Therefore, only the ®rst two canonical correlations will be discussed.

4.4.1. The ®rst signi®cant canonical correlation

The ®rst signi®cant canonical correlation related language learners' self-e�cacyabout learning English to their use of all six groups of learning strategies, with thestrongest connection being to functional practice strategies. In other words, studentswith strong self-e�cacy beliefs reported using strategies included under each ofthe strategy factor groups, especially functional practice strategies. These studentswould actively increase their exposure to English outside the classroom. Forinstance, they would encourage themselves to speak and start conversations inEnglish; watch TV shows or movies spoken in English or listen to English radioprograms; look for opportunities to read English as much as possible and read forpleasure. This ®nding supports the relationship between self-e�cacy beliefs andstrategy use in second language acquisition situation (cf. Pintrich, 1989).

Table 4

Results of canonical correlation analysis

Canonical

correlation R

R2 Eigenvalue Proportion Cumulative

proportion

Bartlett's test

R1 0.704 0.495 0.981 0.824 0.824 p < 0:001R2 0.379 0.143 0.167 0.141 0.964 p < 0:001R3 0.192 0.037 0.039 0.032 0.997 p < 0:050R4 0.064 0.004 0.004 0.003 1.000 NSa

a NS, not signi®cant.


4.4.2. The second signi®cant correlationThe second signi®cant canonical correlation related language learners' beliefs

about the value and nature of spoken English to more frequent use of formal oral-practice strategies. The great majority of these college students (from 78 to 99%)endorsed the statements that constituted Factor 2, i.e. beliefs about the value andnature of learning spoken English (cf. Section 4.1.2). As these students believed thatrepetition and practice is important and that excellent pronunciation is essential,their oral-practice strategies also focused on the formal aspects of English, ratherthan on the functional or communicative use of English. Many of them, for exam-ple, reported having practiced English pronunciation, trying to imitate native Eng-lish speakers, saying new English words repeatedly, and paying attention whensomeone was speaking English. This ®nding supports Wenden's (1986a) study onsecond language learners' explicit beliefs and their approach to language learning, aswell as Pintrich and his colleagues' research on students' motivation and strategy use(Pintrich, 1989; Pintrich and De Groot, 1990).

5. Discussion and implications

5.1. Con¯icting beliefs and strategy use

A close examination of the results revealed that students in this study held somecon¯icting beliefs and these were re¯ected in their use of strategies. For example,many students (92%) rejected the statement that ``you shouldn't say anything inEnglish until you can say it correctly.'' However, over 80% of the students agreedthat if beginning students were allowed to make errors in English without correc-tion, it would be di�cult for them to speak correctly later on. In other words, whilethese students thought that it was necessary to practice speaking English if possible,they also worried about making mistakes, which might become an obstacle for theirlater progress. This con¯ict of beliefs poses a paradox, for while it is the oral skillthat most interested these EFL students, speaking in the foreign language was also acause for concern. It is no wonder that a substantial group of the students (39%) felttimid when speaking English with other people. The timid feeling about speakingEnglish was found to have signi®cant negative correlations with all the functionalpractice strategies. That is, students tended not to use any functional practice stra-tegies in practicing English if they felt timid while speaking English. On the otherhand, two strategies (i.e. ``trying to relax'' and ``encouraging themselves to speak'')were found to be negatively related to the timid feeling. It is possible those students(38%) who disagreed that they felt timid had used these two learning strategiesto conquer their fear of speaking English. This explains why many students tried torelax (77%) and encourage themselves (81%) by every means possible when theywere afraid of speaking English or making mistakes.In another case, even though the students overwhelmingly (90%) agreed that

language learning involves a lot of memorization, they only used few cognitive-memory strategies to facilitate their memory process. In fact, none of the learning


strategy items was signi®cantly correlated with this belief item, not to mention thecognitive-memory strategies. A possible explanation might be that, while the stu-dents reported learning English by memorizing English vocabulary, grammaticalrules, and even whole pieces of English articles, they tended to use a limited inven-tory of memory strategies. This speculation is supported by several students' andanswers to the open-ended question. For example, 18 students wrote that they justmemorized ``through repetitions'' and ``by heart.'' Perhaps for them memorystrategies mean only rote memorization. Additional support comes from the resultsof a strategy training study by the author. When students' awareness about learningstrategies was raised through group discussion, their use of cognitive strategiesand memory strategies was signi®cantly increased at the end of the semester(Yang, 1996).

5.2. Cyclical relationships among learner's beliefs, motivation and strategy use

This study found that the ®rst signifcant, and also the strongest, canonical corre-lation related students' self-e�cacy about language learning and their use of allsix groups of learning strategies; while the second signi®cant canonical correlationlinked students' beliefs about the value and nature of spoken English to their useof formal oral-practice strategies. Canonical correlation indicates a relationshipbetween two sets of variables, but it does not tell whether the relationship is a cau-sative one. Thus, it is possible that learners' beliefs led to their use of learning stra-tegies, or that learners' use of learning strategies shaped their beliefs about languagelearning. It is also possible that other factors may cause learners' beliefs and a�ecttheir use of learning strategies.Cyclical relationships among learners' beliefs, motivation, and strategy use, for

example, might be a plausible explanation. In studying variables a�ecting collegeforeign language students' strategy use, Oxford and Nyikos have suggested: ``Notonly does high motivation lead to signi®cant use of language learning strategies . . .but high strategy use probably leads to high motivation as well'' (Oxford and Nyi-kos, 1989, p. 295). It seems that appropriate strategy use will lead to an enhancedself-perception of language pro®ciency and, in turn, increases motivation. Thisexplanation has been illustrated by McCombs's (1988) Generative Process Model ofContinuing Motivation, and empirical support is provided for this explanation byPintrich's (1989) research report,which found that high self-regulation (i.e. use oflearning strategies) leads to a high sense of self-e�cacy.

5.3. Theoretical construct of learners' beliefs

Based on related literature and the results of this study, the author proposes atheoretical construct of language learning beliefs, which is composed of two primarydimensions: metacognitive and motivational. The metacognitive dimension refers tolearner's metacognitive beliefs (or `metacognitive knowledge') about second lan-guage learning (Flavell, 1979; Wenden, 1986b, 1991). It includes the followingcomponents:


1. what learners know about themselves as second language learners (e.g. theirown language pro®ciency, aptitude, learning style, personality, and social rolein the second language learning environment);

2. what learners think about the task of second language learning (e.g. the generalissue of foreign language aptitude, the nature and focus of language learning,the di�culty of language learning; and

3. what they believe about how best to learn a second or foreign language (i.e.knowledge about language learning strategies).

The motivational dimension refers to learners' motivational beliefs about secondlanguage learning and includes Pintrich's three motivational components (Garciaand Pintrich, 1995):

1. learners' beliefs about their ability to learn a second language and their expec-tations about the results or di�culty of the learning task;

2. their goals for second language learning as well as beliefs about the impor-tance, utility, and interest in the learning task; and

3. learners' emotional reactions to second language learning.

Simply put, the motivational belief components involve learners' answers to thefollowing three questions: ``Can I learn the language?'', ``Why am I learning thislanguage?'' and ``How do I feel about learning this language?''By examining items within each belief factor, it was found that the ®rst factor (i.e.

self-e�cacy and expectation about learning English) and the second factor (i.e. per-ceived value and nature of learning spoken English) included most of the motiva-tional beliefs, while the third (beliefs about foreign language aptitude) and fourth(beliefs about formal structural studies) factors were mainly composed of metacog-nitive beliefs. The results of the canonical correlation analysis also indicated that the®rst two belief factors were closely related to students' strategy use. It seems thatmotivational beliefs play an important role in second language learning. However,while metacognitive beliefs or knowledge have been discussed extensively in the ®eldof second language acquisition (e.g. Wenden, 1987b), there have been few studies onmotivational beliefs in second language learning. Further research is needed tovalidate or modify the proposed belief construct, i.e. the metacognitive and motiva-tional beliefs. Research might try to determine which has the greatest in¯uence and/or how they interact with one another in language learning.

5.4. Pedagogical implications

As suggested by this study, learners' beliefs are important determinants of theirbehavior. Thus, language teachers should try to foster positive beliefs that lead toe�ective learning strategy use and minimize negative beliefs that inhibit learning.Teachers can remove students' misconceptions by providing knowledge or illustra-tions concerning the nature and process of second language acquisition (Yang,1998). Persuasive communication or group discussion can be conducted to raise


students' metacognitive awareness (Wenden, 1991; Yang, 1996). Diary-keeping isalso a useful tool for re¯ection on learning (Goh, 1997; Matsumoto, 1996).Teachers' teaching methodologies should also be compatible with (or at least, take

into account) learner beliefs. Since this study showed that students in Taiwan hadstrong beliefs about the need to master speaking and listening skills, a commu-nicative approach to EFL teaching is necessary. As functional practice was provento be essential to students' performance and success in oral communication (Bialy-stok, 1979; Huang, 1984), functional practice should be emphasized more often thanformal practice to achieve communicative competence.

6. Conclusions

In summary, this study provided a greater understanding of the beliefs and learn-ing strategy use of the college students in Taiwan as well as empirical evidence forthe connections between language learners' beliefs and their learning strategy use. Itfound that students' self-e�cacy beliefs about learning English were strongly relatedto their use of all types of learning strategies, especially functional practice strate-gies. In addition, students' beliefs about the value and nature of learning spokenEnglish were closely linked to the use of formal oral-practice strategies. Secondlanguage instruction as well as strategy training programs should attend to students'beliefs about second language learning, including both metacognitive and motiva-tional beliefs as proposed in this study. By encouraging appropriate beliefs, teachersmay enhance e�ective use of learning strategies and, therefore, further contribute tostudents' continuing motivation to learn a second language.

References

Abraham, R.G., Vann, R.J., 1987. Strategies of two language learners: a case study. In: Wenden, A.L.,

Rubin, J. (Eds.), Learner Strategies in Language Learning. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cli�s, NJ, pp. 85±

102.

Atkinson, J.W., 1964. An Introduction to Motivation. Van Nostrand, Princeton, NJ.

Bandura, A., 1986. The explanatory and predictive scope of self-e�cacy theory. Journal of Social and

Clinical Psychology 4, 359±373.

Bandura, A., Schunk, D., 1981. Cultivating competence, self-e�cacy, and intrinsic interest through

proximal self-motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 41, 586±598.

Bialystok, E., 1979. The role of conscious strategies in second language pro®ciency. Canadian Modern

Language Review 35, 372±394.

Brown, S.L., Bransford, R.A., Ferrara, R.A., Campione, J.C., 1983. Learning, remembering and under-

standing. In: Flavell, J.H., Markman, E.M. (Eds.), Carmichael's Manual of Child Psychology. Wiley,

New York, pp. 14±21.

Brunson, B., Matthews, K., 1981. The Type-A coronary-prone behavior pattern and reactions to

uncontrollable stress: an analysis of performance strategies, a�ect, and attributions during failure.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 40, 906±918.

Cain, K.M., Dweck, C.S., 1995. Relation between motivational patterns and achievement cognitions

through the elementary school years. Merrill Palmer Quarterly 41, 25±52.


Cotterall, S., 1995. Readiness for autonomy: investigating learner beliefs. System 23 (Special issue on

Learner Autonomy), 195±205.

Dweck, C.S., Leggett, E., 1988. A social-cognitive approach to motivation and personality. Psychological

Review 95, 256±273.

Elliott, E.S., Dweck, C.S., 1988. Goals: an approach to motivation and achievement. Journal of Person-

ality and Social Psychology 54, 5±12.

Flavell, J.H., 1979. Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: a new area of cognitive developmental

inquiry. American Psychologist 34, 906±911.

Garcia, T., Pintrich, P.R., 1995. Assessing Students' Motivation and Learning Strategies: the Motivated

Strategies for Learning Questionnaire (Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Edu-

cational Research Association, San Francisco, CA) (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED

383 770).

Goh, C., 1997. Metacognitive awareness and second language listeners. English Language Teaching

Journal 51, 361±369.

Horwitz, E.K., 1987. Surveying student beliefs about language learning. In: Wenden, A.L., Rubin, J.

(Eds.), Learner Strategies in Language Learning. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cli�s, NJ, pp. 119±129.

Horwitz, E.K., 1988. The beliefs about language learning of beginning university foreign language stu-

dents. Modern Language Journal 72, 283±294.

Hsiao, T., Lin, M., 1998. To believe or not to believe: on Horwitz's BALLI. In: Lin, M., Chen, P., Leung,

Y., Katchen, J. (Eds.), The Proceedings of the Seventh International Symposium on English Teaching,

Taipei, Taiwan, Vol. 1, pp. 421±430.

Huang, X.H., 1984. An Investigation of Learning Strategies in Oral Communication that Chinese EFL

Learners in China Employ. Masters thesis, Chinese University of Hong Kong (ERIC Document

Reproduction Service No. ED 249 796).

Licht, B.G., Dweck, C.S., 1984. Determinants of academic achievement: the interaction of children's

achievement orientations with skills area. Developmental Psychology 20, 628±636.

Matsumoto, K., 1996. Helping L2 learners re¯ect on classroom learning. English Language Teaching

Journal 50, 143±149.

McCombs, B.L., 1988. Motivational skills training: combining metacognitive, cognitive, and a�ective

learning strategies. In: Weinstein, C.E., Goetz, E.T., Alexander, P.A. (Eds.), Learning and Study Stra-

tegies: Issues in Assessment, Instruction, and Evaluation. Academic Press, San Diego, CA, pp. 141±169.

Oxford, R.L., 1990. Strategy Inventory for Language Learning. In: Oxford, R.L. (Ed.), Language

Learning Strategies: What Every Teacher Should Know. Heinle & Heinle, Boston, pp. 283±300.

Oxford, R.L., Nyikos, M., 1989. Variables a�ecting choice of language learning strategies by university

students. Modern Language Journal 73, 291±300.

Palmer, D.J., Goetz, E.T., 1988. Selection and use of study strategies: the role of the students' beliefs

about self and strategies. In: Weinstein, C.E., Goetz, E.T., Alexander, P.A. (Eds.), Learning and Study

Strategies: Issues in Assessment, Instruction, and Evaluation. Academic Press, San Diego, CA, pp. 41±

61.

Pintrich, P., 1989. The dynamic interplay of student motivation and cognition in the college classroom. In:

Ames, C., Maehr, M.L. (Eds.), Advances in Motivation and Achievement: Motivation-enhancing

Environments, Vol. 6. JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, pp. 117±160.

Pintrich, P.R., De Groot, E.V., 1990. Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom

academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology 82, 33±40.

Schunk, D.L., 1983. Ability versus e�ort attributional feedback: di�erential e�ects on self-e�cacy and

achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology 75, 848±856.

Schunk, D.L., 1985. Self-e�cacy and classroom learning. Psychology in the Schools 22, 208±223.

Stevens, J., 1986. Applied Multivariate Statistics for the Social Sciences. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,

Hillsdale, NJ.

Stipek, D.J., 1993. Motivation to Learn, From Theory to Practice, 2nd Edition. Ally and Bacon, Need-

ham Heights, MA.

Victori, R.M., 1992. Investigating the metacognitive knowledge of students of English as a second lan-

guage. Unpublished Masters thesis, University of California, Los Angeles.


Victori, M., Lockhart, W., 1995. Enhancing metacognition in self-directed language learning. System 23

(Special issue on Learner Autonomy), 223±234.

Weiner, B., 1976. Attribution theory, achievement motivation, and the educational process. Review of

Educational Research 42, 201±215.

Wenden, A.L., 1986a. Helping language learners think about learning. English Language Teaching

Journal 40, 3±12.

Wenden, A.L., 1986b. What do second-language learners know about their language learning? A second

look at retrospective accounts. Applied Linguistics 7, 186±201.

Wenden, A.L., 1987a. How to be a successful language learner: insights and prescriptions from L2 lear-

ners. In: Wenden, A.L., Rubin, J. (Eds.), Learner Strategies in Language Learning. Prentice-Hall,

Englewood Cli�s, NJ, pp. 103±118.

Wenden, A.L., 1987b. Metacognition: an expanded view on the cognitive abilities of L2 learners. Lan-

guage Learning 37, 573±598.

Wenden, A.L., 1991. Learner Strategies for Learner Autonomy: Planning and Implementing Learner

Training for Language Learners. Prentice-Hall International, Hertfordshire, UK.

Yang, N.D., 1992. Second language learners' beliefs about language learning and their use of learning

strategies: a study of college students of English in Taiwan. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The

University of Texas at Austin, Texas.

Yang, N.D., 1996. E�ective awareness-raising in language learning strategy instruction. In: Oxford, R.L.

(Ed.), Language Learning Strategies Around the World: Crosscultural Perspectives. University of

Hawaii Press, Honolulu, pp. 205±210.

Yang, N.D., 1998. Exploring a new role for teachers: promoting learner autonomy. System 26, 127±135.


本文献由“学霸图书馆-文献云下载”收集自网络，仅供学习交流使用。

学霸图书馆（www.xuebalib.com）是一个“整合众多图书馆数据库资源，

提供一站式文献检索和下载服务”的24 小时在线不限IP

图书馆。

图书馆致力于便利、促进学习与科研，提供最强文献下载服务。

图书馆导航：

图书馆首页文献云下载图书馆入口外文数据库大全疑难文献辅助工具

http://www.xuebalib.com/cloud/

http://www.xuebalib.com/

http://www.xuebalib.com/cloud/


http://www.xuebalib.com/vip.html

http://www.xuebalib.com/db.php

http://www.xuebalib.com/zixun/2014-08-15/44.html


the relationship between efl learners' beliefs and...

Documents