International Students Challenges, Strategies and Future Vision: A Socio-Dynamic Perspective 9781788922241

Citation preview

International Students’ Challenges, Strategies and Future Vision

SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION Series Editors: Professor David Singleton, University of Pannonia, Hungary and Fellow Emeritus, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland and Associate Professor Simone E. Pfenninger, University of Salzburg, Austria This series brings together titles dealing with a variety of aspects of language acquisition and processing in situations where a language or languages other than the native language is involved. Second language is thus interpreted in its broadest possible sense. The volumes included in the series all offer in their different ways, on the one hand, exposition and discussion of empirical findings and, on the other, some degree of theoretical reflection. In this latter connection, no particular theoretical stance is privileged in the series; nor is any relevant perspective – sociolinguistic, psycholinguistic, neurolinguistic, etc. – deemed out of place. The intended readership of the series includes final-year undergraduates working on second language acquisition projects, postgraduate students involved in second language acquisition research, and researchers, teachers and policy-makers in general whose interests include a second language acquisition component. All books in this series are externally peer-reviewed. Full details of all the books in this series and of all our other publications can be found on http://www.multilingual-matters.com, or by writing to Multilingual Matters, St Nicholas House, 31-34 High Street, Bristol BS1 2AW, UK.

SECOND LANGUAGE ACQUISITION: 129

International Students’ Challenges, Strategies and Future Vision A Socio-Dynamic Perspective

Anas Hajar

MULTILINGUAL MATTERS Bristol • Blue Ridge Summit

DOI https://doi.org/10.21832/HAJAR2234 Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data A catalog record for this book is available from the Library of Congress. Names: Hajar, Anas, 1985- author. Title: International Students’ Challenges, Strategies and Future Vision: A Socio-Dynamic Perspective/Anas Hajar. Description: Bristol, UK; Blue Ridge Summit, PA: Multilingual Matters, [2019] | Series: Second Language Acquisition: 129 | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2018031323| ISBN 9781788922234 (hbk : alk. paper) | ISBN 9781788922241 (pdf) | ISBN 9781788922265 (kindle) Subjects: LCSH: Students, Foreign—Great Britain. | Education, Higher—Great Britain. | Foreign study—Social aspects—Great Britain. Classification: LCC LB2376.6.G7 H35 2019 | DDC 378.1/9826910941—dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2018031323 British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue entry for this book is available from the British Library. ISBN-13: 978-1-78892-223-4 (hbk) Multilingual Matters UK: St Nicholas House, 31-34 High Street, Bristol BS1 2AW, UK. USA: NBN, Blue Ridge Summit, PA, USA. Website: www.multilingual-matters.com Twitter: Multi_Ling_Mat Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/multilingualmatters Blog: www.channelviewpublications.wordpress.com Copyright © 2019 Anas Hajar. All rights reserved. No part of this work may be reproduced in any form or by any means without permission in writing from the publisher. The policy of Multilingual Matters/Channel View Publications is to use papers that are natural, renewable and recyclable products, made from wood grown in sustainable forests. In the manufacturing process of our books, and to further support our policy, preference is given to printers that have FSC and PEFC Chain of Custody certification. The FSC and/or PEFC logos will appear on those books where full certification has been granted to the printer concerned. Typeset by Deanta Global Publishing Services Limited. Printed and bound in the UK by the CPI Books Group Ltd. Printed and bound in the US by Thomson-Shore, Inc.

To my parents Who have always been the backbone to my achievement and always in my corner. To my fabulous siblings My brother, Mahmoud, and my sister, Yasmine Who have always believed in their youngest brother and been there whenever I need them.

Contents

Figures and Tables

x

Abbreviationsxi Acknowledgementsxii Foreword by Jane Jackson

xiii

1 Introduction

1

1.1  Background to the Book 1 1.2  A Personal Perspective 3 1.3  An Outline of the Present Study 5 1.4  Audience8 1.5  Structure of the Book 9 Part 1: Theoretical Considerations 2  Has Language Learning Strategy Research Come to an End? 13 2.1  Introduction13 2.2  Definitional Issues 13 2.3  Issues of Categorisation 18 2.4  Issues in Research Methodology 22 2.5  Movements towards Self-Regulation 25 2.6  A Response to Calls to Move Away from Language Learning Strategy Research 29 2.7  Conclusion33 Resources for Further Reading 34 3 Towards a Socio-Dynamic Perspective on Language Learning Strategy Research35 3.1  Introduction35 3.2  ‘Good Language Learner’ Strategies: Criticism and Insights35 3.3  The Shifting Language Learning Research Landscape 42 vii

viii Contents

3.4  Socio-Dynamic Perspectives and Empirical Language Learning Strategy Research 45 3.5  Framework for Understanding the Intersection between Learning Motivations, Strategy Use and Future Visions: A Socio-Dynamic Perspective 55 3.6  Conclusion61 Resources for Further Reading 61 Part 2: Language Learning Strategy Research in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) Contexts 4 Impact of Household Members on EFL Students’ Strategic Language Learning and Future Vision 65 4.1  Introduction65 4.2  Importance of Understanding Individuals’ Language Learning Experiences beyond the Classroom 66 4.3  Examining the Mediating Role of Household Members 68 4.4  Role of Learner Agency 83 4.5  Conclusion and Pedagogical Implications 85 Resources for Further Reading 88 5 Impacts of Mainstream Schooling and ‘Shadow Education’ on EFL Students’ Strategic Language Learning and Development89 5.1  Introduction89 5.2  Participants’ Language Motivation Orientation and Strategy Use in Their Homelands 90 5.3  Impact of Mainstream Schooling 95 5.4  The Mediating Role of Assessment Practices 103 5.5  English Private Tutoring and ‘Shadow Education’ 105 5.6  Conclusion and Implications 114 Resources for Further Reading 119 Part 3: Learning Strategy Research in a Study Abroad Context 6 Social Interaction, Strategy Use and Future Vision on Pre-Sessional English Programmes 123 6.1  Introduction123 6.2  Study Abroad and Pre-Sessional English Programmes 124 6.3  Relationships with Home Citizens and Future Visions During a Pre-Sessional English Programme 125 6.4  Social Interaction with Co-National and Multinational Networks on a Pre-Sessional English Programme 131

Contents 

ix

6.5  Perspectives on Native Speakers as Models for English Teaching on a Pre-Sessional English Programme136 6.6  Effects of Assessment Modes in the Pre-Sessional English Programmes on Strategy Use 140 6.7  Conclusion and Implications 143 Resources for Further Reading 146 7 Social Connectedness, Learning Strategy Use and Future Vision during Master’s Programmes 147 7.1  Introduction147 7.2  Impact of Social Agents 148 7.3  Academic Studies in the Medium of English 156 7.4  Participants’ Motivational Orientations and Strategy Use after Joining Their MA Programme169 7.5  Conclusion and Implications 171 Resources for Further Reading 173 8 The Challenges of Writing a Master’s Dissertation, Learning Strategy Use and Future Vision: Perspectives of International Students 174 8.1  Introduction174 8.2  The Importance of Demystifying International Students’ Situated Experiences of Master’s Supervision175 8.3  Impact of Dissertation Supervisors’ Practices on Supervisees’ Strategic Learning Efforts and Future Vision177 8.4  Dealing with Insecurities 186 8.5  R  ecommendations for Improving the Effectiveness and Quality of Master’s Dissertation Supervision 192 Resources for Further Reading 196 Epilogue by Carol Griffiths

197

Appendices201 Appendix 1: Biographical Vignettes of the Participants in This Research

201

Appendix 2: Indicative Interview Protocol

204

Appendix 3: Prompts for Initial Essay

207

References208 Index233

Figures and Tables

Figures

Figure 4.1 An illustration of the participants’ personal social networks

69

Tables

Table 1.1 Demographic data of the participants 6 Table 2.1 Defining language learning strategies/learner strategies/strategic14 Table 2.2 Illustration of Tseng et al.’s (2006) SelfRegulating Capacity in Vocabulary Learning Scale (SRCvoc) 26 Table 2.3 Description of Rubin’s (2005) LSM framework 28 Table 2.4 Griffiths’ characteristics of language learning strategies32 Table 3.1 Intersection between language learners’ goals, motivations and learning strategies from a socio-dynamic perspective 56 Table 5.1 An overview of the participants’ language strategy use in their homelands 94

x

Abbreviations

CoP DA EAP EFL ESL GLL IELTS LLS LSM NPRMs SILL TA TEFL ZPD

Community of practice Dynamic assessment English for academic purposes English as a foreign language English as a second language Good language learner International English Language Testing System Language learning strategy Learner self-management Near peer role models Strategy Inventory for Language Learning Thematic analysis Test of English as a foreign language Zone of proximal development

xi

Acknowledgements

Many people and institutions in various ways made this book possible. First and foremost, I am deeply indebted to the students who took part in the research and shared their experiences with me. I would also like to express my sincerest gratitude for the substantial assistance and support I received from the Higher Institute of Languages at Aleppo University in Syria, the Chinese University of Hong Kong in Hong Kong SAR, Warwick and Canterbury Christ Church universities in the United Kingdom and Cara (the Council for At-Risk Academics) in the United Kingdom. My profound gratitude is extended to Professor Jane Jackson and Dr Carol Griffiths for their generous contributions to this book, including reading chapters, writing the foreword and epilogue parts and sharing their expert knowledge with me. I would also like to thank Professor David Wray, Dr Gerard Sharpling and Ms Doreen du Boulay for their constructive feedback on my research. Finally, abundant appreciation goes to the energetic and supportive Multilingual Matters family for their recommendations throughout the preparation of this book. Special thanks are due to Ms Laura Longworth, the editor, for her prompt and friendly answers to all my queries.

xii

Foreword

This book comes at a time when the number of students who are choosing to study outside their home country for all or part of their tertiary education is on the rise. Annually, nearly 5 million are now gaining some form of international educational experience, up from 1.3 ­million in 1990 (http://monitor.icef.com/2015/11/the-state-of-international-studentmobility-in-2015/; https://www.iie.org/Research-and-Insights/ProjectAtlas/Explore-Data/Current-Infographics). As in any field, within the context of international education, scholars may define key terms differently. Within the United States, for example, study abroad generally refers to ‘a subtype of Education Abroad that results in progress toward an academic degree at a student’s home institution’, excluding ‘the pursuit of a full academic degree at a foreign institution’ (Forum on Education Abroad, 2011: 12). In European contexts, this form of education abroad is generally known as ‘credit mobility’ (http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/education_culture/repository/education/library/ publications/erasmus-stat-2012-13_en.pdf). For this volume, Dr Hajar has adopted Benson et al.’s (2013: 3) broader conception of study abroad, which encompasses ‘any period spent overseas, for which study is part of the purpose’. While many edited collections and monographs centre on the experiences of short-term student sojourners (e.g. international exchange students, summer language immersion students), this unique volume presents the developmental trajectories of second language students who were pursuing a full postgraduate degree at a university in the UK. Many previous publications have tracked the language and (inter)cultural learning of American, European or Chinese students in a second language study abroad context. Refreshingly, drawing on a sociocultural language learning framework and, more specifically, a socio-dynamic orientation towards language learning strategy research, Dr Hajar explores the international educational experiences of Arab university students from diverse countries (Iraq, Libya, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Syria and the United Arab Emirates). His work offers valuable insight into the multifarious factors, both internal and external, that can influence language learning xiii

xiv Foreword

in both an English as a foreign language (EFL) context and the host speech community. After explaining the theoretical framework and methodological approach that he adopted in his study, through a retrospective lens, in the first part of the volume, Dr Hajar paints a vivid picture of the participants’ language learning journeys in their home countries. In the process, he highlights multiple individual variables that appeared to affect their language learning motivation and strategy use outside the classroom (e.g. agency, parental mediation) as well as in formal mainstream schooling, ‘shadow education’ or private tutoring (e.g. peer influence, teacher mediation). Drawing on his findings, he offers useful, practical suggestions to better support the language learning of EFL students both in and out of the classroom (e.g. strategy use). The next part of the volume shifts to the international educational experiences of the participants as they adjusted to an unfamiliar linguistic and cultural environment. After providing essential details about their master’s degree programme of studies in the UK, Dr Hajar offers a window into the barriers and affordances that impacted their language learning and cross-cultural adjustment both in and outside the academic arena. In his exploration, he discovered that social networks and strategy use played a vital role in their language and intercultural development. As the students were writing a master’s dissertation during his investigation, Dr Hajar was able to incorporate findings related to this element, which is another valuable feature of this book. In particular, this aspect of his study shed light on the complexity and significance of the student– supervisor relationship, including the various ways in which supervisors can help or hinder the adjustment and learning of second language students who are new to higher education in that context. Through the analysis of rich qualitative data, Dr Hajar was able to distil key elements that resulted in different learning trajectories and outcomes. Drawing on a careful analysis of the data, he offers sound recommendations for ways to enhance the effectiveness and quality of postgraduate dissertation supervision. As the number of second language speakers undertaking research-oriented studies continues to grow exponentially, this is another important contribution of this study. This volume has certainly been enhanced by the author’s reflection on his own journey from an EFL context (Syria) to international educational settings (e.g. the pursuit of master’s and PhD degrees at an institution of higher education in the UK). In fact, his own experiences and observations of the struggles and triumphs of other EFL learners and international students compelled him to carry out this research. It is evident that his background helped him to develop a rapport with the participants. An empathetic stance and the ability to conduct interviews in their first language, if they desired, enabled him to gain deeper insight into their perspectives and experiences. While there is always the potential for

Foreword 

xv

personal biases in studies of this nature, it is evident that Dr Hajar made a concerted effort to present an ‘emic’ or insider’s perspective as much as possible and not impose his views on the interviewees. Appropriately, a critical, ‘etic’ or researcher’s perspective is also evident in this volume. In addition to problematising developments in language learner strategy research, Dr Hajar has scrutinised how his own background and perspectives might have impacted his study. In sum, this volume makes a valuable contribution to the literature on international postgraduate education and applied linguistics, more broadly. In particular, it enriches our understanding of the complex ways in which learner strategy use and varying degrees of motivation can enhance or hinder second language learning and engagement both in the home environment and abroad. A welcome addition to the field, Dr Hajar’s volume has the potential to inspire scholars to investigate the developmental trajectories of EFL and international students, both postgraduate and undergraduates, in other parts of the world. Professor Jane Jackson The Chinese University of Hong Kong

1 Introduction

1.1 Background to the Book

This book is a new exploration of language learning strategies (LLSs) based on recent longitudinal research conducted with eight postgraduate Arab students from the date of their arrival in the UK till the end of their master’s degree (MA) courses, taking account of their previous language learning experiences in their homelands. The focus of this book is on international students whose first language is not English. In the UK, the UK Council for International Student Affairs (UKCISA) reported that 310,575 international students from outside the EU had registered at UK universities for the academic year 2015/2016, and 127,440 students from other EU countries (UKCISA, 2018). UK higher education policy sees international students as potential customers who pay full-cost fees, thus student recruitment teams aim to recruit more of them every year. Benson et al. (2013: 3) point out that ‘study abroad’ refers to ‘any period spent overseas, for which study is part of the purpose’. Therefore, the purpose of study abroad is not limited to achieving academic qualifications, but can include personal and intercultural development. As Jackson and Oguro (2018: 4) suggest, the study abroad experience can be one of the most exciting events in students’ lives, because the experience can lead to ‘significant development in intercultural competence, second-language proficiency, global-mindedness, and personal growth’. International students thus need to be viewed as whole people with complete lives instead of separating their minds, bodies and social behaviour into separate domains of inquiry (Coleman, 2013; Jackson, 2018). While international students from different backgrounds are often able to make outstanding contributions to their home countries, many encounter daunting linguistic and academic challenges during their overseas sojourn. As a result, a number of researchers (e.g. Chamot, 2001; Cohen, 1998; Ellis, 1994; Oxford, 1990; Wenden, 1987, 1998) have suggested that one possible way for individuals to deal with such a situation is for them to be efficient language learners in terms of strategy use, in the belief that variation in strategy use accounts for differences in language 1

2  International Students’ Challenges, Strategies and Future Vision

learners’ learning achievements. Interest in LLSs remains intense because of their apparent potential for fostering effective teaching and learning. This is evidenced by their ongoing presence in the research literature (e.g. Cohen, 2011; Grenfell & Harris, 2017; Griffiths, 2018; Oxford, 2017; Oxford & Amerstorfer, 2018; Trendak, 2015). However, LLS research has attracted vigorous debate due to the conceptual ambiguities of the term ‘learning strategy’, and the questionable results obtained from the survey methods used (Dörnyei, 2005, Dörnyei & Ryan, 2015; Gao, 2007; Wray & Hajar, 2015). Some researchers, adopting socially oriented theoretical approaches, call for a shift in the theorising of LLSs together with other concepts, including language learners, learning and context (Gao, 2010; Hajar, 2016; Norton & Toohey, 2001; Palfreyman, 2006; Rose et  al., 2018). They pinpoint a commensurate need for more qualitative, holistic perspectives in LLS research to capture the ‘lived experience of learners in real-life contexts’ (Palfreyman, 2003: 244). This has lent support to researching learning strategy studies informed by a sociocultural standpoint. These studies, however, are ‘still relatively rare’ (Mason, 2010: 647). The longitudinal, qualitative study reported in this book represents one of the few empirical studies to capture an in-depth understanding of the changing learning goals of eight Arabic-speaking students in higher education. Particular attention was paid to their underlying motivations and strategy use during their attendance on both short and long academic programmes (i.e. the pre-sessional language course and a postgraduate programme) in a study abroad context. The study also shows how these students’ dynamic strategic behaviour in a study abroad context is influenced by their past language learning experiences in their Arab countries. This is because the study abroad experience does not begin in the minds of individuals at the airport departure gate; how individuals see themselves and how they approach language learning in their homelands often influence the shape of their strategic learning efforts and personal study abroad goals (Irie & Ryan, 2014; Jackson, 2016). The participants in the current study came from several Arab countries. The modern history of the Arab world goes back to the post-World War I settlement (Rawaf & Hassounah, 2014: 138). At present, the Arab world comprises 22 countries. The Arab people have Semitics origin, living largely in Iraq, Syria, the Arabian Peninsula, the Maghreb region of North Africa, Egypt and Mauritania (Al-Khatib, 2006). Arabs are united in their use of Arabic as their native tongue. A great Arab unifying force is Islam, the religion of 95% of all Arabs (Al-Khatib, 2006: 2). However, there are Arabs who are Christians, Jews and atheists. English as a foreign language (EFL) was introduced to the Arab world after World War I, the commencement of Western colonialism in the Arab world (Al-Khatib, 2006: 3). Van-den-Hoven (2014: 67–68) posits that during most of the 20th century, English was treated in the Arab world as ‘the

Introduction 

3

language of a colonizing and bellicose West’. There was also a fear that learning more English could weaken the Arabic language, the language of the Quran. This, in turn, led to a delay in the introduction of English into the school curriculum, then confining English to the classroom, and accepting the fact that students entering university would have a poor command of English (El-Ezabi, 2014). Nonetheless, a few wealthy families in the Arab world sent their male children abroad for higher education as a means of maintaining their position above other social class groups (El-Ezabi, 2014). By the end of the 20th century, the flourishing of business and communications technology ‘forced Arab states to reevaluate their positions’ towards the learning of foreign languages, especially English (Ridolfo, 2001: 915). English has become the world language of business, science, technology and communication. In this respect, many citizens in Arab countries recognise that ‘a high standard of proficiency in English is a critical requirement for effective education and for access to, and utilization of, new knowledge and new technology’ (El-Ezabi, 2014: x). English is currently regarded in the Arab world as the first foreign language to learn and is taught in Arab schools from an early stage, usually from the fourth grade at age 9. Moreover, almost all Arab countries have begun sending a number of students abroad, most often to English medium universities, at their government’s expense. Consequently, the task of upgrading their English language proficiency has recently been seen by many Arab students as a necessary precursor to academic success and professional development. One of the increasing concerns linked to learning and mastering English in the Arab world is the outflow of Arab students to overseas institutions (Malcolm, 2011: 206). 1.2 A Personal Perspective

In relation to international students’ growing interest in moving abroad to pursue English medium education, I myself experienced first-hand the phenomenon of international students pursuing their academic studies through the medium of English abroad as an MA, and subsequently, a doctoral student at one of the leading universities in the UK. My motivation for undertaking this research within the area of learning strategy research arose from my language learning experiences before and after my arrival in the UK. My English language learning started in Grade 7 in an intermediate state school in Syria when I was 12 years old. Although I was not explicitly introduced to the concept of LLSs during my stay in Syria, I was never without strategies. Throughout my school education, I used LLSs, mostly for classroom study and examinations. For example, I used to memorise the words and texts assigned by my English teachers, complete the exercises and check my answers in the back of the book, as well as ask one of my family members to help me

4  International Students’ Challenges, Strategies and Future Vision

prepare a lesson in advance so I could participate in class. Encouraged by my parents, I majored in English literature at Aleppo University in Syria. In my academic studies at university, memorising and repetition strategies remained my dominant language strategies, with the result that I could accomplish my ultimate vision of being one of the top students, able to win a scholarship to the UK. However, I was simultaneously cognisant of the need to actively create and seek language learning opportunities beyond the classroom in Syria. Therefore, I embraced three effective strategies: (1) I worked as a volunteer tourist guide to Aleppo landmarks during the summer vacations; (2) I subscribed to a weekly English newspaper; and (3) I met up with three classmates on Fridays to practise English together. Technology played a secondary role in improving my English before coming to the UK in 2009, because of its scarcity in public educational settings, the banning of some popular social networking sites such as YouTube and Facebook, slow internet connections and my inability to afford a smartphone. After graduating from university, I spent two years teaching English at Aleppo University before I pursued my higher degree in the UK. During my stay abroad, I noticed an increasing number of international students, in particular from Asian countries, coming to the UK driven by a desire to attain better academic credentials and improve their English proficiency. Many of these students, including myself, had little or no prior travel experience. We had few ideas about how to cope with the different challenges in the new setting. In the first term of my MA programme, I tried out almost the same strategies that I had previously used when I was studying in Syria, such as reading every page of an article several times and trying to memorise some sentences by heart, along with checking the meaning of nearly every new word in a text. The use of these strategies in the UK led me to use up a lot of time, and sometimes I gave up socialising in non-academic settings to finish my postgraduate assignments. These were almost the only strategies that I knew of until I came across Language Learning Strategies: What Every Teacher Should Know by Rebecca Oxford (1990), as one of the set texts recommended by the module tutor in the second term of my MA programme. At that time, I recognised that I needed to use different strategies because many of the previous ones were no longer valid in the new learning setting with a learner-centred approach. My language learning experiences taught me a valuable lesson, namely that we need to develop sound strategies appropriate to the situation and the task at hand, to go alongside our changing learning goals. This is because there is almost nothing we cannot learn with sufficient effort and determination, although different contextual conditions (e.g. teachers’ teaching practices and parents’ level and manner of involvement) can leave their mark in this regard.

Introduction 

5

1.3 An Outline of the Present Study

Drawing on a sociocultural language learning research perspective, this book presents a longitudinal, multiple case study of eight Arab students as they endeavour to complete master’s degrees in a variety of disciplines through the medium of English, and are thus confronted with the issue of enhancing their English capability while dealing with the content of their degrees and attempting to build new social networks. The book addresses the dynamism and context sensitivity of the strategic learning efforts and future visions of these students from the date of their arrival in the UK till the end of their MA courses, taking account of their previous language learning experiences in their Arab homelands. Related to this, the participants’ constant interactions with a myriad of situated contextual realities (e.g. social agents, assessment modes and the availability of technological tools) were particularly examined. Eight participants took part in the study: five male and three female. They were Arab Muslims, and Arabic was their native language. They came from the following Arab countries: Iraq, Libya, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Syria and the United Arab Emirates, and their ages ranged between 23 and 28 years. None of them had lived outside the Arab region before their arrival in the UK. Moreover, all of the participants were unknown to me before the data collection stage. They came to pursue their postgraduate studies in the UK in the same area as their undergraduate specialisation. I gained initial access to the participants with help from the director of the pre-sessional preparatory English course that the students attended. The vignettes of each participant’s biography, constructed from their short written accounts of their past English learning experiences and their first interview data, are presented in Appendix 1. Due ethical procedures were followed to obtain the informed consent of the participants. At the beginning of each interview, the participants were reminded that their involvement was optional, and that they had the right to withdraw from the study at any point without any negative repercussions. They were also given the opportunity to raise any queries. The participants’ verbal permission to digitally record their speech for later transcription was also obtained and they were reminded of this at the start of each interview. The participants were given pseudonyms to protect their identities; their profiles are provided in Table 1.1. Along with supplementary methods (i.e. email correspondence and written narratives), 13 to 15 in-depth, one-to-one interviews were conducted with each participant at different stages of their sojourn in the UK. The interviews took place face-to-face in public areas; namely, the university library and coffee shops. This was primarily because the participants came from conservative societies and some of them, especially the women, could feel uncomfortable being interviewed in private places. Each interview lasted 1 hour to 1 hour 15 minutes (see Appendix  2 for

6  International Students’ Challenges, Strategies and Future Vision

Table 1.1  Demographic data of the participants Name

Gender Age

Educational Nationality background

Adnan

Male

23

Saudi

BA in Industrial Engineering

His father is a government clerk and his mother is a housewife

Waleed Male

23

Saudi

BA in Industrial Engineering

His father is a maths teacher and his mother is a housewife

Feras

Male

24

Syrian

BA in Dentistry

His father is a surgeon and his mother is an ophthalmologist

Osama Male

28

Libyan

BA in English Literature

His father is a judge and his mother is a housewife

Yazn

23

Jordanian

BA in Business and Management

His father is a senior administrator in a corporation and his mother is a maths teacher

Rawan Female 24

Syrian

BA in Agricultural Engineering

Both parents are farmers

Zahra

Female 24

Iraqi

BA in Business and Management

Her late father was an architect and her mother is a pharmacist

Haifa

Female 25

Emirati

BA in Gynaecology

Her father is a retired policeman and her mother is a housewife

Male

Family background notes

sample interview questions at each research phase). All the interviews were conducted in the participants’ language of choice. While Zahra (the Iraqi participant) chose English, all the other interviews were conducted in Arabic to help the participants express their ideas more deeply and freely. The interview transcripts were translated into English by another researcher who came from an Arab background. This longitudinal research consisted of four phases, lasting over 17 months (5 July 2013 to 12 November 2014): • Phase  1: This phase dealt with the participants’ earlier language learning experiences in their Arab homelands in their different settings, the strategies they used and their future ambitions. The findings from this research phase are presented in the second part of this book (Chapters  4 and 5). In this phase, the participants were first asked to write a short account about themselves and some of their English learning experiences along with the LLSs that they often employed in their Arab homelands. They were given a set of questions to help them to complete this written work (see Appendix  3). There were four subsequent rounds of individual semi-structured interviews with open questions. • Phase 2: This phase focused on the participants’ expectations, social networks and the academic and sociocultural challenges that confronted them from the moment they arrived in the UK to the end of the pre-sessional English course (i.e. the first three months of their stay in the UK). Phase  2 also explored the participants’ strategic

Introduction 

7

learning efforts and future visions. Chapter  6 provides the findings from this research phase. Two research methods were used: email exchanges and four in-depth interviews. Email correspondence was used to arrange times for the interview meetings with the participants, to send the translated data to them to be verified and to ask them to comment on a few points that were mentioned in the interviews but needed further illustration. • Phase  3: The focus of this research phase was on the participants’ language learning experiences, particularly in terms of their social networks, strategy use and motivational discourse in the first and second terms of their MA programmes. It constituted a critical part of the study, because the main reason for the participants’ coming to the UK was to obtain academic qualifications through the medium of English. Chapter 7 provides the findings from this research phase. During this phase, the participants were first asked to write an essay describing the challenges that they faced in their MA courses and the strategies they deployed to deal with these challenges. Then, four to five individual in-depth interviews were conducted with each participant. • Phase  4: This research phase addressed the challenges that the participants faced while working on their dissertations at a UK university, with special focus on their strategic learning efforts and future visions mediated by their dissertation supervisors and peers. For this purpose, two to three in-depth interviews were carried out with each participant. The findings from this research phase are presented in Chapter 8. An innovative aspect of this research was the strong personal relationships built between the participants and myself, in part due to the long-term nature of this longitudinal study. Additionally, as all of us were international students with an Arab background, this enabled the building up of trust and confidence, which, in turn, facilitated access to the participants’ views. As Jackson (2008: 61) cautions, however, a researcher may have biased interpretations if they are too familiar with a particular context or group of participants and do not engage in ongoing reflexivity. With this in mind, I continually sought to verify the participants’ experiential learning accounts with fresh eyes throughout the process of collecting and analysing data. When conducting interviews, I verified responses in previous interviews and also conducted member checks, that is, I gave the participants transcripts of their interviews to review and asked them to indicate if they accurately represented their perceptions and experiences. This also provided me with the opportunity to clarify any statements or ideas that were unclear to me. In order to lessen the probability of imposing my ideas and agenda on the participants and to more fully engage with their lifeworlds, when conducting the interviews, I followed

8  International Students’ Challenges, Strategies and Future Vision

the practical suggestions put forward by Ashworth and Lucas (2000) as follows: • make minimal use of questions prepared in advance; • use open-ended questions; • engage in empathetic listening to hear meaning, interpretations and understandings; • allow participants sufficient opportunities to discuss and reflect, and ask impromptu questions for clarification during the interview. Braun and Clarke’s (2013) systematic guidelines for conducting thematic analysis (TA) were adopted to analyse the semi-structured interviews with the participants. TA is ‘a method for identifying and interpreting patterns of meaning (themes) across qualitative data’ in rich detail (Braun & Clarke, 2013: 218). In order to familiarise myself with the data, I read and reread the transcripts ‘actively, analytically, and critically’ by considering both the surface and hidden meanings of the participants’ words (Braun & Clarke, 2013: 205). After a process of familiarisation, the data were coded to generate initial codes in relation to the focus of the study inquiry. For this purpose, a ‘selected reading approach’ (Van Manen, 1997) was used, meaning that as I read the transcripts, I highlighted the statements that seemed to capture the influences of diverse contextual factors on the participants’ strategy use and future visions. In order to enhance the reliability of the study, a ‘coder reliability check’ was used by sending the initial codes along with the participants’ transcripts to another coder after obtaining the participants’ permission. The second coder is a prominent researcher in the field of applied linguistics and familiar with Arabic. The other coder and I met five times to discuss and compare our coding processes. This led to the development of central themes for each research phase. Following this, subthemes within each theme were identified, after testing the tentative themes formed in the previous phase against the coded data and the entire data set. The themes and extracts that showed the participants’ in-depth experiential accounts of each research phase will be explained in Parts 2 and 3 of this book. 1.4 Audience

It is anticipated that this book will be of interest to a wide variety of readers in both foreign language and study abroad contexts. • Students and educators in EFL contexts may be informed by practical suggestions on how best practices for teaching/learning English can be properly nurtured inside and outside the classroom to formulate learners’ desired self-image.

Introduction 

9

• EFL students who are thinking of pursuing their higher studies abroad in English-speaking education systems can gain a wider perspective on understanding why international students in general seek to study abroad; how they manage the different challenges they confront; and how this impacts on their current strategy use, identities and future visions. • Module tutors, study abroad programme designers and policymakers in host institutions can better understand international students’ (especially Arab academic sojourners’) study abroad experiences in terms of their expectations, aspirations, diverse difficulties and the strategies they deploy to deal with these difficulties. This, in turn, may encourage these social actors to revise their attitudes and practices for supporting international students, especially the support they offer for the development of competence in academic English and social integration. • Researchers (especially those in the field of learning strategies) can benefit from reading this book to keep abreast of the latest developments in this area in the hopes of stimulating further research. Each chapter contains a valuable set of annotated further readings. 1.5 Structure of the Book

This book opens with a foreword kindly provided by Professor Jane Jackson, a leading scholar in the field of internationalisation in higher education. The book is divided into three main parts: Part  1 provides a detailed account of existing LLS research by discussing theoretical and methodological issues (Chapter 2), and then puts forward an argument for the importance of adopting socio-dynamic perspectives in LLS research (Chapter 3). These perspectives are informed by frameworks such as Activity Theory, the community of practice model and issues of investment and identity (Chapter  3). Chapter  2 offers a working definition that emphasises the dynamism and context sensitivity of the nature of learning strategies after explaining the failure to reach consensus on strategy definitions. Chapter  3 stresses that strategies are inevitably context-dependent and that they are always directed towards the achievement of specific learning goals. As strategies are dynamic and do not operate alone, a conceptual theoretical framework is proposed in Chapter 3 to capture language learners’ shifting strategy use, learning goals and motivations. Part  2 presents the findings from the first research stage about the research participants’ developmental processes in terms of their language learning experiences together with their strategic language learning efforts and how they envisioned their future in their Arab homelands. The focus of Chapter 4 is to create a picture of how household members (i.e. parents, siblings and foreign domestic helpers) can mediate EFL students’

10  International Students’ Challenges, Strategies and Future Vision

language learning experiences and their strategy use. Chapter  5 examines the impact of mainstream schooling and ‘shadow education’ (i.e. participation in private English tutoring outside formal classrooms and/ or fee-paying private schools) on EFL students’ strategy use and their motivation for learning/using English. The mediating role of formal social actors (English teachers, private tutors and classmates), material learning resources and assessment modes is particularly explored in Chapter 5. Chapters 4 and 5 conclude by offering some practical recommendations to be promoted in academic and/or non-academic settings in EFL contexts. Part 3 looks at the participants’ social interaction inside and outside the classroom, their changing strategy use and how they see their future during their entire stay in the UK, using experiential accounts collected from the second, third and fourth stages of the longitudinal qualitative study. The issue of international students’ isolation and lack of meaningful contact with host nationals is tackled in Chapters  6 and 7. Chapter  6 describes the process of change in the participants’ strategic learning efforts to handle the challenges confronted while undertaking a pre-sessional English (10 week) course before joining their postgraduate programmes in the UK. Chapter 7 captures the participants’ motivational discourse and strategies developed to manage the new demand of coursework assessment in English in the first and second terms of their MA programmes. Shifts in the importance of the participants’ social and material learning resources are also discussed in Chapter  7. Chapter  8 explores the participants’ challenges while working on their master’s dissertation in English, including their strategic learning efforts and future visions. The key role of dissertation supervisors and peers is particularly examined in this chapter. Each chapter in Part 3 ends by providing suggestions for international students who are considering pursuing their studies abroad in English-speaking education systems and for study abroad programme designers and teachers in the host country. This book ends with an epilogue written by Dr Carol Griffiths, a leading scholar in the field of learning strategies. In the epilogue, Dr Griffiths presents a synthesis of the main themes of the book and suggestions for future research.

Part 1 Theoretical Considerations

2 Has Language Learning Strategy Research Come to an End?

2.1 Introduction

This chapter provides an overview of language learning strategy (LLS) research and outlines the problems faced by LLS researchers as well as the future of LLS research. These problems have been largely associated with the theoretical inconsistencies and conceptual ambiguities concerning the construct of LLS, and the contradictory and questionable results obtained from the excessive use of survey methods as instruments to measure the use of LLSs. These problems, as Dörnyei and Ryan (2015) claim, have played a pivotal role in the decline in the significance of the LLS theoretical base. Each of these problems will be discussed in this chapter. It then examines the suggestions related to discarding LLS research by using self-regulatory capacity and self-regulation to replace the construct of LLS and strategic language learning. Finally, it responds to such suggestions by reporting recent developments in LLS research, and emphasises the salience of taking up a more qualitative and context-sensitive approach to capture language learners’ actual and dynamic use of learning strategies across time and space. 2.2 Definitional Issues

The history of the term ‘strategy’ dates back to ancient Greek times, when it was used to describe the plans used for winning a war (Trendak, 2015: 30). Despite its military connotations, the word ‘strategy’ has been applied in other fields, including business and education. In the field of second language (L2) education, researching LLSs has been associated with the long-standing problem of lack of clarity and consensus regarding matters of definition. Largely due to definitional confusion, the LLS concept is variously described in the literature as ‘fuzzy’ (Ellis, 1994: 529), ‘extremely fluid’ (Gu, 2012: 348) and ‘elusive’ (Dörnyei & Ryan, 2015: 146; Wenden & Rubin, 1987: 7). The task of reaching a coherent agreement on the defining criteria for LLSs has been compared to ‘stumbling blindfold around a room to find a hidden object’ (Ellis, 1985: 88) and ‘trying to get an octopus into a box’ (Griffiths, 2018). Oxford (2017: 50) 13

14  Part 1: Theoretical Considerations

Table 2.1  Defining language learning strategies/learner strategies/strategic Definition

Source

Strategies: ‘the conscious actions that learners take to improve their language learning’.

Anderson (2005: 757)

Learning strategies: ‘thoughts and actions used by students to assist their own learning… they are usually explicit, conscious and goaldriven’.

Chamot (2011: 31)

Learner strategies: ‘thoughts and actions, consciously chosen and operationalized by language learners, to assist them in carrying out a multiplicity of tasks from the very onset of learning to the most advanced levels of target-language (TL) performance’.

Cohen (2012: 136)

Strategies: are ‘either consciously or semi-consciously chosen by a language learner, operate somehow on a continuum between being intentionally deliberate and fully automatic, are purposeful and goal-directed and can be enhanced through instruction’.

Gregersen and MacIntyre (2014: 148)

Learning strategies: actions chosen by learners (either deliberately or automatically) for the purpose of learning.

Griffiths (2018)

Language learning strategies: ‘the learner’s consciously chosen tools for active, self-regulated improvement of language learning’.

Oxford et al. (2014: 30)

Language learner strategies: ‘processes and actions that are consciously deployed by language learners to help them to learn or use a language more effectively’.

Rose (2015: 421–422)

Learning strategies: ‘any thoughts, behaviours, beliefs, or emotions that facilitate the acquisition, understanding, or later transfer of new knowledge and skills’.

Weinstein et al. (2000: 727)

asserts that the lack of consensus on certain aspects of LLSs has sparked battles on the pages of many published papers, and created ‘an unruly, confusingly tangled garden, in which definitions run wild and rarely take coherent shape across studies’. As a consequence, Cohen (2018: 32) suggests that LLS definitions ‘should clarify, not obfuscate. It helps move the action along into the realm of practice to use definitions that lay language learners can understand’. Table 2.1 lists some definitions of the term LLSs and related terms, such as ‘learner strategies’ and ‘strategic’ suggested by some high-profile researchers in educational psychology. Although the definitions in Table 2.1 seem logical and comprehensive, they leave several issues open. Ellis (2008) and Macaro (2006), for instance, show that there are four major problems with the construct of LLS: (1) The first problem is related to the nature of LLSs in terms of whether they should be seen as unobservable mental operations such as selective attention, or observable behaviour such as seeking out a conversation partner and taking notes in a lecture, or both. Stevick (1990: 144) calls this problem ‘the Outside-Inside Problem’, which suggests that there is ‘no clear relationship between external acts and the mental constructs to which they are attributed’. Grenfell and Macaro (2007: 18) suggest that it is difficult and atheoretical to

Has Language Learning Strategy Research Come to an End?  15

suggest that inner cognitive operations and overt behaviour can be condensed within a single concept, i.e. LLS. Considering the definitions of LLS in Table 2.1, many LLS researchers tend to locate LLSs in two domains, that is, observable behaviours and mental processes. However, the concern of Anderson’s (2005: 757) and Griffiths’ (2018) definitions seems to be with the overt behaviours practised by learners through using the word ‘actions’. Elsewhere, Griffiths (2013: 15) defines LLSs as ‘activities consciously chosen by learners for the purpose of regulating their own language’. The term ‘activities’ used by Griffiths (2013) can include both ‘physical and mental behaviour’. Addressing this point, Gregersen and MacIntyre (2014: 147) suggest that in spite of any apparent differences in defining the term LLS, almost all LLS researchers agree with Rubin’s (2013) argument that ‘LLSs are what learners DO’ – whether that ‘doing’ is a mental or physical activity. Some LLS researchers who adopt cognitivist psychology approaches have attempted to address the interrelationship between observable behaviours and mental thoughts by replacing ‘behaviours and thoughts’ with more general terms such as ‘tools’ (Oxford et al., 2014: 11), ‘methods’ (Bialystok, 1978: 71) and ‘approaches’ (O’Malley & Chamot, 1990: 7). However, this leads to another problem in defining LLS which Ellis (2008) refers to; namely, whether LLSs are broad, general approaches to learning or specific actions or devices. (2) The second problem with the concept of LLS is the dimension of behavioural specificity-generality. That is, the problem is whether LLSs should be kept at a more flexible and general level, or whether they need to be more specifically combined with other strategies to complete specific language tasks. Rubin (1975), for example, follows the less general perspective which claims that LLSs are used by ‘good language learners’ (GLLs) (see Section 3.2 in Chapter 3 for an elaboration of the concept of GLLs). The less general perspective of LLSs, as described by Gu (2012: 334), sees them as ‘skills’, ‘tactics’ or ‘techniques’. For Rubin (1975), LLSs are specific techniques or devices that learners employ to acquire knowledge, such as monitoring their own speech and making use of practice opportunities by seeking out native speakers or watching movies with a view to developing cultural understanding. Hence, Rubin (1975) claims that LLSs are both learnable and teachable forms. However, other researchers (e.g. Seliger, 1984; Stevick, 1990) suggest that some strategies identified by Rubin such as ‘having a strong drive’ or ‘being a willing guesser’ cannot be regarded as techniques or devices. Stern (1983) points out the importance of differentiating between ‘strategies’ and ‘techniques’. According to Stern (1983: 405), strategies are ‘general tendencies or overall characteristics of the approach employed by a language

16  Part 1: Theoretical Considerations

learner’, e.g. having a positive attitude towards the target language, whereas ‘techniques’ are the ‘particular forms of observable learning behaviour’ used by a learner, e.g. looking up words in a dictionary. Goh (1998: 125), in turn, differentiates between strategies and tactics, stating that the former represent a general approach to learning, whereas the latter are specific observable actions. However, Griffiths (2013: 44) and Oxford (2011: 31) criticise this flexible and general perspective on the grounds that the term LLS becomes similar to the concept of language learning styles. Echoing the problem of the specificity-generality of LLSs, Takać (2008: 43) points out that the confusion between strategies and tactics/techniques can be overcome by using ‘the term individual LS to refer to the kind of behaviour Stern calls techniques’. In this respect, Cohen (2011, 2018) emphasises the potential of choice as a fundamental criterion for distinguishing strategic behaviour from other non-strategic processes. Griffiths (2018) is another who argues that strategies are essentially chosen by learners, since it would be difficult to force them to employ strategies against their will. This point relates to Ellis’ (2008) third issue about LLSs; namely, whether or not the choice of LLS is conscious. (3) The third problem is how conscious and attentive to language activities should language learners be to consider their activities as strategies. In reviewing the literature on consciousness and attention, Dörnyei (2009: 132–135) points out that consciousness is ‘a notoriously vague term’, and that attention actually entails ‘a variety of mechanisms or subsystems, including alertness, orientation, detection, facilitation, and inhibition’. With this in mind, Cohen (2011: 11) declares that if a learning activity is automatically carried out by a learner, it should not be regarded as a ‘strategy’, because the learner is likely to be unaware of the importance of carrying out that activity or describing it through a verbal report, and thus the activity loses its salience as a strategy. Like Cohen (2011, 2012, 2018), Oxford (2011: 51; 2017: 176) stresses that ‘when the strategy has become automatic through extensive practice, it is no longer a strategy but has instead been transformed into… an unconscious habit’ (author’s emphasis). The concept of ‘habit’, as described by Oxford (2017: 176), stands for ‘an action that was formerly effortful but has become unconscious, automatic, and habitual’. Oxford (2017: 177) further contends that it is possible for automatic, unconscious behaviour to become a conscious strategic action again through the use of various awareness-raising techniques, including strategy questionnaire completion, think-aloud procedures, diaries and class discussions. Table 2.1 explains that unlike Gregersen and MacIntyre (2014) and Griffiths (2018), many LLS researchers (e.g. Anderson, 2005; Chamot, 2011; Cohen, 2011, 2012, 2018; Oxford, 2011, 2017; Oxford et al., 2014; Rose, 2015) believe that the conscious element is essential

Has Language Learning Strategy Research Come to an End?  17

in defining the concept of LLS. In her recent work, Griffiths (2018) has responded extensively to the argument for the inclusion of being conscious as essential in some authors’ definition of LLSs. Griffiths’ (2018) argument makes the following points: • The term ‘conscious’ has not been precisely defined, even in the medical field. Griffiths (2018) indicates that we cannot learn anything without thinking or knowing what is happening around us. She concurs with McLaughlin’s (1990: 617) suggestion that the use of the terms ‘conscious’ and ‘unconscious’ should be abandoned because they are very ambiguous and have ‘acquired too much surplus meaning’. • Griffiths (2018) also expresses her doubts about Oxford’s (2011, 2017) claim that not all habitual actions are strategic (i.e. they are dichotomous). In this regard, Griffiths (2018) questions how do we pinpoint the point at which a strategy becomes a habit? She claims ‘this is an impossibility, surely, meaning that the distinction is unfalsifiable or “prescientific” (McLaughlin, 1990, p. 617)’. • According to Griffiths (2018), when we carry out an action automatically/habitually, it does not always mean that we do not recognise its goal or significance. Much of our regular behaviour (including our learning behaviour) is habitual. We automatically select strategies that we know, without having to think about them too much. It is the sign of an experienced, effective learner in which they do not need to waste time and brain power doing it every time. In other words, expert learners often select their strategies automatically, but if they are asked to describe their strategies, they can verbalise their reasons. Griffiths (2018) gave her morning routines as an example. She indicated that although she barely has to think about her morning routines as a result of repeated practice, the strategies she deploys in the morning to get to work on time have been carefully chosen and orchestrated. • Griffiths (2018) points out that strategies operate on a continuum from deliberate to automatic. A novice learner will choose strategies carefully and deliberately, but with practice, this selection process may become so automatic that they may scarcely be aware of it. However, the learner can revert to a deliberate mode any time they want to. Griffiths (2018) refers to other strategy researchers who agree with her. Gregersen and MacIntyre (2014: 148), for example, indicate that strategies ‘operate somewhere on a continuum between being intentionally deliberate and fully automatic’. Similarly, Gu (2012: 312) suggests that although the initial strategy selection is ‘intentionally done… the skilful execution of a strategy is done automatically’. (4) The final issue concerns learners’ motivation for using strategies, i.e. ‘what learning strategies are for’. Guided by Anderson’s (1985) cognitive information processing theory based on the idea of transforming declarative conscious knowledge into automatic procedural knowledge, Anderson (2005), Chamot (2011), Cohen (2012, 2018), Oxford

18  Part 1: Theoretical Considerations

et al. (2014) and other LLS researchers seem to believe that LLSs that activate mental processes can contribute greatly to fostering language learning (see Table 2.1). This idea is touched on by Weinstein et al. (2000: 727), who state that the use of LLSs can help learners select, acquire, organise and integrate new knowledge. Cohen (2012) and Rose (2015), in turn, appear to place greater emphasis on the role of LLSs in improving proficiency in learning and using a language and completing specific learning tasks, agreeing that the learning goal should be formulated by learners themselves. The definitions of LLSs in Table 2.1 suggest that most LLS researchers adopt a cognitive approach, which treats language learning as a set of mental processes (e.g. perceiving, analysing, classifying, storing and retrieving) whereby learners deal with input and output. In this view, LLSs are primarily conceived as mental activities directed towards successful language learning and/or use. That is, the purpose of using LLSs from a cognitivist psychology standpoint seems to be confined to learning vocabulary, grammar and pronunciation. As Canagarajah (2006: 20) aptly puts it, LLSs are defined ‘at the most micro level of consideration in somewhat individualistic and psychological terms’, so they may ‘lack direction without a larger set of pedagogical principles’. As a consequence, some sociocultural strategy researchers (e.g. Gao, 2006a, 2010; Gu, 2012; Hajar, 2016; Norton & Toohey, 2001; Palfreyman, 2003, 2011) have stressed the need to consider the impact of mediation and socialisation on language learners’ language strategy use, learning goals and identity formation and development. We shall return to this matter later in this chapter and Chapter 3, when we examine the response to calls to move away from LLS research. 2.3 Issues of Categorisation

One of the outstanding contributions of LLS research is the shift from focusing on the methods and products of language teaching to being concerned with ‘explaining the variability in success among L2 learners, sought to describe the characteristics and practices of successful language learners in the hope of understanding them and passing them on to less successful learners’ (Plonsky, 2011: 995). In order to establish the relationship between language learners’ strategy use and their learning success, strategy researchers developed various taxonomies and inventories of LLSs. This section discusses three major strategy inventories suggested by Dörnyei (2005), O’Malley and Chamot (1990) and Oxford (1990). O’Malley and Chamot’s (1990: 99) framework has 26 strategy items and 3 categories: cognitive, metacognitive and socioaffective strategies. According to O’Malley and Chamot (1990: 44), cognitive strategies ‘operate directly on incoming information, manipulating it in ways that enhance learning’. This category includes strategies such as auditory

Has Language Learning Strategy Research Come to an End?  19

representation (i.e. keeping a sound or sound sequence in the mind), elaboration (i.e. relating new information to prior knowledge), grouping (i.e. classification of words or concepts according to their meanings or attributes), imagery (i.e. the use of visual images to understand and remember new information), making inferences, note-taking, resourcing (i.e. making use of language materials such as dictionaries) and summarising. Metacognitive strategies are ‘higher order executive skills that may entail planning for, monitoring, or evaluating the success of a learning activity’ (O’Malley & Chamot, 1990: 45). Examples of this category are selective attention (i.e. paying attention to specific parts of the language input), self-management (i.e. arranging appropriate conditions for learning such as sitting at the front of the class), advanced organisation (i.e. planning the learning activity in advance by reviewing before going to class), self-monitoring (i.e. checking one’s performance as one speaks), self-assessment (i.e. checking how well one is doing against one’s own standards) and self-reinforcement (i.e. giving oneself rewards for success). Thus, language learners usually use metacognitive strategies to manage, direct, regulate and guide their learning. Socioaffective strategies involve interaction with others or taking control of one’s own feelings concerning language learning. This category in O’Malley and Chamot’s (1990: 99) taxonomy comprises three items: questioning for clarification, cooperation and self-talk. Although O’Malley and Chamot’s (1990) taxonomy has provided a theoretical background for much of LLS research (Grenfell & Macaro, 2007: 16), Dörnyei and Skehan (2003: 445) criticise this strategy inventory due to its ‘including diverse behaviours, such as cooperation, questioning and clarification, and self-talk within one class i.e. social/affective strategies’. Dörnyei (2005: 168) further suggests that the nature of the third category in O’Malley and Chamot’s (1990) classification appears to be ‘a miscellaneous category… introduced simply to accommodate all strategies that did not fit into the first two types’. Likewise, Hsiao and Oxford (2002) suggest that the explanatory power of the taxonomy would increase if the category ‘social/affective strategies’ was divided into two categories, i.e. ‘social and affective strategies’. Oxford (2011: 173) elsewhere proclaims that adopting Anderson’s (1985) cognitive information processing theory as the basis of O’Malley and Chamot’s (1990) framework limits the focus to cognitive and metacognitive strategies. O’Malley and Chamot (1990) themselves acknowledge this: Affective strategies are of less interest in an analysis such as ours which attempts to portray strategies in a cognitive theory. For the purposes of discussion, however, we present a classification scheme that includes the full range of strategies identified in the literature. (O’Malley & Chamot, 1990: 44)

20  Part 1: Theoretical Considerations

Recognising the weaknesses of the previous LLS taxonomies, Oxford (1990) produced her own classification by drawing a distinction between direct and indirect strategies, which are further subdivided into six subcategories (memory, cognitive, compensation, metacognitive, affective and social). The LLSs that directly involve learning the target language include memory, cognitive and compensation strategies. Memory strategies are used for remembering and retrieving information and include creating images, repeatedly pronouncing or writing new words to remember them or making associations with what has already been learned (Oxford, 1990: 37). Cognitive strategies are often employed for understanding and producing the language such as using English computer games, listening to radio/CDs in English and finding similarities between the first and target languages. Compared with memory strategies, the purpose of cognitive strategies is not simply memorisation, but deeper processing and use of language. Compensation strategies are ‘for using the language despite knowledge gaps’ such as using gestures or body language (for speaking), making guesses based on the context (for listening and reading) and rephrasing (for speaking and writing) (Oxford, 1990: 38). Oxford’s (1990) classification of direct LLSs concurs with the cognitive and metacognitive strategies in O’Malley and Chamot’s (1990) taxonomy. Oxford’s (1990: 11–12) indirect LLSs include metacognitive, social and affective strategies, which ‘contribute indirectly but powerfully to learning’. In other words, indirect strategies pertain to the management of learning by regulating thoughts and feelings. Oxford (1990), in her strategy taxonomy, breaks down O’Malley and Chamot’s (1990) socioaffective category into two categories, social and affective, and more strategies are included within her two categories. Her affective strategies include learners’ recognition of their feelings and learning circumstances, by taking risks or trying to relax when feeling anxious about learning, whereas social strategies help the learner deal with the people and surrounding environment by asking someone to speak slowly, for instance, and learning about social or cultural norms. Oxford (2001: 167) elsewhere affirms that the boundaries between the six categories in her taxonomy might be ‘fuzzy’ because learners sometimes deploy more than one strategy simultaneously. For example, the metacognitive strategy of planning requires reasoning which might also be considered a cognitive strategy. Reviewing different LLS classification systems, Hsiao and Oxford (2002: 372) argue that Oxford’s (1990) is ‘the most comprehensive, detailed and systematic taxonomy of strategies’ because it involves ‘the whole learner’ by taking into account learners’ affective and social aspects rather than just focusing on their mental capabilities. Notably, Oxford’s (1990) strategy classification is used as the basis for ‘the most widely used instrument in language learner strategy research’, the Strategy Inventory

Has Language Learning Strategy Research Come to an End?  21

for Language Learning (SILL) (Yesilbursa & Ipek, 2013: 888). Oxford’s (1990) SILL will be described in the following subsection. Dörnyei (2005) points out two essential problems with Oxford’s 1990 LLS classification. The first is that it contains compensation strategies related to language use rather than language learning, and these two processes (i.e. language learning and language use) ‘are so different in terms of their function and their psycholinguistic representation that they are best kept separate’. The second problem has to do with separating cognitive strategies from memory strategies, because the latter should be regarded as ‘a subclass of cognitive strategies’ as demonstrated by Purpura’s (1999) empirical study (Dörnyei, 2005: 168). This separation, as Gu (1996: 18) notes, brings ‘more confusion than illumination’. Consequently, Dörnyei (2005: 169) suggests a four-component classification of LLSs (cognitive, metacognitive, social and affective) by excluding compensation strategies from the scope of LLSs. Dörnyei’s (2005: 169) four main components of LLSs are: (1) cognitive, including ‘the manipulation and transformation of the learning materials’ (e.g. repetition, using imaging); (2) metacognitive, involving higher-order strategies aimed at analysing, monitoring, evaluating and organising one’s own learning process; (3) social, involving interpersonal behaviours aimed at increasing the amount of L2 communication (e.g. initiating interaction with native speakers, cooperating with peers); and (4) affective, involving control of the emotional conditions and experiences. Although Oxford (1990: 17) agrees that LLS ‘classification conflicts are inevitable’, Oxford (2011: 90–91) believes that excluding compensation strategies from LLS classification seems to be inappropriate, given that it might be difficult to separate language learning from language use because learning can only be accomplished through use, such as through meaningful communication. As can be seen, over the years there has been little consensus in the area of strategy categorisation, and repeated attempts to classify strategies have been ‘fraught with contradictions’ (Woodrow, 2005: 91). Faced with the inability to make neat and universally agreed categories of strategy classification, as discussed above, the research reported in Parts 2 and 3 of this book followed Griffiths’ (2013: 44–45) advice by reporting the patterns of strategy use displayed in the data in accordance with ‘the particular learners, situations and goals involved and the purpose for which the research is being carried out’. More precisely, the classification of the participants’ strategy use across different settings was based on ‘post hoc thematic analyses’ (i.e. on the participants’ experiential language learning accounts) rather than on any pre-existing classification system (Griffiths & Oxford, 2014: 3, authors’ emphasis). This is a practical solution for the moment. The participants’ strategy use in the present research was classified into ‘compulsory strategies’ and ‘voluntary strategies’ (for more elaboration of this distinction, see Section 3.5 in Chapter 3).

22  Part 1: Theoretical Considerations

2.4 Issues in Research Methodology

The development of strategy taxonomies contributed, as Oxford (2011: 160) argues, to the increasing use of survey methods in the LLS research community. Oxford’s (1990) SILL ‘has been the most widely used instrument for assessing language learning strategy use’ (Dörnyei & Ryan, 2015: 157). Oxford’s (1990) SILL is a structured, self-reporting questionnaire designed to measure learners’ reported frequency of use of LLSs, rather than ‘a specific portrayal of the strategies used by the learner on a particular language task’ (Oxford, 1999: 114). SILL has two basic versions: one for learners of English as a second or foreign language (50 items) and one for speakers of English learning other target languages (80 items). Furthermore, SILL has five Likert scale responses for each strategy item, ranging from ‘never or almost never true of me’ to ‘always or almost true of me’ (Oxford, 1999: 114). Some of these strategy items are more general (e.g. ‘I look for patterns in the new language’) while others are more specific (e.g. ‘I try to notice my language errors and find out the reasons for them’). Oxford (2011: 160) indicates that approximately 10,000 learners around the world have used SILL, which has been translated into many languages, such as Arabic, Chinese, German, Japanese, Korean and Portuguese. The lion’s share of learning strategy research in the past has involved the use of questionnaires, especially Oxford’s (1990) theoretical framework in both English as a second language (ESL) and English as a foreign language (EFL) environments (Rose et  al., 2018). For example, almost all previous LLS empirical published studies on strategy use among Arabic-speaking students learning English (e.g. Ababneh, 2013; El-Dib, 2004; Kaylani, 1996; Khalil, 2005; Salem, 2006) have been conducted quantitatively, using Oxford’s SILL. However, the quantitative paradigm used in a substantial body of LLS research has been criticised by many researchers (e.g. Dörnyei & Ryan, 2015; Gao, 2004; LoCastro, 1994; Rose, 2012; Rose et  al., 2018; Woodrow, 2005; Wray & Hajar, 2013). Three major criticisms are made by these researchers: (1) Strategy questionnaires tend to minimise the impact of contextual variations on language learners’ strategy use by attempting to use a particular strategy questionnaire in different sociocultural settings. According to Oxford and Burry-Stock (1995: 6), the purpose of using specific survey methods in different pedagogical contexts is to help strategy researchers compare the relevant findings from different studies. However, LoCastro (1995) challenges Oxford and Burry-Stock’s (1995) claim that SILL fits all sociocultural settings. To support her claim, LoCastro reported the contradictory results that she gained from the empirical study she conducted in 1994. For example, according to LoCastro (1994), Oxford’s (1990) SILL lacked

Has Language Learning Strategy Research Come to an End?  23

contextualisation, because the most frequent LLSs employed by her Japanese university participants of English were memory strategies, although SILL implies that these strategies are not likely to be used by all language learners. Another issue is that language learners might have difficulty understanding or accurately interpreting the strategy description in each item of the written questionnaires (Bremner, 1998: 494). For example, some items in Oxford’s (1990) SILL might not be clear to some learners of English where English is taught as a foreign language in their homelands, such as ‘acting out a new word or using flash cards’. A further example is that learners may become confused when responding to the following item in Oxford’s (1990) SILL: ‘I pay attention when someone is speaking English’, simply because learners might be unable to decide who ‘someone’ is. Related to this, Griffiths (2013: 47) notes that some of the key strategies mentioned by her participants during their interviews were not included in SILL. Examples of these ‘missing’ strategies were ‘looking new words up in a dictionary’, ‘reading newspapers’ and ‘keeping a notebook’. As a result, the validity of general strategy questionnaires used to measure learners’ strategy use may be questionable, simply because the survey tools do not appear to apply equally well to all learners irrespective of different educational and social backgrounds. In response to this criticism, Oxford (2011: 162) encourages strategy researchers to adapt questionnaire items to suit their local research contexts, by leaving a space for the participants to write down additional strategies. For her, Lee and Oxford’s (2008) empirical study is a good example of adding extra, open-ended questions to Oxford’s (1990) SILL to provide indepth, qualitative data. (2) The difficulty of ascertaining if strategy questionnaires measure what they purport to measure and do so consistently. As Jiang and Cohen (2012: 33) state, most strategy questionnaires focus primarily on the frequency of learners’ strategy use, rather than on the quality or effectiveness of their use, as they invite language learners to respond to a frequency scale, ranging from ‘never or almost never’ to ‘always or almost always’. Dörnyei and Ryan (2015: 142) further argue that strategy questionnaires appear to be psychologically flawed and not ‘cumulative’. This is because of the potential presence of a non-linear relationship between individual item scores and total scale scores. For instance, a learner may not be a good memory strategy user in general, but may score highly on some items in the memory scale (e.g. using rhymes or a combination of images and sounds to remember a new word). Like Dörnyei and Ryan (2015), Ehrman et  al. (2003) recognise that using several strategies is not necessarily an indicator of being an able strategy user, because some advanced learners may use very

24  Part 1: Theoretical Considerations

few learning strategies to perform a specific task. Echoing this point, Yamamori et  al. (2003: 384) state that ‘low reported strategy use is not always a sign of ineffective learning. Moreover, reportedly high-frequency use of strategies does not guarantee that the learning is successful’. For example, one of the findings of Hong-Nam and Leavell’s (2006) quantitative study of 53 ESL learners from different cultural backgrounds enrolled in an intensive college English programme was a curvilinear relationship between the participants’ strategy use and their language performance, as measured by their test of English as a foreign language (TOEFL) scores. Their study revealed that participants at the intermediate level reported more LLS uses than those at the beginner or advanced levels. Likewise, Phillips’ (1991) study of 141 ESL learners at American universities reported a non-linear relationship between ESL learners’ use of strategies and their language proficiency, as measured by TOEFL scores. Oxford (2011: 160) acknowledges that it might be preferable to conduct interviews with advanced learners, rather than ask them to respond to a questionnaire, because such learners can ‘automatize many of their cognitive or metacognitive strategies, creating unconscious habits’. Rose (2015: 429) also indicates that modifying a questionnaire to fit local research contexts should be triangulated with qualitative research methods such as interviews or observation, in order to capture more aspects and dimensions of the language learning behaviour of learners. (3) Strategy questionnaires also create the impression that language learners’ strategy use is a static ‘variable’ by focusing on the frequency and expressed preferences of learners’ strategy use, rather than on the dynamic and fluid nature of their strategy use and development over time and space. As a result, Ellis (2004: 527) assumes that learners could be incapable of responding appropriately to the item ‘I ask questions in English’ simply because the strategic learning behaviour adopted by a learner can vary ‘dynamically according to context’. Notably, language learners may claim to use strategies they do not actually employ, since the processes of learning, as Grenfell and Harris (2017: 10) note, lie within the ‘black box’ of the brain. Based on the aforementioned discussion, over-dependence on strategy questionnaires in LLS studies has encouraged some LLS researchers (e.g. Dörnyei & Ryan, 2015; Gao, 2004, 2010; Palfreyman, 2003) to be suspicious about the findings of studies that correlate learners’ strategy use with other factors such as motivation, learning style or learning beliefs. Their claim is based on the assumption that these studies provide a decontextualised, unchanging and incomplete picture of language learners’ strategic learning behaviour by merely examining language learners’ frequency of strategy use, and underestimating the importance of both contextual variations and task

Has Language Learning Strategy Research Come to an End?  25

influence. This has lent support to the concept that sociocultural approaches can provide a useful lens to capture the dynamic and complex nature of LLS, using qualitative methods. This point relates to sociocultural perspectives in language education, and is further explained in the next chapter. 2.5 Movements towards Self-Regulation

These weaknesses related to the field of LLSs have encouraged some language learning researchers (e.g. Dörnyei, 2005; Dörnyei & Ryan, 2015; Dörnyei & Skehan, 2003; Ortega, 2009; Tseng et  al., 2006) to adopt a ‘sceptical and dismissive’ position concerning the potential of LLS research (Grenfell & Macaro, 2007: 25). Dörnyei and Skehan (2003: 610), for instance, abandoned the construct of LLS altogether in their research studies. They recommend a ‘more versatile concept of self-­regulation’ (Dörnyei & Skehan, 2003: 611). The detractors of LLS research find the notion of ‘self-regulation’ (e.g. Dörnyei, 2005; Ortega, 2009; Tseng et  al., 2006) a more dynamic concept because it explains learners’ strategic efforts to manage their personal learning processes, especially how to plan, monitor, focus on and evaluate their own learning. Accordingly, language learners’ self-regulatory capacity and their cognitive processes may be captured. Dörnyei’s (2009: 183) trenchant critique of LLS research is unequivocally pessimistic, seeing learners’ activities as ‘idiosyncratic self-regulated behaviour, and a particular learning behaviour can be strategic for one learner and non-strategic for another’. For example, some learning activities such as repetition, note-taking and rote memorisation might appear to be strategic for a learner whose main goal is to pass an exam, but these activities are arguably less useful to learners whose central aim is to communicate with native speakers of the target language. Consequently, an activity can be strategic when it addresses an individual learner’s learning purposes in a specific learning setting, and this, in turn, may negate the use of strategy questionnaires, as they are chiefly designed to describe learners’ strategy use in a general way. More recently, Dörnyei and Ryan (2015: 142) indicated that none of the most prolific and/or prominent researchers in the field of LLSs (e.g. Cohen, 2011; Cohen & Macaro, 2007; Griffiths, 2013; Oxford, 2011) has adequately responded to the theoretical and methodological concerns pertinent to LLS research in their recent writings. Dörnyei (2005: 191) even questions whether LLSs actually exist as a psychological construct, and hence, he suggests using the term ‘self-regulation’ instead. In an insightful review of LLS research, Phakiti (2003: 680) also points out that much LLS research embraces cognitive psychology approaches that focus on the traits of language learners’ strategy use by using strategy questionnaires. LLS as a trait represents a

26  Part 1: Theoretical Considerations

decontextualised and fixed picture of learners’ strategy use across all occasions (Hong & O’Neil, 2001: 187). Therefore, Tseng et al. (2006: 82) question the viability of most LLS studies which seem to relate learners’ strategy use ‘to an underlying trait because items ask respondents to generalize their actions across situations rather than referencing singular and specific learning events’ (author’s italics). Tseng et  al. (2006: 81) argue for ‘a shift from focusing on the product – the actual techniques employed – to the self-regulatory process itself and the specific learner capacity underlying it’. To facilitate this new mode of inquiry, Tseng et  al. (2006) proposed the Self-Regulatory Capacity in Vocabulary Learning Scale (SRCvoc) to measure language learners’ underlying self-regulatory capacity that can result in strategy use. SRCvoc (see Table 2.2) is an instrument with 20 six-point Likert scale statements that indicate greater or lesser creative effort to control one’s own actions in vocabulary learning. The SRCvoc, as Tseng et al. (2006: 89) suggest, focuses on five broad aspects of self-regulation in vocabulary learning: commitment control, metacognitive control, satiation control, emotion control and environment control. Tseng et al. (2006) used confirmatory and exploratory factor analysis on data obtained from 172 (90 male; 82 female) Taiwanese senior high school final year students to show that their instrument had valid psychometric properties. The authors found that the reliability of SRCvoc is acceptable, and that the outputs of confirmatory factor analysis support the five-subscale structure, although the last subscale of environmental control was somewhat less useful. SRCvoc has appeared in a modest number of published studies. Mizumoto and Takeuchi (2011), for instance, embraced Tseng et  al.’s (2006) SRCvoc for use in Japan with undergraduate learners of English, and found the scale to be valid, albeit with a different factor structure, which they attributed to cultural Table 2.2  Illustration of Tseng et al.’s (2006) Self-Regulating Capacity in Vocabulary Learning Scale (SRCvoc) Dimensions of volitional action control

Item illustration

Commitment control: Focusing on outcome goals

‘When learning vocabulary, I believe I can achieve my goals more quickly than expected’.

Metacognitive control: Reducing procrastination or distraction and increasing concentration

‘When it comes to learning vocabulary, I have my special techniques to prevent procrastination’.

Satiation control: Eliminating boredom and creating interest in the task

‘When feeling bored with learning vocabulary, I know how to regulate my mood in order to invigorate the learning process’.

Emotion control: Managing disruptive emotional states or moods

‘When I feel stressed about vocabulary learning, I know how to reduce this stress’.

Environmental control: Eliminating negative environmental influences and exploiting positive ones

‘When learning vocabulary, I know how to arrange the environment to make learning more efficient’.

Has Language Learning Strategy Research Come to an End?  27

differences. Commenting on Tseng et al.’s (2006) SRCvoc, Ortega (2009, 2011) encourages researchers to take the self-regulatory approach as a theoretical framework in order to understand language learners’ ‘creative and conscious efforts’ to control their own learning processes, rather than to focus on the sheer frequency of learners’ strategy use, which dominates the bulk of LLS research (author’s italics). Ortega (2009: 212) adds that embracing the self-regulatory approach as a theoretical framework enables language learning researchers to examine learners’ language learning motivation and strategic behaviour together with their cognition and affect in the same study. Following the same line of reasoning, Dörnyei (2006: 59) strongly values the ‘learner self-management (LSM)’ model proposed by Joan Rubin (2005), a leading LLS expert, because such a model can prompt language learning researchers to shift their focus from ‘the product (strategies) to the process (self-regulation)’. The construct of LSM, as indicated by Chamot (2005: 125) and Oxford (2011: 7), seems to parallel the notion of ‘self-regulation’ established in educational psychology. According to Rubin (2005: 37), LSM is concerned with ‘the ability to deploy [metacognitive strategic] procedures and to access knowledge and beliefs in order to accomplish learning goals in a dynamically changing environment’ (author’s italics). There are five procedures, namely ‘planning, monitoring, evaluating, problem identification/solving and implementing’ (Rubin, 2005: 37). Knowledge and beliefs has five components: ‘task knowledge, self-knowledge, beliefs, background knowledge, and strategy knowledge’ (Rubin, 2005: 41) (for a description of LSM, see Table 2.3). Table 2.3 shows that only the last component, strategic knowledge, relates to the traditional construct of LLS. For this reason, Dörnyei (2006: 59) regards Rubin’s (2005) LSM model as ‘a major extension of the traditional conceptualisation of L2 strategic learning’ and encourages other LLS experts to embrace Rubin’s ideas in their empirical studies. In other words, this model might appear to portray Rubin’s change in focus from identifying the characteristics of a ‘good language learner’ (i.e. focus on the outcome) to LSM (i.e. focus on the process), which fundamentally underscores the significance of metacognition as a prerequisite to language learners’ self-regulation. Following Rubin (2005), Oxford (2011), a prominent strategy researcher, has recently proposed a new model, ‘the Strategic Self-Regulation (S2R) Model of language learning’. This model has three dimensions: cognitive, affective and sociocultural-interactive. The cognitive dimension refers to strategies for remembering and processing linguistic content. An example of a cognitive strategy is ‘using the senses to understand and remember’. The affective dimension of Oxford’s S2R Model is linked to the emotions, beliefs, attitudes and motivation. Only two affective strategies are stated: ‘activating

28  Part 1: Theoretical Considerations

Table 2.3  Description of Rubin’s (2005) LSM framework Procedures

Planning

Contains four steps: Defining goals, setting criteria to measure goal achievement, task analysis and setting a timeline.

Monitoring

Learners notice any problems they might face such as ineffective application of one or more strategies.

Evaluation

Learners determine whether they have made appropriate progress.

Problem identification/solving

Learners identify some possible causes for their lack of success such as insufficient knowledge about the topic.

Implementation of problem-solution

Learners try out solutions to determine if they will lead to a better outcome.

Knowledge Task knowledge and beliefs

Refers to knowledge about task purposes (i.e. pedagogical or real-life goals), task demands (i.e. resources, knowledge, strategies) and their nature.

Self-knowledge

Knowledge about personal characteristics such as motivation, interest and learning styles.

Beliefs

One’s beliefs about language learning such as boys are not good at learning languages.

Background knowledge

There are several kinds of background knowledge including: domain, cultural, linguistic, contextual and world.

Strategy knowledge

Knowledge about what strategies are, why they are useful and when and how to use them.

supportive emotions, beliefs and attitudes’ and ‘generating and maintaining motivation’. The sociocultural-interactive dimension focuses on the importance of communication and cultural identity for language learning. An example of a sociocultural-interactive strategy is ‘interacting to learn and communicate’. Oxford’s (2011) S2R Model also identifies meta-strategies for each strategy dimension: metacognitive strategies, meta-sociocultural-interactive strategies and meta-affective strategies. These meta-strategies draw on six types of underlying metaknowledge: person knowledge, group/culture knowledge, task knowledge, wholeprocess knowledge, strategy knowledge and conditional knowledge. According to Dörnyei and Ryan (2015: 150), Oxford’s (2011) S2R Model acknowledges the need to integrate the principles of self-regulation to understand language learners’ strategic learning efforts. However, Dörnyei and Ryan (2015: 150) question the value of the S2R Model, given that the concept of LLSs was broadened in this model to include motivational and communication strategies; namely, ‘generating and maintaining motivation’ and ‘overcoming knowledge gaps in communicating’. Rose et  al. (2018: 158) also note that although Oxford’s (2011) S2R Model presents the interaction between the concepts of self-regulation and learning strategies, this model ‘has not yet been widely adopted, thus notions of integrated research approaches are still in their infancy’.

Has Language Learning Strategy Research Come to an End?  29

2.6 A Response to Calls to Move Away from Language Learning Strategy Research

Some researchers have challenged the vigorous attempts made by opponents of LLS research (e.g. Dörnyei, 2005; Dörnyei & Ryan, 2015; Ortega, 2009; Tseng et  al., 2006) to abandon the construct of LLS in research studies by exploring learners’ strategic learning in accordance with their self-regulatory capacity (e.g. Cohen, 2011; Gao, 2007; Griffiths, 2018; Gu, 2012; Oxford, 2017; Rose, 2012, 2015). In an illuminating paper, Gao (2007) critically addresses Tseng et  al.’s (2006) proposal to replace the construct of LLS with the notion of self-regulation by questioning whether introducing self-regulation into research into learners’ strategic learning marginalises LLS research. As already described, Tseng et  al. (2006) suggest that LLS research has run its course because most LLS studies have focused on describing learners’ strategy use, rather than on capturing the underlying processes. Tseng et  al. (2006: 81) also call on language learning researchers to examine ‘the self-regulatory process itself and the specific learner capacity underlying it’ (i.e. focus on the process). Gao (2007: 616) agrees with Tseng et  al.’s (2006) view that many LLS research studies have depicted the trait aspect of learners’ strategy use by relying heavily on task-free strategy questionnaires, which address language learners’ strategy preferences independently of any specific situation or task at hand. Nonetheless, Gao (2007: 616–617) points to two facets of language learners’ strategy operation, namely LLS as a trait and LLS as a state. The former symbolises learners’ general tendency to use certain kinds of LLSs ‘free from a particular context’ (Phakiti, 2006: 26), whereas states of learners’ strategy use signify ‘their actual deployment of strategies in different learning settings or contexts’ (Gao, 2007: 616). In this sense, LLS as a state can capture the dynamism of learners’ actual use of LLSs, according to particular situations or tasks. Similarly, Gao (2007) postulates that some LLS researchers have recognised the importance of presenting a contextualised and dynamic picture of learners’ strategy use. Hsiao and Oxford (2002), for instance, suggest the use of actual-task strategy questionnaires as an alternative approach to general learner strategy assessment. Actual-task strategy questionnaires ask respondents to fill out a questionnaire immediately after they complete a task in order to capture their dynamic strategy use in specific learning events. In this way, both the frequency and effectiveness of learners’ strategy use can be explored. Oxford et al.’s (2004) quantitative study of reading strategies with 36 ESL adult participants (14 male and 22 female) in the United States provides a rationale for task-based strategy research. Using a structured questionnaire about reading tasks with two levels of difficulty, Oxford et  al.’s (2004) study findings showed the influence of task on strategy use by showing how the learners employed different

30  Part 1: Theoretical Considerations

reading strategies at different levels of difficulty. The main limitation of actual-task-based questionnaires, however, is the difficulty of making comparisons across LLS studies because there is no ‘standardization of either tasks or follow up questionnaires’ (Chamot, 2004: 16). For this reason, some LLS researchers (e.g. Cohen et al., 2006; Paige et al., 2004) have developed hybrid strategy questionnaires based on the strategies that participants would be likely to use for a given task. This kind of questionnaire has its own weaknesses. For instance, participants might have difficulty accurately interpreting the meaning of items in written questionnaires or be confused by the following item in Cohen et  al.’s (2006) Language Strategy Use Survey: ‘try to predict what the other person is going to say based on what has been said so far’, simply because they might be unable to decide who ‘the other person’ is. In this regard, three types of strategy questionnaires can be distinguished: those that are based on participants’ general strategy use, those that invite participants to indicate what strategies they prefer to use for a given task and those that are fundamentally based on actual completed tasks (Oxford, 2011: 156–164). Gao (2007: 619) concludes his paper by claiming that the emergence of self-regulation does not necessarily mean that LLS research has come to an end, because Tseng et al. (2006) themselves acknowledge the fact that LLS is regarded as an important construct in language learners’ self-regulated learning. As Cohen (2011: 377) aptly puts it, the movement towards using the term ‘self-regulation’ in place of the LLS construct may leave an important question unanswered; namely ‘What do learners do to self-regulate? The answer is that they use strategies’. Therefore, Gao (2007: 619) recommends that language learning researchers embrace sociocultural approaches while investigating their learners’ strategy use, on the grounds that using qualitative or multi-method approaches underpinned by sociocultural language learning perspectives can reveal the ongoing interplay between learners’ actual strategy use and the underlying processes in specific contexts. This is discussed in the sociocultural perspectives of language learning in Chapter 3. In response to a scathing attack on the ‘theoretical muddle’ that Dörnyei and Skehan (2003: 610) argue the LLS field has been operating in, Cohen (2011) suggests that the concept of LLS is valid both theoretically and practically by referring to major developments in LLS research. Like Gao (2007), Cohen (2011: 377) claims that one of the key developments in the LLS field is the shift in focus to a more qualitative, context-sensitive approach, which sees learners’ strategy use as ‘dynamic and varying across contexts’. For example, the analysis of the experiential narratives of a group of Chinese learners of English in Gao’s (2006a) qualitative study found that his participants’ LLS use responded to their shifting contextual needs. That is, these participants mainly deployed repetition, note-taking and rote memorisation strategies in their Chinese learning context because these strategies helped

Has Language Learning Strategy Research Come to an End?  31

them pass exams, while addressing both their teachers’ recommendations and their cultural beliefs, implying that ‘a person can memorize a word if s/he repeats exposure to it [particularly visually] seven times’ (Gao, 2006a: 63). However, the intensity of the strategies applied by the participants in China decreased when they moved to the UK because of changes in the mode of assessment from the ‘authoritative’ standard exams in China to ‘coursework assessment’ through the medium of English in the UK (Gao, 2006a: 63). Related to this, the instrumental value of learning English merely to pass an exam decreased for these participants upon arrival in the UK. Based on this study, a more qualitative and contextualised approach to investigating learners’ LLS use may be favourable in LLS research. Following the same train of thought, Griffiths and Cansiz (2015: 474) claim that replacing strategies with self-regulation is unfeasible on the grounds that LLSs and self-regulation are interdependent. To support this argument, Griffiths and Cansiz (2015) affirm that even an early proponent of self-regulation, Winne (1995a), upholds the idea that language learners need to embrace a specific set of LLSs in order to self-regulate. Griffiths (2013: 6) too, points out that ‘the slippery strategy concept hangs on tenaciously and refuses to be so easily dismissed’. This is evidenced by its ongoing presence in the research literature (e.g. Cohen & Griffiths, 2015; Grenfell & Harris, 2017; Griffiths, 2018; Oxford, 2017; Oxford & Amerstorfer, 2018; Trendak, 2015). More recently, Dörnyei and Ryan (2015: 141) themselves conceded that many criticisms directed at LLS research ‘had lost their moral high ground because similar issues have also been raised about the more “respectable” ID [Individual Difference] counterparts of the concept (such as aptitude and motivation)’. As a result, Oxford (2017: 11) has welcomed the changing perspective of Dörnyei’s (2005) extreme credo that LLSs do not exist and thus LLS research needs to be cancelled entirely. Concerning the definition issues of LLS, some LLS researchers argue that the use of learner self-regulation instead of the construct of LLS might be a matter of ‘throwing the baby out with the bathwater’ (Rose, 2012: 1) or ‘mowing down the whole garden so that no further strategy research could occur’ (Oxford, 2017: 10). These researchers claim that the term ‘self-regulation’, in marked similarity to the term LLS, suffers from definitional fuzziness. More specifically, the construct of ‘self-regulation’ has been used more or less synonymously with different technical terms such as ‘self-management’ (Rubin, 2005, 2013); ‘autonomy’ (Oxford, 2011) and ‘self-direction’ (Pemberton & Cooker, 2012). Conflating the construct of self-regulation with other terms might prompt some researchers in the field of language learning to argue that there is no coherent agreement as to the exact nature of self-regulation. Cohen (2011), in fact, implicitly refers to this problem through differentiating between the concept of self-regulation and other terms such as

32  Part 1: Theoretical Considerations

‘self-management’ and ‘autonomy’. According to Cohen (2011: 34–35), ‘self-management’ is usually used to represent metacognitive strategies, which can be applied to any learning task (i.e. strategic knowledge) such as arranging suitable conditions for learning and seeking opportunities for practice. In contrast, ‘self-regulation’ includes both ‘the will (i.e., the motivation to use self-management) and the skill (i.e., the ability to use both metacognitive and task-specific learning strategies)’ (Cohen, 2011: 34–35). Cohen’s (2011) definition of the construct of self-regulation appears to fit Rubin’s (2005) definition of LSM as consisting of both procedures and knowledge. Gu (2012) follows a similar line of reasoning to that of Gao (2007) and Rose (2012), arguing that attempts to replace the term LLS with self-regulation are ‘not a healthy sign’ (Gu, 2012: 330). To support his point, Gu (2012) states that …conceptual fuzziness should not be a problem serious enough to overthrow forty years of research on language learning strategies. The argument is clear and straightforward: if not being able to agree on the definition of a Planet until 2006 does not in any way discredit the scientific nature of astronomy, or necessitate the removal of the concept of ‘planet’ altogether, why should we throw away a whole line of research on language learning strategies? In fact, the proposed alternative term ‘self-regulation’ or even a more general and key term ‘learning’ fall into the same fuzziness trap. (Gu, 2012: 331)

Although there is no generally accepted definition of the concept of LLS, some language learning researchers (e.g. Dörnyei & Ryan, 2015; Griffiths, 2013; Macaro, 2006) have supported the view that the key characteristics of LLSs should be highlighted rather than attempting to present a concise definition of LLSs. Griffiths (2013: 6), for instance, confidently asserts that ‘it is possible to identify the essential characteristics of language learning strategies and to incorporate them into a workable definition’. To clarify this point further, a brief description of Griffiths’ (2013: 6–7) defining characteristics of LLSs is provided in Table 2.4. It may be noted that although Griffiths’ (2013) key characteristics contribute to a more precise delineation of what is covered by strategic Table 2.4  Griffiths’ characteristics of language learning strategies Characteristic

Description

Activity

LLSs are what learners do, and thus they are usually expressed as verbs, either in the first person (i.e. I study English grammar) or as gerunds (i.e. revising regularly).

Choice

LLS are chosen with the learner’s active involvement.

Goal orientation

LLSs are goal oriented and purposeful.

Learning focus

LLSs are employed with learning in mind as opposed to communication.

Has Language Learning Strategy Research Come to an End?  33

behaviour, these characteristics along with many others identified by LLS researchers are still very much based on the notion of language learning as an individual, rather than a social activity. That is, the goal of using LLSs included in most definitions of LLS is confined to linguistic or sociolinguistic competence. Accordingly, less attention has been paid to the significance of the social, historical and political-economic situations in which a language learner is involved. Therefore, following an extensive review of the literature and the major criticisms addressed at the LLS field, I would like to suggest a working definition that stresses the dynamism and context-sensitivity of the nature of learning strategies: Learning strategies refer to an individual’s active engagement in the learning process within a particular situated setting to accomplish their proximal goals (i.e. to learn language for immediate gains) or/and ultimate ones (i.e. master language for academic/professional/national advancement)

In this definition, strategy use is not restricted to cognitive and metacognitive processes but extends to acknowledging the key role of situated contextual realities in mediating the choice and use of strategies. That is, the learner is aware of the strategies they are deploying. However, their own contextual conditions (e.g. the practices of their teachers and the availability of material resources) are likely to influence (not determine) their LLS choices and learning goals, which can vary from completing a learning task to passing an exam to mastering the target language as a means to increase their knowledge about their own specialisation and/ or respectable employment, for instance. Therefore, in addition to the importance of linguistic competence, language learning can be a bridge to help learners design a more privileged identity and achieve their ideal self-image related to professional and academic achievement, while benefiting their own native country and fellow citizens. This concept, related to the ‘ideal self’, will be described in more detail in the next chapter. 2.7 Conclusion

This chapter has presented a detailed description of the major challenges regarding LLS research since its inception. These challenges have been classified into two main categories: those of a conceptual nature and those of a methodological nature. Many of the criticisms of LLS research seem to be justified. In this chapter, the movement towards a clearer definition of strategic language learning has been supported by suggesting a working definition underpinned by sociocultural language learning perspectives, as will be examined in the next chapter. The discussion in this chapter has shown that over-dependence on task-free strategy

34  Part 1: Theoretical Considerations

questionnaires, especially Oxford’s SILL, appears to have reached something of an impasse, given that they merely depict learners’ expressed strategy preferences, and often paint a decontextualised, static picture of learners’ strategy use. Accordingly, recent reviews of LLS research have suggested that LLS research is not over, and call for more qualitative and holistic studies in order to reveal language learners’ intentional and dynamic deployment of LLSs according to different learning settings and changing language learning goals. As Rose et  al. (2018: 153) note, ‘there is consensus among most researchers that quantitative approaches need to be built upon richer qualitative data in order to fully understand the complexities of strategy use in context’. This chapter has supported this standpoint by stressing that exploring learners’ strategic language learning efforts from sociocultural language learning perspectives is not incompatible with movements towards self-regulation. Resources for Further Reading Dörnyei, Z. and Ryan, S. (2015) The Psychology of the Language Learner Revisited. New York: Routledge. In Chapter 6 of this book (pp. 140–170), Dörnyei and Ryan critically evaluate language learning strategy research. It is essential reading for novice researchers, as it questions many problematic facets of the field concerning definitions and classifications of LLSs, the instrumentation and the data collection procedures. The tone of the discussion about strategies in this chapter is much improved over the first edition that appeared in Dörnyei (2005). Griffiths, C. (2018) The Strategy Factor in Successful Language Learning: The Tornado Effect (2nd edn). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. In Chapter 1 of this book, Griffiths shares her beliefs about the way strategies should be understood and defined. She identifies key characteristics of learning strategies and incorporates them into a workable definition. Oxford, R.L. (2017) Teaching and Researching Language Learning Strategies: Self-Regulation in Context, Second Edition (Applied Linguistics in Action). New York: Routledge. In Chapter 1 of this book (pp. 7–64), Oxford examines the issues surrounding the theoretical challenges of learner strategy research. She presents a new definition of language learning strategies and discusses factors in reaching (or failing to reach) consensus on strategy definitions. Rose, H. (2012) Reconceptualizing strategic learning in the face of self-regulation: Throwing language learning strategies out with the bathwater. Applied Linguistics 33 (1), 92–98. This article acts as a good counterpoint to the claims made by opponents of LLS research such as Dörnyei (2005) and Tseng et  al. (2006). While the article concedes that self-regulation represents a significant emerging field, it remains an insufficient replacement for LLS research. A similar perspective can be found in Gao (2007), Gu (2012) and Wray and Hajar (2013).

3 Towards a Socio-Dynamic Perspective on Language Learning Strategy Research 3.1 Introduction

The previous chapter examined in detail the major challenges in language learning strategy (LLS) research since its inception. The challenges pertained to theoretical inconsistencies and conceptual ambiguities surrounding the concept of LLS, together with overdependence on questionnaires as often the sole instrument in LLS research. Task-free strategy questionnaires have essentially failed to capture the situated experiences of language learners and their actual and dynamic use of LLSs over time and space. Chapter 2 suggested a working definition of the construct of LLS, and emphasised the importance of taking a more qualitative and context-sensitive approach which views language learners’ strategy use as dynamic and varied according context. In this chapter, three broad directions of research on the relationship between LLSs and the ‘good language learner’ (GLL) will be explained. This will reveal the changing outlook with regard to what constitutes a GLL, followed by an examination of ‘the social turn’ in language learning research (Block, 2003, 2014) and the importance of adopting a socio-dynamic perspective to LLS research. As language learners’ strategy use is non-static and always directed towards a specific learning goal, a conceptual framework is proposed in this chapter to capture the intricate association between language learners’ learning goals, learning motivation and strategy use. The suggested framework is based on Dörnyei’s (2009) distinction between two possible selves (i.e. the ideal self and the ought-to self), Higgins’ (2000) distinction between the promotion and prevention aspects of instrumentality and my suggested distinction between compulsory (i.e. largely regulated by cultural beliefs and significant others) and voluntary (i.e. essentially internalised within the self) strategies. 3.2 ‘Good Language Learner’ Strategies: Criticism and Insights

One of the major challenges in the field of second language (L2) teaching and learning pertains to the noticeable variations in individuals’ 35

36  Part 1: Theoretical Considerations

linguistic accomplishments despite receiving similar amounts and quality of exposure to the target language. Some language learners appear to make more use of what they experience than others. This has led to a research concern with individual factors, in particular the LLSs they use, as a means of capturing how language learners contribute to their own language learning. The following discussion will review and describe the three main directions of research into the relationship between LLSs and the GLL. The first and second directions review the characteristics of the GLL from the cognitive perspective, which dominates the bulk of LLS research and supports the idea that language learning is an individual accomplishment and a GLL is the one who is internally motivated to learn the target language and has specific cognitive capabilities. As Parks and Raymond (2004: 375) show, success in language learning from a cognitive psychological standpoint is primarily ‘a matter of individual initiative, notably in terms of strategy use and personal motivation’. However, some researchers adopting socially oriented theoretical models (e.g. Darvin & Norton, 2015; Gao, 2010; Hajar, 2016; Lantolf, 2013; Morgan, 2007; Norton, 2013; Palfreyman, 2014) argue that the cognitive point of view paints an improvised portrait of a language learner by stressing the cognitive and metacognitive mechanisms, while paying scant attention to the relevance of the social, cultural, historical and political-economic situations in which an individual is situated. The discussion of the third direction of research on GLLs will explain this notion. 3.2.1 The first direction: Investigating the prototypical characteristics of GLLs

The initial spark for the LLS field came from the unsatisfactory results obtained by focusing merely on the methods and products of language teaching, suggesting that ‘good teaching automatically meant good learning’ (Cohen, 2011: 683). Therefore, some researchers in the mid-1970s became more interested in discerning the characteristics of the prototypical GLL that were believed to lead to their success in language learning. These researchers held the view that teaching the strategies deployed by GLLs to their less successful counterparts would enable the latter to find their own means to success. At that time, it was revolutionary to focus exclusively on language learners, since the perception of most language educators was that the focus needed to be primarily on teachers. As Gu (1996: 1) vividly puts it, LLS research ‘started off with the Robin Hoodian good will of breaking the secret behavioural codes of successful language learners and sharing them with the unsuccessful ones’. Joan Rubin (1975) is considered the first scholar to attempt to catalogue what GLLs were doing to improve their target language competence. Based on her observations of the language learning process of GLLs in English-speaking classroom contexts in California and Hawaii,

Towards a Socio-Dynamic Perspective on Language Learning Strategy Research  37

Rubin (1975: 44–47) generated the seven-strategy list she presumed to be essential for all ‘good L2 learners’: • • • • • • •

making reasoned guesses when not sure; being extroverted and uninhibited about mistakes; attending to form (for instance, by looking for patterns); paying attention to meaning (for instance, by attending to context); monitoring one’s own speech and that of others; willing to practise the target language whenever possible; having a strong drive to communicate and to learn through communication.

Other researchers worked along similar lines. Stern (1975: 316), for instance, identified 10 main strategy groups as the ‘features that mark out good language learning’ based on his observations, his own teaching and learning experience, his reading of the related literature and comparisons with Rubin’s list. Stern’s labelling system has been simplified and reduced by Griffiths (2018) as follows: • • • • • • • • •

experimenting; planning; developing the new language into an ordered system; revising progressively; searching for meaning; practising; using the language in real communication; self-monitoring; learning to think in the target language.

According to Griffiths (2018), although Stern’s work constituted a salient addition to the field of LLSs, his strategy groups were a rather confused mixture, with characteristics such as ‘active’, ‘tolerate’ and ‘outgoing’. In addition, Stern (1975) made no clear distinction between ‘strategy’ and ‘learning style’ in his list, and this, in turn, increased the difficulty of defining the term ‘learning strategy’. Following this, Naiman et  al. (1978) conducted the first empirical study of GLLs through carrying out interviews with 34 English-speaking students learning French in Canada. Based on their data, Naiman et al. (1978: 225) listed five broad strategies as ‘essential for successful language learning’: • adopting an active task approach (e.g. intensifying efforts where necessary, practising regularly and identifying problems); • developing the language as a separate system (e.g. making guesses about language and responding to clues); • using the language in real communication;

38  Part 1: Theoretical Considerations

• reviewing the target language performance and making adjustments; • managing the affective demands of language learning. The above discussion concurs with Grenfell and Harris’ (2017: 29) argument that the lack of agreement among the earliest works on the characteristics of GLLs casts doubt on the nature of ‘learning strategy’ in L2 learning (for more elaboration about the definitional problems with the construct of LLS, see Section 2.2 in Chapter 2). However, Chamot (2001) notes that six major GLL characteristics were often documented in the early LLS studies: The good language learner… is an active learner, monitors language production, practises communicating in the language, makes use of prior linguistic knowledge, uses various memorization techniques, and asks questions for clarification. (Chamot, 2001: 29)

Furthermore, early LLS researchers (e.g. Cohen, 1977; Naiman et  al., 1978; Politzer, 1983; Reiss, 1981; Rubin, 1975; Wenden, 1985) tended to support the view that GLLs use a larger number and a wider range of strategies than less successful learners, ‘inactive’ learners. This assumption is aptly articulated by Wenden (1985: 7), who states that ‘ineffective learners are inactive learners’ and that ‘their apparent inability to learn is, in fact, due to their not having an appropriate repertoire of learning strategies’. From this perspective, GLLs do not simply have the motivation to learn the target language, but they also tend to deploy a larger repertoire of LLSs than less successful learners. Hence, these early studies of the GLL are pedagogically oriented because it is believed that LLSs are ‘teachable’ (Oxford & Nyikos, 1989: 291), and that less effective learners may benefit from coaching in LLSs. The assumption of a single profile for a GLL has been criticised by many researchers (e.g. Dörnyei & Ryan, 2015; Lee & Oxford, 2008; Macaro, 2010; Stevick, 1990) mainly because only listing a repertoire of possible LLSs deployed by some GLLs appears to disregard language learners’ individual variation and their agency, i.e. ‘the human capacity to act on informed choices’ (Benson & Cooker, 2013: 7). As Grenfell (2000: 14) emphasises, ‘what works for one learner may not work for another’, especially since there is little information about the LLSs used by less successful individuals. Moreover, the actual language strategy behaviour of individuals can vary in accordance with the particular context and their linguistic level (Cohen & Macaro, 2007: 13). The difficulty of defining a universal set of LLSs, as Murphy (2008: 304) notes, is because ‘strategy use per se doesn’t necessarily lead to success’. Furthermore, Rubin (2005: 47–48) critically reflects on the earliest descriptions of the GLL, stating that they focused largely on cognitive strategies: ‘guessing, use of cognates, practicing, analyzing, categorising’, and to a lesser extent, on

Towards a Socio-Dynamic Perspective on Language Learning Strategy Research  39

social and affective strategies such as being extroverted and uninhibited about making mistakes and asking questions for clarification. Nonetheless, there was ‘incipient reference to procedures or metacognitive strategies’, i.e. the process of how the GLL strategies identified are used (Rubin, 2005: 47–48). 3.2.2 The second direction: Comparing strategies used by good and less successful language learners

In the mid-1980s, some LLS researchers (e.g. Gan et al., 2004; Green & Oxford, 1995; Porte, 1988; Purpura, 1999; Vann & Abraham, 1990) ascribed the limited success of previous LLS studies to inadequate knowledge of the LLSs used by less successful learners. In other words, comparing the LLSs used by good and less successful learners was seen as a catalyst for developing learners’ target language competence. The general findings from these studies were that the main weakness of underachieving learners was a result of their lack of appropriateness and flexibility in using LLSs in given contexts rather than the quantity and variety of the LLSs they used (Chamot, 2005: 120; Gu, 1996: 647). Based on Di Pietro’s (1987: 13) assumption that ‘anyone who is not suffering a learning disability is capable of successfully learning a foreign language’, Porte (1988) carried out semi-structured interviews with 15 Italian less successful learners of English, whose scores were noticeably low in both placement tests and homework. Porte’s (1988: 168) study suggested that less successful learners tended to use many LLSs similar to those often used by GLLs, such as consulting a dictionary and inferring from context. However, the major problem that underachieving learners had was in applying inappropriate LLSs to a particular activity, as a result of learners’ employing the same LLSs across different learning situations. One of Porte’s (1988) participants, Maria, for instance, deployed a particular set of LLSs when studying at an Italian school, such as consulting a bilingual dictionary and using the translated equivalent. Although these LLSs worked well for Maria in Italy, she later discovered that her past LLSs were no longer valid in the new learning situation in London, where a learner-centred approach was advocated. Likewise, Vann and Abraham (1990), in a case study focusing on two less successful Saudi Arabian female learners, used a think-aloud procedure along with product analysis of three language tasks (a verb exercise, a cloze passage and a composition) to show the reasons why these two learners did not pass in an intensive English programme. One of the principal findings of Vann and Abraham’s (1990) study was that the two learners were active strategy users, employing many LLSs such as paying attention to overall meaning and monitoring their errors. However, the difference between these two less successful and other GLLs’ strategy use lay in the degree of appropriateness and flexibility in their use of LLSs,

40  Part 1: Theoretical Considerations

and their skill in matching their choice of strategy to the demands of the task. For example, one of the two less successful learners used the low-level strategies (e.g. paying attention to the grammatical knowledge) effective for a verb tense exercise, for carrying out tasks that require higher-level strategies (e.g. deducing the overall meaning). In sum, the results of Porte’s (1988) study and those of Vann and Abraham (1990) called into question the claim of Wenden (1985: 7) that ‘ineffective learners are inactive learners’. That is, they are inappropriate learners in their use of strategies. Given that there is no single model of a GLL and addressing the empirical studies that examined how less successful learners approached their language learning, some LLS researchers (e.g. Anderson, 2008, 2012; Chamot, 2009; Littlejohn, 2008; Oxford, 1996; Rubin, 1994, 2013) have suggested that language learners need to develop some level of metacognition to identify their own learning goals and select the strategies required to complete a specific learning task. Kozulin (2005: 2) describes metacognition as ‘the higher level of mental activity, involving knowledge, awareness, and control of one’s lower level of cognitive skills, operations, and strategies’. Having metacognitive knowledge can allow language learners to have greater awareness and control of ‘how they learn and how they react to successes and setbacks in learning’ (Anderson, 2012: 170). To this end, the viability of integrating strategy instruction into language programmes and language learning materials has been given a considerable amount of emphasis, based on the premise that ‘there is little or no variation in the use of metacognitive strategies by GLLs’ (Rubin, 2005: 53). This interest in the notion of strategy instruction increased after identifying various taxonomies and inventories of LLSs that assist effective language learning (e.g. Cohen, 2011; Dörnyei, 2005; O’Malley & Chamot, 1990; Oxford, 1990) (see Section 2.3 in Chapter 2). Nonetheless, some researchers in LLS (e.g. Larsen-Freeman, 2001; LoCastro, 1994; Rees-Miller, 1993) have responded differently to the value of strategy instruction. Rees-Miller (1993: 687), for example, argues that although the notion of strategy instruction by focusing on metacognitive strategies seems to be ‘intuitively appealing’ to both language teachers and materials developers, some internal and external factors also need to be taken into account, such as gender, motivation, learning age and cultural background. She adds that teaching language learners a specific set of LLSs may deprive them of choosing and using the strategies that suit them for their learning goals and wants. As a result, Rees-Miller (1993: 691) asserts that devoting class time to overt language work appears to be more profitable than teaching learners specific LLSs, or even incorporating them into language textbooks (for more elaboration on the usefulness of LLS instruction, see Cohen [2011, 2018], Ellis & Sinclair [1989], Grenfell & Harris [2017], Littlejohn

Towards a Socio-Dynamic Perspective on Language Learning Strategy Research  41

[2008], Murphy [2008], Oxford [2011, 2017], Reinders [2011] and Wray & Hajar [2017]). 3.2.3 The third direction: Understanding contextualised and situated experiences of language learners

A volume edited by Griffiths (2008), Lessons from Good Language Learners, charts more than 30  years of research since Rubin’s (1975) landmark article on the GLL. The book has 23  chapters dealing with LLSs used by GLLs for receptive and productive skills and for grammar and vocabulary. In a review of Griffiths’ (2008) book, Macaro (2010: 291) sees this work as focusing on the characteristics of the GLL, without explaining ‘how to measure a good language learner’ or knowing how ‘that GLL got his or her badge of honour!’ (author’s italics). According to Macaro (2010: 293), in order to learn lessons from a GLL, we need to ‘know a lot more about learners than simply a snapshot in time of their proficiency level’. Reinforcing his point, Macaro (2010: 292) wonders: ‘[I] s a GLL someone who has achieved a level 8 in the IELTS test? Is this a better GLL than someone who has achieved a level 6? Clearly not. Or at least not necessarily’. In this regard, Norton and Toohey (2001: 310) seem to have an answer to Macaro’s (2010) inquiry by taking a sociocultural stance and concluding that the proficiencies of GLLs ‘were bound up not only with what they did individually but also in the possibilities their various communities offered them’. To demonstrate this argument, Norton and Toohey (2001) reviewed two examples of Polish-speaking learners of English in Canada (an adult learner, Eva, and a kindergarten learner, Julie), both of whom succeeded in exercising their agency in resisting and shaping their access to learning provided by their environments. In Eva’s case, although initially marginalised as an immigrant in her workplace community, she succeeded in achieving a more respected position among her co-workers and management by asking her partner to provide transport for her colleagues in his car for monthly outings. In addition to social resources, Eva employed her intellectual resources and her knowledge of the Italian language and European countries. In a similar vein, but in the very different social context of a kindergarten community, five-year-old Julie was regarded as ‘a desirable playmate with access to valued information’ and used her knowledge of Polish to teach her peers some words, in addition to the important scaffolding that she gained from her adult cousin, Agatha, who was an experienced speaker of English and Polish (Norton & Toohey, 2001: 317). In this sense, Eva and Julie were regarded as GLLs, given that they found ways of exercising their agency to negotiate entry into the desired social networks. Yet, as Norton and Toohey (2001) commented, the two participants were fortunate in that the communities they desired access to were eventually receptive of their contributions. Hence,

42  Part 1: Theoretical Considerations

Norton and Toohey (2001: 310) challenge the underlying assumption of the cognitive-based approaches to the GLL literature that largely hinges upon learners’ motivation for learning languages and their control of a wider variety of linguistic forms and cognitive traits, without adequately taking account of the ‘situated experiences of language learners in real-life contexts’. Elsewhere, Norton (2013) carried out a longitudinal study of five immigrant women in Canada. She claimed that her participants possessed the main characteristics of GLLs identified by early LLS researchers (e.g. Rubin, 1975), in particular, being extroverted and uninhibited about making mistakes. Norton (2013: 95) noted that her participants felt comfortable speaking in the company of their classmates who knew them well. However, they were reluctant to communicate with Canadians in out-of-class contexts because they felt marginalised and regarded as less worthy since they were immigrants. Norton (2013) emphasised that her participants’ struggled and underwent hardship in order to construct and negotiate their preferred identities, partly because of power relations they encountered in the real world. Therefore, how far the surrounding social practices facilitate or limit individuals’ access to the linguistic resources of their communities, often affects the quality and level of language learning success (see Gu, 2013; Ushioda, 2008). Surprisingly, perhaps, there is still very little literature on the GLL revealing how individuals struggle to gain a foothold in the contexts in which they find themselves. For this reason, more research on the GLL is necessary to evaluate not only ‘learners’ internal characteristics, learning strategies, or linguistic outputs’, but also ‘the reception of their actions in particular sociocultural communities’ (Norton & Toohey, 2001: 308). At this point, it seems fruitful to present a general picture of ‘the social turn’ in language learning research that departs from the dominance of cognitive norms and assumptions (for a comprehensive review, see Atkinson, 2011; Benson & Cooker, 2013; Block, 2003; Murray, 2014). The ‘social turn’ in language learning research has played a key role in prompting some researchers to explore learners’ strategic language learning efforts from sociocultural language learning perspectives, as will be discussed in the coming sections. 3.3 The Shifting Language Learning Research Landscape

The dominant cognitive theories of language learning are largely based on the theory of human information processing and tend to regard language learning as ‘a mental process that… resides mostly, if not solely in the mind’ (Davis, 1995: 427–428). According to Atkinson (2011: 4), cognition is information processing, or in Oxford’s (2011: 46) words a ‘faculty of knowing’ that ultimately undergoes a mechanical set of operations. This set of operations comprises encountering new information

Towards a Socio-Dynamic Perspective on Language Learning Strategy Research  43

where the knowledge is mainly static and conscious, processing that information through practising it and associating it with what is already in the mind to ‘strengthen and expand the schemata’ (i.e. the existing information), and finally producing output automatically (Oxford, 2011: 48–49, author’s emphasis). The main aim of cognitive information processing is to transform (conscious, effortful) declarative knowledge to (unconscious, automatic) procedural knowledge (Oxford, 2017: 174). To remember a new item of English vocabulary, for instance, a language learner might associate it with other known words that have similar or exactly the same pronunciation, such as ‘site, cite, sight’, ‘pear, pare, pair’ and ‘there, their, they’re’. In this example, the learner deployed the metacognitive strategies of paying attention and organising, and the cognitive strategy of grouping. At first, this process takes effort and thought (declarative knowledge), but it may become automatic through practice. The use of procedural knowledge in the target language might take place in a routine, effortless conversation or the application of very familiar grammatical rules in order to make a meaningful sentence (for more explanation about cognitive information processing theory, see Atkinson [2011: 1–22], Grenfell & Harris [2017: 35–41] and Oxford [2017: 172–182]). Cognitivism draws on psychological explanations for language learning, assuming that ‘learning is an individual accomplishment’ without being based on ‘epistemological insights from contextuality’ (Ortega, 2011: 168). In other words, a cognitive model of language learning seems to depict an individualistic and static picture of the language learner by ascribing a learner’s success at language learning only to their personal motivation and cognitive traits. The concept of learning context in such research might be viewed as a variable ‘modifying the internal acquisition process occurring in individual minds’ without considering the specific details of the immediate setting in which the learners operate (Gao & Zhang, 2011: 25). Many researchers adopting cognitive psychology frameworks in their LLS studies support Macaro’s (2001: 264) conclusion, namely that ‘[O]ne thing seems to be increasingly clear and that is that, across learning contexts, those learners who are pro-active in their pursuit of language learning appear to learn best’. From this cognitive perspective, LLSs are often defined as the learner’s chosen actions for ‘active, self-regulated improvement of language learning’ (Oxford et  al., 2014: 30). Theorised as such, an individualistic and static picture of LLSs tends to be formulated by limiting learners’ success at language learning to achieving linguistic objectives and possessing cognitive traits, while paying scant attention to the significance of the ‘lived experience of learners in real-life context’ (Palfreyman, 2003: 244). That is, language learners tend to be viewed as relatively decontextualised cognitive beings, acting upon target language input and producing output (Barkhuizen et  al., 2014: 11) rather than as ‘sociohistorically, socioculturally,

44  Part 1: Theoretical Considerations

and sociopolitically situated individuals with multiple subjectivities and identities (e.g., not only as language learners)’ (Duff & Talmy, 2011: 97, authors’ emphasis). However, this impoverished view of language learners improved after the ‘social turn’ in second language acquisition (SLA), by the acknowledgement of the agentive interaction between learners and their environments and learning contexts mediated by different types of mediational tools. That is, following the early decades of the ascendancy of psycholinguistic and individualistic perspectives on language learners, recent research is redressing the balance through an orientation to the ‘social turn’ in theoretical frameworks and a preference for qualitative methodologies in L2 learning research (Block, 2014; Rose et al., 2018). Sociocultural perspectives, which refer to a variety of approaches to learning that underline the prominence of social, political and cultural processes in mediating learners’ cognitive and metacognitive processes, have recently become more established in language learning research. In this sense, some researchers adopting socially-oriented theoretical models (e.g. Darvin & Norton, 2015; Gao, 2010; Hajar, 2016; Huang, 2016; Lantolf, 2013; Mercer, 2011; Morgan, 2007; Palfreyman, 2003, 2011) have argued that language learning does not occur in a sociocultural vacuum, but rather it is a social process whereby culturally and historically situated individuals are in active pursuit of both linguistic and non-linguistic objectives mainly related to identity formation. In this view, a language learner, from a sociocultural stance, constantly negotiates their sense of self in relation to their larger social world, and can hold ‘multiple identities’ such as those of ‘a student’, ‘an actor’, ‘a university lecturer’, etc. (Benson & Cooker, 2013: 6). Theorised in this way, learning a language is conceptualised as a vehicle for self-explanation and social alteration, rather than being ‘an end-in-itself’ (Morgan, 2007: 1035, author’s emphasis). ‘Context’ or ‘real-world situations’ are also treated as ‘fundamental, not ancillary, to learning’ in sociocultural research (Zuengler & Miller, 2006: 37), and they include a variety of different societal learning discourses, social agents and cultural or material artefacts (Palfreyman, 2014). It may be argued that sociocultural approaches can help us to move away from the ‘encapsulated view’ of LLSs (i.e. relating learners’ strategy choice and use solely to their cognitive predispositions or personality traits) through acknowledging the mediational processes of particular learning communities, including artefacts, practices, interactions and relationships among people. This trend has also been recently recognised by some cognitivist LLS researchers, who restrict the focus of their studies to the linguistic gains of using LLSs (i.e. seeing a language learner as ‘a mere learner’ rather than as ‘an individual with multiple identities’). For example, Griffiths and Oxford (2014: 3–4) look at sociocultural perspectives on LLS as ‘a sound theoretical base’, suggesting that although questionnaire surveys ‘have formed the “backbone” of strategy research’,

Towards a Socio-Dynamic Perspective on Language Learning Strategy Research  45

‘there is a need for richer descriptions of LLS use. This can be achieved by using more qualitative methods’. Such a paradigm shift and theoretical reconceptualisation enable researchers to understand learners’ dynamic strategy use in LLS research (Rose et al., 2018). As a result, concepts like community of practice (CoP), agency, identity, situated experience and power have been increasingly used by researchers who adopt socially oriented theoretical models. The following sections will focus on the notions that relate sociocultural perspectives on language learning to LLS research. A theoretical framework to capture the close relationship between language learners’ learning goals, learning motivations and strategy use will also be explained. 3.4 Socio-Dynamic Perspectives and Empirical Language Learning Strategy Research

The ‘social turn’ in education offers ‘a new dimension to the study of learning strategies’ (Palfreyman, 2003: 245), by clearly showing through a sociocultural lens, the dynamic, fluid nature of LLSs in accordance with specific learning settings and learners’ language learning goals. Sociocultural theory is a unified perspective embracing earlier theories of Vygotsky (1978, 1981) and later views about the social formation of the mind as proposed, for example, by Engeström (1999) and Wertsch (1998) (see Moll, 2014; Oxford, 2017). Lantolf (2000: 1) points out that the essential concept of sociocultural theory is presented in Lev Vygotsky’s (1978) view that the ‘human mind is mediated’. This concept incorporates the view that human beings act in the world with the assistance of culturally created artefacts, which can be either physical, such as computers and mobile phones, or symbolic such as language. These artefacts, in turn, play a vital role in mediating the relationship between subject and object (Lantolf & Thorne, 2006: 11). The subject points to the individual or group involved in the central activity, whereas the object is the ‘focus of the activity, the issue or thing that is being acted upon’ (Daniels, 2004: 123). The symbolic tool of language, for instance, can be used by learners to mediate both ‘interpersonal (social interaction) and intrapersonal (thinking) purposes’ (Lantolf, 2000: 8). From this point of view, language learning is a social process, in which culturally and historically situated individuals engage in ‘culturally valued activities, using cultural tools’ such as books, media and technology (Norton & Toohey, 2011: 419). Vygotsky (1978) also claims that the integration of cultural artefacts into thinking can result in higher mental capacities, which include ‘voluntary attention, intentional memory, planning, logical thought and problem resolving, learning, and evaluation of the effectiveness of these processes’ (Lantolf, 2000: 2). These higher mental capacities, as Oxford (2017: 66) argues, imply cognitive and metacognitive strategies, although Vygotsky avoided using the word ‘strategy’. Oxford (2017: 66) also

46  Part 1: Theoretical Considerations

contends that the process of mediation or assistance offered by a more capable person (i.e. a teacher, a parent or a more advanced peer) to a language learner is highly empathised by Vygotsky and often implies the deployment of socially-oriented strategies. Examples of these strategies are collaborating with others, asking questions, requesting assistance and paying close attention to what the other is saying (Oxford, 2017: 66). Lantolf and Thorne (2006: 211) go further, pointing out that considering human actions as mediated by cultural tools and signs as the unit of analysis plays a central role in breaking down the boundary between the individual and the social structure they operate within. Likewise, Engeström (2001) notes the importance of Vygotsky’s (1978) focus on mediation by tools and signs, stating that The insertions of cultural artifacts into human actions …overcome the split between the Cartesian individual and the untouchable societal structure. The individual could no longer be understood without his or her cultural means; and the society could no longer be understood without the agency of individuals who use and produce artifacts. (Engeström, 2001: 134)

In this sense, learners’ higher-order mental functioning is socially constructed and culturally transmitted by deploying different, mediating artefacts while learning the target language. Mediating artefacts might be objects (e.g. textbooks), human beings (e.g. family members, peers or teachers) and/or symbols (e.g. language or signs). Larsen-Freeman (2001: 23) points out that Donato and McCormick’s (1994) qualitative study, based on analysing the portfolios of 10 American female undergraduate learners of French, is considered the first empirical study to introduce a sociocultural theoretical framework for understanding learners’ language strategy use and development in a particular learning context. Donato and McCormick’s (1994: 453) study showed that the use of a portfolio as a mediational means enabled the learners in this study to formulate and develop their learning goals, ‘the genesis of strategic action’, simply because the portfolio required the learners to produce concrete evidence of their growing language abilities and LLS use. One participant (S6) clearly took this position when she stated: In my first portfolio I chose things that I thought you (the instructor) would want to see in the portfolio of a good student. But gradually I began to use what helped me learn to converse. I think this is an example of my progress. (Donato & McCormick, 1994: 463, author’s italics)

Jang and Jiménez (2011: 142) note that Donato and McCormick (1994), in their landmark study, attempted to offer LLS researchers a complementary vision by considering the mediational processes of particular

Towards a Socio-Dynamic Perspective on Language Learning Strategy Research  47

learning communities, including artefacts, practices, interactions and the relationships between people. Bearing this in mind, Gao (2006b: 287) suggests that language learning and language learner development constitute ‘a socialization process’, mediated not only by teachers’ efforts within the classroom but also by ‘various social agents in contexts where language learning occurs’. In this sense, language learning can take place ‘in family, community, workplace and classroom’ (Watson-Gegeo, 2004: 340). Although sociocultural perspectives represent ‘a robust framework for investigating and explaining the development and use of strategies and mediation is a critical variable in the development of strategic learning’ (Donato & MacCormick, 1994: 462), LLS studies undertaken from this standpoint are still relatively few (Mason, 2010: 647; Rose et  al., 2018: 152). Nevertheless, the small body of sociocultural LLS research has enriched our insights into the mediated nature of LLSs in classroom culture, including artefacts, interactions and the relationships between people (e.g. Coyle, 2007; Donato & McCormick, 1994; Huang, 2016; Jang & Jiménez, 2011), the examination of GLL social practices in both natural and formal settings (Hajar, 2016; Norton & Toohey, 2001; Palfreyman, 2006, 2011) and the dynamism of learners’ strategy use in response to shifting learning contexts over time (e.g. Gao, 2006a, 2010, 2013a; Hajar, 2017; Parks & Raymond, 2004). Some of these studies will be described in detail in the following subsections with reference to certain sociocultural concepts. 3.4.1 Activity Theory in relation to language learning strategies

Activity Theory, a sub-theory of sociocultural theory, was originally proposed by Vygotsky’s colleague, A.N. Leontiev (1981), and highlights the fact that ‘socially-organized and goal-directed actions play a central role in human development’ (Lantolf & Beckett, 2009: 460). That is, an activity carried out consciously by individuals should be the prime unit of analysis of any human behaviour, in order to recognise the pivotal role of mediation by other human beings and material or cultural tools. Leontiev (1981), in Donato and McCormick’s (1994: 55) words, defines activity as ‘the who, what, when, where, and why, the small recurrent dramas of everyday life, played on the stage of home, school, community, and workplace’. Donato and McCormick’s (1994) illuminating qualitative study is considered to be the first empirical study to introduce a sociocultural theoretical framework for understanding learners’ LLS use and development. Leontiev’s (1981) version of Activity Theory was the main concept that guided their empirical study. Donato and McCormick (1994) suggest that Activity Theory allows us to better understand the nature of LLSs, by emphasising that they are not stable and do not operate alone. Rather, LLSs are ‘motivated by specific objectives and… instrumental to fulfilling specific goals’ (Donato & McCormick, 1994: 455).

48  Part 1: Theoretical Considerations

Donato and McCormick (1994: 455) further point out that analysing LLSs adequately requires discussing certain elements. These elements are: a subject or person; an object or goal; actions, i.e. strategies used to move towards the stated goal; and the conditions under which goal-oriented actions or strategies are carried out in accordance with the changing situation, task, person and sociocultural context (see McCafferty et al., 2001: 289; Oxford, 2017: 28). For example, when an advanced language learner comes across a new word in a text, they will automatically employ contextual clues to guess its meaning. However, a learner is likely to choose contextual guessing carefully and deliberately when they encounter a text in which the difficulty lies beyond their linguistic competence. In addition, contextual guessing might sometimes be used by the learner to save time during a reading assignment rather than to improve their target language reading proficiency. Thus, changing conditions can lead to changes in how an action (strategy) is implemented (Oxford, 2017: 180). Hence, Kim (2010) points out that Activity Theory can be used as a useful conceptual framework to explore individuals’ situated experiences of language learning and their actual and dynamic use of LLSs across time and space. Kim’s (2010: 95) argument is based on the grounds that Activity Theory understands ‘the human world as an open system, which can be modified in relation to both contextual changes and learners’ (or agents’) recognition of them’. That is, individuals tend to alter their strategy use to achieve their goals according to contextual changes. Lantolf and Pavlenko (2001: 146), drawing on Leontiev’s (1981) version of Activity Theory, argue against the widespread viewpoint of language learners as ‘processing devices’ within SLA research and for recognising learners as ‘people… who actively engage in constructing the terms and conditions of their learning’. That is, learners are viewed as active agents capable of assigning relevance and significance to certain actions. Therefore, Lantolf and Pavlenko (2001: 146) assume that the main concern of human activities is not the mere performance of an action or ‘doing’ it, but instead ‘the meanings and interpretations’ assigned to the action by the acting individual and others who are engaged in the action. Lantolf and Pavlenko (2001: 147), however, stress that individuals’ recognition of the ‘significance’ that language study has on their lives largely relates to their sociocultural historical backgrounds. This notion was also emphasised by Parks and Raymond’s (2004) longitudinal qualitative LLS study of 18 Chinese learners at a Canadian university. Guided by Engeström’s (1991) version of Activity Theory, Parks and Raymond (2004: 384) note that ‘the relation between the subject and object is not only mediated by the immediate tools (materials as well as ideas) that are employed by the individual, but also by the community in which the individual is embedded’. In other words, a learner is an active agent, whose motivation to achieve a certain goal

Towards a Socio-Dynamic Perspective on Language Learning Strategy Research  49

and use a particular set of learning strategies is often influenced (but not determined) by their personal history and experiences accumulated in the community. As Oxford (2017: 78) comments, learners are viewed as ‘active, self-regulated agents, whose choice of strategies is influenced but not determined by the sociocultural context’. Hence, the learner usually adopts the strategies that correspond with the aims of their particular sociocultural settings. Parks and Raymond (2004: 385), for instance, found that their Chinese participants chose the strategy of being in separate groups from their Canadian colleagues while discussing topics in groups. They did this because their Canadian classmates were unwilling to accept them as ‘valued partners’. For this reason, Parks and Raymond (2004: 374) affirmed that the Chinese learners’ use or non-use of certain LLSs was influenced by their situated context. Likewise, Gillette (1994) explored the implications of Activity Theory on the development of LLS use by conducting a series of in-depth case studies of three successful and three less successful adult language learners enrolled in a French course in a US university. The choice of the six learners was chiefly based on their writing samples and their scores on a cloze test and an oral imitation task, as well as on classroom observations. Through extensive interviews, class notes and diaries, Gillette (1994: 197) confirmed that the personal histories of the participants played a key role in forming their different motives and goals for studying a foreign language (e.g. to learn the language or to fulfil the language requirement), which in turn influenced the kinds of strategies that the participants deployed. For example, one of Gillette’s successful learners, B, was a native speaker of Chinese, but had positive personal experience in relation to learning foreign languages, having grown up in Hong Kong, where language skills are seen as valuable, in addition to the influence of her multilingual parents. Accordingly, B’s individual sociocultural history of learning foreign languages led her to have a genuine interest in learning French and to use effective LLSs such as inferencing and functional practice. Conversely, J, the less successful learner, had a completely different language learning experience, in which learning foreign languages had little meaning in his life because he had never travelled out of his hometown, and thus he regarded learning foreign languages as ‘useless baggage’ (Gillette, 1994: 197). J’s main goal of simply fulfilling a course requirement and his sociocultural background, as Gillette (1994: 211) argues, led him to deploy markedly less effective LLSs such as translation and rote learning. Thus, it might be argued that learner agency is about more than ‘an inherent capacity’ (Malcolm, 2011: 198) or ‘voluntary control over behavior’ (Lier, 2008: 163). It is regarded as ‘something that a person can achieve… only in transaction with a particular situation’ (Biesta & Tedder, 2006: 19). However, Burr holds the view that learner agency is liable to change because:

50  Part 1: Theoretical Considerations

…human agents are capable (given the right circumstances) of critically analyzing the discourse which frame their lives and of claiming or resisting them according to the effects they wish to bring about. (Burr, 1995: 90)

From the above discussion, human activity as perceived by Activity Theory is dynamic and non-static, and subject to probable changes when the circumstances of the individual alter. Accordingly, such a model may serve to replicate a contextualised and flexible picture of the LLSs deployed by language learners (Gao, 2010). 3.4.2 ‘Community of practice’ model to understand contextually situated and dynamic uses of learning strategies

The term ‘communities of practice’ (CoP) was first coined by Lave and Wenger (1991) to describe the socially situated learning of apprentices in informal settings (midwives, tailors, quartermasters, butchers, alcoholics and insurance processors). Lave and Wenger (1991) suggest that newcomers learn their professions not only by understanding abstract information, but also by taking part in the execution of concrete work tasks, through observing their more experienced co-workers and interacting with objects, tools and technologies. It was not long before Wenger (1998) realised that the central concept of a CoP is not restricted to apprenticeship. A CoP can occur in both formal and informal settings. Lave and Wenger (1991) defined the CoP as a group of people who come together to share common interests and goals, with the aim of learning from each other and developing themselves both personally and professionally. Another definition of the CoP is ‘groups of people who share a concern, a set of problems, or a passion about a topic, and who deepen their knowledge and expertise in this area by interacting on an ongoing basis’ (Wenger et al., 2002: 4). For Lave and Wenger (1991), learning is not an individual, cognitive process but the consequence of a person’s gradual engagement in a particular community and in their social relations with other members of it. Initially, newcomers join communities and learn at the edges or periphery. They gradually gain fuller participation in the activities of a community through interacting with more experienced members and observing the strategies used by these experts or ‘old-timers’. As they become more experienced, they move from the periphery to the centre of the particular community. Oxford (2017) suggests that the notion of a CoP suggested by Lave and Wenger (1991) can contribute to enriching our insights into the mediated and dynamic nature of LLSs. This is because the CoP shows that a strategic, practical, learning-based relationship with a more capable other enables students to ‘develop and use learning strategies in authentic activities via interaction, social construction of knowledge,

Towards a Socio-Dynamic Perspective on Language Learning Strategy Research  51

scaffolding, modelling, goal-setting, peer sharing, and learner reflection’ (Oxford, 2017: 68). Coyle’s (2007) qualitative study is regarded as one of the very few empirical studies in the field of LLSs that have adopted the CoP notion. Coyle (2007) used the notion of the CoP to explore the ‘interpersonal interaction’ between individuals within the classroom setting that using language or a technological tool necessitates. Coyle (2007: 66) regarded the classroom mediated by technology as a ‘learning community’, and highlighted the fact that exploring LLSs used by learners requires focusing on the interactions taking place within the classroom. One of the findings of Coyle’s (2007) study was that the classroom culture was inspired by the goal orientation of the teacher, who focused from the very beginning on LLSs that could help her learners build and develop their self-confidence and increase their motivation for learning German, such as guessing the meaning of new words from the context and using the target language from the beginning. Moreover, the teacher appreciated all the students’ contributions and gave them sufficient opportunities to ask questions and initiate new ideas. The conclusion of Coyle’s (2007: 77) study sheds light on the importance of conducting further LLS studies that combine ‘both a micro and macro approach to learning strategies’ (i.e. also focus on a language learner’s interaction with their contextual conditions). Nonetheless, it might be argued that Coyle’s (2007) limited focus on the classroom and the interactions that grow out of it is insufficient to capture a holistic understanding of learners’ LLS use and development, on the grounds that both classroom and out-of-class learning are equally important. Although Lave and Wenger (1991) stress newcomers’ strategic learning efforts towards fuller participation while interacting with more experienced members, the host community members may not always enable or facilitate the newcomers or students’ participation in the host community. In this sense, the role of power relations in the CoP has been insufficiently considered (Contu & Willmott, 2003; Fox, 2000). As Norton (2014: 78) comments, individuals’ legitimacy as potential members of a specific community largely depends on ‘who they are talking to’. This is because newcomers are likely to gain access to resources and opportunities for socialisation in the target community only if old members of that community accept them. A convincing example is given in Morita’s (2004) ethnographic study of the experiences of six female Japanese graduate students in a Canadian university. Morita (2004) claims that her participants encountered challenges in negotiating their competence and identities, and power relations, which were important for them to be recognised as legitimate and competent members of their classroom communities. One of the participants in Morita’s study, Nanako, was doing a master’s degree in education. Nanako was concerned about her silence in class discussions due to her sense of being a less experienced or less knowledgeable member of the class. Therefore, she actively sought

52  Part 1: Theoretical Considerations

the support of her instructors. One of the instructors that Nanako approached made her feel a legitimate participant by informing her that there are different learning styles and that it was normal for international students to take some time to familiarise themselves with ‘North American interactional styles’ (Morita, 2004: 588). The instructor also told Nanako that her different background was useful to bring a valuable new perspective to the class. However, in another course, when Nanako consulted the instructor about her difficulty following discussions, the instructor ‘did not seem to care’ about her problems and ‘offered no constructive advice’ (Morita, 2004: 589). In the second course, Nanako felt marginalised and construed as an ‘other’ by her classmates who did not invite her to participate in class discussions. To compound the situation, her native English-speaking classmate told the class that Nanako had ‘nothing to learn from small-group discussions’ (Morita, 2004: 589). Morita (2004) cites Nanako: If someone followed me in all my courses and simply observed me, she would have just thought that I was a quiet person. But my silence had different meanings in different courses. In Course E, the instructor made me feel that I was there even when I was quiet. In the other courses my presence or absence didn’t seem to make any difference… I just sat there like an ornament. (Morita, 2004: 587)

Morita’s (2004) study clearly reveals that a student’s passive participation or relative silence in class may be the product of different contextual aspects of the classroom community, including course content, interpersonal relationships and power relations. As a consequence, Bonny Norton introduced the construct of investment to explore the complexity of the relationship between identity, power and language learning. This is the focus of the next subsection. 3.4.3 Investment, language learning strategies and identity construction

Bonny Norton conceptualised the sociological construct of investment in the mid-1990s to serve as a complement to the psychological construct of motivation and explore how relations of power impact human relationships (see Darvin & Norton, 2018; Norton, 2000, 2013, 2014, 2017, 2018; Norton & De Costa, 2018; Norton Peirce, 1995). Norton (2014: 61; 2017: 13) questions simplistic target language motivation theories that regard language learners as outside of the orbit of history, society and culture, as a set of fixed and unidimensional characteristics (such as motivated or unmotivated, introverted or extroverted, anxious or confident and inhibited or uninhibited). These traditional conceptions of language learners’ motivation do not adequately describe why individuals may be highly motivated on certain occasions, but may resist

Towards a Socio-Dynamic Perspective on Language Learning Strategy Research  53

opportunities to speak or learn in contexts where they are positioned in unequal ways (Norton & De Costa, 2018: 92). Oxford (2017: 191–192) concurs with Norton’s criticism of most previous motivation models, given that these models did not adequately capture the ambivalence some learners may experience about learning and speaking a target language. Oxford (2017) comments that: A learner cannot be labelled as always introverted or extroverted, anxious or relaxed, unmotivated or motivated, silent or talkative. We must consider the learner’s fluctuating social identity, which is related to how he or she perceives the power dynamics in the sociocultural context, in which the L2 is being used. When the learner experiences the context as exclusionary, harsh, or indifferent, he or she feels less identified with the context, less confident, less successful, and less likely to invest in the L2. (Oxford, 2017: 192)

In the place of weak motivation theories, Norton (2013, 2014, 2018) introduced the sociological construct of investment in language learning research to understand the often unequal social relationships of the language learner in the changing social world, and likewise the connection between a learner’s desire and commitment to learn a language, and their complex and changing identity. She defined identity as ‘how a person understands his or her relationship to the world, how the relationship is constructed across time and space, and how the person understands possibilities for the future’ (Norton, 2013: 4). Identity is often conceived of as multiple, changing and a site of struggle, chiefly in contexts where learners experience sexism, racism and/or other types of discrimination. According to Darvin and Norton (2018), the term ‘investment’ can be defined as ‘the commitment to the goals, practices, and identities that constitute the learning process and that are continually negotiated in different social relationships and structures of power’. In this view, a motivated language learner (particularly refugees, immigrants or language minority group members) may have little desire or commitment to engage in the language practices of the classroom or community if target language speakers are racist, sexist or homophobic. Related to this, language classroom methodology may not align with the learner’s expectation of good language teaching. Hence, the construct of investment provides for a different set of questions associated with a learner’s commitment to learning the target language. Along with asking, for example, ‘Are students motivated to learn a language?’, researchers and teachers are encouraged to ask an additional question, ‘To what extent are students and teachers invested in the language and literacy practices of a given classroom and community?’ (Norton, 2017: 14). Norton (2016: 467) points out that learning the target language is not completely determined by contextual realities, and individuals tend

54  Part 1: Theoretical Considerations

to invest in language learning if they believe that their endeavours can bring about commensurate results in terms of enhancing their cultural capital and social power (e.g. a respectable job, further educational opportunities). Because it emphasises that both costs and benefits must be weighed in any given interaction, the concept of ‘investment’ captures the ambivalence some learners experience about learning well. Hajar (2017: 3) indicates that although Norton’s focus was not on learning strategies, the learners – when capturing the importance of a certain activity – often exercise their agentive power by embracing a particular set of learning strategies in attempts to become whoever they want to be. Hajar’s (2017) argument was based on Dörnyei and Kubanyiova’s (2014: 11) suggestion that one’s desired future vision should be associated with the use of appropriate and effective learning strategies which function as a roadmap towards the stated goal. Like Hajar (2017), Oxford (2017: 192) suggests that ‘if the learner makes the decision to invest, it should be followed by a host of cognitive, affective and other strategies to make the investment successful. The social strategy of finding allies will also turn to be essential if investment is undertaken’. As described in Section 3.2.3, Norton and Toohey (2001) explained that a young Polish woman’s investment in learning English after she immigrated to Canada with little English was in order to gain economic advantages. The woman’s identity as an immigrant limited her opportunities in the first few months to improve her English and find better work, especially as her co-workers at a fast-food restaurant initially made little investment in interacting with her. However, her other identity positions as ‘a competent speaker of Italian’, ‘a woman of wide knowledge of European countries’ and ‘a vehicle provider to her colleagues to commute to workplace’ offered enhanced sets of possibilities for developing her social relationship with her co-workers and making substantial progress in her English proficiency. Hence, Eva succeeded in exercising her human agency by deploying a number of effective metacognitive and social strategies to gain access to the learning provided by her environments. Lee (2014) adopted Norton’s theory of investment in her longitudinal research to explore an exceptionally motivated Korean student’s personal investment in English language improvement and associated learning strategies in a US university. Lee (2014) used different data collection procedures, including semi-structured interviews, autobiographical and journal entries generated by the student, as well as data from the student’s language teachers and social peers. Lee (2014: 447–448) found that her participant’s strong desire and investment to acquire English had a focal impact not only on her use of learning strategies but also on her identity construction as a legitimate member of both academic and non-academic communities in the United States. Along with her new lab environment, the participant got involved in American communities such as a church and small-group Bible studies. This participant, Mina, also employed the

Towards a Socio-Dynamic Perspective on Language Learning Strategy Research  55

strategy of ‘reading aloud’ to improve her English vocabulary and her knowledge of common English speech rhythms, which enabled her to interact more capably and confidently with her peers and professors. This section has depicted the continued presence of Bonny Norton’s work in the literature underpinned by the ‘social turn’ in language education, and the way that understandings of investment have been combined with other recent theoretical developments, including LLS research. 3.5 Framework for Understanding the Intersection between Learning Motivations, Strategy Use and Future Visions: A Socio-Dynamic Perspective

The suggested framework used in this book is informed by a socio-dynamic perspective, and aims to disentangle the dialectic between individuals’ language learning goals, motivation and strategy use on the grounds that LLSs cannot stand by themselves and are constantly intertwined with ‘a learner’s disposition’ which entails ‘a pre-existing readiness for something’ (Littlejohn, 2008: 11). This conceptual framework is inspired by Oxford’s (2017: 189) suggestion that ‘Perhaps a future iteration of [Dörnyei’s (2009)] L2 Motivational Self System will benefit from including learning strategies along with a knowledge of how to attain the desired (ideal L2 self) state’. As shown in Table 3.1, the suggested framework is guided by Dörnyei’s ideal L2 self/ought-to L2 self binary in the L2 Motivational Self System and some other constructs associated with ‘the ideal self’; namely, ‘integrativeness’ (Gardner, 1985), ‘international posture’ (Yashima, 2002, 2009) and ‘national interest’ (Islam et al., 2013). It is also based on the distinction between short-term and long-term learning goals and between compulsory and voluntary strategies (see Table 3.1). 3.5.1 Distinction between ‘compulsory/other-imposed strategies’ and ‘voluntary strategies’

One of the key features of a learning strategy listed by prominent LLS researchers (e.g. Chamot, 2009; Cohen, 2011; Griffiths, 2018; Macaro, 2006) is ‘the explicitness of its goal orientation’, that is, a learning strategy is characterised by being explicitly goal directed, a solution which the learner enacts to a problem they experience. However, Chamot (2004: 17) claims that ‘little attention has been paid to students’ learning goals’ when researchers have tried to classify LLSs. The findings of the current research reported in the second and third parts of this book adopted Griffiths and Oxford’s (2014: 2) approach to strategy classification, by reporting the patterns of strategy use displayed in the data according to the participants’ experiential accounts and their language learning goals rather than any pre-existing classification system. As a consequence, this book suggests that language learners’ LLS choices and use are according to their learning-oriented goals and can be generally

56  Part 1: Theoretical Considerations

Table 3.1  Intersection between language learners’ goals, motivations and learning strategies from a socio-dynamic perspective First group Learning goals

Short-term (proximal) goals: Partially recognising the importance of the target language in one’s life. One’s goals are associated with immediate material gains.

Learning motivation

An ‘instrumental-prevention’ focus, related to the ought-to self (Dörnyei, 2009; Higgins, 2000): Meeting the expectations of important others, and avoiding possible negative outcomes. It is less regulated one’s self.

Language learning strategies

Dominant use of compulsory/other-imposed strategies with a few voluntary strategies.

Second group Learning goals

Long-term (distal) goals: Having a clear plan to master the target language to accomplish personal, social, academic, vocational and/or national purposes.

Learning motivation

Having an ‘instrumental-promotion’ focus related to the ideal L2 self (i.e. more internalised within one’s self). A person has one or more of the following learning motivations: • Integrativeness: An openness to the target culture and native speakers of the target language. • International posture (Yashima, 2009): An interest in intercultural friendship and international affairs and openness to all other cultures. • National interest (Islam et al., 2013): An interest in mastering the target language as a means of projecting a positive group/national image in the international arena.

Language learning strategies

A balance in using the voluntary and compulsory/other-imposed strategies.

classified into two categories: ‘compulsory/other-imposed strategies’ and ‘voluntary strategies’. ‘Compulsory/other-imposed strategies’ refers to the strategies employed by language learners in response to the direct involvement or coercion imposed upon them by some influential agents, principally teachers and parents. These strategies (e.g. repetition, note-taking and rote memorisation) are essentially associated with the goal of ‘grade achievement’. By contrast, ‘voluntary strategies’ are used by language learners because of their own language learning beliefs and personal ambitions as regards mastering English. That is, ‘voluntary strategies’ are more internalised within language learners’ selves and less passed on by others. Examples of these strategies are composing English poetry, learning more about geographical places and customs in Britain and participating in English-related competitions. The following two extracts taken from the interview transcripts of one participant in the present research exemplify the distinction between compulsory and voluntary strategies: Extract 1: In Iraq, I had to read 10 short stories in English during the academic year because they were formally assessed. These stories were assigned by my teacher and available in the school library. She would have counted the

Towards a Socio-Dynamic Perspective on Language Learning Strategy Research  57

number of the pages that I read. I had to remember the names of most characters and the plot of each story for the test… I found some stories fairly uninteresting. (Zahra, 1st interview)

Extract 2: During the summer period, I used to read English poetry. I found some interesting poetic works by Shakespeare and other well-known English poets in my brother’s personal library. This encouraged me to start composing poetry in English later… Poetry not only helped me to learn new words but also to know more about English culture. (Zahra, 2nd interview) In Extract 1, Zahra appeared to feel obliged to read some uninteresting stories by paying greater attention to certain preselected details for a compulsory English test at school. However, the second extract shows that Zahra exercised a higher degree of choice in relation to the use of LLSs when reading some poems of her own choice. This helped her to learn new words in context and to develop an understanding of the cultures of English-speaking societies. 3.5.2 Dörnyei’s (2009) concept of ‘possible selves’ and Higgins’ (2000) two types of instrumental motivation

The compulsory-voluntary classification of LLSs according to language learners’ learning-oriented goals seems to correspond with Dörnyei’s (2009) notion of possible selves used to depict individuals’ ideas of what one would like to become or avoid becoming, or how one feels one ought to become in the future through their language learning. Drawing on the socio-dynamic perspective of associating the human self with human action, i.e. ‘the doing side of personality’ (Dörnyei & Kubanyiova, 2014: 11), Dörnyei (2009) differentiates between two core types of possible future language selves: the ought-to self and the ideal self. The ought-to self is a vision of the future self that appears to embody the wishes and expectations of significant others (e.g. teachers and parents); it is about having to ‘bow to social pressures and demands, or avoid possible negative consequences’ (Ushioda, 2014: 133–134; see Dörnyei & Kubanyiova, 2014). Therefore, it ‘bears little resemblance to the person’s own desires and wishes’ (Dörnyei et al., 2006: 17). That is, the ought-to self signifies other influential agents’ visions for the individual. For example, an individual might study English so as not to fail an exam, in order to complete their high school finishing exams or not to thwart their immediate family members. To achieve these short-term goals, the individual may well use more compulsory LLSs (i.e. exam-oriented strategies), which are largely imposed by powerful agents such as family members and teachers. Higgins (2000: 209–210) points out

58  Part 1: Theoretical Considerations

that the prevention aspect of instrumentality pertains to the ought-to self because it centres on obligation, responsibility and safety (i.e. avoidance of a feared end state). As shown in Table 3.1, the first group in the suggested framework indicates that the goals or visions channelled by the ought-to self are more likely to be short term than those related to the ideal self because they are less internalised within the self, and largely directed by external factors in one’s sociocultural environment (see Gu, 2009; You & Dörnyei, 2016). By contrast, the ideal self signifies the future self-image that a person strongly values and internally desires to achieve (i.e. it is a representation of the hopes, aspirations and wishes of one’s personal, vocational, social or national purposes) (Dörnyei, 2009: 17–18; Ushioda, 2014: 133). Higgins (2000: 209–210) states that the promotional aspect of instrumentality – for example, learning English to facilitate professional advancement – is largely associated with a long-term dominant goal because its focus regulates aspiration towards one’s ideal self-image. Table 3.1 indicates that the second group in the conceptual framework suggests that the goals or visions directed by the ideal self-image are essentially long term because they are more internalised within the self, and less imposed by others or external factors. Hence, an individual is expected to use more voluntary strategies to accomplish their ideal end state and desired identity. The above discussion indicates that instrumentality can be viewed as part of the ideal self or the ought-to self according to the context of internalisation. For example, studying English for going overseas is promotional for the person who internally desires to study overseas and become a more knowledgeable person, but it can be preventative for the person who might be posted overseas by their employer. It should be noted that future self-image needs to be ‘accompanied by relevant and effective procedural strategies that act as a roadmap towards the goal’, similar to an elite athlete’s training plan (Dörnyei & Kubanyiova, 2014: 11, authors’ emphasis). In other words, taking up a particular set of learning strategies to address one’s future vision is seen as a prerequisite for accomplishing that vision; otherwise, it turns into having ‘the character more of fantasy rather than concrete ambition’ (Lamb, 2013a: 24). In this regard, Oxford (2017: 189) claims that achieving the state of the ideal self ‘logically requires the intelligent selection and implementation of learning strategies’. 3.5.3 Motivational orientations enhancing individuals’ ideal L2 self vision

As indicated in Table  3.1, an individual’s ideal self vision can be enhanced by possessing certain motivational language orientations, including integrativeness (Gardner, 1985, 2001), international posture (Yashima, 2002, 2009) and/or national interest (Islam et  al., 2013).

Towards a Socio-Dynamic Perspective on Language Learning Strategy Research  59

Integrativeness was initially suggested by Gardner (2001: 5) to signify a person’s genuine interest in the target language ‘in order to come closer to the other language community’. A person’s integrativeness orientation can be indicated through their openness and respect towards native speakers of the target language and sometimes through actual identification with or integration into the target community (Gardner, 2001). As MacIntyre et  al. (2009: 44) state, integrativeness reflects ‘a genuine desire to meet, communicate with, take on characteristics of, and possibly identify with another group’. Dörnyei (2009: 27) suggests that the concept of integrativeness can be conceived of as ‘the L2-specific facet of one’s ideal self’. That is, if our ideal self is concerned with mastering the target language and becoming a proficient user of that language, we would be described in Gardner’s (1985) terminology as having an integrative disposition (Dörnyei, 2009: 27). In this sense, Dörnyei (2009) regards integrativeness as one of the key motivational orientations of a person’s ideal language self. However, this concept of integrativeness has been criticised by some researchers (see Csizér & Kormos, 2009; Ryan, 2009; Ushioda, 2011a; Yashima, 2009) based on the notion that the Gardnerian concept of integrativeness merely presents a partial picture of individuals’ language motivation orientations. This is because language learners in many English as a foreign language (EFL) contexts tend to possess little opportunity for direct interaction with the target language community. In this regard, Ushioda (2011a) postulates that the impact of globalisation and internet use have led integrativeness to lose ‘its explanatory power’, because English is no longer limited to Anglophone societies such as the UK or the United States. Ushioda (2011a: 201) further contends that one’s integrative motivation needs to be explained according to the ‘desired self-representations as de facto members of these global communities, rather than in terms of identification with external reference groups’. With the above in mind, Yashima (2002) proposed the concept of ‘international posture’ as an alternative to integrativeness, ‘to capture a tendency to relate oneself to the international community rather than any specific L2 group’ (Yashima, 2009: 145). She did this for two reasons: (1) the limited opportunities for direct communications with native speakers of English in many foreign language contexts and (2) the impact of globalisation and internet use which made English the language of communication among people from different parts of the world (Yashima, 2013: 39–40). Yashima (2002: 57) describes ‘international posture’ as an ‘interest in foreign or international affairs, a willingness to go overseas to stay or work, readiness to interact with intercultural partners, and, one hopes, openness or a non-ethnocentric attitude toward different cultures’. Yashima (2009: 159) suggests that international posture constitutes a central part of individuals’ future visions of the ideal language self since they ‘expand their self by creating new images of themselves linked to global concerns’ in today’s world. A number of previous studies that explored

60  Part 1: Theoretical Considerations

the relationship between Dörnyei’s (2009) concept of ‘possible selves’ and international posture reported that the ideal language self was highly related to international posture (e.g. Kim & Lee, 2015; Kong et al., 2018; Kormos et  al., 2011; Mystkowska-Wiertelak & Pietrzykowska, 2011; Yashima, 2009). Mystkowska-Wiertelak and Pietrzykowska’s (2011: 257) study in the Polish educational context found that their participants with a higher level of international posture were motivated to interact with individuals from different cultures and read English language websites. These participants also imagined their ideal selves working/studying abroad or pursuing an international career. As already stated, embodying such visions and reaching the desired possible self-image may be impossible to achieve without adopting certain effective strategies. Therefore, language learners who display a higher level of ‘international posture’ tend to articulate long-term learning goals and they deploy many voluntary language strategies that they have internalised. Another motivational language construct related to one’s ideal language self is that of ‘national interest’ (Islam et  al., 2013). It was first suggested by Islam et  al. (2013: 4) as representing ‘attitudes towards national socio-economic development, national integrity and the projection of a positive group/national image in the international arena’. Islam et al. (2013) carried out a quantitative study of Pakistani undergraduate students’ motivation to learn English, using Dörnyei’s (2009) L2 Motivational Self System as their main theoretical framework, while also including some context-specific factors that might influence their English language motivation. Islam et al. (2013: 231) found that ‘national interest’ made a strong contribution to the participants’ ideal language self, highlighting the need to understand the association of English with the national identities and interests of language learners. They revealed that instead of viewing English as a colonial language or as a threat to their personal or national identity, the Pakistani participants’ image of themselves as future English users was essentially associated with their desire for socioeconomic development, internal harmony and the international reputation of their country in a challenging global context. This was because Pakistan’s involvement ‘in the international war against terrorism has badly affected local and international trade, investment and tourism’ (Islam et al., 2013: 240). Therefore, some of these participants sought to master English as an essential means to restore the image of ‘Pakistan as a peaceful, progressive country’. In line with the findings of Islam et al. (2013), Hajar’s (2016) qualitative study of a female postgraduate learner of English from a rural region of Iraq found that the participant’s ultimate reason for pursuing her postgraduate study at a UK university was related to her personal and national interest. This participant in Hajar’s (2016) study aspired to move abroad to pursue education through the medium of English to expand her knowledge in her own specialisation, contribute to the economic development of Iraq and attempt to counter

Towards a Socio-Dynamic Perspective on Language Learning Strategy Research  61

negative stereotypes of the Arab world and Islam since her village was under the control of the Islamic State group (Daesh). Hajar (2016: 14) concludes his study by affirming the need to enable language learners in the context of developing countries or those recovering from conflict to visualise themselves as competent language users in the future – or in Dörnyei’s (2009: 33) terms, to ‘ignite the vision’ and construct an ideal L2 self. This can be achieved, Hajar (2016: 14) affirms, by helping these learners achieve their long-term goals, including those related to the powerful motivational construct of ‘national interest’. 3.6 Conclusion

This and the previous chapter presented a detailed account of existing LLS research by discussing its theoretical and methodological bases and the shifting language learning research landscape before going on to describe how sociocultural perspectives have advanced as a useful lens through which to consider LLS use. These chapters have further discussed the affinity between the theoretical underpinnings of socio­ cultural perspectives and conceptual understanding of LLS as a state (i.e. actual and dynamic deployment of strategies in different learning settings). This has been done by emphasising socially oriented theoretical concepts, including dynamic interactions with contextual affordances, goal orientation, identity, CoP and power relations. However, empirical studies undertaken from a sociocultural viewpoint are still relatively rare. Accordingly, the present research reported in this book resembles one of the few longitudinal, qualitative studies in the LLS field that has used a socio-dynamic conceptual framework to obtain a rich and contextualised picture of the learning strategies used by a group of postgraduate international learners, including their shifting learning motivations and future vision in both their homelands and study abroad contexts. Resources for Further Reading Atkinson, D. (ed.) (2011) Alternative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition. London: Routledge. In this volume, Atkinson reports the overdominance of cognitivism and the need for more social procedural theories and research methods. With the influence of cognitivism as a backdrop, six alternative approaches are discussed by prominent advocates. These approaches – sociocultural, complexity theory, conversation-analytic, identity, language socialisation and sociocognitive – bring attention and understanding to the complexities of learning an additional language, allowing for direct comparison across approaches. Dörnyei, Z. (2009) The L2 Motivational Self System. In Z. Dörnyei and E. Ushioda (eds) Motivation, Language Identity and the L2 Self (pp. 9–42). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. This chapter offers a clear theoretical analysis of the proposed language motivation model – ‘L2 Motivational Self System’ – in terms of self-perspectives. This model connects one’s language learning motivation to future self guides, and includes three dimensions:

62  Part 1: Theoretical Considerations

the ideal L2 self (i.e. aspiration towards a desired end state), the ought-to L2 self (i.e. avoidance of feared or negative end states) and the L2 learning experience (i.e. the situation-specific motives related to the immediate learning environment and experience). Gao, X. (2010) Strategic Language Learning: The Roles of Agency and Context. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. In this book, Gao reviews research on LLS use and adopts a sociocultural perspective to guide his longitudinal qualitative study of a group of mainland Chinese undergraduates’ language learning experiences and strategy use at an English-medium university in Hong Kong. Gao examines the roles of learner agency and contextual conditions in mediating his participants’ changing strategic learning efforts before and during their stay in Hong Kong.

Part 2 Language Learning Strategy Research in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) Contexts

4 Impact of Household Members on EFL Students’ Strategic Language Learning and Future Vision 4.1 Introduction

As described in the first part of this book, individuals’ strategic language learning efforts do not take place in a sociocultural vacuum; they are likely to be influenced by mediated and situated processes, through participation in a range of institutional contexts such as schooling, and non-academic ones, including ‘the household, the peer group, the workplace or neighbourhood shops’ (Palfreyman, 2011: 33). The second part of this book (i.e. Chapters 4 and 5) reports on the findings from the first phase of the current longitudinal qualitative research. The first research phase is concerned with the participants’ past language learning experiences in their Arab homelands, with special focus on their strategy use, learning motivation and future goals. It serves as a baseline for the subsequent phases of the enquiry. The background of the participants, the data collection and the analysis processes of this study were described in Chapter 1. This book supports the argument that both classroom and outof-class learning are equally important in shaping individuals’ strategic language learning efforts and learning goals. Drawing on sociocultural language learning research, the major thrust of this chapter is to uncover the central role that household members (i.e. parents, siblings and foreign domestic helpers) can play in orchestrating the strategic language efforts and future goals of a group of English as a foreign language (EFL) students in their homelands. Field (2005: 101) points out that learning beyond the classroom is supported by informal social agents (e.g. family members and friends), considering that ‘when it comes to new ideas or skills or information, many people prefer to trust their networks rather than rely on educational institutions’. In this chapter, particular attention is paid to the quality of the enabling language learning resources that can be accessed by the participants, more than the quantity of such resources.

65

66  Part 2: Language Learning Strategy Research in EFL Contexts

4.2 Importance of Understanding Individuals’ Language Learning Experiences beyond the Classroom

The focus of much research in the field of language teaching and learning has been on learning and developing English within formal settings. Language teachers and peers are usually conceived of as the most significant actors who help shape students’ strategic language learning efforts, their learning motivation and future vision. Coyle (2007: 77), for instance, defines language learning strategies (LLSs) as a ‘by-product of classroom culture’, highlighting the fact that exploring LLSs deployed by language learners requires focusing on interactions within the classroom. With the so-called ‘social turn’ in education described in Chapter  3, however, the landscape of language learning research challenged the assumption that ‘foreign language learners’ development as language learners is largely language teachers’ responsibility’ (Gao, 2006b: 287). A sociocultural perspective of language learning emphasises the influential impact of both formal (i.e. language teachers and peers) and informal (i.e. parents, siblings or friends) social actors on learners’ language learning experiences and their strategy use. In a volume edited by Benson and Reinders (2011: 2) called Beyond the Language Classroom, 13  chapters were written in response to the claim that ‘vast swathes of the territory for language learning beyond the classroom remain undiscovered by research’. A reader of this volume can gain greater insights into how some language learners actively engage in language learning beyond the walls of the classroom. Outlining language learning beyond the classroom as an area of inquiry, Benson (2011) suggests a theoretical model with four dimensions: location, formality, locus of control and pedagogy. Location pertains to the various places where non-prescribed activities can occur, including the home, playgrounds and internet cafés. The second dimension, formality, refers here to the degree to which learning activities are formally structured or, for example, can lead to officially recognised qualifications, and include prearranged sequences of teaching and learning, textbooks and tests. As regards informal learning, this entails interests pursued outside institutionalised learning environments. The dimension of locus of control centres on how far learners feel in control of their learning or feel controlled by other people or instructional materials (i.e. self-directed or other-directed). The fourth dimension, pedagogy, mainly pertains to the contrast between selfdirected naturalistic learning and instructed learning, where instruction is understood to be a specific form of pedagogy, including processes, such as the sequence of the material to be taught, overt explanations and evaluation or testing. In this sense, when a learner listens to English music, it might be said that music is ‘teaching’ them rather than ‘instructing’ them. According to Benson (2011: 11), self-directed naturalistic learning refers to a learner’s intention to learn a language outside the classroom

Impact of Household Members  67

by setting out a naturalistic learning situation, but during the situation, the focus could switch to enjoyment, communication or even learning something else other than the language, as in the case of watching a soap opera on TV in a foreign language. Benson’s (2011) model is currently the only theoretical model that attempts to capture learners’ extramural language efforts. Doyle and Parrish (2012) applied this model to examine how Japanese university students used out-of-class English learning opportunities. Doyle and Parrish (2012: 200) found that the majority of the participants engaged in ‘traditional ways of using English outside of class’ in their spare time using exam-oriented LLSs, by working on mock exam papers and memorising chunks of language. However, a few participants in Doyle and Parrish’s study (2012) showed ‘creativity and resourcefulness’ in their approach to learning English outside the classroom by using LLSs that seemed to be more internalised within their selves and less likely to have been passed on by others (i.e. voluntary strategies). Examples of these strategies were talking to themselves in English, thinking about how they might handle a task in their daily lives in English or singing karaoke in English. With the addition of high-speed internet connections to media sources, there has been a recent burgeoning of research studies investigating the less well-charted terrain of learners’ language learning experiences with technology beyond the classroom, underlying their LLS use (Reinders & Benson, 2017). According to Lai (2015: 266), most of these studies (e.g. Chik, 2014; Frumuselu et al., 2015; Murray, 2008; Richards, 2015; Wang, 2012) found that ‘good language learners’ were more likely to make use of the out-of-class language learning artefacts available to them, and that this was positively associated with their learning outcomes, confidence and enjoyment. Richards (2015) refers to a number of effective LLSs in EFL contexts that language learners can take advantage of by using technology-mediated language resources beyond the classroom. Examples of these LLSs are participating in online chat rooms in English, interviewing foreign visitors, playing online language-based digital games, using online resources (e.g. Ted Talks) and watching English programmes or movies. Wang’s (2012) study, for example, explained how a group of Chinese students of English had overcome their poor listening and speaking skills by adopting the strategy of immersing themselves regularly and rigorously in English television dramas at home in China. Based on the findings of her study, Wang (2012) suggested that the significance of watching movies rich in authentic and functional use of the target language was not limited to only targeting some specific linguistic facets that these students might still have needed to improve, such as pronunciation and intonation. The value of watching movies extended to their being a mediating and enabling artefact for ‘an in-depth understanding of western social values, which will empower them [language learners] to become world citizens’ (Wang, 2012: 339). By the same

68  Part 2: Language Learning Strategy Research in EFL Contexts

token, Murray (2008) recorded the language learning experiences of a few successful adult Japanese EFL learners, and found that they achieved intermediate to advanced levels of fluency through their engagement outside the classroom with technological tools related to American pop culture such as movies, TV programmes and music. Kuppens (2010), in turn, reported that the employment of LLSs using technology-mediated language resources, such as listening to English songs, watching television and movies with subtitles and playing English computer games, had a positive impact on the bilingual translation skills of her Flemish sixth-grade participants. The aforementioned studies offer a number of potentially significant findings in relation to the role of material resources, particularly new technologies, for enhancing EFL students’ motivation for learning and using English. Notwithstanding, most of these studies paid scant regard to the role of social actors (e.g. language teachers, family members, friends and neighbours) in mediating the out-of-school language learning resources available to language learners. In this sense, the first phase of the present qualitative research study reported in this chapter targeted the impact of social actors within the households (parents, siblings and foreign domestic helpers) on a group of postgraduate Arab participants’ English language learning motivation, strategy use and future vision in out-of-school contexts. These actors are often as important to language learners as their teachers. 4.3 Examining the Mediating Role of Household Members

Based on the sociocultural theoretical underpinnings discussed in Chapter 3, language learning is a socially mediated process, in the sense that language learners act in the world with the help of a host of social agents (e.g. family members and teachers) across different social spaces to mediate their language learning beliefs, motivations and strategy use. With the global dominance of English and the associated opportunities and challenges related to learning it, an increasingly salient issue for language learning researchers is the possibilities offered to language learners by their various communities, including schools, neighbourhoods, workplaces and households. Accordingly, a family becomes a ‘learning community’ (Wenger, 1998). Lave and Wenger’s (1991: 29) notion of ‘legitimate peripheral participation’ implies that communities (including families) learn through the ongoing interaction between experts, who are ‘old-timers’ and normally do focal tasks, and novices, who gradually become mindful and skilled. In this sense, parents and older siblings are likely to be the experts and children can learn from them. In this regard, Gao (2012: 583) points out that household members may offer children different language learning resources to organise and regulate their language learning, including ‘material resources’ (e.g. technology,

Impact of Household Members  69

Trust network

Advice or guidance network

Constraining network

Providing encouragement, either financially or emotionally (i.e., a positive, indirect kind of involvement)

Teaching/practising English with language learners or through exposing them intentionally to language resources (i.e., a positive, direct kind of involvement)

Revealing a range of discouraging behaviours such as openly belittling the value of English learning or disregarding the learner’s language views completely

Figure 4.1  An illustration of the participants’ personal social networks

textbooks), ‘social resources’ (e.g. competent speakers of English) and ‘discursive resources’ (i.e. motivational and belief discourses about language learning). It is crucial for language learners to exercise their agency by taking advantage of these enabling language resources in their pursuit of English competence in various contexts. According to Kurata (2011: 7), gaining access to a myriad of target language resources, such as English textbooks or competent speakers of English, is, in essence, mediated through learners’ personal social networks within their immediate learning settings. In the business and management field, Krackhardt and Hanson (2011: 31) differentiate between two main types of social network: trust and advice networks. The trust network is restricted to sharing confidential and delicate information with others without taking procedural action (i.e. a positive, indirect kind of involvement). Conversely, the advice network is formed by prominent players in an organisation, and their task is to solve problems and provide significant information (i.e. a positive, direct kind of involvement). Based on Krackhardt and Hanson’s (2011) distinction between trust and advice networks, along with an analysis of the impact of household members (i.e. parents, siblings and domestic helpers) on the participants’ strategic language engagement and future vision, three types of social network were distinguished: trust, advice and constraining networks (see Figure 4.1). The following sections look at the mediating effect of family members and domestic foreign helpers on EFL students’ LLS use and future goals in their homelands, with specific focus on the interview data collected from the Arab participants taking part in the present study. 4.3.1 Parental mediation

The role of parental involvement in enhancing children’s first language acquisition and literacy skills has been exhaustively explored (e.g. Gregory, 1998; Guasti, 2017; Sénéchal & LeFevere, 2002). There has also

70  Part 2: Language Learning Strategy Research in EFL Contexts

been increasing research into how parents contribute to their children’s foreign language learning (e.g. Forey et  al., 2016; Gao, 2006b, 2012; Huang, 2015; Jiang, 2011; Lamb, 2013; Palfreyman, 2011). Gao (2006b), for example, interviewed 20 mainland Chinese high school graduates who pursued their undergraduate programmes in Hong Kong, in order to uncover the role of parental involvement in the participants’ previous English language learning. All the participants came from highly educated and well-off families. Gao’s (2006b) participants identified their parents’ investment, support and sacrifice in various ways and degrees to support their English learning and strategy use. Gao (2006b: 290) classified parental involvement into six different types: language learning advocates, language facilitators, collaborators with teachers, language learning advisers, learning coercers and learning nurturers. For example, the participants in Gao’s (2006b) study valued the role of their parents as ‘language learning facilitators’ who created a good language learning environment for their children to learn in and use certain effective LLSs. These parents did so by practising oral English at home, hiring competent speakers of English as home tutors, purchasing English movies and English magazines and choosing the schools where English is emphasised. Similarly, Jiang’s (2011) mixed methods study with 170 Chinese university students revealed strong parental involvement in these students’ English learning experiences. Jiang (2011) explained the strategies the parents of his participants used to involve their children effectively and actively in learning and using English, which included verbal communication (e.g. praise), full financial support (i.e. paying for private supplementary tutoring or extra language learning resources) and rewards (e.g. for talking to foreigners in English). As will be explained in the coming sections, the findings of the current research suggest that the participants’ parents played different kinds of positive roles to promote and shape their children’s LLS use and future goals, but some parents actually obstructed their children’s language learning through a range of discouraging behaviour such as favouring scientific subjects over English or openly belittling the value of English learning. In the following sections, I present the findings concerning the impacts of the parents’ socioeconomic status together with their religious and political beliefs on the participants’ strategic language efforts and future vision. 4.3.1.1 Impact of parental education level and financial status

In the current research, the socioeconomic status of the participants’ parents relating to their occupation, income and education level played a pervasive role in identifying the amount and kind of support they offered to their children learning English. Apart from Rawan, the participants’ parents were classified as ‘those who have’ (Nunan, 2003: 605), with

Impact of Household Members  71

different levels of education. Rawan, the Syrian participant, was the only one who had experienced a noticeable lack of almost any kind of support from her family members in relation to her English language study. Rawan recalled that her family members were unable to foster an appropriate language learning environment for her, for example, by purchasing English learning material or creating opportunities for practising English: Extract 1: I was sent to under-resourced rural schools and none of my family could speak any English. My parents were farmers. We didn’t have satellite TV or a computer in our house… I couldn’t even dare to ask any of my family to finance private English tuition classes for me at university because of our bad financial situation. (Rawan, 1st interview)

This extract seems to suggest that Rawan ascribed this limited family involvement in her English learning to the low income and education level of her parents. This finding was also echoed by Lamb (2013: 24–25), who reported that none of the rural parents in his study of a group of young adolescent learners in rural Indonesia had created ‘optimal ways of learning English’ for their children, and ‘they were not proactive’. Their support was limited to ‘the frequent invocation of the power of prayer’ because of the lack of money and education of these parents (Lamb, 2013: 24–25). The data also suggest that the parents of four participants (Adnan, Haifa, Osama and Waleed) were less educated and mostly represented ‘trust networks’ for the participants. These parents engaged indirectly with their children’s language learning through emotional and/or financial support, such as by encouraging them to ‘study hard’ and providing English learning materials required by the participants. To clarify this finding further, four participants reported that they realised the importance of English in their lives at university level because the medium of instruction of some subjects was English. At that stage, the parents of these participants recognised that mastering English was essential for their children’s future job prospects. Therefore, the parents purchased the English resources (e.g. electronic dictionaries, English textbooks) that their children required. The two Saudi participants (Waleed and Adnan), for instance, mentioned that their father purchased the Atlas English–Arabic electronic dictionary that they needed during their attendance at university. However, Adnan expressed his dissatisfaction with the use of this kind of electronic dictionary, given that ‘they often did not accurately depict the word’s meaning and use’ (Adnan, 2nd interview). The less educated parents also financed private English tuition classes for their children at university and in preparation for the International English Language Testing System (IELTS) test as a prerequisite to

72  Part 2: Language Learning Strategy Research in EFL Contexts

obtaining an unconditional offer on their master’s (MA) programmes at a UK university. In addressing this point, Haifa, the Emirati participant, commented that her father allowed her to arrange one-to-one tutorials with an American tutor at home to help her prepare for the IELTS test. With the same objective in mind, Haifa in Extract  2 indicated that her father also paid for her two-month subscription to online IELTS preparation on the British Council website. In addition to expanding her vocabulary inventory through communication with a private English tutor, the American tutor passed on some effective LLSs in relation to each section of the IELTS test (i.e. exam-oriented strategies). Extract 2: Although my parents weren’t highly educated, I received from them unlimited emotional and financial support… my father gave me the money needed to hire a private American tutor to train me in the IELTS test for five months. I also subscribed to some websites to try out online some IELTS sample tests. I sharpened my vocabulary repertoire and my pronunciation in my communication with this tutor. She taught me many effective strategies for the IELTS test. (Haifa, 1st interview)

Waleed’s father invited one of his friends who was an MA graduate in English Language Teaching to help Waleed improve his English skills before going on to one of the Saudi universities: Extract 3: … a friend of my father, he was proficient in English because he was studying in the UK. He taught me general English for one month … he advised me to watch English channels to improve my listening skills before going to university. (Waleed, 1st interview)

The picture that emerges from Extract 3 is one of cooperation between formal and informal social agents (i.e. between tutors and parents) in orchestrating the participants’ strategic language learning efforts. It also shows that the influence of the less educated, well-off parents on their children’s English learning was, in Kyriacou and Zhu’s (2008: 101) words, ‘largely benign’, and appeared at a late stage of their academic lives, i.e. after starting university and realising the role that English could play in their children’s futures. In line with this, Daleure et al. (2014: 18) found that 50% of their 1173 participants’ parents in the United Arab Emirates had only attended primary school, and more than 75% had no post-secondary education. Therefore, these parents had no experience of higher education, and tended to involve themselves indirectly in their children’s education. In his qualitative study of the impact of immediate family members on a group of Emirati university students’

Impact of Household Members  73

English language improvement, Palfreyman (2011: 29–30) found that the support of parents was confined to oral encouragement (i.e. a positive, indirect kind of involvement), mainly because the well-off parents were less educated and not proficient in English. However, the present research revealed the significance of not only the emotional, but also the financial support given by less educated parents to their children, mainly by financing private English tuition classes for their children at university and during their preparation for the IELTS test. On the other hand, the present study revealed that the parents of three participants (Feras, Yazn and Zahra) were highly educated and financially stable, and were both directly and indirectly involved in their children’s strategic language learning and development. These parents simultaneously formed the trust and advice networks for their children. For example, the parents of Feras and Zahra, the Syrian and Iraqi participants, attempted to instil positive attitudes and motivate them to learn English from the start by practising oral English at home, and sending them to a private international school where English was emphasised throughout their school education. Extracts 4 and 5 exemplify this point. Extract 4: When one is sent to a remarkable international school and some of one’s teachers are competent speakers of English, the English level of that person definitely develops. This picture describes my situation perfectly. We had to use only English and were encouraged to read English novels outside the classroom. The tuition fees for this school were extremely high. So, my parents gave me the spark to learn English…. my father is a surgeon and participates in some international conferences. I liked it so much when he spoke English with me at home… I hung a large map of Britain on the wall of my room to get to know more about its geography. My mother bought it for me. (Feras, 1st interview) Extract 5: My school was the first private school in Iraq that taught most of its classes in English. At that time, my mother insisted that English was not very important but that no-one could predict what would happen after several years. She was right especially after the fall of the regime of Saddam Hussein… I used to practise my English with my mother and my eldest brother. (Zahra, 1st interview)

Extracts 4 and 5 indicate that the parents of Feras and Zahra seemed to buy into ‘the idea of the earlier the better’ in terms of their children’s English language learning. The same extracts also reveal how the school– family collaboration created an additional avenue for these two participants to practise English in out-of-class settings. Related to this, the two

74  Part 2: Language Learning Strategy Research in EFL Contexts

participants used some voluntary, less exam-oriented strategies such as reading English novels in the summer, using English in daily communication and hanging a large map of Britain on the wall to get to know more about its geography. Notably, the parents of Feras and Yazn were ‘the chief decision-makers’ when it came to completing their postgraduate studies abroad. In particular, these parents were responsible for covering the educational and living expenses of their sons. The parents of three participants (Feras, Yazn and Zahra) also intentionally purchased some English resources (e.g. electronic dictionaries, English movies/novels and video games) for their children to enhance their interest and confidence in learning English. Concerning Feras’s case, he recalled that his parents used to reward him whenever he excelled at the primary and intermediate stages of his education, by bringing some animation DVD movies in English into the house. Extract 6: I was addicted to English language movies and my parents knew that. Therefore, their gifts to my sister and me whenever we passed an exam at school were to choose ten animation movies. Most of these movies were in English. (Feras, 1st interview)

This extract depicts the active role that Feras’s parents played in cultivating their son’s positive attitude towards learning English. In a similar case, Yazn reported the value of English video games purchased by one of his parents to increase his vocabulary repertoire, since he tended to recycle some game vocabulary during his interaction with other gamers. In Extract 7, Yazn recalled that he tended to use a bilingual dictionary or turn to one of his family members when encountering new vocabulary in some video games. Extract 7: My mother used to help me write my English homework. But my father had the leading role in my English learning. For example, whenever I got high marks in examinations at school, he rewarded me with one of the video games that I liked. They were mostly in English. Playing videogames was like watching movies but the difference between the two was that in videogames I had a role in changing the story line and other elements… In games, I was the one who fought and took decisions. (Yazn, 2nd interview)

This extract echoes the harmonious interplay between the direct and indirect involvement of Yazn’s parents in his English language learning and development. The same extract also recalls the argument put forward by Gee (2008: 318), namely that when playing a video or digital

Impact of Household Members  75

game, ‘players feel a real sense of agency, ownership, and control. It’s their game’. Accordingly, using video games as one of the affordances of technology could entail a considerable amount of spoken and written English output (see Stockwell, 2013). The above discussion indicates that parents who were highly educated and financially stable helped their children to bring about their desired future self-images as English speakers before going to university. They did so by adopting a variety of procedures, such as sending their children to outstanding private schools from the beginning of their education, practising English with them at home and offering them some technology-mediated language resources. This encouraged the participants to take up certain effective voluntary strategies to master English. Examples of these strategies were reading and composing poetry in English, speaking English at home and listening to English music. This finding seems to be inconsistent with the claim of some language researchers (e.g. Block, 2007; Lamb & Budiyanto, 2013; Ryan & Dörnyei, 2013) that pre-university EFL students are likely to be unable to recognise the primacy of learning the target language in their lives, or even to identify realistic language learning goals, given that ‘early adolescence is typically considered a period of flux and uncertainty’ (Lamb & Budiyanto, 2013: 19, 20). Reinforcing this argument, Block (2007: 144) adds that ‘there is usually far too much first language-mediated baggage and interference for profound changes to occur in the individual’s conceptual system and his/her sense of self’. However, this study showed that language learners engaged with the process of foreign language learning are capable of articulating realistic language learning goals and constructing their desired identity as language users if their awareness of English is properly nurtured inside and outside the classroom. This point was aptly put by Gao (2012: 592) who argues that immediate family members ‘can be regarded as highly proactive shadow teachers for their children, whose support was essential to their success in learning English’ and in conceptualising future visions that hold the flavour of actuality rather than fantasy (see also Dörnyei & Al-Hoorie, 2017; Dörnyei & Kubanyiova, 2014). 4.3.1.2 ­Impact of parental political and religious beliefs

It also emerges from the data analysis that the practices of some family members, mostly parents, seemed to deter or delay the participants’ use of some language learning material. All the participants were Arab Muslims, and some of them, especially the Libyan and Saudi participants, came from religiously conservative families. Adnan’s parents, for example, did not allow him to watch movies in English or any other foreign languages before going to university because they considered that such movies could contain scenes unsuitable for children. However, Adnan reported that he started watching English movies, especially the

76  Part 2: Language Learning Strategy Research in EFL Contexts

American ones, when he attended university. This strategy was crucial in helping him to gain the required score in IELTS, as shown in Extract 8. Extract 8: Adnan: I discovered the importance of watching movies to improve my English at university and during the preparation for IELTS… it helped me improve my listening skill and learn a great deal of new vocabulary. Interviewer: Did you watch English movies before going to university? Adnan: Unfortunately, I didn’t. I still remember how my father scolded me when he saw me watching an English movie on one of international TV channels. I was 11 years old. This was because some English movies included scenes of women in revealing clothes. (Adnan, 1st interview)

In this sense, Adnan’s parents’ obstructing his access to a key language resource appears to be based on the particular cultural and religious views that many Arab families hold. Indeed, there are differences in the way some Muslims treat English and Islam in their lives. According to Rahman (2005), Muslims mainly hold two attitudes towards English. The first regards English as the language of a colonising and bellicose West. Conservative Muslims are concerned that learning more English could result in neglecting Arabic, which is the language of the Quran. In this view, English could undermine the religious identity of Muslims. The other view is pragmatic, arguing that Muslims should make use of English as an essential requirement for effective education and for using new knowledge and new technology. In this way, Kabel (2007: 138) argues that English does not oppose Islam, but rather, can be deployed to facilitate its spread. In this regard, one of the findings of Palfreyman’s (2011) study concerning the impact of immediate family members on a group of Emirati university students’ strategic language improvement indicated that neither the participants nor their parents made any reference to the possible disadvantages or dangers of learning English based on their religious beliefs. Conversely, the father of one participant in Palfreyman’s (2011: 30) study mentioned that he encouraged his children to improve their English because they would have a wider choice of career and learn better about the cultures of others. That participant also cited an Islamic saying, ‘learn people’s language, and you will be safe from their harm’ (Palfreyman, 2011: 30). Three participants (Adnan, Haifa and Waleed) mentioned that their parents used to encourage them while at school to focus on scientific subjects more than English, given that the percentage of marks allocated to these subjects was higher than to English, which was treated as a supplementary subject. In this sense, parents can play a central role in cultivating their children’s positive or negative attitudes towards learning and

Impact of Household Members  77

using English (see Lambert, 1981). The father of the Libyan participant, Osama completed his postgraduate studies in a British university and was working as a judge in the Libyan supreme court. Nonetheless, Osama claimed that he did not receive noticeable support from his parents for his English language development before graduating from university, mainly due to the impact of political and societal factors in Libya. Therefore, he was not influenced by British culture or even interested in improving his competence in English before his decision to complete his postgraduate studies in the UK. Extract 9: Teaching English during the late 1980s was banned in Libyan schools due to political tensions between Libya and the West. This had a negative effect on my generation’s outlook towards English. University graduates had a very limited grasp of English and didn’t receive any kind of support from their parents… I started learning English formally at 17 years old. I still remembered that most Libyans used to consider people who talked in English as non-patriotic… Although my father studied in the UK for two years, he didn’t use to speak English at all in the house. He began encouraging me to improve my English when I was at university. But I only recognised the importance of English after my graduation… He supported me financially by hiring a tutor for the IELTS test. (Osama, 2nd interview)

Related to this, the participants’ use of some Web 2.0 technologies (i.e. blogs, Facebook, Skype, YouTube, Twitter and wikis) to improve their English in their Arab homelands was fairly limited. For some participants (Feras, Rawan, Osama and Zahra), the political factor might have had a prominent role in this finding, on the grounds that some popular social networking sites (e.g. Facebook, Skype and YouTube) were blocked by these participants’ governments for most of their lives in their home countries, and later, the internet connection speed was very slow. For instance, Rawan said ‘I actually didn’t know about Facebook or YouTube before my coming to the UK’ (Rawan, 2nd interview). The role of political factors in the participants’ use of technology for language learning was clearly reflected in Li’s (2013) qualitative study. Li (2013) reported the case of a Chinese university student’s use of web technologies and resources to facilitate his English learning. One of Li’s (2013: 133) findings was that his participant, Tao, drew a link between internet censorship in China (Google access), the politics of the United States and Chinese patriotism. More specifically, Tao believed that the Google ban in China was because the United States sought to distort the reputation of China and thus he was proud of not using Google. Tao also expressed his antagonism towards the American media, for example, by no longer listening to the Voice of America to develop his listening skills. Tao said:

78  Part 2: Language Learning Strategy Research in EFL Contexts

I listened to VOA [Voice of America]. I wanted to use it to practice my listening ability. It said China is… [He could not remember the word], anyhow, it was a very negative word. I am patriotic about my own country. I don’t want others to blame it. [Interviews in English, 31 October 2008] (Li, 2013: 133)

In sum, the above discussion reflects Lai and Gu’s (2011: 319) argument that ‘learners’ out-of-class learning activities are subject to the impact of their social/political contexts and their personal attitudes and situations’. 4.3.2 Mediating role of siblings

Existing research suggests older siblings can play a pivotal role in mediating monolingual children’s language acquisition (e.g. Andersen & Kekelis, 1986; Zukow, 1989) and the majority language into minority language households (e.g. Kibler et al., 2016; Pérez-Granados, 2002; Schecter & Bayley, 2002). Andersen and Kekelis (1986) are best known for their work on evaluating the interactions between blind children and their older siblings. They discovered that the older siblings’ language input to the visually impaired children was helpful, by describing events around them and involving them as participants in whatever was going on. The older siblings in Andersen and Kekelis’ (1986) study also verbally and non-verbally enabled their younger blind siblings to understand joint play, a process achieved by using ‘strategies for topic initiation and maintenance, for group inclusion and for conflict resolution’ (Andersen & Kekelis, 1986: 147). Howe et al. (2005) also found that young immigrant children with older siblings in Canada were more advanced than first-born children in their ability to understand and elaborate their classmates’ ideas, and in their ability to deploy conversational maintenance behaviours such as negotiation. However, some other researchers (e.g. Bridges & Hoff, 2014; Brody, 2004) claim that older siblings can negatively affect their younger siblings’ language skills. Bridges and Hoff (2014), in their study with US-born toddlers who were raised in bilingual homes, reported that older siblings (as young as 4 years old) altered their language to make it simpler when speaking to their younger siblings. However, younger siblings tended to be disadvantaged by the lower quality, in terms of grammatical structure, accuracy and richness of the older sibling’s input. In spite of the considerable evidence available on older sibling influences on the language learning and development of children in monolingual and bilingual contexts, little empirical research exists about the role played by older siblings as mediators of their younger siblings’ English language learning experiences in EFL contexts. The research reported in this chapter shows that siblings in the Arab region can be seen as another source of language learning opportunities. Almost all the participants

Impact of Household Members  79

mentioned getting help from one of their siblings with their English homework at home, before they went to university. In addition, three participants (Feras, Osama and Zahra) expressed a passion for listening to English music as a purposeful learning strategy to expand their exposure to English input and accumulate their repository of vocabulary items and phrases. They mentioned that their brothers or sisters played a pivotal role in introducing them to this strategy. Osama explains this point in Extract 10. Extract 10: I started listening to English songs with my sister after attending university. I loved Celine Dion’s songs. With her songs lyrics found on some websites, I sometimes put new words and phrases in my notebook to lodge them in my memory. I also revised them with my sisters. (Osama, 2nd interview)

Zahra, the Iraqi participant, also stated that her brother, a holder of a master’s in English literature, used to practise English with her, along with fuelling her passion for both reading and writing English poetry through purchasing some poetry books. Extract 11: My brother sometimes used English with me in our daily communication. During the summer period, I used to read some of his poetry books in his personal library. Poetry not only helped me to learn new words but also to know more about English culture. (Zahra, 2nd interview)

This extract reveals how Zahra’s brother passed on some useful voluntary LLSs to her while reading some poems; namely, learning new words in context and developing an understanding of the cultures of English-speaking societies. The reference made by some participants to the direct effects of their brothers or sisters on their language learning and strategy use may point to an increasing awareness of the significance of English for life skills by the new generation in the Arabic-speaking world. This finding resonates somewhat with Palfreyman’s (2006) empirical study at Zayed University in Dubai with female university students. Palfreyman (2006) found that the participants’ older siblings had a stronger influence on their English language learning and strategy use than their parents. This finding was principally ascribed to the remarkable difference between the educational level of students’ parents and that of their siblings. That is, 35% of the fathers and 31% of the mothers of Palfreyman’s (2006) participants only completed primary education, and just 8% of fathers and 4% of mothers had successfully completed higher education. Conversely, the rates were higher among their siblings; 72%

80  Part 2: Language Learning Strategy Research in EFL Contexts

of older siblings had completed higher education. Gitsaki (2011: xiii) in the preface to her volume on teaching and learning in the Arab world, emphasised Arabs’ rapidly rising interest in English in the 21st century: ‘Education is undergoing significant change globally and locally. In the Arab States, globalization and economic development have had a significant effect on [English language] education’. 4.3.3 Influence of ‘foreign domestic helpers’

In addition to parents and siblings, some participants, especially those who came from Arab Gulf states, referred to communication with domestic staff as another aspect of their daily home interaction. The presence of foreign domestic helpers in the household is indicative of a family’s socioeconomic status, given that families with higher earnings are more able to hire help (Dulay et  al., 2017: 223). O’Neill (2017: 31) indicates that many households in Arab Gulf countries have foreign domestic helpers, and English sometimes acts as a lingua franca between these workers and their employers to facilitate the functioning of the household. These domestic helpers often come from countries where English is a second language, such as India, Sri Lanka and the Philippines. Roumani (2005: 154) notes that 58% of children under three years of age in the Arabian Gulf are cared for by housemaids for between 30 and 70 hours per week, and remarks that ‘many children spend more of their waking hours with the substitute caregiver than they do with their parents’. Similarly, Al-Sumaiti (2012) points out that 94% of Emirati families employ maids and nannies to perform household chores and to care for their children. However, the employment of foreign domestic helpers has become a controversial issue in the Arab Gulf countries (O’Neil, 2017). O’Neil (2017: 34) has attributed this to the assumption by several Arab parents that employing foreign domestic helpers might damage their children, for example, if they acquire non-Arabic accents and ‘bad grammar’, or even their English may be somewhat tainted by contact with helpers whose English proficiency may be minimal. O’Neil (2017: 35) further argues that in the Arab Gulf region, some families prefer to hire Indonesian helpers in their households, given that they are mostly Muslim and their official language, Bahasa Indonesia, includes many Arabic words which may help them learn Arabic in the workplace. In the present study, four participants who came from Jordan, Saudi Arabia and the UAE (Adnan, Haifa, Waleed and Yazn) mentioned domestic helpers in their households. Apart from Yazn, the other three participants stated that these helpers did not have a discernible impact on their English language learning and use, mainly because they either came from other Arab countries or had limited interaction with family members. The domestic helpers employed by their families tended to

Impact of Household Members  81

use quite simple words in English or even Arabic with family members. Further, Adnan, Haifa and Waleed seemed to think that most helpers in their countries had inadequate English proficiency and were unlikely to help foster others’ English learning and development. Haifa, an Emirati participant, made the following comment regarding this point: Extract 12: In our house in Dubai we used Arabic. We did not mix languages at home although we had maids and cooks from India and Indonesia for four years. They did not have a positive influence on my English. They were able to speak some Arabic since they had already received training in Arabic prior to their arrival in Dubai. Some of them had previously worked in another Gulf country. One Filipino woman also worked in our house. She did not know Arabic very well. Therefore, very simple English words were used in our limited communication with her. I think most helpers do not speak English very well. (Haifa, 2nd interview)

This finding seems to reflect Palfreyman’s (2011), who found that his Emirati participants did not mention any benefit from interaction with foreign domestic helpers residing in their houses to help their English language learning and development. One participant in Palfreyman’s (2011: 25) study stated that the workers in her house did not speak English well, ‘because they were from Indonesia’, and therefore her house was ‘something of an Arabic-only zone’. However, Yazn, the Jordanian participant, reported that one English-speaking domestic worker helped motivate him to learn English and enabled him to try out some metacognitive and social strategies (e.g. by asking questions in English and learning new vocabulary in context). Extract 13 exemplifies this point. Extract 13: I started learning English formally in the fourth grade when I was nine years old. But I knew some English words and phrases beforehand like ‘hello’, ‘how are you?’ ‘My name is this’ and so on. My siblings and an Indian maid taught them to me. I still remember the amazement felt when I first saw my name written in English on a piece of paper by this maid. I was four years old…. Another Sri Lankan maid lived in our house for three years. I was in middle school and I learnt some words when I talked to her. When she used a higher level word, I remembered it – Oh, that’s a useful word… the helpers were treated as family members by my parents and siblings. (Yazn, 2nd interview)

The positive impact of foreign domestic helpers on individuals’ attitudes and motivation for learning and using English and, in turn, their

82  Part 2: Language Learning Strategy Research in EFL Contexts

strategy use has been reported in the findings of a number of studies in other contexts. Tse et al. (2009), for instance, analysed quantitative data from 4352 fourth-grade Hong Kong students and found that 42% of families hired a domestic helper. Tse et al. (2009) also reported that 64% of domestic helpers communicated with the children of the families in English and this in turn increased their exposure and experience of English. The same study also found a statistically notable difference between the English reading comprehension of children who had English-speaking domestic helpers and those who did not. The authors have partially ascribed this finding to the extra English interaction with English-speaking domestic helpers in the home. Nonetheless, Tse et al. (2009: 60) acknowledged that ‘it is unwise to ascribe such superiority to this factor alone’ since almost all of the participants in their study had parents with high incomes and education levels. Tse et  al. (2009: 62) concluded their study by stating that English-speaking domestic helpers can be ‘a very handy asset for children engaged in acquiring English as a second language and helps them to build a positive attitude and self-concept about English reading’. The presence of English-speaking domestic helpers in the household as facilitators of the acquisition of English vocabulary knowledge has also been reported in a study conducted by Chan and McBride-Chang (2005), who compared the English and Cantonese vocabulary knowledge of 50 kindergarten children in Cantonese-speaking Hong Kong, with or without a Filipino helper in the household. The participants took tests which measured their respective English and Cantonese vocabularies. Chan and McBride-Chang (2005) found that children who were cared for by Filipino foreign domestic workers displayed greater knowledge of English vocabulary than children who were cared for by their Cantonese-speaking relatives. Further, Leung (2012) examined the impact of foreign domestic helpers on child second language acquisition, by focusing on the listening skills of Cantonese-speaking kindergarten school children who were learning English in Hong Kong. Half of the participants had received/were receiving some of their English input from Filipino domestic helpers. Leung (2012) reported that all the children responded similarly in listening tasks where the speakers had American, British or Hong Kong accents. However, the children with Filipino helpers outperformed the others in relation to Filipino-accented English. Leung (2012) concluded that being familiar with another variety of English is an advantage, on the grounds that English is used as a lingua franca among non-native speakers on a daily basis. The discussion in this section has shown that English-speaking domestic helpers’ focus is more likely to be on completing daily routine tasks than providing English language support. Notwithstanding, they can on occasion foster children’s positive attitude and motivation for learning English, leading to their use of some useful LLSs.

Impact of Household Members  83

4.4 ­Role of Learner Agency

The discussion in the previous sections outlined the key role of household actors in mediating contextual realities and scaffolding the participants’ strategy use and their future possible selves. However, the contextual realities of social, cultural and material artefacts held an influential rather than a determining impact on the participants’ strategic language learning efforts because their language strategy use and learning goals cannot be properly interpreted without projecting their human agency into putting strenuous efforts into learning English as documented in the data. The findings of the current research largely align with Lantolf’s (2013: 19) understanding of human agency as ‘the human ability to act through mediation, with awareness of one’s actions, and to understand their significance and relevance’. That is, individuals need to be seen as proactive agents who are capable of thinking, wishing and acting when recognising the significance of a specific activity to overcome certain contextual constraints and accomplish their ultimate goals (see Gkonou, 2015). Rawan’s case vividly exemplifies this point. She experienced a noticeable lack of both financial and moral support from her family members in relation to her English language study. However, Rawan was not ashamed of her family background. Additionally, her two unsuccessful attempts to reach the required score on the test of English as a foreign language (TOEFL) to get an unconditional offer from a UK university did not affect her long-term goal of completing her higher education studies abroad and being the first university lecturer in her village. Instead, the obstacles she confronted, as shown in Extract 14, functioned as a wake-up call emboldening her to invest her agency and take up a new set of LLSs, principally mediated by a Canadian lecturer of English in her workplace at university. Palfreyman (2014: 183) asserts that language learners ‘will not be simply swept along in the stream of schooling/work/life, but will make efforts to float, swim and navigate to some extent according to his/her own purposes’. Extract 14: In order to get an unconditional offer from any British university, I needed to get a high score in the TOEFL test. Neither my parents nor I could afford private English tuition…. When I was working as a teaching assistant at one of Syria’s public universities, I met a Canadian lecturer in the office of the Dean. I took advantage of this opportunity by inviting her for a soft drink at the university cafeteria. She knew a few words in Arabic. She accepted my offer to teach her some Arabic and she trained me for the TOEFL test. She taught me many strategies in relation to each section of this test. For example, for the reading passage, she taught me how to use skimming and scanning strategies to save time during the exam. She also gave me the names of some websites that provide free

84  Part 2: Language Learning Strategy Research in EFL Contexts

TOEFL sample tests… I also started watching English films on TV channels or websites that gave subtitles in Arabic. (Rawan, 2nd interview)

In this sense, gaining the required score on TOEFL represented for Rawan an essential artefact to mediate her aspiration of moving upward in the educational hierarchy and hence to command a well-respected identity for herself. According to Dörnyei and Ushioda (2011: 68), such ‘key transformational episodes’ [authors’ italics] affect an individual’s language learning beliefs and strategy use by altering long-term learning goals. Bearing this in mind, Kalaja et  al. (2011: 49) argue that learners’ language learning goals and strategy use ‘cannot be considered stable mental states or characteristics of the individual, but dynamic and situated processes’. Gao (2013b: 228) also suggests that ‘reflexive/reflective thinking or thinking during action and post event in the learning process’ is indicative of agency as it shows individuals’ intentionality. The participants’ powers of critical reflection and thinking about their language learning experiences and strategy use in their homelands were also clear. For instance, they were most suspicious of exam-oriented/ other-imposed strategies and their possible effect on learning English, as will be explained in the coming chapter. Further, many participants indicated how their parents’ lack of English education along with other political and religious factors played a role in their late recognition of the usefulness of English in their lives (see Extracts 8 and 9). As explained in Section  4.3.1, three participants (Feras, Yazn and Zahra) were more fortunate than the others since they received numerous types of English language support from their immediate family members, particularly their parents, who were highly educated and financially welloff. Their parents were both directly and indirectly involved in cultivating positive attitudes in them towards learning English and facilitating their development as competent English learners. However, possessing such a resource-rich language environment should not be conceived as underestimating the potential role of these three participants’ personal agency in choosing the appropriate language strategies and formulating their own desires and visions themselves. More specifically, the three participants, to varying degrees, indicated their agency by seizing the language opportunities offered by members of their households and investing more time in learning and practising English across different settings. To clarify this point further, Zahra, the Iraqi participant, exercised a higher degree of choice in relation to the use of LLSs by, for example, displaying her enjoyment of reading some English novels and poetry books available in her brother’s personal library, together with practising English with some members of her household on a daily basis (see Extract 11). Similarly, Yazn, the Jordanian participant, capitalised on the opportunities offered by household members to be in contact with competent/ native speakers of English in informal settings to improve his English

Impact of Household Members  85

before going to the UK. He did so, for example, by frequently going with his brother to visit English university students living in a dormitory in addition to working voluntarily during the summer vacations in his father’s company responsible for finding accommodation for European people working in Jordan. In this sense, the participants’ willingness to take advantage of the supportive resources offered to them in terms of language learning reflected their agentive behaviour, because the presence of the enabling language resources in an individual’s life, as Palfreyman (2014: 177) suggests, ‘does not guarantee that they will contribute to learning’ or that an individual will invest these sources in their language development as well (see also Flowerdew & Miller, 2008). In sum, the participants’ strategy use and learning goals were the outcome of the close-knit intersection between their agentive power and a multitude of situated contextual realities, for instance, material and social resources. 4.5 Conclusion and Pedagogical Implications

Underpinned by socio-dynamic language learning perspectives, the current chapter has looked more closely at how EFL students’ language learning experiences and their strategy use can be mediated by their household members. The data from the current research suggest that the occupation and educational attainment of the Arab participants’ family (mostly parents) affected the amount and kind of support these participants received from their families while learning English. Less educated and well-off parents provided ‘a trust network’ by involving themselves indirectly in their children’s English language learning, and their involvement appeared at a late stage in the participants’ academic lives in the form of emotional and/or financial support. The LLSs used by these participants were mainly exam oriented. Conversely, higher educated parents formed the trust and advice networks of their children, and also helped their children to enact their desired future self-images confidently as English speakers from the start, for example by sending them to well-resourced private educational establishments throughout their education. The data also showed that the participants, especially those from the oil-rich Arab Gulf States, did not always take the opportunity to practise their English with the available English-speaking domestic helpers in their homes. Indeed, there is still a need to conduct further in-depth qualitative studies in EFL contexts, mainly from the students’ perspectives, to capture their own perceptions and experiences of the extent to which English-speaking domestic helpers can facilitate children’s strategic language learning efforts and future vision. This is because most previous studies of domestic helpers, as Tang and Yung (2016: 97) note, have been carried out by economists to examine issues like the consequences of tax reductions on the employment of domestic helpers and the importance of legislating a minimum wage for them (Dinkelman & Ranchhod, 2012; Flipo et al., 2007).

86  Part 2: Language Learning Strategy Research in EFL Contexts

This chapter has also demonstrated that although the extent of technology mediated language resources deployed by the participants in their homelands, such as video games, mobile phones and the media (i.e. TV, films, music and the internet) varied, none gave the impression that their use of technologies had been systematic or extensive, as they used technologies in limited ways in informal settings, chiefly for entertainment purposes, throughout their schooling but that later, this evolved into managing their goal commitment after entering university and/or during their preparation for TOEFL/IELTS to complete their higher education studies in the UK. This finding resonates somewhat with the claim made by Lai et al. (2015: 298) that ‘being able to exert agency to construct one’s out-of-class learning experiences does not necessarily mean that these experiences are beneficial’. To clarify this point, one of the findings of Lai and Gu’s (2011: 329) study on Hong Kong university students’ use of technology outside the classroom to regulate their language learning was related to a mismatch between the language proficiency levels of the majority of their participants and the online authentic materials they tried to use. For instance, some participants in their study found it difficult to understand reading materials on online websites or in Facebook, since they were at a beginner proficiency level (Lai & Gu, 2011: 329). Lai and Gu (2011: 330) highlighted the critical role that English teachers can play in drawing their students’ attention to the existence of authentic material engagement tools, such as web annotation tools (e.g. WordChamp and WebNotes) and speech rate adjustors. Elsewhere, Lai (2015) claims that language learners, mostly non-advanced ones, need some guidance from more experienced others such as English teachers to make a bridge between learners’ language learning experiences inside the classroom and outside classroom settings. Telling their students about the multitude of technological resources they can use outside the classroom and/or giving them assignments that involve exploiting these resources could greatly broaden their experience and strategy development opportunities (Lai, 2015). However, it is noteworthy that some technological resources may not be appropriate in every formal setting. For example, three participants (Feras, Osama and Zahra) regarded listening to English music as a purposeful strategy for learning English. However, music is a controversial issue in Islam, since some consider it a distraction from thinking about God, while other Muslims argue that music is a permissible pleasure. Hudson (2011), for instance, investigated the attitudes of 75 Muslim students (16% male and 84% female) at an Emirati university on the subjects they considered appropriate for the classroom. Hudson (2011: 132) found that 24% considered that music and songs should never be used in class. As a consequence, although it may be seen as useful to build music and songs into English classes, for example, as a way of developing listening skills and

Impact of Household Members  87

vocabulary, this language learning resource might not be applicable in some academic settings. Palfreyman’s (2012) exploration of mobile technology (students’ own camera phones) conducted at Zayed University in Dubai is an excellent example of finding ways of supplementing learners’ school-based language learning with the affordances related to their daily lives. Palfreyman (2012: 171–172) invited his female university students from the Arabian Gulf States to take a photograph with their own mobile camera phones to be shown as a presentation (with minimal explanation) in the classroom. Palfreyman (2012: 171) added that the resulting images became the starting point for dialogues among his students, and this was followed with a writing task based on these images. Commenting on the findings of his study, Palfreyman (2014: 189–190) elsewhere suggested that the use of a technology familiar to his students (the camera phone) in a familiar context raised their ‘awareness of their everyday lives’ and allowed them to express their ‘identity for a particular audience’. Palfreyman (2014: 190) further claims that the students themselves represented ‘a cultural resource’ for him, because the images displayed in the classroom enabled him as a non-Arab teacher of English and ‘a stranger in a strange land’ to gain an idea about the food, famous places and customs of the context in which he was teaching. Raising language awareness of the diversity and quality of technology-mediated learning artefacts can lead to fostering ‘learners’ positive beliefs and mindsets to enhance their intent to act on the resources/venues’ (Lai, 2015: 280), along with enabling them to create their desired potential self-image. Yashima (2013) shrewdly exemplifies this point: If classroom engagement is tied to the outside world, where learners can be guided to see their possible selves in ways that will help expand their life opportunities and career options, the knowledge and skills they have acquired in schools can be situated in their imagined communities and thus English might retain its meaningfulness through their lives. (Yashima, 2013: 50)

As a consequence, the cooperation between formal and informal social agents (i.e. between teachers and family members) in EFL contexts needs to be promoted, because language teachers are likely to be pleased by the recognition that they are not alone in their efforts to help individuals to learn better. Schools, for example, can become platforms for immediate family members to exchange ideas in relation to the best procedures for supporting students to actively utilise the English learning resources available to them in diverse settings. As White (2012: 8) aptly states, English language learning ‘is no longer hermetically sealed within the classroom, with the teacher and the textbook as the sole or principal source of target language texts and learning opportunities’.

88  Part 2: Language Learning Strategy Research in EFL Contexts

In a nutshell, social networks in language learning beyond the classroom are a fairly new area for research, and will benefit from further investigation. This chapter has introduced new information about the involvement of household members in the strategic language learning and development of some Arab EFL students, but its limitations should be acknowledged. In this study, for instance, the impact of parents on the participants’ English language learning and strategy use was highly relevant, and varied according to the family’s socioeconomic status. Nonetheless, the kind of influence immediate family members have on Arab students in their homelands might not be reflected in other modern societies, where an individual’s peer group may be as powerful as, or more powerful than their family. Therefore, research on individuals from places or countries with different sociocultural, economic and political conditions, in relation to the impact of informal agents (i.e. family members, domestic helpers, neighbours and friends) on their strategic language learning efforts would enrich the data available so far. Resources for Further Reading Gao, X. (2006b) Strategies used by Chinese parents to support English language learning: Voices of ‘elite’ university students. RELC Journal 34 (3), 285–298. The paper reports on the direct and indirect involvement of highly educated and well-off parents in their Chinese children’s language strategy use and development as competent English learners. The parents were involved indirectly by acting as language advocates, language learning facilitators and language teachers’ collaborators. Their direct involvement emerged by working as language learning advisors, coercers and nurturers. Palfreyman, D. (2011) Family, friends, and learning beyond the classroom: Social networks and social capital in language learning. In P. Benson and H. Reinders (eds) Beyond the Language Classroom. The Theory and Practice of Informal Language Learning and Teaching (pp. 17–35). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. In this chapter, Palfreyman adopts social network theory to examine how female English language students in the United Arab Emirates draw on networks of family and friends to organise their English learning and influence their language strategy use outside the classroom settings. Tse, S.K., Lam, R.Y., Loh, E.K., Ip, O.K., Lam, J.W. and Chan, Y.M. (2009) Englishspeaking foreign domestic helpers and students’ English reading attainment in Hong Kong. Chinese Education and Society 42 (3), 49–65. In this paper, Tse et al. explored the impact of English-speaking foreign domestic helpers on the English reading comprehension of a selected group of Grade 4 students in Hong Kong. They found a statistically significant difference between the reading performance of students who had domestic helpers and their peers who did not. They also reported that most helpers had a stronger influence on the students’ English learning than did the children’s parents.

5 Impacts of Mainstream Schooling and ‘Shadow Education’ on EFL Students’ Strategic Language Learning and Development 5.1 Introduction

In the current longitudinal qualitative research, the participants were active social agents, acting in the world with the assistance of a variety of mediating resources, including social agents (e.g. teachers, family members and friends) and material and cultural tools (e.g. textbooks, assessment modes and technology) alongside religious and political macro factors. Thus, multiple processes of social interaction and participation were essential for constructing these participants’ strategy use, learning motivation and future visions. The previous chapter discussed how household members (i.e. parents, siblings and foreign domestic helpers) played a pervasive role in bolstering and sometimes deterring the participants’ language learning and strategy use in their homelands. In spite of increased mobility and abundant opportunities for learning English beyond the classroom through online media and social networking services, most individuals’ early encounters with English in English as a foreign language (EFL) contexts are likely to occur in formal settings. These encounters may shape the individuals’ attitudes towards the target language and affect their strategy use and willingness to invest further in learning and using the target language (Lamb, 2017: 301). Thus, the classroom might be thought of as preparation for English use in out-of-school settings and/or as a place to obtain a qualification. This chapter reports the findings from the first phase of the current research, exploring the influence of mainstream schooling and ‘shadow education’ (i.e. privatisation in the education sector) on the participants’ language learning strategy (LLS) use and their motivation orientation towards learning/using English. More precisely, the role of formal social agents (English teachers, private tutors and classmates),

89

90  Part 2: Language Learning Strategy Research in EFL Contexts

material learning resources and assessment modes will be examined in detail. In addition, the motivation for and effects of private tutoring in English (PT-E) outside the formal classroom and fee-paying private schools will be discussed. 5.2 Participants’ Language Motivation Orientation and Strategy Use in Their Homelands

The analysis of data in Phase 1 shows that almost all the participants were grade-conscious and competitive. They considered examinations as the fundamental artefact which determined their level of English proficiency and access to higher education and social communities (Shohamy, 2000). Haifa’s words, although varying in tone and expression, echoed other participants’ motive orientation for learning English in their homelands, saying ‘the English language is a tool to achieve our goals’ (Haifa, 2nd interview). However, the participants’ recognition of the instrumental values of English emerged at different stages of their academic lives in their Arab homelands. For instance, most participants who attended state-funded public schools saw English before going to university as ‘just another subject on the school curriculum, quite divorced from the powerful resonances which it might have in the communities where it is used’ (Lamb & Budiyanto, 2013: 19). As a result, their motivation for learning English was likely to be ‘required motivation’, on the grounds that ‘passing an English course is detached from any real life purpose, but is a compulsory part of the education syllabus’ (Malcolm, 2013: 100). This finding seems to reflect Lamb’s (2012, 2013) finding that none of his Indonesian junior high school participants gave the impression that English was of much benefit for accomplishing their future dreams. Therefore, many participants during their school-level education reported using strategies associated with learning English as a compulsory subject, mostly for classroom study and to pass examinations. The majority of the strategies listed were compulsory strategies and were mediated by their English teachers in formal settings, for instance by their ‘using Arabic excessively in English classes’, ‘asking teachers for an L1 translation’, ‘reading the grammatical rules several times before working on the textbook exercises’ and ‘writing the new words several times for the exam’. To clarify, many of the participants were mostly concerned with remembering words for a test, rather than as a long-term communication goal. This is further demonstrated by the general failure to revise any items learned after the formal test (see Extracts 10 through 12). Apart from Feras, Yazn and Zahra, the other participants barely used social strategies during school-level education, mostly because of their lack of awareness of the significance of English in their lives, resulting in the overuse of Arabic inside the classroom and insufficient support received from their family members at that stage (Jiang &

Impacts of Mainstream Schooling and ‘Shadow Education’  91

Smith, 2009; Malcolm, 2011, 2013; Smith et  al., 2018; Taylor, 2013a). Therefore, their use of English was confined merely to uttering a few words inside the classroom. This finding largely aligns with Malcolm’s (2011: 199) argument that English use by many students in EFL contexts may be hampered by ‘inadequate resources and little formal support for their language learning’. Four participants (Adnan, Haifa, Osama and Waleed) mentioned that the critical value of English for them emerged at the moment of their enrolment in university, since some of their university classes would be conducted in English. In addition to memorisation strategies, these participants at university used more social strategies as well as other new strategies. Examples of these strategies were asking their university tutors and classmates questions in English, watching English programmes with Arabic subtitles in their spare time and following a meditative way of reading English texts (see Table 5.1). They took up these strategies mainly to develop their English ability as a precondition for passing their university modules and satisfying their families’ expectations (Malcolm, 2011; Van-den-Hoven, 2014). The following extracts reveal how the participants strived to get the examination results that met their family’s expectations: Extract 1: In Saudi Arabia, we learn English only to cope with the curriculum and examinations. My inner voice told me that my English level was good because my exam results were very good. I knew I was unable to express myself well in English, but marks were my sole concern.… I followed an English course before entering the university mainly because some modules would be taught in English. It would be shameful for me and my family if I failed my university exams. (Adnan, 2nd interview) Extract 2: My interest in learning English was secondary. At school, it was only a subject. Then I recognised its importance at university because English became a tool for reading medical books… I had to memorise a great deal of medical terminology such as the names of organs and instruments because our exams at university were mainly multiple choice questions. (Haifa, 2nd interview) Extract 3: My father wanted me to work hard to get a scholarship to the UK… in Libya, the best strategy to get high marks was memorisation. Therefore, I used it at university to memorise English poems and essays by heart. I knew that this strategy wouldn’t improve my English but this was the only choice to achieve my father’s wish and my dream as well. (Osama, 3rd interview)

92  Part 2: Language Learning Strategy Research in EFL Contexts

As is evident from these extracts, the participants’ experiential language learning accounts in their homelands emphatically underline the centrality of performing well in high-stakes examinations to determine their English proficiency and avoid negative outcomes by failing to meet the expectations of influential social agents, mainly parents and English teachers (see Magid, 2011, Malcolm, 2011; Ueki & Takeuchi, 2014). Hence, an instrumental-prevention force, compatible with Dörnyei’s (2009) ‘ought-to self’ dominated the motivational orientation of most participants during their stay in their homelands. This finding is supported by a number of other studies, for instance, Malcolm (2011) depicted the difficulties that four Year  1 university students from Saudi Arabia had while studying some university subjects in English; all their previous schooling had been exclusively in Arabic. Malcolm (2011: 201) argued that in this ‘sink or swim atmosphere’, her participants were seriously afraid of failure and of being shamed in front of their family members. For example, one of Malcolm’s (2011: 203) participants put it like this: ‘I didn’t give up because I think my family is looking at me… I didn’t tell anybody the problem was English. Just I told myself it’s English and I have to work hard’. Although the prevention aspect of instrumentality, the ought-to L2 self, constituted the dominant theme in the participants’ interview transcripts, some participants, especially after going to university, gave some instances where their intrinsic language learning motivation was more like ‘doing something because it is inherently interesting or enjoyable’ (Malcolm, 2011: 196). For instance, Waleed was interested in listening to English music at university, saying ‘I liked English music... I really wanted to understand what was said in English songs without looking at the lyrics’ (Waleed, 2nd interview). Waleed also attempted to communicate with some speakers of English who came to Mecca in Saudi Arabia to perform Islamic rituals. As will be described in Section  5.5.2.2, the three participants who studied in private educational establishments (Feras, Yazn and Zahra) had more intrinsic motivation than the other participants during their stay in their homelands. These participants took up a variety of LLSs in their homelands, and some of these strategies were essentially formed within themselves to master English, and went beyond any immediate utilitarian purpose. Examples of these strategies were borrowing English novels from the school library to read in the summer (Zahra), hanging a large map of Britain on the wall to get to know more about its geography (Feras) and preferring to watch English cartoons or movies and listening to English music (Feras, Yazn and Zahra) (see Table  5.1). The following conversation between Zahra and me indicates the combination of extrinsic and intrinsic elements in her language learning motivation:

Impacts of Mainstream Schooling and ‘Shadow Education’  93

Extract 4: Zahra: I had to speak English with my peers and sometimes with my family. I also used to read English novels as I was able to receive some gifts from my teacher like USB memory sticks… I liked to read English poetry in the summer because I was influenced by Shakespeare’s poetry… my love of English increased at university when I had two Canadian teachers. I also participated in an English club when I was at school. Interviewer: How long was your participation in that club? Zahra: It’s only for a short period because my focus was on getting high marks in the examinations. Otherwise, I wouldn’t have been able to win the annual prize allocated to the top student. (Zahra, 3rd interview)

This extract indicates that while competitive examination-oriented learning influenced Zahra’s language learning efforts, she also experienced learning English as ‘fun’ in various ways, using the internet, reading novels and watching movies. Yazn also reported that he used to visit some English university students staying in a dormitory in addition to working as a volunteer after graduation in an organisation responsible for finding accommodation for European people working in Jordan. Unlike the other participants, an analysis of Rawan’s data describing the time in her homeland showed that throughout her academic life in Syria, Rawan ‘lacked tangible evidence of the utility of English’, and regarded it as ‘a useless requirement’ that was ‘extremely tedious’ (Rawan, 1st interview). To support her point, Rawan claimed that her main goal for learning English in Syria was to obtain the minimum pass score in the compulsory English examination, although she was outstanding in her other taught subjects: Extract 5: In English, my aim was always to gain the minimum score required. I found learning English very difficult no matter how hard I tried. Although the English lectures at university were boring, I used to attend them and translate the English texts word by word. I also wrote some vocabulary in a notebook specifically for the exam. But I forgot them as I didn’t use them… English affected my grade point average. (Rawan, 2nd interview)

This extract suggests that English took a back seat in Rawan’s language learning history, and her inability to recall much vocabulary might be explained by her unwillingness to integrate new vocabulary into a meaningful context. However, the instrumental values of English emerged in Rawan’s motivational processes after being made a teaching assistant at one of the Syrian state universities to be sent afterwards to the UK to

94  Part 2: Language Learning Strategy Research in EFL Contexts

Table 5.1  An overview of the participants’ language strategy use in their homelands Strategy classification ‘Compulsory/ other-imposed strategies’ (i.e. exam-taking necessities with direct involvement/ coercion from important others)

‘Voluntary strategies’ (i.e. largely internalised within the self)

Strategy items

Participants

Work on practice exam papers/exercise books

All participants

Ask teachers for an L1 translation

All participants excluding Feras and Zahra

Learn by heart the short essays assigned by teachers

All participants

Memorise texts and vocabulary

All participants excluding Zahra

Repeat words/sentences aloud (chorally or individually)

All participants

Write words/sentences many times to remember them

All participants

Follow teachers’ teaching by classifying new words into groups based on their type and topic using different colours

Feras and Zahra

Listen to cassettes in the classroom

Feras, Haifa, Yazn and Zahra

Assign specific time each day to practise English with some family members (as required by teachers)

Zahra

Use almost only English in the classroom to avoid punishment

Feras, Yazn and Zahra

Watch short videos to complete reading comprehension questions

Feras

Cooperate with classmates to complete specific tasks

Feras, Yazn and Zahra

Focus on specific elements while reading stories assigned by teachers

Zahra

Participate in English-related competitions and clubs

Zahra and Feras

Read and compose poetry in English

Zahra

Open up a conference room at Yahoo! Messenger to do homework with some colleagues at university

Zahra

Murmur to one’s self

All participants

Play English PC games

Feras, Waleed and Yazn

Have a large map of Britain to know more about its geography

Feras

Install electronic dictionaries on mobile phones

Adnan, Waleed, Haifa and Zahra

Seek opportunities to interact with competent speakers of English outside the classroom

Feras, Waleed, Yazn and Zahra

Listen to English songs to relax or to learn new phrases/words

Osama, Waleed, Feras and Zahra

Watch some YouTube guitar video lessons in English

Yazn

Attempt to use the new vocabulary in daily life

Feras, Yazn and Zahra

Watch English programmes and movies on TV

All participants

Note: When a participant made several references to the same strategy in their experiential accounts, only one count was taken.

Impacts of Mainstream Schooling and ‘Shadow Education’  95

complete her postgraduate studies. More precisely, she was pressured into working hard at learning English to obtain a high score in the test of English as a foreign language (TOEFL), otherwise she would never have been able to come to the UK. Rawan made the following comment regarding this challenge: Extract 6: … to get an unconditional offer from a UK university, my score in the Paper-Based TOEFL had to be at least 550. Only at that point did I realise how wrong I had been not to be interested in English before. (Rawan, 2nd interview)

This extract echoes how high-stakes examinations as artefacts, in particular TOEFL, played a pivotal role in Rawan’s language learning investment and her underlying motivation. As shown in Extract  14 in Section  4.4 of Chapter  4, Rawan was willing to make the effort to reach the required score on the TOEFL test by embracing a specific set of LLSs such as downloading some English articles from the internet and allocating two hours a day to watching some English programmes. She also worked hard at having a strong relationship with a Canadian lecturer who was working in the department of English literature at Damascus University. Since Rawan was unable to afford private English tuition, she exercised her agency by suggesting that she teach this Canadian colleague some Arabic in return for English tuition (see Section 4.4 of Chapter  4). The following sections will clarify the central role of perceived contextual reality and mediation by certain social agents like teachers, classmates and private tutors in supporting the participants’ strategic language learning efforts, learning motivation and future vision during their stay in their native countries. 5.3 Impact of Mainstream Schooling 5.3.1 Effect of teachers as formal social agents

Along with the input from some informal social networks explained in the previous chapter, the findings of the first research phase showed how the participants’ attempts to learn and use English were markedly orchestrated by some teachers in the educational settings. More precisely, the data suggest that the involvement of mainstream English teachers in regulating the participants’ investment in learning English occurred on two levels: through fostering or limiting the participants’ language beliefs and motivations and/or through compelling them to embrace a specific pattern of LLSs, especially the exam-oriented strategy use. The five participants who were educated in state schools (Adnan, Haifa, Osama, Rawan and Waleed) expressed their dissatisfaction with, and even on occasions, contempt for the English teaching methods that

96  Part 2: Language Learning Strategy Research in EFL Contexts

they were subjected to in the formal school settings of their Arab home countries. These participants claimed that almost all their English classes were monotonous, unchallenging and teacher centred, focusing intensively on grammar instruction over other language skills. Related to this, they reported that most of their English teachers had poor pronunciation, tended to use Arabic more than half the time, interacted only with students who could understand their teaching on grammar, had little patience with student errors and were inclined to focus predominately on exam preparation. The following interview extracts exemplify the participants’ polemics on the English teaching practices in their classrooms: Extract 7: I don’t remember any of my classmates asking me one question in English. If I had a question, I used Arabic and the teacher replied in Arabic too… my English teachers in the United Arab Emirates sometimes pronounced words incorrectly and I discovered that when I grew up. Most of my English teachers were not really passionate about what they did. (Haifa, 3rd interview) Extract 8: The problem lies in the fact that all my English teachers in Saudi Arabia used to teach us only from the assigned books and these books were the absolute standard of success or failure… they didn’t invite us to work in pairs or groups and they focused only on excellent students. It’s the teacher who kept talking and we just listened to him. (Adnan, 3rd interview) Extract 9: As you know, schools and teachers in Syria often focus only on excellent students who are good at grammar. In my school, the English teachers often ignored other students, specifically those in the middle or weak, like me… I was frightened to put my hand up and ask questions or confess I had not understood something. (Rawan, 3rd interview) Extract 10: There was a wall between my English teachers and us. The only voice heard in all my classrooms in Libya was the teacher… it was input without output. Maybe we could utter only a word or so during the whole session. Teachers used Arabic a lot. (Osama, 3rd interview)

The picture that emerges from Extracts 7 through 10 indicates that English teachers in the five participants’ learning past, in particular before commencing their undergraduate degrees, appeared to encourage ‘a fixed mindset’ rather than ‘a growth mindset’, by seeing mental abilities as

Impacts of Mainstream Schooling and ‘Shadow Education’  97

immovable and responsible for the success or failure in learning a language (Mercer & Ryan, 2010: 437). More specifically, the teachers paid insufficient attention to motivating the participants or encouraging them to take risks and to reflect on their own thinking to shape their desired possible self-image. English lessons, as most participants claimed, lacked methodological variety since they were confined to text-based reading, grammar and vocabulary exercises. As Smith et al. (2018: 13) point out, language teaching methodology in most developing countries ‘remains largely traditional, with teacher-centred, textbook-based lessons aimed at the staged learning of grammar, vocabulary and reading comprehension, while oral practice is limited to rote repetition of textbook dialogues and teacher-pupil question and answer routines’. The participants’ perceptions were reminiscent of a number of empirical studies that examined factors contributing to EFL students’ disengagement (e.g. Esseili, 2014; Henry, 2013, 2014; Kuchah, 2013; Malcolm, 2013; Marcellino, 2008; Taylor, 2013a). Taylor (2013a), for example, in her large-scale study of Romanian teenagers found that many participants were reluctant to invest effort inside school classrooms full of dissimulation. This finding was mainly due to the teachers’ lecturing mode of teaching, which placed much emphasis on grammar and assessment marks with little room for communicative practice or authentic activities connected to life outside the classroom (Taylor, 2013a: 47–48). Taylor (2013a) suggests that her participants were keen to be treated by their teachers as real people, with acknowledging and valuing their opinions and complex personalities instead of being treated as abstract language learners, with no account taken of their interests. This echoes Lamb and Budiyanto (2013: 26), who point out that English in most EFL contexts is taught and learnt as ‘a value-free body of knowledge conveyed via official textbooks’ and the students are essentially oriented towards practice for local and national exams. According to Ushioda (2013), the high demand to learn English has contributed to a shortage of well-trained teachers in many EFL contexts. Consequently, some English language teachers might lack the skill or motivation to teach, which can have negative consequences for students (Ushioda, 2013). The current research also showed that the negative perceptions that the five participants had about their own English teachers at school led some of them to develop an aversion to English itself. This point aptly describes Rawan’s case, when she explained how her English teacher’s rigid pattern of outward behaviour constituted a stumbling block in relation to her academic pursuits. Extract 11: I started out as a good student at English learning at the primary stage of schooling in Syria but after being subjected to a form of punishment from my English teacher in the intermediate school, my feelings towards English completely changed. (Rawan, 3rd interview)

98  Part 2: Language Learning Strategy Research in EFL Contexts

This extract recalls Norton’s (2014: 70) poststructuralist view of motivation and resistance in the language classroom, whereby an individual may be highly motivated and enthusiastic to learn English in general, but if the language practices of the classroom make that individual unhappy or dissatisfied, they may resist participating in classroom activities, or gradually become disruptive. Norton (2014: 70) claims that resistance in the classroom can sometimes be generated by racist, sexist or elitist practices, or even from a divergence between what a student might assume to be ‘good teaching’ practice and what the teacher actually does. To support her argument, Norton (2014) related an incident concerning an immigrant Vietnamese woman in Canada named Mai. Mai made great sacrifices to attend her evening English classes after working a whole day in a factory and using public transport on cold winter days. However, Mai felt that she ‘didn’t learn at all’ and did not return to the class. This was mainly because her teacher focused only on students’ past language learning experiences, giving them little or no chance to reflect on their daily challenges in Canada. Therefore, Mai was reluctant to engage in classroom learning. According to Norton (2014: 71), Mai’s story revealed that the teacher is responsible for ensuring that ‘the activities in which students engage are meaningful to students and pedagogically rigorous’. The data analysis of the current research also indicates that mainstream English teachers – as critical agents – had an inescapable impact, forcing the participants to deploy a specific set of LLSs, principally the LLSs seen as essential for improving their English examination results (i.e. compulsory/other-imposed strategies). This can be seen in the following extracts: Extract 12: Almost all my English teachers in the United Arab Emirates used to teach us in the same way… after reading and translating the new reading text from stem to stern by our teacher, we had to answer the comprehension questions of the text… we had to memorise the list of vocabularies found at the end of the reading text for the exam. After my exams, I forgot not only most of the vocabulary that I had learnt but almost everything about English. (Haifa, 4th interview) Extract 13: Unfortunately, our English teachers didn’t give us useful strategies that could help us write a short essay in English. I had to learn all the paragraphs by heart to get a good mark in the exam. (Adnan, 3rd interview) Extract 14: In every English session in Libya, we had to copy some vocabulary and grammar points from the board… all learning and teaching were only for

Impacts of Mainstream Schooling and ‘Shadow Education’  99

exams… I forgot most of the English I learnt from my teachers at school because we didn’t practise it outside the classroom and the focus was on the exam alone. (Osama, 2nd interview)

These extracts reveal that preparing students for examinations was at the forefront of most participants’ mainstream English teachers in their Arab homelands. Consequently, the participants made liberal use of repetition and memorisation strategies. The same extracts also displayed the participants’ agentive power when they critically reflect upon their past language learning experiences and strategy use in their homelands. That is, most participants affirmed that much of what they had been doing had only limited significance, relating only to achieving examination success. The overuse of compulsory, exam-oriented strategies by the participants, especially those educated in public educational settings, is also exemplified in Table 5.1 (for more details about the distinction between compulsory and voluntary strategies, see Section 3.5 in Chapter 3). Unlike the other four participants who were educated in formal public settings, Waleed had positive things to say about one of his mainstream English teachers in the third year of secondary school. He claimed that the focus of that English teacher was not limited to rote memorisation strategies, but extended to spurring his students on to enlarge their language learning opportunities and employ alternative LLSs, especially metacognitive strategies such as checking their progress and analysing their mistakes. Since the final examination at Saudi secondary state schools is set by the Ministry of Education, Waleed acknowledged that he paid scant attention to his teacher’s ardent recommendations. The following extract illustrates this point: Extract 15: My teacher in my last year of secondary school was against everything that mainstream of English teaching in Saudi Arabia was… he kept telling us about the importance of English for our future… he encouraged us to think about our mistakes and he corrected them gently. I was unlucky because he came in the decisive final year of my study… the questions were put by the Ministry of Education and the focus of every student was on getting high scores in the final exam. (Waleed, 3rd interview)

In a nutshell, examinations as artefacts were found to play a central role in the participants’ developmental processes in terms of their language learning experiences and their LLS use before coming to the UK. Although they did not enjoy exam-oriented learning and teaching, the interview data showed that exam-oriented strategies were heavily used by most participants (especially those who attended state-funded public schools). These strategies were largely scaffolded by powerful social agents and were seen as systems for monitoring their language learning progress.

100  Part 2: Language Learning Strategy Research in EFL Contexts

5.3.2 Impact of classmates

Apart from English teachers, classmates can often greatly influence for EFL students’ strategic language learning efforts and their learning motivation (e.g. Baleghizadeh, 2010; Huang, 2015; Sato & Ballinger, 2016; Storch, 2005, 2007). Watkins et al. (2007: 88) point out that ‘mutual classmate support’ means a group of students working together with the aim of creating new learning opportunities and trying new LLSs. Huang (2015), for instance, examined the contribution of classmates to the English language learning experiences of a group of Taiwanese EFL students, including their strategy use. The participants were 12 university students from the departments of Chinese literature and physics. One of the findings of Huang’s (2015) qualitative study was that the participants’ employment of some cognitive and social strategies was largely mediated by their classmates who supported them in accomplishing their mutual academic, exam-oriented goals. Examples of these strategies were usually pronouncing or writing new vocabulary to remember it, working together on classifying vocabulary into meaningful units based on the type of word or topic and asking more proficient fellow classmates for clarification or correction. One participant, Jane, in Huang’s (2015) study described her classmate’s supportive role thus: In senior high school, there were 7,000 words for us to memorize. So, we formed study groups to memorize the large number of new English words. Every week we shared what we had memorized and tested one another. Sometimes, if some friends found some good ways to improve our English performance, they would share the ways with the group. In this way, we conquered the difficulties in memorizing vocabulary…. we fought the battles together. (Huang, 2015: 257)

Huang (2015) concluded her study by noting that the collaborative learning approach is favoured by most Chinese students in accordance with the collectivist characteristics of Chinese culture. Raddawi (2011: 80) points out that people in collectivist societies from birth onwards ‘are integrated into strong, cohesive in-groups and are concerned about the harmony and the heritage of their society’. However, some researchers (e.g. Gao, 2008; Pham, 2016; Taylor, 2013a) hold the view that in the absence of a harmonious cooperative environment and the dominance of teacher-controlled and examination-oriented practices, classmates can be a source of inequality in the classroom, leading to feelings of vulnerability, insecurity, anxiety and frustration. Gao (2008), for instance, found that stressful peer relationships based on fierce competition constituted a potential barrier to Chinese students exploring the uses of effective strategies together. One participant in Gao’s (2008) study indicated that his classmates were unwilling to reveal their ‘academic secrets’, and this academic competition caused isolation and mutual distrust, which

Impacts of Mainstream Schooling and ‘Shadow Education’  101

provided the seeds for potential conflict and behaviour clashes. This participant, Jiang, stated that ‘They [classmates] all kept their learning secrets to themselves. It seems that they were afraid of your exceeding them in learning if you knew their learning secrets and learnt in their ways’ (Gao, 2008: 181). The findings of the current research largely reflect Huang’s, suggesting that peers represented almost exclusively ‘a trust network’ (i.e. sharing some useful information with others without taking any procedural action) for almost all the participants by engaging indirectly in their language learning by checking the homework given by their teachers, for instance, or recommending private supplementary tutoring for each other. As a result, most participants had little to say about their interactions with their counterparts throughout their educational lives in their homelands. This was probably due to the fact that the classroom was mostly teacher-directed and competitive examination-oriented. For example, when Rawan, the Syrian participant, was asked about the influence of her classmates on her language learning before moving to university, she said: Extract 16: My classmates and I were quite poor in English. I didn’t ask them for help as I knew we were all suffering. There was no motivated peer there. This was the situation of many Syrian students in the rural areas… our teachers didn’t encourage us to work in pairs or group. (Rawan, 4th interview)

As evident in this extract, the classroom environment was not supportive of collaborative learning. At university, almost all the participants reported that competitive examination-oriented learning was dominant in order to win an academic scholarship. This, in turn, led the participants to continue working in an isolated manner. As Mideros and Carter (2014: 137) argue, a language classroom organised on ‘the basis of competition and confrontation is antithetical to cooperation and collaboration’. Yazn, for example, repeated this idea, saying: Extract 17: We completed some tasks together inside the classroom… In the last two years at university, I noticed that my colleagues were reluctant to provide much help. This was because we were all concerned with our own benefits. This did not mean that we hated each other but we had to try our best to win a scholarship. There was intense competition. (Yazn, 4th interview)

This finding about lack of peer support largely aligns with Taylor’s (2013b: 15) argument that most establishments in EFL contexts are premised

102  Part 2: Language Learning Strategy Research in EFL Contexts

on ‘competitive environments in which performance orientations are encouraged, to the detriment of learning orientations’ (author’s italics). In performance-oriented language classrooms, emphasis is placed on the importance of a student’s ability demonstrated through outperforming classmates in tests and avoiding negative judgment of his/her competence (Taylor, 2013b: 16). In relation to this, Seifert (2004: 141) affirms that performance goal orientation suggests that effort is an indication of low ability, in the sense that ‘smart people do not have to try hard and people who try hard are not smart’. Further, classmates for a performance-oriented student are rivals, whose failure is celebrated as an opportunity to appear better than them. Dweck (1999) describes this kind of peer pressure: [Peer competitiveness] creates a system of winners and losers, where there are a few winners at the top and a large number of losers under them… The norm of low effort also means that students’ feelings about their intelligence are further protected… If they don’t try, a poor grade doesn’t mean they’re not intelligent. (Dweck, 1999: 131)

In contrast, learning-oriented language classrooms support the idea that increased effort leads to improvement in language competence, and emphasise that ‘peers are facilitators of self-worth through cooperation and mutual enabling of progress’ (Taylor, 2013b: 16). That is, a learning-oriented student aims to become smarter, rather than to look smarter. This orientation, as Gao (2008: 180) indicates, is strengthened in the stages of education where peer competition is relatively low. In supporting this position, Zahra, the Iraqi participant, shared her reflections on the experience of opening up a conference room at Yahoo! Messenger with some colleagues in the first year of university to work together on their assigned homework: Extract 18: I had four close friends when I entered university. At that stage, the competition between us was at a very low level. We wanted to come up with something that made our homework fun. So, we created a conference room at yahoo messenger. When we had a question in our homework, each one gave his ideas… we often used English in our discussion. Sometimes I gave my answer to other members in this conference room to evaluate before submitting my homework. (Zahra, 3rd interview)

This extract exemplifies how online chat and conference rooms can constitute a vital tool for opening up new venues for language learning and easing the shift between formal and informal learning contexts. In addition, harmonious peer relationships played a role in enabling Zahra to deploy a number of social and metacognitive strategies such as the analysis and evaluation of her language learning.

Impacts of Mainstream Schooling and ‘Shadow Education’  103

5.4 The Mediating Role of Assessment Practices

The approaches to tracking students’ academic progress through assessment procedures in formal settings traditionally fall into two categories: summative and formative. According to Ur (2012), summative assessment is normally carried out by the class teacher or by an external authority, and merely provides a grade, often expressed as a percentage, offers no specific feedback on aspects of performance, and is designed to summarize or conclude a period of learning… [it] may be used as final school grades, or for acceptance into further education or employment. It may contribute little or nothing to ongoing teaching and learning. (Ur, 2012: 167–168)

In this sense, summative assessment is chiefly administered at the end of an academic semester or year to discern whether and to what extent students have mastered concepts taught during the course. It takes the form of grades and is primarily evaluative in its purpose. In contrast, formative assessment is not generally used for grading purposes, but to monitor individual progress. It is essentially employed to help form or shape students’ knowledge and thinking through regular interaction with teachers and peers (Shrum & Glisan, 2015: 366). Examples of formative assessment are ‘short quizzes, class interaction activities such as paired interviews, and chapter or unit tests’ (Shrum & Glisan, 2015: 366). Through formative assessment, students are capable of ‘doing something and learning: as autonomous agents and partners in critical reflection’ (Blanchard, 2009: 141, author’s italics). The current research reveals that with the exception of two participants (Feras and Zahra), summative assessment was almost the only kind of assessment used in the formal educational settings of the other participants in their Arab homelands. As exemplified in Extracts 1 through 3 of this chapter, summative assessment apparently enhanced the participants’ prevention aspect of instrumentality associated with the ought self and ‘generated by a mere sense of duty or a fear of punishment’ (Dörnyei, 2005: 103). Thus, this kind of assessment is ‘more likely to have a short-term effect, without providing the sustained commitment that the successful mastery of an L2 requires’ (Dörnyei, 2005: 103) (for more elaboration on the distinction between ideal and ought language selves, see Section 3.5 in Chapter 3). In such a frenzied exam-oriented learning process, the participants’ choice and use of LLSs in their homelands were markedly influenced by the goal of doing well in their final examinations. Accordingly, they focused on ‘the format effect of the exams’ they underwent (Jiang & Sharpling, 2011: 55). This might be partially attributed to the fact that the final examination results were predominately viewed as the sole, ‘gold standard measure’ (Stupnisky et al., 2014: 151) of the

104  Part 2: Language Learning Strategy Research in EFL Contexts

participants’ English proficiency and a source of future pride to their parents. As can be seen in Table 5.1, the participants, in particular those studying in state educational settings, largely used the strategies regulated by their English teachers throughout their schooling – strategies such as rote oral and written repetition of new vocabulary, memorising grammar rules, texts and decontextualised lists of vocabulary, along with completing the book exercises assigned by teachers for the exam. They did so because grammar and vocabulary skills constituted the largest proportion of the total mark in their final exams (see Extracts 12 through 14). Consequently, a belief developed among most participants that learning English is chiefly related to acquiring knowledge about the English language rather than developing communicative skills like spoken English. After going to university, English for five participants (Adnan, Haifa, Osama, Waleed and Yazn) became the medium of instruction in teaching the content courses of some university subjects. At this stage, the use of multiple-choice testing was the primary method of assessing knowledge and passing the university subjects tests at the end of each term. In response to this kind of assessment, these participants directed their attention to subject-specific content, using other exam-oriented strategies such as a meditative way of reading materials, recycling notes and memorising chunks of language. Related to this, these participants upon entry into university also employed a number of voluntary strategies outside class to improve their language skills and to be able to understand lectures; strategies such as watching English programmes and films with Arabic subtitles and listening to English music along with enrolling in private supplementary tutoring, as will be explained in Section 5.5.2. The domination of the summative, exam-oriented assessment paradigm as the only indicator used to measure students’ language learning outcomes and its effect on their strategy use and learning motivation has been discussed in a number of research studies in EFL contexts. Examples of these studies are in China (e.g. Gao, 2008, 2010; Jiang & Sharpling, 2011), Egypt (e.g. Gebril, 2017; Gebril & Brown, 2014), Indonesia (e.g. Lamb & Budiyanto, 2013; Lamb et  al., 2017) and Vietnam (e.g. Pham, 2016). Jiang and Sharpling (2011), for instance, qualitatively examined the influence of assessment practices on a group of Chinese graduate students’ LLS choices and development in their homelands and in the UK. Jiang and Sharpling (2011) reported that the participants’ LLS use in China was largely regulated by the summative form of assessment, which focused more on language knowledge than language use. Accordingly, exam-oriented LLSs were heavily deployed by these participants in China in order to pass high-stakes exams (e.g. the College English Test and the International English Language Testing System [IELTS]) with minimal engagement with the input or stimulus material. Examples of these strategies were memorising decontextualised vocabulary lists by heart and finding enough exam practice papers to familiarise themselves with

Impacts of Mainstream Schooling and ‘Shadow Education’  105

the format of exams (Jiang & Sharpling, 2011: 45). The authors further revealed that since their participants were only measured by summative assessment in China, most of them faced some difficulty in adapting to the new assessment modes during their postgraduate programme in the UK. This was mainly because in the UK context, they were assessed more by formative measures such as through classroom participation, group work and written assignments. Accordingly, the participants in Jiang and Sharpling’s (2011: 55) study took time to recognise that during their higher studies abroad, they needed to concentrate more on ‘how to write an effective piece of academic writing, rather than simply learning specific segments of language such as vocabulary and grammar’. Jiang and Sharpling (2011: 57–58) concluded their study by emphasising the salience of providing a balance between summative large-scale testing and formative assessment in EFL classrooms, together with helping EFL students who are about to study abroad to be acquainted with the diversity of the assessment system in an English-speaking environment. Unlike the other participants, the experiential accounts of Feras and Zahra (and to a lesser extent, Yazn) in the current research revealed that there was to some extent a balance between formative assessment (e.g. class discussions, group work with peer feedback, student selfassessment) and final exams during some stages of their educational histories in their homelands. As will be further explained in Section 5.5.2.2, the teaching practices of some participants’ English teachers in private educational establishments fostered formative assessment, for instance by encouraging students to work together on discussion-based tasks, providing detailed feedback on their homework, asking students to make oral presentations, organising a book reading competition during the year and motivating students to join English clubs organised by the school and visited sometimes by Europeans. These formative assessment practices undertaken by some teachers seemingly played a focal role in making these three participants aware of the potential of English for their future at an early stage of their lives. With this in mind, the strategies used by three participants (Feras, Yazn and Zahra) were not confined to repetition and memorisation (i.e. exam-oriented strategies) like many of the others taught in public schools. They also had adequate opportunities to use English with their classmates and competent English teachers (see Section 5.5.2.2). 5.5 English Private Tutoring and ‘Shadow Education’

The analysis of data in Phase 1 of the present longitudinal, qualitative study revealed the contribution of ‘shadow education’ (i.e. privatisation in the education sector) on the participants’ LLS use and their orientation towards learning/using English. The following subsections will focus on fee-paying English teaching both outside formal settings and in private

106  Part 2: Language Learning Strategy Research in EFL Contexts

schools, by explaining its nature and the reasons for having it from the perspectives of EFL students. Further, the mediating effect of ‘shadow education’ on EFL students’ strategic language learning efforts and learning goals will be discussed in detail. 5.5.1 Definition and nature of ‘shadow education’

Private (fee-paying) tutoring has expanded to become a global phenomenon since the turn of the 21st century. Recently, it has gained growing recognition from researchers, educators and policymakers owing to its influential implications ‘for the nurturing of new generations, for economic and social development, and for the operation of school systems’ (Bray & Kwo, 2014: viii). This is evidenced by its increasing presence not only in books (e.g. Bray et al., 2013, 2016; Kim, 2016) but also in special issues of journals including the Journal for Educational Research Online (Vol. 6, No. 1, 2014) and the Asia Pacific Journal of Education (Vol. 34, No. 4, 2014). Yung and Bray (2017: 95) suggest that ‘shadow education’ is the academic term for private tutoring, because it operates alongside regular schooling and, to some extent, copies its curriculum. The metaphor ‘shadow education’ was first suggested by Marimuthu et  al. (1991) to stand for tutoring in academic subjects that is provided for a fee and that takes place outside standard school hours. Referring to the practice of private instruction in Malaysia, Marimuthu et al. (1991) pointed out that: The study… found that a considerable percentage of youths attended private tuition [in Malaysia] in order to prepare themselves for the selective national examinations… the practice of private tuition was so prevalent that it could be considered as a ‘shadow educational system’. (Marimuthu et al., 1991: vi)

The following year, Stevenson and Baker (1992) used the shadow education metaphor in the title of an article about Japan. They defined it as ‘a set of educational activities that occur outside formal schooling and are designed to enhance the students’ formal school career’. Bray et al. (2016: 4–5) point out that the metaphor of ‘shadow education’, like many other metaphors, is imperfect mainly because students may study content during private tutoring before rather than after their classes in mainstream schooling. Additionally, as described by Paviot (2015: 168–169), private tutoring seems ‘to have evolved in such a way that we can no longer consider it a “parallel” form of practice but instead as a crucial element in most pupils’ daily school life’. The phenomenon of private tutoring or ‘shadow education’ has long been visible in East Asian societies, such as Hong Kong, Japan and Taiwan, which are deeply rooted in the Confucian culture that places a greater emphasis on credentials and the examination systems (Hajar,

Impacts of Mainstream Schooling and ‘Shadow Education’  107

2018; Zhang, 2014). Subsequently, it has become endemic in many parts of the world. ‘Shadow education’ can take various forms, including oneto-one or small groups in the homes of tutors or students, or in large classes and even lecture theatres with video screens to cater for the overflow (Bray & Kobakhidze, 2015: 467). Most tutoring is live, but some is in recorded form. Tutors range from university students providing tutoring informally to large companies that operate internationally (Bray & Kobakhidze, 2015: 467). Loyalka and Zakharov (2016) suggest that by 2018, students and their families worldwide will spend – at all levels of schooling – over $100 billion annually on ‘shadow education’. The use of private tutoring is dominated by high-achieving students seeking an enrichment strategy, or by low-achieving students seeking remedial help (Huang, 2013). According to Hamid et al. (2017: 1), although research on ‘shadow education’ has gained increasing attention as a global educational phenomenon with substantial implications for educational practices, PT-E remains a relatively under-researched area in teaching English to speakers of other languages (TESOL). Coniam (2014: 105) also aligns with this argument, stating that ‘English as a subject in the shadow education system has received comparatively little attention in the research literature’. Coniam (2014: 105) adds that the use of the construct ‘shadow education’ is no longer confined to out-of-school settings, but can also encompass the tuition-charging private formal settings where English is both the content and medium of instruction. In this respect, Bray and Lykins (2012: 1) underscore the significance of clarifying the use of the term ‘shadow education’ in empirical studies, simply because ‘it is not always employed with consistent meaning’. In this book, the term ‘shadow education’ refers to English tutoring that is provided for a fee and that occurs both inside and outside formal classroom settings for different purposes. In this chapter, two terms are used interchangeably: private tutoring and shadow education. This study is one of the few empirical studies to examine the focal role that PT-E could play in scaffolding a group of EFL students’ language learning experience, underlying their LLS use and future goals. 5.5.2 Influences of ‘shadow education’ on strategic language learning and future vision 5.5.2.1 Participation in English private tutoring (PT-E) outside formal classrooms

With the global domination of English and the recognition that a high standard of proficiency in English is a critical requirement for academic success and social development, some researchers have explored diverse learning activities outside the English class for language development. Consequently, English private tutoring was seen as a potentially pivotal

108  Part 2: Language Learning Strategy Research in EFL Contexts

language learning opportunity outside formal instruction. The few studies that have considered PT-E outside mainstream schooling in EFL contexts can be divided into three groups. The first group of studies acknowledges the role of PT-E, although it does not directly investigate PT-E participation or academic outcomes (e.g. Hamid & Baldauf, 2011; Lee, 2010; Park, 2009). The second group considers PT-E in relation to the motivation for using it, mainly from students’ and their parents’ perspectives. Khuwaileh and Al-Shoumali (2001), for instance, investigated the reasons and conditions that contributed to the growth of outof-school PT-E in Jordan. For this purpose, 50 undergraduate students enrolled in the field of science and technology were asked to complete a questionnaire survey. Following this, some of these students and 10 parents were interviewed. The authors recorded positive attitudes on the part of both parents and students towards receiving private lessons in English outside mainstream schooling. Khuwaileh and Al-Shoumali (2001: 34–35) gave some reasons for the prevalence of PT-E in Jordan. The three reasons mentioned by parents were their own high income, lack of Arabicised scientific textbooks and the importance of English for their children’s academic specialisation. For example, one parent in Khuwaileh and Al-Shoumali’s (2001) study stated that: You cannot find Arabic textbooks covering university topics and at the same time accepted by university professors. The problem is that university professors recommend textbooks published in English. This puts emphasis on the need for English. Therefore we want our children to operate well in their target situation in order to get their degrees. (Khuwaileh & Al-Shoumali, 2001: 32)

The students in Khuwaileh and Al-Shoumali’s (2001: 34–35) study also articulated other reasons that encouraged them to participate in PT-E at university. They mentioned that they were dissatisfied with their English level, which they attributed mainly to their school English teachers’ lack of competence. Further, they believed that their having English tutoring was essential for obtaining the highest possible grades, which necessitated having a good command of English. By the same token, Alotaibi (2014) examined the factors underlying the prevalence of PT-E outside public education in Saudi Arabia. Alotaibi (2014) conducted group discussions with samples of secondary school students and their parents. The reasons mentioned by students for PT-E uptake included the difficulty of the English language, poor English teacher performance and the need to pass exams with high marks. The parents, in turn, reported other reasons, such as their lack of follow-up, social pressures and large classes. The third group of studies of PT-E in EFL contexts has a wider focus, not only on the reasons for having English tutoring but also on its impact on students’ English language development and future vision. One of the

Impacts of Mainstream Schooling and ‘Shadow Education’  109

most extensive pieces of research on PT-E was conducted by Su (2005) who worked with 353 Year 10 students in South Korea and investigated the relationships between participating in PT-E and English proficiency, measured by the components of the Korean English Test comprising reading, writing, listening and speaking. Su (2005) found that although private English education in Korea is apparently sought because of the demand for communicative competence in the globalised world, the focus of the private English education received by her participants was on reading and writing as required by the college entrance examination, rather than on developing their proficiency in spoken English. As a result, Su (2005) questioned the function and objectives of PT-E, on the grounds that PT-E is largely linked to short-term goals by stressing examination results as a means to avoid failing to reach the expectations of students’ family members, while paying scant attention to enhancing their identity formation as English users. In line with the findings of Su’s (2005) study, the present study suggests that the participants (apart from Feras and Zahra) experienced diverse forms of PT-E outside formal settings during their stay in their homelands, and that these experiences were often orchestrated by ‘significant others’ (e.g. parents and friends). In the Arab world, almost all public schools use Arabic as the medium of instruction and the English language is taught as a separate subject (Al-Thubaiti, 2014: 163). The participants who were educated in public schools mentioned that they had received financial support from their immediate family members at a late stage of their education to help them to be successful in their English examinations, a prerequisite for progressing onto their future studies. Their immediate family members offered support by helping them hire a native-English-speaking tutor for the IELTS exam, a requirement for obtaining an unconditional offer for their MA programmes in the UK (Adnan, Haifa, Osama and Waleed) or receive online English tutoring services for an IELTS exam (Haifa) or enrol in private English institutions for academic success at university because the medium of instruction of some subjects would be English (Adnan, Osama and Yazn). In this way, almost all the participants resorted to PT-E outside the formal classroom in the hope of passing high-stakes compulsory examinations and thus living up to both self and family expectations. The following extracts exemplify this idea: Extract 19: The secondary school holiday was long. So, one of my close friends advised me to enrol in an English private tutoring course to improve my English before going on to the university. This idea appealed to me and my parents. This was because English would be used as a medium of instruction in the teaching of content courses of some university subjects.

110  Part 2: Language Learning Strategy Research in EFL Contexts

So, I needed to improve my English to understand lectures and pass my university exams. This short English course helped me to some extent to enlarge my English vocabulary and familiarise myself with completing a specific task within a group using English. (Waleed, 3rd interview) Extract 20: In the United Arab Emirates, I sought help from a private American tutor to help me prepare for an IELTS exam only. I had two lessons a week for five months. She used to charge me a lot but I didn’t mind that because I had had a bad experience with my Arab teachers of English at school… This tutor taught me some strategies to do better and faster in test. She showed me how to subscribe to some websites to try out online IELTS paid sample tests… She used to proofread my weekly writing tasks and gave me constructive feedback as to what the mistakes were and how to correct them. The tutor also helped me with my speaking by doing a simulation test by assuming the role of the examiner, with me as the candidate. I couldn’t have passed the IELTS test without my tutor’s help. (Haifa, 4th interview) Extract 21: After graduation, I worked in one of the leading Saudi government companies in industry. My employer offered me a Master’s scholarship in the UK. Therefore, I hired an Irish IELTS tutor to help me pass this test. I received 7 hours of individual tuition per week for three months. The tutor helped me to familiarise myself with the test format and equip me with the exam strategies especially for writing skills. (Adnan, 4th interview)

From these extracts, the prevention aspect of instrumentality dominated these five participants’ motivational discourses in their homelands. The participants’ instrumental-preventative motivation was interwoven with their interim short-term objectives, which in turn contributed to making them use heavily exam-oriented strategies such as visual repetition of new words and work on trial exam papers. However, the five participants highly valued the potential of private supplementary tutoring because it served to compensate for their dissatisfaction with the English teaching methods received in state-funded public schools, and also to improve their proficiency levels, which ‘were translated into grades and test scores’ (i.e. ‘for pragmatic reasons rather than pleasure’) (Besser & Chik, 2014: 306). In this way, their limited language identity development can be largely attributed to contextual uncertainties. The findings of the present study concerning the participants’ perceptions of receiving PT-E outside formal education largely accord with the argument suggested by Hamid et al. (2017). Based on the findings of their quantitative study on students’ perceptions of PT-E in Bangladesh, Hamid et al. (2017: 16)

Impacts of Mainstream Schooling and ‘Shadow Education’  111

pointed out that many students in EFL contexts often ‘resort to PT-E not because of its proven effectiveness but because of their declining faith in school English teaching’. As a result, Hamid et al. (2017: 16) call on policymakers in EFL contexts to foster English teaching efficiency in formal settings to meet students’ personal needs, preferences and concerns. 5.5.2.2 Attending fee-paying private schools

The data of the current research show that three participants (Feras, Yazn and Zahra) experienced a different kind of ‘shadow education’, namely, attending private schools that charged fees to tailor their services to the clients’ needs (Bray & Lykins, 2012: 10). Based on this, ‘private tutoring may supplant rather than supplement mainstream instruction’ (Lykins, 2014: 4). As mentioned in Chapter 4, Feras and Zahra were sent by their highly educated and well-off families to outstanding fee-charging private schools, which used English not only as a key academic subject, but as the medium of instruction for many other subjects. However, Yazn received education at a private school of a lower quality, in that the focus was on scientific subjects more than on English. In addressing this point, Yazn stated: Extract 22: I studied in private schools in Jordan. These schools provided a very good quality of education for scientific subjects and were quite fair for English. Their services are still far better than those in public ones. (Yazn, 4th interview)

Accordingly, Bray (2014: 385) points out that parents’ expenditure on their children’s language development needs to be accompanied by a choice of the kind and quality of formal educational setting that would enable their children to obtain access to more language input and exposure. Related to this, Hartmann (2008: 7) suggests that the phenomenon of ‘shadow education’ can represent ‘a commodity’ and its quality varies in accordance with the socioeconomic status of children’s parents related to their occupation, income and educational attainment. For example, in Hong Kong where both English and Chinese are official languages, Morris and Adamson (2010: 147–148) claim that many better-off parents prefer to send their children to tuition-charging private educational settings in which English is the medium of instruction. Likewise, Tucker (2014: 181) describes the increasing interest in the Arab region of attending fee-paying private schools where the school curriculum is largely taught in English. This has led to growing numbers of tuition-charging private schools in EFL contexts. According to Alhabahba et al. (2016: 6), statistics from 2015 show that 8% of students in the Middle East attended private schools where English was emphasised.

112  Part 2: Language Learning Strategy Research in EFL Contexts

Drawing on the experiential accounts of two participants (Feras and Zahra), the educational practices of their private schools largely emphasised the significance of English by providing a number of technology-mediated language learning artefacts inside the classroom and employing competent/native speakers of English as teachers. Most of these teachers, as described by Feras and Zahra, used a communicative approach in their teaching and used both summative and affirmative kinds of assessment. More specifically, the teachers played a central role in mediating a number of effective LLSs, including inviting some native/ competent speakers of English to class to talk about different topics with students, using extra language learning material related to current events and encouraging students to take part in English clubs and book reading competitions organised by the school. The following extracts taken from the interviews of Feras and Zahra exemplify this point: Extract 23: In my school, we had to make English part of our lives and had many opportunities to express our opinions. I had to speak English at home for a specific period of time because my teacher would come to our house three times a year… she talked with my family members to ensure that they communicated in English with me. Otherwise, I would have had to stay in school accommodation… we also had to read any 15 English story books each year, and during the summer, book reading competitions were held… there were exhibitions at the end of the year attended by people from Europe. (Zahra, 3rd interview) Extract 24: My teachers were native speakers of English or Syrians who had studied in Britain or United States…. They sometimes used external materials and some of them set aside, at the end of each session, ten minutes to let us discuss together in English some interesting topics relating to recent events in Syria and other countries. Such activities helped me expand my vocabulary and increase my knowledge about other countries because some of my peers were the children of European and foreign countries’ diplomats…. Our exams were different from those in public schools because we didn’t just have written midterm and final examinations. There were other forms of evaluation such as a group project and participation in the classroom. The exam of one teacher in the intermediate school consisted of watching an English movie or programme for a half an hour in the language laboratory of our school followed by questions relating to what we had watched. (Feras, 4th interview)

As shown in these extracts, English for the participants who attended fee-paying private establishments represented more than a subject in the school curriculum. Since the early stages of their English learning, they

Impacts of Mainstream Schooling and ‘Shadow Education’  113

exhibited in some instances their own determination to connect with the international English-speaking community, or what Yashima (2009, 2013) terms an ‘international posture’ (i.e. an interest in intercultural friendship and international affairs along with openness to other cultures) (for further explanation of this construct, see Section 3.5 in Chapter 3). Furthermore, these participants took up a variety of LLSs in their homelands, and some of these strategies were essentially developed by themselves to master English beyond the immediate utilitarian purpose. Examples of these strategies were borrowing English novels from the school library to read in the summer (Zahra), hanging a large map of Britain on the wall to get to know more about its geography (Feras) and preferring to watch English cartoons or movies and listening to English music (Feras, Yazn and Zahra) (for more examples, see Table  5.1). In these examples, the participants were more involved with English for personal reasons and pleasure. With this in mind, enrolling in private schools where English was emphasised constituted a major form of ‘shadow education’, and played a pivotal role in enhancing some participants’ identity formation as English users (see Coniam, 2014). Consequently, ‘educational policy, cultural values, and distribution of resources may impact on young learners in similar contexts’ (Besser & Chik, 2014: 308). Besser and Chik (2014: 306) note that EFL students who enrol in outstanding private schools often have ‘exposure not only to academics in English, but also access to teachers and peers who serve as role models for cosmopolitans’. ‘Cosmopolitans’ is a term borrowed from Hannerz (2004) to describe individuals who negotiate ‘an L2 identity in English language and culture alongside their L1 identity’ (Besser & Chik, 2014: 306). Besser and Chik (2014) in their longitudinal qualitative study in Hong Kong revealed how EFL students were capable of constructing identities as English speakers by the age of 11–12. These authors found that their participants’ ability to do this was facilitated by socioeconomic factors, in particular, attending well-resourced private English-medium schools where they had access to iPods, computers and good quality English books and popular culture media. Having such a resource-rich language environment, as Besser and Chik (2014: 307–308) claimed, enhanced their participants’ motivation to normalise English use in their daily lives by finding ways to make connections with the English-speaking world outside the classroom. One participant, Rain, in Besser and Chik’s (2014: 303) study declared ‘I can learn by myself outside school, such as chatting with English speakers through MSN and Xanga, because we like the same idols’. Besser and Chik (2014: 306), however, have acknowledged that the participants who enrolled in outstanding private English-medium schools all came from better-off families, and this in turn can reflect how ‘the unequal distribution of resources may impact on young learners’ L2 identity development’. In this respect, Besser and Chik (2014: 306) have encouraged mainstream teachers in EFL contexts to create inexpensive

114  Part 2: Language Learning Strategy Research in EFL Contexts

ways of involving their students with English for personal reasons and pleasure. This can be achieved, for instance, by integrating into teaching lessons examples from English popular culture (e.g. commercial movies and highly stimulating music), and creating a channel of communication between EFL students and those in English-speaking expatriate schools (Besser & Chik, 2014: 306; see also Cheung, 2001). As a final comment on the discussion in this chapter, making generalisations about the learning characteristics of national populations and the patterns of LLSs that they use must be avoided. For example, many researchers (e.g. Abu-Radwan, 2011; Damerow & Bailey, 2014) hold the view that English in the Arab world is taught as a foreign language, and rote memorisation strategies are almost the only strategies used by Arabs. These researchers assume it is hard, if not impossible for Arabs to negotiate their second language (L2) identities in their homelands. In this study, however, it seems possible to argue that the participants who were educated in private schools had more agentive opportunities for the development of their target language identity than those who attended state-funded public schools. The national policies followed in the Arab world, as is the case, perhaps, in many other developing countries, ‘created divisions in terms of educational resources among rural and urban schools and non-key and key institutions’ (Gao, 2008: 183).To exemplify this further, attendance at tuition-charging private schools where English is emphasised tends to offer students exposure to a resource-rich language environment by, for instance, being in contact with competent teachers of English and using digital and mobile technologies in the classroom, along with being encouraged to read novels and magazines in English for pleasure. Consequently, McKay (2012) points out that learners attending fee-paying private schools or after-school English classes may exacerbate existing educational inequalities and social reproduction since not all parents can afford this service for their children (see Hajar, 2018). It is noteworthy that the findings of this study in relation to the impact of ‘shadow education’ cannot be taken as general because of the limited number of participants. 5.6 Conclusion and Implications

Together with the preceding chapter, the findings of the first phase of data analysis have examined eight participants’ developmental processes in terms of their language learning experiences together with their strategic learning efforts and future vision, while in their homelands. This chapter has shown that the practices of most mainstream teachers and private tutors emphasised exam-oriented language learning, mainly by using summative assessment as the only kind of assessment. Summative assessment contributed to enhancing most participants’ ought-to language self in their motivational discourse in their home countries.

Impacts of Mainstream Schooling and ‘Shadow Education’  115

As described by Dörnyei et  al. (2016: 43), the ought-to language self stems from avoiding a possible negative future outcome, like a student receiving a bad grade, and heading towards meeting the goals foisted on them by authority figures, such as parents and teachers. As a result, exam-oriented learning strategies or ‘compulsory/other-imposed strategies’ such as the written repetition of new words and work on sample exam papers are used heavily by most participants, especially those attending public educational establishments. Nonetheless, some teachers in outstanding private schools attempted to foster the participants’ new identity as language users by using both formative assessment (e.g. class discussions, group work with peer feedback, student self-assessment) and final exams. As a consequence, this effective form of ‘shadow education’ (i.e. attending fee-paying private establishments at which English was emphasised) directly or indirectly caused Feras and Zahra to use on occasion certain LLSs that were more controlled by themselves in order to master English (i.e. voluntary strategies). Nonetheless, the findings of this study in relation to the impact of ‘shadow education’ on language learners’ strategy use, future vision and L2 identity are difficult to generalise, principally because of the limited number of participants. This is arguably a fruitful area for further research, especially since empirical research on shadow education is in its infancy, and ‘English private tuition is still a relatively under-researched area’ (Yung, 2015: 727) in TESOL. Based on the discussion in this chapter, the participants’ LLS use was always goal oriented, and their language learning goals and L2 identity development were largely influenced by the quality and level of interpersonal support provided in their social learning environment. With this in mind, individuals in EFL contexts are likely to be able to recognise the primacy of learning and using English in their lives if their awareness of English has been properly nurtured at school and home. Related to this, the following subsections will discuss some practical recommendations for academic and/or non-academic settings in EFL contexts. 5.6.1 Enabling students to ‘speak as themselves’ with their preferred transportable identities

A number of researchers (e.g. Henry, 2014; Lamb, 2017; Lamb & Budiyanto, 2013; Palfreyman, 2014; Smith et al., 2018) have argued that English in most EFL contexts often loses its function as a ‘language for identification’ for a large number of individuals. This is largely due to the in-school-English/out-of-school-English dissonance in addition to the power of instrumental-prevention force related to the ‘ought-to L2 self’ over their motivational orientation. In this sense, a large number of EFL students are chiefly motivated by fear of failure more than by a true vision of a future English-speaking self. In addressing this issue, Ushioda

116  Part 2: Language Learning Strategy Research in EFL Contexts

(2011b: 12–13) contends that most teachers in EFL contexts tend to prefer to play safe by imbuing their students with the local societal learning discourse that sees them as mere ‘language learners’ practising language rather than people holding ‘an identity, a personality, a unique history and background, with goals, motives and intentions’. For this reason, the majority of LLSs deployed by these students are likely to go under the category of ‘compulsory strategy use’ (i.e. exam-oriented strategies), and are essentially imposed by their English teachers who consider such strategies useful because of traditional exam-oriented learning and increasingly educational and professional competitiveness (Gitsaki, 2011; Tucker, 2014). As a consequence, Ushioda (2011b: 21–22) has underlined the salience of creating an enabling environment for EFL students to view the target language as a means of self-expression and self-development. This can be achieved, as Ushioda (2011b) describes, by helping students to ‘speak as themselves’ and to engage and express their own preferred interests and transportable identities (e.g. as a football fan, keen tennis player, art lover) through the medium of English: When students are enabled to voice opinions, preferences, and values, align themselves with those of others, engage in discussion, struggle, resist, negotiate, compromise or adapt, their motivational dispositions and identities evolve and are given expression. (Ushioda, 2011b: 21)

Commenting on Ushioda’s (2011b) seminal paper, Falout (2014: 287) points out that Ushioda has properly recognised that English constitutes part of the social fabric of most individuals’ daily lives, and thus English teachers need to engage with their students as ‘people’ rather than as ‘abstract language learners’, and to know that ‘formulaic approaches to teaching language may disregard the potential growth of their students’ individual agency and participation’. In this respect, creating opportunities for EFL students to engage with their own identities and interests and express themselves using the target language need to be fostered. This may be accomplished by building bridges between their lives inside and outside the classroom, in the form of organising out-of-class projects and/or via introducing digital and mobile technologies, entertainment and social media into the educational setting, for instance (see Lamb, 2004; Lyons, 2014; Smith et  al., 2018; Tyers, 2015). By giving students a legitimate voice in the classroom, ‘what they learn becomes part of what they are’ (Little, 2004: 106), and their future possible selves as users of English can be formulated and sustained in the long run. Palfreyman (2012: 171–172) gives a good example of his endeavouring to ‘tap into students’ worlds’ and ‘bring the world into the institution’ by inviting his female university students from the Arabian Gulf States to take any photograph with their mobile camera phones to show as a presentation (with minimal explanation) in the classroom. Palfreyman (2012: 171) added that the resulting

Impacts of Mainstream Schooling and ‘Shadow Education’  117

images became the starting point for dialogues between his students, and this was followed by a writing task, based on these images. Commenting on the findings of his study, Palfreyman (2014: 189–190) elsewhere indicated that the use of a technology familiar to his students (the camera phone) raised their awareness of their everyday lives and expressed one’s identity for a particular audience. In essence, organising appropriate and sufficient training sessions for teachers of English in developing countries delivered by experts seems to be essential for enhancing their perceptions of the importance and benefits of technology for learning and teaching English and providing them with greater knowledge of the appropriate models for incorporating technology as part of language learning in the classroom and linking it to their students’ daily lives. With advances in technology, policymakers and practitioners in developing countries are simultaneously enabled and required to introduce authentic language materials at both school and university levels. 5.6.2 Using ‘near peer role models’ as a motivational strategy

Considering the reported crucial role of influential social agents (i.e. family members, peers and teachers) in orchestrating the participants’ LLS use and their future vision in the context of this study, English teachers in EFL contexts can introduce the motivational strategy of ‘near peer role models’ (NPRMs) into their language classrooms. NPRMs represent ‘peers who are close to our social, professional and/or age level who for some reason we may respect and admire’ (Murphey, 1998: 201; see also Murphey & Arao, 2001; Murphey et al., 2014). Dörnyei and Kubanyiova (2014: 63) suggest that NPRMs can help raise individuals’ hopes for the future and motivate them to pursue similar excellence in learning and mastering the target language. This is principally based on the argument that NPRMs would have similar features (e.g. gender, ethnicity, interests, age level or social background) to the language learners, who may, in turn, attempt to interact and/or emulate their nearest role model’s ways to success. By doing this, they can generate a possible future image for themselves. Therefore, Dörnyei and Murphey (2003: 128) consider NPRMs as ‘one of the most powerful ways of teaching’. In this sense, it may be argued that EFL students’ siblings or outstanding ‘proximal others’ from their academic institutions/immediate social context can be regarded as positive role models for them (Murphey & Arao, 2001: 3). In line with this argument, Gao (2013b) explained how Zhang Haidi, a disabled language learner, was promoted nationwide by the Chinese government as a legendary role model for a huge number of Chinese language learners because she achieved outstanding success in learning English despite her physical predicament. Gao (2013b: 182) claimed that Zhang invested and sustained her language learning efforts by relying mainly on the help of a close friend who was an expert English teacher

118  Part 2: Language Learning Strategy Research in EFL Contexts

and who aided her to reconstruct the new vision of her ideal self as a language user and a ‘useful’ member of her society. In a similar way, Dörnyei and Kubanyiova (2014: 63–64) cited the work of one of their Chinese postgraduate students in the UK, underlying how the motivation of this student for learning English was reinforced in China due to the influence of a Chinese TV celebrity. For this student, the TV celebrity represented her NPRM in China, given that the celebrity was a successful woman in society and fluent in English. The student, as cited by Dörnyei and Kubanyiova (2014: 64), reported that ‘My idol has been Lan Yang since my secondary school. While in China, I watched her Talk-show programmes, with so many celebrities from all over the world. She is so wise, elegant, and her English, her knowledge impressed me so much; I access her blogs for her latest news – I have got lots of information related to my future career’. The value of introducing a near peer role modelling approach to students ‘in a way that is compelling in a particular socio-cultural setting, and engages the identity of learners’ has not been sufficiently supported in contexts in which English is taught as an additional language (White, 2008: 126). As seen in this chapter, the findings in the present study found that Zahra repeatedly mentioned that her eldest brother, a holder of a diploma in English literature, was her own role model in relation to reading and even composing poems in English. Feras, the Syrian participant, also mentioned that his uncle’s children living in the UK boosted his aspirations for learning English and choosing the UK to pursue his postgraduate studies. As a result, Dörnyei and Kubanyiova (2014: 64) suggest that English teachers need to embrace certain procedures in their language classrooms in order to increase their language learners’ awareness of the motivational power of NPRMs. For example, teachers can invite successful speakers of the target language from the same school, region or city into the classroom to share their experiences and success stories, and may use the experiences of these successful learners as teaching material (Dörnyei & Kubanyiova, 2014: 64). Teachers may also share their own language learning experiences of success. Furthermore, they could create a platform for sharing students’ successful language learning strategies and experiences, e.g. classroom displays, classroom online blogs and newsletters (i.e. a selection of inspiring extracts from the students’ language learning histories). It is noteworthy that the near peer role modelling approach appears to be context-sensitive and more effective than teaching students a list of LLSs possibly possessed by a number of ‘good language learners’ in other learning contexts and developed by some researchers such as Rubin (1975) and Stern (1975) (for more elaboration on this point, see Section 3.2.1 in Chapter 3). This is because teaching students a decontextualised set of LLSs is likely to disregard their individual variation and human agency (Lee & Oxford, 2008: 306).

Impacts of Mainstream Schooling and ‘Shadow Education’  119

Resources for Further Reading Bray, M., Kwo, O. and Jokić, B. (eds) (2016) Researching Private Supplementary Tutoring: Methodological Lessons from Diverse Cultures. Hong Kong: Comparative Education Research Centre, The University of Hong Kong and Dordrecht: Springer. In Chapter 1 of this book (pp. 3–23), Bray and colleagues present the features of private supplementary tutoring and identify major reasons for its expansion around the world. They also describe its scale, forms, intensity and methodological issues regarding research on private tutoring. Jiang, X. and Sharpling, G.P. (2011) The impact of assessment change on language learning strategies: Views of a small group of Chinese graduate students. Asian EFL Journal 13 (4), 33–78. In this article, Jiang and Sharpling qualitatively explore Chinese graduate university students’ perceptions of the impact of assessment on their choice and development of language learning strategies in their homelands and the UK. The authors conclude their study by offering recommendations for Chinese students who are considering pursuing their studies abroad in English-speaking education systems, and for study abroad programme designers and teachers in the host country. Smith, R., Kuchah, K. and Lamb, M. (2018) Learner autonomy in developing countries. In A. Chik, N. Aoki and R. Smith (eds) Autonomy in Language Learning and Teaching (pp. 7–27). London: Palgrave Pivot. In this chapter, Smith and colleagues critically examine the relevance of the concept learner autonomy in developing countries and under-resourced learning and teaching contexts. They review some research that demonstrates motivational dissonances between EFL students’ sense of boredom and frustration with school English classes on the one hand, and on the other their investment in learning and using English outside the classroom through numerous entertainment media and online social networking. The authors conclude their chapter by stressing the importance of exploiting technologies as new means of accessing knowledge, although school language lessons in ‘developing countries’ remain largely unchanged. Ushioda, E. (2011b) Motivating learners to speak as themselves. In G. Murray, X. Gao and T. Lamb (eds) Identity, Motivation and Autonomy in Language Learning (pp. 11–24). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. In this chapter, Ushioda examines how language learning motivation has been reconceptualised in the context of contemporary theories of self and identity – that is, people’s sense of who they are, how they relate to the social world and what they want to become in the future. Based on this theoretical shift, Ushioda calls on teachers to create opportunities for their students to ‘speak as themselves’ and express their own meanings, interests and identities through the target language. To this end, Ushioda stresses the importance of exploiting digital technologies and online communication. Yung, K.W.H. (2015) Learning English in the shadows: Understanding Chinese learners’ experiences of private tutoring. TESOL Quarterly 49 (4), 707–732. In this paper, Yung addresses the significance of TESOL researchers and practitioners to evaluate the effectiveness of participation in English private tutoring (EPT) on EFL students’ language learning use and development. In his qualitative study, Yung found that most of his Chinese participants did not view EPT as an effective way to foster their English proficiency due to its undue focus on test familiarisation and practice instead of the use of English as a language of global communication. Yung ascribed this finding to the influence of contextual conditions where learning for assessment and competitions prevails.

Part 3 Learning Strategy Research in a Study Abroad Context

6 Social Interaction, Strategy Use and Future Vision on Pre-Sessional English Programmes 6.1 Introduction

The second part of the book (Chapters 4 and 5) described and interpreted the participants’ past language learning experiences in their Arab homelands, with special focus on the shifts in their strategy use and learning goals. The participants’ strategic learning efforts, in particular their use of exam-oriented strategies in learning English, were ostensibly controlled by the contextual realities of their homelands. Related to this, a dissonance between language learning in-school and out-of-school could be seen in the experiential accounts of most participants (especially those who attended state-funded public schools). This was further demonstrated by the use of assessment as a means of control and ignoring the salience of integrating technology-mediated language resources into English classes to facilitate the participants’ investment in learning and using English. As described in Chapter  5 (Section  5.5), the participants experienced diverse forms of ‘shadow education’ (i.e. private education) during their time in their homelands, and these experiences affected their strategy use and the formation and development of their target language identity. The third part of this book (Chapters 6 through 8) presents the findings of the second, third and fourth phases of the current longitudinal qualitative study. In this part, the participants’ dynamic use of learning strategies and their altering future vision during their stay in the UK (i.e. between July 2013 and November 2014) are captured. Hence, the focus is not only on the difficulties that postgraduate international students (especially those from an Arab background) face in adjusting to an unfamiliar environment, but also how these students succeed or fail to gain entry into the desired social networks. This chapter reports the findings of the second research phase which addresses the participants’ language learning experiences and their social interaction inside and outside the classroom while undertaking a pre-sessional English (10-week) course before joining their postgraduate programmes in the UK. More specifically, this 123

124  Part 3: Learning Strategy Research in a Study Abroad Context

research phase explains the process of change in the participants’ strategic learning efforts to handle challenges that confronted them in the first three months of their time in the UK. 6.2 Study Abroad and Pre-Sessional English Programmes

When international students move into culturally unfamiliar contexts and leave their families and social networks behind in their homelands, they are likely to face many challenges in adjusting to the new sociocultural environment (Al-Sharideh & Goe, 1998; Guidry Lacina, 2002). In addition to being under great stress to perform satisfactorily in their academic fields, international students can experience difficulties concerning ‘living conditions, food, social activities, recreational activities, working hours or conditions, work responsibilities, family circumstances (e.g., there may be marital separation, or new schools for children), and so on’ (Spencer-Oatey & Franklin, 2009: 153). Accordingly, many international students who travel overseas to gain academic qualifications through the medium of English attempt to access their desired learning communities, and these attempts are sometimes associated with ‘discomfort, ambivalence, anxiety, or even sorrow’ (Kinginger, 2013: 342). Many international students begin their lives in an English-speaking country on pre-sessional English for academic purposes (EAP) programmes. This type of programme often represents the students’ first contact with the English-speaking education system, and potentially with the host culture (Dewaele et al., 2015). In the UK context, EAP programmes generally run for between 4 and 12 weeks prior to the beginning of the academic year, but can, in some instances, last as long as one year (Górska, 2013: 192). These programmes are usually housed within a central university language unit and are based on a communicative approach to language learning and active participation. The majority of the learners doing the pre-sessional English course are postgraduates, coming from a wide range of backgrounds and many different countries. The main goal of pre-sessional English courses in a study abroad context is to prepare international students for the English language requirements of the university they enrol in. These courses have linguistic benefits, and can help international students to familiarise themselves with the social and cultural context of the host country, along with ‘the structure of the courses, tutors’ expectations and style of teaching’ (Dewaele et al., 2015: 96; see also Copland & Garton, 2011; Kinginger, 2015; Wu & Hammond, 2011). Benson et al. (2013: 102) point out that international students in their first trip away from home are required to step out of their ‘comfort zone, both personally and linguistically’. As a result, we may expect to see conspicuous changes in international students’ strategy use and their future visions are expected to be discernible across a gamut of academic and non-academic settings in the new context.

Social Interaction, Strategy Use and Future Vision on Pre-Sessional English Programmes  125

In the current research, all the participants took a pre-sessional English course run by the UK university where they planned to pursue their higher studies. The reasons for their attendance on the course were principally to obtain additional training in English and/or to adjust themselves to their new circumstances. Only two participants (Rawan and Zahra) were obliged to take this pre-sessional course as a requirement for obtaining an unconditional offer for their master’s (MA) programmes, the others having acquired an acceptable test score. Zahra’s preparation was not very good for the International English Language Testing System (IELTS) exam, due to the unexpected death of her father two months before she came to the UK. As explained by the participants, their pre-sessional English course was divided into two five-week phases. The first phase was called ‘English for General Academic Purposes’ because it provided a broad focus on all four language skills (listening, speaking, reading and writing) with a specific focus on general EAP, along with other skills that the learners could make use of later on in their MA courses, such as avoiding plagiarism, using dictionaries and using reference systems. The second phase was called ‘English for Specific Academic Purposes’ because it paid specific attention to the learners’ needs for their future MA course and their subject-specific reading. 6.3 Relationships with Home Citizens and Future Visions During a Pre-Sessional English Programme

International student networks are important because they promote the view that learning is a social, rather than a purely cognitive process. As far as relations with host country citizens are concerned, this section examines the social interaction of a group of Arab international students with British individuals along with their future visions during their attendance on a pre-sessional English course at a leading UK university. According to Jackson (2017) and Ryan and Mercer (2011), many international students in the first period of their stay in a host country have an idealised, rather than a tangible ambition, as they articulate unrealistic or unfeasible goals. Ryan and Mercer (2011: 170–171) claim that there is a strong belief among many language learners and some practitioners that ‘if the learner can go abroad to this perceived “perfect” language learning environment, then learning should occur naturally, without the need for any effort or conscious reflection on the part of the learner’. This belief, as Gao and Lamb (2011: 6) argue, can lead to reducing learners’ exercise of their agency to reach their desired goals, and a concession that an extended period of time in a country where the target language is spoken can effortlessly validate their new identity as language users. For this reason, Ryan and Irie (2014: 120) emphasise the crucial role of learner agency in the construction of one’s possible selves, in order to avoid ‘maladaptive behaviour, such as the setting of unrealistic or impractical goals’.

126  Part 3: Learning Strategy Research in a Study Abroad Context

The above argument raised by Ryan and Mercer (2011) concurs with the findings of the current research, namely that almost all the participants in the first two months of their stay in the UK had what Pizzolato (2006: 59) terms ‘aschematic’ future selves. That is, although all participants appreciated the benefits of obtaining academic qualifications through the medium of English for their future careers after returning home, and this was their overarching reason for coming to the UK, almost all of them articulated other relatively far-reaching goals, without identifying the learning strategies that they intended to deploy to achieve them. For example, many of them expected to be befriended by British nationals from the moment they arrived in the UK and thought that they would be able to speak English like native speakers after spending a limited time in the UK without undertaking any strategic behaviour. They likened the process to a child’s attempt to acquire their mother tongue. The following extracts are taken from the participants’ interview transcripts in response to the question related to their social networks and their future goals after spending seven weeks in the UK: Extract 1: My expectations about life in the UK was 180 degrees different. I thought I would have only seen British people and my English would improve automatically by building close relationships with British people and speaking English for 24 hours a day. I can see just a few British here and most of them are anti-social. Neither my classmates nor my flatmates are British. (Adnan, 5th interview) Extract 2: As I learnt in private schools in Syria, I’m able to communicate in English. But I wanted to mix with British residents to learn the British English slang and to know more about their culture… However, almost all the people around the university are international students. Only some class teachers and some staff members in the supermarkets around the university are British. This is what I’ve seen so far. (Feras, 5th interview)

From the participants’ comments, it may be inferred that most participants expressed their frustration at not finding sufficient opportunities to socialise with British citizens. As Brown (2009: 440) argues, the absence of interaction with home citizens constitutes for many international students ‘a lasting source of disillusionment and disenchantment’. The participants in this study attributed the difficulty of establishing interpersonal bonds with the British to two main factors: (1) the nature of the pre-sessional English course, as it is designed for international students; and (2) the scarcity of British students living on campus during the summer holidays. In this sense, the barriers to meeting British people and the superficiality of their interactions with them stemmed more from

Social Interaction, Strategy Use and Future Vision on Pre-Sessional English Programmes  127

institutional shortcomings than personal ones. This finding appears to be in line with the argument put forward by Ward et al. (2009: 80), that international students’ opportunities to meet and mix with their host nationals relate not only to the former’s motivation, but also ‘the willingness of the receiving community to facilitate integration’. In a study conducted by Montgomery (2010), international students remarked on the specific challenges that limited their ability to build constructive relationships with British home students. Students suggested that not having the chance to spend extended periods with British people constituted an essential barrier in their failure to develop friendships. There was also evidence in Montgomery’s (2010) study that some preconceptions and stereotypes about other cultural groups were present and had an inescapable impact on the development of strong bonds between international students and British nationals. For example, Western instructors and home students tended to believe that international students ‘like to stay with their own nationality’, ‘don’t contribute to discussions’ or ‘don’t want to mix’. Harrison and Peacock (2007), in turn, studied British home students’ reactions to international students’ participation in higher education. Their study involved eight focus groups, with eight UK undergraduates in each, divided equally between arts and business courses. Based on the findings of their study, Harrison and Peacock (2007: 4) found that British students used stereotypical terms to categorise their international counterparts in accordance with the geographical position of their countries (e.g. African), ethnicity (e.g. Chinese or Asian) or religion (e.g. Muslim). International students were also thought of as ‘shy’, ‘introverted’ or ‘difficult to get to know’. According to Harrison and Peacock (2007), most British students believe that international students lack adequate English skills and, accordingly, communication with them required ‘mindfulness’. These British students, however, were reluctant to make an effort to understand their international counterparts because they ‘just wanted to relax and have a laugh’ (Harrison & Peacock, 2007: 5). Therefore, Kinginger (2004: 221) claims that ‘access to language is shaped not only by learners’ own intentions, but also by those of the others with whom they interact’. Notably, some participants in this research referred to the services offered by the university they attended to enhance their knowledge and experience of British culture during their attendance on the pre-sessional English programme; for instance, organising free weekend trips to places of cultural interest. In addressing this point, two participants (Rawan and Osama) divulged that although these trips increased their cultural awareness of the UK, they did not lead to any noticeable improvement in their English capabilities because they were not surrounded by opportunities to use English or mingle with British people. More specifically, almost all the individuals who went on these trips were Asian classmates who tended to stick together and speak their first language among themselves. The following extracts exemplify this point:

128  Part 3: Learning Strategy Research in a Study Abroad Context

Extract 3: As it was my first time away from Libya, I enjoyed seeing the amazing landscape of Britain and knowing more about its history… I was lonely there since my Chinese classmates spoke their mother tongue all the time. (Osama, 5th interview) Extract 4: I went on just two trips organised by the university around the UK. They helped me get some information about the British heritage. I spent my time there with an Arab student from another group on the pre-sessional course because the others were Asians. (Haifa, 6th interview)

The participants, however, described a few incidents that showed their limited social interaction with some British people, along with the strategies that they used to overcome the linguistic challenges that they confronted during their attendance on the pre-sessional English programme. Two participants (Feras and Zahra), who had attended outstanding private schools in their homelands, had been capable of expressing themselves well in English since their arrival in the UK. Nonetheless, they were sometimes linguistically hindered by some local expressions and slang. Conversely, the other participants, who were educated in public formal settings in their home countries, blamed the miscommunication and misunderstandings that they had experienced with the British partly on their inadequate level of English. The following are examples of the participants’ encounters with British people in the first three months of their stay in the UK: Extract 5: As I learnt in outstanding private schools in Iraq, I’m able to communicate well in English. However, two days ago I went with another Iraqi lady to a restaurant which offered halal food.1 The accent of the lady working there was difficult to understand. I didn’t understand at the beginning where we had to sit. That’s why I asked her to repeat what she said…. Now I realise that I need to have some knowledge about different accents in the UK since focusing on general English is no longer sufficient. (Zahra, 5th interview) Extract 6: I sometimes had a problem in understanding the tutors’ speech in the UK… I also find difficulty when talking to the British on the phone. Last week, I received a call from the bank to verify some of my details. The agent was talking fast first. I asked him to slow down. I felt embarrassed because I asked him to repeat four times the question related to the date of my birth. I didn’t get much of his speech. I need to work

Social Interaction, Strategy Use and Future Vision on Pre-Sessional English Programmes  129

on my listening skills by listening to radio, for instance. (Adnan, 6th interview) Extract 7: Last week, I went to the shop to buy my breakfast. I wanted ‘cheese spread’. I approached a scarf-wearing woman thinking that she was an Arab. But I discovered that she was a British Asian Muslim. I forgot all my English. So I used my body language to show her what I needed. (Rawan, 5th interview) Extract 8: Yesterday one of my Arab friends met her PhD friends in TESCO. She is British. She was sad because of her father’s death. I wanted to comfort her but I kept silent as I was at a loss for words. This awkward situation encouraged me to search on Google for a statement that should be said on such an occasion. I liked the statement ‘I’m so sorry about what happened’. (Haifa, 5th interview)

As is evident from these interview extracts, the participants used some strategies to compensate for their inadequate repertoire of English vocabulary and knowledge of varieties of English. We may also infer that the participants’ strategic language learning efforts during their time in the UK appeared to be affected by their previous language learning experiences in their homelands. This confirms the core assumptions of sociocultural language learning perspectives, that language learners’ strategy use and future vision are influenced by their ‘unique history’ (i.e. looking not only at the present but at past causes and expected outcomes) and ‘mediated by artefacts and social interactions’ (Palfreyman, 2014: 181). The participants’ experiential accounts during the pre-sessional course of the present study revealed their gradual awareness of the fact that community integration may take longer, and accordingly, they started to set concrete goals by reacting positively to writing strategies. Hence, most participants claimed that they gave paramount importance to developing their writing skills in this course because academic writing requirements constituted the main form of assessment in their MA programmes. They were satisfied with the academic writing support that they received from their pre-sessional English tutors, taking into account the limited duration of the pre-sessional course and the inadequate support for writing academic texts in their homelands. The writing and reading tutors mediated the participants’ academic skills principally from three points of view: (1) learning an outline plan or basic elements of essay structure, i.e. an introduction, body and a conclusion; (2) discrete elements of language and academic style, such as writing summaries, formal vocabulary or hedging; and (3) finding resources, referencing and avoiding plagiarism. The participants made the following comments:

130  Part 3: Learning Strategy Research in a Study Abroad Context

Extract 9: My writing skill still wasn’t good enough because I used to study from ready-made notes for the university exams in Libya… the tutor here taught us some useful writing strategies for our MA course such as how to avoid plagiarism through citing and referencing. (Osama, 6th interview) Extract 10: Our tutor taught us first how to make a summary of the text… first I took notes while reading the text. Then, I put one or two sentences that expressed the idea of the whole paragraph. Finally, I used some linking words to enhance cohesion such as conversely, on the contrary, consequently, furthermore and to begin and to conclude… I have recently found out that plagiarism means cheating. To avoid this, I learnt I had to change the tense of the sentence, to use synonyms and to mention the original source… Improving the writing skill is important for writing assignments in my MA course. (Yazn, 6th interview) Extract 11: In the United Arab Emirates, my university teachers didn’t teach me how to write an academic essay because the exam questions were multiplechoice. Besides, I’m a gynaecologist not going to be an English teacher… Writing classes were useful to me because I have to write ten assignments for my MA programme. For instance, I learnt from my tutor here the basic elements of essay structure. In an Arabic essay, a general introduction about the title was first put. Then, we wrote one long paragraph about the title in the body and finally we wrote the conclusion in one or two sentences. In writing an academic essay in English, the introduction is very important. It starts with a general sentence and then with a more specific one. It also includes a thesis statement which presents the points that the body will present. The body contains paragraphs and each paragraph begins with one main idea followed by supporting sentences that give supporting facts and examples. And in the conclusion you state what your essay’s about. (Haifa, 6th interview)

These interview extracts indicate that all participants responded positively to the writing strategies taught by their tutors (i.e. other-imposed strategies), and they showed signs of recognising the fact that changing motivation might require embracing different learning strategies. The participants’ concerns about the academic writing requirements of their destination programmes repeat the point raised by Górska (2013). According to Górska (2013: 191), ‘the inability to write academic texts puts international students in danger of failing their courses, and may lead to interruption of studies or, more gravely, to their abandoning or

Social Interaction, Strategy Use and Future Vision on Pre-Sessional English Programmes  131

being dropped from their programmes’. This finding shows how Higgins’ (2000: 209) prevention aspect of instrumentality (i.e. avoidance of a feared end state) dominated the participants’ motivational discourses in the early stages of their stay in the UK (for more elaboration of Higgins’ [2000] distinction between the promotion and prevention aspects of instrumentality, see Section 3.5 in Chapter 3). More specifically, their driving force was principally to avoid possible negative consequences in terms of failure and returning home in disgrace. As seen above, there were changes in the participants’ strategic efforts to handle the linguistic and sociocultural challenges that they confronted in the first three months of their time in the UK. The superficiality of the participants’ interactions with non-Arabs at this stage left most of them frustrated, as they had expected to construct strong relationships with the British immediately, and that their English would improve spontaneously. However, their extramural activities to meet their daily needs afforded opportunities to use English, and sometimes pushed them to embrace or reactivate a specific set of learning strategies. One of the most interesting findings was that the participants greatly valued the writing strategies that they learnt on this course, such as finding resources, referencing and avoiding plagiarism, given that academic writing requirements constituted the essential form of assessment in their MA programmes. 6.4 Social Interaction with Co-National and Multinational Networks on a Pre-Sessional English Programme

This section describes the friendship groups of the participants in the current research and presents quotes from Arab international student interviews that illustrate their relationships with co-national and multinational networks on a pre-sessional English course, i.e. during the first three months of their stay in the UK. According to Trice (2007: 108), international students’ difficulty in becoming involved in social exchanges with host nationals is most likely intertwined with ‘feelings of loneliness, depression, and stress’. Therefore, many international students tend to develop strategies to buffer the effects of loneliness and helplessness in the host culture. One of these strategies is to build strong and purposeful relationships with people who share their culture and language. In the longitudinal research study reported in this book, the participants’ strongest network was their co-national network, including Arab postgraduate students attending the pre-sessional course or those sharing their lodgings and leisure time, along with their family members back home. Alongside the lack of opportunities available to the participants to socialise with British people, they had a strong need to consult their Arab nationals on religious, academic, personal and emotional issues. In addressing this point, Adnan, the Saudi participant, commented as follows:

132  Part 3: Learning Strategy Research in a Study Abroad Context

Extract 12: Before coming to the UK I thought that I would not be able to perform my religious practices freely, but I discovered that here I can pray and do everything I want without any restrictions… An Egyptian student living in another campus unit showed me the location of the University Chaplaincy. He also gave me a printed paper including prayer times and a Ramadan2 timetable in addition to a compass to determine the Qibla [direction of prayer]. (Adnan, 5th interview)

This extract seems to concur with the argument raised by Bankston and Zhou (1995: 524), namely that ‘religion plays an important part in the psychological adjustment and the maintenance of a sense of a group identity’ of many international students. That is, practising religious rituals in the host country can play a pivotal role in enabling many international students to adjust to the new society and maintain a sense of belonging to their home countries. Three participants (Feras, Osama and Rawan) also described how their Arab friends in the UK alleviated their sorrows and worries over their families at home due to the political turmoil taking place in Syria and Libya. In this regard, Rawan, the Syrian participant, stated that: Extract 13: Two of my Arab friends on the pre-sessional course always showed their concern for the safety of my family in Syria due to the civil war taking place there… It’s easier for me to use Arabic when talking about my ordeal. (Rawan, 6th interview)

Likewise, Zahra, the Iraqi participant, highly valued the endeavours of her Iraqi friend in the UK to console her on the death of her father using every possible means. In addressing this point, Zahra commented thus: Extract 14: Sometimes I feel depressed here especially I lost my father two months before coming to the UK. It was hard and emotional for me. My Iraqi friend attending the pre-sessional course always tries to soothe me whenever she sees me crying. She’s just like a sister to me… I also rehearsed my first oral presentation relating to this course in front of her. (Zahra, 5th interview)

This extract also shows the academic support offered to Zahra by her fellow Iraqi attending the same pre-sessional English programme. Despite the emotional and practical advantages of establishing strong ties with Arab friends in the UK, Osama, the Libyan participant, described a distressing incident he had experienced with his two Arab flatmates attending the same pre-sessional English programme:

Social Interaction, Strategy Use and Future Vision on Pre-Sessional English Programmes  133

Extract 15: As we are all living on the university campus, I presented my suggestion to two Arab students here that we should converse only in English when together. They reluctantly accepted my offer. If I didn’t speak English first, none would have taken the initiative. I was dismayed yesterday when they both told me that they wanted to use Arabic only in our everyday conversation and accused me of being arrogant. Therefore, I now just use Arabic with them. (Osama, 6th interview)

Osama’s words revealed how some informal actors can curtail a study abroad student’s strategic language learning efforts at any given point in time. The reaction of Osama’s Arab flatmates brings to mind Ting-Toomey and Chung’s (2005: 158) elucidation of the connection between language, culture and identity: ‘In speaking a common tongue, members signal equal ingroup linkage’. In other words, the use of English by Osama in informal settings with his Arab flatmates was most likely to be seen as ‘an intrusion or challenge to their in group affiliation’ (Jackson, 2008: 120). Along with having good social bonds with co-national fellows in the UK and, to a lesser extent, with other social networks to reduce the effects of sad feelings, all the participants embraced another strategy by maintaining strong ties with their relatives back home, in particular the immediate ones. This strategy was mediated by diverse means of communication such as email, mobile phone and instant messaging conversations using Windows Live messenger and Skype. For instance, Rawan, the Syrian participant, expressed her excitement at staying in contact with her family members in Syria through installing Viber on her iPhone: Extract 16: Two weeks ago, I purchased a second-hand iPhone 4Gs from Amazon. I’m very glad today after talking with my family for free through Viber. I told my eldest brother about the difficulties I’m now facing in my study. He’s not highly educated but his encouraging words have raised my morale. (Rawan, 6th interview)

Rawan’s words recall Montgomery’s (2010: 69) argument that ‘the idea of technology as a support to friendship and kinship is an interesting one, as it touches on the idea of a global community that is maintained despite geographical distance’. In this sense, technological tools provided both academic and non-academic gains for the participants. The merit of utilising technology-mediated language resources in out-of-class contexts for independent learning purposes was also mentioned by three participants (Adnan, Feras and Yazn). For instance, Yazn, the Jordanian participant, described his reaction when one of the British TESCO staff could not understand what he wanted to purchase:

134  Part 3: Learning Strategy Research in a Study Abroad Context

Extract 17: In Ramadan, I decided to invite two Arab friends to break our fast together. So, I wanted to prepare a kind of Jordanian desserts for them called ‘Mhalabia’ [similar to blancmange]. I went to TESCO to buy the ingredients. One of them was ‘corn starch’. First, I searched for this word in the electronic dictionary installed on my iPhone. But the British lady working there didn’t get what I needed because I pronounced the word ‘corn starch’ incorrectly. I felt embarrassed because I repeated it many times. Then, the problem was solved when I played the audio pronunciation. (Yazn, 7th interview)

This extract shows that the mobile phone device was used by Yazn as an effective strategy to make up for his inadequate repertoire of English vocabulary and inaccurate pronunciation. As regards the participants’ accommodation, all participants said they were living on the university campus. Overseas educational representatives from a number of UK universities operating in the Arab world had helped most participants with the application process and accommodation issues. Based on the participants’ accounts of their own experiences, most of them were reluctant to communicate with their Asian flatmates in the first three months of their stay in the UK, because they believed that building a strong relationship with Asians would not have a beneficial impact on their English language proficiency. The differences between Asian and Arab cultures also had a key role in this matter, especially food habits. More precisely, some participants claimed that as Muslims, they were conscientious in consuming only halal (permitted) foods in the UK, but pork was one of the favourite foods of the non-Muslim majority. As Muslims, they were also prohibited from consuming alcoholic drinks, according to Quranic law. Fears about coming into contact with pork products led some participants to avoid sharing meals with their Asian flatmates. To exemplify this point, Waleed, the Saudi participant, declared: Extract 18: Unfortunately, I cannot have a meal with my Chinese flatmates because they eat pork a lot. One of my flatmates told me that a ‘pig’ has a sublime connotation in Chinese culture because the Chinese ideogram for the word ‘family/home’ [家] consists of two components: a pig [豕] and a roof [宀]. (Waleed, 6th interview)

Waleed’s words seemingly resonate with the point made by O’Connor (2012: 97) that ‘keeping a halal diet in a non-Islamic country reminds Muslims of their religious identity’. In other words, the participants’ following of halal food laws not only implied a religious connotation but extended it to represent a very practical reminder to Muslims of their

Social Interaction, Strategy Use and Future Vision on Pre-Sessional English Programmes  135

minority status. Haifa, the Emirati participant, also described an incident that revealed the lack of help she received from her flatmates in finding out about some places to shop: Extract 19: In the first month of my stay in the UK, I bought everything from an expensive store. Some students said in passing that prices were lower at another store. But nobody would say where it was. And I became angry… I searched Google Maps and then I found it. (Haifa, 6th interview)

Most participants also reported that they had a superficial relationship with their Asian counterparts in the classroom setting during the pre-sessional English course, although they were sometimes assigned to work together to complete some learning tasks. For instance, Zahra, the Iraqi participant, divulged that she was reluctant to work with her Asian classmates on a group oral presentation because they were not sufficiently cooperative: Extract 20: The duration of the first presentation was 7 minutes for each student within the group. I started preparing for the presentation immediately after being told by my tutor. It was about animal rights. We went to the city centre and spoke to British people. It took too much time when I did it with other members because they were unwilling to do their parts, and they insisted on me doing the interviews on their behalf. I said to them we were here to practice our English. So it was an opportunity to make it better. I jotted down the key points on a sheet of paper and I replaced some words that were difficult to pronounce with simple ones. I had known these strategies since I was in Iraq…. I focussed more on my tutors’ feedback than my peers. (Zahra, 8th interview)

This interview extract exemplifies the way in which Zahra deployed some metacognitive and social strategies such as being prepared and using simplified forms, organising her schedule, identifying the purpose of a task and favouring language use and communicative activities. There is also a reference to the way in which she reactivated some of the strategies that she had previously used at home. Notably, Zahra along with most other participants downplayed the value of their classmates’ oral and written feedback on the pre-sessional English course. This finding might be partially ascribed to Carson and Nelson’s (1996: 11–12) argument, namely that students who are accustomed to teacher-dominated pedagogy often consider peer feedback as less effective because the tutor is deemed to be the only source of knowledge that can be trusted. This finding also concurs with that of Poverjuc et al. (2012), who investigated

136  Part 3: Learning Strategy Research in a Study Abroad Context

the perceptions of five international students regarding the usefulness of their peers’ feedback on their academic writing while attending a one-year MA course at a major UK university. Poverjuc et al. (2012: 465) found that most participants did not fully capitalise on the benefits of peer feedback practice, on the grounds that ‘students’ lack of prior peer feedback and their perception of peers’ ability to provide valid feedback constituted potential barriers to the success of peer feedback’. Unlike the other participants, Feras and Yazn expressed their satisfaction with their experiences of interacting with their Asian counterparts, but just for entertainment purposes. For instance, Yazn, the Jordanian participant, said: Extract 21: I’m an easygoing guy. I tried to mix with all social groups because I had already received an unconditional offer from the university. So the pre-sessional course for me is just for fun. Sometimes at weekends, I play basketball with my classmates…. One of my flatmates has got a guitar. She’s Taiwanese. We sometimes play some classical guitar pieces together. (Yazn, 7th interview)

It is noteworthy that none of the participants during their attendance on the pre-sessional English course referred to any kind of interaction with European individuals outside the classroom in the UK. As the above discussion indicates, the strongest social network of the participants in the first months of their stay in the UK was their co-national network (i.e. friends from the Middle East and family members back home). Conversely, the participants’ multinational networks constrained participants’ language use to some extent, on the grounds that the Asian students (especially the Chinese) constituted the dominant group on the pre-sessional English course and were described by some participants as introverts and less competent English speakers. 6.5 Perspectives on Native Speakers as Models for English Teaching on a Pre-Sessional English Programme

‘Native-speakerism’ represents an ideological belief that individuals from an English-speaking country are better equipped to teach English language learners because of their superior language proficiency, immaculate pronunciation and up-to-date teaching methodology (Christiansen et al., 2018; Swan et al., 2015). This ideology, as Lowe and Pinner (2016) point out, stems from Phillipson’s (1992) concept of linguistic imperialism, which promotes the belief that English is best taught monolingually as a way to strengthen British and American colonial polices. In this view, the earlier and the more English is taught by a native speaker to the exclusion of other languages in the classroom, the more proficient students

Social Interaction, Strategy Use and Future Vision on Pre-Sessional English Programmes  137

will be in acquiring English. Anjea (2014: 32) points out that over 70% of English language teaching programmes continue to classify a ‘native English speaker criterion’ as one of the most fundamental criteria in hiring teaching staff. However, this idealisation of ‘native speaker’ English language teachers has recently been challenged by some language learning researchers such as Holliday (2015, 2017), Kumaravadivelu (2016), Mahboob (2010), Moussu and Llurda (2008) and Rivers (2011). Rivers and Ross (2013: 327), for instance, suggest that the steady use of native speakers of English as ‘models’ and interlocutors may be conceived of as ‘a specific kind of chauvinistic action involving similar processes as more established forms of prejudice, stereotyping, and/or discrimination’. Elsewhere, Rivers (2011: 843) in her study of 120 Japanese English language learners, found that relying on ‘native speaker’ English language teachers to provide models of teaching practices ‘serves to train students in the development of less favourable attitudes toward English language speakers of other racial, national and ethnic backgrounds’. It may even reinforce a ‘heightened sense of anxiety and inferiority among the students’ (Rivers, 2011: 843). The findings of the second research phase revealed that almost all the participants’ tutors on the pre-sessional English course were British. Apart from Feras and Zahra, the participants mentioned that they preferred their tutors to be native speakers of English over non-native ones on the pre-sessional course. In this sense, they were pleased and ‘felt lucky’ to be taught by native speakers who, as articulated by the participants, treated them as ‘real people’. They did so by prominently acknowledging and valuing their opinions and answers, in addition to encouraging them to bring their own real world into the language classroom by, for instance, allowing them to choose the topic of their oral presentation and discuss with their classmates what they had listened to on English radio (see Falout, 2014; Ushioda, 2011b). In this sense, genuine endeavours were made by the tutors to create a bridge between inside and outside the classroom. They also passed on some effective strategies such as listening to English radio and watching English movies (i.e. cognitive strategies), learning new vocabulary in some meaningful context and planning for a language task (i.e. metacognitive strategies) and cooperating with others (i.e. social strategies). When asked about their perceptions of the tutors teaching on the pre-sessional programme, most participants compared their teachers’ teaching practices in their homelands with those on the pre-sessional programme: Extract 22: In Libya, there’s a wall between my English teachers and us. The only voice heard in all my classrooms was the teacher… in the UK, the practice of calling tutors by their first names was new to me. My Tutors here

138  Part 3: Learning Strategy Research in a Study Abroad Context

are British and are much friendlier than in Libya… they encouraged us to speak and they respected us and our ideas. (Osama, 7th interview) Extract 23: We are here in Britain to capture the true pronunciation of English. I was lucky since my two tutors were British, especially as my classmates were non-British… my Arab teachers of English in Emirates used to pronounce words incorrectly and were strict… my tutor in the pre-sessional course sometimes took his soft drink with us during the break and we had fun together. (Haifa, 6th interview) Extract 24: … my English teachers in Saudi Arabia were Arabs. They taught us only from the assigned books… on this pre-sessional course, one of my tutors sometimes asked us to listen to the radio every day as homework to discuss together later in the classroom. She’s British. She always invites us to work in pairs or groups. (Adnan, 8th interview)

These extracts signify the potential for removing the ‘communication wall’ (Taylor, 2013a: 52) between teachers and students to increase the academic engagement and well-being of students. In this sense, the participants’ social strategies and their talking time inside the classroom increased in response to their tutors’ apparent behaviour. The same extracts reveal that the participants’ position in terms of their preference to be taught by British tutors appeared to be the outcome of their negative experiences with most Arab teachers of English in their homelands. This is because the participants in this research (apart from Feras and Zahra) were only taught English by Arab and/or Asian non-native speaker teachers during their academic lives in their homelands. In the participants’ accounts of past language learning experiences, a large number of English language teachers seemed to function as the participants’ ‘constraining network’ rather than their ‘advice/guidance network’ (i.e. a direct and positive involvement in the participants’ language learning processes) (see Section 5.3.1 in Chapter 5). This occurred because they ‘put exams first’ in their language teaching (Pan & Block, 2011: 399), limiting the participants’ opportunities to use English inside and outside the classroom along with disregarding their need to express their private visions of their future possible selves (see Smith et al., 2018). In this sense, most participants were treated by their English teachers in their homelands as abstract language learners, and their interests were not taken into account. As a consequence, the majority of strategies deployed by the participants in their homelands went under the category of ‘compulsory strategy use’ (i.e. exam-oriented strategies), and were essentially imposed by their English teachers in formal settings. Taylor (2013a: 46) addressed this point, suggesting that a

Social Interaction, Strategy Use and Future Vision on Pre-Sessional English Programmes  139

considerable number of English-speaking teachers in developing countries tend to ‘leave no room for reflection and subjectivity – either in determining the learning content or in how information is used, interpreted or understood’. Elsewhere, Taylor (2013b: 15) points out that the classroom is ‘a micro social setting that leaves its social-ideological mark on students’ identity through the mediation of teacher beliefs and practices’. Cross and Hitchcock (2007), for instance, examined Chinese students’ attitudes at a UK university and found a high level of awareness of the differences in the roles of learners and tutors in China and the UK. Their study revealed that many participants tended to view their role in English classes in China as being confined to absorbing the knowledge given by their Chinese tutors of English ‘like a memory stick’, whereas they likened their relationship with their ‘native speaker’ English language teachers in the UK to ‘a traveller and a guide’ (Cross & Hitchcock, 2007: 9). Accordingly, two participants (Adnan and Rawan) in the current study felt that they were ‘unlucky’ because one of their tutors on the pre-sessional English programme was a non-native speaker of English. Participants’ motives for being taught only by native speakers of English could be attributed to three main factors: (1) having negative experiences with most Arab teachers of English in their homelands; (2) considering ‘native speaker’ English language teachers as being more experienced and knowledgeable about the best language teaching methods; (3) seeing their British tutors as almost the only available resource to practise and improve their English, chiefly because of the absence of native English students in the pre-sessional course. In addressing the point of preferring ‘native speaker’ English language teachers, Lamb and Budiyanto (2013: 29–30) in their study on a group of young adolescent learners in provincial Indonesia reported that the teachers of these language learners viewed ‘native speaker models as the prestigious professional variety, and learners picked up that message’. The learners also found ‘difference exciting’ (Lamb & Budiyanto, 2013: 30, see also Timmis, 2002). Related to this, native-speaking English teachers’ lack of proficiency in the Indonesian language was conceived of as an advantage since English became the only possible medium of communication. Lamb and Budiyanto (2013: 30) further argue that as ‘scarce commodities will find their own price’ in the market economy, some private sector language institutions in developing countries pay relatively high salaries to ‘native speaker’ English language teachers in order to attract them. Nonetheless, a number of researchers (e.g. Baker, 2012; Holliday, 2005; Medgyes, 1994; Rivers, 2011) advocate the strengths of non-native local teachers of English, on the grounds that these teachers have a good knowledge of the learners’ home sociocultural context and language. Although the perceptions of most participants in the current research accorded with the myth of the native speaker as the ideal teacher, two

140  Part 3: Learning Strategy Research in a Study Abroad Context

participants of the present study (Feras and Zahra) did not show any preference in terms of the nationality of their pre-sessional English tutors. This finding might be attributed to the positive experiences they possessed about most of their English teachers in their homeland. That is, they were taught by both native and non-native teachers of English in fee-paying private schools in their homelands. They expressed their satisfaction with what had been taught by some of their Arab teachers of English before coming to the UK, primarily because many of them were native-like and held master’s degrees in English language teaching from British or American universities. As a consequence, it should be borne in mind that English teachers’ teaching practices often mirror the educational sector they work in (i.e. private or public sector) along with the national policies in their countries that are likely to create divisions ‘in terms of educational resources among rural and urban schools and non-key and key institutions’ (Gao, 2008: 183) (for more explanation about the effect of attending fee-paying private schools, see Section 5.5.2.2 in Chapter 5). In this sense, one point that needs further consideration is whether non-native speakers of English in the mainstream schooling of developing countries are receiving adequate teacher preparation about the appropriate language teaching methods and the best ways of using digital and mobile technologies in the classroom. 6.6 Effects of Assessment Modes in the Pre-Sessional English Programmes on Strategy Use

When international students decide to pursue further studies within an English-speaking higher education environment, they face significant changes in the type of assessment they experience. Hence, adjustments in strategy use in response to the new mode of assessment are required. In the current research, the analysis of the participants’ experiential accounts during their attendance on the pre-sessional English course revealed that their tutors used a communicative approach to language teaching, and both summative and affirmative kinds of assessment. That is, the assessment activities used by the tutors had to do ‘double duty’ (Boud, 2000: 159), since they encompassed both formative assessment for learning as well as summative assessment for certification. Ur (2012: 168) points out that anyone can be an agent in formative assessment, including teachers, peers and the learners themselves. Ur (2012) further postulates that: It [formative assessment] may, like summative assessment, provide a grade in the form of a number, but it happens in the middle of a period of learning rather than at the end, provides clear feedback in the form of error correction and suggestions for improvement and has the primary aim of enhancing future learning. (Ur, 2012: 168)

Social Interaction, Strategy Use and Future Vision on Pre-Sessional English Programmes  141

In this sense, students in formative assessment not only receive feedback from their teachers and peers, but provide feedback to peers. The participants in this research mentioned that their tutors on the pre-sessional English course used different types of formative assessment, such as class discussions, group work with peer feedback, an oral presentation and a micro written project (1500–2000 words). This course did not involve high-stakes exams, and the participants appeared to enjoy having more freedom to select the strategies that they themselves believed necessary to use rather than those required for the extremely exam-oriented nature of the education system in their homelands. However, the strategy choice of most participants was largely influenced by the previously context-mediated motivational discourses, mainly during the first five-week phase of this course. To further clarify this point, almost all the participants were less conscientious in dealing with cooperative activities introduced by their tutors, describing them as ‘fun’, ‘time wasting’ and ‘sometimes unimpressive’. The following extracts illustrate this point: Extract 25: The collaborative activities assigned by our tutors sometimes made learning more fun for me. However, I often didn’t take them seriously as I had already obtained the unconditional offer for my MA programme… I listened to my colleagues’ opinions when completing some tasks together but their input wasn’t so helpful, compared to the tutor’s comments. (Waleed, 7th interview) Extract 26: Peer learning activities somewhat reduced the feeling of boredom that I used to experience in Syria. However, much time was wasted on such activities and they have not produced any genuine benefits so far. Many colleagues also use their first language during discussions… I watched most movies assigned by my tutor because it was a part of the final assessment. I’m obliged to pass this pre-sessional course to attend my MA programme. (Rawan, 8th interview)

This finding related to the indifferent behaviour that many participants exhibited in dealing with cooperative activities could be attributed to two main causes: (1) the mark was unimportant to many participants, since they had already had an unconditional offer for their MA programmes; and (2) the pre-sessional English course was only attended by international students, who were essentially accustomed to striving for their final examination results in their homelands rather than improving their English in the long run (see Pan & Block, 2011). That is, the final examination results for many international students were viewed as the

142  Part 3: Learning Strategy Research in a Study Abroad Context

sole measure of their English proficiency and source of pride for parents in the future in their homelands. As explained in Section 5.4 in Chapter 5, this summative assessment (typically at the end of semester and school year) enhanced the participants’ prevention aspect of instrumentality (i.e. avoidance of feared or negative end states) associated with the ought-to self, which was tied to a short-term goal such as studying in order not to fail or foil their parents’ expectations (Dörnyei & Kubanyiova, 2014; Ushioda, 2014). In this sense, the reactions of many international students to the different assessments they experienced in the UK were influenced by their past language learning experiences. It can be inferred that one of the most fundamental tasks for tutors working with international students is to enlighten them to the potential of cooperative activities, and how these activities can be implemented, especially at the early stages of attending a course. A learner’s disposition (i.e. a pre-existing readiness for something) is essential because it is not easy for an individual to be engaged in any activity without recognising its importance for them (see Dörnyei & Kubanyiova, 2014). In order to capture international students’ changing perceptions of the assessment modes in their homelands and the study abroad context, Cross and Hitchcock (2007) surveyed Chinese students at a UK university, suggesting that many students explained the most obvious differences in the assessment methods used in the Chinese and British university systems. In their study, students reported that Chinese universities use traditional written exams as the only assessment method, whereas UK universities tend to use various assessment tasks, including spoken language skills (e.g. oral presentations), written essays and reflective or review tasks. Cross and Hitchcock (2007) concluded that international students might take much longer than expected to adapt to the changes in assessment modes. This bears out the findings from the qualitative study of Jiang and Sharpling (2011), who investigated the experiences and perceptions of Chinese students studying at a UK university in relation to the shifting assessment orientations that they encountered during their attendance on a pre-sessional English course and their master’s degree programme. Jiang and Sharpling (2011: 57) found that the participants’ use of learning strategies was markedly examination oriented, in the sense that ‘for some [participants], surviving the system rather than deriving full benefit from the English-speaking environment [was] their main goal’. This finding related to international students’ gradual adaptation to the new assessment practices in the UK is not in line with that of Gao (2006a, 2010). Gao’s (2006a, 2010) longitudinal studies of mainland Chinese university students’ strategy use in Britain and Hong Kong, respectively, found that his participants responded positively and directly to the changing mode of assessment in the new context; namely, coursework assessment in English. According to Gao (2006a, 2010), this

Social Interaction, Strategy Use and Future Vision on Pre-Sessional English Programmes  143

change in assessment methods led his participants to replace the directly exam-oriented strategies (memorisation and repetition strategies) used in China with a different strategic approach based on ‘language in use’ as a result of the lifting of the pressure of examinations in the new contexts in Britain and Hong Kong. As described in Section  6.3, all the participants in the present research, during their attendance on their pre-sessional English courses, valued academic writing classes and the writing strategies mediated by their tutors (see Extracts  9 through 11). They did so because a typical means of assessment in their MA academic programmes would be writing assignments, and thus, they wished to learn how to write an effective piece of academic writing (see Górska, 2013). Waleed, the Saudi participant, made the following comment regarding this point: Extract 27: My graduation project in Saudi Arabia was in English but I used to copy information from books without referencing it… I think the writing sessions were the best thing in this course for my MA assignments… the tutor taught us how to find resources from the library catalogue and how to use the reference list and other things. (Waleed, 6th interview)

This finding related to the participants’ particular focus on writing strategies could be viewed as an example of practising their agentive power. As Kramsch (2013: 195) aptly puts it, language learners are no longer ‘simply moved to learn what others teach them. They can exercise agency, claim their rights to be heard, and strive to become whoever they want to be’. In this view, the participants were pushed into learning the writing strategies (e.g. referencing and avoiding plagiarism) taught by their tutors after recognising the relevance of these strategies to their academic success. 6.7 Conclusion and Implications

This chapter has explained the expectations and perceptions of a group of Arab international students who attended a pre-sessional English course before joining their postgraduate programmes. In addition, the participants’ friendship groups and the process of change in their future vision and strategy use during their endeavours to handle the diverse challenges that they confronted on this course have been examined. The discrepancy between what the participants would have preferred to do and what they actually did during the first few months of their stay in the UK might be partially attributable to their lack of prior travel experience. That is, many of them set unachievable goals by anticipating that they would be befriended by British nationals

144  Part 3: Learning Strategy Research in a Study Abroad Context

from the moment they arrived in the UK, and that their English would improve automatically so they would speak like native speakers after spending a limited time period in the UK without requiring certain strategies to accomplish such goals. Additionally, most participants seemed to have inadequate knowledge about how to familiarise themselves with cultural differences or second language learning and use while abroad. To increase the benefit of attending pre-sessional English courses, international students should equip themselves with some details of student life in the host country and about a prospective institution before studying abroad. They can do so, for example, by researching on the internet or through contacting previous local students who have returned from that country after completing their academic programmes. International students should also possess realistic expectations of the experience from the start and avoid inflated expectations (Zhou & Todman, 2009), and here, Wu and Hammond (2011) express concern over the marketing of the international student experience. Programme managers need to help international students form realistic expectations of the aims and design of their specific study abroad programmes. This can be partially achieved through organising face-to-face and/or electronic meetings between international students and programme coordinators, academics and campus directors. Students’ inquiries in terms of the goals and assessment modes of their destination programmes, together with accommodation and lifestyle issues in the host country should be properly addressed without misleading information. From this, international students could identify and refine their expectations and goals before studying abroad or from the early period after their arrival at the destination university. This, in turn, could help many international students avoid making any cause and effect assumptions about the availability of an enabling English learning environment and an automatic improvement in English, without the need to undertake any strategic behaviour. This is because learning goals can best be achieved by ‘real action and participation (i.e. exercise of agency)’ (Gkonou, 2015: 196). Further, international students need to develop their computer literacy before studying abroad, because most of their academic work will be on or near a computer, using a host of technological tools such as word processing, electronic dictionaries, Dropbox, Mendeley Desktop, Mindjet and SkyDrive. It has been seen that most participants in the present research showed a low degree of ‘international posture’ in the first few months of their stay in the UK. As described in Chapter  3, ‘international posture’ signifies an ‘interest in foreign or international affairs, readiness to interact with intercultural partners, and, one hopes, openness or a non-ethnocentric attitude toward different cultures’ (Yashima, 2002: 57). This powerful motivational construct is predominately associated

Social Interaction, Strategy Use and Future Vision on Pre-Sessional English Programmes  145

with achieving long-term goals. However, most participants in the second research phase were reluctant to mingle with international students from other cultural groups (see Section 6.4). The association of culture and language has been a point of much debate by researchers in the field of second language teaching and learning (e.g. Byram, 1998; Kramsch, 2009). Baker (2012, 2015), for example, points out that cultural awareness limited to learners’ national cultures or Anglophone cultures is likely to be inadequate for achieving intercultural communicative competence in a world where the use of English by non-native speakers is escalating dramatically. Based on this, tutors on pre-sessional English courses are supposed to enhance students’ intercultural awareness inside and outside the classroom as a prerequisite for promoting the students’ international posture. Baker (2012) echoes this point, stating that: The ELT classroom is a site in which learners, and ideally teachers, are necessarily engaged in multilingual and multicultural practices that provide the ideal environment in which to develop ICA [intercultural awareness] and to prepare users of English to communicate in global settings. (Baker, 2012: 70)

Accordingly, international students attending pre-sessional English courses can develop their ‘international posture’ within the language classroom by allowing themselves to critically evaluate images and descriptions of local and other cultures found in English learning materials and traditional and electronic media (e.g. television, newspapers or the internet). Moreover, tutors themselves can introduce their experiences of other cultures as content for the classroom, for example through reading texts or discussion topics. Pre-sessional English tutors can also directly explain to their international students the significance of reflecting on their intercultural communication involvement. Communication between international students from different cultures can bring benefits from an academic aspect and may boost their employability in a modern enterprise. Further, international students attending pre-sessional English courses need to be directly informed by their language tutors or other people (e.g. counsellors) about diverse intercultural activities and other academic workshops that their university campuses offer. This is because many international students (especially in the first few months of their stay in the UK) are not fully cognisant of the importance of taking part in such activities and may have limited experience in technology to check the latest activities offered by their university. Related to this, the diverse cultural and religious backgrounds of international students need to be taken into account when organising social and intercultural activities. This is arguably a fruitful area of further research, especially since empirical research on the application of ‘international posture’ in language classes is still relatively rare.

146  Part 3: Learning Strategy Research in a Study Abroad Context

Notes (1) Halal food signifies ‘pure food’ with regard to meat in particular by proper Islamic practice such as ritual slaughter and pork avoidance. (2) Ramadan is the ninth month of the Islamic calendar, and a time when Muslims across the world fast during the hours of daylight.

Resources for Further Reading Copland, F. and Garton, S. (2011) ‘I felt that I do live in the UK now’: International students’ self-reports of their English language speaking experiences on a pre-sessional programme. Language and Education 25 (3), 241–255. This article investigates the range and nature of international students’ language use outside the classroom during their attendance of a pre-sessional English course at a UK university. The article concludes with some suggestions as to how pre-sessional courses may develop international students’ linguistic and sociocultural skills in order that they may interact successfully in English outside the classroom. Jackson, J. (2017) Intervening in the learning of L2 study abroad students: From research to practice. Language Teaching 51 (3), 365–382. In this paper, Jackson presents examples of two courses for international students to propel them to higher levels of second language proficiency, global-mindedness and intercultural sensitivity. Montgomery, C. (2010) Understanding the International Student Experience. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan. This book presents a detailed picture of the international student experience in a range of different settings in the UK. It enables those working and studying at a university to develop an advanced understanding of the social and academic experience of international students. The book considers issues relating to these students’ experience, such as friendship, language, culture and identity, and how they affect students’ view of their educational context. Swan, A., Aboshiha, P. and Holliday, A. (eds) (2015) (En)countering Native-Speakerism: Global Perspectives. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. This book addresses the issue of native-speakerism, an ideology based on the assumption that ‘native speakers’ of English have a special claim to the language itself, through critical qualitative studies of the lived experiences of practising teachers and students in a range of scenarios.

7 Social Connectedness, Learning Strategy Use and Future Vision during Master’s Programmes 7.1 Introduction

The previous chapter of this book examined the process of changes in the participants’ strategic learning efforts, underlying their learning motivations and future vision during their attendance of a 10-week pre-sessional English course at a UK university. The findings of the second research phase suggest that the participants’ strategies for handling the challenges that they were confronted within the first three months of their time in the UK were largely regulated by their social networks. During this research phase, the participants’ strongest network was their co-national network, mainly to buffer feelings of loneliness and stress, since they found few opportunities to mix with native speakers of English across different settings. They initially set unrealistic goals by expecting to build strong bonds with the British immediately, and that their English would spontaneously improve. The superficiality of the participants’ interactions with local students at their host institution left most of them feeling discontented and frustrated, especially during the first phase of the pre-sessional English course (Brown, 2009; Ryan & Mercer, 2011; Schartner, 2015, 2016). The participants, however, significantly valued the writing strategies they learned that were mediated by their tutors during the second phase of the pre-sessional course, given that academic writing requirements would constitute the main form of assessment in their master’s (MA) programmes. Examples of these strategies were paraphrasing, synthesising, referencing skills and avoiding plagiarism. In this chapter, the findings of the third research phase will focus on the participants’ strategic learning efforts and motivational discourses in the first and second terms of their MA programmes. This phase of data analysis represented a critical part of the research because it gave greater in-depth insights through snapshots of the complexity and dynamism of the participants’ strategy use and learning goals. Given that the main reason for the participants’ coming to the UK was to obtain academic qualifications through the medium of English, their experimental accounts during this stage largely concentrated on the strategies they used 147

148  Part 3: Learning Strategy Research in a Study Abroad Context

to manage the new demand, namely, coursework assessment in English. Accordingly, seeking out authentic opportunities to practise their English in non-academic settings came to occupy a secondary position for most participants at this research stage. Related to this, shifts were noted in the importance of the social and material learning resources, along with their motivational forces regulating the participants’ learning process, as will be discussed in the forthcoming sections. 7.2 Impact of Social Agents

This section explores how a host of social agents mediated the participants’ strategy use and future vision after the start of their MA programmes, as reflected in the qualitative data. In the first research phase, parents and English teachers were the most prominent figures in influencing the participants’ language learning strategy (LLS) use in their Arab homelands. However, the data analysis of the second research stage shows that the pre-sessional English tutors constituted the most significant agents to the participants at the academic level, while their fellow nationals’ support was mostly confined to boosting their morale. In this sense, most of the participants’ close friends in the first three months of their stay in the UK were monocultural (see Montgomery, 2010; Schartner, 2015, 2016). As will be discussed in the following subsection, non-Arab international students at the third research phase emerged as the most prominent agents in helping the participants to orchestrate their strategic learning efforts after the start of their MA programmes at both the academic and non-academic levels. 7.2.1 Mediating agents: Peers

As described in Section 6.3 in Chapter 6, peers in the second research phase played a neutral to constraining role in the participants’ language learning and strategy use, as Asian students were the dominant group in the pre-sessional English course and were described by most participants as introverted and less competent English speakers. However, almost all the participants after the start of their MA programmes maintained lively links with their co-national network, and strengthened their relationships with the multinational network (i.e. non-Arab and non-native English-speaking individuals) both inside and outside the classroom. Apart from Feras, the participants’ network with host nationals (the British in this study) continued to represent the participants’ weakest social network during their MA programmes. Effect of the network of host students

The participants ascribed their limited interpersonal links with British students during their MA programme to four main reasons: (1) the

Social Connectedness, Learning Strategy Use and Future Vision  149

scarcity of British students within the classroom (Osama); (2) the reluctance of British students to work collaboratively with their international counterparts (excluding Feras and Osama); (3) their inadequate level of English proficiency (Rawan); and (4) prioritising the successful completion of their postgraduate studies over establishing friendships and working relations with British students (Adnan, Osama and Rawan). International students’ lack of meaningful interaction with host students has been addressed in numerous empirical studies, as discussed in Section 6.2 in Chapter 6. In addition to the reasons given by the participants in this research, some researchers found a number of reasons for participating in host-nationals networks being given less importance. These include perceptible discrimination (Russell et al., 2010), and the fact that most host students already possess strong friendship networks (Green, 2013; McKenzie & Baldassar, 2017; Rienties et al., 2014; Schartner, 2015; Schartner & Cho, 2017). Moreover, many host students in Britain, as described by Peacock and Harrison (2009: 494), are likely to regard their international counterparts as ‘a perceived threat that could bring the marks of the group down through his or her lack of language ability, lack of knowledge of the United Kingdom or understanding of British pedagogy’ (see Section 7.3.2 for more elaboration on this point). Unlike all the other participants in the current research, Feras was the only one who reported the focal role of his British peers in regulating his strategic learning efforts at both the academic and non-academic levels. Feras, the Syrian participant, said that his postgraduate programme in implant dentistry was essentially assessed according to fieldwork experience, as two out of three written assignments were largely based on the 20 cases that he diagnosed and treated during his hospital work. Feras valued the support that he received from his British colleagues in the hospital, given that most of them had already been working there for at least two years, and they were familiar with both medical terminology and the colloquial English used by many patients. Extract 1 explains this. Extract 1: In the hospital, I was exposed to two types of English. I used the academic one with my colleagues and supervisors. I had no problem at all with this. And the colloquial English was often used by most patients. In the first period of my working here, I paid attention to my British colleagues’ ways of talking to patients and how they diagnosed the treated cases… some medical terms weren’t understood by some patients, so I had to explain their situations in a simple way. One of my British colleagues advised me to say ‘stitches’ instead of ‘sutures’ to patients. I also learnt new colloquial words and phrases such as ‘blowing your nose’. Some patients’ accents were difficult to understand. In this case, I asked my colleagues to help me or I typed the difficult words uttered by the patient on my mobile phone to look them up. (Feras, 9th interview)

150  Part 3: Learning Strategy Research in a Study Abroad Context

Although the kind of assessment followed in Feras’s department played a pivotal role in increasing his real opportunities to communicate with both academic and non-academic native English speakers, Feras evidently exercised his agentive power by taking advantage of these enabling language resources to overcome any linguistic or academic difficulties that he encountered while working at the hospital. Feras did so by deploying certain useful voluntary strategies, such as paying attention to situational details (i.e. metacognitive strategies), asking questions and cooperating with his peers (i.e. social strategies). Effect of the network of co-national and multinational students

The findings of some empirical studies on the experiences of international students (e.g. Bochner et al., 1977; Green, 2013; Montgomery, 2010) have suggested that the main purpose of a multinational network was ‘recreational’. Nonetheless, the present research revealed the more active role of this social network in the participants’ process of language learning and strategy use. Just as Schartner (2015) found in her qualitative study of 20 international postgraduate students at a UK university, the participants in this research acted agentively to compensate for the dearth of host contact by forming meaningful bonds with their fellow international students. More precisely, non-Arab international students by the third research phase were involved both directly and indirectly in the participants’ strategic learning efforts at the linguistic, academic and intercultural levels. The participants living on the university campus had a more positive outlook towards their flatmates than was the case while attending the pre-sessional English course. They referred to some instances of their interactions with non-Arab international students, for instance by visiting diverse places in the UK and playing football and billiards with them. The change in the participants’ standpoint towards their non-Arab flatmates might be attributed to two major factors: (1) the participants’ increased awareness of the campus lifestyle; and (2) the need to socialise with each other to avoid being isolated. This idea was aptly described by Yazn. Extract 2: I was living with students from different nationalities. They were from China, Greece, India, and Turkey. It’s good to listen to different dialects and exchange ideas and experiences together. I was in a very good relationship with the Turkish guy… we sometimes play billiards at weekends. (Yazn, 9th interview)

Two participants (Yazn and Zahra) also mentioned that they came to be more interested in the English language itself through their dynamic interaction with some of their peers. To exemplify this finding, Zahra

Social Connectedness, Learning Strategy Use and Future Vision  151

reported that one of her Indian classmates was a poet and became a valuable source of encouragement for her to read more poetry as well as compose some poems in English herself. Zahra said: Extract 3: Before coming to the UK, I liked reading Shakespeare’s poems. My interest in English poetry increased after reading many poems written by my Indian classmate… poetry taught me to think of the hidden meaning of the poem and to learn new vocabulary in context. I also learned more about English culture as well as other cultures. I recently wrote two short poems and my colleague was impressed by them. However, I am not sure if this could help me in my academic study. (Zahra, 10th interview)

This extract illustrates how reading and composing poetry in English led Zahra to use some effective voluntary strategies such as cooperating with proficient users of English, developing cultural understanding and becoming cognisant of others’ thoughts and feelings (i.e. social strategies), along with identifying the purpose of reading/writing poetry and learning new vocabulary in context (i.e. metacognitive strategies). As regards Yazn, the Jordanian participant, he indicated that his opportunities for using English increased after he strengthened his relationship with one of his German classmates, who also introduced him to her European friends. Echoing this point, Yazn said that: Extract 4: My relationship with a German classmate pushed me to use English more spontaneously. If I didn’t understand any word or idea, I asked her… I improved my relationship with her European friends as well. Both of us had similar interests in watching English movies. We also used to go to study in the library together and we helped each other in two assignments. (Yazn, 9th interview)

Hence, Yazn’s German classmate was seen to be a supportive social resource that enabled him to improve his fluency and vocabulary inventory in English and develop his social networks while studying in the UK. The data also suggest that the participants received varying degrees of academic support from their international counterparts, primarily in terms of learning technology resources. For instance, Haifa, the Emirati participant, mentioned that her Colombian classmate taught her the strategy of drawing mind maps using the Mindjet software programme to help her ‘capture, organise and visually prioritise the main themes of an assignment question in a faster and smarter way’ (Haifa, 9th interview). Waleed, the Saudi participant, also reported that he started using the Mendeley Desktop in his study at the end of the first term of his

152  Part 3: Learning Strategy Research in a Study Abroad Context

MA course after being recommended to do so by his Japanese classmate. For Waleed, this programme saved him time and effort, because it helped him manage and store references along with generating bibliographies and in-text citations. He declared that in his last two written assignments, he used the Mendeley Desktop to annotate PDFs, i.e. adding highlights and notes to documents. To support his claim, Waleed explained: Extract 5: My Japanese classmate advised me to use Mendeley. I was able to have many pdfs on my desktop in Mendeley with full bibliographic entries for each… I no longer needed to write the references manually. In addition, I used it when I needed an in-text citation while writing my assignments. I recently found out how I could take notes on the same PDF rather than on paper as I used to do for my previous assignments. My studying became more organised and saved me a lot of time. (Waleed, 10th interview)

The use of the Mendeley Desktop thus enabled Waleed to employ some cognitive and metacognitive strategies such as grouping, note-taking, highlighting and advanced organisation. The same extract also uncovered how different contextual affordances worked together (Gao, 2010). That is, the Mendeley Desktop, a mediating artefact, was introduced by a social figure, namely a Japanese student. In similar ways, a couple of participants (Adnan and Yazn) reported that they were encouraged by Waleed to install the Mendeley programme on their laptops. They used this programme at the end of the second term of their MA course to manage their documents and references and to search documents for a specific term. Adnan, for instance, said: Extract 6: In the pre-sessional course, I learnt how to cite references manually. However, I made some mistakes in using references in my written assignments. Last week Waleed advised me to download Mendeley onto my laptop. It helped me not only for referencing but also in organising my files. I marked the important documents with the star icon. It could help me a lot in my MA dissertation. (Adnan, 10th interview)

In this sense, the Arab students’ academic support and encouragement for each other was also evident in this research phase. Similarly, Osama, the Libyan participant, declared that he followed his Syrian classmate’s advice to save all his work online on both Dropbox and SkyDrive. It may be inferred from the above findings that the participants, to a greater or lesser extent, exhibited a willingness to alter their learning strategies in response to the changing learning contexts and learning goals. This matter was made clear by the increased incorporation of technology learning

Social Connectedness, Learning Strategy Use and Future Vision  153

resources into their academic and daily lives in the UK, along with the successful formation of a close-knit ‘international community of practice’ (Montgomery & McDowell, 2009). That is, the participants steadily consolidated their ties with the multinational network during their MA programmes so it became their primary network after their initial reluctance to be involved in this relationship in the first three months of their stay in the UK, as indicated in the previous chapter. This network in the third research phase greatly helped the participants to orchestrate their strategic learning efforts at both the academic and non-academic levels to compensate for the lack of meaningful contact with host nationals. 7.2.2 Impact of module tutors’ practices

In the first and second research phases, English teachers and tutors emerged as the most prominent figures in shaping the participants’ language learning goals, motivation and strategy use. More precisely, the majority of the participants, especially those who had been educated in public academic settings at home, reported that their English teachers in their homelands urged them to embrace particular strategies to improve their English examination results, namely, rote memorisation strategies. The pre-sessional English tutors in the second research phase, as the participants argued, tended to tread a fine line between teaching and learning for examinations and knowledge. That is, these tutors not only mediated a specific, useful set of learning strategies for their MA courses, principally those related to writing skills, but they also intensified the participants’ self-centredness and awareness of the importance of integrating technology use into their language learning. The data from this research phase suggest that the participants’ relationship with their subject module tutors was much more academic and formal than that in the pre-sessional course. They suggested that this was due to the limited time allocated to each taught module, accompanied by their inclination to deal more seriously with every aspect of their academic lives, given that getting a master’s degree was the main impetus for their coming to the UK. Comparing their relationship with the tutors on the pre-sessional English course and those on the MA course, Feras, for instance, remarked: Extract 7: Attending the pre-sessional course was kind of fun. We used to meet the same two young tutors almost every day for three months. They also joined us in two trips to Oxford and London. Therefore, our relationship with them was friendlier than that with the lecturers in my MA course. There were more formalities with my MA tutors, especially some who were big names in my field. Then, the duration of each module was often two to three weeks. In one module, the tutor invited guest speakers to the class and he only delivered two short lectures. (Feras, 9th interview)

154  Part 3: Learning Strategy Research in a Study Abroad Context

Concerning the characteristics of ‘a good tutor’, almost all the participants said that they preferred the tutors who, in Waleed’s words, ‘played a parental role by being caring and strict at the same time’ (Waleed, 11th interview). Similar to the findings of Sovic’s (2013) qualitative study on the experiences of international students at a UK university, the participants valued the module tutors who placed emphasis on the students’ ideas, shared their own experiences with them, gave them a clear understanding about the module and provided them with useful materials and detailed feedback on their written assignments. The following extracts from the interview transcripts of Haifa and Rawan are typical of this view. Extract 8: Two tutors influenced me so much. They were open-minded and appreciated our ideas. They also remembered the names and faces of all the students. They provided us with simple and clear guidelines for the modules. Additionally, the assignment questions were clearly shown at beginning with a useful reference list and some good websites in every lecture. They also responded to my emails… Although there’s a lot of freedom in presenting my argument in the written assignments, I still need the support and guidance of my tutors. (Haifa, 11th interview) Extract 9: The tutor of my core module was knowledgeable, encouraging and concerned with creating a cooperative atmosphere inside the classroom. When I was stuck on the assignment for her module, she replied to my questions that I sent via email… she recommended one book to me. She gave me a good mark at the end with detailed written feedback. (Rawan, 11th interview)

Extracts  8 and 9 appear to testify that although the majority of the participants were aware of the need to be more independent in their MA studies than they were used to being, they valued any kind of support and guidance given by their tutors. In this sense, the shift to independent learning needed to be supported. The interview data also show that some participants expressed disappointment at the practices of some tutors. They had three essential criticisms of their tutors: (1) speaking too fast when delivering their lectures (Adnan, Haifa, and Rawan); (2) not manoeuvring members of the different learning groups in assessed cooperative tasks to strengthen the social cohesion inside the classroom (Waleed, Yazn and Zahra) (see Section 7.3.2 for more elaboration); and (3) giving students inadequate support to develop the critical thinking skills needed for writing their assignments, together with receiving late feedback on their assignments (all the participants excluding Feras) (see

Social Connectedness, Learning Strategy Use and Future Vision  155

Section  7.3.1 for more details on this point). The following interview extracts explain the participants’ main criticisms of their tutors: Extract 10: Since Arabic was the medium of instruction for all taught subjects in Syria, I had sometimes a problem understanding the tutors’ speech in the UK. I went to one tutor and asked if she could possibly slow down her pace of teaching and that of speaking. But I felt she ignored my request. Probably, most tutors believed that our English should’ve been as good as native speakers in order to take this course… paper-based feedback would be more useful if we received it after one week of submitting the assignment because I sometimes forgot what I discussed in the previous assignments. (Rawan, 12th interview) Extract 11: In Libya, students can only get high marks if they mention the same words uttered by their teachers or included in the assigned books… in the three previous assignments, I got the same feedback ‘your work is more descriptive than critical’ …My grades ranged from C to B–. Our tutors didn’t teach us how to write critically. (Osama, 11th interview)

It may be argued that module tutors in English medium universities need to make links between international students’ previous experiences and expectations of learning and help students to understand the requirements of their current academic programme (Ryan, 2005). 7.2.3 Impact of family members

As explored in the previous chapter, the impact of family members back home, in particular parents, on the participants’ future self-guides and strategy use did not actually disappear despite being geographically distant (see Montgomery, 2010). The distance network acted as a reference point for the values of the home culture and provided emotional support to compensate for the lack of friendships with British students. However, this network also simultaneously put pressure on most participants after their arrival in the UK, given that they wanted to prove to their parents that they were successful on both the academic and personal levels (i.e. being able to be independent and complete their MA programmes successfully). Two of the participants (Haifa and Osama) were married. One of the interesting findings reported by Osama, the Libyan participant, in the third phase of this research, was that his seven-year-old daughter played a role in fostering his listening and speaking skills and sharpening his vocabulary as he sometimes used English with her in their daily communication along with occasionally watching Disney programmes with her. The following interview extract elicited this point:

156  Part 3: Learning Strategy Research in a Study Abroad Context

Extract 12: When I listen to my seven-year-old daughter speak English, I feel proud. I didn’t even feel shy about learning new vocabulary from her. She sometimes used everyday vocabulary that she learnt from her peers at school. I sometimes watched with her children’s programmes such as cartoons, Superman and Walt Disney. These programmes helped me improve my listening skills. (Osama, 12th interview)

In this sense, Osama felt that it was natural to learn English from any supportive resource, including his small daughter, although traditional parent–child roles may not be conducive to this. This finding may not be in line with the traditional parent–child roles, on the grounds that parents tend to be seen as the top of the hierarchy with profound impacts on their children’s language learning processes (Pinter, 2011). However, Field (2005: 120) points out that nowadays ‘the flow of socialization within contemporary families is increasingly multi-directional’ and cases of what Field (2005) calls ‘inverse socialization’ could include parents developing their language skills through their children, as in Osama’s case. In addressing this point, Hall and Guéry (2010: 24) coined the term ‘child language brokering’ to signify the positive influences that children might exert directly or indirectly on their parents’ learning a new language when moving from one country to another. This may be regarded as a fruitful area for further research. Haifa, the Emirati participant, also valued the support offered by her husband in terms of English learning during her stay in the UK through proofreading some of her assignments, occasionally using English in their daily communication and encouraging her to build a social network with her British neighbours. 7.3 Academic Studies in the Medium of English

The analysis of the interview data reveals that academic coursework in the medium of English had a strong impact on the participants’ strategy use and their motivation orientation towards learning/using English. Apart from Waleed, all the other participants indicated that their vocabulary, especially that relevant to their area of study, expanded because of their academic lectures in English, reading many resources in English to write their assignments and socialising with their classmates (Gao, 2003; Jiang & Sharpling, 2011). For instance, Haifa made the following comment: Extract 13: My vocabulary repertoire was enlarged, especially medical terminology. This was because of attending lecturers delivered by British tutors and discussing ideas with my colleagues. I always tried to pay attention to

Social Connectedness, Learning Strategy Use and Future Vision  157

how they pronounced words and I sometimes checked the new words they uttered… I also learnt new vocabulary from reading many resources in English while writing my assignments. (Haifa, 10th interview)

Most participants also reported that they began to use the context to guess the meaning of new vocabulary items or sometimes they would ask their conversational partner for clarification or even look up the words in the electronic dictionaries installed on their laptops. Accordingly, the reviewing or rote learning strategies that many of them used to employ heavily in their homelands were markedly less reported after the start of their MA programmes, mainly because of the changing mode of assessment. The participants were assessed by means of written assignments and sometimes collaborative group work, as will be explained in Section 7.3.2. Unlike the other participants, Waleed claimed that although he encountered many new words in his academic studies in the UK, he became less active in learning and retaining new vocabulary. For him, writing down the new vocabulary on a piece of paper several times along with repeatedly practising it in context was the best strategy to retain any vocabulary. However, he was reluctant to use this strategy because of the pressure of academic study. Rather, he often used the Babylon dictionary installed on his laptop to look up unfamiliar vocabulary while reading PDF articles in order to save time. To support his point, he declared that Extract 14: In Saudi Arabia, I used to set aside more time to learn new vocabulary through repeating it orally many times and then jotting it down in my notebook. As most of my academic work in the UK has to be done on the computer, I often use the Babylon dictionary to check the vocabulary while reading the articles and e-books necessary for writing my assignments. I highlighted unfamiliar words, and this dictionary gave me its category and meaning. However, I felt this strategy wasn’t so useful for retaining words… I noticed this when I wanted to use them in the following assignments. Therefore, I need to start using some of the new vocabulary words in my communication here. (Waleed, 10th interview)

Extracts 13 and 14 seem to affirm that the participants’ strategy use and self-image were not static, and were largely influenced by their changing goals, past language learning experiences and contextual realities (e.g. social agents’ practices, assessment modes and the availability of language learning resources) (Benson & Cooker, 2013; Mercer, 2011). The following section will explain the diverse academic challenges that participants were confronted with while dealing with the new mode of assessment and their strategic learning efforts to overcome these challenges.

158  Part 3: Learning Strategy Research in a Study Abroad Context

7.3.1 Assessment methods: Academic writing requirements

The primary means of assessment in the participants’ MA programmes was through academic writing, rather than an end-of-course examination with multiple-choice and short essay questions, as it was in their homelands. In this research, all the participants, to a greater or lesser extent, responded effectively to the changing mode of assessment by embracing a new set of strategies or reactivating some old ones, in accordance with the assigned learning tasks to achieve their goal of successfully accomplishing their MA programmes. For example, the presence of computers in the participants’ lives in the UK became overarching, in the sense that they did most of their academic work on or near a computer. Related to this, they used a variety of learning technology resources to facilitate and organise their academic studies. Examples of these learning technology resources mediated by their peers were the Mendeley Desktop, Dropbox, SkyDrive and Mindjet. Since the experience of writing an extended essay (between 3000 and 5000 words) required them to critically discuss an unfamiliar topic was new to all participants, they confronted some challenges in this respect. For instance, Yazn, the Jordanian participant, used the analogy of ‘a non-swimmer in a deep sea’ when talking about writing assignments. As Kettle (2017) argues, academic written tasks for postgraduate international students at English-speaking universities constitute a critical challenge because they require use of scientific concepts and terms; comprising extensive cognitive demands including summarisation, synthesis, evaluation and speculation; demanding argument and author positioning; and complying with disciplinary conventions on structure, formatting and expression. The following subsections will discuss some of the aspects of academic writing that the participants, like many other international students, identified as challenging while working on their high-stakes written assignments in the first two terms of their postgraduate programmes: Finding and selecting resources

To varying degrees, the participants referred to the difficulty of selecting the most beneficial resources from a wide range of material while working on their written assignments (Bailey, 2013; Górska, 2013; Kettle, 2017; Smailes & Gannon-Leary, 2008). Three participants (Adnan, Haifa and Waleed) mentioned that they lacked the knowledge of how to construct a long research-based assignment because the university teachers in their homelands used to ask them to read only from the assigned books, in spite of the availability of huge libraries and e-resources there. They added that although the tutors on the pre-sessional English course taught them how to find a specific resource from the library catalogue in their UK university, the participants still lacked experience in identifying the

Social Connectedness, Learning Strategy Use and Future Vision  159

criteria for choosing the most relevant and reliable learning resources to answer their assignment question. Adnan and Haifa, for instance, aptly expressed this comment: Extract 15: Writing long academic assignments was a new experience to me. I spent a lot of time searching for references from the Internet or books to choose what I needed for my assignment… As this was the first assignment, I felt disappointed after spending three days without finding anything useful for my topic… I followed one PhD student’s advice to use Google Scholar to find peer-reviewed articles. I did that by using some key words relevant to my assignment question. I also made use of the reading list given by my tutors. (Haifa, 10th interview) Extract 16: I rarely used Google or any other search engine in my study before coming to the UK. My study in Saudi Arabia was from the assigned textbooks. Although the university library in my country had access to digital resources, no teacher told us about these facilities and thus I didn’t make use of them… in writing my first assignment, finding references was something difficult to me. I thought I should read only from the reading list given by our tutors. I also felt giddy, as I didn’t know which references on that list I had to start with… I sent an email to my tutor asking him to recommend some resources to me. Based on the recommended resources, I could find the writings used by other authors… I also sought some help from my peers working on the same assignment question. (Adnan, 12th interview)

Two important points can be inferred from the above extracts. The first is that the three participants’ limited past experiences of writing an extended research-based assignment, meant they were students who have difficulty distinguishing ‘between core and peripheral material and may lack the skills to judge the authority of a source’ (Smailes & G ­ annon-Leary, 2008: 55). This held true for the other participants as well. The second point included genuine endeavours by the participants to overcome this difficulty by using certain effective strategies mediated by their teachers and peers such as reading the updated references included in the reading list and using accurate search terms in Google Scholar and library databases. In Bailey’s (2013) qualitative study, an analysis of interviews conducted with international students regarding their experiences of writing their first assignment at a UK university found that their main challenge was finding and selecting the most useful sources. This finding was said to be due to the participants’ limited knowledge of how to get access to electronic resources in their homelands, imprecise use of search terms and

160  Part 3: Learning Strategy Research in a Study Abroad Context

spelling or grammar mistakes (Bailey, 2013: 175–176). Two participants (Feras and Rawan) also reported that they booked an appointment with the information desk librarians for specialist help in their subject areas, including finding source material for their assignment questions. Unlike the other participants, Osama recalled that he did not face a noticeable challenge in searching for useful resources while writing his academic assignments. He said that ‘the module tutors of most of my assignments tended to include in the given reading lists the parts or pages which we needed to read’ (Osama, 12th interview). Reading and organising ideas in English

After finding the relevant source material, the participants were required to read it. In the findings of the second phase, the majority of the participants talked about the reading and writing strategies mediated by their tutors such as skimming for the general idea, scanning for specific information, summarising and paraphrasing. The data from this phase of the research suggest that the participants employed these strategies to varying degrees in writing their academic assignments. For example, two participants (Feras and Zahra) were likely to encounter fewer difficulties when dealing with English texts, because most of their academic studies in their homelands had been in English. They also deployed a set of cognitive and metacognitive strategies to highlight and organise the necessary ideas for their work. Echoing this idea, Zahra declared that Extract 17: When writing any assignment, I first checked the key words of the assignment question. Then I read the module handouts by focusing on the parts relevant to my assignment, to take notes afterwards. I borrowed some books from the library and downloaded some articles as well… I drew mind maps using Mindjet software programme to help me organise the main themes faster… when I read articles, I often skipped some sections, and for a book I read just one part. I learnt these strategies from my university teachers in Iraq and they were also emphasised by my tutors on the pre-sessional course. (Zahra, 11th interview)

All the other participants reported experiencing difficulty having to spend long hours extracting ideas from the selected resources, particularly in the first term of their postgraduate programmes. This difficulty was largely because many participants were inclined to use a meditative, holistic, intensive way of reading, believing that they, in Rawan’s words, had to ‘read every page of an article or a chapter of a book several times to assure myself that everything was understood and could be recalled’ (Rawan, 10th interview). By doing this, they limited their opportunities to practise English in out-of-class settings. Hence, Smailes and

Social Connectedness, Learning Strategy Use and Future Vision  161

Gannon-Leary (2008) suggest that one of the major problem areas international students encounter is being unaware of the need to change their reading strategies when studying abroad in English-speaking education systems. Smailes and Gannon-Leary (2008: 17) add that these students often believe that ‘all books on a reading list have to be read cover to cover and fully understood. Furthermore, some are unlikely to critically evaluate the contents of their reading due to the respect that they have for academic authors’. For four participants (Adnan, Haifa, Waleed and Yazn), the assessment they used to undergo in their homelands may have influenced them. That is, preparation for multiple-choice tests requires a slow, careful reading speed, and ‘the ability to differentiate between apparently similar lexical items’ (Macias & Dolan, 2009: 27). Nonetheless, these participants acted agentively by altering their reading strategies in the second term of their MA programmes to suit the new aims, as epitomised in the interview extracts taken from Yazn and Waleed: Extract 18: In the first three assignments, I read every single word in a paper as I used to do when I was in Jordan. For each paper I read, I made a summary. It’s a very time-consuming process… I consulted my European colleagues for the other assignments. One of them advised me to read the abstract and conclusion of each paper to see if it’s related to my assignment. If yes, I can continue reading it. I also learnt from one tutor the importance of drawing a mind map to generate and organise my ideas. I intend to use these strategies in other assignments in the second term. (Yazn, 12th interview) Extract 19: Although we were given a very long deadline for the first assignment, I hardly managed to finish it by the day of submission. The mistake that I made was that I used to read the whole paper without taking notes on the materials I read. Therefore, I sometimes read the same article more than thrice to find the idea that I was searching for… after installing Mendeley programme into my desktop, I started taking notes on the same PDF rather than on papers. (Waleed, 12th interview)

Extracts 18 and 19 accord with Bailey’s (2013: 177) argument that a ‘meditative way of reading does not always work well in the UK when students are required to survey a range of material and pick out key points in a short time’. The same extracts also reveal a growing recognition by the participants that many of their past strategies were no longer appropriate in the new learning setting, where a different mode of assessment was adopted. Notably, all the participants’ assignments received pass grades on the first submission.

162  Part 3: Learning Strategy Research in a Study Abroad Context

Academic writing conventions

The analysis of the interview data in the third research stage showed that all the participants were well aware of the meaning of plagiarism and the strategies that they needed to deploy in order to prevent it in their own work by providing the correct acknowledgement in the forms of paraphrasing and quoting (Divan et al., 2015; Pecorari, 2013; Petrić, 2015; Williams & Davis, 2017). They claimed that their tutors on the pre-sessional English course orchestrated these strategies for them. Nonetheless, two participants (Adnan and Rawan) commented on the amount of time they spent trying to paraphrase, given that paraphrasing entailed understanding the core ideas accurately along with manipulating grammatical structures and choosing appropriate synonyms. Extract 20: The pre-sessional course is very useful for any international student. For example, in that course I learnt that plagiarism was seen as an academic crime and all students had to avoid it in order not to fail their courses. In my assignments, I had to change the tense of the sentence, to use synonyms and to mention the original source. I spent long hours doing this. That sometimes put me under pressure, especially when a deadline was looming. (Adnan, 13th interview) Extract 21: A tutor on the pre-sessional course taught us the dangers of committing plagiarism. I was happy as I passed the three previous assignments without being accused of plagiarism. However, paraphrasing someone’s words took a lot of my time due to my lack of vocabulary. (Rawan, 12th interview)

According to Keck (2006: 263), paraphrasing is ‘an instance where the writer selects a specific excerpt of a source text and makes at least one attempt to change the language of the select excerpt’. Keck (2006) classifies four types of paraphrasing: ‘near copies’ (in which 50% or more of the paraphrase is taken from the original); ‘minimal revisions’ (comprising 20–49% of borrowed words); ‘moderate revisions’ (containing less than 20% of borrowed words); and ‘substantial revisions’ (containing no borrowed words). Keck (2006: 274) compared paraphrases by international students and their native English counterparts and discovered that the former used significantly more near copies and were less aware that the use of almost copied excerpts is considered unacceptable in many Western institutions. Likewise, Pecorari (2003) found that most international students used almost copied excerpts in their doctoral theses. As a consequence, Keck (2006: 275) highlights the importance of organising composition courses for international students at all academic levels in order to help them recognise that the near

Social Connectedness, Learning Strategy Use and Future Vision  163

copy strategy could prompt accusations of plagiarism from the university. One participant, Zahra, also referred to the challenge of answering the assignment question without going over the word limit: Extract 22: One of the written comments that I received in the first two assignments was related to exceeding the prescribed word account. I was penalised for that. Now when I write the other assignments, I will always try to keep in mind not to exceed the limits by checking each paragraph repeatedly. I realise that one needs to have a good knowledge of English grammar and vocabulary to be able to manage this. (Zahra, 11th interview)

As a consequence, one of the main anxieties that international students face when carrying out written assignments is the requirement to observe academic writing conventions and ‘avoid plagiarism’. However, all the participants of this research affirmed that they had been informed about the notion of ‘plagiarism’ and its consequences by their pre-sessional English tutors before the start of their postgraduate programmes. Critical and analytical thinking skills

With the exception of Feras, the other participants claimed that they had not received enough support either from their English tutors on the pre-sessional course or from subject lecturers in relation to what critical thinking skills were required in a particular disciplinary area. They reported that their assignment scores in the first term of their MA programmes were below their expectations, because they had not been fully aware that the process of writing assignments was more than just putting words onto paper and composing grammatical sentences. The major criticism that they often received from their tutors on their written assignments was related to their ‘lack of critical thinking’. Critical thinking is defined by Bailey (2011: 27) as ‘not just passively accepting what you hear or read, but instead actively questioning and assessing’. The participants exercised their agency and adopted certain effective strategies to improve their skills in critical analysis/thinking by, for instance, soliciting help from their most able European counterparts (Zahra and Osama), watching some videos online about the notion of critical thinking in assignments (Waleed and Yazn), borrowing books from the university library about writing postgraduate assignments critically (Haifa and Zahra) and reading former students’ essays (Adnan). The following extracts from the interview transcripts of Osama and Zahra describe their strategies. Extract 23: In my first three assignments, the main weakness mentioned by my tutors was that my work was so descriptive. The tutors did not explain

164  Part 3: Learning Strategy Research in a Study Abroad Context

to me the ways of becoming more analytical in my assignments. Two students who got a Distinction in their assignment allowed me to read their papers. I learnt I should have tackled a specific issue from different perspectives rather than to stick to the point that I supported. I applied this in the coming assignments. (Osama, 12th interview) Extract 24: My problem wasn’t related to language itself but rather to the ability to write critically. It’s related to the ability to read and understand different viewpoints and then to integrate them tactically in the paper. I need to focus more on the content of the module… I got some help from one of my Polish classmates. She got a Distinction in her assignment. She sent them via email… I also borrowed a book from the University library entitled ‘How to Improve your Assignment Results’. (Zahra, 11th interview)

Extracts 23 and 24 signify the interplay between the participants’ agency and the contextual conditions represented by their peers in helping them make their written assignments more critical. In this sense, improving English was no longer the only prominent goal because the focus came to be more on ‘meaningful writing’. Górska (2013) examined the perspectives of international students from South-East Asia in responding to academic writing requirements in UK higher education. According to Górska (2013: 205), although her participants gave a positive evaluation of the generic writing support offered by their tutors in the pre-sessional English course in comparison to that in their home countries, this kind of support was ‘insufficient in preparing students for writing in academic disciplines’. Divan et al. (2015) also contend that although the pre-sessional English courses taught at UK universities can provide international students with the opportunity to practise writing within the UK academic tradition, the courses are usually generic and lack specific disciplinary content. By the same token, Jiang and Sharpling (2011: 49) reported that most Chinese students in their postgraduate study at a UK university were not fully aware that they ‘needed not only to understand and document a number of items of literature written in non-native language, but also to try to adopt critical thinking strategies’. Unlike all the other participants, Feras was the only one who had a reasonable knowledge of critical thinking in assignments, because his first module (Understanding Research and Critical Appraisal) focused on this idea. Feras stated that Extract 25: My tutor in the first module told us that the heart of critical thinking was negotiating between the different viewpoints of a specific topic. And after weighing up the arguments, we had to state our considered position… To critically appraise a journal article, we learnt the PICO tool to help

Social Connectedness, Learning Strategy Use and Future Vision  165

to break down the query into Population, Intervention, Comparison and Outcome. This module was also supported by web-based resources. (Feras, 12th interview)

This extract depicts the focal role of MA tutors in developing the critical thinking skills of their international students. They need to make it clear during lectures what particular critical thinking skills are most widely used within a disciplinary area and how to show evidence of critical thinking on paper. In this respect, Jokikokko (2009: 145) argues that one of the most fundamental tasks for teachers working with international students is ‘the ability to take students’ various cultures, languages, backgrounds and abilities into account in teaching and learning’. Related to this, all the participants underlined the importance of activating the role of their personal tutors to give them some tips in relation to critical thinking skills and proofreading some parts of their MA assignments, for instance. Three participants (Haifa, Adnan and Rawan), for instance, declared that they did not meet their personal tutors during their MA programmes, chiefly due to their inadequate knowledge of the kind of support that the tutors could offer. 7.3.2 Teamwork

In the previous chapter, it was observed that the participants’ engagement in cooperative language learning tasks on the pre-sessional course was not seen as serious learning. This finding was apparently attributed to the domination of Asian students in this course. Additionally, marks were unimportant to most participants since they had already received unconditional offers to attend their MA programmes (Górska, 2013) (see Section 6.4 in Chapter 6). However, the participants’ perceptions of the value of collaborative group work in the UK changed after the start of their MA programmes. The data suggest that the participants’ group work experiences were profoundly influenced by the way that modules taught in the first two terms of their MA programmes were assessed. More precisely, the cooperative learning tasks given by MA tutors to four participants (Feras, Haifa, Rawan and Osama) inside the classroom were not formally assessed in the final score of their MA modules. Rather, these tasks were intended to promote a better quality of learning and to create a less stressful environment so new international students could interact positively with their peers (Baker & Clark, 2010). Apart from Rawan, the other three participants reflected on their satisfying group work experiences, as exemplified in the following extracts: Extract 26: The majority of the students on my course were British and Indian. This motivated me to exchange my ideas with them in the cooperative activities… at the beginning it was not easy to catch up with them in group

166  Part 3: Learning Strategy Research in a Study Abroad Context

work. It’s completely different from the pre-sessional English course where I used to work only with international students. (Haifa, 10th interview) Extract 27: We don’t have to sit in the classroom for three hours. We can move around. I get many new ideas from my peers while working in groups such as the application of the communicative approach in Libya and in their countries. (Osama, 12th interview)

Extracts 26 and 27 indicate that the participants not only referred to the benefits of making new friends and learning about other students’ cultures and backgrounds while engaged in group work. The collaborative learning tasks also helped them increase the breadth of their knowledge in their subject specialisation by sharing and collecting useful ideas. Both social and metacognitive strategies were noticeably deployed by these participants, such as seeking practice opportunities and identifying the purpose of a learning task. However, Rawan held a rather negative outlook towards group work, mainly because of her inadequate level of English proficiency ascribed to her negative past experiences of English in Syria. Rawan stated that Extract 28: Tutors sometimes gave us long texts to discuss together. Some of my classmates were British and European. They quickly finished reading the given text and started discussing it while I was still in the fourth or fifth line of that text. Therefore, I often kept silent during the discussion but I revised the materials later. I’m slow at reading and understanding English texts because all my study in Syria was in Arabic. (Rawan, 13th interview)

The interview data also reveal that the other four participants (Adnan, Waleed, Zahra and Yazn) held more sophisticated views of the value of teamwork because it accounted for 20–30% of the assessment in most of their taught modules. For instance, Zahra mentioned that her aspirations of contributing meaningfully to group work discussions and leading her team to outperform other teams were not accomplished in all the group assignments. She attributed this matter to three factors: (1) the inclination of British and European classmates to work with students like themselves, believing that the other students would drag down their marks; (2) lack of cooperation between her group members (e.g. some Asian members were often shy to express their viewpoints); and (3) tutors’ practices of allowing students to self-select the composition of the groups. The following extract clearly captures this point:

Social Connectedness, Learning Strategy Use and Future Vision  167

Extract 29: Some of the group members weren’t working hard. So it’s unfair that all the students in the same group got the same grade… the British and Europeans always worked together because they could easily communicate with each other and achieve the highest marks. I didn’t ask to join their group in order not to feel embarrassed. Whenever there were two Chinese they often just spoke in Chinese and that made me nervous. So I had to keep asking them what they’re saying. Some other students just sat back and agreed with what others decided… the tutor should have applied specific criteria and assigned students to groups. (Zahra, 13th interview)

Some participants reflected on their negative experiences in relation to the reluctance of some British and European classmates to work with them in group work discussion inside the classroom when the cooperative activities were formally assessed. This finding resonates with Parks and Raymond (2004: 386), who point out that ‘a social context is not merely a neutral container. Active involvement in a specific social context may be essential in helping the individual become aware of his or her needs, and may constrain or facilitate the use of various strategies’. These authors’ argument was based on the findings of their qualitative study investigating 18 Chinese international students’ experiences of participating in group work with domestic students at a Canadian university, underlying their learning motivations and strategy use. Parks and Raymond (2004: 385) reported that a couple of participants learnt to use note-taking strategies from their Canadian classmates to improve their understanding of textbook materials and their ability to participate actively in classroom discussions. However, most participants indicated that they chose to be isolated from Canadian colleagues while discussing topics in groups because their Canadian classmates were often unwilling to accept them as ‘valued partners’, thinking that working with Chinese learners might affect their own proximal goal of getting high grades (Parks & Raymond, 2004: 386). For this reason, Parks and Raymond (2004: 374) claim that their participants’ use or non-use of certain strategies was the by-product of issues pertinent to social and personal identity implicated, for example, in their relationship with Canadian classmates. By the same token, the Chinese students in Tian and Lowe’s (2009: 667) study reported negative experiences of working collaboratively with host students to discuss issues or solve simulated problems at a UK university. These students regarded these activities as ‘sources of discomfort’ because of their ‘lack of confidence to engage in discussions with native English speakers in the group’ who marginalised them during the discussions. One participant in Tian and Lowe’s (2009: 668) study, for instance, stated that ‘They [British students] never stop talking, we three

168  Part 3: Learning Strategy Research in a Study Abroad Context

become the audience… there is a clear distance between us and them, both in the way of thinking and in terms of language’. Likewise, Leki (2001) carried out an empirical study to examine the group work experiences of two Chinese and Taiwanese international students who were involved with native English speakers in an assessed group project at an American university. Leki (2001: 60) found that the group mates of his participants ‘consciously or not, appeared to be positioning themselves as experts, masters, or at least more senior members of a community of practice and their bilingual group mates as novices, incompetents, or apprentice’. Leki (2001: 59) ascribed this finding partially to the domestic students’ belief that ‘linguistic difficulty suggests intellectual incapacity’. Therefore, the two participants had few opportunities to participate in assignments in any significant way. They were largely relegated to subordinate roles like photocopying and holding up the posters their native English group mates had prepared. They did not noticeably benefit from any of the supposed advantages of working with native English speakers in group work, such as opportunities for language development and sharing cultural knowledge. One participant in Leki’s (2001: 58) study summed up her attitude to cooperative activities by saying ‘So I just hope no more group work’. As a result, Leki (2001) concludes his study by stressing the significance of the positive intervention of module tutors when assigning cooperative learning by asserting that each group member has an equal role. Leki’s (2001: 60) suggestion of constructive mediation by module tutors was clearly reflected by two participants in this research (Waleed and Yazn). These participants declared that they were fully content with their assessed group work experiences in one module because the group members were selected by their tutor, according to a questionnaire they completed called ‘The Belbin Team Role Inventory’. This questionnaire was a personality test to measure preferences for eight team roles such as shaper, coordinator, implementer and completer-finisher. They reported that this inventory enabled them to see themselves as partners with meaningful contributions to make to the group, along with more opportunities to use English. The following extract explains this: Extract 30: In most modules, groups were formed by seating proximity. But the composition of the groups in one module was based on completing a personality questionnaire to find out what team roles would suit us. Some of us were good at leadership whereas others were good at critical thinking… my team role was as the coordinator. That’s true because I liked to talk only when I felt there’s something I could add. I knew my strengths and my team, consisting of both British and international students, ended up with a very good score. (Adnan, 13th interview)

Social Connectedness, Learning Strategy Use and Future Vision  169

Accordingly, many participants had an increased level of awareness of teamwork, by asserting that such collaborative tasks had a key role in developing their oral English proficiency and widening their knowledge of their specialisation. They also stressed the significance of the tutors managing the composition of the groups to save face of some students and strengthen the social cohesion inside the classroom (see De Vita, 2002, 2005). 7.4 Participants’ Motivational Orientations and Strategy Use after Joining Their MA Programme

As has been described in Section 5.2 in Chapter 5, the participants – especially those educated in state academic settings – had a low degree of ‘international posture’ before their arrival in the UK. ‘International posture’ includes an interest in intercultural friendship and international affairs, a willingness to go overseas to study or work and an openness to other cultures (Yashima, 2009, 2013). However, the third research phase reveals that most participants (apart from Adnan and Rawan) exhibited a higher level of ‘international posture’ in the first and second semesters of their postgraduate programmes in the UK. This matter was clear from their openness to other cultures, along with greater links with multinational social networks than native speakers of English at that stage. This finding might be because almost all the participants possessed dual goals in the first two terms of their MA programmes: (1) their immediate goal was passing their modules (preferably with high marks); and (2) their long-term overarching goal was to increase their knowledge in their major fields of study and recent developments, from any available resource, including their international colleagues (i.e. English became the language of knowledge). For example, Osama and Zahra mentioned that they approached their Indian and Polish classmates to learn from them how to become more analytical in their assignments (see Extracts  23 and 24 in this chapter). Additionally, the participants living on campus increased their interaction with their flatmates in the third research phase, for instance, by sharing meals and exchanging ideas about their academic lives, cultures and customs (see Section  7.2.1). As described in Chapter  3, there is a connection between international posture and Dörnyei’s (2009) preferred kind of possible self, i.e. the ‘ideal L2 self’ (i.e. the future self-image that a person internally desires to achieve). The participants’ revised learning goals affected their strategy choice and use. During the third research phase, there was a balance between the use of voluntary and compulsory/other-imposed strategies. While they focused on the learning materials and references identified by their tutors to write their assignments, they also used many voluntary strategies to widen their knowledge about their academic specialisation and/ or other cultures. Examples of these voluntary strategies were reading

170  Part 3: Learning Strategy Research in a Study Abroad Context

and writing poems in English together with an Indian colleague (Zahra), watching Ted Talks and YouTube videos about the notion of critical thinking in assignments (Waleed, Yazn and Zahra) and incorporating a multitude of technologies (installing electronic dictionaries on their laptops, Dropbox, Mendeley Desktop, Mindjet and SkyDrive) in their educational lives, principally to save time and organise their academic work (all participants). It is noteworthy that Feras was more integratively motivated than the other participants in this research. Feras was motivated not only to complete his MA programme, but also to identify himself with British individuals and English culture. He was more fortunate than other participants since he had meaningful opportunities to have contact with British people after coming to the UK. This was chiefly because of the way in which Feras’s programme was assessed, based on written assignments according to the patients he treated in hospital. Nonetheless, Feras’s resource-rich language environment does not lessen the agency he demonstrated in choosing the appropriate strategies and validating his identity as a language user. Indeed, on numerous occasions, Feras capitalised on the language opportunities offered by some critical mediators, and invested more time in learning and practising English across different settings in the UK. To do this, he used many voluntary strategies such as sharing an apartment with two British students, strengthening his relationship with his British colleagues at the hospital and attempting to use any new slang words in his daily life (see Extract 1 in this chapter). Hence, Feras’s willingness to take advantage of the supportive resources offered to him in terms of language learning reflected his agentic behaviour, because the presence of ‘enabling language resources’ in an individual’s life, as Palfreyman (2014: 177) suggests, ‘does not guarantee that they will contribute to learning’ or that that individual will invest these sources in their language development as well. As explored in the previous chapter, the impact of family members back home, mostly parents, on the participants’ future self-guides and strategy use after arrival in the UK did not disappear despite being geographically distant (see Montgomery, 2010). More specifically, all the participants, especially in the second research phase, were under great stress, because they wanted to prove to their parents that they were successful at both the academic and personal levels (i.e. being independent and completing their MA programmes successfully). This finding may justify the domination of ‘instrumental-preventative’ motivation (i.e. avoidance of feared or negative end states) in the participants’ discourse in the first three months in the UK (Lamb, 2012; Magid, 2011). Lamb (2012: 1001– 1002) has commented on this point, suggesting that the ought-to self dimension in the target language motivation ‘might be more relevant in Asian or Arab cultures where young people have shown themselves to be more susceptible to the influence of significant others’. In Magid’s (2011)

Social Connectedness, Learning Strategy Use and Future Vision  171

study of the motivational orientations of a group of Chinese university students at a British university with reference to Dörnyei’s (2009) L2 Motivational Self System, Magid (2011) discovered that the preventional dimensions of instrumentality such as saving face, responsibility and family pressure dominated his participants’ motivational orientations. Magid (2011: 183) further contends that his participants ‘not only want to not fail their English examinations, but they are also concerned about disappointing their parents by not finding a suitable job’. In this research, however, the participants’ experiential learning accounts reveal that although completing a master’s degree and meeting family expectations tended to be the overarching goal of all the participants, they articulated on many occasions other long-term dominant goals related to increasing knowledge in their major fields of study, together with strengthening their ‘international posture’, i.e. openness to other cultures. This point was examined in the above discussion of this section. 7.5 Conclusion and Implications

This chapter has described the findings of the third research phase, which followed the investigation of the eight participants’ language learning experiences and their strategy use during their pre-sessional English course in the UK. This research phase has uncovered a deeper understanding of the dynamism of the participants’ strategy use, along with their intentionality in exercising greater agency to manage a new demand after joining their master’s programmes; namely, coursework assessment in English. As seen in this chapter, most participants were more agentive in the academic than the linguistic and intercultural aspects of their lives. They indicated that academic study pressure was extremely high, and accordingly, some faced difficulty in creating a balance between completing their academic requirements and allocating a specific time to improving their English by watching English films or seeking opportunities to be friends with British people, for instance. Two participants (Adnan and Rawan) stated that they sometimes missed sleep and gave up socialising in non-academic settings in the UK to finish their postgraduate assignments. As Mercer (2012: 56) comments, ‘although there is an assumption that learners will wish to be as agentic as possible, this may not be the case in every context and for every purpose’. Accordingly, the participants in the third research phase were highly agentic at the academic level and English for many of them was mainly needed for instrumental reasons, such as helping them to survive their academic studies in the medium of English, along with increasing their knowledge in their own fields. While they focused on the learning materials and references identified by their tutors together with approaching their most able classmates to learn how to make their written assignments more critical, they used some voluntary strategies to enhance their intercultural

172  Part 3: Learning Strategy Research in a Study Abroad Context

awareness and English level. Examples of these voluntary strategies were reading poems about English and Indian literature (Zahra), watching British programmes with or without English subtitles (all participants) and attending some cultural activities organised by their host university (Feras, Yazn, Waleed and Zahra). Some participants reflected on their negative experiences in relation to the reluctance of some British and European classmates to work with them in group discussions in the classroom. This was because teamwork in some modules was formally assessed, and a number of the British/ European students thought working with non-European students might drag their marks down. Based on this finding, it may be argued that seeking out opportunities to speak and interact with native speakers as one of the salient characteristics of ‘good language learners’ (Rubin, 1975: 45) is not just a matter of an individual’s will and knowledge of the importance of this learning strategy. The social context that individual is in can also play a pivotal role in either consolidating or hampering their entry into their desired community. As Kinginger (2004: 221) appositely puts it, ‘[A]ccess to language is shaped not only by learners’ own intentions, but also by those of the others with whom they interact’. Consequently, programme providers and tutors in the host country need to take measures to enhance the relationship between local individuals and study abroad students. For instance, British and European students in this study were sometimes reluctant to work with other students on specific language learning tasks. Therefore, module tutors should be responsible for assigning students to groups for cooperative learning tasks to ensure that all study abroad students are in groups that include native-speaking local students to save their international students’ face and strengthen the social cohesion inside the classroom. Moreover, study abroad programmes need to create a close link between theory and practice when choosing their assessment methods. For instance, the assessment methods of Feras’s master’s programme in implant dentistry were based on three written assignments recording the 20 cases that he diagnosed and treated during his work at the hospital. This, in turn, enabled him to be in contact with native-speaking local individuals inside and outside the classroom. In contrast, the assessment methods of other participants’ master’s programmes were mostly based on writing academic assignments. Meanwhile, international students themselves should be more interested in their new surroundings, and continuously reflect on their learning goals while exploring strategies to overcome possible challenges. For example, they can participate in volunteer activities on their university campuses to increase their opportunities for mingling with the host and multinational students. They can also deepen their understanding in their area of specialisation by participating in workshops/seminars, for instance, in their own or other institutions.

Social Connectedness, Learning Strategy Use and Future Vision  173

Resources for Further Reading Benson, P., Barkhuizen, G., Bodycott, P. and Brown, J. (2013) Second Language Identity in Narratives of Study Abroad. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. This book weaves together three ideas: target language identity, narrative and study abroad. It provides case study narratives of one graduate, seven undergraduate and two secondary students from Hong Kong studying overseas for periods ranging from 10 days to 2 years. This book provides a useful overview of some of the theoretical ideas that are currently used to explain how and why many individuals studying abroad change in terms of the ways they see themselves and the world around them. Parks, S. and Raymond, P.M. (2004) Strategy use by non-native English-speaking students in an MBA program: Not business as usual. The Modern Language Journal 88 (3), 374–389. In this paper, Parks and Raymond present their longitudinal qualitative study on the experiences of postgraduate Chinese students in a Canadian university. Specifically, the focus was on how contact with native English-speaking Canadian students mediated the Chinese students’ strategy use in three domains: reading, class lectures and teamwork. The study found that the participants’ strategy emerged as a complex, socially situated phenomenon, bound up with issues related to personal identity. Schartner, A. (2015) ‘You cannot talk with all of the strangers in a pub’: A longitudinal case study of international postgraduate students’ social ties at a British university. Higher Education 69 (2), 225–241. In this paper, Schartner presents the findings of a longitudinal case study that explored a group of international students’ social ties over one academic year in Britain. The data show evidence of a lack of host contact, reveal complexities associated with co-national contact and point to the dominance of highly supportive ‘international ties’. Although ties with host nationals were desired by the students for cultural and linguistic benefits, instigating meaningful contact with British people was perceived as difficult which resulted in discontentment and frustration on the part of the international students. Therefore, they strengthened their relationships with other international students. Some students also felt they ‘ought to’ avoid contact with co-nationals because their compatriots might have some negative influence on their English improvement and personal growth.

8 The Challenges of Writing a Master’s Dissertation, Learning Strategy Use and Future Vision Perspectives of International Students

8.1 Introduction

In the vast majority of English-speaking education systems, home and international students are required to write a dissertation in English as part of their master’s (MA) studies. The term ‘dissertation’ is used in this chapter to define a document that reports ‘a piece of research which comes after the coursework stage of a one-year MA programme, being roughly 10,000–20,000 words in length in one setting, depending on the discipline, programme and institution’ (Harwood & Petric, 2017: 2). Structurally speaking, master’s dissertations often have introductions, literature reviews, methodology, results and analysis, and conclusions. Many master’s dissertations must be completed in 10–12 weeks. Thomas and Brubaker (2008: 1–2) suggest that the major purposes of writing a dissertation are to help MA students to conduct research and produce work of respectable quality and of both academic and practical usefulness. However, the process of writing a dissertation in English has been seen as complex and messy, as it can involve a clash of expectations, miscommunication, uncertainties and confusion. Ylijoki (2001: 25) has categorised postgraduate international students’ experiences of writing a dissertation as ‘heroic, tragic and business like’. Ylijoki (2001: 32) emphasises that to make the supervision process successful, ‘it is important that the student and the supervisor are part of the same story; if not mutual understanding is difficult’. This comment suggests the need to conduct further empirical studies to understand international students’ perceptions of the process of master’s dissertation writing in English-speaking education systems. Although the number of international students has rapidly increased in study abroad contexts, very few published studies have explored the situated use of learning strategies, underlying motivation and ultimate vision of international students while writing a dissertation in English. Therefore, the last research phase of the qualitative longitudinal study addressed 174

Challenges of Writing a Master’s Dissertation, Learning Strategy Use and Future Vision  175

this research gap by exploring not only the challenges that postgraduate international students (especially those from an Arab background) face while working on their dissertations in a UK university, but also their strategic learning efforts and future vision mediated by some influential social agents; namely, their dissertation supervisors and peers. This chapter concludes with some practical recommendations to develop the effectiveness (quality) of dissertation supervision at English medium universities. It should be noted that Feras, the Syrian participant, did not take part in this research stage because the duration of his postgraduate programme in dentistry was three years and did not involve writing a dissertation in the first year of the course. Therefore, the total number of participants in this stage was seven. The following section will discuss the importance of doing research into supervision and understanding international students’ experiences of writing their master’s dissertation in English. 8.2­ The Importance of Demystifying International Students’ Situated Experiences of Master’s Supervision

In English-speaking education systems, international postgraduate students who speak English as a second or additional language often find writing a master’s dissertation daunting. This may be partly because they cannot entirely appreciate the supervision process in terms of where the responsibility for choosing the research topic lies, or the research methodology and the quality of the writing of the final product (Paltridge & Woodrow, 2012; Sadeghi & Khajepasha, 2015). The process of master’s level supervision has been described by some researchers as an ‘opaque, poorly understood’ phenomenon (Harwood & Petric, 2017: 3), a ‘black box’ (Goode, 2010: 33), an ‘elusive chameleon’ (Pilcher, 2011: 37) and ‘a secret garden where students and supervisor engage with little external scrutiny and accountability’ (Halse, 2011: 557). Dong (1997: 10) notes that for international postgraduate students ‘the mismatch of writing difficulties and expectations operating in their home countries compound their writing difficulties’. In this view, the academic conventions and cultures of international students’ countries of origin might play a pivotal role in increasing their difficulties while writing their master’s dissertations in English. In her study of science dissertation students at two US universities, Dong (1998) noted that international students working on their master’s dissertations faced several writing challenges that native speakers often take for granted or have had prior experience of. Examples of these challenges were ‘the conventions of formality, objectivity, conciseness, technical details and precision’ (Dong, 1998: 382). Similarly, Fan (2013) undertook an empirical study of international students and their supervisors to understand the challenges of a group of postgraduate business students, mostly from China and India, when writing their master’s dissertations in English. Fan’s (2013: 3) study was

176  Part 3: Learning Strategy Research in a Study Abroad Context

prompted by the assumption that the grading of international students’ master’s dissertations is likely to be at least one point below that of domestic students. Data were collected from questionnaire surveys and focus groups from three UK universities. Fan (2013: 6–7) found that most supervisors in the study indicated that their international students were unclear about how to work independently or undertake critical thinking in their dissertation work; alongside their language deficiencies, this limited their ability to take advantage of their supervisors’ feedback and improve their subsequent work. To support his argument, Fan (2013: 7) provided the following comments from one of the supervisors: ‘I think writing courses would be advantageous to students, so they know what they are expecting, within research methods they should cover how to think critically and implement within the dissertation, this is always lacking in international student work’. In line with this view, Bryce (2003) reflected on her own experience as both an Asian (Japanese) research student and MA supervisor in an Australian context. Bryce (2003: 1) argued that a supervisor’s lack of awareness of possible cultural differences ‘may cause serious yet unnecessary frustration and misunderstanding’. To clarify this point, she pointed out that international students come from an educational culture in which student–lecturer relations are more authoritarian, and they are only trained to accept and memorise the material they are given (Bryce, 2003: 4). Accordingly, most of these students find it extremely difficult to operate within a more egalitarian system. Many researchers (e.g. Armstrong, 2012; Devos, 2003; Fan, 2013; Waghid, 2006) point out that international students pursuing their academic studies through the medium of English abroad are likely to be classified as surface or rote learners, and their work is likely to be repetitive and based on rote memorisation strategies. These researchers’ arguments are based on the assumption that international students are often incapable of learning independently or demonstrating adequate critical and analytical skills in their written work, in addition to being uncertain about their learning goals during the dissertation writing process. In response to these claims, Clark and Grieve (2006: 63) point out that these stereotypical perceptions have been ‘asserted rather than demonstrated’. That is, much of the evidence given for the way international students behave in formal settings has been premised on ‘reports and perceptions by Western instructors, thus filtered through their own values, expectations and standards’ (Clark & Grieve, 2006: 63). Huang (2008), for instance, investigated the perceptions of Chinese international students on postgraduate tourism and hospitality programmes of the notion of critical thinking and the challenges they faced in using analytical and critical thinking skills in their work at a UK university. Huang (2008: 3) found that the notion of critical thinking is quite broad and not clearly defined by academics. Huang (2008: 3) concluded that it would

Challenges of Writing a Master’s Dissertation, Learning Strategy Use and Future Vision  177

be reasonable to suggest that both home and international students are likely to confront problems in understanding what it means to think critically, and how to do so. To further exemplify this idea, Huang (2008) refers to work by Egege and Kutieleh who suggest that Our understanding of what critical thinking entails is heavily influenced by the history and traditions of our academic ‘institutions’. What Western academics recognise as evidence of reasoning, the tools used to reason with, the language and structure of the argument, actually represent a cultural, rather than a universal method. (Egege & Kutieleh, 2004: 3)

In this regard, Paltridge (2014: 304) highlights the importance of not adopting a stereotyped view of how a student from one language and culture will necessarily write in another. Paltridge (2014) goes on to argue that only a handful of empirical studies underpinned by sociocultural perspectives on language learning have tried to capture the pervasive effect of situated contextual conditions (e.g. supervisors’ practices, assessment mode and peers’ mediation) on non-native English-speaking students’ experiences of writing their master’s dissertations in English (e.g. Paltridge & Woodrow, 2012). The study reported here took a sociocultural perspective to explore the situated use of learning strategies, the underlying motivation and ultimate vision of a group of Arab international students while writing a dissertation in English at a UK university. 8.3 Impact of Dissertation Supervisors’ Practices on Supervisees’ Strategic Learning Efforts and Future Vision

This section examines the mediating role of dissertation supervisors on their supervisees’ language learning goals and associated strategy use in the third term of their postgraduate programmes. Dissertation supervisors are likely to be considered as the most influential actors for MA students during the dissertation writing process. This is mainly because they are the immediate readers and assessors of students’ work. The following subsections discuss the criteria for selecting master’s dissertation supervisors and a research topic, along with the value of establishing realistic and negotiated expectations of the supervision process. Emphasis will also be placed on the importance of dissertation supervisors offering various kinds and amounts of support to their supervisees, to enable them to shape their desired possible self-image, and make their goals clearer and more specific by employing effective learning strategies. 8.3.1 Choosing a dissertation supervisor

The typical scenario for appointing master’s dissertation supervisors at English medium universities is by asking students to submit a summary or outline of the proposed topic of their dissertation, accompanied

178  Part 3: Learning Strategy Research in a Study Abroad Context

by the names of their ‘nominated supervisor’ (Harwood & Petric, 2017). After that, the head of the department or director of research attempts to match MA students to potential supervisors, largely based on the suggested research topic and the number of students already being supervised by that member of staff. Notably, supervision selection can be a two-way process in which the possible supervisor will also assess the students who nominated her/him and their research proposals. Accordingly, some postgraduate students do not get the supervisor of their choice. The analysis of the interview data of the present study reveals that the participants’ choice of research supervisor was principally determined according to the policy and procedures of each academic department. More specifically, two of the eight participants (Waleed and Zahra) reported that they were given the opportunity to choose a supervisor with whom they felt comfortable, by approaching the potential supervisor in the first place. For example, Zahra, the Iraqi participant, mentioned that she began to discuss and develop her master’s dissertation research three months before her peers had been allocated a supervisor. This was because her supervisor-to-be was teaching a module Zahra was following. She used to meet him in his office to discuss her research plan for the dissertation. Extract 1: I wanted to do something on healthcare because I’m quite interested in this sector. I found the content of one module in the first semester was relevant to my interest. The tutor of that module was very good at lecturing and in his relationship with students. So I visited him in his office to tell him that I wanted him to be my dissertation supervisor… he accepted to supervise me perhaps because I used to participate a lot in his classes. But he said that I needed to narrow down the focus of my research topic. He recommended me to read two sources to help me with this matter. (Zahra, 14th interview)

This extract shows Zahra’s agentive power in arranging and planning her learning to achieve her future goals, a metacognitive strategy. Zahra succeeded in securing her preferred lecturer’s agreement to be her supervisor three months before dissertation supervisors were allocated to MA students in her department. This helped her to gain sufficient time to build and reinforce her knowledge of the research topic that captured her interest. Conversely, the other participants mentioned that they did not select their supervisors, but their departments allocated them in accordance with each student’s short research proposal presented at the end of the second semester of their MA programmes. It may be inferred from the above discussion that university departments should give an introductory talk about the dissertation, preferably at the end of the first semester of postgraduate programmes. Meanwhile, MA students can be

Challenges of Writing a Master’s Dissertation, Learning Strategy Use and Future Vision  179

given a booklet including staff members’ research interests and information about the number of students and topics they are able to supervise. 8.3.2 Choosing a dissertation research topic

A dissertation proposal is a piece of writing that describes how a future project will be approached. It often includes an introduction to the context of a student’s project, its purpose and significance, a brief literature review related to the problem, some research questions with the methods to be employed to answer these questions and a list of references used in the proposal. Although a dissertation proposal is a key element in successful academic work, some international postgraduate students pay less attention to this type of document (Harwood & Petric, 2017). The participants in this study commented on the amount of support they received from their dissertation supervisors when choosing their research topic. Apart from Rawan, the participants reported that their choice of research topic was based on the very personal interests included in their dissertation proposals, and the advice of their supervisors in relation to narrowing down the focus of their research topic and looking for gaps in the literature to justify their project. This is explained in the following extracts from the interview transcripts of Haifa and Yazn. Extract 2: The United Arab Emirates has the second highest number of diabetics in the world. Therefore, I was interested in presenting some possible effective solutions to prevent diabetes increasing in my country. I discussed my ideas in my written proposal with my supervisor. He offered me some suggestions to narrow down my specific zone of interest. So I decided to focus on the notion of type 2 diabetes mellitus in women. (Haifa, 14th interview) Extract 3: In my Masters programme, the focus of many taught modules was on how we dealt with machines. So I wanted to challenge myself by exploring the techniques that can be used by Saudi employees in industrial factories to help them engage more with their work… After two long meetings with my supervisor and reading some resources, I decided to examine the assumption that minority groups in work are more engaged than majority ones. (Adnan, 14th interview)

The picture that emerges from Extracts  2 and 3 is of supervisors bolstering the agentive power of many participants by enabling them to choose a research topic that meets with their long-term goals at both individual and national levels. Islam et al. (2013: 4) proposed a new construct of ‘national interest’, which comprises ‘attitudes towards national

180  Part 3: Learning Strategy Research in a Study Abroad Context

socio-economic development, national integrity and the projection of a positive group/national image in the international arena’. In the present study, several participants reported that their master’s research projects could increase the breadth of their knowledge in their subject specialisation which could be employed in their future careers and benefit their native country and fellow citizens (i.e. a long-term overarching goal). This, in turn, played a pivotal role in encouraging them to take up a particular set of learning strategies while working on their master’s dissertations. Many of these strategies were more internalised within themselves, and less imposed by external factors (i.e. voluntary strategies). Examples of these strategies were watching YouTube videos related to a Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) for data analysis, drawing a mind map for each chapter or section that summed up the main points and setting their own deadlines to complete each chapter of their dissertation. This point will be further explained in Section 8.4. Unlike the other participants, Rawan was the only one in this study to say that her research topic was assigned by her dissertation supervisor because he was not convinced by her carelessly designed and written proposal. She admitted that she wrote her dissertation proposal without much thinking or doing preliminary research. Therefore, the supervisor gave her a research topic in accordance with his main area of expertise. Rawan made the following comment regarding this challenge: Extract 4: I met my dissertation supervisor twice without having a clear plan about my project. This was because I submitted a carelessly written proposal. My supervisor was shocked when I told him that I thought it was his duty as supervisor to find a research topic for me… I directly accepted the topic suggested by my supervisor. (Rawan, 14th interview)

Rawan’s inability to see herself as responsible for finding an appropriate research topic recalls the case of Mei reported in Aspland’s (1999) study. As a Chinese PhD student in Australia, Mei expected a directive style of supervision, anticipating that her supervisor would give her certain instructions to follow throughout her PhD research journey. She described her expectations of the first meeting with her supervisor as follows: I wanted to get a plan and to talk about every detail of the plan so I’d get to know what I had to do. I think it was the duty of the supervisor to do this and for me to follow that plan. (Aspland, 1999: 29)

The above discussion supports Paltridge’s (2013: 88–89) argument that in dissertation or doctoral writing research, it is ‘not all about language’ because international students also need to be acquainted with the social

Challenges of Writing a Master’s Dissertation, Learning Strategy Use and Future Vision  181

and cultural context in which the dissertation occurs. As Braine (2002: 60) comments, to experience success, international postgraduate students are required to ‘adapt smoothly to the linguistic and social milieu of their host environment and to the culture of their academic departments and institutions’. This is mainly because the expectations of supervisors and supervisees might be quite different, as will be described in further detail in the next subsection. 8.3.3 Uncertainty about supervisory roles and expectations

There is evidence in the literature to indicate that dissertation supervisors and their supervisees have different expectations about the processes of producing a master’s dissertation, especially in terms of the amount and kind of support provided by the supervisor (e.g. Grant, 2005; Harwood & Petric, 2017; Manathunga, 2014; Paltridge & Woodrow, 2012; Strauss, 2012; Turner, 2015). Grant (2005), for example, described the concerns uttered by a number of postgraduate students during the workshops she organised: In the many supervision workshops I have done over the last 10 years with Master’s and PhD students, the same kinds of question nearly always arise: ‘What can I expect from my supervisor, what does s/he expect from me? How often should we meet?’. (Grant, 2005: 338)

Grant (2005) associated these uncertainties with the fact that supervisors do not always clarify their supervisory expectations with their students. In this regard, Hetrick and Trafford (1995) examined divergent views of the amount of preparatory work that should have been done by the student before the first meeting to discuss the postgraduate dissertation. They found that supervisors expected their students to ‘possess a research statement before the first meeting’ while students generally expected the first tutorial to help them to work out a feasible research statement. To handle such a mismatch, McCallin and Nayar (2012: 70) underline how important it is for supervisors to clarify MA students’ responsibilities and rights in the first meeting to overcome any qualms or worries about supervisory practices. According to Exley and O’Malley (1999: 48), ‘clarifying expectations’ through tutorials is conceived of as one of the central elements of effective supervision. As Phillips and Pugh (2000: 161) aptly indicate, ‘for supervisors to improve their performance, they must understand what their students expect of them’. Hence, Woolhouse (2002) asserts that the expectations of the MA supervision process need to be discussed in the early stages. In her words, I now ask students to come to their first tutorial not only with a clear idea for the focus of their study but also to have thought about what

182  Part 3: Learning Strategy Research in a Study Abroad Context

they expect from me as their supervisor. I ensure that there is time in the first tutorial for discussion about our expectations of each other. (Woolhouse, 2002: 143)

In line with findings of many previous studies, the data analysis of this research indicates that the participants held different expectations and perceptions of the supervision process. Two participants (Osama and Rawan) were fully satisfied with the amount and type of input provided by their dissertation supervisors. They mentioned that their supervisors offered them a substantial amount of support by providing them with some readings for their research topic, suggesting methods that could be used for the empirical part of the dissertation and ways of recruiting potential participants, giving detailed feedback on their drafts and encouraging them to stay focused and determined to finish their dissertation in a timely manner. Meanwhile, MA students are expected to be self-directed and autonomous when working on their projects (Laycock et al., 2016). The relative over-guidance given by some supervisors may be due to their sympathising with the participants’ worries over their families back home, due to the political turmoil going on in Libya and Syria. The following extracts illustrate this idea: Extract 5: My supervisor did his best to protect me from the pressure I experienced because of the war in Libya… I didn’t want to fail. I didn’t want to disappoint my family, friends and myself. I mainly wanted to get my certificate… my supervisor used to reply quickly to my emails. He provided me with some useful resources. His written comments on my work were so detailed… he corrected some English mistakes I made in my writings. Not all supervisors are willing to give this important kind of feedback. (Osama, 14th interview) Extract 6: My supervisor was quite aware that the situation in Syria is appalling and it must be heart breaking to watch from afar… as I wrote my research proposal hastily, I used the topic suggested by my supervisor. I also used the questionnaire developed by him in his work… I distributed my questionnaire among his undergraduate students. My aim is to get my Masters degree at any cost in order not to disappoint my family back home. (Rawan, 15th interview)

As is evident from these interview extracts, Osama and Rawan were pleased to receive a considerable amount of assistance from their supervisors when writing their master’s dissertation in English. However, the directive style of supervision and undue assistance given by the supervisors seemed to

Challenges of Writing a Master’s Dissertation, Learning Strategy Use and Future Vision  183

be an aspect of ‘instrumental-preventative’ motivation (i.e. avoidance of feared or negative end states) in the two participants’ discourses while working on their master’s dissertation. In this sense, the two participants’ choice and use of learning strategies in the third term of their postgraduate programmes were markedly influenced by the interim short-term objective of getting the dissertation over with as quickly as possible with a pass grade, in order not to fail or foil their parents’ expectations. According to Pilcher (2011), many international students are likely to wish and expect a directive style of supervision which is associated with their limited capacity to work independently. To support this view, Pilcher (2011: 35) referred to the words uttered by one master’s dissertation supervisor in his empirical study; ‘I would suggest a Chinese student is a wonderful example do work better under a structured process, someone that tells them what’s required at each stage’. Similarly, Elsey’s (1990: 55) study of Asian international postgraduates’ experiences of supervision at a British university showed that these students perceived an ‘ideal supervisor’ as one who would supply constant guidance to their supervisees throughout their research project. Elsey (1990) attributed this finding to the fact that Asian students were familiar with a teacher-centred educational system, wherein students follow the intellectual path set by their instructors. However, it should be noted that in McClure’s (2005) study of a group of Chinese international research students’ experiences of supervision during the first year of their studies in Singapore, many students enjoyed a level of freedom of choice in their research study. McClure (2005: 12) added that one of the supervisees in her study opted to change her supervisor because the supervisor incessantly monitored her research and gave her little room to work independently. This participant in McClure’s (2005) study stated I am a person who likes freedom and my former supervisor let me do everything in his strict time… I like to arrange my own things by myself, and if you ask me to do something, I can finish it by the deadline, but I don’t need everyday you tell me, ‘You do that, or you do that!’ (McClure, 2005: 12)

McClure (2005: 13) concluded her study by asserting that research supervisees have a wide range of preferred supervisory style, ‘from a high level of dependence to a high level of autonomy’. In this regard, Brown and Atkins (1988: 127) found the most common criticisms of research supervisors from students’ perspectives were: • • • •

Too few meetings with students. No interest in the student. No interest in the topic. Too little practical help given.

184  Part 3: Learning Strategy Research in a Study Abroad Context

• • • • •

Too little direction. Failure to return work promptly. Absence from the department. Lack of research experience. Lack of relevant skills and/or knowledge.

In the current study, elements of a dysfunctional supervisor–student relationship and poor communication appeared to emerge in the case of Adnan more so than in the other cases. Adnan indicated that his supervisor was overloaded with administrative commitments and did not have sufficient time to set up frequent tutorials with students. He made the following comment: Extract 7: My supervisor was hard to contact and meet, especially when he was in Spain attending a conference… I was disappointed when he told me that he was very busy with teaching and other administrative commitments, and his only responsibility was to give me general advice. I needed more feedback on my drafts and help in the methodology section of my dissertation… I relied on myself to complete my dissertation. (Adnan, 15th interview)

This finding resonates somewhat with Moses’s (1984: 163) argument that many supervisors are uneasy about being able to provide timely written comments to their students. They were equally unclear about the ‘frequency and duration of meetings, about finding time themselves and sometimes pinning down elusive students’. Goldstein (2004: 64), for instance, argues that class sizes and the number of drafts vitally affect the effectiveness and speed of the instructor’s written feedback. Goldstein (2006: 66) goes further, suggesting that if ‘class sizes may be smaller, more attention may be paid to the needs of faculty and their students and everyone may find it easier to be more engaged in writing, responding and revising’. Thus, contextual factors can play a central role in fostering or hampering the process of providing effective feedback. Considering the master’s dissertation process, it may be argued that overload comes from the sheer number of MA students and from the length of the master’s dissertation (roughly 15,000–20,000 words in length). Indeed, the time- and energy-consuming aspect of the supervisor offering written feedback on supervisees’ work needs greater practical consideration. 8.3.4 The significance of accommodating differences in supervisees’ needs

There has been growing interest in supervisor development and defining the various roles and responsibilities of supervisors (e.g. Brown

Challenges of Writing a Master’s Dissertation, Learning Strategy Use and Future Vision  185

& Atkins, 1988; Cullen et al., 1994; Gurr, 2001; Halse & Bansel, 2012; Lee, 2012; Pearson & Kayrooz, 2004). Cullen et al. (1994), for instance, conducted a longitudinal study at the Australian National University, Canberra, to produce a list of the ‘desirable features’ of a good supervisor from the students’ perspectives. Cullen et al. (1994: 101) found that a ‘good supervisor’ has to be approachable and friendly; open-minded, prepared to acknowledge error; supportive and knowledgeable; and stimulating and convey enthusiasm for research. Similarly, some of the roles of academic supervisors outlined by Brown and Atkins (1988: 120) are listed as follows. For instance, they should be: • • • • • •

Director: Help determine the topic and method, provide ideas. Facilitator: Enable the development of ideas. Adviser: Make suggestions. Teacher: Teach research techniques. Assessor: Provide critical and constructive feedback. Freedom giver: Authorise the student to make decisions and support their decisions. • Supporter: Give encouragement, show interest, discuss the student’s ideas. • Friend: Extend interest about and concern for the non-academic aspects of a student’s life. • Manager: Check progress regularly, set guidelines and deadlines. In reviewing the previous research on the multiple roles and duties that academic supervisors are expected to undertake, Harwood and Petric (2017) concluded that although there is no universal agreement on this matter, several researchers see that one of the core characteristics of a ‘good supervisor’ is to be adaptable and flexible. In other words, a ‘good supervisor’ is willing to embrace diverse supervisory roles at different times in their supervision of the same student, according to the needs of that student. Brown and Atkins aptly describe this point as follows: Thus during the initial stages a supervisor may be directive, but later allow the student more freedom and autonomy. He or she may revert to a directive stance once again during the writing-up stages when the pressure to see the student complete on time is strong. (Brown & Atkins, 1988: 121)

By the same token, one of de Kleijn et al.’s (2016: 1469) dissertation supervisors in their qualitative study used ‘a chameleon metaphor’ to describe his supervisory style, stating that ‘as a supervisor I show chameleon-like behaviour… Parker [a student] is somewhat easy-going, so I show a certain type of supervision behaviour. When I have a less bright student in front of me, I show rather different supervision behaviour’. In this regard,

186  Part 3: Learning Strategy Research in a Study Abroad Context

the supervisory style used by MA or PhD supervisors needs to adapt to their supervisees’ needs, personalities and cognitive abilities. In the present study, the analysis of the participants’ experiential accounts shows that the supervisors of four participants (Haifa, Waleed, Yazn and Zahra) tended to be flexible, taking on different roles and providing varying amounts of input at different stages of the supervision of the dissertation, depending mainly on the needs of their supervisees. The following extracts further demonstrate this idea: Extract 8: My supervisor helped me to narrow down the focus of the research topic I suggested. As he was working for Xerox, he arranged three interviews with people working there to collect my data… I didn’t receive many comments on my drafts from my supervisor but they were very useful. His comments showed me how to be argumentative in my writing… I found reading materials by myself. I adopted a strategy given by a PhD student of using Google Scholar to find peer-reviewed articles. I did this by using some key words relevant to my research topic… my supervisor was friendly and kept encouraging me throughout my research. (Yazn, 15th interview) Extract 9: My supervisor used to respond to my emails quickly and commented on my drafts. But she sometimes gave me the choice to do whatever I wanted. So I sometimes felt afraid of not being on the right track, but I kept telling myself I’m up to any challenge… I was excited to research a topic that appealed to me. (Waleed, 14th interview)

Extracts  8 and 9 suggest these participants’ supervisors were sensitive to the needs of their supervisees and maintained ‘the delicate balance between retaining too much or too little control of their supervisees’ work’ (Harwood & Petric, 2017: 10). The same extracts also exemplify how the practices of some supervisors enabled the participants to foster their growing sense of agency and enact their new identity as researchers (see Section 8.4.1). These participants employed certain effective strategies to overcome the difficulties that they confronted while working on their dissertation. Examples of these strategies were asking questions, cooperating with their counterparts and self-talk (i.e. social and affective strategies), planning, self-monitoring and self-assessment (i.e. metacognitive strategies). 8.4 Dealing with Insecurities

Although some international non-native English-speaking students are able to successfully negotiate the expectations of supervision with

Challenges of Writing a Master’s Dissertation, Learning Strategy Use and Future Vision  187

their dissertation supervisors, they nonetheless tend to find the process of writing a master’s dissertation a challenging and burdensome task. This section discusses three main notions: (1) adjustment to a new identity as a researcher, (2) time management and (3) the ability to work independently. 8.4.1 Adjustment to a new identity as a researcher

International students at master’s level are liable to experience insecurity in their new identity as a researcher and as an academic. In addressing this point, Paltridge and Woodrow (2012) point out that many international students might suffer from ‘imposter syndrome’ while writing their dissertation as part of their master’s degree. ‘Imposter syndrome’ stands for the feelings of uncertainty, confusion and self-doubt that may accompany international non-native English-speaking students in terms of their perceived competence as researchers (Paltridge & Woodrow, 2012: 95). This is because many international students tend to associate English proficiency with intellectual ability. Paltridge and Woodrow (2012: 95) found that their participants who came from different non-English-speaking backgrounds (e.g. China, Indonesia, Japan, Korea and Vietnam) were seriously afraid of being ‘found out’ as incapable researchers while working on their dissertation in an Australian university. For example, one of Paltridge and Woodrow’s (2012: 96) participants put it like this: ‘I look at everyone and thought to myself that I was in the company of experienced researchers; was my work good enough, would I “cut it” as a researcher? I realise now, although I didn’t know it at the time that I was suffering an acute attack of the dreadful Imposter Syndrome’. The data collected in this research reveal that most participants commented on their new identities as neophyte researchers when working on their master’s dissertation. Notwithstanding their recognition that they were novice researchers, the participants (apart from Rawan and Osama) to varying degrees displayed their agentive power and enthusiasm as researchers not only to earn their academic credentials, but also to add to their own research areas, widen the breadth of their knowledge in their subject area and help their fellow citizens in their homelands (i.e. personal and national interest). They did this by using a range of voluntary strategies to face diverse challenges, predominantly the challenges of accessing and collecting data, as exemplified by the interview extracts taken from the experiential accounts of two participants (Waleed and Yazn). Extract 10: I discovered that one of the key objectives of my postgraduate programme was to develop us as researchers. In my research project, I

188  Part 3: Learning Strategy Research in a Study Abroad Context

developed a framework to understand the national and organisational culture during the lean implementation in the industry sector. The findings of my research can benefit the industrial managers in Jordan. I’m content with my contribution… One of the challenges I faced was finding participants for my study. I approached a residential tutor on the university campus who was working in one of the prominent car companies in the UK. He kindly helped me circulate my questionnaire to some workers in that company. (Yazn, 16th interview) Extract 11: …to remain focussed, I drew a mindmap for each chapter that summed up the central points. This helped me to review my ideas speedily. As I’m now about to submit my dissertation, I can say that I’m not as good as I wanted to be but I’m not a bad researcher. I’m satisfied with the quality of my work. (Waleed, 15th interview)

These extracts outwardly confirm that most participants acted agentively to overcome the new experience of writing their dissertations in English, although they expected to receive more assistance from their research supervisors. According to some researchers (e.g. Anderson et  al., 2006; Harwood & Petri, 2017), international students’ motivation and confidence in themselves as researchers during the dissertation writing process can be largely influenced by the feedback they receive from their supervisors. This is because supervisors’ feedback on their students’ work can have an affective impact on the students themselves as persons rather than on their dissertation work alone. Addressing this point, Hyland and Hyland (2001: 194) suggest that in order to ‘sugar the bitter pill’ of negative feedback and safeguard the student’s face, supervisors’ written feedback needs to be mitigated. This can be achieved by using hedges (e.g. perhaps, slightly and a little), personal attribution (e.g. I find it hard to know the main point of this paragraph) and interrogative syntax (e.g. the first two paragraphs – do they need joining?). These mitigation devices can be employed by dissertation supervisors to relinquish some of their authority and to give the impression that their feedback is directed towards improving the quality of their students’ dissertation rather than being a direct challenge to their research and writing abilities. 8.4.2 Time management

According to Griffiths (2013: 31), planning and time management can be seen as vital characteristics of ‘a good language learner’. When writing their dissertations, students may struggle to organise themselves and submit their work on time, for various reasons. One mentioned by Paltridge and Woodrow (2012) relates to the challenge of managing family and/or work responsibilities along with writing their master’s dissertations in

Challenges of Writing a Master’s Dissertation, Learning Strategy Use and Future Vision  189

English. For example, a participant in Paltridge and Woodrow’s (2012: 96) study made the following comment regarding this challenge: ‘the reason causes my progress moving like a snail is the duty to take care of my baby… when he’s unwell I can barely have time to study’. In this study, Yazn, the Jordanian participant, described a similar experience of balancing his work as a residential tutor on the university campus and writing his dissertation in English. Yazn declared that this job allowed him to use certain learning strategies such as cooperating with proficient users of English, developing cultural understanding and being aware of others’ thoughts and feelings. However, working as a residential tutor led him to limit his data collection to the use of a questionnaire as a research method. To support his argument, Yazn stated: Extract 12: I’m a well-organised person by nature. My work as a residential tutor on the campus for two months didn’t greatly impede my study. This work helped me to earn a good amount of money and build my self-confidence. Also, it increased my knowledge of different cultures. I decided to use only the questionnaire method for I wanted to hand in my dissertation as scheduled. I also knew that getting a high score on my dissertation would not earn me a distinction in my MA. I completed my dissertation nine days before the submission date, so, I had enough time to review, print and bind my dissertation. (Yazn, 16th interview)

In this sense, Yazn succeeded in creating a balance between his various commitments. According to James and Baldwin (1999), the timing of feedback from the supervisor also plays a pivotal role in the quality of supervisees’ work and their ability to meet the submission deadline. Supervisors are the immediate readers and assessors of their MA students’ dissertations. Prompt written feedback given by supervisors on their supervisees’ dissertation work could enable the latter to actively think, improve their written drafts and subsequently complete their dissertation writing within the stipulated deadline. The findings of the present research study revealed how Zahra, the Iraqi participant, set a personal timetable to ensure that her work with her dissertation supervisor fitted her needs as far as possible. She gave herself deadlines for her dissertation development, to make it possible for her supervisor to read several of her dissertation drafts, and she revised these drafts carefully, following her supervisor’s comments. She informed her supervisor of these guidelines to make sure they both agreed with her suggestions. Extract 13: As my supervisor didn’t give his student group a timetable to follow, I set guidelines myself. So each week, I sent an email to my supervisor telling him the part that I expected to finish. And he was happy with this. My

190  Part 3: Learning Strategy Research in a Study Abroad Context

supervisor’s rapid feedback and brisk comments advanced my work vigorously. I couldn’t have successfully completed my dissertation without setting deadlines and sticking to them. (Zahra, 16th interview)

The picture that emerges from Extract 13 is of a student using metacognitive strategies to assist her in planning, organising and managing her time more efficiently. In doing so, she became more productive and ensured that her agenda did not differ from that of her supervisor. Several participants in this research also declared that the difficulties they underwent while writing their assignments in the first two terms of their postgraduate programmes helped them to improve their metacognitive strategies, including planning and time management. The following extract from the interview transcripts of Haifa, clarifies this idea. Extract 14: From the first term of my postgraduate programme, I worked hard to complete my academic assignments at least four days before the submission deadline. This was because I needed to send my work to a tutor in the surgery sessions to check it before submission. Therefore, I’m quite aware of the importance of time management in the dissertation writing process. (Haifa, 15th interview)

Unlike all the other participants, Rawan was the only one who struggled to organise herself and hand in her dissertation work on schedule. Rawan mentioned that she stayed behind for three weeks at the end of the supervisory period, predominantly because of the deterioration of the situation in her homeland caused by the civil war. As a result of her sorrows and worries over her family in Syria, Rawan struggled to get everything done before the submission deadline. Following Rawan’s lack of progress, her supervisor helped her to get a one-week extension. Rawan made the following comment regarding this: Extract 15: Once I heard the TV news reports about continuing heavy clashes near my parents’ residence in Syria, I completely lost my mental concentration over my dissertation work. The internet and mobile phone systems in Syria were cut off during this period. This happened three weeks before the submission deadline date. My supervisor gave me a lot of academic and emotional support. He helped me to get a one-week submission extension. (Rawan, 16th interview)

This extract illustrates the importance of changing the style of dissertation supervision to respond to students’ cognitive and affective situations. This section has discussed the importance of time management for master’s dissertations. It has been shown that almost all the participants

Challenges of Writing a Master’s Dissertation, Learning Strategy Use and Future Vision  191

in this study demonstrated effective time management skills by showing their awareness of deadlines, starting work on their dissertation early, setting priorities, allowing sufficient time to revise their work and balancing among their study, work and family commitments. 8.4.3 Master’s dissertation as an independent, self-directed work

According to some researchers (e.g. Biggam, 2015; Bui, 2013), one of the essential aims of writing a master’s dissertation is for postgraduate students to prove their ability to undertake independent, self-directed work. However, Johnston (1995), in her empirical study of a group of postgraduate students of education at an Australian university, reported that the dissertation performance of many participants was negatively affected by isolation and a feeling of not belonging in the university. One of the participants commented ‘I miss having small groups to discuss my work with people who have the same material. I rely on people outside the University for professional networking’. In order to alleviate postgraduate students’ feelings of loneliness and building their sense of belonging within the academic community while working on their master’s dissertation, Johnston (1995: 284–285) proposed certain procedures the university could implement. Examples are providing postgraduate students with some rooms to meet and work, along with organising a regular seminar series open to all students and supervisors to discuss different topics such as ‘Getting started’, ‘Research methodology’, ‘How to write a research proposal’ and ‘Good writing habits’. Johnston (1995: 284–285) believes that one advantage of these procedures is they offer MA students the opportunity to receive more peer group feedback, which may help them improve the quality of their final work. One participant in Johnston (1995: 286) commented ‘with increasing numbers of students, supervisors will not be able to give so much individual attention. They should explore group supervision – let students help each other, for example by reading drafts and editing’. The data collected in this research reveal that the participants were inclined to discuss their research issues mostly with their dissertation supervisors, and to a lesser extent, with their Arab peers. The lack of classroom lectures in the third term of the participants’ postgraduate courses seemed to play a pivotal role in inhibiting their communication with non-Arab students. When asked to mention the individuals who either bolstered or hampered their learning efforts when working on their master’s dissertations, the participants made the following comments: Extract 16: While working on my dissertation, no one influenced me negatively… working on a dissertation is quite an independent project. There were no regular classes or workshops to discuss my work with my colleagues.

192  Part 3: Learning Strategy Research in a Study Abroad Context

Therefore, I preferred to work in the library with three Arab classmates to exchange ideas and encourage each other. We also shared some effective strategies offered by our dissertation supervisors. For example, I followed the advice of my peer’s supervisor for searching and reading papers that presented a systematic review of the previous studies relevant to my research topic…. I miss discussing my work with my non-Arab classmates. (Adnan, 14th interview) Extract 17: Apart from my supervisor, the most significant individual for me while writing my dissertation was an Arab colleague… He kept asking me about my academic progress and other things… I also shared some useful articles with one Saudi colleague via Dropbox… I wish I had more opportunities to communicate with other classmates. (Waleed, 14th interview)

Rawan, however, built a strong relationship with a Korean classmate who helped her to use the SPSS to analyse her quantitative data. 8.5 Recommendations for Improving the Effectiveness and Quality of Master’s Dissertation Supervision

This chapter has discussed some of the fundamental challenges that international students are likely to face while working on their master’s dissertation in English, including their strategic learning efforts and future visions. The study reported here revealed how the participants’ learning goals and associated strategy use for writing a dissertation were essentially influenced and shaped by the practices of their dissertation supervisors. In light of the findings of this study, the following subsections present some recommendations for developing the effectiveness of master’s dissertation supervision in English-speaking education systems. 8.5.1 Adoption of ‘dynamic assessment’ by dissertation supervisors

The findings reported in this chapter reveal that the participants received varying degrees of support from their dissertation supervisors while writing their dissertations in English as part of their master’s degree. Most dissertation supervisors in the current research study seemed to embrace what is called ‘dynamic assessment’ (DA). DA is a type of assessment inspired by the sociocultural theory of learning, specifically the Vygotskian zone of proximal development (ZPD). ZPD is the distance between an individual’s ‘actual developmental level as determined by independent problem solving’ and their higher level of ‘potential development as determined through problem solving under

Challenges of Writing a Master’s Dissertation, Learning Strategy Use and Future Vision  193

adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers’ (Vygotsky, 1978: 86). Hessamy and Ghaderi (2014) point out that the essential characteristic of DA is its interactive procedure through which the facilitator or teacher provides different kinds of support to elicit the best performance from each student. According to Lantolf and Poehner (2013), the conceptualisation of fairness in assessment is reframed in DA because, unlike conventional assessment, it goes beyond helping language learners improve their test scores to include: performance that is undertaken collaboratively with the assessor, often referred to as a mediator. The kind and amount of support individuals require, as well as their responsiveness during interaction, enriches assessments by identifying both the underlying causes of poor performance and how near individuals are to successful independent functioning. (Lantolf & Poehner, 2013: 147)

Concerning the master’s dissertation process, the amount and type of input offered by dissertation supervisors to their supervisees through DA should be based on the students’ cognitive abilities and their affective situations. It should also be ensured that they are aware that the supervisor’s role in dissertation writing research is ‘collegial rather than authoritarian, and skills of hypothesising and speculating are highly valued’ (Paltridge & Woodrow, 2012: 90). Lantolf and Poehner (2013: 154) affirm that DA does not constitute a threat to the validity or fairness of assessment, given that ‘one cannot assume that all individuals will require the same quality and quantity or even that a given individual will require similar mediation at different points in time’. This claim was clear in this research, when two participants (Rawan and Osama) received more academic and non-academic support from their supervisors who seemed to sympathise with these participants’ sadness and worry over their families back home due to the political turmoil taking place in their homelands. Supervisors, therefore, need to keep their minds open as to how to respond to the various circumstances and needs of their supervisees in both time and space. Concerning the quality of mediation in DA, Lantolf and Poehner (2013: 149) argue that an implicit form of mediation is preferable in the first place, since the defining feature of DA is to pinpoint the minimum level of support that learners need in order to take the next steps towards taking responsibility for accomplishing their intended learning goals successfully. As reported in the findings of this study, the majority of dissertation supervisors tended to mediate the participants’ learning efforts implicitly by, for example, helping them narrow down the focus of the research topic chosen by the participants themselves. They also encouraged the participants to be open with their ideas and provided opportunities for the participants to make their own decisions,

194  Part 3: Learning Strategy Research in a Study Abroad Context

including the choice of research methods for their study, and ways of approaching their potential research participants. As mediation became more implicit, the supervisors as ‘enabling social resources’ played a remarkable role in bolstering the participants’ growing sense of agency. Further, the use of DA by dissertation supervisors can contribute to enhancing their supervisees’ long-term, rather than just short-term goals. In the current research, most participants in response to the new assessment method used in the third term of their postgraduate programmes produced a more developed version of their future visions of the ‘ideal L2 self’ which included both their individual and national interest (Islam et al., 2013). For example, Zahra, the Iraqi participant, mentioned that her supervisor helped her to enact her new identity as ‘a researcher’. She said she would also attempt to publish some parts of her master’s dissertation in an Iraqi scientific magazine, because she believes her research topic about the role of stakeholders in managing healthcare projects in Iraq could have a direct effect on Iraqis’ lives and the economy of her country. This new vision of the participants’ ideal language selves also led them to take up a particular set of learning strategies. Most of these strategies were more internalised within themselves, and less directed by external factors, i.e. the dominant use of voluntary strategies rather than other-imposed strategies, for instance they watched YouTube videos related to SPSS for data analysis; drew mind maps for each chapter summing up the main points; and set deadlines by themselves to complete each chapter of their dissertation. In this sense, DA by the academic supervisor has the potential to enable research students to change their perspective of the process of writing a dissertation or PhD thesis from being an arduous and formidable task into a journey developing a number of transferable skills, including self-awareness, patience, time management, flexibility and problem-solving. However, the findings of this study concerning the effects of DA on learners’ academic achievement and future visions cannot be generalised because of the small number of participants. This is arguably a fruitful area of further research, especially since empirical research on the validity of DA at tertiary education level is still relatively rare. 8.5.2 Activating the role of ‘personal tutor’ in dissertation supervision

In most higher education institutions (especially in the UK), there is a standard practice by which postgraduate students have personal tutors assigned to them. There are diverse understandings of the personal tutoring role. Many researchers in the field of higher education (e.g. Lindsay, 2011; McFarlane, 2016; Neville, 2007; Reinheimer & McKenzie, 2011; Yale, 2017) have argued that the responsibilities of personal tutors range

Challenges of Writing a Master’s Dissertation, Learning Strategy Use and Future Vision  195

from academic support to deeply personal concerns. More precisely, they are in charge of tracking the academic progress of their tutees, being the main point of contact for academic and personal challenges, ‘providing guidance and signposting to appropriate support services and offering one-to-one or group meetings on a regular basis’ (McFarlane, 2016: 78). In addition, personal tutor meetings are less formal than taught classes, and they represent an essential opportunity for students to verbalise their academic and non-academic challenges in a study abroad context. Collicott and Neville (2007) identified a number of central issues that should be taken into consideration when allocating personal tutors in postgraduate programmes. The personal tutor needs to be ‘named, identified at the beginning of the course, accessible, approachable, a good listener and equipped with referral skills’ (Collicott & Neville, 2007: 65). In the current research, none of the participants made reference to the influence of their personal tutors on their academic learning and future vision. When the participants were asked about the impact of their personal tutors, Adnan’s words echoed most participants’ experiences: ‘I had a personal tutor named, but we did not meet at all’ (Adnan, 14th interview). Related to this, almost none of the previous studies on academic supervision has examined the possible mediating influence of personal tutors on postgraduate international students’ strategic learning engagement while working on their master’s dissertations in English. In this sense, it might be argued that cooperation between academic supervisors and personal tutors in the dissertation supervision process should be promoted, because students are likely to be pleased to receive feedback from more than one source, along with alleviating supervisors’ burden of academic work. The support of personal tutors can be introduced in different ways. For example, they can tell master’s students about some of the codes of practice concerning the duties of both supervisors and students throughout the dissertation writing process to avoid any miscommunication. Personal tutors can also inform their tutees about the availability and significance of attending free training sessions offered by their university, especially any sessions related to critical thinking, gathering and analysing data electronically and time management skills. Many international students are not aware of the importance of taking part in such activities, along with their limited experiences with technology, to check the latest possibilities. Furthermore, personal tutors can offer emotional support to students, as in the cases of Rawan and Osama, who were worried about their families back home due to the political turmoil taking place in their homelands. This is arguably a fruitful area of further research, especially since empirical research on the impact of the personal tutor on postgraduate programmes is still relatively rare.

196  Part 3: Learning Strategy Research in a Study Abroad Context

Resources for Further Reading Harwood, N. and Petrić, B. (2017) Experiencing Master’s Supervision: Perspectives of International Students and Their Supervisors. Abingdon: Routledge. This book investigates the experiences of supervising and being supervised at master’s level at a UK university. It presents think, rich descriptions of five case studies, focusing upon expectations, supervision styles, feedback and students’ support networks. It also presents the broader implications for university and departmental policymakers, responsible for guidelines and requirements. Lantolf, J. and Poehner, M.E. (2013) The unfairness of equal treatment: Objectivity in L2 testing and dynamic assessment. Educational Research and Evaluation 19 (2–3), 141–157. This paper discusses the theoretical basis of dynamic assessment (DA) in the work of Vygotsky, contrasting DA with traditional static approaches to assessment. It also explains the notion of ‘fairness’ in DA with the understanding that the quality of support offered may vary across individuals. The paper concludes with the implications of applying DA in the fields of L2 research, pedagogy and language testing. Paltridge, B. and Woodrow, L. (2012) Thesis and dissertation writing: Moving beyond the text. In R. Tang (ed.) Academic Writing in a Second or Foreign Language: Issues and Challenges Facing ESL/EFL Academic Writers in Higher Education Contexts (pp. 88–104). London: Continuum. This chapter discusses the experiences of the non-native English-speaking students who were taking the course on thesis and dissertation writing at a university in Australia. The students were doing master’s or doctoral degrees in areas such as business, economics, education, social work and veterinary science. The students were asked to write their reflections on their experience of writing a thesis or dissertation in English. The students wrote these reflections in online journals that were posted on a blog for comment and feedback from the teacher of the course.

Epilogue

It is not so long ago that Gao (2007) was asking the desperate question: ‘Has language learning strategy research come to an end?’. The question was in response to suggestions (e.g. by Dörnyei, 2005; Dörnyei & Skehan, 2003) that strategies should be abandoned in favour of the self-regulation concept. A number of other writers (e.g. Boekaerts et al., 2000; Winne, 1995b; Zimmerman & Risemberg, 1997), however, argued that strategies are an important element of self-regulation, and according to Rose (2012), strategies and self-regulation are not incompatible. On the contrary, Oxford (2011, 2017) amalgamates the two concepts in her Strategic Self-Regulation (S2R) model. More than a decade after Dörnyei and Skehan’s (2003) original call for abandonment, we find that language learning strategies are ‘alive and kicking’ (Dörnyei & Ryan, 2015: 140–141), and an ongoing stream of publications attest to the concept’s vitality (e.g. Chamot & Harris, 2019; Cohen, 2011; Cohen & Macaro, 2007; Gao, 2010; Griffiths, 2013, 2015, 2018; Gu, 2012; Macaro, 2006; Plonsky, 2011; Oxford, 2011, 2017; Rose et al., 2018; Teng & Zhang, 2016) as well as special journal issues on the subject of strategies (e.g. System, 2014; Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 2018), among many others. This latest book by Anas Hajar is therefore a welcome addition to a long and vibrant (if, at times, contentious) tradition, which goes back to writers such as Naiman et al. (1978), Rubin (1975) and Stern (1975) in the midto late-1970s. Hajar begins by boldly tackling three highly controversial issues: definition, categorisation and research methodology. He starts by identifying eight well-known definitions, and then discusses four problem areas: the nature of strategies, specificity versus generality, the issue of consciousness, and motivation. Under categorisation, he summarises the debates regarding pre-existing classification systems and instruments. And three major issues are dealt with under research methodology: context, validity and dynamism. Hajar concludes this chapter by presenting a neat definition of his own which views language learning strategies as goal-oriented learning activities undertaken by situated individuals. 197

198  International Students’ Challenges, Strategies and Future Vision

In the next chapter, Hajar moves towards a socio-dynamic perspective on language learning strategy research. Under this heading, he considers the prototypical characteristics of good language learners, which often depended on comparing the strategies used by successful and unsuccessful learners, and he emphasises the importance of the situated experiences of language learners. He considers the shifting landscape of language learning strategy research that has tended to move away from a purely cognitive perspective towards a more socio-dynamic view, which draws on frameworks such as Activity Theory, a communities of practice model, issues of investment and identity and the role of future vision of the self as a motivating force. In Part 2, the sociocultural, contextualised view is extended and exemplified by means of quoting from individual participants in an English as a foreign language (EFL) context to support the argument that ‘both classroom and out-of-class learning are equally important in shaping individuals’ strategic language learning efforts and learning goals’ (p. 51). The significant others considered include parents (especially in view of their own education, their financial status and their political and religious beliefs), siblings and foreign domestic workers. Although all of these factors have the potential to have a positive influence (e.g. parents who have the financial resources to provide for extra tuition or materials), this may not always be the case. Ultimately, however, Hajar argues that contextual constraints can be overcome by learner agency, which he defines as a characteristic of ‘proactive agents who are capable of thinking, wishing and acting when recognising the significance of a specific activity to overcome certain contextual constraints and accomplish their ultimate goals’ (p. 83). A convincing example of this is given in the case of Rawan, from a poor, uneducated, rural Syrian family, who refused to be discouraged by her family background or her two unsuccessful attempts to obtain the test of English as a foreign language (TOEFL) score she needed to study abroad and pursue her long-term goal of completing her degree and becoming a university lecturer. In the next chapter, Hajar considers the effect of what he calls ‘shadow education’ (which operates alongside mainstream schooling) on learners’ language learning strategy development. He makes the point that learners’ motivation to develop high levels of communicative competence tends to be limited by a rigid examination system. Furthermore, learners in the mainstream system often have to cope with limitations in teacher competence and traditional dependence on repetition and memorisation strategies. Learners often cannot depend on classmate support, since classmates are typically also focused on an exam and are therefore not interested in or prepared to participate in language extension activities (such as conversing in English). Furthermore, feedback is commonly restricted to summative assessment, which only tells the student whether an exam standard has been reached or not, but is not very useful as a

Epilogue 

199

means of informing students how they might improve, as formative assessment procedures might be. It is for these reasons, he contends, that ‘shadow education’ has expanded globally in recent years. As a result of analysing the student responses, Hajar identifies a number of strategies and makes recommendations aimed at enhancing learning. He suggests that students should be allowed to speak as themselves, using their own identities and voices; and they should be encouraged to look to role models who are similar to themselves as motivators. In the third part of the book, Hajar looks at how international students cope when they move from their home context to a study abroad environment. Looking first at pre-sessional programmes, whose goal is to ‘prepare international students for the English language requirements of the university they enrol in’ (p. 124), Hajar points out that moving from a familiar environment and family and friends can be an extremely stressful experience, and this may require adjustments to familiar strategies. Although international students may believe that merely being exposed to a target language environment will automatically lead to improved target language competence (the way children acquire their first language), the reality is often not so straightforward, and they will still have to exercise agency and employ suitable strategies (such as metacognitive and social strategies) in order to achieve their ideal future vision of themselves. This tends to apply especially to learners’ frequently held hopes of making friends with local people, which often turns out to be not as easy as they had expected. Another issue that Hajar discusses is that of native speaker versus non-native speaker teachers. In spite of research that indicates that non-native teachers can be advantageous in terms of understanding the learners’ home context and empathising with the difficulties of the language learning process, most of the students in the current study expressed a clear preference for native speakers. And yet another issue is the need for students to make adjustments for different forms of assessment (which may be formative as well as summative) in a new learning environment. After the start of their master’s programmes, Hajar found that numerous social agents, especially other international students, mediated the students’ strategy use and future vision of themselves. Some students found that they could learn useful information (e.g. about technological resources) from their classmates. As for their tutors, students most favoured those who were caring but also strict. In addition, the participants valued the tutors who ‘placed emphasis on the students’ ideas, shared their own experiences with them, gave them a clear vision about the module and provided them with useful materials and detailed feedback on their written assignments’ (p. 154). In other words, although by this stage of their study students recognised the need for autonomy, they still recognised and valued their tutors’ input. Furthermore, although distant, the influence of family remained and they continued to be a

200  International Students’ Challenges, Strategies and Future Vision

cultural reference point and emotional support. In the case of many of the students, the use of English as the medium of instruction (EMI) expanded their vocabulary, and they increased their use of the strategy of guessing from context rather than depending on rote learning as in the past. In addition, students found they had to adopt new strategies in response to changing modes of assessment. In particular, they needed to develop strategies for finding and selecting resources, for reading and organising ideas, for managing the conventions of academic writing, for thinking critically and analytically and for working as a team. In other words, the participants’ strategy use was not static, but it expanded dynamically in response to the changing needs and conditions. In his final chapter, Hajar turns to the challenges for international students of writing a master’s dissertation, the strategies they use and the relationship of this task to their future vision of themselves. This is, in fact, an extremely challenging task, because students may still be struggling to write in a language which is not their own, and they may also be struggling to adjust to academic standards and expectations which are quite different from those they are used to in their home environments. Hajar considers the effect of supervisor’s practices and the choice of dissertation topic, emphasising the need for students to assume agency and to be willing to adjust their identities and strategies to accommodate their new roles as researchers. Good time management is vital, as well as the ability to be independent and self-directed. Hajar recommends the adoption of dynamic assessment methods, which are more interactive and less authoritarian than conventional assessment procedures, and take more account of the needs of individual students. So, although there was a time soon after the turn of the millennium when the language learning strategy concept seemed in danger of being thrown out with the bathwater (Rose, 2012), ongoing research initiatives such as Hajar’s reported here provide reassurance that interest in strategies remains vibrant. In fact, as Griffiths (2018) points out, strategies underpin everything we do in life in one way or another, so why should learning a language be any different? Of course language learners need strategies! The study reported here, which looks at how students from an EFL environment adapt their strategies to cope in a study abroad context, represents an under-explored area of language learning strategy research. But there remain many more strategy-related areas awaiting investigation, and we look forward to ongoing research initiatives that will continue to contribute to our knowledge of this important area which has the potential to greatly enhance effective learning. Dr Carol Griffiths

Appendices

Appendix 1: Biographical Vignettes of the Participants in This Research

The following is a brief biographical vignette of each participant, constructed from their short written accounts of their past English learning experiences and their first interview data. Zahra

Zahra was born in 1989 into a highly educated professional family in Baghdad, the capital of Iraq. Her late father was an architect and her mother a pharmacist. She grew up with an older and a younger brother. Although English language began to be taught as a compulsory subject in Iraqi public schools from the intermediate level in her schooldays, Zahra’s English language learning started in Grade 2 in a primary private school when she was 7 years old. She was relatively successful at English from the beginning, a success which she attributed primarily to the influence of her eldest brother, a holder of a diploma in English literature, and to the education system of the private school at which she studied. At this school, English was the medium of instruction of many taught subjects, and students had to communicate in English with each other. After earning a bachelor’s degree in business and management, she gained a governmental sponsorship to complete her postgraduate studies in the UK. Feras

Feras was born in 1989 into a highly educated and well-established family in Damascus, the capital of Syria. His father was a surgeon in a government hospital and his mother an ophthalmologist. He grew up with his younger sister. Feras started learning English formally in an English-Arabic private kindergarten when he was 5 years old. His parents sent him to outstanding private educational establishments throughout his education. The medium of instruction for many subjects at his school was English, and he was taught by a number of competent speakers of English. Feras mentioned that he had experienced the value of using the 201

202  International Students’ Challenges, Strategies and Future Vision

English language at an early age because some of his colleagues at school were non-native speakers of Arabic. After graduating from dentistry, his parents encouraged Feras to complete his higher studies in the UK, principally because of the political turmoil in Syria. Yazn

Yazn was born in 1990 into a well-educated, middle-class family in Amman, the capital of Jordan. He was the second child in his family, and grew up with an older brother and two younger sisters. His father worked in one of the world’s largest commodities trading companies and his mother was a maths teacher. Yazn started learning English formally in a private kindergarten when he was 5 years old. His parents sent him to private schools in order to get a better education. However, the focus of Yazn’s schools was more on scientific subjects than on English. Yazn recalled that he realised the importance of English in his life at university level because the medium of instruction of some subjects was English. After graduating from university, Yazn’s parents decided to send Yazn to the UK to gain a master’s degree in his field of industrial engineering. Adnan

Adnan was born in 1990 to a middle-class family in Jeddah, in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA). Adnan was the youngest son in his family, and he grew up with two sisters and three brothers. Adnan’s father worked as a government clerk and his mother was a housewife. His parents were not highly educated, and accordingly they were not closely involved in his educational progress and language learning. Adnan’s English language learning started in Saudi public schools from the intermediate level when he was 12 years old. Adnan became aware of the salience of the English language in his life when he commenced his undergraduate degree in industrial engineering, where the medium of instruction of many subjects was English. After earning a bachelor’s degree in industrial engineering, Adnan was immediately employed in one of the leading Saudi government companies in the industry. After four months of work, the company offered Adnan a master’s scholarship to the UK. Waleed

Waleed was born in 1990 to a middle-class family in Mecca, KSA. Waleed grew up with three older sisters and one younger brother. His father was a maths teacher and his mother was a housewife. Waleed recalled that his eldest sister, an English teacher, forced him to memorise as many English words as possible when he was a young child. He expressed his satisfaction with the English instruction he received during some stages of his academic study in public Saudi educational

Appendices 

203

settings, especially at university level. He was more interested in science subjects at school than English. He gained a master’s scholarship to the UK from the Saudi Ministry of Higher Education. Rawan

Rawan was born in 1989 into a large family in the countryside near Damascus, the capital of Syria. Rawan’s parents were farmers and only educated up to primary school level. As a result, they were not directly engaged in her educational progress and language learning. She was the fifth child, and grew up with four older brothers and two younger sisters. Rawan’s English language learning began at Grade 5 of a primary public school when she was 10 years old. She was the only child in her family to attend university. Rawan became aware of the importance of English in her life after earning a bachelor’s degree in agricultural engineering. She was assigned as a teaching assistant at Damascus University and afterwards sent to the UK to complete her postgraduate studies. Haifa

Haifa was born in 1988 into a middle-class family in Ajman, United Arab Emirates (UAE). She was the third child in her family, and grew up with two older brothers and one younger sister. Haifa was married with one son. Her father was a retired policeman and her mother a housewife. She formally started her English language learning in Grade 4 in a primary public school when she was 9 years old. Haifa became attentive to the significance of English in her life after commencing her undergraduate studies in gynaecology, where the medium of instruction for some core subjects was English. After graduation, Haifa worked in one of the Emirati governmental hospitals for six months, before gaining a master’s scholarship in gynaecology to the UK from the Emirati Ministry of Higher Education. Osama

Osama was born in 1985 to an upper-middle-class family in Tripoli, the capital of Libya. He was the second child and grew up with one older brother and three younger sisters. He is married with two children. His father was a judge in the Libyan Supreme Court and his mother was a housewife. He learnt English formally when he was 17 years old because the English language was taught as a compulsory subject in Libyan public schools from the third year of secondary school in his schooldays. His father encouraged him to enrol in the Department of English. Because of political turbulence in Libya, Osama decided to make use of the privilege of receiving a scholarship from the Libyan government to pursue his postgraduate studies in the UK.

204  International Students’ Challenges, Strategies and Future Vision

Appendix 2: Indicative Interview Protocol

The following questions were the basis for the semi-structured interviews used in the current research. However, other questions followed or developed from what the participants said to illuminate meaning, to develop understanding of what each participant said and to seek examples from their experience. Phase 1: Participants’ past language learning experiences in their homelands

(1) What do you think learning English is for? (2) What did you normally do in English classes? (3) What kind of problems did you normally have in learning English in your homeland? How did you deal with the difficulties? (4) Did you receive sufficient support from your family members in terms of English learning? If yes, how? If no, why? (5) Is there any outstanding event/person that encouraged or discouraged you to learn English? (6) Did you have enough opportunities to practise English outside the classroom? If not, why not? (7) When did you actually recognise the importance of English in your life? (8) Have you found sufficient chances to communicate with competent speakers of English in your homeland? If yes, how? If not, why not? (9) What about the role of your peers in facilitating your English learning? (10) Did you have domestic helpers in your house? If yes, to what extent did they have an impact on your English? (11) Where did you encounter or learn new words in your native country? And what did you do in order to consolidate your memory of new words? (12) What about the role of technology in your life? Do you use it to improve your English? If yes, how? If not, why not? (13) Have you attended English private lessons? If yes: (a) Can you tell me when you first started to take private lessons? (b) Who suggested them? (c) What do you learn in private lessons? (d) Do you enjoy private lessons? Are they useful? Why? (14) How do you feel about pursuing your higher studies in the UK? Phase 2: Participants’ experiences on the pre-sessional English course (i.e. the first three months of their stay in the UK)

(1) Why did you decide to come to study in the UK?

Appendices 

205

(2) How did you come to the UK (i.e. at your own expense or were you granted a scholarship)? (3) What do you think about the differences in studying in your country and the UK? (4) Why did you join the pre-sessional English course? (5) What are your expectations of this course? (6) What are your current learning goals? Are they different from those before coming to the UK? What kind of activities or steps have you adopted/do you intend to use to achieve your goals? (7) What about the role of English in your life after coming to the UK? (8) Which particular aspects of English do you think you still have problems with? Why? What strategies did you use/do you want to use to improve this aspect/these aspects of your English? (9) What kind of help do you currently need most? (10) What do you think about the tutors in this course? Are they using their own materials? (11) What do you think are the strengths and weaknesses of this pre-sessional English course? (12) Can you describe your preparation for the oral presentation? (13) Can you describe your preparation for the written project? (14) Do you feel that you are doing well on the pre-sessional course? Why? (15) What about the role of technology in your life after coming to the UK? (16) Can you tell me about the people you know here in the UK? (a) How many people? Who are they? (b) How do you know them? (c) Why do you contact them? (d) Do they help/support you? How? (e) Any outstanding person? (17) Where are you now living? What about your flatmates? Do you think they can play a role in improving your English? (18) Do you have frequent contact with friends and family in your country? (19) Where do you usually encounter or learn new words here? What do you do with the new vocabulary? Phase 3: Participants’ experiences in the first and second terms of their master’s programmes

(1) What do you think are the similarities and differences between the pre-sessional English course and the MA programme? (2) What are your current learning goals? Are they different from those during your attendance in the pre-sessional English course? How can you achieve them?

206  International Students’ Challenges, Strategies and Future Vision

(3) To what extent did the pre-sessional course help you in your MA programme? (4) How is your course assessed? Are you satisfied with the assessment modes of your course? Why? (5) Which kind of challenges are you now facing? How do you deal with them? (6) Do you feel that you are doing well on your MA programme? Why? (7) What about the role of technology in your life now? Do you use it to improve your English and facilitate your academic study? If yes, how? If no, why? (8) Can you describe your preparations for your written assignments? What are the main difficulties? How do you deal with them? (9) What is your perception of collaborative group work assigned by your module tutors? (10) What about your relationship with your flatmates? (11) In what ways are your relationships with people around you in the UK successful? (a) People on your course? (b) People around the university? (c) People in the community outside the university? (12) Any outstanding event/person? Phase 4: Participants’ experiences of writing their master’s dissertation in English

(1) Why did you choose this research topic? (2) How did you choose your research topic? Did your dissertation supervisor play a role in this matter? (3) Why did you use a specific methodology in your study? (4) What do you think about your own identity as a researcher and as an academic? (5) Did you wait a long time to get approval from your participants? How did you approach them? (6) Which kind of challenges are you now facing? How do you deal with them? (7) Do you feel that you are doing well on your dissertation writing? Why? (8) What about your relationship with your dissertation supervisor? (9) What are your current learning goals in the third term of your master’s programme? How can you achieve them? (10) Did technologies help you achieve your goals? If yes, how? (11) Any person/event that either enhanced or deterred your learning goals?

Appendices 

207

Appendix 3: Prompts for Initial Essay

Write an essay that covers the following points: (1) Could you please write general information about your background (e.g. your parents’ job, how many brothers and sisters you have and your city/village). (2) When did you start learning English? (3) What was your perspective on learning English at that time? (4) When did you recognise the importance of English in your life? (5) What sort of problems did you usually have in learning English? (6) How did you sort them out?

References

Ababneh, S. (2013) Strategies used by Jordanian university students in dealing with new vocabulary in English. Journal of Education and Practice 4 (4), 1–6. Abu-Radwan, A. (2011) Effect of L2 proficiency and gender on choice of language learning strategies by university students majoring English. The Asian EFL Journal Quarterly 13 (1), 114–162. Alhabahba, M.M., Pandian, A. and Mahfoodh, O.H.A. (2016) English language education in Jordan: Some recent trends and challenges. Cogent Education 3 (1), 1156809. Al-Khatib, M. (2006) Aspects of bilingualism in the Arab world: An introduction. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 9 (1), 1–7. Alotaibi, G.N. (2014) Causes of private tutoring in English: Perspectives of Saudi secondary students and their parents. Studies in Literature and Language 8 (3), 79–83. Al-Sharideh, K.A. and Goe, W.R. (1998) Ethnic communities within the university: An examination of factors influencing the personal adjustment of international students. Research in Higher Education 39 (6), 699–725. Al-Sumaiti, R. (2012) Parental involvement in the education of their children in Dubai. Policy Brief No. 30. Dubai School of Government. Al-Thubaiti, K. (2014) Age of L2 learning makes no difference in instructed settings: Input matters most. In K.M. Bailey and R.M. Damerow (eds) Teaching and Learning English in the Arabic-Speaking World (pp. 162–177). New York: Routledge. Andersen, E.S. and Kekelis, L.S. (1986) The role of sibling input in the language socialization of younger blind children. In J. Connor-Linton, C. Hall and M. McGinnes (eds) Southern California Occasional Papers in Linguistics, Vol. 11: Social and Cognitive Perspectives on Language (pp. 141–156). Los Angeles, CA: University of Southern California Press. Anderson, A. (1985) Cognitive Psychology and its Implications (2nd edn). New York: Freeman. Anderson, C., Day, K. and McLaughlin, P. (2006) Mastering the dissertation: Lecturers’ representations of the purposes and processes of master’s level dissertation supervision. Studies in Higher Education 31 (2), 149–168. Anderson, N. (2005) L2 learning strategies. In E. Hinkel (ed.) Handbook of Research in Second Language Teaching and Learning (pp. 757–771). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Anderson, N. (2008) Metacognition and good language learners. In C. Griffiths (ed.) Lessons from Good Language Learners (pp. 99–109). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Anderson, N. (2012) Metacognition: Awareness of language learning. In S. Mercer, S. Ryan and M. Williams (eds) Psychology for Language Learning: Insights from Research, Theory and Practice (pp. 169–188). London: Palgrave Macmillan. Anjea, G. (2014) Disinventing and reconstituting native speaker ideologies through the classroom experiences of international TESOL students. Working Papers in Educational Linguistics 29, 23–39. 208

References 

209

Armstrong, K. (2013) Best Practice in Managing, Supervising and Assessing Post-Graduate Marketing Dissertations. York: Higher Education Academy. Ashworth, P. and Lucas, U. (2000) Achieving empathy and engagement: A practical approach to the design, conduct and reporting of phenomenographic research. Studies in Higher Education 25, 295–308. Aspland, T. (1999) Struggling with ambivalence within supervisory relations. In A. Holbrook and S. Johnston (eds) Supervision of Postgraduate Research in Education (pp. 95–111). Coldstream, Victoria: Australian Association for Research in Education. Atkinson, D. (ed.) (2011) Alternative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition. London: Routledge. Bailey, C. (2013) Negotiating writing: Challenges of the first written assignment at a UK university. In S. Sovic and M. Blythman (eds) International Students Negotiating Higher Education: Critical Perspectives (pp. 190–209). London: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group. Bailey, S. (2011) Academic Writing: A Handbook for International Students (3rd edn). New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group. Baker, T. and Clark, J. (2010) Cooperative learning – a double‐edged sword: A cooperative learning model for use with diverse student groups. Intercultural Education 21 (3), 257–268. Baker, W. (2012) From cultural awareness to intercultural awareness: Culture in ELT. ELT Journal 66 (1), 62–70. Baker, W. (2015) Research into practice: Cultural and intercultural awareness. Language Teaching 48, (1), 130–141. Baleghizadeh, S. (2010) The effect of pair-work on a word-building task. ELT Journal 64 (4), 405–413. Bankston, C. and Zhou, M. (1995) Religious participation, ethnic identification, and adaptation of Vietnamese adolescents in an immigrant community. Sociological Quarterly 36, 523–535. Barkhuizen, G., Benson, P. and Chik, A. (2014) Narrative Inquiry in Language Teaching and Learning Research. London: Routledge. Benson, P. (2011) Language learning and teaching beyond the classroom: An introduction to the field. In P. Benson and H. Reinders (eds) Beyond the Language Classroom. The Theory and Practice of Informal Language Learning and Teaching (pp. 7–16). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Benson, P. and Reinders, H. (eds) (2011) Beyond the Language Classroom. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Benson, P. and Cooker, L. (eds) (2013) The Applied Linguistic Individual: Sociocultural Approaches to Autonomy, Agency and Identity. London: Equinox. Benson, P., Barkhuizen, G., Bodycott, P. and Brown, J. (2013) Second Language Identity in Narratives of Study Abroad. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Besser, S. and Chik, A. (2014) Narratives of second language identity amongst young English learners. ELT Journal 68 (3), 299–309. Bialystok, E. (1978) A theoretical model of second language learning. Language Learning, 28 (1), 69–83. Biesta, G.J.J. and Tedder, M. (2006) Agency and learning in the lifecourse. In P. Armstrong, J. Coles, R. O’Rourke and M. Zukas (eds) Proceedings of the 26th Annual Conference of SCUTREA: Inter-Cultural Perspectives on Research into Adult Learning: A Global Dialogue (pp. 486–490). Leeds: University of Leeds and SCUTREA. Biggam, J. (2015) Succeeding with Your Master’s Dissertation: A Step-by-Step Handbook. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill Education (UK). Blanchard, J. (2009) Teaching, Learning and Assessment. Maidenhead: McGraw-Hill Education (UK). Block, D. (2003) The Social Turn in Second Language Acquisition. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.

210 References

Block, D. (2007) The rise of identity in SLA research, post Firth and Wagner (1997). The Modern Language Journal 91 (5), 863–876. Block, D. (2014) Second Language Identities (2nd edn). London: Bloomsbury. Bochner, S., McLeod, B.M. and Lin, A. (1977) Friendship patterns of overseas students: A functional model. International Journal of Psychology 12 (4), 277–294. Boekaerts, M., Pintrich, P. and Zeidner, M. (eds) (2000) Handbook of Self-Regulation. San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Boud, D. (2000) Sustainable assessment: Rethinking assessment for the learning society. Studies in Continuing Education 22 (2), 151–167. Braine, G. (2002) Academic literacy and the nonnative speaker graduate student. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 1 (1), 59–68. Braun, V. and Clarke, V. (2013) Successful Qualitative Research: A Practical Guide for Beginners. London: Sage. Bray, M. (2014) The impact of shadow education on student academic achievement: Why the research is inconclusive and what can be done about it. Asia Pacific Education Review 15 (3), 381–389. Bray, M. and Lykins, C. (2012) Shadow Education: Private Supplementary Tutoring and Its Implications for Policy Makers in Asia. Hong Kong: Asian Development Bank and University of Hong Kong. Bray, M. and Kwo, O. (2014) Regulating Private Tutoring for Public Good: Policy Options for Supplementary Education in Asia. Hong Kong: Comparative Education Research Centre and UNESCO. Bray, M. and Kobakhidze, M.N. (2015) Evolving ecosystems in education: The nature and implications of private supplementary tutoring in Hong Kong. Prospects 45 (4), 465–481. Bray, M., Mazawi, A. and Sultana, R. (eds) (2013) Private Tutoring across the Mediterranean: Power Dynamics, and Implications for Learning and Equity. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers. Bray, M., Kwo, O. and Jokić, B. (eds) (2016) Researching Private Supplementary Tutoring: Methodological Lessons from Diverse Cultures. Hong Kong: Comparative Education Research Centre, The University of Hong Kong and Dordrecht: Springer. Bremner, S. (1998) Language learning strategies and language proficiency: Investigating the relationship in Hong Kong. Canadian Modern Language Review 55 (4), 490–514. Bridges, K. and Hoff, E. (2014) Older sibling influences on the language environment and language development of toddlers in bilingual homes. Applied Psycholinguistics 35 (2), 225–241. Brody, G.H. (2004) Siblings’ direct and indirect contributions to child development. Current Directions in Psychological Science 13 (3), 124–126. Brown, L. (2009) A failure of communication on the cross-cultural campus. Journal of Studies in International Education 13 (4), 439–454. Brown, G. and Atkins, M. (1988) Effective research and project supervision. In G. Brown and M. Atkins (eds) Effective Teaching in Higher Education (pp. 115–149). London: Methuen. Bryce, M. (2003) Defining the doctorate with Asian research students. Proceedings of Australian Association for Research in Education (AARE), Newcastle mini-conference. See http://minerva.mq.edu.au:8080/vital/access/manager/Repository/mq:6298 (accessed 1 March 2018). Bui, Y.N. (2013) How to Write a Master’s Thesis. London: Sage. Burr, V. (1995) An Introduction to Social Constructionism. London: Routledge. Byram, M. (1998) Cultural identities in mutilingual classroom. In J. Cenoz and F. Genesee (eds) Beyond Bilingualism (pp. 96–116). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Canagarajah, S. (ed.) (2006) TESOL at forty: What are the issues? TESOL Quarterly 40 (1), 9–34.

References 

211

Carson, J. and Nelson, G.L. (1996) Chinese students’ perceptions of ESL peer response group interaction. Journal of Second Language Writing 5, 1–19. Chamot, A.U. (2001) The role of learning strategies in second language acquisition. In M. Breen (ed.) Learner Contributions to Language Learning: New Directions in Research (pp. 25–43). London: Longman. Chamot, A.U. (2004) Issues in language learning strategy research and teaching. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching 1 (1), 14–26. Chamot, A.U. (2005) Language learning strategy instruction: Current issues and research. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 25, 112–130. Chamot, A.U. (2009) The CALLA Handbook: Implementing the Cognitive Academic Language Learning Approach (2nd edn). White Plains, NY: Pearson Education/Longman. Chamot, A.U. (2011) Preparing language teachers to teach learning strategies. In W.M. Chan, K.N. Chin and T. Suthiwan (eds) Foreign Language Teaching in Asia and Beyond (pp. 29–44). Boston, MA/Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. Chamot, A.H. and Harris, V. (eds) (2019) Learning Strategy Instruction in the Language Classroom: Issues and Implementation. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Chan, T.Y. and McBride-Chang, C. (2005) Environment and bilingualism in Hong Kong kindergartners: The impact of foreign domestic helpers on early language-learning. Journal of Psychology in Chinese Societies 6, 179–193. Cheung, C.K. (2001) The use of popular culture as a stimulus to motivate secondary students’ English learning in Hong Kong. ELT Journal 55 (1), 55–61. Chik, A. (2014) Digital gaming and language learning: Autonomy and community. Language Learning and Technology 18 (2), 85–100. Christiansen, M.S., Trejo Guzmán, N.P. and Mora-Pablo, I. (2018) ‘You know English, so why don’t you teach?’ Language ideologies and returnees becoming English language teachers in Mexico. International Multilingual Research Journal 12 (2), 80–95. Clark, R. and Grieve, S. (2006) On the discursive construction of ‘The Chinese Learner’. Language, Culture and Curriculum 19 (1), 54–73. Cohen, A. (1977) Successful second-language speakers: A review of research literature. Balshanut Shimushit 1 (1), 3–23. Cohen, A. (1998) Strategies in Learning and Using Second Language. Harlow: Longman. Cohen, A. (2011) Strategies in Learning and Using a Second Language (2nd edn). London: Longman. Cohen, A. (2012) Strategies: The interface of styles, strategies, and motivation on tasks. In S. Mercer, S. Ryan and M. Williams (eds) Psychology for Language Learning: Insights from Research, Theory and Practice (pp. 136–150). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Cohen, A. (2018) Moving from theory to practice: A closer look at language learning strategies. In R.L. Oxford and C.M. Amerstorfer (eds) Language Learning Strategies and Individual Learner Characteristics: Situating Strategy Use in Diverse Contexts (pp. 31–53). London: Bloomsbury. Cohen, A.D. and Macaro, E. (eds) (2007) Language Learning Strategies: Thirty Years of Research and Practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Cohen, A.D. and Griffiths, C. (2015) Revisiting LLS research 40 years later. TESOL Quarterly 49 (2), 414–429. Cohen, A., Oxford, R.L. and Chi, J.C. (2006) Language strategy use survey. In A. Cohen and S.J. Weaver (eds) Styles and Strategies-Based Instruction: A Teachers’ Guide, Center for Advanced Research on Language Acquisition (pp. 68–75). Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota. Coleman, J. (2013) Researching whole people and whole lives. In C. Kinginger (ed.) Social and Cultural Aspects of Language Learning in Study Abroad (pp. 17–44). Amsterdam/ Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins. Collicott, A. and Neville, L. (2007) Students’ experiences of personal tutoring. In L. Neville (ed.) The Personal Tutor’s Handbook (pp. 37–55). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

212 References

Coniam, D. (2014) How much do students benefit from attending private tutorial schools? A case study of the Hong Kong shadow education system. In D. Coniam (ed.) English Language Education and Assessment: Recent Developments in Hong Kong and the Chinese Mainland (pp. 103–119). Singapore: Springer. Contu, A. and Willmott, H. (2003) Re-embedding situatedness: The importance of power relations in learning theory. Organization Science 14 (3), 283–296. Copland, F. and Garton, S. (2011) ‘I felt that I do live in the UK now’: International students’ self-reports of their English language speaking experiences on a pre-sessional programme. Language and Education 25 (3), 241–255. Coyle, D. (2007) Strategic classrooms: Learning communities which nurture the development of learners strategies. Language Learning Journal 35 (1), 67–79. Cross, J. and Hitchcock, R. (2007) Chinese students ‘(or students from China‘s) views of UK HE: Differences, difficulties and benefits, and suggestions for facilitating transition. The East Asian Learner 3 (2), 1–31. Csizér, K. and Kormos, J. (2009) Learning experiences, selves and motivated learning behavior: A comparative analysis of structural models for Hungarian secondary and university learners of English. In Z. Dörnyei and E. Ushioda (eds) Motivation, Language Identity and the L2 Self (pp. 98–119). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Cullen, D.J., Pearson, M., Saha, L.J. and Spear, R.H. (1994) Establishing Effective PhD Supervision. Canberra: AGPS. Daleure, G.M., Albon, R., Hinkston, K., Ajaif, T. and McKeown, J. (2014) Family involvement in Emirati college student education and linkages to high and low achievement in the context of the United Arab Emirates. Forum for International Research in Education 1 (3), 8–31. Damerow, R. and Bailey, K. (2014) Research on the teaching and learning of English in the Arabic-speaking world. In K. Bailey and R. Damerow (eds) Teaching and Learning English in the Arabic-Speaking World (pp. 1–13). Abingdon: Routledge. Daniels, H. (2004) Activity theory, discourse and Bernstein. Educational Review 56 (2), 121–132. Darvin, R. and Norton, B. (2015) Identity and a model of investment in applied linguistics. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics 35, 36–56. Darvin, R. and Norton, B. (2018, in press) Identity, investment, and TESOL. In S. Nero and J. Liontas (eds) Sociocultural Aspects of English Language Teaching: The TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching. Wiley. Davis, K. (1995) Qualitative theory and methods in applied linguistic research. TESOL Quarterly 29, 427–454. De Kleijn, R.A., Bronkhorst, L.H., Meijer, P.C., Pilot, A. and Brekelmans, M. (2016) Understanding the up, back, and forward-component in master’s thesis supervision with adaptivity. Studies in Higher Education 41 (8), 1463–1479. De Vita, G. (2002) Does assessed multicultural group work really pull UK students’ average down? Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 27 (2), 153–161. De Vita, G. (2005) Fostering intercultural learning through multicultural group work. In J. Carroll and J. Ryan (eds) Teaching International Students: Improving Learning for All (pp. 75–83). London: Routledge. Devos, A. (2003) Academic standards, internationalisation, and the discourse of the international student. Higher Education Research and Development 22 (2), 155–166. Dewaele, J., Comanaru, R. and Faraco, M. (2015) The affective benefits of a pre-sessional course at the start of study abroad. In R. Mitchell, N. Ventura and K. Mcmanus (eds) Social Interaction, Identity and Language Learning during Residence Abroad (pp. 33–50). Amsterdam: The European Second Language Association. Dinkelman, T. and Ranchhod, V. (2012) Evidence on the impact of minimum wage laws in an informal sector: Domestic workers in South Africa. Journal of Development Economics 99 (1), 27–45.

References 

213

Di Pietro, R.J. (1987) Strategic Interaction: Learning Languages through Scenarios. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Divan, A., Bowman, M. and Seabourne, A. (2015) Reducing unintentional plagiarism amongst international students in the biological sciences: An embedded academic writing development programme. Journal of Further and Higher Education 39 (3), 358–378. Donato, R. and McCormick, D. (1994) A sociocultural perspective on language learning strategies: The role of mediation. The Modern Language Journal 78, 453–464. Dong, Y.R. (1997) Supervising international students requires cultural sensitivity. The Scientist 11 (19), 10. Dong, Y.R. (1998) Non-native graduate students’ thesis/dissertation writing in science: Self-reports by students and their advisors from two US institutions. English for Specific Purposes 17 (4), 369–390. Dörnyei, Z. (2005) Psychology of the Language Learner: Individual Differences in Second Language Acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Dörnyei, Z. (2006) Individual differences in second language acquisition. AILA Review 19 (1), 42–68. Dörnyei, Z. (2009) The Psychology of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Dörnyei, Z. and Al-Hoorie, A.H. (2017) The motivational foundation of learning languages other than Global English: Theoretical issues and research directions. The Modern Language Journal 101 (3), 455–468. Dörnyei, Z. and Murphey, T. (2003) Group Dynamics in the Language Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Dörnyei, Z. and Skehan, P. (2003) Individual differences in second language learning. In C.J. Doughty and M.H. Long (eds) The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (pp. 589–630). Malden, MA: Blackwell. Dörnyei, Z. and Ushioda, E. (2011) Teaching and Researching Motivation (2nd edn). Harlow: Longman. Dörnyei, Z. and Kubanyiova, M. (2014) Motivating Learners, Motivating Teachers: Building Vision in the Language Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Dörnyei, Z. and Ryan, S. (2015) The Psychology of the Language Learner Revisited. London: Routledge. Dörnyei, Z., Csizer, K. and Nemeth, N. (2006) Motivation, Language Attitudes and Globalisation: A Hungarian Perspective. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Dörnyei, Z., Henry, A. and Muir, C. (2016) Motivational Currents in Language Learning: Frameworks for Focused Interventions. New York: Routledge. Doyle, H. and Parrish, M. (2012) Investigating students’ ways to learn English outside of class: A researchers’ narrative. Studies in Self-Access Learning Journal 3 (2), 196–203. Duff, P. and Talmy, S. (2011) Language socialization approaches to second language acquisition: Social, cultural, and linguistic development in additional languages. In D. Atkinson (ed.) Alternative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition (pp. 95–117). London: Routledge. Dulay, K.M., Tong, X. and McBride, C. (2017) The role of foreign domestic helpers in Hong Kong Chinese children’s English and Chinese skills: A longitudinal study. Language Learning 67 (2), 321–347. Dweck, C.S. (1999) Self-Theories: Their Role in Motivation, Personality, and Development. Ann Arbor, MI: Psychology Press, Taylor & Francis Group. Egege, S. and Kutieleh, S. (2004) Critical thinking: Teaching foreign notions to foreign students. International Education Journal 4 (4), 75–85. Ehrman, M.E., Leaver, B.L. and Oxford, R. (2003) A brief overview of individual differences in second language learning. System 31 (3), 313–330. El-Dib, M. (2004) Language learning strategies in Kuwait: Links to gender, language level, and culture in a hybrid context. Foreign Language Annuals 37 (1), 85–95.

214 References

Ellis, G. and Sinclair, B. (1989) Learning to Learn English: A Course in Learner Training. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ellis, R. (1985) Understanding Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ellis, R. (1994) The Study of Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ellis, R. (2004) Individual differences in second language learning. In A. Davies and C. Elder (eds) The Handbook of Applied Linguistics (pp. 525–550). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. Ellis, R. (2008) The Study of Second Language Acquisition (2nd edn). Oxford: Oxford University Press. El-Ezabi, Y. (2014) Forward. In K. Bailey and R. Damerow (eds) Teaching and Learning English in the Arabic-Speaking World (pp. viii–xi). Abingdon: Routledge. Elsey, B. (1990) Teaching and learning. In M. Kinnell (ed.) The Learning Experiences of Overseas Students (pp. 46–62). Buckingham: Open University Press. Engeström, Y. (1991) ‘Non scolae sed vitae discimus’: Toward overcoming the encapsulation of school learning’. Learning and Instruction 1, 243–259. Engeström, Y. (1999) Activity theory and individual and social transformation. In Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen and R. Punamäki (eds) Perspectives on Activity Theory (pp. 19–38). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Engeström, Y. (2001) Expansive learning at work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of Education and Work 14 (1), 133–156. Esseili, F. (2014) English language teaching in Lebanese schools: Trends and challenges. In K. Bailey and R. Damerow (eds) Teaching and Learning English in the ArabicSpeaking World (pp. 101–115). Abingdon: Routledge. Exley, K. and O’Malley, C. (1999) Supervising PhDs in science and engineering. In G. Wisker and N. Sutcliffe (eds) Good Practice in Postgraduate Supervision. SEDA Paper 106. Birmingham: SEDA Publications. Falout, J. (2014) Circular seating arrangements: Approaching the social crux in language classrooms. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching 4 (2), 275–300. Fan, Y. (2013) The Experiences of International Students with Dissertation Study: Business Education. York: Higher Education Academy. Field, J. (2005) Social Capital and Lifelong Learning. Bristol: Policy Press. Flipo, A., Fougère, D. and Olier, L. (2007) Is the household demand for in-home services sensitive to tax reductions? The French case. Journal of Public Economics 91 (1–2), 365–385. Flowerdew, J. and Miller, L. (2008) Social structure and individual agency in second language learning: Evidence from three life histories. Critical Inquiry in Language Studies 5 (4), 201–224. Forey, G., Besser, S. and Sampson, N. (2016) Parental involvement in foreign language learning: The case of Hong Kong. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy 16 (3), 383–413. Forum on Education Abroad (FEA) (2011) Education Abroad Glossary (2nd edn). Carlisle, PA: Forum on Education Abroad. Fox, S. (2000) Communities of practice, Foucault and Actor‐Network Theory. Journal of Management Studies 37 (6), 853–868. Frumuselu, A.D., De Maeyer, S., Donche, V. and Plana, M. (2015) Television series inside the EFL classroom: Bridging the gap between teaching and learning informal language through subtitles. Linguistics and Education 32, 107–117. Gan, Z., Humphries, G. and Hamp-Lyons, L. (2004) Understanding successful and unsuccessful EFL students in Chinese universities. The Modern Language Journal 88 (ii), 229–238. Gao, X. (2003) Changes in Chinese students’ learner strategy use after arrival in the UK: A qualitative enquiry. In D. Palfreyman and R.C. Smith (eds) Learner Autonomy

References 

215

across Cultures: Language Education Perspectives (pp. 41–57). Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan. Gao, X. (2004) A critical review of questionnaire use in learner strategy research. Prospect, An Australian Journal of TESOL 19 (3), 3–14. Gao, X. (2006a) Understanding changes in Chinese students’ uses of learning strategies in China and Britain: A socio-cultural re-interpretation. System 34 (1), 55–67. Gao, X. (2006b) Strategies used by Chinese parents to support English language learning: Voices of ‘elite’ university students. RELC Journal 34 (3), 285–298. Gao, X. (2007) Has language learning strategy research come to an end? A response to Tseng et al. (2006). Applied Linguistics 28 (4), 615–620. Gao, X. (2008) You had to work hard ‘cause you didn’t know whether you were going to wear shoes or straw sandals! Journal of Language, Identity and Education 8 (3), 169–187. Gao, X. (2010) Strategic Language Learning: The Roles of Agency and Context. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Gao, X. (2012) Parental strategies in supporting Chinese children’s learning of English vocabulary. Research Papers in Education 27 (5), 581–595. Gao, X. (2013a) Motivated by visions: Stories from Chinese contexts. In E. Ushioda (ed.) International Perspectives on Motivation: Language Learning and Professional Challenges (pp. 176–192). Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan. Gao, X. (2013b) Reflexive and reflective thinking: A crucial link between agency and autonomy. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching 7 (3), 226–237. Gao, X. and Lamb, T. (2011) Exploring links between identity, motivation and autonomy. In G. Murray, X. Gao and T. Lamb (eds) Identity, Motivation and Autonomy in Language Learning (pp. 1–8). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Gao, X. and Zhang, L.J. (2011) Joining forces for synergy: Agency and metacognition as interrelated theoretical perspectives on learner autonomy. In G. Murray, X. Gao and T. Lamb (eds) Identity, Motivation and Autonomy in Language Learning (pp. 25–41). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Gardner, R.C. (1985) Social Psychology and Second Language Learning: The Role of Attitudes and Notivation. London/Ontario: Edward Arnold. Gardner, R.C. (2001) Language learning motivation: The student, the teacher, and the researcher. Texas Papers in Foreign Language Education 38, 101–126. Gebril, A. (2017) Language teachers’ conceptions of assessment: An Egyptian perspective. Teacher Development 21 (1), 81–100. Gebril, A. and Brown, G.T.L. (2014) The effect of high-stakes examination systems on teacher beliefs: Egyptian teachers’ conceptions of assessment. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy, and Practice 21 (1), 16–33. doi:10.1080/0969594X.2013.831030. Gee, J.P. (2008) Game-like learning: An example of situated learning and implications for opportunity to learn. In P. Moss, D. Pullin, J. Gee, E.H. Haertel and L. Young (eds) Assessment, Equity, and Opportunity to Learn (pp. 200–221). New York: Cambridge University Press. Gillette, B. (1994) The role of learner goals in L2 success. In P. Lantolf and G. Appel (eds) Vygotskian Approaches to Second Language Research (pp. 195–213). Norwood, NJ: Ablex. Gitsaki, C. (ed.) (2011) Teaching and Learning in the Arab World. Oxford: Peter Lang. Gkonou, P. (2015) Agency, anxiety and activity: Understanding the classroom behaviour of EFL learners. In P. Deters, X. Gao, E. Miller and G. Vitanova (eds) Theorizing and Analyzing Agency in Second Language Learning: Interdisciplinary Approaches (pp. 195–213). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Goh, C. (1998) How learners with different listening abilities use comprehension strategies and tactics. Language Teaching Research 2 (2), 124–147. Goldstein, L.M. (2004) Questions and answers about teacher written commentary and student revision: Teachers and students working together. Journal of Second Language Writing 13 (1), 63–80.

216 References

Goldstein, L.M. (2006) Feedback and revision in second language writing: Contextual, teacher, and student variables. In K. Hyland and F. Hyland (eds) Feedback in Second Language Writing: Contexts and Issues (pp. 185–205). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Goode, J. (2010) ‘Perhaps I should be more proactive in changing my own supervisions’? Student agency in ‘doing supervision’. In M. Walker and P. Thompson (eds) The Routledge Doctoral Supervisor’s Companion: Supporting Effective Research in Education and the Social Sciences (pp. 38–50). Abingdon: Routledge. Górska, W. (2013) Ways with writing: International students’ perspectives on responding to academic writing requirements in the UK higher education. In S. Sovic and M. Blythman (eds) International Students Negotiating Higher Education: Critical Perspectives (pp. 190–209). London: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group. Grant, B.M. (2005) The pedagogy of graduate supervision: Figuring the relations between supervisor and student. PhD thesis, University of Auckland. Green, W. (2013) Great expectations: The impact of friendship groups on the intercultural learning of Australian students abroad. In M. Blythman and S. Sovic (eds) International Students Negotiating Higher Education: Critical Perspectives (pp. 211–225). Abingdon: Routledge. Green, J.M. and Oxford, R. (1995) A closer look at learning strategies, L2 proficiency, and gender. TESOL Quarterly 29 (2), 261–297. Gregersen, T. and MacIntyre, P. (2014) Capitalizing on Language Learners’ Individuality. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Gregory, E. (1998) Siblings as mediators of literacy in linguistic minority communities. Language and Education 12 (1), 33–54. Grenfell, M. (2000) Learning and teaching strategies. In S. Green (ed.) New Perspectives on Teaching and Learning Modern Languages (pp. 1–23). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Grenfell, M. and Macaro, E. (2007) Language learner strategies: Claims and critiques. In A.D. Cohen and E. Macaro (eds) Language Learner Strategies: 30 Years of Research and Practice (pp. 9–28). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Grenfell, M.J. and Harris, V. (2017) Language Learner Strategies: Contexts, Issues and Applications in Second Language Learning and Teaching. London: Bloomsbury. Griffiths, C. (ed.) (2008) Lessons from Good Language Learners. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Griffiths, C. (2013) The Strategy Factor in Successful Language Learning. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Griffiths, C. (2015) What have we learnt from good language learners? ELTJ 69/4, 425–433. doi:10.1093/elt/ccv040. Griffiths, C. (2018) The Strategy Factor in Successful Language Learning: The Tornado Effect (2nd edn). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Griffiths, C. and Oxford, R.L. (2014) The twenty-first century landscape of language learning strategies: Introduction to this special issue. System 43, 1–10. Griffiths, C. and Cansiz, G. (2015) Language learning strategies: An holistic view. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching 5 (3), 473–493. Gu, M. (2009) The Discursive Construction of Second Language Learners’ Motivation: A Multi-Level Perspective. New York: Peter Lang Publishing Group. Gu, M. (2013) Individuality in L2 identity construction: The stories of two Chinese learners of English. In P. Benson and L. Cooker (eds) The Applied Linguistic Individual: Sociocultural Approaches to Identity, Agency and Autonomy (pp. 119–135). Sheffield: Equinox Publishing. Gu, P. (1996) Robin Hood in SLA: What has the learning strategy researcher taught us? Asian Journal of English Language Teaching 6 (1), 1–29. Gu, P. (2012) Learning strategies: Prototypical core and dimensions of variation. Studies in Self-Access Learning Journal 3 (4), 330–356.

References 

217

Guasti, M.T. (2017) Language Acquisition: The Growth of Grammar. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Guidry Lacina, J. (2002) Preparing international students for a successful social experience in higher education. New Directions for Higher Education 2002 (117), 21–28. Gurr, G.M. (2001) Negotiating the ‘Rackety Bridge’: A dynamic model for aligning supervisory style with research student development. Higher Education Research and Development 20 (1), 81–92. Hajar, A. (2016) Motivated by visions: A tale of a rural learner of English. The Language Learning Journal 1–7. doi: 10.1080/09571736.2016.1146914. Hajar, A. (2017) Identity, investment and language learning strategies of two Syrian students in Syria and Britain. Language, Culture and Curriculum 30 (3), 250–264. Hajar, A. (2018) Exploring Year 6 pupils’ perceptions of private tutoring: Evidence from three mainstream schools in England. Oxford Review of Education 44 (4), 514–531. doi: 10.1080/03054985.2018.1430563. Hall, N. and Guéry, F. (2010) Child language brokering: Some considerations. Mediazioni 10, 24–46. Halse, C. (2011) ‘Becoming a supervisor’: The impact of doctoral supervision on supervisors’ learning. Studies in Higher Education 36 (5), 557–570. Halse, C. and Bansel, P. (2012) The learning alliance: Ethics in doctoral supervision. Oxford Review of Education 38 (4), 377–392. Hamid, M.O. and Baldauf, J.R.B. (2011) English and socio-economic disadvantage: Learner voices from rural Bangladesh. Language Learning Journal 39 (2), 201–217. Hamid, M.O., Khan, A. and Islam, M.M. (2017) The spread of private tutoring in English in developing societies: Exploring students’ perceptions. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education 1–19. Hannerz, U. (2004) Cosmopolitanism. In D. Nugent and J. Vincent (eds) A Companion to the Anthropology of Politics (pp. 69–85). Malden, MA: Blackwell. Harrison, N. and Peacock, N. (2007) Understanding the UK student response to internationalisation. UKCOSA Worldviews, Summer. Hartmann, S. (2008) The Informal Market of Education in Egypt: Private Tutoring and Its Implications. Mainz: Johannes Gutenberg-Universität Mainz. Harwood, N. and Petrić, B. (2017) Experiencing Master’s Supervision: Perspectives of International Students and Their Supervisors. Abingdon: Routledge. Henry, A. (2013) Digital games and ELT: Bridging the authenticity gap. In E. Ushioda (ed.) International Perspectives on Motivation: Language Learning and Professional Challenges (pp. 133–155). Houndmills: Palgrave MacMillan. Henry, A. (2014) Swedish students’ beliefs about learning English in and outside of school. In D. Lasagabaster, A. Doiz and J.M. Sierra (eds) Motivation and Second Language Learning: New Theoretical Insights and the Interaction with the CLIL Approach (pp. 93–116). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Hessamy, G. and Ghaderi, E. (2014) The role of dynamic assessment in the vocabulary learning of Iranian EFL learners. Social and Behavioral Sciences 98, 645–652. Hetrick, S. and Trafford, V. (1995) The mutuality of expectations: Mapping the perceptions of dissertation supervisors and candidates in a postgraduate department of a new university. Journal of Graduate Education 2 (2), 35–43.Higgins, E.T. (2000) Making a good decision: Value from fit. American Psychologist 55, 1217–1230. Holliday, A. (2005) The Struggle to Teach English as an International Language. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Holliday, A. (2015) Native-speakerism: Taking the concept forward and achieving cultural belief. In A. Swan, P. Aboshiha and A. Holliday (eds) (En)countering Native-Speakerism: Global Perspectives (pp. 11–25). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Holliday, A. (2017) Native speakerism. In J. Liontas (ed.) TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching. Bognor Regis: Wiley.

218 References

Hong, E. and O’Neill, H.F. (2001) Construct validation of a trait self-regulation model. International Journal of Psychology 36, 186–194. Hong-Nam, K. and Leavell, A. (2006) Language learning strategy use of ESL students in an intensive English learning context. System 34, 399–415. Howe, N., Petrakos, H., Rinaldi, C.M. and LeFebvre, R. (2005) ‘This is a bad dog, you know …’: Constructing shared meanings during sibling pretend play. Child Development 76, 783–794. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2005.00877.x. Hsiao, T. and Oxford, R. (2002) Comparing theories of language learning strategies: A confirmatory factor analysis. The Modern Language Journal 86 (3), 368–383. Huang, M.H. (2013) After-school tutoring and the distribution of student performance. Comparative Education Review 57 (4), 689–710. Huang, R. (2008) Decoding Critical Thinking for Chinese and Indian International Students Studying in Tourism and Hospitality Subjects. York: Higher Education Academy. See http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download;jsessionid=0D80F9F3D A90ECBB8AD5EAE1F2413FBF?doi=10.1.1.609.939&rep=rep1&type=pdf (accessed 1 March 2018). Huang, S.C. (2015) Significant others in influencing Chinese EFL students’ learning strategy use: From a sociocultural perspective. Culture and Foreign Language Education: Insights from Research and Implications for the Practice 10, 245–264. Huang, S.C. (2016) Language learning strategies in context. The Language Learning Journal 44, 1–13. doi:10.1080/09571736.2016.1186723. Hudson, P. (2011) Beef and lamb, chicken and h**: Censorship and vocabulary teaching in Arabia. In A. Anderson and R. Sheehan (eds) Foundations for the Future: Focus on Vocabulary (pp. 125–135). Abu Dhabi: HCT Press. Hyland, F. and Hyland, K. (2001) Sugaring the pill: Praise and criticism in written feedback. Journal of Second Language Writing 10 (3), 185–212. Irie, K. and Ryan, S. (2014) Study abroad and the dynamics of change in learner L2 selfconcept. In Z. Dörnyei, P. MacIntyre and A. Henry (eds) Motivational Dynamics in Language Learning (pp. 520–552). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Islam, M., Lamb, M. and Chambers, G. (2013) The L2 Motivational Self System and national interest: A Pakistani perspective. System 41 (2), 231–244. Jackson, J. (2008) Language, Identity, and Study Abroad: Sociocultural Perspectives. London: Equinox. Jackson, J. (2016) The language use, attitudes, and motivation of Chinese students prior to a semester-long sojourn in an English-speaking environment. Study Abroad Research in Second Language Acquisition and International Education 1 (1), 4–33. Jackson, J. (2017) Intervening in the learning of L2 study abroad students: From research to practice. Language Teaching 51 (3), 365–382. doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/ S0261444816000392. Jackson, J. (2018) Interculturality in International Education. London/New York: Routledge. Jackson, J. and Oguro, S. (2018) Introduction: Enhancing and extending study abroad learning through intercultural interventions. In J. Jackson and S. Oguro (eds) Intercultural Interventions in Study Abroad (pp. 4–25). New York: Routledge. James, R.H. and Baldwin, G. (1999) Eleven Practices of Effective Postgraduate Supervisors. Melbourne: Centre for the Study of Higher Education and The School of Graduate Studies, University of Melbourne. Jang, E. and Jiménez, R. (2011) A sociocultural perspective on second language learner strategies: Focus on the impact of social context. Theory into Practice 50 (2), 141–148. Jiang, C. (2011) A mixed-method investigation of the second language motivation and self-identities of English majors in mainland China. Doctoral dissertation, Chinese University of Hong Kong.

References 

219

Jiang, X. and Smith, R. (2009) Chinese learners’ strategy use in historical perspective: A cross-generational interview-based study. System 37 (2), 286–299. Jiang, X. and Sharpling, G.P. (2011) The impact of assessment change on language learning strategies: Views of a small group of Chinese graduate students. Asian EFL Journal 13 (4), 33–78. Jiang, X. and Cohen, A. (2012) A critical review of research on strategies in learning Chinese as both a second and foreign language. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 2(1), 9-43. Johnston, S. (1995) Building a sense of community in a research master’s course. Studies in Higher Education 20 (3), 279–291. Jokikokko, K. (2009) The role of significant others in the intercultural learning of teachers. Journal of Research in International Education 8 (2), 142–163. Kabel, A. (2007) The discourses of appropriation: A response to Karmani. Applied Linguistics 28 (1), 136–142. Kalaja, P., Alanen, R., Palviainen, Å. and Dufva, H. (2011) From milk cartons to English roommates: Context and agency in L2 learning beyond the classroom. In P. Benson and H. Reinders (eds) Beyond the Language Classroom: The Theory and Practice of Informal Language Learning and Teaching (pp. 47–58). London: Palgrave Macmillan. Kaylani, C. (1996) The influence of gender and motivation on EFL learning strategy use. In R. Oxford (ed.) Language Learning Strategies around the World: Cross-Cultural Perspectives (pp. 75–88). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawaii Press. Keck, C. (2006) The use of paraphrase in summary writing: A comparison of L1 and L2 writers. Journal of Second Language Writing 15 (4), 261–278. Kettle, M. (2017) International Student Engagement in Higher Education: Transforming Practices, Pedagogies and Participation. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Khalil, A. (2005) Assessment of language learning strategies used by Palestinian EFL learners. Foreign Language Annals 38 (1), 108–117. Khuwaileh, A.A. and Al-Shoumali, A. (2001) Private tuition in English: The case of two universities in Jordan. English Today 17 (1), 31–35. Kibler, A., Palacios, N., Simpson Baird, A., Bergey, R. and Yoder, M. (2016) Bilingual Latin children’s exposure to language and literacy practices through older siblings in immigrant families. Linguistics and Education 35, 63–77. Kim, T. (2010) Reductionism, activity theory, and L2 motivation research: Toward new concepts and definitions. The Sun Journal of Education Research 1, 1–30. Kim, C. and Lee, H. (2015) The interaction of L2 motivation constructs and learner variables in Korean middle school learners of English. Modern English Education 16 (1), 81–105. Kim, Y.C. (2016) Shadow Education and the Curriculum and Culture of Schooling in South Korea. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Kinginger, C. (2004) Alice doesn’t live here anymore: Foreign language learning and identity reconstruction. In A. Pavlenko and A. Blackledge (eds) Negotiation of Identities in Multilingual Contexts (pp. 219–242). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Kinginger, C. (2013) Identity and language learning in study abroad. Foreign Language Annals 46 (3), 339–358. Kinginger, C. (2015) Language Learning and Study Abroad: A Critical Reading of Research. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Kong, J.H., Han, J.E., Kim, S., Park, H., Kim, Y.S. and Park, H. (2018) L2 Motivational Self System, international posture and competitiveness of Korean CTL and LCTL college learners: A structural equation modeling approach. System 72, 178–189. Kormos, J., Kiddle, T. and Csizer, K. (2011) Systems of goals, attitudes, and self-related beliefs in second-language-learning motivation. Applied Linguistics 32 (5), 495–516. Kozulin, A. (2005) Who Needs Metacognition More: Students or Teachers? Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of American Educational Research Association, Montreal, Canada.

220 References

Krackhardt, D. and Hanson, J.R. (2011) Informal networks: The company behind the charts. Harvard Business Review Onpoint 71 (4), 30–37. Kramsch, C. (2009) The Multilingual Subject. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Kramsch, C. (2013) Afterword. In B. Norton (ed.) Identity and Language Learning: Extending the Conversation (2nd edn; pp. 192–199). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Kuchah, K. (2013) Context-appropriate ELT pedagogy: An investigation into Cameroonian primary schools. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Warwick. Kumaravadivelu, B. (2016) The decolonial option in English teaching: Can the subaltern act? TESOL Quarterly 50 (1), 66–85. Kuppens, A.H. (2010) Incidental foreign language acquisition from media exposure. Learning, Media and Technology 35 (1), 65–85. Kurata, N. (2011) Foreign Language Learning and Use: Interaction in Informal Social Networks. London: Continuum. Kyriacou, C. and Zhu, D. (2008) Shanghai pupil’s motivation towards learning English and the perceived influence of important others. Educational Studies 34 (2), 97–104. Lai, C. (2015) Perceiving and traversing in-class and out-of-class learning: Accounts from foreign language learners in Hong Kong, Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching 9 (3), 265–284. doi: 10.1080/17501229.2014.918982. Lai, C. and Gu, M. (2011) Self-regulated out-of-class language learning with technology. Computer Assisted Language Learning 24 (4), 317–335. Lai, C., Zhu, W. and Gong, G. (2015) Understanding the quality of out-of-class English learning. TESOL Quarterly 49 (2), 278–308. Lamb, M. (2004) ‘It depends on the students themselves’: Independent language learning at an Indonesian state school. Language, Culture, and Curriculum 17, 229–245. Lamb, M. (2012) A self system perspective on young adolescents’ motivation to learn English in urban and rural settings. Language Learning 62 (4), 997–1023. Lamb, M. (2013) Your mum and dad can’t teach you!: Constraints on agency among rural learners of English in Indonesia. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 34 (1), 14–29. Lamb, M. (2017) The motivational dimension of language teaching. Language Teaching 50 (3), 301–346. Lamb, M. and Budiyanto (2013) Cultural challenges, identity and motivation in state school EFL. In E. Ushioda (ed.) International Perspectives on Motivation. International Perspectives on English Language Teaching (pp. 18–34). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Lamb, M., Astuti, S.P. and Hadisantosa, N. (2017) What successful Indonesian school teachers do to motivate their pupils? In M. Apple, D. Da Silva and T. Fellner (eds) Language Learning Motivation in Asia (pp. 195–216). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Lambert, W.E. (1981) The social psychology of language: A perspective for the 1980s. Focus 5, 2–9. Lantolf, J. (2000) Sociocultural Theory and Second Language Learning. New York: Cambridge University Press. Lantolf, J. (2013) Sociocultural Theory and the dialectics of L2 learner autonomy/agency. In P. Benson and L. Cooker (eds) The Applied Linguistic Individual: Sociocultural Approaches to Identity, Agency and Autonomy (pp. 17–32). Lancaster: Equinox Publishing Ltd. Lantolf, J. and Pavlenko, A. (2001) (S)econd (L)anguage (A)activity. Understanding second language learners as people. In M. Breen (ed.) Learner Contributions to Language Learning: New Directions in Research (pp. 141–159). London: Longman. Lantolf, J. and Thorne, S. (2006) Sociocultural Theory and the Genesis of L2 Development. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Lantolf, J.P. and Beckett, T.G. (2009) Sociocultural theory and second language acquisition. Language Teaching 42 (4), 459–475.

References 

221

Lantolf, J. and Poehner, M.E. (2013) The unfairness of equal treatment: Objectivity in L2 testing and dynamic assessment. Educational Research and Evaluation 19 (2–3), 141–157. Lave, J. and Wenger, E. (1991) Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. New York: Cambridge University Press. Larsen-Freeman, D. (2001) Individual cognitive/affective learner contributions and differential success in second language acquisition. In M. Breen (ed.) Learner Contributions to Language Learning: New Directions in Research (pp. 12–25). London: Longman. Laycock, E., Howarth, T. and Watson, P. (2016) The Journey to Dissertation Success: For Construction, Property, and Architecture Students. London: Routledge. Lee, B. (2010) The pre-university English-educational background of college freshmen in a foreign language program: A tale of diverse private education and English proficiency. Asia Pacific Education Review 11 (3), 69–82. Lee, A. (2012) Successful Research Supervision: Advising Students Doing Research. Abingdon: Routledge. Lee, E.J.E. (2014) Motivation, investment, and identity in English language development: A longitudinal case study. System 42, 440–450. Lee, K. and Oxford, R. (2008) The learners’ landscape and journey: A summary. In C. Griffiths (ed.) Lessons from Good Language Learners (pp. 306–317). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Leki, I. (2001) A narrow thinking system: Nonnative‐English‐speaking students in group projects across the curriculum. TESOL Quarterly 35 (1), 39–67. Leontiev, A.N. (1981) Problems of the Development of the Mind. Moscow: Progress. (Original work published 1959.) Leung, A.H.C. (2012) Bad influence? – An investigation into the purported negative influence of foreign domestic helpers on children’s second language English acquisition. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 33 (2), 133–148. Li, X. (2013) Language, discourse and identity: A case study of a Chinese university student learning English through the internet. Chinese Journal of Applied Linguistics 36 (1), 125–140. Lier, L. (2008) Agency in the classroom. In J.P. Lantolf and M.E. Poehner (eds) Sociocultural Theory and the Teaching of Second Languages (pp. 163–186). London: Equinox. Lindsay, S. (2011) Do students in UK Higher Education Institutions need personal tutors? Learning at City Journal 1 (1), 40–45. Little, D. (2004) Democracy, discourse and learner autonomy in the foreign language classroom. Utbildning & Demokrati 13 (3), 105–126. Littlejohn, A. (2008) Digging deeper learners’ disposition and strategy use. Strategies in Language and Teaching 68–81. LoCastro, V. (1994) Learning strategies and learning environments. TESOL Quarterly 28 (2), 409–414. LoCastro, V. (1995) The author responds… [A response to Oxford and Green (1995)]. TESOL Quarterly 29 (1), 172–174. Lowe, R. and Pinner, R. (2016) Finding the connections between native-speakerism and authenticity. Applied Linguistics Review 7 (1), 27–52. Loyalka, P. and Zakharov, A. (2016) Does shadow education help students prepare for college? Evidence from Russia. International Journal of Educational Development 49, 22–30. Lykins, C. (2014) Theorizing private tutoring and its policy conditions in Cambodia. CERC Newsletter 15 (1), 4–7. Lyons, D. (2014) The L2 self-concept in second language learning motivation: A longitudinal study of Korean university students. In K. Csizér and M. Magid (eds) The Impact of Self-Concept on Language Learning (pp. 108–130). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Macaro, E. (2001) Learning Strategies in Foreign and Second Language Classrooms. London: Continuum.

222 References

Macaro, E. (2006) Strategies for language learning and for language use: Revising the theoretical framework. The Modern Language Journal 90 (3), 320–337. Macaro, E. (ed.) (2010) Continuum Companion to Second Language Acquisition. London: Continuum. Macias, I. and Dolan, M. (2009) Motivating international students: A practical guide to aspects of learning and teaching. In P. Davies (ed.) The Handbook for Economics Lecturers (pp. 1–34). Bristol: Higher Education Academy Economics Network. MacIntyre, P.D., MacKinnon, S.P. and Clément, R. (2009) The baby, the bathwater and the future of language learning motivation research. In Z. Dörnyei and E. Ushioda (eds) Motivation, Language Identity and the L2 Self (pp. 43–65). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Magid, M. (2011) A validation and application of the L2 motivational self system among Chinese learners of English. Unpublished PhD thesis, University of Nottingham. Mahboob, A. (2010) The NNEST Lens: Nonnative English Speakers in TESOL. Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Press. Malcolm, D. (2011) Failing to achieve autonomy in English for medical purposes. In G. Murray, X. Gao and T. Lamb (eds) Identity, Motivation and Autonomy in Language Learning (pp. 195–212). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Malcolm, D. (2013) Gulf Arab students studying medicine in English. In E. Ushioda (ed.) International Perspectives on Motivation: Language Learning and Professional Challenges (pp. 98–116). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Manathunga, C. (2014) Intercultural Postgraduate Supervision: Reimagining Time, Place and Knowledge. Abingdon: Routledge. Marcellino, M. (2008) English language teaching in Indonesia: A continuous challenge in education and cultural diversity. TEFLIN Journal 19 (1), 57–69. Marimuthu, T., Singh, J.S., Ahmad, K., Lim, H.K., Mukherjee, H. and Osman, S. (1991) Extra-School Instruction, Social Equity and Educational Quality [in Malaysia]. Singapore: International Development Research Centre. Mason, D. (2010) Strategic language learning: The roles of agency and context, Xuesong (Andy) Gao: A book review. System 38 (4), 647–649. McCafferty, S.G., Roebuck, R.F. and Wayland, R.P. (2001) Activity theory and the incidental learning of second language vocabulary. Language Awareness 10 (4), 289–294. McCallin, A. and Nayar, S. (2012) Postgraduate research supervision: A critical review of current practice. Teaching in Higher Education 17 (1), 63–74. McClure, J.W. (2005) Preparing a laboratory-based thesis: Chinese international research students’ experiences of supervision. Teaching in Higher Education 10 (1), 3–16. McFarlane, K.J. (2016) Tutoring the tutors: Supporting effective personal tutoring. Active Learning in Higher Education 17 (1), 77–88. McKay, S.L. (2012) English as an international language. In A. Burns and J.C. Richards (eds) The Cambridge Guide to Pedagogy and Practice in Second Language Teaching (pp. 15–21). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. McKenzie, L. and Baldassar, L. (2017) Missing friendships: Understanding the absent relationships of local and international students at an Australian university. Higher Education 74 (4), 701–707. McLaughlin, B. (1990) ‘Conscious’ versus ‘unconscious’ learning. TESOL Quarterly 24 (4), 617–634. Medgyes, P. (1994) The Non-Native Teacher. London: Macmillan. Mercer, S. (2011) Towards an Understanding of Language Learner Self-Concept. Dordrecht: Springer. Mercer, S. (2012) The complexity of learner agency. Journal of Applied Language Studies 6 (2), 41–59. Mercer, S. and Ryan, S. (2010) A mindset for EFL: Learners’ beliefs about the role of natural talent. ELT Journal 64 (4), 436–444.

References 

223

Mideros, D. and Carter, B. (2014) Meeting the autonomy challenge in an advanced Spanish listening class. In G. Murray (ed.) Social Dimensions of Autonomy in Language Learning (pp. 135–151). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Mizumoto, A. and Takeuchi, O. (2011) Adaptation and validation of self-regulating capacity in vocabulary learning scale. Applied Linguistics 33 (1), 83–91. Moll, L.C. (2014) L.S. Vygotsky and Education. New York: Routledge. Montgomery, C. (2010) Understanding the International Student Experience. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan. Montgomery, C. and McDowell, L. (2009) Social networks and the international student experience: An international community of practice?. Journal of Studies in International Education 13 (4), 455–466. Morgan, B. (2007) Poststructuralism and applied linguistics: Complementary approaches to identity and culture in ELT. In J. Cummins and C. Davison (eds) International Handbook of English Language Teaching (Vol. II; pp. 1033–1152). New York: Springer. Morita, N. (2004) Negotiating participation and identity in second language academic communities. TESOL Quarterly 38, 573–603. Morris, P. and Adamson, B. (2010) Curriculum, Schooling and Society in Hong Kong (Vol. 1). Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press. Moses, I. (1984) Supervision of higher degree students: Problem areas and possible solutions. Higher Education Research and Development 3 (2), 153–165. Moussu, L. and Liurda, E. (2008) Non-native English-speaking English language teachers: History and research. Language Teachers 41 (3), 315–348. doi: 10.1017/ S0261444808005028. Murray, G. (2008) Pop culture and language learning: Learners’ stories informing EFL. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching 2, 1–16. Murray, G. (ed.) (2014) Social Dimensions of Autonomy in Language Learning. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Murphey, T. (1998) Motivating with near peer role models. In B. Visgatis (ed.) The Proceedings of the JALT 23rd Annual International Conference on Language Teaching and Learning (JALT97– Trends and Transitions), Hamamatsu, Japan, 9–12 October 1997 (pp. 205–209). Tokyo: Japan Association for Language Teaching. Murphey, T. and Arao, H. (2001) Reported belief changes through near peer role modeling. TESL-EJ 5 (3), 1–15. Murphey, T., Falout, J., Fukuda, T. and Fukada, Y. (2014) Socio-dynamic motivating through idealizing classmates. System 45, 242–253. Murphy, L. (2008) Integrating strategy instruction into learning materials. In S. Hurd and T. Lewis (eds) Language Learning Strategies in Independent Settings (pp. 303–320). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Mystkowska-Wiertelak, A. and Pietrzykowska, A. (2011) The Ideal L2 Self and international posture in the Polish educational context. In J. Arabski and A. Wojtaszek (eds) Aspects of Culture in Second Language Acquisition and Foreign Language Learning (pp. 251–262). Berlin: Springer-Verlag. Naiman, N., Fröhlich, M., Stern, H.H. and Todesco, A. (1978) The Good Language Learner. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Neville, L. (ed.) (2007) The Personal Tutor’s Handbook. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Norton, B. (2000) Identity and Language Learning: Gender, Ethnicity and Educational Change. Harlow: Longman/Pearson Education. Norton, B. (2013) Identity and Language Learning: Extending the Conversation (2nd edn). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Norton, B. (2014) Identity and poststructuralist theory in SLA. In S. Mercer and M. Williams (eds) Multiple Perspectives on the Self in SLA (pp. 59–71). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Norton, B. (2016) Identity and language learning: Back to the future. TESOL Quarterly 50 (2), 475–479.

224 References

Norton, B. (2017) Identity and English language learners across global sites. In L. Wong and K. Hylamd (eds) Faces of English Education: Students, Teachers, and Pedagogy (pp. 13–27). Abingdon: Routledge. Norton, B. (2018) Identity and the ownership of English. In A.F. Selvi (ed.) Non-Native English-Speaking Teachers. The TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching. New York: Wiley. Norton, B. and Toohey, K. (2001) Changing perspectives on good language learners. TESOL Quarterly 35, 307–321. Norton, B. and Toohey, K. (2011) Identity, language learning, and social change. Language Teaching 44 (4), 412–446. Norton, B. and De Costa, P.I. (2018) Research tasks on identity in language learning and teaching. Language Teaching 51 (1), 90–112. Norton Peirce, B. (1995) Social identity, investment, and language learning. TESOL Quarterly 29 (1), 9–31. Nunan, D. (2003) The impact of English as a global language on educational policies and practices in the Asia-Pacific region. TESOL Quarterly 37 (4), 589–614. O’Connor, P. (2012) Islam in Hong Kong: Muslims and Everyday Life in China’s World City. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press. O’Malley, J.M. and Chamot, A.U. (1990) Learning Strategies in Second Language Acquisition. New York: Cambridge University Press. O’Neill, G.T. (2017) Heritage, heteroglossia and home: Multilingualism in Emirati families. In L. Buckingham (ed.) Language, Identity and Education on the Arabian Peninsula: Bilingual Policies in a Multilingual Context (pp. 13–38). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Ortega, L. (2009) Understanding Second Language and Acquisition. London: Hodder Education. Ortega, L. (2011) Where cognitivism and its alternatives stand. In D. Atkinson (ed.) Alternative Approaches to Second Language Acquisition (pp. 167–180). London: Routledge. Oxford, R. (1990) Language Learning Strategies: What Every Teacher should Know. New York: Newbury House/Harper and Row. Oxford, R. (1996) Why is culture important for language learning strategies? In R. Oxford (ed.) Language Learning Strategies around the World: Cross-Cultural Perspectives (preface) (pp. ix–xv). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai’i, Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center. Oxford, R. (1999) Relationship between second language learning strategies and language proficiency in the context of learner autonomy and self-regulation. Revista Canaria de Estudios Ingleses 38, 108–126. Oxford, R. (2001) Language learning strategies. In D. Nunan and R. Carter (eds) The Cambridge Guide to Teaching English to Speakers of other Languages (pp. 166–172). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Oxford, R. (2011) Teaching and Researching Language Learning Strategies. Harlow: Pearson Longman. Oxford, R. (2017) Teaching and Researching Language Learning Strategies: Self-­ Regulation in Context (2nd edn). New York: Routledge. Oxford, R. and Nyikos, M. (1989) Variables affecting choices of language learning strategies by university students. Modern Language Journal 73, 291–300. Oxford, R. and Burry-Stock, J.A. (1995) Assessing the use of language learning strategy worldwide with the ESL/EFL version of the Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL). System 23 (1), 1–47. Oxford, R. and Amerstorfer, C.M. (eds) (2018) Language Learning Strategies and Individual Learner Characteristics: Situating Strategy Use in Diverse Contexts. London: Bloomsbury.

References 

225

Oxford, R., Cho, Y., Leung, S. and Kim, H.J. (2004) Effect of the presence and difficulty of task on strategy use: An exploratory study. International Review of Applied Linguistics 42, 1–47. Oxford, R., Griffiths, C., Longhini, A., Cohen, A., Macaro, E. and Harris, V. (2014) Experts’ personal metaphors and similes about language learning strategies. System 43, 11–29. Paige, R.M., Cohen, A.D. and Shively, R.L. (2004) Assessing the impact of a strategiesbased curriculum on language and culture learning abroad. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad 10, 253–276. Paige, R.M., Cohen, A.D. and Shively, R.L. (2004) Assessing the impact of a strategiesbased curriculum on language and culture learning abroad. Frontiers: The Interdisciplinary Journal of Study Abroad 10, 253–276. Palfreyman, D. (2003) Expanding the discourse on learner development: A reply to Anita Wenden. Applied Linguistics 24 (2), 243–248. Palfreyman, D. (2006) Social context and resources for language learning. System 34 (3), 352–370. Palfreyman, D. (2011) Family, friends, and learning beyond the classroom: Social networks and social capital in language learning. In P. Benson and H. Reinders (eds) Beyond the Language Classroom. The Theory and Practice of Informal Language Learning and Teaching (pp. 17–35). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Palfreyman, D. (2012) Bringing the world into the institution: Mobile intercultural learning for staff and students. In J. Diaz-Vera (ed.) Left to My Own Devices: Learner Autonomy and Mobile-Assisted Language Learning (pp. 163–182). Bingley: Emerald. Palfreyman, D. (2014) The ecology of learner autonomy. In G. Murray (ed.) Social Dimensions of Autonomy in Language Learning (pp. 175–192). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Paltridge, B. (2013) Genre and English for specific purposes. In B. Paltridge and S. Starfield (eds) The Handbook of English for Specific Purposes (pp. 347–366). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell Publishing. Paltridge, B. (2014) Genre and second language academic writing. Language Teaching 47 (3), 303–318. Paltridge, B. and Woodrow, L. (2012) Thesis and dissertation writing: Moving beyond the text. In R. Tang (ed.) Academic Writing in a Second or Foreign Language (pp. 88–104). London: Continuum. Pan, L. and Block, D. (2011) English as a ‘global language’ in China: An investigation of learners’ and teachers’ language beliefs. System 39, 391–402. Park, J.S.Y. (2009) The Local Construction of a Global Language: Ideologies of English in South Korea. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. Parks, S. and Raymond, P.M. (2004) Strategy use by non-native English speaking students in an MBA program: Not business as usual. The Modern Language Journal 88 (3), 374–389. Pavičić Takač, V.P. (2008) Vocabulary Learning Strategies and Foreign Language Acquisition. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Paviot, L. (2015) Private tuition in Kenya and Mauritius: Policies, practices and parents’ perceptions examined from an ecological systems perspective. Doctoral dissertation, UCL Institute of Education. Peacock, N. and Harrison, N. (2009) ‘It’s so much easier to go with what’s easy’ ‘mindfulness’ and the discourse between home and international students in the United Kingdom. Journal of Studies in International Education 13 (4), 487–508. Pearson, M. and Kayrooz, C. (2004) Enabling critical reflection on research supervisory practice. International Journal for Academic Development 9 (1), 99–116. Pecorari, D. (2003) Good and original: Plagiarism and patchwriting in academic secondlanguage writing. Journal of Second Language Writing 12 (4), 317–345.

226 References

Pecorari, D. (2013) Teaching to Avoid Plagiarism: How to Promote Good Source Use. Maidenhead: Open University Press. Pemberton, R. and Cooker, L. (2012) Self-directed learning: Concepts, practice and a novel research methodology. In S. Mercer, S. Ryan and M. Williams (eds) Psychology for Language Learning: Insights from Research, Theory and Practice (pp. 203–219). New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Pérez-Granados, D.R. (2002) Normative scripts for object labeling during a play activity: Mother–child and sibling conversations in Mexican-descent families. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences 24 (2), 164–190. Petrić, B. (2015) What next for research on plagiarism? Continuing the dialogue. Journal of Second Language Writing 30, 107–108. Phakiti, A. (2003) A closer look at gender and strategy use in L2 reading. Language Learning 53 (4), 649–702. Phakiti, A. (2006) Theoretical and pedagogical issues in ESL/EFL teaching of strategic reading. University of Sydney Papers in TESOL 1, 19–50. Pham, C. (2016) Identifying sociocultural influences on high school students’ motivation to learn English in rural areas in Vietnam. New Zealand Studies in Applied Linguistics 22 (1), 5. Phillips, V. (1991) A look at learner strategy use and ESL proficiency. The CATESOL Journal 4, 57–67. Phillips, E.M. and Pugh, D.S. (2000) How to Get a PhD: A Handbook for Students and Their Supervisors (3rd edn). Maidenhead: Open University Press. Phillipson, R. (1992) Linguistic Imperialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Pilcher, N. (2011) The UK postgraduate masters dissertation: An ‘elusive chameleon’?. Teaching in Higher Education 16 (1), 29–40. Pinter, A. (2011) Children Learning Second Languages. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Pizzolato, J.E. (2006) Achieving college student possible selves: Navigating the space between commitment and achievement of long-term identity goals. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology 12 (1), 57–69. Plonsky, L. (2011) The effectiveness of second language strategy instruction: A meta‐ analysis. Language Learning 61 (4), 993–1038. Politzer, R. (1983) An exploratory study of self-reported language learning behaviors and their relation to achievement. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 6, 54–65. Porte, G. (1988) Poor language learners and their strategies for dealing with new vocabulary. ELT Journal 42 (3), 167–172. Poverjuc, O., Brooks, V. and Wray, D. (2012) Using peer feedback in a master’s programme: A multiple case study. Teaching in Higher Education 28 (2), 163–188. Purpura, J. (1999) Learner characteristics and L2 test performance. In R.L. Oxford (ed.) Language Learning Strategies in the Context of Autonomy, Synthesis of Findings from the International Invitational Conference on Learning Strategy Research (pp. 61–63). New York: Teachers College, Columbia University. Raddawi, R. (2011) Teaching critical thinking skills to Arab university students. In C. Gitsaki (ed.) Teaching and Learning in the Arab World (pp. 71–93). Bern: Peter Lang. Rahman, T. (2005) The Muslim response to English in South Asia: With special reference to inequality, intolerance, and militancy in Pakistan. Journal of Language, Identity and Education 4 (2), 119–135. Rawaf, S. and Hassounah, S. (2014) Codification and implementation of the ‘Right to Health’ in the Arab world. In B. Toebes, R. Ferguson, M.M. Markovic and O. Nnamuchi (eds) The Right to Health: A Multi-Country Study of Law, Policy and Practice (pp. 135–163). The Hague: Asser Press. Rees-Miller, J. (1993) A critical appraisal of learner training: Theoretical bases and teaching implications. TESOL Quarterly 27, 679–689.

References 

227

Reinders, H. (2011) Materials development for learning beyond the classroom. In P. Benson and H. Reinders (eds) Beyond the Language Classroom (pp. 175–189). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Reinders, H. and Benson, P. (2017) Research agenda: Language learning beyond the classroom. Language Teaching 50 (4), 561–578. Reinheimer, D. and McKenzie, K. (2011) The impact of tutoring on the academic success of undeclared students. Journal of College Reading and Learning 41 (2), 22–36. Reiss, M. (1981) Helping the unsuccessful language learner. Modern Language Journal 65 (2), 121–128. Richards, J.C. (2015) The changing face of language learning: Learning beyond the classroom. RELC Journal 46 (1), 5–22. doi: 10.1177/0033688214561621. Ridolfo, K. (2001) The Arab world: Economic progress and struggle. In R. Kugler and D. Frost (eds) The Global Century Globalization National Security Volume II (pp. 915–931). Washington, DC: National Defence University Press. Rienties, B., Luchoomun, D. and Tempelaar, D. (2014) Academic and social integration of master students: A cross-institutional comparison between Dutch and international students. Innovations in Education and Teaching International 51 (2), 130–141. Rivers, D.J. (2011) Evaluating the self and the other: Imagined intercultural contact within a native-speaker dependent foreign language context. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 35 (6), 842–852. Rivers, D.J. and Ross, A.S. (2013) Idealized English teachers: The implicit influence of race in Japan. Journal of Language, Identity and Education 12 (5), 321–339. Rose, H. (2012) Reconceptualizing strategic learning in the face of self-regulation: Throwing language learning strategies out with the bathwater. Applied Linguistics 33 (1), 92–98. Rose, H. (2015) Researching language learner strategies. In B. Paltridge and A. Phakiti (eds) Research Methods in Applied Linguistics: A Practical Resource (pp. 421–438). New York: Bloomsbury. Rose, H., Briggs, J., Boggs, J., Sergio, L. and Ivanova-Slavianskaia, N. (2018) A systematic review of language learner strategy research in the face of self-regulation. System 72, 151–163. Roumani, H.B. (2005) Maids in Arabia: The impact of maids as carers on children’s social and emotional development. Journal of Early Childhood Research 3 (2), 149–167. Rubin, J. (1975) What the ‘good language learner’ can teach us. TESOL Quarterly 9 (1), 41–51. Rubin, J. (1994) A review of second language listening comprehension research. Modern Language Journal 78 (2), 199–221. Rubin, J. (2005) The expert language: A review of good language. In K. Johnson (ed.) Expertise in Second Language Learning and Teaching (pp. 37–63). Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan. Rubin, J. (2013) Teaching language-learning strategies. In C. Chapelle (ed.) The Encyclopaedia of Applied Linguistics (pp. 1022–1026). London: Wiley-Blackwell. Russell, J., Rosenthal, D. and Thomson, G. (2010) The international student experience: Three styles of adaptation. Higher Education 60 (2), 235–249. Ryan, J. (2005) Improving teaching and learning practices for international students: Implications for curriculum, pedagogy and assessment. In J. Ryan and J. Carroll (eds) Teaching International Students: Improving Learning for All (pp. 92–100). London Routledge. Ryan, S. (2009) Self and identity in L2 motivation in Japan: The ideal L2 self and Japanese learners of English. In Z. Dörnyei and E. Ushioda (eds) Motivation, Language Identity and the L2 Self (pp. 120–143). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Ryan, S. and Mercer, S. (2011) Natural talent, natural acquisition and abroad: Learner attributions of agency in language learning. In G. Murray, T. Lamb and X. Gao (eds)

228 References

Identity, Motivation and Autonomy: Exploring their Links (pp. 160–176). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Ryan, S. and Dörnyei, Z. (2013) The long-term evolution of language motivation and the L2 self. In A. Berndt (ed.) Fremdsprachen in der Perspektive lebenslangen Lernens (pp. 89–100). Frankfurt: Peter Lang. Ryan, S. and Irie, K. (2014) Imagined and possible selves: Stories we tell ourselves about ourselves. In S. Mercer and M. Williams (eds) Multiple Perspectives on the Self in SLA (pp. 109–123). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Sadeghi, K. and Khajepasha, A.S. (2015) Thesis writing challenges for non-native MA students. Research in Post-Compulsory Education 20 (3), 357–373. Salem, N. (2006) The role of motivation, gender and language learning strategies in EFL proficiency. Unpublished MA thesis, The American University of Beirut. Sato, M. and Ballinger, S. (eds) (2016) Peer Interaction and Second Language Learning: Pedagogical Potential and Research Agenda (Vol. 45). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Schartner, A. (2015) ‘You cannot talk with all of the strangers in a pub’: A longitudinal case study of international postgraduate students’ social ties at a British university. Higher Education 69 (2), 225–241. Schartner, A. (2016) The effect of study abroad on intercultural competence: A longitudinal case study of international postgraduate students at a British university. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 37 (4), 402–418. Schartner, A. and Cho, Y. (2017) ‘Empty signifiers’ and ‘dreamy ideals’: Perceptions of the ‘international university’ among higher education students and staff at a British university. Higher Education 74 (3), 455–472. Schecter, S.R. and Bayley, R. (2002) Language as cultural practice: Mexicanos en el Norte. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Seifert, T. (2004) Understanding student motivation. Educational Research 46 (2), 137–149. Seliger, H. (1984) Processing universals in second language acquisition. In F. Eckman, L. Bell and D. Nelson (eds) Universals of Second Language Acquisition (pp. 36–47). Rowley, MA: Newbury House. Sénéchal, M. and LeFevre, J.A. (2002) Parental involvement in the development of children’s reading skill: A five‐year longitudinal study. Child Development 73 (2), 445–460. Shohamy, E. (2000) Interfaces of language testing and second language acquisition, revisited. System 28 (4), 541–553. Shrum, J.L. and Glisan, E.W. (2015) Teacher’s Handbook, Contextualized Language Instruction. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning Company. Smailes, J. and Gannon-Leary, P. (2008) Have we got it right? A case study on international student views of inclusive teaching and learning at Northumbria. International Journal of Management Education 7 (1), 51–60. Smith, R., Kuchah, K. and Lamb, M. (2018) Learner autonomy in developing countries. In A. Chik, N. Aoki and R. Smith (eds) Autonomy in Language Learning and Teaching (pp. 7–27). London: Palgrave Pivot. Sovic, S. (2013) Classroom encounters: International students’ perceptions of tutors in the creative arts. In S. Sovic and M. Blythman (eds) International Students Negotiating Higher Education: Critical Perspectives (pp. 87–104). London: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group. Spencer-Oatey, H. and Franklin, P. (2009) Intercultural Interaction: A Multidisciplinary Approach to Intercultural Communication. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Stern, H. (1975) What can we learn from the good language learner?. Canadian Modern Language Review 3 (1), 304–318. Stern, H. (1983) Fundamental Concepts of Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

References 

229

Stevenson, D.L. and Baker, D.P. (1992) Shadow education and allocation in formal schooling: Transition to university in Japan. American Journal of Sociology 97 (6), 1639–1657. Stevick, E.W. (1990) Research on what? Some terminology. The Modern Language Journal 74 (2), 143–153. Stockwell, G. (2013) Technology and motivation in English-language teaching and learning. In E. Ushioda (ed.) International Perspectives on Motivation: Language Learning Professional Challenges (pp. 156–175). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Storch, N. (2005) Collaborative writing: Product, process, and students’ reflections. Journal of Second Language Writing 14, 153–173. Storch, N. (2007) Investigating the merits of pair work on a text editing task in ESL classes. Language Teaching Research 11 (2), 143–159. doi: 10.1177/136216880707460011. Strauss, P. (2012) ‘The English is not the same’: Challenges in thesis writing for second language speakers of English. Teaching in Higher Education 17 (3), 283–293. Stupnisky, R.H., Hightower, W. and Kartoshkina, Y. (2014) Exploring and testing the predictors of new faculty success: A mixed methods study. Studies in Higher Education 39 (3), 151–177. Su, S.O. (2005) Globalization and English language education in Korea: Communicative competence in English as an international language through private sector education. Unpublished doctor of education dissertation, Arizona State University. Swan, A., Aboshiha, P. and Holliday, A. (eds) (2015) (En)countering Native-Speakerism: Global Perspectives. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Tang, S.H.K. and Yung, L.C.W. (2016) Maids or mentors? The effects of live-in foreign domestic workers on children’s educational achievement in Hong Kong. Education Economics 24 (1), 96–120. Taylor, F. (2013a) Listening to Romanian teenagers: Lessons in motivation and ELT methodology. In E. Ushioda (ed.) International Perspectives on Motivation: Language Learning and Professional Challenges (pp. 35–59). Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan. Taylor, F. (2013b) Self and Identity in Adolescent Foreign Language Learning. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Teng, L. and Zhang, L. (2016) A questionnaire-based validation of multidimensional models of self-regulated learning strategies. Modern Language Journal 100/3, 674–701. Thomas, R.M. and Brubaker, D.L. (2008) Theses and Dissertations: A Guide to Planning, Research, and Writing (2nd edn). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. Tian, M. and Lowe, J. (2009) Existentialist internationalisation and the Chinese student experience in English universities. Compare 39 (5), 659–676. Timmis, I. (2002) Native‐speaker norms and international English: A classroom view. ELT Journal 56 (3), 240–249. Ting-Toomey, S. and Chung, L.C. (2005) Understanding Intercultural Communication. Los Angeles, CA: Roxbury Publishing Co. Trendak, O. (2015) Exploring the Role of Strategic Intervention in Form-Focused Instruction. New York: Springer Press. Trice, A.G. (2007) Faculty perspectives regarding graduate international students’ isolation from host national students. International Education Journal 8 (1), 108–117. Tse, S.K., Lam, R.Y., Loh, E.K., Ip, O.K., Lam, J.W. and Chan, Y.M. (2009) Englishspeaking foreign domestic helpers and students’ English reading attainment in Hong Kong. Chinese Education and Society 42 (3), 49–65. Tseng, W., Dörnyei, Z. and Schmitt, N. (2006) A new approach to assessing strategic learning: The case of self-regulation in vocabulary acquisition. Applied Linguistics 27 (1), 78–102. Tucker, G.R. (2014) Summary and concluding observations. In K. Bailey and R. Damerow (eds) Teaching and Learning English in the Arabic-Speaking World (pp. 178–185). Abingdon: Routledge.

230 References

Turner, G. (2015) Learning to supervise: Four journeys. Innovations in Education and Teaching International 52 (1), 86–98. Tyers, A. (2015) Is Digital Education Easily Accessible to Bangladeshi Girls? British Council. See http://www.britishcouncil.org/blog/digital-education-easily-accessiblebangladeshi-girls (accessed 14 February 2018). Ueki, M. and Takeuchi, O. (2014) Forming a clearer image of the ideal L2 self: The L2 Motivational Self System and learner autonomy in a Japanese EFL context. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching 7 (3), 238–252. UKCISA (UK Council for International Student Affairs) (2018) International Student Statistics: UK Higher Education. London: UKCISA. See https://www.ukcisa.org. uk/Research--Policy/Statistics/International-student-statistics-UK-higher-education (accessed 12 March 2018). Ur, P. (2012) A Course in English Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ushioda, E. (2008) Motivation and good language learners. In C. Griffiths (ed.) Lessons from Good Language Learners (pp. 19–34). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Ushioda, E. (2011a) Language learning motivation, self and identity: Current theoretical perspectives. Computer Assisted Language Learning 24 (3), 199–210. Ushioda, E. (2011b) Motivating learners to speak as themselves. In G. Murray, X. Gao. and T. Lamb (eds) Identity, Motivation and Autonomy in Language Learning (pp. 11–24). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Ushioda, E. (ed.) (2013) International Perspectives on Motivation: Language Learning and Professional Challenges. Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan. Ushioda, E. (2014) Motivational perspectives on the self in SLA: A developmental view. In S. Mercer and M. Williams (eds) Multiple Perspectives on the Self in SLA (pp. 127–141). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Van-den-Hoven, M. (2014) The use of English for education in the Arab world: An ethnographic investigation of female Emirati pre-service teachers’ conceptions of English as a medium of instruction. In K. Bailey and R. Damerow (eds) Teaching and Learning English in the Arabic-Speaking World (pp. 65–88). Abingdon: Routledge. Van Manen, M. (1997) Researching Lived Experience: Human Science for an Action Sensitive Pedagogy (2nd edn). Ontario: The Althouse Press. Vann, R. and Abraham, R. (1990) Strategies of unsuccessful language learners. TESOL Quarterly 24 (2), 177–198. Vygotsky, L.S. (1978) Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Vygotsky, L.S. (1981) The genesis of the higher mental functions. In J.V. Wertsch (ed.) The Concept of Activity in Soviet Psychology (pp. 144–188). Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe, Inc. Waghid, Y. (2006) Reclaiming freedom and friendship through postgraduate student supervision. Teaching in Higher Education 11 (4), 427–439. Wang, D. (2012) Self-directed English language learning through watching English television drama in China. Changing English 19 (3), 339–348. Ward, C., Masgoret, A.M. and Gezentsvey, M. (2009) Investigating attitudes toward international students: Implications for social integration and international education. Social Issues and Policy Review 3, 79–102. Watkins, C., Carnell, E. and Lodge, C. (2007) Effective Learning in Classrooms. London: Sage. Watson-Gegeo, K.A. (2004) Mind, language, and epistemology. The Modern Language Journal 88 (3), 331–487. Weinstein, C.E., Husman, J. and Dierking, D.R. (2000) Self-regulation interventions with a focus on learning strategies. In M. Boekaerts, R. Pintrich and M. Zeidner (eds) Handbook of Self-Regulation (pp. 727–747). New York: Academic Press. Wenden, A. (1985) Learner strategies. TESOL Newsletter 19 (1), 4–57.

References 

231

Wenden, A. (1987) Learner Strategies in Language Learning. London: Prentice-Hall International. Wenden, A. (1998) Metacognitive knowledge and language learning. Applied Linguistics 19, 515–537. Wenden, A. and Rubin, J. (1987) Learner Strategies in Language Learning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Wenger, E. (1998) Community of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. New York: Cambridge University Press. Wenger, E., McDermott, R. and Snyder, W.M. (2002) Cultivating Communities of Practice (1st edn). Watertown, MA: Harvard Business School Press. Wertsch, J. (1998) Mind as Action. New York: Oxford University Press. White, C. (2008) Beliefs and good language learners. In C. Griffiths (ed.) Lessons from Good Language Learners (pp. 121–130). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. White, C. (2012) Emerging opportunities in new learning spaces: Teacher, learner and researcher perspectives. The TESOLANZ Journal 20, 8–21. Williams, K. and Davis, M. (2017) Referencing and Understanding Plagiarism. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Winne, P. (1995a) A metacognitive view of individual differences in self-regulated learning. Learning and Individual Differences 8, 327–353. Winne, P. (1995b) Inherent details in self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist 30, 173–187. Woodrow, L. (2005) The challenge of measuring language learning strategies. Foreign Language Annals 38, 90–100. Woolhouse, M. (2002) Supervising dissertation projects: Expectations of supervisors and students. Innovations in Education and Teaching International 39 (2), 137–144. Wray, D. and Hajar, A. (2013) A response to calls for moving away from language learning strategy research. In International Academic Forum (ed.) The European Conference on Language Learning 2013: Official Conference Proceedings (pp. 725–740). Nagoya: International Academic Forum. Wray, D. and Hajar, A. (2015) A critical review of language learning strategy research. Asian Journal of English Language and Pedagogy 3 (1), 1–19. Wray, D. and Hajar, A. (2017) Helping learners learn: Exploring strategy instruction into language learning textbooks. In H. Mashuhara, F. Mishan and B. Tomlinson (eds) Practice and Theory for Materials Development in L2 Learning (pp. 131–148). Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars. Wu, W. and Hammond, M. (2011) Challenges of university adjustment in the UK: A study of East Asian master’s degree students. Journal of Further and Higher Education 35 (3), 423–438. Yale, A.T. (2017) The personal tutor–student relationship: Student expectations and experiences of personal tutoring in higher education. Journal of Further and Higher Education 1–12. Yamamori, K., Isoda, T., Hiromori, T. and Oxford, R. (2003) Using cluster analysis to uncover L2 learner differences in strategy use, will to learn, and achievement over time. IRAL 41, 381–409. Yashima, T. (2002) Willingness to communicate in a second language: The Japanese EFL context. Modern Language Journal 86, 54–66. Yashima, T. (2009) International posture and the ideal L2 Self in the Japanese EFL context. In Z. Dörnyei and E. Ushioda (eds) Motivation, Language Identity and the L2 Self (pp. 120–143). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Yashima, T. (2013) Imagined L2 selves and motivation for intercultural communication. In M. Apple, D. Da Silva and T. Fellner (eds) Language Learning Motivation in Japan (pp. 35–53). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Yeşilbursa, A. and İpek, Ö. (2013) Why it is necessary to validate SILL? System 70, 887–893.

232 References

Ylijoki, O.H. (2001) Master’s thesis writing from a narrative approach. Studies in Higher Education 26 (1), 21–34. You, C.J. and Dörnyei, Z. (2016) Language learning motivation in China: Results of a large-scale stratified survey. Applied Linguistics 37 (4), 495–516. Yung, K.W.H. (2015) Learning English in the shadows: Understanding Chinese learners’ experiences of private tutoring. TESOL Quarterly 49 (4), 707–732. Yung, K.W.H. and Bray, M. (2017) Shadow education: Features, expansion and implications. In T.K.C. Tse and M. Lee (eds) Making Sense of Education in Post-Handover Hong Kong: Achievements and Challenges (pp. 95–111). London: Routledge. Zhang, W. (2014) The demand for shadow education in China: Mainstream teachers and power relations. Asia Pacific Journal of Education 34 (4), 436–454. Zhou, Y. and Todman, J. (2009) Patterns of adaptation of Chinese postgraduate students in the United Kingdom. Journal of Studies in International Education 13 (4), 467–486. Zimmerman, B. and Risemberg, R. (1997) Self-regulatory dimensions of academic learning and motivation. In G. Phye (ed.) Handbook of Academic Learning (pp. 105–125). San Diego, CA: Academic Press. Zuengler, J. and Miller, E. (2006) Cognitive and sociocultural perspectives: Two parallel SLA worlds. TESOL Quarterly 40 (1), 35–58. Zukow, P.G. (1989) Sibling Interaction across Cultures: Theoretical and Methodological Issues. New York: Springer-Verlag.

Index

British culture, 77, 127 British nationals, 126, 127, 143 British people, 126–128, 131, 135, 170, 171, 173

Academic writing, 105, 129–131, 136, 143, 147, 158, 162–164, 196, 200 Academic writing conventions, 162, 163 Accommodation, 85, 93, 112, 134, 144 Activity Theory, 9, 47–50, 198 Affective strategies, 19–21, 27, 28, 39, 54, 186 Affordances, xiv, 61, 75, 87, 152 Agency, xiii, 38, 41, 45, 46, 49, 54, 62, 69, 75, 83, 84, 86, 95, 116, 125, 143, 144, 163, 164, 170, 171, 186, 194, 198–200 Agentive power, 54, 85, 99, 143, 150, 178, 179, 187 Arab Gulf states, 80, 81, 85, 87, 116 Arabic, 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 22, 71, 76, 79–81, 83, 84, 90–92, 95, 96, 104, 108, 109, 130, 132, 133, 155, 166 Arab world, 2, 3, 61, 80, 109, 114, 134 Arabic-speaking students, 2, 22 Atkinson, D., 42, 43, 61 Asian students, 136, 148, 165, 183 Assessment modes, 5, 10, 89, 90, 105, 140, 142, 144, 157, 206 Summative assessment, 103,105, 114, 140, 142, 198 Formative assessment 103, 105, 115, 140, 141, 199 Dynamic assessment (DA), 192–194

Chamot, A.U., 1, 14–20, 27, 30, 38–40, 55, 197 Classmates, 4, 10, 42, 49, 52, 78, 91, 94–96, 100–102, 105, 126–128, 135–138, 151, 156, 164, 166, 167, 169, 171, 172, 192, 198, 199 China, 31, 67, 77, 78, 104, 105, 118, 139, 143, 150, 175, 187 Chinese students, xiii, 67, 100, 119, 139, 164, 167, 173 Cognition, 27, 42 Cognitive information processing, 17, 19, 43 Cognitive strategies, 18, 20, 21, 24, 38, 45, 137, 152, 160 Cohen, A., 1, 2, 14, 16, 18, 23, 25, 29– 32, 36, 38, 40, 55, 197 Community of practice (CoP), 9, 45, 50, 51, 153, 168 Compulsory strategies, 21, 35, 55–57, 94, 98, 99, 115, 116, 138, 169 Consciousness, 16, 197 Context-sensitive approach, 13, 30, 35 Contextual conditions, 4, 33, 51, 62, 119, 164, 177 Contextual factors, 8, 184 Contextual realities, 5, 33, 53, 83, 85, 123, 157 Coyle, D., 47, 51, 66 Critical thinking, 154, 163–165, 168, 170, 176, 177, 195

Benson, P., xiv, 1, 38, 42, 44, 66, 67, 88, 124, 173 Block, D., 35, 44, 75, 77, 97, 138, 141 Bray, M., 106, 107, 111, 119 Britain, 56, 73, 74, 92, 94, 112, 113, 128, 138, 142, 143, 149, 173

233

234 Index

Cultural/intercultural awareness, 127, 145 Domestic helpers, 192, 194, 195, 198–200 Donato, R., 46–48 Dörnyei, Z., 2, 13, 16, 18, 19, 21, 22–25, 27–32, 34, 35, 38, 40, 54–61, 75, 84, 92, 103, 115, 117, 118, 142, 169, 171, 197 Dynamic strategy use/ dynamic use of LLSs, 13, 24, 29, 34, 35, 45, 48, 50, 61, 123 Dynamism, 5, 9, 29, 33, 47, 147, 171, 197 EFL students, xiv, 9, 10, 65, 68, 69, 75, 85, 88, 89, 97, 100, 105–107, 113–117, 119 EFL context, xiv, 8, 10, 59, 63, 66, 67, 78, 85, 87, 89, 91, 97, 101, 104, 108, 111, 113, 115–117, 198 Electronic dictionaries, 71, 74, 94, 144, 157, 170 Ellis, R., 1, 13–16, 24 Emotional support, 155, 190, 195, 200 English as a foreign language (EFL) context, xv, 2, 8, 10, 22, 59, 63, 67, 78, 85, 87, 89, 91, 97, 101, 104, 108, 111, 113, 115–117, 198, 200 English as a medium of instruction, 109, 111, 200 English as a second language (ESL), 22, 24, 29, 196 English-speaking education system, 9, 10, 119, 124, 161, 174, 175, 192 Engeström, Y., 45, 46, 48 Exam-oriented strategies, 57, 72, 99, 104, 105, 110, 116, 123, 138, 143 Family influences, 155, 156 Financial support, 70–73, 85, 109 Flatmates, 126, 132–136, 150, 169, 205, 206 Future vision, 5, 7, 8–10, 54, 55, 58, 59, 61, 65, 66, 68–70, 75, 85, 89, 95, 107, 108, 114, 115, 117, 123–125, 129, 143, 147, 148, 174, 175, 177, 192, 194, 195, 198–200 Gao, X., 2, 18, 22, 24, 29, 30–32, 34, 36, 43, 44, 47, 50, 62, 66, 68, 70, 75,

84, 88, 100–102, 104, 114, 117, 119, 125, 140, 142, 152, 156, 197 Goal-orientation/goal-oriented, 32, 48, 51, 55, 61, 102, 197 Good Language Learner (GLL), 15, 27, 35–42, 67, 118, 172, 188, 198 Górska, W., 124, 130, 143, 158, 164, 165 Grenfell, M., 2, 14, 19, 24, 25, 31, 38, 40, 43 Griffiths, C., 2, 10, 13–17, 21, 23, 25, 29, 31–34, 37, 41, 44, 55, 188, 197, 200 Group work/teamwork, 105, 115, 141, 157, 165–169, 172, 173 Gu, M., 42, 86 Gu, P., 13, 15, 17, 18, 29, 32, 36, 39, 42, 197 Hajar, A., xiii-xv, 2, 18, 22, 34, 36, 41, 44, 47, 54, 60, 61, 106, 114, 197–200 Harris, V., 2, 24, 31, 38, 40, 43, 127, 149, 197 Harwood, N., 174, 175, 178, 179, 181, 185, 186, 188, 196 Higgins, E., 35, 56–58, 131 High-stakes examinations, 92, 95 Higher Education, xiv-3, 9, 72, 79, 80, 83, 86, 90, 127, 140, 164, 173, 194, 196 Holliday, A., 137, 139, 146 Hong Kong, 49, 62, 70, 82, 86, 88, 106, 111, 113, 119, 142, 143, 173 Host students, 148, 149, 167 Household members, 9, 65, 68, 69, 84, 85, 88, 89 Identity, 9, 18, 28, 33, 44, 45, 52–54, 58, 60, 61, 75, 76, 84, 87, 109, 110, 113–119, 123, 125, 132–134, 139, 146, 167, 170, 173, 186, 187, 194, 198 L2 identity formation/development, 18, 44, 109, 110, 113, 115 Preferred transportable identities, 115 Individual difference, 31 Indonesia/Indonesian, 71, 80, 81, 90, 104, 139, 187 Instrumentality, 35, 58, 92, 103, 110, 131, 142, 171 Instrumental-promotion focus, 56

Index  

Instrumental-prevention focus, 56 Promotion aspect of instrumentality, 35, 58, 131 Prevention aspect of instrumentality, 58, 92, 103, 110, 131, 142 International English Language Testing System (IELTS), 41, 71–73, 76, 77, 86, 104, 109, 110, 125 International students, xiv-4, 7, 9, 10, 52, 123–127, 130–132, 136, 140–146, 148–150, 154, 155, 158, 159, 161–168, 172–177, 180, 183, 187, 188, 192, 195, 196, 199, 200 Interview data/transcripts, xiv, 5–8, 23, 24, 37, 39, 49, 54, 56, 67, 69, 92, 99, 103, 112, 129, 130, 131, 135, 154, 155, 156, 159, 161–163, 166, 178, 179, 182, 187, 190 Informal social agents, 65, 72, 87 Integrativeness, 55, 56, 58, 59, 170 Intercultural awareness, 145 Intercultural friendship, 113, 169 International posture, 55, 56, 58–60, 113, 144, 145, 169, 171 Investment (educational investment and investment in language learning), 9, 52–55, 60, 70, 95, 119, 123, 198 Jackson, J., xv, 1, 2, 7, 9, 125, 133, 146 Japan/Japanese, 22, 23, 26, 51, 67, 68, 106, 137, 152, 176, 187 Kinginger, C., 124, 127, 172 Korea/Korean, 22, 54, 109, 187, 192 Lai, C., 67, 78, 86, 87 Lamb, M., 58, 70, 71, 75, 89, 90, 97, 104, 115, 116, 119, 125, 139, 170 L2 Motivational Self System, 55, 60, 61, 171 future self-guides, 155, 170 future/possible self-image, 8, 33, 58, 60, 75, 85, 87, 97, 169, 177 Ideal self, 33, 35, 55–62, 103, 118, 169, 194 Ought-to self, 35, 55, 56–58, 62, 92, 114, 115, 142, 170 Possible selves, 35, 57, 60, 83, 87, 116, 125, 138

235

Language learning motivation, xiv, 27, 61, 92, 119 Language learning strategy as a trait, 25, 26, 29 Language learning strategy as a state, 29, 61 Lantolf, J., 36, 44–48, 83, 193, 196 Larsen-Freeman, D., 40, 46 Lave, J., 50, 51, 68 Learner self-management (LSM) model, 27, 28, 32 Learning-oriented language classroom, 102 Leontiev, A.N., 47, 48 LoCastro, V., 22, 40 Longitudinal qualitative study, 2, 5, 6, 7, 10, 42, 84, 61, 62, 65, 89, 105, 113, 123, 131, 142, 173, 174 Long-term learning goals, 55, 56, 58, 60, 61, 83, 84, 90, 145, 169, 171, 179, 180, 194, 198 Macaro, E., 14, 19, 25, 32, 38, 41, 43, 55, 197 Malcolm, D., 3, 49, 90–92, 97 Mainstream English teachers’ impact, 95–99, 104, 105, 138, 139 Mainstream schooling, xiv, 10, 89, 95, 106, 108, 140, 198 Master’s degree, xiv, 1, 5, 51, 140, 142, 153, 171, 187, 192 Master’s dissertations, xiv, 10, 174–178, 180–184, 187, 188, 190–195, 200 Master’s/dissertation Supervision, xiv, 175, 190, 192, 194, 195 Dissertation proposal, 178–180, 182, 191 Supervisors' feedback, 176, 182, 184, 185, 188–191, 195, 196 Supervisory roles and expectations, 181–186 Material resources, 33, 68 McCormick, D., 46–48 Memorisation strategies, 30, 91, 99, 114, 153, 176, 198 Mercer, S., 44, 97, 125, 126, 147, 157, 171 Metacognition/ metacognitive strategies, 18–21, 24, 26–28, 32, 33, 36, 39, 40, 43, 45, 81, 99, 102, 135, 137,

236 Index

150–152, 160, 166, 178, 186, 190, 199 Mindset, 87, 96 Fixed mindset, 96 Growth mindset, 96 Module tutor, 4, 9, 153–155, 160, 168, 172, 206 Montgomery, C., 127, 133, 146, 148, 150, 153, 155, 170 Morgan, B., 36, 44 Motivational discourse, 7, 10, 110, 114, 131, 141, 147 Murphey, T., 117 Murphey, L., 38, 41 Murray, G., 42, 67, 68, 119 National interest, 55, 56, 58, 60, 61, 179, 187, 194 “Native-speakerism”, 136–140 Native speaker, non-native speaker, 15, 21, 25, 49, 56, 59, 82, 84, 112, 126, 136–139, 144–147, 155, 169, 172, 175, 199 Near peer role models (NPRMs), 117, 118 Network Advice network, 69, 73, 85, 138 Co-national network, 131, 136, 147, 148 Constraining network, 69, 138, 148 Multinational network, 131, 136, 148, 150, 153, 169 Social network, xiv, 4–7, 41, 69, 77, 88, 89, 95, 119, 123, 126, 133, 136, 147, 148, 150, 151, 169 Trust network, 69, 71, 73, 85, 101 Norton, B., 2, 18, 36, 41, 42, 44, 45, 47, 51–55, 98 O’Malley, J.M., 15, 18–20, 40, 181 Ortega, L., 25, 27, 29, 43 Oxford, R.L., 1, 2, 4, 13–25, 27–31, 34, 38–46, 48–51, 53–55, 58, 118, 153, 197 Out-of-class language learning, 51, 67, 78, 86, 116, 198 Out-of-class settings/contexts, 42, 73, 133, 160 Palfreyman, D., 2, 18, 24, 36, 43–45, 47, 65, 70, 73, 76, 79, 81, 83, 85, 87, 88, 115–117, 129, 170

Paltridge, B., 175, 177, 180, 181, 187– 189, 193, 196 Parental mediation, 69–78, 141–142, 170, 171, 183 Parks, S., 36, 47–49, 167, 173 Peers, 7, 10, 21, 41, 46, 54, 55, 66, 88, 93, 101–103, 112, 113, 117, 135, 136, 140, 141, 148–150, 156, 158, 159, 164–166, 175, 177, 178, 191, 193, 204 Peer feedback, 105, 115, 135, 136, 141 Peer pressure, 102 Performance-oriented language classroom, 102 Personal tutor (in a postgraduate programme), 165, 194, 195 Petrić, B., 162, 174, 175, 178, 179, 181, 185, 186, 196 Phakiti, A., 25, 29 Plagiarism, 125, 129, 130, 131, 143, 147, 162, 163 Politics/political, 44, 70, 75, 77, 78, 84, 88, 89, 132, 182, 193, 195, 198 Political-economic situations, 33, 36 Postgraduate students, 118, 131, 150, 173, 175, 178, 179, 181, 191, 194 Postgraduate programme, 2, 10, 105, 123, 143, 149, 158, 160, 163, 169, 175, 177, 178, 183, 187, 190, 194, 195 Pre-sessional English course/programme, 6, 10, 123–128, 131, 132, 135– 137, 139–148, 150, 153, 158, 162, 164, 166, 171, 204, 205 Pre-sessional English tutor, 129, 140, 145, 148, 153, 163 Private tutor, 10, 89, 95, 114 Private English tutoring/tuition (PT-E), 90, 107–111 Private tutoring/tuition, xiv, 106, 107, 111, 115, 119 Private schools, 10, 75, 90, 111–115, 126, 128, 140, 202 Raymond, P.M., 36, 47–49, 167, 173 Relationships with home citizens, 125–131 Religion/religious, 2, 70, 75, 76, 84, 89, 127, 131, 132, 134, 145, 198 Reinders, H., 41, 66, 67, 88 Rose, H., 2, 14, 16, 18, 22, 24, 28–32, 34, 44, 45, 47, 197, 200

Index  

Rubin, J., 13, 15, 27, 28, 31, 32, 36–42, 118, 172, 197 Ryan, S, 2, 13, 22–25, 28, 29, 31, 32, 34, 38, 59, 75, 97, 125, 126, 147, 155, 197 Schartner, A., 147–150, 173 Self-regulation, 13, 25–32, 34, 197 Self-regulatory capacity, 13, 25, 26, 29 Shadow education, xiv, 10, 89, 105–107, 111, 113–115, 123, 198, 199 Sharpling, G., 103–105, 119, 142, 156 Siblings, 9, 65, 66, 68, 69, 78–81, 89, 117, 198 SILL see Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL) (Oxford), 21–23, 34, 126 Smith, R., 91, 97, 115, 116, 119, 138 Social actors, 9, 10, 66, 68 Social agents, 5, 44, 47, 65, 68, 72, 87, 89, 92, 95, 99, 117, 148, 157, 175, 199 Social strategies, 20, 54, 81, 90, 91, 100, 135, 137, 138, 150, 151, 199 Sociocultural perspectives on language learning, 25, 30, 44, 45, 47, 61, 62, 66, 177 Situated experiences of language learners, 35, 41, 44, 48, 175, 198 Skehan, P., 19, 25, 30, 197 Social turn in language learning, 35, 42, 44, 45, 55, 66 Social interaction, 10, 45, 89, 123, 125, 128, 129, 131 Socio-dynamic perspective, 9, 35, 45, 55–57, 198 Socioeconomic status, 70, 80, 88, 111 Stern, H., 15, 16, 37, 118, 197 Strategy instruction, 40 Strategy LLS taxonomies, 18–22, 40 Strategy use, xiv-2, 7–10, 18, 21–27, 29, 30, 33–36, 38, 39, 45–48, 55, 62, 65, 66, 68, 70, 79, 82–85, 88–90, 94, 95, 99, 100, 104, 115, 116, 123, 124, 129, 138, 140, 142, 143, 147–150, 155–157, 167, 169, 170, 171, 173, 174, 177, 192, 199, 200 Strategic learning efforts, 2, 5, 7, 10, 28, 51, 62, 114, 123, 124, 147–150, 153, 157, 177, 192

237

Strategic Self-Regulation Model (S2R Model), 27, 28, 197 Strategy questionnaire, 16, 22–25, 29, 30, 35 Study abroad context, xiii, 2, 8, 61, 121, 124, 142, 174, 195, 200 Study abroad students, 133, 146, 172 Taiwan/Taiwanese, 26, 100, 106, 136, 168 Taylor, F., 91, 97, 100–102, 138, 139 Technology/ technological tools, 3–5, 45, 50, 51, 67, 68, 75–77, 86, 87, 89, 108, 112, 114, 116, 117, 119, 123, 133, 140, 140, 144, 145, 151–153, 158, 170, 195, 199 Thematic analysis, 8 Thorne, S., 45, 46 Time management, 187, 188, 190, 191, 194, 195, 200 Test of English as a foreign language (TOEFL), 24, 83, 84, 86, 95, 198 Toohey, K., 2, 18, 41, 42, 45, 47, 54 Tseng, W., 25–27, 29, 30, 34 Ushioda, E., 42, 57–59, 61, 84, 97, 115, 116, 119, 137, 142 Vietnam/Vietnamese, 98, 104, 187 Voluntary strategies, 21, 35, 55–58, 60, 67, 74, 75, 79, 94, 99, 104, 115, 150, 151, 169–172, 180, 187, 194 Vygotsky, L.S., 45–47, 193, 196 Wenden, A., 1, 13, 38, 40 Wenger, E., 50, 51, 68 Woodrow, L., 21, 22, 175, 177, 181, 187, 188, 193, 196 Writing strategies, 129–131, 143, 147, 160 Writing academic assignments, 159, 160, 172, 190 Written assignments, 105, 149, 152, 154, 157, 158, 163, 164, 170–172, 199, 206 Yashima, T., 55, 56, 58–60, 87, 113, 144, 169