Learning Strategies

Aim of the subject

During recent times, there has been a marked shift in the focus of language instruction, towards the
needs of individual learners. Inherent to this shift in focus is parallel shift in the responsibilities of
both teacher and students in the foreign language classroom. No longer does the teacher act as the
locus of all instruction, controlling every aspect of the learning process. Rather, the learners
themselves, more than ever, are sharing the responsibility for successful language acquisition and,
in doing so, are becoming theoretically less dependent on the language teacher for meeting their
own individual language learning needs. By giving the students more responsibility for their own
language development, language programs are inviting the learners to become more autonomous,
to diagnose some of their own learning strengths and weaknesses, and to self-direct the process of
language development. In other words, learners have been encouraged to 'learn how to learn' and
'learn how to use' a foreign language in a variety of instructional programs around the world.

As we can see from the above paragraph, one of the many consequences of the communicative
approach in language teaching and learning was the enhancement of the role of the learner in the
language learning process. The old belief that the teacher teaches and that the learners learn what
they are taught is no longer valid; this we know not only from direct observation but also from
research, which has repeatedly proved that learners regularly don't learn what teachers teach. This
has contributed to focusing our attention from the teacher to the learner, from the past focus on the
improvement of teaching to an increased concern for how learners go about their learning tasks and
how the process of learning takes place.

At the same time, the traditional curriculum distinction between content and methodology is not so
pronounced and the emphasis on curricular contents (what the students learn) has moved on to
the process of learning and competences (how and why they learn), which is part of methodology.
Thus content and methodology not only play a different role in today's teaching and learning
situations, but the process of language learning has become part of the content of learning. This
focus on learning and on the learner makes classroom dynamics and curriculum implementation
very different from the past. The whole process is much more learner-centred and the students
become more responsible for their learning than they were in the past. This means that students
need to be more conscious about their individual learning processes and the strategies that they
use in each learning act; that is, they are encouraged to learn how to learn in order to know how
they learn more efficiently. More recent developments such as CLIL have further contributed to this
idea. One of the slogans used in CLIL and in multilingual education is 'Using languages to learn,
and learning to use languages' (Marsh, D. 1998).

However, this awareness about learning processes cannot be taken for granted. It may be latent
and at times it may be subconscious; either way, it needs training. Awareness is not enough;
learners need awareness with a purpose. The learners' co-responsibility in the learning process
implies reflecting and learning about themselves and knowing how to act autonomously as learners
in each teaching and learning situation. It is this complex relationship between strategy and
autonomy, learning to learn and learner's responsibility in the learning process, which is crucial in
this subject.

This subject is concerned with Learning Strategies (LS). It focuses on the application of LS to second
language learning/acquisition (we will be using these terms interchangeably in this subject) by
students learning English (or any other language) as a second or foreign language. We will start off
by providing an overview of the major elements involved in a cognitive view of language learning,
with specific reference to Anderson's distinction between procedural and declarative knowledge
(Chapter 1). Once we have provided a solid background of learning theory, we will consider exactly
how learning strategies fit into a cognitive view of language learning in Chapter 2. The final part of
the subject (Chapter 3) will be devoted to a thorough consideration of how LS research can or should
influence our classroom practice. It is in this section that we will be examining the still very
fashionable notion of strategy instruction (also known as 'learner training'), and how it can be put
into practice in the EFL classroom.

In order to put the theoretical part of the subject, which is to be covered in Chapters 1 and 2, into a
classroom-friendly perspective, we would like you to do the preliminary task below. As a practising
teacher you may well be familiar with activities of the type below, but if you have never taught before,
this activity will give you a clearer idea of where this subject is heading.

Preliminary reflective task

Look at the following activity, in which learners are asked to read and match sentences, and then
answer question 1 below.

Figure 1: From Madrid, D. & McLaren, N. (1997): Making Progress 3, Workbook, (p. 5).

1. What is the point of doing an exercise of this type with EFL students i.e. what are the objectives
of the activity?

Now look at the activity below. Learners need to reflect on what activities in the coursebook they
find most useful to learn the language, and then circle a number depending on whether this particular
activity helps them learn nothing (0), to a lot (4). Now answer question 2 below.
 nothing a lot

1. Listening comprehension exercises .............................. 0 1 2 3 4

2. Speaking activities ..................................................... 0 1 2 3 4

3. Reading texts ............................................................ 0 1 2 3 4

4. Writing sentences and texts ........................................ 0 1 2 3 4

5. Grammar activities ..................................................... 0 1 2 3 4

6. Vocabulary exercises .................................................. 0 1 2 3 4

7. Phonetic activities ...................................................... 0 1 2 3 4

8. Acting out dialogues .................................................. 0 1 2 3 4

9. Playing games ........................................................... 0 1 2 3 4

10. Listening and singing songs ...................................... 0 1 2 3 4

11. Doing projects ......................................................... 0 1 2 3 4

12. Working in pairs ...................................................... 0 1 2 3 4

Figure 2: From Madrid, D. & McLaren, N. (1997): Making Progress 1, Workbook, (p. 6).

2. What do learners learn by doing an activity such as this? What do teachers learn by getting their
learners to do an activity like this?

To see the comments on this task you will find the “Assessment” section of the subject (virtual
campus).
Chapter 1 .- A cognitive theory of learning
1.1. Introduction

Linguistic theories have long assumed that language is learnt separately from other cognitive skills,
according to different principles. Language and linguistic processes are viewed as interacting with
cognition but they maintain a separate identity. One of the principal cognitive processes that has not
been taken into account in these theories is learning strategies. But more recently, researchers
have turned away from linguistic based theories towards the field of cognitive psychology in their
attempts to explain the processes involved in SLA.

1.2. Anderson's information processing

model

Cognitive approaches to SLA consider that language is no longer seen as a unique and separate
form of knowledge but as a complex cognitive skill that can be described within the context of how
people acquire and store knowledge in general. O'Malley and Chamot (1990) argued that SLA
cannot be fully understood without taking into account the interaction between language and
cognition in the storage of information in memory and in the acquisition of new information.

For this reason, O'Malley and Chamot (1990) offered John Anderson's information processing
model of cognitive skill learning(1980, 1983, 1985) as a comprehensive model for examining
language learning from a cognitive perspective. They offered five reasons for the suitability of
Anderson's model (1990:19):

1. Anderson's work integrates numerous concepts that give the theory generality.
2. It covers a broad range of behaviour other than theories: comprehension and production of oral
and written texts, problem solving, etc.
3. The theory distinguishes between factual knowledge and procedural skills.
4.It incorporates strategic processing.
5. It has been continually updated, expanded and revised.

The role of LS in the acquisition of information can be understood by reference to the information
processing framework for learning. The purpose of this framework is to explain how information is
stored in the memory and how new information is acquired. In its simplest form, the framework
suggests that information is stored in two distinct ways, either in short-term memory or long-term
memory. What exactly is the difference between these two types of memory?
1.2.1. The Short-Term Memory (STM)

If we lose our short term memory, as a result of a head injury in a motorbike accident, we can tell
the doctor details about, for example, our infancy, but if asked where we have left our motorbike, we
might reply: 'What motorbike are you talking about?' In this case, the accident has damaged our
short term memory (STM).

STM is glossed by the Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics as
follows:

STM refers to that part of the memory where information which is received is stored for short periods
of time while it is being analysed and interpreted. Once the message or information in an utterance
is understood the data may become part of permanent memory (or long-term memory). The
utterance itself is now no longer needed and may fade from STM.
(1992: 226)

STM is also sometimes referred to as working memory, although working memory can be
differentiated from STM:

The term 'working memory' is used to refer to whatever one has in mind at any particular time...
(Williams and Burden 1997: 16)

For most people, working memory has a very limited capacity, being able to store on average only
about seven items, or to hold things in mind for about 30 seconds (ibid.).

Sometimes, of course, the contents of the STM are passed on to the Long Term Memory (LTM)
where they are structured. In order to pass into the long term memory, information must first be
processed and structured in the short term memory so that it 'makes sense' to the student. The
process of structuring new information takes time; but it is time well spent, because students find it
almost impossible to remember something that they do not properly understand. This vital process
of structuring (or giving meaning) to new information is demanding as well as time-consuming, so
we must try to give our students as much help as we can.

Learning activities that involve students in using the new ideas will aid clarification. The search for
structure also explains why many learners appreciate being given summaries and well-organised
notes. We will be examining how teachers can promote the use of memory strategies in more depth
later in the subject.

1.2.2. The Long-Term Memory (LTM)

Once the STM has 'made sense' of new information, it is then passed into the Long Term Memory
(LTM) where, unless it is subsequently used or recalled in some other way, it is again eventually
forgotten. Forgetting and remembering, then, are not under direct conscious control; they are
automatic. There is only one way to ensure that something is remembered:
through repetitionand practice. Thus a key concept in moving items to LTM involves the strategy
of rehearsal. As teachers, we must make sure that any knowledge we want our students to
remember is recalled and used frequently. Watson (1914), the father of the behaviourist school of
psychology developed by Skinner, admitted this when he said that remembering depended on
'frequency and occurrence'.

According to Weinstein and Mayer (1986), in this cognitive psychology paradigm, new information
is acquired through a four-stage encoding process
involving selection, acquisition, construction and integration (O'Malley and Chamot 1990: 17-
18).

Let us look at each of these four stages in more detail:

- Selection: in this stage learners focus on specific information of interest in the environment and
transfer that information into working memory.

- Acquisition: later, learners actively transfer information from working memory into long-term-
memory for permanent storage.

- Construction: thirdly, learners build internal connections between ideas contained in working
memory; this information can be used to enrich the learner's understanding or retention of the new
ideas.

- Integration: in this final process, the learner searches for prior knowledge in long-term memory
and transfers this knowledge to working memory.

Selection and acquisition determine how much is learned,

whereas construction and integration determine what is learned and how it is organized.

Nevertheless, other cognitive models of learning have proposed a slightly different sequence, for
example Madrid et al., 1998:

- selecting information from the environment,

- organizing the information,

- relating it to what we already know,

- retaining what we consider to be important,

- using the information in appropriate contexts and situations,

- reflecting on the success of the learning efforts and evaluating the effectiveness of results.

1.2.3. Representing knowledge in memory

The representation of knowledge in memory is a key concept in Anderson's theory. He makes an

important distinction between 'static' information or knowing about something, which is referred to
as declarative knowledge and 'dynamic' information or knowing how to do something, which he
terms procedural knowledge. Let us look a little more closely at each of these types of knowledge
in turn.

Declarative (or factual) knowledge is stored in long term memory in the form of cognitive units of
meaning such as:

a) Propositional networks: These are associations of meaning between important elements in a

sentence. The Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics describes the
propositional network behind the proposition The woman gave the man an expensive ring, which
contained a large ruby, as follows:
There was a woman.
There was a man.
There was a ring.
The ring was expensive.
The ring contained a ruby.
The ruby was large.
The woman gave the ring to the man.
(1992: 297)

The basic unit of a propositional network is the node (similar to what people call ideas) and the
connection between nodes are links.

b) Schema: a larger unit of interconnected features which defines a concept. Schemata (plural of
'schema') may be composed of propositional networks. Their principal value is that they facilitate
making inferences about concepts.

Procedural knowledge refers to the ability to understand and generate language, or to apply our
knowledge of rules to solve a problem, or to carry out a particular skill, such as, for example, riding
a bicycle or playing the piano. In other words, it refers to the processes involved in learning how to
do something successfully. In terms of language acquisition, procedural knowledge is simply seen
as our ability to understand and produce language (see Valcárcel, Coyle and Verdú, 1996). The
representation of procedural knowledge in memory is a key issue in cognitive theory and is
contained in what Anderson refers to as production systems.

Reflective task 1.1.

- Briefly, what is the difference between STM and LTM?

- Give two teaching recommendations to favour the development of LTM.

- What is the difference between declarative and procedural knowledge?

- What are the components of declarative knowledge?

- What kind of knowledge do we develop when we teach grammar rules?

- What type of knowledge does the leaner develop when (s)he writes a composition? Why?

To see the comments on this task you will find the “Assessment” section of the subject (virtual
campus).
1.3. Cognitive theory applied to second
language acquisition

The distinction made by Anderson between declarative and procedural knowledge has obvious
implications for both the theory and practice of SLA. Faerch and Kasper (1985, 1987) were the first
to apply this concept to the field of SLA. They stated that the learner's declarative
knowledge consisted of internalized interlanguage rules and memorized chunks of language
whereas procedural knowledge were those strategies and procedures used by the learner to
process L2 information for acquisition and use. According to Faerch and Kasper, procedural
knowledge can be divided into five separate components (O'Malley and Chamot 1990:58-59):

1) Reception procedures, such as the use of inferencing to extrapolate meaning.

2) Production procedures, such as planning and monitoring speech production.

3) Conversational procedures, such as following linguistic principles that produce coherent texts.

4) Communication strategies, which are intended to solve problems in speech comprehension.

5) Learning procedures, such as the development of interlanguage knowledge through hypothesis

formation and testing.

As Faerch and Kasper suggest, most declarative knowledge is activated in a conscious manner,
while procedural knowledge tends to be more automatic and is activated without awareness, except
when the language user has interruptions in communication.

1.3.1. Conscious awareness

As Valcárcel et al. (1996: 85) pointed out, the cognitive theory of skill learning differs somewhat
from other linguistic theories as regards the concept of conscious awareness in the language
learning process. Krashen (1981, 1985), for example, as we have already seen in previous
subjects, distinguishes 'acquired' (unconscious) knowledge from 'learnt' (conscious) knowledge.
Although Krashen's distinction has now largely been discredited, the entire area of consciousness,
as we saw in the subject Approaches to Language, is still fraught with debate.

In cognitive theory, the learner is said to be consciously aware of the formal rules of the L2 during
the early stages of SLA, and he/she becomes increasingly less aware of them as proficiency is
achieved. Achieving proficiency, in a skills model of learning, basically involves automising language
forms, thus developing procedural knowledge, and relying less on declarative knowledge.

Ellis made this point in the following way:

Learning a language, like any other type of skill learning (for example, driving car or playing tennis),
involves the development of procedures that transform declarative knowledge into a form that makes
for easy and efficient performance [i.e. procedural knowledge].
(1994: 388)

From the advent of communicative approaches to teaching in the early 1970s, it became axiomatic
that simply knowing 'about' the language is insufficient if what the learner wants is to be able to use
the language for successful communication. To use the L2 functionally the learner must have
acquired the necessary procedural knowledge, which, in Anderson's terms, can only be mastered
slowly and after a great deal of practice:

We speak the learned language (i.e. the second language) by using general rule-following
procedures applied to the rules we have learned, rather than speaking directly, as we do in our
native language. Not surprisingly, applying this knowledge is a much slower and more painful
process than applying the procedurally encoded knowledge of our own language.
(1980: 224, in Ellis 1994: 389)

1.3.2. Stages of skill acquisition

The important consideration that follows from the distinction between declarative and procedural
knowledge is exactly how the mind proceeds from rule-bound declarative knowledge used in
performance of a complex skill to the more automatic proceduralized stage. Anderson (1976,
1980, 1983) described three stages in this process of skill acquisition: the cognitive,
the associative and the autonomous stages (see O'Malley and Chamot 1990:25-27). We will
now look at each of these stages in turn.

a) Cognitive stage

Anderson describes the acquisition of a complex skill in terms of the proceduralization of declarative
knowledge (as we saw above). Applying this to SLA, O'Malley and Chamot suggested that during
the cognitive stage the L2 learner engages in conscious and intensive mental activity in order to
make sense of the new language. In natural settings this would involve using the language
functionally although the learner may not fully understand the underlying structures of the
expressions used. In classroom settings, the learner would pay deliberate attention to the formal
structure of the language or to the use of chunks and formulae in communicative activities. The
principal characteristic of this first stage in the learning process is the concentrated attention paid to
the new language forms in order to find meaning.

b) Associative stage

In the associative stage, learners begin to use their previously acquired knowledge procedurally.
The L2 is used for communicative purposes although errors can still be detected in learner speech.
The learner continues, however, to have difficulty in using new L2 information as attention in this
second stage, now directed at improving the language skill, which reduces the amount of conscious
effort available for transforming new input into declarative knowledge. This fits in well with the notion
of limited capacity processing, and the difficulties learners experience in trying to focus on both
meaning and form simultaneously, which we examined in the subjects Approaches to
Language and Tasks and Projects.

c) Autonomous stage

In the third and final autonomous stage, performance in the L2 closely resembles that of a native
speaker. The learner uses the L2 fluently and without reference to linguistic rules. Language
processing has become autonomous (or automised) and acquisition of the skill has been
accomplished. However, as pointed out in the Anderson quote in the previous section, complete
mastery of the L2 is seen as being extremely difficult. According to Ellis:

Anderson sees the difference between L1 and foreign language learning as merely a matter of the
stage reached. Whereas L1 learners almost invariably reach the autonomous stage, foreign
language learners typically only reach the associative stage. Thus, although foreign language
learners achieve a fair degree of proceduralization through practice, and can use L2 rules without
awareness, they do not reach full autonomy. (1994: 389)
Reflective task 1.2.

Look at the following activity taken from the Collins Cobuild English Course (1988: 34). Which of
Anderson's three stages (cognitive, associative or autonomous) do you think it is most related to?
1.4. Shortcomings of Anderson's cognitive theory

1.4.1. A unitary process for learning complex skills?

A problem which has been identified with Anderson's theory is the insistence on a single process to
explain all forms of learning complex cognitive skills. As Rumelhart and Norman (1978) suggest, the
learning of a complex cognitive skill may entail other processes. They distinguish between three
stages:

a) Restructuring: the development of novel structures for interpreting new information and for
reorganizing existing knowledge (this process is examined in some detail in the subject Approaches
to Language).

b) Accretion: gradual accumulation of new information by matching new data to existing schemata.

c) Tuning: this acts to refine existing knowledge by modifying available knowledge structures.

However, it is worth considering whether restructuring, accretion and tuning represent unique forms
of learning or can be represented through the stages described by Anderson (cognitive, associative,
autonomous).

1.4.2. Interlanguage as declarative knowledge

As O'Malley and Chamot pointed out (1990:27-31), a further problem with Anderson's theory lies in
the assumption that declarative knowledge for SLA consists essentially of the formal rules of the
language. To accept Anderson's theory it is necessary to extend his definition of declarative
knowledge to include not only the grammatical rules of the L2, which may or may not be taught
explicitly in the second language classroom, but also those highly individual 'rules' which learners
produce as a result of their own learning experience which reflect the imperfect and temporary form
of their interlanguage.

1.4.3. Efficiency in the instructional approach

The fact that skill acquisition begins with the learning of the formal rules of the language has also
been criticized on the grounds that it could lead to an inefficient and tiresome teaching methodology
(see Gagne 1985; Valcárcel et al. 1996:84-85). In the acquisition of an L2, learners frequently prefer
to become actively involved in performing the skill as early as possible in the learning process,
whether they are familiar with the formal rules of the language or not. A classroom approach which
focused solely on learning grammatical rules before allowing the learner to attempt to perform the
skill would soon prove frustrating.

A more effective method for learning a complex skill would be to model the performance required
by the learner while providing opportunities for practising the components of the skill until they
become automatic. In the communicative language classroom, one approach would be for the
teacher to model the use of the L2 and provide feedback to encourage meaningful communication.
The idea of skilled modelling is certainly part of an approach such as Community Language Learning
(CLL). However, the principle of automising skills through practice in the classroom is also
problematic, as we saw in the critique of PPP in the subject Tasks and Projects.

Faerch and Kasper (1985) also proposed learning through imitation as one of the basic processes
in the acquisition and automatization of a second language. They suggest that unanalysed chunks
of language acquired through imitation are stored in short term memory where they are gradually
combined and proceduralized for automatic use. Perhaps the key point here for the classroom
teacher is that these unanalysed chunks need to be meaningful (i.e. serve a clear communicative
function, even though the individual linguistic elements that make up the utterance may not be fully
understood) and useful for the learner. Otherwise we fall back into the trap of approaches such as
Audiolingualism, where drills were neither communicative nor meaningful for learners.

A second process described in Faerch and Kaspar's (1985) work hypothesis

formation and testing: learners form hypotheses based on their previous L1 or L2 knowledge and
test them out in comparison with L2 input acquired receptively, productively, metalingually or
interactionally (see also Valcárcel et al. 1996). Learners are said to test hypotheses in at least one
of four ways (O'Malley and Chamot, 1990:33):

1. Receptively, by comparing hypotheses to second language input.

2. Productively, by using the hypothesis to generate language and assessing the feedback.

3. Metalingually, by consulting a native speaker or text.

4. Interactionally, by making an intentional error to elicit a repair from a native speaker.

Reflective task 1.3.

Look at the student/teacher utterances below. Match each utterance to one of the
hypothesis-testing categories above (either receptive, productive,
metalingual or interactional).

a) Student to teacher: "When must I say arrive in, and when must I say arrive at?"

b) Student: "When she arrived to Rome... (pause)"

Teacher: "Not 'arrive to'. What's the correct preposition?"

c) Teacher (telling a story): "She arrived at the station early"

Student (thinks to herself): "But don't we say arrive in...?"

To see the comments on this task you will find the “Assessment” section of the
subject (virtual campus).

1.5. Conclusion
In this chapter we have spent some time looking at Anderson's cognitive skill-acquisition model of
language learning, and more specifically, at his distinction between declarative and procedural
knowledge. At this point you may well be asking yourself exactly what this has to do with learning
strategies and the classroom. In fact, as we have seen in this chapter, Anderson did not distinguish
LS from other cognitive processes, perhaps because his theory focused not only on LS but
fundamentally on describing how information is stored and retrieved. In Anderson's theory,
strategies can be represented the same way as any other complex skill and described as a set of
actions that are fine-tuned until they become procedural knowledge.

This is our point of departure for the next chapter, in which we look more specifically at exactly what
learning strategies are, and how they relate to the theoretical framework of learning as a cognitive
skill, which we have outlined in detail in this chapter.

It is worth bearing in mind, however, that the application of cognitive theory to SLA research is a
relatively recent development and must be evaluated as such. Anderson's theory provided an
interesting framework for the description of SLA as the acquisition of a complex cognitive skill and
offered insights into, for example, the role played by learning strategies. However, assumptions
made about the language learning process still require much empirical investigation if cognitive
theory is to provide a valid alternative to the approaches of linguistic-based theories.