Print Email Download Reference This Send to Kindle Reddit This
submit to reddit

Theories and models that have classified learners according to type

Since 1975, various theories and models have classified learners according to type, style, and strategy use, such as metacognitive, cognitive, and affective types (O’Malley, et al. ,1985) and holistic, passive, and active learners (Willing 1987). Such theories have led to the development of instruments and taxonomies used for assessing learners’ character types or strategy use, including Oxford’s (1989) Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL), Rubin and Thompson’s (1994) Metacognitive Strategy Inventory for Perceptions, O’Malley (1985) et al.’s taxonomy of language learning strategies and Entwhistle and Tait’s (1996) Revised Approaches to Studying Inventory (RASI).

However, all the existing theories were developed in the years before the pervasion of computer technology, Internet use and the globalization of knowledge. As technology is continuously changing, these growing changes bring social, cultural, economical and educational consequences on different aspects of our daily life.

Today’s learners are born and grown in the era of computer, software, and Internet as well online communication opportunities. The “Net-Gen” (Oblinger and Oblinger, 2005) students’ computer usage is very high. Ninety six percent of children ages 8 to 18, have gone online and 74% can access the Net from home and 61 percent reported daily use of Internet (Oblinger, 2005). The Net-Geners experience the world differently from the previous generation through its connection possibilities, what is sometimes called information highways or even “super highways” (Negroponte, 1995). Internet and constant connection is so integrated with their life that could be considered as a part of their collective being (being a part of a whole), as a culture.

Considering the vast difference between the Net-Geners and extant generation of language learners, it is timely for us to see whether they have similar language learning strategies as the earlier generations, and whether they use new strategies in their language learning and use, as there may be emerging strategies or trends in the strategy use or even modifications not addressed in extant theories that apply to earlier generations of learners.

1.1 Net-Generation learners

Today students live and learn things in a different setting compared to ours. Roberts (2005) puts it that Internet and new technologies influence on the Net generation's culture and education to a great extent. Computer, Internet, hand pho, and interactive games are as an ordinary daily part of Net-Generation students’ life. They are more accustomed to instant messaging (IM) than telephone or emails as their primary means of communication. “Net-Geners” find it not unusual to multitask using all three (Roberts, 2005). While previous generations got the information through print; Oblinger and Oblinger (2005) argue this generation is accustomed to digital path.

In the same way, (Dede, 2002) argues that as new millennial learners, they have “information-age” or “digital mindset”. He points out that technology and media use in the children “formative years” affects their way of learning, just like the media used by adults. With ever changing and developing technology and internet facilities, more communication possibilities such as social networking affordances are emerging daily, and more computer and internet facilities are used for educational purposes. Research findings indicate Dede (2002) remarks that each media when used for educational purposes, brings about special type of communication that encourages and possibly undercuts different learning styles and thus strategies.

The Net Geners of new millennial are immersed in internet and ICT culture. This undoubtedly provides new environments and resources for language learning and use. Moreover, their almost always connection and interaction with and through internet increasingly expose them to glocalization. Glocal, as a hybrid term coined from Global and Local, highlights the contradiction as well as interdependency between global and local forces. The balance between globalization and localization, as expressed by the concept of glocalization, is beginning to catch attention in the ESL field (e.g., Koutsogiannis &Mistikopulou, 2004). When it is applied to the Net-Generation learners, leads us to ask whether or not they might share some common global characteristics while still retaining their cultural characteristics.

1.1.1 Internet culture

The Internet provides the new millennial learners to communicate and share information easily without any limitation. It obviously affects the way we teach and learn things. In the cyberspace individuals are not limited by space or time constraints. Learners are not confined by physical classroom or geographical separation. Online social networking (OSN) users employ language, and technology to interact, cooperate, share their ideas with others, and construct a kind of “cyber community”.

Socio-cultural theories of learning put emphasis on the communication of knowledge through social practice and the opportunity to take part in different communities to learn with and from others. As put by Herrington and Oliver (2000) learning takes place as a result of participation in real-life contexts which seems to occur in digital socialization.

Negroponte (1995) considers the importance of Internet to be less about information and more about communicative facilities as an interpersonal communication medium. Social net working sites such as face book, twitter, and My space… allow the users to communicate freely without time and space limitation with almost everybody they like on the globe.

Although some argue that online socializing is unfavorable as the result of cutting short of F2 F interaction time; but from a socio-cultural perspective of learning, Chan (2006) argues time spent online is equal to development of greater skill and mastery of the socially valued cognitive tools that facilitate a new form of socialization.

From this perspective Young (2009) argues that “OSN can be called a process of enculturation” (p. 43), where users actively take part in a global online community, learn from this community and share their knowledge and cognition to the community.

1.1.2 Learning culture of Net-Geners

In a survey Roberts (2005) found that considering the technology facilities handy to Net-Geners, it is not surprising that they possibly expect technology to support their learning. Technology gives them the chance to get in touch with friends, take part in chat room talks, and share interesting videos and clips with buddies all around the world. In short, it allows interaction with people and material to a great extent.

Net-Generation learners are exposed to oceans of information on the net and it is this immersion in virtual environments that may make their learning style different from earlier generation. It is certainly beyond what the use of computers has brought us so far and for sure has multiple implications for higher education (Dede, 2005).

According to Windham (2005) although online communication is often viewed as contrary to personal interaction, it is for sure not seen as such for the Net-Geners. Internet has become a medium of interaction for them through its global reach that provides unlimited international resources and enables learners to access useful language learning resources and communicate directly with native speakers as well.

In their enumeration of online communication benefits for the learners Yang and Chen (2007) remark learners use the net to practice information application, on the other hand, they can use language in its authentic and natural form to interact with native speakers. Students can learn listening, speaking, reading and writing language in real world contexts. They can also broaden their international perspectives, learn diverse knowledge forms, and appreciate and accept different cultures

In the light of these changing dynamics, it is timely for us to examine whether Net-Geners have similar language learning strategies compared to the earlier generations, and whether there are new trends in strategies to function in emerging contexts of language learning and use. How do they deal with such large quantity of information on the Net? What are their strategies? What sort of assistance would make it easier for them to pursue these strategies? How do the strategy trends shift in the presence of various facilities? The present study is trying to investigate the learning strategies employed by Net-Geners language learners as they work through tasks, as there may be emerging strategies or trends not addressed in extant theories that apply to earlier generations of learners.

1.2 Major paradigms of learning theories

Although the history of learning theories starts from Aristotle time and his laws of association, modern interests in the human learning, consciousness, understanding human mental processes and his behavior, date back to the late 19th century (Wenden, 1987).

1.2.1 Behaviorism

Behaviorism and their views of learning based on laws of association and “directly observable data” dominated much of the history of teaching and learning for a long time. A new paradigm as put by Matlin (2002) was presented that accounted for human behavior with the publication of Skinner’s experiments “The Behavior of Organisms” in the 1930. According to a behavioral understanding it was possible to directly “observe” what a student learns and behavior could be explained without the need to consider mental processes in the learners’ mind. Behavior was viewed as caused by external stimuli (operant). Such views were founded on “stimulus-response” theory and a static view of motivation as well as laws of association.

According to the Behaviorist viewpoint, as Brown (2000) puts it, a learner is essentially passive, responding to environmental stimuli. The learner starts with a clean slate (tabula rasa) and his/her behavior is shaped based on the positive or negative reinforcement that is received as a response to the behavior (stimulus). Behaviorists define learning as “a change in behavior”.

Researches done based on a behaviorist view by Wundt and other psychologists were highly criticized for having no substantial theory; therefore further research along those lines were not any longer carried out (Matlin, 2002; Wenden, 1987).

1.2.2 Cognitivism

About 1950s, the study of learning changed from understanding outside representation of a behavior to the study of mental processing through an alternation in cognitive science as the ways of processing of information in the human mind. Learning in cognitive theory is an “active, constructive process”, and includes kind of understanding, which based on Stevenson and Palmer (1994) involves conscious effort on the part of learner to make sense of new input material by connecting it to prior knowledge and attempts to rethink one’s conception in the presence of new information. It entails the purposeful use of new material to modify, regulate and update already existing beliefs and ideas.

In cognitive theory, according to O’Malley and Chamot (1990) individuals have to “process” information and thoughts in the cognitive activity for effective and efficient learning, storing, and recalling information. There is a need for the learners to employ specific methods and strategies in order to evaluate, question and monitor their progress. O’Malley and Chamot (1990) develop their taxonomy of language learning strategies based on a cognitive viewpoint and defined learning strategies as specific ways of processing information that enhance comprehension, learning or retention of that information.

1.2.3 Constructivism

Constructivism is another paradigm of learning based on the premise that, by reflecting on their experiences, individuals construct their own understanding of the world they live in (Brown, 2000). It argues that every learner constructs knowledge based on their own internal representation of information. Constructivism defines learning as the process of adjusting learner’s mental ideas and images to new upcoming experiences. Rovali (2004) asserts that through experience and interaction with the environment, learners gradually build their own understanding of the world. Based on the constructivists point of view, the learner is an “active processor of information”, which is in sharp contrast with behaviorism viewpoint that believed the learner is just a recipient of information. A Constructivist perspective according to Brown (2000) “goes a little beyond the rationalists and cognitive psychological perspective in its emphasis on the primacy of each individual’s construction of reality” (p.11) therefore, it may count for different “legitimate” ways and methods of “knowing and describing” (Spivey, 1997).

1.2.3.1 Social Constructivism

Piaget (1972) as a constructivist emphasizes the importance of individual cognitive development and basic biological timetables (cited in Brown, 2000); suggesting that social interaction starts development at the proper moment in time. On the other hand, Brown (2000) quotes Vygotsky (1978) who is described as a "social" constructivist as maintaining that “social interaction is fundamental in cognitive development and rejecting the notion of predetermined stages” (p.11). As the nature of internet culture and networking implies kind of socialization in the social networking form and entails negotiation of meaning and interaction, the social constructivism is found to be in close proximity with the objectives and stances of this study and thus is selected as the theoretical basis for the work.

As the result of the way different paradigms considered learning, people started to think about the strategies the learners use to make their learning easier, quicker and more effective that in turn resulted into studies on the learning strategies.

1.3 Learning strategies

As mentioned earlier based on cognitive theory, learners need to use specific techniques and methods for evaluating, questioning and monitoring their mental processes as necessary conditions of effective learning. These specific techniques according to O’Malley and Chamot (1990) are called learning strategies and encompass specific ways of processing information to enhance understanding, learning or retention of that information.

Nisbet and Shucksmith (1986) point to the importance of learning strategies and maintain that effective learning to a large extent depends on the ability of learners to transmit their skills and strategies to suit new problems or situations not previously encountered. Learning strategies are important based on O’Malley and Chamot (1990) views as tools to “make explicit what otherwise may occur without the learner’s awareness or may occur inefficiently and inappropriately during the early stages of learning” (p.11). Chamot et al. (1987) establishes on Anderson model and suggests learning strategies are“…declarative knowledge that may become procedural through practice.” (p. 24). And Nisbet and Shucksmith (1986) put their emphasis on the learners’ ability to choose proper learning strategies and use them in their proper place as an important part of good learning.

1.4 Language learning strategies

All learners in general and language learners in particular consciously use language learning strategies (LLS) when performing language-related activities and think and rethink about new encountered information in the classrooms or outside. Zaitseva (1994) believes language learners encounter vast amount of new information and complex tasks in their language lessons. Employing their own LLS students they try to use the most simple and effective way of performing the tasks and resolving the language problems. (1994)

When the purpose and utility of language learning strategies are concerned, learners use language learning strategies to “facilitate and recall both linguistic and content area information” (Chamot, 1987: 71), “help comprehend learn or retain new information” (O'Malley & Chamot, 1990:1) and to “make learning easier, faster, more enjoyable, more self-directed, more effective and more transferable to new situations” (Oxford, 1990: 8).

The change of interest in learner processes in second language learning in applied linguistics rather than teachers and teaching methods over the last few decades caused the researchers to focus more on the language learners and with their ability to take full advantage of opportunities to learn. (Lessard-Clouston, 1997; oxford, 1990) This evoked different nomination, clarification and classification of language learning strategies.

As a result the domain of language learning strategy research encounters overabundance of terminologies often making the distinction between them difficult to make. (Brown, 2000; Cohen, 1995; O'Malley & Chamot, 1993)

As for the purpose of this study; it seeks to explore a few definitions by key researchers in the field of certain terms which are of direct relevance to its subject matter.

“Learning strategies are strategies that contribute to the development of the language system which the learner constructs and affects the learner directly” (Rubin, 1987: 23).

Chamot (1987) described them as “techniques, approaches, or deliberate actions that students take in order to facilitate the learning and recall of both linguistic and content area information” (p 71). In O'Malley & Chamot (1991) definition, learning strategies are “…special thoughts or behaviors that individuals use to help them comprehend, learn or retain new information” (p.1). Oxford defines them as “…specific actions taken by the learner to make learning easier, faster, more enjoyable, more self-directed, more effective and more transferable to new situations” (1990: 8).

The few last definitions of language learning strategies capture the elements and purpose of language learning strategies more successfully. As for the elements of language learning strategies, scholars explain them as : “techniques, approaches or deliberate actions” (Chamot 1987:71) and “special thoughts or behaviors” (O’Malley and Chamot 1990:1) and “specific actions” (Oxford 1990:8).

Communicative competence according to Oxford (1990) is believed to be the ultimate goal of all the language learning strategies, requiring the learners to interact by meaningful, contextualized language. They operate in general and specific ways to encourage the development of communicative competence, thus helping the learners to actively take part in authentic communication. Learning strategies also make the learners more self-directed. They are problem oriented and are tools used to solve the encountered problem, perform a task, meet an objective, or attain a goal. Learning strategies are action based because by definition they are “specific actions or behavior deployed by learners to enhance and promote their learning” (Oxford, 1990:11).

Oxford explains that reflection on language learning strategies reveals conscious efforts by learners to take control of their learning. However, after a certain amount of practice and use, like any other skill or behavior, these learning strategies can become automatic which is considered a desirable condition for language.

The definitions cited above indicate the lack of consensus among researchers about whether the specific behaviors or actions taken by the learners have to be conscious in order for them to be considered strategies. Chamot et al (1987) believe that when learners employ strategies without conscious awareness they can no longer be termed strategies. Cohen (1995) too asserts when a learner cannot identify any strategy, associated with a particular behavior i.e. it is unconscious; it is simply called a process, not a strategy.

1.4.1 Language learning strategies taxonomies and inventories

From the early studies on language learning studies, scholars and researchers have tried to develop effective means to elicit language learners’ strategies in order to make them clear for less successful learners. They have used different methods such as direct observation, semi and structured interviews and lately have developed different inventories for the same purpose. Although all have been trying to fulfill the same need; but different inventories that have been developed show in turn the perspectives and viewpoints of their developers and it is believed that each had their own demerits or shortcomings.

Besides the inventories mentioned at the beginning of this chapter, some more inventories and questionnaires have been developed by researchers in the field that proved not to be inclusive by any means, the following is a brief look at some of the most outstanding inventories:

1.4.1.1 LASSI

Among the relatively early taxonomies is that of Weinstein and her associates; their model is represented by the LASSI questionnaire (Weinstein et al., 1987; 1988). Their self-reported instrument ‘Learning and Study Strategies Inventory (LASSI)’ was designed for learning in general, not just for language learning. They claimed that LASSI enables students to understand their strengths and weaknesses, and gives them the information about areas where students may be weak and need to improve their knowledge, attitudes, beliefs and skills.

1.4.1.2 CALLA

O’Malley et al. (1985a) made a category of three language learning strategies:

1. Metacognitive strategies that includes ‘planning’, ‘monitoring’ and ‘evaluation’.

2. Cognitive strategies that operate on and process the received information to enhance learning.

3. Socio affective strategies as interaction with others or control over feeling.

Skehan (1989) finds it striking that “many of the strategies reported by Naiman et al (1978) i.e. social and affective considerations receive less attention by O’Malley et al (1985)” (p.88-9) in that they mainly focused on metacognitive strategies.

An alternative taxonomy based on explicit teaching of learning strategies has been offered by O’Malley and Chamot (1990) that focuses on teacher - student interaction as Cognitive Academic Language Learning Approach (CALLA). It is based on the premise that active learners are better learners and assumes that academic learning strategies may transfer successfully to new and different tasks and put emphasis on the development of Cognitive Academic Language Proficiency (CALP).

1.4.1.3 SILL

Oxford (1990) presents another system for the classification of language learning strategies. She distinguishes between direct LLS, "which directly involve the subject matter", i.e. the L2 or FL, and indirect LLS, which "do not directly involve the subject matter itself, but are essential to language learning nonetheless" (p. 71). Each of these broad kinds of LLS is further divided into LLS groups. Oxford outlines three main types of direct LLS, as (memory, cognitive, and compensation strategies). Oxford (1990a, 1990b) also describes three types of indirect LLS (metacognitive, affective, and social strategies). The aim of language learning strategies as put by Oxford (1990) tends to be enhancement of communicative competence.

With the emphasis Oxford puts on the affective/social aspect of the language learning strategy studies, the trend seems to enter a new process, she believes that not enough attention has been attracted toward social and affective strategies in the past and asserts that “language learning is indisputably an emotional and interpersonal process as well as a cognitive and metacognitive affair” (1990:11). She believes that most of the LLS instruments stopped with cognitive and metacognitive strategies neglecting affective and social side of the case. Thus she believes a more comprehensive scale was needed for measuring strategy use among ESL and EFL students and this was the key reason for the development of Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL).

As reflected in the recent literature the most widely used and comprehensive LLS inventory is claimed to be SILL (Hsiao and Oxford, 2002; Oxford, 1990). It takes into account the two important strategies that reportedly were ignored in extant taxonomies and inventories, i.e. social and affective strategies as indispensible parts of LLS studies.

1.4.2. More recent inventories

Researchers in the field have developed other inventories for eliciting learners’ language learning strategies such as: Metacognitive awareness inventory MAI which mostly focuses on metacognitive strategies (Schrew and Denisson, 1994).

Metacognitive Awareness on Reading Strategy Inventory MARSI (Mokhtari &Richard, 2002) focused on reading strategies. Metacognitive Reading Strategies Questionnaire MRSQ (Taraban et al, 2004) emphasized just metacognitive reading strategies, and A Reading Awareness Scale ESCOLA (Jimenez et al, 2009) which merely deals with reading strategies. As far as the literature is concerned SILL is reported to be the most comprehensive inventory for LLS to date and is widely used.

1.5 Statement of the problem

All the existing inventories which claim to elicit language learning strategies are from pre-internet era and don’t take into account the individual differences among the learners, internet culture and the differences between the Net-Geners and earlier learners of language stipulated through the above mentioned literature. More recent inventories are generally narrower and particularly focus on one of the aspects of language learning strategies. The trend for language learning may have changed through internet access, social interaction and social networking. Therefore, it seems necessary to conduct a study to speculate emerging trends in learning strategies that learners of Net-Generation may use in their learning of a second language. The study also tries to find out if there is a need to extend current inventories. So a considerable and systematic effort needs to be done to obtain empirical data on possible emerging learning strategies employed by Net-Geners that are not currently considered in existing theories.

All of these could consequently lead us to work out how these learners learn differently.

How do students of Net-Geners deal with such large quantity of information on the Net? Especially as these net based oceans of information are not in a linear fashion and need special manipulating skill to use. On the other hand, the internet access has increased social interaction through social networking, but the existing inventories do not seem to look into it. We need therefore, to conduct a study to look at the current trend(s) in the language learning strategy use and also to look at what might not have been addressed by the existing inventories especially SILL which is believed to be more comprehensive to date.

1.6 Research Questions

The study speculates new possible trends in language learning strategies that learners of Net-Geners may use in their second language learning; so the answer the following research questions all sought throughout the study.

What language learning strategies are used by tertiary ESL Net-Geners in an academic setting?

Are there emerging learning strategies that are not addressed by current inventories?

What social and ethical issues arise from the use of emergent strategies?

What new trends in language learning strategies are emerging?

How does the Internet culture and environment contribute to the emergence of learning strategies and trends?

1.7 Theoretical framework for the study

Learning in the Constructivists theory as put by Rovali (2004) is construction of world understanding through ‘experience’, ‘maturation’, and ‘interaction with the environment especially other individuals’. Brown (2000) cites Piaget as a constructivist and builds on his emphasis on the importance of individual cognitive development and basic biological timetables; Piaget claims that socially interacting with others ‘triggers’ development at the ‘proper time’. On the other hand Vygotsky (1978) quoted as a Social Constructivist by Brown (2000) maintains that “social interaction is fundamental in cognitive development and rejects the notion of predetermined stages” (p.11).

The Theoretical rationale for this study comes from the Social Constructivist theory that puts emphasis upon the importance of culture and context in forming understanding. Learning is not viewed as a purely internal process of Cognitivists, nor is it a passive shaping of behaviors as behaviorists believed. For Social Constructivists learning is a socially made construct mediated by language through social discourse (Vygotsky, 1978).

The nature of internet culture and networking implies kind of socialization in the social networking form and entails negotiation of meaning as well as interaction. Internet as a communications medium has strong potential for social interactivity. Internet based communication tools such as E-mail, Chat rooms, and online interaction give the opportunity of both rapid synchronous communication of normal speech and asynchronous interaction which may help language learners promote their language skills through practice, cooperation, collaboration as well as peer learning. It might assist learners develop their desired learning strategies through which they feel more comfortable and successful in their learning or it may lead to the emergence of new trends in language learning strategies that help learners construct their individual understanding of the learning material through interaction with background and environment knowledge including Web, that helps them in their social and cultural interaction with others based on their personal reflection to construct knowledge of the language. The schematic diagram of the theoretical framework is presented in the table 1.1

Table 1.1 Schematic diagram representing theoretical framework of the study

Social Constructivism

1.8 An overview of the research methodology

In order to answer the research questions, the following instruments and tools will be used to obtain data and elicit information regarding emerging probable language learning strategies or new trends in LLS use from the study respondents.

1.8.1 SILL

The first instrument is Oxford’s SILL (1989) administered to find out which type of strategies learners of Net-Geners prefer more in their language learning. SILL was selected from among other inventories because it was reported in the literature as the most comprehensive tool for measuring strategy use among ESL and EFL students and is one of the most widely used instruments in this capacity (Cohen and Macaro,2007; Hsiao and Oxford, 2002; Oxford, 1990).

1.8.2 Interviews

Semi-structured in depth interviews in the form of questions and answers are also intended for the study for at least 20 students to gather information in the respondents own words. The researcher can supply information about the learners’ way of thinking and feeling about the various aspects of the subject under study through probing. Interviews are used to supply a complement to the findings of SILL as a measure of establishing research triangulation.

1.8.3 Journal diaries

Student diaries constitute an interesting source of information about the students' use of strategies and their skills in language learning, so they will be used in this study to collect information about the strategies Net-Gen language learners employ to overcome the problems they may encounter at their language learning tasks and activities.

1.8.4 Open-ended questionnaire

Informants of the study will also be asked to answer some questions regarding their major source of information, their primary source of information, and the place they get or seek the information and knowledge they need in order to complete a language task or an assignment.

1.8.5 Online interaction analysis

Analysis of the students’ online interaction will be done as the fifth method of data collection for the study to help establish its reliability and validity through triangulation of the data. Online interaction is a part of their language and ICT course. The students are grouped based on their own preferences and asked to work on their tasks and assignments as groups. The group members are expected to cooperate and collaborate on their home works and assignments. Their online interactions is stored in the UPM, FBMK servers and can be accessed by their lecturers and the researcher for the analysis and tracking of the probable emergent learning strategies or trends in the strategy use.

1.9 Scope of the study

A sample of 107 undergraduate ESL students enrolled in Semesters 3 & 5 of a BA English program in UPM, FBMK is selected for the study. English is used as their instruction medium and are engaged in learning the language. They are all around 21 years old and therefore considered as members of Net-Gen students. They had been exposed to computer and net for their studies from their first year of secondary school and all had satisfactory English score in their SPM examination. They are also required to work on online language tasks/activities in an online environment as part of their course.

1.10 Significance and focus of the study

In the current study, learning a second language is viewed as a complex conscious cognitive activity. As such, the focus is on the conscious mental activities that Net- Generation second language learners employ to store and retrieve declarative and procedural knowledge. The actions, behaviors and thoughts deliberately employed by learners until the time these activities become automatic and used without awareness are viewed as strategies within this study. Finding from the study can then suggest what else to look for among Net-Geners language students and Net-Geners from different disciplines.

1.11 Operational terms defined

1. Net-Geners

Today's students born and grown at the age of computer and Internet prevalence , described as having an information-age mind set (Dede, 2002). They are almost always connected via new devices and social networking interfaces and are being Millennial or members of the Net- Generation.

2. Learning style

Learning styles are “enduring tendencies or preferences within an individual or general characteristic of intellectual functioning…” (Brown, 2000: 113).

3. Learning strategies

Learning strategies as explained by Oxford (1990) are defined as “specific actions taken by the learners to make learning easier, faster, more enjoyable, more self-directed, more efficient and more transferable to a new situation” (p.11).

4. Process

Kind of stable constant learning behavior that is totally unconscious, in that the learner is not able to identify any associated learning strategies (Cohen, 1995).

5. Glocalization

A hybrid term coined from Global and Local, highlighting the contradiction as well as interdependency between global and local forces and refers to a balance between globalization and localization.

6. Trend

According to Merriam Webster online dictionary, Trend is defined as a prevailing tendency, inclination or movement over time toward a detectable change.

Print Email Download Reference This Send to Kindle Reddit This

Share This Essay

To share this essay on Reddit, Facebook, Twitter, or Google+ just click on the buttons below:

Request Removal

If you are the original writer of this essay and no longer wish to have the essay published on the UK Essays website then please click on the link below to request removal:

Request the removal of this essay.


More from UK Essays