Applied Research Language Research

Adult English Learners Learning Strategies in an English as a Second Language Setting

Bryan McClellan

Abstract Adult English as a Second Language (ESL) learners come to the United States from a variety of countries. Generally they have different learning strategies that reflect their English as a foreign language education and their personal experiences with the language. This study sought to investigate if adult ESL learners continue or change their learning strategies once they come to the United States. Ten participants were invited to an interview and categorized into two groups: students attending the Intensive English Program at the Monterey Institute of International Studies and graduate students on campus. Data sources included a series of semistructured interviews, learner language histories, and other relevant artifacts of learning strategies such as flash cards or journals. Data were analyzed using Oxfords (2011) strategic self-regulated model to identify participants learning strategies as well as the metastrategies and metaknowledge behind them. Keywords: learning strategies, strategic self-regulated model, multiple learning environments, ESL learners, Intercultural Communication

Learning strategies are the special thoughts or behaviors that individuals use to help comprehend, learn or retain new information (OMalley & Chamot 1990, p. 1). To give some examples, learning strategies can be activities like: using flashcards to master vocabulary, commenting out loud when reading main points in a text, keeping a dairy to practice writing, arranging to live with a host family to increase the opportunities to learn the language, or thinking positive thoughts to push oneself to speak even when someone feels shy or self-conscious their ability. Second language acquisition (SLA) researchers began studying learning strategies to understand the practices of the successful language learner. Because learning strategies are thoughts and behaviors and given that if key learning strategies can be identified, these strategies can be consequently implemented into classroom instruction. Learners with similar learning environments often show different learning outcomes and learning strategies that may explain these learning outcomes. How one learner acquires learning strategies may be the result of only individual creativity and motivation. Additionally, they may also be dependent on the learning environment in which the learner develops these learning strategies and in order meet language learning expectations. For example, a learner may adapt learning strategies to take advantage of available linguistic resources such media in the second language or opportunities to speak with native speakers of the second language. Another example to highlight meeting learning language expectations could be that a learner in a high school may not be expected to speak in class and so she hardly develops learning strategies for speaking. If a learner changes

environments, she may continue to use some learning strategies while modifying or adopting new ones. There is a large body of literature that examines how learning strategies are learnt, used, and taught in classrooms in specific contexts (e.g., Chan, 2005; Huang, 2007; Iwai, 2006; Vandergrift & Tafaghadatari, 2010; Zhang, Gu, & Hu, 2008). For example, Huang (2007) studied the metacognitive learning strategies students used in writing for an English for business class at a technical college in Taiwan. In another study, Vandergrift and Tafaghadatari (2010) studied the listening learning strategies of students studying French as a foreign language. While some SLA research investigates how these learning strategies can be taught in the classroom, there is a need to study the process of acquisition and adaption of learning strategies by individuals in multiple learning contexts. Examples of these include how language learners apply learning strategies from English as a foreign language class to an immersion environment, and how language learners use their learning strategies once they have left an academic setting. It is important to remember that learners in an ESL classroom come from different backgrounds and may have different learning strategies. Learners with similar backgrounds may also use different learning strategies based on their personal experiences. These learning strategies may be a critical factor in determining how two students with similar backgrounds and who receive the same instruction may perform differently. Given this reality, this study investigated participants learning strategies by exploring the following research questions:

1.

How did participants study English prior to their arrival to the US? Did they have any particular learning strategies?

2.

How do they study here in the United States? Are there any learning strategies that they have implemented?

3.

Have they modified or changed the ways they study English?

Literature Review Perspectives oon Learning Strategies The study of learning strategies began with Rubins (1975) investigation about how good language learners study in foreign language classrooms and which practices were applied to most efficiently learn the language. Similarly, Stern (1975) suggested that a model of good language learning could be constructed by looking at the distinct strategies used by these learners. Elaborating on language strategies, Oxford (1990) expanded her definition of learning strategies to include the often conscious steps or behaviors used by language learners to enhance the acquisition, storage, retention, recall, and use of new information (p. 312). Importantly, SLA research on learning strategies has been wide reaching in scope and in taxonomy. Two of the most important learning strategies taxonomies were those presented by Oxford (1990) and OMalley and Chamot (1990). On one hand, Oxford (1990) organized learning strategies into (a) primary categories that comprised of memorization, cognitive and compensation strategies; and (b) secondary categories which included social, metacognitive, and affective strategies. On the other hand, OMalley and Chamot (1990) organized strategies into the

following categories: metacognitive, cognitive, and social / affective. Notably, these taxonomies advanced the discussion about learning strategies by questioning not only the projected behaviors but also the internal process(es) that affect learning. More recently, the focus of learning strategies has shifted to: (a) identifying these learning strategies in terms of their external manifestations as behaviors and patterns of actions, and (b) in relation to their internal cognitive processes that facilitate greater learning and memorization. Drnyei (2005), for example, has suggested that learning strategies shift to self-regulation in order to account for the external behaviors of learning strategies and internal psychological processes that construct them. In fact, Zimmerman (1990) used Vygotskys term self-regulation to discuss learning strategies in educational psychology, while Drnyei (2005) appropriated the self-regulation construct in conjunction with the construct of learning strategies in SLA. Zimmerman (1990) defined self-regulatory learning strategies as actions and processes directed at acquisition of information or skills that involve agency, purpose, and instrumentality perceptions by learners (p. 5). Crucially, the shift towards the notion of self-regulatory learning strategies has expanded the discourse on learning strategies in hopes of better understanding the cognitive aspects of these strategies. Strategic Self-Regulated (S2R) Model In the past 20 years, there has been increasing interest by SLA researchers in socio-constructivism and several constructs have been modified to bridge theoretical differences between social and constructivist research. For example, Oxford (2011) has adopted the new definition of self-regulation learning strategies

discussed earlier and has attempted to align the construct closer to the socioconstructivist theories by linking it to Vygotskys Sociocultural Theory (1978), which examines how the learning encountered by the learner and through his interactions are mediated by the cultural context. Oxford calls her adaption the strategic self-regulated (S2R) model. In this model, Oxford revised her original taxonomy (primary categories: memorization, cognitive and compensation strategies; and secondary categories: social strategies, metacognitive, and affective) to three strategies (cognitive, affective and sociocultural-interactive strategies) and three metastrategies (meta-cognitive, meta-affective and meta-socioculturalinteractive strategies). According to her, cognitive strategies, such as activating schemata, assist the learner to construct, transform and apply L2 knowledge (p. 14). Affective strategies aid the learner to maintain positive emotions and attitudes, while sociocultural-interactive strategies assist the learner with communication, sociocultural contexts and identity (p.14). In other words, the three metastrategies (i.e., meta-cognitive, meta-affective and meta-sociocultural-interactive strategies) enable the learner to facilitate, control and manage these strategies (i.e., cognitive, affective, sociocultural-interactive strategies). Further, Oxford (2011) uses these metastrategies to link their external use with six types of metaknowledge: person, group/culture, task knowledge, whole process, strategy knowledge and conditional knowledge. Oxfords S2R model is summarized in Figure 1 here. Figure 1 Conceptual Map of Oxfords (2011) S2R Model

Oxfords S2R model is a noteworthy contribution to learning strategies research because it identifies attempts to better classify the mental processes behind these learning strategies through an examination of the learners meta-strategies and meta-knowledge. While the learners preferences may be a part of how strategies are adopted, the learners ability to link knowledge about the language and culture is crucial because it may (a) affect strategy choice, and (b) influence the degree of the learners ability to use the strategy successfully. Research Design Chamot (2005) states that while participants self reporting their learning strategies is prone to error, there is no better way to identify learners mental processes and techniques for completing a learning task while using a learning strategy. Keeping this limitation in mind, this study will be an exploratory research case study of multiple participants. Specifically, Oxfords (2011) strategies, metastrategies and meta-knowledge of the S2R model will be used to examine data. Participants

All participants are non-native English speaking students studying at the Monterey Institute of International Studies in California. These participants were then split up into two groups to account for their language proficiency. The first group, participants 1-5 (see Figure 2 in Appendix A), were intermediate ESL students who were studying English in an Intensive English Program. The second group of adult ESL learners, participant 6-10, were advanced speakers who were enrolled in Masters courses at MIIS. I matched my participants in both groups to speakers of the same language to look for similarities in learning strategiesi. Even though these participants were matched by languages, each participants learning strategies were considered independently because they may have adopted different learning strategies. All ten participants were invited to a personal interview and these participants also wrote a brief language learner history. These participants were directly invited to participate in this study and received a small reward in the form of food for their participation. Data Collection Participants first were asked to reflect on their experience learning English by writing a brief language learner history using a writing prompt (Appendix B). The interviewer read this learner history prior to the twenty minute interview to assure that questions were relevant to student experiences. The structured interview questions were about language learning events, and learning strategies in the order the order that these events occurred (Appendix C). Methodologically, I started by identifying the strategies that the participants used. To do so, I asked the participants to give some examples of when they used

their learning strategies in their language learning history and under what conditions to determine the meta-strategies and meta-knowledge that may have been involved in the cognitive processing of the learning strategy. I further asked each participant to define the degree of success that she had with her learning strategies and to define the contextual limits that the participant is aware of so as to better understand underlying meta-strategies and meta-knowledge. Data Analysis Once the interviews were completed, they were transcribed and examined. A brief description was written for each participant using pseudonyms to protect their identities. A list of learning strategies was compiled for each participant and examples of how these participants used these learning strategies were examined. Using Oxfords (2011) S2R model, these learning strategies and examples were categorized into groups in relation to the meta-strategies, and meta-knowledge framework in her model. The learning strategies of participants with similar cultural backgrounds were then analyzed. Discussion and Findings Oxfords (2011) S2R model was used to identify learning strategies and the meta-strategies, and meta-knowledge behind them. Once I identified an example of a learning strategy, I asked the participant for examples of when this strategy was used and had her evaluate the degree of success. These additional and relevant contextual clues were used to determine the participants cognitive processes in relation to Oxfords (2011) notion of meta-strategies, and meta-knowledge. Learning strategies were then compared against each participants description to

look for continuation, adaption or change of the strategy. Similar strategies were compared across participants with similar native cultures to see if there were patterns in learning strategies.

Research Question 1: How did participants study English prior to their arrival to the US? Did they have any particular learning strategies? The impact of formal education One of the most common themes in the interviews was that English classes in middle school and high school focused on teaching participants using the Grammar Translation Method. Prator and Celce-Murcia (1979) note that the Grammar Translation Method is marked by: (1) classes being taught in mother tongue with little active use the foreign language; (2) most vocabulary being taught through vocabulary lists of isolated words; (3) explicit explanations of grammar; (4) grammar emphasis on sentence structure and instruction that focuses largely on form; (5) an importance placed on early readings of classical texts; (6) less attention paid to the content of the text; (7) drills focused on translating isolated sentences from the foreign language to the native language; and (8) no emphasis on pronunciation. The grammar-translation method is thus seen by some as a learning strategy to learn grammar and vocabulary. However, several participants commented that the strategies learnt from this method did not help them learn to speak or write. Participants 2, 4, and 5 noted that it was not until they came to the United States that they needed or were encouraged to speak English in the classroom or out of the classroom. While participants commented that they did not

10

receive explicit language strategies instruction according to the Grammar Translation Method, they may have adapted cognitive learning strategies from this method. Participants may have learnt paying attention, planning, and organizing second language use by focusing heavily on form; yet they were unable to selfreport the value of these instructions. Even though several participants felt that they had not received explicit learning strategy instruction, participants 4, 5, 9, and 10 commented that they received learning strategies for listening and reading for exams. Participant 3 noted that he had to take a list of vocabulary words and use the words in writing a short story. Participant 10 commented that she was encouraged by teachers to buy books that contained topic based vocabulary lists in order to prepare for exams. However Participant 10 said that she did not adopt this strategy because the vocabulary was out of context and removed from her reading. For these participants, these strategies taught them monitoring and evaluation skills as well as paying attention, planning, and organizing second language use. Most participants commented while the instruction they received contributed to their knowledge of the language, they stated that they needed to learn to speak and write. Some participants commented that it was only until college that they encountered speaking and writing in the classroom. For participants, classroom instruction laid the foundation for their future language study, whether it enabled them to immediately jump into the English speaking classroom or created gaps in their language skills. Pursuing English out of the classroom

11

While many participants stated that their formal language education before their tertiary education did not help them to develop language skills or learning strategies, this deficit did not stop some participants from developing their personal learning strategies. Participants created learning strategies based on the linguistic resources available to them and highlighted the cognitive strategies of obtaining and using resources as well as implementing plans. For example, Participant 1 recorded English-speaking broadcasts with a tape recorder and played them back to practice listening and speaking. These broadcasts appear to have been one of the few linguistic resources available to her at the time outside of the classroom as well as helped develop her monitoring and evaluating skills. Participant 7 learned English in an environment where English language resources were restricted by the government, but Participant 7 appears to have made use of each linguistic resource as it became available. First, Participant 7 used Arabic-English dictionaries to learn new words when other resources were unavailable. Much later, Participant 7 bought English books and other media in city markets and later became a translator to learn English. Through this unconventional learning process, Participant 7 learnt English learning strategies such as cognitive strategies (i.e. reasoning, activating knowledge, conceptualizing details). Additionally, he learned socioculturalinteractive strategies because he seems to have learnt how to speak English through his interactions with native English speakers. While participants 1 and 7 demonstrate that strategies can help learners maximize the linguistic resources available yet for many people learning English, the availability of linguistic resources is generally on the rise (e.g., through the

12

internet) and the new challenge for learners will be orchestrating effective learning strategy use to maximize learning opportunities. This positive trend was reflective in Participant 8 and 9s pursuit of English conversation courses outside of the classroom, which may present a more common path for learners given opportunities were available to them. Both of these participants pursued instruction outside of the classroom and received both practice and individual guidance in communicating in English. Participant 9 not only pursued conversational classes outside of the classroom but also joined an English drama club. In short, private instruction and extra-curricular activities may provide the opportunities to speak and experiment with speaking English that are not available to learners until they study in an English speaking immersion context. Research Question 2: How do they study here in the United States? Are there any learning strategies that they have implemented? How participants choose to study here in the United States is largely dependent on multiple contexts in which they study and use English. However, all of the participants also commented on the need to work collaboratively. The Monterey Institute of International Studies pedagogic philosophy, known as the Monterey Way, places a large emphasis on the integration of language learning with contentbased instruction and on cooperative group work. Whether they were students in the intensive ESL program, a policy program, the language teacher or translation and interpretation program, my participants were required to work collaboratively in and out of the classroom. For those participants who commented that they were not encouraged to speak or write in class, this change in methodology probably

13

signified the end of their conception of the language learner as a passive and solitary learner in the classroom. Newly Implemented Learning Strategies The participants who were students in the Intensive English program gave the richest examples of newly implemented learning strategies. While all five of these participants commented on the need to continually improve all four language skills, participants 1 and 4 emphasized the need to become more proficient writers and had adopted learning strategies in hopes of doing so. Both participants made a conscious effort to practice writing outside of writing for classwork and also received feedback from native speakers about their writing. Participant 2 also adopted several learning strategies to improve her language skills and prepared for the TOEFL. She began a daily practice of creating and reviewing flashcards to learn new vocabulary. She reviewed these new flashcards with a tutor and now reviews these words with her husband. She also prepared for the listening and reading sections of the TOEFL by listening to podcasts and reading extensively. These learning strategies demonstrate the ability of these participants to build on their studies through additional practice as to plan and evaluate the new language that they encountered in the classroom. Immersion and Identity The other common theme in the interviews was that participants created affective and sociocultural-interactive strategies. The move from ones native country to the United States to study presented more challenges than just learning English. However, the ability to effectively communicate in English and balance

14

classwork also presented challenges that made progress in language learning highly personal. For these reasons, there were several examples of participants affective strategies. Participant 5 demonstrated that his experience learning in the US had helped him learn to speak and continued to motivate him.
Cause even like study hardly so much in my country does not work, just doesn't work. When I am...I think when I try to speak to somebody in English, I think the most important things is like confidence. Even like, you know, study hardly in my country, I couldn't, I have never get that confidence.

Participant 5s quote echoes the concerns of other lower proficiency participants in this study. While these participants struggled to learn a new language, their abilities to see their progress and continue to seek more opportunities to use the language helped them move closer to their individual goals. The more advanced participants, had learning strategies to interact to learn and communicate as well as overcome knowledge gaps in communication. Yet for these participants, they still had the challenge of dealing with sociocultural contexts and identities. For participant 7, this challenge involved balancing his interactions with other Arabic speakers with his desire to maximize his opportunities to speak with native English speakers. Participant 7 described these conflicting emotions in this account:
I stayed with a host family and then the host family rent was really high for me for my budget. So I had to move in with one of my friends who speak the native Arabic language. And I thought that my skills stop at my level because I was talking with him in Arabic. So we created a micro community of Arabic speakers and like we had this small community in this American big community. So I speak all the day in English and then go back and I start talking in Arabic. Which I don't like for some extent because I came here to study English, I am not an Arabic speaker for the time being, I don't want to speak Arabic.

For participant 7, his awareness of his context may not appear to be a solution to his problem, yet by recognizing it, he could search for opportunities to speak more often in English and maximize his time in the US. For many non-native English speakers who study in the US, they are rarely the only native speaker of their

15

language in an academic institution. Helping these students recognize their need to balance their identity within their micro-community of native speakers and pursue opportunities to use the language independently English could prove crucial as they try to acquire higher levels of proficiency. Research question 3: Have they modified or changed the ways they study English? It should come as no surprise that participants noted that learning in an immersion environment changed how they learned English. For participants who received training in oral communication in their native countries, daily living and interactions with native speakers became the source of new language acquisition. When asked about the differences in learning English in South Korea and in the US, Participant 9 highlighted that point when she says:
(B)ecause I have to use English in my life practically so I have to...the life itself is very, the life itself here is teaching me the conversation things. In Korea, I just have to memorize those things and expressions. And I have to find someone to practice those, here I just practice with everybody at school from various countries.

For participants 6, 9, and 10 who were Translation and Interpretation students, extensive reading and listening were both key components of their studies and a language strategy they brought from their home countries. This use of language strategies accounted for the large amount of specialized vocabulary in which they needed to become proficient. Participants 6, 8, 9, and 10 commented that the greatest challenges they faced as English learners was to become more accustomed to hearing different accents and registers. Stopping the Grammar Translation Method

16

Another notable example of a participant changing his learning strategies is Participant 3 as he explained his effort to stop translating into his native language and predict a words meaning.
Now I actually do something different, I used to translated everything to my language so I understand. And now here at the school, they are like challenging me to try guess what this word can be in a sentence, like what the mean(ing) of the word is. It's like it's different from the process that we have in my country to learn vocabulary and to learn grammar and things like that. But here in America, its like you have to guess sometimes what it is not to translate in your language. And if you want to know the meaning of the word in English, you learn the word so not in your language.

The quote above demonstrates Participant 3s conscious effort to rely on his English skills and abandon translation as a learning strategy to more effectively learn vocabulary and grammar. It should be noted that Participant 3 had extensive language training in Latin, Greek and English with the Grammar-Translation method. Participant 3 was not asked about methods he used to learn Portuguese or Italian, but because of the similarities between Portuguese and Italian to his native language Spanish, he may have used more oral communication to learn these languages. While one participants learning strategy is not enough to generalize that successful language learners need to completely separate their native language from their desired language, Participant 3 may be in the process of creating more effective learning strategies that will help him learn and communicate. Limitations and Future Research There are several limitations to this study and several things that a future study can address. Because of the short period of time in which the study was conducted, participants were asked to provide a learner history and were interviewed once. There was no opportunity to observe or interview participants to ask them about their learning strategies over an extended period of time. Thus, the

17

findings were dependent on participants self-reporting of their learner histories and their perceived degree of success with memorable learning strategies. There is also the challenge that participants in this study came only from MIIS and their educational experiences and language learner histories may have a limited applicability in that the findings may resonate only with university-educated language learners. After all, most of these participants had already completed fouryear college degrees and were now furthering their education towards a masters degree. The limitation may then be that even with instruction, possibly younger or less proficient students may not understand the value or desire to adapt these less strategies into their daily life. There are several directions that this research could be expanded upon in the future. This research study sought to compensate for the short length of research by comparing the learning strategies of participants with similar native languages who had different levels of proficiencies. The duration of this research study could be improved by conducting further interviews with the same participants. By interviewing and tracking participants of lower proficiency over an extended period of time, a greater breadth of learning strategies could be and investigated. Another challenge was to effectively identify learning strategies. Some participants commented that it was difficult to identify the learning strategies given that only a basic definition of learning strategies was given to participants at the study. This issue can be addressed in two different ways. First, participants could be given a learning strategies inventory such as Oxfords (1990) questionnaire known as the Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL) to help participants

18

recognize the learning strategies that they have used through their language learning. Using a learning strategies inventory like SILL could also help participants to raise awareness of their battery of learning strategies. Second, a think-aloud protocol could be used to help identify the learning strategies of participants and possibly be a point for participants to discuss the progression of their language skills and learning strategies. Conclusion Learning strategies are tools for learners to help them better acquire and use the desired language in their current environments. Teachers cannot control the environment students are in, but they can make efforts to ensure that students have the opportunity to learn and practice all language skills. By doing so, the teacher has the opportunity to instruct students in developing learning strategies. Once a learning strategy is taught in the classroom, it is up to the student to use the language learnt as well as the learning strategies. As a student progresses, only the student can discern if she is effectively using the strategy or if she needs to adapt it. Teachers can provide cognitive strategies in the native country classroom to help students maximize the linguistic resources available to them. Yet for those who come to an immersion environment, the individual student can enhanced the affective and sociocultural-interactive learning strategies that will help them acclimate to their context. As demonstrated in this study, many students from similar native language backgrounds had similar experiences learning English in the classroom. Yet individual students used different language strategies to adapt to their new learning environment. If we consider the metaphor of learning strategies

19

as techniques within art, learning strategies demonstrate that each learner is creative, adaptable and agentive. It is the hope that language teachers give their learners instruction about learning strategies so learners can gain awareness of their potential. Only then can these learners fully that explore the power of their ability to learn languages.

20

References Chamot, A. U. (2005) Language learning strategy instruction: Current issues and research. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 25, 112-130 Chan, A. Y. W. (2005), Tactics employed and problems encountered by university English majors in Hong Kong in using a dictionary. Applied Language Learning, 15(1 & 2), 1 27. Drnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Huang, P. C. (2007). A metacognitive approach to the task demands encountered in business English writing. In Leung, H. Chang, K. Cheung, & W. Dai (Eds.), Selected papers from the 16th International Symposium and Book Fair on English Teaching (pp., 255-265). Taipei: English Teachers Association Republic of China. Iwai, C. (2006). Linguistic and pedagogical values of teaching communication strategies: Integrating the notion of communication strategies with studies of second language acquisition. Hiroshima: Hiroshima City University. OMalley, J.M. & Chamot, A.U. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Oxford, R.L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. New York: Newbury House/Harper Collins. Oxford, R.L. (2011). Teaching and researching language learning strategies. Harlow, UK. Pearson Education Limited.

21

Oxford, R.L., & Ehrman, E. (1990). Adult language learning styles and strategies in an intensive training setting. The Modern Language Journal, 74(3), 311-327. Prator C., & Celce-Murcia, M. (1979). An outline of language teaching approaches. In M. Celce-Murcia & L. McIntosh (Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (p. 3). New York: Newbury House. Rubin, J. (1975). What the good language learner can teach us. TESOL Quarterly, 9, 25-37. Stern, H. H. (1975). What can we learn from the good language learner? Canadian Modern Language Review, 31, 304-318. Vandergrift L., & Tafaghadatari, M. H. (2010). Teaching L2 learners how to listen does make a difference: An empirical study. Language Learning, 60(2), 470497. Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind and society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Zhang, L. J., Gu, Y., & Hu, G. (2008). A cognitive perspective on Singaporean bilingual childrens use of reading strategies in learning to read in English. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 78, 245-271. Zimmerman, B.J. (1990). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement. Education Psychologist, 25(1), 3-17.

22

Appendix A Figure 2 Participant language learner profile and learning strategies

Individual Participant 1 Nationality: Chinese Studying: Intensive ESL student Languages: Chinese (Native); English
(30 years); Russian (28 years)

English Instruction in Home Country Description: Instruction initially focused on grammar-translation and vocabulary. In college, more emphasis was placed on speaking and listening. Learning Strategy: Teacher used TPR to teach English prepositions. Encouraged by teachers to do extensive reading. P1 independently recorded English T.V. broadcasts and replayed these recordings to practice listening and emulate speaking.

Language Instruction in U. S. Description: Enjoys classes because integrated skills into games in class. Hopes to bring back elements of American language educational philosophy to China. Learning Strategy: Does not continue to record and re-listen to T.V. broadcasts. P1 has been practicing writing and editing to improve writing skills outside of class. P1 believes reading and writing are helping to re-activate dormant vocabulary. P1 has sought more opportunities to speak by joining an American family for dinner, and attending church. Description: P2 has enrolled in the intensive ESL program on campus for nine months. Has developed her language all four skills and hopes to pass TOEFL/IELTS to receive Masters. Learning Strategy: P2 was couched and maintains a regiment of flashcards to practice vocabulary. Extensively studies for the IELTS using a test-prep book, recording P2 uses podcasts and other resource Seeks out opportunities for speaking. Description:

Participant 2 Nationality: Saudi Arabian Studying: Intensive ESL student Languages: Arabic (Native); English (since middle school, 9 months intensively)

Description: P2 states that English classes focused on grammar. Students did not learn writing in English but had to write oneparagraph responses to topics on tests. P2 states that some teachers did not speak English and learned only the present and past tense. Learning Strategy: P2 learned grammar translation method and memorized whole phrases.

Participant 3

Description:

23

Nationality: Mexican Studying: Intensive ESL student Languages: Latin/Greek (high school); Portuguese (2 years); Italian (2 years), English (6 months intensive and some high school).

P3 received extensive classroom instruction in Latin and Greek in high school. Had a near native speaking English teacher in college who placed more emphasis on communication skills. Learning Strategy: P3 reports that students were encouraged to write stories with words in their vocabulary lists. The near native speaking English teacher may have taught P3 other learning strategies through communication skills. Description: Large focus on vocabulary, grammar and reading. P4 stated studying English was individuals responsibility. Learning Strategy: Listening strategies to master listening quizzes. Mnemonics and rote memorization used to for vocabulary Description: P5 stated that English classes focused on grammar and getting a high marks on exams. P5 states there was little emphasis on oral communication. Learning Strategy: Any strategies learned were for test taking (listening, reading and vocabulary). P5 struggled to identify learning strategies.

Began studying at the Intensive ESL a two weeks prior.

Participant 4 Nationality: South Korean Studying: Intensive ESL student Languages: Korean (native); English (15 years)

Learning Strategy: Attempts to separate his native language with English to avoid translation. Disconnect Believes guessing vocabulary and concepts is an important. As attempted to maximize learning opportunities by speaking exclusively to English speakers and using English media. Description: Has studied at the intensive ESL program for 4 months. Lives with Korean-English speaking relatives. P4 likes emphasis placed on group study. Learning Strategy: P4 writes in a journal and has her entry edited by a native speaker Description: P5 first received instruction on oral communication and writing. Attended intensive ESL program for 4 months. P5 studies for TOEFL independently. Learning Strategy: Cultural immersion has given him confidence in his language abilities

Participant 5 Nationality: Japanese (Native); English Studying: Independentl y for TOEFL after one session Language: Japanese (Native); English (6 years, 6 months intensively)

24

Participant 6 Nationality: Chinese Studying: T&I Chinese/ English Language:

Chinese (native); English (18 years); Spanish and French (2 years)

Description: Excelled and majored in English in college. Took college content business classes in English. Trained in British pronunciation. Worked extensively as a translator.

Participant 7 Nationality: Iraqi Studying: MATESOL Language: Arabic (Native);

English (since 7 years old): French (4 years)

Learning Strategy: Group practice Flash cards for reciting words and not memorization. Read English 1-page news articles daily Watched English speaking dramas Description: P7 reported government strictly controlled English curriculum and limited English texts. Lack of linguistic resources until fall of Sadam regime, contractors sold English resources in the city markets. Became a translator for the American and Iraqi army to learn how to speak English. Learning Strategy: Intensively studied dictionaries. Did extensive reading to build sentence level understanding of grammar as well gained cultural knowledge. Sought opportunities to learn to speak English.

Description: Attended summer intensive language program for translation students and lived with host family prior to beginning T&I classes. P6 believes that translation classes are teaching her a high register of English and specialized vocabulary but needs to seek more conversational English. Learning Strategy: Group practice Recognizes need to Recognizes need to pursue more opportunities to speak with native speakers. Description: P7 completed English requirement for the Intensive ESL program early and had stay for additional time to fulfill scholarship agreement. Commented a need to balance time with Arabic speaking friends and engaging native English speakers. Learning Strategy: Continues to apply social strategies. Mentioned networking a couple of times. Continues to do extensive reading. Commented that travel is beneficial to language learning. Wants continue to increase communication skills. Description: Attended English Preparation for Graduate Studies classes but stated she was familiar with course content.

Participant 8 Nationality: Russian / Hungarian Studying: MPA Language: Russian

Description: Immigrated to Hungry at the age of six and learned Hungarian from a private Russian tutor. Same tutor instructed her with English for two years.

25

(Native); Hungarian (since 6 years old); English (same); German (4 years); French (2 years)

Participant 9 Nationality: South Korean Studying: T&I Korean / English Language: Korean (Native);
English (20+), Russian (12), Japanese (10), Chinese (3)

Started school language instruction at thirteen. Took German and French classes in college. Received additional tutoring for German, commented on tutors method. Learning Strategy: Commented that tutor English showed cartoons. Stated that many strategies were intuitive. Looks for similar words in known languages. Actively sought to learn English, German and French independently. Memorized conversational scripts for German. Description: Received English grammar instruction from father before attending school. Elementary school English classes focused on conversation and short expressions. A shift in middle school to grammar, reading and some writing. High emphasis placed on reading for tests. Learning Strategy: Attended private instruction for conversational practice. Joined extracurricular English activities such as a drama club. Description: Exposed to English through American relatives who visited them annually. Started English classes in middle school and were grammar focused. There was some listening practice for listening tests. First conversation course in college. American teacher in college created social events to practice

Learning Strategy: States that she continues to use language strategies. Uses some new internet resources to continue learn German and French.

Description: Did not receive ESL instruction prior to pursuing T&I classes. Stated that she came for both the interpretation degree and to be surrounded in language environment.

Participant 10 Nationality: Japanese Studying: T&I Japanese / English Language: Japanese (Native); English (12 years)

Learning Strategy: Believes that she is learning everyday English States that different English speakers accents are still challenging. Description: Studied ESL in Australia to prepare for graduate school.

26

English Learning Strategy: Learned anticipation and back knowledge skills in school. Independently used dictionaries for vocabulary. Learned multiple words using stems and parts of speech. Learning Strategy: Believes that she has maintained her learning strategies.

27

Appendix B Writing prompt For me to better understand you as a language learner, please give me a brief (about a page) description of your experiences learning languages. Please answer the following questions: How many languages do you speak? How long have you spoken these languages? Did you study a foreign language in school in your home country? If so, which languages and for how long? What were your experiences learning foreign languages at school? Was a foreign language mandatory or voluntary in school? Why did you decide to study English in the United States? Did you receive English language instruction in the United States? How do you rate about your ability to communicate in English in the United States?

28

Appendix C Interview questions Foreign Language Instruction in Participants Native Countries 1) Describe foreign language instruction in your home country? a) How did instruction change as you advanced in your language studies? 2) Did anyone explicitly teach you learning strategies? 3) What strategies did you use to learn: a) Vocabulary b) How to speak c) How to write d) How to read e) How to listen 4) Tell me about your learning environment outside of the classroom (e.g., activities, social life, personal study space). 5) Did you prefer classroom or out-of-classroom learning? 6) Did you do anything outside of the classroom to practice or use your language skills? English Language Instruction in the United States 7) Tell me about how you believe learning English in the US was different from your experiences in your home country? 8) Was there pressure for you to reach a certain level of proficiency? 9) What language strategies do you continue to use? 10)Did you adapt or acquire new learning strategies? 11)Why do you think a learning strategy did or did not work? 12)Do you believe that you are taking advantage of being immersed in an Englishspeaking environment? If so how? 13)Do you believe that some learning strategies did not transfer from learning one language to another? Why? 14)What currently are the greatest challenges for you as an English language learner? How do your learning strategies help you to address these challenges? 15)What are some learning strategies you will use in the future? With the notable exception of Participant 3 (a Spanish speaker) and Participant 8 (a Russian and Hungarian speaker), the remaining participants were paired with a partner who shared the same native language.
i

29