Important Announcement
PubHTML5 Scheduled Server Maintenance on (GMT) Sunday, June 26th, 2:00 am - 8:00 am.
PubHTML5 site will be inoperative during the times indicated!

Home Explore RtICELT 2016 Conference Proceedings (Final.Ed.)

RtICELT 2016 Conference Proceedings (Final.Ed.)

Published by phomanee.w, 2016-11-10 04:00:47

Description: RtICELT 2016 Conference Proceedings (Final.Ed.)

Keywords: Rt International Conference, Conference on English Language Teaching, Conference, RtICELT 2016, Diversity our Identity

Search

Read the Text Version

The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity” Keywords as a Clue to Disciplinary Identities in the Discussion Sections of Research Articles Punjaporn Pojanapunya [email protected] King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi, Thailand Richard Watson Todd [email protected] King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi, ThailandAbstractDiversities of language used in particular academic disciplines form differentidentities. Due to their evaluative and interpretive nature, discussion sections are likelyto have the greatest diversity of any section in a research article. This study exploreshow the identities expressed in the discussion sections of research articles in socialsciences and humanities (DHUM) and pure and applied sciences (DSCI) areconstructed through an investigation of keywords, the statistically significant wordswhich show how discourses of the disciplines are distinct from each other. Keywordanalysis is a corpus-based technique which compares frequencies of words in a givencorpus against those in a normative corpus to identify keywords. Two corpora of 400discussion sections were compiled and subsequently compared to generate twokeyword lists, the DHUM and DSCI lists. Concordances and collocational andphraseological patterns of some selected keywords were further explored to seewhether the keywords can provide clues to the identities expressed in the discussionsections and how these are constructed and shaped in these two diverse disciplines.The quantitative and qualitative analyses of the keywords highlight a markeddifference in the discussions in the two disciplines as well as show the characteristicsthat they share. The study has substantial implications for using keywords in cross-disciplinary studies and provides ESP learners with the conventions of language whichare crucial to the production and interpretation of the discussion section discourses.Keywords: Disciplinary identities, Discussion section, Keyword analysisIntroductionResearch Articles (RA) are one of the most widely practiced genres in academiccommunities and act as a means of disseminating knowledge and incorporating claimsPathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 201


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity”and argumentations among community members (Bruce, 2005; Koutsantoni, 2004;Peacock, 2002). Conventions of the RA in the particular disciplines are shaped by adiversity of views on knowledge, theories, research practices, and techniques (Hyland,2004; Hyland & Hamp-Lyons, 2002). In order to write and interpret this genresuccessfully, it is important that community members understand the conventions andrules which closely match the specific demands of their disciplines (Belcher & Braine,1995; Hyland, 2002b; Marta, 2015; Swales, 1990).The language conventions of each discipline can be examined through the study of adisciplinary identity which is the representation of authors’ expressions of thepreferred practices and norms of the discourse in their academic domains (Hyland,2012). In research into the disciplinary identity through the analysis of the RAs,previous studies have investigated rhetorical structures (Basturkmen, 2012; Bruce,2008; Kuteeva & McGrath, 2013) and linguistic features of the RAs (Foad Ebrahimi,Swee Heng, & Nadzimah Abdullah, 2014; Karimi, Gorjian, & Eidian, 2015; Kim &Lim, 2013; Mu, Zhang, Ehrich, & Hong, 2015; Yang, 2013) either in a single disciplineor across disciplines.On the one hand, previous research into rhetorical structures and functions haveprovided insights into the rhetorical moves employed in the four internal sections;introduction (Cortes, 2013; Loi, 2010), methodology (Bruce, 2008; Lim, 2006), results(Basturkmen, 2009; Bruce, 2009; Lim, 2011), and discussion (Basturkmen, 2012;Kanoksilapatham, 2012). Contributions from these studies have been accepted by thewider professional community since they applied a well-established research method,namely, move analysis. Because these studies have employed a primary functional-qualitative basis, they initially develop an analytical framework that describes types ofdiscourse units in the target genre and provide a detailed linguistic description of thestudied discourse (Biber, Connor, & Upton, 2007). However, since this qualitative-based method requires detailed analysis of each individual text to describe itsstructures and functions, the findings generated by many of these studies have beendrawn from a small selection of texts of the discipline they studied (Connor, Upton,& Kanoksilpatham, 2007). As a result, in terms of identities, the findings might reflectindividuality rather than the disciplines.On the other hand, focusing on linguistic features, a number of studies haveinvestigated a large set of RAs using a corpus-based approach. For example,metadiscourse (e.g. Cao & Hu, 2014; Hu & Cao, 2015; Salas, 2015), hedges (Karimi etal., 2015), self-mentions (McGrath, 2016), reporting evidentials (Yang, 2013),directives (Jalilifar & Mehrabi, 2013), citations (Hu & Wang, 2014), and politenessPathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 202


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity”markers (Getkham, 2014) have been investigated in at least 30 to more than 400 RAs.However, the features and their instantiations under these investigations have typicallybeen predetermined by researchers, rather than those which are emerged from thetarget texts.To provide different insights into disciplinary differences in RAs, this study uses acorpus-based method combining qualitative and quantitative analyses to examineinstantiations of a feature emerging from the texts. Instead of beginning with aqualitative-functional analysis as in genre analysis or an analysis of predeterminedinstantiations of features as in the existing corpus studies, this study uses aquantitative method to identify the instantiations of the selected feature. Then,relevant patterns of their use in the target corpus of RAs are examined using aqualitative analysis to facilitate interpretations of the texts (Biber et al., 2007). Thisstudy employs the keyword analysis method to produce keywords and considers themas clues to the disciplinary identities of the discussion sections which are assumed toinclude the most salient use of voices shaped by the traditions of the disciplines.Keyword analysisKeyword analysis is a corpus-based method which compares frequencies of words ina given corpus against those in a normative corpus to identify keywords using log-likelihood (LL), a statistical test that reports whether the words are key by chancealone or due to authorial or disciplinary choices (Bondi & Scott, 2010; Hyland, 2012;Rayson & Garside, 2000). Differing from the more commonly used move-basedanalysis, this method sequences a quantitative before a qualitative analysis, focuses ona set of distinctive words to guide interpretation of the target texts rather than movesof a distinct communicative function (Biber et al., 2007), identifies keywords based onfrequency data which is likely to be more objective than authors’ identification ofmoves, and uses statistical methods to identify features. By using this method,keywords are believed to play a crucial role in authorship attribution because theauthors basically choose words which simply present their ideas to target readers, andpart of this involves adopting an appropriate identity (Hyland, 2002b). When appliedto a large set of samples, therefore, we posit that the method could provide keywordswhich are clues to disciplinary identities.While keyword analysis is a useful initial analysis, it is worth noting that, since thisapproach uses automatic analytical techniques to identify linguistic patterns that existacross a large set of texts, the results do not necessarily represent those that can beuncovered through a detailed analysis of individual texts. That means, in the currentPathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 203


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity”study, this approach may not provide a detailed description of the discussion sectionsof the two disciplines, but may help identify patterns which would otherwise possiblygo unnoticed by analysts (Biber et al., 2007).Prior to this study, keyword analysis has been employed to identify the content oftexts changing over time (de Schryver, 2012; Peng et al., 2015), characterize thecontent of texts (Kang & Yu, 2011; O’Halloran, 2011; Wu, Xiao, Dong, Wang, &Xue, 2012), help identify patterns of language use within text (Liang, 2015), andidentify textual and rhetorical features in texts within specific genres (O’donnell, Scott,Mahlberg, & Hoey, 2012; Poole, 2016) and across different disciplines (Schutz, 2013).The method has also been used in cross-disciplinary studies to analyze identities ofacademic discourse. However, this research has been restricted to examining theidentities of the discourse of specific disciplines, e.g. Economics and Marketing(Malavasi & Mazzi, 2008) and History and Marketing (Malavasi & Mazzi, 2010). Thisstudy aims to explore the identities expressed in RAs by systematically identifying andanalyzing distinctive words associated with the discussion sections of two broadacademic domains, social sciences and humanities on the one hand, and pure andapplied sciences on the other.Because linguistic conventions can vary at the macro and micro structural levels ofthe RAs, many researchers have investigated rhetorical and linguistic features inresearch article sections. Among conventional sections in RAs, discussion sections arelikely to have the greatest diversity due to their evaluative and interpretive nature andbecause they seem to have great potential for investigating disciplinary identities. Theyvary considerably depending on a number of factors. First, the section offers anincreasingly generalized account of what has been investigated in the discipline andplays an important role in merging and presenting information from previous sectionsof the RA: the statements made in the introduction and literature review, researchquestions that the study attempted to answer, the purposes of the study, specificmethodology, and results (Basturkmen, 2009; Swales & Feak, 2004). More specificallyto the key function of the section, authors explain, interpret, and make claimsconcerning the significance of their current findings on how the findings contributeto and integrate with the disciplinary existing knowledge (Basturkmen, 2009;Basturkmen, 2012; Brett, 1994; Foad Ebrahimi, Swee Heng, & Tan, 2015). Thesestudies suggest that the discussion sections typically have greater freedom and indicatedisciplinary differences in more explicit ways compared to the other parts of the RA.In terms of writing, their variation poses a challenge to many writers, especiallynovices and ESP students who are new to their academic communities (Brett, 1994;Foad Ebrahimi et al., 2015; Swales & Feak, 2004). Consequently, working on thisPathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 204


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity”section could also make important contributions to ESP classrooms.To account for the cross-disciplinary nature of this study, although this is not a clear-cut distinction, social sciences and humanities and pure and applied sciences areconsidered as two diverse disciplines which differ in their research approaches andpractices. Each of them, therefore, has its own conventions of scientific writing andproduces its own varieties of RAs with distinctive language features.The studyCorporaThe data for this study consisted of two corpora. The first was a collection ofdiscussion sections from 400 research articles in social sciences and humanities relateddisciplines (DHUM), i.e. psychology, sociology, education, and politics. The secondcorpus, also 400 discussion sections, was collected from research articles in puresciences and applied sciences (DSCI), i.e. mechanical engineering, marketing,microbiology, biotechnology, and nursing. The selection of the RAs was restricted tothose published in leading journals in each sub-discipline having four distinct sections:introduction, methods, results, and discussion. The discussion sections could be thosewritten in separate sections under headings such as discussion or discussion andimplications, excluding ones in which results and discussion or discussion andconclusion sections were coalesced. In total, the sizes of DHUM and DSCI were538,078 and 527,794 words, respectively.Keyword identification and data analysisThe first step in the analysis was to identify keywords which occurred with asignificantly greater frequency in one corpus when compared to the other, bycomparing the DHUM and DSCI wordlists generated by AntConc (Anthony, 2014).The keyword analysis method typically produces three types of words: open-classlexical words or aboutness keywords characterizing a text, grammatical wordsindicating the style of the texts, and proper nouns (Scott & Tribble, 2006). To help usfocus on the keywords that potentially correspond to the construction of disciplinaryidentities rather than the aboutness keywords which dominate the top of keyword listsbecause of the differences in the DHUM and DSCI subject content, a set of criteriawas applied to each keyword list.Among the top 200 keywords in each list, we focused on the words that occured inmore than 20% of texts in the target corpus to ensure that the keywords wereidentified as key because they were distributed across a large proportion of the corpus,Pathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 205


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity”not because they repeatedly occured in a few texts. Secondly, discipline-specificcontent words and terminologies were filtered out to retain keywords which werelikely to be associated with rhetorical functions, purposes or style of the discussionsections. Third, we selected keywords that occured in more than 80% of the sub-disciplines comprising the discussion corpus to avoid focusing on those withsignificantly high occurrences in some of the sub-disciplines in the corpora. Althoughthese thresholds for identifying keywords are arbitrary, these criteria helped narrowthe scope of keywords to be considered as clues to the disciplinary identities.Next, all selected keywords were observed through concordances and collocationaland phraseological patterns that helped suggest their potential representation ofidentities. In this stage, some other topic words that refer to the difference betweenknowledge domains rather than identities of the discussion sections were removedfrom the list. Then, the keywords identified as providing evidence for identities of thediscussion sections were analyzed for concordances and collocates with the aim ofgaining insights into their uses in the target texts as clues to disciplinary identities. Thegoal of the analysis was to illustrate how the discursive construction of identities isshaped, thus highlighting any major diversities or commonalities in the discussionsections across these two seemingly diverse disciplines.ResultsThe identification of the two keyword lists: DHUM vs. DSCI and vice-versa providesthe distinctive lexical items used in the discussion sections of RAs from the two broaddisciplines. The selected keywords of the two comparisons are given below in order ofLL values with their frequency per 500,000 words.DHUM vs. DSCI: more (2645), their (2623), that (8223), they (1535), who (948), do (694), s (1876), research (1612), about (915), how (694), not (2814), work (757), groups (594), support (811), findings (980), likely (714), less (690), what (445), are (3582), evidence (433), but (1198), individual (400), these (1935), measures (318), ways (238), have (2213), finding (378), own (216), context (364), one (1057), whether (422), our (1624), analyses (281), questions (196), we (1919), question (203), state (296), theory (248), might (673), article (142), understanding (345), them (391), some (792)Pathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 206


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity”DSCI vs. DHUM: fig (1009), al (2867), et (2717), the (31952), was (2418), method (356), due (478), observed (506), using (621), experiments (181), obtained (275), material (250), rate (374), shown (436), used (705), reported (590), been (990), samples (273), experimental (243), function (235)Based on survey analyses of concordances and collocational patterns of the keywords,we categorized the words that potentially reflect identities of the discussion sectionsof each discipline into three main themes: research focus, research paradigms, andresearch presentation of results (see Table 1). Table 1 Keywords in DHUM and DSCI lists which potentially reflect disciplinary identitiesThemes DHUM keywords DSCI keywordsResearch Goal of research process how define duefocus causes Object of focus on their, they, who, focus on material, research people participation objects sampleResearch Way research provisional evidence, definitive observed,paradigms works understanding, obtained theory Paradigm - - paradigm experiments, experimental How to get - - how to get using, used results resultsPresentation Degree of uncertain might, more, certain shownand certainty of interpretation support, likely, interpretatiointerpretation interpretation less, that, one, nof results some Generalizability context- these, our generic the of research specific results results Researchers’ researchers’ we, our - - involvement involvementPathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 207


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity”Research focusAmong the top 200 keywords of the DHUM vs. DSCI and vice-versa (DHUM listand DSCI list hereafter), some keywords were found to relate to goals and focuses ofresearch, for example, how in the DHUM list and due in the DSCI list.how in DHUM vs. DSCI manipulated purpose of our study was to determine how independently characteristics of fpurpose of this study was to examine how mental verb input promotes children's ToMaim of this research was to explore how the political, economic, and social changes afspeakers. A related goal was to how differences in English reading investigate trajectories bepurpose of our study was to how culture might influence the understand adoption of thesedue in DSCI vs. DHUMthe present study, such as decreased due to impermeability of the membrane accumulation and/orinvestigate several areas of experimental due to the ease of working with this biologythe present study) may explain this due to the difference in surface discrepancy, properties ofobserved in this study, which was due to low ribozyme transfection probably efficiency and thCompared to the frequent use of how in the statements of purpose in DHUM, whichsuggests that research in social sciences and humanities is process-oriented, the use ofPathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 208


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity”due in contexts of DSCI suggests that the goal of research in pure sciences and appliedsciences is to define causes. Moreover, the presence of keywords such as their, they,who, participation, them, individual in the DHUM list, which are likely to be associatedwith participants and contexts of research, refers to the focus on variables studied inthe disciplines. In the DSCI, the more frequent use of material and sample than in theDHUM list suggests the focus is on the objects in a laboratory, indicating differencesin sources of data, research methodology, and approach between the two disciplines.Research paradigmsThe keywords also reveal a disciplinary difference in terms of research paradigms,approaches, and methodological concerns. The frequent presences of evidence,“provide evidence to support,”understanding, “for our understanding,” and theory in DHUMare associated with practices in creating knowledge and argument in writing. Weexamined the concordances for these keywords and found that the findings from theparticular research are usually viewed as evidence that enhances authors’ and readers’understanding and requires reference to an existing theory to strengthen the arguments.These findings correspond to previous research which pointed out that researchfindings as knowledge in social sciences and humanities are typically interpreted andreflect a more evaluative pattern of argumentation (Hyland, 2012; Millán, 2010).Unlike research in social sciences and humanities, research in pure and appliedsciences commonly aims to discover findings that create new knowledge. Linguisticdevices in writing tend to be used as a means of establishing truth and objective facts.For example, the use of observed, “we observed,” and obtained, “the results obtained,” areassociated with laboratory objects and materials showing the way that experimentsand research are conducted and the results of the studies. In order to promoteobjective facts, moreover, authors in this discipline more frequently use words thatrefer to the research itself (e.g. experiment and experimental) and highlight activities in thelaboratory concerning how the results can be obtained, e.g. by the frequent use ofusing and used.Research presentation of resultsDifferent keywords in the two disciplines concerning presentation of results can becategorized into three main aspects: certainty in presenting the results, generalizabilityof research, and researchers’ involvement in writing.Pathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 209


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity”Some keywords in the DHUM list seem to indicate some degree of uncertainty ingiving comments and judgments on the results. For example, the use of more, less, andlikely in the cluster “more/ less likely to,” the use of support in “results/ findings/analyses support,” and the explicit hedge might, e.g. in “might be argued/ explainedthat,” “might be associated with/ related to,” “might be because,” and “might be useful”shows that authors in this discipline carefully explain and interpret research results.One possible reason for the use of these features is that the authors attempt todowntone their voices to avoid later criticism of their interpretations of results(Hyland, 1998; Foad Ebrahimi et al., 2014). Some other keywords, such as one in “oneof the most,” “one possible explanation for,” and “one of the most/ main/ important/essential” also imply an acknowledged status of knowledge in the fields. On the otherhand, in DSCI, shown in, e.g. “we have shown that,” “as shown by,” and “present studieshave shown” reflects more certainty in reporting results. This presence of shown alsocarries the assumption of an objective fact and pronounces the authors’ certaintyregarding what the research has accomplished or can accomplish in pure and appliedsciences (Koutasantoni, 2004; Myers, 1989).Secondly, another aspect expressed through the keywords concerns the scope of thecontexts covered in interpretations. In DHUM, the use of these and our (followed byfindings, results, data) are likely to indicate that the interpretations made by theauthors only apply to the contexts which they studied. In DSCI, on the other hand, the(also followed by findings, results, data) is commonly used to show a broadergeneralizability of interpretations.our in DHUM vs. DSCInot include power and conflict findings add a macro level of theory. Thus, our understandingrace in the process of residential findings also shed light on attainment. Our historical changesboundaries within the United States results add to the accumulating are fading, our evidence thatthe same observer identifies the results challenge the notion of a same face. Our mandatorynamely, the escalation of results have important practical commitment. Our implicationsPathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 210


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity”Another distinct identity of research in social sciences and humanities is theresearchers’ involvement in reporting results and disseminating claims. It is apparentthat authors of DHUM frequently use we and our to perform different functions indiscussion sections. First, as noted above, the authors seem to be aware that the useof our followed by, e.g. analysis, data, findings, results, and study allows them torestrict their interpretations to the contexts they studied. Secondly, we followed bycognitive verbs, e.g. argue, assume, believe, know, see, hope, think, and suspect, whichare found in the discussion sections, also relate to the fact that articles in socialsciences and humanities allow more interpretative arguments that are less preciselymeasurable than in the other discipline (Hyland, 2002a). It may be the case that theauthors use we and our to construct persuasive authority and credibility to helpstrengthen identity of the discipline (Hyland, 2001; Hyland & Tse, 2004), e.g. the useof we in “we found that,” “we observed,” and “we were able to” and the use of “ourargument,” “our conclusion,” and “our evidence.”On the other hand, the pure and applied sciences have a different way of creatingknowledge, where new knowledge is usually associated with certainty and descriptionrather than interpretation. Therefore, the authors in this knowledge domain seem todownplay their role to highlight the issue under study and to help strengthen animpression of the objective and impersonal nature of the research process (Hyland,2002a; Marta, 2015; Millán, 2010).Discussion and implicationsThis research proposes the application of a corpus-based method, keyword analysis,to identity research. We attempt to explore whether keywords can be clues todisciplinary identities constructed in academic discourse. The findings of the currentstudy enhances our understanding of the identities of the discussion sections in socialsciences and humanities and pure and applied sciences.The discussion sections in both disciplines are concerned with the same broad issuesbut manifest these issues in different ways. This pattern is analogous to principle andparameter theory in generative linguistics (see Chomsky & Lasnik, 1993), with thebroad issues being the principles and the discipline-specific manifestation being theparameters. For example, both disciplines discuss the research focus as a principle,but the parameter in DHUM concerns process and a focus on people, whereas theparameter in DSCI concerns causes and a focus on objects. These are, then, generalprinciples of what should be discussed in discussion sections irrespective of discipline,Pathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 211


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity”but these principles are manifested through discipline-specific parameters indicative ofdisciplinary identities. Generally, these findings of keywords match those discussed inearlier studies, e.g. Hyland (2012), Marta (2015), Millán (2010), Poudat and Follette(2012) and on disciplinary differences across different disciplines as well as betweenhard and soft domains of knowledge. The study also provides the distinctive words of each discipline for ESPcontext. The findings suggest that authors in the two disciplines use different words inreporting and interpreting results with different tones and styles, meaning that theyadopt different conventions of linguistic expression to express identities as membersof the disciplines. Based on views of knowledge and practices, in fact, there areconsiderable options for the negotiation of disciplinary identity in research writingacross disciplines (Hyland, 2004; Johns, 1997). Choices of linguistic features andexpressions in the discussions presented in this study might raise awareness of anddraw learners’ attention to adopting an appropriate identity using linguistic choicesthat serve the expectations of members of the disciplines as their target audiences(Hyland, 2012; Jalilifar & Mehrabi, 2013; Marta, 2015) when they engage in researchactivities.Finally, it should be noted that the discussion section of this article includes the wordswe, evidence, understanding, might and likely, suggesting that, in writing this article, we arefollowing the disciplinary identity of the humanities and social sciences.ReferencesAnthony, L. (2014). AntConc (Version 3.4.3) [Software]. Available from http://www.laurenceanthony.net/software/antconc/Basturkmen, H. (2009). Commenting on results in published research articles and masters dissertations in language teaching. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 8(4), 241-251.Basturkmen, H. (2012). A genre-based investigation of discussion sections of research articles in dentistry and disciplinary variation. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 11(2), 134-144.Belcher, D. D., & Braine, G. (1995). Introduction. In D. Belcher & G. Braine (Eds.), Academic writing in a second language: Essays on research and pedagogy (13-29). New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Corporation.Pathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 212


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity”Biber, D., Connor, U., & Upton, T. A. (2007). Discourse on the move: Using corpus analysis to describe discourse structure. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Bondi, M., & Scott, M. (2010). Keyness in texts. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Brett, P. (1994). A genre analysis of the results section of sociology articles. English for Specific Purposes, 13(1), 47-59.Bruce, I. (2005). Syllabus design for general EAP writing courses: A cognitive approach. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 4(3), 239-256.Bruce, I. (2008). Cognitive genre structures in methods sections of research articles: A corpus study. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 7(1), 38-54.Bruce, I. (2009). Results sections in sociology and organic chemistry articles: A genre analysis. English for Specific Purposes, 28(2), 105-124.Cao, F., & Hu, G. (2014). Interactive metadiscourse in research articles: A comparative study of paradigmatic and disciplinary influences. Journal of Pragmatics, 66, 15-31.Chomsky, N., & Lasnik, H. (1993). The theory of principles and parameters. In J. Jacobs (Ed.), Syntax: An international handbook of contemporary research (506-569). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Connor, U., Upton, T. A., & Kanoksilpatham, B. (2007). Introduction to move analysis. In D. Biber, U. Connor & T. A. Upton (Eds.), Discourse on the move: Using corpus analysis to describe discourse structure (23-41). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Cortes, V. (2013). The purpose of this study is to: Connecting lexical bundles and moves in research article introductions. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 12(1), 33-43.de Schryver, G. (2012). Trends in twenty-five years of academic lexicography. International Journal of Lexicography, 25(4), 464-506.Foad Ebrahimi, S., Swee Heng, C., & Tan, H. (2015). Choice and use of context frames to augment the writing of result and discussion section of research articles across four disciplines. 3L: The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 21(1), 71-80.Pathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 213


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity”Foad Ebrahimi, S., Swee Heng, C., & Nadzimah Abdullah, A. (2014). Discourse functions of grammatical subject in result and discussion sections of research article across four disciplines. Journal of Writing Research, 6(2), 125-140.Getkham, K. (2014). Politeness strategies in Thai graduate research paper discussions: Implications for second/foreign language academic writing. English Language Teaching, 7(11), 159-167.Hu, G., & Cao, F. (2015). Disciplinary and paradigmatic influences on interactional metadiscourse in research articles. English for Specific Purposes, 39, 12-25.Hu, G., & Wang, G. (2014). Disciplinary and ethnolinguistic influences on citation in research articles. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 14, 14-28.Hyland, K. (1998). Persuasion and context: The pragmatics of academic metadiscourse. Journal of Pragmatics, 30(4), 437-455.Hyland, K. (2001). Humble servants of the discipline? Self-mention in research articles. English for Specific Purposes, 20(3), 207-226.Hyland, K. (2002a). Authority and invisibility: authorial identity in academic writing. Journal of Pragmatics, 34(8), 1091-1112.Hyland, K. (2002b). Options of identity in academic writing. ELT Journal, 56(4), 351- 358.Hyland, K., & Hamp-Lyons, L. (2002). EAP: Issues and directions. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 1(1), 1-12.Hyland, K., & Tse, P. (2004). Metadiscourse in academic writing: A reappraisal. Applied Linguistics, 25(2), 156-177.Hyland, K. (2004). Disciplinary discourses: Social interactions in academic writing. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Hyland, K. (2012). Disciplinary identities: Individuality and community in academic discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Jalilifar, A., & Mehrabi, K. (2013). A cross-disciplinary and cross-cultural study of directives in discussions and conclusions of research articles. Iranian Journal ofPathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 214


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity”Language Teaching Research, 2(1), 27-44.Johns, A. M. (1997). Text, role, and context: Developing academic literacies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Kang, N., & Yu, Q. (2011). Corpus-based stylistic analysis of tourism English. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 2(1), 129-136.Kanoksilapatham, B. (2012). In search of the generic identity of the discussion section: Three engineering sub-disciplines. Taiwan International ESP Journal, 4(2), 1-26.Karimi, H., Gorjian, B., & Eidian, F. (2015). A comparative study if using hedges in English scientific articles among English native and Iranian non-native researchers: The case of conclusion sections. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World, 8(4), 120-136.Kim, L. C., & Lim, J. M. (2013). Metadiscourse in English and Chinese research article introductions. Discourse Studies, 15(2), 129-146.Koutsantoni, D. (2004). Attitude, certainty and allusions to common knowledge in scientific research articles. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 3(2), 163-182.Kuteeva, M., & McGrath, L. (2013). The theoretical research article as a reflection of disciplinary practices: The case of pure mathematics. Applied Linguistics, 36(2), 215-235.Liang, M. (2015). Patterned distribution of phraseologies within text: The case of research articles. In B. Zou, M. Hoey & S. Smith (Eds.), Corpus linguistics in Chinese contexts (74-97). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Lim, J. M. (2011). “Paving the way for research findings”: Writers’ rhetorical choices in education and applied linguistics. Discourse Studies, 13(6), 725-749.Lim, J. M. H. (2006). Method sections of management research articles: A pedagogically motivated qualitative study. English for Specific Purposes, 25(3), 282- 309.Loi, C. K. (2010). Research article introductions in Chinese and English: APathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 215


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity”comparative genre-based study. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 9(4), 267-279.Malavasi, D., & Mazzi, D. (2008). ‘It can be assumed that, if our conceptual model is valid, then…’: The construction of multiple identities in Economics vs. Marketing. Linguistica e Filologia, 27, 157-179.Malavasi, D., & Mazzi, D. (2010). History v. marketing: Keywords as a clue to disciplinary epistemology. In M. Bondi & M. Scott (Eds.), Keyness in texts (169- 184). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Marta, M. M. (2015). Current trends in written academic discourse. Journal of Romanian Literary Studies, 7, 894-903.McGrath, L. (2016). Self-mentions in anthropology and history research articles: Variation between and within disciplines. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 21, 86-98.Millán, E. L. (2010). ‘Extending this claim, we propose...’ The writer´ s presence in research articles from different disciplines. Ibérica, 20, 35-56.Mu, C., Zhang, L. J., Ehrich, J., & Hong, H. (2015). The use of metadiscourse for knowledge construction in Chinese and English research articles. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 20, 135-148.Myers, G. (1989). The pragmatics of politeness in scientific articles. Applied Linguistics, 10(1), 1-35.O’donnell, M. B., Scott, M., Mahlberg, M., & Hoey, M. (2012). Exploring text-initial words, clusters and concgrams in a newspaper corpus. Corpus Linguistics and Linguistic Theory, 8(1), 73-101.O’Halloran, K. (2011). Investigating argumentation in reading groups: Combining manual qualitative coding and automated corpus analysis tools. Applied Linguistics, 32(2), 172-196.Peacock, M. (2002). Communicative moves in the discussion section of research articles. System, 30(4), 479-497.Peng, Y., Lin, A., Wang, K., Liu, F., Zeng, F., & Yang, L. (2015). Global trends inPathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 216


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity” DEM-related research from 1994 to 2013: A bibliometric analysis. Scientometrics, 105(1), 347-366.Poole, R. (2016). Good times, bad times: A Keyword analysis of letters to shareholders of two fortune 500 banking institutions. International Journal of Business Communication, 53(1), 55-73.Poudat, C., & Follette, P. (2012). Corpora and academic writing: A contrastive analysis of research articles in biology and linguistics. In A. Boulton, S. Carter-Thomas & E. Rowley-Jolivet (Eds.), Corpus-informed research and learning in ESP: Issues and applications (167-191). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Rayson, P., & Garside, R. (2000). Comparing corpora using frequency profiling. In Proceedings of the Workshop on Comparing Corpora (1-6). Hong Kong: Association for Computational Linguistics.Salas, M. D. (2015). Reflexive metadiscourse in research articles in Spanish: Variation across three disciplines (linguistics, economics and medicine). Journal of Pragmatics, 77, 20-40.Schutz, N. (2013). How specific is English for Academic Purposes? A look at verbs in business, linguistics and medical research articles. Language and Computers, 77(1), 237-257.Scott, M., & Tribble, C. (2006). Textual patterns: Key words and corpus analysis in language education. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Swales, J. M. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Swales, J. M., & Feak, C. B. (2004). Academic writing for graduate students: Essential tasks and skills. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Wu, B., Xiao, H., Dong, X., Wang, M., & Xue, L. (2012). Tourism knowledge domains: A keyword analysis. Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 17(4), 355- 380.Yang, L. (2013). Evaluative functions of reporting evidentials in English research articles of applied linguistics. Open Journal of Modern Linguistics, 03(02), 119-126.Pathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 217


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity” Language Learning Strategies of Tertiary English Learners Jeng jeng M. Bolintao, PhD [email protected] Ifugao State University (IFSU), Nayon, Lamut, Ifugao, PhilippinesAbstractLearning strategies have been the center of attention and have gained greatimportance in the teaching-learning environment (Deneme, 2010). These are specificactions taken by learners to make learning easier, faster, more enjoyable, more self-directed, more effective, and more transferable in new situations (Cohen, 1996;Oxford, 1993, 1992, 1990). With the conviction that learner strategies are the key tolearner autonomy, language teachings most important aspiration should be thefacilitation of that key.This study aimed to determine the language learning strategies of students at IfugaoState University (IFSU), the only Higher Education Institution (HEI) in the provinceof Ifugao. In addition, it will guide language instructors in their language teaching.Rebecca Oxford’s Strategy Inventory on Language Learning (SILL) was used as aprimary instrument to gather data. Respondents were 290 freshman students fromthree colleges of IFSU. Slovin’s formula and stratified sampling were used to identifynumber of male and female respondents. Data were analyzed using descriptivestatistics, multivariate analyzes of variances (MANOVAs) and independent samples t-tests.Results revealed that IFSU tertiary freshman students use language learning strategies(LLS) at a medium level. Age and ethno-linguistic affiliation have no significance inthe use of LLS; but gender, course and college affiliation affected the use of LLS inthe classroomKeywords: Language Learning strategies (LLS), language teaching, learnerautonomy, SILL, tertiaryIntroductionLearning strategies have been the center of attention and have gained greatimportance in the teaching-learning environment (Deneme, 2010). As Tezcan &Pathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 218


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity”Deneme (2016) posits that teachers and researchers have noticed that there is not anysingle research or method that would provide universal achievement in secondlanguage teaching. Successes of learners in language learning have been a source ofinspiration for teachers and researchers (Brown, 2007), thus enabling them to facilitateinvaluable research by shedding light on language learning strategies.Oxford (2000) stressed that learning strategies are among the main factors that helpdetermine how and how well a student learns a second or foreign language. A secondlanguage is a language studied in a setting where that language is the main vehicle ofeveryday communication and where abundant input exists in that language. Inaddition, Brown (2000) stated that while we all inherently exhibit human traits oflearning, every individual approaches a problem or learns a set of facts or organizes acombination of feelings from a unique perspective. These unique or specific methodsthat we make on a given problem are called strategies.Cohen (1996) and Oxford (1990, 1992, 1993) defines learning strategies as the specificactions taken by learner to make learning easier, faster, more enjoyable, more self-directed, more effective and more transferable to new situations. Further, learningstrategies are “the special thoughts or behaviors that individuals use to helpcomprehend, learn or retain new information” (Rubin, 1987; O’ Malley &Chamot,1999). In the context of language learning, Oxford (1994) highlights thatlanguage learners use the strategies consciously to improve their progress inapprehending, internalizing, and using the target language.Strategies vary intra-individually. Strategies are the moment-by-moment techniquesthat we employ to solve “problems” posed by second language input – learningstrategies (deal with the receptive domain of intake, memory, storage, and recall) andoutput – communication strategies (pertain to the employment of verbal or nonverbalmechanisms for the productive communication of information). The application ofboth learning and communication strategies to classroom learning has come to beknown generically as strategies-based instruction (SBI) (McDonough, 1999, Cohen,1998), or as learner strategy training.Research demonstrated that students apply learning strategies while learning a secondlanguage as evident in many studies on learning strategies that dates back to the 1970sby authors such as Rubin, 1975; Bialystok, 1981; Wenden, 1987; O’Malley & Chamot,1990; Deneme, 2008; Özmen & Gülleroğlu, 2013; and Tezcan & Deneme, 2016.Hence Brown (2000) postulated that apparently, “teaching learners how to learn” isPathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 219


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity”crucial. Further, Wenden (1985) asserted that learner strategies are the key to learnerautonomy, and that one of the most important goals of language teaching should bethe facilitation of that autonomy. Likewise, teachers can benefit from anunderstanding of what makes learners successful and unsuccessful, and establish amilieu for realization of successful strategies in the classroom (Bialystok, 1985). WhileMacIntyre & Noels (1996) found that, students will benefit from SBI if they (a)understand the strategy itself, (b) perceive it to be effective, and (c) do not consider itsimplementation to be overly difficult.One of the most useful manuals of SBI available is Rebecca Oxford’s (1990a) practicalguide for teachers. She outlined host of learning and communication strategies thathave been successful among learners. Oxford grouped language learning strategiesunder two major classes: direct and indirect strategies which are sub-divided into sixsub-groups (memory, cognitive, compensation, meta-cognitive, affective, and social).Language learning strategies that directly involve the target language are called directstrategies and all direct strategies require mental processing of the language. Indirectstrategies, on the other hand, are grouped as meta-cognitive, affective, and social.These strategies are called “indirect” as they support language learning withoutdirectly involving the target language.Teachers cannot always expect instant success in their effort in teaching since studentsoften bring with them certain preconceived notions of what “ought” to go on in theclassroom. Therefore, our efforts to teach students some technical know-how abouthow to tackle a language are well advised. Through checklists, tests, and interviews,teachers can become aware of students’ tendencies and then offer advice on beneficialin-class and extra-class strategies.It is in this light that this research was conducted to determine the language learningstrategies IFSU freshman students’ practice in the acquisition of English as a SecondLanguage using Rebecca Oxford’s Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL),thereafter giving the baseline for the language teachers/instructors in their languageteachings. Specifically, it answered the following questions: 1. What is the profile of the respondents in terms of the following: 1.1. age, 1.2. gender, 1.3. course, 1.4. college, and 1.5. ethno-linguistic?Pathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 220


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity” 2. What strategy is used by tertiary freshman students of IFSU? 3. Is there a significant difference of the strategies used when respondents are grouped by: 3.1. age, 3.2. gender, 3.3. course, 3.4. college, and 3.5. ethno-linguistic?MethodResearch DesignThis is a descriptive study which aimed to determine the language learning strategies(LLS) used by the tertiary freshman students based on different variables as age,gender, course, college, and ethno-linguistic affiliation.ParticipantsThere were 290 respondents out of the 1,048 freshman students which weredetermined using Slovins’ formula. Stratified random sampling using proportionalallocation were utilized where college was used as the stratification variable. Thesestudents were enrolled in the regular subject course Engl. 12 (Writing in theDiscipline) across all programs during the second semester school year 2015-2016 atIFSU.Research EnvironmentThe study was conducted at Ifugao State University, Main Campus, Nayon, Lamut,Ifugao, Philippines. As shown in Figure 1, Ifugao Province is located at the Northernpart of the Philippines. Ifugao has 11 municipalities namely: Lamut, Kiangan, Lagawe,Asipulo, Hingyon, Hungduan, Banaue, Mayoyao, Aguinaldo, and Alfonso Lista. Ofthe 11 municipalities, 6 housed the different campuses of IFSU which was markedwith a circle in the map. The main campus is located at Lamut, the municipality thatserves as a gate way to the province from Manila via Nueva Vizcaya. This provincealso is proud to be the site of one of the UNESCO’s inscribed world heritage – theBanaue Rice Terraces.Pathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 221


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity” Figure 1 Map of the Philippines & the Ifugao ProvinceInstrumentA set questionnaire was used as the instrument to gather information from thestudents. The instrument consisted of two parts. The first part included personalquestions about the students such as age, gender, course, college, and ethno-linguisticaffiliation. The second part of the questionnaire was Rebecca Oxford’s “StrategyInventory for Language Learning” (SILL). The inventory consists of six dimensionsand 50 items. The dimensions were remembering more effectively (memory), using allyour mental processes (cognitive), compensating for missing knowledge(compensation), organizing and evaluating your learning (metacognitive), managingyour emotions (affective), and learning with others (social).The SILL is a standardized measure with versions for students of variety of languages,and as such can be used to collect and analyze information about large numbers oflanguage learners (Chamot, 2004).Data AnalysisData were analyzed using descriptive statistics, multivariate analyzes of variances(MANOVAs) and independent samples t-tests. Descriptive statistics were used todescribe and summarize the properties of the mass of data collected from therespondents. The demographic profile of the college freshmen and frequency of usePathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 222


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity”of language learning strategy were analyzed using descriptive statistics. MANOVAswere used to find the mean differences and statistical significance of differencesamong two or more groups. Significant level was set at 0.05 alpha level. Theindependent samples t-tests were used only in situations where the independentvariable had two levels, e.g., gender of respondents.Result and DiscussionsThe results of the study have been presented below in order of the research questions.ProfileThe respondents of the study were 290 tertiary freshman students. Figure 2 presentsthat most of the freshmen were at age level 18 to 19 with 46% followed by 16 to 17 at41% and only 13% of were at the age of 20 above. It could be associated that most ofthe freshmen have entered grade school at age 8 since the Philippine educationalsystem has no compulsory kindergarten yet during the time these students entered inthe academe. Unlike this time that with the implementation of the K to 12, kids arerequired to enter kindergarten at age 5 (DepEd DO 16. S 2015). Figure 2 Distribution of respondents by ageThe female freshmen dominate the respondents with 56% as shown in figure 3. Thisis true because based on the records of the University Registrar, female populationwas higher across program offerings of the university compared to male except for BSCriminology that has more male enrollees.Pathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 223


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity” Figure 3 Distribution of respondents by genderThe figure below presents that most respondents were from the BS Criminology andDiploma in Agricultural Technology. This is due to the fact that these programs haveboth 300+ population while the other programs have only 70 and below number ofenrollees. Figure 4 Distribution of respondents by courseFigure 5 shows that College of Tourism, Home Science, and Agriculture has the mostrespondents considering the college offers only four programs. In addition, thecollege hosts a program in agriculture that sends on-job trainees to Israel and USA.Hence, inviting a lot of students.Pathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 224


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity” Figure 5 Distribution of respondents by collegeBased on ethno-linguistic affiliation, more than half of the respondents were from theTuwali followed by Ayangan. This could be associated with the fact that mostmunicipalities in Ifugao were occupied by Tuwali.Figure 6 Distribution of respondents by ethno-linguistic affiliationLanguage learning strategy usedTable 1 shows the distribution of freshmen’s responses on their frequency of use oflanguage learning strategies in the classroom. Cronbach’s alpha value of 0.96 for theresponses to all the items showed a high internal consistency. This is in consistentwith Kline (2005), that alpha value of .90 is considered excellent, .80 very good and.70 acceptable.It reveals that freshmen utilized all the LLS at medium level as shown by the meanwithin 2.50 – 3.49 described as sometimes used. Oxford (1989) used the three levelsas high, medium, and low. The scale 3.50 – 4.40 (usually used) and 4.50 – 5.0 (alwaysor almost always used) are under high level, 2.50 – 3.49 (sometimes used) is mediumlevel, while 1.0 – 1.49 (never or almost never used) and 1.50 – 2.49 (generally notPathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 225


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity”used) are low level. This implies that freshmen can easily switch to any of the LLSwhether it calls for direct or indirect strategies as they are learning an L2 or FL. Theresult corroborates the study of Özmen & Gülleroğlu (2013) that students at Facultyof Education and Science use all LLS at medium level.Table 1Tertiary freshman student’s responses for strategies used in language learningMultivariate analysis (MANOVA) were used to find the mean differences in the use oflanguage learning by age groups. The multivariate result was not significant for age(Wilks’ Lambda =0.96, F-value = 0.68, p-value>0.05), indicating no difference in theuse of language learning among the freshmen in different age groups.This implies that students learn an L2, in this case English, in similar ways regardlessof their age level as presented in the table 2. This further means that language teachersneed not to worry if there are younger or older students in the class on as to whatactivities he/she employs since age has no effect in the learning of an L2. Thiscomplements Nambiar (2009) statement that age does not appear to have an influenceon how learning strategies are used by learners.Pathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 226


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity”Table 2Multivariate Analyses of Differences in the use of language learning strategies by ageThe multivariate result, as shown in Table 3, was not significant for gender (Wilk’sLambda= 0.96, F-value = 2.07, p – value > 0.05). This indicates that there was nosignificant difference in the use of language learning strategies between male andfemale freshmen. However, when the analysis was performed independently, therewere significant differences in the use of language learning between male and femalefreshmen in compensation (F=4.88, p<0.05), meta-cognitive (F=7.25, p<0.05) andaffective (F=4.63, p<0.05). This indicates that in the teaching-learning processes inlanguage class, the language teacher should consider preparing an instruction thatwould cater to the strategies likely utilized by the students. More importantly, thelanguage teacher has to design activities harmonizing the strategy where gender hasseen to have significance in the L2 learning.Further statistical analysis revealed that female freshmen were more likely to uselanguage learning strategies in the aforementioned areas than their counterpart. Thiscomplements several researches claiming that female use LLS more widely or morefrequently than male (Tezcan & Deneme, 2016; Özmen & Gülleroğlu, 2013; Kaylani,1996; Oxford, Park-Oh, & Sumrall, 1993).In teaching, this signifies that language learners need to explore different learningstrategies by experimenting through the guidance of language teachers until eventuallychoosing their own set of effective strategy (Chamot, 2004). With the teachers’assistance, the learners should progress up the ladder of their studies and surelyunleash out of their comfort zone.Pathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 227


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity”Table 3Multivariate Analyses of Differences in the use of language learning strategies by genderTable 4 shows the mean differences in the use of language learning strategies bycourse. The multivariate result revealed that there was no significant differences in theuse of language learning by course enrolled (Wilk’s Lambda = 0.80, F = 1.18, p >0.05). However, univariate analysis revealed that there were significant differences inthe use of language learning strategies among the freshmen in memory (F=2.33,p<0.05) and compensation (F=2.39, p<0.05). Post-hoc analysis revealed thatfreshmen who are taking AB Psychology (M=2.89, SD=0.64) were less likely to uselanguage learning strategies than any other students.The result implies that language teachers should craft instructions and assessmentmaterials that best fit into the courses the students were enrolled. As Chamot (2009)cited, learners desire to learn a language is related to the value attached to learning thatlanguage in society (Mah, 1999), how motivated they are (Lo Castro, 1994), and whatopportunities to practice are readily available to them (Kouraogo, 1993).Pathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 228


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity”Table 4Multivariate Analyses of Differences in the use of language learning strategies by courseTable 5 shows the mean differences in the use of language learning strategies bycollege affiliation. The multivariate result revealed that there was no significantdifferences in the use of language learning by college affiliation (Wilk’s Lambda =0.93, F = 1.70, p > 0.05). However, univariate analysis revealed that there weresignificant differences in the use of language learning strategies among the freshmenin memory (F=4.16, p<0.05) and compensation (F=3.76, p<0.05). Post-hoc analysisrevealed that students in CTHSA (M=3.33, SD=0.74) were more likely to uselanguage learning strategies than students in CCCHS (3.09, SD=0.58).This posits that the college where the students belong is a determinant of whatpreferred LLS is used. Hence, language teachers have to corroborate the students’LLS with teaching style that is adaptable and suitable to each college. As Tezcan andDeneme (2016) cited that teachers should be aware of what LLS their students preferto use and accordingly deliver strategy instruction to their students as an importantpart of language curriculum (Cohen, 1998).Table 5Multivariate Analyses of Differences in the use of language learning strategies by college affiliationThe multivariate result was not significant for ethno-linguistic affiliation (Wilk’sLambda = 0.93, F = 0.91, p < 0.05). This indicates that there was no difference in thePathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 229


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity”use of language learning among the freshmen when grouped according to ethno-linguistic affiliation. It can be generalized from here that ethno-linguistic affiliation orenvironment where one grown is not a factor in the second language learning in thiscase of Ifugao Province and its neighboring provinces.The findings were conclusive in this case only as the respondents may differ in ethno-linguistic affiliation but still all were of the same race. Researchers conducted in othercountries comparing ethnicity and LLS show that the work is still uncoordinated andin a state of early infancy (Nambiar, 2009).Table 6Multivariate Analyses of Differences in the use of language learning strategies by ethno-linguisticaffiliationConclusionThe research has focused on the language learning strategies (LLS) IFSU freshmanstudents’ used based on different demographic profiles. Result revealed that therespondents utilized all the LLS in medium level. Age and ethno-linguistics affiliationhave no significance in the use of LLS, however, gender, course (the degree thestudents are taking), and college affiliation have significance in their choice oflanguage learning strategy they use in the classroom.This study benefits the languagefaculty of IFSU in their language teaching pedagogy. Moreover, the result serves asenlightenment to both teachers and learners. Teachers can now fit its assessmentstrategy to the preferred LLS of the students. Furthermore, they can craft instructionsand assessment materials that will develop the other LLS the students should acquire.In effect, teachers are helping the students advance their autonomy in learning theEnglish language. On the other hand, the learners may become aware that there areother LLS that they can use in language learning. With this, they will not only bedependent in one or two LLS that they use in the classroom.Pathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 230


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity” ReferencesBialystok, A. (1985). The role of conscious strategy is second language proficiency. Modern Language Journal, 65.Brown, H. D. (2007). Principles of language learning and teaching. (5th Ed.)Brown, H. D. (2000). Principles of language learning and teaching (4th Ed.) New York: Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.Chamot, A. U. (2004). Issues in language learning strategy research and teaching. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 1 (1).Cohen, A.D. (1996). Second language learning and use strategies: Clarifying the issues. Research Report, Revised Version, Center for Advanced Research on Language Acquisition, Minnesota University, Minneapolis.Cohen, A. (1998). Strategies in learning and using a second language. New York: Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.Department of Education. (2015). Department Order 16, s. 2015. Addendum to DepEd Order No. 1, s. 2015 (Declaring January 24, 2015 as Commencement of Early Registration for SY 2015-2016). Retrieved from http://www.deped.gov.ph/Deneme, S. (2008). Language learning strategy preferences of Turkish students. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 4.Deneme, S. (2010). Cross-cultural differences in language learning strategy preferences: A comparative study. The International Journal – Language Society and Culture, 31.Kaylani, C. (1996). The influence of gender and motivation on EFL learning: Strategy use in Jordan. In R.L. Oxford (Ed.), Language learning strategies around the world. Cross cultural perspectives. Manao: University of Hawaii Press.Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (2nd Ed.). New York: Guilford.Kouraogo, P. (1996). Language learning strategies in input-poor environments. System 27.Pathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 231


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity”Lo Castro, V. (1994). Learning strategies and learning environments. TESOL Quarterly, 28 (2).Mah, S. F. (1999). The language learning strategies of Malaysian undergraduates from national primary schools and national type (Chinese) primary schools for completing selected ESL classroom activities. Unpublished master’s thesis, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, Bangi.MacIntyre, P. D. & Noels, K A. (1996). Using social-psychological variables to predict the use of language learning strategies. Foreign Language Annals, 29 (3).McDonough, S. H. (1999). Learner strategies: state of the art article. Language Teaching, 32 (1)Nambiar, R. (2009). Learning strategy research – Where are wenow? The Reading Matrix, 9.O’Malley J. & Chamot, A. (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: Newburry House.Oxford, R. L. (1992/1993). Language learning strategies in a nutshell: Update and ESL suggestions. TESOL Journal, 2 (2).Oxford, R.L. (1994). Language learning strategies: An update 21st May 2010. http://www.cal.org/.Oxford, R. L. (2000). Language learning styles and strategies: An overview.Özmen, D. & Gülleroğlu, H. (2013). Determining language learning strategies used by the students at Faculty of Educational Sciences based on some variables. Education and Science, 38.Rubin, J. (1975). What the “good language learner” can teach us. TESOL Quarterly, 9.Tezcan, S. & Deneme, S. (2016). A study of language learning strategy use of young Turkish learners. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 7.Wenden, A. (1987). Meta-cognition: An expanded view on the cognitive abilities of L2 learners. Language Learning, 37.Pathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 232


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity” EFL Teachers’ Teaching Strategies Vilma Badua-Liwan [email protected] Ifugao State University, Philippines AbstractIn the field of teaching English as a foreign language, each teacher has his/her ownunique and innovative strategies and methodologies in the classroom. This researchaimed to investigate EFL teachers’ profiles according to their age, years of teachingexperience, years of formal study of the English language, nationality, and educationalattainment. Likewise, this research examines teachers' perceptions of their teachingstrategies and whether there are significant differences in their perceptions whengrouped according to their profiles. This study was conducted at KabinwittayaSecondary School in Thailand with 12 EFL teachers as respondents. A teacher-madequestionnaire on the strategies in teaching the four- macro skills, writing, speaking,reading, and listening, was used. Statistical tools used for the descriptive data weremean, frequency count, and percentage to determine the profiles and teachingstrategies of the teachers. For inferential data analysis, t-test and ANOVA were usedwith the level of significance set at .05 alpha. The respondents were Thais, 24-59 yearsold, Bachelor’s degree holders, who have taught for between 10-40 years and haveformally studied English for between 11-20 years. They usually employed severalteaching strategies in teaching the four macro skills. Age, years of teaching experience,and years of formal study in English language did not influence the teaching strategiesof the teachers; however, educational attainment influenced the teaching strategies inwriting and reading. An intervention program needs to be developed to enhance theteaching strategies of EFL teachers.Keywords: Teaching Strategies, EFL Teachers, English as a Foreign LanguageIntroductionIn teaching and learning a foreign language, teachers and students alike have their ownteaching and learning strategies. Teachers innovate and employ different strategies intheir teaching to maximize learning and address the learners’ varied learning styles andconditions. In Bongolan and Moir’s (2005) case study, which was considered agroundwork in this field, they recorded some teaching strategies which greatly helpedteachers develop their students’ English language skills such as vocabulary andlanguage development strategy, guided interaction and Schema-Building strategy,Pathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 233


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity”metacognition and authentic assessment strategy, explicit instruction strategy,meaning-based context (contextualization), the use of modeling, graphic organizers,visuals, and text representations strategy. By using these strategies, EFL teachers plan,reflect, and observe classroom instructions with the students’ language skillsdevelopment and content learning in mind. Such strategies are used to identify goodteaching skills that help them plan lessons that are accessible to a range ofstudents.There is no doubt that skills in employing different strategies in teaching areacquired throughout the years of a teachers’ profession. Richards (2010) hashighlighted the significance of some core dimensions of teachers’ skills and expertisewhich include: language proficiency, content knowledge, teaching skills, contextualknowledge, learner-focused teaching, and professionalism. Thus, EFL teachers in anycontext require these skills to make their efforts worthwhile and exercise theireffectiveness in EFL classrooms. As Hammond (2000) emphasized, a teacher’sknowledge of the subject taught has often been found to be an important factor inteacher effectiveness. However, measures of pedagogical knowledge includingknowledge of learning, teaching strategies, methods, and curriculum have more oftenbeen found to influence teaching performance, and frequently these factors exert evenstronger effects than subject matter knowledge. Knoblauch & Woolfolk, (2008) alsoagreed that teachers with positive attitude towards teaching often strive for betterperformances. Their beliefs and perceptions about their teaching skills when usingvaried teaching strategies have a strong impact on their teaching effectiveness. Thus,this study aimed to find out the following: 1. To find out the profile of the surveyed teachers according to their age, yearsof teaching experience, years of formal study in English language, and educationalattainment. 2. To identify the teaching strategies that they employ in teaching the fourmacro skills: writing, reading, speaking, and listening. 3. To determine if there are significant differences in the teaching strategiesused by the teachers when grouped according to their profiles. 4. To develop an intervention program to enhance the teachers’ teachingstrategies.Moreover, the hypothesis stated that there is no significant difference in the teachingstrategies used by EFL teachers at Kabinwittaya School when grouped according toage, years of teaching experience, years of formal study of the English language, andeducational attainment.Pathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 234


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity”MethodParticipants and ProcedureThere were twelve participants who were EFL teachers at Kabinwittaya School inKabinburi, Pachinburi, Thailand where the study was conducted. The participants areThai nationals and who have all undergone and completed the required training tobecome professional teachers. All of them were able to complete the surveyquestionnaire and handed them over in time. Since this study aimed to investigate theprofile of the EFL teachers and their innovative teaching strategies in teaching thefour macro skills, the descriptive survey method was employed.Data Gathering Tool and AnalysisTo gather data, a survey questionnaire was used to determine the respondents’ profilesand teaching strategies in teaching the four macro skills. The questionnaire wasdivided into three parts and used a 5 point rating scale to measure the degree of therespondents’ frequency in employing the teaching strategies, with 5 as “always oralmost always employed” and 1 as “never employed”. Part 1 of the questionnairedetermined the respondents’ profile in terms of age, educational qualification, yearsof teaching experience, and years of formal study of the English language.The second part of the questionnaire examined the respondents’ perceptions of theirstrategies in teaching the four- macro skills. Frequency and percentage were used todetermine the respondents’ age, years of formal study of the English language, yearsof teaching, and educational qualification. The mean and standard deviation wereused to determine the respondents’ perceptions of their teaching strategies.The one-way Analysis Of Variance (ANOVA) and t-test were used to determine ifthere were significant differences that existed among the respondents’ perceptions ofteaching strategies when grouped by their profiles.Pathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 235


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity”The interpretation of the scale used to measure teaching strategies they employed areas follows:High Description/Frequency RangeMediumLow Always employ 4.5-5.0 Usually employ 3.5-4.4 Occasionally employ 2.5-3.4 Rarely employ 1.5- 2.4 Never employ 1.0-1.4Results and DiscussionsProfile of TeachersEducational Attainment, Years of Formal study of the English language, andNationalityTable 1 shows the frequency and percentage distribution of the teachers’ profilesaccording to years of formal study of the English language and educationalattainment. The results show that a majority of the respondents had a bachelor’sdegree (83.33%), while 16. 67% had a master's degree. Likewise, 33.34% of theteachers had 11 to 15 years of formal study of the English language with a very closegap of 33.33% for those who had 16 to 20 years of formal study of the Englishlanguage. Furthermore, the results show that majority of the teachers were Thainationals (75%). This implies that most of the participants had a formal study of theEnglish Language.Noopong (2002) stated in his survey that seventy percent of secondary schoolEnglish teachers in Thailand graduated with a bachelor’s degree in English, whileSiribanpitak, P. and Boonyananta, S. (2007) found out that a majority of Thaielementary and secondary school teachers had completed undergraduate studies as of2004. Ninety-one percent of the teachers completed a bachelor’s degree program, andthe remaining percentage either had a master’s degree or higher or held less than abachelor’s degree.Pathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 236


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity”Table 1Frequency and Percentage Distribution of Teachers by Years of Formal Study of the EnglishLanguage, Educational Attainment and NationalityFormal Study of English Educational Attainment Total(in years) Frequency Bachelor' Masters Percentage s11-15 Nationality Fil 1 1 8.33Total Th 3 3 25 ai 4 33.34 416-20 Nationality Fil 0 2 2 16.67 Th 2 0 2 16.67 aiTotal 2 2 4 33.3321-25 Nationality Th 1 1 8.33 aiTotal 1 1 8.3326-30 Nationality Th 3 3 25 Total ai 3 3 25Total Nationality Fil 1 2 3 25 Th 9 0 9 75 ai 10 2 12 100Percentage 83.33 16.67 100Pathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 237


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity”Age and Years of Teaching ExperienceTable 2 shows the frequency and percentage distribution of teachers according to ageand years of teaching experience. Twenty five percent of the teachers were 24-30years old with one to ten years of teaching experience, and 8.33% of the teacherswere 31-37 years old with 1 to 10 years of teaching experience. Twenty five percent ofthe participants were 38-44 years old with 11 to 20 years of teaching experience.This study shows that most of the participants were more than 30 years old, and amajority had more than 11 years of teaching experience.Table 2Frequency and Percentage Distribution of Teachers by Age and Years of Teaching ExperienceAge (in years) Teaching Experience (in years) Total 1-10 11- 21-30 31-40 Frequency % 20 24-30 300 0 3 25 31-37 100 0 1 8.33 38-44 030 0 3 25 45-51 001 2 3 25 52-59 000 2 2 16.67Total 431 4 12 100% 33.33 25 8.34 33.33 100Teaching Strategies of Teachers in the Four Macro SkillsWritingTable 3 highlights the teachers’ perception on teaching strategies in writing with amean total of (2.92), which means the participants occasionally employ differentteaching strategies in teaching writing. The teachers felt that the strategy they employthe most were the guided interaction strategy (3.83), followed by vocabulary andPathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 238


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity”language development strategy (3.75), modeling, graphic organizers, and visualsstrategy (3.66).The results imply that the participants employ a variety of teaching strategies whichinclude: integrating group or team work in their class activities to maximize students’learning experiences and minimize the time used; using different formats and givingwriting activities like word analysis, vocabulary journals, subject-specific journals, A-B-C books, word webs, and word walls; letting their students make illustrations usingVenn diagrams and story maps; letting their students compare language uses forsimilar contexts; and including writing the main idea and supporting detailschematics in their class activities.However, the results indicated that the participants never or rarely employ somestrategies like giving their students a structured note-taking format such as graphicorganizers for lectures, letting their students do their own learning logs or journalsand quick writes, and letting their students write double-entry journals.The result corroborates with the study of Ferede, et al. (2012) stating that EFLteachers of preparatory schools in Jimma believe that students can develop theirwriting skills if they get the chance to learn them because writing requires regularpractice. They strongly believe that writing requires critical thinking. Thus, these EFLteachers hold that making students write error-free sentences should not be theemphasis in the teaching of writing.Table 3 Mea Descripti SDMeans of Teachers’ Strategies in Writing n on .4522 3.750 Teaching Strategies in Writing High 7 0 1. Vocabulary and Language Development 1.1 I use different Medium .65134 formats and give writing activities like word analysis, vocabulary 3.333 journals, subject-specific journals, A-B-C books, word webs, and word 3 Medium .6685 walls. High 6 1.2. I let my students do some interactive editing and cloze 2.916 paragraphs. 7 .8348 2. Guided Interaction strategy 5 2.1. I give poster projects for my students to work with. 3.833 2.2. I integrate group/team work in my class activities to maximize 3 students’ learning experience and minimize the time.Pathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 239


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity”3. Metacognition and Authentic Assessment 1.416 Low .51493.1. I let my students do their own learning logs/ journals and quick 7 3writes. .71774. Explicit Instruction strategy - I give activities for essay formats 3.833 High 4or sentence starters 3 .7537 85. Meaning-Based Context and Universal Themes strategy 2.7500 Medium5.1. I give activities like quick-write responses or I let my students’ .5149record their responses to visuals. 35.2. I let my students compare language uses for similar contexts. 3.416 Medium .7785 7 06. Modeling, Graphic Organizers and Visuals 3.6667 High .71776.1. I let my students make illustrations using Venn diagrams and story 4maps. .51496.2. I include writing the main idea and supporting detail schematics in 3.166 Medium 3the activities. 7 .66856.3. I let my students write double-entry journals. 1.416 Low 6 7 0.649016.4. I give my students a structured note-taking format such as 1.583 Lowgraphic organizers for lectures. 3Overall 2.9236 MediumReadingTable 4 indicates the teachers’ perception on teaching strategies in reading with amean of (3.35) which means they occasionally employ strategies in teaching reading.The teachers felt that the strategies they employ most with the highest mean of (4.66)were Vocabulary and Language Development strategies, while Modeling, GraphicOrganizers, and Visuals strategies have a mean of (4.50). On the contrary, theparticipants felt the strategy they employ the least were Guided Interaction strategywith the mean of (1.83) and Meaning-Based Context and Universal Themes strategywith the mean of (2.41).It can be concluded that the strategies that the participants make use of the mostwhen teaching reading are picture clues, think-aloud activities, and the use of differentteaching materials and high technology such as class websites, blogs, and videos. TheyPathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 240


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity”also improvise if necessary. In addition, the participants teach specific readingcomprehension skills for completing assignments, including task procedures,answering questions, word problems, and understanding text and graphics. However,the teachers felt that the strategies they employ the least are the use of Word Wallsalphabetically arranged from high to low frequency words displayed at an easy accesspoint for students to read and choosing and providing reading materials about currentevents, local news, or true stories about real people.A number of studies like that of Fisher, Frey and Williams (2002) maintain thatcomprehension strategy instruction has positive effects on students’ readingcomprehension. While Lai Tung and Luo (2008) also stated that teachingcomprehension strategies, both explicitly and directly to language learners, help thembecome more thoughtful and proficient readers. Thus, a prolonged, regular andconstant reading strategy instruction will be needed. Comprehension strategyinstruction also requires a long-term engagement from both teachers and students.For the consideration of long-term strategy use, it is also necessary to investigate thedelayed recall of strategy use of the subject.Likewise, numerous studies have proven that the think-aloud approach plays anessential role in enhancing learners’ reading comprehension abilities, especially forstruggling readers, argued Lai, et.al (2008). The think-aloud approach is not only apractical research tool to investigate language learners’ reading strategies but also aneffective instructional technique to benefit students’ reading comprehension. Caldwelland Leslie (2003) also emphasized that the link between thinking aloud andcomprehension improvement may be affected by variables other than the strategyitself. Thus, it is the teachers’ responsibility to make students visualize the process oftheir own thinking while reading English texts by adopting think-aloud activities.Table 4 Mean Description SDMeans of Teachers’ Strategies in Reading .49237 4.6667 High Teaching Strategies in Reading 3.4167 Medium .51493 1. Vocabulary and Language Development 1.1. I use picture clues in teaching reading. 1.2. I use Word Walls: Alphabetically arranged high to low frequency words displayed at an easy access point for students to read.Pathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 241


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity”2. Guided Interaction- I make my reading class fun and 1.8333 Low .83485motivating by using different reading activities for studentssuch as “reader’s theater”. 3.3333 Medium .492373. Metacognition and Authentic Assessment3.1. I utilize guided reading and the Directed Reading 2.9167 Medium .66856Thinking Activity (DRTA) in my reading class. 3.3333 Medium .492373.2. I encourage reciprocal teaching.4. Explicit Instruction strategy 2.7500 Medium .7537841. I give my students some reading directions before they 2.4167 Low .51493read a passage.4.2. I give reading activities like completing a story map. 4.5000 High .674205. Meaning-Based Context and Universal Themes 3.5833 High .51493strategy-I choose and provide reading materials aboutcurrent events, local news or true stories of real people. 4.0833 High .668566. Modeling, Graphic Organizers, and Visuals strategy6.1. I use some think-aloud activities. 3.3485 Medium 0.601996. 2. I teach specific reading comprehension skills forcompleting: task procedures, answering questions, wordproblems, understanding text & graphics. 6.3. I use different teaching materials and high technology such as class websites, blogs, and videos. I also improvise if necessary. OverallSpeakingTable 5 shows the teachers’ perceptions on teaching strategies in speaking with amean of (4.15), which means they always employ strategies when teaching speaking.The participants felt the teaching strategies in speaking they utilize the most areguided interaction strategy with the mean (4.66) followed by explicit instructionstrategy and modeling, graphic organizers, and visuals strategy with the same mean of(4.50); then vocabulary and language development strategy and metacognition andauthentic assessment strategy with the same mean of (4.25) and lastly, the meaning-based context and universal themes strategy, with a mean of 4.0.Pathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 242


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity”The results show that the teachers employ most of the teaching strategies such asthink-aloud and think-pair-share when asking questions, and give students enoughtime to process the questions. They employ different and appropriate speakingactivities such as interviews, and group presentations. Likewise, they use good andinteresting activities to provide interactive learning to their students like role playingand other real based situations when teaching new vocabularies. These activities alsoallow students to use vocabulary according to context. Lastly, they use effectivemotivations to give students meaningful experiences like integrating songs in somelessons. Although they give activities involving idioms, they employ this approachinfrequently. Some researchers like Chou (2004), however, assert that the cognitivestrategies are the most frequently used strategy.Table 5 Mean Description SDMeans of Teachers’ Strategies in Speaking 4.2500 High .62158 4.6667 High .65134 Teaching Strategies in Speaking 1. Vocabulary and Language Development - I use picture clues 4.6667 High .49237 in giving speaking activities. 4.2500 High .75378 2. Guided Interaction strategy 2.1. I employ different and appropriate speaking activities such as 3.0833 Medium .79296 interviews, and group presentations. 4.5000 High .67420 2.2. I use think-aloud and think-pair-shares when asking questions, 3.9167 High .79296 and give students enough time to process the questions. 3. Metacognition and Authentic Assessment 3.7500 High .96531 3.1. I encourage my students to say what they think about a certain 4.0000 High 1.0444 topic by employing think aloud. 4. Explicit Instruction strategy 7 4.1. I give activities involving idioms. 4.2. I let my students answer simple questions. 5. Meaning-Based Context and Universal Themes strategy 5.1. I use good and interesting activities to provide interactive learning to my students like role playing in teaching new vocabularies and their uses according to context. 5.2. I use effective motivations to give students meaningful experiences like integrating songs. 5.3. Instead of translating a word from Thai to English, I use the word in a sentence or give examples in English so my students can understand the meaning of the word and its use.Pathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 243


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity”6. Modeling, Graphic Organizers, and Visuals 4.5000 High .522236.1. I incorporate new and technological materials such as audio-videos, computer aided instructions (CAI), etc. in teaching EFL 4.0833 High .79296speaking. 4.1515 High 0.736746.2. I use jazz chants as an activity in some lessons. OverallListeningTable 6 shows the means of teachers’ perceptions on teaching strategies in listeningwith a mean of (3.46), which means they occasionally employ listening teachingstrategies. The teachers felt that the strategy they apply the most is the GuidedInteraction strategy with the highest mean of 4.66 followed by Vocabulary andLanguage Development strategy with a mean of 4.00, then, Explicit Instructionstrategy with the mean of 3.91 and Meaning-Based Context and Universal Themesstrategy with the mean of 3.75 and lastly, Metacognition and Authentic Assessmentstrategy with mean of 3.50.It can be concluded that the teachers employ several teaching strategies in teaching thelistening skills such as providing activities like partner interviews, listen and repeat,and think-pair-share as well as providing guided practice in using relevant listeningskills for specific listening purposes depending on their students’ proficiency level.They also give listen and repeat activities by using picture clues or real objects as wellas use technological materials such as audio, video, or computer aided instructions inteaching listening. They provide activities such as listening to directions and listeningto a story and answering comprehension check questions while integrating songs androle plays in their lessons. Likewise, they use multimedia like audio and video clips,news, or true story movies in Thai settings and lastly, they use a variety of suitablelistening activities and comprehension checks in their lessons.McCloud (2011) discussed in his research how teachers can focus on listeningstrategies through cognitive listening strategy as it relates to one of the most secondlanguage (L2) problem which is the “Speed of Speaking”. Since EFL learners thinkspeakers speak too fast, teachers need to be aware of why this happens. McCloudemphasized that teachers need to understand how to better organize a listeningactivity in the classroom. Teachers need to understand that students, when hearing arecording in class, are unable to get non verbal clues or pick up on sounds or catchthe general idea. Therefore, when planning a listening activity that includes aPathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 244


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity”recording, a teacher could explain the situation in the recording and have studentspredict what the dialogue might be before they listen to it. The teacher should repeatthe recording several times and have students take notes of the recording. It is alsoimportant that the teacher explains the dialogue. It is also fun to let the students’ roleplay the dialogue to reveal nonverbal clues.Table 6 Mean Descripti SDMeans of Teachers’ Strategies in Listening on .85280 Teaching Strategies in Listening High .77850 High .492371. Vocabulary and Language Development - I give listen and 4.0000 Highrepeat activities by using picture clues or real objects. 4.3333 .753782. Guided Interaction strategy -2.1. I provide activities such as 3.6667 Medium .67420partner interviews, listen and repeat, and think-pair-share. High .738552.2. I provide guided practice in using relevant listening skills for 3.2500 1.02986specific listening purposes depending on my students’ 3.5000 Mediumproficiency level. 3.0000 High .900343. Metacognition and Authentic Assessment 3.8333 .651343.1. I give anticipation guides for my students to use before the Highlesson 3.9167 Medium .866033.2. I use a variety of suitable listening activities and 2.6667 .71774comprehension checks in my lessons. High3.3. I use task cards to give students opportunities to take 3.7500 Mediumresponsibility for their own learning. 3.16674. Explicit Instruction strategy4.1. I provide activities such as listening to directions andlistening to a story and answering comprehension checkquestions.4.2. I use technological materials such as audio, video, orcomputer aided instructions in teaching listening.5. Meaning-Based Context and Universal Themes strategy5.1. I use multimedia like audio and video clips, news, or truestory movies in Thai settings.5.2. I integrate songs and role plays in my lessons.6. Modeling, Graphic Organizers, and Visuals6.1. I provide activities like “jazz chants”.Pathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 245


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity”6.2. I use bilingual handouts and cue lists. 3.0833 Medium .79296 6.3. I use metaphors and imagery for cues. Overall 2.7500 Medium 1.28806 3.4551 Medium 0.8105Difference on Teachers’ Strategies by ProfileBy Age, Years of Teaching Experience and Years of Formal Study of theEnglish LanguageTable 7 presents the results of ANOVA between the perceptions of teachers onteaching strategies and their age, years of teaching experience, and years of formalstudy of the English language. The results of the study revealed that there is nosignificant difference between the teaching strategies in teaching the four-macro skillsin EFL, writing, reading, speaking, and listening and the age, years of teachingexperience, and years of formal study of the English language. Therefore, the nullhypothesis is accepted.An earlier study on the effect of teacher experience on student learning found apositive relationship between teachers’ effectiveness and their years of experience, butthe relationship observed is not always significant or an entirely linear one (Zuzovsky,2003). The evidence currently available suggests that while inexperienced teachers areless effective than more senior teachers, the benefits of experience level off after afew years (Rivkin et al., 2000).Pathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 246


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity”Table 7Result of ANOVA between the Teachers’ Strategies and their Age, Years of Teaching Experienceand Years of Formal Study of the English Language EFL Age Years of Teaching Years of Formal StudyTeaching Experience in theStrategies English Language F- Sig Interpretatio F- Sig Interpretation F- Si Interpretation value n valu valu g Decision eeWriting .985 .474 Not Significant .773 .54 Not Significant . 62 . Not Significant Accept Ho Accept Ho 62 Accept HoReading 0.36 .338 Not Significant 1.76 . Not Significant 1 .11 . Not Significant Accept Ho .23 Accept Ho 32 Accept HoSpeaking 1.28 .361 Not Significant 0.46 .71 Not Significant .000 1.0 Not Significant Accept Ho Accept Ho Accept HoListening .79 .564 Not Significant 0.50 .69 Not Significant .093 .77 Not Significant Accept Ho Accept Ho Accept HoOthers .94 .494 Not Significant 1.28 . Not Significant 4.12 .07 Not Significant Accept Ho 34 Accept Ho Accept HoBy Nationality and Educational QualificationTable 8 shows the result of the t-test between the perceptions of teachers on teachingstrategies and their nationality and educational qualification. The results show thatthere is no significant difference between the EFL teaching strategies when teacherswere grouped according to nationality. Therefore, the null hypothesis is accepted.Pathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 247


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity”However, when the teachers were grouped according to educational qualification,significant difference existed on the EFL teaching strategies in teaching writing, andreading. Thus, the null hypothesis is rejected. In contrast, no significant differenceexisted between EFL teaching strategies in teaching speaking and listening skills whenteachers were grouped according to educational qualification. Hence, the nullhypothesis is accepted.Zuzovsky (2003) reported that findings related to teachers’ academic degrees such asBachelor’s, Master’s, doctorate, and the like are inconclusive. Some studies showpositive effects of advanced degrees (Betts, Zau and Rice, 2003; Goldhaber andBrewer, 2000); others show negative effects (Ehrenberg and Brewer, 1994). There isno evidence that graduates of the longer programs become more effective teachers(Zuzovsky,R..2003).Table 8Result of t-test between the Teachers’ Strategies and their Nationality and Educational QualificationEFL Teaching Nationality Educational Qualifications Strategies Sig Interpretation t-value t t- Sig Interpretation valueWriting .295 .774 Not Significant 9.0 .037 Significant Accept Ho Reject HoReading .525 .444 Not Significant 9.0 .001 Significant Accept Ho Reject HoSpeaking .673 .444 Not Significant 1.027 .274 Not Significant Accept Ho Accept hoListening .701 .333 Not Significant 1.603 .319 Not Significant Accept Ho Accept HoConclusions 1. The teachers at Kabinwittaya School are Thai, Bachelor’s degree holders whohave taught for 10 to 40 years and formally studied English for between11 to 20 years. 2. The teaching strategies most commonly used by the teachers are vocabularyand language development, guided interaction, metacognition and authenticassessment, explicit instruction, meaning-based context and universal themes,modeling, and graphic organizers and other visual aides.Pathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 248


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity” 3. Age, years of teaching experience, years of formal study of the Englishlanguage, and nationality do not determine the teaching strategies of the teachers inthe four macro skills; however, educational attainment determines the teachingstrategies in the skills in writing, reading, and other instructional challenges. 4. There is a need to develop an intervention program to enhance the EFLteachers’ teaching strategies.Recommendations 1. The teachers at Kabinwittaya School should be encouraged and motivated togrow professionally by pursuing teacher trainings and higher education or itsequivalent. 2. The administration of the school, in collaboration with the teachers, shouldconsider coming up with certain activities and plan trainings or professionaldevelopment activities for teachers to become acquainted with the various teachingstrategies such that these teachers will be able to use them in their classes. Throughthese trainings, the teaching-learning situation would be enhanced and a moresuccessful output will be realized. 3. The proposed intervention program is highly recommended to be fundedand implemented. 4. Future researchers are encouraged to do a similar study but on a wider scopeand include other variables.ReferencesBetts, J., Zau, A. and Rice, L. (2003). Determinants of Student Achievement: New Evidence from San Diego. Public Policy Institute of California, San Francisco, CA. From http://www.ppic.org/Bongolan, R and Moir, E. (2005). Six Key Strategies for Teachers of English- Language Learners, A Case Study. New Teacher Center, University of California at Santa Cruz 1201 Connecticut avenue, NW Suite 901 Washington DC. From http://suu.edu.Caldwell, J. and Leslie, L. (2003). Does proficiency in middle school reading assure proficiency in high school reading? The possible role of think-aloud. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 47 (4), 324-335.Chou, Y. (2004). Promoting Learners' Speaking Ability by Socio affective Strategies.Pathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 249


The 1st Rt International Conference on English Language Teaching (RtICELT) 2016 Proceedings “Diversity our Identity” The University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA. The Internet TESL Journal, 10, 9. From http://iteslj.org.Ehrenberg, R. and Brewer, D. (1994). Do school and teacher characteristics matter? Evidence from high school and beyond. Economics of Education Review, 13, 1-17.Ferede, T., Melese. E., and Tefera, E. (September, 2012). A descriptive Survey on Teachers’ Perception of EFL Writing and Their Practice of Teaching Writing: Preparatory Schools in Jimma Zone in Focus. Jimma University, College of Social Sciences, English Department. Ethiop. J. Educ. & Sc. Vol. 8 No 1. From www.ajol.infFisher, D., Frey, N. and Williams, D (November, 2002). Seven Literacy Strategies That Work. Educational Leadership. The Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. 60 (3) 70-73. From http://www-tc.pbs.org/; http://www.ascd.orgGoldhaber, D. and Brewer, D. (2000). Evaluating the Effect of Teacher Degree Level on Educational Performance. From http://nces.ed.gov/Hammond, L. (2000). Teacher Quality and Student Achievement. From http://epaa.asu.edu.Knoblauch, D. and Woolfolk, H. (2008). “Maybe I can teach those kids.” The influence of contextual factors on student teachers’ sense of efficacy, Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 1, 166-179.Lai. Y., Tung. Y., and Luo. S. (2008) Theory of Reading Strategies and its Application by EFL Learners: Reflections on Two Case Studies Taipei Municipal University of Education. from https://www.lhu.edu.twMcCloud, G. (2011) Problems in teaching listening in EFL classrooms. From http://www.slideshare.net.Noopong, D. (2002). English teaching problems and the needs for professional development of teachers of English in education extended schools under the Jurisdiction of the Office of Primary Education, Nakhon Ratchasima. Nakhon Ratchasima Rajabhat University. English Program.Pathumtani, Thailand, May 14, 2016 Page | 250


Like this book? You can publish your book online for free in a few minutes!
Create your own flipbook