Effects of Gender Differences on L2 Learning Strategies性别差异对二语学习策略的影响

来源 :外语学法教法研究 | 被引量 : 0次 | 上传用户:yanzhenwei2
下载到本地 , 更方便阅读
声明 : 本文档内容版权归属内容提供方 , 如果您对本文有版权争议 , 可与客服联系进行内容授权或下架
论文部分内容阅读
  中文摘要:文章通过回顾过去几十年学者们的研究,考查了性别差异对二语学习策略的影响。作者首先指出学者们一致认为男性和女性在选择语言学习策略上是存在差异的,比如,女性比男性使用的策略更多且更频繁。此外,作者还考查了学者们对性别和其它变量如文化、学科、语言水平等的关系方面的研究,以便找出学者们是否对男性和女性在选择策略方面是否存在相对一致的观点。研究发现,在这一方面,学者们似乎还没有统一的结论。因此,作者建议应该做更多的研究来考查性别差异对语言学习者学习策略的影响。
  关键词:性别差异,学习策略,语言水平
  
  Abstract:The paper examines gender differences in L2 strategy use by reviewing the literature of the last two decades. The author first points out that a general consensus exists in the studies on the choice of language learning strategies by men and women, i.e., women use more strategies with a higher frequency than men. She then reviews the studies about the relationships between gender and other variables such as culture, the discipline of study, subject domains, language proficiency and the rest to find out whether there are consistent findings of the selection of learning strategies by males and females within and across different variables respectively. She states that research on this aspect is far from conclusive. Accordingly, she concludes the further research needs to be carried out on gender differences in L2 learning strategy use within and across other variables.
  Key words:gender differences; language learning strategies; language proficiency
  Learning strategies are the specific operations used by language learners to aid their learning in any subject area (Oxford, 1989). Considerable research has been done on the efficient strategies employed by the “good language learner” (See Oxford, 1993). Research reveals that many factors such as gender, culture, career, learning style, age, learning tasks, the discipline of study and the rest have an effect on the choice of language learning strategies (e.g. Oxford & Nyikos, 1989). Among these variables, gender differences are “of potential strategic value to university departments insofar as they are able to locate difficulties that students bring with them early in their undergraduate studies”(Meyer, 1995, p. 201). What’s more, Virpislotte & Sarilindblom-Ylanne (2001) point out that the study on the similarities and differences of gender in strategy use can provide valuable information for planning more successful study strategy training, to name but a few. Therefore, it is of great importance to study gender differences in L2 learning strategy use.
  However, few studies have touched on gender differences in L2 learning strategy use. Oxford, Nyikos and Ehrman (1988) made a thorough review of studies concerning gender differences in L2 learning strategies and only found four empirically based studies that investigated the different strategies used by men and women (See Oxford, 1993a). Over the last two decades, researchers have come to realize that gender differences play an important role in L2 learning strategies, among whom Rebecca Oxford has made the most contribution to it (e.g. Oxford, 1988).In general, there is a consensus to date among the researchers that females tend to use more strategies and have a higher frequency of the strategy use than males. As noted earlier, other variables besides gender relate to the choice of language learning strategies. Accordingly, researchers have examined the gender differences when taking other variables into consideration to see whether gender difference trends exist within and across different variables (e.g. Oxford & Crookall, 1989; Fritz, 1992; Sheorey & Mokhtari, 2001; Ehrman and Oxford, 1988). However, research findings on gender difference with other variables under control have so far not been consistent and conclusive.
  1. General Consensus on Gender Difference in L2 Strategy Use
  Women were generally reported using more strategies with a higher frequency of strategy use than men in many studies (e.g. Politzer, 1983). As is mentioned earlier, four studies were mentioned in the review of Oxford, Nyikos and Ehrman (1988) to have provided empirical evidence for sex differences in L2 strategy use. Politzer (1983) was the first to have reported a more frequent use of social strategies for L2 learning among female college students than their male counterparts, which he did not explain and Oxford (1989) attributed to women’s stronger social orientation. Besides, Ehrman and Oxford (1989) found that women used significantly more L2 learning strategies than men in a study of adult language learners in four categories: general study strategies, functional practice strategies, strategies for negotiating meaning and self-management strategies. Further, the finding of Oxford and Nyikos (1989) revealed that females used three of five identified L2 learning strategies significantly more often than their male peers, which were formal rule-based strategies, general study strategies and conversational input-elicitation strategies. These studies consist with L1 research in that females are judged to be more socially interactive than males (Bacon, 1992). Oxford (1989) argued that these sex differences in Ehrman and Oxford (1989) and Oxford and Nyikos (1989) might have something to do with women’s greater social orientation, stronger verbal skills, and greater conformity to norms. The fourth study mentioned in the review is Nyikos (1987), whose study indicated a significant gender difference in the use of memory strategies for German vocabulary learning among university students. Men in the study performed better than women in the use of the color-plus-picture mnemonic strategy while women were superior to men in color-only condition after the training of the use of these strategies. She explained that socialization factors contributed to these differences, because “socialization processes cause men to value certain modalities for learning over those viewed as more appropriate for women”(Nyikos, 1990, p285).It might be safe to say that these four studies laid a foundation for the investigation of gender differences in L2 learning strategy for later research.
  The findings of more recent studies have also revealed this gender difference trend in the use of strategies by men and women. The study of Green and Oxford (1995) has demonstrated that women use strategies significantly more often than men. In their factor analysis, women report using more affective and social strategies and are more often than men classified as global learners. Sheorey (1999) has studied language learning strategy use among Indian college students and found that Indian female students used strategies in greater frequency than male students. His findings provide empirical evidence to the observation of Green and Oxford (1995) that there are gender difference trends in strategy use despite different cultures. In addition, Sheorey and Mokhtari (2001) have examined differences in the reported use of reading strategies of native and non-native English speakers and find that the females in general use certain strategies more frequently than their male counterparts, although this difference is not very significant in the case of female ESL students.
  It appears that researchers would like to consider other variables when studying gender differences in strategy use. They basically have other factors like culture, language proficiency, the discipline of study and the rest under control with an attempt to find out whether gender differences are pronounced within or across different variables. The relationships between gender and other variables in the choice of language learning strategies are discussed in the following sections separately.
  2. Gender and Other Variables in the Choice of Learning Strategies
  2.1 Gender and culture
  The variables of culture and gender have undeniable effects on L2 learning strategy use.However, it is far from conclusive whether men and women from different cultural backgrounds can be consistently differentiated by the selection of learning strategies. Oxford, Par-Oh, Ito, and Sumrall (see Oxford, 1988) discovered the same gender difference trends among Japanese English learners. Their study showed that female Japanese students had a tendency to use cognitive strategies, social strategies, and affective strategies more frequently than their male counterparts.The same result is found by Sy (1994), who studies gender differences in the strategy use among Chinese students and discovers that females outperform men in using cognitive, compensation, metacognitive, and social strategies (see Oxford & Green, 1995). The same result is found by Sheorey (1999) also provides empirical support for this trend, who finds that Indian female students use learning strategies more often than male students and concludes, “gender differences in the use of strategies may be independent of cultural and educational background” (p186). These findings are of great importance because they show that some consistent gender differences in strategy use might exist within and across cultures. If this is the case, Green and Oxford (1995) argues that biological and/or socialization-related causes may account for these differences, and women and mendo differ in the use of different approaches to language learning. However, Tran (1988) examined gender differences in English learning strategies among Vietnamese adults over age 40 in the United States and obtained different findings from Sy (1994) and Sheorey (1999). He found that males performed better than females in using a variety of L2 learning strategies to improve their English skills (See Oxford, 1988). Additionally, as noted earlier, Sheorey and Mokhtari (2001) examine differences in the use of reading strategies of native (Americans) and non-native English speakers, who are of diverse cultural backgrounds such as Asia, Middle East, Latin America and others. They state that significant gender differences are found in the native group with the female reporting a higher frequency of strategy use, but not in the nonnative sample. They attribute this to the uneven number of males and female in nonnative students. Therefore, further research may be conducted on gender differences in strategy use within and across cultures.
  2.2 Gender and the discipline of study
  Investigations of student learning preferences have not yet obtained consistent findings about gender differences in the choice of learning strategies across disciplines of study. Richardson (1993) studies the gender difference in learning strategy use among students majoring social sciences to determine whether there is any gender difference among students in the same discipline with regard to their approaches to studying. His study indicates no difference between male and female students in particular aspects of studying behaviors.Besides his study, research suggested that females preferred the qualitative learning and content about people, while males had a preference for numeric and inanimate content in learning (Brainard & Ommen, 1977; Heikkinen et al, 1985; Smith & Lindner, 1986). Based on these studies, Smith (2001) examines the gender differences in the learning preferences of technology students and concludes that both male and female technology students need to develop the strategies for efficiently processing textually presented materials. But the males are in greater need of the strategies to assist them in dealing with qualitative information.Similarly, more research is needed to examine gender differences in L2 language learning strategy use within and across disciplines of study.
  2.3 Gender and learning tasks
  A few studies have investigated whether men and women differ in the kinds of incidence of strategies they use when they are engaged in different learning tasks. Bacon (1992) studies gender difference in strategy use when students listen to authentic input. The findings of the study indicate that men and women adjust their strategies differently to the difficulty of the passage. Women report using metacognitive and cognitive strategies when the passage becomes more difficult. On the other hand, “men dealt with the passage difficulty more aggressively with strategies that depended on linear processing and reference to English (the native language of students)” (p172).As far as the task of reading is concerned, Sheorey and Mokhtari (2001) studies gender differences in the use of reading strategies when dealing with academic materials. As noted earlier, the females in the native group report using reading strategies more frequently than their male peers, which is not reflected in the nonnative groups. In so far as the literature I’ve reviewed, no research has been conducted on speaking and writing. I assume that some interesting findings may be obtained when gender differences are studied in the use of strategy when students carry out speaking and writing tasks.
  2.4 Gender and language proficiency
  A general agreement has been reached on the relationship between gender and proficiency on learning strategies, i.e., that women and students with high English proficiency report using more strategies with a higher frequency than men and those with low proficiency (e.g. Sheorey, 1999), but it doesnot necessarily mean that women are more successful at language learning than men. Oxford and Crookall (1989) stated that it appeared that learners of high proficiency used more strategies than those of low proficiency. Yet, they asserted that the relationship between strategy use and proficiency was a complicated matter if the factor of gender was taken into consideration. Besides, Green & Oxford (1995) examine the relationship L2 proficiency and gender in terms of learning strategies. The findings of the study reveal that gender differences in language learning strategies do not necessarily mean that women learn languages better than men, because the study indicates no overlap between the strategies used more often by women and the strategies employed more frequently by more proficient students.In addition, Green and Oxford find that women do not outnumber men at more advanced course levels, although women use more strategies than men do in the study. Therefore, gender differences are not necessarily correlated with proficiency in the use of language learning strategies according to their study.
  2.5 Gender and psychological type
  Women and men can be identified by their use of learning strategies, which may be related to people’s psychological type (Ehrman & Oxford,1988). Ehrman and Oxford discovered that females showed preference for intuition and feeling than males. And feelers were superior in the use of general strategies than people of other psychological types. Since women were more feelers as the study indicated, Ehrman and Oxford contended that feeling could make a difference to the greater female reports of strategy use (p260). Nevertheless, few studies except this one have been done on the relationship between gender and psychological type on the choice of learning strategy in sofar as the literature I’ve found.
  2.6 Gender and learning styles
  Gender plays an important role in the choice of L2 learning strategies, which depends crucially on L2 learning styles (Oxford, 1993). It has been found that L2 learning style is also linked to gender (e.g. Ehrman & Oxford, 1988; Oxford and Ehrman, 1988; Nyikos, 1990). Oxford (1993b) concludes that learners have a tendency to select L2 learning strategies which are consistentwith their learning styles. To illustrate, she states that males have a preference for analytic, field-independent styles while females are identified as global, field-dependent learners. Accordingly, males would use more logic such deductive reasoning, whereas females would have a higher frequency of using nonanalytic strategies. Thus, the effect of learning styles should be considered when studying gender differences in strategy use.
  2.7 Gender and subject domain
  L2 learner may employ different strategies according to different subject domains besides other variables. It might be assumed that gender have an effect on the choice of learning strategies within specific subject domains. Virpi Slotte & Sarilindblom-Ylanne (2001) explores the existence of gender-difference in spontaneous study-strategies use in understanding statistical and philosophical texts. The findings of their study reveal that female students use overt study strategies more often than male participants, but no differences are detected between men and women in comprehending statistical and philosophical texts. Likewise, few studies have been made in this aspect.
  Interestingly, different learning strategies, in turn, also affect women and men differently in their learning. Wang (1998) suggests that females are hindered by encapsulation strategy, which is not their favored strategy, whereas the learning process of men is made difficult by integration strategy, their nonpreferred strategy. More research might be carried out to see how different strategies affect men and women, which would be instructive to language strategy training.
  3. Conclusion
  To conclude, Oxford (1993a) argues that the study on gender differences in L2 learning strategies is interesting but complex, given that the results of these studies are far from conclusive and consistent. Therefore, she suggests that further research can examine both similarities and differences by gender, report variances as well as means that show gender differences, describe samples in detail and conduct mutlimethod research (p87). Besides, further investigations can be conducted on the relationship of gender-related factors such as learning styles, motivation and attitude or the choice of individual strategies and combination of strategies (Green and Oxford, 1995).
  
  References
  [1] Bacon, S. The relationship between gender, comprehension, processing strategies, and cognitive and affective response in foreign language listening[J]. Modern Language Journal, 1992, 76(2): 160-178.
  [2] Baumeister, R.F. Should we stop studying sex differences altogether?[J] American Psychologist, 1988, 43:1092-1095.
  [3] Brainard, S.R., & Ommen, J.L.Men, women, and learning styles[J]. Community College Frontiers, 1977, 5:32-36.
  [4] Ehrman, N & Oxford, R. Effects of sex differences, career choice, and psychological type on adults’ language learning strategies[J]. Modern Language Journal, 1989, 73:1-13.
  [5] Fritz, R. A study of gender differences in cognitive style and cognitive volition. Eric document [J]. 1992, ED354370.
  [6] Green, J.M.& Oxford, R. A closer look at learning strategies, L2 proficiency and gender[J]. TESOL Quarterly, 1995, 29(2).
  [7] Heikkinen, M., Pettigrew, F., & Zakrajsek, D. Learning styles vs.teaching styles-studying the relationship[J]. NASSP Bulletin,1985, 69: 80-85.
  [8] Meyer, J.H.F. Gender-group differences in the learning behavior of entering first-year university students. Higher Education, 1995, 29: 201-215.
  [9] Nyikos, M. The effect of color and imagery as mnemonic strategies on learning and retention of lexical items in German[M]. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, 1987.
  [10] Nyikos, M.Sex-related differences in adult language learning: socialization and memory factors[J]. Modern Language Journal, 1990, 74(3): 273-287.
  [11] Oxford, R., Ehrman, M., & Nyikos, M. Vive la difference? Reflections on sex differences in use of language learning strategies[J]. Foreign Language Annals,1988, 21:321-329.
  [12] Oxford, R., & Nyikos, M. Variables affecting choice of language learning strategies by university students[J]. Modern Language Journal, 1989, 73: 291-300.
  [13] Oxford, R.Use of language learning strategies: a synthesis of studies with implications for strategic training[J]. System, 1989, 17(2): 25-247.
  [14] Oxford, R.& Crookall D.Research on language learning strategies: methods, findings, and instructional issues[J]. Modern Language Journal,1989,73(4):404-419
  [15] Oxford, R. Instructional implications of gender differences in second/foreign language styles and strategies[J]. Applied language learning, 1993a, 4:65-94.
  [16] Oxford, R.La difference continue…gender differences in second/foreign language learning styles and strategies[M]. In:Sutherland, J.(Ed.), Exploring Gender(pp.140-147). Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ,1993b.
  [17] Politzer, R.L. An exploratory study of self-reported language learning behaviors and their relation to achievement[J]. Studies in Second language acquisition, 1983, 6: 54-65.
  [18] Richardson, J.T.Gender differences in responses to the approaches to studying inventory[J]. Studies in Higher Education, 1993, 18 (1),
  [19] Sheorey, R. An examination of language learning strategy use in the setting of an indigenized variety of English[J]. System, 1999, 27:173-190.
  [20] Sheorey, R. & Mokhtari, K. Differences in the metacognitive awareness of reading strategies among native and non-native readers. System, 2001, 29:431-449.
  [21] Smith, P.J., & Lindner, C. Learning styles preferences of technical and further education students[M]. Melbourne: TAFE Board, 1986.
  [22] Smith, P.J.Technology student learning preferences and the design of flexible learning programs[M]. Melbourne: TAFE Board, 2001.
  [23] Virpi Slotte, K & Sarilindblom-ylanne. Study-strategy use in learning from text. Does gender make any difference?[J]. Instructional Science, 2001, 29: 255-272
  [24] Wang, Nina. Do different learning strategies affect women and men differently in their learning?[J] Eric document ED416314, 1998.
其他文献
一、问题的提出    外语教学最基本的要求之一就是要会运用。无论学了多长时间的英语,无论学了多少英语,不论是小学、中学、大学, 教学大纲上对“说”英语都有明确的要求。新课标中对小学英语一、二级中“说”的技能有着详细的描述。由上述可以知道,“说”分为两种,第一种是不用思维去组织自己的想法,直接在图片或教师的提示下说,第二种是根据一定要求,经过思维对自己所要表达的意思进行整理,从而正确流利表达自己的想
期刊
环境的限制,很少有教师与学生或学生与学生之间,运用英语口语进行交流,很少听取有关英语形式的交流,广播或报道。致使中国学生的英语学习多为哑巴式英语学习。鉴于此,“阅读”这一输入信息的方式对于学习英语的中国学生而言变得更为可行。  也就是说,阅读成为我们学生学习英语较关键的步骤,也是提高英语水平的最大平台。它可以帮助学习者在更多的空间内随时摄取信息,增加复习生词的频率,扩大词汇量和知识面,提高解答阅读
期刊
摘要:英语教学的目的就是要培养学生的独立阅读能力和应用语言的能力。本文从初中英语阅读教学的现状出发,提出了“大阅读”理念和教学观,详尽地阐述了阅读策略和情感教学,并且就其在课堂教学中的实际运用提出了笔者的看法。  关键词:英语阅读理解能力 阅读策略训练情感态度培养    我们英语教学的目的就是要培养学生的独立阅读能力和应用语言的能力。在近几年的英语中考试题中阅读理解能力题占了45分,这就进一步要求
期刊
课堂教学有两个显著的特征:一是教育性,二是艺术性。教师强调前者忽视后者,课堂教学就缺少蓬勃生机,教师平铺直叙,学生消极听课,提高课堂教学质量只能是一句空话。苏霍姆林斯基认为:如果教师不想方设法使学生产生情绪高昂和智力兴奋的内心状态,就急于传授知识,不动情感的脑力劳动就会带来疲倦。从情感上讲,也会使学生心情焦虑,而影响外语学习的情感障碍主要是焦虑。在这种情感状态中学习,只能抑制学生的思维活动,降低学
期刊
【摘要】为了解决英语教学“费时,低效”的普遍问题,笔者以高中英语教学为例,进行了“汉语文化英语教学”试验。贯彻以人为本的教学思想,努力营造生活化的教学环境。让学生更轻松、明白地掌握较为抽象、枯燥无味的语法知识,使教与学成为师生共同进行的活动研究。  【关键词】英语课堂 汉语运用 有效教学    《高中英语课程标准》对高中英语教学的要求是“培养学生的综合语言运用能力。着重提高学生用英语获取信息、处理
期刊
“书读百遍,其义自见”,这句古语可见朗读是学习语言知识所必须掌握的一种基本技能,是学好一门语言的基础。《外语教学与理论》一书中提说:“学外语主要靠‘经历’(experience)培养语言交际能力,而不是靠教师的讲解或理性的分析。”对于小学英语教学也是这样,教学中朗读的各种训练是增加这种“经历”的有效方法,加强小学英语的朗读训练,在英语教学中,引导小学生声情并茂的朗读,不仅可以使小学生在各种朗读中感
期刊
如今的社会,英语已被广泛推广运用,在大街小巷的路标、广告牌、店铺招牌等都到处能见到英语,但在这么多英语的使用当中不乏有许多不规范的用法,也就是我们常说的中国式英语,“Chinese-English”, 简称“Chinglish”。顾名思义,中国式英语就是人们因受到汉语思维方式或文化的影响而生搬硬套、拼造出不符合英语表达习惯的,具有中国特征的不规范的或畸形的英语。这是中国人在学习英语过程中普遍出现的
期刊
城市人口急剧增长、城市化进程不断加速、地下轨道交通的建设如火如荼,种种因素都推动着城市地下空间的形成与发展。地铁接驳点作为地上、地下空间的联系过渡点,成为影响地下空间发展的重要因素之一。随着城市轨道交通不断地拓展延伸,地下空间呈现出商业、娱乐、文化、生态等多种功能复合的形式,并且发展迅速。
  在这样的背景下,地下轨道交通与其周边场所空间的接驳应运而生,而处于二者之间的具有复合性的联系过渡空间——接驳点复合型空间,其重要性不言而喻。
  笔者的具体研究从实地调研开始,走访了以西南地区为主的数个
摘要:本文对课堂教学艺术化的内涵与功能加以初步探讨,认为在倡导全面素质教育的今天实现课堂教学艺术化是优化初中英语课堂教学, 提高教学效果的有效手段。  关键词:初中英语;课堂教学;艺术化;教学效果    引言    课堂教学艺术化也就是课堂教学的审美化过程。在课堂教学过程中,学生与知识、教师与知识、学生与教师之间,除了认知与被认知、教育与被教育的关系外,还存在着欣赏与被欣赏的关系,亦即审美关系。课
期刊
[摘要]提高学生阅读能力的方法和措施很多。其中培养学生的阅读兴趣是前提。有了阅读的兴趣。学生就会不断自觉阅读、汲取新知识,为其素质的全面发展和终身发展提供坚强的保障。同时必须清醒地意识到,基于英语的学科特点和现实的阅读教学模式,培养学生对英语阅读的兴趣是一个漫长而复杂的过程。教师只有从“以学生为主体”的基本教学理念出发,努力研究并实践科学的指导阅读的措施和方法,并以客观、科学的评价作为保障,才能真
期刊