The Role Of Metacognitive Strategies In Foreign Language Learning

As we know, changes in the field of language teaching have never stopped. Among the changes that have taken place in recent years, the most important one is a shift of focus from teachers onto the language learners. Researches in language learning strategies are the result of the recognition that the learners themselves constitute the most important factor in the learning process. Language learning strategies, which aid learners in the process of acquiring or improving target language competence, have been of interest to researchers for more than two decades. There are six key reasons that brought the study of language learning strategies to the concern of the researchers, e.g. the shift of focus from teaching onto learning; the fast development of science and technology that pose its demands on education; the issue of teaching methodological disappointment; the development of cognitive psychology and cognition science; the development of the field in linguistics and sociolinguistics; and the heavy influence of the global changes in the availability of information. Since 1975, when Rubin carried out her pioneering study, there have been numerous attempts to identify and describe strategies employed by good language learners and poor language learners or by ESL learners and EFL learners. Most importantly, various taxonomies of language learning strategies have been worked out ( Naiman 1978; Rubin 1975,1981, 1987;Bialystok 1979; Tarone 1981; O'Malley & Chamot 1990; Oxford 1990; Stern 1992; Cohen 1998; Wen Qiufang 1996). However, there is no agreement among researchers as to how to classify strategies, which is not helpful for researchers and teachers alike. This brief introduction to language learning strategies forms the first part of the thesis.In the second part of this thesis, a literature review of the typology of language learning strategies is provided. Naiman's(1978), Bialystok's(1979),Tarone's(1981), Rubin's (1987), Oxford's (1990), O'Malley's (1990), Stern's (1992), Cohen's(1998) and Wen Qiufang's (1996) taxonomies of language learning strategies are handledin details. Based on the theoretical perspectives of individual researchers, the categories are overlapping and definitions for language learning strategy (LLS) vary. Apart from this overlapping terminology that tends to blur the whole picture of language learning strategies, there is some confusion in terms of the relationship between metacognitive strategies and other types of strategies. Oxford (1990) puts metacognitive strategies, social strategies and affective strategies at the same level without hierarchical relationship, both of which are belonging to indirect strategies, While Rubin's (1987) framework sees metacognitive as a sub-category to learning strategies, and learning strategies, communication strategies and social strategies are at the same level. Likewise, O'Malley & Chamot(1990) consider metacognitive strategies as higher order executive skills, with a hierarchical relationship to cognitive strategies. Thus, the relationship between metacognitive strategies and other types of strategies is confusing.The third part of the thesis concerns with a case study of language learning strategies employed by non-English majors of Guangxi Normal University. The result of the investigation indicates that the most frequently employed strategies are cognitive strategies, metacognitive strategies and compensation strategies, followed by memory strategies, with affective and social strategies in the least use. Furthermore, the employment of cognitive and metacognitive strategies shows significant difference between the successful learners and the less successful learners. The successful learners tend to use more frequently cognitive strategies and metacognitive strategies than the less successful learners. Considering the low employment of social strategies and affective strategies, which actually are powerful strategies in language learning, the reason perhaps lies in the fact that second language researchers do not study these behaviors...