|
| The Journal of Asia TEFL |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Today |
|
580 |
| Total |
|
5,467,194 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
  Past Issues |
|
|
|
Go List
 |
|
|
| Volume 7 Number 4, Winter 2010, Pages 1-137 |
|
|
|
| |
A Comparative Study of Monolingual and Bilingual EFL Learners on Language Learning Strategies Use: A Case of Iranian High School Students
|
|
| |
Abdolmajid Hayati and Khaled Deheimi Nejad
|
|
This study was conducted to compare the language learning strategies used by bilingual (Arab-Persian) and monolingual (Persian) EFL learners in Iran. Among a pool of more than 650 students studying in grade one in two high schools located in Ahvaz city, 200 learners (100 monolingual and 100 bilingual) were randomly selected as the research participants. The prime data collection instrument utilized in this study was SILL questionnaire. An oral interview was also designed after SILL questionnaire administration to check the written and oral responses. The results of the study revealed the superiority of bilingual learners on four strategy categories. Bilingual learners tended to use social and compensation strategies most frequently while monolinguals preferred social and affective strategies.
Keywords: language learning strategies, direct strategies (cognitive, memory, compensation), indirect strategies (metacognitive, affective, social) |
|
|
|
|
|
The Journal of Asia TEFL
