This slide is created for Language Learning Strategies Class. Prepared for Prof. Mohamed Amin Embi.

1. NABIRA BINTI MANSOR
P79857
PROF. DR. MOHAMED AMIN EMBI

3. MOTIVATION
GENDER
EXPERIENCE IN STUDYING A LANGUAGE
PROFICIENCY LEVEL
LEARNING STYLE

4. Gardner (1985) & Oxford (1989)
 Gardner (1985) says that motivation and
attitudes are the major factors contributing
to individual language learning.
 Learners with high motivation to learn a
language will likely to use a variety of
strategies. (Oxford,1989)
 Hence, motivations can lead and support all
activities.

5. Khamkhien (2010)
 Different gender will use different
strategies. Research shows that males used a
greater number of strategies significantly
more often than females.
 Nevertheless, the relationship between
gender and learning strategies are not
explicit due to conflicting results generated
by different previous studies.

6. Purdie & Olive (1999)
 Both scholars have claimed that students
who have been in Australia for a longer
period of time obtained significantly higher
scores for Cognitive strategies and Memory
strategies.

7. Chen (1990)
 The study on the relationship between
communication strategies and the
proficiency level of L2 learners found that
low-proficiency students employed more
communication strategies than high-
proficiency ones.

8. Rahimi et. al (2004)
 The learners with a global learning style
significantly used compensation and
affective strategies more frequently than
those with a sequential learning style.
 The intuitors’ preference for cognitive
strategies seems to be in line with their
tendency to tackle language complexities,
ambiguities and exceptions.

9.  Khamkien, A. 2010. Factors Affecting
Language Learning Strategy Reported Usage
by Thai and Vietnamese EFL Learners
 Kalajahi, S.A.R. Nimehchisalem,V.
Pourshahian, B. 2012. How Do
English Language Learners Apply Language
Learning Strategies in Different Proficiency
Levels? A Case of Turkish EFL Students
 Oxford, R. 1994. Language Learning
Motivation: Expanding the Theoretical
Framework. The Modern Language Journal
Volume 78, Issue 1 : 12–28

10. THE END