外文翻译--大学生英语学习策略研究

1、毕业论文外文参考中文译文学牛 姓名班级 学号07023118业应用心理学导师 指教李成齐设计（论 文）题n大学生英语学习策略研究参考外文题冃effect of explicit language learning strategy instruction外文出处ccse english language teaching vol. 3, no1, march 2010中文译文：明确的语言学习策略指导对语言测试和自我评估的影响海洋研究和运输学院，卢彳|j尔雅那大学，斯洛文尼亚，violet jurkovic电话：386-31-742-342 邮箱：violeta. jurkovicguest.

2、arnes. si摘要；本文是一项关于报告研究结果新发现的文章，探讨在混合语言能力分组里较高 教育背景下，明确的语言学习策略对英语语言水平的发展影响。研究证实了明确的语言学习策略的指导，目标在于提高语言进步，对于那些最初 的语言发展程度参茅不齐的学生组中，统计上在他们的语言知识发展上没有明显的 效果。这些结果证实了在某些环境下（冇限的课堂时间和参差不齐的语言发展水平 尤其是在群体中）以分组模块的有组织的策略训练或者是明确的语言学习策略的训 练似乎是更有效的关键词：明确的语言学习策略指导，英语作为第2语言，高等教育，混合能力组， 语言能力介绍：在斯洛文尼亚，学生学习了八年的英语语言之后进入高等教

3、育领域，尽管在正 式的学校他们可以学习英语，在校外的语言课程屮他们也同样可以习得语言，在 进入高等教育前，他们没有能够达到满意的语言发展水平，比较好的语言发展水平 可以帮助提高他们的一般知识和更专业的英语，另外需要教师的指导分析，在他们 将来可能的职业发展屮，我们的毕业生需要高水平的英语能力，同样的，在老师中，语言学习策略在学生屮的使用从低等到 中等。许多的学生在处理语言课程需要吋不能体验怵难，在专业的语言课程屮也不能体 验困难，在这个方面显示了很高的辍学率，在这种情况下，我们应该寻求课堂干预, 这样可能使不成功学习者可以跟上他们的同龄人，保证学生可以掌握高水平的语言 发展水平，有机会探索他们

4、的学习进程，可以成为终生的学习成功者。一项可能的课堂干预瞄准的目标是将明确的学习策略的指导引入到教学中，依 靠在高等教育背景下如果应用语言学习策略会更有效地假说。理论框架语言学习策略的研究开始30多年丽，由rubin (1975年)和stern (1975)提出了成 功的语言学习者的理念，在那个时候开始，大量语言学习策略的学习相继出现并得 到发展。在这个领域被修i:的理论框架，macaro(2006年)表明，语言学习策略应该被描述 成他们基木的特征，这是在记忆领域，最基木最根木的，有意识的心智活动会促使 学习追求一个目标在所给的学习环境里，并可转移性。一系列不同的语言学习分类 学业相继出现，有

5、些是指学习策略，所有的语言技能。(见牛津1990 chamot & o' malley, 1994),然而其他却限定在单一的语言技能或则元素。例如词汇(schmitt, 1997),该决定的分类是主观的，并且选择通常取决于一系列因素，例 如相似性的研究结果基于测量仪器。例如语言学习的战略口录,牛津大学岀版 社，1990年)他的其信度和效度，因此，明确策略引入教学过程中是选取于牛津的。 划分成直接(记忆、认知和补偿)和间接的(后设认知，情感和社会)的策略。反过来，根据不同的分类多种策略教学模式已经被捉出，(chamot &0' malley, 1994; cohe

6、n, 1998; grenfel 1 & harris, 1999),尽管有分歧，区别每一个指令模 式，另一个方面，他们有很多的特征被指(harris, 2003; chamot, 2004). as chamot (2008),所冇现有的教学模式战略重点是使学生的知识得到发展，并了解 口己的学习过程，鼓励他们采取学习策略使他们的学习更加的有效。根据cohen et al. (1996),语言学习策略冇两个部分。事实上，研究发现有效地语言学习策略指导应该是明确的，要和规律的课堂活动相 结合(chamot, 2004),尽管我们应该意识到发现内隐的学习更加有力量.在现在 的研究中使用的策

7、略指导是认知语言学习方法或则calla(chamot & malley, 1994)主要选择这个模型的原因是这个模型包括三个部分：学习规律内容(固有的 语言教学和学习屮的具体语言学习的目的，除了一般的英语学习，学术研究的一大 目标在于我们的教师，语言学习技能(这个更适合更高的教育背景)语言学习策略 的外在具体框架(chamot &malley, 1994). calla模型是基于认知理论的学习,区分三种类型在记忆中的功能:长期记忆，短时记忆，工作记忆问题。在长期的记忆 中声明(在记忆框架)和程序(如生产系统)的知识被储存在短期记忆我们只保存资 料一会儿而信息处理是在工作记忆系统

8、，在长期的记忆里，学习者大多没冇控制过 程和互动工作记忆。通过一些战略性的行为在工作记忆中，通过发展声明和程序性 知识，长期记忆屮导致了外语学习，”因此，理解学习策略和语言学习我们需要去 了解什么公开的知识和程序性知识的特定组成，以及它们是如何储存和学习的。o另外,成功地学习元认知知识和学习策略的使用是同样重要的。无数的研究显 示语言学习策略在学语言上积极地效应。然而，有儿项研究，考察了策略培训的效果 在语言表达方面，也显示了不确定的结果或披露了策略训练没有影响语言的性能另 外，大部分的这些研究专注于i种策略使用的培训效果或则一组策略对单一语言技 能或元素的培训效果。另外,冇几个策略训练的研究

9、焦点在于冇关词汇学习和运用，最重要的是在这一 研究中，所有这些研究报告的结果是在混合策略指导语言能力组里。研究证实，在此 实验屮语言能力水平的参与者是被鉴定得松散的，低于屮等的，很糟糕的，没有提 供精确的数据。然而，我们可以假定语言学习策略指导在相对均一的语言发展水平群体中就他 们最初的语言能力而言。因此，本文提出下列问题：“在较高的教育背景，不同语言 发展水平组里。明确的语言学习策略教学是否促进所有策略组的语言测试成绩与学 生的英语自我评估。2,方法 2.1背景 研究和运输学院的教师 是卢布尔雅那大学,斯洛文尼亚的成员。英语时唯一被教授的语言，英语课程是每 周30个3小吋的课程了占了90小吋

10、在第一年的学习中，和第2年的90个小吋（不幸的 是，在全面贯彻实施高等教育改革，小时将减少到120在第一年的学习语言课程的目标，是现在的研究所相关的，包括了一般语言发展， 除了交通技术和物流运输的特殊语言，专业术语。2. 2参加者样本包括7个全日制的学生，年龄在18到24,参加了英语作为外语学习的课 程的交通技术和物流运输的学生，从2007年10月到2008年的5月，参加者的平 均年龄是19. 94, 29个参加者是女性，48个参加者是男性。22个研究对象进入四年制课程物流运输的,21个参加者进入4年制运输系统，34个 参加者进入3年制的交通技术系统，在两个四年的研究计划组的学生都百分百的报

11、名了，三分之四的参加为期三年的参与者报名的大约是三分之一的人口，一个四年 的组织（运输物流）随机分配部分治疗组和三年的交通运输组在一起。因此,治疗组（a组）曲三年的交通科技集团公司和四年的物流运输集团（一共冇 56个学生）组成。对照组（b组）包括交通技术集团四年（一共有21个学生）。需要强调 的是，即使参与者被纳入不同课程的学习，为本研究z目的，其内容和过程都是一样 的英语课程。没有其他课程的教师使用英文作为教学媒介，这就意味着学牛不接触 任何额外的英文输入在正规的教育背景下，参加不同学习课程的学生可以被视为没 冇影响这项研究的结果。背景问卷被用来确定是实验组合对比组治疗的异同，冇关 下列变量

12、:参加者年龄，中学类型，中学的累计平均成绩，中学英语成绩。英文原文:effect of explic辻 language learning strategy instruction on language-test and self-assessment scoresviolet jurkovicfaculty of maritime studies and transport university of ljubljana，sloveniapot pomorscakov , 320 portoroz ovcnia abstractthe present article reports on

13、the findings of a study that explored the effect of explicit language learning strategyinstruction on the development of english as a foreign language within a higher education setting in mixed languageability groups. the research results indicate that explicit language learning strategy nstruction

14、that aimed at enhancinglanguage progress in groups of students that were heterogeneous in terms of initial anguage ability did not have anystatistically significant effect on the development of language knowledge these results indicate that under certaincircumstances (limited course time and heterog

15、eneous language ompetence levels within groups in particular) theorganization of strategy training in the form of a separate module or implicit training in the use of language leamingstrategies seem to be more appropriatekeywords： explicit language learning strategy instruction, cnglish as a foreign

16、 language, higher education, mixedability groups, language competence1 introductionin slovenia students enter higher education after having learnt english as a foreign language in most cases for eightyears. despite language learning in the formal school setting and opportunities for the acquisition

17、of english outside thelanguage classroom, before entering higher education many students fail to reach satisfactory levels of languagecompetence that would allow them to upgrade their knowledge of general as well as discipline-specific english. inaddition, needs analysis conducted at our faculty (ju

18、rkovic, 2002) has shown that in their probable future careers ourgraduates will need a high level of english language competence and also that language learning strategy use amongstudents at our faculty ranges from low to medium. many students do not experience difficulties in coping with language c

19、ourse requirements only but also with discipline-specific course content, which is shown by the extremelyhigh drop-out rate.in these circumstances we should look for classroom interventions that might allow less successful learners to catch upwith their peers (ceh, 2007) and provide students that ha

20、ve previously acquired a high level of english languagecompetence with opportunities to explore their learning processes and become (more) successful lifelong learners. apossible classroom intervention aiming at these objectives is the explicit introduction of learning strategies into theteaching th

21、at rests upon the premise that language learning in a higher education setting will become more efficient ifsupported with language learning strategies (jurkovic, 2007).1.1 theoretical framework studies in language learning strategies started more than three decades ago when the idea of successful l

22、anguageleamers was put forward by rubin (1975) and stem (1975). since then a multitude of definitions of language learningstrategies has been developed. in a revision of the theoretical framework in this field, macaro (2006) suggests thatleaming strategies should be described in tenns of their essen

23、tial features, which are their origins in working memory, conscious mental activity that learners employ to pursue a goal in a given learning situation, and transferability.a series of different taxonomies of language learning strategies has also been produced some refer to learning strategies acros

24、s all language skills (see oxford 1990; chamot & o'malley, 1994) while others are limited to a single language skill or element, for example vocabulary (schmitt, 1997). the decision which taxonomy to choose usually is subjective and dependent on a number of factors, for instance comparabilit

25、y of study results based on a measuring instrument (for example the strategy inventory for language learning, oxford, 1990) and its reliability and validity. hence, the strategies that were explicitly introduced into the teaching process were selected from oxford (1990) division into direct (memory,

26、 cognitive, and compensation) and indirect (metacognitive, affective, and social) strategies.in turn, based on different taxonomies a variety of strategy instruction models have also been proposed (chamot &o'malley, 1994; cohen, 1998; grenfell & harris, 1999). despite differences that di

27、stinguish one instruction modelfrom another, they share a number of features (harris, 2003; chamot, 2004). as chamot (2008) points out, all current strategy instruction models focus on the development of studentsknowledge about their learning processes and encourage them to adopt strategies that wil

28、l make their learning more efficient. according to cohen et al. (1996),language learning strategy instruction has two components: regular class work and explicit training in learning strategies. in fact, research studies have shown that effective language learning strategy instruction should be expl

29、icit and integrated into regular class work activities (chamot, 2004) although we should be aware that implicit instruction can also be powerful (chamot, 2008).the strategy instruction model used in the present research study was the cognitive academic language learning approach or calla (chamot &am

30、p; o'malley, 1994). the main reason for the selection of this model was that it includes three components, which are study-discipline content (inherent to the teaching and learning of languages for specific purposes, which is 一 in addition to general english 一 one of the learning objectives of t

31、he language course at our faculty), academic language skills (which means that it is appropriate for higher education settings) and explicit scaffolded instruction in language learning strategies (chamot & ct malley, 1994).the calla model is based on the cognitive theory of learning, which disti

32、nguishes between three types of functions in memory: long-term memory, short-term memory, and working memory. in long-term memory declarative (in memory frameworks) and procedural (as production systems) knowledge is stored, in short-term memory we only keep information for a few moments while infor

33、mation is manipulated in working memory (anderson, 1985) procedural and declarative knowledge in long-term memory is modified and upgraded based on information that is processed and manipulated in working memory. as mentioned earlier, one of the essential features of learning strategies is their ori

34、gins in working memory (macaro, 2006). learners mostly do not have control over processes in long-term memory with which, however, working memory interacts. foreign language learning "is brought about, in long-term memory,via strategic behaviour in working memory, through the development of dec

35、larative and procedural knowledge/xmacaro, 2006, p. 332) therefore, to understand learning strategies and language learning we need to understand what declarative knowledge and procedural knowledge in particular consist of and how they are stored and learned .in addition, the role of metacognitive k

36、nowledge in successfully learning and applying learning strategies is equally important.numerous studies have shown positive effects of language learning strategy instruction on language performance (cohen et al., 1996; lawson & hogben, 1998; kusiak，2001; rasekh & ranjbary, 2003; atay &

37、ozbulgan, 2007; lau& chan, 2007; graham & macaro, 2008). nevertheless, several studies that have examined the effect of strategy training on language performance have shown inconclusive results or revealed that strategy training had no effect on language perfbnnance (o'malley, 1987; oxfo

38、rd et al, 1990; rossiter, 2003). in addition, most of these studies have focused on the effect of training in the use of one strategy or one group of strategies on a single language skill or element (e.g.? kusiak (2001); rossiter (2003); lau & chan (2007); graham & macaro (2008). moreover, s

39、everal studies focused on strategy training in relation to vocabulary learning and retention (lawson & hogben, 1998; rasekh & ranjbary, 2003; atay & ozbulgan, 2007).most importantly for this study, none of these studies reports results of strategy instruction in mixed language ability gr

40、oups. in studies where the language competence level of participants is stated, it is described loosely (e.g., intermediate, lower intermediate, poor), which does not provide accurate data.nevertheless, we can assume that language learning strategy instruction was conducted in relatively homogeneous

41、 language groups in terms of initial language ability.therefbre, this article addresses the following question: "does explicit language learning strategy instruction across all strategy groups contribute to better language-test and self-assessment scores in english as a foreign language in a hi

42、gher education setting in mixed language ability groups?"2. method2.1 settingthe faculty of maritime studies and transport is a member of the university of ljubljana, slovenia english is the only language taught at the faculty. the english course covered ninety hours organized in thirty three-h

43、our weekly sessions in the first year of studies and ninety hours in the second year (unfortunately, after the full implementation of the higher education reform the number of hours will be reduced to a total of 120). the learning objectives of the language course in the first year of studies, which

44、 the present study is related to, included the development of general english in addition to language specific to the fields of traffic technology and transport logistics.2.2 participantsthe sample consisted of seventy-seven full-time first year students, aged between 18 and 24，attending classes of english as a foreign language for students of traffic technology and transport logistics from october, 2007, through may, 2008 the average age of the participants at the beginning of the language course was 19.94. twenty-nine participants were female an