The reported use of grammar learning strategies by L3 english learners at secondary school
Abstract
Language Learning Strategies (LLS) and their implication in language acquisition have been
researched for decades now (Rubin, 1975; Oxford, 1986; Wenden and Rubin, 1987;
Larsen-Freeman, 1995; Chamot, 2001; Oxford, Lee and Park, 2007). Many researchers
(Rubin, 1975; Wenden and Rubin, 1987; O'Malley and Chamot, 1990; Cohen, 2011) support
the idea that LSSs play an important role in Second Language (L2) acquisition by stating that
these set of strategies serve as an aid for students in their Target Language (TL) learning
process and they are a key factor for their success in the acquisition of their L2. LLS have
been defined in many ways: Chamot (2001), for instance, defined LLS as procedures that
help the process of learning, and although LLS have been widely investigated, there is a part
of language learning that has been paid little attention to, these being Grammar Learning
Strategies (GLS). GLS are defined as the intentional thinking and steps that the learner uses
in their process of learning and improve their use of grammatical structures. The reason for
investigating GLS lays on the important role grammar plays in language acquisition and
further research ought to be carried out to investigate the GLS learners employ in the process
of their L2 learning (Anderson, 2005). The scarce research that has been conducted in this
field has investigated the reported grammar strategy use of mainly adolescent and adult
students (Tilfarlioğlu, 2005; Supakorn, Feng and Limmun, 2018; Pawlak, 2018; Mulugeta
and Bayou, 2019). These studies have revealed that the set of strategies both adolescent and
adult students reportedly employ with the highest frequency belong to the categories of
Cognitive, Metacognitive and Social Strategies. Furthermore, adolescent students reported
using Affective Strategies more frequently than adult students (Tilfarlioğlu, 2005; Muguleta
and Bayou, 2019).
The aim of the present study is to contribute to the little research that has been carried
out on the reported use of GLS by secondary-school adolescents by investigating the reported
use of GLS in Spanish/Basque bilingual L3 English learners at Secondary School. The 75
participants of this study were divided into two groups according to their choice of studying
the subject of History in English or Basque. The reason for having made this distinction is to
3
be able to discover if there is any difference in the frequency of use of the GLS between the
group that is more exposed to English (Group 1) and the one that is less exposed to it (Group
2). The participants of this study completed 3 tasks: a background questionnaire in order to
find out information about their linguistic background, an English level test and Pawlak’s
(2018) Grammar Learning Strategy Inventory (GLSI) questionnaire. The results of the study
seem to show that secondary school learners reported using Social Strategies with the highest
frequency in terms of general strategy use closely followed by Cognitive Strategies and
Metacognitive Strategies, reportedly using Affective Strategies with the least frequency.
When the distinction between the two groups is taken into account, the results show that the
difference in exposure between the two groups did not lead to any difference in the reported
use of GLS. The set of strategies both groups reportedly used with the highest frequency are
Cognitive Strategies while Affective Strategies were reported with the least frequency. The
results obtained coincide in some aspects with the research that has previously been carried
out in this field, where university-level students reported employing Cognitive,
Metacognitive and Social strategies with the highest frequency (Tilfarlioğlu, 2005); on the
other hand, the results do not support Tilfarlioğlu’s (2005) finding where adolescent students
who had been less exposed to the TL had reported having used GLS with a lesser frequency
than those who had been more exposed to their TL. Furthermore, the data presented in the
present study agrees with the findings in Supakorn, Feng and Limmun’s (2018) study, where
they found that higher proficiency students made use of Metacognitive, Social and Cognitive
Strategies with the highest frequency