UNIVERZITA KOMENSKÉHO V BRATISLAVE PEDAGOGICKÁ FAKULTA

Transcription

1 UNIVERZITA KOMENSKÉHO V BRATISLAVE PEDAGOGICKÁ FAKULTA RAISING ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS METACOGNITIVE AWARENESS: FOCUS ON LEARNING STYLES ZVYŠOVANIE METAKOGNITÍVNEJ UVEDOMELOSTI PRI UČENÍ SA ANGLIČTINY: UČEBNÉ ŠTÝLY DIPLOMOVÁ PRÁCA 2013 Jana Pastorková

2 UNIVERZITA KOMENSKÉHO V BRATISLAVE PEDAGOGICKÁ FAKULTA RAISING ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS METACOGNITIVE AWARENESS: FOCUS ON LEARNING STYLES ZVYŠOVANIE METAKOGNITÍVNEJ UVEDOMELOSTI PRI UČENÍ SA ANGLIČTINY: UČEBNÉ ŠTÝLY DIPLOMOVÁ PRÁCA Študijný program: Učiteľstvo psychológie a učiteľstvo anglického jazyka a literatúry Študijný odbor: 7819 Učiteľstvo akademických predmetov Školiace pracovisko: Katedra anglického jazyka a literatúry Vedúca práce: doc. PhDr. Gabriela Lojová, PhD. BRATISLAVA 2013 Mgr. Jana Pastorková

3 ABSTRAKT PASTORKOVÁ, Jana: Zvyšovanie metakognitívnej uvedomelosti pri učení sa angličtiny: Učebné štýly. Diplomová práca. Katedra anglického jazyka a literatúry. Vedúca diplomovej práce: doc. PhDr. Gabriela Lojová, PhD. Bratislava: Pedagogická fakulta Univerzity Komenského, s. Kľúčové slová: metakognícia, učebné štýly, učebné stratégie, hodnotenie učebníc, vyučovanie angličtiny ako cudzieho jazyka, učebnice angličtiny, metakognitívna výučba Cieľom tejto diplomovej práce bolo zistiť, do akej miery učebnice anglického jazyka pre stredné školy odporúčané Ministerstvom školstva, vedy, výskumu a športu SR obsahujú nástroje k výučbe metakognitívnych zručností, predovšetkým učebných štýlov. Prostredníctvom obsahovej analýzy 16 setov učebníc (spolu s metodickými príručkami a pracovnými zošitmi 47 publikácií) sme zisťovali výskyt nástrojov na rozvíjanie učebných štýlov, stratégií a iných metakognitívnych zručností. Štúdia odhalila, že iba 3 zo 16 setov obsahovali veľmi dobré inštrukcie k problematike učebných štýlov. Podobne aj z hľadiska učebných stratégií dosiahli najvyššiu úroveň práve 3 tituly. Štyri testované sety preukázali rozvoj ďalších metakognitívnych zručností v požadovanom počte a variabilite. Ostatné učebnice ich obsahovali výrazne menej na rôznych kvalitatívnych úrovniach, s výnimkou jednej učebnice, ktorá nezaradila také nástroje vôbec. Výskum taktiež testoval kvalitu metakognitívnej výuky, a to najmä z hľadiska systematicity a hĺbky zaangažovania uvedomelého myslenia žiakov. Štúdia poskytuje odporučenie slovenským učiteľom, ako aj tvorcom vzdelávacích štandardov, aké knihy si môžu zvoliť, aby napomáhali k rozvoju metakognitívnych schopností svojich študentov. 3

4 ABSTRACT PASTORKOVÁ, Jana: Raising English language learners metacognitive awareness: Focus on learning styles. Master s thesis. The Department of English Language and Literature. Thesis advisor: doc. PhDr. Gabriela Lojová, PhD. Bratislava: The Faculty of Education, Comenius University in Bratislava p. Key Words: metacognition, learning styles, learning strategies, textbook assessment, TEFL, EFL textbooks, metacognitive training, metacognitive instruction The objective of this thesis is to identify the scope of metacognitive training in EFL textbooks recommended by the Slovak Ministry of Education for secondary schools in Slovakia. Sixteen sets of textbooks (in all 47 publications incl. workbooks and teachers manuals) were examined by means of content analysis with the aim to determine the presence of learning styles, learning strategies and other techniques supporting metacognitive learning. The study revealed that only 3 textbook sets proved to contain very good training in learning styles. Another 3 sets showed an excellent level of learning strategy instruction, and 4 out of 16 sets provided with outstanding range of techniques developing other metacognitive skills. The rest of the tested books employed significantly fewer metacognitive instruction tools on various quality levels, except for 1 book which did not use any at all. In addition, our research also examined the quality of metacognitive techniques, especially in terms of their systematic use and conscious involvement of students in the learning process. The outcomes of this study should provide Slovak language teachers and policy-makers with recommendation which teaching materials they may choose in order to facilitate metacognitive learning of their students. 4

5 PREFACE They know enough who know how to learn. Henry B. Adams, 1905 Teachers in contemporary society are facing a great challenge. Living in information era they are no longer the sole providers of information. Even the smartest and most professional ones cannot possibly keep up with the information flow and their role is changing from conveying knowledge to facilitating learning. Knowing how to learn is more important than any piece of knowledge itself, claimed Henry B. Adams more than a hundred years ago. Are we able to utilize this wisdom today? Many teachers these days believe that teaching their students how to learn (i.e. raising their metacognitive awareness) is a worthwhile investment. Unfortunately, each one of us who has ever been teaching in an institutional context is familiar with the common problems: time pressure to cover curriculum, school authorities strictly prescribing textbooks, everyday dealing with learning disabilities, drilling for tests, extensive groups, lack of funding, etc. All of these factors often result in teachers being worried to spend time on metacognitive instruction which does not bring along immediate measurable results. For this reason I assume that training in metacognitive skills is not realistic unless proper instruction manuals are provided and widely spread. I believe that such material should be embedded directly in textbooks and metacognitive instruction would then become a regular topic of curriculum. Teachers would not have to make choices between metacognitive and language learning, as both would happen simultaneously. The aim of my thesis was to explore to what extent do EFL textbooks used in Slovakia at secondary school intermediate level contain techniques for metacognitive instruction. The research was focused predominantly on learning styles instruction, which would enable students to get to know their qualities related to learning. However, other aspects of metacognition were mapped simultaneously, because they are an inseparable part of the same concept. My analysis has shown that there are some materials supporting metacognitive learning available for Slovak teachers. Unfortunately, they are not widely spread yet and only a few teachers use them. These titles are relatively unknown, while metacognitive training is still neglected in the well-established and best-selling textbook brands. 5

6 Comparing and selecting textbooks is a very complex process and it requires a lot of energy and time. That might be a reason why lecturers remain loyal to traditional trademarks. I am convinced that if they are offered an understandable comparison of various titles, they might consider using new textbooks, which facilitate metacognitive tuition. Acknowledgements I would like to sincerely thank Darina Marčeková from Oxford University Press, Gréta Korpádiová from Macmillan and Peter Bojo from Cambridge University Press for their willingness to lend me textbooks and for our discussions which helped me to understand the process of publishing EFL textbooks. Without their help and the help of the employees of OXICO it would have been very difficult to obtain the newest editions of all tested textbooks. My deepest gratitude goes to my advisor Gabriela Lojová, who gave me a guidance as well as freedom to explore on my own. I would also like to thank her for the greatly inspiring psycholinguistics lectures and for giving me a direction how to become a better teacher. 6

7 CONTENTS ABSTRAKT... 3 ABSTRACT... 4 PREFACE... 5 CONTENTS... 7 List of Tables... 8 List of Figures... 9 List of abbreviations and acronyms INTRODUCTION THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK TERMINOLOGY AND BACKGROUND THEORY Metacognition Learning Styles Learning Strategies METACOGNITION IN LANGUAGE LEARNING Why is it useful to encourage metacognitive thinking? How to teach metacognition? Mesh or mismatch? Practical implications for TEFL PREVIOUS RESEARCH Research on metacognitive instruction in textbooks Research on EFL textbook assessment Research on metacognitive strategy training models Research on metacognitive instruction and learning styles other than in textbooks RESEARCH DESIGN PRELIMINARY RESEARCH RESEARCH PLAN Research question Methodology Selection of Data Corpus Checklist design ANALYSIS & RESULTS LEARNING STYLES Quantitative analysis Qualitative analysis LEARNING STRATEGIES Quantitative analysis Qualitative analysis OTHER METACOGNITIVE SKILLS Quantitative analysis Qualitative analysis DISCUSSION & PEDAGOGICAL IMPLICATIONS SUMMARY PEDAGOGICAL IMPLICATIONS LIMITATIONS SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH CONCLUSION RÉSUMÉ REFERENCES APPENDICES

8 List of Tables Table 3-1 List of textbooks forming a corpus material 37 Table 4-1 Criteria related to learning styles 40 Table 4-2 Summary table of learning styles 40 Table 4-3 Quality of learning styles instruction 42 Table 4-4 Criteria related to learning strategies part 1 47 Table 4-5 Summary table of learning strategies part 1 47 Table 4-6 Criteria related to learning strategies part 2 50 Table 4-7 Summary table of learning strategies part 2 50 Table 4-8 Quality of learning strategies instruction 50 Table 4-9 List of criteria for other metacognitive skills 55 Table 4-10 Summary table of other metacognitive skills 55 Table 5-1 Overall summary of research results 65 8

9 List of Figures Figure 1 Opportunities, SB p Figure 2 Success, SB Figure 4 Success SB Figure 3 Success, SB Figure 5 English Unlimited SB Figure 7 Inspiration SB Figure 6 Inspiration, SB 7 46 Figure 8 Gateway, brochure 48 Figure 9 Horizons SB Figure 10 Horizons SB Figure 12 Opportunities TB Figure 11 Opportunities SB Figure 13 Inspiration SB Figure 14 Inspiration TB Figure 15 Gateway SB p Figure 16 Gateway SB p Figure 17 Gateway SB Figure 18 Gateway SB p Figure 19 Gateway TB p Figure 20 Gateway TB p Figure 21 Inspiration SB 6 56 Figure 22 CODE SB Figure 23 Opportunities WB Figure 24 Opportunities SB Figure 25 CODE SB Figure 26 CODE SB Figure 28 Inspiration SB Figure 27 Inspiration SB Figure 29 Opportunities SB Figure 30 Face2Face SB back cover 60 Figure 31 Inspiration SB p Figure 32 Inspiration SB p Figure 33 Face 2 face SB Figure 34 Opportunities SB Figure 35 Gateway SB Figure 36 Inspiration SB Figure 37 Gateway SB Figure 38 New Horizons SB

10 List of abbreviations and acronyms CALLA CEFR CUP EFL ELT ESL LS LStr. MBTI OUP PL SB Ss SSBI ŠPÚ TB TEFL VAK VAKT VARK WB Cognitive Academic Language Learning Approach Common European Framework of Reference Cambridge University Press English as a foreign language English language teaching English as a second language Learning Styles Learning Strategies Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (learning styles typology) Oxford University Press Pearson Longman Student s book, Course book Students Styles- and Strategies-Based Instruction National Institute for Education (Slovakia), Štátny pedagogický ústav SR Teacher s book, Teacher s manual, Teacher s guide Teaching English as a foreign language Visual-auditory-kinaesthetic (learning styles typology) Visual-auditory-kinaesthetic-tactile (learning styles typology) Visual-auditory-read/write-kinaesthetic (learning styles typology) Workbook, Practice book 10

11 1 INTRODUCTION We often hear that the primary objective of modern education is to teach students how to learn. Nevertheless, many teachers still do not know how to develop such skills in their students. The overall aim of this thesis is to promote the use of metacognition, which is still a rather unexplored notion, as an integral part of institutional language education in Slovakia. Our research objective is to find out whether Slovak textbooks for teaching English as a foreign language (hereinafter TEFL ) provide tools for teaching metacognitive skills. We tested books for secondary school students which were recommended by the Ministry of Education, Science, Research and Sport of the Slovak Republic (hereinafter Ministry or Ministry of Education ) for secondary school intermediate level. The practical outcome of this research is to provide Slovak EFL teachers with the list of textbooks which contain metacognitive instruction and thus make the process of textbook selection easier. In addition, such list would contain information about specific metacognitive functions supported by particular textbooks. Within our study we focused mainly on exploring instruction on learning styles. The reason is that while students are likely to reflect on their learning or memory strategies, they rarely explore their own personality and individual characteristics that influence learning. By concentrating on learning styles, we can dig deeper into the background of their learning preferences and difficulties which they have in studying. Another reason for paying special attention to learning styles is that our schools are still strongly biased towards visual, reflexive, well-organized (i.e. left-hemisphere dominant) learners with an eye for detail (field independent). Teaching methods and techniques are adjusted to their learning preferences, while other students lag behind and become less and less successful as they grow up. Unfortunately, so far we have not fully adopted the idea that there are many ways of learning and that no learning style is good or bad. In fact, no such thing as bad learning style exists. There are only inappropriate methods for particular learner types. Naturally, the theory on learning styles is inseparable from the theory on learning strategies, learner s autonomy, planning own learning or getting to know oneself as a learner. Therefore we also thoroughly studied these factors. Accordingly, our analysis was focused on three areas. 1 Learning styles 2 Learning strategies 11

12 3 Other metacognitive skills. Each of these categories was assessed from the qualitative and quantitative point of view by means of content analysis. The sixteen textbook sets were evaluated by strictly set criteria summarized in a form of checklist, which was filled for every book separately. These criteria were developed in two stages. First, criteria were chosen as a result of our needs and the analysis of previous research in this field. Subsequently, a pilot study was conducted on 4 textbook sets with the aim to make sure that the criteria are answerable and they cover whole range of metacognitive techniques used in EFL textbooks. The complete set of criteria adjusted by findings of the pilot research is summarized in Appendix 1. The qualitative content analysis was further supported by unstructured interview with the representatives of publishers Mr. Peter Bojo for Cambridge University Press (hereinafter CUP ), Ms. Gréta Korpádiová from Macmillan and Ms. Darina Marčeková from Oxford University Press (hereinafter OUP ). This thesis consists of 7 chapters. Following the introductory chapter, theoretical framework of the study is thoroughly examined in Chapter 2. It consists of terminology, theoretical background of metacognition related to TEFL and an overview of previous research relevant to our inquiry. Chapter 3 reveals in great detail our research design, namely the type and nature of content analysis, ways of choosing the corpus material and setting of evaluation criteria. In this chapter we also describe the coding procedures and further details of their interpretation. The results are presented in Chapter 4 where raw data are categorized and interpreted. Moreover, the authors provide many samples from textbooks as a support for qualitative part of the analysis. These are further adapted into pedagogical implications and recommendation for teachers in Chapter 5. Moreover, we acknowledge limitations of our study and suggest ideas for further research. Finally, in Chapters 6 and 7 the reader may find overall summary and conclusion, the former being written in English, the latter summarized in Slovak. 12

13 2 THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK 2.1 Terminology and Background Theory Metacognition Metacognition is broadly defined as cognition about cognition, in other words thinking about thinking. The notion was introduced by John Flavell in the 1970s, at the time when the foundation of cognitive psychology were laid. He defined metacognition as knowledge and cognition about cognitive phenomena (Flavell in Shaughnessy et al : 46). Flavell (1979 : 906) further specifies metacognitive knowledge as one's stored knowledge or beliefs about oneself and others as cognitive agents, about tasks, about actions or strategies, and about how all these interact to affect the outcomes of any sort of intellectual enterprise. He understood metacognition on two interrelated levels: - metacognitive awareness (awareness of one s thoughts; monitoring of thought ); and - metacognitive regulation (the ability to control and manage own thinking processes; control of thought ) Subsequently, psychologists and educationists (e.g. Papaleontiou-Louca 2008 : 1 ; Martinez 2006 : 696) broke down this notion to separate skills or elements such as: metaperception, metacomprehension, metamemory (thinking about one s own perceiving, understanding, remembering), autonomy, independence and self-regulation. Metacognition remains an umbrella term for any kind of conscious development of one s cognitive abilities. Furthermore, Efklides (2002 In Papaleontiou-Louca 2008 : 7) lists other metacognitive skills such as planning, monitoring of the progress of processing, effort allocation, strategy use and regulation of cognition. Ridley et al. (1992, in Coskun 2010 : 36) adds other metacognitive abilities such as selecting strategies, correcting errors, monitoring the progress of learning, analyzing the effectiveness of learning strategies, and changing learning behaviours and strategies when necessary. For a purpose of this thesis, we understand metacognition as active and deliberate thinking about thinking and learning of English as a foreign language. In addition, we use terms metacognitive abilities and metacognitive skills interchangeably for all of the above listed metacognitive elements. 13

14 In the results analysis we grouped our findings to three categories learning styles, strategies and other metacognitive skills. In this category we gathered techniques supporting any metacognitive skills except for styles and strategies. Within this study we often refer to metacognitive techniques, by which we mean any techniques, activities or tasks which have a potential to enhance students metacognitive skills and raise their metacognitive awareness and/or metacognitive regulation. Last but not least, by metacognitive instruction (or tuition) we mean deliberate and systematic development of students metacognitive skills Learning Styles Learning styles (often referred to as cognitive styles or learner types ) can be defined in many distinct manners. Pritchard (2009: 42) lists the following definitions: - a particular way in which an individual learns ; - an individual s preferred or best manner(s) in which to think, process information and demonstrate learning - an individual s preferred means of acquiring knowledge and skills. Rebecca Oxford (2003 : 2) defines learning styles as general approaches for example, global or analytic, auditory or visual that students use in acquiring a new language or in learning any other subject. In addition to the cognitive aspects, James and Gardner (1995 : 20) added also the dimension of environmental factors, defining learning styles as "the complex manner in which, and conditions under which, learners most efficiently and most effectively perceive, process, store, and recall what they are attempting to learn". Lojová and Vlčková (2011: 23-27) further define nature and characteristics of learning styles. They consider them to be holistic, multidimensional (composed of cognitive, personality, affective, physiological, social, self-regulatory and other factors), highly individual and relatively permanent characteristics. Styles can be conscious, unconscious or combined. They may be perceived as predispositions (inclinations, tendencies, preferences) determined by biological, psychological and social (environmental) influences, which can be altered by appropriate stimulation and training. Learning style typologies There is no unitary agreement on the amount and validity of specific learning style typologies. The field is extremely complex, offering all kinds of typologies from those on 14

15 a bipolar continuum (convergers/divergers, holists/serialists, field dependent/independent, sensing/intuition, left/right brainers, etc. 1 ) to complex multidimensional models (e.g. Dunn Dunn s model containing 24 elements grouped under environmental, emotional, sociological, physiological and psychological categories) 2. Coffield Moseley Hall Ecclestone (2004 (1)) have recently conducted an impressive research evaluating 3800 references and studies on learning styles, out of which 838 papers were thoroughly reviewed. They claimed that they were surprised by the the extensive nature of the field (2004 (1) : 2) when they defined 71 models of learning styles. They confirm that even more of them exist (often as outcomes of doctoral theses, which have not gained much experimental verification yet). Coffield s team finally defined 13 most influential typologies, which were examined in detail. Slightly different approaches are preferred in Slovak ELT environment (Mareš (1998) in Homolová 2003, Homolová 2003, Lojová-Vlčková 2011, Pokrivčáková et al. 2008). Local authors focus especially on the following typologies: - Visual-auditory-kinaesthetic (VAK/VARK/VAKT) perceptive preferences typology (designed by Fleming) - Field dependence/independence (by Herman Witkin) - Impulsiveness/Reflexiveness - Ambiguity tolerance - Brain hemisphere dominance (based on Sperry and Torrance) - Individual/group learners - Gardner s multiple intelligences - Myers Briggs model (MBTI) - Holists/serialists (by Gordon Pask) It is clear that no mutual agreement about the learning style typology exists. Theory of learning styles is rather an umbrella term for very distinct conceptions. For the purpose of our study, we will consider any of the above mentioned typologies to be appropriate for learning style instruction, notwithstanding the reservations of some authors about their psychometric validity. 3 1 For more bi-polar classifications see Coffield et al (1) p Number of elements is different for children and adults. For more information see the official web site of Dunn&Dunn: 3 Allinson and Hayes Cognitive Styles Index (CSI), Apter s Motivational Style Profile (MSP), Dunn and Dunn model and instruments of learning styles, Entwistle s Approaches and Study Skills Inventory for Students (ASSIST), Gregorc s Mind Styles Model and Style Delineator (GSD), Herrmann s Brain Dominance Instrument (HBDI), Honey and Mumford s Learning Styles Questionnaire (LSQ), Jackson s Learning Styles Profiler (LSP), Kolb s Learning Style Inventory (LSI), Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), Riding s Cognitive Styles Analysis (CSA), Sternberg s Thinking Styles Inventory (TSI), Vermunt s Inventory of Learning Styles (ILS). 15

16 Criticism of learning styles We are aware of the fact that learning style theories have many opponents. The core of their argumentation is lack of appropriate empirical evidence proving that learning style instruction positively influences performance and brings along measurable improvement of students results (e.g. Pashler et al. 2008: 116) This issue is well addressed by Coffield et al. (2004 (1)), who repeatedly points out that many typologies lack scientific justification. Even in case of the thirteen most influential classifications, only one model matched the minimal criteria for internal consistency, reliability and validity (Coffield et al (1) : 139). According to Coffield et.al (2004 (2) : 46), learning styles receive unjustified prominence and their appeal among practitioners is unreasonable. On the other hand, he mentions the enormous size of the research literature which presents very particular problems for practitioners, policy-makers and researchers who are not specialists in this field. It is very improbable that teachers will ever review the original research papers and assess their quality appropriately. Other group of critics states that the learning style theory is misused for commercial purposes, pointing out especially private schools based on certain typology approach and expensive managerial and soft-skills trainings (Pashler 2008: 106). Probably most of criticism was received by Dunn & Dunn model, which is widely used all around the world in business sphere. 4 Nevertheless, commercialization itself, in our opinion, is not harmful unless it attempts to manipulate the research findings. Even more serious is the fact that learning styles may contribute to labelling students in certain groups corresponding with a particular inventory. Once the student is marked to be impulsive, the teacher may perceive him or her that way for a long time, even though the results of psychological test might have been an outcome of a momentary situation. On the other hand, such label is much more convenient than being labelled as unintelligent or unwise. Finally, learning style tuition is claimed to be too expensive taking into account that many other factors influence student s performance to a greater extent and more significantly than learning style, though they are not being facilitated. Too much effort brings along too little results. Coffield et al. (2008 (2): 46) aptly summarizes that: For more than 40 years, hundreds of thousands of students, managers and employees have filled in learning style inventories, their scores have been subjected to factor analyses of 4 See offical web-page of the Dunns. Online: 16

17 increasing complexity, numerous learning styles have been identified, and what are the conclusions that stem from such intensive labour? We are informed that the same teaching method does not work for all learners, that learners learn in different ways and that teachers should employ a variety of methods of teaching and assessment. Comenius knew that and more in seventeenth century Prague and he did not need a series of large research grants to help him find it out. In spite of the above mentioned reservations, we are convinced that learning style instruction can significantly contribute to students' results and their attitude towards studying. Validity is in our view the most serious problem. Although this issue is very serious in pedagogical research, in may sometimes be secondary in educational practice. A student s textbook, for example, may contain an inventory which is not scientifically valid, however it helps students to comprehend their own characteristics. The message to be conveyed is that it is perfectly acceptable if each one of us approaches learning differently. For this purpose we do not need a standardized psycho-diagnostic technique. Furthermore, we do not agree with the argument that teaching based on learning styles is ineffective. It depends on how we design education process once we know the learner types of our students. There are basically two options. So-called meshing hypothesis (Pashler 2008: 105) says that tuition should be tailored to each student s particular needs (in that case it really can be expensive). Another approach, called mismatched hypothesis, says that teachers should help students to unveil their individual characteristics and show them how to utilize them in learning process. However, at the same time, they expose students to techniques which do NOT match their learning style, in order to reduce their weaknesses. While with the meshing hypothesis we agree that its effectiveness may be questionable, we assume that the latter approach is certainly beneficial for students from the long-term view. Any discussion which leads students to get to know themselves better is worth to invest in. Even Coffield et al. (2004 (2): 3) acknowledge the importance of learning style based education by seeing value in better self-awareness [which] may lead to more organised and effective approaches to teaching and learning. Nevertheless, we stress the need to notify students about these reservations and present the learning style theories as hypotheses and tools rather than ultimate truth. Critical thinking, both on the side of teachers and students is the key to prevent from spreading misunderstandings about learning theories. 17

18 2.1.3 Learning Strategies In ELT terminology we need to differentiate between learning styles and learning strategies (also called study strategies ). Strategy comes from Greek strategia, which means art of commanding or leading a war; style relates to manner, preference or individual predetermination. One of the greatest experts on learning strategies in language teaching, Rebecca Oxford (2003 : 1) distinctly defines styles as general approaches to learning a language and strategies as specific behaviours or thoughts learners use to enhance their learning. In this sense, styles are relatively stable and build-in characteristics of an individual. Strategies, by contrast may be learned, developed and the learner may vary their usage in time. Interconnection of styles and strategies is not symmetrical. While strategies can function even without knowledge of one s learning styles (such strategies are not metacognitive), styles can be put into practice only via strategies. On the other hand, we can often observe that our students acquire and use strategies inconsistent with their learning styles, as a result of their teacher s insistence. (Teachers unaware of this theory unconsciously prefer their dominant learning style and make students use the same strategies as they do). Even inappropriate strategies may become natural for a student if they become a habit (as a result of reinforced, learned behaviour). Oxford and Scarcella (in Oxford 2003: 2) further explain strategies as a useful toolkit for active, conscious and purposeful self-regulation of learning. According to them, strategies are supposed not only to increase efficiency of learning, but also ensure that the learning will become easier, faster and more amusing. In our research we need to keep in mind that learning styles and strategies are inextricably intertwined with each other. Learners with a similar style tend to pick similar strategies. Learning style instruction without practice (i.e. without tools in sense of strategies) would be useless. When digging deeper, one comes across unlimited number of strategies used by learners in various situations. Some of them may be simple (e.g. selective attention on a specific language input or improving listening by sitting closer to a learner), the others are more complex (e.g. using mind maps and own graphic schemata to learn grammar). Oxford classified study strategies into 2 groups, each of them with 3 sub-categories (1990: pp 16-21): - DIRECT: cognitive, memory, compensation; - INDIRECT: metacognitive, affective and social. 18

19 Her classification is unique, because it points out that strategies are not purely cognitive (or memory-related) processes, but they can contain all kinds of compensations for learner s inability to use the target language (e.g. coinage of new words, conscious guessing, avoiding the communicative situation, etc.). Moreover, they involve also affective and social elements (e.g. students deliberately encourages themselves, or seek for social interaction to practise). Although Oxfords classification is most widely used, the author herself admits its drawbacks. She mentions that this system is in its infancy, it is only a proposal to be tested through practical classroom use and through research and that classification conflicts are inevitable (1990 : 16). It is mostly for the overlapping categories why we could not use her classification in our checklist. We would have come across too many double-assigned items, which would make our interpretation too difficult. Therefore, in our research, we categorized strategies according to their use in textbooks (see criterion 2.1 in Appendix 1). We need to clarify that our use of the term metacognitive strategies differs from Oxfords understanding. She defines them as a subgroup of indirect strategies, which encompasses centering, arranging, planning, and evaluating one s learning. However in this sense they overlap with other 5 subcategories. For example, conscious analyzing and reasoning (cognitive strategy) can be at the same time a metacognitive strategy (when the analyzing is a result of student s planning how to learn). Metacognitive strategies are always performed by conscious thinking, whereas the other 5 sub-categories can be used either consciously or subconsciously (as an imitation or following orders). In our understanding, metacognitive strategies are any deliberate and conscious actions, behaviours or techniques used by students to enhance their own learning. Please note that the strategies which are used subconsciously, or which are passively passed from teachers to students without further explanation of their meaning and purpose, are not considered to be metacognitive (we call them just learning strategies ). 2.2 Metacognition in language learning Why is it useful to encourage metacognitive thinking? Extensive research findings are available to support the hypothesis that metacognition is essential for effective learning and inevitable for acquiring whole-life motivation and ability to learn. As an old Chinese proverb states: Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime. Teaching a child how to think and learn gives him or her an invaluable tool for the rest of his or her life. 19

20 O Malley et al. (1985 in Coscun 2010 : 36) state that learners without metacognitive approaches have no direction or ability to monitor their progress, accomplishments, and future learning directions. Similarly Hauck (2005 in Coscun 2010 : 36) claims that learners with developed metacognitive awareness became more autonomous. The same conclusions are proposed by Chamot (2005), Goh (2002) and Anderson (2002) (in Coskun 2010 : 36-39). According to these authors, learners with metacognitive skills are more successful, show better performance, are able to think strategically and work out their own tactics for learning. Furthermore, they are more confident and do not hesitate to ask for help when needed. In addition, Ann Brown (1978 in Martinez 2006 : 697) justifies the generality of metacognitive functions claiming that The skills of metacognition do appear to have recognizable counterparts in real world, everyday-life situations. ( ) economy and commonsense reality is a metacognitive skill applicable whether the task under consideration is solving a math problem, memorizing a prose passage, following a recipe, or assembling an automobile. Studying separate elements of metacognition (e.g. particular learning styles) also brought us to general conclusions that metacognitive training improves students performance (see research overview by Boudah and O Neill (In Kerka (ed.) 2007 : 60-61) How to teach metacognition? Once teachers acknowledge the need of metacognitive instruction, they most probably face the question how to develop metacognitive skills and strategies. Although metacognition comprises of various sub-skills (metamemory, autonomy, learning styles, raising metacognitive awareness), most of the practitioners focus their instruction almost exclusively on learning strategies. In our opinion, there are two basic problems related to such approach. Firstly, strategies are only a part of metacognition (though the most applicable one) and the other skills shall not be neglected. Secondly, not all strategies are used deliberately and consciously (i.e. they are not metacognitive) and they are passed from teachers to students without deeper understanding. Ellis (1999: 5) address this issue by describing fruitless experimenting with strategies by practice (e.g. matching, predicting, guessing, classifying, comparing or sequencing) which 5 Researches were focused on reading strategies (Lenz & Hughes, 1990), text taking strategies (Hughes & Schumaker, 1991), strategies for improving the quality of student compositions, planning processes, and revisions (Graham, Harris, MacArthur, & Schwartz, 1991), reciprocal teaching (e.g., Palincsar & Brown, 1986), mnemonics usage (Scruggs & Mastropieri, 1992) 20

21 rarely informs students explicitly about why they are using certain strategies or get them to reflect on how they are learning. In other words, the metacognitive dimension is missing, so students are not helped to understand the significance of what they are doing. ( ) The emphasis here is on learning something rather than learning to learn. Ehrman, Leaver and Oxford (2003 In: LaBelle 2010 : 359) summarise that no strategy is good or bad (they are necessarily neutral ) and it needs to be considered in broader context. The usefulness of strategy depends on a) whether it is relevant to adjoining language task, b) whether it fits student s individual learning style, and c) whether the student uses the strategy effectively and in connection to other strategies. Classroom practice for implementing strategies should according to Oxford (2003: 15) consist of 4 phases: assessing styles and strategies in the L2 classroom, attuning L2 instruction and strategy instruction to learners style preferences, remembering that no single L2 instructional methodology fits all students, and preparing for and conducting strategy instruction. Similarly, Veenman et al. (2006 : 9) presents 3 fundamental principles for successful metacognitive training: first, to connect metacognitive instruction in the content matter; second, explain learners why metacognitive activities are useful; third, ensure prolonged training to maintain application of metacognitive activities. He refers to these rules as a WWW&H principle What (to do), When, Why and How. At this point we can see that strategy training without connecting with the learning styles theory is rather ineffective. Ellis (1999 : 5) adds that there is a need to explain reasons for learning and its process. Furthermore, she recommends to introduce materials for learning, discuss why is learning beneficial, what activities will be done and why and encourage selfassessment and self-correction of learners. Instruction focused predominantly on learning styles is (unlike with strategies) inevitably metacognitive. It does not allow us to serve students ready-made solutions and it requires deeper introspection. Moreover, learning styles develop abstract thinking, awareness of learner s own mental and cognitive processes, which are very useful skills in other areas of their lives. Styles and strategies are two interconnected elements, two sides of the same coin and we can not separate them and study them in isolation. In Flavell s division of metacognition on awareness and regulation, styles roughly correspond to metacognitive awareness, while learning strategies relate to regulation. Focusing solely on strategies would be reduction of the concept of metacognition and getting stuck on the application level without understanding the underlying principles. 21

22 2.2.3 Mesh or mismatch? Shifting attention to learning styles, the scientists argue vigorously whether it is beneficial to teach according to student s preferred styles or not. They either recommend instruction in line with student s learning style (i.e. meshing hypothesis, see Pashler et al. above), or intentional mismatching, with the aim to develop students non-dominant skills. The proponents of meshing are convinced that when using methods corresponding to individual s learning styles, one learns faster, more efficiently and with a prolonged effect. Those who object mashing claim that the most successful students are not the ones matched but those who are able to use techniques appropriate for various learning styles - in other words those who are more flexible. Bandler Grinder s research (1979 in Pritchard 2009: 54) sheds some light on this dispute, claiming that 70 per cent of learners will be able to cope however a lesson is presented; 10 per cent will be unable to learn whatever method is employed, for reasons largely unrelated to learning style; but the remainder will only be able to learn in a visual, auditory or kinaesthetic way. Those 20 per cent of students require matching, but their orientation on solely one way of processing information might probably limit them in the future anyway. A partial solution might be teaching to all types (Pritchard 2009: 54), when the teacher employs various styles of teaching and activities based not solely on his or her own preferences, but appropriate to all styles. In addition, students should gain ability to identify (diagnose) their own learning style. Furthermore, they need to apply this knowledge into their learning processes. This means, firstly, to connect their previous learning experience with the newly introduced knowledge on learning styles (i.e. to interpret student s previous endeavours and its effectiveness through learning style theory), secondly to define which learning strategies correspond to their learning style, thirdly to apply corresponding strategies in learning, and finally to be aware of the non-preferred learning style (i.e. their weakness) and decide how the student is going to develop his non-dominant ways of learning. Students need to understand that some learning styles are more appropriate for certain kinds of tasks than other. E.g., even the strictly auditory learners, find it easier to use visuals to localize a country on the map than to struggle with verbal explanation. Thus students comprehend that they should not only utilize their dominant learning style, but also develop their non-dominant predispositions. The first step is to get to know oneself, one s strengths and weaknesses. Then the student can develop a repertoire of styles. 6 6 For an example of a reasonable balance between meshing and mismatching, see Figure 6 in Chapter

23 2.2.4 Practical implications for TEFL To sum up the above mentioned theoretical concepts we may conclude that metacognitive instruction is inevitably needed and it is currently heavily neglected in teaching. Emstack (2001 in Kerka (Ed.) 2007 : 18) clarifies that teachers, under pressure of curricular standards and requirement focus on content rather than teaching skills. Coffield (2004 (2) : 12) emphasized the need to improve initial teacher education and continuing professional development, because teachers do not possess enough knowledge in the field of metacognition. Furthermore, Ellis (1999 : 4) expresses her disappointment that many teaching materials do not support development of metacognitive skills and strategies, therefore the burden of responsibility on teaching such skills is completely on the teacher. Subsequently, the need for embedding strategies directly into curricula is explained by Cohen (2003 in Kerka 2007: 72-74). Especially in EFL learning, some textbooks already provide strategy-embedded activities. Nevertheless, without metacognitive awareness, students may not be aware that they are using strategies at all. In case the metacognitive training is a part of a textbook, there is no need for extracurricular training, and students may develop such skills while learning the target language. In such case, the pressure of meeting curricular standards is eliminated, as the metacognitive instruction becomes both the process of learning language and the aim of learning. Both teachers and students need to adopt Kolb s persuasion that (1999 Coffield 2004(2): 38) Understanding your learning style type, and the strengths and weaknesses, inherent in that type, is a major step toward increasing your learning power and getting the most from your learning experiences. 2.3 Previous Research Our research is focused on mapping metacognitive instruction in the EFL textbooks with a focus on learning styles. We will concentrate predominantly on studies with identical or similar objectives, however there are also several other research areas which are relevant for us. These can be found in journals related to education, pedagogy, psychology and language learning. In addition we found many interesting sources also in periodicals dealing with psycholinguistics, human resources and neuroscience. 23

24 2.3.1 Research on metacognitive instruction in textbooks There is an abundant research available on textbook evaluation, metacognition in language learning and learning strategies. Nevertheless, when it comes to assessment of metacognitive instruction in textbooks the amount of research papers decreases rapidly. Even those few deal mostly with learning strategies (La Belle 2010, Coskun 2010), or other metacognitive skills (such as autonomy, self-assessment), but not with learning styles. We have not found a single study which would evaluate the extent and/or quality of learning style instruction in ELT textbooks. We assume that the reason why this field is rather unexplored is that while learning strategies are usually observable (and therefore easier to measure), it is difficult to observe (and examine) styles directly. From the researches focused on learning strategies, we found a lot of inspiration in Jeffrey La Belle s (2010) content analysis of ELL textbooks. The author examined 33 books and searched for learning strategies in written texts and illustrations. However, his approach is rather quantitative, as he focused solely on frequency of strategies. Furthermore, there is a group of scholars who deal with evaluating metacognitive training in textbooks on a theoretical level e.g. introducing criteria for its measurement. Unfortunately they have not been empirically validated yet. To our great pleasure, such papers occurred also among Slovak and Czech authors, who present fairly good sets of criteria. Homolová (2003: 19) has emphasized the need to include learning styles into textbook evaluation criteria. In addition, she performed a small study examining whether New Opportunities Upper Intermediate textbook includes tasks both for all VAK-types of learners (2003: 20-29). By examining two units (modules) of this textbook, she came up to the conclusion that the tasks are well-balanced in terms of VAK typology. Janíková (2007 in Maňák Knecht (Eds.) 59-60) enumerates several very specific metacognitive criteria which should be included in textbooks assessment checklists. She introduces a well applicable model for language textbook assessment. She sorted criteria into 5 categories, namely: A: Orientation in the learning process, B: Taking responsibility for one s own learning; C: Learning process itself; D: Other forms of learning; E: Sociocultural aspects of learning (intercultural learning) Research on EFL textbook assessment Due to the fact that resources on textbook evaluation in terms of metacognitive instruction are scarce, we focused also on researches examining other aspects of EFL textbooks and teaching materials. This research area is profoundly developed. Not only researchers, but also state authorities and publishers have many evaluation schemes developed at hand. 24

25 There is an excessive number of studies, therefore we focused on secondary sources, whereof we recommend especially the overview of Mukundan and Ahour (2011 : ) who published a comparative study summarizing how textbook evaluation checklists evolved during four decades ( ). They examined 48 checklists, which give us a fairly good overview of evaluation methods, although metacognition aspect is unheeded. Another useful guide to textbook evaluation is available in well-known Ur s A course in language teaching (2009 : ), where he enumerates several criteria which need to be included. Similarly, Williams (1983 : 255) analyzes the aspects of textbook evaluation checklist which were taken into consideration when evolving our evaluation tools. Specifically for Slovak foreign language coursebooks, there is a list of evaluation criteria developed by National Institute for Education (ŠPÚ) 7. They are discussed in detail in the following chapter and the full list is available in Appendix 2. Highly relevant in Slovak conditions is also an edited book of Maňák and Knecht (2007). Thereof, we closely examined the contribution of Staudková who points out from the view of a textbook publisher that a textbook shall support student s metacognitive competence (2007: 49); and the above mentioned contribution of Janíková. In spite of the abundance of resources on textbook evaluation, teachers often underestimate the selection of textbooks, and they rather obediently wait for orders from the school authorities or advice of their colleagues. Nevertheless, Wallace (2000: 181) alerts them that if they ask colleagues for a suitability of a textbook used in particular situation, they are most likely to receive a statement that the book was very useful. As a result, they may feel confident in using it, although more systematic evaluation would be needed. We hope that the above mentioned sources might help the practitioners to do so Research on metacognitive strategy training models Strategy training models bring along endless resources on how should metacognitive training be designed in general, therefore they are interesting for setting criteria of our research. The methods are very often universal, and can be applied to other metacognitive aspect than strategies, including learning styles. Basically all of the strategy training models (SSBI 8, CALLA 9 and Genfell & Harris model) follow similar patterns and common principles, comprising techniques such as planning, awareness raising, using of previous knowledge, presentation, general practice, monitoring, 7 Kritériá na hodnotenie kvality učebnicovej sady pre cudzí jazyk issued by ŠPÚ, Edičný portál; 8 Styles and Strategies-Based Instruction Model (SSBI) Cohen The Cognitive Academic Language Learning Apprach Chamot