A study of the metacognitive language-learning strategy use and language-learning style preferences of English L2 learners at a vocational education institute in Hong Kong

• Main Author: Wu, Manfred Man Fat
• Other Authors: Grundy, Peter
• Published: University of Leicester 2007
• Subjects: 428.0071; ning Strategies Language-learning Styles Learner Autonomy Metacognition Chinese-speaking L2 Learners Hong Kong Vocational Education
• Online Access: http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.444823

This study identifies the relationship between preferred metacognitive language-learning strategies (MCLLSs) and language-learning styles (LLSYs) and their patterns of use amongst a selected group of learners at a vocational education institute in Hong Kong. Quantitative data were collected from 192 survey respondents and qualitative data from 8 interview participants. With regard to MCLLSs, the quantitative data reveal a medium to high use among learners, with Finding out about language learning, Self-monitoring and Paying attention identified as the most frequently used MCLLSs; with regard to style preferences, the quantitative data reveal a prevalence of multiple major preferences. The most favoured LLSYs are Auditory, Kinaesthetic and Group. The qualitative data show the reasons for using (and not using) particular MCLLSs as well as the reasons for preferring (and not preferring) particular LLSYs. The major factors which were found to determine the use of MCLLS were easiness of implementation, applicability, availability of opportunity, level of knowledge of strategies and motivation to use strategies. The major factors which were found to affect the choice of LLSYs were boredom, easiness in implementation and availability of practice opportunities. The study also identified the situations and language tasks in which MCLLSs were selectively used and in which particular LLSYs were favoured. The survey questionnaires and interviews reveal some differences in the use of MCLLSs and choice of LLSYs, and in the relationship between them. Despite the existence of these discrepancies, the findings from the two data sources were consistent in showing that there were no differences in the MCLLS use of learners with each of the six major style preferences. Several methodological issues, implications for teaching and directions for future research are discussed.