§ Browsing ETD Metadata
System No. U0002-1806201323562600
Title (in Chinese) 運用社會認知理論於EFL大學環境中: 探討語言學習策略、英語自我效能和學習策略教學之關係
Title (in English) Applying Social Cognitive Theory to EFL College Contexts: The Relationship among Language Learning Strategies, English Self-Efficacy, and Explicit Strategy Instruction
Other Title
Institution 淡江大學
Department (in Chinese) 英文學系博士班
Department (in English) Department of English
Other Division
Other Division Name
Other Department/Institution
Academic Year 101
Semester 2
PublicationYear 102
Author's name (in Chinese) 楊佩玲
Author's name(in English) Pei-Ling Yang
Student ID 898110050
Degree 博士
Language English
Other Language
Date of Oral Defense 2013-05-31
Pagination 213page
Committee Member advisor - Ai-Ling Wang
co-chair - Yueh-Kuey Huang
co-chair - Yea-Huey Chang
co-chair - Hsiu-Chieh Chen
co-chair - Shih-Ping Wang
Keyword (inChinese) 語言學習策略
Keyword (in English) language learning strategies
English self-efficacy
Social Cognitive Theory
Other Keywords
Abstract (in Chinese)
本研究旨在調查EFL大學生的語言學習策略、英語自我效能以及明確的策略教學之關係。許多研究結果顯示使用較多的語言學習策略以及較高的自我效能和學習者的學業表現有高度的相關。 本研究以社會認知理論的觀點來建立出三個重要的研究變數:語言學習策略、英語自我效能和明確的策略教學。這三個研究變數會透過一個兩階段式的準實驗來做探討。在實驗的第一階段中,所有的參與者(78位主修英語的大學生)完成中級程度的全民英檢閱讀測驗、語言學習策略量表(Strategy Inventory for Language Learning)以及英語自我效能量表(English self-efficacy scale)。 在實驗的第二階段中,實驗組進行六個星期的策略教學活動。一個月之後實驗組和對照組都再次填寫語言學習策略及英語自我效能量表。 藉此來探討實驗組與對照組的語言學習策略使用和英語自我效能是否有顯著性的改變。除了有參與者背景資料的描述性分析以及研究者現場觀察、事後面談的質性分析外,一連串的量性分析(獨立t檢定、變異數分析、共變數分析和皮爾森相關係數)也運用於本研究中。本研究顯示出三個重要的結果。首先,學習者的英語能力和他們的語言學習策略運用以及英語自我效能之間是正相關。第二,語言學習策略和英語自我效能之間也是正相關。最後,在學習策略教學介入之後,學習者運用更多的語言學習策略,尤其是記憶策略。因此,本研究的結果將可以為外語學習的策略運用和自我效能的提升提供一個新的契機。 外語教學的教師及外語學習者都將可以藉此使得語言教學和學習更有效率。
Abstract (in English)
The present study aims to investigate the relationship among EFL college learners’ language learning strategies, English self-efficacy, and explicit strategy instruction.  More language learning strategy application and a higher level of self-efficacy, as proved and claimed by numerous researchers, are highly associated with learners’ academic achievement.  However, there is little research on applying explicit strategy instruction in EFL contexts based on the model of Social Cognitive Theory.  Therefore, in this study, from the perspectives of Social Cognitive Theory, three constructs, namely language learning strategies, English learning self-efficacy, and explicit strategy instruction, were investigated through a two-phase quasi-experiment.  In this experiment, all the participants (78 English majors) in the first phase were asked to complete an intermediate-level General English Proficiency Test (GEPT) reading test, Strategy Inventory for Language Learning designed by Oxford, and English Self-Efficacy Scale adapted from Huang et al.  In the second phase, after the intervention of explicit strategy instruction, learners’ strategy application and their self-efficacy were measured again in order to investigate whether or not there would be any significant difference before and after the instruction and between the two groups of learners (the experimental and the control groups).  The six-week strategy instruction was conducted according to the following steps: awareness raising, strategy instruction, hands-on activities, evaluation, and diagnosis.  Besides the descriptive analysis of the learners’ background information and qualitative analysis of on-site observation and post-interview, a series of t-tests, ANOVA, ANCOVA and Pearson Correlation coefficient were conducted to demonstrate findings from the quantitative data.  Given the results, the study reveals three significant findings.  First, learners’ English proficiency is correlated with their language learning strategy use and levels of English self-efficacy.  Second, there is a positive correlation between language learning strategies and English self-efficacy.  Third, after the strategy instruction, the learners applied more language learning strategies, especially memory strategies.  Therefore, the findings of the study could possibly shed light on EFL learning and could be of help to those who are interested in strategy building and self-efficacy enhancement.  Both EFL instructors and learners could be benefited in terms of effective teaching and learning.
Other Abstract
Table of Content (with Page Number)
Table of Contents
Abstract:	ii
Table of Contents	iii
Chapter 1 Introduction	1
Background of the Study	1
Statement of the Problem	5
Purpose of the Study	7
Importance of the Study	10
Definitions of Terms	11
Organization of the Dissertation	14
Chapter 2 Review of the Literature	16
Social Cognitive Theory	16
Self-Efficacy	18
Self-efficacy and academic performance.	22
Self-efficacy and contexts.	24
Self-efficacy and gender.	25
Self-efficacy and strategy.	26
Learning Strategies	27
Direct Strategies.	30
Indirect Strategies.	33
Learning strategies and language performance.	38
Learning strategies and academic majors.	39
Learning strategies and gender.	40
Language learning strategies and nationality.	42
The Importance of Language Learning Strategies..	42
Learning Strategy Instruction	44
Summary of Chapter 2	52
Research Hypotheses	53
Chapter 3 Method	55
Participants	55
The Settings	58
The Pilot Study	58
Research Design	62
Grouping Procedure	64
Instruments	65
The background information questionnaire.	66
The GEPT reading test..	66
The English learning self-efficacy scale.	68
Strategy inventory for language learning.	68
The learners’ perception questionnaire on the explicit strategy instruction.	69
Research Procedures	71
Design of the Explicit Strategy Instruction	72
Data Collection	78
Data Analysis	79
Chapter 4 Results	82
Overall Descriptive Results	82
Quantitative Analysis of Phase I	84
Reported use of language learning strategies in the SILL.  	85
The relationship among the six categories of language learning strategies.	93
The relationship between English proficiency and language learning strategies.  	94
Reported Level of English Self-efficacy.  .	94
The relationship among the four categories of English self-efficacy.  	101
The relationship between English self-efficacy and English proficiency.	102
The relationship between language learning strategies and English self-efficacy.  	102
Phase I Summary	104
Quantitative Analysis of Phase II	106
Reported use of the language learning strategies in the SILL by the two groups of participants after the explicit strategy instruction.  	107
The results of ANCOVAs in the application of all language learning strategies.  	107
The results of ANCOVAs in the application of All English self-efficacy.  
Qualitative analysis of Phase II	119
Learners’ perception results.  	119
Post-interview results.  	123
Learners’ description of English learning.  	128
The instructor’s on-site journal.	129
Summary of Phase II	131
Chapter 5 Discussion, Implications and Conclusions	133
Overview of the Study	133
Discussion	136
Hypothesis 1: Level of English proficiency makes a difference to the number of language learning strategies used.  	136
Hypothesis 2: Level of English proficiency makes differences in the level of English self-efficacy.  	139
Hypothesis 3: There is a correlation between language learning strategies and English self-efficacy.  .	140
Hypothesis 4: There are differences between the experimental and control group in the number of language strategies used after the explicit strategy instruction.  	142
Hypothesis 5: There are differences between the experimental and control group in the level of English self-efficacy after the explicit strategy instruction.  .	144
Hypothesis 6: There is a correlation between language learning strategies and English self-efficacy after the strategy instruction.  .	145
Conclusions	146
Pedagogical Implications	149
Limitations and Suggestions for Future Research	151
References	154
Appendices	170

List of Tables
Table 2.1  29
Features of language learning strategies  29
Table 2.2  48
Steps in the model of strategy training (instruction) 48
Table 2.3  51
Typology of strategy instruction  51
Table 3.1  57
Description of the participants in the study  57
Table 3.3  61
Descriptive Results of the SILL in the Pilot Study  61
Table 3.4  61
Descriptive Results of the SILL in the Pilot Study after the Strategy Instruction  61
Table 3.5  61
Results of Paired-Samples t-tests of the SILL in the Pilot Study  61
Table 3.6  65
Grouping selection results  65
Table 3.7  71
Selected Materials for the Explicit Strategy Instruction  71
Table 3.8  75
Procedure of the strategy instruction in the present study  75
Table 3.9  76
Time Allocation and Examples for the Explicit Strategy Instruction  76
Table 3.10 . 80
Summary of the data analysis  80
Table 4.1  84
Participants’ Attitudes toward and Perceptions of English Learning  84
Table 4.2  85
Interpretation of Pearson correlation coefficient values  85
Table 4.3  86
Language Learning Strategy Application of All the Participants  86
Table 4.4  87
Scale for Interpretation of Scores for the SILL  87
Table 4.5  88
Frequency Distribution of Metacognitive Strategies  88
Table 4.6  88
Frequency Distribution of Memory Strategies  88
Table 4.7  89
Frequency Distribution of all strategies by two groups of participants  89
Table 4.8  91
Language Strategies by Different English-level Participants 91
Table 4.9  92
ANOVA results of language strategies by different-level participants 92
Table 4.10  93
Post hoc test results of language learning strategies by different English-level
participants  93
Table 4.11  94
Pearson Correlation coefficient of Six Categories of Language Learning
Strategies  94
Table 4.12  94
Pearson correlation coefficient of language learning strategies and English
proficiency  94
Table 4.13  95
Level of English Self-Efficacy by All Participants  95
Table 4.14  96
Level of English self-efficacy (aspiration, persistence, and enjoyment) by all
participants  96
Table 4.15  96
Level of English self-efficacy (writing affect) by all participants  96
Table 4.16  97
Level of English self-efficacy by different groups of participants  97
Table 4.17  98
An independent samples t-test of English self-efficacy by the two groups  98
Table 4.18  99
Level of English Self-Efficacy by Learners with Different Levels of English
Proficiency  99
Table 4.19  100
ANOVA of English self-efficacy by different English-level participants 100
Table 4.20  101
A post hoc analysis of English self-efficacy by different English-level
participants  101
Table 4.21  102
Pearson Correlation coefficient of Four Categories of English Self-Efficacy  102
Table 4.22  102
Pearson correlation coefficient of English self-efficacy and English proficiency 102
Table 4.23  103
Pearson Correlation coefficient of overall language learning strategies and
English self-efficacy 103
Table 4.24  104
Pearson Correlation coefficient of Individual Category of language learning
strategies and English self-efficacy  104
Table 4.25  108
ANCOVA results of the six parts of language learning strategies  108
Table 4.26  109
ANCOVA results of Part A strategie 109
Table 4.27 Results of paired Comparison regarding Part A strategies  109
Table 4.28  110
ANCOVA results of Part B strategies  110
Table 4.29  110
ANCOVA results of Part C strategies  110
Table 4.30  111
ANCOVA results of Part D strategies  111
Table 4.31  112
ANCOVA results of Part E strategies  112
Table 4.32  112
ANCOVA results of Part F strategies  112
Table 4.33  113
ANCOVA results of all parts of English self-efficacy  113
Table 4.34  114
ANCOVA results of Part 1 English self-efficacy  114
Table 4.35  114
ANCOVA results of Part 2 English self-efficacy  114
Table 4.36  115
ANCOVA results of Part 3 English self-efficacy  115
Table 4.37  116
ANCOVA results of Part 4 English self-efficacy  116
Table 4.38  117
Pearson Correlation coefficient of overall language learning strategies and
English self-efficacy after the strategy instruction  117
Table 4.39  118
Pearson Correlation coefficient of Individual Category of language learning
strategies and English self-efficacy after the strategy instruction  118
Table 4.40  120
First part of the learners’ perception  120
Table 4.41  122
Second Part of the Learners’ Perception 122
Table 4.42  125
Findings of the Post-Interview  125
Table 4.43  129
Summary of Learners’ Description about English Learnin  129

List of Figures
Figure 2.1  17
The self-reflective process  17
Figure 2.2  20
Sources of Efficacy Expectations  20
Figure 2.3  30
Diagram of the strategy system: overview  30
Figure 2.4  31
Diagram of the direct strategies: Overview  31
Figure 2.5  35
Diagram of the direct strategies: Overview  35
Figure 2.6  53
Three Constructs in the Present Study  53
Figure 3.1  63
Framework of the research design  63
Figure 3.2  72
Flowchart of the research procedure  72
Figure 3.3  73
Cycle of Strategy Instruction  73
Adler, P. A., & Adler, P. (1994). Observational techniques. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Anderson, N. (1999). Exploring second language reading: Issues and strategies. Toronto, Canada: Heinle & Heinle.	
Atkinson, R. C., & Michael, R. R. (1975). An application of the mnemonic keyword method to the acquisition of Russian vocabulary. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 104(2), 126-133. 	
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191-215. 	
Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37(2), 122-147. 	
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.	
Bandura, A. (1989). Human agency in social cognitive theory. American Psychologist, 44(9), 1175-1184. 	
Bandura, A. (1995). Experience of personal and collective efficacy in changing societies. New York: Cambridge University Press.	
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.	
Bandura, A. (2004). Swimming against the mainstream: The early years from chilly tributary to transformative mainstream. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 42, 613-630. 	
Bandura, A., & Adams, N. E. (1977). Analysis of self-efficacy theory of behavioral change. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 1(4), 287-310.

Bandura, A., Bararanelli, C., Caprara, G. V., & Pastorelli, C. (1996). Multifaceted impact of self-efficacy beliefs on academic functioning. Child Development, 67, 1206-1222. 	
Bandura, A., & Schunk, D. H. (1981). Cultivating competence, self-efficacy, and intrinsic interest through proximal self-motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41(3), 586-598. 	
Barone, D., Maddux, J. E., & Snyder, C. R. (1997). Social cognitive psychology: History and current domains. New York: Plenum.	
Bax, S. (2003). The end of CLT: A context approach to language teaching. ELT Journal, 57(3), 278-287. 	
Beihler, R., & Snow, J. (2000). Psychology applied to teaching. USA: Houghton Mifflin Company.	
Bremner, S. (1999). Language learning strategies and language proficiency: Investigating the relationship in Hong Kong. Canadian Modern Language Review, 55(4), 490-514. 	
Carrell, P. L. (1989). Metacognitive awareness and second language reading. The Modern Language Journal, 73(2), 121-134. 	
Cervone, D., & Wood, R. (1995). Goals, feedback, and the differential influence of self-regulatory processes on cognitively complex performance. Cognitive Therapy and Research, 19, 519-545. 	
Chamot, A. U. (1998). Teaching learning strategies to language students. (ERIC Document Reproduction Services NO. ED 433719). 	
Chamot, A. U. (2004). Issues in language learning research and teaching. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching, 1(1), 14-26. 

Chamot, A. U. (2007). Accelerating academic achievement of English language learners: A synthesis of five evaluations of the CALLA Model. In J. Cummins & C. Davison (Eds.), The international handbook of English language learning,Part I (Vol. 317-331). Norwell, MA: Springer.	
Chamot, A. U., Barnhardt, S., El-Dinary, P., & Robbins, J. (1996). Methods for teaching learning strategies in the foreign language classroom. In R. L. Oxford (Ed.), Language learning strategies around the world: Cross-cultural perspectives (pp. 175-188). Manoa: University of Hawaii Press.	
Chamot, A. U., Robbins, J., & El-Dinary, P. B. (1993). Learning strategies in Japanese foreign language instruction. ERIC Document Reproduction Service NO. ED 370346. 	
Christmann, E. P., & Badgett, J. (2009). Interpreting assessment data: Statistical techniques you can use. USA: NSTA Press.	
Cohen, A. D. (1990). Language learning: Insights for learners, teachers, and researchers. New York: Newbury House Publishers.	
Cohen, A. D. (1998). Strategies in learning and using a second language. London: Pearson Education Limited.	
Cohen, A. D., & Edna, P. (1980). Retention of second-language vocabulary over time: Investigating the role of mnemonic associations. System, 8(3), 221-235. 
Collins, J. L. (1982). Self-efficacy and ability in achievement behavior. Paper presented at the the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York. 	
Comprehensive assessment program for junior high school students. (2013).   Retrieved March 1, 2013, from http://cap.ntnu.edu.tw/test_4_3.html	
Dickinson, L. (1987). Self-instruction in language learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.	
Dornyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguist: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methodologies. Oxford: OUP.	
Dornyei, Z., & Skehan, P. (2003). Individual differences in second language learning. In C. Doughty & M. Long (Eds.), Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (pp. 589-630). Oxford: Blackwell.	
Ehrman, M., & Oxford, R. L. (1989). Effects of sex differences, career choice, and psychological type on adult language learning strategies. Modern Language Journal, 73, 1-13. 	
Elliot, A. J., Faler, J., McGregor, H. A., Campbell, W. K., Sedikides, C., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2000). Competence valuation as a strategic intrinsic motivation process. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26(780-794). 
Ellis, R. (1985). Understanding second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.	
Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. London: Oxford University Press.	
Gan, Z., Humphreys, G., & Hamp-Iyons, L. (2004). Understanding successful and unsuccessful EFL students in Chinese Universities. The Modern Language Journal, 88(2), 229-244. 	
Gardner, R. C., & Lambert, W. (1972). Attitudes and motivation in second language learning. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.	
Gardner, R. C., & MacIntyre, P. D. (1993). A student's contribution to second language learning: Part II, affective factors. Language Teaching, 26, 1-11. 	
Gass, S., & Selinker, L. (2001). Second language acquisition: An introductory course (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Graham, S., & Harris, K. (2000). Writing development The role of cognitive, motivational, and social/ contextual factors. Educational Psychologist, 35(1), 3-12. 	
Green, J., & Oxford, R. L. (1995). A closer look at learning strategies, L2 proficiency, and gender. TESOL Quarterly, 29(261-297). 	
Greene, B. A., Miller, R. B., Crowson, M., Duke, B. L., & Akey, K. L. (2004). Predicting high school students' cognitive engagement and achievement: Contributions of classroom perceptions and motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29, 462-482. 	
Grenfell, M., & Harris, V. (1999). Modern languages and learning strategies in theory and practice. London: Routledge.	
Grenfell, M., & Harris, V. (2004). Language-learning strategies: A case for cross-curricular collaboration. Language Awareness, 13(2), 116-130. 	
Griffiths, C. (2006). Strategy development and progress in language learning. Prospect, 21(3), 58-76. 	
Hajer, M., Meestringa, T., Park, Y. Y., & Oxford, R. L. (1996). How print materials provide strategy instruction. In R. L. Oxford (Ed.), Language learning strategies around the world: Cross-cultural perspectives. Honolulu, HI: Second Language Teaching & Curriculum Center, University of Hawai'i	
Hong-Nam, K., & Leavell, A. G. (2006). Language learning strategy use of ESL students in an intensive English learning context. System, 34, 399-415. 	
Hosenfeld, C., Arnold, V., Kirchofer, J., Laciura, J., & Wilson, L. (1981). Second language reading: A curricular sequence for teaching reading strategies. Foreign Language Annals, 14(5), 415-422. 	
Huang, S. C., & Chang, S. F. (1996). Self-Efficacy of English as a second language learner: An example of four learners. ED396536.	
Huang, X. H., & Van Naerrsen, M. (1987). Learning strategies for oral communication. Applied Linguistics, 8, 287-307. 	
Junge, M. E., & Dretzke, B. J. (1995). Mathematical self-efficacy gender differences in gifted/ talented adolescents. Gifted Child Quarterly, 39, 22-26. 	
Knowles, M. (1975). Self-directed learning: A guide for learners and teachers. Chicago: Association Press.	
Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon.	
Krashen, S. D. (1985). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. New York: Longman.	
Lai, Y.-C. (2009). Language learning strategy use and English proficiency of university freshmen in Taiwan. TESOL Quarterly, 43(2), 255-280. 	
Lai, Y.-C. (2011). Language learning strategy use and English proficiency of university freshman in Taiwan. TESOL Quarterly, 43(2), 255-280. 	
Lam, W. Y. K. (2009). Examining the effects of metacognitive strategy instruction on ESL group discussions: A synthesis of approaches. Language Teaching Research, 13(2), 129-150. 	
Lau, K. L. (2006). Implementing strategy instruction in Chinese language classes: A school-based Chinese reading strategy instruction program. Educational Research, 48(2), 195-209. 	
Leaver, B. L. (2003). Achieving native-like second language proficiency: A catalogue of critical factors (Vol. I). Salinas, CA: MSI Press.	
Lee, C. K. (2010). An overview of language learning strategies. ARECLS, 7, 132-152. 	

Lee, K. R. (2007). Strategy awareness-raisin for success: Reading strategy instruction in the EFL context. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), University of Maryland, College Park,MD, USA.   	
Lee, K. R., & Oxford, R. L. (2008). Understanding EFL learners' strategy use an strategy awareness. Asian EFL Journal, 10(1), 7-32. 	
Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Larkin, K. C. (1984). Relation of self-efficacy expectations to academic achievement and persistence. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 31, 356-362. 	
Lent, R. W., Brown, S. D., & Larkin, K. C. (1987). Comparison of three theoretically derived variables in predicting career and academic behavior: Self-efficacy, interest congruence, and consequence thinking. . Journal of Counseling Psychology, 34, 293-298. 	
Liu, J. (2006). A comparison between good and poor language learners in vocabulary learning. Sino-US English Teaching, 3(3), 18-29. 	
MacIntyre, P. D. (1994). Toward a social psychological model of strategy use. Foreign Language Annals, 27, 185-195. 	
Maddux, J. E., & Volkmann, J. (2010). Self-efficacy. In R. H.Hoyle (Ed.), Handbook of personality and self-regulation. West Sussex, UK: Wiley-Blackwell	
McLaughlin, B. (1987). Theories of second-language learning. London: Edward Arnold.	
Meece, J. L. (1991). The classroom context and children's motivational goals. In M. L. Maehr & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Advances in achievement motivation research (pp. 261-285). New York: Academic Press.	
Meece, J. L. (1994). The role of motivation in self-regulation. In D. H. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Self-regulation of learning and performance: Issues and educational applications (pp. 25-44). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Meece, J. L., Herman, P., & McCombs, B. (2003). Relations of learner-centered teaching practices to adolescents' achievement goals. International Journal of Educational Research, 39, 457-475. 	
Mochizuki, A. (1999). Language learning strategies used by Japanese university students. RELC Journal, 30(2), 101-113. 	
Motlagh, S. E., Amrai, K., Yazdani, M. J., Abderahim, H. A., & Souri, H. (2011). The relationship between self-efficacy and academic achievement in high school students. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 765-768. 	
Naiman, N., Frohlich, M., & Todesco, A. (1975). The good second language learner. TESL Talk, 6(1), 58-75. 	
Nakatani, Y. (2005). The effects of awareness-raising instruction on oral communication strategy use. The Modern Language Journal, 89(2), 76-91. 	
Nguyen, N. (2010). Factors influencing language-learning strategy use of English learners in an ESL context. Mid-Western Educational Researcher, 23(4), 7-13. 
Norton, B., & Toohey, K. (2001). Changing perspectives on good language learners. TESOL Quarterly, 35(2), 307-322. 	
Nyikos, M. (1991). Prioritizing student learning: A guide for teachers. In L.Strasheim (Ed.), Focus on the foreign language learner: Priorities and strategies. Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook.	
Nyikos, M. (1996). The conceptual shift to learner-centred classrooms: Increasing teacher and student strategic awareness. In R. L. Oxford (Ed.), Language Learning Strategies around the World (pp. 109-117). Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press.
O'Malley, J. M. (1987). The effects of training in the use of learning strategies on learning English as a second language. In A. Wenden & J. Rubin (Eds.), Learner Strategies for Learner Autonomy (pp. 133-143). UK: Prentice Hall	
O'Malley, J. M., & Chamot, A. U. (1988). How to teach learning strategies. In A. U. Chamot, J. M. O'Malley & L. Kupper (Eds.), The cognitive academic language learning approach (CALLA) training manual (pp. 121-122). Arlington, VA: Second Language Learning.	
O'Malley, J. M., & Chamot, A. U. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.	
O'Malley, J. M., Chamot, A. U., Stewner-Manzanares, G., Russo, R. P., & Kupper, L. (1985). Learning strategy applications with students of English as a second language. TESOL Quarterly, 19(3), 557-584. 	
O'Neil, H. F., & Spielberger, C. (1979). Cognitive and affective learning strategies. New York: Academic Press.	
Oxford, R. L. (1986). Second language learning strategies: Current research and implications for practice. Los Angeles: Center for Language Education and Research, University of California at Los Angeles.	
Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.	
Oxford, R. L. (1993). Research on second language learning strategies. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 13(5), 175-187. 	
Oxford, R. L. (1994). Gender differences in L2 styles and strategies: Do they exist? Should we pay attention? . In J.Alatis (Ed.), Strategies interaction and language acquisition: Theory, practice, research (pp. 541-557). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.	

Oxford, R. L. (2008). Hero with a thousand faces: learner autonomy, learning strategies and learning tactics in independent language learning. In S. Hurd & T. Lewis (Eds.), Language learning strategies in independent settings. Ontario, Canada: Cromwell Press Ltd.	
Oxford, R. L. (2011). Teaching and researching language learning strategies. Harlow, UK: Pearson Education Limited.	
Oxford, R. L., & Leaver, B. L. (1996). A synthesis of strategy instruction for language learners. In R. L. Oxford (Ed.), Language learning strategies around the world: Cross-cultural perspectives (pp. 227-246). Honolulu: Teaching & Curriculum Center, University of Hawai'i.	
Oxford, R. L., & Nyikos, M. (1989). Variables affecting choice of language learning strategies by university students. The Modern Language Journal, 73(3), 291-300. 	
Ozeki, N. (2000). Listening strategy instruction for female EFL college students in Japan. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), Indiana University of Pennsylvania.   	
Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in achievement settings. Review of Educational Research, 66, 543-578. 	
Pajares, F. (2002). Overview of social cognitive theory and of self-efficacy. Retrieved May 15, 2013 from www.emory.edu/EDUCATION/mfp/eff.html	
Pajares, F. (2008). Motivational role of self-efficacy beliefs in self-regulated learning. In D. H. Shunk & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Motivation and self-regulated learning: Theory, research and application. (pp. 111-140). Oxon, UK: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. 	

Pajares, F., Miller, M. D., & Johnson, M. J. (1999). Gender differences in writing self-beliefs of elementary school students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 50-61. 	
Pajares, F., & Valiante, G. (2001). Gender differences in writing motivation and achievement of middle school students: A function of gender orientation? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 26(3), 366-381. 	
Pintrich, P. R. (1999). The role of motivation in promoting and sustaining self-regulated learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 31, 459-470. 	
Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 33-40. 	
Pintrich, P. R., & Schrauben, B. (1992). Students' motivational beliefs and their cognitive engagement in classroom tasks. In D. Schunk & J. Meece (Eds.), Student perceptions in the classroom: Causes and consequences (pp. 149-183). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.	
Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. H. (1996). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.	
Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. H. (2002). Motivation in education: Theory, research, and applications (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.	
Politzer, R., & McGroarty, M. (1985). An exploratory study of learning behaviours and their relationship to gains in linguistic and communicative competence. TESOL Quarterly, 19, 103-123. 	
Raimes, A. (1985). What unskilled ESL students do as they write: A classroom study of composing. TESOL Quarterly, 19, 229-258. 	
Rao, Z., & Liu, F. (2011). Effect of academic major on students' use of language learning strategies: A diary study in a Chinese context Language Learning Journal, 39(1), 43-55. 	
Rigney, J. W. (1978). Learning strategies: A theoretical perspective. In H. F. O'Neil (Ed.), Learning strategies (pp. 165-205). New York: Academic Press.	
Rodgers, T. S. (1978). Towards a model of learner variation in autonomous foreign language learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 2(1), 73-97. 	
Rong, M. (1999). Language learning strategies of a sample of tertiary-level students in the P.R.China. Guidelines, 21(1), 1-11. 	
Rubin, J. (1975). What the "good language learner" can teach us. TESOL Quarterly, 9(41-51). 	
Salahshour, F., Sharifi, M., & Salahshour, N. (2013). The relationship between language learning strategy use, language proficiency level and learner gender. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 70, 634-643. 	
Schultz, D. P., & Schultz, S. E. (2005). Theories of personality. Belmont, CA: Thomson Learning, Inc.	
Schunk, D. H. (1991). Self-efficacy and academic motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26, 207-231. 	
Schunk, D. H. (1995). Self-efficacy and education and instruction. In J. E. Maddux (Ed.), Self-efficacy, adaptation, and adjustment: Theory, research, and applications (pp. 281-303). New York: Plenum.	
Schunk, D. H. (1996). Goals and self-evaluative influences during children's cognitive skill learning. American Educational Research Journal, 33, 359-382. 	

Schunk, D. H. (2008). Attributions as motivators of self-regulated learning. In D. H. Schunk & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Motivation and self-regulated learning: Theory, research, and applications. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.	
Schunk, D. H., & Ertmer, P. A. (1999). Self-regulatory processes during computer skill acquisition: Goals and self-evaluation influences. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91, 251-260. 	
Schunk, D. H., & Meece, J. L. (2005). Self-efficacy development in adolescences. In F. Pajares & T. Urdan (Eds.), Self-Efficacy Beliefs of Adolescents (pp.71-96). USA: University of Colorado School of Education. 
Shell, D. F., & Murphy, C. C. (1989). Self-efficacy, outcome expectancy mechanism in reading and writing achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(1), 91-100. 	
Skehan, P. (1989). Individual differences in second-language learning. London: Edward Arnold.	
Stern, H. (1975). What can we learn from the good language learner? The Canadian Modern Language Review, 34, 304-318. 	
Tarone, E., & Yule, G. (1989). Focus on the language learner. Oxford: Oxford University Press.	
Tran, T. V. (1988). Sex differences in English language acculturation and learning strategies among Vietnamese adults aged 40 and over in the United States. Sex Roles, 19, 747-758. 	
Tyacke, M., & Mendelsohn, D. (1986). Students needs: Cognitive as well as communicative. TESL Canada Journal, 1, 177-198. 	

Urdan, T., & Midgley, C. (2003). Changes in the perceived classroom goal structure and pattern of adaptive learning during early adolescence. Contemporary Educational Psychology 28, 524-551. 	
Usuki, M. (2000). A new understanding of Japanese students views on classroom learning. Independence, 27, 2-6. 	
Valentine, J. C., DuBois, D. L., & Cooper, H. (2004). The relation between self-beliefs and academic achievement: A meta-analytic review. Educational Psychologist, 39, 111-134. 	
Vann, R., & Abraham, R. (1990). Strategies of unsuccessful language learners. TESOL Quarterly, 24, 177-198. 	
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.	
Wei, D. D. (2004). Rethinking the English pedagogy at Hope College in Taiwan. Paper presented at the AARE, Melbourne, Australia. 	
Weinstein, C. E., & Meyer, D. K. (1994). Learning strategies: Teaching and testing for. In T. Husen & T. N. Postlethwaite (Eds.), The International Encyclopedia of Education (pp. 3335-3340). Oxford: Pergamon Press	
Whitley, B. E. J. (1997). Gender differences in computer-related attitudes and behavior: A meta-analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 13(1), 1-22. 	
Winstead, L. (2004). Increasing academic motivation and cognition in reading, writing, and mathematics: Meaning-making strategies. Educational Research Quarterly 28(2), 30-49. 	
Wolters, C. A. (2003). Regulation of motivation: Evaluating an underemphasized aspect of self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 38, 189-205. 	

Wong, M. S. (2005). Language learning strategies and language self-efficacy: Investigating the Relationship in Malaysia. Regional Language Centre Journal, 36(3), 245-269. 	
Yamamori, K. (2004). Durability of the will to learn English: A one year study of Japanese seventh graders. Japanese Journal of Educational Psychology, 52, 71-82. 	
Yang, L. L. (2004). The development of a validated perceived self-efficacy scale on English reading strategies. Journal of Education & Psychology, 27(2), 377-398. 	
Yang, N. D. (1999). The relationship between EFL learners' beliefs and learning strategy use. System, 27, 515-535. 	
Yilmaz, C. (2010). The relationship between language learning strategies, gender, proficiency and self-efficacy beliefs: A study of ELT learners in Turkey. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2, 682-687. 	
Zamel, V. (1983). The composing processes of advanced ESL students: Six case studies. TESOL Quarterly, 17, 165-187. 	
Zhang, L. J. (2010). A dynamic metacognitive systems account of Chinese university students' knowledge about EFL reading. TESOL Quarterly, 44(2), 320-353. 	
Zhang, Z. (1992). English reading strategies. Beijing: Transportation Press.	
Zimmerman, B. J. (1989). A social cognitive view of self-regulated academic learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81(3), 329-339. 	
Zimmerman, B. J. (1990). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: An overview. Educational Psychologist, 25(1), 3-17. 	

Zimmerman, B. J., & Bandura, A. (1994). Impact of self-regulatory influences on writing course achievement. American Educational Research Journal, 31, 845-862. 	
Zimmerman, B. J., Bandura, A., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1992). Self-motivation for academic attainment: The role of self-efficacy  beliefs and personal goal-setting. American Educational Research Journal, 20, 663-676. 	
Zimmerman, B. J., & Kitsantas, A. (1996). Self-regulated learning of a motoric skill: The role of goal setting and self-monitoring. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 8, 60-75. 	
Zimmerman, B. J., & Kitsantas, A. (1997). Developmental phases in self-regulation: Shifting from process goals to outcome goals. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89, 29-36. 	
Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1990). Student differences in self-regulated learning: Relating grade, sex, and giftedness to self-efficacy and strategy use. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 51-59.
Terms of Use
Within Campus
I request to embargo my thesis/dissertation for 5 year(s) right after the date I submit my Authorization Approval Form.
Duration for delaying release from 5 years.
Outside the Campus
I grant the authorization for the public to view/print my electronic full text with royalty fee and contact me for receiving the payment.
Duration for delaying release from 5 years.

If you have any questions, please contact us!

Library: please call (02)2621-5656 ext. 2487 or email