1

LANGUAGE LEARNING STRATEGIES INSTRUCTION IN A MALAYSIAN ESL CLASSROOM: A CASE STUDY Abstract Although researchers have found learner training to be useful in enhancing language skills, language learning strategies instruction in second language classrooms, especially in Malaysia, is rare. How can a Malaysian English ESL classroom teacher implement LLS instruction (learner training) within the constraint of a tight and rigid timetable? This paper reports the findings of an investigation into implementing Learner Training in the use of language learning strategies in Learning English in a Malaysian Form Four classroom. Multiple data sources such as the teachers journal, students learning dairy and weekly journal report, interview and pre- and post-test scores were used to elicit the data. Both the quantitative and qualitative results showed that learner training seemed to have a positive effect in enhancing the performance of the students. Results also showed that learner training plus the systematic provision of opportunities for learners to reflect on their learning process seemed to lead to greater sensitivity to the learning process over time. INTRODUCTION

Within the field of education in the last two decades or so, a gradual but significant shift has taken place, resulting in less emphasis being placed on teachers and teaching and a greater stress on learners and learning. Learner training in language teaching and learning is just such a case in point. This issue has of late been receiving a fair amount of attention from language experts around the world.

A peek into the background of learning in Malaysia, however, shows that the conscious teaching of language learning strategies (LLS) has rarely been emphasized or carried out in practice. This fact is obliquely acknowledged in the very Compendium, Ministry of Education (1991) itself: It cannot be denied that up to now, our curricula have not paid much attention to this aspect of training our students. These have encouraged teaching that has tended to put students in a dependent position, forcing them to rely solely on the guidance and instructions of the teacher in

order to make progress neither are students made aware of the strategies they can employ to become more efficient learners. [Emphasis researchers] (Ministry of Education, 1991: p 9) This paper describes a case study of the conscious teaching of language learning strategies in a mainstream classroom, offering possible insights and solutions into some of the events surrounding the planning and implementation of a leaner training programme.

WHY LEARNER TRAINING?

The major aim and theory of language learning underpinning the KBSM English syllabus point towards the need for learner training. For example, The KBSM Curriculum of Specification for English Language for Form 4 states that the English Language Programme for the upper secondary school level aims at equipping students with the skills and knowledge of English to communicate in certain everyday activities and certain job situations. (Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia, 1992). Within communicative approaches to language teaching, a key goal is for the learner to develop communicative competence in the target L2 or FL, and language learning strategies (LLS) can help students in attaining this goal. An understanding of LLS is crucial for all L2 teachers who aim to help develop their students communicative competence and language learning abilities. As Oxford (1990) puts it, language learning strategies are especially important for language learning because they are tools for active, self-directed involvement, which is essential for developing communicative competence. (p.1)

In addition to developing students communicative competence, LLS are important because research suggests that training students to use LLS can help them become better language learners. Various research (Chamot and Rubin, 1994; Oxford, 1990; OMalley, 1987) show us that learners who receive learner training generally learn better than those who do not and theories in L2 learning done on learning strategies (OMalley & Chamot, 1990) also point towards the usefulness of LLS in L2 acquisition. The earlier investigations in the 70s on good language learners (Naiman et. al., 1978) suggest that good language learners use a variety of strategies to assist them in gaining command over new language skills. This implies that less competent learners should be able to improve their skills in L2 through training on strategies used by the more successful language learners. This sentiment is reinforced by Hosenfield (1977) who states that successful strategies can be used to good effect by less effective learners. A study by OMalley and Chamot (1990) also suggests that effective L2/FL learners are aware of the LLS they use and why they use them. Grahams work (1997) in French further indicates that L2/FL teachers can help students understand good LLS and should train them to develop and use them.

It is submitted that once the strategies of good language learners are identified, they can be made available and, wherever useful, be used by less successful learners to enable them to learn a FL/L2 more effectively (Oxford, 1990). With successful training, less competent learners should be able to apply strategies in the acquisition of a variety of different language skills, enabling the transfer of the strategies to similar language tasks.

Research also shows that consciousness-raising is not incidental to learning, but can lead learners to learn better (Skehan, 1989). It is submitted that making learning decisions conscious can lead both poorer and better learners to learn better (OMalley & Chamot, 1990; Oxford, 1990). Teachers can play an important role in this training by conveying strategy applications to students. It is assumed that once the range of possible learner strategies is identified, one important role of the teacher would be to provide an environment that facilitates the identification by students of those strategies which work best for them. Once trained, students become the best judge of how to approach the learning task. It is submitted that once students develop an ability to evaluate their own learning processes, each in turn becomes the best judge of how to approach his/her own learning task (Graham, 1997).

As self-direction promotes learning both inside and outside the classroom, students who use effective strategies would be able to work better outside the classroom by themselves, once the teacher is not around to direct them or provide them with the necessary input. As language learning is like any other kind of learning, it is essential that students be able to assess their own knowledge. The importance of learner training is neatly encapsulated in the following quotation from an ESL teacher interviewed by Nunan (1991), As a teacher I see my role as being twofold. One is, yes, I am teaching the language, but I feel my other very important role is to assist the learners to take a growing responsibility for the management of their own learning. Within our programme, learners are with us for only a relatively short time, and we have to prepare them so that their learning can continue outside. Nunan, p.185

Since most of the literature on learner strategies training or instruction is Americanbased, the need for an in-depth study of a typical Malaysian secondary school, with significant differences in linguistic and cultural requirements, makes the present study all the more pressing. Also, despite the progress made in understanding the application of learning strategies to vocabulary and reading, there is an evident lack of studies done to provide information on the effect, process and outcomes of developing and implementing LLS instruction in a mainstream classroom with secondary school students in ESL/EFL contexts. Not much is known about incorporating learner training within a teaching and learning context with secondary school students, especially where English is taught merely as a general subject among the myriad of other learning subjects.

OBJECTIVES AND RESEARCH QUESTIONS

The objective of this study is to describe the events surrounding the process of implementing LLS instruction in a Malaysian Form 4 mainstream classroom. This study attempts to analyse the effects of strategy training on two types of language learning tasks - reading and vocabulary learning. It also attempts to look into the effects of learner training on the development of the learning process of the students. Hence this study seeks answers to the following questions:

1.

What are the opportunities and constraints in implementing LLS instruction in a Form 4 Malaysian mainstream classroom?

2.

What are the effects of strategy training on two types of language tasks vocabulary learning and reading - on learning English as a second language?

3.

What is the impact of learner training on the development of the students learning process?

METHODOLOGY

Research Design This study adopted a qualitative approach where the researcher functioned as a participant observer, both as the researcher as well as the language instructor.

Participants The participants (38 Form 4 Science students) were naturally formed and were all students of the same class. The students were between 16-17 year old, of intermediate level in English proficiency (21 obtained A, 7 obtained B and 7 obtained C, 2 obtained D and one obtained E in their 1999 PMR examinations), consisting of 17 boys and 21 girls of which 5 are Malays, 32 are Chinese and one of Indian parentage.

Overview of Training The students were put through a one-month strategy training programme in two areas of their learning tasks, vocabulary learning and reading comprehension, emphasizing mainly in the use of a few selected language learning strategies, as summarised in Table 1.
Table1:Language Learning Activities and Learning Strategies Used

Strategy Type Metacognitive Cognitive Social-affective

Language Tasks Vocabulary Self-monitoring & Self-evaluation Imagery/word-linking Cooperation Reading Self-monitoring & Selfevaluation Semantic-mapping Cooperation

Students were instructed in the use of learning strategies for 180 minutes per week. The training sessions were conducted from Mondays to Saturdays following the researchers time-table with the class. On any single day of training, students received two language learning activities: vocabulary and reading. The same learning strategies were always repeated with each language activity, although new content was presented each time a language activity recur. Students could therefore practice transfer of strategy applications to similar materials. Direct instructions to use the strategies were reduced over successive weeks of treatment for each activity, until at the post-test only a reminder of the strategies was enough. Pretesting and post-testing were carried out on the first and last days of the one month period.

Outlined below is a brief description of the training procedure for the two language tasks and the three language learning strategies:

Language Learning Tasks:

Vocabulary

The vocabulary task that the students were required to undergo involved learning 100 new words using the imagery/word-linking strategy. The imagery/word-linking strategy involves creating mental images of the key words in the mind or pegging them to some vivid events or past experience. Recall is facilitated by re-entering the scene and extracting the required words.

Reading Comprehension

The reading task that students were requested to perform was semantic-mapping on the reading passages given. Semantic mapping embraces a variety of strategies designed to display graphically information within categories related to a central concept (Johnson, 1986 in Carrell, P.L. et.al., 1989). In other words, categories and associations are indicated visually in a diagram or map. This strategy was chosen over others because semantic mapping could be used not only to introduce the key vocabulary from the passage to be read, but also to provide the teacher with an assessment of the students prior knowledge, or schema availability, on the topic. In addition to that, this strategy was extremely useful in doing text summarization.

Language Leaning Strategies:

Metacognitive Strategy The metacognitive strategy emphasised were self monitoring and self-evaluation. For self-monitoring and self-evaluation, students were instructed to note in their journals what they have learnt, what they found difficult and what they found useful in the process of using semantic mapping.

Cognitive Strategies The cognitive strategies were semantic-mapping for reading comprehension and imagery/word linking for vocabulary instruction.

Social-affective Strategy The social-affective strategy was cooperation or group dynamics. Students were instructed to use cooperation as a strategy to verify the accuracy of their semanticmapping, enabling them to fill in gaps in information or clarify areas of confusion by using their peers as a resource.

Data Collection Both quantitative and qualitative data were collected. The quantitative data is based on both the pretest and the post-test scores of both the vocabulary and reading comprehension learning tasks. The qualitative data included the reflective journals of the students (recorded in daily and weekly journals), researchers reflection (based on observation and feelings) and structured interview with selected subjects.

Instruments Used Two pre-tests were administered to the learners before starting the program, one on vocabulary learning and the other on reading comprehension. At the end of the onemonth training, the learners were given the same tests (post-test) and the scores were recorded and computated.

The Learning diary (both daily and weekly) contained the following sentence starters, which students were asked to complete.

Today/This week I studied: Today/This week I learned: Today/This week I used English in these places:

10

Today/This week I made these mistakes: My difficulties are: I would like to know: My learning & practicing plans for tomorrow/next week are:

As a participant observer the researcher recorded field notes in the form of field jottings to record what transpired during the process of implementing strategy training. The field jotting included all those that the researcher has heard, seen, experienced and thought about in the course of collecting and reflecting on the training.

Structured interviews were conducted with three selected individuals. These subjects were chosen on the account that they provided the most revealing and insightful responses in their guided reflection during the duration of the training. The purpose of interviewing the selected individuals was to verify their reflection and to seek richer and deeper insights pertaining to their opinions and feelings towards learner training. The topics and issues asked during the interview were mainly based on the following outline:

1. What do you think of the Learner Training project? Which part of the training do you think was the most memorable to you and why? Which part of the training was the least memorable to you? 2. What would you like to see changed in the way things were done in your 3. training? 4. How do you feel about the Learner Training project?

11

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Quantitative Results To get an objective view on the project, pre and post-tests results were analysed.

Pre- and Post-tests Findings

The quantitative results for both vocabulary instruction and reading generally showed impressive overall gain in the raw scores in almost all the subjects. There is also an overall improvement in the average mean for the post-test for both the learning tasks.

For vocabulary instruction, it can be seen in Figure 1 that almost all subjects (31 altogether) showed significant increase in their raw scores.
Figure 1: Bar Graph Showing Raw Pre and Post-test Scores for Vocabulary
40

30

MARKS

20

10 P E E T R -T S 0 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 P S -T S O T E T

C S N M E A E U B R

The average mean for the pre and post-test also registered big gains, from a mere 15.51 initially in the pre-test to 31.77 in the post-test implying that the training has helped in raising the learners performance in their vocabulary acquisition. Table 2 below shows

12

the mean difference. Further statistical analysis via the paired samples T-test shows a positive correlation between the pre and post-test means with a significant value of 0.006 (2 tailed).
Table 2: Paired Samples Statistics

Mean Pair 1 Pair 2 VOCPRE VOCPOS READPRE READPOS 15.52 31.77 49.78 54.63 N 31 27

N 31 31 27 27

Std. Std. Error Mean Deviation 4.36 .78 5.04 .90 8.12 1.56 6.90 1.33 Correlation .481 .816 Sig. .006 .000

Table 3: Paired Samples Correlations

Pair 1 Pair 2

VOCPRE & VOCPOS READPRE & READPOS

For reading comprehension, a similar increase in raw score was also recorded. Figure 2 and Table 3 show the increase in raw score and means of both the pre and post-test respectively.
Figure 2: Bar Graph Showing Combined Raw Sores for Pre and Post-test for Reading.
70

60

50

Raw Scores

40

30

20

P -Te re st P st-Te o st 1 3 5 7 9 11 13 1 5 17 19 21 23 25 27

10

C ase N ber um

13

The results from paired samples t-test analysis show that there are significant differences in the mean scores before and after the training, implying that the training has effected an improvement in achievement.

However, caution ought to be taken in generalising on the effectiveness of learning training alone in improving students performance. The improvement in scores could also be due to other factors such as maturity of the participants, familiarity with the content and construct, heighten motivation of the learners due to the novelty of training, etc.

To get a clearer picture of whether the training alone has effected the improvement, a look at the qualitative data would be interesting. Qualitative Results

Learning Diary (Journals) The journals provided qualitative information of the subjects feelings and thoughts about the training. While the written reflections were not really exhaustive and thus less revealing, they nevertheless provided the researcher enough details to make some generalizations. Exemplified below are some remarks written by students (quoted in verbatim) in response to some guided statements; and the conclusions made: There was a gradual shift from a linguistic focus to a more applied focus. Students began to see language less as an object to be studied than as a tool to be used, as seen below:

14

I studied At the beginning of the course An article on soft drink, The real thing in soft drink. (S5) Adjectives vocabulary on describing people (S21)

At the end of the course Using semantic-mapping to map out the main ideas of the passage on teenage problems. (S5) how to use those strategies of learning. I dont know how I learn, but I hope to find out soon. (S21)

Students comments began to take on more of a process rather than a product focus. In other words, they began to reflect on how they learned as much as what they learned.

I learned At the beginning of the course More information about soft drinks especially the ingredients and the effects of it if we take took much of it. (S28)

At the end of the course I have learnt more vocabulary about describing people and the article on learner and learning. Im happy to study like this, I feel comfortable with friends. We are braver in giving our own ideas. (S28)

Students began to reflect on their needs to seek out opportunities to use English outside the classroom.

I use English in these places At the beginning of the course I use English in the classroom while discussing the article on soft drinks. (S6)

At the end of the course I use English to talk to my teacher. Although my English is not good, Im still brave enough to speak in English. (S6) I use English to talk to my group members when discussing. Need to use less Mandarin . (S22)

There is a shift in focus from errors of pronunciation and vocabulary, that is, product errors, towards process errors. The students seemed to be comparing and contrasting the strengths and weaknesses of their known strategies with the

15

new ones. This awareness implied that they were beginning to take a more active role in their learning process. The mistake(s) I made At the beginning of the course Dont know how to spell and pronounce some words. (S23) (S26) (S28)

At the end of the course I still cant grasp the method of doing semantic-mapping (S23) I failed to memorize all the new words by using imagery strategy. I still use my own way of rote memorization. However, I will try to use imagery-word linking to memorize. (S26)

Students responses gradually became more detailed, and the same time more precise, i.e. the students exhibited awareness that the strategies needed to be further practiced before they are good at using them.

My difficulties At the beginning of the course I dont know how to pronounce the words and cannot speak well in English. (S7)

At the end of the course Although I find imagery/word linking interesting, I still find it difficult to use them. I have to force myself to use this material. When I use rote learning, I find that I could memorize easily. (S7)

Reflections seemed to shift from focus on the content of learning towards the process of learning. If initially they mentioned that the some of the texts were difficult to understand (due to the difficult vocabulary), their tone of reflection towards the tail end of the course was that, they would like help in using semantic-mapping in other areas of their study. In vocabulary learning, some students wondered how they could apply the strategy of imagery to learn other vocabulary which they could not establish mental-linkages.

I would like to know At the beginning of the course more information about soft drinks. (S30)

At the end of the course how to overcome my learning problems. I find that my old style of learning which is

16

rote learning is not very suitable in some areas or subjects. However, I am also aware that it is very difficult for me to change my style of learning. Teachers suggested strategies are interesting, but I need more training on them. (S30)

Students began to make connections between their English study and their other subjects. They exhibited awareness that the strategies they learned in English were not only confined to language learning, but could be applied to other areas as well.

My learning & practising plans At the beginning of the course I hope to use the new vocabulary in my essays in future. (S19)

At the end of the course I tried using semantic-mapping with Sejarah. Its so time consuming but I think it is quite helpful. I can remember better. (S19) I hope I can start using the new strategies as fast as I can in order to see whether there is any improvement in my English and also other subjects. (S15)

To know more vocabulary to improve my writing skill. (S15)

The illustrative examples above provided some insights into how learning strategy training has on the development in the learning process of the subject. What is obvious from the above illustration is that it seemed that learner training plus the systematic provision of opportunities for learners to reflect on their learning process has led to greater sensitivity to the learning process over time.

Interview

To probe deeper into the insights demonstrated so far, a structured interview was conducted with three selected participants. Summarised below are excerpts taken and quoted in verbatim from the learners when responding to the following structured questions.

17

1.

What do you think of the learner training project? doing, time is up.

S18 : Time is not enough. I feel just when we are about to understand what we are S13: For me, the vocabulary and reading training were useful. For example, the vocabulary training, I still have deep impression of some of the words that we have learned. I could still remember some of them, so its useful. S27: For me semantic mapping has been very useful. I tried it on History and its helped me to remember better. But, I am not too sure about using imagery and grouping. They are difficult to learn. I still prefer my old style of memorising words. 2. S13: S18: S27: Which part of the training do you think is the most memorable to you and why? The different ways of learning vocabulary. I can now remember more words. The semantic mapping but I still think it is too time consuming to do one. In exam you dont have enough time to draw one. Journal writing and semantic mapping. I think journal writing is good. It helps me to keep track of my own learning. It also forces me to write in English. 3. S13: S18: Which part of the training is the least memorable to you? I mean, which part of the training do you think you can do without? I enjoyed everything so far very relaxing, sonothing needs to be changed. I hope it will continue. Group work. We should not do it all the time. Perhaps teacher could teach 70% of the time and allow us to work in groups for the remainder 30%. I think I learn better that way. S27: The daily journal writing. Sometimes I dont have enough time to write. Writing once a week is quite okay though. 4. What would you like to see changed in the way things are done in your class? S13: S18: I hope this thing will continue. Not only for this training, but continue forever. It will be nice if we can learn strategies on speaking and writing also.

18

5. S18: S13: S27:

How do you feel about the training? Good, but we need a longer time. I enjoy the training because its relaxing. Ive benefited a lot. I hope it could be continued. It has been quite interesting so far. I am now more aware of what I am doing or what I should do.

From the illustrative examples above, it can be concluded that all the three subjects generally had a good impression of the strategy training. They generally thought that the training ought to be made a permanent feature in the class teaching and learning process. They also wanted the time spent on the training to be extended and the skills (tasks) to be covered to include others such as writing and speaking. The interviewees also expressed interests on journal writing as it has benefited them. Although they found group work to be interesting, they thought the 30:70 ratio in terms of group work and teacher instruction respectively be ideal. This issue raises a very interesting but diabolical issue. While they appeared to like the learner training programme, they still wanted the teacher to take the centre-stage, which in its essence is very much against the main objective of learner training. This interview also confirmed the earlier view that our learners are all different they have their own preferences and learning styles.

Researchers Reflections

The researchers field jottings are summarised and presented in the form of reflections for the ease of presentation. Some of the more significant events affecting the process and outcome of the implementation of learner training within the mainstream classroom are shown below:

19

The subjects enthusiasm wavered throughout the duration of the training at times they were enthusiastic and excited; and at times at their normal docile and reserved selves. Among the possible reasons that have affected these changes are the initial novelty of the training; the topic/theme selected; the timing and the occasion when the training was carried out.

Implementing learner training within the rigid school time-table was indeed difficult. The 5-period-a-week schedule made planning and implementing a comprehensive training programme difficult. Students found it hard to keep pace, stay motivated and participate actively throughout the training.

Amalgamating a comprehensive learner training programme within the gambit of the English language KBSM curriculum required careful planning and tedious preparation to get the students attracted. This is made more difficult due to the many chores teachers had to attend to such as class teacher duty and other curricular and extra curricular responsibilities.

Designing teaching and learning materials within the confine of the syllabus was a challenge the teacher is constantly faced with the dilemma of allowing students a free hand in choosing what they want to learn against the responsibility of covering the necessary topics stipulated in the KBSM Curriculum Specification and some of the skills in the Syllabus.

However, learning training provided both the researcher and students the opportunity to reflect on the teaching and learning process.

Learner training has invariably helped the learners to play a more active and responsible role in their learning process

Learner training also provides the researcher an opportunity to peep into the learning preferences, attitude and learning styles of his learners.

20

This has helped the researcher to be more aware and critical of the pedagogical approaches and techniques that he had employed or going to employ.

PEDAGOGICAL IMPLICATIONS

The results above prove that the process of learner training has increased the awareness of students to the importance of direct language learning strategies in learning English. It has also raised the students awareness to the importance of indirect language learning strategies, such as metacognitive and social-affective strategies. The students have become more aware that metacognitive strategies can help to improve organization of learning time, self-monitoring, and self-evaluation. The students are also more aware that social-affective strategies can be used to facilitate peer teaching and learning, especially working together on a particular language problem. All these strategies are necessary, as attests by Fedderholdt, F (1998), when she states that possessing these skills help the language learner build up learner independence and autonomy whereby she can take control of her own learning.

21

The study also highlighted that Malaysian ESL learners can tell a lot about their own learning process. The excerpts exemplified earlier show that learners do think about the process of their own language learning. It also demonstrates that learners are not mindless people who simply follow whatever their teachers tell them to do. They are constantly thinking about the process of their own learning. Secondly, although there appear to be some general agreement in terms of the effectiveness of learner training, there is no conclusive evidence that the learning strategies are indeed useful to all learners..

What generalisations can be made about the effects of learner training?

Students began to see language less as an object to be studied than as a tool to be used

Students reflect on how they learned as much as what they learned. Students reflection shift from focus on the content of learning towards the process of learning

Students show more awareness of learning strategies and its transferability to other subjects.

Students show greater sensitivity to the process of language learning.

The above mentioned generalizations show quite similar resemblance to what Carrell et.al. (1989) and OMalley (1987) have found in their studies, that language learning strategies are effective in enhancing second language learning in reading and vocabulary acquisition. What this means is that learner training has exacted a positive

22

effect on the development of the learning process of the learners, thereby signifying that learner training is worthwhile implementing.

This study also points towards the need for teachers to encourage their students to talk about their own learning process. The use of journal or diary writing in class has generated a lot of interests among the researchers students and could be used as a tool to stimulate and enhance the teaching and learning process.

In addition to that, this study also reinforces the idea that it would be useful to talk about ways of language learning. Naiman et al (1978) echoes that when he says,

Hints from the teacher or periodical brief exchanges with students about different ways of learning would change classroom language learning from a fairly mechanical routine into a more deliberate cooperative understanding. (p.103)

This would then allow different learning strategies to be planned and to be tried out in a more conscious way than has been customary. This study also shows that most of our learners are active learners and they have their own idiosyncrasies, preferences and learning styles. It also shows that every learner has his or her own characteristics and learning strategies which contribute to his or her own success in language learning. If each learner has different characteristics, and if it is too much to expect a teacher to be responsible for managing all aspects of learning, then there is a strong case for helping learners to become responsible for their own learning. At best, the most sensible

23

approach would be the teacher abdicating his or her role (Allwright, 1978) as the sole provider of information to take up the role of facilitator of learning by self-empowering learners who are capable of deciding what is best taught or learnt.

Pedagogically speaking then, learning how to learn should be given higher priority as the mode of learning and learner training be made a more inherent part of the teaching and learning scenario in schools.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that the process of implementing learner training in a mainstream classroom is viable and worthwhile, though hindrances and constraints were aplenty. Nevertheless, learner training in certain explicit areas can broaden the horizons of our learners and may empower them to become autonomous in some aspects of their language learning. In becoming actively involved in the process of learning the students may set their own objectives and by working independently of their teacher both inside and outside the classroom, and in selecting and using the strategies best suited to the occasion, they may realise a sense of autonomy. Bibliography Allwright, R.L. 1978. Abdication and responsibility in language teaching, Studies in Second Language Acquisition, II/1:105-121. Carrell, P.L, Pharis, B.G. and J.C. Liberto. 1989. Metacognitive Strategy Training for ESL Reading. TESOL Quarterly, 23:4, 647-678. Chamot, A.U. and Rubin, J. 1994. Comments on Janie Rees-Millers A critical appraisal of learner training: theoretical bases and teaching implications: Two readers react. TESOL Quarterly, 28:4, 771-76. Fedderholdt, K. 1998. Using Diaries to Develop Language Learning Strategies. http://langue.hyper.chubu.ac.jp/jalt/pub/tlt/98/apr/fedderholdt.html.

24

Graham, S. 1997. Effective Language Learning. Clevedon, Avon: Multilingual Matters. Hosenfeld, C. 1977. A preliminary investigation of the reading strategies of successful and non successful language learners. System, 5. 110-123. Kementerian Pendidikan Malaysia. 1992. Huraian Sukatan Pelajaran Bahasa Inggeris Tingkatan IV Kurikulum Bersepadu Sekolah Menengah. Kuala Lumpur: Dewan Bahasa dan Pustaka. Ministry of Education Malaysia. 1991. Compendium: A Handbook for ELT Teachers, Vol.2. KualaLumpur : Ministry of Education Malaysia. Naiman, N. et.al. 1978. The Good Language Learner. Toronto, Ontario: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education. Nunan, D. 1991. Language Teaching Methodology: A Textbook for Teachers. Hemel Hempstead: Prentice-Hall International. OMalley, J. M. 1987. The Effects of Training in the Use of Learning Strategies on Learning English as a Second Language in Wenden, A & Rubin, J. (Eds). Learner Strategies in Language Learning. New York: Prentice Hall. OMalley, J. M., & Chamot, A. 1990. Learning Strategies in Second Language Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Oxford, R. L. 1990. Language Learning Strategies: What every Teacher Should Know. New York: Newbury House. Skehan, P. 1989. Language learning strategies. Individual Differences in SecondLanguage Learning. London: Edward Arnold.