Loading…

Language Learning Strategies and English Proficiency of Chinese University Students

: This study investigated the relationship between language learning strategy (LLS) preferences and English proficiency among Chinese university students. Oxford's (1990) Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL) and an institutional version (ITP) of the Test of English as a Foreign Langu...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Foreign language annals 2005-03, Vol.38 (1), p.100-107
Main Authors: Nisbet, Deanna L., Tindall, Evie R., Arroyo, Alan A.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4360-395334f84a4a2bf10326122a7e2af2c90de311c3c687b47b7d24562cb3836d9a3
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4360-395334f84a4a2bf10326122a7e2af2c90de311c3c687b47b7d24562cb3836d9a3
container_end_page 107
container_issue 1
container_start_page 100
container_title Foreign language annals
container_volume 38
creator Nisbet, Deanna L.
Tindall, Evie R.
Arroyo, Alan A.
description : This study investigated the relationship between language learning strategy (LLS) preferences and English proficiency among Chinese university students. Oxford's (1990) Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL) and an institutional version (ITP) of the Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL) were administered to 168 third‐year English majors. Multiple regression analysis revealed that SILL strategies accounted for only 4% of the variation in ITP‐TOEFL score. Results of a multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) indicated no significant differences between males and females on eight measures of learning strategy preferences and proficiency. Findings suggest a need for further research examining other factors that may account for variation in proficiency among Chinese learners. The authors recommend a closer examination of the relationship between learning strategies and proficiency, and the possible interplay of learner autonomy, across diverse cultural settings.
doi_str_mv 10.1111/j.1944-9720.2005.tb02457.x
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_85631532</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><ericid>EJ741801</ericid><sourcerecordid>85631532</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4360-395334f84a4a2bf10326122a7e2af2c90de311c3c687b47b7d24562cb3836d9a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqVkE1v1DAURSNEJYaWf8Ai6oJd0ueP2AkbVI2m06KoVEwr2FmO85J6SJ1iJ3Tm35NRqlmwwxsv7r1H9omicwIpmc7FNiUF50khKaQUIEuHCijPZLp7Ey2O0dtoAUCyRJL857vofQhbACioJItoU2rXjrrFuETtnXVtvBm8HrC1GGLt6njl2s6Gx_jO9401Fp3Zx30TLx-tw4Dxg7N_0Ac77KfhWKMbwll00ugu4IfX-zR6uFrdL6-T8tv6ZnlZJoYzAQkrMsZ4k3PNNa0aAowKQqmWSHVDTQE1MkIMMyKXFZeVrKefCWoqljNRF5qdRp9m7rPvf48YBvVkg8Gu0w77Mag8E4xkjE7F83-K2370bnqbokQAJTnnU-nzXDK-D8Fjo569fdJ-rwiog2y1VQej6mBUHWSrV9lqN40_zmP01hyHq6-SkxzIFH-Z4xfb4f4_wOqqvLwlABMhmQk2DLg7ErT_pYRkMlM_btfqDtbfYSPvlWB_ASJTnpE</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>216021844</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Language Learning Strategies and English Proficiency of Chinese University Students</title><source>Wiley</source><source>Linguistics Collection</source><source>ProQuest One Literature</source><source>ERIC</source><source>Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts (LLBA)</source><source>ProQuest Social Science Premium Collection</source><source>Education Collection</source><creator>Nisbet, Deanna L. ; Tindall, Evie R. ; Arroyo, Alan A.</creator><creatorcontrib>Nisbet, Deanna L. ; Tindall, Evie R. ; Arroyo, Alan A.</creatorcontrib><description>: This study investigated the relationship between language learning strategy (LLS) preferences and English proficiency among Chinese university students. Oxford's (1990) Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL) and an institutional version (ITP) of the Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL) were administered to 168 third‐year English majors. Multiple regression analysis revealed that SILL strategies accounted for only 4% of the variation in ITP‐TOEFL score. Results of a multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) indicated no significant differences between males and females on eight measures of learning strategy preferences and proficiency. Findings suggest a need for further research examining other factors that may account for variation in proficiency among Chinese learners. The authors recommend a closer examination of the relationship between learning strategies and proficiency, and the possible interplay of learner autonomy, across diverse cultural settings.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0015-718X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1944-9720</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1111/j.1944-9720.2005.tb02457.x</identifier><identifier>CODEN: FLGAAS</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd</publisher><subject>China ; Chinese languages ; College Students ; Cultural differences ; English (Second Language) ; English as a second language ; English as a second language learning ; English as a second language tests ; English proficiency ; Foreign Countries ; Foreign language learning ; Foreign students ; Gender Differences ; Language Acquisition ; Language Proficiency ; Language Tests ; Learning Strategies ; Majors (Students) ; Measures (Individuals) ; Multiple Regression Analysis ; Second Language Learning ; Second Languages ; Statistical Analysis ; Strategy Inventory for Language Learning ; Test of English as a Foreign Language</subject><ispartof>Foreign language annals, 2005-03, Vol.38 (1), p.100-107</ispartof><rights>2005 American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages</rights><rights>Copyright American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages Spring 2005</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4360-395334f84a4a2bf10326122a7e2af2c90de311c3c687b47b7d24562cb3836d9a3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4360-395334f84a4a2bf10326122a7e2af2c90de311c3c687b47b7d24562cb3836d9a3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/216021844/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/216021844?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,12832,21359,21363,21375,27905,27906,31250,31251,33592,33593,33858,33859,33892,33893,43714,43861,43877,62640,62641,62643,62656,73945,73970,74146,74162</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=EJ741801$$DView record in ERIC$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Nisbet, Deanna L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tindall, Evie R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Arroyo, Alan A.</creatorcontrib><title>Language Learning Strategies and English Proficiency of Chinese University Students</title><title>Foreign language annals</title><description>: This study investigated the relationship between language learning strategy (LLS) preferences and English proficiency among Chinese university students. Oxford's (1990) Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL) and an institutional version (ITP) of the Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL) were administered to 168 third‐year English majors. Multiple regression analysis revealed that SILL strategies accounted for only 4% of the variation in ITP‐TOEFL score. Results of a multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) indicated no significant differences between males and females on eight measures of learning strategy preferences and proficiency. Findings suggest a need for further research examining other factors that may account for variation in proficiency among Chinese learners. The authors recommend a closer examination of the relationship between learning strategies and proficiency, and the possible interplay of learner autonomy, across diverse cultural settings.</description><subject>China</subject><subject>Chinese languages</subject><subject>College Students</subject><subject>Cultural differences</subject><subject>English (Second Language)</subject><subject>English as a second language</subject><subject>English as a second language learning</subject><subject>English as a second language tests</subject><subject>English proficiency</subject><subject>Foreign Countries</subject><subject>Foreign language learning</subject><subject>Foreign students</subject><subject>Gender Differences</subject><subject>Language Acquisition</subject><subject>Language Proficiency</subject><subject>Language Tests</subject><subject>Learning Strategies</subject><subject>Majors (Students)</subject><subject>Measures (Individuals)</subject><subject>Multiple Regression Analysis</subject><subject>Second Language Learning</subject><subject>Second Languages</subject><subject>Statistical Analysis</subject><subject>Strategy Inventory for Language Learning</subject><subject>Test of English as a Foreign Language</subject><issn>0015-718X</issn><issn>1944-9720</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2005</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7SW</sourceid><sourceid>7T9</sourceid><sourceid>AIMQZ</sourceid><sourceid>ALSLI</sourceid><sourceid>CJNVE</sourceid><sourceid>CPGLG</sourceid><sourceid>M0P</sourceid><recordid>eNqVkE1v1DAURSNEJYaWf8Ai6oJd0ueP2AkbVI2m06KoVEwr2FmO85J6SJ1iJ3Tm35NRqlmwwxsv7r1H9omicwIpmc7FNiUF50khKaQUIEuHCijPZLp7Ey2O0dtoAUCyRJL857vofQhbACioJItoU2rXjrrFuETtnXVtvBm8HrC1GGLt6njl2s6Gx_jO9401Fp3Zx30TLx-tw4Dxg7N_0Ac77KfhWKMbwll00ugu4IfX-zR6uFrdL6-T8tv6ZnlZJoYzAQkrMsZ4k3PNNa0aAowKQqmWSHVDTQE1MkIMMyKXFZeVrKefCWoqljNRF5qdRp9m7rPvf48YBvVkg8Gu0w77Mag8E4xkjE7F83-K2370bnqbokQAJTnnU-nzXDK-D8Fjo569fdJ-rwiog2y1VQej6mBUHWSrV9lqN40_zmP01hyHq6-SkxzIFH-Z4xfb4f4_wOqqvLwlABMhmQk2DLg7ErT_pYRkMlM_btfqDtbfYSPvlWB_ASJTnpE</recordid><startdate>200503</startdate><enddate>200503</enddate><creator>Nisbet, Deanna L.</creator><creator>Tindall, Evie R.</creator><creator>Arroyo, Alan A.</creator><general>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</general><general>American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>7SW</scope><scope>BJH</scope><scope>BNH</scope><scope>BNI</scope><scope>BNJ</scope><scope>BNO</scope><scope>ERI</scope><scope>PET</scope><scope>REK</scope><scope>WWN</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>4T-</scope><scope>4U-</scope><scope>7T9</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88B</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AIMQZ</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CJNVE</scope><scope>CPGLG</scope><scope>CRLPW</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>LIQON</scope><scope>M0P</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQEDU</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200503</creationdate><title>Language Learning Strategies and English Proficiency of Chinese University Students</title><author>Nisbet, Deanna L. ; Tindall, Evie R. ; Arroyo, Alan A.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4360-395334f84a4a2bf10326122a7e2af2c90de311c3c687b47b7d24562cb3836d9a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2005</creationdate><topic>China</topic><topic>Chinese languages</topic><topic>College Students</topic><topic>Cultural differences</topic><topic>English (Second Language)</topic><topic>English as a second language</topic><topic>English as a second language learning</topic><topic>English as a second language tests</topic><topic>English proficiency</topic><topic>Foreign Countries</topic><topic>Foreign language learning</topic><topic>Foreign students</topic><topic>Gender Differences</topic><topic>Language Acquisition</topic><topic>Language Proficiency</topic><topic>Language Tests</topic><topic>Learning Strategies</topic><topic>Majors (Students)</topic><topic>Measures (Individuals)</topic><topic>Multiple Regression Analysis</topic><topic>Second Language Learning</topic><topic>Second Languages</topic><topic>Statistical Analysis</topic><topic>Strategy Inventory for Language Learning</topic><topic>Test of English as a Foreign Language</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Nisbet, Deanna L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tindall, Evie R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Arroyo, Alan A.</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Ovid)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>ERIC( SilverPlatter )</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>ERIC PlusText (Legacy Platform)</collection><collection>Education Resources Information Center (ERIC)</collection><collection>ERIC</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Docstoc</collection><collection>University Readers</collection><collection>Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts (LLBA)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Education Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Literature</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Education Collection</collection><collection>Linguistics Collection</collection><collection>Linguistics Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>One Literature (ProQuest)</collection><collection>Education Database</collection><collection>ProQuest research library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Education</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Foreign language annals</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Nisbet, Deanna L.</au><au>Tindall, Evie R.</au><au>Arroyo, Alan A.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><ericid>EJ741801</ericid><atitle>Language Learning Strategies and English Proficiency of Chinese University Students</atitle><jtitle>Foreign language annals</jtitle><date>2005-03</date><risdate>2005</risdate><volume>38</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>100</spage><epage>107</epage><pages>100-107</pages><issn>0015-718X</issn><eissn>1944-9720</eissn><coden>FLGAAS</coden><abstract>: This study investigated the relationship between language learning strategy (LLS) preferences and English proficiency among Chinese university students. Oxford's (1990) Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL) and an institutional version (ITP) of the Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL) were administered to 168 third‐year English majors. Multiple regression analysis revealed that SILL strategies accounted for only 4% of the variation in ITP‐TOEFL score. Results of a multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) indicated no significant differences between males and females on eight measures of learning strategy preferences and proficiency. Findings suggest a need for further research examining other factors that may account for variation in proficiency among Chinese learners. The authors recommend a closer examination of the relationship between learning strategies and proficiency, and the possible interplay of learner autonomy, across diverse cultural settings.</abstract><cop>Oxford, UK</cop><pub>Blackwell Publishing Ltd</pub><doi>10.1111/j.1944-9720.2005.tb02457.x</doi><tpages>8</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0015-718X
ispartof Foreign language annals, 2005-03, Vol.38 (1), p.100-107
issn 0015-718X
1944-9720
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_85631532
source Wiley; Linguistics Collection; ProQuest One Literature; ERIC; Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts (LLBA); ProQuest Social Science Premium Collection; Education Collection
subjects China
Chinese languages
College Students
Cultural differences
English (Second Language)
English as a second language
English as a second language learning
English as a second language tests
English proficiency
Foreign Countries
Foreign language learning
Foreign students
Gender Differences
Language Acquisition
Language Proficiency
Language Tests
Learning Strategies
Majors (Students)
Measures (Individuals)
Multiple Regression Analysis
Second Language Learning
Second Languages
Statistical Analysis
Strategy Inventory for Language Learning
Test of English as a Foreign Language
title Language Learning Strategies and English Proficiency of Chinese University Students
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-19T12%3A30%3A14IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Language%20Learning%20Strategies%20and%20English%20Proficiency%20of%20Chinese%20University%20Students&rft.jtitle=Foreign%20language%20annals&rft.au=Nisbet,%20Deanna%20L.&rft.date=2005-03&rft.volume=38&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=100&rft.epage=107&rft.pages=100-107&rft.issn=0015-718X&rft.eissn=1944-9720&rft.coden=FLGAAS&rft_id=info:doi/10.1111/j.1944-9720.2005.tb02457.x&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E85631532%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4360-395334f84a4a2bf10326122a7e2af2c90de311c3c687b47b7d24562cb3836d9a3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=216021844&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_ericid=EJ741801&rfr_iscdi=true