A Comparative Study of the Language Learning Systems Used by

Monolingual and Bilingual Students

M. A. Dzhukaeva

, M. I. Muslimova

and E. Kh. Arsalieva

Chechen State University Named After A.A. Kadyrov, Grozny, Russia

Chechen State Pedagogical University, Grozny, Russia

Keywords: Bilingual Students, Language Learning System, Direct and Indirect Learning Strategies, Language Skills,

Cognitive Skills.

Abstract: The purpose of our study is to compare the language learning systems of students who speak the same

language at bilingual universities. We will attempt to determine whether students' use of foreign language

learning strategies varies in terms of variables such as gender, department, or type of institution. These studies

were conducted and analyzed using descriptive statistics and parametric tests. The study found that bilingual

students used more language learning systems in the foreign language learning process than monolingual

students. It was found that students mostly use methocognitive strategies and least of all affective strategies;

female students use language learning system more than male students; English Language and Literature and

Translation Studies students use language learning system more than translation students.

1 INTRODUCTION

As in all developing countries, learning and teaching

foreign languages in our country has gained great

importance due to globalization, increasing

international interactions, and the development of

technology. Teaching English as a foreign language

in our country has a half-century history, but the level

of knowledge is not able to achieve the desired

success, given the effort, money and time spent on

teaching a foreign language. There are many reasons

for the ineffective teaching of English in our country,

such as the competence of teachers, physical and

technical equipment, the learning environment and

working conditions. The methods, strategies, and

techniques used in foreign language learning and

teaching are important. In recent years in our country,

foreign language teaching has emphasized student-

centered approaches in which the student is active in

learning the language, rather than teacher-centered

approaches. Since the responsibility for learning is

transferred to the learner in a learner-centered

environment, the learner's behavior or thoughts in the

learning process and how they learn matters. This

brings us to the concept of "learning strategy." It is

defined differently by different researchers (Oxford,

1990).

2 MATERIALS AND METHODS

R. Oxford defined that strategies used by learners to

facilitate make the process more effective and transfer

it to new situations; Meyer and Vanstein defined

learning strategies as behaviors and thoughts that

influence the learner's coding process (Mayer, 1983);

O'Malley and A. Chamot defined specific thoughts or

behaviors that are used to help individuals

understand, learn and retain knowledge (O’Malley,

1990); A. Chamot defines conscious thoughts and

actions used to achieve any learning goals (Chamot,

2004); H. Güleroglu and D. Ozmen defined as

strategies that involve internal human cognitive

processes used by learners to enable and manage their

own learning (Gullerogly, 2013);Learning strategies

not only help an individual to be effective in using or

learning a language, but also contribute to an

individual's own learning (Hong-Nam, 2006).

Language learning strategies suggest that there are

certain social and cognitive variables that influence

language learning. Researchers looked for variables

that affect foreign language learning, stressing that

learning strategies are another variable that influences

language learning. Researchers state that successful

students use different strategies for language learning

and these strategies allow them to internalize more

Dzhukaeva, M., Muslimova, M. and Arsalieva, E.

A Comparative Study of the Language Learning Systems Used by Monolingual and Bilingual Students.

DOI: 10.5220/0011600900003577

In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Actual Issues of Linguistics, Linguodidactics and Intercultural Communication (TLLIC 2022), pages 28-31

ISBN: 978-989-758-655-2

 2023 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. Under CC license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)

responsibility in the learning process (Tuncer, 2009).

Language learning strategies are directly or indirectly

related to self-regulation and R. Oxford states that

they promote autonomous learning (Chamot, 2004).

One of the most common ways to assess language

learning strategies is through the use of data

collection tools such as surveys, inventories, and

scales.

Stern classifies management and planning

strategies: cognitive strategies, communicative-

empirical strategies (Stern, 1992). In studies

concerning the definition of language learning

strategies. The most frequently used tool is the

"inventory of language learning strategies" developed

by R. Oxford. Since this data collection tool uses

individual strategies in relation to language skills,

such as reading, writing, listening speaking skills,

R.Oxford divided them into two groups: direct and

indirect. And each group was divided into three

subcategories. Direct learning strategies directly

contribute to learning, divided into three categories:

memory strategies, cognitive strategies, and

compensatory strategies. Memory strategies help

transfer knowledge to long-term memory to retain

knowledge in memory and recall. When appropriate.

For these strategies, you can use techniques such as

creating a meaning map, making mental connections,

grouping, linking, and using keywords. Cognitive

strategies are used in creating mental schemata and

interpreting learning. For these strategies, methods

such as using native language when speaking or

writing, using facial expressions and body language,

using cues, and overcoming limitations in various

ways can be used. Indirect learning strategies are not

directly related to learning, but contribute to

individual regulation of learning and fall into three

categories: metacognitive, emotional, and social.

Metacognitive strategies help students organize, plan,

and evaluate their own learning. These strategies can

be addressed by methods such as setting learning

goals, creating organization, planning for learning,

and self-assessment. Affective strategies help

students control motivation, emotions, and attitudes

toward learning. In relation to these strategies, one

can use feelings experienced when learning a

language, taking risks, and doing relaxation-oriented

exercises. Social strategies help learners

communicate verbally with those who use the same

language. They are matched by methods such as

cooperation, developing empathy. Questioning

techniques, creating cultural awareness, can be used

in relation to these strategies (Oxford, 1990).

3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

When the definition of "bilingual people" is used in

the literature, different opinions are expressed

regarding this condition. According to the simplest

definition, they are those people who know two

languages and can keep them separate from each

other (Ahlsen, 2006). Some classifications regarding

bilingualism are available in the literature. These

classifications vary widely, from having a second

language as one's mother tongue to being able to use

any linguistic features in the second language. For

example, anyone who can read and write, but cannot

speak a language other than their mother tongue, can

be called bilingual. Some researchers consider

various criteria related to the state of bilingualism: the

age of language learning of persons learning a

language other than their native language; the level of

language proficiency and frequency of language use;

social factors and the context in which the language

is learned, all become important factors in classifying

bilinguals. The most widely used classification

criteria are based on age and language proficiency.

Classifications made according to age criteria can be

divided into early, late, and adult bilingualism;

classifications made according to language

proficiency levels can be defined as fluent, balanced,

and dominant. In addition to these criteria, E.Aslen

proposed a comprehensive classification of learning

age criteria and grouped them under three headings:

complex bilingualism, where both languages are

learned simultaneously before age 6, and usually one

of the languages is learned by family members;

coordinated bilingualism, where the second language

is learned at home or in another environment before

puberty; natural bilingualism, where the first

language is dominant, and the second is instrumental,

where one thinks in the former and translates it into

the latter. Bilinguals in this study can be seen as

composite or coordinated. It is believed that a person

who is able to use his or her native language at a

certain level will act more consciously with respect to

the structure of the foreign language being learned

(Sarica, 2014). As a result, it turns out that bilingual

people will learn a foreign language more effectively

and use language-learning strategies more often,

because the similarities between the foreign language

the individual has to learn and the other languages

he/she speaks are likely to facilitate the process of

learning the foreign language. Research on the

language learning strategies that bilinguals use when

learning a new language is often conducted in

countries where English is the official language or

spoken language. Research done on language

A Comparative Study of the Language Learning Systems Used by Monolingual and Bilingual Students

learning strategies used by bilinguals in countries

where English is not the official or native language is

rather limited in the literature. Undoubtedly,

bilinguals are more sought after than monolinguals

because of their past language experience in learning

a new language, and bilinguals perform better in a

variety of cognitive skills (Hakuta, 1990). It is

important to compare bilingual and monolingual

people in terms of language learning strategies that

are used in foreign language learning.

The aim of our study was to compare the language

learning strategies used by bilingual and monolingual

university students and to determine whether

students' use of language learning strategies during

foreign language learning differs according to gender,

department, or type of school. In accordance with this

goal, we will try to find answers to the following

questions:

1. At what level do university students use

language-learning strategies when learning

English?

2. Is there a significant difference between the

levels of language strategy use by monolingual

or bilingual university students?

3. Is there a significant difference between the

levels at which university students use

language learning strategies in terms of

gender?

4. Is there a significant difference between the

levels of language strategy use of university

students in terms of terms?

The study is a survey model. Since survey models

aim to describe the situation in the same way as it has

occurred in the past or continues to this day, it is an

appropriate model for this study. Participation was

conducted with 524 students enrolled in the Faculty

of Literature at two universities and a vocational

school in Turkey. 335 participants (63.9%) were

monolingual and 189 participants (36.1%) were

bilingual. Students' use of language learning

strategies was assessed based on mean values. The

mean scores and standard deviations for each item

were calculated according to the scores on the

inventory questions to determine the level of students'

use of language strategies. If the strategies used by

students were scored below 2.4 to 3.4, strategy use

was considered to be at an average level; 3, 4, and

above meant that strategy use was at a high level.

Thus, the analyses were interpreted according to these

categories.

4 CONCLUSIONS

Our study showed that university students usually use

language learning strategies at the intermediate level.

The algorithm most commonly used by bilingual and

monolingual students is similar. Both bilingual and

monolingual students used metacognitive strategies.

However, monolingual students used metacognitive

techniques moderately, whereas bilingual students

used them frequently. Metacognitive concepts

represent high-level management skills and include

skills such as planning, organizing, monitoring, and

evaluating. The more frequent use by bilingual

students of metacognitive strategies, which allow

students to question their learning process based on

past linguistic experiences, was an expected finding,

and its frequent use by students is generally

encouraging because it shows that students are able to

plan, organize, and evaluate their own learning. But

similar studies have reached different conclusions

about the most frequently used algorithms. In a study

of bilingual students, it was found that this type of

student most frequently used social strategies, which

contradicts the results of this paper. Social concepts

mostly involve interactive learning situations such as

asking questions and collaboration in foreign

language learning, productive skills are not taught at

a sufficient level, which may explain why students do

not really want to speak English and do not use social

algorithms enough. We observe that both bilingual

and monolingual students were the least likely to use

effective strategies. Bilingual students are more

engaged in language learning compared to

monolingual students. Individuals with some level of

skill, using their native language, are more successful

in understanding the structure of the foreign

languages they are learning. Bilingual people have

the skills to use both languages as their mother

tongue, and they should both be more effective in

their efforts to learn the other language, using better

strategies and achieving more effective and efficient

learning by drawing parallel lines between the

languages they already know and the new language

REFERENCES

Oxford, R., 1990. Language Learning Strategies: What

Every Teacher Should Know. New York; Viewbury

House.

Mayer, R. E., Weinstein, C. E., 1983. The teaching of

learning or learning strategies. Innovation Abstracts.

5|32. pp. 1-4.

TLLIC 2022 - I INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE "ACTUAL ISSUES OF LINGUISTICS, LINGUODIDACTICS AND

INTERCULTURAL COMMUNICATION"

O’Malley, J. M., Chamol, A., 1990. Learning Strategies in

Second Language Acquisition. CUP, Cambrige.

Chamot, A. U., 2004. Issues in language learning strategy

research and teaching. Electronic journal of Foreign

Language Teaching. 1(1). pp. 14-26.

Gullerogly, H. D., ve Ozmen, D. T., 2013. Determining

language learning strategies used by the students at

faculty of educational science based on some variables.

English ve Bilim. 38(169).

Hong-Nam, Y., Leavell, A. G., 2006. Language learning

strategy use of ESL students in an intensive English

learning context. System. 34. pp. 399-415.

Tuncer, U., 2009. How do monolingual and bilingual

language learns differ in use of learning strategies while

learning a foreign language? Evidences from Mersin

University. Procedia Social and Behaviral Sciences. 1.

pp. 852-856.

Chamot, A. U., 2004. Issues in language learning strategy

research ans teaching. Electronic journal of Foreign.

Language Teaching. 1(1). pp. 14-26.

Stern, H. H., 1992. Issues And options In Language

Teaching. London: Oxford Universiyu Press.

Oxford, R., 1990. Language Learning strategies: applied.

Lenguage Learning. 4. pp. 65-94.

Ahlsen, E., 2006. Introduction to Neurolinguistics.

Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Sarica, N., 2014. Idiosyncrasy in native language

acquisition and linguistic transfers in second language

acquisition. International journal of Language

Academy. 2(4). pp. 554-563.

Hakuta, K., 1990. Bilingualism and bilingual education: a

research perspective. NCBE Focus 1.

A Comparative Study of the Language Learning Systems Used by Monolingual and Bilingual Students