Abstract
ABSTRACT Most of the research in second language learning after the mid 1970's, has shoun that no teaching technique can guarantee success in language learning, and that some certain types of learners are successful regardless of the teaching method ernployed. Thus, the researchers have changed their focus from the classroom teacher to the individual learner and his/her learning strategies which are `the special thoughts ör behaviors that individuals use to comprehend, learn, ör retain new information` (O'Malley and Chamot, 1990, p. 1). This study investigated the language learning strategies of bilinguals and monolinguals. The subjects in this study were 16 male first-year beginning level EFL learners betueen the ages of 18 and 20 at the Turkish Military Academy, Ankara. Turkey. The bilingual and monolingual subjects were selected on the basis of their scores and cumulative credits at the end of the 1991-1992 Fail semester at the Academy. Bilinguals were graduates of an immersion program either in French ör German. Data uere collected through a questionnaire based on the SILL Version 7.0 (Oxford, 1989), and an artificial language learning test (Broum, 1991). The questionnaire uhich included 25 statements had three parts. The first part in the questionnairefocused on metacognitive language learning strategies, cognitive language learning strategies were in the second part, and the third part was on socioaffective language learning strategies. The questionnaire required subjects to express agreement on these statements concerning their use of language learning strategies on a four-point Likert scale which allowed them to report their strategies in terms of strategy type and frequency of use. in the artificial language learning task developed by Brown (1991), subjects were first supplied with vocabulary words and grammar rules for an artificial language along with example sentences. This was followed by 16 test items. The 'think-aloud' protocol was used by the researcher to determine their language learning strategies uhile they were taking the test. The data obtained from the ques tionnaire were analyzed by using percentages and tabulations. Subjects' performance was determined in scores through the achievement test in the artificial language learning task. At the end of the data analysis, it was found that although bilinguals use more strategy types than do monolinguals, the difference is not statistically significant. Bilinguals were also found to use these language learning strategies more frequently than do monolingual s, although the difference is not statistical?y significant. On the other hand, bilinguals performed significantly betterthan the monolinguals on the artificial language task (p <.05). However, bilinguals took more time to complete the artificial language task than did monolinguals, although this difference is not significant either. Thus, the first part of the experimental hypothesis that the bilingual EFL learners are expected to use more types of learning strategies and to use their strategies more frequently than do monolinguals has been rejected. Houever, the second part of the experimental hypothesis that bilingual EFL learners are expected to perfortn significantly better than monolingual EFL learners in an artificial language learning task has been accepted.
