Learning Strategies of Non Science and Science Undergraduates in Learning Mandarin

Abstract

The study uses survey methods to investigate Mandarin learning strategies of L2 learners. The Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL), a 50-item questionnaire developed by Oxford in 1990 was used to collect the data. 129 Malay undergraduates enrolled in Mandarin II and III courses participated as subjects. To identify the overall means used by degree students, descriptive statistics such as mean and standard deviation of learning strategies for instance memory, cognitive, compensatory, metacognitive, affective, and social strategies were conducted. To ascertain the pattern of learning strategies preferred by Faculty of Accountancy (FPN) and Faculty of Computer Science and Mathematics (FSKM) degree students in learning Mandarin, descriptive statistics mean, and standard deviation of the learning strategies based on faculties were also done. The significant differences in the learning strategies applied by the undergraduates in FSKM and FPN were determined using the Independent Sample t-Test. The findings indicate that the degree students' preferred learning strategies are the metacognitive strategy. Also, regardless of faculty, Metacognitive Strategy ranked as the most preferred learning strategy. According to the studies, the FPN and FSKM undergraduate did not show any statistically significant differences in their use of memory, cognitive, compensatory, metacognitive, affective, or social strategies

Keywords: Accountancy, computer science, foreign language, language learning strategy, Mandarin language

Introduction

Since China has become an enormous market in the world, interest in learning the Mandarin language has increased tremendously in many countries. Many people have begun to learn Mandarin because those who speak Mandarin have an advantage in tapping into the Chinese market. This phenomenon can also be seen in Malaysian universities where the number of students learning Mandarin as a foreign or third language has been growing rapidly. For instant, the students’ registration of Universiti Teknologi MARA (UiTM) shows that 19,994 undergraduates enrolled for Mandarin language classes at the end of 2022. The Mandarin language has always been the most popular elective courses among other foreign languages. However, learning Mandarin is a challenging task for non-native speakers. The learners are always facing the problems such as insufficient learning time, learning environment (Cheun, 2006), lack of vocabulary (Tan & Hoe, 2009), difficulties in construct basic sentences precisely (Terng & Yin, 2009) and psychological reasons (Tan & Hoe, 2007). Consequently, the purpose of this study is to ascertain how Malay Mandarin learners use language learning strategies to solve learning difficulties and create an easier, quicker, congenial, autonomous, constructive and more “learning easier, faster, more enjoyable, more self-directed, more effective and more transmittable to new circumstances (Oxford, 1990).

The results of this study are hoped to help in the general knowledge of the nature, style, and patterns of strategy utilization of Mandarin as a Third Language learners. Also, the study's results will be crucial to instructors of Mandarin as a third language as they choose strategies, pedagogical approaches, teaching materials, and activities to implement in their language classes.

Language learning strategies (LLSs) is viewed as an important move to ease the challenges for learners to learn a language. Lee (2010) perceived LLSs as varied techniques that assist learners to be better at learning and acquiring the target language. Mayer (1988) mentioned LLSs exist in learners’ behaviour which determine the way learners process knowledge from the perspective of cognitive psychology. LLSs are also described as broad strategies and high-level groups of instructional strategies that work together to produce learners' predictable learning results (Schmeck, 1988). Using the right language learning strategies can accelerate learners to experience a more self-directed and easier learning process. Meanwhile, LLSs is also able to build autonomous learning for learners to carry out their learning independently. This statement is supported by Cohen (1998) stating that LLS helps learners to reserve, memories, recall and apply the knowledge in the language learning process. Oxford (1990) highlighted the most essential of LLSs criteria is the ability to construct autonomous learners. Learners can plan and guide their own learning according to their ability and situation rather than depending solely on teachers throughout the learning process. Independent and dynamic learning integrated LLSs have become a part of learning a language.

There exists a very extensive literature on the topic related to LLSs that have been conducted by researchers in learning second language and foreign language. However, much uncertainty still exists about the use of LLSs by comparing both social science and science learners in learning Mandarin as a foreign language. The study has argued that both social science and science students have shown significant differences in using LLSs in learning foreign languages. Mohd Soupi et al. (2022) compared the use of LLSs by TESL students and non-TESL students which indicated there were no significant differences between these two groups. This is in contrast to study done by Adnan and Anwar (2020) to examine the LLSs used by Art School ESL learners which argued that Metacognitive was the most preferred LLS followed by Compensation is the least used in learning English as Second Language. The contradictory findings from these studies have shown that there are inadequate studies in this aspect.

Literature on the use of LLSs in learning language has provided a view on the significant impact of employing LLSs. Gender plays a crucial role to affect the pattern use of LLSs. Study done by Eng et al. (2022) showed that undergraduates employed memory the most in direct learning strategy, whereas Gan et al. (2022) disputed that undergraduates mostly preferred metacognitive indirect learning strategy for learning Mandarin as a foreign language. Likewise a study done by Thao (2020) asserted that gender factors could affect the low usage of autonomous English LLSs by ESL learners at a technical Ho Chi Minh City- based university in Vietnam.

Studies on the application of LLS provided a more positive impact towards the learning process among learners. Metacognitive LLS has been identified as mostly used LLS by 582 students learning Mandarin as foreign language and study proved that there is no statistically differences across learning levels such as Mandarin Level One, Mandarin Level Two and Mandarin Level Three on Metacognitive LLS (Tan et al., 2019). Similarly, Lam and Kuan (2019) argued that metacognitive is the least popular learning strategy used to learn Mandarin vocabularies. A study conducted by Nair et al. (2021) on the language learning strategies utilized by students in a rural primary school found that memory strategy is the most popular strategy among the students. Pawlak and Kiermasz (2018) justified second language learners highly used language learning strategy in contrast to the third language learners, which both employed mostly memory strategies in their learning process.

Research Questions

The purpose of this study is to define the language learning strategies used by Mandarin learners. The study's research questions (RQ) are as follows:

What overall direct learning strategies are FPN and FSKM degree students using to master Mandarin?

What pattern of learning strategies do FPN and FSKM undergraduates favor when learning Mandarin?

Are there any notable differences between the learning strategies employed by FPN and FSKM degree students when learning Mandarin?

Based on the RQ3, three hypotheses were suggested as below:

H1: There are no appreciable differences in the memory learning systems employed by FSKM degree students and FPN degree students when learning Mandarin.

H2: There are no appreciable differences in the cognitive learning strategy employed by FSKM degree students and FPN degree students when learning Mandarin.

H3: There are no appreciable differences in the compensation learning strategy employed by FSKM degree students and FPN degree students when learning Mandarin.

H4: There are no appreciable differences in the metacognitive learning strategy employed by FSKM degree students and FPN degree students when learning Mandarin.

H5: There are no appreciable differences in the affective learning strategy employed by FSKM degree students and FPN degree students when learning Mandarin.

H6: There are no appreciable differences in the social learning strategy employed by FSKM degree

students and FPN degree students when learning Mandarin.

Research Methods

The Oxford (1990) Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL) was used in this study to explore how FPN and FSKM students learn Mandarin. Oxford has categorized strategies into direct strategies and indirect strategies as shown in Figure 1. Learning strategies are defined under the research model as memory, cognitive, compensatory, metacognitive, affective, and social strategies that are applied in a classroom situation. Figure 1 shows proposed research model.

Direct strategies need mental processing of the language where memory, cognitive and compensation function differently and for different purposes. Memory strategies help learners to keep and retrieve information. Cognitive strategies help learners to understand and produce new language using various means. Compensation strategies assist learners to use the language nevertheless of their big gaps in knowledge. On the contrary, Oxford (1990) explained indirect learning strategies are functioned to support and manage language learning without directly intervene in the target language. Metacognitive strategies act as emotion controller and coordinator of their learning through centering, arranging, planning and evaluating. Affective strategies help to adjust emotions, motivations and attitudes. Social strategies help learners learn via interaction with others.

See Full Size >

Findings

This section investigates the learning strategies of undergraduate students attending Mandarin courses. The findings and comments are given in accordance with the research questions stated

Conclusion

This result of this study indicated that science and non-sciences undergraduates have no significant differences between direct learning strategies and indirect learning strategies to learn Mandarin. However, metacognitive strategies appeared as the mostly used learning strategies in this study. Non science and science undergraduates learn the same targeted language and they share the same attributes which they are more left-brained learners although both are from different streams sophomores. It could be the metacognitive strategies are very essential for successful language learning. Three Metacognitive strategies for instance centering learning, arranging and planning learning, and evaluating learning could trigger learners' interest to find more opportunities to learn a new language outside the classroom. It is suggested that in-depth research can be carried out in the future on how or why learners choose the strategies indicated in the survey. To acquire more detailed info about the usage of strategies, it would be advantageous for future research to integrate a quantitative and qualitative approach in order to obtain comprehensive information, participants' data based on other demographic variables, such as age, gender, academic performance, and other factors, can be generalized. Therefore, it is recommended that future studies could research on the use of different strategies by looking at the cognitive and aptitude of non-science versus science learners.

References

• Adnan, M., & Anwar, K. (2020). Online learning amid the COVID-19 pandemic: Students perspectives. Journal of Pedagogical Sociology and Psychology, 2(1), 45-51.

• Bessai, N. A. (2018). Using Oxford’s strategy inventory of language learning (SILL) to assess the strategy use of a group of first and third year EFL Algerian university students. American Scientific Research Journal for Engineering, Technology, and Sciences (ASRJETS), 42(1), 166-187.

• Cheng, Y. L. (2019). Relationship between learning style and learning strategies of mandarin learners in Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia (UTHM). Journal of Advanced Research in Social and Behavioural Sciences, 16(1), 144-154.

• Cheun, H. H. (2006). Problems encountered in teaching Chinese as a second language in Malaysia. New Era College.

• Cohen, A. D. (1998). Strategies in learning and using a second language. Addison Wesley Longman Limited.

• Eng, S. B., Soo, Y.-P., Lai, Y. Y., Gan, K. C., & Yeap, C. K. (2022). Online Direct Learning Strategies of Mandarin as a Foreign Language Learners During COVID-19 Pandemic Period in a Malaysian University. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 12(11). DOI:

  Google Scholar

  Crossref

• Gan, K. C., Lai, Y. Y., Soo, Y.-P., Eng, S. B., & Yeap, C. K. (2022). Indirect Learning Strategies of Mandarin as A Foreign Language Learners During Online Learning in COVID-19 Pandemic Period. International Journal of Academic Research in Progressive Education and Development, 11(3). DOI:

  Google Scholar

  Crossref

• Hapsari, A. (2019). Language Learning Strategies in English Language Learning: A Survey Study. Lingua Pedagogia, Journal of English Teaching Studies, 1(1), 58-68. DOI:

  Google Scholar

  Crossref

• Lam, K. C., & Kuan, W. L. (2019). Vocabulary learning strategies: The case of mandarin learners in Sarawak. Human Behavior, Development and Society, 20(3).

• Lee, C. K. (2010). An overview of language learning strategies. Annual Review of Education, Communication, and Language Sciences, 7, 132-152.

• Mayer, R. (1988). Learning strategies: An overview. In Weinstein, C., E. Goetz, & P. Alexander (Eds.). Learning and study strategies: Issues in assessment, instruction, and evaluation. Academic Press.

• Mohd Soupi, F. N. S., Zulkiflee, Z. N., Kenol, N. I. H. H., Chin, L. Z., Neithanantan, P., & Hashim, H. (2022). Language Learning Strategies Used among ESL Graduates. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 12(6). DOI:

  Google Scholar

  Crossref

• Nair, V., Muniandy, M., Santhanasamy, C., Arumugam, D., Nabilah, I., & Hashim, H. (2021). Language Learning Strategies Employed By Pupils at A Rural Primary School in Malaysia. International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, 11(6). DOI:

  Google Scholar

  Crossref

• Oxford, L. R. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. Newbury House Publishers.

• Pawlak, M., & Kiermasz, Z. (2018). The use of language learning strategies in a second and third language: The case of foreign language majors. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 8(2), 427–443. DOI:

  Google Scholar

  Crossref

• Schmeck, R. R. (1988). An introduction to strategies and styles of learning. In Schmeck, R. R. (Ed.), Learning strategies and learning styles. Plenum Press.

• Tan, T. G., & Hoe, F. T. (2007). Research and contribution of University Technology MARA to the teaching Chinese language as a foreign language. Proceedings of 3rd International Forum on Chinese Language Teaching. National Taiwan Normal University.

• Tan, T. G., & Hoe, F. T. (2009). Vocabulary learning strategies of students learning mandarin as a foreign language. Proceedings of ILANNS 2009 Conference. MARA University of Technology Malaysia.

• Tan, T. G., Lim, T. H., & Hoe, F. T. (2019). Metacognitive language learning strategies used by students learning mandarin as a foreign language. Journal of Second and Multiple Language Acquisition, 7(1), 1-14.

• Terng, H. F., & Yin, M. B. (2009). GAT – A Teaching module of restructuring basic mandarin sentences to UiTM malay students.

• Thao, T. Q. (2020). Non-English majors’ employment of autonomous English lexical learning strategies. Ho Chi Minh City Open University Journal of Science-Social Sciences, 10(1), 43-54. DOI:

  Google Scholar

  Crossref