Technical university students' beliefs about second language learning

The findings indicated that students agreed with the statement about the connection between early introduction of a second language in school programmes and success in learning (Mdn=2, IQR=2), but the responses were scattered (see Table 1). The results of another research claim that those, who start learning a second language at an early age, reach nativelike proficiency. At the same time it depends on the time and frequency of the lessons, one-two classes per week being not enough to make progress (Lightbown, Spada, 2013: 205).

According to the results of the research, most students agreed with the statement that interference from their first language is the reason for most of the mistakes that second language learners make (Mdn=2, IQR=2), but the responses were scattered (see Table 1). It is true that one of the main reasons for errors is transferring patterns from the native language, and those kinds of errors can be fossilised. Both similarities and differences between the first and second languages may lead to errors because of the wrong assumptions second language learners make. However, speakers of different origins often make similar mistakes, which proves that they experiment with the target language rather than recall the patterns from their native languages (Lightbown, Spada, 2013: 205).

The findings showed that most students agreed with the statement about reading being the best way to learn new vocabulary (Mdn=2, IQR=2), with responses scattered (see Table 1). Another research evidence recognises this statement as true, but suggests that the material should be selected according to the level of difficulty, it should be interesting and important for second language learners (Lightbown, Spada, 2013: 205).

Most students agreed with the statement that knowing 1,000 words and the basic structure of a language is enough for a learner to easily participate in conversations with native speakers (Mdn=2, IQR=2), the responses were scattered (see Table 1). Another research confirms that it is possible to take part in conversation having a command of limited number of words and certain patterns. However, without understanding the language usage in various situations, breakdown of communication is possible (Lightbown, Spada, 2013: 207).

The findings showed that most students agreed with the statement that they learn about a language in classroom, but not about using a language (Mdn=2, IQR=2), with the responses scattered (see Table 1). It is a complicated issue, and the answer depends on goal setting and the ways of achieving it, on the approach to teaching and learning a second language. Communicative, content-based and task-based approaches to language learning claim practical reasons to be crucial, the goal is to use a target language inside and outside the classroom. Balancing acquiring explicit knowledge (to know about language) and implicit knowledge (to use language) prepares students for effective communication in any environment (Lightbown & Spada, 2013: 211-212).

According to the results of the research, most students were neutral about the statement that highly intelligent people are good language learners (Mdn=3, IQR=1) (see Table 1). Indeed, high score in IQ tests usually indicates success in learning about the language like grammar rules. However, real communication involves the whole range of wide intellectual abilities, which cannot be measured by IQ tests. Therefore, in order to achieve a good result in learning second language, it is important to use different ways to exploit multiple intelligences of students (Lightbown, Spada, 2013: 203).

Most university students were also neutral about the statement that teachers should use materials that contain the language structures already taught (Mdn=3, IQR=1) (see Table 1). In fact, restrictions to the language structures, which are familiar to students, may be demotivating for those, who are not challenged enough. Students gradually become dependent on the teacher, and they cannot develop the strategies of dealing with new language patterns, which they need in real communication (Lightbown, Spada, 2013: 209).

The findings showed that most university students were neutral about the statement that learners copy each other's mistakes when they work in pairs or groups (Mdn=3, IQR=2), but the responses were scattered (see Table 1). It is true that when working in pairs or groups students may make mistakes or use their interlanguage instead of the target one. Nevertheless, by effective design of the activities, grouping and clear instructions it is possible to eliminate disadvantages of group work. According to the research, learners make as many mistakes talking to their groupmates as with native speakers. Balancing group work with individual tasks and teacher-centred activities encourages effective language learning (Lightbown & Spada, 2013: 209-210).

To conclude, technical university students agreed with the statements about second language learning, thirteen out of eighteen being “myths”, which could impede successful language acquisition. Follow up activities included reflection on the results of the survey, providing additional input concerning controversial statements about language learning and discussion in groups.

Limitations of the study. Though the study provided valuable data on technical university students' beliefs about second language learning, there were limitations to the study. More students could participate in the research, some statements could be not quite clear to all respondents. Future research include comparative analysis of teachers and students' beliefs about second language learning.

Conclusions

The results of the research provide information for a better understanding of teachers and students' responsibilities in a second language learning class. The findings showed that most technical university students agreed with the statements about second language learning, most of which are “myths”. Reflection on the results of the survey, providing additional input concerning controversial statements about language learning and discussion in groups contributed to better understanding of students' needs. Being aware of students' beliefs about second language learning allows teachers to adjust instruction to the needs of students, share with students' knowledge about the language supported by the latest research, which they need to make language acquisition more effective.

Further investigations may be devoted to comparing technical university students and teachers beliefs about second language learning.

foreign language technical teaching

References

1. Alhamami, M. (2019). Learners' beliefs about language-learning abilities in face-to-face & online settings. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 16(1), 1-23.

2. Altan, M. X. (2006). Beliefs about Language Learning of Foreign Language- Major University Students. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 31(2), 45-52.

3. Ariogul, S., & Unal, D.C., & Onursal, I. (2009). Foreign language learners' beliefs about language learning: a study on Turkish university students. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1, 1500-1506. 10.1016/j.sbspro.2009.01.265.

4. Aslan, E., & Thompson, A.S. (2018). The interplay between learner beliefs and foreign language anxiety: insights from the Turkish EFL context. Language Learning Journal.

5. Bernat, E., & Gvozdenko, I. (2005). Beliefs about Language Learning: Current Knowledge, Pedagogical Implications, and New Research Directions. TESL-EJ. Teaching English as a Second or Foreign language, 9(1 ).

6. Bьyьkyazi, M. (2010). The Beliefs of University Foreign Language Students and Their Teachers about Language Learning. Celal Bayar Ьniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 8, 169-182.

7. Dellar, H. & Walkley, A. (2020). Teaching Lexically: Principles and practice. Delta Publishing.

8. Dubravac, V., & Latic, E. (2019). The plasticity of students' language learning beliefs: The interplay of gender, grade and educational level. Journal of Language and Education, 36-53.

9. Gabillon, Z. (2007). Learner beliefs on L2 attitudes and motivation: An exploratory study. In K. Bernhardt & G. Davis (Eds.), Lingua et Linguistica, 1.1(pp.68- 90). UK: Shakespeare Centre Press.http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=JgY1 CJTKH6gC&oi=fnd&pg=PA6 8&dq=zehra+gabillon&ots=PWoQ.G2ibfa&sig=gu fzrp5tS2LhR83W4h7Bv0P7c#v=one page&q=zehra%20gabillon&f=false

10. Horwitz, E.K. (1985). Using Student Beliefs About Language Learning and Teaching in the Foreign Language Methods Course. Foreign Language Annals, 18, 333-340.

11. Horwitz, E.K. (1988). The Beliefs about Language Learning of Beginning University Foreign Language Students. The Modern Language Journal, 72(3), 283294.

12. https://www.istor.org/stable/327506http://dx.doi.org/10.14221/aite.2006v31n2.5

13. Larsen-Freeman, & D., Anderson, M. (2018). Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press.

14. Lightbown, P.M., & Spada, N. (2013). How Languages are Learned (4th ed.). Oxford Handbooks for Language Teachers. Oxford University Press

15. Mohebi, S.G., & Khodadady, E. (2011). Investigating University Students' Beliefs about Language Learning. Research Article, 42(3), 291-304.

16. Mustafa, A. (2006). Beliefs about Language Learning of Foreign Language- Major University Students. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 31. 10.14221/ajte.2006v31n2.5.

17. Saienko, N., & Chugai, O. (2020). Quarantine: Teaching English From Home with Google Classroom, Classtime and Quizlet. Revista Romaneasca pentru Educatie Multidimensional, 12(1Sup2), 151-156

Размещено на Allbest.ru