![OUTLINE ,[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object],[object Object]]()
Recomendados
Recomendados
Más contenido relacionado
La actualidad más candente
La actualidad más candente (20)
Destacado
Destacado (20)
Similar a [1] Concurrent 3 Gender Differences
Similar a [1] Concurrent 3 Gender Differences (20)
Más de englishonecfl
Más de englishonecfl (20)
Último
Último (20)
[1] Concurrent 3 Gender Differences
- 1. GENDER DIFFERENCES IN LANGUAGE LEARNING STRATEGY USE Presenter: Nguyen Thu Hien Cao Thuy Hong VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES ENGLISH DEPARTMENT
- 3. INTRODUCTION
- 15. Gender differences in second language learning strategies There are significant differences between male and female students’ use of LLS with females using those more frequently. Green & Oxford (1995), Lan & Oxford (2003), Chang, Liu & Lee (2007), etc . Young and Oxford’s (1997) study on the strategies used by native English-speaking learners of Spanish found no significant differences between males and females in their use of LLS. Tercanlioglu (2004) in a quantitative data analysis on gender differences in language learning strategies used by foreign language learners in a Turkish University, report significant gender differences, favouring males in students’ strategy use.
- 24. DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
- 27. Data analysis and discussion Comparing the current research findings with others Affective (M= 2.43) Metacognitive (M= 2.74) Memory (M= 2.74) Cognitive (M= 2.90) Social (M= 2.94) Compensation (M= 3.14) (5) Korean Affective (M= 2.28) Social (M= 3.14) Memory (M= 3.22) Cognitive (M= 3.23) Compensation (M= 3.37) Metacognitive (M= 3.39) (4) Turkish M= 2.89 Affective (M= 2.80) Cognitive (M= 2.84) Social (M= 2.90) Metacognitve (M= 2.91) Memory (M= 2.93) Compensation (M= 2.97) (3) Taiwanese Memory (M= 2.88) Social (M= 3.07) Affective (M= 3.16) Cognitive (M= 3.27) Compensation (M= 3.46) Metacognitive (M= 3.54) (2) Chinese M= 3.25 Memory (M= 2.91 Social (M= 3.12) Cognitive (M= 3.21) Affective (M= 3.22) Compensation (M= 3.30) Metacognitive (M= 3.74) (1) Chinese M= 2.78 Affective (M= 2.24) Memory (M= 2.58) Social (M= 2.61) Cognitive (M= 2.87) Metacognitive (M= 3.02) Compensation (M= 3.35) This study Overall 6 th 5 th 4 th 3 rd 2 nd 1 st Study Most frequently used Least frequently used
- 28. Data analysis and discussion Research question 2: Is there a significant difference in the frequency of EFL learning strategy used by the male and female students? (> .05) No association between the two variables 72 72 N . .092 Sig. (2-tailed) 1.000 .200 Correlation Coefficient LLS total score 72 72 N .092 . Sig. (2-tailed ) .200 1.000 Correlation Coefficient gende r Spearman's rho LLS total score gender Table 7: Correlations between gender and language learning strategy use
- 29. Data analysis and discussion Correlations between gender and sub- categories of language learning strategy use N= 72 Independent variable: Gender .001 .399 .32879 2.4559 .31979 2.7082 F. Social r=.399 (moderate) p < .05 .001 .399 .28152 2.1059 .27531 2.3236 E. Affective .532 .075 .59285 2.9667 .64011 3.0491 D. Metacognitive .149 .172 .66958 3.2222 .58378 3.4329 C. Compensation .995 .001 .46225 2.9156 .47414 2.8529 B. Cognitive r: close to “0” p > .05 .615 .060 .54091 2.5474 .48705 2.6051 A. Memory SD M SD M Comments p r Male N= 27 Female N= 45 Strategies
- 31. CONCLUSION
- 38. Thank you for your attention!!