Iranian Undergraduates Non-English Majors' Language Learning Preferences

Azam Noora

Abstract


For effective language learning and teaching , both learner skills and assumptions shouldbe given due attention. In promoting this idea, students should be provided with theopportunity to clarify and assess their preferences. Moved with the conviction thatlearners and learners’ preferences are of crucial importance in the development oflanguage learning, we asked 192 non-English major undergraduates to state their viewson how they prefer learning English in the “General English “ class. The wide-spreadbelief among Iranian university instructors is that in General English classes, students’language learning preferences do not differ significantly. However, the results indicatethat there is a significant difference among non-English majors’ preferences, even indifferent branches of the same major, regarding preferred teaching method, the mostimportant language skill and their motivational orientations. The results have implicationsfor syllabus and material design and classroom practice.

Keywords


learning preference, non-English major, general English, language skills

Full Text:

PDF

References


Allwright, R. L. (1984). The importance of interaction in classroom language learning.

Applied Linguistics, 5, 156-171.

Bada, E. & Okan, Z. (2000). Students' language learning preferences. TESL-EJ, 4(3), 1-

Retrieved December 30, 2003, from http://writing.berkeley.edu/TESLEJ/

ej15/a1.html

Barkhuizen, G. P. (1998). Discovering learners' perceptions of ESL classroom

teaching/learning activities in a South African context. TESOL Quarterly, 32 (1),

-108.

Block, D. (1994). A day in the life of a class: Teacher/learner perceptions of task purpose

in conflict. System, 22, 473-486.

Block, D. (1996). A window on the classroom: Classroom events viewed from different

angles. In K. M. Bailey & D. Nunan (Eds.), Voices from the language classroom:

qualitative research in second language education (pp. 168-194). Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language

pedagogy (2nd edition). Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Addison Wesley

Longman.

Cray, E. & Currie, P. (1996). Linking adult learners with the education of L2 teachers.

TESOL Quarterly, 30 (1), 113-130.

Eslami, R. & Valizadeh, K. (2004). Classroom activities viewed from different

perspectives: Learners' voice and teachers' voice. TESL-EJ, 8(3), Retrieved July

, 2007, from http://writing.berkeley.edu/TESL-EJ/ej15/a1.html

Ghasemi, P. (1996): The study of second grade of guidance school English textbook from

teachers' point of view and students' educational development in Shiraz.

Unpublished master thesis. The University of Tarbiat Moalem.

Jordan, R. R. (1997). English for academic purposes: A guide and resource book for

teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Leng, H. (1996). New bottles Old wine: communicative language teaching in China.

English Teaching. Forum, October, 38-40.

Makarova, V. (1997). Discovering phonetics. The Language Teacher Online, 21(3).

Japan: TLT Online Editor. Retrieved October 1, 2000 from

http://Langue.hyper.chubu.ac.jp/jalt/pub/tlt/97/mar/phonetic.html

Mazandarani, Saeed. (1998). The study of the quality of curriculum development of high

schools with emphasis on the experts' view in Gorgan Province. Unpublished

master thesis. The University of Tarbiat Moalem.

Nunan, D. (1988). The learner-centered curriculum. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.

Nunan, D. (1989). Hidden agendas: The role of the learner in programme implementation.

In R. K. Johnson (Ed.), The second language curriculum (pp. 176-186).

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Rifkin, B. (2000). Revisiting beliefs about foreign language learning. Foreign Language

Annals, 33 (4), 394-409.

Sadeghi, A. R. (2003): The problems of English subjects at Semnan guidance and high

schools. Paper presented at Busan: The first Asia TEFL international conference.

Rudduck, J. (1991). Innovation and change. Buckingham: Milton Keynes, Open

University Press.

Seif, A. A. (1998). The study of problems and hindrance for application of research

findings. In Research in education. Publication of Ministry of Education.Tehran.

Spratt, M. (1999). How good are we at knowing what learners like? System, 27, 141-155.

Talebinezhad, M. R. & Aliakbari, M. (2002). Evaluation and justification of a paradigm

shift in the current ELT models in Iran. Linguistik online, 10,(1), Retrieved

September 20, 2002 from http://www.linguistikonline.

de/10_02/talebinezhadaliakbari.html

Talebinezhad, M. R. & Sadeghi, A. (2005): Non-academic L2 users: A neglected

research pool in ELT in Iran. Linguistik online, 24, (4), Retrieved July 27, 2007,

from http://www.linguistik-online.de/27_07/talebinezhadaliakbari.html

Warden, C. & Lin, A. (1998). Different attitudes among non-English major EFL students.

The Internet TESL Journal, 2(7), Retrieved February 19, 2005, from

http://www.iteslj.org

Wright, T. (1990). Understanding classroom role relationships. In J. C. Richards & D.

Nunan (Eds.), Second language teacher education (pp. 82-97). Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


 

 

 

eISSN : 2550-2131

ISSN : 1675-8021