Abstract
This study aimed at investigating the language learning style preferences of Iranian EFL learners, and the degree of teachers’ awareness of them. To this end, two hundred and nineteen language learners (121 males and 98 females) from different levels of instruction and different ages (14-44), studying at two language institutes took part in the study. As a further step, 14 teachers working with the same students were called for cooperation. A 13-item language learning preference questionnaire adopted from Brindley (1984) was employed to elicit information for the study. The data obtained through the questionnaire were subjected to Chi-square tests in order to check the significance of the difference between the responses. Results showed the learning preferences of students in different areas. Results also indicated that teachers are aware of their students’ learning preferences in some cases, but unaware in some others. Therefore, there needs to be a closer cooperation between teachers and students in some instances.
1. Introduction
In recent years with the shift from an instructional paradigm to a learner-oriented approach towards language learning/teaching, understanding the way people learn is of crucial importance and is the key to educational improvement. There is no doubt that students take in and comprehend information in different manners. Some like to see and others like to hear. Some prefer to learn individually, independent of others, while others enjoy interaction and relationship with their peers. It is widely believed (e.g. Reid, 1987; Celcc-Murcia, 2001) that the different ways of how a learner takes in and processes information are collectively referred to as learning styles or learning preferences. To achieve a desired learning outcome, teachers should provide teaching interventions and activities that are compatible with the ways through which learners like to learn the language or any other subject matter. When mismatches exist between learning styles of the learners in a class and the teaching style of the teacher, the students may become bored and inattentive in class, do poorly on tests, get discouraged about the courses, the curriculum, and themselves, and in some cases change to other curricula or drop out of school (Felder, 1996).
Most teachers are not aware of the ways their students prefer to learn the language, or even if they are, they pay little, if any, attention to them. Although most teachers believe that their students come to language classroom with different interests and preferences, they are still reluctant to consult learners in conducting language learning activities, hence being unable to meet the learning needs of individual students. Teachers, therefore, need to discover their students’ preferred way of learning the language. This way they can teach in a way that is appealing to most students, if not all, and do what works best for them. Such information can also help material designers and syllabus planners to devise a language learning syllabus that is in line not with their own perceptions and experiences, but with what is most likely to meet with the students’ approval. And as Spratt (1999) argues, often, those involved in syllabus, materials, and activity design predict what learners like or dislike on the basis of their own experience or by consulting the relevant literature. It has been proved that such an approach would have failed to capture many of the students’ learning preferences, and how useful it is to consult learners and involve them in the teaching/learning design process. It is, therefore, crucial to find out the ways through which students prefer to learn the language, hoping that such information can help teachers, in general, and Iranian EFL teachers, in particular, to be more effective in their career.
2. Literature Review
2.1. Categorization of learning styles
Reid (1995) divides learning styles into three major categories: cognitive learning styles, sensory learning styles, and personality learning styles.
Cognitive learning styles
Field-independent vs. Field-dependent: Field-independent learners learn more effectively step by step, beginning with analyzing facts and proceeding to ideas. Field-dependent learners, in contrast, prefer to learn in context and holistically.
Analytic vs. Global: Analytic learners learn individually, and prefer setting goals. Global learners, on the other hand, learn more effectively through concrete experience, and by interaction with other people.
Reflective vs. Impulsive: Reflective learners learn more effectively when they have time to consider options before responding. This is while, impulsive learners are able to respond immediately and take risks.
Sensory learning styles
Perceptual learning styles
Auditory learner: learns more effectively through the ear (hearing)
Visual learner: learns more effectively through the eyes (seeing)
Tactile learner: learns more effectively through touch (hands-on)
Kinesthetic learner: learns more effectively through body experience (movement)
Haptic learner: learns more effectively through touch and body involvement
Environmental learning styles
Physical vs. Sociological: Physical learners learn more effectively when variables such as temperature, sound, light, food, time, and classroom arrangement are considered. Sociological learners, in contrast, learn more effectively when variables such as group, individual, pair, and team work, and level of teacher authority are regarded.
Personality learning styles
Extroversion vs. Introversion: Extroverted learners are interested in concrete experience, contact with outside, and relationship with others. Introverted learners, on the other hand, are more interested in individual, independent situations.
Sensing vs. Perception: Sensing learners learn best from reports of observable facts and happenings, and rely on their five senses. This is while, perception learners learn more effectively from meaningful experiences and relationships with others.
Thinking vs. Feeling: Thinking learners learn best from impersonal circumstances and logical consequences. On the other hand, feeling learners prefer personalized circumstances and social values.
Judging vs. Perceiving: Judging learners learn by reflection, analysis, and processes that involve closure. Perceiving learners, in contrast, learn through negotiation, feeling, and inductive processed that postpone closure.
Ambiguity-tolerant vs. Ambiguity-intolerant: Ambiguity-tolerant learners learn best when opportunities for experience and risk, as well as interaction, are present. Ambiguity-intolerant learners, however, learn most effectively when in less flexible, less risky, and more structured situations.
Left-brained vs. Right-brained: Left-brained learners tend toward visual, analytic, reflective, self-reliant learning. Right-brained learners, on the contrary, are more interested in auditory, global, impulsive, interactive learning.
2.2. Learners’ learning preferences
Over the past three decades researchers have started to work on the learning preferences. Research that identifies and measures perceptual learning styles relies primarily on self-reporting questionnaires by which students select their preferred learning styles. Reid (1987), for example, based on the findings of a survey, distinguished four perceptual learning modalities:
1) Visual learning (for example, reading and studying charts)
2) Auditory learning (for example, listening to lectures or audiotapes)
3) Kinesthetic learning (involving physical responses)
4) Tactile learning (hands-on learning, as in building models)
Results of Reid's study showed that ESL students strongly preferred kinesthetic and tactile learning styles. Most groups showed a negative preference for group learning. Reid came to the conclusion that the learning style preferences of nonnative speakers often differ significantly from those of native speakers; that ESL students from different language backgrounds sometimes differ from one another in their learning style preferences; and that variables such as sex, length of time in the United States, length of time studying English in the U. S., field of study, level of education, TOEFL score, and age are related to differences in learning styles.
Wintergerst, DeCapua, and Marilyn (2003) tried to explore the learning style preferences of three different populations (Russian EFL students, Russian ESL students, and Asian ESL students). Findings revealed that these three groups of language learners clearly preferred group activity above individual work, with the Russian EFL and Asian ESL students favoring group work and project work. The researchers further suggested that at least some cultural influences were at play. Both quantitative and qualitative studies in cross-cultural settings support a relationship between culture and learning and contend that culture, ethnicity, class, and gender play important roles in shaping the learning preferences and learning styles of students (see Anderson, 1993).
In an attempt to investigate the issue of learners' preferences of the methodology of learning a foreign language, Kavaliauskiene (2003) drew three main conclusions from this research. First, slightly more than half of the learners favor a communicative approach to perfecting their language skills by working in pairs/small groups, taking part in projects and practicing English by talking to their peers. Second, given assignments 93 percent of learners support the idea of homework against 7 percent who reject it. Third, a short-term approach to studying a foreign language prevails. Learners seek passing their exams and getting good marks, and are not concerned with improving language skills and competence for the future usage.
To conclude, it is very important to understand and explore each individual’s learning style. Analyzing one’s own particular learning style can be very helpful and beneficial to the student by aiding them in becoming more focused and an attentive learner, which ultimately will increase educational success. Discovering this learning style will allow the student to determine his or her own personal strengths and weaknesses and learn from them.
2.3. Comparing students’ and teachers’ opinions
Various studies have shown that there can be considerable discrepancies of opinion between learners and their teachers or syllabus experts. A divergence of opinion between these two groups has been noted in relation to what learners need, what they prefer, and the nature of language and language learning (Brindley, 1984).
The teachers in Barkhuisen’s (1998) survey were frequently surprised to learn about the thoughts and feelings of their students. In other words, the students’ perceptions did not match those of teachers. The implication of this piece of research is that if teachers are aware of where their learners are coming from, how they approach language learning, what they feel about their language learning experiences, and how they like to learn the language, they will be able to facilitate desired learning outcomes in the classroom. Learners must be encouraged to express their learning preferences, both for themselves and teachers. Doing so would allow learners to consider why they are participating in certain activities, how these activities help them learn English, and what use they can make of them both for academic purposes and outside classrooms.
Spratt’s (1999) study, too, showed a considerable lack of correspondence between the learners’ preferences and teachers' perceptions of them. It was seen that teachers' perceptions of learners' preferences corresponded in approximately 50% of cases with learners' actual preferences. It was also found that there is no obvious pattern to the correspondences or lack of them. This means that it is hard to discern reasons for why they occurred and hard too to predict where they might occur.
Finally, Stapa (2003) concluded that students' preferences do indeed correlate with those of teachers in many instances. The findings of his study reveal significant results suggesting a need for a closer cooperation between students and teachers as to how learning activities should be arranged and implemented in the classroom.
Along with all the studies stated above, the present study strived to investigate the learning styles preferred by the Iranian EFL learners. More importantly, it attempted to examine the extent to which teachers are aware of the students’ learning preferences. This second issue has been worked upon by quite a few researchers in a number of settings. It has not, however, been duly delved into in the Iranian context, particularly in the context of language institutes which are home to myriads of language learners across the country. As a result, a detailed and comprehensive study of the learning preferences of Iranian EFL learners seemed to be of paramount necessity and importance. To this end the present study with the following goals and objectives was designed.
3. Objectives of the study
The present study intended to investigate the language learning preferences of the Iranian EFL students and the extent of teachers’ awareness of them. Specifically, the study sought answers to the following questions:
1. What are the learning style preferences of the Iranian EFL learners?
2. To what extent, if any, are teachers aware of their students’ learning preferences?
3. How can these students be categorized in terms of learning styles typologies?
4. Method
4.1. Participants
Two hundred and nineteen language learners (121 males and 98 females) from different levels of instruction (Elementary, Intermediate, and Advanced levels) and different ages (14-44) took part in the study. Moreover, 14 teachers working with the same students were asked to express their views regarding the extent of their awareness of their students’ learning preferences. The data were collected from 14 intact classes of two language institutes. The first institute was Shiraz University Language Center (SULC), and the second was Navid Language Institute.
4.2. Instrument
The instrument used in this study was a 13-item language learning preference questionnaire adopted from Brindley (1984). It consisted of two versions: version 1 was designed for students and version 2 for teachers. In the students’ version, the students were supposed to state how they prefer to learn the language. In the teachers’ version, the teachers were asked to express their opinions as to how they feel their students prefer to learn the language (See the Appendix for a copy of the questionnaire). Since one of the objectives of the study was to examine the degree of agreement between teachers and students in terms of language learning preferences, this questionnaire was employed due to the fact that it has two versions, taking into account both teachers’ and students’ responses.
4.3. Procedures for data collection and analysis
The required data were collected in one session. The questionnaire was given to students during their class session. Instruction as to how to complete the questionnaire was given in Persian. At the same time and during the same session, the teachers were provided with the questionnaire (teachers’ version) to complete.
The data obtained through the questionnaire were subjected to Chi-square tests in order to define the significance of the difference between the responses.
5. Results and Discussion
Results of some of the items in the questionnaire are presented in this section. Some of the responses received rendered significant results, while some others did not. This section will briefly present those responses which were statistically significant. However, it should be noted that for the purpose of not making this paper lengthy and hence difficult to read, only some of the most prominent responses (that is, items 2, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, and 13) are briefly discussed.
In item 2, students were asked to express whether they preferred working individually, in pairs, in small groups, or in a large group. Results are presented below:
As shown, only 35.2% of students expressed their preference for working individually. This is while, 64.8% of the students preferred other modes of learning the language, such as learning in pairs or in groups.
It can be concluded from the results of this item that learners seem to favor a communicative approach to language learning by showing reluctance to working on their own. It seems they feel more comfortable, productive, and relaxed by working in other ways, e.g. in pairs, or in groups where their voices would be heard, and views listened to and valued.
In the teachers’ version, teachers were asked whether their students liked working individually, in pairs, or in groups. The following table illustrates the pertaining results:
Table 2: Teachers' view on students' learning mode
As can be seen in the table above, 78.6% of teachers were of the opinion that their students liked working individually, while 21.4% did not hold such a belief. Teachers generally believe that students do not like to have interaction with their classmates and form groups. Instead, they think their students prefer to work by themselves independently of their peers. Evidently, teachers are not aware that their students do not like to work on their own, and prefer to work in other ways such as in pairs or in groups. In other words, there seems to be disagreement between students and teachers with respect to this issue.
Item 6 asked whether students liked learning by listening, reading, repeating what they hear, listening and taking notes, copying from the board, and making summaries. Results can be seen below:
Table 3: Preferring listening and taking notes
“Listening and taking notes” received high percentage from students (78.5%). “Reading and taking notes,” too, received rather high percentage from students (67.6%).
What can be inferred from the results displayed in Tables 3 and 4 could have otherwise focused on the first two options, “Listening” or “Reading.” They are inclined to be involved in classroom interactions and not just sit and see what is going on. This is a message for language teachers to take steps that would enable students to be as much involved in what is happening in classroom as possible.
Item 7 aimed to find out how students would like to learn new vocabulary. The options were: (1) by using the word in a sentence, (2) by thinking of relationship between known and new, (3) by saying or writing words several times, (4) by avoiding verbatim translation, (5) by guessing the unknown, and (6) by reading with no dictionary help. Table 5 displays the results:
Table 5: Using new words in a sentence
As is clear from results in the table, the majority of students (91.3%) give priority to using new words in a sentence. This shows that learners prefer to learn the new vocabulary by making a sentence with them and using them in a context. This obligates teachers to help students make sentences with new words in order to enhance their vocabulary learning. Such finding is in congruence with Stapa’s (2003) study in which learners, who were doing an ESP course in Malaysia, preferred to learn the new words when they are contextualized.
Another option for learning new words was “Avoiding verbatim translation.” Results received for this choice are tabulated below:
Table 6: Avoiding verbatim translation
As shown, 61.6% of the learners expressed their reluctance towards verbatim translation as a way of learning the new vocabulary.
It can be understood from the results that students do not generally favor translating new words to learn them. One reason for this finding can be the institutes from which the data were obtained which claimed to follow a communicative approach to language teaching/learning. In recent years with a trend towards communicative language teaching it appears that our students are more and more oriented towards using authentic materials and do not like to make use of translation in their learning.
In the teachers’ version, teachers were asked about their students’ preference for learning vocabulary. The following table presents the pertaining results:
Table 7: Avoiding verbatim translation
As is clear form the table above, 21.4% of teachers believed that their students do not like verbatim translation, while most teachers (78.6%) held that students were inclined to learn new vocabulary through translation. It can be inferred that most teachers think of translation as an effective way of teaching vocabulary, and that their students are fond of such strategy.
Another option which received relatively high percentage from students is “Guessing the unknown.” Results of this option can be observed in the following table:
Table 8: Guessing the unknown
As can be observed, a good number of students (78.5%) expressed their preference towards guessing the unknown word as a way of learning the new vocabulary. Results show that learners are not reluctant to guess the meaning of new vocabulary or infer the meaning from the context. This shows that students are not willing to learn new words in isolation, nor by simple rote memorization. It is important that new vocabulary items be presented in contexts rich enough to provide adequate clues for students to guess a word’s meaning. The reason behind such tendency may be the fact that in students’ view, meaningful information is retained longer and retrieved more easily.
Item 8 asked students how they would prefer to be corrected by their teachers, whether they would like to be corrected immediately in front of everyone, or later at the end of the activity in front of everyone, or later in private. Results are displayed in the table below:
Table 9: Students' preference for feedback
As is apparent from the results, only 37.9% of the learners preferred to be corrected later in private. This is while, 62.1% of the students did not hold such a belief. This shows that students are against delayed correction and prefer other kinds of error correction such as what exists in the first two options of this item. The reason is hidden in the fact that students think of immediate correction to be more effective than delayed correction.
It seems that students do not mind having their instructors correct them immediately in front of everyone, although correcting students’ errors directly may not necessarily lead to more correct language usage in the future, and even worse, it may result in negative affective feelings that interfere with learning. However, the results of this item reveal that students consider the teacher as an authority and would rather be corrected on the spot, though this may be embarrassing to some students, especially the shy ones.
As a tool for language teaching/learning, media have undoubtedly always facilitated the task of language learning and teaching. All language teachers seem to agree that media can and do enhance language teaching and learning (Brinton, 1997). Such being the case, item 10 asked students whether they like learning from (1) television/video/films, (2) radio, (3) tapes/cassettes, (4) written material, (5) blackboard, or (6) pictures/posters. Results are tabulated below:
Table 10: Television/video/films
What can be inferred from the results above is that television and video, being powerful media, are most popular with language learners. The reason, according to Celce-Murcia (2001), may be the fact that such media motivate students by bringing a slice of real life into the classroom and by presenting language in its more complete communicative context. Another reason may be the fact that students like to see what they hear, and such media are more vivid and attention-catching than radio or tapes.
The following table presents the teachers’ responses to this very option:
Table 11: Teachers' view on students' preference for Television/video/films
The results indicate that most teachers think that their students prefer television/video/films to other media. It is promising that teachers are aware of their students’ media preference, and hence should make more effective use of such media in their teaching. In fact, since students in their daily lives are surrounded by technology, they expect to see it in their language classroom as well.
Another option to be discussed here is “Tapes/Cassettes.” Table 12 displays the results of this option:
Table 12: Using tapes/cassettes
It can be inferred from the results that students tend to listen to tapes either in classroom environment or outside the classroom. The rationale might be the fact that tapes are relatively cheap and easy to use and carry. Furthermore, they are the main source (other than the teacher) of spoken language texts in most classrooms.
Item 11 delves into the activities learners find very useful in classroom. These include role play, language games, songs, talking with and listening to other students, memorizing dialogues, getting information from guest speakers, getting information from planned visits, writing a learning diary, and learning about culture. One option which received rather high percentage from students is "Talking with and listening to other students." The results are cited in the table below:
Table 13: Talking with and listening to other students
The striking point about these results is that in students’ view, student-to-student interaction is highly beneficial to their learning. Students would like to talk to and listen to other students. One explanation for such preference may be the fact that when language learners interact with each other, they experience some difficulties as they attempt to use the target language to communicate. As a result, they become aware of what they need to know in order to express themselves effectively. They, then, may ask their fellow students for help. Needless to say, such interaction makes the classroom a more pleasant and friendly place.
The last option of the item was "Learning about culture." Table 14 illustrates the results received for this option:
Table 14: Learning about culture
It can be inferred from the results presented in Table 14 that most of the students (71.7%) believe that culture and language are interwoven and should be treated as such. Although teachers devote a good deal of time, effort, and attention to the teaching of language skills, gaining linguistic competence is not adequate for many learners to achieve their goals. To be able to communicate effectively, learners need to attain foreign language cultural competence. Results of this option prove that students are eager to attain such knowledge and are aware of culture involvement in learning. So, the burden is upon the shoulder of all EFL/ESL teachers to acquaint their students with cultural values, concepts, and norms on people’ speech and behavior.
The following table shows teachers’ responses to this very option:
Table 15: Teachers' view on students' preference for learning about culture
According to the results presented in the table above, most teachers believed that students are willing to learn about culture, and are aware of the importance of developing cultural competence when learning the language. There seems to be agreement between teachers and students in this regard. Teachers are apparently aware that their students are eager to attain knowledge regarding cultural issues.
Item 12 asked about assessment. Here, the learners were asked how they would like to find out how much their English is improving. The choices were: (1) through written tasks set by the teacher, or (2) the ability to use language in real-life situations. Results are illustrated below:
Table 16: Using language in real-life situations
An overwhelming majority of the students (91.3%) stated that they would evaluate themselves and their knowledge based on their performance in authentic communications. They would prefer to judge their L2 improvement on the basis of their capability to use the language effectively in real-life communicative events, rather than being assessed formally by the teacher. Evidently, students see tests as a threat to their competence, because they are afraid that they will not perform well. Perhaps, that is why the students of the study were more willing to assess themselves based on the extent to which they are successful in real-life situations. Such finding contradicts the findings of Stapa’s (2003) study in which most of the students showed their preference towards being assessed formally by the teacher.
Item 13 asked students if they get a sense of satisfaction from (1) having their work graded, (2) being told that they have made progress, or (3) feeling more confident in situations they found difficult before. Only the third option proved significant. Results can be seen below:
Table 17: Feeling more confident in situations you found difficult before
A quick look at the data presented in the table reveals that a great number of learners (78.5%) feel satisfied in seeing themselves performing successfully in situations which they felt less successfully before. There is no doubt that the satisfaction learners get from their L2 performance differs from one student to another. Some are after high marks; some after command of L2; and some after both. From the results of this choice, it is apparent that most of the students are after command of English, and feel content if they can communicate easier and more efficiently than before.
The findings are in sharp contrast with those of Kavaliauskiene’s (2003) study which reported that learners seek passing their exams and getting good grades, and are not concerned with improving language skills and competence for future usage.
In conclusion, one can say that most of learners in the study seem to favor a communicative approach to perfecting their language skills by working in pairs/ groups, tending to be actively engaged in classroom discussions, practicing their English by talking to their peers and having interaction with other people. This is in line with Spratt’s (1999) and Kavaliauskiene’s (2003) studies which reported similar results.
Another point which can be inferred from the results is that students’ preferences do correlate with teachers’ perceptions in some instances, but not in some others. This is consistent with Barkhuizen’s (1998) research which showed that teachers were frequently surprised to learn about the thoughts and preferences of their students. Simply, the students’ perceptions did not match those of teachers in several cases. This study, too, showed that teachers’ perceptions are consistent with those of students in some areas. This, of course, does not mean that the situation of language teaching/learning is perfect and totally satisfactory. There still needs to be closer cooperation between teachers and students as to how language learning activities should be arranged and implemented in classroom.
6. Conclusions
Some major points concluded from the study are summarized below:
1) Regarding studying style, students do not like working individually, but teachers did not know this.
2) Types of learning that emphasize receptive skills only were not appealing to students. Students expressed their views towards class content that focuses on receptive and productive skills equally. They did not like to be sitting passively in classroom, but to be actively engaged in classroom practices.
3) Students’ most favored vocabulary learning strategies were using words in a sentence, and guessing the meaning of unknown words, not looking them up in dictionary. Teachers wrongly thought that their students like to learn the new words through translation.
4) Being corrected immediately in front of every one did not seem to bother students. Students did not like to be corrected later in private.
5) In terms of media, students would like to see more television programs and video films which make language learning more exciting and meaningful. Teachers appeared to endorse their students’ opinion. Moreover, learners showed tendency to pictures/posters, since they would like to see what they are learning. However, some learners were more interested in listening to tapes. The former group can be labeled “visual” learners, while the latter are referred to as “auditory” learners (using two terms in Reid’s (1995) classification).
6) “Language games” did not highly catch the attention of the students. But, most students enjoyed talking with and listening to other students and having interaction with each other (global learners).
7) “Learning about culture” caught the interest of both students and teachers, showing that they were aware of the crucial importance of developing cultural competence when teaching or learning the language.
8) Students would feel satisfied with their achievement in English if only they could use the language effectively in real-life situations.
9) Finally, students got a sense of satisfaction not just by getting high grades, but by seeing that they were more successful than before in using the language to communicate.
To sum up, in order to answer the third research question, learners, based on Reid's (1995) classification, were classified into several categories. However, it should be noted that this classification is partly in keeping with that of Reid; that is, it includes some of the categories touched upon by her.
Visual learners: by enjoying reading and seeing the words; enjoying seeing what they are hearing, and learning by looking at pictures/posters
Auditory learners: by enjoying conversations and the chance for interactions with others, as well as listening to tapes
Global (Relational) learners: by learning more effectively through interactions with other people
Extroverted learners: by having tendency to work in groups and have relationship with others
7. Pedagogical Implications
It was pointed out earlier that one of the reasons for conducting this study was to come across findings that could feed into classroom practice, and provide guidance for students and teachers as well as material designers and syllabus planners. Having the findings at hand, one can suggest sound implications as follow:
1) The first implication is for students. The findings of this study are helpful to students in demonstrating the importance of learning style identification. Students are recommended to identify the best way(s) through which they can learn the language more fruitfully. Knowledge of one's learning style may be beneficial in that the learner will now be aware of his or her strengths and weaknesses in terms of learning experiences. Therefore, future learning may be enriched if the learners maintain their strengths and improve on their weaknesses. Aside from that, this process will improve one’s self esteem because now the students will feel more comfortable and prepared to take on the learning challenge, also gives students the confidence needed to achieve their goals.
2) Teachers should keep in mind that students do not like working individually. So it is strongly recommended that teachers exert their utmost effort to encourage students to form groups and share ideas.
3) It is essential that teachers assign some work for students to do outside the classroom, either in the form of reviewing the day’s work or preparing for the next session.
4) Teachers need to organize the lesson content in a way that equally emphasizes both receptive and productive skills.
5) It is a good idea that teachers motivate their students to use the new words in a sentence, or try to infer the meaning of the new vocabulary. Furthermore, they should remember not to translate new words into Persian since learners do not like such vocabulary learning strategy.
6) The way error correction is done is much more important than the error itself. Teachers must be very careful and tactful in correcting errors and try to employ encouraging correction.
7) Teachers should bear in mind that students like to watch television programs or video films since they like to see what they hear. Also, they like to learn from pictures/posters.
8) Teachers ought to be aware that students like to interact with each other and be actively engaged in classroom debates.
9) Teachers should not think that their students learn English just to get grades or a degree, but also to attain command of L2.
10) Teachers should keep in mind that students would like to be evaluated on the basis of their progress and their improvement in English. They get satisfaction from their achievement in English if they see they can use the language effectively in real-life communications.
11) Teachers should help students discover their own learning preferences and provide constructive feedback about the advantages and disadvantages of various styles. Also, teachers should respect the learners’ present preferences and encourage their development, while at the same time creating opportunities for students to try different ways of learning.
12) The outcomes of the study can, too, contribute to materials and syllabus design by indicating which activities or areas of language are most likely to meet with students’ approval. Hence, the pivotal role of the students in the actual processes of materials and syllabus design must not be ignored.
13) Moreover, researchers may make use of the results of the present study to conduct some pieces of research as to the effect of variables such as gender, age, level of education, and cultural influences on the students’ choice of learning styles.
References
Anderson, J. (1993). Cognitive styles and multicultural populations. Journal of Teacher Education, 39, 2-9.
Barkhuizen, G.P. (1998). Discovering learners' perceptions of ESL classroom teaching/learning activities in a South African context. TESOL Quarterly, 32, 85-108.
Brindley, G. (1984). Needs analysis and objective setting in the adult migrant education program. Sydney, NSW: Adult Migrant Education Service.
Brinton, D. M. (1997). The use of media in language teaching. In M. Celcia-Murcia (2001), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (pp. 459-76.). Dewey Publishing Services: NY.
Celce-Marcia, M. (2001). Teaching English as a second or foreign language (3rd ed.). Dewey Publishing Services: NY.
Felder, R.M. (1996). ‘Matters of styles’. ASEE Prism, 6(4), 18–23. Also available at
http://www2.ncsu.edu/unity/lockers/
users/f/felder/public/Papers/LS-Prism.htm.
Kavaliauskiene, G. (2003). English for specific purposes: Learners’ preferences and attitudes. Journal of Language and Learning, 1(1).
Reid, J. M. (1987). The learning style preferences of ESL students. TESOL Quarterly, 21, 87-111.
Reid, J. (1995). Learning styles in the ESL/EFL classroom. Boston, MA: Heinle and Heinle Publishers.
Spratt, M. (1999). How good are we at knowing what learners like? System, 27, 141-155.
Stapa, S. H. (2003). ESP students’ learning preferences: Are the teachers aware? Retrieved from http://www.Esp-world.Info/rticles/stapa.htm.
Wintergerst, A. C., DeCapua, A., & Marilyn, A. V. (2003). Conceptualizing learning style modalities for ESL/EFL students. System, 31, 85-106.
Appendix 1 & 2 (see PDF)
