A Closer Look at Learning Strategies, L2 Proficiency, and Gender

TLDR

Previous research using the Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL) has mainly compared overall strategy scores or categories, emphasizing proficiency while overlooking other variables. The study investigates how language learning strategy use varies by gender and L2 proficiency among 374 students at three course levels. It analyzes individual SILL strategy usage across these groups, examining variation in strategy selection. Women and higher‑proficiency learners generally used more strategies, yet only certain strategies varied significantly, with successful students favoring active, naturalistic practice combined with core strategies used across all levels.

Abstract

This study builds on previous research using the Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL). Most previous SILL research has made comparisons across the entire survey or in terms of strategy categories and has stressed proficiency level at the expense of other variables. The present largescale (N = 374) study of language learning strategy use by students at three different course levels at the University of Puerto Rico relates strategy use to gender as well as to L2 proficiency level and includes analysis of variation in the use of individual strategies on the SILL. Like previous researchers, we found greater use of learning strategies among more successful learners and higher levels of strategy use by women than by men. Our analysis, however, revealed more complex patterns of use than have appeared in previous studies. With both proficiency level and gender, only some items showed significant variation, and significant variation by proficiency level did not invariably mean more frequent strategy use by more successful students. The strategies reported as used more often by the more successful students emphasized active, naturalistic practice and were used in combination with a variety of what we term bedrock strategies, which were used frequently or moderately frequently by learners at all levels. The study's generalizability and its implications for teachers and researchers are discussed.