FASE I: Planificación Preliminar

The previous sections show that variables amongst individual learners have caused many problems in the definition of ‘learner strategy’ and it has been also proposed that there is a theoretical ‘fuzziness’ in the research that has been undertaken (Hsiao and Oxford, 2002; Tseng et al. 2006). In order to address these problems, the framework shifts the focus from the product (learner strategy) to the L2 learning process (learners’ capacity for self-regulation, such as capacity for metacognition, for combining strategies effectively in any given situation), from the quantity of strategy use to the quality of strategy use. Therefore, it proposes that ‘strategic self-regulation’ (Oxford and Schramm, 2007) is a more important notion to be considered in the process of SVL, since both cognitive and sociocultural approaches place an emphasis on

self-regulation. These two approaches discuss the concept from different perspectives, and they seem to be both valuable; thus the framework adopts a multiperspectival viewpoint.

2.4.1.1 Cognitive views of strategic self-regulation

From the cognitive perspective, self-regulation refers to a process whereby learners metacognitively, motivationally and behaviourally participate in their own thoughts, feelings and actions through goal setting, planning, monitoring, evaluation and affective control (Zimmerman, 1986). According to Zimmerman (2001), models of self-regulation are psychologically based, and self-regulated strategic learning often refers to a cyclical process in which language learners purposefully employ specific LLSs, monitor their effectiveness, evaluate and modify their strategy choice/use (such as replacing one VLS with another). For example, in relation to my previous study (2010), one of the participants regularly used repetition strategies which were efficient for remembering massive numbers of words within a short time. They seemed to be very common in an exam-oriented academic culture. However, after coming to the UK, the purpose for VL was shifted from simply passing English tests to improving communicative competence more holistically. Repetition learning became marginalised as the student found that it was less useful in communicative activities. Instead, social strategies were increasingly deployed.

Information processing is one of the most prominent cognitive ways in which of self-regulated learning is modelled from a cognitive perspective. According to Winne (2001), individuals can increasingly develop their capacity to construct information and regulate their own responses. His model of strategic self-regulation involves four phases: defining the task, setting goals and plans, enacting strategies and adapting metacognitive strategies. Control is also increased through use of acquired learning strategies. Another aspect which is developed by O’Malley and Chamot (1990) in particular relates the notion of self-regulation to LLSs. They argue that knowledge of strategy moves from declarative (conscious and fact-oriented) to procedural (autonomous and habitual) through learning, as well as learners’ own practice and evaluation. In other words, learners select information (in this case, VLSs), monitor its usefulness and make modification in appropriate contexts. In my theoretical framework, both models of information processing which describe strategic self-regulation address the notions of cognitive and metacognitive control in the process of SVL.

Based on the models above, my framework also stresses that the notion of ‘learner agency’ can broaden a cognitive perspective of learner strategies. Strategic learning is not only about the knowledge of mental processes but also about knowledge of the self, and involves the process in which individuals manage all sorts of their own psychological factors (such as emotion and motivation) (Williams and Burden, 1997; Dörnyei and Ushioda, 2009). This framework takes account of vocabulary learners

with their own sense of being self-regulated agents, who are continually developing and increasingly take control of their vocabulary learning/building towards learning as autonomous learners.

2.4.1.2 Sociocultural views of strategic self-regulation

The framework also addresses the importance of social mediation and interactive dialogue in the development of learners’ strategic self-regulation. Vygotsky (1962) suggests that learning is mediated through dialogue with more capable others, and explains an underlying process: social interaction with others (as a form of dialogue) involves turning thought into words and through internalisation words turn into thoughts. Strategic self-regulation is possible when learners actively co-construct and internalise the essential features of the dialogue that occurs with the more capable others (Kozulin et al. 2003, cited in Oxford and Schramm, 2007: 52). The framework also incorporates McCaslin and Hickey’s (2001) ‘model of co-regulated learning’ which is a development of Vygotsky’s model and places an emphasis on the co-regulation. Co-regulated learning plays an important role in the growth of strategic self-regulation. The more capable others (e.g. teachers) provide supportive scaffolding opportunities to promote learners’ mediation processes of strategic learning, motivation and self-evaluation. Co-regulated learning between more capable others and learners provides a link to eventual learner self-regulation.

Like cognitively oriented researchers, sociocultural theorists, such as Vygotsky (1978) also view the eventual goal of learning as being autonomy. According to Little (1991: 4), autonomy is viewed as the learner’s capacity for ‘detachment, critical reflection, decision-making, and independent action’. Self-regulation is closely linked to autonomy. The strategic individual is capable of autonomous functioning, such as planning, monitoring and evaluating the learning process, which is self-regulation (Mitchell and Myles, 1998). As a self-regulated agent, eventually the learner should be able to appropriate and reproduce his/her own strategic approaches towards becoming an autonomous learner. However, the sociocultural approach argues that the term ‘autonomy’ does not mean learning without teaching or interaction (Ushioda, 2003). The framework supports this view and suggests that unskilled or dependent students can gradually develop strategic competence to become autonomous learners through the processes of social mediation and interactive support. During these processes, interactive dialogue is used as an important mediational tool to scaffold them from other-regulation to self-regulation (Myers and Mitchell, 1998).

As mentioned above, the framework shows that both approaches contribute towards the understanding of strategic self-regulation. More importantly, it creates a positive dialogue between the two perspectives to help expand or modify their theoretical understanding of SVL from the other viewpoint.