The results of this study reveal that students use social LLSs at the highest level (3.64 on the SILL-V) when compared with the five other LLS types. This finding is significant in that only a few LLS studies have found this pattern of use in similar settings. In fact, a number of other LLS studies using the SILL in the East-Asian context have found social LLSs to be used the least of all six types (an example being Park 1997). Nonetheless, a previously-mentioned study conducted by Wharton (2000) in Singapore displayed the same pattern in terms of reported LLS use as the current study. Wharton (2000: 229) claims such a high average for social LLS use “is unique for language learning studies conducted with samples of Asian students in Asia and generally so for most SILL studies conducted worldwide”. Despite the supposed paucity of studies showing high social LLS use, Phillips’ (1991) findings also showed a high use of social LLSs by Asian students in an ESL setting. These results strongly contradict what Phillips (1991: 62) refers to as “the popular belief that Asian students generally resist using participation in social interaction as a means to improve their second language proficiency”.
One possible reason for the contradiction of the stereotypical Asian learner regarding social LLS use may be related to the learning context. To illustrate, similar to the current study, Phillips and Wharton’s research was conducted with Asian university-level students. At this education level, students are often asked to work in groups to complete tasks and assignments. This could mean that university students are aware of the need to interact, ask questions and communicate in order to be successful at learning the language and using it in their academic studies, which would then be reflected by their frequent employment of social LLSs.
82
More support for the high social LLS scores of this study may be found by investigating students in the participant group’s previous learning experiences. Wei (2012) surveyed Vietnamese students enrolled at the same institution as the participant group of the current study regarding their high school experiences and found that these previous school experiences greatly shaped students’ learning and expectations for university. In terms of studying English at high school, priority is given to reading, vocabulary and grammar in teacher-centred classes, with preparation for examinations also a major focus, and there is little emphasis or time spent on social and communicative activities in class. Littlewood (in Gan 2006: 44) conducted a large-scale survey of over 2600 students from both European countries and CHCs and found that most students inherently question the authority structure of the classroom, regardless of their background. It seems plausible then that once students graduate from high school, they may want to depart from this teacher-centred, didactic approach to learning and teaching and instead embrace a more social and interactive attitude to studying when attending an international university where the English programs are built around a communicative approach to English teaching. As mentioned, the majority of these students have also studied at the lower levels in this IEP, or in other intensive English courses at language centres in Vietnam, where they would have been exposed to the communicative approach and where social interaction is fostered, encouraged, and often assessed.
Students’ proficiency level may also influence their frequent use of social LLSs significantly. Oxford (1990) believes social LLSs to be higher order LLSs and thus related to advanced proficiency. Various other researchers have found higher levels of interactive and communicative LLS use to be related to higher proficiency levels (see Griffiths 2003; and Oxford and Nyikos 1989). An example is Hong-Nam and Leavell’s study (2006: 247), which identified social LLSs as the most frequently used LLS type amongst their advanced level learners. It seems quite likely then that the upper-intermediate level students in the current study are probably more confident in their language skills than students at lower levels of proficiency and hence are more likely to employ social LLSs, such as seeking out native speakers to practise their English with, asking for corrections of their own speech from English speakers or practising their English with others outside of class.
83
It may also be assumed that the cultural context influences social LLS use to a certain degree. The participating learners study in an EFL environment where there is a dearth of opportunities to speak English outside the classroom. This is because English is not commonplace in Vietnam: even though it has become a compulsory school subject in recent years, the majority of Vietnamese do not speak the language. It seems likely then that when students learning English get the opportunity to practise their English in a social context, both with native speakers and other students in and outside the classroom, they make full use of this opportunity. The factors mentioned above do not exist completely separately from each other and, for this reason, it is most probable that the high level of social LLS use reported by this group of students is based on a combination of the reasons proposed above.