research paper on learning english language

Strategies in English Language Learning

• First Online: 20 August 2024

Cite this chapter

• Angeliki Psaltou-Joycey 4  

Part of the book series: Springer Texts in Education ((SPTE))

38 Accesses

This chapter is addressed to TESOL practitioners to show how learning strategies enhance language learning by helping learners to make decisions about the behaviours they could develop, the actions they should take, and the processes they could follow to maximize learning outcomes. In this way, learners become aware of what they learn and why they learn it, knowledge which enables them to continue to learn outside the classroom, thus becoming autonomous learners. However, as it is not easy for most learners, especially younger ones, to undertake initiatives which require the adoption of autonomous learning, language teachers must guide, encourage, and support their learners’ efforts to self-manage their learning and self-evaluate their progress. First and foremost, therefore, it is necessary to help TESOL teachers to develop awareness about strategies, increase their appreciation of how strategies contribute to and facilitate language learning, and be prepared to adopt strategy teaching, whether they teach English in a second or foreign language environment. For this purpose, the chapter first defines language learning strategies, describes the types of strategies scholars have researched, and reviews the outcomes of studies concerning individual learner characteristics in relation to strategies. It further emphasizes the need for explicit and integrated instruction of strategies in the everyday lesson and provides examples of such instruction which can be easily accommodated in the usual classroom routine.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Subscribe and save.

• Get 10 units per month
• Download Article/Chapter or eBook
• 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
• Cancel anytime
• Available as PDF
• Read on any device
• Instant download
• Own it forever
• Available as EPUB and PDF
• Compact, lightweight edition
• Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
• Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Agathopoulou, E. (2016). Factors affecting language learning strategy use by learners of English at Greek secondary schools: Proficiency and motivation. In Z. Gavriilidou & K. Petrogiannis (Eds.), Language learning strategies in the Greek setting: Research outcomes of a large-scale project (pp. 58–75). Saita Publications.

Google Scholar  

Barón, J., & Muñoz, C. (2023). Exploring the effects of audiovisual material and age in pragmatic learning. Spanish Journal of Applied Linguistics, 36 (2), 467–498. https://doi.org/10.1075/resla.20063.bar

Article   Google Scholar  

Chamot, A. U. (2009). The CALLA handbook: Implementing the cognitive academic language learning approach (2nd ed.). Pearson Education/Longman.

Chamot, A., & Harris, V. (Eds.). (2019). Learning strategy instruction in the language classroom: Issues and implementation . Multilingual Matters.

Cohen, A. D. (1998). Strategies in learning and using a second language . Longman.

Cotterall, S. (2008). Autonomy and good language learners. In C. Griffiths (Ed.), Lessons from good language learners (pp. 110–120). Cambridge University Press.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition . Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Dörnyei, Z., & Ryan, S. (2015). The psychology of the language learner revisited . Routledge.

Book   Google Scholar  

Gardner, R. C. (1985). Social psychology and second language learning: The role of attitudes and motivation . Edward Arnold.

Gavriilidou, Z., Petrogiannis, K., Platsidou, M., & Psaltou-Joycey, A. (Eds.). (2017). Language learning strategies: Theoretical issues and applied perspectives . Saita Publications.

Gavriilidou, Z., Tresorukova, I., & Mylonopoulos, A. (2021). Understanding language learning strategies in context: The case of Russian students learning Greek as a foreign language. In Z. Gavriilidou & L. Mitits (Eds.), Situating language learning strategy use: Present issues and future trends (pp. 181–199). Multilingual Matters.

Gregersen, T., & MacIntyre, P. D. (2014). Capitalising on language learner individuality: From premise to practice . Multilingual Matters.

Griffiths, C. (2003). Patterns of language learning strategy use. System, 31 , 367–383. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(03)00048-4

Griffiths, C. (2008). Age and good language learners. In C. Griffiths (Ed.), Lessons from good language learners (pp. 35–48). Cambridge University Press.

Griffiths, C. (2013). The strategy factor in successful language learning . Multilingual Matters.

Griffiths, C. (2018). The strategy factor in successful language learning: The tornado effect (2nd ed.). Multilingual Matters.

Griffiths, C., & Cansiz, G. (2015). Language learning strategies: A holistic view. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 5 (3), 475–495. https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2015.5.3.7

Griffiths, C., & Parr, J. (2001). Language-learning strategies: Theory and perception. ELT Journal, 55 (3), 247–254. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/55.3.247

Gu, P. Y. (2002). Gender, academic major and vocabulary learning of Chinese EFL learners. RELC Journal, 33 (1), 35–55. https://doi.org/10.1177/003368820203300102

Gu, Y. (2012). Learning strategies: Prototypical core and dimensions of variation. Studies in Self-Access Learning Journal, 3 , 330–356. http://crie.org.nz/research-papers/Peter_Gu.pdf

Kantaridou, Z., & Psaltou-Joycey, A. (2021). Affective dimensions of L2 learning. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 34 , 74–99. https://doi.org/10.26262/jal.v0i34.8520

Kinsella, K. (1995). Understanding and empowering diverse learners. In J. M. Reid (Ed.), Learning styles in the ESL/EFL classroom (pp. 170–194). Heinle and Heinle.

Lan, R., & Oxford, R. L. (2003). Language learning strategy profiles of elementary school students in Taiwan. IRAL, 41 , 339–379.

Mallahi, O. (2022). Investigating the strategies and problems of Iranian EFL learners while writing summaries in academic contexts. Language Teaching Research Quarterly, 28 , 1–30. https://doi.org/10.32038/ltrq.2022.28.01

Mitits, L. (2013). Language learning strategy use by early adolescent monolingual EFL and multilingual EFL/L2 Greek learners in the Greek educational context . Unpublished doctoral thesis. Democritus University of Thrace. https://hdl.handle.net/10442/hedi/43957

Mitits, L., Psaltou-Joycey, A., & Sougari, A-M. (2016). Language learning strategy profiling of Greek elementary/secondary school learners of English as a FL. In Z. Gavriilidou & K. Petrogiannis (Eds.), Language learning strategies in the Greek setting: Research outcomes of a large-scale project (pp. 26–41). Saita Publications.

Nguyen, L. T. C., & Gu, P. Y. (2013). Strategy-based instruction: A learner-focused approach to developing learner autonomy. Language Teaching Research, 17 (1), 9–30. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168812457528

O’Malley, J. M., & Chamot, A. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition . Cambridge University Press.

Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know . Heinle and Heinle.

Oxford, R. L. (1992/93). Language learning strategies in a nutshell: Research update and ESL classroom implications. TESOL Journal, 1 (3), 18–22.

Oxford, R. L. (Ed.). (1996). Language learning strategies around the world: Cross-cultural perspectives . Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center.

Oxford, R. L. (2011). Teaching and researching language learning strategies . Pearson/Longman.

Oxford, R. L. (2017). Teaching and researching language learning strategies: Self-regulation in context . Routledge.

Oxford, R. L., & Amerstorfer, C. M. (Eds.). (2018). Language learning strategies and individual learner characteristics: Situating strategy use in diverse contexts . Bloomsbury.

Oxford, R. L., Gu, P., Gunning, P., & Hernández-González, T. (2024). Considerations in designing and validating the diagnostic inventory for self-regulated language learning (DISLL): Status of the process. Language Teaching Research Quarterly, 41 , 4–20. https://doi.org/10.32038/ltrq.2024.41.02

Panadero, E., & Alonso-Tipia, J. (2014). How do students self-regulate? Review of Zimmerman’s cyclical model of self-regulated model. Anales de Psicologίa/Annals of Psychology, 30 (2), 450–462. http://revista.umes/analesps/article/view/analesps.30.2.167221

Pawlak, M. (2024). Grammar learning strategies: Towards a pedagogical intervention. Language Teaching Research Quarterly, 39 , 174–191. https://doi.org/10.32038/ltrq.2024.39.12

Plonsky, L. (2011). The effectiveness of second language strategy instruction: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 61 (4), 993–1038. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2011.00663.x

Psaltou-Joycey, A. (2008). Cross-cultural differences in the use of learning strategies by students of Greek as a second language. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 29 (3), 310–324. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434630802147817

Psaltou-Joycey, A. (2010). Language learning strategies in the foreign language classroom . University Studio Press.

Psaltou-Joycey, A. (2014). Language learning SI: The English language coursebooks in the Greek state schools. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 29 , 6–23. https://www.new.enl.auth.gr/gala/jal-vol-29/

Psaltou-Joycey, A. (Ed.). (2015). Foreign language learning strategy instruction: A teacher’s guide . Saita Publications.

Psaltou-Joycey, A. (2019). Guidelines and materials for integrating language learning strategy instruction into the language lesson. In A. Chamot & V. Harris (Eds.), Learning strategy instruction in the language classroom: Issues and implementation . Multilingual Matters.

Psaltou-Joycey, A. (2020). Language learning strategies and good language teachers. In C. Griffiths & Z. Tajeddin (Eds.), Lessons from good language teachers . Cambridge University Press.

Psaltou-Joycey, A. (2022). Fostering language learning strategy instruction in the classroom. In M. Dimasi & E. Griva (Eds.), Educational policies and practices in language teaching: Contemporary impressions and innovative approaches (Vol. 1, pp. 107–125). Paratiritis of Thrace.

Psaltou-Joycey, A., & Kantaridou, Z. (2009a). Plurilingualism, language learning strategy use and learning style preferences. International Journal of Multilingualism, 6 (4), 460–474. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790710903254620

Psaltou-Joycey, A., & Kantaridou, Z. (2009b). Foreign language learning strategy profiles of university students in Greece. Journal of Applied Linguistics, 25 , 107–127. https://www.new.enl.auth.gr/gala/jal-vol-25/

Psaltou-Joycey, A., & Sougari, A. (2010). Greek young learners’ perceptions about foreign language learning and teaching. In A. Psaltou-Joycey & M. Mattheoudakis (Eds.), Advances in research on language learning and teaching: Selected papers (pp. 387–401). The Greek Applied Linguistics Association.

Purpura, J. (2014). Language learner styles and strategies. In M. Celce-Murcia, D. Brinton, & A. Snow (Eds.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (4th ed., pp. 532–549). National Geographic Learning/Cengage.

Rubin, J. (1975). What the “good language learner” can tell us. TESOL Quarterly, 9 (1), 41–51. https://doi.org/10.2307/3586011

Rubin, J. (1981). Study of cognitive processes in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11 , 117–131. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/II.2.117

Sabnani, R. L. (2024). Strategy instruction and enhancement of young learners’ speaking skills. Language Teaching Research Quarterly, 41 , 67–80. https://doi.org/10.32038/ltrq.2024.41.06

Sabnani, R. L., & Goh, C. C. M. (2022). Developing young learners’ metacognitive awareness for speaking. TESOL Quarterly, 56 (1), 336–346. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.3042

Schunk, D. H. (2002). Self-regulation through goal-setting . https://cyc-net.org/cyc-online/cyconline-june2010-schunk.html

Sen, H., & Sen, M. (2012). A comparison of EFL teachers’ perceptions of language learning strategies and learners’ reported use of strategies in their English language classes. Procedia—Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46 , 1846–1854. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.05.390

Shen, H.-J. (2003). The role of explicit instruction in ESL/EFL reading. Foreign Language Annals, 36 (3), 424–433. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.2003.tb02124.x

Soruç, A., & Griffiths, C. (2015). Identity and the spoken grammar dilemma. System, 50 , 32–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2015.03.007

Tajeddin, Z., & Malmir, A. (2024). Learners’ use of pragmatic learning strategies across language learning experience and gender: An investigation framed by Rebecca Oxford’s taxonomy of learning strategies. Language Teaching Research Quarterly, 41 , 99–115. https://doi.org/10.32038/ltrq.2024.41.09

Victori, M., & Tragant, E. (2003). Learner strategies: A cross-sectional and longitudinal study of primary and high-school EFL teachers. In M. P. Garcia Mayo & M. L. Garcia Lecumberri (Eds.), Age and the acquisition of English as a foreign language (pp. 182–209). Multilingual Matters.

Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13–39). Academic Press.

Zou, B., & Lertlitb, S. (2022). Oxford’s strategy inventory for language learning: English learning of Chinese students in a Thai university. Learn Journal, 15 (2), 705–723. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ358724.pdf

Download references

Acknowledgements

The example from the Teacher’s Guide was designed by Zoe Kantaridou and Iris Papadopoulou, both ESP instructors at the University of Macedonia, Thessaloniki, Greece. It constitutes one of the LLSI activities included in the Teacher’s Guide which was developed by the teams of the THALES (2012–2015) project MIS379335, co-funded by the European Union and National Resources.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of English, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece

Angeliki Psaltou-Joycey

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Angeliki Psaltou-Joycey .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Department of Education, University of York, York, UK

Andrzej Cirocki

Department of Languages, General Sir John Kotelawala Defence University, Colombo, Sri Lanka

Bimali Indrarathne

Writing Centre, Central European University, Vienna, Austria

Sharon McCulloch

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2024 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Psaltou-Joycey, A. (2024). Strategies in English Language Learning. In: Cirocki, A., Indrarathne, B., McCulloch, S. (eds) Cognitive and Educational Psychology for TESOL. Springer Texts in Education. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-66532-5_10

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-66532-5_10

Published : 20 August 2024

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-031-66531-8

Online ISBN : 978-3-031-66532-5

eBook Packages : Behavioral Science and Psychology Behavioral Science and Psychology (R0)

Share this chapter

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• DOI: 10.26634/jelt.14.1.20492
• Corpus ID: 269571599

Exploring the influence of cognitive task complexity on EFL language learning and curriculum development

• Sadat Roozafzai Zahra
• Published in i-manager's Journal on… 2024
• Education, Linguistics

13 References

Manipulating cognitive complexity across task types and its impact on learners' interaction during oral performance, task complexity, task difficulty, and task production: exploring interactions in a componential framework, cognitive load theory and complex learning: recent developments and future directions, expertise reversal effect and its implications for learner-tailored instruction, task-based language learning, the efficiency of multimedia learning into old age., cognitive load theory and the format of instruction, exploring language pedagogy through second language acquisition research, a coherence effect in multimedia learning: the case for minimizing irrelevant sounds in the design of multimedia instructional messages., review: task-based language learning and teaching, related papers.

Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers

Impact of social media on learning English language during the COVID-19 pandemic

PSU Research Review

ISSN : 2399-1747

Article publication date: 21 January 2022

This research shows how social media has affected learning at present during the COVID-19 pandemic and how it has become the largest and most convenient area of communication. In the current scenario, it seems that social networking sites not only had a profound impact on our social structure and intra-social interaction, but also affected education in general and learning English language in particular. It has been proven that these various social media platforms have created a realm of digital environment in today's new-age learning. Social media platforms are social networking sites through which people interact and communicate with each other easily and conveniently. Undoubtedly and unquestionably, social networking has been proven to be a global phenomenon that has caused a vast paradigm shift in the world of Learning and education during the current pandemic. Therefore, the present study aims to reach the extent of the impact of the various social media platforms on learning English language during the COVID-19 pandemic from the students' point of view.

Design/methodology/approach

The study was conducted at the undergraduate level for English language learners. The sample comprised 166 undergraduate students at Najran University. A survey questionnaire was administered to find out the impact of various social media platforms and social networking sites on learning English language in the academic year of 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic and to highlight possible suggestions for improving future virtual language learning.

The findings of the study contributed to the area of online learning of English language during the COVID-19 pandemic. Final results confirmed that the utilization of social media has been significantly perceived to have positively impacted learning English language in terms of writing style, reading skills, listening and lexical variation, communication skills and grammar usage.

Practical implications

The findings of the study can serve as fundamental indicators to implement prompt pedagogical reformations, for which a number of pedagogical implications can be proposed. Another equally important pedagogical implication is to design and provide professional development and training sessions to both students and educators on the ultimate utilization of social media as instructional technologies in the context of English language teaching and learning.

Originality/value

This research provides insights in developing policies to assist with the integration and utilization of social media platforms as instructional technologies in the context of English language teaching and learning and how institutions can respond to the advent of advancing technology, especially during and after the COVID-19 era. A model to improve online English language learning process is recommended as a guideline for all educators offering online learning.

• Social media in education
• English language learning
• L2 learning style
• COVID-19 pandemic

Muftah, M. (2022), "Impact of social media on learning English language during the COVID-19 pandemic", PSU Research Review , Vol. ahead-of-print No. ahead-of-print. https://doi.org/10.1108/PRR-10-2021-0060

Emerald Publishing Limited

Copyright © 2022, Muneera Muftah

Published in PSU Research Review . Published by Emerald Publishing Limited. This article is published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, translate and create derivative works of this article (for both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject to full attribution to the original publication and authors. The full terms of this licence may be seen at http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode

1. Introduction

Social media is constantly changing the way people live in different aspects. Nowadays, various social media platforms are affecting communication, information delivery, knowledge exchange, commerce, education and all different aspects of life ( Rieger and Christoph, 2018 ; Bhatti et al. , 2019 ; Amin et al. , 2020 ). With the vast spread of various social networking sites on the Internet, researchers from different fields have started to direct their attention and shed more light on the importance and impact of social media on different aspects of life including social as well as educational aspects.

To pursue their constant efforts and to look at those aspects as an area of concentration that needs to be investigated further, Language learning professionals and instructors specifically have attempted to investigate the effect of social media and social networking sites in second language acquisition and second/foreign language learning. In one of the researches, it was found out that the group who got learning, commitment and inspiration through social media sites has indicated higher results in an English proficiency test compared to the other one that got training on an eye-to-eye premise ( Wamba and Carter, 2016 ).

Up-to-date data available on Statista (2020) have indicated that there are about 3.96 billion social media users across the world. Social media networking sites range from microblogs such as Twitter and sites and applications such as Facebook, YouTube, Instagram, LinkedIn and Snapchat. Yet, these different platforms have influenced the individuals' social, educational and personal aspects of life.

In the area of education, a significant number of research studies have been conducted to estimate their effectiveness in different disciplines. Linguistically speaking, the influx of linguistic output on social media represents numerous opportunities for language learners to process language and obtain input, as young users of social media networks spend more than half of their days using and interacting on these networking sites using their language and communication skills ( Al Jahromi, 2020 ).

Consequently, online chats and discussions, whether oral or written, have replaced conventional face-to-face dialogues, leading to substantial changes in the users' daily language and language skills. The extensive use of smartphones, laptops, and tablets along with prosperous social media applications has perhaps availed rich linguistic input at the fingertips of their users and has contributed in the production of comprehensible L2 output ( Al Jahromi, 2020 ; Pikhart and Botezat, 2021 ).

Regardless of the inevitable impact of social media in individuals' lives everywhere, and taking into account that the students of today are insubordinate to old-fashioned instructing methods and learning techniques, there are not many studies that explore their effects in learning and education particularly in the English language context. Therefore, the present study aims to identify the impact of social media on learning English during the COVID-19 pandemic. To achieve this aim, the present work specifically seeks to address the following research questions.

In what way did social media platforms impact the learning of English Language during the COVID-19 pandemic?

In order to answer this question, the following sub-question was developed to direct the scope of the study: How do Saudi university students perceive the impacts of using social media platforms on their learning of English language during the COVID-19 pandemic with regard to (1) Positive and negative effect? (2) Number of social media platforms used? (3) Motives for using Social Media platforms? (4) Frequency and time spent in using Social Media? (5) Educational or communicative tools? (6) The Rate of using social media on Learning English Language? (7) Aspects of language Skills improved via social media? and (8) Social media effects on students' studies?

2. Literature review

The COVID-19 pandemic led to shocking and unpredicted experiences for Saudi university students. The precautionary measures followed during the pandemic have had a wide impact on the students' social and educational life aspects ( Alghamdi, 2021 ). Recently, we have seen a radical change in favor of distance learning due to the COVID-19 pandemics, therefore, it could be worthwhile to investigate the impact of social media in the foreign language context as they have been used much more now ( Pikhart and Botezat, 2021 ). The current COVID-19 situation makes us aware that the impact of social media will increase due to social distancing.

Social media platforms are omnipresent and the research into the use of them in foreign language learning has become immense ( Yurdagül and Öz, 2018 ; Artyushina and Sheypak, 2018 ; Ayers, 2020 ). Today, with 2.95 billion social network users worldwide, social media usage is increasingly attractive and accessible, especially among the younger generation ( Pikhart and Botezat, 2021 ). Social network sites have become the main means of communicating and a way to maintain a social life ( Li and Croucher, 2020 ).

Social Media refers to websites, blogs, chats, computer programs, i.e. any content-based form of e-communication that enables users to share information and expose ideas. While social networking sites for language learning represent the corpus of those social media channels and service, mainly designed for specific purposes, devoted to foreign language learning. Furthermore, it is also proposed that English might now be the first truly global language, being the dominant or official language in over 60 countries. The English language as stated is one of the most widely spoken languages in the world ( Akinwamide, 2012 ).

Roelofse (2013) argues that exposure to new literacies found in new technologies definitely impacts the way in which second/foreign language learners perceive the world. Likewise, the amount of contact with these social utilities certainly influences literacy practices by learners. New technologies do not merely alter the way people live, but it influences the way they think. Moreover, Davies (2012, p. 21) in Roelofse (2013) argues that “texts of the new technologies have mutated into complex hybrid systems that have made new demands on reading and writing, viewing, social exchange, and communication”.

Facebook is no exception in that the use of this social network site requires a multimodal approach of embedding and combining words and written texts from many sites. In the same sense, WhatsApp is perceived by the researchers as having the same contaminating effect on learners' writing skills. In this regard, social media is a “dialogue” and “means [of] engaging with people” ( Coons, 2012 , p. 44).

The body of literature reveals a significant number of studies in the area of the impact of social media on the linguistic output of non-native speakers of English. Chomsky (2014) has stated that our language is constantly, inevitably, and naturally changing, transforming and becoming more adaptive to its users due to the changes in our contemporaries. More particularly, the initiation and rapid development of social media networking sites as eminent activity has created a distinguishing language system necessary for practical communication ( Attila, 2017 ).

Baldwin (2012) suggests that social media can be both a friend and a foe for natural language processing. While he considers social media a cause for “spelling inconsistencies, the free-form adoption of new terms, and regular violations of English grammar norms,” he refers to the advantage of “lexical normalization” in the same linguistic setting. In this regard, Thurairaj et al. (2015) examined whether social media networks were “making or marring academic English” and whether infrequent online code-switching and inconsistent spelling affect non-native learners' language learning process. Their findings revealed that the discourse used on social media had not influenced the learners' English language proficiency due to their higher awareness of the deviations between their online informal meta-language and their formal academic language.

Furthermore, simplified online interactions help speakers produce meaningful exchanges whilst using the target language in useful manners ( Mutum and Wang, 2010 ). Another advantage of social media is the reduced communication anxiety. People often exchange and share information and construct new personal and linguistic identities on social media because of being at ease with revealing their preferred identities behind monitors as a result of the anonymity expedited in such situations ( Blattner and Fiori, 2011 ). Lowered anxiety in online settings coined with heightened motivation and self-confidence have been shown to provide L2 learners with anxiety-free zones that enable them to produce language spontaneously and creatively ( Al Jahrami, 2019 ).

Studies conducted by Slim and Hafedh (2019) , Thurairaj et al. (2015) have revealed that social media platforms such as Facebook and Twitter enhance students' overall language learning process. In connection with particular language skills, a significant number of studies have found that the use of social media enhances learners' grammatical complexity and vocabulary acquisition and learning ( Al Jahrami, 2019 ; Attila, 2017 ; Mills, 2011 ; Stevenson and Liu, 2010 ). Mason and Rennie (2008) notice that vocabulary acquisition on social media has become a phenomenon due to the employment of techniques such as coining and compounding to produce words such as Face + book, Snap + chat and Blog + sphere.

Another employed technique is sound imitation resulting in words such as Twitter which comes from the verb tweet, and Boo which reflects the sound of contempt. Similarly, social media have affected the forms of different words. For instance, the proper names of social media applications and websites have become verbs and adjectives (e.g. Google it, I'll Instagram this). Another technique is the change in the negative form of the verb like and the noun friend to become unlike and unfriend. Additionally, the semantic connotations of many words have undergone change on social media (e.g. wall on Facebook, spam, steam, etc.).

As to the writing skill, the fact that social media exchanges are more written than spoken in what is referred to as “text speak”. Attila (2017) argues that the use of logograms, abbreviations, acronyms and paralinguistic features (e.g. b4 = before, Gr8 = great) has made writing easier, faster and more liberated from the normal constraints of traditional writing. However, spelling can accordingly be negatively affected when frequently using logograms and abbreviations (e.g. 2 day = today).

Longitudinal studies have also indicated a significant improvement of oral proficiency with particular reference to speaking and listening ( Chen, 2013 ; Lin et al. , 2016 ). Lin et al. , however, have asserted caution that learners would need carefully planned instructional guidance and tailored activities in order to be able to use social media efficiently to enhance their language learning process.

Despite the positive effects of social media on language proficiency and language learning, many researchers are more concerned with the harmful effects these networking sites might have on L2 learners' interlanguage with particular reference to inconsistent spelling and violated grammatical rules ( Baldwin, 2012 ). Lin et al. (2016 , p. 143) claim that “language use on the Internet is often criticized as being less correct and less coherent than other forms of language use, and as having disrupted adjacency.” Effects of social media on Pakistani students' L2 learning process have also been reported in a study conducted by Tariq et al. (2012) . Similarly, Akram and Albalawi (2016) found Facebook to be a negative learning distraction for their Saudi students.

Amidst these incompatible claims, the present study aims to confirm the possible impact of social media platforms on learning English language during the Covid-19 Pandemic from the perspectives of undergraduate students in the Saudi context. The precautionary measures followed during the pandemic have led the Saudi government to abundantly utilize the World Wide Web and all its facets for different socioeconomic and educational purposes. It is not surprising, then, that social media platforms and social networking sites are heavily used by L2 learners. Consequently, the purpose of the current study is to evaluate the possible gains of the broad use of social media platforms on the learning of the English language during the pandemic and to view the perceptions of the learners in regard to these possible gains, which is a gap in the literature that the current study aims to fill.

3. Methodology

The purpose of the current study is to find out the impact of various social media platforms and social networking sites on learning English language in the academic year of 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic and to highlight possible suggestions for improving future virtual language learning.

3.1 Participants

The study was conducted at the undergraduate level for English language learners in the College of Languages and Translation–Najran University, KSA. It was performed after completing a full year of online education and teaching classes and during the final examinations in the second semester of 2020. The sample comprised 166 students: 66 male and 100 female students in all bachelor's degrees with English language majors. Students in the English department form the highest number of students with their ages ranging from below 20 years–23 years old. The participants are native speakers of Arabic. Their interaction outside the classroom is low. That's to say, most of them had very little interaction with native English speakers outside the classroom and in most cases no contact at all.

Most of the students do not have any prior experience with online learning. Requirement courses including Arabic, Religious Culture and other general courses were conducted online on the main campus before the recent crisis, and it was optional. However, the examinations were conducted on campus. The following Figure 1 displays the percentage of the participants.

3.2 Research instrument

The method chosen for this study is quantitative; a more in-depth method was designed to estimate the impact of various social media platforms on learning English language during the COVID-19 pandemic. The quantitative method was used to conduct more detailed studies of a smaller area using closed-questionnaires. This survey-based questionnaire consists of 10 multiple choice questions, which covered the study objectives. The questionnaire was administered to 166 English language learners. It consists of different parts; the first part is looking at students' demographic information, the second part includes a set of multiple-choice questions about learners' experiences with social media platforms (e.g. Facebook, WhatsApp, Twitter, Instagram, Google+, … etc.), and their effect on learning English during the COVID-19 pandemic, the number of Social Media platforms they use and have access to, the motives for using social media during the pandemic, the Frequently used Social Media platforms, the extent to which social media is used for educational and communication purposes, The rate of social media use on learning English language during the COVID-19 pandemic, time spent on social media platforms, language skills improved via social media use and finally the effect of social networking sites Students' Studies. The questionnaire was checked for validity and reliability fulfillment.

3.3 Data analysis procedures

In this study, a quantitative approach to data collection has been employed. A descriptive analysis method was applied to analyze the research by counting the answers for every question to get the percentages. A questionnaire was the tool that was used in order to collect data. The questionnaire consisted of ten questions. Thick description and reflective thinking are the two most important elements that have been used while analyzing and interpreting the data. The data were carefully read for possible categories relevant to the purpose of the study. Then, these reported statements were categorized based on the purpose to be achieved.

4. Results and interpretation

The results of the present study were structured based on the varying types and length of questions applied in the close-ended questionnaire. In the scheduled questionnaire, the researchers set certain questions to gain a wide range of answers and opinions regarding the impact of social media platforms on learning English language during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Figure 2 displays the results of the students who think that social media can affect learning English positively during the pandemic. The results indicate that the majority of the participants use social media as a language learning tool. Almost 86.75% of the students believe that social media can affect learning English positively, while 13.25% of them think that it has a negative effect on the language learning process.

As to the number of social media platforms that students have access to and can straightforwardly use, Figure 3 indicates that 25.91% of the total respondents use only one social networking site, 22.29% use two sites and 37.35% of them use three social networking sites. Yet, only 14.45% of the students use more than three social media platforms.

Concerning the reasons and the motives for using social media during the pandemic, Figure 4 below shows that 60.84% of the participants use social networking sites for the purpose of studying. Likewise, the results indicate that 19.27% of them use social networking sites for playing games, while the students who use these sites for making friends and chatting with friends are 28.31 and 31.74% respectively. The remaining 24.09% reported that they use social networking sites for other purposes.

Figure 5 below shows the most frequently used social media platforms. The data indicate that the most popular online networking site was WhatsApp, with the highest percentage of 72.89% of all university students stating that they use it on a typical day. Facebook is the second mostly-used platform, with 53.01% of the students using it daily. It is also reported that only 31.32% use Twitter, another 26.50 and 21.68% use Google+ and Instagram respectively. The least used social media platform was WeChat, with 3.61% of students using it daily. Moreover, 18.07% of the students prefer to use different other social media platforms and no one of them uses LinkedIn.

Similarly, Figure 6 below presents results related to the use of social media as a communication tool during the COVID-19 Pandemic. The results point out that 81.92% of the students prefer to use social media platforms for learning purposes. They believe that social media provide the facility to communicate among the students during the pandemic, i.e. to communicate with their teachers and classmates. On the other hand, 18.07% did not use social media for educational purposes, as they believe that social networking platforms did not support their studies. They believe that these platforms are supposed to make them feel more connected.

Figure 7 reflects the students' perception towards using social media as an educational tool and as a support for their studies in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. Results point out that the majority of the students 84.94% are interested in using social media as an educational tool as it helps them to get more useful information and to interact with learning groups and other educational systems that make the learning process more convenient. However, only a few students, 15.06% mention that social media platforms did not support their own studies.

Results reported prove that the majority of the students are interested in using social media as an educational tool and that almost 51.20 and 18.08% of the students use social media to learn English language at higher rates “good” and “excellent” respectively. Moreover, it is also reported that only 21.09% of the students rate the use of social media on learning English language during the COVID-19 pandemic as “average”, another 7.23% rate it as “poor” and only 2.40% rate using social media in learning English as “very poor” (see Figure 8 ).

Concerning how much time do students actively spend on social networking sites, Figure 9 shows that 6.02% of the students do not spend a moment on social networking sites during a typical day, almost 21.08% of them spend 10–30 min a day. Most of the students 31.93% spend about one to two hours on social networking sites during their typical day, while 27.71% spend from 2 to 3 h of their time. It is also reported that 4.22% of the participants spend between 4 and 5 h on social networking sites, and only 9.04% of the participants spend more than 5 h on social networking sites daily.

Interactive social media channels to language learning enable students to develop communication and language skills. Regarding the different aspects of language skills the students improve via social media platforms, the results presented in Figure 10 below showed that 40.96% of the students improved their writing skill, 39.15% improved their reading skill, the third skill is listening and vocabulary with a ratio of 31.92%. In addition, their speaking skill was improved with a percentage of 31.32% and only 22.28% of learners improved their grammar.

The last question discusses the effect of social networking sites on students' studies. The results specified that social networking sites have seriously affected students' studies at a ratio of 24.09%, whereas 31.93% of the participants believe that social networking sites have slightly affected their performance and their language achievement.

On the other hand, 18.07% of the learners agreed that social networking sites have no impact on their studies. Moreover, 14.46% of them believed that such sites are seriously helping, while only 11.45% of the total number of students admitted that social networking sites can slightly help them on their studies. The extent to which social networking sites are affecting the learners' studies is presented in Figure 11 above.

5. Discussion and conclusion

The present work attempts to investigate the most important impacts of using social media for learning English language during the Covid-19 Pandemic. The challenges of the digital world are omnipresent, and different options have to be considered so that educators are able to use them to assist the learners.

Social media is no exception, as it can provide many opportunities in the foreign language learning process. The technological revolution today, like never before, can be obviously reflected in the L2 learners' wide experience, the independence in exploring digital resources and documents that represent powerful support in enhancing oral, written, listening and reading competence. In this sense, L2 learners do no longer depend directly and entirely on the teacher to improve their skills but on other resources such as Internet and technology ( Al Jahromi, 2020 ; Pikhart and Botezat, 2021 ; Slim and Hafedh, 2019 ; Thurairaj et al. , 2015 ).

In other words, social media along with social networking sites have become part of the learners' as well as educators' daily routines, in terms of communication, language experience, practice and exercise, news feed and knowledge sharing. The digital world has seemingly become their way of life inside and outside class settings and that is the reason behind examining their impact on L2 learners.

With the help of social media platforms, L2 learners can learn, read, write, advertise or communicate in a more efficient way. The main questions addressed referred to the impact of social media on learning English language during the Covid-19 pandemic and usage and the degree of facilitation and assistance of foreign language learning by social media, and the findings revealed that students were very positive and felt motivated by social media.

L2 learners do not have to rely on classes or handbooks to get their daily amount of knowledge. It can all be achieved from the social networking sites as indicated in question 2. At least, the learners can use three different types of social media platforms and formats to reach their educational goals and in some cases four types. The learners can follow or get information about their studeis from any part of the world. For instance, Twitter allows a user to get information which is more interactive in nature with the help of embed photo and video. Smartphones are an example of a handheld device through which learners can communicate and exchange information by using any social media platform which is allowed.

The world is getting closer every day and everyone, including L2 learners, needs to be connected. It is moving strongly and more towards “social media”. The information comes to users rather than users have to make effort to get the information. In terms of personal relationships too, social networking is connecting people. Social networking can also be very crucial in educational help. Education support groups can be created from which learners can get information as indicated in question 3 where 60.84% of L2 learners indicated that they use social media platforms for studying and for educational purposes while the rest of them use them for other purposes including chatting with friends, making friends, playing games and for other different purposes.

The kind of interaction a user wants from these social networks depends on the type of information the user is interested in. With reference to question 4, using different platforms depends on users' purposes, for the participants in the study aiming at enhancing proficiency in English language, WhatsApp can be used for chatting or sending many kinds of text-information, assignments or even creating groups for different courses. Facebook was not appealing due to its informal style, while the participants aiming at improving communicating skills found it useful for social and L2 identity construction. Google + can be used for academic purposes, it can greatly enhance the way people learn. Twitter and Instagram have also become popular and integral part of everyday communication. Other platforms such as YouTube, learners can watch videos to understand a topic better or look at photos which might help them to visualize a concept, after all, “a picture speaks a thousand words”. Brick (2011) reported it as the main positive aspect of using social networking sites, adding to it the real-time feedback. The immediate response and real-time conversation are also achieved through live sessions on Instagram or Facebook dedicated pages for L2 learners, such as the Instagram stories that offer quizzes focusing on idioms, phrasal verbs or other lexical related items or lives where learners are invited to write down words that they would like to learn the pronunciation.

The fact that technology including social media and the different networking sites should be part of the educational process is not questionable anymore, the way it finds its scope within it and how and to which extent should educators, as well as learners, use it, had better be delivered by a multidisciplinary methodological framework. Among the numerous potential advantages to using social media, L2 learners have perceived that it can be used as a good communication and educational tool (See Question 5 and 6). The opportunities provided by this medium are immense and many L2 learners are making use of this medium to better their practices. Social networks, unlike the common media, do not have a pattern as to how much information has to be conveyed and where to draw the line. Therefore, learners can obtain much information and better performance. Similar findings were found by Sitthirak (2012) , who acknowledged the attitudinal impact of social media on language from an educational perspective. Similarly, Mutum and Wang (2010) and Blattner and Fiori (2011) have declared that social media provides a smoother, more direct communication tool.

In other words, by maximizing the benefits of social networks, whether it be their role in delivering educational outcomes, or facilitating supportive relationships, identity formation, or a sense of belonging and resiliency, the direct contacts that occur in discussion groups, exercises, conversations, videos and other widgets on linguistic social networks cover various language registers. With the expanding demand of various social media platforms, the growing numbers of users in different parts of the world, it is fair to assume that it impacts second language acquisition, at least by the permanent flow of visuals and text that we access on a daily basis. In the broad context of globalization, all visuals improve not only linguistic skills, but they also build an international culture ( Pikhart and Botezat, 2021 ).

The current Covid-19 pandemic has posed some challenges, and like any emergency event, it has some inherent risks. Through increased social media literacy as an educational tool– ensuring all students can utilize these media to develop the skills and to critically understand, analyze and create content – these challenges can be overcome and risks mitigated in a way that ensures the many benefits for both learners and educators. The findings shown in questions 7 and 8 corresponded with the aforementioned ones related to L2 learners' views on the particular effects of social media on the enhancement of these language learning skills. Results have asserted that approximately 69.28% of the frequent users of social media platforms for learning purposes have rated them as excellent and good mediums to enhance language skills, especially during the Covid-19 pandemic. This is in line with Li (2017) study. Li argued that students' comfort with online class design, structure, level of interaction between students and faculty, the quality and amount of class content and overall experience with online class delivery impact the overall learning experience and determine the ultimate success or failure of online mode of education. Haque and Al-Salem (2019) have also found that social media is a good platform for students as it provides opportunities for learners to study foreign languages.

The intensity of using English-language social media content is positively and significantly related to students' perceptions of their ability to speak English including reading, writing, listening and speaking aspects. Hence, social media is needed to be learning media for learning English language as a Foreign Language ( Anwas et al. , 2020 ). Online socialization according to Slim and Hafedh (2019) seems to have positively affected the production of an acknowledged linguistic repertoire independent of age or gender.

With reference to the last question, results show positive perceptions of the respondents of the effects of using social media on their L2 writing (see Figure 11 ). In addition to improved English language learning, these effects included enhanced writing style, quality and quantity. Al Jahromi (2019) and Li (2017) have similarly found that online interactions on social media networks and online facets significantly develop L2 learners' writing accuracy and complexity. These findings could also be related in this regard to the influence of the projection of authorial and social presence and identity practices facilitated on social media due to the increased linguistic input and output on these platforms in comparison to the less-advantageous classroom settings ( Chen, 2013 ).

In addition, L2 learners who acknowledged the positive impact of social media on their English learning reported that their L2 Reading skills are also enhanced. This is due to the improvement of the L2 learners' vocabulary as well as listening skills. This is similar to the findings obtained by Mutum and Wang (2010) , Thurairaj et al. (2015) and Slim and Hafedh (2019) . However, online communication of students raises another important issue discussed by the great majority of authors, that of the nonacademic purposes of social media usage of students. Given that the majority of the students were using written-based social media networks such as WhatsApp, Twitter and Instagram, speaking, grammar and pronunciation skills were perceived as the least enhanced. However, Al Jahrami (2019) has claimed that language accuracy is concerned, extensive reading and writing online can enhance L2 learners' grammatical competence (see also Attila, 2017 ; Mills, 2011 ; Stevenson and Liu, 2010 ).

In sum, the research study investigated the impact of social media platforms on learning English language during the Covid-19 pandemic from undergraduate Saudi users' perspectives. The aforementioned findings suggest that Saudi L2 learners find social media platforms effective in enhancing their L2 proficiency, with particular reference to how positively they influence L2 writing, vocabulary learning and communication skills. They also reported that they use various social media platforms including WhatsApp, Facebook, Google+, Twitter, etc., and that they find social media as both educational and communicative tools. Based on these findings, it is safe to conclude that social media can be appreciably helpful in enhancing English language learning.

6. Research implications and recommendations

The findings of the study can serve as fundamental indicators to implement prompt pedagogical reformations, for which a number of pedagogical implications can be proposed. Social media can be implemented to make teaching more student-centered through the facilitation of interactive collaboration and exchange of information, resulting in an enhancement of syntactic and lexical complexity.

L2 teachers in particular need to use social media to aid their teaching strategies and amplify their material with interactive and innovative activities on social media such as online debates and group discussions. Another equally important pedagogical implication is to design and provide professional development and training sessions, workshops, seminars to both students and educators on the ultimate utilization of social media as instructional technologies in the context of English language teaching and learning.

Social media networks can be employed in this regard to provide authentic extensive reading tasks that can facilitate intentional and incidental vocabulary learning and writing complexity. Furthermore, awareness campaigns can be conducted by e-learning educationists to recognize the benefits of online learning and teaching and validate the acceptability of social media learning, mobile learning and mixed teaching via learning management systems.

For implementing the positive findings of different studies and for educational technology to be used effectively, educators must be ready for a paradigm shift: from traditional education to pedagogy enhanced by the new technology. Further research is needed into the current realism and prospects of the utilization of digital media in connection with the wellbeing of the learners, increased levels of depression and anxiety, and some other negative psychological, social and economic aspects of the use of social media. This paper is the starting point and should be an impetus for further research into the topic of utilization of social media, especially during and after the COVID-19 era.

To offer online learning, English language undergraduate students require assistance. The following model is recommended as a guideline for all educators offering online learning. The proposed model is demonstrated in Figure 12 .

Participants distribution

The effect of social media platforms on learning English

The use of social media

Motives for using social media platforms

Frequently used social media platforms

Use of social media platforms as a communication tool

Using social media platforms as an educational tool

The rate of social media use on learning English language during the COVID-19 pandemic

Time spent on social media platforms

Language skills improved via social media use

Social networking sites effects on students' studies

Procedure to improve online English language learning process

Akinwamide , T.K. ( 2012 ), “ The influence of process approach on English as second language students' performances in essay writing ”, ELT , Vol.  5 No.  3 , pp.  16 - 29 , doi: 10.5539/elt.v5n3p16 .

Akram , M.S. and Albalawi , W. ( 2016 ), “ Youths' social media adoption: theoretical model and empirical evidence ”, International Journal of Business and Management , Vol.  11 No.  2 , pp.  22 - 30 .

Al Jahrami , D. ( 2019 ), “ The impact of online discussions on the accuracy of the written output of Bahraini L2 university students ”, in Hidri , S. (Ed.), English Language Teaching Research in the Middle East and North Africa , Palgrave Macmillan , Cham , pp.  637 - 666 .

Al Jahromi , D. ( 2020 ), “ A quantitative study of the perceived impact of social media networks on Bahraini users' English language learning ”, Teaching English with Technology , Vol.  20 No.  4 , pp.  23 - 40 .

Alghamdi , A.A. ( 2021 ), “ Impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the social and educational aspects of Saudi university students' lives ”, PLoS One , Vol.  16 No.  4 , doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0250026 .

Amin , B. , Rafiq , R. and Mehmood , N. ( 2020 ), “ The impact of social media in English language learning ”, Journal of Critical Reviews , Vol. 7 No. 10 , pp. 3126 - 3135 , doi: 10.31838/jcr.07.10.507 .

Anwas , E. , Sugiarti , Y. , Permatasari , A. , Warsihna , J. , Anas , Z. , Alhapip , L. , Siswanto , H. and Rivalina , R. ( 2020 ), “ Social media usage for enhancing English language skill ”, International Journal of Interactive Mobile Technologies , Vol.  7 No.  14 , pp.  41 - 56 .

Artyushina , G. and Sheypak , O.A. ( 2018 ), “ Mobile phones help develop listening skills ”, Informatics , Vol.  5 , p. 32 .

Attila , B. ( 2017 ), “ The effects of social media on the language: do social networks have damaging or constructing effects on language? ”, available at: http://midra.unimiskolc.hu/document/26612/22012.pdf .

Ayers , J. ( 2020 ), “ Competence literate but context lacking? Investigating the potential of study abroad programs to promote sustainability competence acquisition in students ”, Sustainability , Vol.  12 , p. 5389 .

Baldwin , T. ( 2012 ), “ Social media: friend or foe of natural language processing? ”, Paper presented in the 26th Pacific Asia Conference on Language, Information and Computation , pp.  58 - 59 , available at: https://www.aclweb.org/anthology/Y12-1005.pdf ( accessed 29 June 2019 ).

Bhatti , A. , Bano , T. and Rehman , S.-U. ( 2019 ), “ Social media and consumer satisfaction effect on consumer purchase intention with the moderating role of trust ”, International Journal of Business Management , Vol.  4 No.  2 , pp.  131 - 141 .

Blattner , G. and Fiori , M. ( 2011 ), “ Virtual social network communities: an investigation of language learners' development of sociopragmatic awareness and multiliteracy skills ”, CALICO Journal , Vol.  29 No.  1 , pp.  24 - 43 .

Brick , B. ( 2011 ), “ Social networking sites and language learning ”, International Journal of Virtual and Personal Learning Environments (IJVPLE) , Vol.  2 No.  3 , pp.  18 - 31 .

Chen , H.-I. ( 2013 ), “ Identity practices of multilingual writers in social networking spaces ”, Language Learning and Technology , Vol.  17 No.  2 , pp.  143 - 170 .

Chomsky , N. ( 2014 ), Aspects of the Theory of Syntax , The MIT Press , Cambridge, Massachusetts .

Coons , S. ( 2012 ), “ Communication through social media: its potential and pitfalls ”, Research Practitioner , Vol.  13 No.  2 , pp.  44 - 45 .

Haque , S. and Al-Salem , N. ( 2019 ), “ Social media in EFL context: attitudes of Saudi learners ”, Journal of Language Teaching and Research , Vol.  5 No.  10 , pp.  1029 - 1040 .

Li , V. ( 2017 ), “ Social media in English language teaching and learning ”, International Journal of Learning and Teaching , Vol.  3 No.  2 , pp.  148 - 153 .

Li , M. and Croucher , S. ( 2020 ), “ Effects of social media use on cultural adaptation ”, in Rings , G. and Rasinger , S. (Eds), The Cambridge Handbook of Intercultural Communication (Cambridge Handbooks in Language and Linguistics) , Cambridge University Press , Cambridge , pp.  504 - 520 . doi: 10.1017/9781108555067.037 .

Lin , C.-H. , Warschauer , M. and Blake , R. ( 2016 ), “ Language learning through social networks: perceptions and reality ”, Language Learning and Technology , Vol.  20 No.  1 , pp.  124 - 147 .

Mason , R. and Rennie , F. ( 2008 ), E-Learning and Social Networking Handbook: Resources for Higher Education , Routledge , Abingdon, Oxon .

Mills , N.A. ( 2011 ), “ Situated learning through social networking communities: the development of joint enterprise, mutual engagement, and a shared repertoire ”, CALICO Journal , Vol.  28 No.  2 , pp.  345 - 368 .

Mutum , D. and Wang , Q. ( 2010 ), “ Consumer generated advertising in blogs ”, in Burns , N.M. , Daugherty , T. and Eastin , M.S. (Eds), Handbook of Research on Digital Media and Advertising: User Generated Content Consumption 1 , IGI Global , Hershey, Pennsylvania , pp.  248 - 261 .

Pikhart , M. and Botezat , O. ( 2021 ), “ The impact of the use of social media on second language acquisition ”, Procedia Computer Science , Vol.  192 , pp.  1621 - 1628 .

Rieger , D. and Christoph , K. ( 2018 ), “ The daily dose of digital inspiration: a multi-method exploration of meaningful communication in social media ”, New Media and Society , Vol.  21 No.  1 , pp.  97 - 118 .

Roelofse , L. ( 2013 ), Investigating the Impact of Facebook-Speak on the Written Academic Work of Learners in a Western Cape High School , Department of General Linguistics, Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences, Stellenbosch University , available at: http://scholar.sun.ac.za ( accessed 10 May 2018 ).

Sitthirak , C. ( 2012 ), “ Social media for language teaching and learning ”, Thammasat Journal , Vol.  31 , pp.  1 - 25 .

Slim , H. and Hafedh , M. ( 2019 ), “ Social media impact on language learning for specific purposes: a study in English for business administration ”, Teaching English with Technology , Vol.  19 No.  1 , pp.  56 - 71 .

Statista ( 2020 ), “ Social media: statistics and facts ”, available at: https://www.statista.com/topics/1164/social-networks ( accessed 29 June 2019 ).

Stevenson , M.P. and Liu , M. ( 2010 ), “ Learning a language with Web 2.0: exploring the use of social networking features of foreign language learning websites ”, CALICO Journal , Vol.  27 No.  2 , pp.  233 - 259 .

Tariq , W. , Mehboob , M. , Khan , M.A. and Ullah , F. ( 2012 ), “ The impact of social media and social networks on education and students of Pakistan ”, International Journal of Computer Science Issues , Vol.  9 No.  4 , pp.  407 - 411 .

Thurairaj , S. , Hoon , E.P. , Roy , S.S. and Fong , P.K. ( 2015 ), “ Reflections of students' language usage in social networking sites: making or marring academic English ”, The Electronic Journal of E-Learning , Vol.  13 No.  4 , pp.  302 - 316 .

Wamba , S.F. and Carter , L. ( 2016 ), “ Social media tools adoption and use by SMES: an empirical study ”, Social Media and Networking: Concepts, Methodologies, Tools, and Applications , pp. 791 - 806 .

Yurdagül , C. and Öz , S. ( 2018 ), “ Attitude towards mobile learning in English language education ”, Education Sciences , Vol.  8 , p. 142 .

Further reading

Bhatti , A. ( 2018 ), “ Sales promotion and price discount effect on consumer purchase intention with the moderating role of social media in Pakistan ”, International Journal of Business Management , Vol. 3 No. 4 .

Habermas , J. ( 1979 ), “ What is universal pragmatics? ”, in McCarthy , T. (Ed.), Communication and the Evolution of Society , Beacon , Boston, Massachusetts , Vol.  2 No.  5 , pp.  1 - 68 .

Corresponding author

About the author.

Dr. Muneera Muftah is an Associate Professor in the Department of English at the Faculty of Arts, Thamar University, Yemen. She is currently working in the Department of English Language at the College of Languages and Translation, Najran University, KSA. She earned PhD in English Language Studies from Universiti Putra Malaysia, Malaysia. She teaches courses in linguistics, applied linguistics and translation. Her main research interests are in the areas of translation, syntactic and morphological mental representation and development, and vocabulary development in SLA, generative syntax and morphology, discourse studies and second language assessment.

Related articles

All feedback is valuable.

Please share your general feedback

Report an issue or find answers to frequently asked questions

Contact Customer Support

An official website of the United States government

The .gov means it’s official. Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

The site is secure. The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

• Publications
• Account settings

Preview improvements coming to the PMC website in October 2024. Learn More or Try it out now .

• Advanced Search
• Journal List
• v.7(9); 2021 Sep

Evidence-based reading interventions for English language learners: A multilevel meta-analysis

Associated data.

Data included in article/supplementary material/referenced in article.

The number of English Language Learners (ELLs) has been growing worldwide. ELLs are at risk for reading disabilities due to dual difficulties with linguistic and cultural factors. This raises the need for finding practical and efficient reading interventions for ELLs to improve their literacy development and English reading skills. The purpose of this study is to examine the evidence-based reading interventions for English Language Learners to identify the components that create the most effective and efficient interventions. This article reviewed literature published between January 2008 and March 2018 that examined the effectiveness of reading interventions for ELLs. We analyzed the effect sizes of reading intervention programs for ELLs and explored the variables that affect reading interventions using a multilevel meta-analysis. We examined moderator variables such as student-related variables (grades, exceptionality, SES), measurement-related variables (standardization, reliability), intervention-related variables (contents of interventions, intervention types), and implementation-related variables (instructor, group size). The results showed medium effect sizes for interventions targeting basic reading skills for ELLs. Medium-size group interventions and strategy-embedded interventions were more important for ELLs who were at risk for reading disabilities. These findings suggested that we should consider the reading problems of ELLs and apply the Tier 2 approach for ELLs with reading problems.

English language learners, Evidenced-based intervention, Meta-analysis, Reading.

1. Introduction

There is a growing body of literature that recognizes the importance of quality education for learners who study in a language other than their native language ( Estrella et al., 2018 ; Ludwig et al., 2019 ). As cultural, racial, ethnic, and linguistic diversification takes place globally, the number of students studying a second language different from their native language is also increasing worldwide. In the United States, nearly 5 million learners who are not native speakers of English are currently attending public schools, and this figure has increased significantly over the past decade ( NCES, 2016 ). As the number of children whose native language is not English increased, the need for educational support also increased. Furthermore, the implementation of NCLB policy emphasizes the need for quality education for all students included in all schools. Accordingly, NCLB has emerged as a critical policy for learners to study in their second language. In other words, there is an urgent need to ensure that non-native English speakers receive appropriate education due to NCLB, which has not only increased the demand for education but also led to the practice of enhanced education for learners whose English is not their native language.

ELLs (English language learners) refer to the education provided for learners whose native language is not English in English-speaking countries ( National Center for Education Statistics, 2021 ). The education provided to these ELLs is called ESL (English as a second language), ESOL (English to speakers of other languages), EFL (English as a foreign language), and so on. Each term is adopted differently depending on the policy, purpose, and status of operation of the state and/or school district. While a variety of terms have been suggested, this paper uses the term ‘ELLs’ to refer to learners who are not native speakers of English and uses the terms ‘the English education program’ and the ‘ELL program’ to refer to the English education program provided to ELLs.

To ensure quality education, students identified as ELLs can participate in supportive programs to improve their English skills. These ELL programs can be broadly divided into two methods: “pull-out” and “push-in” ( Honigsfeld, 2009 ). In the pull-out program, students are taken to a specific space other than the classroom at regular class time and are separately taught English. In the push-in program, the ELL teacher joins the mainstream ELLs’ classroom and assists them during class time. Through these educational supports, ELLs are required to achieve not only English language improvements addressed in Title III of NCLB but also language art achievements appropriate to their grade level addressed in Title I of NCLB. ELLs are expected to achieve the same level of academic achievement as students of the same grade level, as well as comparable language skills.

A considerable amount of literature has been published on the achievement and learning status of ELLs ( Ludwig, 2017 ; Soland and Sandilos, 2020 ). These studies revealed that despite the intensive, high-quality education support for ELLs, they encounter difficulties learning and academic achievement. The National Reading Achievement Test (NAEP) results show that the achievement gap between non-ELLs and ELLs is steadily expanding in the areas of both mathematics and reading ( Polat et al., 2016 ). Ultimately, ELLs are reported to have the highest risk of dropping out of school ( Sheng et al., 2011 ). These difficulties are not limited to early school age. Fry (2007) reported that the results from a national standardized test of 8th-grade students found that ELLs performed lower than white students in both reading and math. Callahan and Shifrer (2016) analyzed data from a nationally representative educational longitudinal study in 2002 and found that, despite taking into account language, socio-demographic and academic factors, ELLs still have a large gap in high school academic achievement. Additionally, research has suggested that ELLs are less likely to participate in higher education institutions compared to non-ELL counterparts ( Cook, 2015 ; Kanno and Cromley, 2015 ).

Factors found to influence the difficulties of ELLs in learning have been explored in several studies ( Dussling, 2018 ; Thompson and von Gillern, 2020 ; Yousefi and Bria, 2018 ). There are two main reasons for these difficulties. First, ELLs face many challenges in learning a new language by following the academic content required in the school year ( American Youth Policy Forum, 2009 ). Moreover, language is an area that is influenced by sociocultural factors, and learning academic contents such as English language art and math are also influenced by sociocultural elements and different cultural backgrounds, which affects the achievement of ELLs in school ( Chen et al., 2012 ; Orosco, 2010 ). Second, it is reported that the heterogeneity of ELLs makes it challenging to formulate instructional strategies and provide adequate education for them. Due to the heterogeneous traits in the linguistic and cultural aspects of the ELL group, there are limitations in specifying and guiding traits. Therefore, properly reflecting their characteristics is difficult.

The difficulties for ELLs in academic achievement raise the necessity for searching practical and efficient reading interventions for ELLs to improve English language and academic achievement, including ELLs' English language art achievement. These needs and demands led to the conduct of various studies that analyze the difficulties of ELLs. Over the past decade, these studies have provided important information on education for ELLs. The main themes of the studies are difficulties in academic achievement and interventions for ELLs, including reading ( Kirnan et al., 2018 ; Liu and Wang, 2015 ; Roth, 2015 ; Shamir et al., 2018 ; Tam and Heng, 2016 ), writing ( Daugherty, 2015 ; Hong, 2018 ; Lin, 2015 ; nullP ) or both reading and math ( Dearing et al., 2016 ; Shamir et al., 2016 ). The influences of teachers on children's guidance ( Kim, 2017 ; Daniel and Pray, 2017 ; Téllez and Manthey, 2015 ; Wasseell, Hawrylak, Scantlebuty, 2017 ) and the influences of family members ( Johnson and Johnson, 2016 ; Walker, Research on 2017 ) are also examined.

Reading is known to function as an important predictor of success not only in English language art itself but also in overall school life ( Guo et al., 2015 ). This is because reading is conducted throughout the school years, as most of the activities students perform in school are related to reading. Furthermore, reading is considered one of the major fundamental skills in modern society because it has a strong relationship with academic and vocational success beyond school-based learning ( Lesnick et al., 2010 ). In particular, for ELLs, language is one of the innate barriers; thereafter, reading is one of the most common and prominent difficulties in that it is not done in their native language ( Rawian and Mokhtar, 2017 ; Snyder et al., 2017 ). In this respect, several studies have investigated reading for ELLs. These studies explore effective interventions and strategies ( Kirnan et al., 2018 ; Mendoza, 2016 ; Meredith, 2017 ; Reid and Heck, 2017 ) and suggest reading development models or predictors for reading success ( Boyer, 2017 ; Liu and Wang, 2015 ; Rubin, 2016 ). For these individual studies to provide appropriate guidance to field practitioners and desirable suggestions for future research, aggregation of the overall related studies, not only of the individual study, and research reflections based on them are required. Specifically, meta-analysis can be an appropriate research method. Through meta-analysis, we can derive conclusions from previous studies and review them comprehensively. Furthermore, meta-analysis can ultimately contribute to policymakers and decision-makers making appropriate decisions for rational strategies and policymaking.

Although extensive research has been carried out on the difficulties of ELLs and how to support them, a sufficiently comprehensive meta-analysis of these studies has not been carried out. Some studies have focused on specific interventions, such as morphological interventions ( Goodwin and Ahn, 2013 ), peer-mediated learning ( Cole, 2014 ), and video game-based instruction ( Thompson and von Gillern ). Ludwig, Guo, and Georgiou (2019) demonstrated the effectiveness of reading interventions for ELLs. However, they divided reading-related variables into “reading accuracy”, “reading fluency”, and “reading comprehension” and examined the effectiveness of the reading-related attributes in each of the variables. Therefore, the study has limitations for exploring the various aspects of reading and their effectiveness for reading interventions.

Individual studies have their characteristics and significance. However, for individual studies to be more widely adopted in the field and to be a powerful source for future research, it is necessary to analyze these individual studies more comprehensively. Meta-analysis reviews past studies related to the topic by 'integrating' previous studies, analyzes and evaluates them through 'critical analysis', provides implications to the field, and gives rise to intellectual stimulation to future studies by ‘identifying issues’ ( Cooper et al., 2019 ). Through this, meta-analysis can be a useful tool for diagnosing the past where relevant research has been conducted, taking appropriate treatment for the present, and providing intellectual stimulation for future studies.

Therefore, the purposes of this study are to examine evidence-based reading interventions for ELLs presented in the literature to analyze their effects and to identify the actual and specific components for creating the most effective and efficient intervention for ELLs. The findings of this study make a major contribution to research on ELLs by demonstrating the implications for the field and future study.

2.1. Selection of studies

A meta-analysis of peer-reviewed articles on ELL reading interventions published between January 2008 and March 2018 was conducted. According to the general steps of a meta-analysis, data related to reading interventions for English language learners were collected as follows. First, educational and psychological publication databases, such as Google Scholar ( https://scholar.google.co.kr ), ERIC ( https://eric.ed.gov/ ), ELSEVIER ( http://www.elsevier.com ), and Springer ( https://www.springer.com/gp ) were used to find the articles to be analyzed using the search terms “ELLs,” ESL,” “Reading,” “Second language education,” “Effectiveness,” and “Intervention” separately and in combination with each other. We reviewed the results of the web-based search for articles and included all relevant articles on the preliminary list. We selected the final list of the articles to be analyzed by applying inclusion and exclusion criteria to the preliminary list of articles. Studies were included in the final list based on three primary criteria. First, each study should evaluate the effectiveness of a school-based reading intervention using an experimental or quasi-experimental group design. In this process, single case, qualitative, and/or descriptive studies for ELLs were excluded from the analysis. Second, we included all types of reading-related interventions (i.e., phonological awareness, word recognition, reading fluency, vocabulary, and reading comprehension). Third, each study needed to report data in a statistical format to calculate an effect size. Fourth, we only included studies whose subjects were in grades K-12. The preliminary list had 75 articles, but since some of these studies did not meet the inclusion criteria, we excluded them from the final list for analysis. In total, this meta-analysis included 28 studies with 234 effect sizes (see Figure 1 ).

Prisma flow diagram.

2.2. Data analysis

2.2.1. coding procedure.

To identify the relevant components of the evidence-based reading interventions for ELLs, we developed an extensive coding document. Our interest was in synthesizing the effect sizes and finding the variables that affect the effectiveness of reading interventions for ELLs. The code sheet was made based on a code sheet used in Vaughn et al. (2003) and Wanzek et al. (2010) . All studies were coded for the following: (a) study characteristics, including general information about the study, (b) student-related variables, (c) intervention-related variables, (d) implementation-related variables, (e) measurement-related variables, and (f) quantitative data for the calculation of effect sizes.

Within the study characteristics category, we coded the researchers’ names, publication year, and title from each study to identify the general information about each study. For the student-related variables, mean age, grade level(s), number of participants, number of males, number of females, sampling method, exceptionality type (reading ability level), identification criteria in case of learning disabilities, race/ethnicity, and SES were coded. We divided grade level(s) into lower elementary (K-2), upper elementary (3–5), and secondary (6–12). When students with learning disabilities participated in the study, we coded the identification criteria reported in the study. For race/ethnicity, we coded white, Hispanic, black, Asian, and others. Within intervention-related variables, we coded for the title of the intervention, the key instructional components of the intervention, the type of intervention, and the reading components of the intervention. The reading components coded were phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, reading comprehension, listening comprehension, and others. If an intervention contained multiple reading components, all reading components included in the intervention were coded. Fourth, within implementation-related variables, we coded group size, duration of the intervention (weeks), the total number of sessions, frequency of sessions per week, length of each session (minutes), personnel who provided the intervention (i.e., teacher, researchers, other), and the setting. Fifth, in measurement-related variables, we coded the title of the measurement, reliability coefficient, validity coefficient, type of measurement, type of reliability, and type of validity. We also coded quantitative data such as the pre- and posttest means, the pre- and posttest standard deviations, and the number of participants in the pre- and posttests for both the treatment and control groups. These coding variables are defined in Table 1 . The research background and sample information are in Appendix 1 .

Table 1

Coding variables.

2.2.2. Coding reliability

The included articles were coded according to the coding procedure described above. Two researchers coded each study separately and reached 91% agreement. Afterward, the researchers reviewed and discussed the differences to resolve the initial disagreements.

2.2.3. Data analysis

First, we calculated 234 effect sizes from the interventions included in the 28 studies. The average effect size was calculated using Cohen's d formula. In addition, we conducted a two-level meta-analysis through multilevel hierarchical linear modeling (HLM) using the HLM 6.0 interactive mode statistical program to analyze the computed effect sizes and find the predictors that affect the effect sizes of reading interventions. HLM is appropriate to quantitatively obtain both overall summary statistics and quantification of the variability in the effectiveness of interventions across studies as a means for accessing the generalizability of findings. Moreover, HLM easily incorporates the overall mean effect size using the unconditional model, and HLM is useful to explain variability in the effectiveness of interventions between studies in the conditional model. The aim of the current study is to provide a broad overview of interventions for ELLs. To achieve this aim, we conducted an unconditional model for overall mean effect size and conducted a conditional model to identify factors that have an impact on the strength of effect sizes. In regard to variables related to the effectiveness of interventions, we conducted a conditional model with student-related, measurement-related, intervention-related, and implementation-related variables. In the case of quantitative meta-analyses, it is assumed that observations are independent of one another ( How and de Leeuw, 2003 ). However, this assumption is usually not applied in social studies if observations are clustered within larger groups ( Bowman, 2003 ) because each effect size within a study might not be homogeneous ( Beretvas and Pastor, 2003 ). Thus, a two-level multilevel meta-analysis using a mixed-effect model was employed because multiple effect sizes are provided within a single education study. To calculate effect size (ES) estimates using Cohen's d, we use the following equation [1]:

The pooled standard deviation, SD pooled , is defined as

In HLM, the unconditional model can be implemented to identify the overall effect size across all estimates and to test for homogeneity. If an assumption of homogeneity is rejected by an insignificant chi-square coefficient in the unconditional model, this means that there are differences within and/or between studies. This assumption must go to the next step to find moderators that influence effect sizes. This step is called a level two model or a conditional model. A conditional model is conducted to investigate the extent of the influence of the included variables.

The level one model (unconditional model) was expressed as [3], and the level two model (the conditional model was expressed as [4].

In equation (3) , δ j represents the mean effect size value for study j, and e j is the within-study error term assumed to be theoretically normally distributed with a mean of 0 and a variance of V j . In the level two model equation [4], γ 0 represents the overall mean effect size for the population, and u j represents the sampling variability between studies presumed to be normally distributed with a mean of 0 and a variance τ .

Regarding publication bias, we looked at the funnel plot with the 'funnel()' command of the metafor R package ( Viechtbauer, 2010 ), and to verify this more statistically, we used the dmetar R package ( Harrer et al., 2019 ). Egger's regression test ( Egger et al., 1997 ) was conducted using the 'eggers.test()' command to review publication bias. Egger's regression analysis showed that there was a significant publication error (t = 3.977, 95% CI [0.89–2.54], p < .001). To correct this, a trim-and-fill technique ( Duval and Tweedie, 2000 ) was used. As a result, the total effect size corrected for publication bias was also calculated. The funnel plot is shown in [ Figure 2 ].

Funnel plot.

We analyzed 28 studies to identify influential variables that count for reading interventions for ELLs. Before performing the multilevel meta-analysis, the effect size of 28 studies was analyzed by traditional meta-analysis. The forest plots for the individual effect sizes of 28 studies are shown in Appendix 2. We present our findings with our research questions as an organizational framework. First, we showed an unconditional model for finding the overall mean effect size. Then, we described the variables that influenced the effect size of reading interventions for ELLs using a conditional model.

3.1. Unconditional model

An unconditional model of the meta-analysis was tested first. In the analysis, restricted maximum likelihood estimation was used. This analysis was conducted to confirm the overall mean effect size and to examine the variability among all samples. The results are shown in Table 2 .

Table 2

Results of the unconditional model analysis.

∗∗∗ p < 0.001, df: degree of freedom.

The intercept coefficient in the fixed model is the overall mean effect size from 234 effect sizes. This means that the effect of reading intervention for English language learners is medium based on Cohen's d. Cohen's d is generally interpreted as small d = 0.2, medium d = 0.5 and large d = 0.8. The variance component indicates the variability among samples. The estimate was 0.589 and remained significant (χ 2 = 1245.90, p < . 001). This statistical significance means that moderator analysis with dominant predictors in a model is required to explore the source of variability.

3.2. Conditional model

Moderator analysis using the conditional model was expected to identify factors that have an impact on the strength of effect sizes. In this study, the moderator analysis was administered by nine critical variable categories: students’ grade, exceptionality, SES, reading area, standardized test, test reliability, intervention type, instructor, and group size. Variables in each category were coded by dummy coding. Dummy coding was used to identify the difference in dependent variables between the categories of independent variables. For example, we used four dummy variables to capture the five dimensions. The parameter estimates capture the differences in effect sizes between the groups that are coded 1 and a reference group that is coded 0. From a mathematical perspective, it does not matter which categorical variable is used as the referenced group ( Frey, 2018 ). We labeled one variable in each category as a reference group to make the interpretation of the results easier. We used an asterisk mark to denote the reference group for each category; if a word has an asterisk next to it, this indicates that it is the reference group for that category.

• 1) Student-related variables

The results of the conditional meta-analysis for students' grade variables are presented in Table 3 . In Table 3 , the significant coefficients mean that mean effect sizes are significantly larger for studies in reference conditions. For student grades, upper elementary students showed significantly larger mean effect sizes than secondary students (2.720, p = 0.000), but preschool students showed significantly lower mean effect sizes than secondary students (-0.103, p = 0.019). The Q statistic was significant for students’ grades ( Q = 27.20, p < 0.001) (see Table 4 ).

Table 3

Results of the moderator analysis for student grade.

df: degree of freedom.

Table 4

Results of the moderator analysis for exceptionality.

For the student-related variables, students with low achievement showed significantly larger mean effect sizes scores than general students (0.707, p = 0.001). However, there was no significant difference between students with low achievement and general students. The Q statistic was significant for students’ exceptionality ( Q = 0.0278, p < 0.001).

Table 5 shows that low and low-middle SES was not significantly different from students with no information about SES (0.055, p = 0.666). Moreover, students with middle and upper SES did not have significantly smaller effect sizes than students with nonresponse (-0.379, p = 0.444). The Q statistic was significant for students’ SES ( Q = 68.50, p < 0.001).

Table 5

Results of the moderator analysis for SES.

• 2) Measurement-related variables

Table 6 shows the results of the moderator analysis for measurement types. The coefficient for the standardized measurement-related variable was not significant. The Q statistic was significant for the standardization of measurement tools ( Q = 5.28, p < 0.001).

Table 6

Results of the moderator analysis for standardization of measurement tools.

Table 7 shows the results of the moderator analysis for the reliability of the measurement tools. The coefficient for the measurement reliability-related variable was significant (0.409, p = 0.003), which means that the effect sizes of measurements that reported reliability (ES = 0.770) were significantly larger than the effect sizes of measurements that had information about reliability (ES = 0.361). The Q statistic was significant for the reliability of the measurement tools ( Q = 5.82, p < 0.001) (see Table 8 ).

Table 7

Results of the moderator analysis for reliability.

Table 8

Results of the moderator analysis for content of the intervention.

• 3) Intervention-related variables

The content of the intervention was divided into phonological awareness, reading fluency, vocabulary, reading comprehension, listening comprehension, and other areas. Studies measured other areas that functioned as a reference group. For the measurement area, all reading areas were significantly larger than other areas. Reading fluency (1.150, p = 0.001), reading comprehension (0.971, p = 0.000) and listening comprehension (0.834, p = 0.002) were significantly larger than those in the other areas. However, phonological awareness and vocabulary were significantly larger than other areas but lower than reading fluency, reading comprehension, and listening comprehension (0.528, p = 0.013; 0.442, p = 0.000). The Q statistic was significant for the content of the intervention ( Q = 24.005, p < 0.001).

For intervention types, strategy instruction, peer tutoring, and computer-based learning were compared to other methods, which were fixed as a reference group. Table 9 shows that strategy instruction was significantly larger than other methods in mean effect sizes (0.523, p = 0.001). However, studies that applied peer tutoring and computer-based learning showed lower than other methods, but these differences were not statistically significant (-0.113, p = 0.736; -0114, p = 0.743). The Q statistic was significant for intervention types ( Q = 73.343, p < 0.001).

Table 9

Results of the moderator analysis for intervention types.

• 4) Implementation-related variables

For instructor-related variables, other instructor-delivered instructions were assigned as a reference group. Table 10 shows that the teacher and researcher groups showed significantly larger than the other instructors. Moreover, the teacher group showed larger than the researcher group (0.909, p = 0.000). The Q statistic was significant for instructor-related variables ( Q = 14.024, p < 0.001).

Table 10

Results of the moderator analysis for instructor.

For group size, mixed groups were fixed as a reference group. Group size variables were divided into a small group (1 or more and 5 or less), a middle group (6 or more and 15 or less), and a large group or class size (16 or more). Table 11 shows that the middle group (6 or more and 15 or less) and the small group (1 or more and 5 or less) were significantly larger than the mixed group (0.881, p = 0.000; 0.451, p = 0.006). However, the difference between the large group and the mixed group was not significant (0.120, p = 0.434). The Q statistic was significant for group size variables ( Q = 17.756, p < 0.001).

Table 11

Results of the moderator analysis for group size.

4. Discussion

The purpose of this meta-analysis was to explore the effects of reading interventions for ELLs and to identify research-based characteristics of effective reading interventions for enhancing their reading ability. To achieve this goal, this study tried to determine the answers to two research questions. What is the estimated mean effect size of reading interventions for ELLs in K-12? To what extent do student-, intervention-, implementation-, and measurement-related variables have effects on improving the reading ability of ELLs in K-12? Therefore, our study was limited to recent K-12 intervention studies published between January 2008 and March 2018 that included phonological awareness, fluency, vocabulary, reading comprehension, and listening comprehension as intervention components and outcome measures. A total of 28 studies were identified and analyzed. To inquiry the two main research questions, a two-level meta-analysis was employed in this study. For the first research question, the unconditional model of HLM was conducted to investigate the mean effect size of reading interventions for ELLs. The conditional model of HLM was conducted to determine which variables have significant effects on reading interventions for ELLs. Below, we briefly summarized the results of this study and described the significant factors that seem to influence intervention effectiveness. These findings could provide a better understanding of ELLs and support implications for the development of reading interventions for ELLs.

4.1. Effectiveness of reading interventions for ELLs

The first primary finding from this meta-analysis is that ELLs can improve their reading ability when provided appropriate reading interventions. Our findings indicated that the overall mean effect size of reading interventions of ELLs yielded an effect size of 0.653, which indicates a medium level of effect. From this result, we can conclude that the appropriate reading interventions generally have impacts on reading outcomes for ELLs in K-12. This is consistent with prior syntheses reporting positive effects of reading interventions for ELLs ( Vaughn et al., 2006 ; Abraham, 2008 ).

Effect size information is important to understand the real effects of the intervention. Therefore, this finding indicated that supplementary reading interventions for ELLs will be developed and implemented. This finding also showed that states are required to develop a set of high-quality reading interventions for ELLs. Language interventions for ELLs have become one of the most important issues in the U.S. Increasing numbers of children in U.S. schools have come from homes in which English is not the primary language spoken. NCES (2016) showed that 4.9 million students, or 9.6% of public school students, were identified as ELLs, which was higher than the 3.8 million students, or 8.1%, identified in 2000 ( NCES, 2016 ). While many students of immigrant families succeed in their academic areas, too many do not. Some ELLs lag far behind native English speakers in the school because of the strong effect of language factors on the instruction or assessment. Although English is not their native language, ELLs should learn educational content in English. This leads to huge inequity in public schools. Thus, improving the English language and literacy skills of ELLs is a major concern for educational policymakers. This finding can support practitioners’ efforts and investments in developing appropriate language interventions for ELLs.

4.2. The effects of moderating variables

The second primary finding of this meta-analysis relates to four variable categories: student-, intervention-, implementation-, and measurement-related variables. Effective instruction cannot be designed by considering one factor. The quality of instruction is the product of many factors, including class size, the type of instructions, and other resources. This finding showed which factors affected the effectiveness of reading interventions. Specifically, we found that the variables that proved to have significant effects on reading outcomes of ELLs were as follows: upper elementary students, reliable measurement tools, reading and listening comprehension-related interventions, strategy instruction, and the middle group consisting of 6 or more and 15 or less. Teachers and practitioners in the field may choose to adopt these findings into their practices. ELL teachers may design their instruction as strategy-embedded instruction in middle-sized groups.

We found that grades accounted for significant variability in an intervention's effectiveness. Specifically, we found that reading interventions were substantially more effective when used with upper elementary students than secondary students. This means that the magnitude of an intervention's effectiveness changed depending on when ELLs received reading interventions. Specifically, the larger effect sizes on upper elementary students than secondary schools showed the importance of early interventions to improve ELLs' language abilities. Students who experience early reading difficulty often continue to experience failure in later grades. ELLs, or students whose primary language is other than English and are learning English as a second language, often experience particular challenges in developing reading skills in the early grades. According to Kieffer (2010) , substantial proportions of ELLs and native English speakers showed reading difficulties that emerged in the upper elementary and middle school grades even though they succeeded in learning to read in the primary grades.

Regarding students’ English proficiency and academic achievement, there was no statistically significant difference between students with low achievement and general students. Given the heterogeneity of the English language learner population, interventions that may be effective for one group of English language learners may not be effective with others ( August and Shanahan, 2006 ). This result is similar to the results achieved by Lovett et al. (2008) . Lovett et al. (2008) showed that there were no differences between ELLs and their peers who spoke English as a first language in reading intervention outcomes or growth intervention. This finding suggests that systematic and explicit reading interventions are effective for readers regardless of their primary language.

For students' socioeconomic status (SES), there was no significant difference between the low-middle group and the nonresponse group. However, we cannot find that students' SES is critical for implementing reading interventions. Low SES is known to increase the risk of reading difficulties because of the limited access to a variety of resources that support reading development and academic achievement ( Kieffer, 2010 ). Many ELLs attend schools with high percentages of students living in poverty ( Vaughn et al., 2009 ). These schools are less likely to have adequate funds and resources and to provide appropriate support for academic achievement ( Donovan and Cross, 2002 ). Snow, Burns and Griffin (1998) highlighted multiple and complex factors that contribute to poor reading outcomes in school, including a lack of qualified teachers and students who come from poverty. Although this study cannot determine the relationship between the effectiveness of reading interventions and the SES of students, more studies are needed. In addition, these results related to students’ characteristics showed that practitioners and teachers can consider for whom to implement some interventions. Researchers should provide a greater specification of the student samples because this information will be particularly critical for English language learners.

Although many of the studies measured a variety of outcomes across all areas of reading, interventions that focused on improving reading comprehension and listening comprehension obtained better effects than other reading outcomes. This result is similar to those discussed in previous findings ( Wanzek and Roberts, 2012 ; Carrier, 2003 ).

With regard to effective intervention types, the findings indicated that strategy instruction was statistically significant for improving the reading skills of ELLs. However, computer-based interventions, which are frequently used for reading instruction for ELLs in recent years, showed lower effect sizes than mixed interventions. Strategy instructions are known as one of the effective reading interventions for ELLs ( Proctor et al., 2007 ; Begeny et al., 2012 ; Olson and Land, 2007 ; Vaughn et al., 2006 ). These strategies included activating background knowledge, clarifying vocabulary meaning, and expressing visuals and gestures for understanding after reading. Some studies have shown that computer-based interventions are effective for ELLs ( White and Gillard, 2011 ; Macaruso and Rodman, 2011 ), but this study does not. Therefore, there is little agreement in the research literature on how to effectively teach reading to ELLs ( Gersten and Baker, 2000 ). Continued research efforts must specify how best to provide intervention for ELLs.

With respect to the implementation of the intervention, teachers and researchers as instructors would produce stronger effects than other instructors. In this study, multiple studies showed that various instructors taught ELLs, including teachers, graduate students, and researchers. The professional development of instructors is more important than that of those who taught ELLs. This finding is consistent with Richards-Tutor et al. (2016) . They also did not find differences between researcher-delivered interventions and school personnel-delivered interventions. Continuing professional development should build on the preservice education of teachers, strengthen teaching skills, increase teacher knowledge of the reading process, and facilitate the integration of newer research on reading into the teaching practices of classroom teachers ( Snow et al., 1998 ). Overall, professional development is the key factor in strengthening the reading skills of ELLs.

This study showed that medium-sized groups of 6 or more and 15 or less had larger effect sizes than the mixed groups. In addition, the medium-sized group showed a larger effect size than the small group of 5 or less. This finding showed that a multi-tiered reading system should be needed in the general classroom. This finding is linked to the fact that the reaction to intervention (RTI) approach is more effective for ELLs. Linan-Thompson et al. (2007) pointed out that RTI offers a promising alternative for reducing the disproportionate representation of culturally and linguistically diverse students in special education by identifying students at risk early and providing preventive instruction to accelerate progress. Regarding interventions for ELLs who are struggling with or at risk for reading difficulties, Ross and Begeny (2011) compared the effectiveness between small group interventions and implementing the intervention in a 1/1 context for ELLs. They showed that nearly all students benefitted from the 1/1 intervention, and some students benefitted from the small group intervention. This finding is commensurate with a previous study investigating the comparative differences between group sizes and suggests research-based support for the introduction of the RTI approach.

However, most implementation-related variables, including duration of intervention, the total number of sessions, frequency per week, length of each session, settings, and instructor, did not have any significant effect on the reading ability of ELLs. That is, ELLs are able to achieve their reading improvement regardless of the duration of intervention, where they received the reading intervention, and who taught them. This finding is similar to those discussed by Snyder et al. (2017) . They also synthesized the related interventions for ELLs and showed that the length of intervention did not seem to be directly associated with overall effect sizes for reading outcomes. This finding is also the same as recent research on intervention duration with native English speakers ( Wanzek et al., 2013 ). Wanzek and colleagues examined the relationship between student outcomes and hours of intervention in their meta-analysis. The findings showed no significant differences in student outcomes based on the number of intervention hours. Elbaum et al. (2000) stated that the intensity of the interventions is most important for effectiveness. Our results somewhat support these researchers’ opinions, but we cannot be certain that a brief intervention would have the same overall effect on reading outcomes as a year-long intervention. Thus, we should consider the intervention intensity, such as student attendance at the sessions, with the duration of the intervention.

4.3. Implications for practice and for research

The most effective and efficient education refers to education that is made up in the right ways, that includes proper content, and that is delivered on time so that the students can benefit the most. To implement this, research to identify a particular framework based on the synthesis of research results through meta-analysis, such as this study, must be conducted. Furthermore, the implications based on the results must be deeply considered. In this respect, important implications for the practice and research of practitioners, researchers, and policymakers on enhancing reading competence for ELLs of this study are as follows.

First, reading interventions for ELLs are expected to be the most efficient when conducted on a medium-sized group of 6–15 students. This indicates that implementing reading interventions for ELLs requires a specially designed group-scale configuration rather than simply a class-wide or one-to-one configuration. Second, the implementation of reading interventions for ELLs is most effective when conducted for older elementary school students. This is in contrast to Morgan and Sideridis (2006) , who demonstrated the characteristics of students with learning disabilities using multilevel meta-analysis and showed that age groups were irrelevant in the effect size of reading interventions for students with learning disabilities. Therefore, it can be seen that the ELLs group, unlike the learning disability group, the students of which have reading difficulty due to their disabilities, is in the normal development process but has reading difficulty due to linguistic differences. Accordingly, it can be seen that the senior year of elementary school, in which a student has been exposed to the academic environment for a sufficiently long time and language is sufficiently developed, is the appropriate time for learning English for ELLs. Third, effective reading interventions for ELLs should be performed with a strategy-embedded instruction program. This is based on the fact that strategic instructions are effective for vocabulary or concepts in unfamiliar languages ( Carlo et al., 2005 ; Chaaya and Ghosn, 2010 ).

The above implications require the implementation of Tier 2 interventions for reading interventions for ELLs in practice. In Tier 2 interventions, students can participate in more intensive learning through specially designed interventions based on their personal needs ( Ortiz et al., 2011 ). In other words, in policymaking and administrative decision-making, intensive education programs for ELLs who have been exposed to the academic environment for a certain period but still have reading difficulties, including having achievements that fall short of the expected level, are needed.

Considering further applications, these findings could guide practitioners and policymakers to develop effective evidence-based reading programs or policies. The significant variables in this study can be considered to develop new programs for ELLs.

Declarations

Author contribution statement.

All authors listed have significantly contributed to the development and the writing of this article.

Funding statement

This work was supported by the Ministry of Education of the Republic of Korea and the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2020S1A3A2A02103411).

Data availability statement

Declaration of interests statement.

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Additional information

No additional information is available for this paper.

Appendix A. Supplementary data

The following is the supplementary data related to this article:

• Abraham L.B. Computer-mediated glosses in second language reading comprehension and vocabulary learning: a meta-analysis. Comput. Assist. Lang. Learn. 2008; 21 (3):199–226. [ Google Scholar ]
• August D., Shanahan T. In: Developing literacy in second-language learners: Report of the National Literacy Panel on Language Minority Children and Youth. August D., Shanahan T., editors. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; Mahwah, NJ: 2006. Synthesis: instruction and professional development; pp. 351–364. [ Google Scholar ]
• Begeny J.C., Ross S.G., Greene D.J., Mitchell R.C., Whitehouse M.H. Effects of the Helping Early Literacy with Practice Strategies (HELPS) reading fluency program with Latino English language learners: a preliminary evaluation. J. Behav. Educ. 2012; 21 (2):134–149. [ Google Scholar ]
• Beretvas S.N., Pastor D.A. Using mixed-effects models in reliability generalization studies. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 2003; 63 (1):75–95. [ Google Scholar ]
• Bowman N.A. Effect sizes and statistical methods for meta-analysis in higher education. Res. High. Educ. 2003; 53 :375–382. [ Google Scholar ]
• Boyer K. The Relationship Between Vocabulary and Reading Comprehension in Third Grade Students Who Are English Language Learners and Reading Below Grade Level. 2017. (Masters Thesis) [ Google Scholar ]
• Carlo M.S., August D., Snow C.E. Sustained vocabulary-learning strategy instruction for English-language learners. Teach. Learn. Vocabul.: Bring. Res. Pract. 2005:137–153. [ Google Scholar ]
• Carrier K.A. Improving high school English language learners' second language listening through strategy instruction. Biling. Res. J. 2003; 27 (3):383–408. [ Google Scholar ]
• Chaaya D., Ghosn I.K. Supporting young second language learners reading through guided reading and strategy instruction in a second grade classroom in Lebanon. Educ. Res. Rev. 2010; 5 (6):329–337. [ Google Scholar ]
• Chen X., Ramirez G., Luo Y.C., Geva E., Ku Y.M. Comparing vocabulary development in Spanish-and Chinese-speaking ELLs: the effects of metalinguistic and sociocultural factors. Read. Writ. 2012; 25 (8):1991–2020. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cole M.W. Speaking to read: meta-analysis of peer-mediated learning for English language learners. J. Lit. Res. 2014; 46 (3):358–382. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cooper H., Hedges L.V., Valentine J.C., editors. The Handbook of Research Synthesis and Meta-Analysis. Russell Sage Foundation; 2019. [ Google Scholar ]
• Daniel S.M., Pray L. Learning to teach English language learners: a study of elementary school teachers’ sense-making in an ELL endorsement program. Tesol Q. 2017; 51 (4):787–819. [ Google Scholar ]
• Daugherty J.L. 2015. Assessment of ELL Written Language Progress in Designated ESL Noncredit Courses at the Community College Level. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dearing E., Walsh M.E., Sibley E., Lee-St. John T., Foley C., Raczek A.E. Can community and school-based supports improve the achievement of first-generation immigrant children attending high-poverty schools? Child Dev. 2016; 87 (3):883–897. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Donovan M.S., Cross C.T. National Academies Press; Washington, DC: 2002. Minority Students in Special and Gifted Education. 2101 Constitution Ave., NW, Lockbox 285, 20055. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dussling T.M. Examining the effectiveness of a supplemental reading intervention on the early literacy skills of English language learners. Liter. Res. Instr. 2018; 57 (3):276–284. [ Google Scholar ]
• Duval S., Tweedie R. Trim and fill: a simple funnel-plot–based method of testing and adjusting for publication bias in meta-analysis. Biometrics. 2000; 56 (2):455–463. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Egger M., Smith G.D., Schneider M., Minder C. Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. Bmj. 1997; 315 (7109):629–634. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Elbaum B., Vaughn S., Tejero Hughes M., Watson Moody S. How effective are one-to-one tutoring programs in reading for elementary students at risk for reading failure? A meta-analysis of the intervention research. J. Educ. Psychol. 2020; 92 (4):605–619. [ Google Scholar ]
• Estrella G., Au J., Jaeggi S.M., Collins P. Is inquiry science instruction effective for English language learners? A meta-analytic review. AERA Open. 2018; 4 (2) 2332858418767402. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Frey B.B. Sage Publications; 2018. The SAGE Encyclopedia of Educational Research, Measurement, and Evaluation. [ Google Scholar ]
• Gersten R., Baker S. What we know about effective instructional practices for English-language learners. Except. Child. 2000; 66 (4):454–470. [ Google Scholar ]
• Guo Y., Sun S., Breit-Smith A., Morrison F.J., Connor C.M. Behavioral engagement and reading achievement in elementary-school-age children: a longitudinal cross-lagged analysis. J. Educ. Psychol. 2015; 107 (2):332–347. [ Google Scholar ]
• Goodwin A.P., Ahn S. A meta-analysis of morphological interventions in English: effects on literacy outcomes for school-age children. Sci. Stud. Read. 2013; 17 (4):257–285. [ Google Scholar ]
• Harrer M., Cuijpers P., Furukawa T.A., Ebert D.D. Doing meta-analysis with R: A hands-On guide. from. 2019. https://bookdown.org/MathiasHarrer/Doing_Meta_Analysis_in_R/ [ Google Scholar ]
• Hong H. Exploring the role of intertextuality in promoting young ELL children’s poetry writing and learning: a discourse analytic approach. Classr. Discourse. 2018; 9 (2):166–182. [ Google Scholar ]
• Honigsfeld A. ELL programs: not ‘one size fits all’ Kappa Delta Pi Rec. 2009; 45 (4):166–171. [ Google Scholar ]
• How J.J., de Leeuw E.D. In: Multilevel Modeling: Methodological Advances, Issues, and Applications. Reise S.P., Duan N., editors. Lawrence Erlbaum; Mahwah, NJ: 2003. Multilevle model for meta-analysis; pp. 90–111. [ Google Scholar ]
• Johnson E.J., Johnson A.B. Enhancing academic investment through home-school connections and building on ELL students' scholastic funds of knowledge. J. Lang. Literacy Educ. 2016; 12 (1):104–121. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kieffer M.J. Socioeconomic status, English proficiency, and late-emerging reading difficulties. Educ. Res. 2010; 39 (6):484–486. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kim K. Global Conference on Education and Research (GLOCER 2017) 2017. May). Influence of ELL instructor’s culturally responsive attitude on newly arrived adolescent ELL students’ academic achievement; pp. 239–242. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kirnan J., Ventresco N.E., Gardner T. The impact of a therapy dog program on children’s reading: follow-up and extension to ELL students. Early Child. Educ. J. 2018; 46 (1):103–116. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lesnick J., Goerge R., Smithgall C., Gwynne J. Chapin Hall at the University of Chicago; Chicago, IL: 2010. Reading on Grade Level in Third Grade: How Is it Related to High School Performance and College Enrollment. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lin S.M. A study of ELL students' writing difficulties: a call for culturally, linguistically, and psychologically responsive teaching. Coll. Student J. 2015; 49 (2):237–250. [ Google Scholar ]
• Linan-Thompson S., Cirino P.T., Vaughn S. Determining English language learners' response to intervention: questions and some answers. Learn. Disabil. Q. 2007; 30 (3):185–195. [ Google Scholar ]
• Liu S., Wang J. Reading cooperatively or independently? Study on ELL student reading development. Read. Matrix: Int. Online J. 2015; 15 (1):102–120. [ Google Scholar ]
• Lovett M.W., De Palma M., Frijters J., Steinbach K., Temple M., Benson N., Lacerenza L. Interventions for reading difficulties: a comparison of response to intervention by ELL and EFL struggling readers. J. Learn. Disabil. 2008; 41 (4):333–352. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Ludwig C. University of Alberta; Canada: 2017. The Effects of Reading Interventions on the Word-Reading Performance of English Language Learners: A Meta-Analysis (Unpublished Master’s Thesis) [ Google Scholar ]
• Ludwig C., Guo K., Georgiou G.K. Are reading interventions for English language learners effective? A meta-analysis. J. Learn. Disabil. 2019; 52 (3):220–231. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Macaruso P., Rodman A. Benefits of computer-assisted instruction to support reading acquisition in English language learners. Biling. Res. J. 2011; 34 (3):301–315. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mendoza S. Reading strategies to support home-to-school connections used by teachers of English language learners. J. English Lang. Teach. 2016; 6 (4):33–38. [ Google Scholar ]
• Meredith D.C. Trevecca Nazarene University; 2017. Relationships Among Utilization of an Online Differentiated Reading Program, ELL Student Literacy Outcomes, and Teacher Attitudes. [ Google Scholar ]
• Morgan P.L., Sideridis G.D. Contrasting the effectiveness of fluency interventions for students with or at risk for learning disabilities: a multilevel random coefficient modeling meta-analysis. Learn. Disabil. Res. Pract. 2006; 21 (4):191–210. [ Google Scholar ]
• National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) 2021. English Language Learners in Public Schools. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/cgf Retrieved from. [ Google Scholar ]
• Olson C.B., Land R. A cognitive strategies approach to reading and writing instruction for English language learners in secondary school. Res. Teach. Engl. 2007:269–303. [ Google Scholar ]
• Orosco M.J. A sociocultural examination of response to intervention with Latino English language learners. Theory Into Pract. 2010; 49 (4):265–272. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ortiz A.A., Robertson P.M., Wilkinson C.Y., Liu Y.J., McGhee B.D., Kushner M.I. The role of bilingual education teachers in preventing inappropriate referrals of ELLs to special education: implications for response to intervention. Biling. Res. J. 2011; 34 (3):316–333. [ Google Scholar ]
• Pang Y. Empowering ELL students to improve writing skills through inquiry-based learning. N. Engl. Read. Assoc. J. 2016; 51 (2):75–79. [ Google Scholar ]
• Polat N., Zarecky-Hodge A., Schreiber J.B. Academic growth trajectories of ELLs in NAEP data: The case of fourth-and eighth-grade ELLs and non-ELLs on mathematics and reading tests. J. Educ. Res. 2016; 109 (5):541–553. [ Google Scholar ]
• Proctor C.P., Dalton B., Grisham D.L. Scaffolding English language learners and struggling readers in a universal literacy environment with embedded strategy instruction and vocabulary support. J. Literacy Res. 2007; 39 (1):71–93. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rawian R.M., Mokhtar A.A. ESL reading accuracy: the inside story. Soc. Sci. 2017; 12 (7):1242–1249. [ Google Scholar ]
• Reid T., Heck R.H. Exploring reading achievement differences between elementary school students receiving and not receiving English language services. AERA Online Paper Repositor. 2017 [ Google Scholar ]
• Richards-Tutor C., Baker D.L., Gersten R., Baker S.K., Smith J.M. The effectiveness of reading interventions for English learners: a research synthesis. Except. Child. 2016; 82 (2):144–169. [ Google Scholar ]
• Ross S.G., Begeny J.C. Improving Latino, English language learners' reading fluency: the effects of small-group and one-on-one intervention. Psychol. Sch. 2011; 48 (6):604–618. [ Google Scholar ]
• Roth A. Northwest Missouri State University; United States: 2015. Does Buddy Reading Improve Students' Oral Reading Fluency? Unpublished Doctoral dissertation. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rubin D.I. Growth in oral reading fluency of Spanish ELL students with learning disabilities. Interv. Sch. Clin. 2016; 52 (1):34–38. [ Google Scholar ]
• Shamir H., Feehan K., Yoder E. EdMedia+ Innovate Learning. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE); 2016. June). Using technology to improve reading and math scores for the digital native; pp. 1425–1434. [ Google Scholar ]
• Shamir H., Feehan K., Yoder E., Pocklington D. MANAGEMENT AND MARKETING (MAC-EMM 2018); 2018. Can CAI Improve Reading Achievement in Young ELL Students? ECONOMICS; p. 229. [ Google Scholar ]
• Sheng Z., Sheng Y., Anderson C.J. Dropping out of school among ELL students: implications to schools and teacher education. Clear. House. 2011; 84 (3):98–103. [ Google Scholar ]
• Snow C.E., Burns S.M., Griffin P. Predictors of success and failure in reading. Prevent. Read. Difficul. Young Child. 1998:100–134. [ Google Scholar ]
• Snyder E., Witmer S.E., Schmitt H. English language learners and reading instruction: a review of the literature. Prev. Sch. Fail.: Alter. Educ. Child. Youth. 2017; 61 (2):136–145. [ Google Scholar ]
• Soland J., Sandilos L.E. English language learners, self-efficacy, and the achievement gap: understanding the relationship between academic and social-emotional growth. J. Educ. Stud. Placed A. T. Risk. 2020:1–25. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tam K.Y., Heng M.A. Using explicit fluency training to improve the reading comprehension of second grade Chinese immigrant students. Mod. J. Lang. Teach Methods. 2016; 6 (5):17. [ Google Scholar ]
• Téllez K., Manthey G. Teachers’ perceptions of effective school-wide programs and strategies for English language learners. Learn. Environ. Res. 2015; 18 (1):111–127. [ Google Scholar ]
• Thompson C.G., von Gillern S. Video-game based instruction for vocabulary acquisition with English language learners: a Bayesian meta-analysis. Educ. Res. Rev. 2020; 30 :100332. [ Google Scholar ]
• Vaughn S., Kim A., Sloan C.V.M., Hughes M.T., Elbaum B., Sridhar D. Social skills interventions for young children with disabilities: a synthesis of group design studies. Remedial Spec. Educ. 2003; 24 :2–15. [ Google Scholar ]
• Vaughn S., Martinez L.R., Linan-Thompson S., Reutebuch C.K., Carlson C.D., Francis D.J. Enhancing social studies vocabulary and comprehension for seventh-grade English language learners: findings from two experimental studies. J. Res. Educ. Effect. 2009; 2 (4):297–324. [ Google Scholar ]
• Vaughn S., Mathes P., Linan-Thompson S., Cirino P., Carlson C., Pollard-Durodola S., Francis D. Effectiveness of an English intervention for first-grade English language learners at risk for reading problems. Elem. Sch. J. 2006; 107 (2):153–180. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Viechtbauer W. Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package. J. Stat. Softw. 2010; 36 (3):1–48. [ Google Scholar ]
• Walker S.A. Chicago State University; 2017. Exploration of ELL Parent Involvement Measured by Epstein's Overlapping Spheres of Influence. Doctoral dissertation. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wanzek J., Roberts G. Reading interventions with varying instructional emphases for fourth graders with reading difficulties. Learn. Disabil. Q. 2012; 35 (2):90–101. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wanzek J., Wexler J., Vaughn S., Ciullo S. Reading interventions for struggling readers in the upper elementary grades: a synthesis of 20 years of research. Read. Writ. 2010; 23 (8):889–912. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Wanzek J., Vaughn S., Scammacca N.K., Metz K., Murray C.S., Roberts G., Danielson L. Extensive reading interventions for students with reading difficulties after grade 3. Rev. Educ. Res. 2013; 83 (2):163–195. [ Google Scholar ]
• Wassell B.A., Hawrylak M.F., Scantlebury K. Barriers, resources, frustrations, and empathy: teachers’ expectations for family involvement for Latino/a ELL students in urban STEM classrooms. Urban Educ. 2017; 52 (10):1233–1254. [ Google Scholar ]
• White E.L., Gillard S. Technology-based literacy instruction for English language learners. J. Coll. Teach. Learn. 2011; 8 (6):1–5. [ Google Scholar ]
• Yousefi M.H., Biria R. The effectiveness of L2 vocabulary instruction: a meta-analysis. Asian-Pacific J. Second Fore. Lang. Educ. 2018; 3 (1):1–19. [ Google Scholar ]

References for studies included in the meta-analysis

• Amendum S.J., Bratsch-Hines M., Vernon-Feagans L. Investigating the efficacy of a web-based early reading and professional development intervention for young English learners. Read. Res. Q. 2018; 53 (2):155–174. [ Google Scholar ]
• American Youth Policy Forum. (2009). Issue brief Moving English language learners to college and career readiness. Retrieved November 22,2009, from: www.aypf.org/documents/ELLIssueBrief
• Callahan R.M., Shifrer D. Equitable access for secondary English learner students: course taking as evidence of EL program effectiveness. Educ. Admin. Q. 2016; 52 (3):463–496. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Cho H., Brutt-Griffler J. Integrated reading and writing: a case of Korean English language learners. Read. Foreign Lang. 2015; 27 (2):242. [ Google Scholar ]
• Chow B.W.Y., McBride-Chang C., Cheung H. Parent–child reading in English as a second language: effects on language and literacy development of Chinese kindergarteners. J. Res. Read. 2010; 33 (3):284–301. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cruz de Quiros A.M., Lara-Alecio R., Tong F., Irby B.J. The effect of a structured story reading intervention, story retelling and higher order thinking for English language and literacy acquisition. J. Res. Read. 2012; 35 (1):87–113. [ Google Scholar ]
• Cook A.L. Exploring the role of school counselors. J. Sch. Couns. 2015; 13 (9):1–33. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dabarera C., Renandya W.A., Zhang L.J. The impact of metacognitive scaffolding and monitoring on reading comprehension. System. 2014; 42 :462–473. [ Google Scholar ]
• Dockrell J.E., Stuart M., King D. Supporting early oral language skills for English language learners in inner city preschool provision. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 2010; 80 (4):497–515. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Filippini A.L., Gerber M.M., Leafstedt J.M. A vocabulary-added reading intervention for English learners at-risk of reading difficulties. Int. J. Spec. Educ. 2012; 27 (3):14–26. [ Google Scholar ]
• Fry R. How far behind in math and reading are English language learners? Pew Hispanic Center; Washington, DC: 2007. [ Google Scholar ]
• Jamaludin K.A., Alias N., Mohd Khir R.J., DeWitt D., Kenayathula H.B. The effectiveness of synthetic phonics in the development of early reading skills among struggling young ESL readers. Sch. Effect. Sch. Improv. 2016; 27 (3):455–470. [ Google Scholar ]
• Kanno Y., Cromley J. English language learners’ pathways to four-year colleges. Teachers College Record. 2015; 117 (12):1–44. [ Google Scholar ]
• Mancilla-Martinez J. Word meanings matter: cultivating English vocabulary knowledge in fifth-grade Spanish-speaking language minority learners. Tesol Q. 2010; 44 (4):669–699. [ Google Scholar ]
• McMaster K.L., Kung S.H., Han I., Cao M. Peer-assisted learning strategies: a “Tier 1” approach to promoting English learners' response to intervention. Except. Child. 2008; 74 (2):194–214. [ Google Scholar ]
• Olivier A.M., Anthonissen C., Southwood F. Literacy development of English language learners: the outcomes of an intervention programme in grade R. S. Afr. J. Commun. Disord. 2010; 57 (1):58–65. [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]
• Pollard-Durodola S.D., Gonzalez J.E., Saenz L., Resendez N., Kwok O., Zhu L., Davis H. The effects of content-enriched shared book reading versus vocabulary-only discussions on the vocabulary outcomes of preschool dual language learners. Early Educ. Dev. 2018; 29 (2):245–265. [ Google Scholar ]
• Proctor C.P., Dalton B., Uccelli P., Biancarosa G., Mo E., Snow C., Neugebauer S. Improving comprehension online: effects of deep vocabulary instruction with bilingual and monolingual fifth graders. Read. Writ. 2011; 24 (5):517–544. [ Google Scholar ]
• Rodríguez C.D., Filler J., Higgins K. Using primary language support via computer to improve reading comprehension skills of first-grade English language learners. Comput. Sch. 2012; 29 (3):253–267. [ Google Scholar ]
• Silverman R., Hines S. The effects of multimedia-enhanced instruction on the vocabulary of English-language learners and non-English-language learners in pre-kindergarten through second grade. J. Educ. Psychol. 2009; 101 (2):305–314. [ Google Scholar ]
• Slavin R.E., Madden N., Calderón M., Chamberlain A., Hennessy M. Reading and language outcomes of a multiyear randomized evaluation of transitional bilingual education. Educ. Eval. Pol. Anal. 2011; 33 (1):47–58. [ Google Scholar ]
• Solari E.J., Gerber M.M. Early comprehension instruction for Spanish-speaking English language learners: teaching text-level reading skills while maintaining effects on word-level skills. Learn. Disabil. Res. Pract. 2008; 23 (4):155–168. [ Google Scholar ]
• Spycher P. Learning academic language through science in two linguistically diverse kindergarten classes. Elem. Sch. J. 2009; 109 (4):359–379. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tong F., Irby B.J., Lara-Alecio R., Koch J. Integrating literacy and science for English language learners: from learning-to-read to reading-to-learn. J. Educ. Res. 2014; 107 (5):410–426. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tong F., Irby B.J., Lara-Alecio R., Mathes P.G. English and Spanish acquisition by Hispanic second graders in developmental bilingual programs: a 3-year longitudinal randomized study. Hisp. J. Behav. Sci. 2008; 30 (4):500–529. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tong F., Irby B.J., Lara-Alecio R., Yoon M., Mathes P.G. Hispanic English learners' responses to longitudinal English instructional intervention and the effect of gender: a multilevel analysis. Elem. Sch. J. 2010; 110 (4):542–566. [ Google Scholar ]
• Tong F., Lara-Alecio R., Irby B.J., Mathes P.G. The effects of an instructional intervention on dual language development among first-grade Hispanic English-learning boys and girls: a two-year longitudinal study. J. Educ. Res. 2011; 104 (2):87–99. [ Google Scholar ]
• Townsend D., Collins P. Academic vocabulary and middle school English learners: an intervention study. Read. Writ. 2009; 22 (9):993–1019. [ Google Scholar ]
• Vadasy P.F., Sanders E.A. Efficacy of supplemental phonics-based instruction for low-skilled kindergarteners in the context of language minority status and classroom phonics instruction. J. Educ. Psychol. 2010; 102 (4):786–803. [ Google Scholar ]
• Vadasy P.F., Sanders E.A. Efficacy of supplemental phonics-based instruction for low-skilled first graders: how language minority status and pretest characteristics moderate treatment response. Sci. Stud. Read. 2011; 15 (6):471–497. [ Google Scholar ]
• Van Staden A. Reading in a second language: considering the 'simple view of reading' as a foundation to support ESL readers in Lesotho, Southern Africa. Per Linguam: J. Lang. Learn. 2016; 32 (1):21–40. [ Google Scholar ]
• Yeung S.S., Siegel L.S., Chan C.K. Effects of a phonological awareness program on English reading and spelling among Hong Kong Chinese ESL children. Read. Writ. 2013; 26 (5):681–704. [ PMC free article ] [ PubMed ] [ Google Scholar ]

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

The effect of language learning strategies on proficiency, attitudes and school achievement.

• Institute of Education, University of Szeged, Szeged, Hungary

This study examines language learning strategy (LLS) use in connexion with foreign language attitude, proficiency and general school achievement among lower secondary students in Years 5 and 8 ( n = 868) in Hungary. An adapted version of the Strategies Inventory for Language Learning questionnaire was used for data collection. The results showed that Hungarian students mainly engage in metacognitive strategies in both years. Differences between more and less proficient language learners’ strategy use have also been found. With regard to the effect of LLS on foreign language attitude, the foreign language mark and school achievement, path analysis indicated a good fit in both years. The metacognitive, social and memory strategies primarily influenced foreign language attitudes and marks in Year 5. The metacognitive strategies had a slight impact on school achievement as well as on foreign language marks. We demonstrated the dominant effect of metacognitive strategies and the low effect of memory strategies in Year 8. In addition, metacognitive strategies also influenced foreign language marks. The effect of foreign language marks on school achievement was also remarkable. There was a strong impact on the children’s attitudes through these variables.

Introduction

In recent decades, a number of studies have focused on foreign language learning, with the emphasis often having been placed on language learning strategies (LLS; Wong and Nunan, 2011 ; Oxford, 2016 ). Several studies have confirmed that these strategies aid students in becoming more effective learners inside the classroom and foster more efficient development of students’ mastery of the target language after leaving school ( Wong and Nunan, 2011 ). However, less is known about the structure and relationship between LLS, foreign language attitude, the foreign language mark and general school achievement (GA). Recent studies have mainly dealt with LLS among university students and upper secondary students, with only a few investigations having been conducted among lower secondary students. In the present study, we aim to examine young Hungarian students’ LLS use and its connexion to foreign language attitude, the foreign language mark and school achievement at the beginning and end of lower secondary school. We believe that it adds value to the article that we have investigated a young age group, as the beginning period of language learning can establish the success of the entire process. Another advantage of our research is that we analysed the whole language learning process in connexion with several other factors to represent the complexity of the language learning process.

Theoretical Background

Studies on LLS in recent decades have identified a large number of strategies which are employed by English as a foreign/second language (EFL/ESL) learners and several strategy categorisation patterns have also been established. The most frequently used taxonomy was developed by Oxford (1990) . She identified three direct and three indirect strategy types. Direct strategies are specific means of language use: memory, cognitive and compensatory (or compensation) strategies. Indirect strategies, such as metacognitive, affective and social strategies, support LLS indirectly. Recently, Oxford revisited her strategy categories and developed a model with four different strategy categories: cognitive, affective and sociocultural-interactive as well as a master category of “metastrategies.” Metastrategies comprise metacognitive, meta-affective and meta-sociocultural-interactive strategies ( Griffith and Oxford, 2014 ; Oxford, 2016 ). However, she did not elaborate on this strategy classification, and thus our study relied on her original taxonomy.

Various studies have focused on LLS use and aimed to identify the strategies most frequently employed by language learners ( Chamot, 2004 ; Magogwe and Oliver, 2007 ; Wu, 2008 ; Chen, 2009 ; Al-Qahtani, 2013 ; Charoento, 2016 ; Alhaysony, 2017 ; Dawadi, 2017 ). Overall, it can be concluded that the most commonly used LLS in these studies were metacognitive, compensation and cognitive strategies. However, Chamot (2004) pointed out that different strategy preferences were reported by students in different cultural contexts. Chinese and Singaporean students reported a higher level preference for social strategies and lower use of affective strategies than European students.

Some studies have dealt with the implementation of the SILL with a focus on school-aged students ( Magogwe and Oliver, 2007 ; Chen, 2009 , 2014 ; Gunning and Oxford, 2014 ; Platsidou and Kantaridou, 2014 ; Pfenninger and Singleton, 2017 ). The overall conclusion of these studies has been that young learners mostly used social, affective and compensation strategies. The use of memory strategies was relatively low ( Doró and Habók, 2013 ). The attitudes of learners at this age toward language learning are particularly important since they can greatly determine motivation, learning outcomes and later success in language learning ( Platsidou and Kantaridou, 2014 ; Platsidou and Sipitanou, 2014 ).

As the purpose of investigating LLS is to foster learning processes and improve language level, research projects often deal with LLS use in relation to language learning proficiency ( Khaldieh, 2000 ; Magogwe and Oliver, 2007 ; Wu, 2008 ; Chen, 2009 ; Liu, 2010 ; Al-Qahtani, 2013 ; Platsidou and Kantaridou, 2014 ; Charoento, 2016 ; Rao, 2016 ). The notion of proficiency has been defined and involved in analysis in a multitude of ways by various researchers. Charoento (2016) involved self-ratings, Wu (2008) used the results from language proficiency and achievement tests, Magogwe and Oliver (2007) incorporated language course grades into their analysis of their results. Most studies have shown a positive relationship between LLS and proficiency, but the direction of their connexion was often different. Some researchers have stressed that strategy use was mainly specified by proficiency. More proficient students engaged in LLS more frequently and also employed a broader range of strategies overall compared to less proficient students ( Khaldieh, 2000 ; Wu, 2008 ; Rao, 2016 ). Al-Qahtani (2013) and Charoento (2016) demonstrated that successful students mainly used cognitive strategies, while Wu (2008) emphasised significant utilisation of cognitive, metacognitive and social strategies among more proficient university students. Chen (2009) pointed to the use of fewer communication strategies among proficient learners, but noted that they employed them more efficiently than less proficient learners. In addition, Magogwe and Oliver (2007) also established that the basic difference in LLS use between proficient and less proficient learners was that more successful students not only used certain LLS significantly more often, but were also able to select the most adequate strategies depending on the goal of their task.

Some studies have dealt with the effect of LLS use on language proficiency. Both Liu (2010) and Platsidou and Kantaridou (2014) pointed out that learning strategy influences language use and that it plays a significant role in anticipating perceived language performance. Wu (2008) noted that cognitive strategies have the most dominant influence on proficiency. Rao (2016) found that students’ English proficiency significantly affected their learning strategy use and also observed that high-level students avail themselves of more strategies more frequently than low-level students.

Another essential area of LLS research is the study of strategy use in relation to affective variables, such as attitude and motivation ( Shang, 2010 ; Jabbari and Golkar, 2014 ; Platsidou and Kantaridou, 2014 ). Most of these studies have found that learners with a positive attitude employed LLS more frequently compared to learners with a negative attitude. Platsidou and Kantaridou (2014) reported that attitudes toward second language learning influence both direct and indirect strategy uses and that changing learners’ attitudes toward language learning can thus foster their strategy practises. Jabbari and Golkar (2014) established that learners with a positive attitude employ cognitive, compensation, metacognitive and social strategies more frequently.

It can be concluded that LLS use has been studied extensively in recent decades. Most research has found that LLS cannot be analysed separately; it must be examined in relation to certain other factors, among which foreign language attitudes and proficiency play a central role ( Griffiths and Incecay, 2016 ). However, most previous studies preferred university students or adults to primary or secondary school-aged students. Furthermore, a limited amount of research has investigated the relationship of LLS with attitude toward foreign language learning and the foreign language mark. There has also been a dearth of scholarship on how language proficiency and school achievement are determined by LLS use and attitude. Our study aims to fill this gap and attempts to present a comprehensive view of the relationship between LLS use and language attitude and between proficiency and general school achievement by focusing on school children at the beginning and end of lower secondary school. Our specific research question we focus on in this paper is the following:

What are the lower secondary school children’s strategy use preferences and how these are connected with their foreign language attitude, proficiency and general school achievement? Based on the relevant literature we assume that students of this age mainly employ indirect strategies, such as affective, metacognitive and social strategies and these have a significant impact on their foreign language learning attitude, proficiency and general school achievement.

Materials and Methods

Participants.

The participants in the present study were lower secondary students (11- and 14-year-olds) in Hungary ( n Year5 = 450, n Year8 = 418). Participation in the study was voluntary both for schools and students. This study was carried out in accordance with the recommendations of the University of Szeged, the Hungarian law and the municipalities that maintain the schools. The IRB of the Doctoral School (University of Szeged) specifically approved this research project. The agreements are documented and stored in written form in the schools.

Our target group generally started learning a foreign language in Year 4. As one portion of our sample have been learning a foreign language for at least four years, they must have experience of how they learn language. In Hungary, the primary level of education is composed of the elementary and lower secondary school levels; hence, the transition occurs with relatively few major changes, and children have the same language teacher during these school levels. While the foreign language teacher does not change, the other school subjects are taught by specialist teachers as of Year 5. Learning difficulties and differences among children grow considerably from the beginning of lower secondary school; hence, diagnosing language learning attitude is particularly essential.

Instruments

The Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL, Oxford, 1990 ) was administered to investigate the children’s LLS use. The SILL is a standardised measurement tool, and it is applicable to various foreign languages. The complex questionnaire is clustered into six strategy fields: (1) memory (9 items); (2) cognitive (14 items); (3) compensation (6 items); (4) metacognitive (9 items); (5) affective (6 items); and (6) social strategies (6 items). The participants were asked to respond to each statement on a five-point Likert scale. The answers ranged from ‘1 = never or almost never true of me’ to ‘5 = always or almost always true of me.’ The reported internal consistency reliabilities of the questionnaires ranged between 0.91 and 0.94 (Cronbach’s alpha) ( Oxford and Burry-Stock, 1995 ; Ardasheva and Tretter, 2013 ). The questionnaire was conducted in Hungarian to eliminate differences in English knowledge and make it suitable for the language levels in these age groups. The reliability of the Hungarian version was confirmed in previous research ( Doró and Habók, 2013 ). In addition, the children were asked to self-report their foreign language attitude, foreign language mark (indicating students’ foreign language knowledge) and general school achievement (grade point average, which includes students’ achievement in all subjects) on a five-point scale. In Hungarian schools, the different proficiency levels are rated on a five-point scale: 1 is the weakest mark, and 5 is the most excellent.

Design and Procedure

Quantitative research design was employed through online survey methodology. The SILL questionnaire was administered via the eDia online testing platform, which was developed by the Centre for Research on Learning and Instruction for assessing Year 1–6 children’s foreign language knowledge and attitudes. One school lesson was provided for data collection; however, the children needed approximately 20 min to hand in their ratings. Both the children and teachers are familiar with this system because the online platform has been in use since 2009.

Data were handled confidentially during the testing procedure; the children used an identification code provided by research administrators. The researchers were only able to see the codes, and only the teachers were able to identify their students with the codes. All the instructions were in the online questionnaire, so the children were able to answer the questions individually. The teachers were also requested to report the children’s questions, remarks and difficulties during testing. Finally, the teachers reported no misunderstandings or problematic items during data collection.

The data analyses were twofold. First, SPSS for Microsoft Windows 20.0 was employed for classical test analysis, which included an estimation of frequencies, means and standard deviations. The significance of differences among the variables was determined by ANOVA analysis. Second, path analysis was managed by the SPSS AMOS v20 software package to analyse the effect of strategy use on the variables under observation ( Arbuckle, 2008 ). The model fit was indicated by the Tucker–Lewis index (TLI), the normed fit index (NFI), the comparative fit index (CFI) and the root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) ( Byrne, 2010 ; Kline, 2015 ).

Descriptive Analysis

General strategy uses among lower secondary school children.

The mean scores and standard deviations showed moderate LLS use, with the use of metacognitive, affective and social strategies being the highest in Year 5 (Table 1 ). Compensatory strategies were employed significantly the lowest. In Year 8, besides metacognitive and social strategies, cognitive strategies were relied on the most. Metacognitive strategy use was similarly high in both age groups. Significant differences were found between the age groups in memory, compensation and affective strategies ( p ≤ 0.01). While the use of affective strategies was relatively high in Year 5, it was the least frequently employed in Year 8.

TABLE 1. The strategy use results for the sample.

Differences in Strategy Use among Students with Different Proficiency Levels

One of our goals was to identify students’ LLS use preferences according to their proficiency levels. To implement this goal, we grouped the children into categories according to their proficiency, which was derived from their foreign language marks.

We combined the foreign language marks for those children who were evaluated with a 1 or a 2. These children showed a very low knowledge level and demonstrated a large number of difficulties and misunderstandings in foreign language learning. The next group was formed of children who were assessed at mark 3. This mark indicated an average knowledge level with gaps. Children who were evaluated with a mark 4 had fewer significant deficits. Children who received a mark 5 were the highest performers in school. Tables 2 , 3 summarise our results on strategy use according to foreign language marks. The number of children is also indicated according to each category.

TABLE 2. Means of strategy users according to their foreign language mark in Year 5.

TABLE 3. Means of strategy users according to their foreign language mark in Year 8.

Multivariate Analyses

The relationships between lls and foreign language attitude, lls and foreign language marks, and lls and general school achievement.

Our results demonstrated that the sample was evaluated at an approximate level of mark 4 ( M Year5 = 3.84, SD Year5 = 1.17; M Year8 = 3.62, SD Year8 = 1.17); however, Year 5 children achieved significantly higher ( p < 0.01). As regards children’s attitudes, we found no significant differences between the years ( M Year5 = 3.53, SD Year5 = 1.35; M Year8 = 3.43, SD Year8 = 1.23; p < 0.05). On the whole, it can be stated that children’s foreign language marks are higher than their attitude toward foreign language. The average school achievement showed significantly higher means than foreign language marks in both years ( M Year5 = 3.82, SD Year5 = 0.87, p < 0.001; M Year8 = 3.62, SD Year8 = 1.17, p < 0.001).

We also examined the correlation between LLS and attitude toward foreign languages, LLS and the foreign language mark, and LLS and general school achievement. We observed the most significant estimates between language learning strategy use and attitude in Year 5 ( r = 0.53–0.20; p < 0.001–0.05). The correlational coefficient between attitude and the foreign language mark was also significant ( r = 0.37; p < 0.001). We noted that children who achieved higher in foreign languages showed a more positive attitude toward them. We also noticed a significantly strong effect for the foreign language mark and strategy use ( r = 0.49–0.13; p < 0.001–0.05).

In Year 8, we found significant ( r Year5 = 0.70–0.12; p < 0.001–0.01; r Year8 = 0.82–0.66; p < 0.001–0.01) relationships between overall strategy use and foreign language marks, attitudes and general school achievement. However, the relationship between affective strategies and school achievement was not significant. We observed that children who use LLS have positive attitudes toward language learning, except for compensation and affective strategies.

The Effect of Language Learning Strategies on Attitude, School Marks and General School Achievement

We analysed the effect of LLS on foreign language attitude, school marks and general achievement using AMOS. We were looking for causalities between questionnaire fields and further variables by constructing a theoretical model on the basis of Oxford’s strategy taxonomy and children’s background data. We hypothesised that strategy factors largely influence children’s attitude toward language learning and through this the other variables. The model we created showed appropriate fit indices for the final model and indicated a good fit to our data in both years (Figures 1 , 2 ).

FIGURE 1. The path model for LLS influence on foreign language mark through foreign language attitude and general school achievement (GA) in Year 5.

FIGURE 2. The path model for LLS influence on foreign language mark through foreign language attitude and general school achievement (GA) in Year 8.

Year 5 : χ 2 (13) = 18,309, p = 0.146; Year 8 : χ 2 (13) = 23,893, p = 0.18. An analysis of the hypothesised path model indicated a comparative fit index (CFI) of 0.998 in Year 5 and 0.994 in Year 8. The RMSEA (root mean squared error of approximation) was also good in both years, 0.030 in Year 5 and.049 in Year 8. Both the Tucker–Lewis index (TLI Year5 = 0.992; TLI Year8 = 0.981) and the normed fit index (NFI Year8 = 0.992; NFI Year8 = 0.989) confirmed that the model we constructed was a good fit to our data.

The main aim of the present study was to investigate our understanding of LLS in a foreign language learning context. Therefore, first, we identified the strategy use preferences in the sample and specified the most and least often used strategies among children with different proficiency levels. Second, we examined the children’s LLS use in connexion with their foreign language attitude, proficiency and general school achievement. Our results confirmed some results from previous studies and also established new relationships among the variables.

Regarding the general strategy use preferences of the sample, the students reported moderate use of the six strategy categories. The use of indirect strategies, more precisely, metacognitive, affective and social strategies, was the highest in Year 5, while metacognitive, cognitive and social strategies were the most frequently employed in Year 8. These findings shed light on the different preferences among the different ages and proficiency levels. While affective strategies play a significant role in Year 5, cognitive strategies become more dominant later. Metacognitive and social strategies remained the most frequently used in both Years. Our result is consistent with those reported by Dawadi (2017) who discovered similar strategy preferences. We can also reinforce Alhaysony’s (2017) results that high school sample did not engage in affective strategies, and Charoento’s (2016) findings about the low use of memory strategies.

We also examined the differences in strategy use among students with different proficiency levels in both Years. In Year 5 the research findings analysis demonstrated significant differences among strategy uses in four areas: the memory, cognitive, metacognitive and social fields. We noted no significant differences among children in compensation and affective strategies. As regards memory strategies, we observed that low-achieving children rarely employed them. Low achievers used cognitive strategies significantly less often than good and high performers. As our results showed, the most excellent learners are also metacognitive strategy users, and they engage in social strategies significantly very often. In Year 8, we observed significant differences in every field among children with different proficiencies. As in Year 5, the use of metacognitive and social strategies was the most frequent among the high-achieving students; however, cognitive strategy use was also relatively high. Charoento (2016) and Rao (2016) reported the same results, so we can confirm his previous research outcomes that high achievers avail themselves of strategies significantly more frequently than low-performing learners.

We also investigated the relationship between LLS and foreign language attitude, LLS and the foreign language mark, and LLS and general school achievement. According to our results, we found that children who prefer foreign language learning reported significantly higher strategy use. As regards foreign language marks, the relationships between different kinds of strategy users and their foreign language marks were low. Children with high proficiency did not necessarily employ each of the strategies at a higher rate. The same result was reached by Chen (2009) . The relationship between affective strategies and school achievement was not significant. We observed that children who use LLS have positive attitudes toward language learning. So our findings partly confirmed previous results reported by Jabbari and Golkar (2014) and Platsidou and Kantaridou (2014) .

Concerning the impact of strategy use on foreign language learning attitudes, proficiency and general school achievement. In Year 5 the effect of the questionnaire fields on foreign language attitude was considerably high; attitudes were strongly influenced by metacognitive strategies, and the effect of social strategies was also high. While memory and cognitive strategies showed positive paths to attitudes, compensation and affective strategies indicated negative effects on attitudes. Foreign language attitudes signified the same effect on foreign language marks as these marks did on general achievement. A lower but significant effect of metacognitive strategies was found on general school achievement in Year 5.

In Year 8, we found similar tendencies. The effect of metacognitive strategies on foreign language attitudes was very high, while that of memory strategies was low. The effect of social strategies was lost in Year 8. The impact of foreign language attitude on the foreign language mark was almost the same as in Year 5, but that of the foreign language mark on general school achievement was twice as high. Shawer (2016) likewise highlighted what our results have also shown: strategy use has a significant effect on general school achievement. Metacognitive strategies also had a direct effect on foreign language marks. On the whole, not only did we observe a strong use of metacognitive strategies, but the effect of metacognitive strategies on attitudes was also dominant in both years. Moreover, metacognitive strategies influenced school achievement in Year 5 and foreign language marks in Year 8.

To sum up, our results demonstrated that like other studies, our Hungarian sample showed significant preferences for metacognitive strategy use. Compensatory strategies were the least frequently preferred in Year 5 and memory strategies were the least common in Year 8, a finding which also reinforced previous research outcomes ( Doró and Habók, 2013 ). We observed significant differences between more and less proficient students in strategy use. In line with other research ( Platsidou and Kantaridou, 2014 ), we conclude that more proficient learners avail themselves of a broader range of strategies than less proficient students and strategy use has a significant effect on foreign language marks.

The research focused on the whole language process in connexion with several other factors among young students. The added value of our research is not only that we discovered relationships between factors required for foreign language learning, but direct and indirect underlying effects have also been brought to light through path analysis. These analyses provide a comprehensive view both of the dominant role of metacognitive strategies and of the foreign language learning process generally.

In spite of its value, the study has certain limitations. First, we employed a self-report instrument for data collection which does not address students’ deeper views on learning. Qualitative methods would make it possible to gain a more detailed understanding of foreign language learning through interviews, including think-aloud procedures and classroom observations. Second, the current research into LLS and proficiency among Hungarian students was conducted with participants from two different years at the lower secondary school level, so generalisation of the results is limited. In addition, our sample was not representative. Further research would be necessary to fully examine the relationship between language learning strategies, language learning attitudes, foreign language proficiency and general achievement among Hungarian students in a variety of years and in a larger sample.

Third, the current research only used two measurement points of proficiency, the foreign language mark and general achievement, which are evaluated by different teachers. In future, we will collect a wider range of language proficiency data, including language proficiency test and interviews. Fourth, a comparison of LLS and general learning strategies would produce a more nuanced overview of students’ strategy use.

Conclusion and Pedagogical Implications

The main purpose of the present study was to ascertain the effect of LLS on other variables, such as foreign language attitude, foreign language proficiency and general school achievement among secondary school children in Hungary at the beginning and end of lower secondary school. In the beginner phase of learning foreign languages, it is important to better understand the relationship between language learning and related factors. Hence, our main objective was to provide a complex overview of these measurement points and to examine how LLS can support children in the first phase of the language learning process.

We used the Hungarian translation of Oxford’s Strategy Inventory for Language Learning questionnaire and supplemented it with the children’s self-reports of their foreign language attitudes and proficiency indicated by their foreign language mark and school achievement. This provided the basis for our research.

Past research has demonstrated that students with more frequent LLS use have better chances to become more proficient language learners. It has been pointed out that students that are more proficient engage in a wider range of strategies and select learning strategies dependent on learning tasks. Thus, teachers are encouraged to introduce a range of strategies for children to be able to select those that are most appropriate to features of their personality and relevant to learning tasks. At this age, introducing LLS is significant, particularly for children with low and average foreign language marks. It would be essential to motivate children to discover a variety of ways to practise their foreign language and find opportunities to read and engage in conversations with others. Children who are able to recognise the significance of language learning and use a broad range of strategies can find new ways and opportunities to practise language and to improve their proficiency. Hence, it would be highly recommended to integrate LLS consciously into foreign language lessons.

Ethics Statement

This study was carried out in accordance with the recommendations of the University of Szeged. According to these recommendations participation in the study was voluntary both for schools and students. The participating schools had consent with the parents in allowing their students’ engagement in the research. According to the Hungarian law, the schools’ responsibility to conduct a written agreement with the parents about their consent to allow their children to take part in researches. The whole process is permitted and coordinated by the school holding municipalities. The agreements are documented and stored in written forms in the schools. The authors declare that data collection and handling strictly adhered to the usual standards of research ethics as approved by the University of Szeged.

Author Contributions

AH and AM substantially contributed to the conception and design of the study, data collection, analysis and interpretation of data for the research. Both have written the manuscript and reviewed all parts of the manuscript. AH and AM have given final approval of the final version to be published. AH and AM agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

The research was founded by the University of Szeged.

Conflict of Interest Statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Alhaysony, M. (2017). Language learning strategies use by Saudi EFL students: the effect of duration of English language study and gender. Theory Pract. Lang. Stud. 7, 18–28. doi: 10.17507/tpls.0701.03

CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Al-Qahtani, M. F. (2013). Relationship between English language, learning strategies, attitudes, motivation, and students’ academic achievement. Educ. Med. J. 5, 19–29. doi: 10.5959/eimj.v5i3.124

PubMed Abstract | CrossRef Full Text | Google Scholar

Arbuckle, J. L. (2008). AMOS (Version 17.0) [Computer Software] . Chicago, IL: SPSS.

Google Scholar

Ardasheva, Y., and Tretter, T. R. (2013). Strategy inventory for language learning–ELL student form: testing for factorial validity. Mod. Lang. J. 97, 474–489. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-4781.2013.12011.x

Byrne, B. M. (2010). Structural Equation Modelling Using AMOS. Basic Concepts, Applications, and Programming , 2nd Edn. New York: Routledge.

Chamot, A. U. (2004). Issues in language learning strategy research and teaching. Electron. J. Foreign Lang. Teachnol. 1, 14–26.

Charoento, M. (2016). Individual learner differences and language learning strategies. Contemp. Educ. Res. J. 7, 57–72.

Chen, M. (2014). Age differences in the use of language learning strategies. Engl. Lang. Teach. 7, 144–151. doi: 10.5539/elt.v7n2p144

Chen, M. L. (2009). Influence of grade level on perceptual learning style preferences and language learning strategies of Taiwanese English as a foreign language learners. Learn. Individ. Dif. 19, 304–308. doi: 10.1016/j.lindif.2009.02.004

Dawadi, S. (2017). Language learning strategies profiles of EFL learners in Nepal. Eur. J. Educ. Soc. Sci. 2, 42–55.

Doró, K., and Habók, A. (2013). Language learning strategies in elementary school: the effect of age and gender in an EFL context. J. Linguist. Lang. Teach. 4, 25–37.

Griffith, C., and Oxford, R. (2014). The twenty-first century landscape of language learning strategies: introduction to this special issue. System 43, 1–10. doi: 10.1016/j.system.2013.12.009

Griffiths, C., and Incecay, G. (2016). “New directions in language learning strategy research: engaging with the complexity of strategy use,” in New Directions in Language Learning Psychology , eds C. Gkonou, D. Tatzl, and S. Mercer (Berlin: Springer), 25–38. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-23491-5_3

Gunning, P., and Oxford, R. L. (2014). Children’s learning strategy use and the effects of strategy instruction on success in learning ESL in Canada. System 43, 82–100. doi: 10.1016/j.system.2013.12.012

Jabbari, M. J., and Golkar, N. (2014). The relationship between EFL learners’ language learning attitudes and language learning strategies. Int. J. Linguist. 6, 161–167. doi: 10.5296/ijl.v6i3.5837

Khaldieh, S. A. (2000). Learning strategies and writing processes of proficient vs. less-proficient learners of Arabic. Foreign Lang. Ann. 33, 522–533. doi: 10.1111/j.1944-9720.2000.tb01996.x

Kline, R. B. (2015). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling , 4th Edn. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Liu, J. (2010). Language learning strategies and its training model. Int. Educ. Stud. 3, 100–104. doi: 10.5539/ies.v3n3p100

Magogwe, J. M., and Oliver, R. (2007). The relationship between language learning strategies, proficiency, age, and self-efficacy beliefs: a study of language learners in Botswana. System 35, 338–352. doi: 10.1016/j.system.2007.01.003

Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language Learning Strategies: What Every Teacher Should Know . Boston, MA: Heinle and Heinle.

Oxford, R. L. (2016). Teaching and Researching Language Learning Strategies: Self-Regulation in Context . New York, NY: Routledge.

Oxford, R. L., and Burry-Stock, J. A. (1995). Assessing the use of language learning strategies worldwide with the ESL/EFL version of the strategy inventory for language learning (SILL). System 23, 1–23. doi: 10.1016/0346-251X(94)00047-A

Pfenninger, S. E., and Singleton, D. (2017). Beyond Age Effects in Instructional L2 Learning: Revisiting the Age Factor . Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. doi: 10.21832/PFENNI7623

Platsidou, M., and Kantaridou, Z. (2014). The role of attitudes and learning strategy use in predicting perceived competence in school-aged foreign language learners. J. Lang. Lit. 5, 253–260. doi: 10.7813/jll.2014/5-3/43

Platsidou, M., and Sipitanou, A. (2014). Exploring relationships with grade level, gender and language proficiency in the foreign language learning strategy use of children and early adolescents. Int. J. Res. Stud. Lang. Learn. 4, 83–96. doi: 10.5861/ijrsll.2014.778

Rao, Z. (2016). Language learning strategies and English proficiency: interpretations from information-processing theory. Lang. Learn. J. 44, 90–106. doi: 10.1080/09571736.2012.733886

Shang, H. F. (2010). Reading strategy use, self-efficacy and EFL reading comprehension. Asian EFL J. 12, 18–42.

Shawer, S. F. (2016). Four language skills performance, academic achievement, and learning strategy use in preservice teacher training programs. TESOL J. 7, 262–303. doi: 10.1002/tesj.202

Wong, L. L. C., and Nunan, D. (2011). The learning styles and strategies of effective language learners. System 39, 144–163. doi: 10.1016/j.system.2011.05.004

Wu, Y. L. (2008). Language learning strategies used by students at different proficiency levels. Asian EFL J. 10, 75–95.

PubMed Abstract | Google Scholar

Keywords : language learning strategy, foreign language attitude, foreign language mark, general school achievement, lower secondary students

Citation: Habók A and Magyar A (2018) The Effect of Language Learning Strategies on Proficiency, Attitudes and School Achievement. Front. Psychol. 8:2358. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02358

Received: 06 July 2017; Accepted: 26 December 2017; Published: 11 January 2018.

Reviewed by:

Copyright © 2018 Habók and Magyar. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) . The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

*Correspondence: Anita Habók, [email protected]

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.