THE DIFFERENCES OF INDIVIDUAL LEARNERS

AMOY

MARCELINA

Marcelina-amoy@gmail,com

Abstract

This study investigated the differences of individual learner. It was aimed to find out the factors influence individual learner differences and the extent of the factors of individual learner differences influence students’ achievement. Furthermore, in conductiong this study the writer used qualitative research in which case study was employed to collect the data from participants in this study. The students at the sixth grade were the participant of this study. Moreover, classroom observation and questionnaire were the instruments used by the writers in collecting the data. The data obtained from those instruments were anlyzed by the writers. The writers analyzed and interpreted the data from classroom observation and questionnaire qualitatively. Based on the research findings, the writers concluded that there were some factors influence individual learner differences. They were age, aptitude, cognitive style, motivation, learning styles, learning strategies, and personality. In addition, the writers also concluded that the factors of individual differences (age, aptitude, cognitive style, motivation, and personality) influenced students’ achivement.

Keywords : The differences of individual learners, the factors influence individual learner

differences.

I. Introduction

Individual learner differences are one of the aspects in language acquisition. In this

regard, there are some factors that affect to individual differences such as age, aptitude,

cognitive style, motivation, learning styles, learning strategies, and personality were the

factors of individual learner differences (Ellis, 1985, p. 10).

Every learner or student of course different from the others because they are different

individuals. As the result, the differences of the learner should be developed for being a

strenght side in every learner. Therefore, the understanding of the individual learner

differences should be emphasized, therefore it could be encouraged by the teacher to

maximize students’ personality (Bond, 2002, p. 8)

To emphasize, the study conducted y Zhou (2011) entitled “An Exploratory Study of

Learner Differences between Two Major Adult English” showed that there were some

differences found from two major adult English. However, his study just focus of cognitive

differences of the students as the main focus in his study without investigated the other

factors in individual learner differences.

As the result, this study tries to fill that gap by investigating same issue on individual

learners differences. More specifically, this study attempt to find out the factor influence

individual learner differences and the extent the factors of individual learner differences

influence students’ achievement. It is a case study at the elementary school students.

II. Literature review

This study presents the literature review that covers up some points concerning

individual learners’ differences. There are some issues discussed by the writer in this section

in order to support the theory on individual learner differences. In addition, the data also

supports by the factors that influences individual differences. Moreover, the detail literature

review could be seen in the following discussion.

This section began from the statement from Liao (1996, p. 1) who distinguishes the

cognitive factors of second language acquisition: (1) intelligence, (2) aptitude, and (3)

language learning strategies. Furthermore, Lujan and Ortega (2000, p. 45 ) proposes (1) age,

(2) aptitude/intelligence, (3) motivation, (4) learning/cognitive style, and (5) personality. To

emphasize, Skehan (2002, p. 5) argues that in literature four main areas are emphasised when

considering individual differences in second and foreign language learning: (1) language

aptitude, (2) learning style, (3) motivation, and (4) learning strategies. He adds that,

according to Dewaele and Furnham (1999), personality is also of certain importance.

In addition, Bond (2002), in her research on successful language learners, is more

accurate in stating the factors that may aid one’s language learning and draws more detailed

perspective: (1) age, (2) exposure to foreign language in infancy, (3) immersion, (4)

intelligence, (5) personality, (6) attitude and motivation, (7) relationship between first and

target language, (8) sensory style, (9) learning strategies, and (10) other factors (mimicry,

musical ability).

On the other hand, Skehan’s study (2002) entitled “Learner characteristics: factors

affecting the success of L2 acquisition” summarizes opinions of several authors and

concludes that the following factors affect the success of foreign language acquisition: (1)

intelligence, (2) language learning aptitude, (3) personality, (4) motivation and attitude, and

(5) age of acquisition. It is also stated in the article that due to a lack of detailed research in

the area, there is no solid evidence for effect of aptitude, personality and learner beliefs and

preferences. A similar approach can be found in Ellis (1985, p. 10) who claims that “there are

five general factors that contribute to individual learner differences in some depth”: (1) age,

(2) aptitude, (3) cognitive style, (4) motivation, and (5) personality (6). Learning styles and

strategies

Furthermore, Liao (1996) asks whether there really is “such a thing as a gift for

language learning, distinct from general intelligence” (Liao, 1996, p. 9), which implies that

he considers general intelligence (g-factor) one of the most important factors influencing

language acquisition. “The study of individual differences in SLA has received considerable

attention over the years and has shown that there are a number of dimensions of learner

differences which are generally acknowledged to affect the way they learn foreign languages,

how they perform in actual language use and the eventual levels of success they achieve”

(Lujan and Ortega, 2000, p. 1).

From the above overview, several assumptions can be made that within individual

learner differences, there are a number of factors that influence individual learner differences.

Most authors state that age, motivation and attitude, learning style/strategy and

attitude/intelligence are of determinate importance.

According to some sources, personality and cognitive style play an important role,

too. In the following subchapters, the most relevant factors are presented in more detail and

research findings in favour of as well as against their importance in foreign language

acquisition are introduced. These are important as they are considered the key aspects in

acquisition of a foreign language. Individual learner differences influencing foreign language

acquisition have been the subject of many research works (Ellis, 1985; Reilly, 1988; Bond,

2002; Walqui, 2000; Liao, 1996; Skehan, 2002). The following are generally believed to play

a part in influencing foreign language acquisition.

A. Age

The results of research suggest that there is a critical period for foreign language

acquisition. This is supported by proponents of Critical Period Hypothesis, which states that

human beings are optimally suited to learn certain types of behaviour (including

foreign/second language abilities) during a certain age span, and that after this period has

passed, learning such behaviour is difficult or impossible (adapted from “Learner

Characteristics: Factors Affecting the Success of L2 Acquisition”). Johnson and Newport

(1989) state that, in their research (carried out among Chinese and Korean learners who had

learnt English in the US for at least 5 years), accuracy on Grammaticality Judgement Test

(GJT) correlated with the age of arrival for subjects who arrived in the US before puberty;

while accuracy on GJT did not correlate with the age of arrival for subjects who arrived in the

US after puberty. Some research (Bilinguals: Separate Minds, 1999) in neurolinguistics

provides clear evidence for the Critical Period Hypothesis.

It states that the individuals (monitored in the study) who had acquired a second

language as young children utilized the same location of Broca’s area1 for both languages. In

connection with the above, though, DeKeyser (2000) found out what can be considered

contradictory to Johnson and Newport’s findings. He observed that there was strong negative

correlation between age of acquisition and score on the GJT. As far as critical period

hypothesis goes, research has found that different critical periods may apply to different

language skills (Birdsong, 1999). Some researchers suggest that the critical period in its

original conception only concerns pronunciation and native-like accent and that other levels

of the target language need not be involved (Bongaerts, 1999). Moreover (according to the

same source), adult learners can even outperform younger learners in acquisition of second

language grammar.

B. Sex

Although it is fair to argue that males and females are equal human beings, they

demonstrate different features – not just physically; which in most cases is rather obvious, but

also mentally. They are said to perform differently in everyday activities, to think in different

ways or sometimes even to transform a surface structure to different deep structures and to

misunderstand each other in this way.

As the way of thinking is closely related to use of language (be it the first or a foreign

language); if the thinking of the two sexes differs, it is quite predictable that the ways they

learn and acquire languages will be different. Oki (2003, p. 9) states that “according to

several studies, the sex of the students makes a significant difference in learning a second or

foreign language” (Kim 1995, p. 67). Then, Baron (2003, p. 4) in his research found out that

“females have also been shown to have better language ability than males”.

Without any motivation or positive attitude, there can hardly be a successful process

of learning. The question why people learn foreign languages can be put forward. According

to Trigos (1999, p. 34) most people nowadays feel the need to speak a new language for

personal and professional aims. These aims are the following:

1. more employment opportunities;

2. better salary prospects;

3. higher chances for business success;

4. further understanding of someone else’s culture.

According to Thanasoulas (2002, p. 4) “ideally, all learners exhibit an inborn curiosity to

explore the world, so they are likely to find the learning experience per se intrinsically

pleasant. In reality, however, this "curiosity" is vitiated by such inexorable factors as

compulsory school attendance, curriculum content, and grades – most importantly, the

premium placed on them”. Learner’s motivation and needs have always had a central place in

theories of foreign language acquisition.

According to Ellis (1985, p. 118), “motivation and attitudes are important factors, which

help to determine the level of proficiency achieved by different learners.” Savignon (1976, p.

295, according to Ellis, 1985) even declares that “attitude is the single most important factor

in second language learning.”

Among linguists, several types of motivation are distinguished: Brown (1981,

according to Ellis, 1985, p. 192 ) identifies three types of motivation:

1. global motivation, which consists of a general orientation to the goal of learning a

foreign language;

2. situational motivation, which varies according to the situation in which learning

takes place;

3. task motivation, which is the motivation for performing particular learning tasks.

Savignon (1976, p. 204) also differentiate between:

1. integrative motivation – learners wish to identify with the target ethnolinguistic

group (although this is far more significant in second than in foreign language

acquisition).

2. Instrumental motivation – learners study to improve their social status or meet

educational requirements. The author of the article “Learner Characteristics:

Factors affecting the success of L2 Acquisition”, came to the conclusion that the

results showed conflicting evidence about the role of language learner’s attitude

towards success in foreign language learning. Nevertheless, the author states that

even if there was no correlation between attitude and success in the early stages;

there is definitely a correlation in the later stages.

C. Personality

Personality of the learner is another controversial matter being considered a factor

influencing foreign language acquisition. A widely-held belief claims that extroverted

learners learn more rapidly and are more successful than introverted learners. Krashen (1981,

according to Ellis, 1985, p. 120) argues that “an outgoing personality may contribute to

acquisition.” Likewise Rossier (1976, . 89) found out that his subjects’ oral fluency correlated

significantly with extroversion/introversion. However, there are some research results that

contradict the above findings. Naiman et al. (1978, quoted in Ellis, 1985, p. 67) found no

significant relationship between extroversion/introversion and proficiency.

Similarly, Swain and Burnaby (1976) did not find the expected relationship between

the measures of sociability and talkativeness on the one hand and proficiency on the other in

the early stages of acquisition of French as a L2. Similarly, social skills and inhibition are

considered segments of one’s personality possibly influencing foreign language acquisition;

however, research findings about their actual effect are rather controversial.

D. Learning styles and strategies

In the process of learning, be it a foreign language or any other subject matter, certain

ways must be used, so that the result the learner wishes for is achieved. Learning style is a

“general approach to language learning” Burnaby (1992, p. 6). The ways the learner applies

while studying are called learning techniques. If used in combination to develop a plan, they

are called learning strategies.

He emphasize that learning strategies are “specific actions, behaviours, steps, or

techniques students use – often consciously – to improve their progress in apprehending,

internalizing, and using the L2”. “Researchers have identified active strategies commonly

employed by learners which help them learn more effectively (Naimen et al., 1978; Wesche,

1979). These include, for example, repeating silently what is heard, thinking through one's

own answer and comparing the results to the one given, memorising dialogues, identifying

oneself with one's foreign language identity, seeking opportunities for communication in the

target language, and finding ways to widen the scope for social interaction”.

With regard to preferred learning activities, a learning style of an individual can be

identified. According to Straková (2004, p. 18), learning styles are “general approaches we

use to learn a new language. These are the same styles we use in learning other subjects”. The

most general viewpoint differentiates between:

1. analytical (field independent) students who concentrate on grammatical details but

feel less safe in communicative activities. They tend to learn the rules and

principles of a language and do not like improvisation or taking guesses if an

unfamiliar language situation occurs.

2. global (field dependent) students who are more sociable, like interaction and

communication. They are not keen on grammatical rules and often use

compensation strategies2 to avoid blocks in communication.

Based on sensory preference of an individual learner, the following learning styles can be

identified:

1. Visual – students who prefer to use their sight to receive information;

2. Auditory – students who prefer to use their hearing to receive information;

3. Kinaesthetic – students who need active movement and involvement to

4. learn;

5. Tactile – students who like handling objects and use their touch to receive

6. information.

Another classification divides students into innovative, analytical, common sense and

dynamic learners (adapted from Svoboda and Hrehovčík, 2006; Straková, 2004). When

acquiring a foreign language, learning strategies can be of significant importance. According

to Svoboda and Hrehovčík (2006, p. 56) language learning strategies:

1. allow learners to become more self-directed;

2. expand the role of language teachers;

3. are problem-oriented;

4. involve many aspects, not just the cognitive;

5. can be taught;

6. are flexible;

7. are influenced by a variety of factors.

Furthermore, they are “especially important for language learning because they are tools

for active, self-directed involvement, which is essential for developing communicative

competence” (Oxford, 1990:1).

E. Intelligence and aptitude

As far as intelligence as a factor influencing learning in general or foreign language

acquisition is concerned; again, rather controversial results have been found. First of all, there

is no clear evidence whether aptitude and intelligence are separate issues. Ellis (1985, p. 11)

argues that ’aptitude’ is to be contrasted with ’intelligence’, as the first refers to the special

ability involved in language learning and its effects are “measured in terms of proficiency

scores achieved by classroom learners”. ’Intelligence’, on the other hand, refers to the

“general ability that governs how well we master a whole range of skills, linguistic and

nonlinguistic.”

On the other hand, Oller (1980, according to Ellis, 1985, p. 213) states that general

intelligence and ability to use language in language tests is essentially the same. Whether we

are in favour of the first opinion or the latter, most authors believe intelligence is one of the

factors influencing foreign language acquisition. Bogaards (1996, p. 54) states that many

studies have shown the existence of a positive correlation between intelligence and foreign

language learning, but also that this link is relatively weak and subject to significant

variations.

Furthermore, Pimsleur, Mosberg and Morrison (1987) discussed intelligence in connection

with foreign language acquisition. On the basis of 40 articles that they felt were pertinent,

they stated there is a “positive correlation between intelligence and foreign language

achievement. Intelligence, they said, is a significant factor” (Lambert, 1993, p. 2).

According to Gardner’s model (as cited in Norris-Holt, 2000, p. 2) “in a formal setting

intelligence and aptitude play a dominant role in learning.” He also introduces four individual

differences which are believed to be the most influential in second language acquisition.

These are the variables of intelligence, language aptitude, motivation and situational anxiety.

Genesee (1976, as quoted in Ellis, 1985, p. 111) found that “intelligence was strongly related

to the development of academic L2 French language skills (reading, grammar, and

vocabulary), but was in the main unrelated to ratings of oral productive skills by native

speakers.” Ekstrand (1977, according to Ellis, 1985, p. 67 ) found high correlation while

measuring proficiency on tests of reading comprehension, dictation and free writing. There

are some authors who express their opinions on intelligence in connection with learning in

much more general terms.

Barton, Dielman and Cattel (1972) (as quoted in AbiSamra, 2000, p. 6) declare that IQ

together with the personality factor predict achievement in all areas. Nevertheless, there are

some psycholinguists who declare that intelligence and language do not necessarily

demonstrate any positive relationship. Pinker (in press) states that individuals with

catastrophic losses in language do not always perform badly at other aspects of intelligence,

such as those measured on the nonverbal parts of IQ tests.

He also says that there are syndromes showing opposite dissociation, where intact

language coexists with severe retardation. “These cases show that language development

does not depend on fully functioning general intelligence” (Pinker, in press: 4).

According to Gorzelanczyk et al. (1998), in their study, the authors have been looking for

correlates between the parameters of the learning process and various components of

intelligence. Their results surprisingly show that “no significant correlates have been found”

Gorzelanczyk et al. (1998, p. 2).

They also state that memory-related components of intelligence do not play a visibly

more significant role in the learning process than other components. Some authors even add

to the unclearness of the matter, as Spoerl (1939), according to her study using tests,

proclaims that significant correlations between language learning and intelligence have been

found for women; however, none for man. She, thus, suggests there is a presence of diverse

factors. The fact that her results were reached quite a long time ago and, therefore, could have

been influenced by the then differentiation in social position and status of males and females

must be taken into consideration.

The above controversial findings prompted the idea to carry out research with the

intention of finding out whether there is a relationship between English grammar acquisition

and the level of cognitive processes in Slovak learners. Before the actual research is

presented, the most important notions in the area of intelligence are discussed in the

forthcoming chapter.

III. Research questions

Considering the theoretical and empirical issues discussed above, the present study

attempted to provide plausible answers to the following questions:

a) What are the factor influence individual learner differences?

b) To what extent the factors of individual learner differences influence students’

achievement?

IV. Methodology

IV.1 Participants

The participants of this study were the students at the sixth grade consisting 20

students. They were choosen purposively. In addition, the students were taken as the sample

because they were appropriate to be a sample of this study and the students fulfill the

requirements as the sample to be investigated in which the writers investigate individual

learners differences.

4.2. Instruments

In order to find out the factors influence individual learners differences, the writer

used classroom observation in which the focus of classroom observation was the entire

students in teaching-learning process. In this case, Fraenkel et al., (2007, p. 122) state that

observation is “A method of data collection in which the situation of interest is watched and

the relevant facts, actions and behaviors are recorded. In addition, to investigate the extent of

the factors of individual learner differences influence students’ achievement, the writer used

the questionnaire consisting of five items.

4.3.Research procedures

In conducting this study, the writer used some instruments to get the data including

observation and questionnaire. Observation was the first instrument used by the writer to

collect the data. Video recording was used by the writer to record the activities of the students

in order to find out learners individual differences. The subsequent step done by the writer

after recording process was indentified and analyzed the data resulted. Finally, the last step

done by the writer were summarizing and took the earlier conclusion based on the data from

classroom observation.

The next step was administering the questionnaire. It was given to the students to

collect the data. The data taken from the questionnaire were combined with the data taken

from the observation. Then, the writer interpreted the data. Furthermore, the writer also drew

the conclusions.

V. Results of the study

Based on the data collected through classroom observation and questionnaire, the

writers found some data concerning language learner differences. Furthermore, the results of

this study presented by the writer based on each research question. Moreover, in responding

the first research question on the factors influence individual learner differences, the writers

found that the age, aptitude, cognitive style, motivation, learning styles, learning strategies,

and personality were the factors of individual learner differences (Ellis, 1985, p. 10).

In the point of age, the writer found that a students who age 13 years old she more

calm in conducting the teaching-learning process that the others students who are 12 years

old. Furthermore, in the point of aptitude, the writers found that the each student has different

aptitude in the teaching-learning process. The subsequent factors was cognitive style. In this

matter, the writers observed that every students have different cognitive styles. The next

factor of individual learners differences found by the writers was motivation. In this regard,

the writers found that the students who have high motivation in learning English, they

showed positive attitude in which they engage in teaching-learning process emotionally,

behaviourally, and cognitively. In contrast, the students who have lack motivtion in learning

English were not too interest in joining teaching-learning process. Furthermore, learning style

was the next factor influence indivuals learners differences. In this case, the writers found

some kinds of learning styles used by the students inclusing visual, auditory, and kinaesthetic.

It was categorized as Visual because there were some students who prefer to use their sight

to receive information. Then, it was classified as Auditory beause there were some students

who prefer to use their hearing to receive information. And finally, it was classified as

Kinaesthetic because there were some students who need active movement and involvement

to learn. The next point influence individual learner differences was learners strategies. The

writer found some activities done by the students including repeating, silently what they

heard, thinking through one's own answer, and memorising dialogues.Finally, the last point

that influence individual learner differences was personality. The writer observed that the

students who have good personality in learning English, they engaged in the teaching-

learning process emotionally, behaviourally, and cognitively.

Meanwhile, in responding the subsequent research question on the extent of the

factors of individual learner differences influence students’ achievement, the writer found

some data concerning the data investigated from questionnaire. In this matter, the writer

generally concluded that the factors of individual differences including age, aptitude,

cognitive style, motivation, and personality influenced students’ achivement. Moreover, the

detail data from the questionnaire filled by the students could be seen in the following

descriptions.

The first point stated in the questionnaire was about the students’ age and their grade

in the class. In this case, a student who are 13 years old ranked first in the classroom. On the

other hand, the other students who are 12 years old, they were ranked by second, third, and so

on. The second point was about students’ aptitude. In this ase, the writer asked the students

about their aptitude in learning English. Moreover, the students stated that they like watching

English movie, reading the English comic, they like sing English movie, and vocabulary.

They stated that at least their habit or their aptitude help them in learning English.

The next point stated in the questionnaire was the third statement. In this case, the

writer asked whether the students could follow the English lesson well, did the task given

correctly, and cooperated with groups in the classroom or not. In responding this question,

the majority of the students especially a students who are 13 years olds stated that they could

follow the English lesson well, did the task given correctly, and cooperate each other in

groups. Therefore, they stated that they could get high achievment in the classroom.

Furthermore, the next questionnaire item was about motivation. In this case, the writer asked

the students whether they have high motivation or not and its relationship toward their

achievment. Moreover, the data showed that the students who have high motivation in

learning English, they have high position in the rank of students’ achivement and viceversa.

VI. Discussion

This section present the discussion in which the writes discuss some points concerning

the results of this study. In the first point, the writers discuss that this study was similar with

the study conducted by Amir (2010) entitled “The Effect of Individual Differences on

Learners’ Translation Belief in EFL Learning”. His study showed that the factors of

individual differences from the students affect to the students’ translation belief that could be

seen from students’ translated work. In this case, the previous study was similar with this

study in which both of the study investigated the individual differences. However, Amir’s

stdusy was focused o the effect of individual differences toward learners’ translation belief.

However, the effect of individual differences toward students’ achievement was not pointed

out. Therefore this study fills that gap by investigating individual difference with focus on

factors influence individual learner differences and the extent of the factors of individual

learner differences influence students’ achievement.

Furthermore, the subsequen point to be discuss was concerning the results of this study.

In this case, the writer foud that there were some factors influence individual learner

differences including age, aptitude, cognitive style, motivation, learning styles, learning

strategies, and personality. Moreover, those all were relevant with the the factors of

individual learner differences presented by Ellis (1985, p. 10). In addition, the writer also

found that the the factors of individual differences influence students’ achivement that have

been proven by the data collected through classroom observation and questionnaire.

VII. Conclusions

This study investigated the analysis of indivudal learner differences. Moreover, based

on the research questions outlined in the first chapter, the writer drew some conclusions

regarding the research findings.

The first conclusion was about the factors influence individual learner differences.

Based on the reults of this study, the writers concluded that there were some factors influence

individual learner differences. They were age, aptitude, cognitive style, motivation, learning

styles, learning strategies, and personality. The second and the last coclusion was about the

extent of the factors of individual learner differences influence students’ achievement.

Moreover, the writers concluded that the factors of individual differences (age, aptitude,

cognitive style, motivation, and personality) influence students’ achivement.

VIII. REFERENCES

Baron, C. S. (2003). Do sex differences in empathy account for sex differences in language acquisition? Accessed from : http://www.interdisciplines.org/coevolution/papers/7

Brown, D. (1987), Principles of Language Learning & Language Teaching. EnglewoodClifs: Prentice Hall.

Birdsong, D. (1999). Introduction: Whys and why nots of the critical period Hypothesis. In D. Birdsong (ed.), Second language acquisition and the critical period Hypothesis (pp.1-22)

Bond, J. (2000). Learning from the Confucian heritage: So size doesn't matter? International Journal of Educational Research, 29, 723-738.

Bogaards, S. R. (1996), The optimal level of measurement for personality constructs. In: D. M. Buss and N. Cantor (eds.), Personality psychology: Recent trends and emerging direction, pp. 246-260. New York: Springer-Verlag.

Bongarets, T. (1999). Ultimate attainment in foreign language pronunciation: the case of very advanced late foreign language learners. Second language acquisition and the critical period hypothesis (pp. 133-59). Mahwah, Nj: Erlbaun.

Bumaby, M. (1999), Quality of language and purpose of task: Patterns of learners’ language on two oral communication tasks. Language Teaching Research, 3, pp. 185–214.

Dewaele J-M. and Furnham A (1999). Extraversion: the unloved variable in applied linguistic research. Language Learning 43:3

DeKesyer, R. M. (2000). The Robustness of critical period effects in second language acquisition. Studies in second language acquisition, 22, 499-533.

Ekstrand, L 1977. Social and Individual Frame Factors in Second Language Learning: Comparative Aspects. In T. Skutnabb-Kangas (ed.) Papersfrom the First Nordic Conference on Bilingualism. Finland: University of Helsinki.

Genesee, F. 1976. The Role of Intelligence in Second Language Learning,Language Learning 26, 267-80.

Ellis, R. (1985) Understanding Second Language Acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Johnson, J.S. & Newport, E.L. (1989). Critical period effects in second language learning : the influence of maturational state on the acquisition of English as a second language. Cognitive Psychology, 21, 60-99

Liao, D. L. (1996). Ethnocentrism in TESOL: Teacher education and the neglected needs of international TESOL students. ELT Journal, 52 (1), 3-10.

Luján & Ortega, Violante. (2000). The Influence of Situational Factors on the Use of Compensatory Strategies. Working Papers in Language and Linguistics 13: 1-58.

Kim, K.H.S. (1997). Distinct cortical areas associated with native and second languages. Nature, 388, 171-4

Krashen, S. (1985), The Input Hypothesis. London: Longman

Oki, L. K. (2003). The relationship of school year, sex and proficiency on the use of learning strategies in learning English of Korean junior high school students. Accessed from : http://www.asian-efl-journal.com/sept_o3_ok.html

Oxford, R. L., & Ehrman, M. (1993). Second language research on individual differences. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 13, 188-205. doi: 10.1017/S0267190500002464

Pimsleur, P.,L. Mosberg & A. Morrison. 1962. Student Factorsin ForeignLanguage Teaching. Modern Language Journal 46, 160-70.

Rossier, J. (1976), Extroversion-introversion as a significant variable in the learning of oral English as a second language. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Southern California, Los Angeles.

Swain, M. (1993), The output hypothesis: Just speaking and writing aren’t enough. The Canedian Modern Language Review, 50, (1), pp.158-164.

Skehan, P. (1989). Individual differences in second-language learning, London: Edward Arnold.

Straková, N. (2004). Language learning strategy and personality variables: Focusing on extroversion and introversion. IRAL: International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 38(1), 71-81. doi: 10.1515/iral.2000.38.1.71

Svoboda and Hrehovčík, R. (2006). Social psychological perspectives on second language acquisition. In H. Giles & P. W. Robinson (Eds.), Handbook of language and social psychology (pp. 495-517). NY: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Thanasoulas, D. (2002). Motivation and Motivating in EFL Motivation and motivating in the foreign language classroom. Tefl article : TEFL net.

Trigos, R. (1999). The monolingual native speaker : not a norm, but still a necessity. Studies in the linguistics sciences, 27, 113, 46

Walqui, A. (2000): Contextual Factors in Second Language Acquisition, Accessed from : http://www.cal.org/ericcll/digest/0005contextual.html

Zhou, K. (2011). An Exploratory Study of Learner Differences Between English Majors and Non-English Majors in Language Learning. National Research Center for Foreign Language Education, Beijing Foreign Studies University, Beijing 100089, China.