Abstract

The present study aimed to compare successful with less successful English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners regarding their cognitive styles and flexibility, together with the learners’ evaluation of their experience of doing an unfamiliar cognitive test. The sample consists of 60 adult EFL learners (30 successful and 30 less successful), both males and females symmetrically. The homogeneity of participants’ age of onset, socio-economic class, and motivation was also considered. The data was analyzed, using Chi-square and Gamma correlation. Overall, it was revealed that analytical, logical reasoning, reflective, and learning were the most prominent cognitive styles among successful learners. They also showed a considerable cognitive flexibility. On the other hand, less successful learners were inclined to the random style, along with a lower cognitive flexibility. With respect to gender groups, it turned out that females in the successful group were significantly inclined to the reflective and logical reasoning styles and less successful females adopted a random style. Finally, no significant result was found concerning the cognitive test evaluation. The findings of this study may contribute to a wider understanding of EFL success and failure from the viewpoint of cognitive preferences.

Highlights

  • The role of cognitive styles, which are partially stable individual differences in preferred ways of information processing (Evans, Cools, & Zarina, 2010), has been investigated by scholars in numerous fields of study, mostly related to psychology, education, and business as large contexts (Zhang, Sternberg, & Rayner, 2012)

  • 60 English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners were recruited for the present study who were selected from an IELTS training center in Tehran

  • We found that less successful EFL learners acted randomly and unsystematically while completing the cognitive test

Read more

Summary

Introduction

The role of cognitive styles, which are partially stable individual differences in preferred ways of information processing (Evans, Cools, & Zarina, 2010), has been investigated by scholars in numerous fields of study, mostly related to psychology, education, and business as large contexts (Zhang, Sternberg, & Rayner, 2012). Many scholars leveled fundamental criticisms at cognitive and learning style measures regarding their validity and reliability and their limited scope (Davies, 2009; Ehrman, 1994; Frisby, Mansson, & Kaufmann, 2014; Marx & Otto, (as cited in Tiedemann, 1989); Michonska-Stadnik, 2013; Norton & Toohey, 2001; O’Leary, Calsyn, & Fauria, 1980; Prinsloo, 2013; Tiedemann, 1989; Williams, 1975; Zelinker, Bentier, & Renan, 1977). Some have highlighted severe problems of questionnaires in that they generally put a limit on participants when answering questions (Murray, 2010)

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call