[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-592113-105":59,"doc-detail-592113-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":123,"head_meta":125,"extra_data":127,"updated_unix":129},105,"en","a-comparative-study-of-language-learning-strategy-use-in-an-efl-context-monolingual-korean-and-bilingual-korean-chinese-university-students","A Comparative Study of Language Learning Strategy Use in an EFL Context: Monolingual Korean and Bilingual Korean-Chinese University Students","","A comparative study examines language learning strategy use in an EFL context between two groups of university students: 428 monolingual Korean learners and 420 bilingual Korean-Chinese learners. Using Oxford’s Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL), results show monolinguals report the highest compensation strategy use and the lowest affective strategy use, while bilinguals prefer metacognitive strategies most and memory strategies least. The study links higher strategy use among bilingual Korean-Chinese learners to the positive influence of bilingual context on acquiring English despite less favorable formal education and limited English learning experience.",{"@graph":69,"@context":122},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/a-comparative-study-of-language-learning-strategy-use-in-an-efl-context-monolingual-korean-and-bilingual-korean-chinese-university-students/592113/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/a-comparative-study-of-language-learning-strategy-use-in-an-efl-context-monolingual-korean-and-bilingual-korean-chinese-university-students/592113.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"Grenda","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-29","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":34},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"What framework and tool does the study use to measure language learning strategies?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"The study uses the Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL) developed by Oxford (1990) to examine learners’ language learning behaviors and thought processes.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"How do monolingual Korean and bilingual Korean-Chinese students differ in strategy preferences?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"Monolingual Korean students report using compensation strategies most and affective strategies least. Bilingual Korean-Chinese students report using metacognitive strategies most and memory strategies least.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"Why do the authors argue bilingual students may show higher strategy use?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"Despite a less favorable formal English education environment and less English learning experience, bilingual Korean-Chinese students report higher use of learning strategies, which the study attributes to positive effects of the bilingual context.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":124,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":126,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":128,"site_id":62},592113,1792162432,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":131},{"doc_id":128,"user_id":132,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":34,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":144,"read_time":145,"preview_page_count":4},7971474921005,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_29158cc5080c5b710cf443261637dec0","Asia Pacific Education Review Copyright 2007 by Education Research Institute  \n2007, Vol. 8, No. 1, 71-88.  \nA Comparative Study of Language Learning Strategy Use in an EFL Context: Monolingual Korean and Bilingual Korean-Chinese University Students  \nKyungsim Hong-Nam Alexandra G. Leavell  \nNortheastern State University University of North Texas  \nUSA USA  \nSince language is socially mediated and context dependent, it would be expected that learners’ use of language learning strategies may vary with the environment. Using the Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL)(Oxford, 1990), this study examines the language learning behaviors and thought processes of two geographically and socio-educationally different groups by comparing learning strategy use as reported by 428 monolingual Korean and 420 bilingual Korean-Chinese university students. Monolinguals reported using compensation strategies most and affective strategies least. Bilinguals preferred to use metacognitive strategies most and memory strategies least. Despite a less favorable formal English education environment in the KoreanChinese community and less experience in learning English, bilingual Korean-Chinese reported higher use of learning strategies, which is arguably indicative of the positive effects of the bilingual context in learning a new  \nlanguage.  \nKey words: language learning strategies, Korean, Korean-Chinese, Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL)  \nIntroduction  \nLearners’ use of language learning strategies is one window into the nature of language learning processes for individuals acquiring a new language. According to Oxford (1990) learning strategies are “…specific actions taken by the learner to make learning easier, faster, more enjoyable, more self-directed, more effective, and more transferable to new situations”(p. 8) . She emphasized,“…learning strategies are  \nKyungsim Hong-Nam, Assistant professor in the College of Education at the Northeastern State University; Alexandra G. Leavell, Associate professor in the College of Education at the University of North Texas.  \nCorrespondence concerning this article should be addressed to Curriculum and Instruction, College of Education, Northeastern State University, Tahlequah, OK 74464, USA. e-mail: hong@ [nsuok.edu](nsuok.edu)  \nimportant for language learning because they are tools for active, self-directed involvement” (p.1), making learning strategies a crucial element of the learning process. The effective use of learning strategies is closely related to learner independence and competence, furthermore, studies have found that successful language learners are more likely to engage in active language learning and use more learning strategies than less successful learners (Bialystok, 1981; Chamot & Küpper, 1989; Oxford & Nyikos, 1989; Park, 1997; Peacock & Ho, 2003; Phillips, 1991; Politzer, 1983) .  \nStudies of language learning strategies have shown that their application is related to both individual differences (Ehrman, Leaver, & Oxford, 2003; Skehan, 1991) and the contexts in which learners acquire the language (Garcia, 2005; Parks & Raymond, 2005) . Since language is socially mediated and context dependent, it would follow that learners’use of language learning strategies could vary with the environment. Starting out from this perspective, this study  \nKyungsim Hong-Nam, Alexandra G. Leavell  \nattempts to examine language learning behaviors and thought processes of two geographically, culturally and educationally different groups that share the same mother tongue. The firstgroup is Korean-Chinese students living in the Korean community (Yanbian Autonomous Prefecture) in China where people live in multilingual and multicultural environments. The second group is Korean students living in Korea where monolingualism is more prevalent.  \nHistorical context  \nSince China and Korea agreed to open their doors to each other in 1992, more and more Korean-Chinese students have enrolle","cbCaibzXwV5nmsAv","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaibzXwV5nmsAv","pdf",281597,18,"English","# Introduction\n## Historical context","[{\"question\":\"What framework and tool does the study use to measure language learning strategies?\",\"answer\":\"The study uses the Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL) developed by Oxford (1990) to examine learners’ language learning behaviors and thought processes.\"},{\"question\":\"How do monolingual Korean and bilingual Korean-Chinese students differ in strategy preferences?\",\"answer\":\"Monolingual Korean students report using compensation strategies most and affective strategies least. Bilingual Korean-Chinese students report using metacognitive strategies most and memory strategies least.\"},{\"question\":\"Why do the authors argue bilingual students may show higher strategy use?\",\"answer\":\"Despite a less favorable formal English education environment and less English learning experience, bilingual Korean-Chinese students report higher use of learning strategies, which the study attributes to positive effects of the bilingual context.\"}]","A Comparative Study of Language Learning Strategy Use in an EFL Context: Monolingual Korean and Bilingual Korean-Chinese University Students | PDF",1792073888,45]