The instructional approaches of the English language learning and teaching as a foreign language in Lao PDR find plenty of factors affecting language proficiency level of students in terms of unsuitability and weakness of the English language curricula. Those have been adopted and appropriated by some academic institutions, teachers English proficiency, teaching experiences, lack of facilities, shortage of materials, student low level of English literacy, inappropriate learning strategies, lack of motivation and confidence [1-3]. Based on these reasons, the majority of Lao students could not use English to communicate with others effectively. Many schools have tried to organize several of English learning activities to correspond the different interest of students and their contexts [4].

Learning styles are defined as “the general approaches-for example, global or analytic, in both written and spoken during the teaching and the learning process by English lecturers in the English Education Study Program. Therefore, to carry out studies properly, language learners must master all English skills; reading, writing, speaking and listening. The chosen learning style is very important for language learners to master all English skills mentioned above. Brown [5], defines learning styles as “the manner in which individuals perceive and process information in learning situations.” Awareness of preferred learning styles is very important because it has impacts on language learners' achievement in acquiring English. Honey and Mumford [6] mentions that an inability or reluctance to adopt any particular style has the potential to hamper language learners' ability to learn effectively.

Since, many previous research studies; Jhaish [7], Sahragard et al. [8], Tabanlıoğlu [9], Cabi and Yalcinalp [10], Ihsan and Diem [11], Cheng [12] and Mulalic et al. [13] proved that the recognizing and reflecting the learners’ language learning styles preference and learning strategies used relatively. Similarly, teaching styles, methods and related learning activities are directly related to students’ learning styles and learning strategies. Therefore, the teaching and learning English at Department of English, Faculty of Education, Champasack university should aware of learners’ different learning styles and learning strategies; it could be concluded that the suitable teaching strategies can be adopted to support students’ language academic performance successfully. So that, this currents study has attempted to seek for a better way to increase learning and teaching English performances get highly achieved in the nearest future.

Research Objectives

• To investigate the situations of students’ learning styles preference and using learning strategies used

• To examine the relationship between learning styles preference and learning strategies used and base on their gender

Research Hypothesis

• H₁ = There is no statistically significant difference between learning styles preferences and strategies used and base on students’ gender with significant values p>0.05 or

• H₀ = There is statistically significant difference between learning styles and strategies used and base on students’ gender with significant values p<0.05

Research Participants

This study was conducted at Department of English, Faculty of Education, Champasack University aiming to investigate the situations of students’ learning style leaning preference and strategies used and to examine the significances between language learning styles, learning strategies and base on their gander. The 180 students were selected equally; 90 males and 90 females by mixed methods sampling strategies techniques systematically as shown by personal information in the following Table 1.

Table1: Information About the Participants’ Personal Information

Research Instruments

• The perception-questionnairewas applied by using the 70-item five-point Likert rating scales including 30 items were surveyed on learning styles using five points Likert scales; (5) Strongly agree, (4) Agree, (3) Neutral, (2) Disagree and (1) Strongly disagree. And other 40 items were about learning strategies using five points Likert scales; (1) Never used, (2) Occasionally used, (3) Sometimes used, (4) Often used and (5) always used. Cronbach Alpha reliability coefficient of the total rating-scale scores were conducted by doing pilot with the target group in order to seek for the scale’s Cronbach Alpha reliability coefficient at 0.75 respectively. Moreover, the criteria of correlation of The Best (1977) cited in Asuero et al. [14] was also applied to rate significant correlation of two mean scores of learning styles and learning strategies

• Interview was a second way of collecting data regarding learning style and learning strategies structured-interview which was organized relatively base the questionnaire for all respondents and lead themselves to statistical analysis Cohen and Scott and it was analyzed into percent proportions of each respondents accordingly in order to use as data supported the related first objective of the study

Data Analysis 

Research data collected in this study were analyzed by using SPSS. Statistic program. Frequency and percentage were used in the presentation of descriptive statistics. Evaluation of the students’ levels of using language learning strategies was made based on the averages specified by Oxford [15]. The mean scores and standard deviation of each item were calculated in accordance with the scores from the responses to the inventory items in order to determine students’ learning styles preference and using learning strategies. Independent t-test and Pearson Correlation value were also applied in order to compare relationship between language learning styles and strategies used by students and depending on their gender.

Findings

The participants’ perception on learning styles preference: According to the data analysis of the participants’ perception towards learning styles preference; the overall results of the participants’ perception toward learning styles preference which calculated in to mean scores and standard deviation. Almost of participants expressed their perception of ‘Agree’ in particularly; towards the variable 3 of (Mean = 4.16; SD = 0.76) of ‘Agree’, they responded that they preferred in ‘Kinesthetic learning styles’. Next, towards variables 1 & 2 of (Mean = 3.87; SD = 0.82) of ‘Agree’, they preferred in ‘Visual and Auditory learning styles’ and addition, towards variables 4 & 6 were similar responded of ‘Agree’ they preferred in ‘Group and Tactile learning’. However, it was important to note that towards the variable5 of ‘Neutral’ of (Mean = 3.13, SD = 1.04), they preferred in ‘Individual learning style’. The interviews results were used to support the findings of language learning styles preferred by the participants ranking of (1) Inappropriate, (2) Neutral and (3) Appropriate. The results of the interview were found that 100% of ‘Appropriated’ they learnt well by ‘Kinesthetic learning’, close results supported that 80% of ‘Appropriated’ respectively, they responded learnt well by ‘Visual learning’ Next, it was interesting to observe that they were two higher optional perceptions of 70% of Appropriated’ towards ‘Auditory and Group leaning’. 

The participants’ perception on language learning strategies used

According to the data analysis of the participants’ perception towards language learning strategies used; the overall results of the participants’ perception towards learning strategies use; towards the variable 4 of (Mean = 3.73; SD = 0.91) of ‘Often’, they responded that they often used ‘Meta-Cognitive Strategies’. And addition, there were two variables 2&3 in the ranks of ‘Often used’ between (Mean = 3.51; SD = 1.01) and (Mean = 3.53; SD = 104), the participants mentioned that they often used ‘Cognitive and Compensatory strategies’ However, the other variables 1 & 6 of (Mean = 3.50; SD = 1,37) of ‘Sometimes used’, they responded that they sometimes used ’Memory-related strategies and Social Strategies’ and another relevant variables. According to the interviews results supported the findings of language learning strategies used by the participants ranking of (1) Never used, (2) sometimes used and (3) Always used; the results of the interview were supported that 70% of ‘Sometimes used’ of the participants used the ‘Meta-cognitive strategies’. Next, 63.33% of ‘Sometimes used’ respectively; they used by ‘Social strategies’ and 16% of them responded of ‘Always used’ while 19.16% of them were responded ‘Never used’ and the other three variables of 60, 61.66 & 61.11% of ‘Sometimes used’ optioned similarly towards ‘Compensatory, Memory-related strategies & Cognitive strategies’. Lastly, 54% of ‘Sometimes used’ of Affective strategies’ were also found in their English language learning field. Those results could be concluded that the most of language learning strategies were used by the majority of participants. However, those strategies were seemed not frequency used and this is because the highest optional proportions of participants were responded on the rank of ‘Sometimes used’ respectively. The results of ‘now highly frequency used of the related strategies should be discussed.

Language learning styles of the participants’ gender

As indicated in the Table 2, the results were found that almost findings of the five language learning styles ‘Auditory, Kinesthetic, Tactile, Individual and Group learning styles’ that expressed above table, there were significant different between two mean scores was 0.01-0.05 at (p≤0.05), respectively. However, the difference between the two mean scores of 0.06, of (p>0.05), therefore, there were no significantly statistical difference between the two means scores obtained by males and females towards ‘Visual learning style’.

Table 2: Significance of Perceptual Language Learning Styles of the Participants’ Gender

Language learning strategies of the participants’ gender

As indicated in the Table 3, the results were found that almost findings of the four language learning strategies ‘Memory, Cognitive, Affective and Social’ shown in Table 3, there were significantly different between mean scores between 0.00-0.03, respectively at (p<0.05). However, the difference between the two mean scores towards ‘Compensatory and Meta-cognitive Strategies) were (M = 3.61 & 3.45) at p = 0.10 and (3.78 & 3.69) at p = 0.32 at (p>0.05), respectively. Therefore, there were no significantly statistical difference between the two means scores obtained by males and females.

Table 3: Significance of Perceptual Language Learning Strategies of the Participants ‘Gender

Pearson Correlation findings

As shown in the Table 4, indicated the analysis of the Pearson correlation between perceptual learning styles and language learning strategies. The findings revealed that there were significantly correlated almost between learning styles and learning strategies at p<0.01) respectively. ‘Visuallearning style’ has significantly correlated with the memory-related, cognitive, compensation, meta-cognitive, affective and social strategies. Addition, ‘Auditory learning style’ has significantly correlated with the memory-related, cognitive, compensation, meta-cognitive, affective and social strategies Next, ‘Kinesthetic learning style’ significantly correlated with the memory-related, cognitive, compensation, meta-cognitive and affective strategies. Moreover, ‘Tactilelearning style’ has significantly correlated with the memory-related, cognitive, compensation, meta-cognitive and affective strategies. Similarly, ‘Individual learning style’ significantly correlated with the memory-related, cognitive, compensation, meta-cognitive and affective strategies. Finally, ‘Group learning styles’ was significantly correlated with memory-related, cognitive, compensation, meta-cognitive and social strategies. Regarding to the criteria of Strength of correlation of Asuero et al. [14] the results were found that the significantly correlated between language learning styles and language learning strategies at r = 0.21-0.49 of ‘little correlation to low correlation’ it means the correlation significance of learning styles and learning strategies were in the rank of low correlation between two mean scores.

Table 4: Components of Perceptual Language Learning Styles and Learning Strategies

**Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed), *Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)

To reveal the first research objective, the results of the study indicate that the predominant learning style of English students at Department of English (DOE), Faculty of Education (FOE), Champasack University (CU) is kinesthetic learning styles; the findings are shown that kinesthetic learning style is the most preferred learning styles by the students, it means that the students could learn very well when they involve and participate the activities such communicative activities or games in classroom, this finding was in line with previous studies Cheng [12] and Mulalic et al. [13]. Secondly, it was very interesting to observe that learning styles of the students while learning English at the (DOE) are visual and auditory learning styles; this findings supported [16]. The students could learn more easily and comfortably when they have documents or lessons with instructions to learn and when the teacher visualizes them in classroom. And addition, in line with the teacher explains clearly, it means they could learn very well when they listen to audiovisual aids and their classmates’ suggestion and explanation. Following up finding close to visual and auditory learning styles is group learning styles; the students could learn more enjoyable and comprehensive when they learn with at least one other student, it means that group interaction and class tasks with other students encourage them to learn and understand the lessons successfully. Next to group learning styles is tactile learning styles. However, the students’ least preferred learning styles is individual learning styles in line with Cheng [12]. Regarding to the results of language learning strategies findings, it is found that meta-cognitive, compensatory and cognitive strategies were the most often frequency strategies used. Following up similar findings are memory-related and social strategies whereas, the affective strategy is the least used strategies regarding to the participants’ perception supported with Cabi and Yalcinalp [10] and Ihsan and Diem [11].

To prove the hypothesis H₀, there is statistically significant difference between learning styles and strategies preference and base on students’ gender with significant values p<0.05 and second research objective, the results of learning styles toward gender’s perceptual preferences, there are statistically significant differences between males and females in auditory, kinesthetic, tactile, individual and group learning styles. According to the results of the students’ learning strategies used, there are statistically significant differences between males and females in memory-related, cognitive, affective and social strategies. The results of the study are in line with Afshar and Bayat [17].

Within respect to the second of research objective, the results of the study revealed significant positive relationships between students’ learning style preference and language strategies used. When the results are examined in details, it is interesting to study that findings revealed that almost language learning styles were significantly correlated with almost language learning strategies, these results also supported the result of Jhaish [7], Sahragard et al. [8] and Tabanlıoğlu [9]. The research which investigated the relationship between perceptual learning style preferences and language learning strategies in learning a second language. The researchers have found significant relationship between perceptual learning styles and language learning strategies reported that visual and auditory learning styles related to each other strategies the most. This study also tended to support the study of Sahragard et al. [8].

In order to prove the hypothesis; H_1, there is no significant difference between learning styles preferences and strategies used and base on students’ gender with significant values p>0.05. The results of learning styles toward gender’s perceptual preferences, there are no statistically significant differences between males and females in visual learning styles. And additional results of the students’ learning strategies used, there are no statistically significantly differences between males and females in compensatory and meta-cognitive strategies. The results of the study are in line with Jhaish [7].

Moreover, it is important to note that the findings of the current study supported the recognizing and reflecting the learners’ language learning styles preference and learning strategies used relatively. Similarly, teaching styles, methods and related learning activities are directly appropriated to students’ learning styles and learning strategies. Therefore, the teachers should be aware of learners’ different learning styles and learning strategies; it also could be said that the suitable teaching strategies can be adopted to support students’ language academic performance successfully. 

The results of the study could be completely concluded that the results highlight that students learn well by using kinesthetic, auditory, visual and group learning styles. For the language learning strategies used reveal that the meta-cognitive, compensatory and cognitive strategies are the most often frequency utilized. Similar related findings are memory-related and social strategies. The results also could be said that the most of language learning strategies were used by the majority of participants however, those strategies are not seemed frequency regularly used and this is because the highest optional proportions of all variables of the interview and the questionnaires are in the options of ‘Sometimes used’ consistently and for ‘Often used’ options are lower differently. Base on the participants’ gender’s perception on language learning styles preference and strategies used are significantly different between males and females, it means the males and females differently prefer in auditory, kinesthetic, tactile, individual and group learning styles. For the participants’ language learning strategies used between males and females in ‘Memory, Cognitive, Affective and Social’ are also significantly different. Lastly, the Pearson Correlation Components of perceptual language learning styles and learning strategies are significantly correlated among almost the other strategies, however, the social strategies is no significantly correlated with ‘Kinesthetic, Tactile and Individual styles’. Similarly ‘Group learning styles’ is also no significantly correlated with ‘Affective strategies’.

Recommendations

For Applications: The following applications of the study are relevant for EFL classrooms in the following useful suggestions:

• Active use of English and various language learning and teaching styles and strategies should be emphasized to students in related context especially at DOE, FOE, CU. English teachers should recognize and provide related types of learning styles such as kinesthetic, visual, auditory and group learning linking up all related types of language learning strategies. To provide them with visual aids such as videos, films, transparencies and slides should be available in English language classroom

• The meta-cognitive, compensatory and cognitive strategies learning strategies should be developed with classroom activities which encourage interactions and comprehension language lessons well. Related organization should create projects which aim is to be aware of the different learning styles and the strategies that favor each style. To encourage teachers to know students learning styles at the beginning of each course. And it is importantly to take language learning styles and strategies training and revealing them know what they are into consideration

For further researchers:

• It is necessary to consider other factors that can influence students` proficiency like their background (age, semester year, academic performance, economic level, learning environment, etc) to enrich the study

• Develop an experimental research on the topic. For students should get aware of their learning styles with the related subject or academic performance achievement

1. Ahmadi, A. and M.R. Bajelani. “Barriers to English for specific purposes learning among Iranian university students.” Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, vol. 47, 2012, pp. 792–796.

2. Khattak, Z.I. et al. “An investigation into the causes of English language learning anxiety in students at AWKUM.” Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, vol. 15, 2011, pp. 1600–1604.

3. Jdetawy, L.F.A. “Problems encountered by Arab EFL learners.” Language in India, vol. 11, no. 3, 2011.

4. Ratana, P. An investigation of Thai students’ English language problems and their learning strategies in the international program at Mahidol University. M.A. Thesis, King Mongkut’s Institute of Technology North Bangkok, 2007.

5. Brown, H.D. Principles of language learning and teaching. Vol. 4, Longman, 2000.

6. Honey, P. and A. Mumford. The manual of learning styles. Peter Honey, 1986.

7. Jhaish, M.A. The relationship among learning styles, language learning strategies, and the academic achievement among the English majors at Al-Aqsa University. Master’s Thesis, The Islamic University Deanery of Graduate Studies, 2010.

8. Sahragard, R. et al. “Field of study, learning styles, and language learning strategies of university students: Are there any relations?” Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, vol. 10, no. 3, 2016, pp. 255–271.

9. Tabanlıoğlu, S. The relationship between learning styles and language learning strategies of pre-intermediate EAP students. Middle East Technical University, 2003.

10. Cabi, E. and S. Yalcinalp. “Lifelong learning considerations: Relationship between learning styles and learning strategies in higher education.” Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, vol. 46, 2012, pp. 4457–4462.

11. Ihsan, D. and C.D. Diem. “The learning styles and language learning strategies of the EFL students at tertiary level.” Jurnal Ilmu Pendidikan, vol. 4, 2016.

12. Cheng, Y.L. “Relationship between learning style and learning strategies of Mandarin learners in Universiti Tun Hussein Onn Malaysia (UTHM).” Journal of Advanced Research in Social and Behavioural Sciences, vol. 16, no. 1, 2019, pp. 144–154.

13. Mulalic, A. et al. “Perceptual learning styles of ESL students.” European Journal of Social Sciences, vol. 7, no. 3, 2009, pp. 101–113.

14. Asuero, A.G. et al. “The correlation coefficient: An overview.” Critical Reviews in Analytical Chemistry, vol. 36, no. 1, 2006, pp. 41–59.

15. Oxford, R. Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. Heinle & Heinle, 1990.

16. Nja, C.O. et al. “The influence of learning styles on academic performance among science education undergraduates at the University of Calabar.” Educational Research and Reviews, vol. 14, no. 17, 2019, pp. 618–624.

17. Afshar, H.S., and M. Bayat. “Strategy use, learning styles and L2 achievement of Iranian students of English for academic purposes.” Issues in Educational Research, vol. 28, no. 4, 2018, pp. 1039–1059.