Prospectus

MS: Dr.
CS: Dr.
:
 Contents
 Chapter 1  Chapter 3
 Introduction  Research Design
 Statement of the Problem  Research Instruments
 Objectives  Sampling Procedure
 Research Questions  Data analysis
 Hypothesis
 Chapter2
 Background Review
 Framework
Effects of Learning Strategies on Pragmatic and Grammatical
Awareness among Gen Z AVRK English Language Learners

Independent Variable Dependent Variable

Categorical Variable

Gen z
Gen z
Learning Styles Gen z
Learning Strategies
Auditory Awareness
Direct
Visual Pragmatic
Indirect
Read/Write Grammatical
Digital
Kinesthetic
Introduction
 English is thought as a compulsory subject to students for 14 years in Pakistan
but still the level of competence of students is considered poor.
 Pragmatic and grammatical awareness are two of the competences selected
from the model developed by Bachman (1990)
 Gen z (born between 2000- 2010) are called digital natives (Prenskey 1990).
 Oxford (1990) introduced English Language Learning Strategies used by
different countries and generations for understanding ESL learners adopted
strategies.
 AVRK (Auditory, Visual, Reader and Kinesthetic) are the learners styles of
leaning which according to Dunn, Beaudry, and Klavas (1989) is present in
learners of every age.
Statement of the Problem
 ESL learners may produce utterances that are perfectly grammatical, but they
may violate social norms of the target language because they lack pragmatic
competence (appropriateness of meaning) to incorporate with grammatical
competence (appropriateness of form).
 In Pakistani context though English is taught as a compulsory language from
primary to graduate level, nevertheless the pragmatic knowledge of learners
is lacking far behind as compared to grammatical knowledge (Saleem, Azam &
Saleem. 2014; Mojabi. 2014; Khan & Ali. 2018; Rasool. 2019) resulting in lack
of confidence, sense of unaccomplishment and eventually being left behind in
job market
Continue
 Without relevant Language learning strategies which include actions, behaviors, steps, or
techniques (such as seeking out target language conversation partners or giving oneself
encouragement to tackle a difficult language task) ESL learners will not be able to enhance their
learning. However, if these strategies are neglected, hurdles will be created in acquisition,
storage, retrieval, and use of information of language.
 In Pakistan’s education system till date, teacher centered technique is used ignoring the
individual differences of styles and strategies.
 Many Language learning theories have been constructed, adopted and promoted till date
starting from Rubin’s direct and indirect learning strategies (1975) followed by O’Malley
metacognitive, cognitive and sociocognitve theory (1990) and the one used in the current
research i.e. Oxford strategy inventory for language learning (1990) but none of these theories
uplift the notion that the digital generation needs learning strategies which exploits technology
for learning.
Objectives
Objectives for the current research are to:
 identify the most and the least frequently used learning strategies as
reported by Gen z ESL learners;
 compare the grammatical and pragmatic awareness of Gen z ESL learners;
 what extent AVRK learners differ from each others in using different learning
strategies for pragmatic and grammatical awareness;
 analyze the relationship between grammatical and pragmatic awareness and
learning strategies of Gen z ESL learners;
 highlight the opportunities and challenges faced by Gen z ESL students in
learning grammatical and pragmatic competencies.
 Research Questions
1. What are the most and least frequently used learning strategies as reported by Gen z English language learners?
2. What is the level of Grammatical awareness of Auditory, Visual and Kinesthetic English language learners of Gen
Z?
3. What is the level of Pragmatic awareness of Auditory, Visual and Kinesthetic English language learners of Gen Z?
4. Based on the Pragmatics and Grammaticality Judgment Task,
a. do Gen z English language learners have more grammatical knowledge as compared to pragmatic awareness?
b. what type of errors do Gen z English language learners perceive as more severe; pragmatic errors or grammatical
errors?
5. Is there any relationship between pragmatic competence and:
a. direct strategies used Gen z English language learners?
b. indirect strategies used Gen z English language learners?
c. digital strategies used Gen z English language learners?
6. Is there any relationship between grammatical competence and:
c. direct strategies used Gen z English language learners?
d. indirect strategies used Gen z English language learners?
c. digital strategies used Gen z English language learners?
7. What are the opportunities and challenges faced by the Gen z ESL learners in learning grammatical and
pragmatic awareness?
Research Hypothesis
 In this correlational study, three hypotheses (HI, H2, H3) are addressed from Research Question 5 and three hypotheses (H4,
H5, H6) from Question 6
 Hypothesis 1 (Ho):
There is no statistically significant relationship between Gen z English language learners’ Direct strategies and their pragmatic
awareness.
 Hypothesis 2 (Ho):
There is no statistically significant relationship between Gen z English language learners’ Indirect strategies and their
pragmatic awareness.
 Hypothesis 3 (Ho):
There is no statistically significant relationship between Gen z English language learners’ Digital strategies and their
pragmatic awareness.
 Hypothesis 4 (Ho):
There is no statistically significant relationship between Gen z English language learners’ Direct strategies and their
grammatical awareness.
 Hypothesis 5 (Ho):
There is no statistically significant relationship between Gen z English language learners’ Indirect strategies and their
grammatical awareness.
 Hypothesis 6 (Ho):
There is no statistically significant relationship between Gen z English language learners’ Digital strategies and their
grammatical awareness.
Significance of the study

This study will be significant for:

 ESL learners by making them understand the effect of different learning
strategies.
 Policy makers as they will know the importance of digital technology for Gen
z’s learning.
 Future research as it will contribute to the knowledge of digital learning
strategies.
Limitation and Delimitation

 Limited to graduate students only.

 Limited to a restricted sample size.

 Delimitation contains Gen z only

 Oxford learning strategies
 Pragmatic and grammatical awareness only
 LITERATURE REVIEW
 Learning Styles: Dunn, Beaudry, and Klavas (1989) stated that “learning
style is a biological and developmental set of personal characteristics that
make the same teaching method effective for some and ineffective for
others” (p. 50).
 Learning Strategies: ). Similarly, Chamot (1987) described that "learning
strategies are techniques, approaches, or deliberate actions that students
take in order to facilitate the learning and recall of both linguistic and
content area information"
 Language Competences: Bachman (1990) suggested to use the term
communicative language ability, claiming that this term combines in itself
the meanings of both language proficiency and communicative competence.
Noticing hypothesis theory
 Graphic Representation of Schmidt's (1993,1995) Noticing Hypothesis

Noticing Hypothesis

First level Noticing Second level Understanding

Input
A general principle rule pattern

Linguistic forms Functional meanings

Relevant contextual features
Intake
Past studies

 Previous researches on English language leaning style preferences

 Previous researches on English learning in Pakistan
 Previous researches on factors affecting language competencies
 Previous researches on Language learning strategies
 Previous researches on Gen z and technology
 Conceptual Framework

AVRK Learners Language Learning Strategies Communicative Competence

Indirect strategy

Metacognitive Strategies
Affective Strategies
Social Strategies Grammatical
Knowledge
Auditory  
Visual
Reading/ Writing Direct strategy
Kinesthetic Memory Strategies
 
Cognitive Strategies
  Pragmatic
Compensatory Knowledge
 

Digital strategy

Using technology
Multitasking
Graphic communication

Instant reward & Gratification

Research Methodology
Chapter 3
 Statement of the Problem

Research Design
 Research Questions

 Frequently used AVRK learners differ in Awareness of grammatical  Relationship between gram Opportunities and
learning strategies strategies knowledge with pragmatic and prag awareness & challenges faced by Gen z
strategies

Pilot Study

Four Instruments Validity & Reliability Item analysis

Data Collection

Learners’ style Learning Strategies Pragmatic & Grammatical Awareness

Interviews

Quantitative Data Analysis Qualitative Data Analysis

Findings
Methodology

 The study will apply exploratory sequential mix method research design with
the quantitative method of survey questioners and qualitative methods of
interviews for data collection and data analysis as well as ascertaining the
study’s findings.
Quantitative Sampling

Total number of University students 1,463,279 *

enrolment in Pakistan (2017)

Sample size for teachers and Principals 384

(according to Krejcie & Morgan, 1970)

* Pakistan Education Statistics 2016-2017 (2017: 50).

Qualitative Sampling

 Quantitative sample will be selected from already selected quantitative

sample with nonprobability sampling procedure.
 As it requires interviews with the learners, convenience sampling method will
be used for the selection of students. Qualitative sample will be based on
these factors of representation of all AVRK learning styles and equal
representation of population from each region.
 Instrumentation
 

Instrument Source Dimensions

1 Individual Background  Constructed Basic Information

Questionnaire (IBQ)

2 VARK Neil D. Fleming Visual, auditory, write/read, and kinesthetic learners

3 Strategy Inventory for Language Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: Memory, Cognitive, Compensation, Metacognitive, Affective, Social

Learning (SILL) What every teacher should know. Boston: Heinle &

Heinle.

4 Discourse Completion Bardovi-Harlig, K., & Dörnyei, Z. (1998). Do language Pragmatic Knowledge

Tasks learners recognize pragmatic violations? Pragmatic vs. Grammatical knowledge

grammatical awareness in instructed L2 learning. four scenarios with no mistakes

TESOL Quarterly, 32, 233-259

5 Digital Native Assessment Scale Teo, 2013; Using technology, multi-tasking, graphics and instant gratification and

  Do digital natives differ by computer self-effi rewards

cacy and experience? an empirical study. Interactive

Learning Environments,& Yong Gates, 2014 Born

digital: are they really digital natives?.

6 Retrospective interview Developed in the light of the available literature and Problems and Opportunities faced by students

data collected.
 Data Collection and Analysis
  Research Question Instrument Data analysis

1 Students' most and least frequently used Language Learning Strategies (Oxford Descriptive statistics (mean, percentage,

strategies 1989) Standard Deviation and frequency)

2 Students' identification of pragmatic Pragmatics and Grammaticality Judgment Descriptive statistics (mean, percentage,

awareness and grammatical awareness Task (PGJT Standard Deviation and frequency)

3 Relationship between frequency of strategy Language Learning Strategies, Pragmatics Regression Analysis

use and pragmatic awareness and Grammaticality Judgment Task (PGJT

4 Relationship between frequency of strategy Language Learning Strategies, Pragmatics Regression and Process Analysis

use and grammatical awareness and Grammaticality Judgment Task

(PGJT)

5 Opportunities and challenges faced by Developed semi-structured interview. Thematic analysis, NVIVO

students in learning Grammatical and

Pragmatic Awareness.
 Thank you!!

Thank You!!!