زینب زندیه

This study compares lexical retrieval amongst monolinguals and intermediate bilinguals and advanced bilinguals. It also investigates the possible effects of their language learning strategies on their respective lexical retrieval advantage. The study used a mixed methods design and the groups consisted of 20 Persian near-monolinguals, 20 Persian-English intermediate level bilinguals, and 20 Persian-English high-proficiency bilinguals. Auditory and visual lexical Memory Span Tasks were utilized to evaluate the lexical retrieval of all the language groups. The way that bilinguals used their L2 on a daily basis was examined using semi-structured interviews. It was suggested that the knowledge of two languages will not necessarily result in lexical retrieval advantages in bilinguals when compared to monolinguals. However, it was found that the specific language learning strategies used by the bilinguals could potentially influence their lexical retrieval advantages. Furthermore, when comparing lexical retrieval in different language proficiency groups, the method by which bilinguals manage their two languages as well as the environment they are located in should be taken into consideration.

The purpose of the present study was to compare writing high achievers and low achievers TEFL (teaching English as foreign language) learners’ writing self-beliefs. Subjects, based on their officially recorded scores on the writing course, were assigned in two 22-member groups of high and low achievers. The adapted English version of Mills’ and Péron’s (2008) questionnaire and the Foreign Language Writing Self-Beliefs Instrument which assesses writing self-efficacy in the areas of organization, expression, content and grammar as well as writing self-concept, writing anxiety, perceived value of writing, and self-efficacy for self-regulation in writing were administered to evaluate each group’s writing self beliefs. The results of the two-way ANOVAs suggested that high achievers’ writing self beliefs were significantly higher than low achievers. Implications for researchers and educators are discussed.