group 6

Group 6:

Isnaini Farida Khilmi (2130730038)
Dyah Nuraini (2130730040)
Nurmawati Kolong (2130730052)
Vita Fitriyah (2120730087)

Process, Style, and Strategy

The different theories of learning, the "types" of learning, transfer processes, and aptitude and intelligence models are all attempts to describe universal human traits in learning. They seek to explain globally how people perceive, filter, store, and recall information. Such processes do not account for the differences across individuals in the way they learn, or for differences within any one individual. While we all exhibit inherently human traits of learning, every individual approaches a problem or learns a set of facts or organizes a combination of feelings from a unique perspective (his/her style or strategy).

What are the differences among process, style, and strategy as they are used in the literature on second language acquisition?

Process:

- All humans of normal intelligence engage in certain levels or types of learning.

- It is a characteristic of every human being.

Style:

- They are the general characteristics of intellectual functioning and personality type that are directly related to a person as an individual, and that differentiate him/her from someone else.

Strategies:

- They are specific methods of approaching a problem or task, modes of operation for achieving a particular end, planned designs for controlling and manipulating certain information.

- They change intraindividually (each of us has a number of possible ways to solve a particular problem, and we choose one—or several in sequence—for a given problem.

Learning Styles

They are the “cognitive, affective, and physiological traits that are relatively stable indicators of how learners perceive, interact with, and respond to the learning environment”.

- Learning styles can contribute significantly to the construction of a unified theory of SLA.

- Learning styles mediate between: Emotion & Cognition

Cognitive style

The way we learn things in general and the way we attack a problem seem to memorize on a rather vague link between personality and cognition. Cognitive styles are preferred ways of perception, organization and retention.

Field Independent and Field Dependent

In general psychological terms, that “field” may be perceptual, or it may be more abstract and refer to a set of thoughts, ideas, or feelings from which your task is to perceive specific relevant subsets.

It is clear, then, that both FI and FD are necessary for most of the cognitive and affective problems people face.

FI/D literature has shown:

 FI increases as a child matures to adulthood

 A person tends to be dominant in one mode or the other

 FI/D is a relatively stable trait in adulthood

Cross-culturally, the extent of the development of an FI/D style as children mature is a factor of the type of society and home in which the child is raised.

 Authoritarian or agrarian societies, which are usually highly socialized and utilize strict raising practices, tend to produce more FD.

 A democratic, industrialized, competitive society with freer raising norms tends to produce more FI persons.

The concepts of Field Dependence (FD) and Field Independence (FI) were first introduced by Witkin and his associates in 1954 to describe individual differences in tendencies to rely primarily either on external visual cues or internal gravitational or body sensations for the perception of the upright. Later, they tried to link people's performance to their ability to visually separate an item from a complex context or field. Usually, the item was a simple geometric shape that was hidden or embedded in a more complicated drawing. In these situations, Field Independents demonstrated a greater ability to overcome a given organizational context and separate or disembed the relevant information from the surrounding stimuli; on the other hand, Field Dependents had lesser competence when performing such tasks. They viewed fields as given and performed less analysis and structuring than Field Independents.

Further studies in this area led the individual differences construct to be designated as an articulated versus global field approach and perceived as an ability to overcome embedding contexts in various perceptual and intellectual activities (Witkin et al., 1977). In the early 1960s, Witkin and his associates began to place the description of Field Dependence and independence in a broad theoretical framework of psychological differentiation that reflected the higher-order construct of self/nonself segregation and the balance of interpersonal competencies and restructuring skills (Pizzamiglio & Zoccolotti, 1986; Witkin, Dyk, Faterson, Goodenough, & Karp, 1962).