PSYCHOMETRIC PROPERTIES OF THE CHINESE EFL ADAPTED LANGUAGE LEARNING STRATEGIES SCALE FOR SPEAKING
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.55197/qjssh.v7i2.1155Keywords:
speaking, language learning strategies, psychometric properties, validationAbstract
This study presents the psychometric properties of an adapted version of the Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL), an instrument employed for research on language learning strategies. It aimed to examine the reliability and construct validity evidence for the language strategies scale for speaking. Due to the limited validation research conducted in the Chinese EFL context, exploring the psychometric properties of the scale is, therefore, essential. A cross-sectional design with an appropriate sample size of EFL Chinese learners was employed to investigate the factor structure and item loadings across six strategic domains: memory, cognitive, compensation, metacognitive, affective, and social strategies. The reliability analysis of the scale demonstrated high internal consistency, while the Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) conducted on the 30 items of a five-point Likert scale revealed that the six-factor model exhibited a good fit to the data. The findings support the scales factor stability and suggest its applicability for measuring speaking strategies among Chinese EFL learners. The study extends the utility of the six-factor structure instrument in assessing language learning strategies of the speaking dimension for EFL learners.
References
[1] Amin, Y.R., Sulistyo, T., Weganofa, R., Herawati, S. (2024): Students’ learning strategies in speaking productions across speaking proficiency. – Journey 7(1): 1-13.
[2] Antunes, L.D.A.M. (2022): Speaking skills and communicative competence in EFL: relating theory to teachers’ and learners’ perceptions. – Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Faculdade de Ciências Sociais e Humanas 68p.
[3] Aouri, Z.E. (2013): Defining language learning strategies: Implications for research. – IOSR Journal of Humanities and Social Science 13(4): 50-54.
[4] Cheung, G.W., Cooper-Thomas, H.D., Lau, R.S., Wang, L.C. (2024): Reporting reliability, convergent and discriminant validity with structural equation modeling: A review and best-practice recommendations. – Asia Pacific Journal of Management 41(2): 745-783.
[5] Cohen, A.D., Macaro, E. (2013): Language learner strategies. – Oxford University Press 344p.
[6] Derakhshan, A., Fathi, J. (2023): Grit and foreign language enjoyment as predictors of EFL learners’ online engagement: The mediating role of online learning self-efficacy. – The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher 11p.
[7] Dörnyei, Z. (2014): The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition. – Routledge 282p.
[8] Fornell, C., Larcker, D.F. (1981): Structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics. – Journal of Marketing Research 18: 382-388.
[9] George, D., Mallery, P. (1999): SPSS® for Windows® step by step: A simple guide and reference. – Allyn & Bacon 386p.
[10] Ghafar, Z.N., Raheem, B.R. (2023): Factors affecting speaking proficiency in English language learning: A general overview of the speaking skill. – Journal of Social Science (JoSS) 2(6): 507-518.
[11] Griffiths, C. (2010): Strategies of successful language learners. – Journal of English Language Studies 1(3): 1-18.
[12] Hair, J.F., Hult, G.T.M., Ringle, C.M., Sarstedt, M., Danks, N.P., Ray, S. (2021): An introduction to structural equation modeling. – Classroom Companion: Business 29p.
[13] Ibrahim, F.L., Nurhaeni, H., Yundayani, A., Alghadari, F. (2023): Language learning strategies in English speaking skills: Gaining the perspective of nursing students. – The Journal of Learning and Technology 2(1): 8-17.
[14] Kyriazos, T.A. (2018): Applied psychometrics: Sample size and sample power considerations in factor analysis (EFA, CFA) and SEM in general. Psychology 9: 2207-2230.
[15] Lambert, L.S., Newman, D.A. (2023): Construct development and validation in three practical steps: Recommendations for reviewers, editors, and authors. – Organizational Research Methods 26(4): 574-607.
[16] Lestari, M., Wahyudin, A.Y. (2020): Language learning strategies of undergraduate EFL students. – Journal of English Language Teaching and Learning 1(1): 25-30.
[17] Maldonado Murillo, M.Á. (2023): The presentation-practice-production PPP English teaching method to promote speaking skills in virtual environment. – La Libertad: Universidad Estatal Península de Santa Elena 68p.
[18] Oxford, R.L. (1990): Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. – Newbury House Publisher 342p.
[19] Park, G.P. (2011): The Validation process of the SILL: A confirmatory factor analysis. – Canadian Center of Science and Education 4(4): 21-27.
[20] Ranjan, R., Philominraj, A. (2019): Role of meta-cognitive and social strategies in learning a foreign language: A case study of Indian and Chilean students. – International Journal of English and Literature 4(2): 362-366.
[21] Saks, K., Leijen, Ä. (2018): Cognitive and metacognitive strategies as predictors of language learning outcomes. – Psihologija 51(4): 489-505.
[22] Shaikh, S., Yayilgan, S.Y., Klimova, B., Pikhart, M. (2023): Assessing the usability of ChatGPT for formal English language learning. – European Journal of Investigation in Health, Psychology and Education 13(9): 1937-1960.
[23] Tragant, E., Thompson, E., Thompson, M.S., Victori, M. (2013): Understanding foreign language learning strategies: A validation study. System 41: 95-108.
[24] Ximénez, C., Maydeu-Olivares, A., Shi, D., Revuelta, J. (2022): Assessing cutoff values of SEM fit indices: Advantages of the unbiased SRMR index and its cutoff criterion based on communality. – Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal 29(3): 368-380.
[25] Zhang, L., Sukying, A. (2022): The relationships between cognitive and metacognitive strategies and EFL reading test performance of Thai university learners. – European Journal of Education Studies 9(3): 1-15.
[26] Zhang, W., Zhao, M., Zhu, Y. (2022): Understanding individual differences in metacognitive strategy use, task demand, and performance in integrated L2 speaking assessment tasks. – Frontiers in Psychology 13: 1-13.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 ELIA MD JOHAR, GUO MINGSHEN
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
