|
|
ENQUIRE PROJECT DETAILS BY GENERAL PUBLIC |
| Project Details |
| Funding Scheme : | General Research Fund | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Project Number : | 18601721 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Project Title(English) : | Uncovering Relationship between Strategy Use and Chinese Character Writing Performance among L2 Learners in Local and Foreign Contexts: A Cross-lagged Panel Analysis | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Project Title(Chinese) : | 本地與外國語境中二語學習者策略使用與漢字書寫表現的關係：延宕交叉分析 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Principal Investigator(English) : | Dr Liang, Yuan | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Principal Investigator(Chinese) : | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Department : | Centre for Research on Chinese Language and Education | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Institution : | The Education University of Hong Kong | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| E-mail Address : | yliang@eduhk.hk | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Tel : | 2948 7483 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Co - Investigator(s) : |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Panel : | Humanities, Social Sciences | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Subject Area : | Education | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Exercise Year : | 2021 / 22 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Fund Approved : | 693,580 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Project Status : | Completed | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Completion Date : | 30-4-2024 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Project Objectives : |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Abstract as per original application (English/Chinese): |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Realisation of objectives: | The use of learning strategies is strongly correlated with good learners. For learners of Chinese as a second language (L2), mastering Chinese characters, the fundamental units of literacy, presents a significant initial challenge. However, the impact of learning strategies on Chinese character writing (CCW) and their reciprocal relationship among L2 learners has received little attention. This study investigates the influence of strategy use on CCW performance among beginner Chinese learners in Hong Kong and Vietnam using a cross-lagged panel design. By doing so, it broadens the scope of research on skill-specific learning strategies, linking individual differences and learning environments to explore the factors affecting language learning strategies and the literacy acquisition component of CCW. Since effective learning strategies can be explicitly taught, the findings have significant pedagogical implications for enhancing learner autonomy and addressing learning challenges faced by Chinese L2 learners globally. In this study, two groups of beginner Chinese learners participated: 150 non-Chinese ethnic students from local schools in Hong Kong (CSL learners, where Chinese is the primary language) and 150 university students from Vietnam (CFL learners, where a language other than Chinese is primary). The students' use of learning strategies for CCW was assessed using the Strategy Inventory for Chinese Character Writing Learning (SICCWL), developed by Ye (2022) and Liang (Ye & Liang, 2023). The SICCWL has a validated two-tier internal structure: Factor 1 represents indirect strategies, and Factor 2 represents knowledge-based strategies. Factor 1 strategies are applicable to L2 learning in other languages, while Factor 2 focuses on the linguistic features of Chinese characters and the unique aspects of CCW. The inventory shows high reliability (Cronbach’s α = 0.90), with reliability scores of 0.84 and 0.87 for the two factors, respectively. Students’ CCW performance, including accuracy and written latency (reaction time), was evaluated through three writing tasks: translation, dictation, and immediate copying. These tasks correspond to three types of input: ideas in the first language (L1), spoken words, and visually presented words in L2. The stimuli consisted of 50 frequently occurring Chinese concrete words selected from the respective textbooks of CSL and CFL students. The CCW tasks were conducted using the Computerized Penmanship Evaluation Tool (the Wacom Intuos Pro S) and online data collection via a laptop computer and Ductus analysis software, allowing automatic recording of handwriting movements and written latencies of the participants. Participants also completed a modified Self-Description Questionnaire I (SDQI) for CCW to assess their self-concept in learning CCW (Liang et al., 2024). This questionnaire consisted of eight items and was validated to have two components: competence and affect, with four items each. The overall reliability is high (Cronbach’s α = 0.94), with reliability scores of 0.94 and 0.93 for the two components, respectively. Participants also provided information on their CCW exposure outside the classroom through a modified Language Contact Profile (LCP) for CCW (Liang et al., 2025), consisting of 36 items validated to have two components: class-related exposure with 6 items and social interaction with 8 items. The overall reliability is high (Cronbach’s α = 0.94), with reliability scores of 0.736 for Factor 1 and 0.854 for Factor 2. Data collection involved two field trips, one in October 2022 and another in April 2023, with a six-month interval between them. Due to some students being unable to attend both sessions for reasons such as transfer or leave, data were collected from 150 CSL learners and 150 CFL learners at the first point, and from 103 CSL learners and 129 CFL learners at the second point. Although the anticipated sample size was not fully achieved, this did not significantly impact the study's results. Significant progress was made throughout the project. We published two journal papers and one book chapter, with one journal paper under review and one journal paper in preparation. Additionally, we constructed a learner corpus of CCW errors partially supported by this project. The PI presented the research findings as a keynote speaker at several academic conferences. Based on the results, we believe all research objectives have been successfully achieved. 1. To assess the concurrent and prospective effect of strategy use on CCW performance of CSL learners. The objective has been fully achieved. Regression analysis indicated that in a CSL environment, the use of indirect strategies at time point 1 (T1) influenced reaction times for the CCW dictation and translation tasks, accounting for 3.1% and 4.4% of the variation, respectively. Specifically, at T1, greater use of indirect strategies resulted in longer reaction times for the dictation task and shorter reaction times for the translation task. However, at time point 2 (T2), no concurrent effect of strategy use on CCW performance was observed among CSL learners. Additionally, regression analysis showed that knowledge-based strategies at T1 significantly predicted reaction times for the immediate copy task, translation task, and overall reaction times across all three CCW tasks at T2. Similarly, indirect strategies at T1 had a significant impact on reaction times for the immediate copy task, translation task, and total reaction times for all three CCW tasks at T2. However, no significant predictive effects were found between CCW learning strategies and accuracy scores of CCW tasks, either concurrently or prospectively, among CSL learners. 2. To assess the concurrent and prospective effect of strategy use on CCW performance of CFL learners. The objective has been fully achieved. In a CFL environment, knowledge-based strategies at T1 accounted for 5.3% of the variation in dictation task accuracy scores and 4.5% of the variation in overall accuracy scores across the three CCW tasks. At T2, knowledge-based and indirect strategies explained 2.8% and 2.5% of the variation in translation task accuracy scores, respectively. This suggests that employing knowledge-based strategies at T1 leads to higher accuracy scores in both the dictation task and overall accuracy across the three tasks in the period. Similarly, using knowledge-based strategies at T2 results in higher accuracy scores in the translation task, while indirect strategies at T2 are associated with lower accuracy scores in the translation task. Additionally, cross-lagged analysis revealed that translation task accuracy scores at T1 strongly predicted the use of knowledge-based strategies at T2, whereas indirect strategies at T1 strongly and negatively predicted dictation task accuracy scores at T2. However, no significant predictive effects were observed between CCW learning strategies and the reaction times of CCW tasks among CFL learners, either concurrently or prospectively. 3. To identify the difference in significant contributors of strategy use to CCW performance between CSL and CFL environments. This objective has been fully achieved. Both CSL and CFL learners showed an increase in the use of CCW learning strategies across both measurements. In a CSL context, indirect strategies have greater predictive value than knowledge-based strategies, while in a CFL environment, knowledge-based strategies prove to be more beneficial than indirect strategies. 4. To compare the cross-lagged relations of strategy use and CCW development between CSL and CFL environments. This objective has been fully achieved. Cross-lagged associations are more pronounced in a CSL environment compared to a CFL environment. In a CSL context, cross-lagged relationships are evident between both knowledge-based and indirect strategies and the reaction times of three CCW tasks. In contrast, only limited associations are found in a CFL context. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Summary of objectives addressed: |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Research Outcome | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Major findings and research outcome: | Based on our analysis, several key findings have emerged. First, we confirmed that L2 learners at higher proficiency levels tend to use a greater frequency and range of strategies compared to those at lower levels. Both CSL and CFL learners demonstrated an increase in the use of indirect and knowledge-based strategies for CCW across two sequential time points in our study. Second, we established the concurrent and prospective effects of learning strategies on CCW, revealing variations based on the types of strategies and the learning environments. In a CSL context, indirect strategies demonstrated greater predictive value than knowledge-based strategies, while in a CFL environment, knowledge-based strategies were more advantageous. Cross-lagged relationships in the CSL context were apparent between both categories of strategies and the reaction times for the three CCW tasks, whereas only limited associations were found in the CFL context. These findings highlight the non-linear development of Chinese L2 learners in CCW and emphasize that the effective use of language learning strategies is both skill-specific and context-sensitive. Third, we identified key factors mediating strategy use and CCW performance between CSL and CFL contexts, such as out-of-class L2 exposure, learner characteristics, and the complexity of mastering specific strategies. For instance, in a CFL context, out-of-class L2 exposure includes two primary dimensions: class-related exposure and social interaction. A significant positive correlation was found between class-related exposure and learners’ performance on the CCW test (Liang et al., 2025, under review). In a CSL context, out-of-class L2 exposure had both direct and indirect effects on CCW through academic self-concept, indicating that Chinese L2 students' perceptions of their emotions and abilities influence their CCW learning (Liang et al., 2024). Furthermore, error analysis revealed that CSL students exhibited a significantly lower proportion of phonological errors on irregular characters, while CFL learners showed a substantially higher occurrence of non-phonological errors (Liang & Cai, 2025). Additionally, factors such as character frequency, stroke identification scores, orthographic awareness scores, and Chinese proficiency significantly impacted CCW performance among learners (Liang & Ng, 2024). These research findings provide valuable instructional insights, emphasizing that teachers should guide learners to adapt their learning strategies flexibly based on individual characteristics and the learning environment to enhance learning efficiency. This study also underscore the significant influence of linguistic background and educational approaches on the challenges and nuances of Chinese learning among diverse student populations. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Potential for further development of the research and the proposed course of action: |
Based on the results obtained, there are two primary future research directions. The first involves exploring additional factors that influence the selection and use of language learning strategies in both CSL and CFL contexts. Our study highlighted significant differences in the factors contributing to strategy use, primarily focusing on self-concept at the individual and environmental levels. Future research could incorporate additional elements, such as motivation, cultural influences, and instructional methods, to examine their impact on strategy use and their interrelationships. This approach would provide a more comprehensive understanding of learners' educational experiences and facilitate more effective support. The second direction is to refine knowledge-based and indirect strategies for CCW. The current project categorizes CCW learning strategies into two main factors: knowledge-based strategies and indirect strategies. Within these categories, further subdivisions into sub-factors are possible. For instance, Ye (2020) identified and validated two sub-factors within knowledge-based strategies for CCW: form-based strategies and sound-meaning-based strategies. These sub-factors align more closely with the cognitive processes involved in CCW and highlight the linguistic features of Chinese characters. Future research can further refine these sub-strategies to explore the immediate and delayed relationships between them and CCW. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Layman's Summary of Completion Report: | This project examined the impact of learning strategies on the performance of L2 learners in Chinese character writing (CCW) across two learning environments: Chinese as a Second Language (CSL) and Chinese as a Foreign Language (CFL), utilizing a cross-lagged panel design. The findings revealed that while both CSL and CFL learners increased their use of CCW learning strategies over two time points, the effectiveness of these strategies differed depending on the learning environment. In a CSL context, indirect strategies demonstrated greater predictive value than knowledge-based strategies, whereas in a CFL environment, knowledge-based strategies were more beneficial. Cross-lagged relationships in the CSL context were observed between strategies and reaction times for all CCW tasks, while only limited associations were found in the CFL context. Additionally, several key factors were identified to moderate the relationship between strategy use and CCW performance in both CSL and CFL contexts, including out-of-class exposure, learner self-concept, and strategy complexity. These findings expanded the scope of research on skill-specific learning strategies, offering instructional insights that underscore the importance of guiding learners to adapt their strategies flexibly based on individual characteristics and the learning environment to enhance learning efficiency. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Research Output | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Peer-reviewed journal publication(s) arising directly from this research project : (* denotes the corresponding author) |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Recognized international conference(s) in which paper(s) related to this research project was/were delivered : |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Other impact (e.g. award of patents or prizes, collaboration with other research institutions, technology transfer, etc.): |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
| SCREEN ID: SCRRM00542 |