The Relationship between Language Learning Strategies and Beliefs among Afghan EFL Learners: A Mixed-Methods Study
This study addresses a notable gap in the literature concerning the relationship between language learning strategies (LLSs) and learner beliefs among Afghan English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners. Utilizing an explanatory mixed methods design, the research aimed to identify the LLSs employed by Afghan EFL learners, explore their beliefs about language acquisition, and examine the relationship between these beliefs and strategy use. The sample comprised 71 intermediate-level EFL learners, aged 18 to 35, selected through convenience sampling from various academic disciplines and institutions across Afghanistan. Data collection involved quantitative surveys and semi-structured interviews. Quantitative data were gathered via online questionnaires (SILL and BALLI) and analyzed using SPSS with descriptive statistics and Pearson correlation coefficient, while qualitative data from phone and WhatsApp interviews were subjected to thematic analysis. The findings indicated a strong preference for writing and reading strategies alongside a widespread belief in the inherent difficulty of language learning. Furthermore, a moderate positive correlation was found between the belief in language learning difficulty and the use of writing strategies (r = 0.258, p = 0.019). Thematic analysis revealed key themes such as a strategic focus on writing, the significance of self-regulated learning, and the impact of contextual factors. These results highlight the necessity for pedagogical interventions that enhance learner confidence, provide explicit strategy instruction, and encourage balanced skill development to improve EFL proficiency and foster learner autonomy within the Afghan context.
Institutions
- University of Tehran (IR)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Journal of Languages and Translation
- Published
- 2025-03-30
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.71864/lct-2025-1208278
- Primary Topic
- EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 0.00