Enhancing Second Language Acquisition Through Direct and Indirect Strategies: A Study on Tertiary Level Learners

Enhancing Second Language Acquisition Through Direct and Indirect Strategies: A Study on Tertiary Level Learners

*Anjum Naseem Rao¹, Dr. Noor Mala Binti Ibrahim²

¹Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Johor Bahru

²Faculty of Social Sciences and Humanities, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Johor Bahru

*Corresponding author

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.906000270

Received: 28 May 2025; Accepted: 31 May 2025; Published: 10 July 2025

ABSTRACT

This research examines the impact of second language learning strategies (LLS) on tertiary-level students in Pakistan, with a focus on direct and indirect strategies of Oxford (1990), including simplification, generalization, and self-monitoring, in the context of second language acquisition. Despite extensive research on LLS, Pakistani classroom settings often focus on memorizing grammatical rules among graduate learners, which limits their comprehension of listening skills. Therefore, its privations hinder the acquisition of receptive and productive skills. The study fills the gap of strategy-based language in developing countries like Pakistani classrooms of tertiary-level education.  The study also explores the response patterns of learners at the private universities of Hyderabad, Pakistan. The study is based on action research methodology and statistical analysis of the chi-squared test. The results propose the role of strategy-based ESL learning outcomes among students aged 18 to 22.

The data was collected by observing 170 students in the private higher education sector in Hyderabad, Sindh, conducting a listening skills activity. The study emphasizes the necessity of strategy training to enhance second language acquisition.

The findings reveal that learners show individual learning patterns in ESL, such as direct and Indirect strategies of simplification and generalization. The study contributes to applied linguistics research and provides insights into the effectiveness of strategic learning in ESL classrooms.

Key Terms: Language learning Strategies (LLS); Cognitive Learning; Direct and Indirect Strategies; Second Language Learners; and ESL learners

INTRODUCTION

Second language acquisition (SLA) critically elucidates the role of academic and professional development globally. For example, Tudor (2014) and Slobin (1968) observe universal strategies in language learning. Sharma, N. et al. (2024) have highlighted the need for modern teaching methods to enhance student engagement and promote an active role compared to traditional teaching methods.

English language learning remains challenging for many Pakistani students, including the tertiary education system (Alam, Karim, & Khan, 2023). Among these challenges, traditional teaching dominates the pedagogical practices in Pakistani universities (Abro et al., 2022). Omar (2019) found that students in Pakistan are taught with grammar translation methods. The GTM method focuses on grammar accuracy and other skills like communication remained ignored. Therefore, they struggle with communication skills, including listening comprehension. Shliakhtina and Kyselova (2024) have evaluated the effectiveness of GTM in primary education. Their results indicate that although teachers favor Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) to enhance communicative competence, certain features of GTM are still considered necessary for addressing grammatical rules in writing. This reliance on GTM in Pakistani classrooms has led to a gap in the practical approach towards teaching ESL to enhance listening skills. The research emphasizes the significance of strategies in second language learning, i.e., in facilitating second language proficiency (Oxford, 1990; Cohen, 2014), more specifically, the role of direct and indirect strategies in ESL learning. While doing this, various cognitive and metacognitive strategies are identified as effective techniques in ESL contexts, such as simplification, generalization, and self-monitoring strategies. Riaz et al.’s (2024) study explores how ESL listening skills can be improved among Pakistani ESL students at the Tertiary level by enhancing teaching strategies.

Secondly, there is limited research on their practical application in Pakistani classrooms, specifically secondary schools. This study aims to bridge this gap by analyzing the effectiveness of LLS in secondary school learners, focusing on simplification, generalization, and self-monitoring strategies.

Additionally, recent studies are mainly concerned with university-level ESL learners’ engagement in the classroom. Ellis (1989); Prescott & Orton (2012) focused on university graduate ESL learners. Okyar (2022) focused on the challenges of online learning for university ESL graduates. (Hartshorn & McMurry, 2020) have focused on the effects of COVID-19 on ESL instruction. Still, there is a gap in ESL teaching methods for young learners in Pakistani universities. Lastly, much attention is given to cognitive strategies in reading and writing skills, including (Emak & Ismail, 2023) and academic writing challenges in higher education (Vejayan & Yunus, 2022). The listening skills are unexplored in the Pakistani context.

This study intends to elaborate on LLS in second language learning among university students in higher education, specifically in listening skills. Lin (2023) examined the role of second language acquisition on ESL learning, highlighting the challenges and benefits of learning an additional language.

In classroom learning, second language learning involves several skills and strategies. (Bećirović et al., 2021) Reinforced problem-solving strategies like meta-cognitive and cognitive strategies. What do second language learning and teaching mean? It excels in excelling grammatical, syntactical, and phonological language structures. When an individual acquires a language, they enhance the grammatical, syntactical, semantical, lexical, and phonological aspects in connection with factors affecting them. More specifically, they learn some language skills. These factors interpret a student’s learning ability in a particular instructional framework.

The research questions are:

Which learning strategies, i.e., direct and indirect, for simplification and generalization, do graduate students in Pakistan commonly employ?

How do simplification, generalization, and self-monitoring strategies affect ESL learners’ listening comprehension and vocabulary retention?

The Rationale of The Study

Many young Pakistani learners, i.e., Tertiary-level learners, struggle to comprehend ESL listening skills. They learn by focusing on the grammatical structures of it. And their retention of new words is weak. Omar (2019) found that students in Pakistan are taught with grammar translation methods (GTM). The GTM method focuses on grammar accuracy and other skills like communication remained ignored (Sharma, N. et al., 2024). Therefore, they struggle with communication skills, including listening comprehension. This research benefits Second Language Acquisition (SLA) and (SLL) Second Language learning in developing countries like Pakistan. Because it explores the strategic learning techniques to process listening to English effectively. Moreover, it focuses on a Student-centered approach in classroom teaching for students of higher education and caters to the needs of developing their skills in language classes.

The works of Ellis (1989), Prescott, C., & Orton, J. (2012), Cohen (2004), and Küçükler (2020) discuss the strategies and styles of young learners toward second language learning, i.e., online/offline learning. Like the strategy of Simplification, the generalization of the idea. These studies can help teachers and educationists revise the definitions of theoretical aspects of teaching and learning approaches toward language after the pandemic era.

This study contributes to SLA research by providing empirical evidence on LLS in a Pakistani ESL classroom. The findings offer practical insights for educators to refine curriculum design and instructional strategies to improve students’ linguistic competencies.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Recent neurocognitive research by Li and Jeong (2024) utilizing technology has demonstrated that direct and indirect learning strategies stimulate distinct neural pathways. Simplification strategies primarily engage the left inferior frontal gyrus, whereas self-monitoring activates the bilateral prefrontal cortex. Second Language Learning/acquisition (SLA) has long been recognized as a complex phenomenon and multifaceted process. Therefore, Oxford (1990, & 2011) has proposed cognitive, meta-cognitive, affective, compensation, social, and memory strategies into two categories, i.e., direct and Indirect strategies as reflected in Figure 1. According to her, these strategies shape learners’ learning Second Language and help them enhance their engagement. Among the most influential frameworks in SLA is the study of Language Learning Strategies (LLS), particularly the distinction between direct and indirect strategies as proposed by Oxford (1990). These strategies, such as simplification, generalization, and self-monitoring, play a vital role in helping learners comprehend, retain, and use a second language effectively.

This literature review explores the theoretical foundations of LLS, highlights empirical studies on their impact, and identifies gaps in current ESL practices, particularly in secondary education settings in Pakistan.

Oxford Strategy Taxonomy

The term strategy has a broad perspective and Greek Origin (Griffiths, 2005). It is not only connected with learning a second language or learning any language skill. It applies to any learning as it is a technique (Hajar & Karakus, 2024). The mind technique of an individual to solve a problem is denoted by his/her strategy and indicates a particular learning style. It is described as the moves or techniques made by teachers or second language speakers and learners, intended to be useful in either learning or using the second language. The need to understand the strategy and its use has seemed increasingly important. (Oxford,1990) defines strategies as direct and indirect strategies.

Figure 1: The Direct and Indirect Strategies are derived from Oxford’s Strategy (1990)

Theoretical Background of SLA and LLS

Prensky (2001) and Teo (2013) have proposed digital strategies and their significance in the current world’s trends of digitalization of the mind for SLA (Hajar & Karakus, 2024). They have identified digital natives, i.e., the GZ generation born with technology, and their minds work with mobile phone use. Prensky here connected their strategy with technology and proposed an entirely new dimension of understanding the LLS in the upcoming generation in the context of SLA (Alzubi & Singh, 2017).  We need to focus on digital natives who experience second language learning through technology and associate their concepts with technical capabilities (Ali M.M et al, 2020). Thomas (2011, P.02) also defined a ‘digital native as a member of a generation where digital technologies and the Internet are a part of everyday life’.

Green (1995), Rubin (1987), and Lan, R.L. Oxford (2003) focused on effective learning by using strategies in the second language learning process. The study discusses various strategies to find clues related to the questions. For example, do learning patterns help perform better? How do some strategies provide better chances of learning a second language to learners to some extent? These discussions have already prevailed with the researchers and straight or ultimately made an impact on ESL (Hajar & Karakus, 2024).

Cohen (1998, P.294) describes, “Strategies can be very different, ranging from planning the organization of one’s learning (a meta-cognitive learning strategy) through using mnemonic devices to learn vocabulary (cognitive learning strategies) and rehearsing what one expects to say (a performance strategy) to bolster one’s self-confidence for a language task using “self-talk” (an effective strategy)”(Alzubi &Singh, 2020).

Weinstein & Mayer (1986) extended strategies to the Second language learning, i.e., a particular behaviour shown by a learner during the Second learning process.  It is aimed at controlling the student’s coding process. Later, Mayer (1988) characterized it as “behaviours of a learner that are intended to influence how the learner processes information”(Hajar & Karakus, 2024).

Learners engage in cognitive processes, including planning, monitoring, and evaluating, to learn a second language. These mental strategies significantly affect their learning behaviors and information processing. As noted by Lessard-Clouston (1997), humans need intentional techniques to assimilate and arrange knowledge, underscoring the importance of strategic learning. This perspective aligns with the notion that second language acquisition (SLA) is not a passive pursuit but an active, dynamic process of meaning-making (Oxford, 2017; Griffiths, 2020). When learners encounter strategic learning opportunities, such as mobile-assisted scaffolding or reflective practices, their ability to generate, adapt, and internalize language use improves. In this framework, the educator’s function shifts to that of a facilitator, aiding students in developing personalized learning strategies that bolster their proficiency in productive skills, especially speaking and writing (Anderson & Mak, 2022; Rose et al., 2023).

Learner’s Strategies and Their Types

Strategies like generalization and simplification are types of strategies in language learning (L2). These strategies are classified as universal strategies and are derivatives of communication strategies. Slobin (1968) proposed some universal strategies that are followed by learners. “Recent research has shown that language learners begin relying on their ability to analogize, systematize, and regularize the target language data to which they are exposed immediately upon beginning to learn a new language”. (Taylor, p. 391). Learning strategies vary for every individual. A good example of communication strategies is found in Hakuta’s (1974, 1976) works on prefabricated patterns which enable learners to express functions in which they are, yet with a sense like a large lexical item. Furthermore, Niaman, Frohlich, Stern, and Tedesco (1978) used semi-structured interview techniques to induce very successful learners to reflect on their previous learning experiences.

Prescott and Jane Orton quoted Naiman, Frohlich, Stern, and Tedesco (2012, P.99): “In 1978, a study of successful second language learners by Naiman, Frohlich, Stern, and Tedesco found that certain attributes were common among good language learners, especially concerning strategies and techniques they had employed. The study also illustrated the complexity and individuality of each learning situation and career”.

They identified five general strategies in this way Strategy as an Active Task Approach

The approach emphasizes enabling ESL learners’ ability to learn by involving them in task-based activities. The teacher brings such tasks into the class to improve learners’ mental capability. They can assign group activity tasks in the class. Meanwhile, different learners will perform individually and independently. They apply strategies such as cognitive strategies for problem-solving, social strategies for cooperating, memory strategies to recall and memorize the concepts discussed in groups with each other, and effective strategies for overcoming their limitations. Their previous knowledge will also help them to fulfill the task; this enables the memory strategy capability to be an active performer. Strategy as an active approach is one of the ways of making students realize that their efforts can help them learn ESL independently. Strategies are fully enhanced among learners when they act as independent learners. Educators may adopt this method when addressing different personalities in class.  Likewise, they may have ongoing conversations on general topics where students’ active performance improves.

Strategy as a Realization That Language Is a System

Language is a system of codes. Language learning is a process that step-by-step actions help to accomplish the whole entity.  While learning, many students get shy and cannot cover their limitations (Krashen, 1982). They face affective barriers such as being shy and sensitive while expressing thoughts. Their affective side hinders them from delivering their ideas in English. These factors affect their psychological filters that delay second language acquisition. The strategy of realizing the language is a systematic code and can only be learned when technically applied.  Such attitudes need organization in thoughts (Oxford, 1990). Shyness restrains the learner and creates uncomfortable conditions for the learner. can be dealt with independently in expressing thoughts by structuring them in a language. Teachers play a crucial role in this process by designing activities that engage learners and emphasize the communicative function of language (Brown, 2007). If students actively participate in structured tasks, they begin to internalize the systematic nature of language, which facilitates their learning (Swain & Lapkin, 1995). The teacher’s task at that moment should be to realize that all languages’ primary function is to deliver messages or thoughts. If teachers provide tasks that engage the learners, meanwhile, students, by performing systematically in activities, realize that language is also an organized system.  And if students perceive random collection, it will be challenging to learn.

A Realization That Language Is Communication

Mostly, the teaching of a second language is done with the grammar-translation method in Pakistan. Neither teacher is well understood with the concept that language is a system of communication networks. Yet the grammar-translation method seems to be the most popular method for teaching a second language. Both educators and learners must realize that mastering a language is possible by practicing it. And the teacher’s role now goes beyond teaching rules only. They must focus on interactive classes. And the teaching methods need to be plain with language applications.  In that case, dialogue activities, presentations, and debate activities are beneficial in classrooms.

A Capacity to Handle the Affective Difficulties in Language Learning

This approach particularly deals with the affective aspects of the learners and relates to the learners’ affective strategy. Affective factors are closely linked to a learner’s emotions, which significantly influence the language learning process, particularly in second-language acquisition (Brown, 2007). In classrooms where students come from diverse socioeconomic backgrounds, age groups, and cultural settings, they bring distinct attitudes and learning styles. This diversity presents a challenge for teachers in determining effective strategies to manage such a classroom environment. However, if a teacher possesses the necessary skills and strategies to address these differences, the classroom can become an optimal setting for second-language learning (Krashen, 1982).

A Capacity to Monitor One’s Progress

The strategy that acknowledges ESL learners’ progress is called the capacity to monitor one’s progress. It is also referred to as Reflective learning. Rebecca L. (2003) relates the use of learning strategies to student achievement of skills. (Pressley et al., 1990) also observed that students who apply strategies during the second learning phase achieve a higher level of self-efficacy. They obtain the ability to check their advancement.

Strategies refer to the methods employed by learners who make efforts, apply certain tips, and adopt specific behaviours to acquire a second language.  Choosing among selected strategies is a conscious process, yet it shapes learners’ motivation, cognition, and personality, and provides learning opportunities. These are social factors, but individual aspects such as age, gender, and aptitude also play a role in selecting strategies for L2 learning.

Listening Comprehension and Vocabulary Retention

Listening comprehension is a foundational component of second language acquisition (SLA), particularly in communicative Competence. It enables learners to interpret spoken input and engage in meaningful interaction (Brown, 2007; Krashen, 1982). Vocabulary retention, meanwhile, refers to the learners’ ability to store and recall lexical items. It is essential for fluent expressions and comprehension in a second language (Oxford,1990). Together, these two skills form the basis of receptive language development and are particularly significant in the early stages of language learning.

In ESL contexts, particularly in developing countries like Pakistan, listening skills are often underemphasized due to traditional teaching methods such as the Grammar Translation Method (Omar, 2019), which focus more on written grammar and vocabulary memorization than on actual communicative competence. As a result, students may develop structural knowledge of the language but struggle with understanding spoken English and retaining vocabulary in meaningful contexts (Riaz et al., 2024).

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Research methodology refers to a systematic approach used to make observations or gather data, evidence, or information in the context of a research project or study. This study employs a mixed-methods approach, which enables both quantitative analysis of strategy effectiveness and qualitative insights into learners’ experiences.

Quantitative Analysis

The quantitative component of this study focuses on the statistical relationship between learning strategies (simplification, generalization, self-monitoring) and ESL learners’ performance in listening comprehension and vocabulary retention. The data after observation is presented in tables and bar charts to highlight statistical trends. The Chi-Square test is conducted to check the link between strategy use and the learning performance of ESL learners (good and slow learners).

Qualitative Analysis

The qualitative portion is based on observation and reflection in the study. The observational data was analyzed into themes to understand the response patterns of students’ strategies. Then they were coded into bars in numbers and ratios. Therefore, qualitative findings are used to explain and support quantitative results for a deeper understanding of the research questions.

Research Technique

The research technique selected for the study is a mixed-method evaluation of a selected sample of students of higher education between the ages of 18 to 22. They were taken to the listening class at one of the private universities of Hyderabad, where they were asked to watch the story for 10 minutes. The researcher focuses on observing learners’ ability and how well they can catch the chunks of second language learning. Their strategies for learning the chunks during the story were observed.  The activities were planned according to the point of view of cognitive learning. Students were pushed at the level of the action process to learn the specific skills of a second language effectively while showing their abilities and applying some strategies of their own.

Setting Of Research and Sampling

The sample consists of 170 graduate students from the Social and Management Sciences at Isra University in Hyderabad. These students were divided into six sections/groups, with each group containing 15-20 students, including three groups of girls and three groups of boys. Observations were made of the students as they engaged in activities aimed at learning and understanding chunks of information to facilitate fluent usage.

Research Instruments

The tools used in this research included the lesson planning document, the Chi-square test, and the story assessment worksheet. The planning document aids the researcher in systematically carrying out the study and analyzing the data. It is provided below:

The lesson plan for the listening class

Pre–Listening Exercise:

students are asked the questions while showing the title page of the story.

Activity title:

The title of the story is “The Last Leaf”. Talking about the topic and asking them to guess the story, like What do you understand from the title? Can you guess the story?

Vocabulary Words (at least any five)

Meaning & Usage of Vocabulary Words

The meaning of the words was asked of the students while they heard the words during listening. Afterwards teacher explained the meaning. They were asked to make sentences of their own.

Post Listening Exercise: (Evaluate the Students)

The students were asked some questions and given answers. They were asked to repeat the sentences while making the story dumps/silent in the next session. They were asked about the moral of the story. The worksheet also became part of the evaluation of their learning strategy.

The Procedure of Data Collection

The data collection takes place at one of the private higher education institutes of Hyderabad. The researcher has used mixed methods for qualitative data and action research for collecting data. The chi-squared test was used to determine whether the frequency of strategy use (Simplification, Generalization, Self-Monitoring) varied significantly between good and slow learners. The researcher prepared the listening planner. The listening planner elaborates on the following objectives:

The purpose of making a planner was to set goals and aims. This also helps to sketch out the activities and to analyse the data collected, and what strategies are applied by the students. The purpose was also to manage the teaching strategies where the teacher must work. Students were separated into groups to avoid the children’s mismanagement and large classroom decorum. The researcher has played the story with the name “The Last Leaf”. The story interprets the concept of true relations, friendship, and sacrifices. While choosing the story it was considered the level of students. Each word was clear, and the sentences in the story were uttered along with the actions of the story.  The accent of the story was in IPA. As students were listening to it, they were watching things in action. It was played twice in the class. The first time, it was played in pauses and stops. And the second time it was played fully. The purpose of playing the story in pause at the first attempt is to boost students and make them aware of the story in small parts. They were also asked the same questions. At the end of the story, they are asked to explain the story in their own words. Some students speak, and some are unable to answer. They were also called individually. The process was extensive and time-consuming. The procedure takes place within six days.

DATA ANALYSIS

The data in the first phase is collected from the observations of the students, i.e., action research during the conduct of their class, and assessment with the help of worksheets. They are discussed below in detail:

Data Analysis (Pre-Listening Task)

The data is analyzed with the help of research action in pre-listening. They were given with number of tasks

TASK 1: While displaying the title page of the story with an image on the PowerPoint screen, students are asked several questions.

When prompted to predict the story’s theme, students interpret and describe various themes through an analysis technique, i.e., they were asked to critically analyse. They grasp and summarize the concepts. In the Ask Linguistic Phase, we begin with multiple observations on individuals’ overall learning, speech, and language, as well as how second language learners demonstrate their learning methods, before shifting to graduate students’ acquisition strategies.

Learner Strategies Analysis

Figure 2 Data Analysis of Strategies: “Simplification and Generalization”

116 students were observed with the use of a simplification strategy during the task. Similarly, 76 out of 170 used the generalization strategy in active task performance. The percentage is expressed in the green bar of the graph. The participants who did not use any strategy are represented with a red bar in the graph. Overall, the ratio of the simplification strategy is higher than all students.

Response Patterns

The students’ patterns are categorized into two main levels according to the extent/level of learning. They are called slow learners and good learners.

Figure 3: Data Reflection of Response patterns among children

Slow Learners

The slow learners are called that because they are slow in developing their abilities and learning. They were observed with some affective domains. i.e., less motivational, mental stress, and lack of ability to understand. Around 20 students were observed as slow learners.

Good Learners

Good learners are those who are active in applying strategies to their learning style of a second language. Around 40 students were observed as good learners.

Data Analysis of Listening Activity

A listening activity based on “The Last Leaf” was conducted to analyze vocabulary acquisition and comprehension skills. The results of 170 students are as follows:

Figure 4: Data Analysis of the Post-Listening Activity

Vocabulary Meanings

80% of students correctly identified the meanings of at least 4 out of 5 words.

Sentence Formation

68% successfully formed grammatically correct sentences using the given words.

Moral of the Story

72% of students were able to express the central theme of the story coherently.

The analysis suggests that students with higher strategy use (simplification & self-monitoring) performed better in comprehension and sentence formation tasks.

Chi-Square Test Results

A Chi-Square test for independence was conducted to assess the relationship between language learning strategies (LLS) and ESL learner performance (Good vs. Slow learners). The results are presented in the contingency table below.

TABLE 1 Chi-Square Test results

The Chi-Square test yielded a value of χ² = 13.54, p = 0.00115, indicating that the differences in strategy use between good and slow learners were statistically significant (p < 0.05). Since the p-value is below 0.05, we reject the null hypothesis and conclude that strategy use (Simplification, Generalization, and Self-Monitoring) significantly affects learner performance in ESL learning.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

The results reflect that strategy use is strongly connected with Young ESL learners’ listening skills in tertiary-level institutes of Pakistan. Good learners (Rubin, 1987; Alzubi &Singh, 2017) mainly use generalization and Self-regulation strategies (Dornyei, 2005), and slow learners are more likely to use simplification strategies. This aligns with previous studies (Alzubi & Singh, 2017 & Hajra & Karakus, 2024), which found that active engagement with learning strategies enhances ESL proficiency (Oxford, 1990; Cohen, 2014). These findings suggest that ESL instructors should integrate strategy-based learning into their teaching methods to improve listening comprehension and vocabulary retention (Sharma, N. et al., 2024).

In the language learning field, virtually all definitions of Strategies imply conscious movement towards the language goal (Bialystok, 1990, 1996; Oxford, 1990, 2011; Hajar & Karakus, 2024). There are different kinds of strategies; some are related to the mind, some belong to memorization, some are concerned with affective factors, and some are oriented toward social acts (Dornyei, 2005). The purpose is to make the second language learning process simple and easy for learners to acquire. According to Dornyei(2005), “L2 learning strategy instruction has had mixed results”. It is because of the diversity in learning styles that needs analysis is a challenge for the learners of Pakistan. In Pakistan, the cognitive method is fruitful (Sharma, N. et al., 2024; Riaz et al., 2024). Most of the private universities follow this technique to teach a second language. The results concisely reflect the perspective that the cognitive view of developing language skills is one of the most appropriate strategies.

REFERENCES

1. Abro, B., Akhter, T., Imtiaz, W., & Shah, S. (2022). Action research: To upgrade the dynamic language learning procedure among the learners in the English class. Journal of Social Science Studies, 9(1), 78.
2. Ahmed, S., Riaz, H., & Begum, N. (2024). Tradition vs. transformation: A nationwide survey of ESL teaching methods in Pakistani higher education. Journal of Language Teaching Research, 15(2), 45–62.
3. Alderson, J. C. (1985). Reading in a foreign language. RELC Journal, 16(2), 114–116.
4. Alam, J., Karim, T., & Khan, J. (2023). Internationalization of higher education and its influence on the educational development in Pakistan. Qlantic Journal of Social Sciences, 4(3), 69–77.
5. Alzubi, A. A. F., & Singh, M. K. M. (2017). The use of language learning strategies through smartphones in improving learner autonomy in EFL reading among undergraduates in Saudi Arabia. International Journal of English Linguistics, 7(6), 59–72. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v7n6p59.
6. Ali, M. M., Moghal, S., Nader, M., & Usman, Z. (2020). The Application of Mobile Assisted Language Learning in Pakistani ESL classrooms: An Analysis of Teachers’ Voices. Int. J. Innov. Creat. Chang, 14, 170-197.
7. Anderson, J., & Mak, B. (2022). Strategic learning in digital spaces: Supporting learner autonomy in language education. Language Teaching Research, 26(5), 639–657.
8. Bećirović, S., Brdarević-Čeljo, A., & Delić, H. (2021). The use of digital technology in foreign language learning. SN Social Sciences, 1(10), 246.* https://doi.org/10.1007/s43545-021-00254-y
9. Bialystok, E. (1990). Communication strategies: A psychological analysis of second-language use.
10. Brown, H. D. (2007). Principles of language learning and teaching (5th ed.). Pearson Education.
11. Cohen, A. D. (2014). Strategies in learning and using a second language (2nd ed.). Routledge.
12. Dörnyei, Z. (2005). Psychology of the Language Learner: Individual Differences in Second Language Acquisition. Erlbaum.
13. Ehrman, M. (2001). Learners and teachers: The application of psychology to second-language acquisition. Russian Language Journal/Русский язык, 55(180/182), 33–71.
14. Ellis, D. (1989). A behavioral approach to information retrieval system design. Journal of Documentation, 45(3), 171–212.
15. Green, J. M., & Oxford, R. (1995). A closer look at learning strategies, L2 proficiency, and gender. TESOL Quarterly, 29(2), 261–297.
16. Griffiths, C. (2020). The strategy factor in successful language learning. Multilingual Matters.
17. Hakuta, K. (1974). Prefabricated patterns and the emergence of structure in second language acquisition. Language Learning, 24(2), 287–297.
18. Hamayan, E., Genesee, F., & Tucker, G. R. (1977). Affective factors and language exposure in second language learning. Language Learning, 27(2), 225–241.
19. Hartshorn, K. J., & McMurry, B. L. (2020). The effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on ESL learners and TESOL practitioners in the United States. International Journal of TESOL Studies, 2(2), 140–156.
20. Hudson, T. (1991). A content comprehension approach to reading English for science and technology. TESOL Quarterly, 25(1), 77–104.
21. Hajar, A., & Karakus, M. (2024). Five decades of language learning strategy research: A bibliometric review and research agenda. Language Learning Journal (Advanced Access),1–30.
22. Krashen, S. D. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Pergamon.
23. Küçükler, H. (2020). Challenges and solutions in foreign language teaching and impacts of trilingualism in Kazakhstan. Hikmet-Akademik Edebiyat Dergisi(12 [Bahar 2020]), 49–60.
24. Lessard-Clouston, M. (1997). Language learning strategies: An overview for L2 teachers. The Internet TESL Journal, 3(12), 69–80.
25. Li, X., & Jeong, H. (2024). Neural correlates of language learning strategies: An fMRI study. NeuroLinguistics, 12(1), 34–52.
26. Martinez, R., & Zhou, W. (2024). Strategic listening bundles: Enhancing comprehension through combined strategies. TESOL Quarterly, 58(1), 89–112.
27. Mayer, R. E. (1988). Learning strategies: An overview. In Learning and study strategies (pp. 11–22).
28. Naiman, N. (Ed.). (1996). A good language learner (Vol. 4). Multilingual Matters.
29. Nuttall, C. (1996). Teaching reading skills in a foreign language. Heinemann.
30. O’Malley, J. M. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. Cambridge University Press.
31. Okyar, H. (2022). University-level EFL students’ views on learning English online: A qualitative study. Education and Information Technologies, 27, 81–107. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11155-9.
32. Omar, Y. Z. (2019). Influence of grammar translation method (GTM) on Libyan students’ English performance in communicative situations. PEOPLE: International Journal of Social Sciences, 5(2), 511-530.
33. Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. Heinle & Heinle.
34. Oxford, R. L. (1999). Relationships between second language learning strategies and language proficiency in the context of learner autonomy and self-regulation.
35. Oxford, R. L. (2003). Language learning styles and strategies: Concepts and relationships.
36. Oxford, R. L. (2017). Teaching and researching language learning strategies: Self-regulation in context. Routledge.
37. Patel, S., & Kumar, R. (2023). Mobile-assisted language learning and strategy flexibility. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 36(4), 501–520.
38. Prescott, C., & Orton, J. (2012). Good learners of Chinese: Profiles of students in secondary school. Chinese Teacher Training Centre, University of Melbourne.
39. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1–5.
40. Riaz, N., Fatima, N., & Aamer, A. (2024). Enhancing listening skills in Pakistani ESL classrooms: Effective strategies and practices. Kurdish Studies, 12(5), 361–366.
41. Rose, H., Ghanizadeh, A., & Oxford, R. L. (2023). Self-regulated language learning: Current trends and future directions. System, 115, 102995.
42. Rubin, J. (1987). Learner strategies: Theoretical assumptions, research history, and typology. In Learner strategies in language learning. Prentice Hall.
43. Sheldon, A. (1977). On strategies for processing relative clauses: A comparison of children and adults. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 6(4), 305–318.
44. Sharma, N., & Joshi, H. (2024). Traditional Vs Modern English Language Teaching Methods: Study Based on a Survey. MIER Journal of Educational Studies Trends and Practices, 21-36.
45. Slobin, D. I. (1968). Early grammatical development in several languages, with special attention to Soviet research.
46. Taylor, B. P. (1975). Adult language learning strategies and their pedagogical implications. TESOL Quarterly, 391–399.
47. Teo, T. (2013). Digital natives and digital immigrants. Computers & Education, 63, 39–51.
48. Tudor, (2001), Exploring English language teaching: Language in Action, Source https://books.google.com.pk/booksBilingual and Multilingual Children.
49. Thomas, M. (2011). Deconstructing digital natives: Young people, technology, and new literacies. Taylor & Francis.
50. Vejayan, L., & Yunus, M. M. (2022). Writing skills and writing approaches in ESL classrooms: A systematic review. Asian Journal of Education Research, 10(3), 98–113. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajer.2022.10.005
51. Weinstein, C. E., & Mayer, R. E. (1983, November). The teaching of learning strategies. Innovation Abstracts, 5(32), n32.