Male and Female EFL Learners’ Self-Perceived Strategy Use across Various Educational Levels: A Case Study


  •  Abdorreza Tahriri    
  •  Hoda Divsar    

Abstract

This study sought to explore the role of language learning strategies (LLSs) in Iran as an EFL context. The major objective was to find out the strategy use of Iranian EFL learners and the possible influence of their educational level and gender on their reported strategy use. Ninety-seven EFL undergraduates studying at Payame Noor University of Guilan participated in the study. A self-reported inventory, Strategy Inventory for Language Learning, was used to determine the participants’ perceived strategy use. The findings revealed that the participating EFL learners were medium strategy users irrespective of their gender and educational level. The reported LLSs which had the highest frequency were metacognitive, compensation, social, and cognitive strategies respectively. Memory and affective strategies were found to be the least frequent ones. The results of the ANOVA indicated that the differences between the educational levels were significant for metacognitive strategy use only. Except for the observed difference between sophomores and juniors, the differences between sophomores and seniors and juniors and seniors were statistically significant. Furthermore, gender differences were not found to be statistically significant. The results of the study highlight the significance of LLSs and also confirm that educational level is a determining factor in strategy use.



This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
  • ISSN(Print): 1916-4742
  • ISSN(Online): 1916-4750
  • Started: 2008
  • Frequency: monthly

Journal Metrics

Citation Metrics (for informational purposes only; sourced from Google Scholar as of May 2026):

1. Citations (May 2026): 112462

2. h-index (May 2026): 145

3. i10-index (February 2025): 1811

*Note: Citation metrics vary significantly across indexing platforms. These figures are provided transparently and should not be used for cross-database comparisons. For methodological details, please refer to the official  Google Scholar Metrics documentation.

Contact