【正文】 but also the professional ethics. I’m very much obliged to his efforts of helping me plete the dissertation. Thanks are also due to my dear friends, who never failed to give me great encouragement and suggestions. Special thanks should go to Miss. Yang Yang and Miss. Zhang Ping for their brainstorming with me when I failed ing up with ideas. Furthermore, none of this would have been possible without the help of those individuals and anizations hereafter mentioned with gratitude: our school library and its staff. At last but not least, I would like to thank my family for their support all the way from the very beginning of my study. I am thankful to all my family members for their thoughtfulness and encouragement. 摘 要 隨著外語(yǔ)教學(xué)實(shí)踐以及研究的深入，外語(yǔ)教學(xué)和研究者進(jìn)行了理論和實(shí)踐的反思，其結(jié)果是：從研究“怎么教”轉(zhuǎn)移到“怎么學(xué)”，從研究“教師”轉(zhuǎn)移到研究“學(xué)生”，學(xué)習(xí)策略的研究因而成為外語(yǔ)教學(xué)研究領(lǐng)域所關(guān)注的熱點(diǎn)。 學(xué)習(xí)策略包括在語(yǔ)言學(xué)習(xí)習(xí)得的運(yùn)用的整個(gè)過(guò)程中某個(gè)特定階段的心理和行為活動(dòng)。本研究采用學(xué)習(xí)策略量表（ SILL）對(duì)南陽(yáng)師范學(xué)院外國(guó)語(yǔ)系英語(yǔ)專(zhuān)業(yè)大二以上的學(xué)生常用的學(xué)習(xí)策略水平進(jìn)行了初步的調(diào)查與探討。根據(jù)研究結(jié)果，本論文認(rèn)為對(duì)英語(yǔ)專(zhuān)業(yè)學(xué)生學(xué)習(xí)策略的教學(xué)還有待加強(qiáng)，并從對(duì)學(xué)習(xí)策略教學(xué)和培養(yǎng)的探究來(lái)提出改進(jìn)建議。學(xué)習(xí)策略 。 learning strategies。 Part B (items 1023, cognitive strategies): relating to how students think about their learning。 Part D (items 3038, metacognitive strategies): relating to students’ feeling。 Part F (items 4550, social strategies): these involve learning by interaction with others. For each item, there is a fivepoint scale ranging from 1 to 5. 1= “never or almost never true of me”, 2= “usually not true of me”, 3= “sometimes true of me”, 4= “usually true of me”, and 5= “always or almost always true of me”. The students would choose 1 from 15 to report their degree for each item. For the participants to understand clearly, the writer used Chinese version of the SILL. Data Collection The present writer and his friends distributed 80 questionnaires to the students. The students were given fifteen minutes to finish the questionnaire in classroom. All subjects received uniform instructions as to how to fill out the SILL in order to minimize confusion. The participants were not asked to report their own specific strategies. And we gave the subjects a list of strategies and asked them to report to make choice of each item. And we were able to get mean scores of each item in the questionnaire through the investigation. Based on the mean score, we would be able to analyze the characteristics of them. It is not difficult for the instruction and monitor of the investigation because the number of participants was small in each class. And most of the participants answered the questionnaires seriously. Then the writer and his friends took the answer sheets back. Due to various reasons there were 77 questionnaires, which were collected. However, the number of the questionnaires was enough to be calculated. The data collection in the study was conducted mainly through the questionnaire. For each item in the questionnaire, it is a fivepoint scale. The raw data were processed to obtain the mean score of each item. Each item was converted into threefrequency scale: low, medium and high (see Table ) Table : Frequency Scale Results and Analysis Results The number of students choosing in the fivepoint scale, the mean Mean Score Evaluation Mean Score Frequency Always or almost always used High Usually or often used Medium Sometimes used Generally not used Low Never or almost not used score of each item and the average score of each part were calculated to get the mean scores for the whole subject. (see Table ) Table : Data Item No. The number of Ss. Choosing 1 The number of Ss. Choosing 2 The number of Ss. Choosing 3 The number of Ss. Choosing 4 The number of Ss. Choosing 5 Mean Score Part A 18% of All the Items Average Score 1 3 26 19 24 5 2 2 24 30 17 4 3 5 27 28 16 1 4 12 34 19 12 0 5 9 34 18 10 6 6 31 30 7 6 3 7 20 36 17 3 1 8 8 30 29 9 1 9 14 21 23 13 6 Part B 28% of All the Items Average Score 10 5 6 14 23 29 11 3 17 37 9 11 12 1 10 34 23 9 13 13 26 26 10 2 14 3 28 31 12 3 15 2 22 29 20 4 16 4 33 20 14 6 17 11 40 22 3 1 18 4 17 33 19 4 19 6 27 18 24 2 20 7 27 26 14 3 21 6 19 27 21 4 22 2 15 35 19 6 23 16 31 17 11 2 Item No. The number of Ss. Choosing 1 The number of Ss. Choosing 2 The number of Ss. Choosing 3 The number of Ss. Choosing 4 The number of Ss. Choosing 5 Mean Score Part C 12% of All the Items Average Score 24 1 19 27 20 10 25 5 25 23 19 5 26 29 24 17 4 3 27 6 19 22 20 10 28 6 21 21 23 6 29 0 10 23 32 12 Part D 18% of All the Items Average Score 30 2 22 34 15 4 31 5 24 21 21 6 32 0 10 26 31 10 33 1 12 28 28 8 34 11 23 29 10 4 35 8 31 20 13 5 36 4 25 25 16 7 37 11 28 21 11 6 38 3 13 28 24 9 Part E 12% of All the Items Average Score 39 1 15 32 18 11 40 1 29 24 15 8 41 8 25 21 17 6 42 3 12 32 24 6 43 35 28 11 1 2 44 5 27 27 15 3 Part F 12% of All the Items Average 45 3 8 30 22 14 46 14 21 27 11 4 47 4 29 26 13 5 48 16 24 22 14 1 49 3 19 26 21 8 Score 50 1 2 24 27 17 Analysis The statistics of the questionnaires showed that the English majors who were investigated use all the 6 strategies equally. And the strategies used mostly are pensation strategies and metacognitive strategies, followed by cognitive strategies and social strategies, then memory strategies and affective strategies. According to Table and , we can see that the average score of each item ranged from to , and most scores were between to . It showed that the subjects were generally aware of using such le