Presentation on theme: "Author: Hossein Bozorgian Queensland University of Technology (QUT) L1 Learning Strategy Instruction Does Make a Difference in EFL Listening: An Empirical."— Presentation transcript:
Author: Hossein Bozorgian Queensland University of Technology (QUT) L1 Learning Strategy Instruction Does Make a Difference in EFL Listening: An Empirical Study
Outline of Presentation Introduction Theoretical Background Listening makes a difference in L2/FL learning Pedagogy of listening strategy Influence of L1 on L2 learning Research Question Methodology Participants Procedure Pre-test L1 Listening Strategy Instruction Post-test Data analysis Result Summary and discussion
ESL/EFL’s definition: Richards, Platt, and Weber (1985): English is taught as a subject in schools but has no acknowledgement out of school context. Triple definitions for ESL : (a) minorities and immigrants in English-speaking countries, (b) English is officially implied but is not the L1 (like India, Singapore, and the Philippines), and (c) in countries (like Germany and Japan) where it is not an L1.
Introduction Rankin (1926): voice communication 74 % rather than reading or writing listening comprehension controls half of our life (42%). Nichols and Stevens (1957, p. 29): individuals devote their time to communication listening (45%), speaking (30%), reading (16%), and writing virtually (9%). Asher (1982) a native 6 year old has listened for 17,520 hours since birth, 50 years of college instruction. (L2/FL) classrooms syllabus: 200 hours for L2 FL context virtually 100 hours listening in a semester,
Theoretical Background Strategies help learners control their learning. Learners use strategies and thoughts as behaviours to comprehend, learn, or recall information (O'Malley & Chamot, 1990). Pressly, Forrest-Pressly, Elliott-Faust, and Miller (1985) link strategies to cognitive processes. "composed of cognitive operations over and above the processes that are a natural consequence of carrying out a task….strategies are used to achieve cognitive purposes (e.g., memorizing, making association with different sets of information) and are potentially conscious and controllable activities" (p.4). ‘consciousness’
Listening makes a difference in L2/FL learning Teaching four macro skills eg. Listening, speaking, reading and writing – 60 years. Understanding incoming message helps acquire an L2 (Krashen, 1982) and the gasoline fuels acquisition process (Nunan, 2003). (1) listening strategies can be targeted for instruction (2) the use of strategies can help second/foreign language learners improve listening comprehension.
Pedagogy of listening strategy Hinkel (2006) approved listeners’ schemata can be improved through attending to the gift of listening in pre-listening and making prediction and inferences. Carrier (2003) applied note-taking, selective attention, making inferences and advance organization strategies in high school L2 listening and reported a positive result of the experimental students receive guided attention. Processing oral input: L1 listeners # beginning level L2/FL learners Working memory capacity limitation. Compensatory mechanism: contextual, visual, paralinguistic information, world knowledge, cultural information, and common sense can compensate for the inadequate knowledge of target language (Vandergrift 2007).
Influence of L1 on L2 learning Jarvis (2000) suggests kinds of L1 influence: (1) Intra-L1-group homogeneity (Iran). Selinker (1983): statistical difference for Hebrew – speaking learners (2) Inter-L1-group homogeneity (Australia) Ringborn (1987): L1 Finnish learners omit English articles and proposition more likely than Swedish learners. (3) Intra-L1-group congruity between L1 & interlangauge. Selinker (1983): Hebrew – speaking learners show parallel significant trends in the L1 and L2 with respect to their sentence – level, ordering of time, place, object and adverb strings.
Research Question Does L1 listening strategy instruction in the EFL classroom improve students' listening comprehension?
Methodology Participants (55 intermediate females, an age range of 15-22) Procedure 1.Pretest (27 listening items) 2.L1 listening strategies for intervention cohort: such as guessing, making Inference, identifying topics, repetition and note-taking 3.Post-test (27 listening items)
Posttest Pursuing the same focus and format after strategy instruction, both groups were given a parallel posttest. Data analysis (1) Reliability for pre-post tests was estimated 0.71 and 0.70. (2) T-test was run to compute the mean scores of both cohorts on listening ability.
Results Table 1. The overall descriptive statistics of pre- and post-test Test sub- sections Pre-testPost-testN ExperimentalControlExperimentalControl MeanSDMeanSDMeanSDMeanSD CR (11) 8.962.638 9.801.329.961.3389.921.258 25 C (9) 6.721.208 7.92.9788.00.9578.04.909 25 CM (5) 2.521.005 3.161.0683.521.0853.161.068 25 R (2).56.507.84.676.96.676.96.746 25 Total 18.763.2521.72 3.1722.443.5222.083.17 50
Table 2. t-test comparing pre and post test performance tdfSig. (2-tailed) Pair 1 Pre-post experiment CR -2.11624.045 Pair 2 Pre-post experiment C -5.01824.000 Pair 3 Pre-post experiment CM -4.47224.000 Pair 4 Pre-post experiment R -2.61924.015 Pair 5 Pre-post control CR.76824.450 Pair 6 Pre-post control C.61824.543 Pair 7 Pre-post control CM 2.024.057 Pair 8 Pre-post control R.56924.574
Summary and discussion The finding is consistent with the findings of of those listening studies conducted in a second or foreign language learning (e.g., Carrier, 2003; Cross, 2009; Graham & Macaro, 2008; Vandergrift & Tafaghodtari, 2010). The outcome of this study in light of cognitive strategy instruction such as making inference and repetition supported some study findings (e.g., Chang & Read, 2006; Cai & Lee, 2010). The control group having had no guided attention to the listening comprehension other than their regular classroom drills, had virtually an approaching significance in identifying topic in the post-test listening performance (р <.057) and this result might be linked to the pre-listening activities, such as familiarity of the topic practised in the classroom.
Limitations Merely Iranian females at varied ages. No control over their previous trip in oversees. Lack of control over participants’ social, educational and psychological knowledge background. Merely intermediate students in the language institute in Iran took part in the study. No assessment on how much different kinds of L1 listening strategy instruction contribute to L2 listening improvement. Directions for Future Studies A new research design needs to include opportunities to observe participants’ attempt while using L1 listening strategies on authentic listening tasks in their high school or college content classrooms.
Conclusion Confidence in listening comprehension among EFL/ESL This study suggests that L1 listening strategy instruction such as guessing, making inference, identifying topics, repetition and note taking can improve students' listening comprehension of material in an EFL context that they will encounter in their high school and college. The result serves a starting point what kind of listening strategies students will mostly use so that teachers would more appropriately prepare their students for high achievements.