Presentation on theme: "“Learning to listen” A pedagogical cycle for: teaching the listening process raising metacognitive awareness improving comprehension."— Presentation transcript:
“Learning to listen” A pedagogical cycle for: teaching the listening process raising metacognitive awareness improving comprehension
BACKGROUND & JUSTIFICATION LEARNERS’ PERCEPTIONS OF LISTENNG most difficult skill toughest to improve least pleasant to learn source of anxiety CRITICAL IMPORTANCE OF LISTENING most used skill negotiation of meaning Important to learners noticing PROCESS APPROACH “demystify the skills” metacognition strategy instruction metacognitive awareness
METACOGNITIVE AWARENESS / STRATEGY USE SUCCESSFUL LEARNING OUTCOMES Thomas (1988); Jessner (2006) Bilingual Advantage Winne (1995); Bolitho et. al (2003); Palmer & Goetz (1988) General Learning Schoonen, Hulstijn & Bossers (1998); Muniz-Swicegood (1994) L1/L2 Reading Purpura (1997) L2 Test Performance Imhof (2001) L1 Listening L2 Writing Fortune (20o5)
METACOGNITIVE AWARENESS IMPROVED L2 LISTENINGCOMPREHENSION Carrier, (2003); Chamot (2005); O’Malley & Chamot (1990); Thompson & Rubin (1994); Ross & Rost, (1991); Thompson & Rubin (1996); Vandergrift (1997; 2004); Vandergrift, Goh, Mareschal, & Tafaghodtari; (2006); Vandergrift & Tafaghodtari (2010) RESEARCHERS HAVE EXAMINED THE LINK BETWEEN: and have found a positive correlation.
HOW CAN WE RAISE LEARNERS’ METACOGNITIVE AWARENESS? A pedagogical cycle of controlled, cognitive & metacognitive strategy training which will: develop understanding of the listening process train students in effective listening strategy use separate listening practice from listening performance mirror real world listening activities provide practice with and promote awareness of the metacognitive processes underlying listening comprehension
1. At the end of the treatment, what will be the difference between the two groups in terms of listening comprehension? 2. At the end of the treatment, what will be the difference between the two groups on a final measure of metacognitive awareness? 3. How will the experimental groups respond to the pedagogical cycle in post-treatment focus group interviews? How will their responses differ from those of the comparison groups in similar focus group interviews? RESEARCH QUESTIONS
PARTICIPANTS Upper-Intermediate Level Students Appropriate Listening Level 65% of class time devoted to listening Authentic Materials Four Intact OPIE Listening & Speaking Classes
MATERIALS & INSTRUMENTS END OF QUARTER MPT Listening Alternative Listening Assessment MALQ Focus Group Interviews During the Quarter Checklist Observations of all Classes BEGINNING OF THE QUARTER Michigan Placement Test (Listening) (MPT) Alternative Listening Assessment Metacognitive Awareness Listening Questionnaire (MALQ)
Michigan Placement Test Metacognitive Awareness in Listening Questionnaire Alternative Listening Assessment Observation checklists Quantitative Observation data Focus group interviews Qualitative DATA ANALYSIS
LIMITATIONS LIMITATIONS Isolation of a single variableStudent placementLack of think-aloud protocol/stimulated recallResearcher as teacher
RQ1: Experimental group will outperform comparison group on final measure of listening comprehension RQ2: Experimental group will outperform the comparison group on a final measure of metacognitive awareness RQ3: Experimental group will respond positively to the pedagogical cycle Expected Findings (Goh & Taib, 2006; Graham & Macaro, 2008; Rubin, 1994; Thompson & Rubin, 1996; Vandergrift, 2002; Vandergrift & Tafaghodtari, 2010).
Your consent to our cookies if you continue to use this website.