Reciprocal-Scaffolding Effects on EFL Learners' Oral Skills and Their Self-Efficacy
Subject Areas : All areas of language and translation
Marziye Sabzevari
1
,
Neda Fatehi Rad
2
,
Massoud Tajaddini
3
1 - Department of English Language, Maybod Branch, Islamic Azad University, Maybod, Iran
2 - Department of English Language, Kerman Branch, Islamic Azad University, Kerman, Iran
3 - Assistant Professor, Department of English Language, Kerman Branch, Islamic Azad University, Kerman, Iran
Keywords: Speaking Skill, listening skill, Scaffolding Strategies, Reciprocal Strategies, On-Line Learning,
Abstract :
This experimental study investigated the impact of reciprocal-scaffolding teaching procedures on two aspects of learners' quality: their self-efficacy and speaking and listening skills. The study also analyzed the EFL learners’ attitudes on the use of reciprocal-scaffolding strategies via LMS. Moreover, it highlighted the possible difference between the effect of reciprocal-scaffolding strategies on EFL learners' oral skills and their self-efficacy. To this end, 48 pre-intermediate Iranian EFL learners were selected as the participants. A concurrent embedded mixed-methods design was employed to collect qualitative and quantitative data through the pre and posttest PET-test and an interview at the end of term. The results of independent samples t-tests and paired t-tests indicated that students who received treatment in form of integration of scaffolding and reciprocal strategies received both statically and practically significantly higher marks on speaking and listening skills, and self–efficacy than did the students in the control group. There was also a significant relationship between self-efficacy and success in speaking and listening performance. It can be inferred that reciprocal-scaffolding strategies have a significant positive impact on the improvement of oral skills. Finally, the results of the interview revealed the positive and negative attitudes of students towards the use of the strategies in LMS context.
Al-Sibai, D. (2004). Promoting oral fluency of second language learners: educational linguistics Department of English. King Saud University. Adult Learners of English.
Bandura, A. (1994). Social cognitive theory and exercise of control over HIV infection. In Preventing AIDS (pp. 25-59): Springer.
Burns, A., & Joyce, H. (1997). Focus on Speaking: ERIC.
Clarke, B. A. (2004). A shape is not defined by its shape: Developing young children's geometric understanding. Australian Research in Early Childhood Education, 11(2), 110-127.
Cole, M., Cole, S. R., & Lightfoot, C. (2005). The Development of Children: Macmillan.
Daniels, H. (2001). Vygotsky and Pedagogy. London: Routledge Falmer. In.
Duchesne, S., & McMaugh, A. (2018). Educational Psychology for Learning and Teaching: Cengage AU.
Greenfield, P. M. (1984). A theory of the teacher in the learning activities of everyday life. Everyday cognition: Its development in a social context.
Grunwald, T., & Corsbie-Massay, C. (2006). Guidelines for cognitively efficient multimedia learning tools: educational strategies, cognitive load, and interface design. Academic Medicine, 81(3), 213-223.
Hammond, J. (2001). Scaffolding: Teaching and learning in language and literacy education: ERIC.
Hashey, J. M., & Connors, D. J. (2003). Learn from our journey: Reciprocal teaching action research. The Reading Teacher, 57(3), 224-232.
Jacobs, G. M. (2001). Providing the scaffold: A model for early childhood/primary teacher preparation. Early Childhood Education Journal, 29(2), 125-130.
Jacobs, G. M., Lee, C., & Ng, M. (1997). Cooperative Learning in the Thinking Classroom: Research and Theoretical Perspectives. Online Submission.
Jafarigohar, M., & Mortazavi, M. (2016). Promoting metacognition in EFL classrooms through scaffolding motivation. Iranian Journal of Applied Linguistics (IJAL), 19(1), 73-98.
MacIntyre, P. D., & Gardner, R. C. (1991). Investigating language class anxiety using the focused essay technique. The Modern Language Journal, 75(3), 296-304.
Mansouri, S., &MashhadiHeidar, D. (2019). Peer/teacher technology-enhanced scaffolding through process approach and Iranian EFL learners’ vocabulary knowledge: A probe into self-regulation. Journal of Teaching Language Skills, 38(3), 189-223.
Mercer, N. (1994). Neo-Vygotskian theory and classroom education. Language, Literacy, and Learning in Educational Practice, 92-110
Miller, P. H. (2002). Theories of Developmental Psychology: Macmillan.
Palinscar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1(2), 117-175.
Pressley, M. (2002). Metacognition and self-regulated comprehension. What research has to say about reading instruction, 3, 291-309.
Razaghi, M., Bagheri, M. S., & Yamini, M. (2019). The Impact of Cognitive Scaffolding on Iranian EFL Learners' Speaking Skill. International Journal of Instruction, 12(4), 95-112.
Rosenberger, C. (2003). Scaffolding Language, Scaffolding Learning: Teaching Second Language Learners in the Mainstream Classroom. Language Arts, 80(4), 310
Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning: Oxford University Press.
Stone, C. A. (1998). The metaphor of scaffolding: Its utility for the field of learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 31(4), 344-364.
Stricklin, K. (2011). Hands‐on reciprocal teaching: A comprehension technique. The Reading Teacher, 64(8), 620-625.
Tani, M. (2005). Quiet, but only in class: Reviewing the in-class participation of Asian students. Paper presented at the Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australia Conference, Sydney, New South Wales. Retrieved September.
Todd, R. B., & Tracey, D. H. (2006). Reciprocal Teaching and Comprehension: A Single Subject Research Study. Online Submission.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1980). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes: Harvard university press.
Wells, G. (1999). Dialogic inquiry: Towards a Socio-cultural Practice and Theory of Education: Cambridge University Press.
Zarandi, S. Z. A., & Rahbar, B. (2014). The impact of interactive scaffolding on Iranian EFL learners’ speaking ability. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World (IJLLALW), 6(2), 344-353.
Reciprocal-Scaffolding Effects on EFL Learners' Oral Skills and Their Self-Efficacy
Marzieh Sabzevari1, Neda Fatehi Rad2 ⃰⃰⃰⃰⃰⃰, Masoud Tajadini3
1Ph.D. Candidate, Department of English Language, Maybod Branch, Islamic Azad University, Maybod, Iran
2Assistant Professor, Department of English Language, Kerman Branch, Islamic Azad University, Kerman, Iran
3Assistant Professor, Department of English Language, Kerman Branch, Islamic Azad University, Kerman, Iran
2022-03-01 2022/04/28
Abstract
Keywords: Scaffolding Strategies; Reciprocal Strategies; Listening Skill; Speaking Skill; On-Line Learning
INTRODUCTION
Proponents of Quality Teaching and Productive Pedagogies (2001) are largely inspired and influenced by socio-cultural theories of teaching and learning. The documents emphasize the important “role of student direction in learning, where students influence the nature of the activities they undertake and assume responsibility for the activities with which they engage. An interesting challenge in teaching English as a foreign language is to develop students’ oral fluency. Teachers and researchers, therefore, are in the need to look for strategies that help students in the process of making them able to communicate in a natural way and be more participative in their English classes, increasing as a result of the student-talking time. It asks for the teaching techniques that focus on the learners' linguistic and psychological needs (Greenfield, 1984; Hashey & Conners, 2003). One of the most visible features that students bring to class is a low level of in-class participation (Tani, 2005), and one of the most interesting challenges in teaching L2 is finding ways to help students improve their oral fluency. This is especially true in countries where learners share a common mother tongue and have little or no exposure to the L2 outside the classroom (Al-Sibai, 2004). Some researchers have pointed out that one of the skills producing anxiety is speaking (Macintyre and Gardner, 1991). Thus, it would seem that in a foreign language context, speaking is definitely not easy. According to Berns (1997), a common problem for EFL teachers is dealing with a passive class, where students are unresponsive and avoid interaction with the teacher. This is especially true when a teacher seeks interaction in a teacher-class dialogue, such as asking questions to the class as a whole, expecting at least one student to respond. Sometimes students may understand the questions and want to participate, but they are not given enough time and opportunity to share their ideas. Moreover, some of the learners are not willing to be active since they are deprived of the self-efficacy to nurture their language abilities. Similarly, very old strategies such as asking for repetition in pronunciation and asking for understanding without contextualizing the learner to the discussion, or no strategy used at all, interfere with the oral fluency development in classrooms. It is very alarming that EFL learners are not competent in developing their oral competence in their process (Stricklin, 2011; Cole, & Cole, 2001).
One major limitation of scaffolding is lack of skill among teachers so as to treat their learners and the situation competently. In order to handle learners in scaffolding lessons, teachers need professional training. This teaching strategy requires the teacher to allow the students to make some mistakes in order to learn. Teachers not trained specifically in this method are unlikely to intentionally allow pupils to make mistakes in the process of learning (Cole, & Cole, 2001; Daniels, 2001; Hashey, Conners, 2003). Scaffolding can be disadvantageous for teachers, because it necessitates giving up control to allow learners to learn at their own pace. It is also time-consuming; you might not have adequate time to complete your entire scaffolding lesson. On certain occasions, you may be forced to cut short the time allocated for each student in order to accommodate all learners. This can result in frustration, and the students' urge to learn can slowly fade (Hashey, Conners, 2003). As an additional limitation is that in order to handle learners in scaffolding lessons, teachers need professional training. This teaching strategy requires the teacher to allow the students to make some mistakes in order to learn. Teachers not trained specifically in this method are unlikely to intentionally allow pupils to make mistakes in the process of learning (Stricklin, 2011; Cole, & Cole, 2001).
However, due to its diverse interpretations (Hammond, 2002), scaffolding does not provide educators with clear and definite guidelines on the ways that it should be used to achieve successful teaching. In fact, it appears to become an umbrella term for any kind of teacher support (Jacobs, 2001). Also, due to the metaphoric nature of the term, which implies “a view of the adult as molder of passive child” (Stone, 1998, p. 362), scaffolding tends to be interpreted as a variation of direct instruction. Consequently, when taken out of its theoretical context, it loses the richness of the original meaning implied by socio-cultural theories and thus it invalidates Vygotskian idea of teaching as co-construction of knowledge within student-centered activities. Such a view of scaffolding is an unfortunate step back to a traditional, pre-Piagetian way of teaching which is adult-driven in nature and is based in an understanding of teacher – learner interaction as a one-way process. As the metaphor of scaffolding remains increasingly popular among practitioners and educational researchers, there is a need for a clear articulation of the basic theoretical principles which will ensure its appropriate use (Stone, 1998).
Based on the discussion above, and to eliminate the discussed deficiencies observed in scaffolding procedures, this study tends to integrate scaffolding procedures with reciprocal teaching techniques where a more prominent role is dedicated to the learners as they feel they are observed as an independent and self-sufficient learner in the teaching context. Moreover, integrations of reciprocal and scaffolding strategies have some practical implications for learners and teachers. In fact, the integration can lead to quality teaching and self-directed learning that is a significant part of the development of students' positive attitudes towards life-long learning, and which is viewed as a key element in the recognition of quality teaching. Achieving high standards of primary and secondary education has been associated with “promoting education for further education and training, work and lifelong learning” (Daniels 2001, p.15). Thus, self-directed, life-long learning has been perceived as an important aim of quality teaching. To achieve this goal, teachers have to engage in effective communication with their students which includes “a repertoire of inquiry techniques and teaching strategies as well as the ability to use a range of tools, activities, and resources to engage their students in learning” (Hammond, 2002).
A well-known practical implication of Vygotsky's theory, the metaphor of scaffolding, which is used to capture the nature of support and guidance in learning, can assist teachers’ understanding and developing of such techniques. Over the past two decades, a large number of educators and researchers have used the concept of scaffolding as a metaphor to describe and explain the role of adults or more knowledgeable peers in guiding children's learning and development (Stone. 1998; Krause, Bochner & Duchesne 2003; Hammond 2002; Daniels 2001). Teachers find the metaphor appealing as it "resonates with their own intuitive conceptions of what it means to intervene successfully in students learning" and "offers what is lacking in much literature on education- an effective conceptual metaphor for the quality of teacher intervention in learning" (Mercer, 1994, in Hammond 2002, p.2). As pointed out by Stone, it highlights one of the key features of children's learning, namely, that it is often guided by others, who strive (explicitly or implicitly) to structure learning opportunities (Skehan,1998).
The study gap can be observed from a number of perspectives. One is related to the deficiencies of teaching oral skills in the EFL context, where the researcher is dealing with. The other is discussing the problems by referring to the pitfalls of reciprocal and scaffolding teaching procedures, and finally the next is regarding the weaknesses that make the learners feel inefficient in their processes of language acquisition.
Based on the proposed discussion, the following research questions were designed to investigate:
RQ1. What is the impact of reciprocal-scaffolding strategies on EFL learners’ listening and speaking?
RQ2. What is the impact of using reciprocal-scaffolding strategies on EFL learners’ self-efficacy?
RQ3.What are the EFL learners’ attitudes on the use of reciprocal-scaffolding strategies via LMS? RQ4. Is there a statistically meaningful difference between the effect of reciprocal-scaffolding strategies on EFL learners' oral skills and their self-efficacy?
LITERATURE REVIEW
With the help of the developments in information and communication technologies, English language learners and teachers can be provided with various educational tools to create environments where learners and teachers can interact and collaborate with each other specially during the Crona Virus Pandemic without the boundaries of time and space. Considering the emergence of a new generation of students, who are called the ‘net generation’ or, in Pressly's (2002) words, ‘digital natives’, these new forms of educational tools are expected to be embraced and used in and outside the classroom via language management system (LMS). The importance of teacher – student communication in learner’s achievements is strongly emphasized in the socio-cultural educational theory, originated by Vygotsky (1978) and further developed in modern research (Daniels, 2001; Grunwald, & Corsbie-Massay, 2006; Gibbons, 2015). This theory describes the process of teaching and learning as "much more than face-to-face interaction or the simple transmission of prescribed knowledge and skills" (Daniels, 2001, p.2) but rather places stress on dialogue and co-construction of knowledge (Wells, 1999). It describes teaching as strongly influenced by, and embedded in its social and cultural context and points to the meaning of teaching as the transformation of socially constructed knowledge into that which is owned by the learner. This type of teaching assumes a specific paradigm of teacher-student interaction where the role of the adult is that of collaborator and co-constructor. A strong emphasis is on the active position of the learner, which is essential for the development of learning skills.
In a more recent study by Mansouri and MashhadiHeidar (2019), the effect of peer and teacher scaffolding through a process approach in a technology-enhanced environment on vocabulary learning was explored. The participants were divided into three groups each consisting of 40 learners. One group of the participants received peer scaffolding; the second group was exposed to teacher scaffolding via the Telegram app based on process approach principles, while the third group served as the control group. The control group received conventional vocabulary teaching. The results of a one-way ANOVA revealed that both peer and teacher scaffolding significantly affected vocabulary learning. However, there was no significant difference between peer and teacher scaffolding in terms of their effects on vocabulary learning. The results of a two-way ANOVA indicated that the main effect of treatment on vocabulary learning was significant; however, there was no statistically significant difference between the effects of the two treatment modalities on students’ vocabulary learning.
Razaghi, Bagheri, and Yamini (2019) analyzed the impact of cognitive scaffolding on Iranian EFL learners’ speaking skill. The results indicated that cognitive scaffolding could foster speaking skill and its components. Besides, it was found that learners’ level of proficiency did not mediate the impact of scaffolding on the studied dependent variables. Therefore, both upper-intermediate and pre-intermediate learners equally benefited from cognitive scaffolds. Jafarigohar and Mortazavi (2016) investigated the impact of motivational scaffolds on a group of Iranian EFL learners’ individual and socially-shared metacognition. The participants’ think-aloud protocols in individual and pair activities were analyzed, and instances of metacognitive activities were identified. The data were analyzed through two Mann-Whitney U tests, and the results indicated that motivational scaffolds statistically significantly enhanced the use of metacognitive strategies at both inter and intra-individual levels.
Zarandi and Rahbar (2014) addressed the effectiveness of interactive strategies of scaffolding on English as a foreign language (EFL) learners' speaking ability. A sample of 60 Iranian EFL learners was selected based on a result of their performance on Oxford Placement-test. Afterward, they took a speaking pretest, and they were randomly assigned to one experimental and one control group. Interactive strategies of scaffolding were given to the experimental group. The control group received routine speaking instruction in ten sessions. Finally, the groups' performance was tested by speaking posttest. The participants were examined in pairs by two examiners. The inter-rater reliability of the examiners was calculated. The results of the paired-samples t-test indicated that interactive scaffolding strategies were effective in enhancing EFL learners' speaking ability. The findings of this study provided insights for teachers in a way that they found scaffolding provided the teachers both with the learners’ actual level of performance and with their learning potential. They could prescribe different individual learning plans for learners with different learning needs. The goal of this study, regarding the shortcomings of scaffolding teaching strategies, was to introduce and practice the integration of reciprocal scaffolding strategies on EFL learners’ self-efficacy trait and their oral production.
METHOD
The study followed the principles of a mixed-method study by implementing both qualitative and quantitative data gathering procedures using tests, questionnaire and interviews. To choose the right sample of the study, the researcher used random sampling procedures by which each individual among the population had an equal chance of being selected. This study implemented reciprocal-scaffolding teaching procedures to impact two aspects of the learners’ quality: their self-efficacy and speaking and listening skills. Table 1 presents an overview of the design of the study by referring to the detailed stages of the study that were carried out.
Table 1
Research Design and Procedures Paradigm
Population: 48 EFL participants Random Sampling: 36 EFL learners | |||||
Tools of Data Collection | |||||
Cambridge Placement-test | PET-test s of speaking | PET-test s of Listening | A 21-item Self-efficacy Questionnaire | ||
Techniques of Data Analysis | |||||
To answer the first two questions: Mean, z score, Std. deviation t-test | To answer the third question: Means, std. deviation, t-test, Chi2, frequencies To answer the last question: interview | ||||
Classroom Procedures for EG
The researcher had to follow clear and well selected and known procedures that would support implication of scaffolding and reciprocal strategies for the EG during the semester as the learners were exposed to LMS teaching and learning procedures. Considering the idea that scaffolding is subject to a number of theoretical and practical limitations as Stone (1998) discussed, it was necessary to use reciprocal strategies so as to compensate for the deficiencies that were observed when implementing scaffolding. Stone suggested that even though scaffolding is substantially based on Vygotskian view of teaching as guided by others, it doesn’t assist an understanding of the nature of such guidance (Jacobs, 2001; Hammond, 2002). In fact, it rather hinders an understanding of Vygotskian interpretation of the relationship between teacher and learner as co-construction of knowledge, especially this gap is more observable when the teaching context is limited to online teaching and LMS where, as Stone discussed, teaching is supposed to be one-sided and teacher-centered. Stone referred to a study of Searle (1984, in Stone 1998) who expressed the concern that too literal an adherence to a scaffolding metaphor, especially in the hands of insensitive teachers, could result in "the imposition of a structure on the student" (Stone 1998, p.349). In other words, the metaphor of scaffolding can lead to viewing the teacher-learner interaction in the classroom as predominantly adult-driven and one-sided in nature. This view of scaffolding, if applied to classroom teaching, might take educators back to a pre-Piagetian, traditional way of teaching through direct instruction. Stone (1998) emphasizes the importance of finely tuned communication between the learner and teacher in order to construct new understanding.
Regarding the limitations that were observed when using scaffolding teaching procedures, it was decided, as the goal of the study, to add a combination of teaching procedures that first of all would overcome the limitations of scaffolding techniques and second would ease and enhance listening-speaking ability of the learners based on the principles of RT and scaffolding. These principles fall within the following procedures and classroom activities. These procedures tend to be both supportive of the role of the learners and at the same time, support the role of the learners to be independent and function as a teacher and instructor to support others in the groups. At the same time, the procedures are arranged in a way that they would establish the necessary connection and interaction from learners to learners. These steps included the following eight steps:
ü The teacher encouraged the students of a particular group to select a topic;
ü She developed a discussion of the topic. The teacher models the entire process step by step using structured dialogues;
ü She modeled appropriate strategies for discussion such as word predicting, questioning, clarifying, and summarizing (Palincsar & Brown, 1984). It occurred in the form of dialogues between teachers and students. At first, the students learn the four key strategies and practice them.
ü She encouraged students to ask and answer questions based on the topic. The teacher provided the students with a chance to get involved and coaches them on how to ask appropriate questions, write adequate summaries, and so on.
ü She improvised a dialog as the group used this dialogue to foster both their listening comprehension and students’ awareness of the strategies;
ü She continued the process of dialoguing, and clarifying any unclear idea
ü She began to get students take the role of instructor or dialogue leader as they became more facile with the dialogue process;
ü She assumed the role of guide or facilitator, rather than a leader. Finally, the students take on greater responsibility to carry out the whole process. Gradually, the teacher’s role as a leader decreases.
According to the proposed teaching strategies above, it can be assumed that RT is a scaffolded discussion method that is based on the teaching strategies, scaffolding and modeling, and social interaction. The suggested procedures and instructions allow a teacher to model and give the students enough practice to foster their learners using and practicing those four main strategies as well as the ones proposed by RT to construct teaching-learning context in a social setting even if all of the processes are undertaken online and happen in accordance with LMS context. The students try to monitor their own thinking through the teaching processes as they receive help from others and are supported by the teacher and learners. During the given processes, the teacher tried to function in two ways:
First to provide enough space for the learners to function independently second, to follow the procedures step by step. In effect, there is an attempt that the integration of RT and scaffolding procedures be implemented as strategies that would promote both the language knowledge and communication skills.
Teaching Procedures for CG
The learners in the CG were instructed using the traditional teaching procedures in terms of word and dialogue memorization, topic discussion, reading and writing activates that were done at home and checked by the teacher online. The activities were limited to the methods that were mostly teacher-centered and controlled by the teacher. Enough attention is not given to the role of the learners as independent agents and their support is limited to the teaching-learning activities that are selected by the teacher.
Data Collection Procedures
The first source of data was using placement-test that was used so as to homogenize the learners of the two groups. Using this test, very high and very low learners based on the z scores and the degree of divergence form the midpoint were discarded. Thus, the participants who were two standard deviations away from the midpoint were eliminated. The other source was using listening and speaking tests in order to evaluate the listening and speaking levels of the learners before and after they were exposed to the treatment. To this goal, PET-test for listening and speaking were used. During the first and the last classes of the learners, the learners were exposed to the test of listening containing 25 items and immediately after it, each two individuals were interviewed for the speaking test as two examiners rated their speaking skill. Moreover, the candidates’ voices were recorded for any future reference. The next instrument was using self-efficacy questionnaire to estimate the EFL learners’ efficacy. The subjects received the questionnaire once at the beginning of the course and them at the end when they had received the treatment. The interview was tape recorded to allow for transcription and close analysis. The focus group was interviewed (EG) to reflect their attitude on the use of the teaching procedures in their speaking and listening.
RESULTS
This study was carried out so as to introduce the teaching strategies that would compensate for the shortcomings that the use of scaffolding strategies imposed to the teaching environment. In fact, the study aimed at observing the effectiveness of teaching strategies that would be proposed by integration of RT and scaffolding teaching strategies. According the data that were collected via three instruments of listening and speaking tests, questionnaire and interview, the researcher came to some significant achievements. The scores of the speaking and listening tests that were achieved thought scores that were provided by three raters indicated that the learners in the EG group improved much satisfactorily than those who were trained using the traditional teaching procedures. The raise in the speaking scores was higher than the listening among the EG. Moreover, the t-test value also indicated that the difference between pre and posttest scores were significant and meaningful and thus the raise in the speaking and listening means of EG was not subject to chance. It could be an indication of the effectiveness of scaffolding-reciprocal teaching strategies in LMS environment and as a result supporting the assumption that the integration of the two teaching techniques can positively and effectively impact oral production. Moreover, as another achievement of the study was that the effect on speaking was more effective than listening. In other words, the use of scaffolding-reciprocal teaching strategies was more effective to improve speaking rather than listening. However, for both these skills, meaningful relationships could be observed between the use of the procedures and the oral skills.
Besides, the data of the questionnaire clearly indicated the learners’ self-efficacy improvement from pre- to post-administration. As a goal of the study, it was important to improve the learners’ self-efficacy using the strategies that could impact their learning level and strategies. First it was the impact of teaching strategies in speaking and listening that granted the learners the opportunity to behave independently. Acceding to the data of the self-efficacy questionnaire, the strategies that were taught by the teacher and used by the learners led to self-efficacy improvement as the learners were instructed using the principles of reciprocal and scaffolding teaching strategies. In fact, it was reciprocal and scaffolding teaching strategies that resulted in self-efficacy of the learners since in this teaching situation and providing the learners with the given teaching strategies, the learners were supported and assisted by their peers and more than their teacher. Moreover, and as an additional source of evidence, the data of the interview could support the positive effect of reciprocal and scaffolding teaching strategies in developing oral language class. The majority of the learners in the EG clearly supported the idea that using these teaching strategies were effective enough to satisfy them and at the same time improve their amount of learning and speed. They could learn faster as they felt less anxious and more confident. The reason lied in the established teaching context that was exercised and practiced by the teacher. Moreover, the use of reciprocal-scaffolding teaching strategies was an important aspect that led to their success. Although the participants faced some limitations in the use of LMS, the achievements were much higher than expected. Lack of teacher and instructors’ help was a great problem for the learners since in some limited cases, to answer some of their questions, they needed to refer to their teachers’ help.
DISCUSSION
Regarding the given research questions, the following null hypotheses were presented:
H01. Using reciprocal-scaffolding strategies has no effect on the EFL learners’ oral skills.
H02. Using reciprocal-scaffolding strategies has no effect on the EFL learners' self-efficacy.
H03. There is not statistically any significant difference between the effect of scaffolding strategies on EFL learners' oral skills and self-efficacy.
To discuss the first hypothesis, the data that were achieved via pre and post listening and speaking tests can make the point clear. In effect, major improvement was observed in the oral skills of the learners in the EG who were exposed to both teaching strategies of RT and scaffolding. The improvement can be supported by looking both at the pre and posttests means and the t-test s. Based on the data, the mean for the pre-listening test of EG was calculated to be 10.05 that increased to 12.72 for the posttest. The difference tells us that this group improved considerably in their listening skill. Thus, the first hypothesis is rejected. Moreover, according to the data, the mean for the pre speaking test was calculated to be 11.14 and it changed to 13.441 for the posttest of the same group. The difference between the means of pre and posttest showed the speaking skill for the learners in the EG. As the data of the listening and speaking tests revealed, the use of scaffolding and reciprocal integration positively impacted the listening and speaking ability of the leaners who were instructed using the given procedures. In fact, the use of the procedures for the improvement of oral skills proved to be effective since in both cases, the difference between the means and the p values supported this assumption. However, it has to be noticed that the impact had been more effective on the speaking rather than listening. The means of speaking improved more significant than the listening and it can be an indication of more improvement from pre to posttest.
The second hypothesis is also rejected since the data of pre and post administration of self-efficacy questionnaire proved that the learners' self-efficacy improved significantly and this can be supported by looking at both the means and t-test values. The level of self-efficacy increased significantly as the learners were exposed to collaborative and learners-centered approach. Since learners felt independent during the teaching and learning processes, they felt more self-efficient and this can be assumed as the result of being self-centered and independent. Moreover, scaffolding assisted the learners collaborate with others in the group and thus they developed their self-efficacy more deeply. Furthermore, the third research hypothesis is also rejected since it was revealed that the relationship between learners' self-efficacy and their oral skills improvement is direct and significant. In other words, the higher was the speaking level of the learners, the higher grew their self-efficacy. In other words, meaningful relationship was observed between the levels of high and low EFL learners and their level of self-efficacy.
CONCLUSION
According to the achievements, it can be suggested that most of the learners preferred RT associated with scaffolding instructional strategies in oral skills development and their active participation in all different activities that led to their listening-speaking development. They expressed that appreciation of the program as stated in the interview was a sign of positive impact of both RT instruction in LMS context and collaboration in being scaffolded. Reciprocal teaching strategy is defined as a strategy that directly teaches learners to use meta-cognitive thinking while constructing meaning from a text. In fact, it is a teaching method being considered as an interactive one, in which EFL learners interact with the teaching context as their prior experience is activated and improves their motivation and interest. It is a strategy that makes dialogue between students within themselves or students with their teacher. Once the instructor has modeled the process, students take on the role of instructor and teach one another using reciprocal teaching strategy. This instructional strategy allows an instructor to model and give the learners enough practice to interact and construct a dialog or activity through sub-sections of reciprocal teaching strategy (making prediction, generating questioning, clarifying and summarizing); furthermore, this activation is used before, during and after any class time period. The instructor can use this strategy as a whole class, guided teaching to improve a deeper understanding of text (Stricklin, 2011).
The achievements of the interview revealed some of the shortcomings that were experienced during the teaching processes in LMS context. Most of the criticisms related to the teaching context where the learners did not receive the necessary feedback from their teachers and peers. It means that the learners have to be assisted to gain the required feedback in correcting their errors if the teacher means to get them improve faster. Hacker and Tenent (2002) stated “reciprocal teaching is an instructional method in which small groups of students learn to improve their reading comprehension through scaffold instruction of comprehension-monitoring strategies” (p. 669). Thus, in this teaching model, the students learn some key strategies of RT and scaffolding teaching and practice them. Moreover, the teacher models the entire process step by step using structured classroom activities. In parallel, the teacher gives the students a chance to get involved and coaches them on how to get involved in the teaching processes, ask appropriate questions, and state opinions, and so on. Gradually, the teacher’s role as a leader decrease. On the other hand, students’ role increases. Finally, the students take on greater responsibility to carry out the whole process. They agreed that teacher's possession of a number of effective teaching strategies is considered one of the main key factors for their professional success, enhancing students’ performance, improving their motivation and promoting their abilities to discover suitable models for effective learning. This will be reflected in students' ability to draw on their background knowledge to pay attention on the main points in content, to enhance higher-order thinking skills and change the new learning into real life situations. This will enable them to evaluate knowledge, understand meaning and organize it in their own knowledge structure. Based on the study achievements, it was concluded that one of the main benefits of scaffolded instruction is that it provided for a supportive learning environment. In a scaffolded and RT learning environment, students are free to ask questions, provide feedback and support their peers in learning new material. When learners incorporate scaffolding and RT in the classroom, they become more of a mentor and facilitator of knowledge rather than the dominant content expert. This teaching style provides the incentive for students to take a more active role in their own learning. Students share the responsibility of teaching and learning through scaffolds that require them to move beyond their current skill and knowledge levels. RT provides them with self-monitoring and self-dependent activities. Through this interaction, students are able to take ownership of the learning event. The need to implement RT and scaffolding occurs when learners realize they are not progressing on some aspect of a task or unable to understand a particular concept. Although scaffolding is often carried out between the instructor and one student, scaffolds can successfully be used for an entire class.
The study bears some pedagogical and psychological implications for teachers, learners, administrators, practitioners and textbook designers who are busy teaching their students in LMS. Before everything, teachers will know that RT teaching together with scaffolding principles in the area of oral skills can impact the EFL learners' ability on production level in a positive and effective manner when working in LMS context. Moreover, teachers also will become aware of the importance of strategy teaching that can impact the learners' self-efficacy. In other words, the use of the collaborative procedures of RT and scaffolding that are selected purposefully and consciously by the teacher can help the learners improve both their language skills as well as their attitudes towards learning. Textbook designers using the achievement of the study can include the principles of MAI in their materials and help the learners to consciously use these principles in their textbooks so as to improve both their linguistic knowledge and their learners’ motivation to study more enthusiastically. An important implication of this study is the need to provide EFL students with further opportunities to use a wide variety of strategies in order to raise learners’ awareness of developing their linguistic competence. Students should be made aware that a wider repertoire of techniques and procedures with higher frequency of their use are critical in learning language effectively.
In order to encourage EFL learners to employ out-of-class sources and collaboration in LMS, language teachers should raise students’ awareness about their benefits and their usefulness as they do their best to exercise them. Greater student awareness about learning might help learners to become more self-confident and successful language learners. Teachers need to create an input-rich environment inside and outside the classroom by providing a variety of activities that stimulate the EFL learners. The research implies a shift from teacher-centered approaches to learner-centered approaches and using extra sources on which the learners can depend is an important contribution that teachers can recommend and follow in their language classes. The classroom teacher needs to be a facilitator who encourages students’ active participation in the learning process and helps learners equip themselves with knowledge, skills and competencies that will enable them to take responsibility for their learning. EFL learners to use language learning has produced positive results. It has allowed students to become more aware of their preferred learning strategies and helped them become more responsible for meeting their own objectives. Such objectives can be achieved when students are trained in strategy use so that they become more independent and effective. Thus, the research indicates a need for more strategy training and instructional programs within Iranian settings of LMS.
References
Al-Sibai, D. (2004). Promoting oral fluency of second language learners: educational linguistics Department of English. King Saud University. Adult Learners of English.
Bandura, A. (1994). Social cognitive theory and exercise of control over HIV infection. In Preventing AIDS (pp. 25-59): Springer.
Burns, A., & Joyce, H. (1997). Focus on Speaking: ERIC.
Clarke, B. A. (2004). A shape is not defined by its shape: Developing young children's geometric understanding. Australian Research in Early Childhood Education, 11(2), 110-127.
Cole, M., Cole, S. R., & Lightfoot, C. (2005). The Development of Children: Macmillan.
Daniels, H. (2001). Vygotsky and Pedagogy. London: Routledge Falmer. In.
Duchesne, S., & McMaugh, A. (2018). Educational Psychology for Learning and Teaching: Cengage AU.
Greenfield, P. M. (1984). A theory of the teacher in the learning activities of everyday life. Everyday cognition: Its development in a social context.
Grunwald, T., & Corsbie-Massay, C. (2006). Guidelines for cognitively efficient multimedia learning tools: educational strategies, cognitive load, and interface design. Academic Medicine, 81(3), 213-223.
Hammond, J. (2001). Scaffolding: Teaching and learning in language and literacy education: ERIC.
Hashey, J. M., & Connors, D. J. (2003). Learn from our journey: Reciprocal teaching action research. The Reading Teacher, 57(3), 224-232.
Jacobs, G. M. (2001). Providing the scaffold: A model for early childhood/primary teacher preparation. Early Childhood Education Journal, 29(2), 125-130.
Jacobs, G. M., Lee, C., & Ng, M. (1997). Cooperative Learning in the Thinking Classroom: Research and Theoretical Perspectives. Online Submission.
Jafarigohar, M., & Mortazavi, M. (2016). Promoting metacognition in EFL classrooms through scaffolding motivation. Iranian Journal of Applied Linguistics (IJAL), 19(1), 73-98.
MacIntyre, P. D., & Gardner, R. C. (1991). Investigating language class anxiety using the focused essay technique. The Modern Language Journal, 75(3), 296-304.
Mansouri, S., &MashhadiHeidar, D. (2019). Peer/teacher technology-enhanced scaffolding through process approach and Iranian EFL learners’ vocabulary knowledge: A probe into self-regulation. Journal of Teaching Language Skills, 38(3), 189-223.
Mercer, N. (1994). Neo-Vygotskian theory and classroom education. Language, Literacy, and Learning in Educational Practice, 92-110
Miller, P. H. (2002). Theories of Developmental Psychology: Macmillan.
Palinscar, A. S., & Brown, A. L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of comprehension-fostering and comprehension-monitoring activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1(2), 117-175.
Pressley, M. (2002). Metacognition and self-regulated comprehension. What research has to say about reading instruction, 3, 291-309.
Razaghi, M., Bagheri, M. S., & Yamini, M. (2019). The Impact of Cognitive Scaffolding on Iranian EFL Learners' Speaking Skill. International Journal of Instruction, 12(4), 95-112.
Rosenberger, C. (2003). Scaffolding Language, Scaffolding Learning: Teaching Second Language Learners in the Mainstream Classroom. Language Arts, 80(4), 310
Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning: Oxford University Press.
Stone, C. A. (1998). The metaphor of scaffolding: Its utility for the field of learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 31(4), 344-364.
Stricklin, K. (2011). Hands‐on reciprocal teaching: A comprehension technique. The Reading Teacher, 64(8), 620-625.
Tani, M. (2005). Quiet, but only in class: Reviewing the in-class participation of Asian students. Paper presented at the Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australia Conference, Sydney, New South Wales. Retrieved September.
Todd, R. B., & Tracey, D. H. (2006). Reciprocal Teaching and Comprehension: A Single Subject Research Study. Online Submission.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1980). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes: Harvard university press.
Wells, G. (1999). Dialogic inquiry: Towards a Socio-cultural Practice and Theory of Education: Cambridge University Press.
Zarandi, S. Z. A., & Rahbar, B. (2014). The impact of interactive scaffolding on Iranian EFL learners’ speaking ability. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World (IJLLALW), 6(2), 344-353.
Biodata
Ms. Marzieh Sabzevari is a Ph.D. student in TEFL at Maybod Islamic Azad University, Yazd, Iran. She has been involved in teaching English for some years at language institutes. Her main areas of interest include methods and techniques of language teaching, CALL, collaborative learning, and innovative teaching methods.
Email: marziye.sabzevari.83@gmail.com
Dr. Neda Fatehi Rad is an assistant professor of English Language Teaching at Islamic Azad University, Kerman Branch, Iran. She mainly teaches language testing, research methodology and teaching language methodology at graduate level and her main areas of interest include teachers' education, cooperative learning, language testing and research. She has published papers in international and national academic journals and presented in several national and international seminars. She has published three books in the field of translation, language learning and teaching.
Email: Nedafatehi@yahoo.com
Dr. Massoud Tajaddini is an assistant professor of English Language Teaching at Islamic Azad University, Kerman Branch, Iran. He mainly teaches language testing, research methodology and teaching language methodology at graduate level and her main areas of interest include teachers' education, cooperative learning, language testing and research. He has published some books in the field of translation, language learning and teaching. He has published papers in international and national academic journals and presented in several national and international seminars. He has published some books in the field of translation, language learning and teaching.
Email: Massoud_taj@yahoo.com
