بررسی تاثیر تدریس راهبردهای فراشناختی شنیداری در تکنیک سایه برروی درک شنیداری زبان آموزان وابسته به زمینه و مستقل از آن

Subject Areas : آموزش زبان انگلیسی

پرستو علی زاده اقیانوس ¹ , مونا خبیری ²

1 - Department of English, Central Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
2 - Department of English, Central Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran

Received: 2017-12-10 Accepted : 2017-12-10 Published : 2017-11-22

Keywords: درک شنیداری, وابسته / نابسته به زمینه, استراتژیهای شنیداری, راهبردهای فراشناختی شنیداری, تکنیک سایه,

Abstract :

هدف از پژوهش حاضر مقایسه تاثیر تدریس راهبردهای فراشناختی شنیداری از طریق تکنیک سایه بر درک شنیداری زبان آموزان وابسته و نابسته به زمینه بوده است. بدین منظور از بین 120 زبان آموز تعداد 85 زبان آموز زن با سطح زبان پیش متوسط و گروه سنی 18 تا 35 سال بر اساس نتایج به دست آمده ازآزمون PET انتخاب شدند.این زبان آموزان در آزمون گروهی شکلهای نهفته GEFT شرکت کردند که بر اساس نمرات کسب شده در آزمون و بر اساس سبک یادگیری به دو گروه آزمایشی وابسته به زمینه FD و مستقل از زمینه FI طبقه بندی شدند (49 FD/ 36 FI). زبان آموزان با هر دو سبک یادگیری/FI FD در دو کلاس مجزا به مدت 5 هفته (دو بار در هفته) تحت آموزش قرار گرفتند.  مهارت درک شنیداری از طریق تلفیق تکنیک سایه و راهبردهای فراشناختی به مدت 45 دقیقه در هر دو کلاس بصورت یکسان آموزش داده شد. نتایج آزمون متغیرهای غیروابسته t-test نشان داد که تفاوت معناداری در نمرات نهایی posttest بین دو گروه FD وFI وجود نداشته و در نتیجه تلفیق آموزش راهبردهای فراشناختی و تکنیک سایه می تواند برای همه زبان آموزان بدون توجه به سبک یادگیری ادراکی آنها (وابسته / نابسته به زمینه) مفید واقع شود.

References:

References

Abraham, R. (1985). Field independence-dependence and the teaching of grammar. TESOL Quarterly, 20, 689-702.

Alharthi, T. H. (2015). Learning Styles and Learning Strategies in Adult Second Language Learning: A Longitudinal Case Study. Life Science Journal, 12(2), 49-59.

Amoli, F. A., & Ghanbari, F. (2013). The effect of conversational shadowing on enhancing Iranian EFL learners’ oral performance based on accuracy. Journal of Advances in English Language Teaching,1(1), 12-23.

Anderson, N. J. (1991). Individual differences in strategy use in second language reading and testing. Modern Language Journal, 75(4), 460-472.

Biehler, R., & Snowman, J. (1993). Psychology applied to teaching. Massachusetts, Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Birjandi, P. & Rahimi, A. H. (2012). The effect of metacognitive strategy instruction on the listening performance of EFL students. International Journal of Linguistics, 4(2), 495-517.

Brown, H. D. (2007). Principles of language learning and teaching (5th ed.). New Jersey: Prentice Hall Regents.

Brown, J. D. (Eds.). (2007). Understanding research in second language learning: A teacher’s guide to statistics and research design. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Coakley, C., & Wolvin, A. (1997). Listening in the educational environment. In M. Purdy & D. Borisoff (Eds.), Listening in everyday life: A personal and professional approach (2nd ed.) (pp. 179-212). Lanham, MD: University Press of America.

Cohen, A. D. (2000). Strategies in learning and using a second language. Massachusetts, Boston: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.

Davis, G. A. (2006). Learning style and personality type preferences of community development extension educators. Journal of Agricultural Education, 47(1), 90-99.

Diaz (2014). Methodological concerns in the study of private speech. In, R. M., Diazand L., E., Berk, (Eds.). Private speech: From social interaction to self-regulation (pp. 55-84). Psychology Press.

Dörnyei, Z. (2005). Psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition. Mulwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Dornyei, Z., & P. Skehan (2003). Individual differences in second language learning. In C. J. Doughty & M. H. (eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition. (pp. 589-630). Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

Dousti, H., & Abolfathias, H. (2013). The effect of metacognitive listening strategy training on EFL learners’ listening sub-skills performance. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature, 4(1), 50-55.

Dreyer, C., & Oxford, R. (1996). Learning strategies and other predictors of ESL proficiency among Afrikaans-speakers in South Africa. In R. Oxford (Ed.), Language learning strategies around the world: Cross-cultural perspectives (pp. 61-74). Manoa: University of Hawaii Press.

Ehrman, M. E., & Leaver, B. L. (2003). Cognitive styles in the service of language learning. System, 31(3) 393-415.

Feyten, C. M. (1991). The power of listening ability: An overlooked dimension in language acquisition. The Modern Language Journal, 75(1), 173-80.

Gilakjani, P. A., & Ahmadi, M. (2011). A study of factors affecting EFL learners’ English listening comprehension and the strategies for improvement. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 2(5), 977-988.

Goh, C. (2002). Exploring listening comprehension tactics and their interaction patterns. System, 30(2), 185-206.

Green, J. M., & Oxford, R. L. (1995). A closer look at learning strategies, L2proficiency and gender. TESOL Quarterly, 29(3), 261–297.

Griffiths, C. (2003). Patterns of language learning strategy use. System, 31(4), 367-383.

Hamada, Y. (2011a). Improvement of listening comprehension skills through shadowing with difficult materials. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 8(1), 139-162.

Hamada, Y. (2011b). Psychological aspects of shadowing training. Journal of the Japan Association for Developmental Education, 6(2), 60-71.

Hamada, Y. (2012). An effective way to improve listening skills through shadowing. Journal of the Language Teacher, Feature Article, Akita University.

Hamada, Y. (2015a). Monitoring strategy in shadowing: self-monitoring and pair-monitoring. The Asian EFL Journal Professional Teaching Articles, 81(1), 4-25.

Hamada, Y. (2015). Uncovering shadowing as an EFL teaching technique for listening: EFL learners’ perceptions, self-confidence, and motivation. Akita University, Ankara, Turkey.

Holden, W. R. (2004). Facilitating listening comprehension: acquiring successful strategies. Bulletin of Hokuriku University, 28(3), 257-266.

Kadota, S. (2007). Shadowingu to ondoku no kagaku [Science of shadowing, oral reading]. Tokyo: Cosmopier.

Kadota, S. (2012). Shadoingu to ondoku to eigoshutoku no kagaku. [Science of shadowing, oral reading, and English acquisition]. Tokyo: Cosmopier.

Kadota, S., & Tamai, K. (2004). Ketteiban eigo shadowing [English shadowing]. Tokyo: Cosmopier.

Karasawa, M. (2009). Shadowing gaNihonjingakushushanimotarasuEikyo [The Effect of "Shadowing" Exercises on JSL Learners' Pronunciation and Motivation]. Bulletin of Department of Humanities of Ochanomizujoshi University, 6(2), 209-220.

Kato, S. (2009). Suppressing inner speech in ESL reading: Implications for developmental changes in second language word recognition processes. The Modern Language Journal, 9(5), 471–488.

Keefe, J. W. (1979). Learning style: An overview. In J. W. Keefe, Student learning styles: Diagnosing and prescribing programs (pp. 1-17). Reston, VA: National Association of Secondary School Principals.

Khatib, M., & Hosseinpur, R. M. (2011). On the validity of the Group Embedded Figure Test (GEFT). Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 2(3), 640-648.

King, K. (1999). Metacognition in the Composition Classroom. Idaho State University. Retrieved on May 2016 from http://www.hiceducation.org/edu proceedings/kathleen.pdf

Kuramoto, A., Nishida, H., Isobe, Y., & Shiki, O. (2010). A study on different effects of shadowing with the help of WBT. Language Education & Technology, 47(1), 93-111.

Kurata, K. (2007). A basic research on cognitive mechanism of shadowing. Bulletin of the Graduate School of Education of Hiroshima University, 56(2), 259-265.

Kyungsim, H., & Leavell, A. (2006). Language learning strategy use of ESL students in   an intensive English learning context. System, 34(5), 399–415.

Lambert, S. (1992). Shadowing. Meta. XXXVII (2), 265-273.

Little, D., & Singleton, D. (1990). Cognitive style and learning approach. In R. Duda & P. Riley (Eds.), Learning styles (pp. 11–19). Nancy, France: University of Nancy.

Liu, H. (2008). A Study of the Interrelationship between Listening Strategy Use, Listening proficiency, And Learning Style. ARECLS, 8(1), 84-104.

Matsuoka, Y. (2009). Possible strategies for listening comprehension: Applying the concepts of conversational implicative and adjacency pairs to understand speaker intention in the TOEFL listening section. Accents Asia 3(2), 27-56.

Mendelsohn, D. J. (1994). Learning to listen: A strategy-based approach for the second language learner. San Diego: Dominie Press.

Mochizuki, M. (2006). Exploring the application of shadowing to Japanese education. Audio-Visual Education, 6(1), 37-53.

Morley, J. (1999). Current perspectives on improving aural comprehension. ESL Magazine, 2(1), 16-19.

Nation, I. S. P., & Newton, J. (2009). Teaching ESL/EFL listening and speaking. New York: Routledge.

Nekoueizadeh, M., & Bahrani, T. (2013). Considering challenges in educational system for implementation of e-assessment. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World (IJLLALW), (2), 89-99.

O‘Malley, J. M., & Chamot, A. U. (1989). Listening comprehension strategies in second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 10(4), 418-437.

O’Malley, J. M., & Chamot, A. U. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition.London: Oxford University Press.

Onaha, H. (2004). Effect of shadowing and dictation on listening comprehension ability of Japanese EFL learners based on the theory of working memory. JACET Bulletin, 39(2), 137-148.

Oxford, R. L. (2001). Language learning styles and strategies. In Teaching English as A Second or Foreign Language.Massachusetts, Boston: Heinle & Heinle Press.

Park, G. (1997). Language learning strategies and English proficiency in Korean university students. Foreign Language Annals, 30(2), 211-21.

Rahimirad, M., & Zaree, A. (2015).  Metacognitive strategy instruction as a means to improve listening self-efficacy among Iranian undergraduate learners of English. International Journal of Instruction, 8(1), 118-132.

Ranalli, J. M. (2001). Consciousness-raising versus deductive approaches to language instruction Astudy of learner preferences. Retrieved June 2016 http://www.cels,bham,ac.uk/resources/essays/Ranalli1,pdf.

Rasouli, M., Mollakhan, K., & Karbalaei, A. (2013). The effect of metacognitive listening strategy training on listening comprehension in Iranian EFL context. European Online Journal of Natural and Social Sciences, 2(1), 115-128.

Richardson, J. (2011). Approaches to studying, conceptions of learning and learning styles in higher education. Learning and Individual Differences, 21(3), 288–293.

Ridley, D. S., Schutz P. A., Glanz, R. S., & Weinstein C. E. (1992). Self-regulated learning: The interactive influence of metacognitive awareness and goal-setting. Journal of Experimental Education, 60(4), 293-306.

Serri, F., Boroujeni, J. A., & Hesabi, A. (2012).Cognitive, metacognitive, and social/affective strategies in listening comprehension and their relationships with individual differences.Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2(4), 843-849.

Scarcella, R., & Oxford, R. (1992). The tapestry of language learning: The Individual in the communicative classroom. Massachusetts, Boston: Heinle & Heinle.

Shen, L., Guizhou. G., Wichura, W., & Kiattichai, S. (2007). The use of websites for practicing listening skills of undergraduate students: A case study at Suranaree University of Technology. Thailand. ERIC Document No. 500 929.

Shiki, O., Mori, Y., Kadota, S., & Yoshida, S. (2010). Exploring differences between shadowing and repeating practices: An analysis of reproduction rate and types of reproduced words. Annual Review of English Language Education in Japan, 21(1), 81–90.

Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Streufert, S., & Nogami, G. Y. (1989). Cognitive style and complexity: Implications for I/O psychology. In C. L. Cooper & I. Robinson (Eds.), International review of industrial and organizational psychology (pp. 43-93). Chichester, UK: Wiley.

Suzuki, K. (2007). Investigation on the instruction for listening comprehension through shadowing. STEP Bulletin, 19(1), 112-124.

Tamai, K. (1992). The effect of follow-up on listening comprehension. STEP Bulletin, 4(1), 48-62.

Tamai, K. (1997). The effectiveness of shadowing and its position in the listening process. Current English Studies, 36(1), 105–116.

Tamai, K. (2005). Research on the effect of shadowing as a listening instruction method. Tokyo: Kazama.

Thompson, I., & Rubin, J. (1996). Can strategy instruction improve listening comprehension? Foreign Language Annals, 29(3), 331-342.

Underwood, M. (1989). Teaching listening. New York: Longman.

Vandergrift, L. (1999). Facilitating second language listening comprehension: acquiring successful strategies. ELT Journal, 53(3), 168-176.

Vandergrift, L. (2003). Orchestrating strategy use: Toward a model of the skilled second language listener. Language Learning, 53(3), 463-496.

Vandergrift, L. (2007). Recent developments in second and foreign language listening comprehension research. Language Teaching, 40(2), 191-210.

Vandergrift, L., & Tafaghodtari, M. (2010). Teaching l2 learners how to listen does make a difference: An empirical study. Language Learning, 60(4), 470-467.

Witkin, H. A., Oltman, P. K., Raskin, E., & Karp, S. A. (1971). A manual for the Embedded Figures Test. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologists Press.

Witkin, H., C. Moore, D. Goodenough, & Cox, P. (1977). Field-dependent and field-independent cognitive styles and their educational implications. Review of Educational Research 47(1), 1-64.

Wooldridge, B., & Haimes-Bartolf, M. (2006). The Field-Dependence/Field-Independence Learning Styles: Implications for Adult Student Diversity, Outcomes Assessment and Accountability. In R., R., Sims, & S., J., Sims, Learning styles and learning (pp. 237-257), Nova Science Publishers, Inc.

Yang, S. (2009). Using blogs to enhance critical reflection and community of practice. Educational Technology & Society, 12(2), 11-21.

Zakeri, E. (2014). Post method era: Amalgamation of methods, a real example. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World (IJLLALW), 5(2), 523-529.