intro chapter ii
Post on 04-Apr-2018
221 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 1/105
1
Chapter One
INTRODUCTION
Listening has gained much attention both in research and in language pedagogy
as it has changed its role from a passive activity which deserved less class time to an
active process through which language acquisition takes place (Vandergrift, 2004).
Listening is now widely accepted as an essential skill that enables language
acquisition to take place, both in mother tongue and in second or foreign language
(Rost, 2002). The learning environment in second language acquisition (SLA) or
foreign language learning is not as supportive as first language acquisition, though. It
is stressed that for a person to learn a second language, three conditions were required:
1) motivation to learn the language, 2) speakers of the target language who are able to
provide support and input, and 3) a social setting which provide the learners with
sufficient exposures to the target language (Wong-Fillmore, 1991). As listening is
required in two of the three requirements, it is evidently that it is worth to be taught
explicitly in its own right. To help the students become proficient in listening,
taxonomies of listening skills that underlie the process of listening comprehension
were proposed. While the taxonomies of listening skills help us understand the
mysterious listening comprehension process, it also sheds light in listening pedagogy
(Buck, 2001). Following the taxonomies of listening skills, the teachers are able to
know which part of listening process is emphasized by the researchers and will pay
more attention to it in their teaching.
With the help of advanced computer technology and the advent of Internet, it is
now easier for both the teachers and learners to have access to spoken input of the
target language, in our case, English. Many listening websites and multimedia
CD-ROMs are now available for teachers to include as teaching materials and for the
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 2/105
2
learners to use as self-study aids. There have been studies investigating the usefulness
of incorporating CALL and listening instruction. Cheng (2006), for example, after
implementing a listening website (Randall’s ESL cyber listening lab) into her listening
instruction, it was found that the learners held very positive attitudes to the website
and also became motivated to learn. Likewise, Ramirez and Alonso (2007)
incorporated digital stories in the language course of a group of young learners,
attempting to investigate how the technology can enhance the learners’ listening
comprehension. A positive finding was obtained in a pretest and posttest comparison.
Students who had access to digital stories performed significantly better than those
who did not. These studies warranted the benefits that CALL are able to bring to
language teaching and learning, especially in the field of listening.
CALL is not enough to make language learning and teaching effective, though.
To be so, a proper learning syllabus has to be designed. That is to say, the materials
should be sequenced in an appropriate order and systematic training should be carried
out. While grading mechanisms are available for selecting reading texts (e.g., Flesch
reading ease score in Flesch, 1949 and Textladder in Ghadirian, 2003), and are even
extended to foster vocabulary acquisition (i.e., Text Grader in Haung, 2004), those
specifically for ‘listening texts’ are still virtually unavailable. Without such a
mechanism, some studies adopted readability measures to determine the difficulty
levels of listening texts. Smidt and Hegelheimer (2004), for example, used Flesch
reading ease score to grade the difficulty levels of three academic lectures, which
were used as assessment tools in their study to ensure text comparability. It seems that
to adopt the approach in reading research to audio materials is feasible.
Given the importance of listening in terms of second language acquisition, the
advantages CALL brings to language learning and teaching, and the pedagogical
needs of a grading mechanism for listening texts, this study attempts to address the
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 3/105
3
following issues: first of all, the development and the assessment of a grading formula
manipulating the weights of three difficulty measures (i.e., speech rate , academic
word ratios, and syntactic complexity); secondly, the impact of incorporating graded
online listening materials with a listening course on the students’ development of
listening ability; and thirdly, the students’ attitudes towards the use of the online
listening materials. A grading formula for listening texts was thus developed, and with
its help, a website was constructed in which sixty-six graded listening texts were
sequenced from easy to difficult with their MP3 files, transcripts, and comprehension
check questions. Meanwhile, the comprehension questions were designed to provide
the learners with systematic training of five target listening skills: listening for main
ideas, listening for details, interpreting the speaker’s intent, making inferences, and
summarizing. Each of them was considered an important element underlying
successful listening comprehension (Buck, 2001; Weir, 1993). Then, we infused this
website into a listening and speaking course for a group of EFL college level learners
to do self-study. It is expected that this study could shed a dawning light on grading
listening texts, and provide a preliminary understanding of how online graded
listening materials could help development of listening skill, and how CALL can
benefit listening instruction.
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 4/105
4
Chapter Two
REVIEW OF LITERATURE
2.1 Overview
Listening is the most essential skill of language learning as virtually all children
learn to listen as part of their first language (L1) acquisition process. Just as the
fundamental role listening plays in L1 acquisition, it is by no means less important in
second language (L2) learning (Rost, 2002). Due to the growing emphasis on
communicative competence in language learning and teaching in recent decades,
more and more studies were carried out to enhance the teaching and learning of
listening. Along the same vein, much research effort has been devoted to exploring
the process of listening comprehension (e.g., Anderson, & Lynch, 1988; Lynch, 1998;
Rost, 1990, 2002), identifying the factors that affect listening comprehension
(Brindley, & Slatyer, 2002; Chiang, & Dunkel, 1992; Flowerdew, 1994; Shohamy, &
Inbar, 1991; Teng, 2002), and finding efficient teaching approaches of listening
(Berne, 2004; Hinkle, 2006; Mendelsohn, 1998; Vandergrift, 1999). At the same time,
with the rapid development of technology, computers and the World Wide Web have
been applied to language courses in various ways. In terms of the teaching of listening,
the computer technology has brought several benefits to the teaching and learning of
listening. First of all, the access to listening materials increases substantially; this, in
turn, creates considerable chances for the learners to learn and practice. In addition,
availability of various websites also makes it much easier for instructors to get
supplementary listening materials. Secondly, listening materials become more
authentic, more reflective to the real-world spoken language. Fianlly, learners can
engage in their learning more actively. With a multimedia computer equipped with
internet service, learners can have access to listening materials anytime and anywhere
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 5/105
5
as many times as they wish. Hence, compared to traditional listening courses where
instructors play tapes or CDs, and learners listen and answer comprehension questions,
computer-based and web-based listening instruction can obviously create a more
meaningful and active learning environment that can in turn contribute to better
listening.
In this chapter, a brief introduction of listening comprehension will be offered,
followed by a discussion of factors that contribute to listening difficulties and thus
affect listening comprehension. Then, an overview of the changes in listening
instruction will be given. Additionally, the recent effort of incorporating computer
technology and the teaching and learning of listening will be introduced. Last, a
discussion on material selection of listening materials will be presented.
2.2 An Overview of Listening Comprehension
Many researchers have given their definitions of listening comprehension (e.g.,
Anderson, & Lynch, 1988; Brown, & Yule, 1983; Rost, 1990, 2002). For example,
Brown and Yule (1983) explained listening comprehension as a process of
understanding, repeating what was heard, figuring out the meaning of an exact word,
and then knowing what an expression refers to. Rost (2002) described listening
comprehension as a process of trying to understand what spoken language refers to in
one’s experience or in the real world.
In order to understand an utterance, various types of knowledge must be applied
to decode and interpret the incoming information. Buck (2001) concludes that the
knowledge involved in the listening process is of two types: linguistic knowledge (i.e.,
lexis, syntax, semantics, and discourse structures) and non-linguistic knowledge (i.e.,
general knowledge of the world, knowledge of the listening context, and personal
experience). How these two types of knowledge and their sub-knowledge are applied
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 6/105
6
to the acoustic information has aroused much debate. Among various perceptions, the
bottom-up view and the top-down view are the most important and classic. These two
perspectives are different mainly in their beliefs of the order in which different types
of knowledge are applied during the comprehension process. In the bottom-up view,
listening comprehension is seen as a process of passing information from stage to
stage. Acoustic input is first decoded into phonemes (the smallest sound unit), then it
is identified as an individual word, followed by the sentential level and then semantic
level. Finally, the listeners pull in their own experience or the communicative context
and understand what the input refers to. In other words, the order of the knowledge
applied in the bottom-up listening process is like a one-way street, which is not
changeable. Under this view, listening for details is usually trained by teachers. On the
other hand, in the top-down view, the order in which different types of knowledge
come into play is not in a fixed manner, rather, they may appear in any order or even
simultaneously. In addition, they are all capable of interacting and influencing with
one another. To illustrate, when hearing a sentence such as ‘It’s raining heavily,
remember to take an ________’ we can confidently expect that the next word being
umbrella. While we are applying our linguistic knowledge to comprehend the
utterance, our general knowledge of the world comes into play, and we know that
when it is raining, we use umbrellas to avoid getting wet. At the same time, our
linguistic knowledge tells us ‘an’ is the article for vowel-initiated words. Thus, as the
example shows, we do not have to process everything in the acoustic input to get its
idea as opposed to the bottom-up view in which listeners have to process every sound
to comprehend the information. In the top-down view, we only take what we need and
what is necessary.
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 7/105
7
2.3 Listening Difficulties
As have been noted by Rost (2002), listening is essential to language
development. Yet, it has been very challenging for L2 learners to learn. To help
learners to become skillful listeners, factors contributing to learners’ listening
difficulties have been identified in many studies, for example, text types (e.g.,
Brindley, & Slatyer, 2002; Shohamy, & Inbar, 1991; Su, 2003), speech rate (e.g., Blau,
1990; Flaherty, 1979; Griffiths, 1992; Rixon, 1986; Teng, 2002), and task types (e.g.,
Cheng, 2003, 2004; Teng, 1998a), syntactical complexity (e.g., Chiang & Dunkle,
1992; Dunkel, 1988), topic familiarity (Carrell, 1983; Carrell & Eisterhold, 1983,
Connor, 1984), and English proficiency (e.g., Vandergrift, 2006). In this paper, speech
rate, text types, syntactic complexity, and also task types, are discussed.
2.3.1 Speech Rate
Speech rate has profound effect on listening comprehension (Flowerdew, 1994,
Rixon, 1986). Concerning temporal factors such as speech rate and pausing time, both
Teng (2002) and Flowerdew (1994) noted that the slower the speech is, and the more
pauses a passage has, the better comprehension level listeners would be able to
achieve. This notion is easy to understand in the sense that with faster speech rate,
listeners would have less time to process the incoming information, hence, results in
unsuccessful comprehension. Based on Rixon’s (1986) remark, L2 learners need more
time than the native speakers to process each piece of information even when they
have no difficulties in understanding, as a result, “any very fast delivery will therefore
place an extra strain on the learner” (p. 58). To examine how speech rate can affect
learners’ comprehension, Griffiths (1992) compared the comprehension levels of 24
low-intermediate Japanese EFL learners who were assigned to listen to three passages
each in three different speech rates—slow, average, and fast—measured in the unit of
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 8/105
8
“words per minute” (wpm). The lower rates ranged from 126 to 128 wpm, average
from 188 to 189 wpm, and fast from 245 to 257 wpm. The results showed that
learners who listened to the slow version of the passages obtained significantly higher
scores than those who listened to normal and fast versions in the post-listening test.
To answer the question of at what rate a listening text is regarded as fast,
different listening specialists have proposed different standards for distinguishing fast
speech from slow speech. For example, Griffiths (1992) adopted the criteria in which
an average rate 125 wpm is slow, 185 wpm is normal, and 250 wpm is fast. Rubin
(1994), in her well-known review, noted that most research accepts 165 to 180 wpm
as normal speech rate. However, regardless of different interpretations of speech rate,
most research accepts 165 to 180 wpm as the normal speech rate (Rubin, 1994).
2.3.2 Text Types and Syntactic Complexity
Text type has also been noted as a factor affecting listening comprehension
(Brindley, & Slatyer, 2002; Rubin, 1994; Shohamy, & Inbar, 1991; Su, 2003).
Listening texts are often categorized into conversation and monologue, or
interactional and transactional (Rixon, 1986). Based on Rixon, “conversation” is
defined as “any series of spoken exchanges among a small group of people in which
the contributions are reasonably balanced in terms of quantity and are reasonably
coherent,” monologue, on the other hand, is “a speech by a single person” (p. 6).
However, to distinguish interactional and transactional, rather than the number of
people involved in, the purpose of the speech is the focus. Brown and Yule (1983)
maintained that the emphasis of a transactional passage is on the exchange of
information or the use of language to get things done, whereas in an interactional
passage it is on the use of language for establishing or maintaining social contact.
Conversations, or dialogues, as they contain information of lower density compared to
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 9/105
9
monologues such as lectures or news broadcasts, are considered to be easier to
listeners than monologues. In Brindley and Slatyer (2002), it is disclosed that
dialogues are easier than lectures as well as news broadcast.
One factor that comes along with text type is syntactic complexity, which is also
documented as an attribute of listening difficulty. While written texts generally
contain more syntactically complex sentences and less redundancies or repetitions
compared to spoken texts, it is assumed that texts similar to written texts are of higher
difficulty level than texts similar to spoken texts (Rubin, 1994; Chang, 2004).
Similarly, Rubin and Raforth (1984, cited in Shohamy & Inbar, 1991) introduced the
notion of ‘listenability,’ which is defined as a ‘function of orality in language,’ or the
degree to which a passage exhibits features common in oral language. Accordingly, it
seems to suggest that the more listenable or orally-oriented a text is, the easier it will
be for the listeners to comprehend. Along this line, Shohamy and Inbar (1991)
conducted a study investigating to what extent the ‘orality’ elements could affect
learners’ performance in listening comprehension tests. In their study, 150 secondary
school EFL learners were randomly assigned to listen to passages of two different
topics. For each topic, three different text types were prepared: news broadcast,
lecture and consultative dialogue. Of these three types of texts, news broadcast is near
to the literate end, lecture at the middle and consultative dialogue close to the oral end
(see Figure 2.1 below).
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 10/105
10
Figure 2.1 Correspondence of text types and the degree of ‘orality.’ (Shohamy & Inbar, 1991, p. 29).
LITERATE ORAL
1 2 3
After listening, the learners were given an immediate posttest to measure their
comprehension level. The results showed that, regardless of the topical differences,
learners who listened to the dialogue version of the topic got the highest scores in the
posttest; the news broadcast group, on the other hand, got the lowest scores. Hence,
the amount of ‘orality’ in a text does seem to be an important factor concerning the
difficulty level of listening texts, namely, the more oral a text is, the easier it will be,
and vice versa. Accordingly, as oral texts are syntactically less complex, the finding
also seemed to suggest the notion that higher syntactic complexity contributes to
higher difficulty level of listening text, and vice versa.
2.3.3 Task Types
Anderson and Lynch (1988) maintain that “[d]ifferent tasks present the listener
with varying degrees of complexity” (p. 59). Therefore, when considering factors
influencing the listeners’ performance, the nature of the task itself is also one that we
need to bear in mind (e.g., Brindley, & Slatyer, 2002; Teng, 1998a; Rubin, 1994;
Shohamy, & Inbar, 1991). Buck (2001), for example, concludes several guidelines of
controlling task difficulties (p. 151):
y Tasks that require processing less information tend to be easier than tasks
which require processing more information.
y Tasks that require processing information from just one location in the text
tend to be easier than tasks which require integrating information scattered
newsbroadcast
lecture consultativedialogue
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 11/105
11
throughout the text.
y Tasks that require recalling exact content tend to be easier than tasks which
require extracting the gist, or making a summary.
y Tasks that require simply selecting information tend to be easier than tasks
which require separating fact from opinion.
y Tasks that require information that is relevant to the main theme tend to be
easier than tasks which ask for irrelevant detail.
y Tasks that require immediate responses tend to be easier than tasks which
require a delayed response.
While these guidelines offer directions for test developers, they also help us to see
how different types of task may affect listening difficulties. For example, based on the
third guideline “tasks that require recalling exact content tend to be easier than tasks
which require extracting the gist, or making a summary”, it is logical to assume that
multiple choice questions are easier than short answer questions and questions
requiring listeners to summarize the text. Similarly, Brindley and Slatyer (2002) also
suggest that “items requiring only recognition are easier than those requiring retrieval
and production” (p. 377). Several studies have also confirmed this proposition (e.g.,
Brindley & Slatyer, 2002; Cheng, 2004; Teng, 1998a; Shohamy, & Inbar, 1991).
Shohamy and Inbar, in their investigation of the influence of text type and task type,
found that regardless of the topic differences, listeners performed significantly better
on questions requiring them to locate details, understand words with contextual
support, and recognize facts (‘local questions,’ Shohamy, & Inbar, 2002) than
questions requiring synthesizing information, drawing conclusions, or making
inferences (‘global questions,’ Shohamy, & Inbar, 2002). Likewise, Teng’s (1998a)
investigated how task type affected 186 low-intermediate level college students’
listening performance. The students were randomly assigned to listen to two types of
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 12/105
12
texts, and were assessed their comprehension using a three-version posttest:
multiple-choice questions, short answer questions, and cloze questions. Among the
three types of questions investigated, students who did the multiple-choice version
were found to get the highest score, and those who did the cloze version got the
lowest.
2.4 Teaching Listening
As communicative competence has been underscored in language teaching and
learning, listening has received increasing attention in language classrooms. The note
from Morley below can describe the change of the status of listening in language
learning and teaching:
At one time, listening was assumed to be a passive activity, meriting
little classroom attention. Now listening is recognized as an active process,
critical to L2 acquisition and deserving of systematic development as a
skill in its own right. (Morley, 1999, cited in Vandergrift, 2004, p. 3)
As the role of listening changed, so did the approach applied to teach listening.
From the “listening to repeat” audio-lingual approach, “question-answer”
comprehension approach, to “real-life listening” communicative approach, listening
instruction has become to underscore the ‘process’ (learning to listen) instead of the
‘product’ (listening to learn) of listening (Vandergrift, 2004). In the 1970s, listening
instruction largely emphasized learners’ development of the bottom-up process, that is,
the ability to identify words, sentence boundaries, individual sounds, and sound
combination. Then, in the following decade, because of the shifted view of second
language listening from language-based to schema-based, the teaching of listening
changed its focus to learners’ development of top-down process, namely, activating
their background knowledge such as topic familiarity, discourse clues, and pragmatic
conventions. However, none of these two teaching foci was proved to obtain
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 13/105
13
successful consequences by itself. In recent years, listening pedagogy has come to
underscore the instruction of learners’ use of strategies to enhance their learning
process (Hinkel, 2006).
2.4.1 Listening Strategies
Since the early 1990s, research on strategy training of second language learners
has become very active. Oxford (1990), for example, identified and categorized the
general language learning strategies. The strategies are classified to two groups: direct
strategies and indirect strategies. On the other hand, O’Malley and Chamot (1990) had
different categorizations: cognitive strategies, metacognitive strategies, and
socio-affective strategies. Regarding listening strategies, many researchers have tried
to identify efficient and beneficial strategies used by more proficient listeners in order
to enhance strategy-based listening instruction (e.g., Berne, 2004; Smidt, &
Hegelheimer, 2004; Teng, 1998b). Rost (2002), for example, summarized five most
commonly recognized strategies used by successful second language listeners:
predicting, inferencing, monitoring, clarifying, responding, and evaluating.
As the strategy-based approach has become more active in language teaching,
more and more studies started to highlight the importance of strategy teaching in
listening courses (e.g., Mendelsohn, 1995, 1998; Vandergrift, 1999, 2004; Vogely,
1995).
2.4.2 Listening Skills
Listening is perceived as a complex and multidimensional process. To
understand the complex process, a number of theorists have attempted to describe
listening in terms of taxonomies of skills (Buck, 2001). One common taxonomy is
dividing listening into two stages: comprehending and application (Carrol, 1972;
Clark & Clark, 1977). At the first stage, the learners process the linguistic information
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 14/105
14
in the message, and in the second stage, they utilize the information in a
communicative context. Given the growing interest in the communicative approach in
language teaching, there are also many taxonomies of listening skills described in
communicative terms. Compared to the available taxonomies to date, Weir’s
classification (1993) seems to be more comprehensive (See Table 2.1). While many of
the components in the taxonomies are essential in listening, there has not been
evidence suggesting that any of the taxonomies contains a complete description of
listening process. These taxonomies are important because they tell us what are
considered important in listening comprehension, and hence shed light in the teaching
of listening.
Table 2.1 A list of listening skills (Weir, 1993, cited from Buck, 2001, pp. 54-55)
Direct meaning comprehension
Listen for gist
Listening for main idea(s) or important information; and distinguishing that from
supporting detail, or examples
Listening for specifics, including recall of important details
Determining a speakers’ attitude or intention towards a listener or a topic
Inferred meaning comprehension
Making inferences and deductions
Relating utterances to their social and situational context
Recognizing the communicative function of utterances
Deducing meaning of unfamiliar lexical items from context
Contributory meaning comprehension
Understanding phonological features
Understanding grammatical notions such as comparison, cause, result, degree etc.
Understanding discourse markers
Understanding the main syntactic structure of clauses or idea units
Understanding cohesion, especially reference
Understanding lexical cohesion, especially lexical set membership and collocations
Understanding lexis
Listening and taking notes
Ability to extract salient points to summarize the textAbility to select relevant key points
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 15/105
15
As shown in Table 2.1, Weir (1993) divided listening process into four main
sections, and each with further detailed description: direct meaning comprehension,
inferred meaning comprehension, contributory meaning comprehension, and listening
and taking notes. The list is not only a description of listening process, but also a
comprehensive checklist of operations for listening tests.
2.5 CALL and listening instruction
Since 1960s, computers have been used in language education. The use of
computers could be divided into three types: behaviorist computer assisted language
learning (CALL), communicative CALL, and integrated CALL (Warschaur, & Healey,
1998). Behaviorist CALL, as the name suggests, was derived from the behaviorist
language learning theory. Where the tasks learners were required to perform via
computers were repetitive drill practices. Communicative CALL, which is derived
from the communicative teaching approach, allowed learners more freedom to engage
in the learning activities whenever they want via their own computers in their own
houses, and thus learners become more active in their language learning. The tasks in
communicative CALL mainly focused on manipulations of linguistic forms.
Integrated CALL, on the other hand, aims at integrating the four skills and pulling in
fuller technology support into learning process. Learners can download audio or video
clips from the World Wide Web (WWW) into their computers. With the rapid
technology improvement, World Wide Web has become the most popular facilities
available to students to obtain information and help them in their learning process
(Flowerdew, & Miller, 2005). Under this circumstance, learners can free themselves
from the constraints of learning time and space as opposed to traditional learning;
they are also granted more opportunities to learn. The type of CALL in this current
study is between the communicative CALL and the integrated CALL as the study
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 16/105
16
concerns the training of a single skill; yet, the CALL materials offered via the internet
is meant to provide learners with more opportunities to learn and practice.
Regarding listening instruction, there have been some examples of integrating
technology into language classes (e.g., Grgurovic & Hegelheimer, 2007; Ramirez &
Alonso, 2007). In Grgurovic and Hegelheimer, multimedia learning materials were
infused into an EFL course to help learners comprehend academic lectures. Two types
of text support were provided: subtitles and transcripts. While the results showed that
learners tend to use subtitles more than transcripts, the researchers further warranted
that instructors should actively encourage and train their students in using such help
options to become more proficient. Likewise, Ramirez and Alonso incorporated
digital stories in the language course of a group of young learners, attempting to
investigate how the technology can enhance the learners’ listening comprehension. A
positive finding was obtained in a pretest and posttest comparison. Students who had
access to digital stories performed significantly better than those who did not. These
studies warranted the benefits that CALL are able to bring to language teaching and
learning.
To move further, there were also studies which incorporated listening websites
into listening classes. Cheng (2006), for example, integrated an existing topic-based
listening websites—Randall’s ESL Cyber Listening Lab
(http://www.esl-lab.com) —into a listening class as supplementary materials after
class. The website offers a considerable amount of audio clips for listening practice,
and scripts of the audio clips along with several multiple-choice comprehension
questions. The purpose of the integration was to understand how learners of different
proficiency levels perceive the role of such CALL materials in their learning of
listening. Participants were 162 freshmen who enrolled in a listening course at a
private university in Taiwan. These learners were categorized into three groups—high,
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 17/105
17
average, and low—in accordance with their scores of the listening section of
intermediate General English Proficiency Test (GEPT). Participants were required to
go to the website once a week and listen to the passages assigned by the instructor that
were related to the weekly topic of the course. In addition to listening to the passages,
learners were also asked to complete the comprehension questions on the website.
Also, they had to tape-record the scripts with their peers. A questionnaire was used to
measure learners’ attitudes toward the supplementary learning materials. The results
showed no significant differences among the learners’ attitude toward the CALL
materials with respect to their proficiency levels. Nonetheless, regardless of learners’
proficiency levels, most of the participants express positive attitudes toward the use of
the website. Some learners reported that using such CALL materials after class was
less stressful than doing exercises during class and thus enabled them to enjoy the
learning process more. Another similar study was conducted by Chen (2004), who
also set up a web-based listening center for learners to practice. When listening,
learners could adjust the speech rate of the audio clips. And post to the listening
passage, they would be presented a set of comprehension questions and a vocabulary
quiz. Most users found themselves satisfied with the system. Chen also suggested that
his listening website be incorporated into language classes.
These studies warranted the benefits CALL are able to bring to language
teaching and learning.
2.6 “Listenabiliry”—selecting appropriate listening materials
Computer and internet have brought about many advantages to learners in their
learning of listening. While the online materials offer the learners with considerable
learning opportunities, they also pose a challenge to the instructors of selecting
suitable materials for learners in different proficiency levels. Despite that everal
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 18/105
18
factors affecting the difficulty levels of listening texts have been identified (e.g.,
Chiang & Dunkel, 1992; Griffiths, 1992; Shohamy & Inbar, 1991; Teng, 1998a, 2002),
very few of them are operationalized as measures for material selection. For the
teaching of vocabulary through extensive reading, a similar problem has also been
identified. For example, Huang (2003), in her study of the effects of graded reading
on vocabulary learning, indicated that preparing suitable reading texts is often a
challenge for teachers as the materials chosen will significantly affect the learners’
learning results. When learners are faced with overwhelming complex authentic texts
in extensive reading, difficulties in comprehension, let alone vocabulary acquisition,
can be expected. Hence, choosing materials that is suitable for a particular group of
learners is of great importance. Some initial efforts have been devoted to addressing
the problem. Huang designed an extensive reading module, named Text Grader
(http://candle.cs.nthu.edu.tw, under Reading) , as a self-access basis for 38 college
participants in Taiwan to investigate their vocabulary gains through the program. The
module was developed based on an earlier and similar program named Textladder
(Ghadirian, 2003). With the help of word lists research and quantitative corpus
analyses using word frequency computer programs, Textladder was able to screen a
large number of texts and choose appropriate materials that meet learners’ levels.
However, Ghadirian did not use the materials on learners to look at the effectiveness.
With modification and a test on real EFL learners in Text Grader , Huang (2003)
filtered the texts with four word lists and selected 16 articles: the General Service
Word List, a local Senior High School Students’ Word List, the University Word List,
and an Exposed Word List. The articles were sequenced from easy to difficult with
another control of times of targeted word exposure. Familiar words and unfamiliar
targeted words are identified for the study. The reading program was used by 38 EFL
college learners at home for a period of 12 weeks. The results suggest that the reading
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 19/105
19
materials facilitate learning of vocabulary in an extensive reading context; in addition,
learners also held a positive attitude toward the program. The two studies provided
preliminary but useful methods of manipulating learning materials based on word
frequency and sequencing of texts.
2.7 Purposes of the Study
Given the importance of listening in terms of second language acquisition, and
the benefits brought by computer technology to language learning, we attempt to
investigate the benefit of CALL, specifically the Internet use, on the development of
listening skill. Additionally, even though online listening materials are easily
accessible, their quality poses a question to language teachers who are motivated to
apply such materials. And, while factors contributing to listening difficulties have
been identified in much literature, there is virtually none, to our limited knowledge,
attempting to operationalize the factors for pedagogical concerns. Last, as grading
mechanisms are available for reading texts, the same mechanisms for listening texts
are still unavailable.
In light of the pedagogical needs and the research gaps, the purposes of the
present study are as follows: first, to examine to what extent online listening materials
could benefit the learners’ listening ability; second, to provide a pedagogical model
for listening teachers to choose supplementary listening materials; and finally, to
investigate the learners’ perceptions of using online listening materials in enhancing
listening ability.
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 20/105
20
Chapter Three
METHOD
3.1 Overview
In the present study, a listening website (called Freshmen Listening,
http://formoosa.fl.nthu.edu.tw/moodle2) using a free course management system was
constructed and infused into a freshmen listening and speaking course for eleven
weeks in the fall semester of 2006. The goal of the course was to enhance the learners’
speaking and listening abilities. Learners in this study were asked to visit the website
to practice their listening skills by doing the listening tasks provided in the website.
With assessment data and the learners’ logs, we hope to understand the feasibility of
sequencing listening materials with the help of a proposed formula as a criterion of
“difficulty” of texts by manipulating the weights of three difficulty measures. Also,
we hope to understand the change the learners might show after using the website for
an eleven-week period, namely, the usefulness of the online training program. In this
study, a one-group pretest and posttest research design was adopted.
This chapter presents the research method we used to construct the website, and
the design of the experiment we adopted to probe into the research questions. The
details of the participants, instructional materials, research instruments, process of
data collection, as well as methods of data analyses are reported.
3.2 Participants
Participants involved in this study were thirty-one EFL learners enrolling in a
freshmen listening and speaking course given by the Department of Foreign
Languages and Literatures in a local university. The class met once a week, each
lasting for 100 minutes. Thirty of the learners were freshmen who just graduated from
high schools and started their first semester in the university, the other one was a
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 21/105
21
junior student in the same department. Proficiency levels of the learners ranged from
low-intermediate to advanced as everyone of them had received formal English
instruction in high school for at least 6 years.
The access to computer and Internet was easy as the majority of the participants
had their own personal computers or notebooks. Moreover, the school dormitory, at
which all first-year students stayed, was equipped with broadband Internet service.
Learners were fairly familiar with using computer and connecting to the Internet, yet,
their previous experience of using listening website differed substantially. In a
questionnaire which tapped into their former experience about listening websites, only
five of them reported having such experience. The websites they used were mainly
international and local news websites such as CNN, BBC, and ICRT. More, English
learning websites like Studio Classroom were also included.
3.3 Development of the Listening Website
The listening website, Freshmen Listening , which was infused into the listening
and speaking course was set up on an open-source course management software,
MOODLE (Modular Object-Oriented Dynamic Learning Environment). MOODLE,
an e-learning platform designed to help material developers create online course, can
provide a user-friendly interface for both the instructors and the learners as the links
were well constructed and clearly described (see Figure 3.1 for a screenshot of the
website).
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 22/105
22
Figure 3.1 A screenshot of “Freshmen Listening”—the listening website
In the listening website, sixty-six listening texts were uploaded for the use of the
eleven-week training project. To gather the 66 passages, more than 66 listening texts
and their MP3 files were collected first from various resources. They included English
learning magazine (CNN Interactive English Magazine, Live ABC; ALL plus
Interactive English Magazine, Live ABC), an online listening website (Randall’s
cyber listening lab http://www.esl-lab.com), and TOEFL CBT and iBT preparation
books ( Master the TOEFL 2005, 2004, Thompson Learning, Inc. and The official
guide to the new TOEFL iBT , 2006, Educational Testing Service). Among the
materials that were collected, those which were too easy or too difficult for the
participants were weeded out, so did those whose topics were not interesting enough.
With these 66 listening passages and their MP3 files, a formula formed based on
a pre-service English teacher’s perspective to generate a difficulty score representing
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 23/105
23
the difficulty levels of the listening texts was developed and adopted to arrange the
texts in proper order, namely, from easy to difficult, for the participants to practice. As
mentioned in the previous chapter, factors that cause listening difficulty were
identified in the literature, yet, very little, to our limited knowledge, tried to
operationalize them for pedagogical concerns. Our study attempted to bridge the gap
by operationalizing three difficulty measures—speech rate, academic word ratios, and
the Flesch Reading Ease score—to develop a formula that could serve as a grading
mechanism for our listening texts as in Flesch Reading Ease score, a readability
measure, to reading texts. The three measures as well as the formula are discussed in
detail in the following section.
Speech rate: Speech rate, namely, the average word number spoken in a minute,
is the basic index reporting how fast a text is spoken. Flowerdew (1994) noted that the
speech rate of a listening passage has profound effects on listeners’ comprehension
level in the way that higher rate results in worse comprehension while lower rate
contributes to better comprehension. In the present study, the rate of each listening
text was computed by dividing the total words by the total time—in the unit of
minute—of the listening excerpt. For example, the first or the easiest passage had 160
words in total, and one minute and twenty-nine seconds duration, making its speech
rate 107.87 words per minute (wpm, i.e., 160/89*60). The rate range for the 66 texts
was between 90 to 242 wpm.
Academic word ratios: As the name suggest, this measure is an indication of the
density of academic word in the texts. In this study, the academic words were defined
using the Academic Word List (AWL, Coxhead, 2000). The AWL has around 10%
occurrences of the total words in written academic texts. It is suggested that by
learning the AWL words, the learners can develop their academic literacy more
efficiently (Nation, 2001). In the current study, it is hypothesized that the more
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 24/105
24
academic word a text contains, the more difficult it becomes. Therefore, of each
listening passage, the percentage of academic words was computed. This was done by
dividing the number of academic words in a passage by the number of total words.
For example, the first/easiest passage on the website has one academic word out of its
116 words (Note what we mean by ‘word’ here is word ‘type’ instead of word ‘token’),
thus its ratio was 0.94 % (i.e., 1/106). The range for the 66 texts was from 1% to 12%
approximately.
Flesch reading ease score: Flesch Reading Ease Score (Flesch, 1949) is a
well-known readability measure which generates scores for reading texts indicating
how easy or difficult a reading text is to comprehend. The score, ranges from 0-100,
are computed with considerations of the number of syllables, words, and sentences,
with higher score indicating easier passages and vice versa. In the case of English,
texts that score from 90 to 100 are believed to be considerably easy for average native
fifth graders, 60-70 for eighth and ninth graders, and 0-30 for college students (for
more detailed information, refer to ‘Wikipedia,’
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flesch-Kincaid_Readability_Test). The scores for the 66
texts were calculated with the help of the inherent function in Microsoft WORD,
which can be found in grammar/spelling check under Tool. For example, the
first/easiest passage among the 66 obtained an ease score of 51.6 using MS WORD
(see Figure 3.2 for the readability computation). The scores for the 66 passages
ranged from 32 to 92.
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 25/105
25
Figure 3.2 The readability computation of the first/easiest passage
Each of the sixty-six passages was computed concerning its speech rate,
academic word ratio, and reading ease score using the aforementioned methods. Table
3.1 summarizes the ranges of the three measures of the sixty-six listening texts.
Table 3.1 The ranges of the three measures of the 66 listening texts
Speech Rate Academic Word Ratios Flesch Reading Ease score
90 - 242 (wpm) 1% - 12% 32 - 92
3.3.1 The Proposed Formula—“Difficulty Score”
In the present study, we tried to operationalize the concept of difficulty in a
listening text with the three measures. With the three measures, the ‘difficulty
score’—a composite variable by weighting differently on the three measures—was
generated by using a proposed formula:
Difficulty score=speech rate × 0.5+academic word ratio × 0.3-reading ease
score × 0.2
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 26/105
26
In the formula, speech rate was assigned 50% of the weights as it was the
measure better supported in the literature (Flowerdew, 1994; Griffiths, 1992; Teng,
2002). As academic word ratios and reading ease score were borrowed from
readability measure, they were assigned 30% and 20% of the weights respectively
(see Figure 3.3 below for a summary of the manipulation of the weights of the three
measures). Even as a readability measure, one study (Smidt & Hegelheimer, 2004)
adopted Flesch Reading Ease score as a mean to ensure the comparability of three
different listening texts. Smidt and Hegelheimer used Flesch reading ease score and
Flesch-Kincaid grade level—another well-known readability measure—to verify the
comparability of different video lectures used in their pretest, posttest and delayed
posttest in their study which aimed at examining the effects of online academic
lectures on ESL learners’ listening comprehension. As the scores for the three texts
were similar to each other, the researchers concluded that the different videos used in
the three tests were comparable.
Difficulty scores generated from the formula ranged from 0 to 100, with higher
difficulty scores signifying harder texts, and lower, easier. After we computed the
score for each of the 66 texts, the texts were sequenced from 1 to 66—easy to
difficult—and presented to the learners on the website every week, six for each, based
on the sequence. Table 3.2 presents the computation results for all the 66 passages in
terms of the three measures.
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 27/105
27
Figure 3.3 The manipulation of the weights of the three measures
50%
30%
20%
Table 3.2 The computation results of the three measures of the 66 texts
Reading
ease score
Speech
rate
Adjusted
rate
Academic
word ratios
Adjusted
ratios
Difficulty
score
Presentation
sequence
TXT.69 51.6 107.87 44.29 0.94 7.93 14.21 No.1
TXT.18 61 112.44 46.46 1.88 15.79 15.77 No.2
TXT.25 62.5 112.81 46.62 2.46 20.72 17.02 No.3
TXT.48 92.3 173.29 71.61 0.00 0.00 17.34 No.4
TXT.30 56.9 100.79 41.65 3.14 26.42 17.37 No.5
TXT.23 52.4 106.56 44.03 2.84 23.86 18.69 No.6
TXT.21 59.3 105.96 43.79 4.09 34.43 20.36 No.7
TXT.36 44.9 121.40 50.16 2.17 18.28 21.59 No.8
TXT.26 50.1 101.75 42.05 4.49 37.80 22.34 No.9
TXT.52 80.4 177.09 73.18 1.37 11.52 23.96 No.10
TXT.28 54.7 115.77 47.84 4.66 39.22 24.75 No.11
TXT.17 41.7 97.71 40.38 5.30 44.60 25.23 No.12
TXT.54 75.9 177.25 73.24 1.53 12.87 25.30 No.13
TXT.22 42.9 104.58 43.21 5.07 42.63 25.82 No.14
TXT.24 59.7 105.21 43.48 6.45 54.26 26.08 No.15
TXT.57 68.8 184.52 76.25 0.79 6.62 26.35 No.16
TXT.29 35.7 90.27 37.30 6.10 51.28 26.90 No.17
TXT.13 70 167.42 69.18 2.68 22.53 27.35 No.18
TXT.20 42.4 103.92 42.94 5.78 48.61 27.58 No.19
TXT.16 50.4 101.60 41.99 6.74 56.70 27.92 No.20
Speech rate
Flesch Reading
Ease score
Academic word
ratios
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 28/105
28
TXT.5 55.5 148.24 61.25 3.50 29.44 28.36 No.21
TXT.51 73.5 176.79 73.05 2.81 23.62 28.91 No.22
TXT.35 37.8 133.41 55.13 3.62 30.43 29.13 No.23
TXT.2 60.1 166.10 68.64 2.78 23.36 29.31 No.24
TXT.66 77.7 153.42 63.40 5.26 44.27 29.44 No.25
TXT.34 61.8 169.30 69.96 2.75 23.11 29.55 No.26
TXT.10 57.9 154.81 63.97 3.80 31.94 29.99 No.27
TXT.9 87.7 213.88 88.38 1.47 12.37 30.36 No.28
TXT.27 50.3 99.81 41.25 7.95 66.90 30.63 No.29
TXT.42 83.2 201.82 83.40 2.22 18.69 30.66 No.30
TXT.47 84.5 215.29 88.96 1.24 10.45 30.72 No.31
TXT.7 52.2 160.27 66.23 3.43 28.84 31.32 No.32
TXT.53 64.3 195.69 80.86 1.75 14.76 32.00 No.33
TXT.70 77.5 198.98 82.22 2.70 22.73 32.43 No.34
TXT.50 77.3 222.86 92.09 0.81 6.78 32.62 No.35
TXT.65 79.4 226.40 93.55 0.74 6.23 32.77 No.36
TXT.56 77.9 214.52 88.64 1.69 14.25 33.02 No.37
TXT.37 47.4 133.48 55.16 5.99 50.34 33.20 No.38
TXT.8 60.2 175.46 72.51 3.66 30.77 33.44 No.39
TXT.43 79 203.89 84.25 2.88 24.20 33.59 No.40
TXT.49 80.4 199.57 82.46 3.40 28.61 33.73 No.41
TXT.11 82.4 225.63 93.24 1.52 12.74 33.96 No.42
TXT.41 89.7 242.00 100.00 0.85 7.13 34.20 No.43
TXT.40 82.2 224.57 92.80 1.74 14.63 34.35 No.44
TXT.63 84.9 235.00 97.11 1.80 15.15 36.12 No.45
TXT.1 83.3 207.57 85.77 4.46 37.55 37.49 No.46
TXT.38 53.7 167.55 69.24 5.60 47.07 38.00 No.47
TXT.3 44.7 160.00 66.12 5.71 48.06 38.54 No.48
TXT.45 55.4 144.31 59.63 8.02 67.49 38.98 No.49
TXT.4 45.6 142.25 58.78 7.42 62.44 39.00 No.50
TXT.6 84.6 222.71 92.03 4.72 39.67 41.00 No.51
TXT.12 84.7 224.48 92.76 4.90 41.23 41.81 No.52
TXT.68 49.3 158.21 65.38 7.76 65.25 42.40 No.53
TXT.67 63.1 223.40 92.32 4.38 36.80 44.58 No.54
TXT.44 64.8 197.87 81.77 6.64 55.84 44.67 No.55
TXT.J58.2 144.00 59.50 10.68 89.82
45.06 No.56
TXT.JJ 44.6 135.00 55.79 10.42 87.61 45.26 No.57
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 29/105
29
TXT.K 60.1 218.44 90.26 5.07 42.66 45.91 No.58
TXT.14 70.1 213.21 88.11 6.44 54.14 46.28 No.59
TXT.kk 54.3 168.09 69.46 9.27 77.95 47.25 No.60
TXT.ii 47.5 164.48 67.97 9.24 77.69 47.79 No.61
TXT.nn 36.8 163.88 67.72 8.61 72.43 48.23 No.62
TXT.B 50.7 152.13 62.86 10.70 90.00 48.29 No.63
TXT.H 32.1 130.83 54.06 11.56 97.23 49.78 No.64
TXT.46 59.5 166.74 68.90 11.89 99.98 52.54 No.65
TXT.Y 42.4 163.71 67.65 11.11 93.45 53.38 No.66
3.3.2 The Online Listening Exercises
In the eleven weeks, the 66 listening texts with their MP3 files and
comprehension check questions were presented to the learners based on their
difficulty levels. For each listening passage, there were three to six comprehension
questions probing into the participants’ comprehension levels, and also aiming at
training the five target listening skills of the learners (see Appendix A for a sample of
online listening task, containing texts, comprehension questions). The five target
listening skills—listening for main ideas, listening for details, interpreting the
speaker’s intent, making inferences, and summarizing the listening texts—were
chosen from the text book of the listening and speaking course in order to tie in the
online resources with the course. Comprehension questions of each passage were
written based on these target skills. For the first four skills, the question type was in
multiple-choice format. As for the last skill, summarization, the learners were asked to
write a summary of 120 to 150 words that included both the main idea and detailed
information. The total number of the questions for each skill across the eleven weeks
is presented in Table 3.3 below. The sample questions for each skill are shown in
Table 3.4.
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 30/105
30
Table 3.3 The number of questions for each skill
Listening
for main
ideas
Listening
for details
Interpreting
the speaker’s
intent
Making
inferencesSummarizing Total
72 118 26 79 11 306
Table 3.4. Sample questions for each target listening skill
Listening skills Sample questions
Listening for main
ideas
-What is the passage about?
-What is the main idea of this listening excerpt?
Listening for
details
-According to the conversation, what didn’t the speaker buy?
-What are the experts’ suggestions mentioned in the excerpt?
Interpreting the
speaker’s intent
-What’s the speaker’s attitude toward student credit cards?
-What does the man imply by saying “That’ll be a long time?”
Making inferences
-What does the speaker imply how she is going to pay back
the money?
-Based on the excerpt, select correct statements below.
Summarizing-Please write a short summary in about 150 words. In your
summary, both important information and details should be
included.
Each week, a set of six listening texts were presented, with three required and
three optional. The learners were required to perform the required set in which one
summary task was embedded. Access for each set of exercises was available for one
week. The learners had to finish the exercises in one week as the system was set to
reject attempts once the exercises were closed. While doing the exercises, the learners
were able to download the MP3 files and listen to it as many times as needed before
they virtually submitted their answers.
The MOODLE system was able to provide instant feedback every time after the
participants submitted their answers. For multiple-choice questions (MCQs), the
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 31/105
31
system would highlight the correct answer. As for the summary tasks, the idea units 1
of the listening passage and a summary model which were written by the research and
a master student majoring in teaching English as a foreign language (TEFL) were also
shown immediately after the submission as a reference for the learners to learn and
improve. Figure 3.4 and 3.5 show the instant feedback of MCQs and summary task
given by the system, respectively.
Figure 3.4 The instant feedback for MCQs
Note. The highlighted item was the correct answer.
Figure 3.5 The instant feedback for summary tasks
Note. The first block is the summary written by the learner, and the second part is the
idea units, and the final block is the sample summary.
1 The idea units of each summarization text were written independently by the researcher and a master
student majoring in TEFL independently. After the two versions were finished, a discussion was carriedout to finalize a version for grading. For the summary tasks in the pretest and posttest, the ratings of the
two writers reached a Cronbach alpha of 0.83 and 0.93, respectively.
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 32/105
32
3.4 Research Instruments
Three types of instruments were designed in this study. First, a listening test was
designed and used in the pretest and posttest in order to assess the participants’
listening ability before and after the eleven-week practice. Secondly, two sets of
questionnaires, the weekly questionnaire, and a final evaluation questionnaire were
developed to understand the participants’ perceptions of the difficulty levels of the
listening materials and their attitudes toward the usefulness of the website as well as
the online listening exercises. Finally, the participants’ logs and scores on the weekly
exercises on the website recorded by the tracker program during the eleven-week
period were used to understand the usefulness of both the online materials and the
grading formula.
3.4.1 Pretest and Posttest
An English listening test was designed to serve as the pretest and posttest, which
aimed at measuring the participants’ overall listening ability, also their strengths and
weaknesses in terms of the five target listening skills. The test comprised five
listening passages with twenty-four items taken from the last four units of the course
book which would not be covered until the second semester of the school year.
Among the twenty-four items, twenty-three of them were true/false and
multiple-choice questions under four listening passages, and the other one was a
productive task that asked the participants to summarize one listening passage. A
sample of the test items is shown Table 3.5. For the complete version, see Appendix B.
Despite the identical multiple-choice questions used in the two versions of the test,
different prompts for the summarizing task were used in the pretest and posttest. In
the pretest, a video clip under the topic of “The Age of E-mail” was used, which
presented a discussion on the good and bad of the technology. As for the posttest,
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 33/105
33
another video clip which concerned the harmful consequences of tobacco
use—Smoking—was used (see Appendix C and D for the video scripts). Due to the
shortage of language labs in the university, the tests were administered in a traditional
paper-based format.
To ensure the comparability of the two versions used in the pretest and posttest,
items in the posttest were identical with those in the pretest but with different order.
The posttest was designed to assess the participants’ listening ability concerning the
five target skills after receiving the eleven-week online practice. To avoid practice
effects, the test papers were collected immediately after the pretest; also, correct
answers to all the items were not reported. Hence, learners did not have chance to
have access to the test items until eleven weeks later.
Table 3.5 An excerpt of the pretest
A. Listen to the excerpt. Mark the sentences T (true) or F (false).
_____ 1. The speaker is an employer.
_____ 2. The speaker does not trust the people who work at his business.
_____ 3. Trusting his employees gives the speaker satisfaction.
B. Listen to the excerpt again. Circle the answer that best completes each
sentence.
1. According to the speaker, an employer should ________.
a. tell his employees what is right and wrong
b. watch his employees closely
c. let his employees decide what is right and wrong
2. According to the speaker, being “Big Brother” is ________.
a. an effective management strategy
b. an ineffective management strategy
c. neither effective nor ineffective
3. When the speaker says “go that extra mile,” he means ________.
a. exercising by running an extra time
b. getting satisfaction and rewards
c. working extra hard
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 34/105
34
3.4.2 The Weekly Questionnaire
The weekly questionnaire probed into the participants’ receptions of the
difficulty level of the easiest passage each week. The questionnaire contained five
items, each representing one aspect of difficulty level of the listening passage:
vocabulary, speech rate, syntactic complexity, topic familiarity, and overall difficulty
(see Table 3.6 for an excerpt of the questionnaire. For the complete version, refer to
Appendix E). The questionnaires were uploaded to the website each week, hence, the
learners, after submitting the required listening tasks, could respond to the
questionnaire immediately. As can be understood, there were eleven questionnaires
across the practice period, it was expected that the learners’ grading could serve as a
mean for us to understand the correspondence of the designed sequence and the
learners’ perceptions.
Table 3.6 An excerpt of the weekly questionnaire
1. I can understand _____ percent of the words in this listening task. □ almost 100%
□ More than 80%
□ 50% to 80%
□ Less than 50%
□ Less than 20%
2. I think the speed of this listening is ______.
□ Too fast to understand
□ Fast but understandable
□ About right for me
□ Slow
□ Too slow
3.4.3 The Final Evaluation Questionnaire
The final evaluation questionnaire was designed to tap into the participants’
background information, previous experiences of using online listening websites,
attitudes towards the website as well as the usefulness of the sequencing and the
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 35/105
35
online training. The questionnaire comprised twenty-three items and was divided into
two sections. The first section (from items 1 to 6) probed into the learners’
background information such as self-rated listening proficiency and previous
experiences of using listening websites. The other section (from items 7 to 23)
concerned the learners’ perceptions of the usefulness of the website, including the
layout, the quality, the role it played in their learning of listening, and the usefulness
of the material sequencing. Table 3.7 presents a sample of the evaluation
questionnaire (The complete version can be found in Appendix F).
Table 3.7 An excerpt of the evaluation questionnaire
The first
section
。 My English listening proficiency is at _____ level.
Primary Low-intermediate Intermediate
High-intermediate Advanced
。 I am eager to improve my listening ability
SA A U D SD
。 I have practiced English listening via other listening websites
like the one used this semester.Yes No (skip Q5 and Q6)
The second
section
。 I think the layout of the website (the color and the
arrangement) is clear and easy to follow.
SA A U D SD
。 The topics of the online listening tasks are interesting and
motivating.
SA A U D SD
。 The website and the online listening tasks are useful to
improve my overall listening ability.
SA A U D SD
。 The online tasks are more and more challenging from the
beginning to the end of the 11 weeks.
SA A U D SD
。 I would like to use such a listening website to enhance my
listening ability in the future.
SA A U D SD
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 36/105
36
3.4.4 Logs of Usage and Scores of the Online Tasks
During the semester, every learner’s logs of usage (i.e., the duration of time and
frequency of use) as well as their scores on the online tasks were recorded
automatically as an index of their progress toward the tasks with the help of the
tracker program embedded in MOODLE (see Figure 3.6).
Figure 3.6 The usage and score of the learner recorded by the system
MOODLE was very powerful in recording the learners’ activities on the website,
yet, the records were scattered in the database. To obtain usable records, we invited a
programmer to help us do the data mining, and pull useful data together. With the help
of the programmer, we were able to get the learners’ average score of each of the 66
tasks, also each learner’s scores across the eleven weeks. In addition, we were also
able to track the learners’ performance on the website in terms of the five target
listening skills. These data helped us understand the learners’ changes in terms of their
listening ability during the eleven weeks. Moreover, it was also expected that the
records could offer clues to the question of the usefulness of the materials in the way
they were designed.
3.5 Procedures
The experimental procedures proceeded from September to December of 2006.
At the first class meeting, a consent form (see Appendix G) was distributed to the
participants, and the pretest was administered. The learners were told that the 11-week
online practice would account for ten percent of their final grades for the course. Also,
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 37/105
37
they were acknowledged that their performance on the pretest, posttest, and the online
listening tasks would not affect their final course grade. In the second meeting, the
learners were instructed to use the website and were informed that the time available
for each set of exercises was one week. After the class was dismissed, the learners
started their first weekly listening practice on Freshmen Listening . Learners did the
required exercises and optional exercises, and then responded to the weekly
questionnaire. In the following weeks, learners followed the same pattern to the last
week of online listening practice. The third week was an exception, because in that
week, the server where the website was constructed went down. The breakdown cut
all the connection to the website for a few days. Hence, to grant the learners more
time to perform the tasks, the schedule was postponed for one week. In the following
weeks, the system worked steadily, and so did the online training project. Then, post
to the online training project, in week 14, the learners were distributed the posttest and
also the final evaluation questionnaire. A summary of the research procedures is
shown below (Table 3.8).
Table 3.8 The summary of the research procedures
Time/Period Research Procedures
Preparation
。 Collected materials
。 Developed the formula and sequenced the
materials
。 Designed comprehension questions
。 Designed pretest and posttest
。 Designed the questionnaires
Week 1 (9/11)。 Distributed the consent form
。 Distributed the pretest
Week 2 to 13 (9/18 to 12/4)
。 Instructed the learners to use the website
。 Online listening practice started
。 Weekly questionnaire
Week 14 (12/11) 。 Distributed the posttest。 Distributed the final evaluation questionnaire
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 38/105
38
3.6 Data Analysis
There were three main research directions in this study. First, we investigated to
what extent the online listening practice was useful or helpful to the learners in their
development of listening ability. Second, with the learners’ report in the final
evaluation questionnaire, we attempted to explore the learners’ attitudes toward the
online listening exercises. Third, with the learners’ weekly questionnaire responses
and scores on the tasks, we tried to examine the usefulness of the proposed formula
and the sequencing of the listening materials. Hence, the research questions we
attempted to answer are phrased as follows:
1. After learning from the online listening materials, did the students perform better
in the posttest than in the pretest in terms of the overall scores and items for each
skill?
2. Were there learners differences found in this project?
– Were the materials equally beneficial to learners of different proficiency
levels?
– Were there differences in achievement, given the unequal number of passages
finished?
– What type(s) of skill practice could best predict the learners’ posttest
performance?
3. How did the learners perceive the role of the materials in their learning?
– Were the learners’ perceptions of the material difficulty congruent with their
performance?
4. Was the proposed formula useful based on the learners’ weekly performance?
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 39/105
39
To answer the first question, the learners' pretest and posttest performance was
compared. For the second research question, the learners were further classified into
two groups based on their proficiency level and diligence level, and then group
performance was compared. Additionally, correlation among the five skills and the
posttest scores was computed to see if the skill practice across the eleven weeks could
predict the learners' performance in the posttest. To analyze data for question three,
learners' responses to the final evaluation questionnaire were reported using
descriptive statistics by assigning 0 to 5 to indicate the level of agreement among the
learners. Question four tapped into the usefulness of the proposed formula. We
computed correlation between the predefined "difficulty scores" and the learners'
scores of the online tasks. Also, to examine the congruency between the learners'
perceptions and their weekly performance in terms of the difficulty levels of the texts,
correlation was adopted again.
Table 3.9 The summary of data analysis methods of each research question
Research Questions Methods
1. Did the students perform better in the
posttest than in the pretest?
Pretest and posttest comparison
2. Were there learner differences found
in this project?
Pretest and posttest comparison based on
the learners’ proficiency and diligence
levels
Correlation
3. How did the learners perceive the role
of the materials in their learning?
Descriptive statistics
Correlation
4. Was the proposed formula useful
based on the learners’ weekly
performance?
Correlation
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 40/105
40
Chapter Four
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Overview
By constructing a MOODLE based listening website and infusing it into an EFL
college listening and speaking course, this study addressed the following research
questions:
1. After learning from the online listening materials, did the students perform better
in the posttest than in the pretest in terms of the overall scores and items for each
skill?
2. Were there learners differences found in this project?
- Were the materials equally beneficial to learners of different proficiency
levels?
- Were there differences in achievement, given the unequal number of passages
finished?
- What type(s) of skill practice could best predict the learners’ posttest
performance?
3. How did the learners perceive the role of the materials in their learning?
- Were the learners’ perceptions of the material difficulty congruent with their
performance?
4. Was the proposed formula useful based on the learners’ weekly performance?
Subjects in this study were thirty-one EFL college freshmen who were taking a
listening and speaking course. In the study, the subjects were required to do at least
three out of the six listening exercise each week across the eleven-week period during
the semester. To ensure the validity of the data, students who failed to complete more
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 41/105
41
than thirty-three tasks were excluded from the following analyses. Learners’ logs on
the listening website showed that eighteen out of the thirty-one students completed
more than thirty-three listening tasks. The valid subject number in this study therefore
dropped to eighteen. According to Hatch and Lazaraton (1991), when the subject
number is smaller than 30, a non-parametric analysis should be applied. Hence, the
results reported in the following section were all based on such analysis. However, the
thirty-one students were asked to fill in a weekly questionnaire, and the results of the
questionnaire responses were recorded anonymously; hence, the data of the valid
eighteen subjects were unable to be identified. Consequently, findings related to the
weekly questionnaire are therefore reported in the original group manner.
In this chapter, the results from the pretest, the posttest, the weekly questionnaire,
learners’ weekly task scores, and the final evaluation questionnaire were analyzed and
presented first. Then the usefulness of the online materials, the learners’ attitudes to
the online materials, and the feasibility of the proposed formula are discussed.
4.2 Results
4.2.1 The Learners’ Background
Several questions in the final evaluation questionnaire were designed to elicit the
learners’ background information (items 1 to 6) concerning their English proficiency
levels (item 1) and English listening proficiency levels (item 2), the attitudes to the
learning of listening (item 3) and their experience in using listening websites to
enhance listening ability (item 4 to 6). Regarding English and English listening
proficiency level, the majority of the subjects rated themselves as at intermediate level.
Among the eighteen students, three of them rated their own English proficiency level
as at high-intermediate level, twelve as intermediate, and three as low-intermediate.
Concerning listening proficiency, two out of the eighteen students rated themselves as
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 42/105
42
at high-intermediate level in listening, twelve as intermediate, and four as
low-intermediate. Table 4.1 summarizes the distribution.
Table 4.1 The learners’ self-evaluation of their English proficiency and English
listening proficiency levels
English Proficiency
Level N %
High-intermediate 3 16.7%
Intermediate 12 66.7%
Low-intermediate 3 16.7%
Total 18 100%
English Listening Proficiency
High-intermediate 2 22.2%
Intermediate 12 66.7%
Low-intermediate 4 11.1%
Total 18 100%
Concerning the learners’ experience of using listening websites, six of them
(33.3%) reported having used such websites to learn about English listening before
they were introduced to Freshmen Listening , the website used in this present study.
The websites used were mainly international and local news websites such as CNN ,
BBC , and ICRT ; and English learning websites such as the Studio Classroom. The
results showed that more than half of the subjects lacked experiences of learning
English listening via internet. For those who did use listening websites, the websites
they had used were not able to provide comprehension check questions and instant
feedback. Therefore, using the MOODLE website to practice listening skills seemed
to be a comparatively new experience to the subjects.
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 43/105
43
4.2.2 The Results from the Pretest and Posttest
Prior and post to the eleven weeks of online listening practice, an independent
listening test containing twenty-four items was administered. The tests were designed
to tap into the learners’ beginning level and their end-of-project level of their listening
ability and of their five target listening skills after the 11-week practice. Comparisons
of the total scores and the individual scores of the five skills were made. In order to
know whether different learners benefited distinctly from the listening practice, they
were classified according to their listening proficiency and their diligence level. The
question of whether more diligent students benefited more from the online practice
was also explored by operationalizing “diligence” as the total listening passages they
completed throughout the eleven weeks. Last, the question of which skill performance
across the eleven weeks is more strongly associated with the posttest performance was
also examined.
For both listening tests used in the pretest and posttest stages, every learner had
five individual scores for each of the five skills, and an overall score (i.e., the sum of
the five scores). The full scores for skill 1 to 5 are “10, 22, 6, 8, 10,” making the full
overall score 56 (see Table 4.2).
Table 4.2 The full scores for the five target listening skill
Skill
1.
Listening
for main
ideas
2.
Listening
for details
3.
Interpreting
the speaker’s
intent
4.
Making
inferences
5.
Summarizing Total
Full
score10 22 6 8 10 56
To investigate the changes the learners made in terms of their overall listening
ability and the five listening skills, both tests were graded by the researcher. Of the
twenty-four items in the tests, twenty-three of them were in true/false or
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 44/105
44
multiple-choice format whose answer keys were readily available. As to the rating of
the summaries, another rater, with the researcher (both were MA-TEFL students) was
invited to grade in order to ensure the rating reliability. Idea units (Johns & Mayes,
1990) of the two summaries were written by the two raters independently based on
their listening comprehension of the passages. Then, the two raters discussed on the
units to finalize a version for each of the summaries as the answer keys (see Appendix
H and I for the complete version of the idea units and the sample summaries of the
tests). Ten units were written for each of the two summaries, making the full score of
each task 10. With the finalized idea units, the two raters graded the learners’
summaries independently. In the pretest, Cronbach alpha reached 0.93, and in the
posttest 0.83. Both alphas indicated fairly high reliability. Thus, Learners’ grades were
computed by averaging the scores given by the two raters.
4.2.2.1 The Usefulness of the Online Materials
To answer the question of the usefulness of the online materials, we compared
the subjects’ performance in the pretest and the posttest in terms of: (1) the overall
score; and (2) the individual scores of the five listening skills.
A higher mean score was obtained in the posttest (45.17) than in the pretest
(42.75). To examine the significance of the difference, the Wilcoxon matched pairs
test (i.e., a non-parametric alternative test to the t-test for dependent samples) was
applied. Results showed that the learners’ change from the pretest to the posttest
reached a statistically significant level (p<0.05, see Table 4.3).
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 45/105
45
Table 4.3 The Wilcoxon matched pairs test of the learners’ performance in the pre-test
and post-test
Valid N T Z P level
Pretest-posttest 18 34.5 1.99 0.05*
Note: *Sig. p<0.05
Table 4.4 displays the learners’ scores on the five listening skills—1) listening
for main ideas, 2) listening for details, 3) interpreting the speaker’s intent, 4) making
inferences; and 5) summarizing—in the pretest and posttest. In terms of the learners’
change in the five skills, as shown in Table 4.5, the Wilcoxon matched pairs test
demonstrated that the learners improved significantly in skill 2 and 5 (p=0.04, p=0.02,
respectively), whereas no gain was found in skill 1, 3 and 4. The improved listening
skills were listening for details and summarizing.
Table 4.4 The learners’ score of the five target skills in the pretest and posttest
Skill 1 Skill 2 Skill 3 Skill 4 Skill 5
Pretest 8.89 18.78 4.67 6.11 4.31
Posttest 8.89 20.33 5.33 5.22 5.39
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 46/105
46
Table 4.5 The Wilcoxon matched pairs test of the learners’ performance on each skill
in the pretest and posttest
Skill 1 Listening for main ideas
Valid N T Z P value
Pretest-posttest 18 22.5 0.00 1.00
Skill 2 Listening for details
Valid N T Z P value
Pretest-posttest 18 7.00 2.09 0.04*
Skill 3 Interpreting the speaker’s intent
Valid N T Z P value
Pretest-posttest 18 11.0 1.68 0.09
Skill 4 Making inferences
Valid N T Z P value
Pretest-posttest 18 26.0 1.66 0.10
Skill 5 Summarizing
Valid N T Z P value
Pretest-posttest 18 20.0 2.27 0.02*
Note: *Sig. p<0.05
To sum up, after using the online materials for eleven weeks, the learners were
found to make progress in (1) their overall listening proficiency, and also in (2)
specific aspects of listening skill—listening for details and summarizing.
4.2.2.2 Proficiency Level and the Final Achievement
To understand if the online materials were equally beneficial to learners of
different proficiency levels, the learners were categorized into a high proficiency
group (high-pro) and a low proficiency group (low-pro) based on their performance in
the pretest. With the mean score of 42.75, and SD being 5.34, learners who got a score
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 47/105
47
higher than 48.09 (i.e., mean+1 SD=42.75+5.34) were placed into the high-pro group
and those who got a lower score than 37.41 (i.e., mean-1 SD=42.75-5.34) were in the
low-pro group. The high-pro group (N=4, mean=49, as shown in Table 4.6) and the
low-pro group (N=4, mean=35.88) were compared of the progress they made from the
pretest to the posttest. The Wilcoxon matched pairs test indicated that in spite of the
score gain in the posttest of both groups (see Table 4.7), neither were statistically
significant. Namely, our online materials seemed to be equally beneficial to learners
of different proficiency levels.
Table 4.6 A summary of mean scores of the pretest and posttest of the high-pro and
the low-pro groups
Pretest Posttest
The high-pro group 49 49.5
The low-pro group 38.88 42.25
Table 4.7 The Wilcoxon matched paired test of the posttest performance of each groupValid N T Z p-level
High proficient
(pre & post)4 1.50 0.80 0.42
Low proficient
(pre & post)4 0.00 1.83 0.07
P<0.05
4.2.2.3 Diligence and Posttest Performance
To address the question concerning the relation between the learners’ diligence
level and their posttest performance, the learners were divided into two groups based
on the number of tasks they completed during the eleven weeks. In this study, every
learner was required to complete at least three out of the six required online tasks
every week. Yet, in spite of the requirement, the number of completed tasks differed
from one to another depending on the learners’ motivation and interests. To classify
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 48/105
48
the learners based on their diligence levels, the average numbers of the passages
finished by all the participants were calculated (see Figure 4.1 for the learners’
completion rates. A detailed picture of the learners’ task completion condition can be
found in Appendix J). The calculation obtained an average number of 43.6 (SD=11.8).
Using this number as a criterion, learners who were above the average were classified
as the more diligent group (N=7, mean number=33.6), while those below the average
were put into the less diligent group (N=5, mean number=60.4). The more diligent
group obtained a mean score of 44.1 in the pretest and 45 in the posttest (see Table 4.8
for the summary of the mean scores of each group). Though the scores increased from
the pretest to the posttest, the Wilcoxon matched pairs test showed that the
improvement was not statistically significant (see Table 4.9). The less diligent group,
on the other hand, obtained a mean score of 41.6 in the pretest and 44.5 in the posttest.
The same with the more diligent group, despite the score gain, the matched pairs test
did not find significant improvement.
Table 4. 8 A summary of the mean scores of the pretest and posttest of the more
diligent group and the less diligent group
Pretest Posttest
More diligent 44.1 45.0
Less diligent 41.7 44.5
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 49/105
49
Figure 4.1 The distribution of completion rates among the 18 learners
Table 4.9 The Wilcoxon matched pairs test of the pretest and posttest performance of
the less diligent and the more diligent group
Valid N T Z p-level
Less diligent
(pre & post)7 7.00 1.18 0.24
More diligent
(pre & post)5 5.00 0.00 1.00
4.2.2.4 Skill Performance and the Final achievement
The learners’ scores of each of the five skills across the eleven weeks were
retrieved from the tracker program and analyzed using correlation analysis to probe
into the relations between the learners’ posttest scores and their scores of each skill
across the eleven weeks. Table 4.10 displays the learners’ mean scores2 of each skill
across the eleven weeks, and Table 4.11 presents the mean scores of each learner
across the eleven weeks.
2
The mean score here indicates the average number of items correctly answered by the learners. Toillustrate, if there were 10 questions in “listening for main ideas,” and student A did five of them and
answered each one correctly, the mean score for student A was 10 (5/5*10) instead of 5 (5/10*10).
32
3
10
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
60-66 50-60 40-50 33-40
Number of finished tasks
N u m b e r o f l e a
r n e r s
17% 17%11%
55%
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 50/105
50
Table 4.10 The learners’ performance on the five target skills across the 11 weeks
Week 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Skill1 9.33 9.17 8.06 8.46 7.87 8.61 7.50 5.65 6.67 7.78 4.72
Skill2 6.67 8.09 9.35 8.36 8.83 8.53 7.97 7.16 7.48 7.77 7.28
Skill3 7.78 * 5 5.56 5 4.44 9.44 6.11 8.33 * *
Skill4 8.33 8.41 8.80 3.98 7.87 8.89 7.32 7.78 7.92 1.57 6.11
Skill5 5.74 3.55 7.14 6.39 6.27 7.94 7.59 5.93 6.56 4.88 4.81
Table 4.11 The learners’ mean scores of the five target skills and their posttest scores
across the 11 weeks
Skill 1 Skill 2 Skill 3 Skill 4 Skill 5 PosttestS1 7.77 6.50 4.17 6.90 3.12 48
S2 7.42 8.96 7.71 7.70 6.98 51
S3 6.69 6.57 6.88 5.86 5.94 46.5
S4 7.74 7.82 6.88 7.89 6.54 50
S5 6.74 8.57 8.13 7.69 8.10 50
S6 8.30 7.62 4.58 6.34 5.89 38
S7 5.79 6.11 4.79 5.97 3.29 40
S8 7.61 7.97 6.88 6.97 8.08 49
S9 8.30 8.40 6.88 7.49 1.99 48
S10 9.03 7.42 6.46 7.14 5.40 42.5
S11 6.38 7.24 2.08 6.92 3.68 41
S12 7.06 8.11 7.08 6.62 5.93 40
S13 7.60 8.42 8.13 6.50 6.67 50.5
S14 7.41 9.12 5.63 7.42 6.79 45
S15 8.06 8.50 6.46 6.38 7.08 41.5
S16 9.39 8.09 6.67 8.50 8.39 42.5
S17 7.39 8.79 9.58 7.27 7.96 48
S18 8.64 8.95 7.29 6.39 6.79 41.5
Spearman correlation (i.e., a non-parametric alternative test of correlation
analysis) was performed to explore the relations between the learners’ performance on
each of the five skills and on the posttest. As shown in Table 4.12, it was found that
the learners’ performance on skill 3 (interpreting the speaker’s intent) and skill 4
(making inferences) were significantly related to their performance on the posttest. In
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 51/105
51
other words, learners’ performance on skill 3, interpreting the speaker’s intent (r=0.58,
p<0.05), and skill 4, making inferences (r=0.55, p<0.05), across the eleven-week
training period was found helpful in predicting the learners’ posttest performance.
Table 4.12 Spearman correlation between the learners’ performance on each of the
skill and on the posttest
Skill 1 Skill 2 Skill 3 Skill 4 Skill 5
Corr. with the posttest -0.01 0.34 0.58* 0.55* 0.34
Note: *Sig. p<0.05
4.2.3 Results from the Final Evaluation Questionnaire
In this section, learners’ responses to the evaluation questionnaire containing
twenty-three items were gathered and analyzed. The questionnaire was divided into
two sections, the first section, items 1 to 6, concerned the learners’ background
information. And the second section, items 7 to 23, was about the learners’
perceptions of the usefulness of the website and online materials. The majority of the
questions were in 5-point Likert scale format in which the five options were “strongly
agree, agree, undecided, disagree, and strongly disagree.” For each item, 5 to 1 point
was assigned to each option for data coding. For each Likert-scale question, the
learners’ ratings were computed by dividing the sum of points given by the learners
by the total number of the learners (i.e., rating=5×a+4× b+3×c+2×d+1×e/a+b+c+d+e,
“a” to “e” represents the number of the learners choosing a particular option). As a
result, higher ratings signify more positive attitudes from the learners.
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 52/105
52
4.2.3.1 Design of the Website
In our evaluation questionnaire, items 7 to 23 elicited learners’ perceptions about
the usefulness of the website. For item 7, a rating of 4.0 was obtained, indicating that
the learners felt fairly positive about the statement, “I think the layout of the website
is clear and easy to follow.” Item 8 also got a rating of 4.0, indicating that most
learners agreed on the statement that the website was easy to use. In item 9, “the
topics of the online listening tasks are interesting and motivating,” a rating of 3.00
was obtained, implying that the learners were indecisive about the statement. Namely,
our learners found the topics of the listening tasks neutral to them, neither interesting
nor boring. Table 4.13 below presents the statements as well as the percentage of
agreement and the rating of each item.
Table 4.13 The learners’ attitudes toward the design of the website
Item Statement% of
agreementRating
#7I think the layout of the website is clear and easy to
follow.
15/18
(83.5%)4.0
#8The website is easy to use, and I get used to it very
easily.
14/18
(77.8%)4.0
#9The topics of the online listening tasks are interesting
and motivating.
9/18
(50%)3.0
4.2.3.2 The Usefulness of the Online Materials
Items 13 to 22 in the evaluation questionnaire were designed to probe into the
learners’ perceptions of the usefulness of the online materials in terms of improving
their overall listening ability as well as the five listening skills. Item 13, 21, and 22
concerned the learners’ views of the helpfulness of the website in improving their
overall English ability. For item 13, “the website and the online listening tasks are
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 53/105
53
useful to improve my overall listening ability,” a fairly high rating (4.0) was obtained.
The learners’ supportive view was also evidenced from their responses to item 21, “It
is beneficial to have resources like this listening website accompanying with listening
courses” (rating=4.4), and item 22, “I would like to use such a listening website to
enhance my listening ability in the future” (rating=4.1). Table 4.14 provides a
summary of these findings. These findings may be due to the friendly online
environment of the website, as shown in learners’ responses to item 7—the layout is
clear—and item 8—the website is easy to use (both ratings are 4.0).
Items 14 to 18 explored learners’ attitudes of the usefulness of the materials
concerning the five target listening skills. For all the five items, the ratings were
satisfactory. Item 14 concerned the skill of listening for main ideas, the rating, 4.1,
indicated the learners found the materials fairly useful in terms of enhancing this
specific skill. The ratings for the other four skills were 3.8, 4.0, 3.7, and 3.6,
respectively (see also Table 4.14). The findings suggest that the learners did agree that
the online materials were useful for them to enhance their ability of the five individual
skills.
More supportive attitudes to the material usefulness were found in the learners’
comments which were also reported in the final evaluation questionnaire. One of the
learner reported that “the website gave her extra opportunities to practice her
listening.” Many other stated that “the materials did help enhance their listening
ability.” Furthermore, there was even one learner asking where she could find free
listening website like Freshmen Listening for her to practice; and another asking if we
could keep Freshmen Listening open so that she could have extra practice in the
future. All these comments given by the learners provided strong evidence of the
learners’ positive attitudes toward the online materials and the website.
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 54/105
54
Table 4.14. The learners’ perceptions of the usefulness of the online materials
Item Statement% of
agreementRating
#13The website and the online listening tasks are useful to
improve my overall listening ability.
14/18
(77.8%)4.0
#14The online practice improves my ability of listening for
the main idea of the passages.
17/18
(94.4%)4.1
#15The online practice improves my ability of listening for
detailed information of the passages.
14/18
(77.8%)3.8
#16The online practice improves my ability of
understanding the speaker’s intention or thoughts.
16/18
(88.9%)4.0
#17The online practice improves my ability of
understanding the implied information of the passages.
13/18
(72.3%)
3.7
#18The online practice improves my ability of summarizing
the listening content.
12/18
(66.7%)3.6
#21It is beneficial to have resources like this listening
website accompanying with listening courses.
17/18
(94.4%)4.4
#22I would like to use such a listening website to enhance
my listening ability in the future.
15/18
(83.4%)4.1
4.2.3.3 The Learners’ Perceptions about Attributes to Listening Difficulty
Items 10 to 12 tapped into the learners’ perceptions about factors causing their
listening difficulties. Item 10 dealt with text type, “There were two types of texts
during the eleven weeks—conversation between people and lectures/ news reports by
one person—which one do you find more challenging?” Among the thirty learners,
77.8% of them considered lectures and news reports more challenging than
conversation. On the question regarding “task type,” item 12 asked the learners to
grade their level of agreement to the statement, “the summary task is more difficult
than all the multiple-choice questions.” A very high grade, 4.6, was obtained from this
item, indicating that the learners did regard task type—specifically multiple-choice
questions and essay questions—a factor influencing their performance.
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 55/105
55
Item 11 investigated how the learners rated the importance of the potential
causes of listening difficulties. Five difficulty factors were listed in the item: speech
rate, vocabulary, text types, topic familiarity, and sentence structure. The learners
were asked to rank them from the most important to the least important; rank 1
indicated the most important and 5 the least important. The learners’ rankings were
averaged to understand how they perceived the five factors. Findings showed that the
learners generally regarded speech rate as the most influential factors causing
listening difficulties (rank=1.8) and sentence structure as the least influential
(rank=3.7). For the other factors, vocabulary was ranked as the second place (2.6),
followed by text types (3.2) and topic familiarity (3.6).
4.2.4 Results from the Weekly Questionnaire and Weekly Tasks
One of the main goals in this study was to propose and test a formula which
generated a “difficulty score” that determined the difficulty levels of our listening
materials. The formula was as follows:
Difficulty score=speech rate×0.5+academic word ratio×0.3+reading ease
score×0.2
In the formula, three listening difficulty factors—speech rate, syntactical
complexity, and vocabulary—were involved. The range of difficulty score was from 1
to 100; the higher the score was, the more difficult the passage would be, and vice
versa. With the difficulty scores generated from the formula, the 66 listening passages
in Freshmen Listening were sequenced from easy to difficult.
To verify the usefulness of the proposed formula, data was gathered from three
sources: a) the learners’ perceptions of the difficulty levels reported in the weekly
difficulty questionnaire, b) items concerning the usefulness of the formula in the final
evaluation questionnaire, and c) the learners’ performance on the required exercises
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 56/105
56
across the 11 weeks. Based on these data sources, an analysis of the usefulness of the
formula is presented in the following sections.
4.2.4.1 The Learners’ Perceptions
In the evaluation questionnaire, item 19 and 20 examined whether the learners’
perceptions of the difficulty levels of the 66 texts corresponded to the pre-determined
sequence. As is clear in Table 4.15, item 19, “the online tasks are more and more
challenging from the beginning to the end of the eleven weeks” was assigned a rating
of 3.4, indicating slightly positive attitudes from the learners. Item 20, “I performed
better on the listening tasks at the beginning than at the end in the past eleven weeks”
was given an average grade of 2.9, suggesting that the learners were indecisive on or
slightly disagreed with this statement. Based on the learners’ report in the evaluation
questionnaire, it seemed that the formula was not as useful as we expected in
determining the difficulty levels of listening texts.
Table 4.15 The learners’ perceptions of the usefulness of the predefined difficulty
scores
Item Statement% of
agreementRating
#19The online tasks are more and more challenging from
the beginning to the end of the 11 weeks.
7/18
(38.9%)3.4
#20I performed better on the listening tasks at the beginning
than at the end in the past 11 weeks
3/18
(16.7%)2.9
Another way we used to probe into the learners’ perceptions of the usefulness of
formula was the weekly questionnaire (Note that, due to the anonymous nature of the
questionnaire, it was not possible for us to identified the responses of the 18 learners
from the whole class, hence, as far as the weekly questionnaire is concerned, the
analysis was based on the responses of the 31 learners.) After the learners completed
the weekly required tasks, a weekly questionnaire was provided. In the questionnaire,
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 57/105
57
the learners were asked to rate the difficulty level of the easiest passage of the week
from five perspectives—speech rate, syntactical complexity, vocabulary, topic
familiarity, and overall difficulty. Throughout the eleven-week practice, the learners’
responses to the surveys were collected and analyzed. On one hand, we expected that
the learners’ perceptions could correlate with the pre-determined sequence. Namely,
we expected that the learners could rate the texts more and more difficult across the
eleven weeks. On the other hand, however, we did hope that the learners could gain
progress with the help of the practice, which would then lead to a reverse
consequence—disagreement between the learners’ perceptions and the predefined
sequence. Transformation of the learners’ ratings of the easiest passage across the
11-week period to a curve diagram is shown in Figure 4.2. The curve seems to suggest
that the learners’ ratings of the selected passages fluctuated across the eleven weeks. A
pattern moving from a lower score to a higher score was not found. The findings may
be in part due to the learners’ maturation and improvement during the practice period.
However, it may also show that the proposed formula needs further adjustment or
revision.
Figure 4.2 Learners’ ratings of the easiest passage each week throughout the practice
period
0
1
2
3
4
5
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
weeks
p o i n t s
vocabulary
speech rategrammar
topic familiarity
overall difficulty
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 58/105
58
Weekly Task Performance
0.00
10.00
20.00
30.00
40.00
50.00
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Week
S c o r e
4.2.4.2 The Learners’ Weekly Performance
Each week, the learners were required to complete three out of the six listening
tasks. To investigate whether the online tasks were beneficial for the learners in
enhancing their listening ability, the learners’ scores on the required tasks each week
were averaged. Throughout the eleven weeks, eleven mean scores were obtained. The
eleven scores were presented in Table 4.16 and were plotted into Figure 4.3. As in the
figure of the learners’ weekly ratings, there was no clear pattern regarding the
learners’ weekly performance.
Table 4.16 The learners’ mean scores of the weekly required exercises
Week 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
Task
scores37.39 40.32 40.82 34.74 39.04 38.14 42.41 35.18 31.61 32.28 34.77
Note: Maximum score=50
Figure 4.3 The learners’ mean scores of the weekly required exercises
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 59/105
59
4.2.4.3 The Relationship between Learners’ Weekly Rating and Weekly Performance
To understand whether the learners’ perceptions of the difficulty levels of the
texts were congruent with their weekly performance, correlation between the learners’
ratings of difficulty levels and their weekly scores of the online tasks was computed.
Table 4.17 below depicts the learners’ grading from the five perspectives and the
results of the correlation computation. Overall, the correlation was not strong.
Moderate correlation was found between vocabulary and the weekly performance
(r=0.40) as well between grammar and the weekly performance (r=0.41). For the
other three factors, fairly weak relations were found: 0.17, 0.14, and 0.18 for speech
rate, topic familiarity, and overall difficulty, respectively.
Table 4.17 Pearson correlation between the learners’ rating and their weekly
performance
Weekly
performanceVocabulary Speech rate Grammar
Topic
familiarity
Overall
difficulty
1 36.70 3.5 2.6 2.9 3.2 2.82 41.04 3.2 2.6 2.7 2.8 2.3
3 41.28 4 3.1 3.7 3.7 3.2
4 33.49 3.2 2.6 2.8 2.7 2.6
5 37.85 4 2.8 3.3 3.6 3.1
6 36.92 3.6 3.3 3 3 2.9
7 39.05 4.1 2.7 3.4 4 3.4
8 35.69 3.4 1.8 2.9 3.4 2.5
9 40.54 3.1 2.1 2.5 2.4 2.4
10 31.63 3.3 2.5 2.8 3.2 2.7
11 33.69 3 2.6 2.3 2.9 2.6
Corr. 0.40 0.17 0.41 0.14 0.18
To tap into the relations among the five difficulty factors from the learners’
perspectives, correlation was also computed. The correlation matrix is shown in Table
4.18. From the table, it is clear that learners’ grading on vocabulary was highly related
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 60/105
60
to that on grammar, topic familiarity, and overall difficulty. Further, grading on
grammar was also highly related to that on topic familiarity and overall difficulty. The
grading on topic familiarity was highly related to that on grammar and overall
difficulty, and the grading on overall difficulty was found to be highly related to
vocabulary, grammar, and topic familiarity. Speech rate, however, was not found
significantly related to any of the other four aspects.
Table 4.18 The correlation among the learners’ rating from the five perspectives
Vocabulary Speech rate Grammar Topic
familiarity
Overall
difficulty
Vocabulary 1.00 0.49 0.95* 0.88* 0.92*
Speech rate 0.45 1.00 0.49 0.26 0.59
Grammar 0.95* 0.49 1.00 0.82* 0.84*
Topic
familiarity0.88* 0.26 0.82* 1.00 0.84*
Overall
difficulty
0.92* 0.59 0.84* 0.84* 1.00
Note: *Sig. p<.05
4.2.4.4 The Relation between the Predefined Text Difficulty Score and the Learners’
Weekly Performance
To tap into the usefulness of the proposed formula or the predefined sequence of
the 66 listening texts, we have looked at the learners’ perceptions reported both in the
weekly questionnaire and the final evaluation questionnaire, and the learners’
performance on the weekly tasks. To explore the question in more depth, we further
looked at the relation between the predefined text difficulty scores and the learners’
scores on the tasks using Pearson correlation. As only thirty-three required tasks were
completed by more than half of the learners, the computation of the two
variables—the predefined difficulty scores and the learners’ weekly scores—was
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 61/105
61
based on the thirty-three tasks (as listed in Table 4.19). In the Table, difficulty scores
and the learners’ scores and attempts of the thirty-three required online tasks were
displayed. The computation obtained a correlation value of -0.273. The finding
showed that very weak correlation existed between the two variables. In other words,
when taking learners’ performance as an indication of the difficulty levels of texts, the
predefined sequence did not seem to be useful.
3
Higher score had different meanings in each variable. In predefined text difficulty score, it meant amore difficulty text. Yet, in learners’ performance, it meant an easier text. Consequently, a negative
value was expected in the computation.
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 62/105
62
Table 4.19 A summary of the difficult scores of the required tasks and the learners’
performance on the tasks
Text
Presentation
Text difficulty
scoreSs scores
Number of
students who did
the textTXT.69 No.1 14.21 32.78 18
TXT.18 No.2 15.77 35.30 17
TXT.25 No.3 17.02 42.59 18
TXT.48 No.4 17.34 45.42 16
TXT.21 No.7 20.36 46.50 6
TXT.28 No.11 24.75 44.48 18
TXT.17 No.12 25.23 36.11 18
TXT.54 No.13 25.3 41.90 18
TXT.29 No.17 26.9 42.64 18TXT.13 No.18 27.35 29.48 18
TXT.20 No.19 27.58 32.18 18
TXT.35 No.23 29.13 40.28 18
TXT.2 No.24 29.31 38.54 18
TXT.66 No.25 29.44 35.71 7
TXT.27 No.29 30.63 38.33 18
TXT.42 No.30 30.66 31.30 18
TXT.47 No.31 30.72 37.73 18
TXT.7 No.32 31.32 44.79 18TXT.65 No.36 32.77 44.49 17
TXT.56 No.37 33.02 38.82 17
TXT.37 No.38 33.2 35.00 17
TXT.41 No.43 34.2 31.46 16
TXT.40 No.44 34.35 35.94 16
TXT.63 No.45 36.12 38.13 16
TXT.45 No.49 38.98 38.13 16
TXT.4 No.50 39 38.15 16
TXT.6 No.51 41 49.06 16TXT.44 No.55 44.67 34.89 18
TXT.J No.56 45.06 32.41 18
TXT.JJ No.57 45.26 31.76 17
TXT.II No.61 47.79 31.37 17
TXT.NN No.62 48.23 33.92 17
TXT.B No.63 48.29 39.41 17
Note: Maximum score for each text=50. N=18
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 63/105
63
4.2.5 Summary of the Results
Based on the data analysis, the answers to the research questions are summarized
as follows:
1. After learning from the online listening materials, did the students perform better
in the posttest than in the pretest in terms of the overall scores and items for each
skill?
As far as overall listening ability is concerned, the learners indeed made progress
from the pretest to the posttest after using the online materials for eleven weeks. As to
the specific listening skills, we found that the learners became better at the skill of
listening for main ideas and summarizing. Concerning the other three target
skills—listening for main ideas, interpreting the speaker’ intent, and making
inferences,—no significant improvement was identified.
2. Were there learners differences found in this project?
a. Were the materials equally beneficial to learners of different proficiency
levels?
Although the low proficiency group made more progress in the posttest than the
high proficiency group did, the differences were not statistically significant in either
group. Hence, the online materials seemed to be equally beneficial to the learners
regardless their proficiency levels.
b. Were there differences in achievement, given the unequal number of passages
finished?
There was no difference found concerning the learners’ diligence level. Namely,
learners who completed more tasks did not improve more than those who completed
fewer tasks. Both the more diligent group and the less diligent group improved in the
posttest, yet, the differences were not large enough to reach the significance level.
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 64/105
64
c. What type(s) of skill practice could best predict the learners’ posttest
performance?
Based on Spearman correlation, skill 3 and skill 4—interpreting the speaker’s
intent and making inference—were found to be able to predict the learners’ posttest
performance. In other words, when the learners were good at these two skills, their
posttest scores were also higher, and vice versa.
3. How did the learners perceive the role of the materials in their learning?
The learners expressed very supportive view to the use the online materials as
supplementary resources in listening courses. Moreover, many of them reported their
willingness to the use of listening websites as the one used in the study. Also, the
majority of the learners considered that the materials were beneficial to their learning
of listening, especially in “overall listening ability,” “listening for main ideas,” and
“interpreting the speaker’s intent.”
a. Were the learners’ perceptions of the material difficulty congruent with their
performance?
Overall, the learners’ perceptions were not very congruent with their weekly
performance. However, when rating the difficulty levels in terms of vocabulary and
grammar (or syntactic complexity), the learners’ perceptions were found moderately
related to their weekly performance. Concerning rating from the other two
aspects—speech rate and topic familiarity, the relation between perceptions and
performance was very weak.
4. Was the proposed formula useful based on the learners’ weekly performance?
Because no clear pattern was found in the learners’ weekly performance across the
eleven weeks, the formula did not seem to be useful in determining the difficulty
levels of the listening texts used in this study. This indicates that the formula needs
further refinement.
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 65/105
65
4.3 Discussion
In this study, we proposed a formula to grade our listening texts, and with its
help, we constructed a listening website in which the graded listening texts were
sequenced based on difficulty scores generated from the formula for our participants
to enhance their listening ability. The findings of the study were presented in the
previous section. In this section, a discussion on the findings is given.
4.3.1 The Usefulness of the Online Materials
Based on the implications drawn from previous listening studies, we constructed
a website containing 66 listening texts with their MP3 files and comprehension
questions and incorporated the website to a listening and speaking course for the
purpose of eleven-week listening training. The website, Freshmen Listening, had
provided the learners extra opportunities to learn about listening with the help of
several useful functions embedded in the chosen MOODLE platform. To reiterate,
Freshmen Listening was able to track the learners’ activities on it; additionally, it also
offered instant feedback for the learners to check their learning after each attempt on
the tasks. Moreover, transcripts of the listening texts were also provided to promote
comprehension and language acquisition (Chapelle, 2003).
The usefulness of the online materials was first demonstrated by comparing the
learners’ scores in the pretest and the posttest. Analyses were carried out in two
directions, learners’ overall listening performance and their performance in the
separate listening skills. The data analysis showed that the learners improved
significantly in their overall listening ability in the posttest after the eleven weeks
(45.17 in the posttest and 42.75 in the pretest, T=34.5, Z=1.99, p<0.05). Although it is
not clear whether it was the online materials themselves, a maturation effect, or the
combined effect of the materials and the classroom teaching that led to the progress,
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 66/105
66
this finding still provided supportive evidence to the use of such a supplementary
website as learning and teaching aids, which some of the previous studies were not
able to do. For example, Cheng (2006) applied a readily available listening website
(Randall’s Cyber ESL Listening Lab http://www.esl-lab.com) for her learners as extra
practice opportunities. While the learners were found to be highly motivated about the
use of the website, their performance was not measured in the study. In Chen (2004),
a similar situation was also found. In other words, the two studies conducted in a
similar context as that of the current study, though their learners’ attitudes were
positively reported, the advantages of using listening websites in terms of enhancing
listening ability were not confirmed. Measurement of the learners’ performance after
they have used the CALL material is essential to effect evaluation research.
In addition to the overall listening ability, the learners were also found to benefit
in the skills of “listening for details,” and “summarizing.” Namely, the learners
became better at locating and memorizing detailed information, and summarizing the
texts after listening. Concerning their improvement in listening to details, it may be
attributed to the reinforced short-term memory due to the extra listening opportunities
provided by the website. And as the learners were able to recall detailed information
better from the listening, the progress they made in summarizing in the posttest should
not be too surprising. For the other three skills—listening for main ideas, interpreting
the speaker’s intent, and making inferences—significant improvement was not found.
The finding here may be in part due to the uneven arrangement of the online tasks and
the unequal distribution of the question number for each skill. In the online tasks,
“summarizing” was arranged in the required tasks in each week, hence the learners
were more likely to finish all the summarizing exercises throughout the eleven weeks
(the completion rate was 88.9%, see Table 4.20 for detailed information). For the
other four skills, such arrangement was not practiced, which made it possible for the
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 67/105
67
learners to miss questions of certain skills of the week and thus fail to improve in
those skills (See Table 4.21 for the distribution of question number of each skill). Skill
2—listening for details—was an exception because it has the largest number of
practice items, which enabled the learners to practice on it every week. This is another
explanation for the significant progress the learners made skill 2 in the posttest. The
finding here also indicated one limitation in the design of the tasks, namely, the
unequal distribution of the skill questions. Significant progress in the unimproved
three skills may be found once equal number of skill questions was assigned to the
required tasks each week. The assumption is based on a belief of the amount of
practice on the training effects.
Table 4.20 The number of learners who did the summary tasks across weeks
Week 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Ave
Number 18 18 17 18 16 18 16 15 15 14 12 16
% 100 100 94.4 100 88.9 100 88.9 83.3 83.3 77.8 66.7 88.9
Note: The total student number=18
Table 4.21 The distribution of question number of each skill
Skill 1 Skill 2 Skill 3 Skill 4 Skill 5 Total
Question number 72 118 26 79 11 306
To explore more deeply the usefulness of the online listening materials, we
looked into the learners’ performance in the pretest and posttest in many other ways in
addition to comparing the learners’ pretest and posttest scores as a whole and in
individual skills. First of all, to understand whether the online materials were equally
beneficial to learners of different proficiency levels, the achievement of the
more-proficient group and the less-proficient group were compared. The findings
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 68/105
68
suggested that neither group improved significantly in the posttest, implying that the
materials were equally beneficial to both groups. Regardless the fact that our learners
were all college level EFL freshmen, individual differences still existed. Among our
eighteen participants, there were some who were very advanced, and also some below
average. Our online listening materials were selected based on the researcher’s
experience to fit the level of college level EFL freshmen in general. Since there were
both easy and difficulty materials in the website, the online materials seemed to meet
the levels of students in both groups.
A more in-depth investigation of the material usefulness was carried out by
looking at the relationship between the learners’ diligence levels (i.e., the number of
listening tasks completed throughout the practice period) and their posttest
achievement. Based on the learners’ logs on Freshmen Listening , every learner
completed 43.5 tasks on average across the eleven weeks. The learners were divided
into two groups based on their diligence levels. Despite that more improvement from
the diligent group was expected, statistical analysis did not show a significant
difference between groups. The finding indicated that regardless the number of tasks
finished by the learners, their achievement in the posttest did not vary as a function of
diligence levels. This may be ascribed to the small subject number in the study. As the
total subject number was not big (only 18 learners), further grouping made the
sub-group number even smaller, hence their performance is difficult to reach
significant differences. Moreover, looking closer to the achievement differences
between the two groups, more achievement was actually found in the less diligent
group, which was totally contradictory to our expectation. One explanation for this
finding may be the different start points of the both groups in the pretest (the more
diligent group=44.1, and the less diligent group=41.7, p<0.05). As the diligent
learners’ were relatively high in their pretest scores, there was less room for them to
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 69/105
69
improve to a statistically significant level. On the other hand, while some of less
diligent learners had a lower start in the pretest (28.5 and 38.5), it was more likely for
them to show greater improvement.
Another way to assess the material usefulness was by means of the learners’
performance on the online tasks throughout the eleven weeks. A dilemma was posed
here: on one hand, we expected to see a descending curve as conditioned by the texts’
increasing difficulty throughout the eleven week. Yet, when the difficulty levels of
texts were held as constant, an ascending curve could signify the learners’ learning, on
the other hand. The finding reported in the result section indicated that neither
condition was identified; instead, a more complicated curve was found. The finding
was not surprising because learners’ scores on the tasks may not be determined only
by the difficulty levels of the texts, but also by the students’ learning either from the
online tasks or the classroom-based teaching, their motivation, and other
environmental or learner factors. To reiterate, the texts across weeks were arranged in
accordance to their difficulty levels, namely, from easy to difficult. Hence, as the texts
became difficult, the learners were likely to perform worse. However, while learners
were practicing during the eleven weeks, they were also receiving classroom-based
instruction; and their learning from both sources was doubtlessly another factor
influencing the learners’ performance. This may also explain why the learners’
performance did not go down as the materials became more difficult. Based on the
findings in the part, it is clear that learning of listening skills is more complicated than
we have understood.
All in all, we have tried to probe into the usefulness of the online materials via
various means. Whereas pretest and posttest comparisons concerning the learning
listening performance had revealed the usefulness of the online materials,
comparisons of learner performance regarding proficiency and diligence grouping did
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 70/105
70
not show significance possibly due to small subject numbers. In addition, strong
evidence was not found in the learners’ weekly performance, either. This may be due
to other learner or environmental factors, or the combined learning effect from the
class and the website.
4.3.2 The Usefulness of the Proposed Formula or the Predefined Sequence of the
Materials
Material development is a critical issue in language teaching and learning. As in
all area of language learning, it is important that the materials presented to the
learners meet the learners’ proficiency levels. To measure difficulty levels of listening
texts, we had proposed a formula to determine the difficulty levels of our listening
texts, and by putting our materials into use, we tested the feasibility of using the
formula in grading listening texts. The usefulness of the formula was demonstrated in
three ways. First, we looked at the learners’ performance on the online tasks in the
website. Secondly, we examined the learners’ report in the weekly questionnaire and
in the final evaluation questionnaire. Last, we looked at the relation between the
learners’ weekly performance and the predefined sequence of the texts.
The learners’ weekly performance, as have been mentioned, was not supportive
enough to approve of the usefulness of the formula since a steadily descending curve
was not found. To repeat, a descending curve, which stands for the learners’ scores
across weeks, was expected in order to prove that the predefined sequence of the texts
indeed followed the manner—from easy to difficult. Nevertheless, as have been noted
previously, difficulty was not the only factor that could influence the learners’
performance. Instead, learner factors (e.g., the learners’ interests, their motivation,
their familiarity to the materials), and environmental factors (e.g., noise, time), may
also play roles in determining the learners’ scores. To illustrate, when listening to a
text with a boring or unfamiliar topic, the learners may not be able to concentrate as
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 71/105
71
much as when listening to a text with an interesting topic. Also, it is possible that the
learners might have been less willing to do the exercises during certain period of time
such as the mid-term week and at the end of the semester.
In addition to the learners’ weekly performance, their reports in both the final
evaluation questionnaire and the weekly difficulty questionnaire also provided insight
into the usefulness of the formula. In the final evaluation questionnaire, the learners
were asked if the texts across the eleven weeks were more and more difficult from the
beginning to the end. A moderate rating was given by the learners to the question (3.4
out of 5 in 5-point Likert scale question), which indicated that the learners were more
indecisive than positive to the effectiveness of the predefined sequence. In the weekly
difficulty questionnaire, the learners graded the easiest text of each week from five
aspects—vocabulary, speech rate, syntactic complexity, topic familiarity, and overall
difficulty. A similar dilemma was also found when dealing with this question, that is,
on one hand, we expected the learners’ grading showed a descending tendency which
indicated the texts’ increasing difficulty. Nevertheless, bearing in mind the
expectation of seeing improvement from the learners, a descending curve was
absolutely a finding we did not wish to obtain. Results in this part were similar to
those in the learners’ performance across weeks, that is, no clear pattern was found to
approve of the effectiveness of the sequence. Several reasons may provide
explanation to the finding. One straightforward reason contributing to the finding may
be that our sequencing using the formula was indeed ineffective, indicating needs for
further refinement of the proposed formula. Moreover, as when the learners started to
participate in the online training project, almost all of them (except one) were fresh
out the senior high school, and practicing listening online was a fairly new experience
for them. This may explain why the learners graded the texts in the first two weeks as
difficult compared to those in the following few weeks (see Figure 4.2 in the result
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 72/105
72
section). And as the learners became more experienced in online listening, they thus
graded the texts from week 3 to 7 as easier than week 1 and 2, even though the
grading within the weeks was also turbulent. As is clear in the figure, it is undeniable
that there was a tendency of grading the texts in the last few weeks as more difficult
than in the previous weeks. The finding suggested that even though we did not find a
curve supporting the effectiveness of the sequencing in a week-by-week manner; by
zooming out the curve, or looking at it in a more general way, it was demonstrable
that the texts in the last few weeks were indeed more difficult than those in the
previous weeks.
One interesting finding worth mentioning is that, by looking at the learners’
grading and weekly performance, a moderately positive correlation was found
between the learners’ performance and their difficulty rating in terms of vocabulary
(r=0.40) as well as syntactic complexity (r=0.41). Namely, when the learners graded a
text as difficult in vocabulary and syntactic complexity, they actually did worse on the
task. On the other hand, learners’ grading on speech rate, topic familiarity, and overall
difficulty was not found to be related to their task performance. These findings were
found to confirm but also contradict some previous research concerning listening
difficulties. In terms of syntactic complexity, our finding confirmed previous studies
in that, syntactic modified texts (less syntactic complicated) were beneficial to
comprehension (Chiang & Dunkel, 1990; Rubin, 1994). Yet, with much literature
indicating speech rate a profound factor affecting listening comprehension
(Flowerdew, 1994; Griffiths, 1992; Rubin, 1994; Teng, 2001), our finding showed no
clear relation between speech rate and task performance. It may be in part due to that
the speech rate in some of the texts was too slow to be beneficial to the learners, as
speech rate that is too slow comparing to the normal speech may also hinder
comprehension (Griffith, 1992). Hence, whereas the learner may have graded a text as
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 73/105
73
easy because of slow speech rate, they were not necessarily able to show the benefit
they got from the lower rate in their task performance because the perceived slow rate
was actually a factor that hindered their comprehension.
To sum up this section, in the current study, we have tried to test the feasibility of
the proposed formula via various means. Strongly supportive attitudes to the
effectiveness of the predefined sequence (or the formula) were not found in the
evaluation questionnaire. As to the weekly questionnaire, a supportive pattern was not
found in a week-by-week examination, either. However, by looking at learners’
grading from a more general view, the learners’ grading seemed partially congruent
with the sequencing. Either case, however, suggested that the proposed formula may
need further refinement to be effective.
4.3.3 Learners’ Perceptions of the Online Materials
Additionally to the satisfactory findings concerning the usefulness of the online
materials obtained based on the pretest and posttest comparison, learners also reported
very positive attitudes toward the use of Freshmen Listening as supplementary
practice materials to the classroom-based learning. The finding was coherent with the
findings in Cheng (2006) and Chen (2004), in which the learners expressed highly
positive attitudes to the use of online listening materials. Based on their report in the
final evaluation questionnaire, satisfactory ratings were given by the learners to the
statement “the website and the online listening tasks are useful to improve my overall
listening ability,” and statements concerning the usefulness of the website to their five
listening skills (see Table 4.16 in the result section). More positive attitudes were
reported when being asked, “is it beneficial to have resources like the listening
website accompanying with listening courses?” (rating=4.4) and in “would you like to
use such listening website to enhance your listening ability in the future?”
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 74/105
74
(rating=4.1). The fairly high rating given by the learners suggested that learners
believed that by practicing on the website their listening proficiency would improve in
time.
Based on the learners’ reports from the evaluation questionnaire, the beneficial of
CALL to the learners’ learning process was further confirmed. From the learners’
background information, we found that though all of the learners showed high
motivation in improving their English listening proficiency, yet about two-thirds of
the learners have not tried to use listening websites as a practice tool. In the project,
the learners were introduced a listening website, and they indicated in the evaluation
questionnaire that they had became aware of the potential benefits embedded in this
kind of listening websites. To the questions asking whether the learners improved
their overall listening ability and the five target listening skills, fairly high ratings
were given by the learners (4.0 for overall listening ability and interpreting the
speaker’s intent, 4.1 for listening for main ideas, and 3.8 for listening for details). The
learners’ awareness of the benefits of the website was also evidenced from their
comments reported in the questionnaire: “the website did give me extra opportunities
to practice my listening,” and “the online materials did help enhance my listening
ability.” One learner even asked in the questionnaire where she could find free
listening websites like the one used in this project for her to practice. The learners’
reports are incontestably encouraging to the use of online listening materials to supply
regular listening courses. With the easily accessible materials, the learners were able
to attend to the extra practice whenever they have time, and wherever there were
computer facility.
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 75/105
75
Chapter Five
CONCLUSION
5.1 Overview
With regard to the importance of listening and the pedagogical need of a grading
mechanism for listening texts, this study tried to address the issue of how useful it can
be to infuse online listening materials into a listening and speaking course with the
purpose of enhancing the learners’ listening ability. Additionally, it also attempted to
develop a grading mechanism specifically for “listening texts,” and based on it, a
listening website consisting of sixty-six graded listening texts sequenced from easy to
difficult and their comprehension questions was constructed and infused into a
listening and speaking class. Apart from the usefulness of the online listening
materials and the proposed grading formula, another concern in this study is to
understand if there were learner differences that had impacted on the learners’ final
achievement. Finally, the study also takes an interest in exploring the learners’
attitudes toward the website and the online materials after the use for eleven weeks.
Eighteen EFL college freshmen were recruited as participants of this study and were
asked to do three out of six listening tasks each week for eleven weeks. Additionally
to the weekly tasks, which the learners’ performance was automatically recorded by
an embedded tracker program, a pretest, a posttest, a weekly difficulty questionnaire
and a final evaluation questionnaire were used as instruments for data collection.
The results of this study showed that it is useful and beneficial to infuse online
listening materials into listening and speaking classes in two ways. Concerning the
learners’ achievement after the eleven-week practice, they improved not only in their
overall listening ability, but in specific listening skills as well (i.e., listening for details
and summarizing). In terms of their perceptions of material usefulness, most learners
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 76/105
76
agreed that the online materials were beneficial in enhancing their overall listening
ability and specific listening skills. However, based on the learners’ weekly
performance throughout the eleven weeks, definite answer to the materials usefulness
was not found. The finding indicates that learning of listening skills is more
complicated than we have understood. To the question of the formula usefulness, no
definite answer was found either from the learners’ weekly performance on the
website or from their weekly rating of the texts’ difficulty levels. This was because,
first, the learners’ scores on the weekly tasks, which we used to concretize the text
difficulty, were actually not precise enough to reflect the difficulty levels of the
materials. Moreover, the learners’ performance on the tasks may also rely on other
factors such as learner factors (e.g., motivation, familiarity, interest) and
environmental factors (e.g., time). Regarding learner differences, by grouping the
learners based on their proficiency and diligence levels, we did not find apparent
differences that affected the learners’ achievement in the posttest. In other words, the
online listening materials seemed to be equally beneficial to all of the learners,
regardless their proficiency levels. In terms of the relation between the learners’
diligence levels and their achievement, no conclusive answer was found due to the
small subject number in this study, and the different proficiency levels of the learners
in both groups. Finally, With regards to the learners’ attitudes to the online materials,
very positive responses were found from the evaluation questionnaire. In the
questionnaire, the learners not only regarded that the materials were beneficial for
them to improve their listening skills, but also expressed high motivation of using
listening websites to get extra learning opportunities.
In the following section, the limitations of this study, directions recommended
for the future research, and the pedagogical implications are presented.
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 77/105
77
5.2 Limitations of the Study
The participants recruited in this study were from an intact class of college level
EFL freshmen. To address how online materials may affect their development of
listening skill, the texts used in the listening websites were selected depending on our
specific learners’ proficiency levels. Therefore, the tasks in the website may not be
readily usable for learners of other proficiency levels. Moreover, because the
experiment started at the very beginning of the teaching year of 2006, and the learners
were all first-year students, we were not able to know their proficiency levels until the
administration of the pretest. Additionally, during the selection of target texts, the
decision of which texts to include was based on the researcher’s experience
exclusively. Since such selection should rely on the teacher’s understanding of the
learners’ proficiency levels, by gathering target texts before knowing the learners, we
actually ran a risk in the materials selection process in that we may have included
texts of inappropriate difficulty levels and topics.
Secondly, to train the learners of the five target listening skills, comprehension
questions representing each of the five skills were designed. However, as the
development of the skill questions largely depended on the nature of the texts, equal
question numbers for each skill was not achieved. Accordingly, the questions
representing each skill were not distributed equivalently in the required tasks and
optional tasks. That is to say, learners may not be able to encounter every question
type in the required tasks each week with equal amount of practice. This limitation
therefore resulted in the learners’ insignificant achievement in some the skill of
listening for main ideas, interpreting the speaker’s intent, and making inferences.
Apart from the concerns in the materials development phase, incompleteness of
research design may also in part contribute to some of the insignificant findings
regarding the learners’ improvement. To begin with, the subject number was small,
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 78/105
78
making it hard to achieve statistical significance. Secondly, this study adopted the
one-group pretest and posttest design; in other words, a control group which served as
the baseline for comparison was not included. A more influential limitation was the
non-intensive nature of the online training project. During the training period, the
learners were asked to do three tasks each week. Based on the learner logs in the
website, it was found that more than half of the learners did the weekly required tasks
at the time when the tasks were about to be closed. This condition suggested that most
learners had access to the website only once a week, hence, a period of eleven weeks
thus did not seem to be sufficient enough to make differences in some specific
listening skills.
Finally, in this study, we made a pioneer effort in developing a grading
mechanism specially for listening texts. However, as there were many factors that
play roles in listening difficulty other than speech rate, syntactic complexity, and
vocabulary, our formula, which concerned only these three factors, may seem too
shallow. There were many other factors that should be taken into consideration such
as accents of the speakers, intonation, text type, and topic familiarity.
5.3 Directions for Future Research
Given the limitations of the current study mentioned in the previous section, we
recommend some directions for future research.
First of all, concerning the research design, more participants should be recruited,
and a control group should also be included as a basis of comparison. Moreover, in
order to achieve a more conclusive answer to the question of how online listening
materials could benefit EFL learners’ learning of listening, a more intensive training
syllabus is recommended. In other words, the training syllabus should be able to
engage the students in practicing for a longer period. Further, since uneven
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 79/105
79
distribution of the item number of each listening skill may in part account for the
learners unimproved performance in some of the listening skills, it is suggested that
future studies try to reach a balance in item number among the target skills.
Secondly, it is suggested that a listening test containing the materials used during
the eleven-week period be used in the pretest and in the posttest. In this study, one
independent listening test adopted from the course book of the listening and speaking
class was used in the pretest and posttest. However, the test itself did not consist any
of the texts from the 66 online practice texts, regardless that the items in the test were
also measuring the five target listening skills as the eleven-week practice. The
unmatched content between the test and the practice was in fact a threat to the validity
of the test and thus to the findings in this study. Hence, future studies were
encouraged to adopt more tests as a measurement of the learners’ achievement,
especially one that is reflective to the training materials.
Thirdly, as we did not reach a conclusive answer concerning the usefulness of the
proposed formula, and the incomplete design of the weekly difficulty questionnaire
seemed to play a role in such findings, it is encouraged that a refined version of
questionnaire be used. Our weekly difficulty questionnaire asked the learners’
perceptions of the difficulty level of the easiest text each week from five aspects:
vocabulary, speech rate, syntactical complexity, topic familiarity, and overall difficulty.
Since the perceptions of difficulty is comparative by nature, such questions may not
be specific and concrete enough. We recommend that future researchers who are
interested in this issue use more concrete questions to elicit the learners’ perceptions.
For example, instead of asking the difficulty level of a certain text, it may be better to
ask the learners to rank the difficulty levels of the required texts each week. Hence,
questions may be phrased as “please rank the texts from easy to difficult using 1 to 3,”
or “please mark the easiest text of this week.”
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 80/105
80
Finally, the formula proposed in this study was a pioneer effort we made on the
development of grading mechanism for listening texts, and weights assigned to each
difficulty measure in the formula were also tentatively proposed. As we were not
certain about how influential each difficulty measure was in determining listening
difficulty, it is recommended that future studies try to figure out the importance of
each difficulty measure, and then, based on the understanding, refine the current
formula. Future studies which are interested in the issue may try to sequence the
materials from easy to difficult separately based on their speech rate, syntactic
complexity, and academic word ratios. And by examining the relation between the
learners’ performance throughout the practice period and the three different sequences,
we may be able to figure out the importance of each difficulty measure.
5.4 Pedagogical Implications
In the present study, positive attitudes to the online materials and the listening
website were found in the learners’ responses to the final evaluation questionnaire.
This indicated that learners enjoyed learning via online materials which are accessible
anytime and anywhere. Accordingly, a paradigm of incorporating listening websites as
supplementary learning materials and listening instruction was recommended.
To begin with, a website equipped with a tracker program should be constructed
to enable the teachers to hold control on the students’ learning. Secondly, appropriate
listening materials with their MP3 files and transcripts should be gathered. And
comprehension questions should also be offered for the learners to check their
comprehension level and to locate listening problems. Thirdly, an orientation session
will be necessary before letting go the project in order to familiarize the learners with
the online learning environment. That is to say, learners should be informed explicitly
which elements (i.e., listening exercises, transcripts, and downloadable MP3 files) in
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 81/105
81
the website to use to foster their learning.
Based on the findings of this study, it is certain that the learning of listening is
more complicated than we have understood, there are so many factors influencing the
learners’ performance and achievement other than the materials’ difficulty levels. Yet,
as online listening materials or listening websites did seem to motivate the learners in
their learning of listening skill, it is strongly suggested carefully selected online
materials be used to supplement with the formal classroom-based instruction to the
purpose of enhancing the learners’ listening ability.
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 82/105
82
REFERENCES
Anderson, A., & Lynch, T. (1988). Listening. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Berne, J. E. (2004). Listening Comprehension Strategies: A review of the literature.
Foreign Language Annals, 37, 521-533.
Blau, E. K. (1990). The effect of syntax, speed, and pauses on listening
comprehension. TESOL Quarterly, 24, 746-753.
Brindley, G., & Slatyer, H. (2002). Exploring task difficulty in ESL listening
assessment. Language Testing, 19, 369-394.
Brown, G., & Yule, G. (1983). Teaching the spoken language. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Buck, G. (2001). Assessing Listening. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Carrell, P. L. (1983). Three components of background knowledge in reading
comprehension. Language Learning, 33, 183-207.
Carrell, P. L., & Eisterhold, J. C. (1983). Schema theory and ESL reading pedagogy.
TESOL Quarterly, 17, 553-573.
Carrol, J. B. (1972). Defining language comprehension. In R. D. Freedle and J. B.
Carrol (eds.) Language comprehension and the acquisition of knowledge. New
York: John Wiley and Sons.
Chang, C. S. (2004). An investigation of listening support in test takers’ performace in
EFL listening tests. In Proceedings of the Thirteenth Conference on English
Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China, (pp. 239-249). Taipei: Crane.
Chen, H. J. (2004). Developing a web-based listening center for language teachers
and learners. The Proceedings of the 2004 International Conference and
Workshop on TEFL & Applied Linguistics, (pp. 87-95). Taipei: Crane.
Cheng, C. L. (2006). Implementation and evaluation: Integrating English learning
websites into college listening comprehension instruction. The Proceedings of
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 83/105
83
the 23rd International Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the
Republic of China-changes, chances, and challenge in English Teaching and
Learning, (pp. 83-95). Taipei: Kuan Tang International Publications Ltd.
Cheng, H. F. (2004). A comparison of multiple-choice and open-ended responses
formats for the assessment of listening proficiency in English. Foreign
Language Annals, 37, 544-555.
Chiang, C. S., & Dunkel, P. (1992). The effect of speech modification, prior
knowledge, and listening proficiency on EFL lecture learning. TESOL
Quarterly, 26, 345-374.
Clark, H. H., & Calrk, E. V. (1977). Psychology and language: An introduction to
psycholinguisitics. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Connor, U. (1984). Recall of text: Differences between first and second language
readers. TESOL Quarterly, 18, 239-256.
Coxhead, A. (2000). A new academic word list. TESOL Quarterly, 34, 213-238.
Dunkel, P. (1988). The effects of delivery modification on notetaking and
comprehension of Ls lectures. Journal of Intensive English Programs, 2, 41-52.
ETS. (2006). The official guide to the new TOEFL iBT. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Flaherty, S. E. (1979). Rate-controlled speech in foreign language education. Foreign
Language Annals, 12, 275-280.
Flesch, R. (1949). The art of readable writing. New York: Harper.
Flowerdew, J. (1994). Research of relevance to second language lecture
comprehension—An overview. In J, Flowerdew (Ed.) Academic listening:
Research perspectives. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 7-29.
Flowerdew, J., & Miller,L. (2005). Second language listening: Theory and practice.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Ghadirian, S. (2003). Providing controlled exposure to target vocabulary through the
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 84/105
84
screening and arranging of texts. Language Learning & Technology, 6 (1),
147-164
Grgurovic, M., & Hegelheimer, V. (2007). Help options and multimedia listening:
students’ use of subtitles and the transcript. Language Learning & Technology,
11, 45-66.
Griffiths, R. (1992). Speech rate and listening comprehension: Further evidence of the
relationship. TESOL Quarterly, 26, 385-391.
Hatch, E., Lazaraton, A (1991). The research manual: Design and statistics for
applied linguistics. New York: Newbury House Publishers.
Hinkle, E. (2006). Current perspectives on teaching the four skills. TESOL Quarterly,
40 (1), 109-131.
Huang, H. T. (2003). Effects of Graded Texts on EFL College Students’ Incidental
Vocabulary Learning: Text Difficulty and Exposure Amount. Unpublished MA
thesis. National Tsing Hua University, R.O.C.
Johns, A. M., & Mayes, P. (1990). An analysis of summary protocols of university
ESL students. Applied linguistics, 11, 253-271
Krashen, S. (1985). The input hypothesis. New York: Longman.
Lynch, T. (1998). Theoretical perspectives on listening. Annual Review of Applied
Linguistics, 18, 3-19.
Mendelsohn, D. J. (1995). Applying learning strategies in second/foreign language
listening comprehension lesson. In D. J. Mendelsohn, & J. Rubin (Eds.), A
guide for the teaching of second language listening, (pp. 132-150). San Diego,
CA: Dominie Press.
Mendelsohn, D. J. (1998) Teaching listening. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics,
18, 81-101.
Morley, J. M. (1999). Current perspectives on improving aural comprehension.
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 85/105
85
Retrieved from http://www.eslmag.com/MorleyAural Story.htm.
Nation, P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge, U.K.:
Cambridge University Press.
O’Malley, J. M., & Chamot, A. U. (1990). Learning strategies in second language
acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know.
New York :Newbury House Publisher.
Priess, S. (2004). NorthStar: Listening and speaking, Advanced. NY: Pearson
Education Inc.
Ramirez, D. V., & Alonso, I. B. (2007). Using digital stories to improve listening
comprehension with Spanish young learners of English. Language Learning &
Technology, 11, 87-101.
Rixon, S. (1986). Developing listening skills. London: Macmillan.
Rost, M. (1990). Listening in Language Learning. Harlow: Longman.
Rost, M. (2002). Teaching and Researching Listening. London: Longman.
Rubin, J. (1994). A review of second language listening comprehension research. The
Modern Language Journal, 78, 199-221.
Rubin, D., & Rafourth, B. (1984). Oral language: a criterion for selecting listenable
materials (Unpublished paper).
Shohamy, E., & Inbar, O. (1991). Validation of listening comprehension tests: the
effect of text and question type. Language Testing, 8, 23-40.
Smidt, E., & Hegelheimer, V. (2004). Effects of online academic lectures on ESL
listening comprehension, incidental vocabulary acquisition, and strategy use.
Computer Assisted Language Learning, 17 (5), 517-556.
Su, S. W. (2003). The effects of text types on listening comprehension. Proceedings of
2003 International Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 86/105
86
Republic of China, ( pp, 301-310). Taipei: Crane.
Sullivan, P. N., Brenner, G. A., & Zhong, Y. (2004). Master the TOEFL 2005. New
York: Thomson Arco.
Teng, H. C. (1998a). The effects of text types and task types on English listening
comprehension. English Teaching Journal, 23, 5-18.
Teng, H. C. (1998b). A study of EFL listening comprehension strategies. Paper
presented at the Annual Convention and Exposition of the Teachers of English
to Speakers of Other Languages. Retrieved Aug 3, 2006, from
http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2/content_storage_01/0000000
b/80/11/0b/45.pdf
Teng, H. C. (2002). Effects of syntactic modification and speech rate on listening
comprehension. In Pr oceedings of the Tenth Conference on English Teaching
and Learning in the Republic of China, (pp. 588-597). Taipei: Crane.
Vandergrift, L. (1999). Facilitating second language listening comprehension:
acquiring successful strategies. ELT Journal, 55, 168-176.
Vandergrift, L. (2004) Listening to learn or learning to listen. Annual Review of
Applied Linguistics, 24, 3-25.
Vandergrift, L. (2006). Second language listening: listening ability or language
proficiency? The Modern Language Journal, 90, 6-18.
Vogely, A. J. (1995). Perceived strategy use during performance on here authentic
listening comprehension tasks. Modern Language Journal, 79(1), 41-56.
Warshauer, M., & Healey, D. (1998). Computers and language learning: An overview.
Language Teaching, 31, 57-71.
Weir, C. (1993). Understanding and developing language tests. New York: Prentice
Hall.
Wong-Fillmore, L. (1991). Second language learning in children: a model of language
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 87/105
87
learning in social context. In Bialystok, E. (ed.), Language processing in
bilingual children. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 88/105
88
APPENDICES
Appendix A
A Sample of the Online Task
Discovery’s space mission
This week, the space shuttle Discovery flew to the International Space Station as
NASA struggles to meet an important date. A plan to complete the station by 2010 is
at risk.
This is only the second shuttle flight since two thousand three. In February of that
year, the space shuttle Columbia broke apart as it prepared to land. The accident killed
the seven crew members.
Now, just short of a year has passed since the return to flight.
Plans call for sixteen shuttle flights by two thousand ten. NASA, the National
Aeronautics and Space Administration, has fallen behind in its effort to reach that
goal.
The goal is part of a plan that President Bush announced two and a half years ago to
send astronauts to the moon again.
Government money would finance a new spaceship that could take people to the
moon by two thousand twenty. The last time anyone went there was in nineteen
seventy-two. The plan also calls for traveling to Mars.
But Mister Bush said the first goal was to finish the space station by two thousand ten,
to study the long-term effects of living in space. Fifteen other nations are also
involved in the space station.
NASA plans to retire its three remaining shuttles once the station is completed.
This week, Discovery became the first shuttle launched on America’s Independence
Day. It lifted off with a crew of seven on Tuesday from the Kennedy Space Center in
Florida.
Bad weather had delayed the launch. Also, there had been some concerns about the
safety of the foam protective material on the external fuel tank.During the Columbia launch, a piece of material fell off the fuel tank and struck a
wing. The piece weighed more than seven hundred grams. It put a hole in the heat
shields and the shuttle came apart on re-entry.
A small amount of foam did come loose from the fuel tank on the Discovery. But
officials decided it was not enough to be dangerous. Also, astronauts are examining
the heat shields while at the space station.
If any damage were serious, an emergency plan calls for the astronauts to remain on
the station. NASA would then send up another shuttle to return them to Earth.
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 89/105
89
Discovery carried up thousands of kilograms of equipment and supplies. On Friday,
crew members connected a big storage container to the station. The Italian-made
container is called Leonardo.
The shuttle also brought a German astronaut who will remain on the station for six
months. The arrival of Thomas Reiter means a full three-person crew for the first time
since May of two thousand three.
The other two crew members, Pavel Vinogradov of Russia and American Jeff
Williams, arrived on a Russian Soyuz spacecraft in March.
Comprehension Questions
In this listening task, you will hear a passage talking about a space mission. Listen
carefully and answer the following questions.
You can download the file and listen as many times as you need, but only ONE
attempt on the task is allowed.
1. What is the main idea of this passage? (Listening for main ideas)
Recent NASA space project
Discovery’s flight to the moon
NASA’s plan of traveling to Mars
Columbia’s crash during their returning flight2. How many shuttles does NASA plan to send to the space by the year of 2010?
(Listening for details)
13
14
15
16
3. Based on the passage, what is the main goal of Discovery and NASA’s space plan
by 2010? (Making inferences)
Taking people to the moon
Taking people to the Mars
Finishing the space station
Building more spaceships
4. According to the passage, what caused Columbia to crash? (Making inferences)
The crew members were not well trained.
The shuttle was not well built.
The loading was too heavy for the shuttle.
The connection between the shuttle and NASA was in a mess.
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 90/105
90
5. According to the passage, which of the following statement(s) is/are true?
(Making inferences)
Columbia broke apart in the year of 2003.
The long-term goal of NASA’s recent space project is to study the effects of
living in the space.
Discovery was the second shuttle launched on the Independence Day.
NASA will send another shuttle to pick up Discovery’s crew members no matter
what.
6. Please summarize the passage in a short paragraph in less than 120 words. In your
summary, both important information and details should be provided.
(Summarizing)
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 91/105
91
Appendix B
The Pretest and the posttest
TEST 1
C. Listen to the excerpt. Mark the sentences T (true) or F (false).
_____ 1. The speaker is an employer.
_____ 2. The speaker does not trust the people who work at his business.
_____ 3. Trusting his employees gives the speaker satisfaction.
D. Listen to the excerpt again. Circle the answer that best completes each
sentence.
1. According to the speaker, an employer should ________.
a. tell his employees what is right and wrong
b. watch his employees closely
c. let his employees decide what is right and wrong
2. According to the speaker, being “Big Brother” is ________.
a. an effective management strategy
b. an ineffective management strategy
c. neither effective nor ineffective
3. When the speaker says “go that extra mile,” he means ________.
E. exercising by running an extra time
F. getting satisfaction and rewards
G. working extra hard
TEST 2
H. Listen to the excerpt. Mark the sentences T (true) or F (false).
_____ 1. According to the speaker, the Red Cross believes that war can be
abolished.
_____ 2. The Red Cross equates war with barbarism.
_____ 3. According to the speaker, war is sometimes desirable.
I. Listen to the excerpt again. Circle the answer that best completes each
sentence.
1. According to the speaker, oppressed groups ________.
a. should never use war to free themselves
b. use barbarism in war
c. sometimes must use war to free themselves
2. A rule that the Red Cross does NOT try to enforce is: ________.
a. Don’t shoot prisoners
b. Don’t kill people
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 92/105
92
c. Don’t make war on noncombatants
3. According to the speaker, it is important to distinguish between ________.
d. oppression and war
e. ethnic groups
f. war and barbarism
TEST 3
J. Listen to the excerpt. Mark the sentences T (true) or F (false).
_____ 1. Children are born with mathematical ability.
_____ 2. Exposure to music helped preschoolers with their spatial reasoning.
K. Listen to the excerpt again. Circle the answer that best completes each
sentence.
1. The speaker describes music as ________.
a. not very logical
b. highly mathematical
c. geometric
2. Preschoolers were taught ________.
a. to solve mazes
b. to copy geometric shapes
c. singing and piano
3. The wiring for mathematics and music is located ________.
a. on the right side of the brain
b. on the left side of the brain
c. at the base of the brain
TEST 4
L. Listen to the excerpt. Mark the sentences T (true) or F (false).
_____ 1. Broadcasters support the V-chip/ratings system.
_____ 2. Broadcasters trust the public to use the V-chip. _____ 3. Supporters of freedom of speech feel that V-chip/ratings system is
censorship.
M. Listen to the excerpt again. Circle the answer that best completes each
sentence.
1. Broadcasters think the public ________.
a. can be trusted to use the V-chip consistently
b. is hypocritical
c. wants less sex and violence on TV
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 93/105
93
2. The Telecommunications Act ________.
a. ordered the establishment of a TV ratings system
b. ordered broadcasters to control their own programming
c. ordered the establishment of the V-chip system
3. The FCC (Federal Communications Commission) can ________.
a. control the pretests of free speech supporters
b. set up its own ratings system
c. reject the Telecommunications Act
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 94/105
94
Appendix C
Pretest Video Script
The Age of E-mail
(3:27 minutes)
Narrator: When did it happen? How did it happen? It seems like just yesterday we
put a stamp on an envelope and sent it off in the mail. We’d sometimes wait days or
even weeks for a reply. Nowadays, our letters, messages, and business transactions are
instantaneous. And we can get the answers we need immediately.
There are very few people who can tell you who invented e-mail or exactly when
it became such a permanent part of our lives. But in 1971 an engineer created the first
system for sending an e-mail between computers. What seemed like a very small
invention currently has more than 125 million users and has profoundly changed the
way we lived and work.
Woman 1: It’s replaced the telephone. It’s replaced—what we call those
things?—teletypes, quixes, (mail) faxes, (mail) mail, snail mail.
Man 1: On the positive side you can, you know, instead of trying to voice-mail back
and forth and play telephone tag, you can reach a person pretty quickly.
Man 2: I guess it makes everything easier even when you can’t get in touch with
someone, you can always e-mail them, even if they’re, like, moved out of states or friends that go away to college and stuff like that.
Woman 1: I spend a couple of hours a day doing e-mail. It’s changed quite a lot. But I
also can communicate with twenty-seven people at one time and either give or collect
information very quickly.
Man 3: I think it's the perfect way of communicating because you don't have to reach
people. They can get there, get your e-mail when they want to download it—
Narrator: But why is it so popular? In the last ten years e-mail has caught on in a big
way. At work and at home, kids or seniors, we are all able to keep in touch with
co-workers, friends, and family in over 150 countries.
Despite the positive aspects of using e-mail at work, some professionals have
complaints.
Man 4: You can spend your whole day responding to e-mails and you really get
anything done that you want to get done.
Man 5: When you come in on a Monday morning, at least when I do, I probably get
150 garbage mails that I have to go through, get each one of them out there, so you’re
like, you have to go on vacation ‘cause there’ no way to just shut all that off. It’s a
small downside, but it is a downside.
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 95/105
95
Man 4: Well, I think it replaces some of the real personal communication. I think that,
you know, it isn't as effective as having a conversation. I think things can be
misconstrued. If I say something to you with a laugh in my voice that might—you
know, it's not what you say, it's how you say it. So when you are typing, it’s hard to
get across what your true feeling is.
Narrator: According to journalist and author Malcolm Gladwell, when little things
make a big difference in out lives, that constitutes “the tipping point.” Gladwell’s
book explains why change can happen quickly and unexpectedly.
He might even call e-mail a “social epidemic.” With access to e-mail available
almost anywhere, there is no way to escape it.
As e-mail becomes more rooted in today’s society, we will have to accept the
good and bad that go along with its growth.
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 96/105
96
Appendix D
Posttest Video Script
Smoking
(3:31 minutes)
Narrator: We all know that smoking can ruin your health, but a lot of us smoke
anyway. What’s the attraction? Why did we start? And how do we stop?
As you know, addiction is an unhealthy continued involvement with a
mood-altering substance or activity in spite of harmful consequences.
Tobacco use is the single most preventable cause of death in the United States.
Each year over 419,000 people in the United States die of smoking related illnesses.
Another 53,000 die of illnesses caused by secondhand smoke. Smoking contributes to
about one in every seven deaths in the United States—all of them unnecessary.
Dr. Jack Dillenberg: We find that the amount pain and suffering in illness that
tobacco causes is extraordinary. There is no one thing that a human being can do to
hurt their health more than to use tobacco. It is—that is statistically above everything
else.
Narrator: People who start using tobacco sometimes think, “I won’t get addicted.”
But addiction to nicotine, the drug that is found in tobacco products, is virtually
impossible to avoid if you use tobacco regularly. Nicotine is found in all tobacco products including cigarettes, cigars, pipe, tobacco,
chewing tobacco, and snuff.
The risks associated with tobacco are not limited to the physiological or
emotional addiction. Short-term effects include increased heart rate and blood
pressure, interference with blood flow and airflow to the lungs, and smoker’s breath.
Of more serious concerns are the long-term effects of tobacco use. These can be
deadly. They include heart disease, stroke, cancer, and emphysema, just to name a
few.
Today many college students have gotten the message about harmful effects of
tobacco. They consider smoking a thing of the past that has damaged the health of
their parents and older relatives.
Girl 1: I had an uncle who died from lung cancer, I saw what he had to go through
and I don't think anyone should have to go through that.
Narrator: But, unfortunately, smoking has not yet gone the way of the dinosaur.
About 25 percent of the adult population in the United States continues to smoke. And
3000 teenagers start smoking every day, with all the evidence about the hazards of
tobacco, cancer, cardiovascular disease, respiratory disease, gum disease, and
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 97/105
97
premature death, why do so many people continue to take up the habit?
Boy: It takes my mind off other things. It calms me down.
Girl 2: Cause I started and I couldn't stop.
Narrator: What can be done so that teenagers, and especially minority teenagers, get
the message that using tobacco is not cool? One strategy is anti-smoking ads and
slogans aimed at educating preteens and teenagers about the health consequences of
tobacco.
The evidence is clear. If you use tobacco, it’s worth it to quit and it’s worth it to
quit right now.
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 98/105
98
Appendix E
The Weekly Questionnaire
i. I can understand _____ percent of the words in this listening
task.
□ almost 100%
□ More than 80%
□ 50% to 80%
□ Less than 50%
□ Less than 20%
ii. I think the speed of this listening is ______.
□ Too fast to understand
□ Fast but understandable
□ About right for me□ Slow
□ Too slow
iii. I think the grammar in this listening text is ______.
□ Too complex to understand
□ Complex to understand
□ About right for me
□ Easy to understand
□ Very easy to understandiv. The topic of this listening text is ______.
□ Very familiar to me
□ Fairly familiar to me
□ About right for me
□ Unfamiliar
□ Very unfamiliar to me
v. Overall, I think this listening text is ______.
□ Too difficult
□ Difficult
□ Intermediate (about right for me)
□ Easy
□ Too easy
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 99/105
99
Appendix F
The Evaluation Questionnaire
Name: _______________ Student ID: ______________ Male/Female
Age:________
SA=strongly agree, A=agree, U=undecided, D=disagree, SD=strongly disagree
Part A: Personal Information
1. My overall English proficiency is at _____ level.
Primary Low-intermediate Intermediate High-intermediate Advanced
2. My English listening proficiency is at _____ level.
Primary Low-intermediate Intermediate High-intermediate Advanced
3. I am eager to improve my listening ability
SA A U D SD 4. I have practiced English listening via other listening websites like the one used this
semester.
Yes No (skip Q5 and Q6)
5. What websites did you used to improve your listening? (e.g., ICRT, Studio
Classroom, etc.)
_____________________________________________________________________
6. How often do you use those websites?
_____________________________________________________________________
Part B: The usefulness of the website we designed
I. The layout of the website (color, arrangement, user friendliness, clearness of
instruction, etc.)
7. I think the layout of the website (the color and the arrangement) is clear and easy to
follow.
SA A U D SD
8. The website is easy to use, and I get used to it very easily.
SA A U D SD
Thank you very much for completing the online tasks in the past 11 weeks. Weappreciate your efforts. Now we would like to know about what you think about
the online materials in order to help us revise them in the future. Please circle the
answers that best describe your thoughts.
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 100/105
100
II. The online exercises
9. The topics of the online listening tasks are interesting and motivating.
SA A U D SD
10. There are two types of excerpts during the 11 weeks— conversation between
people and lectures/ news reports by one person —which one do you find more
challenging?
Conversation between people Lectures/ news reports
11. There are some factors that may influence the difficulty level of the listening
materials. Based on the listening materials that we have used in this semester,
please rate the following five factors from 1-5 according to the level of their
influences. (Note: ‘1’ indicates the most influential and ‘5’ the least
influential)□ speech rate □ text types (dialogue or lectures/news report) □
vocabulary
□ sentence structure □ topic familiarity
12. The summary task is more difficult than all the multiple-choice questions.
SA A U D SD
13. The website and the online listening tasks are useful to improve my overall
listening ability.
SA A U D SD14. The online practice improves my ability of listening for the main idea of the
passages.
SA A U D SD
15. The online practice improves my ability of listening for the detailed information
of the passages.
SA A U D SD
16. The online practice improves my ability of understanding the speaker’s intention
or thoughts.
SA A U D SD
17. The online practice improves my ability of understanding the implied information
of the passages.
SA A U D SD
18. The online practice improves my ability of summarizing the listening content .
SA A U D SD
19. The online tasks are more and more challenging from the beginning to the end of
the 11 weeks.
SA A U D SD
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 101/105
101
20. I performed better on the listening tasks at the beginning than at the end in the past
11 weeks.
SA A U D SD
21. It is beneficial to have resources like this listening website accompanying with
listening courses.
SA A U D SD
22. I would like to use such a listening website to enhance my listening ability in the
future.
SA A U D SD
23. Please write down you comments or suggestions about the website or the online
listening materials for our future revision.
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
Please make sure that you answer EVERY question before you submit
the questionnaire. Thank you again for completing the questionnaire!
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 102/105
102
Appendix G
The Consent Form
Dear students:
Welcome to the Department of Foreign Languages and Literature in Tsing Hua.
Judy Lo, my advisee, is conducting her thesis project and need to use your online
performance and some in-class tests for the research. By the time of reporting the
research, no participants' names or the institution name will be revealed. We need
your help and agreement of doing this. Thank you in advance for the attention. We
will be happy to answer any questions concerning data collection. Later, we will
provide a small gift as a token reward for you. Thank you very much.
Judy, Lo
Hsien-Chin Liou, Sept, 2006
Signature______________ Cell phone________________ Date _______________
If you have further questions about this project, you are welcome to send emails toJudy at g935251@oz.nthu.edu.tw.
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 103/105
103
Appendix H
Answer Key (Idea Units) to the Pretest Summary
Your summary should cover the following points. Check if you include all
these in your summary.
1. This excerpt talks about the use, and the good and bad of email. / Email has
profoundly changed the way we live and work.
2. In 1971, a group of engineers invented the first system of sending email through
computers.
3. Over 100 million people are using email to contact people in life.
4. Email replaces older forms of communication.
5. Email has made it easier to contact people (far away) and get instant reply.
6. Email allows people to communicate with more than one person at the same time.
7. People are spending too much time checking and responding their emails
8. Email seems to replace real personal communication, making it hard to get the
true feelings of the interlocutors.
9. Email has been rooted into contemporary life.
10. People need to accept both the good and bad of email.
Summary:
Ever since a group of engineers created the email system in 1971, there’s a
tremendous growth in its use. Today, at least 25 million people are use emails
regularly. The email system has profoundly changed the way we live and work. It
replaces the older forms of communication such as telephone, fax, and regular mail.
The positive side of email is that it enables us to easily contact friends who live far
away and get instant reply; it allows us to talk to many people at the same time; and it
lets us approach anyone without direct contact. However, email also has several down
sides. First of all, checking emails can be very time-consuming. We also get too many
garbage mails that need to be erased. Most of all, email replaces face-to-face
communication and makes it hard to get across our true feelings. No matter what,
email is here to stay and we have to accept both its advantages and disadvantages.
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 104/105
104
Appendix I
Answer Key (Idea Units) to the Posttest Summary
1. Everybody knows smoking is harmful to health, but many people smoke anyway.
2. In the US, many people die of smoking- and secondhand smoking-related
diseases.
3. Regular tobacco use will cause tobacco addiction inevitably.
4. Tobacco use has short term effects such as increased heart rate and blood pressure,
and smoker’s breath/ Tobacco use has long term and deadly effects such as heart
disease, stroke, and cancer.
5. Many college students have come to realize that smoking is bad.
6. Many teenagers start to smoke everyday.
7. Teenagers and preteens should be properly educated through anti-smoking ads and
slogans.
8. Tobacco is found more harmful than other substances. (Lily)
9. People continue smoking because they think it makes them feel relived, and
because they just couldn’t stop. (Judy)
10. It’s worth for Smokers’ to quit smoking as soon as possible. (Judy)
SummaryThis video clip showed a serious problem American society now faces: smoking
addition. We all know that smoking can ruin one’s health, in short term effect, it
caused illnesses like increased heart rate, blood pressure, and smoker’s breath; and in
long term, more deadly diseases such as heart disease, stroke, and cancer are expected.
Yet, many people continue smoking anyway. In the US, many people die of smoking-
or secondhand smoking-related diseases each year. Some people start smoking
because they think they won’t get addicted. However, the poisonous substances like
nicotine found in tobacco would inevitably make people addicted to it if tobacco is
used regularly.
Nowadays, many college students have come to realize that smoking is bad. Still,
smoking is not gone. There is still 25% of American adults continues smoking either
because they think it makes them feel relieved or because they just couldn’t stop.
More seriously, it is reported that 3,000 teenagers start to smoke everyday. To solve
this problem, it is suggested anti-smoking ads and slogans be made so that teenagers
and preteens would not regard smoking cool anymore.
7/29/2019 Intro Chapter II
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/intro-chapter-ii 105/105
Appendix J
The Task Completion Situation of the Learners
Ss
Number of
finished tasks
(n=66)
Completion
rate (%)Ss
Number of
finished tasks
(n=66)
Completion
rate (%)
S1 66 100.00 S10 57 83.36
S2 43 65.15 S11 39 59.09
S3 33 50.00 S12 33 50.00
S4 33 50.00 S13 60 90.91
S5 47 71.21 S14 39 59.09
S6 33 50.00 S15 37 56.06
S7 34 51.52 S16 66 100.00
S8 36 54.55 S17 42 63.64
S9 33 50.00 S18 53 80.30
top related