Enhancing Learners Listening Comprehension in an L2 Context

Enhancing Learners’ Listening Comprehension in an EFL Context through Interactionist Dynamic Assessment

Hamideh Marzban

Ph.D. Candidate, Department of Foreign Languages, Shiraz Branch ,Islamic Azad University, Shiraz, Iran

٭Mohammad Sadegh Bagheri

Assistant Professor, Department of Foreign Languages, Shiraz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Shiraz, Iran

Firooz Sadighi

Professor, Department of Foreign Languages, Shiraz Branch ,Islamic Azad University, Shiraz, Iran

٭Corresponding author

Abstract

This investigation resortedto Vygotsky’s (1978) Socio-cultural Theory (SCT) and thezone of proximal development (ZPD) as well as Feuerstein et al.'s (1976) Mediated Learning Experience (MLE) as its theoretical foundation. This study meant to scrutinize the possible disparities residing amongst static and dynamic assessment of listening comprehension in an EFL context. Moreover, a trial was created so as to trace qualitative changes of learners’ listening abilities within a microgenetic framework. The data were collected from the classroom context with 6BA students of TEFL at the University of Yasouj. Both the quantitative and qualitative analyses brought about perceptive results. Firstly, it wasunveiled that non-dynamic assessment (NDA) procedure suffers from the inadequacy to illuminate learners’ potential and cannot predict the abilities which are in the process of maturing. Secondly, it was revealed that the learners benefitted from Enrichment Program and mediation offered during DA-MP (Mediated Performance) and TA-MP (Transfer Assessment) as they outperformed in the post-test administrations.Thirdly, it was concluded that the learners did not proceed with the assessment sessions at the identical pace of development. That is, some benefitted more compared to others. Finally, the results suggested thatReplaywas the foremost frequent meditational strategy employed by the mediator.

Keywords: dynamic assessment, listening comprehension, socio-cultural theory, ZPD, mediated learning experience

1. Introduction

Despite being regarded as complementary, dynamic assessment (DA) opens a qualitatively different window towards educational assessment compared with the traditional static one. While the former caters for both students’ current ability and learning potential through providing them with due assistance, the latter pays exclusive attention to the measurement of students’ present knowledge. Dynamic assessment is not a novel concept in educational settings; rather it dates back to the 1930s. Based on Kozulin and Garb (2002), “for a variety of social, political and scientific reasons the notion of dynamic assessment received relatively little attention in the period from 1930s to the 1960s” (p. 11 ).

Following the lines of Hidri (2014) “mediation, the zone of proximal development (ZPD), contingency and scaffolding are cornerstones in dynamic assessment” (p.2). Gibbons (2003) defines ZPD as “the cognitive gap between what learners can do unaided and what they can do in collaboration with a more competent other” (p.249). Put it differently, learners can reach their learning potential via assistance of another competent communicative partner like a teacher. As Vygotsky puts it, abilities are not doomed to everlasting stability, in the sense that they are prone to change (Liz & Gindis, 2003). What is more, Vygotsky (1962) claims that in order to be internalized and flourished, any cognitive function has to be contextualized in a social milieu. In other words, social interaction with other capable engaging partners paves the way to internalize varied functions and skills; that is why sociocultural theory hinges on the vital role of mediation in internalization. In the same vein, Nassaji and Cumming (2000) are of the idea that the dialogic nature of teaching/learning processes has to be defined in sociocultural theory within the zone of proximal development.

Moreover, amongst the four skills in foreign language learning, listening comprehension can be considered as one of the most influential ones. Despite its utmost significance, listening has not enjoyed lots of popularity in the domains of acquisition, research, teaching and assessment.As Hidri (2014) holds, listening comprehension has been mainly assessed via static assessment. This way of assessment stands in sharp contrast with the way listening comprehension is taught in language classroom in which learners are to engage in joint activities in order to make sense of the listening text. Through such an approach to testing listening comprehension, the students are supposed to work on the tests individually in the absence of any kind of scaffolding on behalf of the mediators or test-takers. According to Lantolf and Poehner (2010), in large-scale situations, static assessment proves to be more feasible and convenient. According to Hidri (2014) “in static or traditional listening comprehension tests, there is no interest allocated to the joint interactions of the learners required for approaching the learning input” (p.2).

1. Objectives of the Study

It can be observed that an insufficient number of investigations have been conducted in the area of DA and in particular germane to listening comprehension skill. To fill this gap, the present study was an attempt to compare and contrast static and dynamic assessment of listening comprehension skill. Furthermore, in this line of research,the researcher aimed to ascertainif all learners moved through their ZPDs, passing the same stages and with the same pace. Finally, endeavor was made to find out if there existed any specific form of mediation during DA-based pedagogical interventions which best nurtured the development of listening skills of EFL language learners. In other words, the following research questions were addressed:

1. What type of assessment is more effective with respect to enhancing listening comprehension skill of EFL learners, static or dynamic?
2. Do all learners move through their ZPD, passing the same stages and with the same pace?
3. Does any specific form of mediation during DA-based pedagogical interventions best nourish the development of listening skills of EFL language learners?

1. Theoretical Framework

DA was born out of both Vygotsky’s (1978) learning theory and Feuerstein’s (1979) theory of mediated learning experience. As Vygotsky (1978) holds, the development process wins out product with respect to its being of utmost importance. From Lantolf and Thorne’s (2006) standpoint, Vygotsky asserts that “the only appropriate way of understanding and explainingforms of human mental functions is by studying the process, and not the outcome of development” (p.25). That is where the difference lies between dynamic assessment and other forms of assessment.

Furthermore, this study endorses the microgenetic method as the general analytical framework. According to Karmiloff-Smith (1993, as cited in Calais, 2008), microgenetic designs loomed up at the time of Post-Piagetian studies since those scholars highlighted the importance of the strong affinities between micro-level changes (e.g., the processes utilized by a child during experimental sessions to solve a specific problem) and macro-level changes (e.g., an individual’s general cognitive system used to encode reality).

Following the lines of a number of researchers (Lavelli, Pantoja, Hsu, Messinger, & Fogel, 2005; Siegler, 2006 as quoted in Calais, 2008), microgenetic analysis coincides on the microgenesis of learning; namely, on the moment-by-moment change scrutinized during a relatively short time in a number of occasions. Microgenetic analysis application in different experimental contexts lies on two justifications: First, obtaining microgenetic details of subjects’ behavior in specific contexts brings about the kind of detailed information required for apprehending change processes. Second, the ability to grasp macro-level changes of developmental time hinges upon witnessing micro-level changes of real time (Lavelli, Pantoja, Hsu, Messinger, & Fogel, 2005).

Due to the aforementioned ideas, microgenetic design proved helpful in order to obtain accurate results for the present study. Consequently, following SCT methodological premises, this study investigates the microgenetic boosting of L2 listening ability through detecting the history of learners’ text comprehension and recall over a two- month period of time.

1. Statement of the Problem

This study is situated in an interdisciplinary filed of applied linguistics taking care of second language acquisition, language pedagogy and sociocultural theory of cognitive development according to the Russian psychologist Lev Semenovich Vygotsky. As such, it intends to scrutinize the so-called entrenched distinction between assessment and instruction particularly with respect to listening assessment. Based on Poehner (2005), previous considerations regarding “teaching to the test”, “narrowing of the curriculum”, and the “power “ that the tests can exert on instructional practices are indicative of a clear-cut discrepancy between teaching and assessment (Shohamy, 1998, 2001; Moss 1996; McNamara 2001; Lynch 2001).

In spite of the significance of listening proficiency with respect to foreign language learning and teaching according to Ableeva (2010), some scholarscontend that listening comprehension is often regarded as a Cinderella skill of L2 instruction (e.g. Nunan, 1997; Vandergrift, 1997) and that research in this domain is “still in its infancy” (Omaggio-Hadley, 2000, p.184). Moreover, a scarcity of L2 listening studies has been highlighted in many reviews of scholarship of the subject passing the years (e.g. Ur, 1984; Rubin, 1994; Vandergrift, 2007).

The previous studies cited in the literature according to Ableeva (2010), deal with product-oriented investigations of listening comprehension which make use of quantitative research methods to measure listening ability (e.g. Rubin, 1994; Rost, 2002; Vandergrift, 1998, 2007; Field, 2008). Vandergrift (2007) claims that quantitative approaches are able to “tell us something about the product, i.e. the level of listening success, [but they] tell us nothing about the process; i.e. how listeners arrive at the right answer or why comprehension breaks down” (p. 192). Vandergrift (2007) hasalso underscored the necessity of investigating listening comprehension qualitatively by asserting that “listening processes are complex and they interact with different knowledge sources, human characteristics and other contextual factors in complex ways. These processes and their interactions need to be explored using in-depth qualitative methods to better understand how L2 listeners attain successful comprehension” (p.206).

Not surprisingly, with respect to the assessment of listening ability, there exists a scarcity of studies to date (e.g. Ur, 1984, Buck, 2003; Flowerdew & Miller, 2005; Field, 2008). Alderson and Bachman assert that “the assessment of listening abilities is one of the least understood, least developed and yet one of the most important areas of language testing and assessment” (Series Editors’ Preface in Buck, 2003, p, 50). As mentioned in Ableeva (2010), in concert with the discussion of different types and purposes of L2 listening tests (e.g. achievement, placement tests), Buck (2003) as well as Alderson (2005), highlighted the pressing need of orientation change in traditional listening assessment. That is, they were after devising some listening tests with diagnostic power in order for the tests to touch upon the areas of weaknesses in learners’ listening abilities and reforming the instructional practices regarding the existing gaps. Buck (2003) claims “ there are currently few diagnostic tests of listening, largely because we still do not fully understand what the important sub-skills of listening are; nor are we sure what information educators need to teach listening better” (p.97).

1. Method

5.1 Participants

The participants of this study were six intermediate junior BA students of TEFL. They were selected out of ten students who volunteered to enroll in an English Oral Communication and Reading Comprehension private course based on Preliminary English Test (PET). After obtaining the scores, the ones situated one standard deviation below and above the mean were considered and this guaranteed their being at the intermediate level of proficiency. All participants were Persian native speakers, ranging in age from 20 to 22. Initially, each participant was supposed to complete two questionnaires on her/his L2 profile and learning history.

5.2 Materials

5.2.1 Listening materials

Many scholars have advocated the worthwhile nature of authenticity as the best classroom assessment (e.g. Archbald & Newman, 1988; Bergen, 1993; Gronlund, 2003; Meyer, 1992; Newman, Brandt & Wiggins, 1998; Wiggins, 1989a, 1989b, as cited in Frey, Schmitt, and Allen, 2012). Wiggins was an early advocate in favor of using the term authenticto describe assessment with real-world application (1989). “Authenticrefers to the situational or contextual realism of the proposed tasks” he has asserted (Newman, Brandt & Wiggins, 1998, p.20, as cited in Frey, Schmitt, and Allen, 2012 ).

Consequently, following the manners of L2 educational researchers, the oral speech of native speakers should be represented in the form of audio/video recordings as the representative of authentic texts (e.g. Reboulet, 1979, Léon, 1979, Lèbre- Peytard, 1987; Malandain, 1991; Mohan, 1986; Valdman, 1992; Kramsch, 1985, 1993; Hall, 2001; Buck, 2003, Leontiev, 2003, etc.). Given that, the present study applied a number of President Obama’s speeches on Iran Accord Statements regarding the nuclear program in audio format. Furthermore, a piece of news broadcast on the same topic in audio format and a visual one on the analysis of Obama’s persuasion of the congress wereutilized.

5.3 Propositional analysis

5.3.1 Pausal Unit Analysis

L2 reading research has recently applied pausal unit analysis, originally introduced by Johnson (1970) as a measure of L1 reading comprehension (e.g. Lee, 1986; Lee & Ballman 1987; Bernhardt, 1991; Riley & Lee, 1996). Propositional analysis system is based on pausal units or breath groups. Based on Lee and Ballman (1987, as quoted in Ableeva, 2010 ), Johnson initially inspected the recall of prose as a function of the structural significance of the linguistic units, as “pause acceptability units” (Johnson, 1970, p.13).

Johnson’s analysis (also termed linguistic units, information units, or idea units) was examined and then endorsed by many L2 researchers. Bernhardt (1991, p. 209), for instance, approves of the merits of pausal unit analysis, and introduces it as an analysis system which lies on pausal-breath units propositions, the endings of which “are generally found at the end of a syntactically related unit such as in the morning or The old man/ was happy/ above all/ about the information/ which he obtained/ recently.”

5.3.2 Recall tasks

L2 research speculates text recall tasks as an influential quantitative and qualitative measure of reading (e.g. Lee & Ballman, 1987; Bernhardt, 1983, 1991; Carell, Devine & Eskey, 1991; Appel & Lantolf, 1994; Roebuck, 1998; Heinz, 2004) and listening comprehension (e.g. Mueller, 1980; Markham & Latham, 1987; Long, 1990; Schmidt-Rinehart, 1994; Vogely, 1995; Elkhafaifi, 2005; Sadighi & Zare, 2006; Jung, 2003, 2007). Appel and Lantolf (1994) have underscored the benefit of recall tasks in comprehension measurement. They elaborate on the impact of this methodological tool by asserting “that text comprehension and recall are closely related in the sense that what readers understand from texts, they can also recall” (Appel & Lantolf, 1994, p. 439).

The present study also pursues the methodological suggestions of L2 research that has probed the influences of L1 versus L2 text recalls and approves of native-language recall tasks. Due to a number of L2 studies , the participants can reply better to reading comprehension questions or to recall more of the reading passage when asked to complete the task in L1 than in L2 (e.g. Shohamy, 1984; Lee, 1986; Lee & Riley, 1990; Riley & Lee, 1996, Heinz, 2004). The rationale behind this can be the fact that learners are able to display superior text comprehension at the absence of interference from their L2 production capability that may be deficient at the beginning and intermediate levels (Bernhardt, 1983; Bernhardt & Berkemeyer, 1988; Heinz, 2004). Therefore, this study maintains the methodological suggestions proceeded by L2 research while applying pausal unit analysis and recall tasks for assessing comprehension of L2 aural texts.

5.4 Instruments

5.4.1 Preliminary English Test

The Preliminary English Test (PET) is one of theCambridge Englishexams. It is mostly recommended to be used for pinpointing the intermediate level of proficiency. It consists of four sections each one devoted to one skill including reading, writing, listening and speaking. There are two versions of the PET test: PET and PET for schools.Both versions have the same type of questions. ThePET for schoolstest has content of interest to school-age learners. Due to its characteristicsof this test, the listening section has been chosen as to fulfill the requirements of the present study.

5.4.2 Reliability and Validity of the instrument

Regarding a well-established test like PET, the reliability and validity indices have been estimated to be quite satisfactory. The reliability index has been reported to be .77 and SEM has been estimated as 2.14.

5.5 Methods of Data Collection Procedures

The data required for this study were collected in 5 distinct phases:

Phase 1:The participants of this study were six intermediate junior BA students of TEFL. They were selected out of ten students who volunteered to enroll in an English Oral Communication and Reading Comprehension private course based on Preliminary English Test (PET).After obtaining the sores, the ones situated one standard deviation below and above the mean were considered and this guaranteed their being at the intermediate level of proficiency.This test was applied as the researcher aimed to investigate the impacts of DA on learners’ listening comprehension ability at intermediate level of proficiency.

Phase 2: The data collection procedures commenced via two instruments: two open-ended questionnaires on students’ biographical and language learning history. These questionnaires were implemented with the purpose of acquiring more vivid perceptions of the participants’ language learning background and contributed to better interpretations of data attained from the assessment sessions.

Phase 3:Replicating Poehner’s (2005) and Ableeva’s (2010) studies, the present investigation follows a pre-test/enrichment program/post-test design. The present study composed of three TA sessions; namely, very near transfer session (TA1), near transfer session (TA2), and far transfer session (TA3).

All assessment sessions and the enrichment program (EP) sessions occurred within aneight-week period. The assessment sessions were handled on an individual basis whereas the EP sessions were carried out in a group format. The study sessions were held as follows:

Week 1 – NDA1 → DA1

Week 2 - TA1

Weeks 3 – 6 – the enrichment program (4 week period)

Week 7 – NDA 2 → DA 2

Week 8 –TA 2 → TA 3

The study initiated with a set of the pre-test assessment sessions enclosing three types of assessment: non-dynamic assessment (NDA1), dynamic assessment (DA1) and transfer assessment (TA1). During these initial assessment sessions, participants listened to three similar excerpts from audio speeches of President Barack Obama on Iran Accord Statement with regard to nuclear energy. Scrutinizing the results from the pre-test assessment sessions the participants’ difficulties at the time of recalling the selected texts were revealed. Needless to say, NDA1 which was based on independent performance was far more abstruse for pinpointing problematic areas than DA1 or TA1 that engaged flexible mediator-learner interactions. Consequently, the problem areas (phonology, cultural knowledge, vocabulary or grammar) were primarily identified based on learner’s listening performance in the DA1 and TA1and partially in the NDA1. The delineated problem areas were applied to organize the enrichment program which was aimed to assist the learners to get rid of these problems.