Metacognitive Listening Comprehension Strategies of Arab English Language Learners

Abstract

Based on the premise that the higher the metacognitive awareness is, the more successful the learners are or vice versa; this study aimed at categorizing the metacognitive listening comprehension strategies (MLCS) of Arab EFL learners in the Preparatory Year Deanship (PYD), Prince Sattam bin Abdulaziz University (PSAU), Saudi Arabia. The data of 353 participants (237 males and 116 females) collected through the Metacognitive Awareness Listening Questionnaire (MALQ) and analysed using descriptive statistical techniques showed that all participants were higher moderate users of all five subscales formed out of 21 strategies. However, their most preferred subscale was problem-solving and the least favourite was mental translation. Directed attention, planning and evaluation, and personal knowledge strategies ranked second, third, and fourth, respectively. Female and male respondents were also found to have preferred similar strategies. In other words, male and female Arab EFL learners did not differ much in employing the MLCS while listening to English texts. The pedagogical implications of being aware of MLCS were also discussed, along with suggestions for students, instructors, and syllabus designers to integrate explicit metacognitive instructions for preparing, planning, managing, monitoring, assessing, and reflecting on listening activities.

Are You Listening Strategically or Randomly? Examining Listening Comprehension Strategies Among Saudi University EFL Students

“…According to Wakamoto and Rose (2021), this questionnaire should be evaluated in other contexts and with other types of learners than those who participated in their own study; hence, the present study applied the instrument in a Saudi Arabian EFL learner context. Most previous studies on listening strategies employed in Saudi Arabian contexts, such as Altuwairesh (2016) and Nasim (2022), used the MALQ questionnaire. However, Aryadoust (2015) evaluated this tool with Rasch analyses and pointed out that two subscales lacked sufficient reliability.…”