Second and Foreign Language Listening: Unraveling the Construct

Abstract

Identifying the variables which contribute to second and foreign language (L2) listening ability can provide a better understanding of the listening construct. This study explored the degree to which first language (L1) listening ability, L2 proficiency, motivation and metacognition contribute to L2 listening comprehension. 115 Persian-speaking English as a Foreign Language (EFL) university students completed a motivation questionnaire, the Language Learning Motivation Orientation Scale, a listening questionnaire, the Metacognitive Awareness Listening Questionnaire, and an English-language proficiency measure, as well as listening tests in English and Persian. Scores from all measures were subjected to descriptive, inferential, and correlational analyses. The results support the hypothesis that variability in L2 listening cannot be explained by either L2 proficiency or L1 listening ability; rather, a cluster of variables including L2 proficiency, L1 listening ability, metacognitive knowledge and motivation orientations can better explain variability in L2 listening ability.

Correlates of Listening Comprehension in L1 and L2: A Meta-analysis

“…On the opposite side of the affective domain, there is a motivation factor which contributes to language learning in the reverse direction. Motivation has been reported to yield a moderate correlation with L2 listening comprehension (Tafaghodtari & Vandergrift, 2008).…”

Development of L2 Listening Metacognitive Awareness via Online Metacognitive Listening Practice

“…The development of metacognitive awareness of listening was gauged with the Metacognitive Awareness Listening Questionnaire (MALQ), which was rigorously developed and validated in Vandergrift,Goh,Mareschal,andTafaghodtari(2006).Thequestionnaireconsistsof21itemswith fivefactors:Planning-evaluation,DirectedAttention(strategiestoconcentrateandstayontask),Person Knowledge(perceptionsoflisteningdifficulty,self-efficacy,listeninganxiety),MentalTranslation (thetranslationstrategieslearnersshouldavoidduringlistening),andProblem-solving(aclusterof strategiestosolvecomprehensionproblemsandtomake/monitorinferences).AccordingtoVandergrift etal. ( 2006),metacognitiveawarenessofthefivefactorsisoptimaltocorrelatesignificantlywithL2 learners'listeningperformance.Previousresearchers (Vandergrift,Goh,Mareschal&Tafaghodtari, 2006;Tafaghodtari & Vandergrift, 2008;Vandergrift & Baker, 2015;Satori, 2021) found that metacognitiveawarenessmeasuredwiththisquestionnairecansignificantlypredict3-22%variances ofL2listeningcomprehensionsuccess.Sofar,manymetacognitivelisteninginstructionstudies(e.g. Bozorgian, 2014;Bozorgian & Alamdari, 2018;Mahdavi & Miri, 2017;Rahimi & Katal, 2013;Vandergrift&Tafaghodtari,2010)haveemployedtheMALQandprovedtheinternalconsistency reliabilityofMALQtobeatanacceptablelevel(thecoefficientα>0.7).However,sinceL2learners mightmisinterpretthedescriptionsofitemsinthequestionnaire (Vandergrift&Tafaghodtari,2010), werephrasedtheseitems(e.g."ItranslatekeywordsasIlisten.…”

The typology of second language listening constructs: A systematic review

“…Phonological knowledge enables L2 listeners to recognize and manipulate syllables and segment phonemes; grammatical and syntactic knowledge enable listeners to decode and convert words to a combined meaning; and pragmatic knowledge enables listeners to infer the implied meaning of the message (Lynch, 2010). These elements of linguistic knowledge should be an integral part of any model of listening (Tafaghodtari & Vandergrift, 2008). Our two-layered model can be said to consist of a continuum of lower-order and higher-order listening abilities, and the subskill groups can help distinguish between comprehension success and failure of listeners, that is, they can be operationalized for L2 listening diagnostic purposes (Y.-W. Lee & Sawaki, 2009;Lynch & Mendelsohn, 2013).…”