The effects of a metacognitive intervention on lower-proficiency EFL learners’ listening comprehension and listening self-efficacy

Abstract

Focusing on the teaching of listening strategies to second language (L2) learners, this study sought to revisit Renandya and Farrell’s (2011) claims that explicit listening strategy instruction for lower-proficiency learners of English as a foreign language (EFL) is a fruitless endeavor. As such, we implemented a quasi-experimental study to measure the effectiveness of a metacognitive intervention for a convenience sample of lower-proficiency (CEFR A2) Japanese university EFL learners ( n = 129). The training program focused on an explicit process-based approach, involving integrated experiential learning tasks and guided reflections, to develop learners’ L2 listening skills. Data collection consisted of TOEIC® test scores, listening comprehension tests, cloze tests, a listening self-efficacy questionnaire, and a post-treatment survey. While the training program was received favorably by students, and students displayed a slightly more confident stance towards listening in their L2, we were unable to find any strong empirical evidence that our lower-proficiency EFL learners’ listening performance improved. As such, these results provide evidence of a potential proficiency threshold for EFL learners to start to benefit from a strategy-focused metacognitive intervention.

Exploring L2 Listening Instruction, Self-Efficacy, and Strategy Use: A Mediation Analysis

“…Regarding the empirical relationship between listening instruction and self-efficacy, Graham (2007 , 2011) found that L2 listening self-efficacy could be boosted by listening strategy instruction, and Yeldham (2016) revealed that strategy-based instruction facilitated 33 Taiwanese non-English major freshman students’ confidence in listening and motivated them to learn how to listen. Milliner and Dimoski (2021) further discovered that strategy-focused metacognitive intervention enabled students to display a slightly more confident stance toward L2 listening. In addition, Boroumand et al (2021) showed a positive influence of explicit teaching and utilization of concept-mapping on EFL students’ improved self-efficacy.…”

The Roads not Taken: Greater Emphasis Needed on “Sounds”, “Actual Listening”, and “Spoken Input”

“…The comprehension approach usually involves the teaching of strategies (as suggested by a reviewer). Making reference to Milliner and Dimoski’s (2021) framework of three listening instruction approaches , listening strategies can be understood and described as cognitive top-down (i.e., “macro-features to make meaning… [such as] making predictions and inferences based on one's existing knowledge and prior experiences”) or metacognitive (i.e., the coordination of strategy use and facilitation of self-management such as monitoring one's comprehension). Many teachers seem to believe that these strategies are the most important in teaching listening and that they are a panacea when listening breaks down.…”

“…This is no mean feat, but given that (a) many incorrect answers in comprehension questions can be attributed to failures of word-level or clause-level rather than general understanding (Field, 2019) and (b) researchers who have focused on sounds and English phonology in teaching listening have shown promising results (e.g., Hamada, 2016; Tsang, 2020), greater emphasis on the process of listening is warranted. In other words, greater attention to the cognitive bottom-up approach (in Milliner and Dimoski's (2021) framework) is called for.…”

Strategy Preference in Listening: A Profile of EFL Students to Answer TOEFL Test

“…On some occasions, they will have difficulties with different speech rates, intonations, and limited knowledge of English and its vocabs. Milliner & Dimoski (2021) addressed their study to investigate the Metacognitive Strategies for lowerproficient learners in Japan. They found that some EFL learners obtain difficulties for different speakers' accents and intonation.…”