An Investigation on Metacognitive Listening Strategy Use and Listening Anxiety in EFL Classrooms

Öz

Employing a survey design, this study aims to examine learners’ metacognitive listening strategies, their listening anxiety and whether there is a relationship between these two research matters in English as a foreign language (EFL) classrooms. The participants included 112 freshman students at a university context and they were taking a listening and comprehension course during the study. Two scales were used to collect the data for this study; Foreign Language Listening Anxiety Scale (FLLAS) was used to measure the participants’ listening anxiety and Metacognitive Awareness Listening Questionnaire (MALQ) was used to identify their strategy use. The collected data were analysed by using a statistical program and with the help of descriptive statistics. The findings revealed that the participants experienced a moderate level of foreign language listening anxiety. In terms of their metacognitive listening strategy use, problem solving strategies were found to be used the most while mental translation strategies were used the least. It was also found that there was a low positive relationship between the participants’ listening anxiety and their listening strategy use. Furthermore, no significant change was found among low, moderate and high anxious learners in terms of the types of their metacognitive listening strategy use. Parallel with those findings, the study offers several suggestions for practitioners to apply in language classrooms and for researchers to further investigate the nature of these two phenomena.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• foreign language listening anxiety
• metacognitive strategy use
• Turkish EFL learners

İngilizcenin Yabancı Dil Olarak Öğretildiği Sınıflarda Yabancı Dil Dinleme Kaygısı ve Üst Bilişsel Strateji Kullanımı Üzerine Bir Araştırma

Öz

Bu çalışma, İngilizcenin yabancı dil olarak öğretildiği sınıflarda öğrencilerin üstbilişsel dinleme stratejilerini, dinleme kaygılarını ve bu iki araştırma olgusu arasında bir ilişki olup olmadığını incelemeyi amaçlamaktadır. Çalışmanın katılımcılarını, bir devlet üniversitesinin İngilizce öğretmenliği programında öğrenim gören ve çalışma esnasında dinleme ve anlama dersini alan 122 birinci sınıf öğrencisi oluşturmaktadır. Çalışmanın verilerini toplamak amacıyla iki temel araç kullanılmıştır; katılımcıların dinleme kaygısını ölçmek için Yabancı Dil Dinleme Kaygısı Ölçeği (FLLAS), strateji kullanımlarını belirlemek için ise Üstbilişsel Farkındalık Dinleme Anketi (MALQ) kullanılmıştır. Toplanan veriler istatistiksel bir program kullanılarak ve tanımlayıcı istatistikler yardımıyla analiz edilmiştir. Bulgular, katılımcıların orta düzeyde yabancı dil dinleme kaygısı yaşadıklarını ortaya koymuştur. Üstbilişsel dinleme stratejisi kullanımları açısından problem çözme stratejilerinin en çok kullanılan strateji olduğu, zihinsel çeviri stratejilerinin ise en az kullanıldığı görülmüştür. Katılımcıların dinleme kaygısı ile dinleme stratejisi kullanımları arasında düşük pozitif bir ilişki olduğu da bulunmuştur. Ayrıca düşük, orta ve yüksek kaygılı öğrenciler arasında üstbilişsel dinleme stratejisi kullanım türleri açısından anlamlı bir değişiklik bulunmamıştır. Bu bulgularla paralel olarak, bu iki olgunun sınıf içi pratik yönlerine ve araştırma alanlarına yönelik bazı öneriler getirilmiştir

Anahtar Kelimeler

• yabancı dilde dinleme kaygısı
• üstbilişsel strateji kullanımı
• İngilizceyi yabancı dil olarak öğrenen Türk öğrenciler

Kaynakça

1. Al-Alwan, A., Asassfeh, S., & Al-Shboul, Y. (2013). EFL learners' listening comprehension and awareness of metacognitive strategies: How are they related? International Education Studies, 6 (9), 31-39. Retrieved May 18, 2021, from https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v6n9p31
2. Anderson, A., & Lynch, T. (1988). Listening. Oxford University Press.
3. Aydın, B. (1999). A study of sources of foreign language classroom anxiety in speaking and writing classes. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Anadolu University.
4. Baker, L. (2002). Metacognition in comprehension instruction. In C. Block & M. Pressley (Eds.), Comprehension instruction: Research-based best practices (pp. 77-95). Guilford Press.
5. Baniadam, I., Meskini, N., & Afra, A. (2019). The relationship between Iranian female dentistry students’ metacognitive awareness and listening performance in English for general purposes (EGP). Philosophy Study, 9 (7), 414-423. Retrieved May 18, 2021, from https://doi.org/10.17265/2159-5313/2019.07.005
6. Berber, G., & Kuru Gönen, S. İ. (2017). How do high and low anxious FL listeners employ FL listening comprehension strategies? Exploring student perspectives. Journal of Qualitative Research in Education, 5 (3), 90-108. Retrieved January 18, 2021, from https://10.14689/issn.2148- 2624.1.5c3s4m.
7. Borekci, R., & Yavuz, F. (2017). Foreign language listening anxiety among Turkish EFL learners. Global Journal of Foreign Language Teaching. 7(2), 86-90. Retrieved May 18, 2021, from https://doi.org/10.18844/gjflt.v7i2.2991
8. Bozorgian, H. (2014). The role of metacognition in the development of EFL learners’ listening skill. International Journal of Listening, 28 (3), 149-161. Retrieved January 18, 2021, from https://doi.org/10.1080/10904018.2013.861303

9. Ceylan, E. (2016). An exploratory study on the relationship between motivation types, metacognitive awaraness, and EFL listening proficiency. [Unpublished master’ thesis]. Dokuz Eylül University.
10. Coşkun, A. (2010). The effect of metacognitive strategy training on the listening performance of beginner students. Novitas-ROYAL, 4 (1), 35-50. Retrieved January 18, 2021, from https://novitasroyal.org/volume-4-issue-1-april-2010/?wpdmc=volume-4-issue-1
11. Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational Research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Pearson Education.
12. Çokluk, Ö., Şekercioğlu, G., & Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2010). Sosyal bilimler için çok değişkenli istatistik: SPSS ve LISREL uygulamaları. Pegem Akademi
13. Dalman, M. R. (2016). The relationship between listening anxiety, listening comprehension strategies, and listening performance among Iranian EFL university students, International Journal of Modern Language Teaching and Learning, 1 (6), 242-256. Retrieved January 18, 2021, from http://www.ijmltl.com/fulltext/paper-01122016185800.pdf
14. Demi̇r, E , Saatçi̇oğlu, Ö.,& İmrol, F . (2016). Uluslararası dergilerde yayımlanan eğitim araştırmalarının normallik varsayımları açısından incelenmesi. Current Research in Education, 2(3), 130-148. Retrieved January 20, 2021, from https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/crd/issue/28292/300531
15. Flowerdew, J. (Ed.) (1994). Academic listening: Research perspectives. Cambridge University Press.
16. Goh, C. C. M. (2000). A cognitive perspective on language learners’ listening comprehension problems. System, 28, 55-75. Retrieved January 18, 2021, from https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(99)00060-3
17. Goh, C. C. M. (2008). Metacognitive instruction for second language listening development: Theory, practice and research implications. RELC Journal, 39 (2), 188-213. Retrieved January 18, 2021, from https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688208092184
18. Goh, C. C. M., & Hu, G. (2014). Exploring the relationship between metacognitive awareness and listening performance with questionnaire data. Language Awareness, 23 (3), 255-274. Retrieved January 18, 2020, from https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2013.769558
19. Golchi, M. M. (2012). Listening anxiety and its relationship with listening strategy use and listening comprehension among Iranian IELTS learners. International Journal of English linguistics, 2 (4), 115-128. Retrieved January 18, 2021, from 10.5539/ijel.v2n4p115
20. Golzadeh, N., & Moiinvaziri, M. (2017). Metacognitive strategy awareness and listening Anxiety: The role of gender and proficiency level among Iranian EFL learners. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching & Research, 5 (19), 91-109. Retrieved May 20, 2021, from http://jfl.iaun.ac.ir/article_593889.html
21. Gönen, M. (2009). The relationship between FL listening anxiety and FL listening strategies: the case of Turkish EFL learners. 5th WSEAS/IASME International Conference on Educational Technologies, 44-49. Retrieved May 20, 2021, from http://www.wseas.us/e-library/conferences/2009/lalaguna/EDUTE/EDUTE-05.pdf
22. Han, J. (2014). A study on the influence of anxiety and metacognitive strategies on listening proficiency. Journal of Chemical and Pharmaceutical Research, 6 (6), 2484-2496. Retrieved May 20, 2020, from https://www.jocpr.com/articles/a-study-on-the-influence-of-anxiety-and-metacognitive-strategies-on-listening-proficiency.pdf
23. Hidayati, A. N., Dewi, N. S. N., Nurhaedin, E., & Rosmala, D. (2020). Foreign language listening anxiety in an academic listening class. J-SHMIC : Journal of English for Academic, 7 (2), 1 – 9. Retrieved May 18, 2021, from https://doi.org/10.25299/jshmic.2020.vol7(2).5241
24. Horwitz, E. K., Horwitz, M. B., & Cope, J. (1986). Foreign language classroom anxiety. The Modern Language Journal, 70 (2), 125-132. Retrieved May 20, 2021, from https://doi.org/10.2307/327317
25. Kaplan, S., & Berman, M.G. (2010). Directed attention as a common resource for executive functioning and self-regulation. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5 (1), 43-57. Retrieved May 20, 2021, from https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691609356784
26. Kim, J. (2000). Foreign language listening anxiety: A study of Korean students learning English. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. The University of Texas at Austin.
27. Kobayashi, A. (2018). Investigating the effects of metacognitive instruction in listening for EFL learners. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 15 (2). 310-328. Retrieved May 20, 2021, from http://dx.doi.org/10.18823/asiatefl.2018.15.2.4.310
28. Lee, H., & Mukhlynina, I. (2017). Listening metacognitive awareness: Case study on Chinese and Russian students in French L2. Journal of Advances in Linguistics, 8 (1), 1236 – 1245. Retrieved May 18, 2021, from https://doi.org/10.24297/jal.v8i1.6353
29. Mendelsohn, D. (1994). Learning to Listen: A Strategy- Based Approach for the Second- Language Learner. Dominie Press.
30. Nunan, D., & Miller, L. (1995). New ways in teaching listening. Alexandria, VA: TESOL.
31. Nunan, D. (1999). Second language teaching and learning. MA: Heinle and Heinle.
32. Oxford, R. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. Newbury house.
33. Oxford, R. L. (1993). Research update on L2 listening. System, 21, 205-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/0346-251X(93)90042-F
34. Özer, A. (2007). Normallik testlerinin karşılaştırılması. [Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi]. Ankara Üniversitesi.
35. Selamat, S., & Sidhu, G. K. (2013). Enhancing listening comprehension: The role of metacognitive strategy instruction (MetSI). Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 90, 421 – 430. Retrieved May 20, 2020, from https:// 10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.07.111
36. Shapiro, S. S., Wilk, M. B., & Chen, H. J. (1968). A comparative study of various tests for normality. Journal of The American Statistical Association, 63(324), 1343-1372. Retrieved January 20, 2020, from https://doi.org/10.2307/2285889
37. Sprent, P., & Smeeton, N. C. (2007). Applied nonparametric statistical methods (Fourth edition). CRC Press.
38. Sun, L. (2013). The effect of meta-cognitive learning strategies on English learning. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 3 (11), 2004-2009. Retrieved May 20, 2021, from https://doi.org/ 10.4304/tpls.3.11.2004-2009.
39. Taheri, P., & Zade, M. H. (2018). The contribution of metacognitive strategies to EFL learners' listening comprehension task types. Teaching English Language, 12 (2), 169-198. Retrieved January 18, 2021, from https://doi.org/10.22132/TEL.[phone]
40. Thompson, I., & Rubin, J. (1996). Can strategy instruction improve listening comprehension? Foreign Language Annals, 29 (3), 331-342. Retrieved January 18, 2021, from https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.1996.tb01246.x
41. Vandergrift, L. (1999). Facilitating second language listening comprehension: acquiring successful strategies. ELT Journal, 53 (3), 168-176. Retrieved January 18, 2021, from https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/53.3.168
42. Vandergrift, L. (2002). It was nice to see that our predictions were right: Developing metacognition in L2 listening comprehension. The Canadian Modern Language Journal Review, 58, 555-575. Retrieved January 18, 2020, from https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.58.4.555
43. Vandergrift, L. (2003). From prediction through reflection: guiding students through the process of L’ listening. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 59 (3), 425-440. Retrieved January 18, 2021, from https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.59.3.425
44. Vandergrift, L. (2004). Learning to listen or listening to learn? Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24, 3-25. Retrieved January 18, 2021, from https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118784235.eelt0567
45. Vandergrift, L. (2007). Recent developments in second and foreign in language listening comprehension research. Language Teaching, 40, 191-210. Retrieved January 18, 2021, from https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444807004338
46. Vandergrift, L., Goh, C, C. M., Mareschal, C., & Tafaghodtari, M. H. (2006). The metacognitive awareness listening questionnaire (MALQ): Development and validation. Language Learning, 56, 431-462. Retrieved January 18, 2020, from https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2006.00373.x
47. Vandergrift, L., & Tafaghodtari, M. H. (2010). Teaching L2 learners how to listen does make a difference: An empirical study. Language Learning, 60 (2), 470-497. Retrieved January 18, 2021, from https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2009.00559.x
48. Vandergrift, L., & Goh, C. (2012). Teaching and learning second language listening: Metacognition in action. Routledge.
49. Wenden, A., & Rubin, J. (1987). Learner strategies in language learning. Prentice Hall.
50. Wenden, A. (1998). Metacognitive knowledge and language learning. Applied Linguistics, 19, 515-537. Retrieved January 18, 2021, from https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/19.4.515.
51. Xu, J. (2017). The mediating effect of listening metacognitive awareness between test-taking motivation and listening test score: An expectancy-value theory approach. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1-10. Retrieved January 18, 2021, from https://doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02201
52. Yang, C. (2009). A study of metacognitive strategies employed by English listeners. International Education Studies, 2 (4), 134-139. Retrieved January 18, 2020, from https://doi.org/10.5539/ies.v2n4p134.
53. Yetiş, K. (2021). The impact of metacognitive instruction on EFL learners’ listening comprehension skill. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Hacettepe University.
54. Young, M. Y. C. (1997). A serial ordering of listening comprehension strategies used by advanced ESL learners in Hong Kong. Asian Journal of English Language Teaching, 7, 35-53. Retrieved January 18, 2020, fromhttps://www.cuhk.edu.hk/ajelt/vol7/art3.htm
55. Zheng, Y., & Cheng, L. (2018). How does anxiety influence language performance? From the perspectives of foreign language classroom anxiety and cognitive test anxiety. Language Testing in Asia, 8 (13). Retrieved May 20, 2021, from https://doi.org/10.1186/s40468-018-0065-4