The relationship between EFL learners’ learning styles and their scores in audio and video-mediated L2 listening tests/İngilizce’yi yabancı dil olarak öğrenen öğrencilerin öğrenme biçimleri ile işitsel ve hem görsel hem işitsel dinleme testlerindeki puanl

Öz

The inclusion of visuals in second language (L2) listening tests has long been a matter of interest for researchers (Progosh, 1996; Suvorov, 2009; Wagner, 2007, 2013). Yet, studies have often yielded indecisive and conflicting results. Besides, there have been few, if any, studies exploring the relationship between learners’ individual differences and their performance in audio and video-mediated listening tests. The aim of this study is thus to investigate the relationship between learners’ perceptual learning styles and their scores in audio and video-mediated L2 listening tests in a classroom based assessment context. It also investigates the impact of channel of input on L2 learners’ listening comprehension test scores. 27 Turkish learners of English as a foreign language took part in this study. A listening test consisting of two short academic lectures and eighteen short-answer comprehension questions was designed to assess the listening comprehension of learners. To detect the learners’ perceptual learning styles, the adapted version of Cohen, Oxford and Chi’s (2001) Learning Style Survey was conducted. The listening comprehension test scores of learners and their responses to the survey were statistically analyzed through SPSS version 20.0. The results indicated that there was not a significant difference between learners’ scores in audio and video-mediated listening tests. However, a one-way ANOVA revealed that kinesthetic learners scored significantly higher than the visual learners in audio listening test. As such, the results showed that audio listening tests favored or disfavored certain groups of learners, contrary to the commonly held assumption that they do not lead to test unfairness. It is hoped that the findings of this study will offer implications for designing valid and reliable listening tests to be used in classroom based assessment contexts. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Learning styles, testing listening, video-mediated L2 listening test

(İNGİLİZCEYİ YABANCI DİL OLARAK ÖĞRENEN ÖĞRENCİLERİN ÖĞRENME BİÇİMLERİ İLE İŞİTSEL VE HEM GÖRSEL HEM İŞİTSEL DİNLEME TESTLERİNDEKİ PUANLARININ İLİŞKİSİ)

Öz

Görsel öğelerin ikinci dilde yapılan dinleme testlerinde kullanılması uzun süredir araştırmacıların dikkatini çekmektedir. Fakat çalışmalarda çoğunlukla ortak bir sonuca ulaşılamamış ve çelişkili sonuçlar ortaya çıkmıştır. Bunun yanında öğrencilerin kişisel farklılıklar ile işitsel ve hem işitsel hem görsel dinleme testlerindeki performansları arasındaki ilişkiyi irdeleyen çalışmalara pek rastlanmamıştır. Bu nedenle bu çalışmada öğrencilerin algısal öğrenme biçimleri ile işitsel ve hem görsel hem işitsel dinleme testlerindeki puanlarının ilişkisi araştırılmaktadır. Ayrıca, girdi kanalının ikinci dil öğrenen öğrencilerin dinleme testlerindeki puanlarına etkisi de incelenmektedir. Bu çalışmada İngilizceyi yabancı dil olarak öğrenen 27 Türk öğrenci yer almıştır. İki kısa akademik konuşma ve onsekiz kısa cevaplı soru, öğrencilerin dinleme becerilerini ölçmek için kullanılmıştır. Öğrencilerin algısal öğrenme biçimlerini anlamak için, Cohen, Oxford ve Chi (2001)’nin Öğrenme Biçimi Anketi’nin uyarlanmış hali kullanılmıştır. Öğrencilerin dinleme testlerindeki puanları ve ankete verdikleri cevaplar SPSS 20.0 programı aracılığıyla istatistiksel olarak hesaplanmıştır. Araştırma sonuçları öğrencilerin işitsel ve hem işitsel hem görsel dinleme testlerindeki puanlarının arasında istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir farklılık olmadığını göstermiştir. Fakat tek yönlü ANOVA analizi kinestetik öğrencilerin işitsel dinleme testlerinde görsel öğrencilerden istatistiksel olarak daha iyi puanlar aldıklarını ortaya çıkarmıştır. Sonuç olarak, işitsel dinleme testlerinin test adaletsizliğine yol açmadığı kanısının aksine işitsel dinleme testlerinin bazı öğrenci gruplarına test sırasında ayrıcalık sağlarken bazı öğrenci gruplarına ayrıcalık sağlamadığı ortaya çıkmıştır. Çalışma sonucunda sınıf içi değerlendirmeleri için geçerli ve güvenilir dinleme sınavı oluşturmaya yönelik çıkarımlarda bulunulmuş ve öneriler belirtilmiştir

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Öğrenme biçimi, dinleme test etme, hem görsel hem işitsel ikinci dil dinleme testi

Kaynakça

1. REFERENCES
2. Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (1996). Language testing in practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
3. Bejar, I., Douglas, D., Jamieson, J., Nissan, S., & Turner, J. (2000). TOEFL 2000 listening framework: A working paper (TOEFL Monograph Series, Report No. 19). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
4. Biggs, J. B. (1993). What do inventories of students’ learning processes really measure? A theoretical review and clarification. Educational Psychology, 63, 3–19.
5. Brett, P. (1997). A comparative study of the effects of the use of multimedia on listening comprehension. System, 25(1), 39–53.
6. Buck, G. (2001). Assessing listening. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
7. Butler, A. C., & Roediger, H. (2008). ‘Feedback enhances the positive effects and reduces the negative effects or multiple-choice testing. Memory & Cognition, 36(4), 604–623.
8. Cesur, M. O., & Fer, S. (2011). Öğrenme stratejileri, stilleri ve yabancı dilde okuma-anlama başarısı arasındaki ilişkiler örüntüsü. Hacettepe Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 41, 83-93.

9. Cohen, A. D., Oxford, R. L., & Chi, J. C. (2001). Learning Style Survey. Retrieved from http://www.carla.umn.edu/maxsa/documents/LearningStyleSurvey_MAXSA_IG.pdf
10. Coniam, D. (2001). The use of audio or video comprehension as an assessment instrument in the certification of English language teachers: A case study. System, 29(1), 1-14.
11. Dörnyei, Z. (2002). Questionnaires in second language research: Construction, administration, and processing. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc., Publishers.
12. Dunkel, P., Henning, G., & Chaudron, C. (1993). The assessment of an L2 listening comprehension construct: Tentative model for test specification and development. The Modern Language Journal, 77(2), 180-191.
13. Ehrman, M., & Oxford, R. (1990). Adult language learning styles and strategies in an intensive training setting. The Modern Language Journal, 74(3), 311–327.
14. Field, J. (2003). Promoting Perception: Lexical segmentation in L2 listening. ELT Journal, 57, 325-334.
15. Ginther, A. (2002). Context and content visuals and performance on listening comprehension stimuli. Language Testing, 19(2), 133-167. doi:10.1191/0265532202lt225oa
16. Gruba, P. (1993). A comparison study of audio and video in language testing. JALT Journal, 15(1), 85-88.
17. Gruba, P. (1997). The role of video media in listening assessment. System, 25(3), 335-345.
18. Gruba, P. (2006). Playing the videotext: A media literacy perspective on video-mediated L2 listening. Language Learning & Technology, 10(2), 77-92.
19. Hearst, M. (2000). The debate on automated essay grading. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 15(5), 22–37.
20. Karns, G. (2006). Learning style differences in the perceived effectiveness of learning activities. Journal of Marketing Education, 28, 56–63.
21. Kinsella, K. (1995). Understanding and empowering diverse learners. In J. Reid (Ed.), Learning styles in the ESL/EFL classroom (pp. 170-194). Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
22. Kunnan, A. J. (2010). Test fairness and Toulmin's argument structure. Language Testing, 27(2), 183–189.
23. Jonassen, D. H., & Grabowski, B. (1993). Handbook of individual differences, learning, and Instruction. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
24. Lado, R. (1961). Language testing: The construction and use of foreign language tests. London: Longman.
25. Larsen, R. E. (1992). Relationship of learning style to the effectiveness and acceptance of interactive video instruction. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 19, 17–21.
26. Leithner, A. (2011). Do student learning styles translate to different testing styles?. Journal of Political Science Education, 7(4), 416-433.
27. Londe, Z. C. (2009). The effects of video media in English as a second language listening comprehension tests. Issues in Applied Linguistics, 17(1), 41-50.
28. Messick, S. (1989). Validity. In R. L. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement (pp. 13-103). New York: Macmillan.
29. Messick, S. (1996). Validity and washback in language testing. Language Testing 13(3): 241-256.
30. Morrison, M., Sweeney, A., & Heffernan, T. (2006). Karns’s learning styles and learning effectiveness: A rejoinder. Journal of Marketing Education, 28(1), 64- 68.
31. Myers, I. B. (1962). Manual: The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator. Princeton, NJ: Education Testing Service.
32. Nichols, S. L., & Berliner, D. C. (2008). Why has high-stakes testing so easily slipped into contemporary American life?. Education Digest, 74(1), 41–47.
33. Ockey, G. J. (2007). Construct implications of including still image or vide in computer-based listening tests. Language Testing, 24(4), 517-537.
34. Oxford, R. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. Newyork: Newbury House.
35. Oxford, R. L. (1995). Gender differences in language learning styles: What do they mean?. In J. M. Reid (Ed.), Learning styles in the ESL/EFL classroom (pp. 34-46). Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
36. Progosh, D. (1996). Using video for listening assessment: Opinions of test-takers. TESL Canada Journal, 14(1), 34-44.
37. Riding, R., & Smith, E.S. (1992). Type of instructional material, cognitive style, and learning performance. Educational Studies, 18, 323–340.
38. Rubin, J. (1995). The contribution of video to the development of competence in listening. In D. Mendelsohn, & J. Rubin (Eds.), A guide for the teaching of second language listening (pp. 151-165). San Diego: Dominie Press.
39. Shin, D. (1998). Using videotaped lectures for testing academic listening proficiency. International Journal of Listening, 12(1), 57-80. doi:10.1080/10904018.1998.10499019
40. Schmitt, N. (1996). Uses and abuses of coefficient alpha. Psychological Assessment, 8(4), 3, 50-353.
41. Suvorov, R. (2009). Context visuals in L2 listening tests: The effects of photographs and video vs. audio-only format. In C. A. Chapelle, H.G. Jun, & I. Katz (Eds.), Developing and evaluating language learning materials (pp. 53-68). Ames, IA: Iowa State University.
42. Swain, H. (2004). It’s as easy as A, B or C. Times Higher Education Supplement, 1648(7), 21–29.
43. Thompson, I. (1995). Assessment of second/foreign language listening comprehension. In D. J. Mendelsohn, & J. Rubin (Eds.). A Guide for the teaching of second language listening (pp. 31-58). San Diego, CA: Dominie Press.
44. Vandergrift, L. (2004). Listening to Learn or Learning to Listen? Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24, 3-25.
45. Vandergrift, L. (2007). Recent developments in second and foreign language listening comprehension research. Language Teaching, 40, 191-210.
46. Vermunt, J. D. (1996). Metacognitive, cognitive and affective aspects of learning styles and strategies. Higher Education, 31, 25-50.
47. Wagner, E. (2002). Video listening tests: A pilot study. Teachers College, Columbia University Working Papers in TESOL & Applied Linguistics, 2(1).
48. Wagner, E. (2006). Utilizing the visual channel: An investigation of the use of video texts on tests of second language listening ability (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Teachers College, Columbia University, New York.
49. Wagner, E. (2007). Video listening tests: What are they measuring?. Language Assessment Quarterly, 5(3), 218-243.
50. Wagner, E. (2013). An investigation of how the channel of input and access to test questions affect L2 listening test performance. Language Assessment Quarterly, 10(2), 178-195.