The Effect of Different Approaches to Repetition Strategy Instruction on the Listening Comprehension of Junior High School Students in Taiwan

Abstract

本研究旨在探討不同方式的複誦教學對台灣國中生聽力理解、 聽的字彙、了解自己說的英語和英語之間的差異及自發性的練習聽和說四方面之影響。本研究結果希望對英文老師在複誦教學上有所啟示和幫助。\r\n 台北市某國中二年級兩班共64位學生參與這項研究,他們被分為實驗組和控制組。學期初,受試者接受全民英檢初級聽力前測,依據該成績, 分成實驗組和控制組兩組群,該兩組群又細分為高中低三組群。受試者在接受全民英檢初級聽力前測後,施以不同之複誦教學。實驗組之教學方式為讓學生先聽一段文章或一段對話,第二次則聽完句子再跟著複誦所聽到的句子,第三次則看著聽力稿再複誦一次並從中了解自己所複誦的句子或片語和所聽到的有何不同。控制組之教學方式為傳統的複誦教學;方式為讓學生先看著聽力稿聽一段文章或一段對話,第二次則聽完再跟著聽力稿複誦,第三次則亦看著聽力稿再複誦一次, 並從中了解自己所複誦的句子或片語和所聽到的有何不同。16週之後,他們接受聽力後測。除接受後測外,實驗組還接受問卷調查和訪談。\r\n 實驗結果顯示實驗組的聽力方面之進步大於控制組。其中實驗組平均數差異檢定以達到顯著水準(t=2.666, p=.010);實驗組三組中,以中組群及低組群進步最多,平均數差異檢定以達到顯著水準(中組群t=3.318, p=.003; 低組群t=.283, p=.016)。此外從問卷調查和訪談得知:實驗組大部份的學生對此教學法皆持肯定的態度。且中組群及高組群對聽的字彙、了解自己說的英語和英語之間的差異及皆持正面的看法。低分組則較希望老師能適時的說明及指導。但在自發性的練習聽和說的能力只有高組群持正面的看法。本文根據研究結果,提出英語教學上之運用以及未來研究之建議。

The purpose of the study is to examine the effect of different approaches to “listen and repeat” strategy teaching on listening comprehension of junior high school students in Taiwan. “Listen and repeat” activity is often practiced in English class; however, its skill and training are often neglected by most English teachers and thus less studied. In this study, an experiment is conducted to examine the effect that different procedures of repetition strategy instruction have on listening comprehension, on the awareness of the gap between students’ output and the aural input, on “sound-to-script” vocabulary, and on students’ automaticity in listening and speaking.\r\n Sixty-four students, taught by the researcher, from two classes of 8th grade at a junior high school in Taipei City, participate in this study. They are divided into the experimental group and the control group. At the beginning of the semester, the researcher gives the two classes an English listening comprehension test at the GEPT elementary level. According to their scores in the test, the subjects are further divided into high, middle, and low proficiency levels. Then, the experimental and the control groups are taught in different methods. The control group is taught to \"listen and repeat\" with the listening scripts; the experimental group is taught to “listen and repeat” after the aural stimuli only and later to check the listening scripts to see if there is any gap between the listening input and their oral output and if there is any gap between their listening vocabulary and the written vocabulary.After 16 weeks, all of the subjects take a listening comprehension posttest. In addition to the listening comprehension test, the experimental group is also asked to fill in a questionnaire. Later, some interviews are conducted.\r\n The results show that “listen and repeat” after the aural stimuli indeed enhances the subjects’ listening comprehension ability. The experimental group significantly outperforms the control group (t=2.666, p=.010). Besides, in terms of proficiency levels, the experimental middle and low subgroups significantly outperform those of the control group (experimental middle subgroup: t=3.318, p=.003; experimental low subgroup: t=.283, p=.016).\r\n Moreover, the questionnaire and interview results show that most of the students like this way of “listen and repeat” practice though it is cognitively demanding and challenging. Furthermore, experimental middle and high subgroups benefit more from the strategy. They can better notice the gap between their output and the aural input and have better correspondence between their listening vocabulary and the written vocabulary. But the strategy facilitates only high proficiency students’ automaticity in listening and speaking. The low subgroup, on the other hand, needs teachers’ instructions and feedback more.\r\nBased on the above results, some pedagogical implications for English teachers and suggestions for learning strategy instructions are provided at the end of the study