Happy Birthday New Zealand

170 today!

Integrating Listening Strategies Into the Classroom

This paper focuses on the classroom integration of learner strategies. It provides an overview of the development and recognition of learner strategies as a field associated with learner autonomy. It then focuses specifically on listening, examining the difficulties encountered by a group of Korean middle school students (aged 13 – 14) in undertaking listening tasks. After discussing listening strategies a lesson plan is presented and critiqued for it's possible benefit to the learners in question in the hope that the integrated teaching of strategies will help them, not only complete listening activities in class, but  will also aid in their day to day interactions on an ongoing (autonomous) basis.

I. Development of Learner Strategies

Learners' solutions to learning problems have long been a topic of interest both in terms of research and pedagogy. (McDonough, 1999:1) Despite this, what constitutes a learner strategy has been difficult to pin down. (Ibid.) Cohen (1998) provides us with this definition:

Second language learning strategies encompass both second language learning and second language use strategies. Taken together they constitute the steps or actions consciously selected by learners either to improve the learning of a second language, the use of it, or both.

(Cohen, 1998:5)

McDonough (1995) however points out the possible ambiguity in the term strategy and how it is often linked to other terms like skill, and process. For example the word strategy has at least four senses: a guiding principle, a heuristic estimation, a compensation mechanism and a plan for action. (McDonough, 1999:1)

Initial research in to strategies focused on what characteristics could be found in good learners and not poor learners. Stern (1975) nominated a list of ten strategies that could be seen as being the features that mark out good language learning' (1975:31 in McDonough, 1999). They include learner characteristics such as active and positive approaches to learning, a willingness to use the target language and having empathy towards the target language and its speakers.

Although Stern mentions experimentation, planning and self monitoring they are not strategies per se. But could instead be seen as the initial discovery of what Vandergrift (2003) would eventually assign to his model of the ''skilled learner'' 23 years later. Indeed McDonough calls these learning strategies as opposed to learner strategies reflecting the active role the learner takes in the learning process (1999:2) as opposed to being a performer regurgitating a script. Strategies have since been isolated and refined since Stern's work 35 years ago. They have been described for learning language, second languages, the four skills of Listening Speaking, reading and writing, for seeking meaning and anticipating problems.

Since Stern, there have been further attempts to identify, describe and classify learner strategies. Amongst them, O'Malley and Chamot's (1990) study presented a three-way division of cognitive, metacognitive and social-affective strategies. This classification would prove useful and has since been drawn upon by Vandergrift (2003), Nation and Newton (2008) and indeed this paper.

According to McDonough, there is a pervading assumption, that learning strategies promote autonomous learning. (McDonough, 1999:4) In providing and teaching the use of strategies, teachers are equipping learners with a set of tools that they can not only use when faced with tasks in the classroom, but also in situations outside the classroom. This paper, like McDonough, assumes that there is a fundamental connection between strategy use and learner autonomy, but also that the modelling and teaching of strategy is a fundamental precursor to autonomy in, and of its self.

II. Identifying Learner Issues in Listening

As in Vandergrift’s (2003) study of French as a Second Language learners our group of Korean English as a Second Language learners vary in ability from skilled, to less skilled, nowhere is this division more prominent than in the area of listening comprehension. The less-skilled learners are characterised by, at best, a bottom-up approach to listening that sees them quickly fall behind the aural text, making guesses at word meaning and key ideas. At worst the stop paying attention and give up altogether. Skilled listeners on the other hand have the attention to see the text through to its conclusion and identify key points and ideas.

Before we address the problems the less skilled learners are having, we must first identify them. In order to do so it is useful to think of listening in terms of the three phase taxonomy of listening developed by Anderson (1985) and adapted for the second language learning context by Goh(2000). Listening is a three phase process with distinct cognitive burdens at each phase that can prevent a learner from hearing something. The first, the perception phase, is the literal hearing of the sound or utterance. The second, the parsing stage, sees learners applying a mental image to the utterance or sound commiserate to their understanding and background knowledge. Finally the third stage is utilisation where in a response is formulated by the listener and delivered. (Goh, 2000:60)

When it comes to listening Korean learners experience problems at all three steps in the listening process. At the perception stage this is centred around the sounds that they are hearing. In a similar vein to Goh’s (2000) case study the Korean learners are having difficulty in identifying words – especially word endings, and where one word flows into another as a result of connected speech, or weak forms. In addition their teacher speaks with something of a British English accent (Received Pronunciation, or RP) whilst most Korean learners are used to hearing aural texts in the General American, or GA accent almost exclusively. At the parsing stage ineffective ‘’chunking’’ as a result of bottom-up processing often leaves Korean learners stuck on a single word, searching for its meaning at the expense of listening to the remainder of the text. Subsequently students find it difficult to understand what is going on later in the listening as they have been unable to grasp the meaning of earlier parts, removing any semblance of context that may have served as a clue to meaning. Finally at the utilisation stage students have previously reported that despite recognising vocabulary being used, and indeed, being aware of lexical chunks and other features, they were still unable to fully understand the intended message.

III. Identifying Appropriate Listening Strategies

With the issues they face now out in the open we turn to finding the appropriate listening strategies that can improve our Korean learners’ ability to complete listening tasks. But why approach these problems with Strategy Based Instruction (SBI)? Most researchers would probably agree that a strategy is a conscious, intentional, and effortful process that aims to tackle learning problems and improve learning results (Gu, 2007). A laudable outcome in and of itself, but it is this author’s contention that in providing and teaching the use of strategies, teachers are equipping learners with a set of tools that they can not only use when faced with tasks in the classroom, but also outside the classroom, thus contributing to learners’ ongoing autonomy.

A more classroom based, perhaps more practical explanation comes from Chamot: (2005) Learning strategies are procedures that facilitate a task. (2005:112)

In the lesson presented below the approach taken to teach strategy is similar to that taken by Gu (2007) based on Chamot, Barnhardt El-Dinary and Robbins (1999). It is characterised by explicit strategy instruction and integration and aims to transfer the responsibility of strategy choice and use from the teacher to the learner, with the ultimate aim of learner emplyment. (Gu, 2007:32)

Table 1 Learning strategies that address listening problems

Listening Problem	Strategy	Description
Difficulty identifying words heard	·         Imagery ·         Planning	·      Using mental or actual             pictures to represent information ·     Developing an awareness of what needs to be done to accomplish a listening task, developing an appropriate action plan to overcome difficulties that may interfere with successful completion of a task
Dealing with accents	·         Asking for clarification ·         Repetition	·       Social-affective strategy making 2-way listening easier ·       Repeating a chunk of language (word or phrase) in the course of performing a listening task
Becoming stuck on a word or phrase	·      Linguistic Inferenceing ·      Extra-Linguistic inferencing ·      Directed attention	·    Using known words and utterances to guess the meaning of unknown words     ·         Deciding in advance to attend in general to the listening task and to ignore irrelevant distractions, maintaining attention while listening
Inability to understand the intended message	·         Inferencing · Personal/world/ academic/questioning      Summarisation	·         logical Using Prior knowledge gained in various contexts to brainstorm possibilities ·         mental and written summaries of info from the task

Adapted from Vandergrift (2003:494-496) and Goh (2000:Appendix)

Vandergift (2003) provides us with a number of cognitive and metacognitive strategies that can be suitably put to use in our case. In addition this author is a strong advocate of some of the socio-affective strategies offered by Goh (2000). Table 1 assigns possible strategies to be taught to learners in order to combat the problems they are having.

Obviously not all of these problems and suggested strategies can be addressed in one or even two lessons. Instead the lesson presented below is assumed to be part of a course of study over a semester where Strategy Based Instruction forms part of a number of overall approaches to teaching, learning and the promotion of learner autonomy.

IV. Applying Listening Strategies: A Lesson Plan

It would probably be counter-productive to try and fit as many strategies into one lesson as possible. Indeed the ‘’real-life’’ lesson plan presented in the appendix to this paper uses three. Each strategy is presented relatively explicitly. The first literally asks students to identify what prior knowledge they have about a subject – in this case basketball. This technique of setting context by eliciting prior world knowledge is common to all of this author’s lessons and students ‘’know the routine’’ as it were. In terms of Strategic Instruction the teacher could bookend this part of the lesson by reminding students to think about what they already know about a subject before undertaking a listening class, while this may have been stated in lesson one of the course, here in lesson four it is admittedly implied albeit a well recognised item in a lesson.

The second strategy used is assigning imagery to unknown (or potentially unknown) words. By using flash cards the teacher attempts to lessen the cognitive burden on students further by doing the hard work of collating and presenting the imagery while students simply have to identify them. Again this is a well known strategy even by this early stage of the course, not to mention the fact that even at the earliest stages of language acquisition students are given picture books of nouns and verbs and corresponding images.

The third strategy highlighted in the lesson plan is planning and developing a sense of what the listening task actually requires from students. This is perhaps the most explicitly explained strategy in the lesson. However it is necessary for the teacher to couch it in language appropriate to the level of the students who at this stage do not have the meta-cognitive language to understand or describe “planning for development of task requirements”. Instead the teacher tells students that they can look for ‘’clues’’ as to what kind of information they need to get from the reading by looking at the set of comprehension questions that will follow.

Again it is important to note that such a lesson plan as that presented below would never occur in isolation. In addition it is presented here to show this author’s efforts in using SBI while also meeting the requirements and expectations of school management, As Gu (2007) notes:

One prerequisite for the successful implementation of SBI is the complete understanding and cooperation from the schools.

(Gu, 2007:33)

As it stands this is an example of a lesson that, while trying to actively promote Learner Autonomy through strategy use, is also something of a hybrid conforming to institutional norms and requirements,.

V. Conclusions

This paper has explored the development of the study of learner strategies from Stern (1970) through McDonough (1999), Gu (2007) and Nation and Newton (2008). Of particular interest is the continued growth of work in the area of listening strategies by first Goh (2000) and then Vandregrift (2003) and others that has seen the relatively ‘’young field’’ (Vandregrift, 2003:464) grow into a wide and varied corpus of qualitative and quantitative research. In addition both what constitutes a learning strategy and why learning strategies should be taught have been refined over time. Ultimately learning strategies are more than just a means for improving the use of a second language by a learner. Rather and teaching the use of strategies, teachers are equipping learners with a set of tools that they can not only use when faced with tasks in the classroom, but also outside the classroom, thus contributing to learners’ ongoing autonomy.

Focusing specifically on listening this paper first identified a number of problems reported by Korean middle school students, in their listening. These problems occurred at the perception, parsing and utilisation phases of listening and were not unique to ‘’less skilled’’ learners. Problems identified included the inability to hear words, difficulty in dealing with different accents, getting stuck on words at the expense of the rest of the text and being unable to understand key points and ideas. A range of cognitive, metacognitive and social-affective strategies described by and adapted from Goh (2000) and Vandergrift (2003) were suggested to address these problems.

Three of these strategies; The use of imagery to introduce new lexis, use of realia to activate learners’ prior knowledge and planning and developing a sense of the task by looking at associated worksheets were mooted as being able to be integrated into a lesson and a lesson plan attempting to do so was presented and then critiqued.

Overall it is important that teachers and schools work in tandem to make strategy based instruction in their schools work. As noted here a fairly restricted approach to SBI is warranted so as to take into account other classroom considerations and the assumptions and expectations of stakeholders. Nevertheless the importance of strategy teaching by teachers and use by their students cannot be overstated when it comes to the case of continued learning in settings outside the classroom.

Bibliography

Anderson, J. R., (1985) Cognitive Psychology and it’s implications, (2^nd ed.) New York: Freeman

Cohen, A. D., (1998) Strategies in learning and using a second language, London & New York: Longman

Chamot, A. U., (2005) Language learning strategy instruction: Current issues and research. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 25, 112-130

Chamot, A. U., Barnhardt, S., El-Dinary, P.B., & Robbins, J. (1999) The learning strategies handbook, White Plains, NY: Longman.

Goh, C., (2000) A cognitive perspective on language learners’ listening, System, 28(1), 55-75

Gu, Y., (2007) Strategy-based instruction. In T. Yashima & T. Nabei (Eds.), Proceedings of the International Symposium on English Language Education in Japan: Exploring New Frontiers (pp. 21-38), Osaka: Yubunsha

Lumsden, S. H. (2009) Teaching listening: Using the model of the ''Skilled Learner'' to help all learners'' Unpublished MA App. Ling (TESOL) paper, Victoria University of Wellington

McDonough, S.H., (1999) Learner strategies, Language Teaching, 32, 1-18

Nation, I. S. P., and J Newton. (2008).Teaching Listening and Speaking. New York: Routledge/ Taylor and Francis Group.

O'Malley, J. M. & Chamot, A. U., (1990) Learning strategies in second language acquisition, Cambridge: CUP

Oxford, R.L., (1990) Language learning strategies: what every teacher should know. New York: Newbury House/Harper & Row

Stern, H. H., (1975) What can we learn from the good language learner? Canadian Modern language Review, 31, 304-18

Vandergrift, L., (2003) Orchestrating strategy use: Toward a model of the skilled second language listener, Language Learning, 53(3), 463-496

Crackdown on Illegal Tutoring Ineffective

Hey Kang ShinWho...

Get a FUCKING clue mate!

In what is the second of a series of articles by Kang on illegal tutoring readers are given this to start:

Many students take private English lessons for writing and speaking to prepare for the Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) and TOEFL test for admission to U.S. universities. But many of those teaching are doing so illegally. 

The education authorities have no immediate measures planned to crack down on illegal private tutoring by foreigners. 

OK. Good one. Why not write an article about a subject that even the authorities don't really give a shit about. I mean you have to fill your paper somehow right!? Why not fill it with race baiting hatred about a group in society you obviously disdain, who through their own hard effort probably make more than you and definitely have bigger penises than you.

Because so may foreigners are guilty of this heinous crime of ellegally trying to educate Kore'as youth.

Those foreign devils.

There have been so many cases reported to the authorities! (emphasis mine)

About 1,720 suspected illegal tutoring cases have been reported to the authorities. Only 368 cases were subject to punishment, all of which involved Korean tutors. 

OK, so really the powers that be are concerned about *Koreans* tutoring illegally. But what of foreigners? There are so many here in Korea flouting the system, ignoring the four distinct Seasons, a good many of them being unqualified and drunk, some of them must have been busted for teaching illegally? (emphasis mine)

No foreign tutors have been caught by the authorities for violation of the Private Education Law, the ministry said.

OK I will be the first to admit that "private" tutoring goes on amongst the E@ visa holding community, and I have stated before that it is both illegal under the terms of your visa if you are on an E2 and you can potentially be deported.

But how can there be a foreigner crime wave of epic tutoring proportions when it seems that the very authorities charged with administering the law can't really do so, there is no society threatening fall out from the activity (actually quite the opposite) and NOT A SINGLE FOREIGNER HAS BEEN ARRESTED FOR BREAKING THE LAW IN QUESTION!

I guess you would draw attention to it for the same reason you would draw attention to child molestation, rape, gambling, drinking, degree forging activities perpetrated by a small number of foreigners in Korea. I mean it's not that it doesn't happen, it's just that, yet again, Kang ShinWho has done it again, made a story sound like Korea needs to lock it's sons and daughters away from the evil foreign menace in is sights.

$86,805 - I'd Like A Share of That

You will recall yesterday's post on English teachers teaching private lessons illegally, where I dryly noted that the sums made through such activities often paled in comparison to what are essentially bribes, offered to our Korean counterparts.

Obviously I was too inflamed by Kang Shin Who's boring rhetoric to consult a real newspaper (well one trying to be real) and so missed this piece in The Joong-Ang entitled:

Officials to offer rewards to catch corrupt teachers

From the article:

In the wake of allegations of corruption in the education sector, the Seoul Metropolitan Office of Education announced Wednesday that it will offer a reward of up to 100 million won ($86,805) to those who report improper acts by the nation’s teachers.

Teachers who are found to have taken bribes in any form will be let go and forbidden to apply for any civil-service positions. 

“We are in discussions about implementing the strongest possible policies to prevent further corruption in the local education system,” said Kim Kyung-hwoi, vice superintendent at the Seoul education office. Beginning next month, centers to take in such reports will be formed in education offices throughout the country.

I don't think foreign teachers are worth that much in terms of rewards, in fact I don't think you'd get anything at all from Immigration if you turned someone in (Perhaps a certificate or Plaque from this guy).

And as if to back up my assertions that the whole 'teaching illegally' thing has more to do with capitalism and market demand and less to do with immoral dirty foreigners, there's this:

Many are sceptical that offering rewards will succeed. “There are so many personal connections between public servants, it will be nearly impossible to expect them to report on each other. If complaints and reports from students’ parents have been muzzled, what difference does it make if you gave them some money?” said Jang Eun-sook, head of the national association of parents for education.

Parents standing up and saying 'who gives a shit if I bribe a teacher to pay more attention to my kid?'.

I have a solution though. Route out corruption in schools by giving the money you would normally bribe a teacher with, to your local indentured servant, slave contracted foreign English teacher, you're return will probably be better and they'll still get to piss of Kang Shin Who.

iYawn

In what is quickly becoming the overused word of the year (February has just begun remember) The Korea Times has another article on Smartphones, that says very little new and would be hardpressed to be called news. 

Although sales of iPhone fell from 10% in December after an initial surge for the device to 6% in January, or 200,000, to about 150000 units.

You'll note though that KT is on target for 500000 iphones in three months, only The US has sold as many units as quick or quicker.

Anyway go read the rest on your own.