speaking self efficacy - ikiu · speaking self-efficacy through audio-journals abbas ali zarei...
Post on 26-Jul-2020
7 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Speaking Self-efficacy Through Audio-journals
Abbas Ali Zarei
Associate professor, Imam Khomeini International University, Qazvin, Iran
Shabnam Sepehri,
MA, Islamic Azad University, Qazvin, Iran
Contents
Chapter One: Introduction
1.1 Introduction
According to Oxford (1990), the mental aspect of the learner is one of the most important
factors on language learning achievement or defeat. According to Shumin (1996), feelings,
self-esteem, sympathy, worry, thoughts, and enthusiasm are the mental parts related to L2
or foreign language learning. He also stated that language learning is a difficult assignment
that is disposed to human apprehension, and is linked with feelings of nervousness,
irritation, uncertainty, and fear. Moreover, he believed that speaking a foreign language in
front of others may generate stress. Sometimes, EFL learners lost the words in an
unpredictable situation so that they feel discouraged.
According to Brown (1994), teachers should offer a friendly and comfortable
condition that makes students speak, however their efforts are problematic and
inconvenient. According to Celce-Murcia (2014), some important kinds of speaking
activities are discussions, role plays, conversations and oral dialogue journals. In oral
dialogue journals, usually, the teacher begins the journal. He recommends a topic and a
time constraint for the first audio exchange. After that the student provides a response to
the teacher, using a sound file, a CD or audiotape. At the end the teacher gives an audio
feedback. In this activity learners can receive feedback from both teacher and other
students. By observing the implementation of audio journal, learners will be conscious of
their abilities and weaknesses, so try hard to improve.
Through observing their success in speaking, they feel more confident and more
efficacious. Bandura (1977) defined self- view in his or her own
ability to succeed. Learners need to be aware of their own abilities by receiving approval
for their efforts. As Brown (1994) stated, one of the principles for designing speaking
activities such as oral journals is to encourage the development of speaking strategies.
The purpose of the present study is to find out how using oral journals affects Iranian
speaking self-efficacy.
1.2 Statement of the problem
According to Huei-yu Chen (2007), for students to learn they must first want to learn and
believe that they can learn. They must have not only the motivation to learn but also the
confidence in performing the given learning task. The basic sign of motivation is effort that
strongly influences the performance. As Keller (1999) asserted, it is possible for a
motivated learner to make minimum effort in learning because of some internal factors
such as confidence. This means they do not believe their abilities to perform the learning
tasks.
The motivational reness of their own abilities to
learn or performing learning tasks is self-efficacy, which is defined by social learning
theorists (Lorsbach
& Jinks, 1999, p.158).
When people consider themselves able to do special tasks, they are highly possible to
perform the task perfectly. Conversely, when the task goes beyond their abilities, people
find it threatening (Yang, 1999).
Although many studies have concentrated on the relationship between language
rformance, few have examined second/foreign
language lear and its effect on their learning (Huei-Yuchen, 2007).
According to Brown (1994), speaking techniques should inspire the learners and
teachers should guide learners to see how useful the activity is. There are some activities
which are emphasized to be done in EFL classrooms for developing oral communication
proficiency and preparing students for performing in real life context, such as
conversations, role plays, presentations and oral dialogue journals (Celce-Murcia, 2014).
Among these activities, as Brown (1994) points out, oral dialogue practice provide the
students with the opportunity to communicate verbally without being afraid of the other
. In this activity students record their dialogue. So they can observe
their successes and failures and they can access not only self and peer feedback but also
teacher feedback.
The present study is aimed to investigate the effect of using audio-journals on the
improvement of Iranian intermediate level speaking self-efficacy.
1.3 Research question
The present study aims to address the following research question:
1.3.1 Does using audio-journals have any statistically significant effect on the
improvement of speaking self-efficacy?
1.4 Research hypothesis
In line with the above question, the following null hypothesis is formulated:
1.4.1 Using audio- journals has no significant effect on Iranian intermediate
EFL -efficacy.
1.5 Definition of the key terms
The key terms and concepts of the present study are defined as follows:
Speaking: Speaking, especially in a foreign language, is the most difficult skill for
learners. He/she needs to find the most suitable words and also the correct grammar to
convey meaning precisely, fluently and accurately. One needs to arrange the discourse for
the addressee to understand what the speaker says (Cameron, 2001).
Harmer (2001) adds that speaking happens when two people are involved in talking to
each other and they are aware that they are doing it for good reason.
Oral dialogue journal: According to Celce-Murcia (2014), one major task that
both fluency and accuracy is the oral dialogue journal.
The teacher begins the journal. He explains to the learners what they need to do and
recommends a topic and a time constraint for the first audio. The learners provide a
response to the teacher, using a sound file, a CD or audio taped, or other voice-based
technology gadgets. At the end, the teacher provides an audio response. Moreover, the
students can exchange journals and . Teachers need
to remind students to speak without planning because the purpose of task is to work on
spontaneous speaking. Student voices are the best document for the teacher to present
individual feedback about their phonological and grammatical problems.
Self-efficacy: Self-efficacy, according to Bandura (1993), refers to viewpoints of
personal abilities for various stages of attainment in a special task field on the basis of
master standard.
For the purpose of the present study, speaking self-efficacy is operationally defined
and measured as the participants scores on specially designed and administered
questionnaires.
1.6 Significance of study
Speaking is an important skill in learning English as a foreign language (EFL), as learners
need to interact (Nunan, 2001). According to Nakagawa (2011), there are different
viewpoints about a successful speaking. Bailey and Savage (1994), believe that speaking
in a second/foreign language has often viewed as the most demanding of the four skills
(pp.6-7). A remarkable amount of factors should be taken into consideration in speaking
because at least two people are involved. For example, observing and following the other
speakers, considering part, constructing that role, considering its results, and so
on. Consequently, many second/foreign speakers are upset and frustrated. They are not
ready for unplanned interaction and cannot handle all of its immediate requirements
(Celce-Murcia, 2001).
According to Azizifar, Fariadian and Gowhary (2014), feeling of stress is common
among second/foreign language learners. Because of such feeling in the learners they may
not achieve the specific goals. The major factors of stress are lack of confidence, lack of
preparation and fear of losing marks or failing. All these negative factors can easily affect
their effort to learn English. Therefore, they cause the learners to do poorly.
Among some different speaking activities which are popular in teaching speaking
classes, the researcher is concerned with audio-taped journals. As Ho (2003), has
-
(p. 269). Audio-taped dialogue journals are journals recorded on the tape. One type of the
audio-taped journals is oral dialogue journals. According to McGrath (1992), the oral
dialogue journals are journals that help students recognize their ego. The students who use
the oral dialogue journals talk about a specific topic through, which they can express their
own opinions and thoughts openly with no constraints (Henry, 1989). Oral dialogue
journals can lead to interaction between the students and the teacher. Ho (2003),
explained that through audio-taped dialogue journals, the teacher could be aware of his
earning goals, language level, motivation, needs and problems. According to
Bandura (1994), perceived self-efficacy is defined as people's opinions about their abilities
to produce specific levels of performance. Self-efficacy beliefs influence the way people
feel, think, motivate themselves and behave. People with a strong sense of efficacy are not
afraid of doing difficult task, but find them as challenges to be performed as well as
possible. The most effective way of creating a strong sense of efficacy is through mastery
experiences. Successes build a strong belief in one's self- efficacy. Failures threaten it. A
strong sense of efficacy requires experience in mastering difficulty through constant effort.
After people accept they have what is needed to succeed, they keep on in the presence of
trouble and quickly come back from disappointment.
A highly successful language teacher, as pointed out by Gilakjani (2012), should have
personal features like enthusiasm and skills in a range of teaching methods that create a
positive classroom practice
and self-efficacy.
The motivation behind this study is to demonstrate what using audio-journals
speaking self-efficacy.
1.7 Limitations and delimitations
The present study, as mentioned already, was an attempt to explore the effect of using oral
journals speaking self-efficacy. The interpretation of this study
should be subject to the following limitation and delimitation.
First, findings cannot be generalized beyond variables. Then, it was carried out in one
institute in Karaj. Also, the learners who were the participants of this study were at
intermediate level and they were female. They were at the range of thirteen to seventeen.
Additionally, the study was done in twelve sessions, otherwise, the result may have
changed.
Finally, the limitations of this study were some factors such as,
traits, cognitive variables and their learning experience.
Chapter Two: Review of Literature
2.1 Introduction
This chapter is divided into different parts. 1- the definition of speaking, 2- components
underlying speaking effectiveness, 3-significance of speaking, 4- how speaking skills
have been taught, 5- skills and strategies for speaking, 6- approaches to teaching speaking,
7- the goal of speaking, 8- explanation of oral dialogue journal and its theoretical
framework, 9- feedback, 10- speaking development activities, 11- self-efficacy, 12-
speaking self-efficacy.
2.2 What is speaking?
Speaking is defined as an interactive process of making meaning that needs producing,
receiving and processing information. Its form and meaning are influenced by the setting
in which it occurs, the participants, and the purposes of speaking (Burns & Joyce, 1997).
Speaking is the most important part of second language learning. In spite of its importance
it has been principally ignored in teaching and testing. According to Hornby (1995),
speaking is the ability to point outs ideas, feeling and demands verbally. It is the ability to
fulfill the linguistic knowledge in real interaction.
Communicative competence refers to the knowledge of grammar, words and sounds, as
well as social knowledge of when and how to apply statements correctly. Actually, to
interact with others effectively (Hymes, 1971). Oral communication involves verbal
communication as well as non-linguistic and paralinguistic features such as gestures, facial
expressions and intonation. An effective oral communication demands a high level of
familiarity with nonverbal interaction system, so different cultural beliefs influence
interactions. Consequently, these features has made it difficult for foreign language learners
to speak like a native (Shumin, 1997).
Because in teaching there has always been an emphasis on grammar and in testing it has
been difficult to organize either appropriate speaking tests or ways to evaluate (Egan,
1999). The students are considered as competent users of a special language when they can
understand the language they are faced with and respond correctly. So communication in
each language underlines the integration of listening and speaking skills. Teaching these
skills separately can have a negative effect on the communication in the classroom.
by providing the students with
opportunities to practice speaking and make the students able to communicate in real life
(Tavil, 2010).
According to Bygat (1998), speaking involves much effort of the central nervous
system , so it is a complicated mental activity. As Harmer points out, it involves well-
defined parts of planning. It occurs in the situation of limited processing abilities because of
restrictions of memory. So, there is a need for automation in each part of production (2001).
According to Skehan (1998), three aspects of linguistic performance in speaking are
accuracy, fluency and complexity. As Ellis (2003) points out, accuracy is determined by
the extent to which learners produce grammar, vocabulary, discourse and pragmatic
features correctly .
organizational structures (p.104).
speaking competencies in real time without unsuitable hesitations (Segowitz, 2000).
2.3 Components underlying speaking effectiveness
According to Canale and swain (1980), communicative competence includes grammatical
competence, discourse competence, sociolinguistic competence and strategic competence.
Grammatical competence: It is related to the knowledge of words and sentences. So that
the speakers are able to produce the forms accurately and at a reasonable speed related to
their fluency (Shumin, 1997).
Discourse competence: It is related to the rules of cohesion and coherence. To
understand and convey meaning according to previous and next sentences. The ability to
use discourse markers to convey ideas, to show comparison, stress, attention and reason
(Scarcella & Oxford, 1992).
Sociolinguistic competence: According to Shumin (1997), to communicate effectively
the speakers needs to have not only the sufficient knowledge of the language but also the
knowledge of the target language culture and appropriate use of the language. For
example, using speech acts, nonverbal responses and time management .
Strategic competence: He also believes that strategic competence is the most
important element. It is the ability to know how and when to start and end a conversation
and how to deal with the failures during the conversation.
2.4 Significance of speaking
As Rivers (1981) argued, people use speaking much more than reading and writing in
communication. Speaking is the most important factor of communication. It is very
important for teachers to pay attention to the elements and situations that make the
instruction effective with a large amount of authentic language input and speaking practice
activities (Shumin, 1997).
Speaking as a productive skill is closely related to listening (a receptive skill) as two
interconnected ways to carry out communication. Every speaker is at once a listener and
every listener is a speaker (EL Menoufy, 1997; Oprandy, 1994). Speaking has two main
functions: transactional (communicating of information) to convey ideas and interactional
(preservation of social relationships) (Brown & Yule, 1983).
Nunan (1999) and Burkartand Sheppard (2004), argued that success in learning a
language is considered according to the ability to accomplish a conversation in the target
language. Therefore, speaking is a main concern for most learners of English (Florez,
1999).
Teaching speaking is important because it helps students get EFL speaking skills to
communicate with native speakers. Moreover, if instructors use the correct speaking
activities in classes, speaking will motivate learners highly and make the English language
class an active place for learners (Celce-Murcia, 2001; Nunan, 1999).
2.5 How speaking skills have been taught
There have been different ways of teaching speaking skills. One of them is the Grammar-
Translation Method; another one is the Audio-Lingual Method; the third one is
Communicative Language teaching.
2.5.1 The Grammar -Translation Method
According to Richards and Rodgers (1986), in this method the primary focus is on reading
and writing rather than speaking. Grammar rules are taught deductively through translating.
Likewise, the learners are not given the opportunities for speaking about their feelings,
ideas and thoughts. They can speak just around the grammar exercises and when they
translate reading texts (Bailey, 2006).
2.5.2 The Audio-lingual Method
In this method students have to repeat the sentences and memorize the conversations.
Moreover, teachers have to correct Students practice grammatical
rules and sounds through repetition drills. It is believed that good speaking habits are
formed through regular repetition and learners become fluent and automatic. However,
there is no opportunity for learners to express their ideas, thoughts and beliefs. On the other
hand, there is no opportunity for learners to be prepared for voluntary interaction outside
the classroom (Bailey, 2006).
2.5.3 Communicative Language Teaching
Communicative language teaching methods include the activities in which learners have to
use English for interaction. Such as, task-based activities, role plays, pair and group work.
In this method, there is an emphasis on both accuracy and fluency. Accuracy is not given
the primary emphasis. Teachers correct just notable errors. Minor errors are ignored. So
teachers try to help learners convey their meanings and be prepared for interaction outside
the class (Bailey, 2006).
learners discuss meaning through
communication and using different kinds of strategies to get a reciprocal understanding.
This kind of communication promotes language development. According to communicative
competence theory, tasks help learners involve correctly with target situation by doing it
(Dinapoli, 2000; Ellis, 2003; McCarthy & Carter, 2001).
Moreover, Torky (2006), argued that from analysis of the preceding researches
associated to the success of communicative tasks in developing speaking it was concluded
that communicative tasks demonstrate a general increase in students' speaking ability,
linguistic proficiency, pragmatic competence which is related to the students' ability to use
language properly and discourse competence which involves their ability to share meaning
and organize conversation.
Tasks like problem solving tasks, jigsaw and information gap activities can be
organized to allow learners to concentrate on grammatical structures when engaged in
meaningful communication. Most important, in role-play tasks the students do not repeat
the dialogue to memorize it, but they have a real purpose for communication and they play
real roles. These tasks push the learners to speak automatically. The students are also have
sufficient time to correct themselves. They are not corrected by teacher.
2.5.4 The Language Awareness Movement
can use in teaching all the language skills. A focus on adults interaction needs and
purposes makes adult teachers able to put an important attention to form. For example, by
getting information about the ways native speakers talk about their own ideas and feelings
(Bailey, 2006). According to Van Lier (1992), the major feature of teaching influenced by
task-based (based on real life projects) and critical (examining the role of
(p.91).
2.6 Skills and Strategies for speaking
Florez (1999) highlighted the following skills underlying speaking:
To use grammar structures correctly; assess features of the target listener; select
vocabulary that is comprehensible and suitable for the listener, the subject of discussion,
and the context in which the speech act takes place; to use strategies for more
comprehension, such as stressing key words, rewording, or ensuring listener's
understanding ; to concentrate on the success of the communication and to fix elements of
speech like language, pace of speech, and difficulty of form to exploit listener's
understanding.
Speaking strategies as Brown (2001) stated are:
1. Asking for illumination.
2. Demanding someone to say something again.
3. Employing protective materials.
4. Employing discussion continuation signs.
5. Catch interest.
6. Manipulating rewordings for difficult structures.
7. Asking for help from the partner.
8. Applying act out and facial expressions to express ideas.
2.7 Approaches to teaching speaking
Through studying different approaches to teaching EFL speaking, it is proved that two
views are more important: a direct approach and an indirect one. The direct approach
involves "skill getting". It gets the learners to focus on specific and isolated parts of
speaking skills (Ernst, 1994; Littlewood, 1992). Activities like drills, studying of spoken
genres, and activities that make learners form rules inductively, are used in this approach
(Ellis, 1994).
The indirect approach, however, promotes learners' autonomy by having them
concentrate on the constructing functional language. The main focus is on communicative
tasks and sharing of information (Ellis, 2003). By practicing activities such as: discussion,
inf
communications (Bremer & Simonot, 1996).
The association between these two approaches is complicated. The single reliance on
only one of these approaches can affect EFL speaking skills negatively. The indirect
approach helps the learners develop their communicative skills and does nothing for
improving accuracy of production. (Burns & Bygate, 1998; McCarthy & Carter, 2001). So,
the two approaches need to be combined to help learners get effective speaking skills
(Aston, 1997).
In addition, Fotos (1998) and Finch (1999) showed that communicative tasks by
applying communication strategies, let learners experience unplanned interaction. Lee
(1995) and Ellis (2003) argued that tasks improve all three aspects of oral communication
like expression, analysis and negotiation of meaning.
2.7.1 Explicit vs. implicit speaking instruction
In the implicit approach of teaching speaking, learners get communicative competence
skills through practicing language in a communicative way in the classroom. By
establishing real life like situations learners they exchange meaning (Burns, 1998; Celce-
Murcia et al., 1997; Hedge, 2000). On the other hand, in explicit approach learners acquire
speaking skills and strategies through direct instruction (Dornyei & Thurrell, 1994; Hedge,
2000). According to Ellis (2003), Cognitive theorists emphasize on explicit instruction.
Learners are able to monitor themselves and they notice the forms. The most important
strategy is raising consciousness.
Consciousness raising
that cannot be seen in synthetic spoken discourse but in natural inductive ways (Fotos,
1993). There is an emphasis on not only grammatical rules but on the rules control
language use further than the sentence level (conversation rules, communicative
approaches, and pragmatic competency) (Bardovi-Harlig & Mahan-Taylor, 2003; Dornyei
& Thurrell, 1994 ).
There are two ways for getting consciousness raising. One way is to help students
concentrate on features of authentic spoken discourse by themselves (discourse analysis).
Another way is to support them to think about their own spoken action (self-monitoring)
(Jones, 2001).
According to Torky (2006), explicit teaching is proved to have a great role in learners'
d by this instruction are
pragmatic competence, discourse competence and strategic competence (interaction
Explicit instruction does not only foster the learners' understanding of spoken discourse
characteristics, however, it helps them to use these characteristics as well as competencies in
actual speaking activities that even casual everyday conversation can be taught explicitly.
Thus, explicit teaching and consciousness raising activities motivate the students to learn
how to speak (Torky, 2006).
2.8 The goals of speaking.
As stated by (Azizfar etal, 2014) mastering of oral aspects of language implies that students
understand what others say and try to express what they want in a language class. Speaking
skill is essential for each person who wants to learn second or foreign languages. Feelings
of tension and apprehension are usually existed among second or foreign language learners.
Different learners use different strategies when they speak a foreign language. Such
feelings in the learners may hold them back from the ultimate goal. Some speak in public
with no tenses, but some wait for a time to gain necessary knowledge, and some never
speak a foreign language (Azizfar et al., 2014).
Language competence is equal to language use and language acquisition is both
affected by and affects the conditions of its use (Goodwin, 1995). Language learning
ability to use the language for social interactions in real-
purpose for studying a language is to get the ability to use the language in a communicative
way not only to get grammatical competence (Cekaite, 2007; Hall, 1995; Hellermann,
2006; Kanagy, 1999; Kramsch, 1986; Markee, 2000; Young, 1999, 2000, 2002; Young &
Miller, 2004). To be able to speak a language requires not only the ability to process
information and language but also the knowledge of language items (Harmer, 2001).
2.9 Audio-taped journal
A learner's ability to use grammatical structures, make correct sentences, and use these
sentences in an appropriate context is referred to communicative competence (Hymes,
1971). With the advent of communicative language teaching, many techniques have been
employed in English language classes to provide the learners with the opportunity to use
language in a communicative way (Ramazanzade, 2011).
In addition, Hymes (1972), argued that this approach has emphasized on learners'
speaking fluency not only accuracy in real world communication, and focused on using
language for communicative purposes. According to Canale and Swain (1980),
communicative competence is included structural competence, sociolinguistic competence,
and strategic competence. Structural competence is referred to the knowledge of language
rules, meaning, and sounds. They explain that sociolinguistic competence is related to
discourse rules. They mean how to use language rules in a meaningful way in social
interactions. Thus, we can convey our intentions as speakers and interpret the other
-verbal
strategies which are used to make up for interaction failure. These are three important parts
of the language use.
Equally important, according to Ramazanzade (2011), in EFL learning context there is a
lack of communicative
language in a communicative way.
Oral dialogue journals by their interactive nature help the teachers to open a channel
of communication with individual students and can be used for working on accuracy
and fluency. These journals can be used for sharing ideas or asking questions
about how to use the language, to interact and to communicate competently. In fact
dialogue journals give the learners this opportunity to use the language in learning
atmosphere and in the classes of teaching English as a foreign language, which
many students are deprived from (p.165).
Also, Peyton (1993), argued that dialogue journals are conversations between a student
and a teacher during a period of time. He explains that "dialogue journals not only open a
new channel of communication but also provide context for language development" (p.1).
By using dialogue journals, learners can find a time to use language to convey meaning and
they are also corrected without being judged. Furthermore, according to Ramazanzade
(2011), oral dialogue journals can be a technique that provide the learners with the
opportunity of speaking when they have little time to speak in classes. Finally, Wertsch
(1997), believes that social constructivism views the learner single, complicated and as an
inseparable part of the learning route. This individuality and complexity is regarded in
using dialogue journals.
2.9.1 Theoretical Framework
Sutudenama and Ramazanzade (2011) explained that social constructivism theory considers
more energetic and effective roles for students in the classrooms. As Vygotsky (1978)
explained, learning is a group activity and students create their own knowledge.
Moreover, social constructivist theory reveals that learners learn when they establish
new meanings. In using dialogue journals, it is possible for learners to have a more
participatory role in learning and to convey their own meaning. Social constructivism
considers each learner as a single person with exclusive needs and conditions (Sutudenama
& Ramazanzade, 2001).
Likewise, Wertsch (1997), believes that social constructivism views the learner single,
complicated and as an inseparable part of the learning route. This individuality and
complexity is regarded in using dialogue journals.
Equally important, through oral dialogue journals, students freely share their ideas with
the same tape as the response (Sutudenama & Ramazanzade, 2001).
Finally, They also state that the purpose of using this technique is practicing
communication without being concerned about assessment.
2.10 Corrective feedback
Learners should continuously evaluate and compare the language they have been learning
with the target to develop their linguistic knowledge. So they need to pay attention to this
dissimilarity between the two to get the break or the hole. The significance of considering a
form to get it is stated Schmidt, 1990).
According to Havranek (2002), On the other hand, to detect new forms as practicing the
target language contribution for meaning, or to correspond the received information and
Corrective feedback offers solution to cope with the matching trouble. Setting the
learners to distinguish the forms that have not been learnt completely. Unluckily,
adjustments do not always do well in having learners conscious of what is to be found out.
Because regular happening in the input does not guarantee acquisition, corrective feedback
iciency.
Therefore, approaches in relation to corrective feedback differ among students, instructors,
and investigators (Havranek, 2002).
Many learners of second and foreign language consider corrections necessary and tend
to be acceptable repeatedly (Havranek, 2002; Schulz, 2001). On the contrary, lots of
learners view corrections uncomfortable. Most teachers also believe that corrections are
essential; but they commonly are concerned about negative emotional responses that are
possible to cancel out the p ).
According to Lyster and Saito (2010), a large number of SLA studies illustrate that CF
Lyster and Saito (2010) argued about
Lyster and Saito (2010) argued prompts consist of exploitation, signs which are not
related to the language itself, explanation requirements, and rehearsal. While prompts
comprise a series of CF forms, they share one main element in general that separates them
from reinvention shifts: They refuse to give right structures but they offer hints to quick
students to recover these right structures from their current information. Thus, clear
modification offers both unhelpful and constructive support, recasts offer helpful and
encouraging support and perhaps unhelpful support as well, and prompts provide only
unhelpful and discouraging support.
According to Lyster and Saito (2010) Since prompts can contain either implied or clear
CF shifts, Ellis (2006) suggested that separating implied and clear strategies in relation with
implicit and explicit
judgments of CF efficiency in second language environment to only implied and hidden
opposed to precise difference in this manner not only believes the reality of dissimilar
explanations of CF forms that is possible to allow definite juxtapositions of implies with
clear interferences but also misjudges either the academic worth or probability of
differentiating implied and direct CF forms in language situations. investigators have
compared CF forms in relation with directness, but this has demonstrated challenging.
Recasts, are regarded definitely indirect (Long, 1996; Long & Robinson, 1998.
Also, quite a few studies concerning adult students revealed the advantage of corrective
feedback over simple input (Ayoun, 2001; Carroll & Swain, 1993; Carroll, Swain, &
Roberge, 1992; Mackey & Philp,1998). Additionally, the researches explain that corrective
feedback is more possible to terminate in learning as long as the learners are all set to get
the rule in question. Learners in content-based and communicative language classes
illustrate a significant growth in accuracy as long as they are given corrective feedback and
other sorts of guides on structure (Doughty & Varela, 1998; Lightbown & Spada, 1990;
Spada & Lightbown, 1993; Trahey & White, 1993; White, 1991; Williams, 2001; Williams
& Evans, 1998).
Most important, Havranek (2002), argued that not only the learner who did the error
and the classmates can benefit the corrected form well in the assessment as long as the
learner is encouraged to self-correct and is competent to apply it. If the learner is not able to
fix the mistake himself, restatement of the accurate form appears to be beneficial.
Elicitation of self-correction is beneficial as long as the correct structure is repeated after it
be the least frightening kind of correction for the learners. It is undoubtedly the most
ineffective sort of corrective feedback as well.
According to Nagano and Kitao (2008), as in relation to first language acquisition the
function of negative evidence which is correction
investigated so it has been examined in second language acquisition, too. From one side,
those investigators who firmly believe in intrinsic potential for first language acquisition
(FLA) ignore the role of negative evidence in second language acquisition (SLA). Those
investigators argue that only positive evidence, in company with the intrinsic language
acquisition mechanism, can lead to SLA. Alternatively, several SLA investigators suggest
that negative evidence is basic for second language learning. Those investigators state that
implicit evidence such as recasting and modeling
rationally required since L2 learners should recognize what structures are not grammatical
in the intended language.
Moreover, according to Nagano and Kitao (2008), supposing negative evidence is basic,
to teach grammar in an explicit way will be practical and beneficial. On the other hand,
communicative teaching techniques are supposed to be more efficient than the grammar-
based approach assuming a second language can be mastered merely from positive
evidence the same as kids acquire their L1.
Instead, Schwartz (1993) clearly rejected the role of negative evidence in L2
acquisition. Schwartz states that direct L2 teaching with direct corrections (negative
Long (1996), claims that negative evidence is normally promoting L2 acquisition and is
needed for mastering of particular kinds of L2 forms. Long points out parents regularly take
advantages of clarification and corrective recast which are indirect kinds of negative
feedback r than grammatical ones.
Also, Nagano and Kitao (2008), believe that Clarification is a hidden and indirect
demand to say the statement again and recasts
statements by varying some aspects of the sentence with maintaining the similar inner
meaning.
Furthermore, Long claims that although parents do not apply explicit negative feedback
mistakes. He additionally believes that the advantage of implicit negative feedback is to
make specific rules prominent for children/ L2 learners, which guides learners to pay
Hirsch-Pasek, Treiman, and Schneiderman (1984) primarily established no relationship
research by Brown and Hanlon (1970). Another research by Tomasello and Herron (1988)
also suggested advantages of negative feedback on the contrary with explicit lessons about
the exclusions to extensible principles. Tomasello and Herron managed two groups of
college French learners with (1) explicit lessons of target forms and exclusions to the
standard principles and (2) merely common and standard patterns. Tomaesello and Herron
called the last procedure the Garden Path condition. It encourages students to make
mistakes and offers corrective recast instead of direct lessons of forms. They announced the
Garden Path group did better than the explicit rule group, so negative feedback is more
useful than explicit lessons. The Garden Path condition makes the students concentrate on
the principles and identifies exclusions to the common principles.
2.11 Speaking development activities
According to Trent (2009), learners like instructors should be director of classroom
discussions. So that they determine the subject matters. As Graham (2006), believes that
allowing the students to manage classroom procedures
and agency, which may lead p. 27). Trent refers to the role of the
teacher as the modifier to manage this student-centered tendency.
According to Celce-Murcia (2014, pp.112-115), speaking activities are:
1. Discussion and group work
2. Presentations
3. Role plays
4. Conversations
5. Dialogue journals
6. Accuracy based activities
According to Brown (2001, p.283), some interactive skills that can be done in
classroom are :
1. Interviews
2. Guessing games
3. Jigsaw tasks
4. Ranking exercises
5. Discussion
6. Values clarification
7. Problem solving activities
8. Role-play
9. Simulations
In discussion, as Kayi (2006) points out the students in different groups talk about a
given topic. They share their ideas and they practice critical thinking and decision making.
They also practice how to show their disagreement politely.
Role play has attraction for students because it makes the students be inventive and to
situate position (Richard, 2003). Widiastuti (2007) refers to
simulation as an activity which is very similar to role-play but here students are allowed to
take objects to the class to construct a practical setting. Widiastuti also argued the role of
interviews in promoting speaking skills not only in classroom context but also outside the
classroom since learners speak about themselves with another person outside the class. It
also has an important role in socializing the learners.In reporting activities according to
Witiastuti students talk about interesting experiences happened to them in their daily lives.
According to Harmer (2002), a very common speaking activity is a prepared talk
which is a presentation on a topic. These talks are more formal than conversations because
the students prepare themselves and they are not spontaneous.
Nation (1989) also argued one of the most effective technique which aims at
developing fluency is 4/3/2 technique. A learner is given two or three
minutes to think about a given topic. Then he should talk on the topic for four minutes to
his partner and the partner should just listen. After that he should change his partner and
talk on the same topic for three minutes to his new partner. Finally he should change his
partner again and he should talk on that topic for two minutes to his new partner. Nation
points out three important features of this technique. The first point is that fluency is
improved through repetition and in this activity speaker has enough opportunity to repeat
the message he wants to communicate. Another point is that the speaker does not try to
keep the listener interested by adding new materials because his partner will change and at
each time he has a new partner, so he just concentrates on conveying the meaning and the
language itself. The last benefit of this technique is that the speaker becomes automatically
fast and so fluent because the time is given reduces at each step and he tries to be faster.
As he refers using this technique leads to accuracy too. It is shown that there is a
considerable reduction of errors in second and third talks. There are two other techniques
that Nation refers to as beneficial ones in improving speaking ability. They are
Marketplace and Messenger techniques. In Marketplace, there will be two groups of
learners buyers and sellers. The sellers are given some minutes to think about what they are
going to sell. Then they give a talk about it. Buyers listen to them and should decide what
to buy. Each seller gives the same talk several times to all the buyers. In Messenger
techniques, there are three groups of learners. Describers, messengers and makers.
Describers are given a copy or a plan to describe. The messengers should listen to
them carefully and convey the message to the makers to tell them what to do.
2.11.1 Speech technology
According to Egan (1999), using CALL (Computer-Assisted Language Learning)
programs and technology can encourage the learners liveliness and involve them in
different events. Technology helps them improve self-directed actions and makes it
possible for them to control the speed of their interactions. They also feel safe. They are
given appropriate feedbacks on their errors and they are provided with exercises related to
their errors to make sure they do not repeat them again.
According to Nunan (1991), CALL program emphasizes on communicating meaning
instead of form. Egan argued CALL systems that contain ASR (Automated Speech
Recognition) can help increase language abilities. Because learners have the opportunities
to hear a large number of native speakers, they will be able to differentiate sounds and
structures well. They also increase their speaking skills as they need to produce speech.
Egan is not sure whether this progress influences fluency, self-reliance, or practical
conversational skills but she believes that because CALL is creative and communicative,
does not let learners stay silent.
2.12 Self-efficacy
According to Bandura (1994), Perceived self-efficacy is defined as people's ideas about
their strengths to produce selected levels of working. Self-efficacy beliefs decide on the
way people experience, believe, encourage themselves and perform. Such beliefs create
these effects through four main stages. They are cognitive, motivational, emotional and
selection stages.
A well-built sense of efficacy increases human achievement and personal success in
many ways. People who strongly believe in their competence view difficult tasks as
challenges and they are not afraid of performing them. They set themselves special
objectives and are committed to them. They make hard efforts in the face of breakdown.
They rapidly get well their feeling of efficacy after break downs. They believe that failure
is because of inadequate effort or poor knowledge which is achievable. Such an effective
idea causes personal success, decreases anxiety and reduces depression.
According to Pajares (2000), beliefs that students create, generate and keep are very
important factors in their achievement or breakdown in school. So it is concluded that why
-efficacy beliefs.
2.12.1 Gender Differences
The connection between gender and self-efficacy has been concentrated in studies. In
general, researchers state that boys and men are likely to be more positive than girls and
women in educational fields which are linked to mathematics, science, and technology
(Meece, 1991; Pajares & Miller, 1994; Wigfield, Eccles, & Pintrich, 1996), regardless of
the truth that success differences in these fields are largely reducing (Eisenberg, Martin &
Fabes, 1996).
Boys and girls also are likely to agree to a contrary position while reacting to
self-efficacy tools. Researchers have examined that boys are likely to be more self-
admiring in their reactions but girls are more humble (Wigfield et al., 1996).
Some researchers have illustrated that gender differences in group, individuality, and
educational variables may really be a role of gender adoption rather than of gender
(Eisenberg et al., 1996; Hackett, 1985; Harter, Waters, & Whitesell, 1997; Matsui, 1994).
According to Eccles's (1987), cultural beliefs like students' gender role beliefs to some
extent cause differences in lessons and occupation choice and in self-belief ideas and
perceived significance of responsibilities and behaviors.
2.12.2 Self-efficacy and its dimensions
According to Zimmerman (2000) and Bandura (1997) considered people motivation mainly
in name of outcome expectations before he developed self-efficacy as a main factor in
social cognitive theory. Through the therapy of phobic humans, he found individual
differences in their perceived potential to use mastery modeling methods outside the
remedial situation in spite of the fact that all individuals were able to communicate
effectively with the aim of their fear without unpleasant results at the end of the treatment.
However, they established a strong outcome hope that right methods would keep them safe
from unpleasant results. Bandura called this individual distinction self-efficacy. Even if
self-efficacy and outcome expectations were equally assumed to influence motivation, he
considered a greater role for self-
depend largely on their judgments of how well they will be able to perform in given
p.392).
According to Zimmerman (2000), Self-efficacy determines focus on performance
competence instead of individual traits. Subjects evaluate their abilities to accomplish
certain task requirements, rather than who they are individually or what ideas they have
about themselves most of the time. Self-efficacy values are multidimensional in type and
they are different according to the function.
2.12.3 Sources of Self-Efficacy
According to Bandura (1994), the most efficient way of generating a powerful sense of
efficacy is through accomplishment of experiences in an excellent way. Successes establish
a strong belief in one's personal efficacy. Failures weaken it, especially when failures
happen before a feeling of efficacy is strongly formed.
The second way of getting self-beliefs of efficacy is through the indirect practices
offered by social models. When they see people similar to themselves succeed by making
effort, they believe that they also have too much to do similar activities to succeed. By the
same token, observing others' fail despite high effort lowers observers' judgments of their
own efficacy and undermines their efforts. The impact of modeling on perceived self-
efficacy is strongly influenced by perceived similarity to the models.
Moreover, social assurance is a third way that causes people to believe that they have
what they need to be successful. People who are encouraged orally that they have the
qualities which are necessary for controlling given activities, are highly possible to make
greater effort and maintain it than if they feel apprehensive about their personal
imperfection when problems occur. The fourth way of reforming self-beliefs of efficacy is
to decrease people's stress and help them adjust their negative emotional tendency.
Last, the way people interpret their mental and physical responses is very important.
People with high feeling of efficacy view their situation of emotional excitement as a
stimulating mean of performance, but people with a low sense of efficacy see their
excitement as an obstruction.
2.12.4 Achievement goals and self-efficacy
In goal theory which is a new way for understanding the idea of motivation (Midgeley et
-aimed actions that learners do to
. , 1999, 549).
According to (Meece et al., 1988), there are two kinds of different goals, mastery and
performance goals. According to (He, 2004), learners with mastery goals are concerned
with acquiring efficiency and growing their abilities. However, for performance oriented
learners the aim of learning is to indicate their abilities to others and they try to get an
approval from their teachers or parents.
Also, academic self-efficacy works such as a major aspect that adjusts learners to
prefer dissimilar aims. So, self-efficacy appears to be an originator of achievement goal
implementations (Elliot & Church, 1997).
As He (2004) refers, learners with a great self-belief in their talent to complete a
learning task and forming their major aim of their learning to develop self-value tend to
implement a mastery aim. Learners with low confidence in their academic ability tend to
select an avoidance goal. This means that when a task is impossible to be carried out,
learners prefer to move away from their learning in order to stay away from being
considered as unintelligent and unqualified by others. In contrast, when learners with high
academic self-efficacy meet a difficult task try hard to succeed because they tend to prove
their special ability over other people. Through effectively performances they keep their
able-beliefs.
Clearly, as Elliot (1999) refers, when learners accept an approach goal, their actions
actions of
2.12.5 Self-efficacy theoretical framework
Self-efficacy theory derived from social-cognitive learning theory, introduced by Bandura
(1997).The foundation of social cognitive theory is an observation of human activity or
sense of agency in which people are actively occupied in their own progress and can create
things by their effort and movements. It is pointed out individuals possess self-beliefs that
make it possible for them to assess a special control over their ideas, emotions, and
performances that what people believe, consider, and experience influence the way they act
(Bandura, 1986).
According to Bandura (1986), Among all the beliefs that influence individual
performance, and at the heart of social cognitive theory, are self-efficacy beliefs, which are
people's findings of their powers to sort out and accomplish what is needed to get selected
kinds of actions.
Moreover, according to Norman and Conner (1995), in this theory individual behaviors
are determined according to situation-consequence, performance-consequence and noticed
self-efficacy.
Also, situation-consequence anticipations include ideas about which outcomes people
will face without intervening their performance. Performance-consequence is the idea that
for a special action will or will not be a special consequence. Self-efficacy anticipation is a
thought whether a special is controlled by individuals.
she is able to accomplish a special learning task would determine a self-efficacy
anticipation. Context-
performance through their effects on performance-consequence anticipations. Action or
performance-consequence anticipations influence performance through their result on aims
and self-efficacy anticipations. Association of situation-consequence anticipation with
performance-consequence anticipation would form special goals and plans to carry out a
special task. Actions will be successful through decreasing a known venture conducts plans
to do such actions.
Self-efficacy anticipations have an explicit effect on actions and an implicit result on
goals and plans.
individual features (e.g., ideas, views), and contextual circumstances (Bandura, 1986, 1997).
Learners get knowledge to assess their self-efficacy from their real behaviors, their practices,
the influences they get from others, and their mental and emotional feedback. Self-efficacy
ideas affect task preference, attempt, patience, purposefulness, flexibility and accomplishment
(Bandura, 1997; Schunk, 1995).
2.13 Speaking self-efficacy
a positive relationship between
speaking skills achievement and satisfaction with speaking classes and speaking skills self-
efficacy beliefs. Speaking self-efficacy belief is a stronger predicator of Iranian EFL
(p.353).
As Asakereh and Dehghannejad (2015) argued, learners with higher speaking skills
self-efficacy tend to perform better in speaking skills. Moreover, the extent of effort,
insistence and flexibility are organized on the basis of self-efficacy beliefs. And self
efficacy-beliefs can chan
Learners with high self-efficacy tend to be more confident and are more positive to
accomplish speaking activities with special complexity levels. Those with a high self-
efficacy belief tend to do complex assignments, whereas those with low self-efficacy may
consider tasks more difficult than they actually are. This kind of belief may cause a feeling
of anxiety and hopelessness (Pajares, 1996).
Also, there are a lot of studies that examined relati -
efficacy and their language skills proficiency. Some studies (Kargar & Zamanian, 2014;
Naseri & Zaferanieh, 2012; Shang, 2011) discovered a positive relationship between self-
efficacy beliefs and reading comprehension skills success.
Chen (2007) studied the relationship between self-efficacy and EFL listening success.
-
s (2009) argued that
listening comprehension self-efficacy remarkably relates to listening ability. Hosseini,
Fatemi and Vahidnia (2013), for example, illustrated a considerable association between
-efficacy beliefs.
According to Liu (2013), a lot of studies suggested that the use of strategies is largely
associated to self-efficacy ideas. Magogwe and Oliver (2007) illustrated that there was a
eir self-efficacy feelings.
-efficacy
feelings. Wang and Li (2010) argued that readers with advanced levels of self-efficacy
applied more reading strategies than readers who had little self-efficacy.
Liu (2013) found that whereas many investigations have been carried out on self-
efficacy in association with writing, reading and listening skills, investigation on self-
efficacy of speaking capability in foreign language learning has been ignored.
Moreover, he also
speaking self-efficacy. He argued that that students who often speak English at t ,
tend to have a high level of self-efficacy in comparison to their classmates who hardly ever
. Liu considere . First, students were
allowed to choose either their co-workers or subjects to decrease their stress. Second,
students without an appropriate level of proficiency in speaking skills were motivated by
the overseas instructors and their co-workers. Thir self-efficacy was developed
who were proficient speakers. At the end, students try
harder as they found out that they were making development to talk about themselves in
English. According to Asakereh and Dehghannezhad (2015), few studies have investigated
the relationship between self-efficacy beliefs and speaking proficiency.
In addition, Saeidi and Ebrahimi Farshchi (2012) found out, communication strategies
help the learners become more positive about their capabilities to handle circumstances
which are fearful to them because of their language imperfections. Teachers are able to
guide the students to promote an idea that they have enough ability to become successful in
their speaking objectives regardless of their language weakness through teaching
communication strategies. hing communicative strategies in content-based courses is
an innovative idea to get the student familiar with the strategies that help them overcome
(p.231).
To conclude, as the above mentioned studies showed using audio-journals has positive
the
effect of self-efficacy beliefs in writing, reading and listening proficiency. Few studies
investigated self-efficacy beliefs in speaking. Therefore, the present study aims to explore
the effect of using audio- -efficacy.
Chapter 3: Method
3.1 Introduction
The aim of this chapter is to report the methodology of this research in order to
answer the research question and to test the hypothesis proposed. The aim of this
study is to examine the effect of using audio journals on Iranian EFL learners
speaking self-efficacy. This chapter gives the description of the participants and
presents a brief justification for the design of the research. Moreover, it consists of
an explanation of the instruments, the elicitation procedures used for gathering data
and data analysis.
3.2 Participants
This study was conducted with 53 female language learners at intermediate level of
proficiency who studied English in Simin language institute in Karaj. They ranged
from 13 to 17 in terms of age. The treatment took over 12 sessions. The experimental
group consisted of 26 learners and the control group consisted of 27 learners. Both
groups were instructed by the same teacher.
3.3 Materials and instruments
The instructional material was a four-level course written specifically for
secondary school students and the main course book at intermediate level, which is
introduced by the institute and is obligatory to be taught there. Each level contains
eight units in two books. The instruction is also followed by some other activities in
relation to the grammar and vocabulary parts of the course book. The students are
supposed to be taught two units each term that takes about two months and fifteen
sessions. All the learners in both groups were studying the same level book (level 3).
Moreover, every session one subject was introduced to the students of the
experimental group to record their ideas about for 5 to 10 minutes, using a CD, USB
flash drive and their mobile phones. The subjects were all related to their everyday
life and interest such as their future goals, their parents, their friends and schools,
their ideas about education, job and money, the country they like to live in and so on.
Another instrument the researcher made use of was Speaking Self-efficacy (SSE)
Scale. The questionnaire was adopted from Rahimi and Abedini (2009),
Dehghannezhad and Asakereh (2015), Gahangu (2007) and Wang et al (2013). It
comprised 27 items, based on a Likert scale ranging from strongly disagree to
strongly agree, and the score given to each question ranged from zero for the first
option to four for the last option. The sample of questionnaire is given in Appendix
A.
3.4 Procedure
To achieve the purpose of the study, the following procedures were followed.
At first session, the speaking self-efficacy questionnaire administered to both groups.
After 12 sessions of treatment which was using the oral journals techniques on
experimental group, the questionnaire was administered to both groups to see
whether treatment has been effective or not. The students were reminded to speak
extemporaneously. Further, they received individual feedback on pronunciation or
grammar problems for each subject they talked about every session. Before
distributing the questionnaire to the participants, they were informed that their
personal information would remain strictly confidential and would be used only for
research purposes. The information on how to complete the questionnaires was
further explained to the participants. No time limit was specified. The name of
participants were requested in order to match with their scores that were obtained
later.
3.5 Data analysis
After administering the questionnaire and gathering the data, in order to answer the
research question, ANCOVA procedures were run to measure the differences
between the control and experimental group on the basis of their speaking self-
efficacy.
Chapter 4: Results and Discussions
4.1 Restatement of the problem
This study considers the effect of using audio-journals on the improvement of Iranian EFL
-efficacy. This chapter presents the quantitative results of the
performances on the pre-test and post-test of both control and experimental
groups. The results are presented in tables.
4.2 Results
The question attempted to investigate the effect of using audio-journals on the improvement
king self-efficacy. Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) used to
compare the post-test scores of the control and experimental groups, using the pre-tests of the
two groups as the covariate variable. The results of the ANCOVA procedure are given in Table
1.
Table 1.
Descriptive Statistics for the ANCOVA on Speaking Self-efficacy Posttest
group Mean Std. Deviation N
experimental 85.5000 11.59051 26
comparison 81.0000 11.68497 27
Total 83.2075 11.74793 53
As Table 1 indicates, the mean and standard deviation of the comparison group is 81.00 and
11.68, respectively, and the mean and standard deviation of the experimental group is
85.500 and 11.59, respectively, on the post-test To see whether or not the difference between
the means is statistically significant, Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) was run. The
results are shown in Table 2.
Table 2.
Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) Comparing Post-test Scores Across Groups
Source Type quares df Mean Square F Sig. Partial Eta
Squared
Corrected model 4150.858 2 2075.429 34.295 .000 .578
Intercept 660.127 1 660.127 10.908 .002 .179
Pretest 3882.641 1 3882.641 64.158 .000 .562
Group 216.281 1 216.281 3.574 .064 .067
Error 3025.859 50 60.517
Total 374122.000 53
Corrected Total 7176.717 52
a. R Squared= .578 (Adjusted R Squared= .562
As the result of ANCOVA in Table 2 indicates, F= 3.57, P
difference in speaking self-efficacy on the post-test. So the null hypothesis that is using
audio-journals does not -
In other words, using audio- -efficacy
in speaking.
Moreover, on the basis of Table 2, speaking self-efficacy showed a significant difference
in favor of the experimental group on the pre-test. Considering the results of the post-test,
this means that speaking self-efficacy has increased more in the comparison group than in the
experimental one.
4.3 Discussion
The present study attempted to investigate the effect of using audio-journals on the
-efficacy. The results indicated no
significance difference in speaking self-efficacy difference between the comparison and
experimental groups on the post-test, suggesting that using audio-journals cannot improve
-efficacy.
The finding of this study goes against Ramazanzade (2011) belief that audio-journals
with their interactive essence can provide the learners with the opportunity to communicate
competently. In fact the result of this study is in contradiction with what Sutudenama and
Ramazanzade (2011), McGrath (1992), Peyton (1993), Henry (1996), Brown (2000), and Ho
(2003) have reported about the advantages of oral dialogue journals for language
improvement.
Furthermore, the finding of this study is not compatible with Peyton and Reed (1990),
who emphasized that audio-journals can provide the students who are afraid of speaking in
class with the chance of talking in order to raise their self-assurance. They also stated audio-
journals can decrease apprehension of speaking.
Moreover, this study is incompatible with that of Brown (2000), who emphasized that
through oral dialogue journal, the students can indicate themselves verbally, can communicate
their real worries and thoughts, and can generate speaking. Oral dialogue journals offer the
students the opportunity to have individual conversation. Accordingly, the students become more
sensitive of their voices in the foreign language. Henry (1996) also confirmed that through oral
dialogue journals, learners practice speaking in their privacy. He further states that students
through dialogue journals concentrate on "pronunciation, communicating personal needs,
introducing elements of their personal lives, overcoming oral communication problems,
grammar, vocabulary, and self-evaluation"(p.15).
On the other hand, the result of this study supports that of Siyli (2012), who states that
learners were very agitated and worried while recording their voices. They were unable to
act calmly while recording their voices. They also had irregular pauses because they
They were also worried to listen to their
own voices. (2008) findings which
claim that there is a significant relationship between recorded mastery experiences
and their self-efficacy.
This study also contradicts what Warren (2011), who reported speaking students obtain
mastery experiences in their speaking classes when they present speeches. When students do
well at presenting a talk in class, their self-efficacy for speaking will grow. On the other hand,
according to Warren, even when people do not succeed, self-efficacy can be improved if their
self-efficacy seems pretty resilient, and they until they make it. They recognize
that they can succeed if they try more on the task. But, in the present study their self-efficacy
could not be improved when they found themselves not successful in speaking.
This study does not support Bandura (1997) belief that people who get encouragement
that they own the ability to overcome given assignments seem to organize more attempt and
continue it than if they live with personal imperfections and shortcomings when problems
come up. According to Warren (2011), social persuasion , which leads to self-efficacy
growth, comes in the form of feedback from instructors. In this study, however, such
persuation does not -efficacy.
audio dialog journals,
with their encouraging essence, could help learners improve their proficiency in speaking.
According to Siyli, the personal observation learners achieve in this task helps raise their
self-assurance, since it is completely a student lead and first step. They can also take
complete role for recognizing and directing their aims.
Additionally, the finding of this study contradicts Liu (2013) findings which
emphasize -efficacy. He considers
some factors at this Bar -efficacy. Although some
of these factors were similar to the conditions of this study, in this study they did not
contribute to self-efficacy in speaking. One of them is that the topics that the students had to
talk about were relevant to the stud iences and interests. So, they were encouraged
to talk. Another similar factor is that they were not afraid of being judged, and they were not
going to get any scores on their performance; so they could speak comfortably, and they
were relaxed. The other advantage of the English Bar was that the students were making
more effort at each session as they realized they were able enough to speak. Although these
factors are the same as the conditions of using audio-journals but here, in this study they did
not contribute to speaking self-efficacy that much.
A number of factors may have contributed to the findings of the present study. First, the
participants of this study were all female and they may have been less willing to make use of
technology and they may have preferred traditional ways of teaching and learning, as
educational system in Iran is traditional and learners are not familiar with new techniques.
Moreover, girls are more nervous than boys and they are also afraid of making
mistakes and being judged. Furthermore, they received an oral feedback after their speech
and most people are less willing to get such feedback, so it was possible that such kind of
feedback affected them negatively. Finally, learners have been asked to do this task for just
twelve sessions. The period of time may have been too short for them to benefit the positive
aspects of using audio-journals. The above mentioned conflicting areas are indicative of the
need for further research.
Chapter Five: Conclusions and Implications
5.1 Introduction
In this section, the findings of the study are summarized. After a brief summary, some
pedagogical implications, limitations and delimitations of the study and suggestions for
further research are provided.
5.2 Summary of the findings
The present study aimed at investigating the effect of using audio-journals on Iranian EFL
-efficacy. In this regard, the results of ANCOVA procedures
indicated that there was no significant difference in speaking self-efficacy between the
comparison and the experimental groups on the post-test, suggesting that using audio-
journals cannot -efficacy.
It is concluded that using audio-journals does not
self-efficacy in speaking. Moreover, speaking self-efficacy showed a significant difference
in favor of experimental group on the pre-test. Considering the results of the post-test, it
may be concluded that speaking self-efficacy has increased more in the comparison group
than in the experimental one.
5.3 Conclusion
The present study aimed at investigating the effect of using audio-journals on Iranian EFL
-efficacy. Based on data collected over a six-week period from 53
participants and using ANCOVA procedures, it was indicated that there was no significant
difference in speaking self-efficacy between the comparison and the experimental groups
on the post-test, suggesting that using audio-
self-efficacy.
According to the result of ANCOVA, (F= 3.57, P> .05), it may be concluded that
using audio- -efficacy in speaking.
Moreover, speaking self-efficacy showed a significant difference in favor of experimental
group on the pre-test. Considering the results of the post-test, it may be concluded that
speaking self-efficacy has increased more in the comparison group than in the
experimental one.
From an educational perspective, one major task tha
and accuracy is the oral dialogue journal. The teacher recommends a topic and a time
constraint for the audio. The learners provide an audio to the teacher, using a sound file, a
CD or audio taped, or other voice-based technology gadgets. At the end, the teacher
provides an audio response. Moreover, the students can exchange journals and provide
because the purpose of task is to work on spontaneous speaking. Student voices are the best
document for the teacher to present individual feedback about their phonological and
grammatical problems.
By using dialogue journals, it is claimed that learners can find a time to use language to
convey meaning and they are also corrected without being judged. Additionally, oral
dialogue journals can be a technique that provides the learners with the opportunity of
speaking when they have little time to speak in classes. Moreover, social constructivism
views the learner single, complicated and as an inseparable part of the learning route. This
individuality and complexity is regarded in using dialogue journals. Audio-journals can
provide the students who are afraid of speaking in class with the chance of talking in order
to raise their self-assurance. It is also stated audio-journals can decrease apprehension of
speaking.
The finding of this study goes against previous claims about the advantages of using
audio-journals. Despite those significant advantages, in this study, audio-journals failed to
help students to achieve good results. Such failure may be due to the fact that most learners
may be less willing to make use of technology and they may prefer traditional ways of
teaching and learning, as educational system in Iran is traditional and learners are not
familiar with new techniques.
Therefore, learners may have been very agitated and worried while recording their
voices. They may have been unable to act calmly while recording their voices. They also
had irregular pauses because they could not find right words to convey their meanings.
They were also worried to listen to their own voices.
There may also have been other possible factors to the findings of the present study.
First, the participants of this study were all female and they may have been less familiar to
technology.
Moreover, girls may be more nervous than boys and they are also afraid of making
mistakes and being judged. Furthermore, they received an oral feedback after their speech
and most people are less willing to get such feedback, so it was possible that such kind of
feedback affected them negatively. Finally, learners have been asked to do this task for just
twelve sessions. The period of time may have been too short for them to benefit the positive
aspects of using audio-journals. So, it is concluded that using audio journals as a modern
technique, should not completely take the place of pretty traditional techniques like lectures
and presentations.
5.4 Implications of the study
The findings of the present study may have implications for teachers, learners and materials
designers. First, it may be more rewarding not to put aside traditional ways of teaching and
to replace them with modern techniques completely. Most Iranian learners typically prefer
traditional techniques in educational contexts. They feel worried to make use of modern
means and unfamiliar techniques to do their classroom tasks. So, teachers can take
advantage of both modern and traditional techniques. Teachers can make students aware of
the purpose of using a special technique and assure the students that they will not be
evaluated and scored according to this special technique. Teachers need to realize that using
audio journals should not take the place of lectures and presentations. Secondly, direct oral
feedback that learners receive from teachers in using audio-journals may affect the
may think they are not good enough and they may lose
their confidence. Teachers can provide the students with indirect feedback.
The present study can have some implications for students in that instead of the
traditional ways of doing their tasks they can also make use of technology and not to feel
defensive about modern techniques. Students should be willing to make use of new
techniques that they have never used. They should be aware of the advantages of using new
techniques and know that practice makes perfect. Additionally, they should be aware that
teachers are to help them improve and they are not their enemies. Moreover, they had better
focus on the process of doing a task and not feel worried about the result.
This study can also have some implications for syllabus designers. They should not
insist on abandoning traditional ways of teaching and educational techniques. They need to
consider the negative feelings of learners about unknown and completely new techniques.
They can -
beliefs and feelings.
5.5 Limitations and Delimitations of the Study
The present study has the following limitations and delimitations. One delimitation of this
study was that it was carried out only with intermediate level students. Accordingly,
learners at other proficiency levels were not considered in this study. Gender was not a
variable in this study, and all of the participants were females. So, another limitation is the
possible differences between the performance of male and female participants. Further, this
study was done in EFL context. Consequently, the results must be carefully interpreted.
The length of this study was another limitation. This study lasted for twelve sessions.
Another limitation of this study was that only 53learners participated in the present study; a
larger number of participants may enhance the generalizability of the findings of this study.
In addition, the effect of other variables like cultural and social factors, which may
influence the findings, were not considered in this study.
5.6 Suggestion for Further Research
For those who are interested in carrying out research in the area of speaking, the following
suggestions are made. This study investigated the effectiveness of the using audio-journals
on intermediate level EFL learners' speaking self-efficacy. It seems very valuable to carry
out the same research at other proficiency levels.
Moreover, the age and gender of the participants were not considered as variables, so
further research can take these variables into consideration. Furthermore, the sample size
in the present study was small. So, this research can be replicated with a larger sample.
Additionally, this study investigated the impact of using audio-
speaking self- efficacy. So investigating the impact of using audio-journals on other traits
like self-concept, self-assessment, self-management, self-regulation and self-esteem in
speaking can be other areas for research.
References
Asakereh A., & Dehghannezhad M. (2015). Student satisfaction with EFL speaking
classes: Relating speaking self-efficacy and skills achievement. Issues in
Educational Research, 25(4), 345-363.
Aston, G. (1995). Corpora in language pedagogy: matching theory and practice in G.
Cook and B. Seidlhofer (Eds.): Principle and Practice in Applied Linguistics
(pp.257-270). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Avoseh, M. B. (2005). The power of voice: Analysis of dialogue as a method in both
elementary and adult education. International Journal of Case Method Research
&
Application, 17(3), 1554-7752.
Ayoun, D. (2001). The role of negative and positive feedback in the second language
acquisition of the passé composé and imparfait. The Modern Language Journal,
85(2), 226-243.
Azizifar A., Fariadian E., & Gowhary H. (2014).The Effect of anxiety on Iranian EFL
learners speaking skill. International Research Journal of Applied and Basic
Sciences, 8(10), 1747-1754.
Bailey, K. M., & Savage, L. (1994). New Ways in Teaching Speaking. New Ways in
TESOL Series: Innovative Classroom Techniques. Alexandria: John Benjamins.
Bailey, K. M. (2006). Issues in teaching speaking skills to adult ESOL learners. Review of
adult learning and literacy, 6, 113-164. Mahwah, New Jersey: Taylor & Francis.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy. In, VS Ramachaudran (Ed.) Encyclopedia of human
behavior (pp.71-81). New York: Academic Press.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.
Bardovi-Harlig, K., & Mahan-Taylor, R. (2003). Teaching pragmatics.
Washinton DC: United States Department of State.
Bremer, K., & Simonot, M. (1996). Preventing problems of understanding.
Achieving understanding: Discourse in intercultural encounters (pp.159-180).
London: Longman.
Bremer, K. et al. (1996). Achieving Understanding: Discourse in intercultural
Encounters. London: Longman.
Brown, R. & Hanlon, C. (1970). Derivational complexity and order of acquisition in child
speech. In J. Hayes (Ed.), Cognition and the Development of Language (pp.11
54),
New York, NY: Wiley.
Brown, G., & Yule, G. (1983). Teaching the spoken language. Cambridge University
Press.
Burkart, G. S., Sheppard, K., & No, C. E. G. (1994). Content-ESL Across the USA: A
Training Packet.
Burns, A. (1998). Teaching Speaking. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 18(3), 102-
123.
Burns, A., & Joyce, H. (1997). Focus on Speaking. Sydney, Australia: National Centre
for English Language Teaching and Research.
Bygate, M. (1998).Theoretical perspectives on speaking. Annual Review of Applied
Linguistics, 18, 20-42.
Canale, M. (1984). A communicative approach to language proficiency assessment in a
minority setting. Centre de recherches en éducationfranco-ontarienne,
Institutd'étudespédagogiques de l'Ontario= The Ontario Institute for Studies in
Education.
Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to
second language teaching and testing. Applied linguistics, 1(1), 1-47.
Carroll, S., & Swain, M. (1993). Explicit and implicit negative feedback. Studies in
second language acquisition, 15(03), 357-386.
Carroll, S., Swain, M., & Roberge, Y. (1992). The role of feedback in adult second
language acquisition: Error correction and morphological generalizations. Applied
Psycholinguistics, 13(2), 173-198.
Cekaite, A. (2007). A child's development of interactional competence in a Swedish L2
classroom. The Modern Language Journal, 91(1), 45-62.
Celce-Murcia, M. (2001). Language teaching approaches: An overview. Teaching English
as a second or foreign language, 2, 3-10.
Celce-Murcia, M.; Dornyei, Z. and Thurrel, S. (1997). Direct Approaches in L2
Instruction: A Turning Point in Communicative Language Teaching?.
TESOLQuarterly, 31(1), 141-152.
Celce-Murcia, M., and McIntosh, L. (1991). Teaching English as a second or foreign
language (p. 244). Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.
Chen, H. Y. (2007). The relationship between EFL learners' self-efficacy beliefs and
English performance. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. The Florida State
University, Florida, USA. Retrieved from
http://diginole.lib.fsu.edu/etd/3846
Cheng, Y. S., Horwitz, E. K., and Schallert, D. L. (1999). Language anxiety:
Differentiating writing and speaking components. Language learning, 49(3), 417-
446.
Chularut, P., & Debacker, T. K. (2004).The influence of concept mapping on
achievement, self-regulation, and self-efficacy in students of English as a second
language. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29(3), 248-263.
Dinapoli, R. (2000, September). Promoting Discourse with Task-Based Scenario
Interaction. Paper presented at the International Conference on Language
for Specific Purposes, Barcelona, Spain.
Dornyei, Z. & Thurrell, S . (1994). Teaching Conversation Skills Intensively: Course
Content and Rational. ELT Journal, 48(1), 40- 49.
Dorshomal, N., Gorjian, B., &Pazhakh, A. the role of pedagogical films in developing
Iranian pre-intermediate EFL
International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistic World, 4(4),
254-268..
Doughty, C., & Varela, E. (1998). Communicative focus on form. In C. Doughty,
& J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in second language acquisition (pp.
114 138). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
Eccles, J. S. (1987). Gender roles and women's achievement-related decisions. Psychology
of women quarterly, 11(2), 135-172.
Egan, K. (1999). Speaking: A Critical Skill and a Challenge. CALLICO journal, 16(3),
277-293.
Eisenberg, N., Martin, C. L., & Fabes, R. A. (1996). Gender development and gender
effects. In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational
psychology (pp. 358-396). New York: Macmillan.
El-
Foreign Cultural Issues in the Classroom.
Elliot, A. J. (1999). Approach and avoidance motivation and achievement goals.
Educational Psychologist, 34(3), 169-189.
Elliot, A. J., & Church, M. A. (1997). A hierarchical model of approach and
avoidance achievement motivation. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 72(1), 218-232.
Elliot, A. J., McGregor, H. A., & Gable, S. (1999). Achievement goals, study
strategies, and exam performance: A mediational analysis. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 91(3), 549-563.
El Menoufy, A. (1997). Speaking.The Neglected Skill.In New Directions in
Speaking.Proceedings of the Fourth EFL Skills Conference, Cairo, Egypt.
Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition.Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching.Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R., & Sheen, Y. (2006). Reexamining the role of recasts in second language
acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(4), 575-600.
Ernst, G. (1994). Talking circle: Conversation and negotiation in the ESL
classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 28(2), 293-322.
Farahian, M., Branch, K., & Rajabi, S. (2014). The Impact of Self-Assessment on Self-
Regulation and Critical Thinking of EFL Learners.
Finch, A. (1999, October).The task-based classroom in practice. Paper presented at The
Second Pan Asian Conference, Seoul, Korea.
Florez, M. A. C. (1999). Improving Adult English Language Learners. Speaking Skills.
Fotos, S. (1993). Consciousness Raising and Noticing Through Focus on Form:
Grammar
Task Performance versus Formal Instruction. Applied Linguistics,14(4), 385-407.
Fotos, S. (1998). Shifting the focus from forms to form in the EFL classroom. ELT
Journal, 52(4), 301-307.
Gilakjani, A. P., Leong, L. M., and Sabouri, N. B. (2012). A study on the role of
motivation in foreign language learning and teaching. International Journal of
Modern Education and Computer Science (IJMECS), 4(7), 9.
Goodwin, C. (1995). Seeing in depth. Social studies of science, 25(2), 237-274.
. Essential
Teacher, 3(3), 26-29.
Graham, S., and Weiner, B. (1996).Theories and principles of motivation. DC Berliner,
RC Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 63-84). New York:
Simon & Schuster.
Greeno, J. G. (1997). On claims that answer the wrong questions. Educational
researcher, 26(1), 5-17.
Hackett, G. (1985). Role of mathematics self-efficacy in the choice of math-related
majors of college women and men: A path analysis. Journal of counseling
psychology, 32(1), 47.
Harmer, J. (1991).The practice of English language teaching. London/New York.
Harmer, J. (2002). The practice of English Language Teaching. England: Longman.
Harter, S., Waters, P. L., & Whitesell, N. R. (1997). Lack of voice as a manifestation of
false self-behavior among adolescents: The school setting as a stage upon which the
drama of authenticity is enacted. Educational Psychologist, 32(3), 153-173.
Havranek, G. (2002). When is corrective feedback most likely to succeed?.
International Journal of Educational Research, 37(3), 255-270.
Kayi, H. (2006). Teaching Speaking: Activities to Promote Speaking in a Second
Language. The Internet TESL Journal, 12(11), 2.
He, T. (2004). The Relations Among Trichotomous Achievement Goals, Self-Efficacy,
and Self-Regulation in EFL Sixth-Grade Classes in Taiwan. Journal of National
Taipei Teachers College,17(1), 111-134
Hedge, T. (2000). Teaching and Learning in the Language Classroom. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Hekmat, M. (2014).Sociological characteristics and their effect on developing the
entrepreneurship of production cooperatives managers. Indian Journal of
Fundamental and Applied Life Sciences, 4(S3), 1537-1547.
Hellermann, J. (2006). Classroom interactive practices for developing L2 literacy: A
microethnographic study of two beginning adult learners of English. Applied
Linguistics, 27(3), 377-404.
Henry, L. M. (1994). Oral Dialog Journals: A Learner-Centered Approach (
thesis).
Hirsh-Pasek, K., Treiman, R., & Schneiderman, M. (1984). Brown & Hanlon revisited:
Mothers' sensitivity to ungrammatical forms. Journal of child language,
11(01), 81- 88.
Ho, Y. K. (2003). Audio-taped dialogue journals: An alternative form of speaking
practice. ELT Journal, 57(3), 269-277.
Hornby, A.S. (1995).
(p.826). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hosseini Fatemi, A. & Vahidnia, F. (2013).
level of writing self-efficacy. Theory and Practice in Language Studies,3(9),1698-
1704.
Hymes, D. (1971). Sociolinguistics and the ethnography of speaking. Social anthropology
and language (pp. 47-93). London : Rutledge.
Hymes, D. (1972). Reinventing Anthropology. New York: Pantheon.
Jones, R. ( 2001). A Consciousness- Raising Approach to the Teaching of
Conversational Storytelling Skills. ELT Journal, 55(2), 155-169.
Kanagy, C. L., & Kraybill, D. B. (1999). The riddles of human society. London: Sage.
Kargar, M. & Zamanian, M. (2014). The relationship between self-efficacy and reading
comprehension strategies used by Iranian male and female EFL learners.
International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World 7(2),
313-325.
Keller, J. M. (1999). Motivation in Cyber Learning Environments. International Journal
of Educational Technology, 1(1), 7-30.
Lee, J. F. (1995). Using Task-Based Activities to Restructure Class Discussion. Foreign
Language Annals, 28(3), 437-446.
Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language
acquisition. In W. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of language
acquisition: Second language acquisition (pp. 413 468). San Diego,
CA: Academic Press.
Long, M. H., & Robinson, P. (1998). Focus on form: Theory, research, and practice. In C.
J. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language
acquisition (pp. 15 41). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (1990). Focus-on-form and corrective feedback in
communicative language teaching. Studies in second language acquisition,
12(4), 429-448.
Littlewood, W. T. (1992). Teaching oral communications: a methodological framework.
Oxford: Blackwell.
Liu, M. (2013). English Bar as a venue to boost students' speaking self-efficacy at the
tertiary level. English Language Teaching, 6(12), 27-38.
Lorsbach, A., & Jinks, J. (1999). Self-efficacy theory and learning environment
research. Learning environments research, 2(2), 157-167.
Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake. Studies in second
language acquisition, 19(1), 37-66.
Lyster, R., & Saito, K. (2010). Oral feedback in classroom SLA. Studies in Second
Language Acquisition, 32(02), 265-302.
Mackey, A., & Philp, J. (1998). Conversational interaction and second language
development: Recasts, responses, and red herrings?. The Modern Language
Journal,
82(3), 338-356.
Magogwe, J. M., & Oliver, R. (2007). The relationship between language learning
strategies, proficiency, age and self-efficacy beliefs: A study of language learners in
Botswana. System, 35(3), 338-352.
Marefat, F. &Moladoust, E. (2011). Audiotaped oral dialogue journal and vocabulary
acquisition and retention. Paper presented at International Conference on
Languages, Literature and Linguistics, Singapore.
Matsui, T. (1994). Mechanisms underlying sex differences in career self-efficacy
expectations of university students. Journal of vocational behavior, 45(2), 177-184.
McGrath, M. M. (1992). Writing before Speaking: How the Dialogue Journal Stimulates
Conversation thesis). Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED347830.
McCarthy, M., and Carter, R. (2001).Designing the discourse syllabus.Innovation in
English Language Teaching (pp.55-63). London: Routledge.
Maehr & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement (pp. 261-285).
Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Meece, J. L., & Holt, K. (1993). A pattern analysis
Journal of Educational Psychology, 85 (4), 582-590.
Middleton, M. J., & Midgley, C. (1997). Avoiding the demonstration of lack of
ability: An underexplored aspect of goal theory. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 89 (4), 710- 718.
Midgley, C., Kaplan, A., Middleton, M., Maehr, M. L., Urdan, T., Anderman, L. H., ..&
Roeser, R. (1998). The development and validation of scales assessing students'
achievement goal orientations. Contemporary educational psychology, 23(2), 113-
131.
Nagano, T., & Kitao, K. (2008). The necessity of negative feedback for learning L2
collocations. Journal of Culture and Information Science, 3(1), 1-13.
Naseri, M. & Zaferanieh, E. (2012). The relationship between reading self-efficacy
beliefs, reading strategy use and reading comprehension level of Iranian EFL
learners. World Journal of Education, 2(2), 64-75.
Nation, P. (1989). Improving speaking fluency. System, 17(3), 377-384.
Norman, P. and Conner, M. (1995). The role of social cognition models in predicting health behaviours: future directions. In M.Conner and P.Norman (Eds), PREDICTING HEALTH BEHAVIOUR:
(pp.197-225). Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
Nicholas, H., Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (2001). Recasts as feedback to language learners. Language learning, 51(4), 719-758.
Nunan, D. (1989). Designing tasks for the communicative classroom. Cambridge
University Press: Cambridge.
Nunan, D. (1991). Language teaching methodology. New York: Prentice Hall
International
Nunan, D. (1999). Second Language Teaching & Learning. Boston, USA: Heinle &
Heinle.
Nunan, D. (2006). Task-based language teaching. The Asian EFL Journal Quarterly, 3(8),
12-18.
Oprandy, R. (1994). Listening/speaking in second and foreign language teaching.
System, 22(2), 153-175.
Pajares, F. (1996). Self efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of Educational Research, 66(4), 543-578.
Pajares, F. (2000). Self-efficacy beliefs and current directions in self-efficacy research.
http://www.emory.edu/EDUCATION/mfp/effpage.html.
Pajares, F., & Miller, M. D. (1994). Role of self-efficacy and self-concept beliefs in
mathematical problem solving: A path analysis. Journal of educational
psychology, 86(2), 193-203.
Peyton, J. K. (1993). Dialogue Journals: Interactive Writing to Develop Language and
Literacy. ERIC Digest: 1-7.
Peyton, J.K. (1988). Dialogue writing Bridge from talk to essay. In J. Staton, R.W.
Shuy, J.K. Peyton, & L.Reed (Eds.). Dialogue journal communication: Classroom,
linguistic, social, and cognitive views (pp. 88-106). Norwood, NJ: Ablex
Peyton, J. K., & Reed, L. (1990). Dialogue Journal Writing with Nonnative English
Speakers. A Handbook for Teachers and An Instructional Packet for Teachers and
Workshop Leaders. TESOL, Alexandria, VA 22314.
Pintrich, P. R. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. Handbook of
self-regulated (pp. 451-502). San Diego, CA, US: Academic Press.
-efficacy
concerning listening comprehension and listening proficiency. NOVITAS ROYAL,
3(1) 14-28.
Ramazanzadeh, A. (2011). The Effect of Oral Dialogue Journals on Iranian EFL
Learners' Communicative Competence Journal of English Language
Teaching and Learning, 2(222), 161-182.
Richard, A., & Patricia, A. ( 2003). Making It Happen, Third Edition. United States:
Pearson Education.
Richards, J.C., & Rodgers. T. (1986). Approaches and methods in language teaching: A
descriptive analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Rivers, W. M. (1981). Teaching foreign-language skills. Chicago University Press:
Chicago.
Rivers, W. M. (1987). Interactive Language Teaching. Cambridge University Press: New
York.
Saeidi, M., & Ebrahimi Farshchi, E. (2012). The effect of teaching communication
strategies on Iranian EFL learners' speaking self-efficacy in content-based courses.
Applied Linguistics Journal, 9(2), 220-238.
Saktiyani, F. (2015). The effectiveness of group investigation to teach speaking viewed
-confidence (Doctoral dissertation). Retreived from
http://eprints.uns.ac.id/18628/
Savignon, S. J. (2007). Beyond communicative language teaching: What's ahead?. Journal
of Pragmatics, 39(1), 207-220.
Scarcella, R. C., & Oxford, R. L. (1992). The tapestry of language learning: The
individual in the communicative classroom (p. 63). Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Schraw, G., Horn, C., Thorndike-Christ, T., and Bruning, R. (1995). Academic goal
orientations and student classroom achievement. Contemporary Educational
Psychology, 20(3), 359-368.
Schulz, R. A. (2001). Cultural differences in student and teacher perceptions concerning
the role of grammar instruction and corrective feedback: USA Colombia. The
Modern Language Journal, 85(2), 244-258.
Schunk, D. H. (1995). Self-efficacy and education and instruction. In J. E. Maddux (Ed.),
Self-efficacy, adaptation, and adjustment: Theory, research, and application (pp.
281-303). New York: Plenum Press.
Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (1994). Self-regulation of learning and performance:
Issues and educational applications. England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (2003). Self regulation and learning. Handbook of
psychology. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.
Shang, H. F. (2011). Exploring the relationship between EFL proficiency level and
reading strategy use. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, (1)3,
18-27.
Sheen, Y. (2004). Corrective feedback and learner uptake in communicative classrooms
across instructional settings. Language teaching research, 8(3), 263-300.
Sheen, Y. (2006). Exploring the relationship between characteristics of recasts and learner
uptake. Language Teaching Research, 10(4), 361-392.
Forum Journal, 35(3), 8.
Siyli, N. A., & Kafes, H. (2012). Audio Journal in an ELT Context. International Journal
of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 1(4), 66-75.
Skaalvik, E. M. (1997). Self-enhancing and self-defeating ego orientation: Relations with task and avoidance orientation, achievement, self-perceptions, and anxiety. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89 (1), 71-81.
Spada, N., & Lightbown, P. M. (1993). Instruction and the development of questions in L2
classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15(2), 205-224.
perceived self-efficacy. European Journal of Social Sciences, 27(3), 335-345.
Suchman, L. (2000). Embodied practices of engineering work. Mind, Culture, and
activity, 7(1-2), 4-18.
Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford, New York:
Oxford University Press. Doi:10.1016/J.SBSPRO2010.12.231.
Tavil, Z. M. (2010). Integrating listening and speaking skills to facilitate English language
Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 9,
765-770
Thornbury, S. (2005). How to teach speaking. Harlow: Longman.
Tomasello, M., & Herron, C. (1988). Down the garden path: Inducing and correcting
overgeneralization errors in the foreign language classroom. Applied
Psycholinguistics,
9(3), 237-246.
Torky, S. A. E. (2006). The Effectiveness of a Task-Based Instruction Program in
Developing the English Language Speaking Skills of Secondary Stage Students
(Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/
Trent, J. (2009). Enhancing Oral Participation Across the Curriculum: Some Lessons from
the EAP Classroom. Asian EFL Journal, 11(1), 256-270.
Trahey, M., & White, L. (1993). Positive evidence and preemption in the second language
classroom. Studies in second language acquisition, 15(2), 181-204.
Vanl
grammar. Language awareness, 1(2), 91-108.
Vygotsky, L. (1978). Interaction between learning and development. Readings on the
development of children, 23(3), 34-41.
Wang, C., & Li, Y. (2010). An empirical study of reading self-efficacy and the use of
reading strategies in the Chinese EFL context. The Asian EFL Journal
Quarterly,
12(2), 144-162.
Warren, J. (2011). The relationship between service learning and public speaking
Retrieved from http://uknowledge.uky.edu/comm_etds/1
White, L. (1991). Adverb placement in second language acquisition: Some effects of
positive and negative evidence in the classroom. Second language research, 7(2),
133-161.
Widiastuti, R. (2008). Teaching Speaking Through Dialogue To The Eleventh Year
Student: A Case Study At SMK Muhammadiyah 1 Jatinom (Doctoral dissertation,
Universitas Muhammadiyah Surakarta). Retrieved from
http://eprints.ums.ac.id/332/.
Wigfield, A., Eccles, J. S., & Pintrich, P. R. (1996). Development between the ages of
and 25. In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational
psychology (pp. 148-185). New York: Macmillan.
Williams, J. (2001). The effectiveness of spontaneous attention to form. System, 29(3),
325-340.
Williams, J., & Evans, J. (1998). What kind of focus and on which forms. In C. Doughty
& J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in second language acquisition (pp. 139 155).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Willis, J. (1996). A Flexible framework for Task-based Learning in J. Willis, & D. Willis
(Eds.), Challenge and change in language teaching. Retrieved
fromhttp://btkteszt.ppke.hu/uploads/articles/5839/file/readings_in_methodology.pdf
#page=13
Willis, J. (1998). Task-based learning? What kind of adventure. Jalt publications.
Retrieved from http://www.jalt-publications.org/tlt/articles/2333-task-based-
learning-what-kind-adventure
Yang, N. D. (1999).The relationship between EFL learners' beliefs and learning strategy
use. System, 27(4), 515-535
Young, D. J. (1990).An investigation of students' perspectives on anxiety and
speaking. Foreign Language Annals, 23(6), 539-553.
Young, R. F. (2000, March). Interactional Competence: Challenges for Validity.
Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Association for
Applied Linguistics, Vancouver, BC, Canada. Abstract retrieved from
http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED444361.
Young, R. F. (2002). Discourse approaches to oral language assessment. Annual
Review of Applied Linguistics (pp. 243-262). USA: Cambridge University
Press.
Young, R. F., & Miller, E. R. (2004). Learning as changing participation: Discourse
roles in ESL writing conferences. The Modern Language Journal, 88(4), 519-535.
Zimmerman, B.J. (1990). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: an
overview. Educational Psychologist, 25(1), 3-17.
Zimmerman, B. J., and Bandura, A. (1994).Impact of self-regulatory influences on writing
course attainment. American Educational Research Journal, 31(4), 845-862.
Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Self-efficacy: An essential motive to learn. Contemporary
educational psychology, 25(1), 82-91.
Zimmerman, B. J., Boekarts, M., Pintrich, P. R. and Zeidner, M. (2000). A Social
Cognitive Perspective. Handbook of Self-Regulation (pp.13-34). California:
Academic Press.
top related