Using Fuzzy Logic in assessing metacognitive intervention in relation to Less-/more-skilled L2 Listeners

Document Type : research article

Authors

1 University of Mazandaran, Mazandaran, Iran

2 Assistant professor at English language and literature department, faculty of humanities and social sciences, university of Mazandaran, Mazandaran, Iran

Abstract

Metacognitive intervention is known as one of the effective approaches to increase listening skills and comprehension. Recent research on less-/more-skilled L2 listeners indicated that metacognitive intervention is more rewarding for less-skilled L2 listeners than more-skilled counterparts. However, since more-skilled L2 listeners achieved a repertoire of knowledge and skills, it is more difficult for them to achieve more improvement. Therefore, the scales of improvements are different between less- and more-skilled L2 listeners, and mere comparison between pre- and post-tests does not suffice. In this study, however, Fuzzy logic analysis was employed as a remedial approach in order to equalize these scales. Next, the comparison was made between less- and more-skilled L2 listeners to find out which group would logically benefit more from metacognitive intervention. A quantitative approach and quasi-experimental design were used to address the research questions. 65 Iranian students were selected including 31 more-skilled (15 advanced and 16 upper-intermediate) and 34 less-skilled (18 intermediate and 16 lower-intermediate). The instruction was based on metacognitive intervention in eight sessions. The result, which was based on a Fuzzy logic analysis approach, indicated that more-skilled L2 listeners benefited more than less-skilled L2 listeners from metacognitive intervention, and is quite contrary to the previous studies. This study is beneficial to the field of assessment. Assessment based solely on differences in pre-/post-test results may not be adequate in some cases. Researchers and teachers should consider other factors in their judgments.

Keywords

References

Alavidoost, M., Jafarnejad, A., & Babazadeh, H. (2021). A novel fuzzy mathematical model for an integrated supply chain planning using multi-objective evolutionary algorithm. Soft Computing, 25(3), 1777-1801.
Alavidoost, M. H., Babazadeh, H., & Sayyari, S. T. (2016). An interactive fuzzy programming approach for bi-objective straight and U-shaped assembly line balancing problem. Applied Soft Computing, 40, 221-235. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2015.11.025
Allan, D. (2004). Oxford placement test 2: Test pack. Oxford University Press.
Babazadeh, H., Alavidoost, M., Zarandi, M. F., & Sayyari, S. (2018). An enhanced NSGA-II algorithm for fuzzy bi-objective assembly line balancing problems. Computers & industrial engineering, 123, 189-208.
Bellman, R. E., & Zadeh, L. A. (1970). Decision-Making in a Fuzzy Environment. Management Science, 17(4), B-141-B-164. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.17.4.B141
Bozorgian, H. (2012a). Metacognitive instruction does improve listening comprehension. ISRN Education, 2012.
Bozorgian, H. (2012b). The relationship between listening and other language skills in international English language testing system. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2(4), 657-663. https://doi.org/10.4304/tpls.2.4.657-663
Bozorgian, H. (2015). Less-skilled learners benefit more from metacognitive instruction to develop listening comprehension. 4(1), 3-12. https://doi.org/10.5861/ijrsll.2014.748
Bozorgian, H., & Alamdari, E. F. (2018). Multimedia listening comprehension: Metacognitive instruction or metacognitive instruction through dialogic interaction. ReCALL: the Journal of EUROCALL, 30(1), 131.
Bozorgian, H., & Muhammadpour, M. (2020). Metacognitive Intervention: High WMC Learners’ Listening Performance and Metacognitive Awareness. Foreign Language Research Journal, 9(4), 1055-1084.
Buck, G. (2001). Assessing listening. Cambridge University Press.
Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis for field settings (Vol. 3). Rand McNally Chicago.
Cross, J. (2011). Metacognitive instruction for helping less-skilled listeners. ELT Journal, 65(4), 408-416. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccq073
Field, J. (2000). Finding one's way in the fog: listening strategies and second-language learners. Modern English Teacher, 9(1), 29-34.
Flavell, J. H. (1976). Metacognitive aspects of problem solving. In L. B. Resnick (Ed.), The nature of intelligence (pp. 231-235). Lawrence Erlbaum.
Geranpayeh, A. (2003). A quick review of the English Quick Placement Test. Research Notes, 12, 8-10. https://www.cambridgeenglish.org/Images/23127-research-notes-12.pdf
Goh, C. (2000). A cognitive perspective on language learners' listening comprehension problems. System, 28(1), 55-75. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(99)00060-3
Goh, C., & Taib, Y. (2006). Metacognitive instruction in listening for young learners. ELT Journal, 60(3), 222-232. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccl002
Graham, S. (2006). Listening comprehension: The learners’ perspective. System, 34(2), 165-182.
Nemati, Y., & Alavidoost, M. H. (2019). A fuzzy bi-objective MILP approach to integrate sales, production, distribution and procurement planning in a FMCG supply chain. Soft Computing, 23(13), 4871-4890.
Nunan, D. (1997). Approaches to teaching listening in the language classroom. Plenary,
O'malley, J. M., O'Malley, M. J., & Chamot, A. U. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. Cambridge university press.
Pressley, M. (2002). Metacognition and self-regulated comprehension. In A. E. Farstrup, & S. J. Samuel (Eds.), What research has to say about reading instruction (3rd ed., pp. 291-309). International Reading Association.
Rahbar, S., Ahangari, S., & Saeidi, M. (2020). Raising the Learners’ Awareness of Prosodic Features in Pronunciation and its Impact on Listening Comprehension: Insights from Noticing Hypothesis (Schmidt, 1995). Foreign Language Research Journal, 10(2), 260-271.
Rost, M. (2002). Teaching and Researching Listening Applied Linguistics in Action Series Longman. A Pearson Education Book.
Rost, M. (2005). L2 Listening. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 527-552). Routledge.
Rost, M. (2013). Teaching and researching: Listening. Routledge.
Scovell, D., Pastellas, V., & Knobel, M. (2004). 404 essential tests for IELTS: General training module. Adams & Austen Press.
Module Student's Book. In: Adams & Austen Press Pty Ltd (1823).
Swaffar, J. K., & Bacon, S. (1993). Reading and listening comprehension: Perspectives on research and implications for practice. Research in language learning: Principles, processes, and prospects, 124-155.
Vandergrift, L. (2003). Orchestrating Strategy Use: Toward a Model of the Skilled Second Language Listener. 53(3), 463-496. https://doi.org/doi:10.1111/1467-9922.00232
Vandergrift, L. (2004). 1. Listening to learn or learning to listen? Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24, 3-25. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190504000017
Vandergrift, L. (2007). Recent developments in second and foreign language listening comprehension research. Language Teaching, 40(3), 191-210. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444807004338
Vandergrift, L., & Tafaghodtari, M. H. (2010). Teaching L2 Learners How to Listen Does Make a Difference: An Empirical Study. 60(2), 470-497. https://doi.org/doi:10.1111/j.1467-9922.2009.00559.x
Zadeh, L. A. (1965). Fuzzy sets. Information and Control, 8(3), 338-353. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/S0019-9958(65)90241-X
Zadeh, L. A. (1988). Fuzzy logic. Computer, 21(4), 83-93. https://doi.org/10.1109/2.53
 
Journal of Foreign Language Research
Volume 11, Issue 1
June 2021
Pages 139-152

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics