臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

第二語言的研究者(Flowerdew and Miller, 2005)一直都將「聽力」視為四大語言學習技能中的「灰姑娘」; 第二語言聽力，在過去好幾年間一直在應用語言學的研究範疇中被忽略，而在現今，作為溝通能力關鍵要素之一的語言聽力，漸漸地在第二語言教學的領域中取得其一席之地。因此，如何讓學生瞭解他們自己在聽力過程中，其英語聽力技巧的使用，進而增進及改善他們的聽力能力，乃成為本研究探討的主要重點。
本質性研究的主旨在於探討大學生在參與英語聽力任務以及其理解過程中，其英語聽力策略的使用情形，並瞭解英語聽力學習者語言能力高低和使用策略之間的關係。研究對象為五位銘傳大學電子工程系以及五位資訊管理系的大三生。研究內容包括文獻的探討、研究者與研究對象的一對一訪談，以及自言自語法(the think-aloud method)的執行。研究過程包含一項聽力考試的執行，視為預先測試的工具，考試內容採用全民英檢中高級聽力模擬試題，測試目的在於將研究參與者的英語聽力能力區分為兩個程度:聽力初級者及聽力中級者，藉以探討不同程度的英語聽力學習者在聽力策略上使用情形的差異。研究分析利用個人深入式訪談以及自言自語法的實驗紀錄，以呈現英語聽力學習者在參與聽力任務及其理解過程中的心理歷程和感受。另外，根據個人訪談的結果，某些日常生活的聽力策略使用情形亦納入研究討論的範圍，並藉此發展出部分與文獻中不同的聽力策略。
本研究結果顯示：大學生在英語聽力理解的過程中，語言能力較低以及語言能力較高的語言學習者在各個英語聽力策略的使用範疇中，包括後設認知策略、認知策略，以及社會情感策略上確實存在其使用差異，此研究結果符合(Chamot, 1987; O’Malley & Chamot, 1990; Goh, 1998; Peterson, 2001; Flowerdew & Miller, 2005) 的研究發現，這些差異可從語言能力較高者在整體聽力策略的應用範圍以及使用次數上比語言能力較低者要來的廣泛及具有彈性看出。而在另一方面，從研究結果的觀察，顯示出不同範疇的聽力策略確實區分出語言能力較低以及語言能力較高的英語學習者在聽力策略上使用的不同。唯自言自語法分析的結果，英語能力較低和較高者在後設認知策略、認知策略等兩大範疇中的聽力策略使用情形上，具有相同的廣度及彈性。
另外，藉由個人訪談紀錄的分析，本研究歸納出三種與文獻中不同的聽力策略, 分別為: 進行英語對話(conversing in English)、自修(self-study)、以及逐字聽力法(word by word); 唯自言自語法的分析中，並未發展出任何社會情感策略以及其他與文獻不同、額外的聽力策略 (additional strategies)，其中一個原因是，在自言自語法中，語言能力較低與較高的兩位受試者皆為分開測試，故缺乏對象使用社會情感範疇中的任何策略。而在另一方面，自言自語法的分析及研究結果證明語言能力較低以及語言能力較高的語言學習者在認知策略英語聽力策略的使用範疇中，確實存在其使用差異; 然而，根據研究發現，並沒有充分證據顯示語言能力較高者其聽力策略的使用能力相對於較低者來的優越，此兩項發現與Goh (1998)的研究結果符合但與某些其他的研究發現(Peterson, 2001; Lau, 2006; McKeown & Gentilucci, 2007)不同，原因是這些發現皆認為高程度的語言學習者其語言學習策略的使用能力高於低程度的語言學習者。
此研究參照研究對象的聽力學習和理解過程，嘗試提供其他附加性的聽力策略使用知識，期能為大學英語聽力課程的內容提供教學上的參考及意義。同時，研究限制及未來研究的參考方向亦於本研究文末提出以供參考。最後，本質性研究乃經由受試者對個人訪談及自言自語法抄錄內容的確認，佐以研究資料的三角測量，以完成信度的檢驗。

Researchers (Flowerdew and Miller, 2005) of second language acquisition (SLA) have often suggested that listening has been treated as the “Cinderella” of the four macro-skills: speaking, listening, reading, and writing. However, as an essential part of communicative competence, listening is a skill that deserves equal treatment with the others, both in the classroom and in the preparation of the language teacher. Second language (L2) listening, relatively ignored for many years within applied linguistics, has today come into its own. Consequently, how to make students aware of the listening skills they are employing and also awaken university studies’ consciousness in the listening comprehension process for their further improvement becomes substantially important.
Therefore, this qualitative study aimed to discover what listening strategies were used by university students, and how the strategies use varied with language proficiency within relatively low and higher proficiency groups. All participants were university juniors. The one-to-one interviews were conducted, and the think-aloud method was employed to elicit their listening strategies used in the English listening comprehension process. In addition, a pretest was carried out by using a high-intermediate GEPT simulated listening test in order to differentiate participants’ language proficiency. Afterwards, data analysis based on qualitative methodologies involved sorting out listening strategies the participants employed in the listening situations as well as observing their listening mental processes. Interesting findings were related to the relationship between the participants’ proficiency levels and their strategy use.
The results of the current study indicated that some metacognitive, cognitive, socio-affective, and additional strategies which differed from previous findings (for example, conversing in English, self-study, and word by word) differences existed between two proficiency groups, when they listened to English tasks or communicated with people in daily conversations. A number of research findings regarding the L2 strategy use of different proficient students (Chamot, 1987; O’Malley & Chamot, 1990; Goh, 1998; Peterson, 2001; Flowerdew & Miller, 2005) have complementarily supported that language learners with different language proficiency used metacognitive, cognitive, and socio-affective strategies in their language comprehension. Furthermore, the results showed that these differences differentiated the English learners with relatively low level from relatively high level.
On the other hand, the present results had the same perspective as Goh’s (1998) think-aloud research, which validated that it is still difficult to determine the wide and flexible use that made relatively higher English listeners more competent than low English listeners. On the contrary, these research findings differed from some research findings (Peterson, 2001; Lau, 2006; McKeown & Gentilucci, 2007) proposed that good learners have better strategy competence and can use strategy better than poor learners.
In sum, this study has findings that contributed to the research line on listening strategy use, provided additional knowledge for our understanding of language learners’ use of strategies in making sense of what they hear, and reveals implications for both language programs and teachers. The limitations of the study and suggestions for future research are provided at the end of the study. Finally, the qualitative validation was checked through participants’ opinions of the transcribed information, and data triangulation of two research protocols as well as literature review was also included in this research.

Table of Contents
Acknowledgements I
Chinese Abstract Ⅱ
English Abstract Ⅲ
Table of Contents Ⅳ
List of Tables Ⅸ
List of Figures Ⅹ

Chapter 1 – Introduction 1
1.1 Background and Motivation 1
1.2 Purposes of the Study 4
1.3 Structure of the Research Paper 4
Chapter 2 - Literature Review 5
2.1 Theories Related to Language Learning and Listening Strategies 5
2.2 Studies on Language Learning and Listening Strategies 12
2.3 Models of the Listening Process 22
2.4 The Classification of Learning and Listening Strategies in SLA 27
2.4.1 Learning Strategies of Chamot (1987) 29
2.4.2 Learning Strategies of O’Mally and Chamot (1990) 29
2.4.3 Learning Strategies of Peterson (2001) 31
2.4.4 Learning Strategies of Goh (1998) 32
2.4.5 Summary of the Classifications of Learning and Listening
Strategies in SLA 33
2.5 The Differences between More- and Less-Proficient Listeners 34
2.6 The Application of the Think-Aloud Method 40
2.7 Summary 42
2.8 Research Questions 42
2.9 Definition of Terms 43
Chapter 3 – Methodology 44
3.1 Context and Setting 44
3.2 Participant Profiles 44
3.3 Research Design 46
3.4 Instruments 46
3.4.1 The Pretest 47
3.4.2 The Interview 49
3.4.3 The Think-Aloud Method 50
3.5 Procedures 50
3.6 Data Collection 52
3.7 Coding Categories and Data Analysis 53
3.8 Validation 55
Chapter 4 - Results 58
4.1 The Findings of the Interviews 58
4.1.1 Major Themes of the Metacognitive Category 59
4.1.1.1 Theme 1: preparing in advance for an upcoming task 59
4.1.1.2 Theme 2: listening to key words and listening for
repetition 61
4.1.1.3 Theme 3: concentrating on listening in spite of
difficulties 62
4.1.1.4 Other metacognitive strategies 63
4.1.1.5 Summary of metacognitive category 64
4.1.2 Major Themes of the Cognitive category 64
4.1.2.1 Theme 4: using the visual image to assist listening 64
4.1.2.2 Theme 5: using text information to complete missing
parts 66
4.1.2.3 Theme 6: utilizing language reference materials 67
4.1.2.4 Other cognitive strategies 68
4.1.2.5 Summary of cognitive category 71
4.1.3 Major Themes of the Socio-Affective Category 72
4.1.3.1 Theme 7: working with peers to solve listening
problems 72
4.1.3.2 Theme 8: asking the teachers for repetition or
explanation 73
4.1.3.3 Other socio-affective strategies 74
4.1.3.4 Summary of socio-affective category 75
4.1.4 Major Themes of Additional Strategies 75
4.1.4.1 Theme 9: attempting to communicate in English
in daily conversations 75
4.1.4.2 Theme 10: trying to understand every word in text 77
4.1.4.3 Other strategies in the additional strategies category 78
4.1.4.4 Summary of additional strategies 79
4.2 The Findings in the Think-Aloud Method 79
4.2.1 Major Themes of the Metacognitive Category 80
4.2.1.1 Theme 1: listening to key words and phrases to
understand text meaning 81
4.2.1.2 Theme 2: concentrating on listening in spite of
listening difficulties 81
4.2.1.3 Theme 3: using the text meaning to complete
missing parts 82
4.2.1.4 Theme 4: summarizing the text by understandable
words 82
4.2.1.5 Theme 5: carrying out the language rules to
understand the text 83
4.2.1.6 Summary of the think-aloud method 83
4.3 Summary of the Interviews and the Think-Aloud Method 84
4.4 Discussion and Summary 86
Chapter 5 - Conclusion 88
5.1 Discussion of the Research Questions 88
5.1.1 Research Question 1 88
5.1.2 Research Question 2 95
5.2 Summary of the Findings Different From Previous Studies 98
5.2.1 Findings Confirmed by Previous Studies 99
5.2.2 Findings not confirmed by Previous Studies 100
5.3 Final Thoughts 100
5.4 Implications 101
5.5 Limitations of the Study 103
5.6 Suggestions for Future Research 104

References 106
Chinese 106
English 106
Appendixes
Appendix A: Pilot interview 111
Appendix B: Questionnaire for pilot study 112
Appendix C: Interview 114
Appendix D: Interview (Chinese) 115
Appendix E: The consent letter 116

List of Tables
Table 2.1 Review of Theories Related to This Study 6
Table 2.2 Review of Present Studies Conducted Abroad and Domestically 13
Table 2.3 Review of Theories and Studies Related to Language Learning and Listening Strategy 27
Table 2.4 the Differences between More- and Less-Proficient Listeners 38
Table 2.5 Listening Strategies Used by the Majority of High- and Low-Abilities
Listeners 40
Table 3.1 Interviewees’ Samples 45
Table 3.2 First Pretest Result 48
Table 3.3 Second Pretest Result 48
Table 3.4 Categories of the Questionnaire Design of Listening Strategies 49
Table 4.1 Categories, Major Themes and Coding from 10 Students’ Interviews 59
Table 4.2 Categories, Major Themes and Coding in First Think-Aloud Method 80
Table 4.3 Categories, Major Themes and Coding in Second Think-Aloud Method 80
Table 4.4 Two Participants’ Strategies Use in the Think-Aloud Method 84
Table 4.5 Classification of Listening Comprehension Strategies Used by Different
Language Proficiency Participants 85
Table 4.6 Results of the two Think-Aloud Sessions 86
Table 5.1 Researchers’ Findings Related to Differences between More- and
Less-Proficient L2 Learners 99

List of Figures
Figure 2.1 A Transmission View of Communication 24
Figure 3.1 Flow Chart of Data Collection 51
Figure 3.2 Picture of the Research Triangulation 57

References
Chinese
台灣英文新聞 (2008, 2月)。雙語週報：全民英檢中級。805，5-33。
台灣英文新聞 (2008, 2月)。雙語週報：全民英檢中級。[CD-ROM]。469。
陶維極、劉中編著 (2005)。全民英檢一路通：中高級聽力能力測驗模擬試題冊。文鶴出版有限公司。頁 9-63。
陶維極、劉中編著 (2005)。全民英檢一路通：中高級聽力能力測驗模擬試題第一回。[CD-ROM]。文鶴出版有限公司。頁 9-17。
陶維極、劉中編著 (2005)。全民英檢一路通：中高級聽力能力測驗模擬試題第六回。[CD-ROM]。文鶴出版有限公司。頁 63。
張保隆、謝寶煖 (2005)。學術論文寫作：APA 規範。臺北市：華泰文化。
English
Arnold, J. (2000). Seeing Through Listening Comprehension Exam Anxiety. TESOL Quarterly, 34(4), 777-786.
Berne, J. E. (2004). Listening Comprehension Strategies: A Review of the Literature. Foreign Language Annals, 37(4), 521-525.
Block, E. (1986). The Comprehension Strategies of Second Language Readers. TESOL Quarterly, 20(3), 463-494.
Brittin, M. E. (2005). Keys to Improving Your Listening Skills. Family Practice Management, 12(4), 68.
Brown, H. D. (2000). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching (4th ed.). White Plains, NY: Addison Wesley: Longman.
Brown, H. D. (2007). Teaching by Principles: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy (3th ed.). White Plains, NY: Addison Wesley: Longman.
Buck, G.. (2001). Accessing Listening. Cambridge University Press.
Chamot, A. U. (1987). The Learning Strategies of ESL Students. In A. Wenden., & J. (Ed.). Learner Strategies in Language Learning (pp. 71-83). Prentice-Hall International (UK) Ltd.
Chamot, A. U. et al. (1999). The Learning Strategies Handbook. Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.
Chen, Y. (2007). Learning to learn: the impact of strategy training. ELT Journal, 61(1), 20-29.
Cheng, H. F. (2004). A Comparison of Multiple-Choice and Open-Ended Response Formats for the Assessment of Listening Proficiency in English. Foreign Language Annuals, 37(4), 544-555.
Cohen, A. D. (1987). Studying Learner Strategies: How We Get the Information. In A. Wenden., & J. Rubin (Ed.). Learner Strategies in Language Learning (pp. 31-40). Prentice-Hall International (UK) Ltd.
Cohen, A. D. (1998). Strategies in Learning and Using a Second Language. Addison Wesley Longman Ltd.
Cook, V. (2001). Second Language and Language Teaching (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press Inc., New York.
Djiwandono, P. I. (2006). Cooperative Listening as a Means to Promote Strategies Listening Comprehension. English Teaching Forum, 3, 32-37.
Dunkel, P. A. (1986). Developing Listening Fluency in L2: Theoretical Principles and Pedagogical Considerations. The Modern Language Journal, 70(2), 99-106.
Ericsson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1984). Protocol Analysis: Verbal report as Data (revised ed.). The MIT Press Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge, Massachusetts, London, England.
Farrell, T. S. C. & Mallard, C. (2006). The Use of Reception Strategies by Learners of French as a foreign Language. The Modern Language Journal, 90(3), 338-352.
Flowerdew, J., & Miller, L. (2005). In J. C. Richards (Ed.). Second Language Listening: Theory and Practice. Cambridge University Press.
Goh, C. C. M. (1998). How ESL learners with different listening abilities use comprehension strategies and tactics. Language Teaching Research, 2(2), 124-147.
Goulden, R. N. (1998). Implementation Speaking and Listening Standards: Information for English Teachers. The English Journal, 88(1), 90-96.
Hill, D. A., & Tomlinson, B. (2004). Coursebook Listening Activities. In B. Tomlinson. (Ed.). Developing Material for Language Teaching (pp. 364-372). London: Continuum International Publishing Group.
Liao, P. S. (2006). The Handbook of Research Papers Writing. Jong Wen Books Co., Ltd. [Text in Chinese and English].
Lau, K. L (2006). Reading strategy use between Chinese good and poor readers: a think-aloud study. Journal of Research in Reading, 29(4), 389-399.
Lester, J. D. (1996). Writing Research Papers: A Complete Guide (8th ed.). Harper Collins College Publishers. pp. 197-332.
Littlewood, W. T. (1984). Foreign and Second Language Learning: Language-acquisition research and its implications for the classroom (1st ed.). Cambridge University Press. pp. 22-27.
Long, M.H. (2005). Methodological issues in learner needs analysis. In M. H. Long (Ed.), Second language needs analysis (p. 19-76). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Macro, E. (2006). Strategies for Language Learning and for Language Use: Revising the Theoretical Framework. The Modern Language Journal, 90(3), 320-337.
Malim, T. (1994). Cognitive processes: Attention, Perception, Memory, Thinking and Language. NK: Palgrave. pp. 1-95.
Maxwell, J. A. (2005). Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach (2nd ed.). Applied Social Research Methods Series, 41. Sage Publications, Inc. pp. 106-115.
McKeown, R.G., & Gentilucci, J. L. (2007). Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 51(2), 136-147.
McLaughlin, B. (1990). The relationship between first and second language: Language proficiency and language aptitude. In B. Harley et al. (Ed.). The Development of Second Language Proficiency (pp. 158-174). Cambridge University Press.
Milne, J. (1981). Teaching adult beginners. In K. Johnson, K., & K. Morrow. (Ed.). Communication in the Classroom: Applications and Methods for Communicative Approach. Longman Group UK Ltd.
O’Malley, J. M., & Chamot, A. U. (1990). Learning Strategies in Second Language Acquisition. Cambridge University Press.
O’Malley, J. M., Chamot, A. U., & Küpper, L. (1989). Listening Comprehension Strategies in Second Language Acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 10(4), 418-437.
Oxford, R. L. (1990). Language Learning Strategies: What Every Teacher Should Know. Heinle & Heinle.
Park, G. P. (2004). Comparison of L2 listening and reading comprehension by University students learning English in Korea. Foreign Language Annals, 37(3), 448-458.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods (3rd ed.). (pp. 245-385.) Sage Publications, Inc.
Peterson, P. W. (2001). Skills and Strategies for Proficient Listening. In C. M. Marianne. (Ed.). Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language (3rd ed.). (pp. 87-100). Heinle & Heinle.
Pietro, R. J. D. (1987). Strategic Interaction: Learning Language through Scenarios (1st ed.). Cambridge University Press. pp. 123-147.
Rost, M., & Ross, S. (1991). Learner Use of Strategies in Interaction: Typology and Teachability. Language Learning, 41(2), 235-273.
Richards, K. (2003). Qualitative Inquiry in TESOL. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Richards, J. C. (1990). The Language Teaching Matrix. UK: Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J. C., & Schmidt, R. (2002). Dictionary of Language Teaching & Applied Linguistics. UK: Pearson Education.
Rubin, J. (1987). Learner Strategies: Theoretical Assumptions, Research History and Typology. In A. Wenden., & J. Rubin (Ed.). Learner Strategies in Language Learning (1st ed.). (pp. 15-30.). Prentice-Hall International (UK) Ltd.
Rubin, J. (1994). A Review of Second Language Listening Comprehension Research. The Modern Language Journal, 78(2), 199-221.
Rubin, H. J., & Rubin, I. (1995). Qualitative Interviewing: The art of hearing data. Sage Publications, Inc.
Smith, L. A. (2006). Think-Aloud Mysteries: Using structured, sentence-by-sentence text passages to teach comprehension strategies. The Reading Teacher, 59(8), 764-773.
Thomson, I., & Rubin, J. (1996). Can Strategies Instruction Improve Listening Comprehension. Foreign Language Annuals, 29(3), 331-342.
Ur, P. (Ed.). (1996). Module 8: Teaching listening. A Course in Language Teaching: Practice and Theory (pp.105-119). Cambridge University Press.
Vandergrift, L. (1997). The Cinderella of Communication Strategies: Reception Strategies in Interactive Listening. The Modern Language Journal, 81(4), 494-505.
Vandergrift, L. (2006). Second Language Listening: Listening Ability or Language Proficiency? The Modern Language Journal, 90(6), 6-18.
Vann, R. J., & Abraham, R. G. (1990). Strategies of Unsuccessful Language Learners. TESOL Quarterly. 24(2). 177-198.
Wenden, J. (1987). In A. Wenden., & J. Rubin (Ed.). Learner Strategies in Language Learning (1st ed.). (pp. 3-13.). Prentice-Hall International (UK) Ltd.