دانشگاه الزهرا

  اخبار و اعلانات

 آمار

تعداد نشریات25
تعداد شماره‌ها967
تعداد مقالات8,010
تعداد مشاهده مقاله13,573,394
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله9,616,109
جلیلی, سید اکبر, ابطحی, سید مهدی. (1403). رابطه‌ی آگاهی از راهبردهای فراشناختی با درک شنیداری فارسی‌آموزان غیرایرانی سطح پیشرفته. جلوه هنر, 16(51), 105-137. doi: 10.22051/jlr.2023.44137.2303
سید اکبر جلیلی; سید مهدی ابطحی. "رابطه‌ی آگاهی از راهبردهای فراشناختی با درک شنیداری فارسی‌آموزان غیرایرانی سطح پیشرفته". جلوه هنر, 16, 51, 1403, 105-137. doi: 10.22051/jlr.2023.44137.2303
جلیلی, سید اکبر, ابطحی, سید مهدی. (1403). 'رابطه‌ی آگاهی از راهبردهای فراشناختی با درک شنیداری فارسی‌آموزان غیرایرانی سطح پیشرفته', جلوه هنر, 16(51), pp. 105-137. doi: 10.22051/jlr.2023.44137.2303
جلیلی, سید اکبر, ابطحی, سید مهدی. رابطه‌ی آگاهی از راهبردهای فراشناختی با درک شنیداری فارسی‌آموزان غیرایرانی سطح پیشرفته. جلوه هنر, 1403; 16(51): 105-137. doi: 10.22051/jlr.2023.44137.2303

رابطه‌ی آگاهی از راهبردهای فراشناختی با درک شنیداری فارسی‌آموزان غیرایرانی سطح پیشرفته

زبان پژوهی
مقاله 4، دوره 16، شماره 51، مرداد 1403، صفحه 105-137    اصل مقاله (459.47 K)
نوع مقاله: مقاله پژوهشی
شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22051/jlr.2023.44137.2303
نویسندگان
سید اکبر جلیلی1؛ سید مهدی ابطحی* 2
1استادیار آموزش زبان فارسی، دانشگاه بین‌المللی امام خمینی(ره)، قزوین، ایران.
2استادیار آموزش زبان فارسی، دانشگاه بین‌المللی امام خمینی(ره)، قزوین، ایران
چکیده
پژوهش حاضر با هدف بررسی رابطة «آگاهی فارسی‌آموزان از راهبردهای فراشناختی» و توانایی آنان در زمینة «درک شنیداری» انجام پذیرفت. آزمودنی‌های این پژوهش 29 فارسی‌آموز دختر و پسر سطح پیشرفتة مرکز آموزش زبان فارسی دانشگاه بین‌المللی امام خمینی(ره) بودند که زبان فارسی را برای ادامة تحصیل در رشته‌های دانشگاهی گروه فنی-‌مهندسی و پزشکی در دانشگاه‌های ایران می‌آموختند. برای بررسی چهار فرضیة پژوهش، از دو ابزار گردآوری داده بهره گرفته شد: یک  پرسشنامة 21‌گویه‌ای آگاهی از راهبردهای فراشناختی شنیداری (Vandergrift, et al., 2006) شامل پنج مؤلفة طرح‌ریزی و ارزشیابی، توجه هدایت‌شده، دانش فرد، ترجمة ذهنی و حل مسأله، و یک آزمون درک شنیداری با 25 پرسش. برای تحلیل داده‌های به‌دست‌آمده، از آزمون­های همبستگی، رگرسیون خطی، و آزمون‌های تی‌مستقل استفاده شد. یافته‌های بررسی داده‌ها نشان داد که بین آگاهی فارسی‌آموزان از راهبردهای فراشناختی و توانایی‌شان در درک شنیداری، رابطة مثبتی وجود دارد و حدود 47 درصد تغییرات متغیر وابسته، به‌وسیلة پنج متغیر مستقل تبیین می­شود. ازسویی‌دیگر، بین فارسی‌آموزان دارای تحصیلات دانشگاهی (کارشناسی و کارشناسی‌ارشد) و فارسی‌آموزان دارای تحصیلات سطح دیپلم، و همچنین بین فارسی‌آموزان زن و مرد، تفاوتی از نظر آگاهی از راهبردهای فراشناختی وجود نداشت. این نبود تفاوت در زمینة میزان آگاهی آنان از راهبردها، با توجه به رشته‌های تحصیلی (فنی و پزشکی) نیز آشکار بود. روی‌هم‌رفته، یافته‌های پژوهش پیشنهاد می‌کند که آگاهی فارسی‌آموزان از راهبردهای فراشناختی می‌تواند نقش مؤثری بر ارتقاء و بهبود مهارت شنیداری آن‌ها داشته باشد. از‌این‌رو، الزامی است مدرسان زبان فارسی در کلاس‌های درک شنیداری، در پی به‌کارگیری راهکارها و رویه‌هایی برای تقویت آگاهی فراشناختی فارسی‌آموزان و نیز آموزش این راهبردها به آنان باشند.   
کلیدواژه‌ها
توانش راهبردی؛ راهبردهای یادگیری؛ راهبرد‌ فراشناختی؛ درک شنیداری
عنوان مقاله [English]
The Relationship between Metacognitive Strategies Awareness and Listening Comprehension of Non-Iranian Advanced Level Persian Language Learners
نویسندگان [English]
Seyed Akbar Jalili1؛ Seyyed Mehdi Abtahi2
1Assistant Professor of Teaching Persian Language, Imam Khomeini International University, Qazvin, Iran.
2Assistant Professor of Teaching Persian Language, Imam Khomeini International University, Qazvin, Iran
چکیده [English]
One of the challenges of second language learners is listening comprehension. In this context, Field (2008: 4) says that if we ask many language learners to determine the relative difficulty of the four language skills, many of them consider listening to be the area in which they feel most insecure. Various reasons have been mentioned as to why listening skill, or in other words, the process of listening in a second language, is considered difficult and challenging (e.g., see Brown and Yule, 1983; Field, 2008). Considering these challenges, one solutions to facilitate the listening process for language learners is to change their listening status from a passive listener to an active listener.
Goh (2014: 73) defines an active listener as someone who uses a range of skills and strategies to direct and manage their listening processes according to their communication goals. Regarding "listening skills", Rost (1990; cited in Lynch and Mendelson, 2010: 185) mentions two categories: enabling skills and enacting skills. He considers the first category to be the skills that are used to perceive what the speaker is saying and interpret the intended meaning (such as recognizing the prominences within utterances and inferring implicit information), and the second category to be the skills that play a role in responding appropriately to the message or text. The second component that exists in the definition of an active listener is Strategy. In a general definition, strategy can be seen as a method of facing a problem. In the context of the present research, strategy can be a method or a tactic used by language learners for encountering listening texts, either in one-way (non-participatory) or two-way (interactive or participatory) listening contexts.
Strategies are generally divided into three categories: cognitive, metacognitive, and social/emotional. Metacognitive strategies are those strategies that direct attention to the input and coordinate various cognitive processes (Goh, 2014: 73). According to Anderson (2005: 758), attention has been paid to the role of strategies in second language learning since the mid-1970s. This attention to strategies in language teaching can be understood from the emergence of two approaches in the context of teaching methodology that have given a central role to strategies: Styles and Strategies-Based Instruction (SSBI) and Cognitive Academic Language Learning Approach (CALLA). Regarding these, it is naturally expected that the more language learners use strategies for listening and understanding, and in fact, the more they focus their listening on strategies, the more comprehending and interpreting of the listening messages and speech interactions or one-way listening will be achieved. Therefore, it is necessary to get information about the language learners’ level of awareness of different strategies and their application.
کلیدواژه‌ها [English]
strategic competence, learning strategies, metacognitive strategy, Listening comprehension
سایر فایل های مرتبط با مقاله
مراجع
  1. رحیمیان، جلال و زهره صدیقی‌فر (1398). «پیشرفت تحصیلی و راهبردهای خودتنظیمی در یادگیری زبان فارسی به‌عنوان زبان دوم». پژوهش‌نامة آموزش زبان فارسی به غیر‌فارسی‌زبانان. سال 8. شماره 2 (پیاپی 18). صص 2-3. https://doi.org/10.30479/JTPSOL.2019.9009.1382
  2. ستوده‌نما، الهه و فاطمه تقی‌پور (1389). «ارتباط میان انگیزه، آگاهی فراشناختی از راهبردها و مهارت‌ شنیداری زبان‌آموزان ایرانی زبان انگلیسی». زبان‌پژوهی. دورة 1. شمارة 2. صص 25-52. https://doi.org/10.22051/JLR.2014.1041
  3. کریمی، اعظم (1393). «میزان به‏ کارگیری راهکارهای درک مطلب شنیداری: مطالعه‏‌ی موردی فارسی‏ آموزان دورة پیش‏ دانشگاهی». پژوهش‌نامة آموزش زبان فارسی به غیر‌فارسی‌زبانان. سال 3. شماره 2 (پیاپی 7). صص 102-69. Retrieved from <https://sid.ir/paper/240650/fa>
  4. ملکی، بهرام (1384). «تأثیر آموزش راهبردهای شناختی و فراشناختی بر افزایش یادگیری و یادداری متون درسی مختلف». تازه‌های علوم شناختی. سال 7. شماره 3. صص 42-50. Retrieved from < http://icssjournal.ir/article-1-165-fa.html>
  5. مهدی‌اخگر، سمیه و میر حسن سیدعامری (1396). «بررسی تأثیر آموزش راهبردهای خودتنظیمی (شناختی و فراشناختی و مدیریت منابع) بر باورهای انگیزشی در دانشجویان تربیت بدنی ارومیه». ارائه‌شده در چهارمین کنفرانس بین‌المللی تربیت بدنی و علوم ورزشی. تهران.
  6. وکیلی‌فرد، امیررضا و شراره خالقی‌زاده (1391). «رابطه‌ جنسیت و به‌کارگیری راهبردهای یادگیری زبان فارسی به‌عنوان زبان دوم». پژوهش‌نامه‌ی آموزش زبان فارسی به غیرفارسی‌زبانان. دورة 1. شماره‌ 1. صص 59-25.
  7. Al-Alwan, A., Asassfeh, S. & Al-Shboul, Y. (2013). EFL learners' listening comprehension and awareness of metacognitive strategies: How are they related? International Education Studies, 6(9), 31-39. https://doi.org/doi.org/10.5539/ies.v6n9p31
  8. Alizadeh Oghyanous, P. & Khabiri, M. (2017). The effect of teaching metacognitive listening strategy during shadowing activity on field-dependent and field-independent EFL learners’ listening comprehension. The Journal of English Language Pedagogy and Practice, 10(21), 1-28. https://sid.ir/paper/181299/en
  9. Anderson, N. J. (2005). L2 learning strategies. In E. Hinkel (Ed), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 757-772). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. https://doi.org/10.12691/education-2-9-17
  10. Bachman, L. F. & Palmer, A. S. (1996). Language testing in practice. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.2307/328718
  11. Bachman, L. F. (1990). Fundamental Considerations in Language Testing. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1191/0265532203lt268xx
  12. Bozorgian, H. (2012). Metacognitive instruction does improve listening comprehension. International Scholarly Research Notices, 2012(1), 734085. https://doi.org/10.5402/2012/734085.
  13. Brown, G. & G. Yule. )1983(. Teaching the spoken language. Cambridge University Press. https://assets.cambridge.org/97805212/73848/excerpt/9780521273848_excerpt.pdf
  14. Canale, M. & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics 1, 1–47. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Merrill-Swain/publication/31260438_
  15. Canale, M. (1983a). From communicative competence to communicative language pedagogy. In Richards, J. C. and Schmidt, R. W. (Eds), Language and communication (pp. 2-27). Longman. https://www.scirp.org/reference/ReferencesPapers?ReferenceID=1893385
  16. Canale, M. (1983b). On some dimensions of language proficiency. In Oller, J. W. (Ed.), Issues in language testing research (pp. 333–342). Newbury House. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/251231685_
  17. Carrell, P. L. & Grabe, W. (2010). Reading. In Schmitt, N. (Ed.), An Introduction to Applied Linguistics (2nd ed., pp. 215-231). Arnold. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2011.05.003
  18. Celce-Murcia, M., Dӧrnyei, Z. & Thurrell, S. (1995). Communicative competence: a pedagogically motivated model with content specifications. Issues in Applied Linguistics, 2, 5-35. https://doi.org/10.5070/L462005216
  19. Chamot, A. U. & O’Malley, J. M. (1986). The cognitive academic language learning approach: An ESL content-based curriculum. National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education. https://doi.org/10.2307/3586733
  20. Cresswell, A. (2000). Self-monitoring in student writing: developing learner responsibility. ELT Journal, 54(13), 235-244. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/54.3.235
  21. Ehrich, J. F. & Henderson, D. B. (2018). Rasch analysis of the metacognitive awareness listening questionnaire (MALQ). International Journal of Listening, 1-13. https://doi.org/0.1080/10904018.2017.1418350
  22. Field, J. (2008). Listening in the language classroom. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511575945
  23. Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34, 906–911. https://doi.org10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906
  24. Mehrdad, A. G., Ahghar, M. R., & Ahghar, M. (2012). The effect of teaching cognitive and metacognitive strategies on EFL students' reading comprehension across proficiency levels. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 3757-3763. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.06.142
  25. Goh, C. C., & Taib, Y. (2006). Metacognitive instruction in listening for young learners. ELT Journal, 60(3), 222-232. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccl002
  26. Goh, C. C. (2000). A cognitive perspective on language learners' listening comprehension problems. System, 28(1), 55-75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(99)00060-3
  27. Goh, C. C., & Hu, G. (2014). Exploring the relationship between metacognitive awareness and listening performance with questionnaire data. Language awareness, 23(3), 255-274. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2013.769558.
  28. Goh, C. C. M. (2014). Second language listening comprehension: Process and pedagogy. In Celece-Murcia, M., Brinton, D. M. & Snow, M. A (Eds), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (4th edition, pp. 72-89). National Geographic Learning. https://hdl.handle.net/10497/26936
  29. Haghighi, M., Rashtchi, M., & Birjand, P. (2019). Developing and validating a questionnaire to assess strategic competence in EFL listening performance: A structural equation modeling approach. Research in English Language Pedagogy (RELP), 7(2), 336-362. https://doi.org/10.30486/relp.2019.665886
  30. Johnson, K. & Johnson, H. (Eds.) (1999). Encyclopedic dictionary of applied linguistics. Blackwell Publishers Ltd. https://ia601607.us.archive.org/6/items/ilhem_20150414_1522/[Keith_Johnson,_Helen_Johnson]_Encyclopedic_Dictio.pdf
  31. Karimi, A. (2014). Applying listening comprehension strategies: A case study of pre-university learners Persian language learners. Journal of Teaching Persian Language to Non-Persian Speakers, 3(2), 69-102. [In Persian]
  32. Kassem, H. M. (2015). The relationship between listening strategies used by Egyptian EFL college sophomores and their listening comprehension and self-efficacy. English Language Teaching, 8(2), 153-169. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v8n2p153
  33. Lv, F. & Chen, H. (2010). A study of metacognitive-strategies-based writing instruction for vocational college students. English Language Teaching, 3(3), 136-144. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v3n3p136
  34. Lynch, T. & Mendelson, D. (2010). Listening. In N. Schmitt (Ed.), An introduction to applied linguistics (2nd ed., pp. 180-196). Hodder & Stoughton Ltd. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2011.05.003
  35. Macaro, E. (2009). Developments in language learner strategies. Contemporary applied linguistics: Language teaching and learning, 1, 10-36.
  36. Maleki B. (2005) The effects of teaching cognitive and metacognitive strategies in increasing the learning and retention of different school texts. Advances in Cognitive Sciences, 7(3), 42-50. http://icssjournal.ir/article-1-165-fa.html [In Persian]
  37. Martínez-Flor, A. & Usó-Juan, E. (2006). Towards acquiring communicative competence through listening. In Usó-Juan E. & Martínez-Flor, A. (Eds), Current trends in the development and teaching of the four language skills (pp. 29-46). Mouton de Gruyter.
  38. Mehdi Akhgar, S., & Ameri, M. H. (2016). Investigation of the effect of teaching self-regulation strategies (cognitive and metacognitive and resource management) on motivational beliefs in physical education students of Urmia. Paper presented at The 4th International Conference on Physical Education and Sports Sciences. Tehran [In Persian].
  39. Mendelson, D. J. (2006). Learning how to listen using learning strategies. In In Usó-Juan E. & Martínez-Flor, A. (Eds.), Current trends in the development and teaching of the four language skills (pp. 76-89). Germany: Mouton de Gruyter.
  40. Namaziandost, E., Neisi, L., Mahdavirad, F. & Nasri, M. (2019). The relationship between listening comprehension problems and strategy usage among advance EFL learners. Cogent Psychology, 6(1), 1691338. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311908.2019.1691338
  41. O’Malley, J. M., Chamot, A. U., Stewner-Manzanares, G., Russo, R. P. & Küpper, L. (1985). Learning strategy applications with students of English as a second language. TESOL Quarterly, 19, 557-584. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ325379
  42. Oxford, R. L. (2018). Language learning strategies. In Burns, A. & Richards, J. C. (Eds.), The Cambridge guide to learning English as a second language (pp. 81-90). Cambridge University Press.
  43. Panahandeh, E. & Esfandiari-Asl, S. (2014). The effect of planning and monitoring as metacognitive strategies on Iranian EFL learners' argumentative writing accuracy. In International Conference on Current Trends in ELT, Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 1409–1416. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.559
  44. Rahimi, M. & Abedi, S. (2014). The relationship between listening self-efficacy and metacognitive awareness of listening strategies. International Conference on Current Trends in ELT, Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 1454–1460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.565
  45. Rahimi, M. & Katal, M. (2012). The role of metacognitive listening strategies awareness and podcast-use readiness in using podcasting for learning English as a foreign language. Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 1153–1161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.01.025
  46. Rahimian, J. & Sedighifar, Z. (2019). Academic Achievement and Self-Regulation Strategies For Learning Persian as a Second Language. Journal of Teaching Persian to Speakers of Other Languages, 8(2), 3-20. [In Persian] https://doi.org/10.30479/jtpsol.2019.9009.1382
  47. Rahimirad, M. & Shams, M. R. (2014). The effect of activating metacognitive strategies on the listening performance and metacognitive awareness of EFL students. International Journal of Listening, 28(3), 162-176. https://doi.org/10.1080/10904018.2014.902315
  48. Rashtchi, M. & Khani, P. (2010). Improving EFL learners’ oral proficiency through metacognitive strategy instruction. JELS, 1(4), 137-156. https://journals.iau.ir/article_510809_bb2b97c39be1aee9f08c85a0adbc0a37.pdf
  49. Renzhi, Y. (2012). Improving English listening self-efficacy of Chinese university students- influences of learning strategy training with feedback on strategy use and performance [Master’s theses, Durham University]. http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/3503/
  50. Richards, J. C. & Schmidt, R. (2010). Longman dictionary of language teaching and applied linguistics (4th ed.). Pearson Education Limited. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315833835
  51. Rost, M. (2006). Areas of research that influence L2 listening instruction. In In Usó-Juan E. & Martínez-Flor, A. (Eds.), Current Trends in the Development and Teaching of the Four Language Skills (pp. 47-74). Mouton de Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110197778.2.47
  52. Sheorey, R. & Mokhtari, K. (2001). Differences in the metacognitive awareness of reading strategies among native and non-native readers. System, 29(4), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(01)00039-2.
  53. Shirani-Bidabadi, F. & Yamat, H. (2011). The relationship between listening strategies used by Iranian EFL freshman university students and their listening proficiency levels. English Language Teaching, 4(1), 26-32. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v4n1p26
  54. Sotoude nama, E. & Taghipour, F. (2010). On the relationships among motivation, metacognitive awareness of listening strategies and listening proficiency of Iranian EFL learners. Zabanpazhuhi (Journal of Language Research), 1(2), 25-52. https://doi.org/10.22051/jlr.2014.1041 [In Persian]
  55. Tafaroji-Yeganeh, M. (2013). Metacognitive listening strategies awareness in monolingual versus bilingual EFL learners. Akdeniz Language Studies Conference (2012), Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 70, 1787–1793. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.01.254
  56. Usó-Juan, E. & Martínez-Flor, A. (Eds.). (2006). Current trends in the development and teaching of the four language skills. Mouton de Gruyter. https://www.redalyc.org/pdf/2870/287024055012.pdf
  57. Vakilifard, A. & Khaleghizade, S. (2012). The relation between gender and using learning strategies for Persian language as a second language. Journal of Teaching Persian to Non-Persian Speakers, 1(1), 25-60. [In Persian]
  58. Vandergrift, L. & Tafaghodtari, M. H. (2010). Teaching L2 learners how to listen does make a difference: An empirical study. Language Learning, 60(2), 470–497. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2009.00559.x
  59. Vandergrift, L. (2005). Relationships among motivation orientations, metacognitive awareness and proficiency in L2 listening. Applied Linguistics, 26(1), 70-89. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/applin/amh039
  60. Vandergrift, L. (2011).Second language listening; presage, process, product, and pedagogy. In Hinkel, E. (Ed), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (Vol. II, pp. 455-471). Taylor & Francis e-Library.
  61. Vandergrift, L., Goh, C. C. M., Mareschal, C. J. & Tafaghodtari. M. H. (2006). The metacognitive awareness listening questionnaire: Development and validation. Language Learning, 56(3), 431–462. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2006.00373.x
  62. Young, R. F.  (2011). Interactional competence in language learning, teaching, and testing. In Hinkel, E. (Ed), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (Vol. II, pp.426-443). Taylor & Francis e-Library. https://dokumen.pub/the-routledge-handbook-of-second-language-acquisition-and-pragmatics-first-edition-0815349769-9780815349761.html
  63. Zarrabi, F. (2020). Investigating the relationship between learning style and metacognitive listening awareness. International Journal of Listening, 34(1), 21-33. https://doi.org/10.1080/10904018.2016.1276458
آمار
تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 365
تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 372


سامانه مدیریت نشریات علمی. طراحی و پیاده سازی از سیناوب