۲.۶ General proficiency in listening comprehension
Cohen (2004) described as investigating successful listeners versus unsuccessful listeners .Successful listening measured in a number of different ways. According to (O’Malley, 1989)said that participants were simply designated as successful or otherwise by their teachers. Young (1996) contended about the students self-rated listening proficiency and Vandergrift (1997b, 1998a, 1998b) said that success was assessed qualitatively by the researcher via the analysis of the participants’ verbal protocols. Vogely (1995), Osada(2001), and Chien and Wei(1998)said comprehension assess via free recall tasks ;In order to describe measure other aspects of learner competence for ensure that listening strategies is not influenced, Laviosa (2000:134) said about general proficiency level in the target language . O’Malley (1989) study the student unequal ‘general proficiency’ also unequal linguistic knowledge .Here unsuccessful listeners reported using different strategies from successful listeners. The latter seem to the text in to larger chunks and link’ concatenated’ segments of text together rather than focus on individual words. For example selective attention (strategy is for perception),’elaboration’ and ‘inferencing’ (strategy for using the phase) were also we mark the successful listener as self- monitoring. ‘Elaboration’ inferencing ‘ and self-monitoring also is important in top-down strategy as well as meta cognition incoming the text. Problematic using ‘general proficiency’ as control by exploring the relationship between strategies used and listening success. Proficiency applied to four language skills regardless of chorological age and number of years that language studied. Long (1990) found that when subjects possessed an appropriate or relevant content knowledge, learners’ L2 proficiency seemed less critical because content knowledge might compensate for L2 proficiency, at least in L2 listening comprehension. Schmidt-Rinehart (1994) said that topic familiarity affected the scores on recall measures, and students, regardless of listening proficiency levels, scored higher on the familiar passage. However, Chiang and Dunkel (1992) conducted that content knowledge did not support comprehension of listening to monologue texts, whereas L2 proficiency played a significant role in the degree of L2 listening comprehension demonstrated. Similarly, Jensen and Hansen (1995) said that listening comprehension performance of L2 learners was mainly affected by their level of L2 proficiency, not by their prior knowledge. Sum up studies are required to establish the relationship between content knowledge and L2 proficiency in L2 listening comprehension, especially in examining the specific roles learners’ L2 proficiency and content knowledge play in comprehension. Vandergrift (1998a) perceived about novice-level students rely more heavy on prior know ledge in order to compensate large chunks of unfamiliar input. Intermediate students because they less rely on the schematic knowledge and they can’t overwhelm the stream of speech. Vandergrift(1997b) said that more successful listener used significantly more’ comprehension monitoring’ and meta comprehension strategy in general and they can over coming cognitive constrints in working memory by strategic and less successful the listeners used more’ translating’. Vandergrift (2004:463) Said that finding contribute to ‘an emerging skilled listeners’. Thus successful listeners using different strategies from an unsuccessful one. Less skilled listeners usually adopting the first one, do mental translation due to heavy reliance on the automatically activated lexicon of L1 to decode the oral message. On the other hand assumed to use the more advanced ones who can access meaning in the L2 lexicon due to a rich exposure and a faster activation. Ishler (2010)Although both models mixed constitute the overall listening comprehension competence , the degree of integrating them depends on the overall language proficiency . Higgins (1996,p.68) said that is more time consuming than the second and characterizes less skilled listeners who have not developed “automatization of lexicon activation”. Vandergrift(2007)For this reason, it is recommended to let listeners who are still in the initial stages of developing listening comprehension skills more processing time .
۲.۷ Empirical research about listening comprehension
According to Huei chun (2001) investigated the effects of syntactic modification and speech rate on EFL listening comprehension. That study were 168 college students in Taiwan. He had four versions of the listening passage on syntactic modification (unmodified/paraphrase/simple sentence/mixed), plus two different speech rates (average/ slow) for each syntactic version, there were altogether eight versions of the listening passage. Subjects were assigned to one of the eight experimental groups according to the results of a randomized complete block design. After listening to the passage, subjects completed a cloze test. The results confirm the significant role played by speech modification in L2 listening comprehension. The study offers empirical evidences for the facilitating effects of syntactic modification and slower speech rate. Rost (2005) & zhaho(1997) said that empirical research on the effects of vary speech rate on foreign you listening comprehension produced mixed results.
Another research according to Hayati (2010) investigated the effect of speech rate on listening comprehension of Iranian EFL learners. That study population were 108 EFL learners majoring sampling from Abadan Islamic Azad University. Based on an ECCE proficiency test, 62 participants chosen and divided into two homogeneous groups of 31. One group had exposure to natural speech rate and the other to slow speech rate of listening materials. After thirteen academic sessions, the results the paired t-test regarding the pre-tests and post-tests of the two group means showed that both differences (group one: -2.83 and group two: -1.22) were significant at 0.05 levels (P 0.05). That study showed that, whether natural or slow, could improve EFL learners listening comprehension; however, natural speech rate could demonstrate greater improvements than slow speech rate in EFL learners’ listening comprehension. According to Kawashima Hideyo (2010)studied about the Effects of English Spoken Hints on the Listening Comprehension of the Japanese Learner of English in Nihon University, Graduate School of Social and Cultural. Accordingly, if instructors want to provide hints orally, they will need to do so in L2 yet at present little is known about the effect of such hints. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of providing the Japanese learner with English spoken hints on the listening exercise; if English spoken hints positively affect the listening comprehension, what characters were composed of the hint. The findings of this study will give us better understanding of the effect of advanced hints on the listening comprehension and will especially be beneficial to language instructors who want to provide advanced hints in oral English in the listening class.
۲.۸ Role’s of listeners in the classroom
Speak about the teacher about the listening in the classroom given to learners some degree of control over the content of lesson, personalize text for learners able to bring something of themselves to the task. According to Underwood (1989) said that seven potential problems that could hinder listening comprehension. First, the speed of delivery is beyond the control of listeners. According to (Underwood, 1989, p.16) contended that “Many language learners believe that the greatest difficulty with listening comprehension, as opposed to reading comprehension, is that listener cannot control how quickly a speaker speaks” Second, it is not always possible for learners to have words repeated. According to (Underwood, 1989, p.17) said that in the classroom, it is the teacher who decided whether or not a recording or a section of recording needs to be replayed. It is “hard forth teacher to judge whether or not the students have understood any particular section of what they have heard” Third, the small size of the learner vocabulary frequently impedes listening comprehension. The speaker does not always use words the listener knows. As listeners encounter a new word, they stop to figure out the meaning of that word, and they therefore, miss the next part of the speech. Fourth, listeners can not recognize the signals that the speaker using to move from one part to another, for example, or repeat. Discourse markers which are utilized in formal situations (i.e., firstly, and after that) are relatively clear to listeners. However, in