Chapter Six Conclusion
The major findings of the present study are summarized in the first section, followed by some pedagogical implications in the second section. Finally, the limitations of the present study and suggestions for future research are also presented.
Summary
The present study investigates the relationship between Taiwanese junior high school EFL students’ textbook activity preference and four learner variables, including perceptual learning styles, motivational intensity, language achievement, and gender. A student questionnaire, including Reid’s (1987) Perceptual Learning Style Preference Questionnaire, Gardner’s (1985) Motivational Intensity Questionnaire, and Textbook Activity Preference Questionnaire, was given to 345 second-year junior high school students. The collected data were analyzed by computing descriptive statistics, ANOVA, and t-tests. The major findings are summarized below.
1. Students’ and teachers’ textbook activity preference
The mean of student participants’ preference for textbook activities (M=2.94) is below the average (3.0, with the range of one and five), which indicates that they did not have strong preference for textbook activities. In contrast, the teacher participants displayed significantly higher preference for textbook activities (M=3.89) than the student participants. The apparent difference between students’ and teachers’
preferences for textbook activities may be due to the textbook selection procedure. In most junior high schools in Taiwan, the version of textbook is mainly decided by teachers (Lin, 2003; Chan, 2003). Thus, it is not surprising that teachers display high preferences for the textbook that they themselves chose. However, students in the
present study showed that they did not feel in the same way as their teachers, which indicates that if teachers hope their students learn more actively and more efficiently, they may need to take the student preference into consideration in their selection of textbooks.
As to the activities preferred by students and teacher participants, there also appears to be some difference. The student participants preferred the activities which they did not have to make much effort to complete while the teacher participants preferred the activities which could be well-controlled and which had a precise, single right answer defined in advance. For the activities least preferred by student and teacher participants, there appears apparent similarity. However, while students disliked the activities because they thought it difficult to do those activities, teachers disliked the same activities for different reasons. When teachers exert the textbook activities in class, they often take into consideration their students’ English proficiency, the classroom management, and the time limit instead of their personal preferences.
2. Textbook activity preference and perceptual learning style
The Taiwanese junior high school students in the present study expressed strong preferences for auditory, group, and kinesthetic learning styles, but weak preferences for visual, tactile, and individual learning. To be specific, the students in the present study preferred auditory learning style the most and individual learning style the least.
As to the relationship between textbook activity preference and perceptual learning style, the result of the present study reveals that students’ overall preference for textbook activities is significantly related to their perceptual learning style.
Students of different learning styles preferred different types of textbook activities, which corresponds to the findings of earlier research that students may prefer different
types of activities depending on their learning styles (Reid, 1987). However, the result also shows that students of different learning styles had the same preference for some of the textbook activities. This may be due to the attributes of these activities. For example, visual, kinesthetic, and individual students all liked to do sentence pattern practice by imitating the examples on the textbook. To be specific, the activity requires students to “look at” an example and “write down” another sentence “by themselves.” Such kind of activity is the combination of different style nature and may be suitable for students of different learning styles. On the other hand, students of all learning style modes are found to have lower preference for the same activities;
most of them are classified as difficult activities, one of them requires students to do an oral activity alone, and one demands students’ extra time to survey and fill in tables. This indicates that students in the present study would lose their interest in the activities that seem difficult for them, that they have to spend extra time to complete, and that requires them to speak alone in class no matter what learning style they had.
3. Textbook activity preference and motivational intensity
Students in the present study did not express strong motivational intensity for their English learning. The mean score of their motivational intensity was slightly above the average (M=3.11, within the range of one and five).
As for the relationship between textbook activity preference and motivational intensity, result of the present study displays that students’ overall textbook activity preference is significantly related to their motivational intensity, which implies that students’ motivational intensity may affect their preferences for textbook activities.
Students of different motivational intensity levels are also found to different types of activities. To be specific, there appears to be more difference in the activities preferred by high- and low-MI students than those preferred high- and mid-MI students and by mid- and low-MI students. Moreover, the mean scores of the entire
top ten activities preferred by low-MI students are under the average (3.0, within the range of one and five), which indicates that students that had low motivational intensity in the present study tend to have negative attitude toward any of the textbook activities. This may reveal that when teachers chose the version of textbook, they did not consider seriously the preference of their students that had low motivational intensity. Besides, there seems to be more similarity among the activities least preferred by students of different motivational intensity levels. Specifically, six of the eight activities least preferred by students of all motivational intensity levels are classified as difficult activities in the TAPQ. From the attributes of the eight activities, it is found that no matter what motivational intensity level students have, they did not like to do difficult activities, especially writing and oral presentation; besides, they did not like to do an oral activity alone in class or spend extra time to survey and complete a task.
4. Textbook activity preference and language achievement
High-achievers are found to have significantly higher preference for textbook activities than mid- and low achievers. The results may imply that high-achievers’
preferences for textbook activities are higher than mid- and low achievers because teachers incline to choose textbooks that better meet the needs of high-achievers.
Another possible explanation may be that as mentioned above, high-achievers are usually found to have stronger motivational intensity than mid- and low achievers.
According to McDonough (2002), students that had strong learning motivation are often able to engage in learning activities more actively, to tolerate the inevitable frustrations, and to persevere in the face of impatience or boredom. As to the activities preferred by students of different English achievement levels, there appear to be more differences in the activities preferred by high- and low achievers. High-achievers preferred more tactile/writing activities while low achievers preferred simple
activities that would not make them feel pressured. On the other hand, as to the activities least preferred by high-, mid-, and low achievers, six of the bottom ten activities preferred by them are the same, four of which are classified as difficult activities in the TAPQ. The results demonstrate that all of the students in the present study did not show high preference for writing beyond sentence level, story telling either in groups or by oneself, and they did not prefer to do an oral activity alone in class or spend extra time on an assignment regardless of their motivational intensity level.
5. Textbook activity preference and gender
Female students expressed significantly higher preference than male ones. To be specific, female students displayed strong preference for sixteen of the textbook activities while male ones expressed high preference for only five of the textbook activities. The reason why female students had higher preference for textbook activities may be because female students usually expressed stronger self-beliefs in learning languages, received higher grades, and therefore had more positive attitude towards language learning than male students (Pajares & Valiante, 2001). Besides, there are only three male teachers among 26 English teachers in total in the researcher’s school; therefore, the fact that the version of textbook was chose mainly by female teachers may explain why female students had higher textbook activity preference. However, it still needs further research because there is no related research in this field.
Instead of doing activities that require them to speak by themselves or to sing, male students liked to do activities quietly by themselves, such as listen-and-repeat or listening activities. They also preferred to learn by using charts in tense description, to play crossword games, and to make a Christmas card. The results indicate that teachers should pay more attention to the needs and learning preference of their male
students so as to increase their participation in the learning activities in class. On the other hand, the bottom ten activities preferred by male and female students are almost the same, which indicates there is only little gender difference in the bottom ten preferred activities. Among the nine activities least preferred by both male and female students, seven of them are classified as difficult activities in the TAPQ while one requires students to do an oral activity alone and the other one asks students to spend extra time surveying and filling in tables.
Pedagogical Implications
Based on the findings of the present study, some implications could be drawn for EFL teachers and material designers in Taiwan.
First, results of the present study demonstrate that students’ preference for textbook activities is significantly related to their perceptual learning style; therefore, teachers’ should be aware of their students’ perceptual learning styles. Before they exert learning/teaching activities in the classroom, they should try to design the activities that can attend to students’ diverse learning styles and compensate for their weakness. Similarly, Mosston and Ashworth (cited in Kroonenberg, 1995) maintained that a skillful teacher should be able to “move deliberately from style to style as the objectives change from one teaching episode to another”. Moreover, teachers should be able to analyze their textbooks to see whether the textbook activities are suitable for their students or are able to meet the needs of their students. If the textbook chosen is not suitable for students or does not take students’ individual characteristics into consideration, teachers have to rough-tune classroom activities to accommodate different students’ needs. If students’ characteristics can be more appropriately addressed in the classroom environment, teachers’ instructions will be more effective.
Besides, because students in a class may have various learning styles, if teachers feel it inefficient and difficult to design activities only for students of one learning style, they may design activities that could combine the nature of different learning styles. Kinsella (1995) stated that by constantly creating all kinds of teaching activities for the students, teachers would be able to prompt the development of multiplicity and learn to efficiently transmit the material to be covered. In this way, students may stretch their potentials by learning through alternative styles. According to the result of the study, students of different learning styles may prefer the same activity. For example, kinesthetic, group, and individual students all preferred to practice reading the dialogue with CD; visual, kinesthetic, and individual students all preferred to do sentence pattern by imitating an example on the textbook; kinesthetic and tactile students both liked to match the words heard from the CD to the pictures on the textbook. All these activities require students to learn through different learning modes at one time. Therefore, if teachers can design activities combining different style nature, they may be able to attend to the needs of students of different learning styles and their instruction would be more efficient.
In addition, the current study confirms that junior high school students’
preference for textbook activities is significantly related to their motivational intensity.
Students that had high motivational intensity also had stronger preference for textbook activities. Thus, it is suggested that besides considering students’ learning styles, teachers should try to enhance students’ learning motivation in order to have them participate in the learning process more actively. In order to enhance students’
learning motivation, teachers or family members are supposed to provide students more opportunities to learn or use English not only in the classroom but also in their daily life. In this way, English will not be only a school subject that they have to learn in formal school setting. Crookes and Schmidt (2001) also pointed out that relevance,
including personal needs, is one important factor to affect students’ motivation. Thus, teachers should pay more attention to the needs and learning attitudes or administer questionnaires to their students if possible before they design or modify the leaning/teaching activities so as to make their teaching relevant to the students and get students personally involved in the learning process in the classroom. By doing this, teachers could present the activities in a more motivating way. Furthermore, teachers should try to foster a pleasant, supportive classroom. Under such circumstances, students would feel easy and safe and would be more willing to participate in the classroom activities.
Moreover, the results reveal that regardless of such factors as learning style, motivational intensity, language achievement, and gender, all the students in the present study all inclined to disfavor difficult activities or activities in which they have to do an oral activity alone or spend extra time doing a survey. It is reasonable to assume that students that do not have enough English proficiency may not favor the activities they could not do well. However, even high-achievers or high-MI students in the present study disliked doing difficult activities; this may be due to the way teachers implement these activities. According to the teacher questionnaire, some teachers did not like their students to do these difficult activities either because they thought it was time-consuming and that many of the students in their class were not able to complete them while as a teacher, they hoped most of their students could participate in the classroom activities, and often ask their students to prepare these activities, such as writing a paragraph or making a story at home in order to save time for other classroom activities or practice. Although this kind of activity seems difficult for students, they can still learn a lot in the activities if the teachers spend some time guiding their students to complete the activities. Therefore, if teachers think students still need to practice writing or speaking in these activities, they should
provide students with the opportunity to fully participate in and enjoy these activities in class. Besides, the reason why students did not like to spend extra time doing an assignment may be owing to the fact that 66.4 percent of the students in the present study had to go to cram school after class; therefore, they may not have enough time or may be unwilling to do extra assignments after class.
Finally, since learning style preferences and motivational intensity levels are different among students, material designers should conduct some survey on Taiwanese junior high school students’ learning styles, motivations, and interests before they develop teaching materials and design learning/teaching activities.
Furthermore, the material designers are supposed to survey teachers and students preferences for textbook activities so as to increase the activities that both students and teachers prefer and to avoid or adapt activities that students and teachers least preferred. The materials and activities designed thereof may ease teachers’ burden of designing lessons or adapting unsuitable learning/teaching activities for students and may help teachers’ instruction become more effective and students learn more actively. Moreover, variety should be added when material writers design the learning/teaching activities in order to maintain students’ interest in learning.
Limitations of the Present Study and Suggestions for Future Research
There are several limitations of the present study.
First, the present study only looked into the relationship of 336 second-year junior high school students’ perceptual learning style preference, motivational intensity, language achievement, and gender to their preferences for textbook activities in Taipei. Therefore, the generalizations of the results may not apply to subjects in other junior high schools in Taiwan or to subjects with a different educational background. It is suggested that a larger sample from different schools or
in different parts of Taiwan should be investigated in order to obtain a clearer picture of the effect of perceptual learning style and motivation on Taiwanese junior high school students’ preferences for textbook activities.
Second, in the present study, the questionnaire was the only instrument for data collection. Although the questionnaire is convenient for statistical analyses and objective group descriptions, the subjects are not given ample opportunities to express their personal opinions and thus may not provide sufficient insights into the relationship among students’ perceptual learning style, motivation and textbook activity preference. Besides, the subjects may not precisely reflect their actual situation because some learners might be unwilling to express their true opinion or might not fully comprehend the questionnaire item descriptions. Thus, it is suggested that multiple instruments, such as interviews and classroom observation, may be used to get a better understanding of the factors that affect students’ preference for textbook activities.
Third, the factors that may affect students’ preference may go beyond learners’ learning style, motivation, achievement, and gender. Other factors, such as learners’ former learning experience, their personality, the teacher-student relationship, and so on, may also affect their preference for textbook activities.
Moreover, the components of motivation included not only motivational intensity, but also other forms, such as intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation, etc. Therefore, it is suggested that in addition to learning style, motivational intensity, achievement, and gender, other factors also need further investigation in future studies.
Fourth, the item descriptions in the Textbook Activity Preference Questionnaire are based on the written instructions in the current textbook. However, some teachers may not implement the activities completely according to the textbook instructions; For example, some teachers may ask students to do tongue twisters in
class individually while some teachers may asks students to do it together. Besides, although some activities just ask students to read aloud, some teachers may ask their students to write down the sentences they make, too. Therefore, the questionnaire item descriptions may need revising for further research.
Finally, students’ English achievement was determined by their final course grades, including the average scores of the three monthly exams, homework, quizzes, and students performance and participation in classroom activities. Since the scores were not obtained in a standardized test, they may not be objective and consistent, and may reflect the instructors’ subjective judgments. The use of final course grades as measures of achievement may result in inconsistent results and may lack reliability and validity, especially across different classes. Consequently, further research should use a standardized test as a measure of the subjects’ English achievement.
