兩種記筆記活動對於大學生英語聽力之影響

全文

(1)國立屏東大學英語學系碩士班碩士論文指導教授：王彩姿博士. 兩種記筆記活動對於大學生英語聽力之影響 The Effects of Two Types of Note-taking Activities on College Students’ Listening Comprehension. 研究生：楊慶宏撰中華民國一零四年七月.

(2)

(3)

(4) ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First, and most of all, I would like to thank my advisor Dr. Tsae-tzy Wang for her guidance, patience and engagement through the process of this master thesis. Without her help this thesis would not have been possible. Second, I would like to thank my committee members, Dr. Hsiu-hsiu Yang and Dr. Yao-feng Huang, for their valuable comments, encouragement, and suggestions. Also, I express my gratitude to Dr. Ching-yi Tseng and Dr. Luke Colgan who help me to conduct this experiment in their classes. Finally, I would like to thank my parents and Pearl for their assistance and support during this long process. In addition, I would also like to thank my friend Yeng-feng Chen who helped contribute to this project.. i.

(5) 摘要本研究旨在探討兩種記筆記活動對於大學生聽力能力之影響。其研究對象為南部一所大學英語系一年級之學生，共兩班一百一十六位同學參與，其中一班隨機指定為實驗組接受一般正式的記筆記活動，另一班則為對照組接受個人風格的記筆記活動。此聽力活動進行十週，包括前測、後測、面談與八個記筆記的聽力活動，並使用學生背景問卷與聽力活動反饋問卷來探討學生對於此實驗過程的態度。首先，本研究將學生依照聽力能力分為高、中、低群組後，發現記筆記活動對於高能力群組有顯著的影響，而其他兩組則無。第二，實驗組中，一般正式的記筆記活動僅對於高能力組有顯著的影響，對於其他兩組則無。對照組中，個人風格的記筆記活動對於高能力與中能力群組有顯著的影響，而低能力群組則無。第三，據問卷的結果顯示，學生在聽力過程中所面臨的主要三個困難是：播放速度、聽力內容的熟悉度以及發音的腔調。本研究提供了英語教師教學啟示，亦提供未來研究相關議題建議。. 關鍵字：記筆記活動、聽力能力、聽力困難. ii.

(6) ABSTRACT This study aims to examine the effects of two types of note-taking activities on college students’ listening abilities. There were one hundred sixteen students from a Taiwanese southern college to participate in this research. The researcher randomly selected one class to receive note-taking activities with a formal style and the other class to receive note-taking activities with personal styles. The researcher took ten weeks to conduct this experiment, which included the pre-test, the post-test, and eight note-taking activities. Besides, the researcher utilized questionnaires to collect students’ background information and attitudes toward note-taking strategy. To begin with, the researcher divided participants into high, intermediate, and low proficiency groups and found out that note-taking activities only had a significant effect on the high proficiency group. The intermediate and low proficiency groups did not have a significant improvement on their listening abilities after the experiment. Second, in the experimental group, note-taking activities with a formal study only had a significant effect on the high proficiency group. The other groups did not perform any significant improvement on their listening abilities. In contrast, note-taking activities with personal styles had significant effects on the high and intermediate proficiency groups; only the low proficiency group did not significantly improve their listening abilities. Third, according to the results of questionnaires, three main difficulties in listening were the speed of delivery, the familiarity with the listening content, and articulators’ accents. Based on the results, the researcher offered pedagogical implications for English teachers, and also suggestions for further research. Keywords: note-taking activities, listening abilities, listening difficulties. iii.

(7) TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS...............................................................................................i CHINESE ABSTRACT.....................................................................................................ii ENGLISH ABSTRACT....................................................................................................iii TABLE OF CONTENTS..................................................................................................iv LIST OF FIGURES........................................................................................................viii LIST OF TABLES.............................................................................................................ix CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION …………………………………………………..1 Background of the Problems .................................................................................... 1 The Purpose of the Study ......................................................................................... 2 Research Questions ................................................................................................... 3 The Significance of the Study ................................................................................... 3 Definition of Terms ................................................................................................... 4 CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................. 5 Frameworks of Learning Strategies ........................................................................ 5 Cognitive strategies ................................................................................................... 8 Social and affective strategies .................................................................................. 9 Difficulties and Factors Influencing Listening Comprehension ......................... 10 Framework of Listening Strategies ....................................................................... 14 Cognitive strategies ................................................................................................. 15 Socioaffective strategies .......................................................................................... 16 Listening Strategy Practices ................................................................................... 16 Investigation of Listening Strategy Use................................................................. 19. iv.

(8) Note-taking .............................................................................................................. 21 Note-taking in Language Learning ................................................................. 21 Note-taking in General Learning .................................................................... 24 CHAPTER THREE METHODOLOGY ...................................................................... 28 Pilot Study ................................................................................................................ 28 Participants....................................................................................................... 28 Instruments and Materials............................................................................... 29 Data Collection ................................................................................................. 29 Data Analysis .................................................................................................... 30 Formal Study ........................................................................................................... 31 Participants....................................................................................................... 31 Instruments and Materials............................................................................... 31 The Listening Comprehension Test ................................................................. 32 Questionnaires.................................................................................................. 32 Eight Note-taking Activities ............................................................................. 32 Experimental Design........................................................................................ 33 Data Analysis .................................................................................................... 37 CHAPTER FOUR RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ..................................................... 38 The Effect of Note-taking Activities on College Students’ Listening Abilities ... 38 Discussion................................................................................................................. 40 The Effects of Using NTF and NTP on Students’ Listening Abilities ................. 41 The Effects of NTF on Students’ Listening Abilities ...................................... 43 Discussion......................................................................................................... 44. v.

(9) The Effects of NTP on Students’ Listening Abilities ...................................... 45 Discussion......................................................................................................... 46 Participants’ Opinions and Attitudes toward Note-taking Activities ................. 47 Students’ Background Information ................................................................ 47 All Students’ Attitudes toward the First Note-taking Activity ........................ 52 Students’ Attitudes toward NTF ...................................................................... 53 Students’ Attitudes toward NTP ...................................................................... 55 Students’ Note-taking Strategies Use .............................................................. 57 Students’ Listening Strategy Use ..................................................................... 59 Students’ Listening Difficulties in Note-taking Activities ............................... 61 CHAPTER FIVE CONCLUSION ................................................................................ 64 Summary .................................................................................................................. 64 Pedagogical Implications ........................................................................................ 65 Limitations of this Study and Suggestions for Further Studies .......................... 66 REFERENCES................................................................................................................ 69 APPENDICES ................................................................................................................. 74 Appendix A: The Pre-test in the Pilot Study ....................................................... 74 Appendix B: Note-taking Activity in the Pilot Study ........................................... 75 Appendix C: The First Questionnaire in the Pilot and Formal Study ............... 76 Appendix D: The Second Questionnaire in the Pilot and Formal Study ........... 78 Appendix E: The Pre-test and Post-test in the Formal Study ............................. 79 Appendix F: : The Third Questionnaire in the Pilot and Formal Study............ 80 Appendix G: The First Note-taking Activity in the Formal Study ..................... 82. vi.

(10) Appendix H: A Feedback toward NTF ................................................................. 83 Appendix I: A Feedback toward NTP ................................................................... 84 Appendix J: A Sample of 3rd Questionnaire Feedback ........................................ 85 Appendix K: A Note-taking Sample ...................................................................... 86. vii.

(11) LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: A Diagram of Learning Strategies between Direct and Indirect Strategies and among Six Strategy Groups ...................................................................................... 6 Figure 2: Oxford’s Categories of Learning Strategies: Direct and Indirect Strategies ............................................................................................................................................. 7. viii.

(12) LIST OF TABLES Table 1: O’Malley and Chamot’s Language Learning Strategies and Their Definitions. 8. Table 2 Goh’s Analysis of Listening Problems (2000)...................................................... 13 Table 3 Vandergrift’s Scheme of Listening Comprehension Strategies ............................ 15 Table 4 Information on the Eight Activities ...................................................................... 33 Table 5 The Experimental Procedure of the Formal Study .............................................. 36 Table 6 All Participants’ Listening Comprehension Scores in the the Pre-test and the Post-test............................................................................................................................. 39 Table 7 Participants’ Pre-test Scores in NTF and NTP .................................................... 42 Table 8 Participants’ Listening Comprehension Scores in NTF ...................................... 43 Table 9 Participants’ Listening Comprehension Scores in NTP ...................................... 45 Table 10 Participants’ Background Information I ........................................................... 48 Table 11 Participants’ Background Information II .......................................................... 49 Table 12 Participants’ Background Information III......................................................... 50 Table 13 Five Methods for Students to Enhance English Listening................................. 51 Table 14 Attitudes of All Participants toward Note-taking Activities .............................. 52 Table 15 Students’ Attitudes toward the Effects of NTF on Their Listening Abilities ..... 53 Table 16 Comparison of Results Showing Improvement of Scores and Attitudes .......... 55 Table 17 Students’ Attitudes toward the Effects of NTP on Their Listening Abilities ..... 55 Table 18 Comparison of Results between Significant Differences of Scores and Attitudes ........................................................................................................................................... 57 Table 19 Participants’ Responses to Note-taking Strategy Use ....................................... 58 Table 20 The Use of Note-taking Strategy in Chinese ...................................................... 58. ix.

(13) Table 21 The Frequency of Using Other Listening Strategies during Note-taking Activities ............................................................................................................................ 59 Table 22 The Listening Difficulties in Note-taking Activities ........................................... 61. x.

(14) CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION Background of the Problems Many researchers in the field of language learning focused on the development of learning strategies for a more effective learning. There are two general taxonomies of learning strategies most cited by researchers. The first one is Oxford’s taxonomy. Oxford (1990) divided strategies into two main categories, direct and indirect strategies. Direct strategies include memory, cognitive and compensation strategies; indirect strategies include metacognitive, affective and social strategies. The other taxonomy is established by O’Malley and Chamot (1990), divided several learning strategies into three main categories including metacognitive, cognitive, social and affective strategies, which seems more concrete and understandable. O’Malley and Chamot thought Oxford’s taxonomy had overlapping elements and a complicated classification, therefore they redefined these strategies and classified them into three main categories. The two taxonomies have been widely utilized in pedagogical research, and many researchers started to evaluate the effect of these strategies on students’ learning. Vandergrift (1997) integrated the two taxonomies of learning strategies to be a specific scheme for listening to reduce listening difficulties and help listeners to achieve a better level of listening comprehension.Vandergrift’s classification included three categories: metacognitive, cognitive and socioaffective strategies. Among the eleven listings under cognitive strategies, note-taking is one of them. Field (1998) emphasized that listening strategies should be taught and indicated that native speakers have competencies of listening sub-skills, but non-native speakers have to. 1.

(15) learn by instruction and practice. The goal of instructors is helping learners to apply strategies in the second language context. According to Field, the way that instructors introduce strategies to learners could include modeling the use of strategies rather than by explicit instruction. However, Ridgway (2000), who opposed to Field, mentioned “if listening strategies are conscious, how can they be employed while listening? And if they are not, how can they be taught?”(p. 196). The dispute between them motivated the researcher to conduct this study. If listening strategies are conscious, can we find effective activities to help language learners to use them? Since the researcher of this study thought note-taking strategy was more feasible and observable, he aimed to study the effects of note-taking strategy on learners’ listening comprehension. Moreover, Boyle (2010) emphasized that “Note-taking skills should not be underestimated. Whether students are recording notes from scientific observations, during class discussions, or at home from textbooks, note-taking skills are important to acquire, used almost daily, and utilized throughout their lifetime” (p. 531). Therefore, the researcher of this study utilized the note-taking activities to observe the effect on students’ listening competence. The Purposes of the Study In this study, the researcher wanted to provide two types of note-taking activities for college students. One was note-taking activities with a formal style (NTF) which meant students should read the instructions provided in the book first before listening. The reason is that in many textbooks, instructions comprised strategy teaching. The other type of activity was note-taking activities with personal styles (NTP) which meant students did not need to read instructions before listening and were encouraged to develop their. 2.

(16) personal note-taking styles. He wondered whether the two types of note-taking activities have different effects on students of three levels of proficiency. This study focused on whether note-taking activities could facilitate college students’ listening performances and if there was a significant difference of listening performance between the two types of note-taking activities. Furthermore, the study aimed to discover which proficiency groups benefited more after undergoing note-taking activities and also investigated students’ feedback and opinions on note-taking activities through questionnaires. Research Questions This study aims to answer the following questions: 1.. Do note-taking activities have a significant effect on students' listening performance? And how do these activities influence the listening performance of students at three different proficiency levels?. 2.. Is there any significant difference between the two types of note-taking activities on college students’ listening performances?. 3.. What are college students’ attitudes toward note-taking activities? The Significance of the Study This study focused on exploring the effects of two note-taking activities on. college students’ listening comprehension to reveal whether instructors should provide opportunities for listeners to develop their personal note-taking style without reading the instructions on textbooks or demand them to read instructions first to learn the note-taking strategy. Besides, students’ attitudes and opinions were also surveyed through questionnaires. The findings of this study provided pedagogical suggestions and evidence to improve listening instruction.. 3.

(17) Definition of Terms Listening strategies Listening strategies were utilized in the listening field, and listeners could use these strategies to solve problems and comprehend listening content. Note-taking As Vandergrift (1997) defined it, note-taking means listeners write down key words in non-formal ways, figures or abbreviations, to assist in their listening performance on tasks; they can use this strategy during listening processes. Note-taking with a formal style (NTF) In this study, the first type of activity was note-taking with a formal style, which meant participants had to read directions in the book which advised them how to take notes, and then completed a note-taking activity after listening. In this group, participants learned some note-taking tips. Note-taking with personal styles (NTP) In this study, the second type of activity was note-taking with personal styles, which meant participants were encouraged to take notes in their personal styles.. 4.

(18) CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW This chapter presents a brief review of research from several researchers to discuss the role of listening in English learning. Therefore, the writer separates the chapter into five sections; the first section introduces the frameworks of learning strategies, the second section reveals difficulties and factors influencing listening comprehension, the third section quotes the framework of listening strategies, the fourth section cites research on listening strategies, and the fifth section focuses on the note-taking strategies. Frameworks of Learning Strategies Many researchers have focused on the strategy use of high proficiency level learners because they wanted to understand the use of strategies by effective learners in diverse tasks and furthermore utilize those strategies to help language learning novices or less effective learners to learn better. In the field of language learning strategies, there are two common taxonomies: one was categorized by Oxford (1990) and the other was organized by O’Malley and Chamot (1990). Oxford (1990) divided learning strategies into two main categories: direct and indirect strategies, and further he divided each into three strategy groups. Figure 1 shows an interrelationship between direct and indirect strategies and their corresponding individual strategies.. 5.

(19) Figure 1: A Diagram of Learning Strategies between Direct and Indirect Strategies and among Six Strategy Groups (Oxford, 1990, p.15). The direct strategies refer to language learning strategies directly involved in the target language, namely: memory, cognitive and compensation strategies. Memory strategies help students to store and retrieve new information; cognitive strategies enable language learners to understand and produce language in different ways; and compensation strategies allow learners to utilize a language to overcome a gap of. 6.

(20) knowledge. On the other hand, the indirect strategies signify strategies that support and manage language learning without direct involvement in the target language; the indirect strategies were divided into metacognitive, affective and social strategies. Metacognitive strategies allow students to control their own cognition; affective strategies help learners to regulate emotions, motivations and attitudes; and social strategies aid students to learn through interactions with others. Both direct and indirect strategies involve three groups, and each group contained several strategy sets, as shown in Figure 2.. Figure 2: Oxford’s Categories of Learning Strategies: Direct and Indirect Strategies (Oxford, 1990, p.17). 7.

(21) O’Malley and Chamot (1990) studied the use of learning strategies, focusing on learners in the United States, and then they organized strategies into three main categories which contain several individual strategies. Through a longitudinal study of learning strategies used by Russian and Spanish students for English learning tasks, the researchers used a think-aloud method to investigate students’ use of learning strategies. Table 1 lists the learning strategies categorized by O’Malley and Chamot (1990). Table 1: O’Malley and Chamot’s Language Learning Strategies and Their Definitions (1990) Metacognitive strategies 1.. Planning: planning or preparing strategies for an upcoming task. 2.. Directed attention: concentrating on a task and ignoring irrelevant distractions. 3.. Selective attention: deciding to pay attention to certain tasks. 4.. Self-management: handling and arranging conditions to help one’s performance. 5.. Self-monitoring: checking and correcting one’s performance or comprehension through a learning process. 6.. Problem identification: explicitly identifying obstacles of a task. 7.. Self-evaluation: evaluating one’s performance and comprehension. Cognitive strategies 1.. Repetition: repeating a word or phrase in a task. 2.. Resourcing: using available information of target language such as dictionaries and textbooks. 3.. Grouping: taking information from tasks previously done. 4.. Note taking: writing down key words or cues. 5.. Deduction/induction: explicitly supplies or self-detected rules of target language.. 6.. Substitution: alternative methods or approaches to achieve a task. 7.. Elaboration: making a connection between new information and prior knowledge. 8.. Summarization: making a mental or written conclusion about a task. 9.. Translation: translating an idea or thing from a language to another. 8.

(22) 10. Transfer: utilizing prior knowledge for a new task 11. Inferencing: predicting unfamiliar information by familiar knowledge Social and affective strategies 1.. Questioning for clarification: asking for clarification. 2.. Cooperation: working with others to solve problems. 3.. Self-talk: using self-talk to reduce personal anxiety. 4.. Self-reinforcement: repeatedly doing a successful thing or task. Source: From O’Malley and Chamot (1990, pp. 137-139).. In Table 1, metacognitive strategies refer to higher skills, including planning for monitoring or evaluating a learner’s activity; cognitive strategies directly process incoming information and verify it in different ways to improve learning; social/ affective strategies refer to interaction with other people to solve problems. Therefore, O’Malley and Chamot’s (1990) definitions of these three main categories are similar to Oxford’s metacognitive, cognitive, social and affective strategies. In sum, the two frameworks of language learning strategies mentioned above are discussed and used frequently in pedagogical research. Furthermore, they could both be applied to overcome learning difficulties concerning the four skills (speaking, listening, writing and reading). Oxford’s strategy classification was more comprehensive and systematic in linking individual strategies. Respond to Oxford’s approach, O’Malley and Chamot stated “The problem with this approach, so far as taxonomy of strategies is concerned, is that this extended listing is far removed from any underlying cognitive theory, fails to prioritize which strategies are most important to learning, and generates subcategories that appear to overlap” (p. 103). O’Malley and Chamot indicated that Oxford’s taxonomy had overlapping elements and a complicated strategy classification.. 9.

(23) Difficulties and Factors Influencing Listening Comprehension In the previous section, the researcher of this study introduced the two frameworks of learning strategies for overcoming difficulties. And on the other hand, Vandergrift (1999) claimed “listening comprehension is a highly integrative skill. It plays an important role in the process of listening, learning acquisition, facilitating the emergence of other language skills” (p. 170). Thus, in this section, the researcher will cite related studies to identify several difficulties and features that affect listening comprehension in the listening process. Schwartz (1998) stated that listening is not just decoding and receiving words or phrases, but rather an active process to construct listeners’ background knowledge and language knowledge; listening comprehension involves concentration, receiving, understanding and remembering. Schwartz emphasized that listening is not a simple and easy process, especially for language learners, and therefore factors mentioned above should be paid attention to in language learning; Although more and more attention has been put on the importance of listening proficiency and the difficulties of listening comprehension, difficulties still affect and exist in learners’ listening comprehension when they are receiving information. Rubin (1994) cited various studies and categorized several elements mentioned in these studies into five factors that affect learners’ listening comprehension: text, interlocutor, task, listener and process. Text factors are related to a listening context, passage or visual support; interlocutor factors are associated with a speaker’s personal factors; task factors are connected to purposes and responses related to listening; listener factors refer to listeners’ personalities; and process factors refer to listeners’ cognitive activities and the. 10.

(24) interaction between listeners and speakers. Rubin provided three suggestions for instructors to teach listening skills; first, teachers and researchers need to consider which elements affect listeners most in both top-down and bottom-up processes, and they also need to find out what elements affect listeners at different proficiency levels; second, before conducting listening strategy instruction to students, instructors should identify problems which listeners might have and plan suitable strategy instruction for listeners to overcome these problems; third, instructors need to pay more attention to negotiate with listeners, so that they can clearly understand problems and difficulties listeners experience. Suggestions from Rubin indicate that different types of strategy instruction should be given to different proficiency level listeners, and problems identified also play an important role in helping teachers to administer strategy instruction. Berne (1998) reviewed previous studies and summarized nine listening factors that facilitated listening comprehension: 1.. Familiarity with passage content facilitates listening comprehension.. 2.. Lower-proficiency listeners attend to phonological or semantic cues, whereas, higher-proficiency listeners attend to semantic cues.. 3.. The effectiveness of different types of speech modifications or visual aids varies according to the degree of listening proficiency.. 4.. Repetition of passages should be encouraged as it appears to facilitate listening comprehension more than other types of modification do.. 5.. The use of pre-listening activities, particularly those that provide short synopses of the listening passage or allow listeners to preview the comprehension questions, facilitate L2 listening comprehension.. 11.

(25) 6.. The use of a videotape, as opposed to an audiotape, as a means of presenting listening passages facilitates L2 listening comprehension.. 7.. The use of authentic, as opposed to pedagogical, listening passages leads to greater improvement in L2 listening comprehension performance.. 8.. Training in the use of listening strategies facilitates L2 listening comprehension and L2 learners can and should be taught how to use listening strategies.. 9.. Due to the complex nature of listening comprehension, L2 listening practice should encompass a wide range of situations where listening is acquired via different types of listening and different modes of presentation (e.g., videotape and audiotape), and different types of activities or tasks. (Berne,1998, p.169-170). Berne indicated that the nine factors had been discussed in previous studies; therefore, she thought that further research should focus on how these factors worked in listening instruction. Goh (2000) collected data on 40 Chinese students’ listening problems and categorized these problems into three groups: perception, parsing and utilization, pointed out ten problems that affected foreign language learners, as shown in Table 2.. 12.

(26) Table 2 Goh’s Analysis of Listening Problems (2000). Perception 1.. Do not recognize words they know.. 2.. Neglect the next part when thinking about meaning.. 3.. Cannot chunk streams of speech.. 4.. Miss the beginning of texts.. 5.. Concentrate too hard or unable to concentrate.. Parsing 1.. Quickly forget what is heard.. 2.. Unable to form a mental representation from words heard.. 3.. Do not understand subsequent parts of input because of earlier problems.. Utilisation 1.. Understand words but not the intended messages.. 2.. Confused about the key ideas in the message. Five of these ten listening comprehension problems were specially emphasized in Goh’s (2000) study since they were more common in listening processes; they were: quickly forget what is heard, do not recognize words they know, understand words but not the intended messages, neglect the next part when thinking about meaning, and unable to form a mental representation from words heard. Moreover, Buck (2001) also pointed out that other aspects could also affect listening, such as prosodic features, speech rate and hesitation.. 13.

(27) Graham (2006) investigated learners’ listening comprehension through questionnaires and interviews; the findings showed the three main factors, the speed of delivery, figuring out word meanings, and participants’ low abilities, which affected participants’ listening comprehension. Furthermore, in Vandergrift’s (2007) study, cognitive, social and physical dimensions were discussed. For instance, low self-confidence, motivation and word segments play important roles in listening processes, and these factors could lead learners to employ ineffective listening strategies. In this part of the literature review, different studies focused on factors and difficulties that could affect students’ listening comprehension. For overcoming these situations, listening strategies might play an important role for listeners. Listeners can utilize various strategies to solve listening difficulties. To reduce difficulties, Vandergrift (1997) adopted a framework of listening strategies that was based on the two frameworks of learning strategies for learners to apply in listening situations. Framework of Listening Strategies While learning strategies could be applied to the four language skills, listening strategies are more specifically designed for enhancing listening skills. In order to provide a solid theoretical base and help students utilize the language input, Vandergrift (1997) adapted the frameworks of learning strategies from Oxford (1990) and O’Malley and Chamot (1990) to be more suitable for the listening aspect, and organized those strategies the same way as O’Malley and Chamot did, into three categories, but modified the total number of individual strategies under each sub-strategy (see Table 3).. 14.

(28) Table 3 Vandergrift’s Scheme of Listening Comprehension Strategies Metacognitive strategies 1.. 2.. 3.. 4.. Planning A.. Advance organization. B.. Directed attention. C.. Selective attention. D.. Self-management. Monitoring A.. Comprehension monitoring. B.. Auditory monitoring. C.. Double-check monitoring. Evaluation A.. Performance evaluation. B.. Strategy evaluation. Problem identification. Cognitive strategies 1.. Inferencing A.. Linguistic inferencing. B.. Voice and paralinguistic inferencing. C.. Kinesics inferencing. D.. Extralinguistic inferencing. E.. Between parts Inferencing. 2.. Elaboration. 3.. Summarization. 4.. Translation. 5.. Transferring. 6.. Repetition. 7.. Resourcing. 8.. Grouping. 15.

(29) 9.. Note-taking. 10. Deduction/induction 11. Substitution Socioaffective strategies 1.. Questioning for clarification. 2.. Cooperation. 3.. Lower anxiety. 4.. Self-encouragement. 5.. Taking emotional temperature. Source: From Vandergrift (1997, pp. 392-395).. In sum, Vandergrift’s (1997) framework of listening strategies was based upon the two frameworks of learning strategies, and the three main categories in his framework was quite similar to O’Malley and Chamot’s version. As an instructor, the purpose of listening strategy instruction aims to help students to be familiar with different strategies to reduce listening difficulties. Hence, in the next section, the researcher of this study will quote studies focused on listening strategy instruction which contains both qualitative and quantitative methods for discussing strategy uses and improvement on listening comprehension. For the qualitative part, the studies surveyed learners’ attitudes regarding listening strategies to reveal learners’ thoughts about listening strategy instruction. Listening Strategy Practices In order to facilitate students to utilize strategies while learning the target language, researchers or teachers have tried to provide them with different strategy practices. The main purpose of this section is to reveal research focus on the effects of listening strategies on listening comprehension and discuss the improvements in their results.. 16.

(30) Thompson and Rubin (1996) tested if the use of cognitive and metacognitive instruction could bring positive effects on learners’ listening comprehension; they conducted both cognitive and metacognitive instruction in a Russian lesson for a longitudinal study in America. Because the researchers thought video segments could increase learners’ interest more than audiotapes, they applied video segments, utilized strategies that were related to listening contexts and used successful learners’ strategies in their strategy instruction. In the study, nine strategies were taught: planning, defining goals, monitoring, evaluating, predicting, listening to the known, listening to redundancies, listening to tone of voice and intonation, and resourcing. The results of their study demonstrated a positive effect of learning strategy instruction on facilitating listeners’ listening comprehension in a video context. According to them, the relationship between strategies and listening context affected listeners’ performance during audio tests. Lin (2006) conducted an experiment to test the effect of strategy instruction on students’ listening comprehension. There were 85 participants in Lin’s study, and she selected eight strategies to teach participants in the instruction: selective attention, listening for main ideas, questioning for clarification, self-monitoring, prediction, linguistic inference, note-taking and repetition. Lin defined participants’ listening proficiency by the pretest, and then utilized questionnaires and interviews to reveal more information about the participants. Because Lin thought the combination of metacognitive and cognitive strategies preceded social and affective strategies in students’ learning process, she decided to employ only metacognitive and cognitive strategies in her study. The results showed a significant difference between the control. 17.

(31) and experimental groups. Students in the experimental group all improved their listening performance after receiving the instruction, especially those more advanced students. Huang (2008) employed O’Malley and Chamot’s (1990) twelve strategies in his listening strategy instruction and introduced those strategies to participants for fourteen weeks. The results in his study showed that participants in the experimental group performed better than those in the control group. Besides, participants with high proficiency level became more interested in listening strategy instruction. Graham and Macaro (2008) tested the effectiveness of their strategy instruction and focused on whether their instruction could improve low-intermediate learners of French as a foreign language, and whether scaffolding level affected listening comprehension and self-efficacy. They collected data through listening proficiency tests and efficacy questionnaires; according to the findings, the combination of both metacognitive and cognitive strategies could facilitate listeners’ comprehension. Otherwise, strategy instruction increased participants’ confidence in their listening processes and helped them to use strategies in accomplishing their tasks. Coskun (2010) investigated the effect of metacognitive strategy training on English listening comprehension for beginners in Turkey, by employing metacognitive strategies from Vandergrift’s (1997) framework of listening strategies, namely: planning, monitoring, evaluation and problem identification. In Coskun’s study, 40 beginners were divided into control and experimental groups; the experimental group received five weeks of metacognitive strategy training. Coskun stated there was a significant difference between the control and experimental groups, and suggested that researchers should explore more strategy trainings to facilitate listening learning.. 18.

(32) In sum, previous studies showed that researchers designed learning instruction with different strategies and indicated that the instruction could help listeners to comprehend contexts which they listened to. In the next section, the researcher of this study will cite studies that investigated listeners’ listening strategy use. Investigation of Listening Strategy Use Teng (1997) investigated the use of listening strategies by using Oxford’s Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL); she found that the most frequently used strategy was translation by 124 freshmen in Taiwan. Teng indicated the frequency of strategy use from high to low was compensation, cognitive and affective. Furthermore, Teng (1998) surveyed the use of listening comprehension strategies in Taiwanese college students, and 51 students at a low-intermediate level took both listening tests and questionnaires. It was found that compensation strategies were frequently used by students in Taiwan; translation and paying attention were used frequently by students. Vandergrift (1997) investigated the use of strategies in his study; 21 participants from four different grades in primary and junior high schools, who had learned French for more than one year, were classified into successful and less successful listener groups. He collected data by using the think aloud method and individual interviews. In Vandergrift’s study, the result indicated that all of the participants used metacognitive and cognitive strategies more often than social affective strategies; second, participants with higher language proficiency used more metacognitive strategies than did lower language proficiency participants. Three cognitive strategies: summarization, elaboration and inferencing, were frequently employed by all participants. Chao (1999) investigated the use of listening strategies by English majors in Taiwan,. 19.

(33) and she developed a listening strategy use questionnaire which divided strategies into six factors of analysis. The results unsurprisingly indicated that effective listeners employed listening strategies more frequently than less effective listeners did. Besides, she found a combination of seven strategies that could predict listening comprehension performance, namely: grasp the overall meaning of the text, keep up with the speed, relate to personal experience or knowledge, focus attention on the listening, guess the meaning based on the context, use known linguistic information to facilitate understanding and listen for the grammatical structure. However, there was no significant difference between effective and less effective participants in the use of certain strategies: repeating heard words, listening to sounds, asking for help, asking for confirmation, reassuring themselves regarding their listening ability and mentally sounding out words or phrases. Chao thought the factors were the cultural influence and the instruction teachers applied in Taiwan that led Taiwanese students to rarely utilize social and affective strategies when listening. In 2003, Vandergrift further examined the types of strategies used and the differences in strategy use by effective and less effective listeners, while Canadian students listened to authentic texts in French. His study discovered that effective listeners employed metacognitive strategies more frequently, such as monitoring, elaboration and translation; effective listeners employed a combination of top-down and bottom-up processes while less effective listeners used a bottom-up process to comprehend contexts. In accordance with the researchers who strove to discover the types and effects of listening strategy in practices, my study focuses on providing the note-taking activities to learners to determine the effect of the note-taking strategy on listening comprehension.. 20.

(34) Note-taking Studies related to note-taking practices will be discussed under two categories: language learning and general learning. James et al. (1992) stressed the use of note-taking practices in listening comprehension, and stated “The teacher concerned with helping listeners develop listening strategies to deal with the problem of ‘insufficient storage’ often attempts to help listeners learn how to record information heard in note form for later retrieval and reconstruction” (p. 552). Boyle (2010) emphasized that “Note-taking skills should not be underestimated. Whether students are recording notes from scientific observations, during class discussions, or at home from textbooks, note-taking skills are important to acquire, used almost daily, and utilized throughout their lifetime” (p. 531). Note-taking is a skill that may be used unconsciously in our lives, and this skill can be utilized in different fields. Hence, the researcher of this study categorized note-taking studies into language learning and general learning in the following sections. Note-taking in Language Learning Kiewra and DuBois (1991) examined the effect of note-taking on 96 college students’ listening comprehension. They found that students in the ‘encoding plus storage’ group who took and reviewed notes, could perform better than others who only took notes without review. Hence, the researchers suggested encoding plus storage could facilitate learners to rebuild the construction of listening contexts. Isaacs (1994) surveyed 100 Australian college students by questionnaires, and found that note-taking played an important function in listening processes. Isaacs stated: “It is generally agreed that the act of taking notes enhances students' short-term and slightly. 21.

(35) longer term recall of the content of a lecture and that review of those notes also enhances recall” (p.203). Isaacs’s opinion corresponded to Kiewra and DuBois’s (1991) finding; both revealed that note-taking could be performed better by reviewing notes after taking notes. Besides, note-taking could improve and bring positive effects in regard to both short- and long-term memories. Khan (1999) pointed out that note-taking is an important strategy and should not be neglected by both English teachers and learners. Students need to practice to increase their familiarity with note-taking, because the strategy can help them to not only store relevant information for further use, but also reach the highest level of listening comprehension. Huang (2002) offered a listening strategy instruction that contained four strategies (scanning, skimming, linguistic inference and note-taking), and the researcher claimed that students could not benefit significantly by using note-taking after strategy instruction training. Huang concluded that note-taking could not have a significant effect on listening performance because she thought note-taking was not suitable to be applied in dialogue tasks, and she stated the real problem was the lack of appropriate listening materials. Besides, Huang’s questionnaires revealed that participants thought note-taking was not a useful strategy in listening processes. Lin’s (2006) finding also corresponded to Huang’s (2002). The junior high school students in Lin’s research stated they had little time to take notes in dialogue tasks. Interestingly, note-taking worked more effectively on low proficiency level students than on high proficiency level students. Lin indicated that students’ having little time to encode notes was one of the main problems in the study, because they had not developed. 22.

(36) their personal styles to save time and encode notes during the listening processes. However, the benefit of note-taking in Lin’s research was decreasing students’ distraction during the listening process. Note-taking can be applied on English proficiency tests such as Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL). Carrell (2007) investigated the effects of the note- taking strategy on TOEFL. In Carrell’s research, 216 international students majoring in different fields in America engaged in the experiment. The study took two weeks to accomplish, and Carrell utilized questionnaires to survey participants’ attitudes on note-taking. The findings revealed that some listeners might use arrows, circles and boxes to replace word spellings, and the way that listeners used symbols in note-taking positively affected participants’ listening comprehension. Makany (2009) responded to Carrell’s (2007) conclusion in his study. In the note-taking skill, many techniques could be utilized in listening processes, such as SmartWisdom, clustering and the Cornell system. SmartWisdom was defined as a technique in note-taking; information in SmartWisdom is recorded in real-time and graphically represented in an organized, semi-hierarchical format. Another technique, clustering, was an open-ended and non-linear method that generated ideas based on people’s knowledge. The other technique, the Cornell system, provided a systematic format that contained keywords, notes and summary columns for users to organize notes. In Makany’s study, the main purpose was to test the difference between linear and non-linear (SmartWisdom) note-taking techniques on listening comprehension. There were 26 adult participants in the study, and the result presented that the non-linear note-takers performed significantly better than those in the linear group. The researcher. 23.

(37) emphasized that using note-taking techniques, such as SmartWisdom and the Cornell system, enables a deeper understanding and more integrated knowledge management concerning listening performance. Note-taking in General Learning Walker (1999) supported a single-page note-taking method in a science seminar; however, a possible disadvantage was that note takers had to be willing and able to write small. The single-page note-taking method required listeners to draw unequal boxes when they took notes, and then they had to write notes in a box for a speaker’s slide. Even though there was a lot of information in a speaker’s slide, audiences who were undergraduates and Ph.D. students tried to write their notes in a small box. Walker claimed that listeners could utilize the single-page note-taking method to take and review notes effectively; furthermore, he thought this technique could help them to evaluate a speaker’s lecture after taking notes. Hartley (2004) concluded that note-taking strategy had little effect in the legal field, and that strategy could be harmful for clients in counseling. However, the researcher stated there was some evidence proving that note-taking could reduce bias in interviews in order to make decisions and further help the elderly to memorize. In Hartley’s opinion, the advantages of note-taking were: aiding recall, improving recall, reducing bias and providing external information to aid memory. On the other hand, disadvantages of note-taking for listeners were: distraction, distressing and becoming lost while listening. McLennan and Isaacs (2002) utilized questionnaires to investigate students and staff views of the role and use of handouts, note-taking and overhead transparencies in veterinary science lectures. The findings pointed out that almost all staff and students. 24.

(38) thought the central function of note-taking was for subsequent recall and encoding information given by the lecturer; many students considered that note-taking in lectures interfered with understanding. Besides, the researchers indicated that students preferred that lecture-related information be provided in the form of handouts rather than jotted in their notebooks. Piolat et al. (2004) stated that note-taking is often realized under severe time pressure. To take notes quickly, it is necessary to shorten and reduce information. Such constraints led to the invention of stenography whose graphic traces and transcribed units are simplified compared with alphabetical writings (p. 293). Because of the limitation of time, the researchers emphasized the importance of abbreviation in note-taking, and discussed the relationship between note-taking and work memory in the study. Piolat et al. (2004) concluded that the differences in learners’ work memory abilities could affect their note-taking performance because work memory has to manage comprehension, selection of information, and the production process concurrently when learners are taking notes. Bonner and Holliday (2006) examined the effect of note-taking on science students’ performance, and carried out five interviews to clarify the use of note-taking in biology college students’ notebooks. Participants’ feedback indicated that notes should be characterized by accuracy, completeness and organization; the accuracy and completeness of notes could help them to recall the information correctly, and the organization helped them to manage their notes clearly. Besides, the participants mentioned that they had to preview their textbooks in order to recognize the instructor’s cues in classes; therefore, the importance of their prior knowledge affected their. 25.

(39) performance in note-taking. However, the note-taking strategy had little significant effect on certain situations. Boyle (2010) conducted an experiment that proved the importance of participants’ abilities, employing 45 participants in each experimental and control group. The researcher stated that “students identified as having a specific learning disability were determined eligible by their respective school districts through testing that used severe discrepancy methodology” (p. 533). Boyle investigated the difference between students with learning disabilities (LD) and students without learning disabilities. The results showed that students with LD performed significantly worse than students without LD, although they had all received the note-taking instruction. Wetzels et al. (2010) studied listeners’ prior knowledge that might influence the effect of note-taking on listening comprehension. The researchers focused on the limitation of listeners’ prior knowledge in the use of note-taking strategy; they assumed that taking notes might be less effective if available prior knowledge is limited. Based on a prior knowledge test, 61 high school students were divided into high and low prior knowledge groups in the study, and they were asked to complete six tasks of medical education. The results of their study indicated that note-taking during prior knowledge activation could decrease mental effort and increase mental efficiency for the high prior knowledge group, and note taking had the opposite effect on mental effort and mental efficiency for the low prior knowledge group. Hence, Wetzels et al. concluded that learners with high prior knowledge could benefit in the note-taking strategy while activating prior knowledge, whereas note-taking had no beneficial effects for learners with limited prior knowledge.. 26.

(40) The above studies discussed the effect of the note-taking strategy in language learning and other fields of study and revealed participants’ opinions toward note-taking. However, not all studies stated a positive effect of the note-taking strategy on students’ listening performance, such as Huang’s (2002) and Lin’s (2006) studies showed that the note-taking strategy did not affect students significantly on their listening abilities. In order to discuss more profoundly the effect of note-taking, the researcher of this study utilized the note-taking strategy by providing two types of note-taking activities in Taiwanese college classroom settings. Afterwards, questionnaires and interviews were also administered to find out college students’ opinions toward note-taking.. 27.

(41) CHAPTER THREE METHODOLOGY This chapter introduces the methodology of the present study in detail. The content of this chapter involves different phases of the pilot study and the formal study. The first section presents the pilot study, and the second section introduces the formal study. Pilot Study The researcher of this study conducted a pilot study to clarify whether the listening materials were feasible and teachable and if questionnaires were appropriate for collecting necessary information for the formal study. As McKay (2006) explained, the necessity of a pilot study might be important for further research experiments. McKay claimed that the purpose of a pilot study was to find out difficulties and problems in the experimental design and which items could be confusing or misleading. Hence, the researcher conducted this pilot study which contained a pre-test, a note-taking activity and two questionnaires which gathered students’ background information and attitudes toward the activity. Participants There were 28 students in note-taking with a formal style (NTF) and 20 students in note-taking with personal styles (NTP). All of these 48 students were freshmen and majored in English in a southern university in Taiwan. They had been taking a listening course for one semester and did not participate in the formal experiment. The researcher selected the first group to receive the note-taking activity with a formal style and the second group to receive the activity with personal styles.. 28.

(42) Instruments and Materials In the pilot study, the researcher utilized a listening comprehension test (see Appendix A) as the pre-test to divide them into different proficiency levels. The listening comprehension test was selected from Interactions 1 which is designed for intermediate learners to enhance their English listening and speaking. The length of the listening comprehension test was one minute; it contained 106 words for the pre-test and the content was related to a weather forecast. In the listening comprehension test, each item contained one point, and the total score was twenty. In the pilot study, the note-taking activity (see Appendix B), which contained 206 words, was selected from Interactions 1 for practice, and the length of the listening activity was one minute and 45 seconds. In accordance with McKay (2006), a questionnaire provided an efficient method for a researcher to gather a deal of information in a short time with little cost. Furthermore, Freeman and Long (1997) indicated that “questionnaires are often used to get language learners to self-report their attitudes or personal characteristics” (p. 35). Hence, two questionnaires designed by the researcher were utilized to collect listeners’ feedback in the pilot study. The first questionnaire (see Appendix C) was designed to gather all participants’ background information and experiences of English learning, and the second questionnaire (see Appendix D) was designed to collect participants’ feelings and attitudes regarding the first practice of note-taking activities. Data Collection In the pilot study, the researcher utilized a listening comprehension test, a note-taking activity and two questionnaires to collect data from 48 students. Students in both groups had to take the listening comprehension test and fill out the first. 29.

(43) questionnaire of background information before the note-taking activity, so that the researcher could realize their listening proficiency before conducting note-taking activities. After taking the listening comprehension test, 28 students in the first group received the note-taking activity with a formal style (NTF), which meant students had to read directions before listening. They used these tips to take notes to complete the activity and then filled out the second questionnaire. Twenty students in the second group received note-taking activities with personal styles (NTP), which meant students did not read directions provided in the book before listening, but were encouraged to take notes with their personal style during the listening process. After listening, students in NTP used their notes to complete the activity and then filled out the second questionnaire. Data Analysis In the pilot study, the researcher found that the questionnaires could not collect some participants’ feedback toward the experiment; therefore, he decided to edit and add some questions in the formal study. Moreover, the researcher planned to add the third questionnaire in the formal study because data which were collected from previous questionnaires were not sufficient to analyze. The results of the pre-test indicated that the difficulty of the listening contents was suitable for the freshmen in the pilot study since most students could answer the listening comprehension test and finish the following activity; thus, the researcher could utilize note-taking activities of Interactions 1 for his formal study.. 30.

(44) Formal Study Participants The participants in the formal study were different from the students in the pilot study. In the formal experiment, the researcher selected two new classes. The first class had sixty students, and the other class had fifty-six students, a total of one hundred and sixteen students in the formal experiment; all of them majored in English in a southern university in Taiwan. These students have been learning English since they were fifth graders, and therefore they have been learning English for over eight years. All students were freshmen in college and had received listening instruction for one semester. Sixty students in the first class received note-taking activities with a formal style (NTF), and fifty-six students in the other class received note-taking activities with personal styles (NTP). In each class, students were divided into three proficiency levels: high, intermediate and low proficiency levels by the scores of the pre-test. Thus, in NTF, each proficiency group contained twenty students; in NTP, high and intermediate proficiency groups each contained nineteen students, and the low proficiency group contained eighteen students. Instruments and Materials In this study, listening materials and instruments were used to facilitate the researcher to conduct the experiment. The process included one listening comprehension test, eight note-taking activities, and three questionnaires. The Interactions series published by McGraw Hill were designed for English listening and speaking skills; thus, the researcher selected Interactions 1 Listening/Speaking for participants. There are four strands in Interactions series, and each of them was designed for different level learners.. 31.

(45) The authors of Interactions series stated that language proficiencies are articulated from the beginning through advanced level within each strand. Hence, the researcher of this study selected listening activities and a listening comprehension test from Interactions 1 for the participants. The Listening Comprehension Test In the formal study, the listening comprehension test (see Appendix E) was utilized as the pre-test and post-test of this study because the researcher planned to measure the effects of note-taking activities using the same listening comprehension test. Each item contained one point, and the total score was fifteen. In addition, participants were allowed to take notes when listening. Questionnaires In order to collect all of the participants’ opinions, the researcher designed three questionnaires for the study. The first questionnaire (see Appendix C) focused on participants’ English learning experiences and background information. This questionnaire could help him to understand participants’ English learning in their previous schools. The second questionnaire (see Appendix D) collected participants’ attitudes toward the first note-taking activity. The third questionnaire (see Appendix F) aimed to survey all of the participants’ thoughts toward note-taking activities after taking the experiment of this study, and this questionnaire could facilitate the researcher to know more about participants’ thoughts toward the whole procedure. Eight Note-taking Activities In Interactions 1 Listening/Speaking, every chapter involves one note-taking activity for learners to practice the note-taking strategy. Therefore, the researcher of this study. 32.

(46) employed those activities for the participants. The following table shows the length and words of each activity. Table 4 Information on the Eight Activities Topics. Length. Words. 1.. Living to eat, or eating to live?. 2:34. 343. 2.. Home. 2:22. 261. 3.. Cultures of the world. 2:06. 256. 4.. Health. 1:36. 224. 5.. Entertainment and the media. 1:27. 216. 6.. Social life. 1:32. 238. 7.. Sports. 3:05. 384. 8.. In the community. 1:33. 236. Quasi Experimental Design The experiment aimed to discover the effects of note-taking activities on students’ listening comprehension. The researcher of this study offered two types of note-taking activities for participants: (1) NTF meant participants read note-taking directions which advised them how to take notes and completed the listening activities; (2) NTP meant participants were encouraged to take notes in their own styles. Therefore, participants in this group had to use their own ways to take notes to complete the listening activities. Because students’ scores on the listening comprehension test might be affected by their listening proficiency and types of note-taking activities the researcher of this study. 33.

(47) provided, the independent variables were students’ listening proficiency and the two types of note-taking activities in this study. And the dependent variable was the score of the listening comprehension test after receiving note-taking activities. Three open-ended questionnaires were utilized through the experiment in this study because participants’ background information and opinions might play an important role for the findings of the study. McKay stated: “Open-ended questions allow respondents to write in their own answers. They typically take one of two forms: fill-in or short answer” (p. 37). Hence, the researcher designed three questionnaires in the experiment. The first questionnaire collected students’ background information in English learning. The second questionnaire surveyed students’ attitudes toward the note-taking activity because the researcher thought that their expectations and opinions were worth discussing. The third questionnaire aimed to investigate students’ thoughts after receiving note-taking activities. In the beginning of the formal study, a pre-test (see Appendix E) was used before the note-taking activities because the purpose of the pre-test was to define participants’ listening proficiency. Since this study also focused on the effects of note-taking activities on participants with different proficiency levels, the pre-test could assist the researcher in defining students’ proficiency levels as low, intermediate and high levels. A post-test which is the same as the pre-test was utilized after note-taking activities because the purpose of the post-test was to evaluate students’ performance after receiving activities. The pre-test was taken in the first week of this formal experiment because the scores of the pre-test could help the researcher to classify students’ proficiency levels and record their initial scores before conducting the note-taking activities. After taking the pre-test,. 34.

(48) all of the students had to answer the first questionnaire that involved questions of background information. In the formal study, the pre-test and the first questionnaire took about twenty minutes to conduct. The researcher used statistics to analyze the frequency and percentages that were collected from the first questionnaire to understand students’ backgrounds and English learning experiences. Besides, the answers of the pre-test were not provided to students because this listening comprehension test was also utilized as the post-test. In the second week, the researcher of this study randomly selected class A to receive NTF and class B to receive NTP. In the first practice, students in NTF could read directions of the note-taking strategy before listening because each activity provided several directions for students. They had to listen to the content of the first activity (see Appendix G) twice and then complete the activity. Then, students in NTF answered the second questionnaire after completing the note-taking activity. Conversely, students in NTP were not given any directions before listening, and were encouraged to take notes in their own styles. The researcher of this study did not provide any information for students in NTP, so they took notes by themselves. Students in NTP had to utilize their notes to complete a note-taking activity; then they also answered the second questionnaire after the activity. From the third to the ninth week, the researcher totally provided 7 note-taking activities for the two classes, and each activity was employed per week. After receiving note-taking activities, all of the students had to take the post-test in the tenth week, which had the same content as the pre-test; then they had to answer the third questionnaire. At the end of the experiment, the researcher interviewed some students who did not. 35.

(49) share their feedback in the open-ended questions of the third questionnaires. Table 5 shows the experimental procedure of this research. Table 5 The Experimental Procedure of the Formal Study NTF Pre-test (1st week). The first practice (2nd week). 1. Listen to the content twice and answer the questions.. 1. Listen to the content twice and answer the questions.. 2. Complete the first questionnaire.. 2. Complete the first questionnaire.. 1. Read and learn the directions before listening.. 1. Listen to the content twice and take notes.. 2. Listen to the content twice and complete an activity.. 2. Use notes to complete an activity.. 3. Answer the second questionnaire.. 3. Answer the second questionnaire.. Other note-taking practices 1. Read and learn the (3rd week - 9th week) directions before listening.. The post-test (10th week). NTP. 1. Listen to the content twice and take notes.. 2. Listen to the content twice and complete the activity.. 2. Use notes to complete the activity.. 1. Listen to the content twice and answer the questions.. 1. Listen to the content twice and answer the questions.. 2. Complete the third questionnaire after listening.. 2. Complete the third questionnaire after listening.. 36.

(50) Interviews (11th week). Select students who did not share feedback toward note-taking activities in the 3rd questionnaire.. Select students who did not share feedback toward note-taking activities in the 3rd questionnaire.. Data Analysis There were three parts of data analysis in this research. The first part of data analysis was the difference between the pre-test and the post-test, which demonstrated the effects of note-taking activities at different proficiency levels. The researcher of this study utilized the paired sample t-test to analyze the data, so that he could know the effects of note-taking activities on participants’ listening performance and the effects among three proficiency groups after completing the experiment. The second part of data analysis was the effects of two types of note-taking activities on students’ listening abilities. The third part was participants’ opinions and attitudes toward note-taking activities. Thus, the paired sample t-test were employed to analyze the data the researcher collected through the pre-test and the post-test, and the descriptive statistics was utilized to illustrate students’ feedback on each question.. 37.

(51) CHAPTER FOUR RESULTS AND DISCUSSION This chapter presented the data collected from the experiment and discussed the results of the analyses. The first section provided the difference between the pre-test and the post-test on all participants to reveal the effect of note-taking activities on college students’ listening abilities. The second section discussed the effect of note-taking activities with a formal style (NTF) and the effect of note-taking activities with personal styles (NTP) on students’ listening abilities. The final section demonstrated the result of the questionnaires that show participants’ opinions and attitudes toward note-taking activities. The Effect of Note-taking Activities on College Students’ Listening Abilities To answer the first research question: Do note-taking activities have a significant effect on students' listening performance? And how do these activities influence the listening performance of students at three different proficiency levels?, the researcher of this study aimed to analyze the effect of note-taking activities on students’ listening abilities. The researcher utilized the paired sample t-test to conduct the comparison. The following Table 6 showed the results of the analysis.. 38.

(52) Table 6 All Participants’ Listening Comprehension Scores in the the Pre-test and the Post-test Pre-test. Post-test. Difference. t-test. Mean. SD. Mean. SD. Mean. SD. t-value. p-value. W (n=116). 5.30. 3.01. 5.39. 3.22. 0.09. 0.60. 1.55. 0.12. H (n=39). 8.49. 1.93. 8.97. 1.83. 0.49. 0.51. 6.01. 0.00*. I (n=39). 5.28. 0.86. 5.26. 0.79. -0.03. 0.58. -2.74. 0.09. L 2.05 1.45 1.84 1.33 -0.21 0.47 -0.27 0.79 (n=38) Note. W= all participants, H= high proficiency, I= intermediate proficiency, L= low proficiency. Three findings were revealed from this table. First, for all participants in this study, the mean score in the post-test was higher than that in the pre-test (5.39 > 5.30). However, the results of the paired sample t-test revealed that the difference of the mean score of all participants between the pre-test and the post-test was not significant (t= 1.55, p= .12>.05), which meant note-taking activities did not bring a significant effect on all students’ listening performance in this study. Second, for students with high proficiency level, the mean score in the post-test was higher than that in the pre-test (8.97 > 8.49). The paired sample t-test showed there was a significant difference between the pre-test score and the post-test score (high: t= 6.01, p= .00 < .05), which meant note-taking activities had a significant effect on the listening performance of students with high proficiency.. 39.