CHAPTER SIX CONCLUSION
The conclusion section includes three parts. First, some major findings of this study are summarized. Second, some pedagogical implications are drawn from the findings of the research. Finally, limitations of the study and suggestions for future research are noted.
6.1 Summary of the Major Findings
In response to the three research questions posed at the beginning of the research, some conclusions can be arrived at. First, explicit strategy instruction did enhance EFL learners’
listening performance. Second, explicit strategy instruction increased the overall strategy use of learners under the treatment condition, when compared with those learners in the control group, who received no strategy training. Third, the learners generally perceived the course interesting and beneficial to improving English listening ability. As can be seen from the results here, the perceptions, or opinions of learners coincided to a great extent. Generally, the participants held positive feelings toward the strategy instruction course, and felt threatened by tasks beyond their linguistic competence. They found it easier to comprehend less complicated cognitive strategies, and considered the strategies they had difficulty understanding ineffective.
The considerable evidence generated from the present study provides empirical support that the strategy instruction course implemented in the present study was successful. As is also
shown, results of the present study are in line with the bulk of past research claiming that learning strategies, with a whole raft of benefits, are conducive to language learning, in this case English listening skills. In addition, counter to the general belief that strategy instruction is best given to college learners, the present study indicates that high school students are able to exploit the benefit of strategy training. The results have also illustrated the effectiveness of English listening strategies in developing listening comprehension skills. In conclusion, this research suggested an approach to classroom strategy instruction that teachers can adopt to introduce listening strategies and prompt higher language achievement. The research suggests that strategy training has a remarkable effect on young adolescent learners, insofar as the results could be generalized to junior high school students in general. What should be noted is that the majority of participants in the present study had no experience with GEPT, which supposedly has made the training effect tangible.
6.2 Pedagogical Implications
It is certain that learning strategies play a key role in language acquisition, notwithstanding no definitive conclusion found as to their long-term effects. But there are grounds to believe that strategies which proved advantageous in research findings should be adopted in general language learning classes. Learning strategy instruction should be widely implemented to the advantage of language learners. The most significant pedagogical
implication drawn is that any method that enables learners to take greater initiative or assume more responsibility for their own learning is likely to spark interest and encourage learners to think independently, which in turn bolsters their learning. Also, the learning tasks to be used in class should be sufficiently difficult but not too far beyond EFL learners’ language competence.
When it comes to the types of class activities conducted, primarily individual practice should be done with advanced learners, while activities that were more collaborative in nature should be carried out more frequently with less proficient learners.
The strategy training seems to exert a greater control on some learners than the others in the experimental group. The factors at play could be related to motivation, proficiency, and preference to different kinds of language tasks. In order for students to take full advantage of strategy training, the overriding concern of teachers would be to closely examine their students’
characteristics and make strategy training individualized.
6.3 Limitations of the Present Study and Suggestions for Future Research
The findings of the present study show some limitations of the research and lead to the following recommendations for future research. The main limitation had to do with the weak effect as indicated by the paired samples t-test performed on the experimental group’s GEPT results. As mentioned above (see 5.1 for GEPT Pretest and Posttest results), some other reasons could have contributed to the experimental group learners’ improvement in their listening
performance. Hence, the confounding factors should be pinpointed in future research so as to more accurately measure the training effect of strategy instruction.
As can be seen from the research results, some lower proficiency level learners expressed difficulty understanding the training provided for them. It points to EFL teachers’ responsibility for preparing learners for a strategy training course. Before a teacher could deliver strategy instruction, they should consider various ways to prepare to conduct such training. Preparatory steps could include taking teacher development courses, finding relevant information through different media, and making contacts with specialists (Oxford, 2004). Suggestions for developing in-service strategy training programs for language teachers could be one of the future research directions.
In line with the bulk of works mentioned in the literature review section (see 2.4 Learning Motivation and Language Learning Strategy), motivation and strategy use are interconnected.
Many studies on strategy training have so far produced positive results, most of which included the impact of motivation. In the present study, the influence of motivation was excluded from the effect of strategy training, which proved its worth. In future research studies, the interaction effect between motivation and strategy training course design could be probed more deeply.
Many researchers have asserted that it is most helpful to incorporate strategy training into regular language learning curriculum (Oxford, 1990, p.206). Different from the so-called long-term strategy training of this kind, normally provided in a more prolonged period of time
and incorporated into regular English curriculum, the strategy instruction conducted in the present study was correspondent with what Oxford (1990, p.203) termed one-time strategy training. As no conclusive evidence regarding the long-term effects of strategy instruction has been found, this could make an eligible topic for future research.
