Document Type: Research Paper

Authors

Islamic Azad University, Karaj Branch

Abstract

Language teachers are usually faced with the challenging classrooms wherein the students with mixed language abilities sit together. One solution to deal with this situation is to apply differentiated instructions in terms of tiered task strategy. By definition, tiered tasks are extracted from the same material or skills, and personalized according to students' readiness, interest and preferred modes of learning. In the same vein, this experiment investigated the role of tiered listening tasks on 46 mixed-ability Iranian EFL learners in 9 intervention sessions. The participants were pre-assessed and assigned in to 3 divisions of high, mid and low achievers. While the control group in this research experienced the conventional one-size-fits-all instructions to listening comprehension, the divisions in the experimental group received open-ended, multiple choice and true-false tiered listening tasks. Moreover, upon the individual’s performance on tiered tasks, their division arrangement changed every 3 sessions so that they either remained or to be removed to higher or lower divisions. Findings statistically implicated the effectiveness of the tiered tasks on the participants’ listening comprehension improvement. However, the observed matrix of multiple correlation coefficients failed to show any powerful association between the participants’ mixed-levels of language proficiency and their successful performance on tiered tasks. The researchers’ concluding remarks on the assessment and teaching benefits of differentiated instructions in EFL contexts were provided too.

Keywords

Article Title [Persian]

آموزش تمایز یافته: کاربرد تکالیف شنیداری درجه بندی شده در کلاسهای ناهمگون یادگیری زبان انگلیسی

Authors [Persian]

  • ناتاشا پوردانا
  • مهدی شاهپوری راد

دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد کرج

Abstract [Persian]

معلمین زبان انگلیسی معمولا با چالش کلاسهای درس ناهمگون که در آن زبان آموزان با سطح مختلفی از توانایی های زبانی حضور دارند مواجهند. به عنوان یک راه حل در مقابل چالش پیش رو میتوان به استفاده از تکالیف طبقه بندی شده برای زبان آموزان اشاره کرد. بنا بر تعریف، تکالیف طبقه بندی شده گونه های مختلفی از یک ماده درسی می باشند که برای تدریس به زبان آموزانی که دارای توانایی های زبانی متفاوت و در یک کلاس درس حضور دارند و بر اساس آمادگی و علاقه ی زبان آموزان آنها طراحی میشوند. این پژوهش در صدد مطالعه 46 زبان آموز ایرانی با توانایی های زبانی نا همگون در 9 جلسه آموزشی برامده که در آن زبان آموزان پیش از دریافت تکالیف طبقه بندی شده، پیش-آزمون شنیداری را دریافت نمودند. زبان آموزان در گروه تجربی به 3 زیرشاخه (1) زبان آموزان با توانایی بالا، (2)زبان آموزان با توانایی متوسط و (3)زبان آموزان با توانایی پایین تقسم گردیدند. پس از انجام تکالیف طبقه بندی در هر جلسه شده بر اساس عملکرد افراد، آنها به شاخه های بالاتر صعود یا به شاخه های پایینتر سقوط می نمودند. برخی نیز بدون تغییر در جایگاه خود باقی می ماندند. نتیجه این پژوهش بر تاثیر مثبت این تکالیف بر بهبود مهارت شنیداری زبان آموزان ایرانی دلالت داشت اگر چه رابطه معنی داری بین دانش زبان انگلیسی آنها و میزان این پیشرفت در سه شاخه ی گروه تجربی مشاهده نگردید.

Keywords [Persian]

  • آموزش تمایز یافته
  • تکالیف طبقه بندی شده
  • مهارت شنیداری
  • کلاسهای ناهمگون

Bazerman, C. (1997). The life of genre, the life in the classroom. In W. Bishop, & H. Ostrom (Eds.), Genre and writing: Issues, arguments, alternatives (pp. 19-26). Ports-mouth, NH: Boynton/Cook.

Beaufort, A. (1999). Writing in the real world: Making the transition from school to work. New York: Teachers College Press.

Beaufort, A. (2004).  Developmental gains of a history major: A case for building a theory of disciplinary literacy. Research in the Teaching of English, 39(2), 136-185.

Bereiter, C., & Scardamalia, M. (1987). The psychology of written composition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Berkenkotter, C., Huckin, T. (1993). Rethinking genre from a sociocognitive perspective. Written Communication, 10, 475-509.

Berkenkotter, C., Huckin, T., & Ackerman, J. (1988). Conventions, conversations, and the writer: Case study of a student in a rhetoric Ph.D. program. Research in the Teaching of English, 22, 9-41.

Carter, R. (1990). The idea of expertise: An exploration of cognitive and social dimensions of writing. College Composition and Communication, 41(3), 265-286.

Christie, F., & Maton, C. (2011). Disciplinarity: Functional, linguistic, and sociological perspectives. London: Continuum International Publishing Group.

Cumming, A. (1989). Writing expertise and second language proficiency. Language Learning, 39(1), 81-141.

Cumming, A. (2006). Goals for academic writing: EFL students and their instructors. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Cumming, A., Busch, M. & Zhou, A. (2002). Investigating learners' goals in the context of adult second-language writing. In G. Rijlaarsdam (Series Ed.) & S. Ransdell & M. Barbier (Vol. Eds.), Studies in writing: Vol. 11: New directions for research in L2 writing (pp. 189-208). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Kluwer.

Cumming, A., Eouanzoui, K., Gentil, G. & Yang, L. (2004). Scaling changes in learners' goals for writing improvement over an ESL course. In D. Albrechtsen, K. Haastrup, & B. Henriksen (Eds.), Writing and vocabulary in foreign language acquisition (pp. 35-50). Copenhagen: Museum Tusculanum Press. 

Curnow, T. J & Liddicoat, A. J. (2010).  Assessment as learning: Engaging students in academic literacy in their first semester. ATN Assessment 08: Engaging Students with Assessment. Available online at: www.ojs.unisa.edu.au/index.php/atna/article/view/222/273

Dornyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of language learner: Individual differences in second language acquisition. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Dornyei, Z., & Ushioda, E. (2011). Teaching and researching motivation (2nd Ed.). Harlow: Longman

Erling, E. J., & Richardson, J. T. E. (2010). Measuring the academic skills of university students: Evaluation of a diagnostic procedure. Assessing Writing, 15, 177-193.

Flower, L., & Hayes, J. R. (1981). A cognitive process theory of writing. College Composition and Communication, 32, 365–387.

He, T. H. (2005). Effects of mastery and performance goals on the composition strategy use of adult EFL writers. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 63(3), 407-431. 

Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6(1), 1-55.

Kent, T. (1999). Post-process theory: Beyond the writing-process paradigm. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.

Kline, R. B. (2011). Principle and practice of Structural Equation Modeling. NY: The Guilford Press.

Lacobucci, D. (2010). Structural equations modeling: Fit indices, sample size, and advanced topics. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 20, 90-98.

Lacobucci, D. (2009). Everything you always wanted to know about SEM (structural equation modeling) but were afraid to ask. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 19, 673-680.

Lea, M. R, & Street, B. V. (1998). Student writing in higher education: an academic literacies approach. Studies in Higher Education, 32(2), 157-172.

Lewis, J. (2007). Academic literacy: Principles and learning opportunities for adolescent readers. In J. Lewis, & G. Moorman (Eds.), Adolescent Literacy Instruction: Politics and Promising Practices (pp. 143-166). NY: International Reading Association.

Manchón, R. M. (2001). Trends in the conceptualizations of second language composing strategies: A critical Analysis. In R. M. Manchón, (Ed.), International Journal of English Studies, 1(2), 47-70.

Manchón, R. M., Roca de Larios, J. & Murphy, L. (2007). A review of writing strategies: Focus on conceptualizations and impact of first language. In A. D. Cohen & E. Macaro (Eds.), Language Learner Strategies: Thirty Years of Research and Practice (229-250). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Marsh, H.W., Hau, K.T., and Wen, Z. (2004). In search of golden rules: Comment on hypothesis-testing approaches to setting cutoff values for fit indexes and dangers in overgeneralizing Hu and Bentler's findings. Structural Equation Modeling, 11(3), 320-41.

Mattern, R. A. (2005). College students' goal orientations and achievement. International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 17(1), 27-32.

Nelson, J., & Hayes. J. R. (1988). How writing context shapes college students’ strategies for writing from sources (Technical Report No. 16). Berkeley. CA: University ofCalifornia, Center for the Study of Writing.

Paton, M. (2007). Why international students are at greater risk of failure: An inconvenient truth. International Journal of Diversity in Organizations, Communities and Nations, 6(6), 101–111.

Prior, P. A. (1998). Writing/disciplinarity: A sociohistoric account of literate activity in the academy. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Riazi, A. (1997). Acquiring disciplinary literacy: A social-cognitive analysis of text production and learning among Iranian graduate students of education. Journal of Second Language Writing, 6(2), 105-137.

Roozen, K. (2010). Tracing trajectories of practice: Repurposing in one student’s developing disciplinary writing processes. Written Communication, 27(3), 318-354.

Slevin, J. F. (1988). Genre theory, academic discourse, and writing within disciplines. In L. Z. Smith (Ed.), Audits of meaning (pp. 3- 16). Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook Publishers.

Spack, R. (1997). The acquisition of academic literacy in a second language: A longitudinal case study. Written Communication, 14(1), 3-62.

Was, C. (2006). Academic achievement goal-orientation: Taking into another look. Electronic Journal of research in Educational Psychology, 4(3), 10, 529-550. 

Weinstein, C. E., Husman, J., & Dierking, D. R. (2000). Interventions with a focus on learning strategies. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of Self-Regulation (pp. 727-747). San Diego: Academic Press.

Young, L. & Leinhardt, G. (1998). Writing from primary documents: A way of knowing in history. Written Communication, 15, 25-68.

Yang, L., Baba, K., & Cumming, A. (2004). Activity systems for ESL writing improvement: Case studies of three Chinese and three Japanese adult learners of English. In D. Albrechtsen, K. Haastrup & B. Henriksen (Eds.), Writing and vocabulary in foreign language acquisition, Special Issue of Angles on English-Speaking World, 4, 13-33.