Abstract/Summary

This study aimed to explore the nature of self-efficacy among 161 Thai undergraduate EFL students through the investigation of the level of their self-efficacy and the relationship between their self-efficacy and their proficiency in listening comprehension. Learners’ attributions for success and failure, which might also influence their self-efficacy beliefs, were also explored. The second aim of the study was to examine whether a programme of listening strategy instruction could improve their level of self-efficacy, the level of their listening comprehension, and their reported use of listening strategies. Finally, the study examined whether learners from different levels of proficiency benefit from the strategy instruction in a similar manner. This research study is of a quasi-experimental, mixed method design, with one intervention group and one comparison group. Listening proficiency was measured by a free-recall listening task and a listening comprehension question task. The levels of self-efficacy and strategy use were elicited by a set of questionnaires. The manner of strategy use was also further investigated by using a stimulated-recall interview which required 14 participants to give a verbal account of how they had performed the previous listening tasks. These instruments were implemented at pre- and post-test data collection points before and after the intervention which lasted 12 weeks. The findings of the study indicate that, at pre-test, the level of self-efficacy among the participants was rather low but correlation analyses suggest a moderate relationship between self-efficacy and listening comprehension levels. Statistical analysis revealed that there was no statistically significant difference in how much the intervention and comparison groups improved their self-efficacy levels from pre-test to post-test. However, the intervention group participants improved their levels of listening comprehension significantly more than the comparison group participants on both the free-recall and the listening comprehension question task. This was true for both high and low proficiency learners. While a 2×2 ANOVA on the strategy questionnaire items did not indicate statistically significant changes in strategy use as a result of the intervention, a Hierarchical Cluster Analysis suggested that a greater number of the intervention group participants had positive behaviours at post-test than was the case at pre-test. The manner of the participants’ listening strategy use was further explored by looking at the frequency of strategies reported in the stimulated recall interview as well as the way in which strategy combinations were employed. At post-test, the intervention group reported a much higher level of hypothesis formation, hypothesis monitoring and hypothesis formation than at pre-test, which was not the case for the comparison group. Likewise, the intervention participants also reported greater use of word or chunk identification as well as being able to combine other strategies to compensate for gaps in their bottom-upskills. Thus, there was evidence that the intervention group had changed the way in which they employed listening strategies as a result of the intervention, while the comparison group showed much fewer changes. The study not only provides evidence of the potential benefits of strategy instruction for improving L2 listening comprehension, regardless of learners’ proficiency levels, but also has methodological implications, as the strategy analyses demonstrated the value of exploring strategy use through a qualitative approach.