Abstract
Listening is critical to language acquisition not only in first language, but in second language and foreign language as well. With the help of skill training, learners are able to become more proficient in listening and consequently in using the target language. In recent years, advanced computer technology and the advent of Internet have made the learning of listening more accessible and flexible. Previous studies have shown that learners held very positive viewpoints to online listening materials and listening websites. However, few of them attempted to measure to what extent the online listening materials could benefit the learners. Likewise, while online materials and multimedia CD-ROM can serve as alternative instructional materials, they also pose a question of materials selection. Meanwhile, though factors contributing to listening difficulties have been identified in much literature, a grading mechanism specifically for ‘listening’ which operationalizes these factors is still virtually unavailable.Given the research gaps and the pedagogical need for a grading mechanism, the present study aims to examine to what extent online listening materials can benefit the learners in their listening, and to propose a formula to grade listening texts by manipulating the weights of three difficulty factors: speech rate, syntactic complexity, and academic word ratios. Based on the proposed formula, a listening website with graded listening materials was constructed for the learners to enhance their listening ability. The website, Freshmen Listening, constructed using the MOODLE platform (a open source software for course management), contained sixty-six listening texts with their MP3 files and comprehension check questions which were sequenced from easy to difficult. To the purpose of enhancing the learners’ listening ability, the website was infused into a listening and speaking course for the learners to do self study for eleven weeks. Each week, six listening texts with their MP3 files and comprehension questions were presented to the learners, of which three were required and the rest were optional. The comprehension questions were designed specifically for the training of five listening skills: listening for main ideas, listening for details, interpreting the speaker’s intent, making inferences, and summarizing.Various instruments were used to measure the learners’ achievement, material usefulness, and the formula usefulness: an independent listening test administered before and after the project, learners’ scores on the weekly listening tasks, an evaluation questionnaire, and a weekly difficulty questionnaire. Eighteen English-majored freshmen were recruited as participants in this study. At the beginning, the pretest was administered to understand the learners’ beginning level. Then, the learners were asked to do the online listening tasks and respond to the weekly difficulty questionnaire every week for eleven weeks. This was to trace the learners’ improvement and thus the material usefulness, and to understand formula usefulness. After the eleven-week period, the posttest and the final evaluation questionnaire were administered in order to understand the learners’ improvement in their listening ability, also their perceptions of the material usefulness and formula usefulness.Four major findings were obtained in this study. First, the online listening materials were useful in enhancing the learners’ listening ability both in overall ability and in specific listening skills: listening for details, and summarizing. For the rest skills, significant improvement was not found. This may in part due to the uneven distribution of the question number for each skill. Nevertheless, whereas pre- and post-test comparison revealed significant improvement of the learners, we did not find supportive answer to the material usefulness based on the learners’ weekly performance on the listening tasks. This indicated that learning of listening is more complicated than we have understood. Secondly, by classifying the learners depending on their proficiency and diligence levels, we did not find such learner differences affecting their achievement in the posttest. One explanation for this finding may be that, as the learners were of different proficiency levels, our listening materials also included a wide range of difficulty, and hence, were beneficial to all the learners. Regarding diligence level, the different start points of both groups may in part account for the insignificant difference of posttest achievement between groups. Thirdly, concerning formula usefulness, the formula seemed to need further refinement since supportive answers were not found either in the learners’ weekly performance or from their perceptions reported in the questionnaires. Combined effect of online practice and classroom learning may be one explanation for this finding. Finally, learners seemed to hold very positive attitudes to the use of online materials. In the evaluation questionnaire, the high ratings and comments given by the learners revealed that after the project, they became aware of the potential benefits brought by the online materials.Based on the results, it is undeniable that online materials were beneficial to learners. Yet, bearing in mind the inconclusive finding concerning the learners’ weekly performance and the formula usefulness, it should be noted that learning of listening, listening difficulty are more complex issues than we have assumed. Limitations and directions for future research were given at the end of the study. It is expected that the pioneer effort made by this study could shed light in the teaching of listening and in listening difficulty literature.