Research Note 85-51 6

BASIC SKILLS RESOURCE CENTER:

o The Effects of Learning Strategies

Training on the Development of

=Skills in English as a Second

Language

J. Michael O'Malley, Rocco P. Russo,

Anna U. Chamot, Gloria Stewner-Manzanares,

and Lisa Kupper

InterAmerica Research Associates

for

Contracting Officer's Representative

Richard P. Kern

Instructional Technology Systems Technical Area

Zita It. Simutis, Chief

TRAINING RESEARCH LABORATORY

Harold F. O'Neil, Jr., Director | DTIC

ELECTE

_ .OCT 171985

- B

U. S. Army

W ,Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences

May 1985

Aporoved for oublic relase; distribution unlimited.

8 5 10 13 1E8
U. S. ARMY RESEARCH INSTITUTE

FOR THE BEHAVIORAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCES

A Field Operating Agency under the Jurisdiction of the

Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel

L. NEALE COSBY

*EDGAR M. JOHNSON Colonel, IN

*Technical Director Commander

7W Thspow has been clared for reissu to the Defense Technical Information Center (DTICI. ft hem been gien o -. Esother primary distribution and will be avalaloe to requestors only through DTIC or other reference services such

no the National Technical Information Servie (NTIS). The view. opinions. mnd/or findings contained in this

~report wre thoe of the author(s) and suld not be constre n an official Departmnt of the Army Position.

* ipsolcy. or decision. unless o designated by other official documentation.
UNCLASSIFIED

sEcu Rrrf CLASSIFICATION OF TaIs PAGE (Whenu Dae. Entered)

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE EFRE INTUTOS

.REPORT WUM1§%GOTER

ARI Research Note 85-51 [*"f4D;Zf SCTLGNME

4. TITLE (mid Subtitle) S. TYPE Of REPORT & PERIOD COVERED

BASIC SKILLS RESOURCE CENTER: The Effects of Interim Report

Learning Strategies Training on the Development of Feb. 1982-Dec. 1984

Skills in English as a Second Language S. PERFORMING ORG. REPORT HUNGER

N 7. AUTNOR~q) S. CONTRACT OR GRANT NUMISER(s)

O'Malley, J.M.; Russo, R.P.; Chamot, A.U.;

Stewner-Manzanares, G.; and Kupper, L. MDlA 903-82-C-0169

S. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS 10. PROGRAM ELEMENT. PROJECT. TASK

InterAmerica Research Associates AREA & WORK UNIT NUNGERS

1555 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 508 2Q162722A791

Rosslyn, Virginia 22209

It. CONTROLLING OFFICE NAME AND ADDRESS 12. REPORT DATE

U.S. Army Research Institute in the Behavioral and May 1985

Social Sciences, 5001 Eisenhower Avenue, IS. NUMBER OF PAGES

Alexandria. Vrgiti 22133-5600 176 14I. MONITORING AGNC NAM & ADDRESS(11 EII11an hom ConbofInd 011100.) 15. SECURITY CLASS. (of gAU. e.,.eW)

Unclassified

1S.. DECkASSI PI CATION/ DOWNGRADING

Of. DISTRISUION STATEMENT (of N.J. Asport)

Approved for public release; distribution unlimited.

17. DISTRISIUTION STATEMENT (of 00. obobacg ent..ed In Xf..& 0,it different Sum1 RXpW")

10. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

Dr. Richar*d P. Kern was the contracting officer and technical monitor for this

* project. The report represents a portion of one of five research projects con-

* ducted as part of the research component of the Basic Skills Resource Center

contract.

It. KEY WORDS (Conflowe on ,.eeeo side It noceaa and Identify by block number)

Learning Strategies;-

English As A Second Language

Second Language Acquisition

* Basic Skills

20. ANSTIOACr (4Vmthea. a roeri m fN inwwor ami fdoraliy by block ..nbor)

"~-'..This project was designed as part of the Basic Skills Resource Center component to identify effects of training in the use of learning strategies on the

development of English-as-a-Second-Language skills. High school students from

mixed foreign language backgrounds were randomly assigned to one of two strategy

treatment groups, or to a control group. Training in a natural teaching environmfent was presented for one hour daily over an eight day period in three language

tasks: vocabulary, listening, and speaking. Results of the training are thoroughly discussed, as are implications for classroom instruction and future research.

1JAM72lwO INV5I OSLT UNCLASSIFIED

SELCURITY CLASSIFICATION OF TP41S PAGE (W'tew'Dota En~ted)

.,....~~~ %*.* % %*....*.

0-1 le 0- I?_..e_
*! TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

I. INTRODUCTION I-1

Background 1-2

Review of the Literature 1-3

Purposes 1-9

SI I. METHODOLOGY 1i-1

Subj ects il-I

Instruments li-i

- Vocabulary pre- and posttest 11-2

- Listening comprehension pre- and posttest 11-4

- Speaking pre- and posttest 11

- Learning Strategies Inventory 11-6

Overview of Treatment 11-7

Vocabulary Instruction 11-9

- General Procedures 11-9

- Vocabulary Treatment Conditions 11-13

* Metacognitive Group 11-13

* Cognitive Group 11-14

* Control Group I1-14

- Implementation of Strategy Training for Vocabulary 11-14

Listening Instruction 11-20

- General Procedures 11-20 .1

rLJ

- Listening Treatment Conditions 11-20

* Metacognitive Group 1-20

* Cognitive Group 11-22 :c |

* Control Group 11-22

.. . . . . .
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued) Page

- Implementation of Strategy Training for Listening 11-22

Speaking Instruction 11-24

- General Procedures 11-24

- Speaking Treatment Conditions 11-25

* Metacognitive Group 11-25

* Cognitive Group 11-26

* Control Group 11-27

- Implementation of Strategy Training for Speiking 11-27

Overall Analysis of Training Implementation 11-30

III. RESULTS II-1

Preliminary Analyses 11-1

Posttest Analyses 111-5

- Vocabulary 111-5

- Listening Il1-11

- Speaking 111-13

Ethnic Group Differences 111-14

Process Analyses 111-20

- Observations and Student Worksheets 111-21

- Learning Strategies Inventory 111-22

Discussion 111-28

REFERENCES 11-33

APPENDICES

A Vocabulary Pretest, Examiner's Directions, and Answer Key

8 Vocabulary Posttest, Examiner's Directions, and Answer Key

C Listening Pretest and Posttest

iv "?/ ; % -5. . % *% \-.*.~~*.~~..*-.-**-*. .-
TABLE OF CONTENTS (continued)

APPENDICES (continued)

-.D Topics for Speaking Pretest and Posttest

E Rating System for Speaking Samples: Factor Definitions

F Rating System for Speaking Samples: Performance Standards

G Rating System for Speaking Samples: Level Definitions

H Rating System for Speaking Samples: Rating Stheet

I Rating System for Speaking Samples: Instructions to Raters

- Language Learning Strategies Inventory and LLSI Strategy

Interpretation Key

K List of Vocabulary, Definitions, and Method of Presentation

(All Groups)

L Teacher's Script of Instruction in Imagery and Grouping (Metacognitive

and Cognitive Groups)

M Teacher's Script for Instruction in Self-evaluation

(Metacognitive Group)

N Teacher's Script for Control Group Instruction in Vocabulary;

Vocabulary Questions for Control Group

0 Teacher's Script for Instruction in Selective Attention, Note-taking,

and Cooperation (Hetacognitive Group)

P List of Markers Used in Speaking Activities (Metacognitive Group)

Q Sample Videotaped Lecture Script (All Groups)

R Sample T-List (All Groups)

S Daily Listening Tests (All Groups)

T Teacher's Script for instruction In Speaking Strategies

(Metacognitive Group)

U Worksheet for Speech Preparation (Metacognitive Group)

V Teacher's Script for Instruction in Cooperation In Speaking

Activities (Metacognitive and Cognitive Groups)

W Speaking rooperatlon Handouts (Metacognitive and Cognitive Groups)

V

" .. ". ."." ....,-.- " ".. ', . ..'.'.'.- * ' "..'*< .".*.*' ' .. ... *.'. '". ," "., " % ." :',. ' "-" " X .
I

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

I Language Learning Activities and Learning Strategies 11-8

Presented for Each Treatment Condition

2 Schedule of Activities 11-10

3 Means and Standard Deviations of Treatment and 111-3

Control Groups at Pretest and Posttest on Measures

of Vocabulary, Listening and Speaking

Analyses of Variance for Treatment and Control Groups 111-4

at Pretest and Posttest on Vocabulary, Listening, and

Speaking

5 The Effect of Learning Strategy Training on Selected 111-6

Language Skills Controlling for Pretest Scores

6 Means and Standard Deviations of Treatment and Control 111-9

Groups at Pretest and Posttest on Vocabulary Subtests

. 7 Analyses of Variance for Treatment and Control Groups 111-10

at Pretest and Posttest on Vocabulary Recognition and

Recall Tasks by Testing Interval

. 8 The Effects of Learning Strategies Training on Listening 111-12

Skills, Controlling for Pretest Score

9 Adjusted Mean Scores of Treatment Groups by Posttest 111-15

Variable and Ethnicity

10 Two-way Analyses of Covariance for Treatment Groups 111-16

by Ethnicity on Posttest Variables

11 Means and Percent Correct on Daily Listening Tests 111-18

by Treatment Group and Ethnicity

- 12 Analyses of Variance for-Treatment Groups by Ethnicity 111-19

for Daily Listening Tests

" 13 Intercorrelations and Reliabilities of Learning 111-24

Strategies Inventory Variables

14 The Effect of Learning Strategy Training on Reported 111-2i

Use of Learning Strategies

15 The Effect of Learning Strategy Training on Selected 111-27

Language Skills by Level of Strategy Use Controlling

for Pretest

vii

% ..%
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Effects of Learning Strategies Training on the

Development of Skills in English as a Second Language

InterAmerica Research Associates has been contracted by the U.S. Army

Research Institute (ARI) to develop and operate the Basic Skills Resource

. Center (BSRC). The BSRC project has two interfacing components: the

-* design, implementation, and operation of an information service; and the

implementation and monitoring of applied research in the area of adult

. basic skills and continuing education. This report describes one of five

"" research studies undertaken through the BSRC research component.

This study was designed to identify the effects of strategy training on the

development of three types of language skills in English as a second

language: vocabulary learning, listening comprehension, and oral

production. The subjects were 75 high school students from Hispanic,

Asian, and mixed foreign language backgrounds who were randomly assigned

proportionate to ethnicity and sex to one of three groups: a metacognitive

treatment group, a cognitive treatment group, or a control group. The

metacognitive group received training in the use of one metacognitive

strategy and up to two cognitive strategies depending on the language

learning task. The cognitive group received training only on cognitive

strategies, but no metacognitive strategies, and the control group received

instruction to work on tasks employing their ordinary procedures. Training

was presented in a natural teaching environment for one hour daily over 8

days. In addition, pretesting and posttesting each took one day.

ix

% -4 4 - 4 4 -4
* Analyses were undertaken to (a) compare the treatment groups on posttest

measures of vocabulary, listening and speaking; (b) study ethnic group

differences for the treatment conditions; (c) determine if training was

more effective for learners with lower pretest scores; and (d) determine if

* students trained on specific strategies actually used them in performing

the language tasks relative to the controls. Throughout these analyses it

was predicted that the order of effects on the outcome variables would be

the metacognitive over the cognitive, and the cognitive over the controls.

* Results indicated that strategy training had (a) no effects on vocabulary

* learning overall, although effects in the predicted direction were evident

for Hispanics; (b) significant effects for listening skills, depending on

the task difficulty or strength of strategy training cues; and (c)

significant effects for speaking tasks as predicted.

* Teachers interested in helping students to become more effective learners

* should be aware of strategies which can be embedded in curricul1a and taught

*to students with only modest extra effort. Teachers can expand their

* instructional role to include a variety of learning strategies which can be

used with specific types of language tasks. Future research should be

* directed to refining strategy training approaches, and determining

* procedures for strengthing the impact of the strategies on student

* outcomes.

-p7
THE EFFECTS OF LEARNING STRATEGIES TRAINING ON THE -p

DEVELOPMENT OF SKILLS IN ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE

I. INTRODUCTION

The Study of Learning Strategies for Developing Skills In English as a

Second Language was designed to Identify approaches that students can use

- to improve language learning and retention. The study was conducted by

i InterAmerica Research Associates for the Army Research Institute for the

Behavioral and Social-Sciences under Contract No. MDA-903-82-C-0169 for

development and operation of a Basic Skills Resource Center (BSRC). The

BSRC consists of two components: (a) an information database and

communications network on Army basic skills education, referred to as the

Military Educators Resource NETWORK; anu (b) a research eomponent on

learning strategies in basic'skilis education. The Study of Learning

-" Strategies in English as a Second Language (ESL) was one of five studies

" performed within the research component of the BSRC.

This report is the fourth of a series of reports for the study of learning

strategies. The first report Identified and analyzed related studies on

the topic and was entitled "A Review of the Literature on Learning

- Strategies in the Acquisition of English as a Second Language: The

Potential for Research Applications." The second report described Phase 1

of the ESL study, in which Information was collected through Interviews and

observations on the varieties of learning strategies used by students in

secondary school ESL classes. The third report was "A Teachers' Guide to

Learning Strategies for Acquiring Skills in Speaking and Understanding

English as a Second Language." The Teachers' Guide was e..signed as a

reference document for teachers Interested in Imparting learning strategies

I-i

' -p . . .. , .,
-to ESL students. The present report, which Is the final report on data

collection In high schools, describes Phase 2 of the ESL study, in which

selected learning strategies were used In an experiment to identify the

effects of learning strategies f or different language learning tasks. Two

-~ later reports will describe a Phase 1 and piloted Phase 2 study on a

military base.

* Background

Research and theory In second language learning strongly suggest that good

- language learners use a variety of strategies to assist them in gaining

coummand over new language skills. By Implication, less competent learners

should be able to Improve their skills in a second language if they could

be trained to use strategies evidenced among more successful language

*learners. With successful training, less competent learners should be

* able to apply strategies to a variety of different language skills and

extend the strategies to new tasks of the saome type on which they received

training. Teachers could play an Important role by conveying strategy

* applications to students and thereby support their efforts to learn the

* new language.

* This study concerns foreign language background students trained to use

learning strategies on three critical academic language tasks in English:

vocabulary learning, listening to a lecture, and making a brief oral

*presentation to other students. These three language tasks were selected

* to assure that the range of skills presented in the strategy training was

- representative of tasks found in a high school second language curriculum.

The study used natural classroom instruction so that the instruction -l

procedures could be generally applied by most teachers. Nevertheless, the

1-2
instructional approach was tightly controlled, and entailed

minute-by-minute planning of each language learning activity for the

purposes of the study. Furthermore, an experimental procedure with random

assignment of students to receive one of two treatment conditions or a

control condition was used to assure that the results of the study could be

interpreted unambiguously.

Review of Literature

The design of learning strategies training in second language learning

draws upon two types of background research. The first is within the

second language learning literature and stems from work on the "good

language learner" by Rubin (1975) and by the Ontario Institute for Studies

in Education (Naiman, Frohlich, Stern, & Todesco, 1978). These pioneering

efforts first pointed to the kinds of strategies that could be used in

language learning and described implications for classroom practice. More

recent work by O'Malley, Russo, Chamot, Stewner-Manzanares, and Kupper (in

press) builds on this earlier background and adds specific new information

about classifications of learning strategies that are generally applicable

across a variety of language tasks, and strategies that are associated with

specific language learning activities.

The second type of literature on which the design of learning strategies

training studies can draw is the considerable body of research amassed over

the past 15 years in' cognitive psychology (e.g., Oansereau, in press;

Weinstein, 1978). This extensive volume of literature, much of which

involves experimental analyses of the impact of learning strategies

training, points to the utility of learning strategies primarily in first

1-3

".
!1;1

language reading for native English speakers and suggests a number of

specific strategies that are adaptable for use In second language learning.

The literature also identifies some specific types of strategies that

* should always be Included In any strategy training effort. For example,

although cognitive strategies serve as the core for most strategy training,

present evidence suggests that a combined metacognltive/cognitive

training approach is superior in producing transfer of strategies to new

tasks (Brown S Palincsar, 1982). The reason is that students with

metacognitive training have an opportunity to reflect on the process of

learning, the application of learning strategies, and the language items

"- with which strategy applications were successful.

Both sources of research reveal that the second language learning

- activities on which strategy training has been analyzed tend to be limited

to vocabulary tasks. The typical approach in these studies has been

either to encourage students to develop their own associations linking a

vocabulary word with Its equivalent in the second language (Cohen & Aphek,

* 1980; 1981), or to train students to use specific types of linking

associations that will cue the target word (e.g., Atkinson & Raugh, 1975;

- Levin, in press; Pressley, Levin, Nakamura, Hope, Bisbo, & Toye, 1980).

Both approaches require one-to-one links between the words and their

translation via an associative connection. In almost all cases, the

- training has been conducted individually rather than In groups. With the

exception of one set of studies where instruction was on vocabulary in

context (Cohen & Aphek, 1980; 1981), this body of work has assumed that

vocabulary learning often can and does take place effectively out of the

context provided by meaningful sentences or narratives. Ignoring the

potential advantages of contextualization runs counter to the experience

','.. .'. .. ' '.' ' :.;, '-. ..... , . . " . . .. . , , .,,.;,.....
a~~~~~~Z - .f 7_-At4 

of many teachers and curriculum designers despite mixed evidence for Its

* effectiveness (e.g., Pressley, Loving Kuiper, Bryant, a hichener, 1981).

The studies nevertheless Indicate that associations established through

imagery to link translated equivalents of vocabulary words either In or

* out of context will dramatically facilitate student learning.

* Despite the effectiveness shown for one-to-one associations In vocabulary

learning,. the associations are Inefficient to a degree because students

must create a special new connecting Image for every vocabulary word

*learned. For example, associating the Spanish word "carts" to Its

- translated equivalent, "letter," requires some unique mental gymnastics

before the linking Image Is developed. One example given in the literature

* ~Is to think of an English homophone f'or "carta," such as 'cart," and to

* Imagine a letter, the translated equivalent, positioned In a shopping cart

*like some bag of groceries. This Image and others like It, once

- established, are virtually Indelible In memory. Yet the mental association

* developed for "carta"' simply has no relevance for other words on most

vocabulary lists, which require new associations of equally complicated

* dimensions.

* One possible solution to this complexity Is to group the words to be

learned so that fewer linkages need to be established. If the student sees

possible ways to group words based on semantic meaning or other characteristics, It Is possible that the linking association established for one

word could be extended to other words In the group. Considerable evidence

Indicates that grouped objects In one's native language are easier to

remember than lists of objects Individually (Weinstein, 1978). Grouping

not only makes the objects easier to remember, but possibly the second

A
language labels as well, through the contextualizing that takes place. For

example, words that go together In a grocery store could have sufficient

contextual identity to cue the English equivalent word. Personal

experience reported by one expert multiple language learner Indicates that

learning groups of words in context is an efficient and effective procedure

for extending familiarity with both words and phrases (Stewner-Manzanares,

personal communication, 1983). Because these types of associations often

- are Idiosyncratic to Individual students, as are the groupings, students

trained to use this approach would probably best be left to their own

devices once provided with Instruction on the use of grouping and imagery

as a combined and possibly more efficient strategy.

Even more effective vocabulary learning might result if students were

. encouraged to use a metacognitive strategy and evaluate their successes

and shortcomings in applying these strategies by recording their

experiences in a daily journal. Journal entries would give the student an

-* opportunity to identify words that were learned or not learned and to

analyze the strategies which served to enhance learning. Further, as has

been suggested in the cognitive literature, transfer of strategy training

*- to new tasks would be more likely if cognitive and metacognitive strategy

training were paired (Brown & Pal incsar, 1982).

As was noted above, studies designed to explore the effectiveness of

. learning strategy training with second languages have been limited

exclusively to vocabulary tasks. Although some studies of first language

listening skills have been conducted with learning strategies (Dansereau,

Atkinson, Long, 6 McDonald, 1974), studies with second languages have yet

to explore the effectiveness of strate .:, training with listening skills.

1-6

- - "' Ar 
More Importantly, strategy training has neglected oral production skills

altogether.

For a variety of reasons, it is extremely Important for studies of learning

strategy training with second languages to address a fuller range of tasks

than Is represented by vocabulary alone. One reason is that only a small

portion of language learning is devoted to vocabulary, and especially to

vocabulary learning in Isolation, at least In most academic settings. In

academic settings, students often listen to discussions or lectures in the

second language, and they are (or should be) required to speak, convey

-. information, and express and substantiate their opinions with regard to

academic content. A second reason for addressing the fuller range of

language tasks in academic settings is that the effectiveness of classroom

instruction for promoting language "acquisition," or the type of language

required for effective coumunication, has been seriously questioned by more

than one major second language theorist (Bialystok, 1979, 1983; Krashen,

. 1983). To the extent that strategy training can be shown to have an effect

on more complicated language tasks, apart from vocabulary and grammar, for

-, example, the contention that the role of classroom Instruction In language

. acquisition Is limited can be questioned.

* Listening skills in first languages have proven responsive to strategy

.* training and there would be every reason to believe them to be equally

responsive to strategy training in second languages. One cognitive

strategy that has proven effective with first language listening skills is

note-taking (Dansereau et al., 197; Di Vesta S Gray, 1982; Wieland &

Kingsbury, 1979). Differences on outcome measures with note-taking may be

" und depending on whether the Information prea...',d is written or oral,

I-7
whether or not students have reviewed their notes, and whether or not

students were Instructed in note-taking strategies. in teaching English as

a second language, instruction on specific note-taking skills has rarely

been discussed in the literature, with some recent notable exceptions

(Dunkel & Pialorsi, 1982; Hamp-Lyons, 1983; Yorkey, Barrutia, Chamot et

al., 1984), and has not been the subject of specific experimental studies.

One way to enhance note-taking skills with a metacognitive strategy would

be to provide students with ideas on specific types of information to

* listen for in a lecture, i.e., to use selective attention for specific

linguistic items. Although in a history lecture one can focus on names and

dates, this may not work for a lecture on psychology or sciences. Focusing

attention selectively on linguistic markers that tend to occur irrespective

of the lecture content should give the student a way to determine the types

of information on which to take notes. Specific examples of markers used

• .for emphasis in a lecture or that reflect the organization of the lecture

are appropriate for this purpose. Examples are the markers "first," "the

most important point is...," and "in conclusion." Students with

information about markers on which to focus their attention should have

identified a mechanism that will direct their note-taking toward specific

main points and details that must be retained for successful comprehension

of the listening task. it Is possible that note-taking skills can be

enhanced even further by using cooperation, a strategy enabling students to

engage in interactions to identify omissions of importance or errors in

recall or Interpretation (Slavin, 1983).

Strategies to assist second language students in learning how to speak more

*effectivly.. In an ecad.ic setting should be effective if the strategies

provide a way to analyze essential purposes or functions in the

1-8

.' ,.. ' . ' " "." . '.- .." " .'..-. • ." . . . ". "C"•*. . .'. .' .' .. '*. ... . ". , ". " , • " " . . .
comimunicationt and generate appropriate language to accomplish those

functions (Stevick, 1984). This is similar in some respects to having an

advance organizer (Ausubel, 1960; 1978) or a schema (Dansereau, in press)

in that a set of basic superordinate principles is available to serve as an

organizing framework for new information. However, whereas advance

organizers are usually applied to reading, where the student uses a

receptive process to gather new information to associate with the

*superordinate principles, here the organizers are applied to oral

production, where the student produces sentences that correspond to the

functions or organizing principles Inherent In the communication. But

first the students must examine their capability to produce those

sentences, and identify specific language elements needed beyond those

presently available in their language repertoire. After retrieving the

needed language elements, students should be able to accomplish all the

functions required in a language task. The main additional requirement

would be an opportunity to rehearse the language in a cooperative setting,

using the superordinate principles to organize the communication, and

*appropriate markers to signal the shift from one organizing function to the

*' next or to highlight other information.

Purposes

This study was designed to test the effectiveness of strategy training with

students of English as a second language (ESL) on three types of academic

language tasks: vocabulary learning, listening comprehension, and oral

production. The strategies were specifically designed to produce increased

learning for the language tasks selected in training, and to maximize the

likelihood of transfat to a new task of the same type.

1-9
(THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK)

1-10
II. METHODOLOGY

SUBJECTS

The subjects were 75 high school students enrolled in ESL classes during

the Fall 1983 semester. The students were located In three high schools In

an Eastern metropolitan area in the United States. Two of the schools were

"" in a single school dist.rict and had common entry assessment and curriculum

approaches, while one school was in another district with somewhat

different assessment and instructional approaches. However, both-districts

'* identified students as beginning, intermediate, or advanced level for

English proficiency placement. The students used in this study were all

Intermediate level, were of both sexes, and were predominantly from Spanish

language countries or from Southeast Asian countries, with a few students

from other countries in Europe or Asia. Intermediate level proficiency was

- defined in both school districts as students with limited proficiency in

understanding and speaking English, and little or no skill in reading and

writing English.

* INSTIUMENTS

Four date collection Instruments were used in the study: curriculum

specific tests In vocabulary, listening comprehension, and speaking, and a

- questionnaire for learning strategy uses. The first three Instruments were

administered at both pretest and posttest, while the questionnaire for

learning strategies was administered only at posttest. Only the speaking

test was Individually administered; all others were group administered.

Each of these tests is described in the fol 'owing sections.

,
* The vocabulary pro- and posttost were constructed to be similar In format;

both were a 32-item test with 10 picture recognition Items, 10 word

recognition Items, -6 picture recall Items, and 6 word recall Items. The

* vocabulary pretest,, along with the examiner's directions and answer key, is

*presented In Appendix A. The posttest, with Its corresponding examiner's

directions and answer key, Is presented In Appendix B.

All words used in training and in the posttest were selected from a

200-word list that had been pilot tested on a separate group of

* intermediate level ESL students. The pilot test group was given a list of

* words and asked to Indicate if the words were familiar or unfamiliar.

* Words retained for use In the training were familiar to fewer than 40

* percent of this group. The words had been selected originally from

*vocabulary lists found In intermediate level ESL work books. After the

* vocabulary words had been selected for the training and the 32-posttest

Items determined, the vocabulary pretest was developed. Pretest Items were

* semantically matched to designated posttest Items. For example, a word to

be presented In the training and posttest, such as 'fangs,t was matched

semantically In the pretest to a word such as claws. A high imagery

* training and posttest word, such as mixer, was matched In the pretest to

*blender, and both were presented with a slide. While the words used in

both the training and the posttest had been piloted on a separate group and

*selected because of the group's lack of familiarity with them, the same was

not true for the pretest. However, the pretest words were selected (a) to

match semantically with the pouttest Items, and (b) to discriminate between

students who had an extensive vocabulary In English and those who did not.

As an example of this latter purpose, words such As rose and snake (likely

to be known to some Intermediate level studentsi) were Included in the

-. 11-2
pretest, along with Items such as strut and rake, Judged less likely to be

familiar. This provided data on the range of student vocabulary In English

at the beginning of training.

For both pre- and posttests, the picture recognition items were multiple

choice and involved slide presentation of four pictures simultaneously, one

of which--the target word--was verbally announced by the examiner. Each of

the four pictures was labeled with a capital letter (A, 6, C, or 0). Only

these letters appeared on the student answer sheet, not the name of any of

the objects depicted. Students marked their papers by circling the letter

corresponding to the picture they belleved represented the target word. On

the posttest, each of the options represented a word that had been

presented pictorially during training. In the word recognition items, the

examiner verbally presented a definition and read the four possible

response words aloud; only the word alternatives were presented on the

student's answer sheet. The students marked their paper to indicate which

of the four words represented the definition. in the recall test,

students were required to write down from memory the word corresponding to

* the slide presented (picture recall) or to the definition verbalized by the

examiner (definition recall). Errors in spelling were not counted as a

wrong answer. Each student received a score for overall correct number of

items, and a subscore for each subset of items. Roughly half the words on

the posttest had been presented during training in the same week as the

posttest (the recent list), and half had been presented in the prior week

(the delayed list). The 16 words posttested with a slide had been

presented during training with a slide; likewise, the 16 words posttested

*with a definition had originally been trained using a definition.

11-3
Both the listening comprehension protest and posttest consisted of 10

four-choice questions and 3 two-choice questions on a 5-minute listening

task presented immediately prior to the test. The four-choice items were

in a standard multiple choice format, and the two-choice items called upon

the students to mark whether a statement about the passage represented a

main idea or a detail. The listening tasks presented to the students prior

to the pretest and posttest were designed to be structurally similar; both

• .tasks consisted of a videotaped S-minute lecture on a historical/

geographical topic. The test items on both tests were designed to assess

different levels of Bloom's taxonomy of the cognitive domain, viz.,

" knowledge, comprehension, and analysis. Both tests were group

administered. They are exhibited in Appendix C.

For the speakina pretest, students were asked to prepare a brief (2-minute)

talk on one of three topics: a personal experience (My first day in school,

What I do on my job), culture (What a tourist should see in my country,

Holidays, Traditions), or an academic subject (A school project, Favorite

author, etc.). After deciding on the topic, students were permitted to

organize and plan their presentation overnight. The following day, which

was the first day of training, students were divided into small groups and,

one by one, they recorded their presentation. This tape represented their

speaking pretest. For the speaking posttest, students were again asked to

prepare a brief talk on one of many possible topics parallel in focus to

the pretest topics. (See Appendix ) for the list of topics used in the

pretest and posttest.) Preparation for the posttest differed from the

pretest only in that students developed their talks during class time.

This ensured that all three treatment groups spent equal time preparing for

posttest. Each student practiced in a small group of 3-4 students in clas.

11-4
* and then made the presentation individually to one of the examiners and the

• same small group. The presentation was tape recorded for later scoring.

The speaking test was rated on four factors appropriate to oral

Spresentations: delivery, appropriateness, accuracy, and organization (see

Appendix E for Factor Definitions). Performance standards for each factor

were modifications of those used by the Foreign Service Institute Test for

Oral Proficiency which gives performance standards for oral interactions.

* The performance standards for this test were: blocking, intrusive,

acceptable, and successful (see Appendix F for definitions and examples of

the performance standards applied to each of the factors).

Ratings by five independent judges knowledgeable about ESL instruction were

averaged to produce a single score. Judges were uninformed about the

details of the treatment conditions but were trained in a two-hour session

to use the rating system and then checked for accuracy against a standard.

The rating system consisted of five levels defined by overall performance.

Descriptions of each level are found in Appendix G. Levels of performance

were established by having one of the authors listen to all tapes and

assign a global rating. Low, mid, and high levels were determined first

and called levels 1, 2, and 3. Levels which were similar to mid and low,

but higher in one or two factors, were considered to be between levels and

were called 1+ and 2+. The tests were then analyzed for performance on

each factor and descriptions of levels were established. Descriptions were

not intended to be absolute as different factors are weighed differently at

different levels and in different linguistic environments. They were

intended merely to be general guidelines for the judges when they were in

doubt about a rating. Judges were instructed, first, to assign a global

rating delative to a standard that had been established In training.

11-5

"""... . . . ' . . . .~ *. - . .-" .. . • , . , ,' . %%.... ' . -. -,- - . .
Second, they were to listen to the test again and determine a performance

level for each factor (see Appendix HI for Rating Sheet). If the global

score did not agree with the summnation of the factor ratings, the score was

to be adjusted (see Appendix I for Instructions to Raters). The raters

were to make notes on their reasons for assigning a particular score. in

fact, judges found It easy to determine global scores and had an interjudge

-agreement of 85 percent. At no time were the judges told the details of

the strategy training or how students were instructed to organize their

presentations. The assigned ratings were global judgements of tests that

* were rated against each other for oral performance.

The Learning Strategies Inventory (Appendix J) was a 42-item questionnaire

* designed to detect uses of 14 learning strategies with specific language

*learning tasks. Five of the learning strategies were metacognitive, eight

were cognitive and one was a social mediating strategy. The instrument

presented statements describing a learning strategy use with one of the

- specific language learning tasks, and asked the student to respond by

indicating whether the statement was "'never true about me," "sometimes true

about me," "usually true about me,' or "always true about me." The

* language learning tasks were one of the three tasks used during the

training sessions: vocabulary, listening comprehension, or speaking. Half

* the strategies on the instrument had been used in training, and half were

* not used in training. A list of these strategies and their definitions Is

Included with the LSI In Appendix J9 accompanied by a key to Interpretation

* of the instrument.

11-6
, 

OVERVIEW OF TREATMENT

Students were randomly assigned within each school to one of three groups:

a metacognitive group, a cognitive group, or a control group.. The size of

an instructional group within each school was 8-10 students on the average.

The metacognitive group received training in the use of one metacognitive

strategy, up to two cognitive strategies, and one social mediating

strategy, depending on the language learning task. The cognitive group

received training only on the cognitive and social mediating strategies,

but no metacognitive strategy training, and the control group received

instruction to work on the language learning tasks using whatever procedure

they ordinarily would employ. In each of the three schools participating

in the study, the three project staff were responsible for implementing a

different treatment condition in Its entirety. By the conclusion of

training in all three schools, each staff member had taught each treatment

condition once, thereby nullifying teacher effects.

An overview of the treatment conditions Is presented in Table 1, which

shows the specific strategies that accompanied each language learning

activity and each treatment. For example, the metacognitive group is seen

to have both metacognitive, cognitive, and social mediating strategies

presented. For the vocabulary task, the metacognitive strategy is

self-evaluation, and the cognitive strategies are grouping and imagery.

With the listening task, the metacognitive strategy is selective attention,

and the cognitive strategy Is note-taking, and the social mediating

strategy is cooperation, and so on. The control group had no strategy

instruction at all but was instructed to work on the language learning

tasks using whatever strategies they usually employed.

li-7
=~~ ~ ~ ~ 77-7 -77-7K77 -,77 

CC

ap.2

c 06 41*

to* Is 1

&0 go

ata

c rC

6. 0 C C c0 

Cj 41- A.

- 4.10~' 4

Z - U~'aa. & . 54

*a. F .1 a Ict

-4'a.

V a.

Aa '. 0-

to - 41

'a 41.

5'a 4 -'CL

0-I~~ c-S.

It1V

~.41U al0e -O 
Students were Instructed In the use of learning strategies 50 minutes daily

for 8 days in roughly a two week period. Table 2 displays the schedule of

classroom activities across the 10-day period. On any single dayp students

typically received two of the following three language learning activities:

vocabulary, listening, or speaking. For the treatment groups, the same

learning strategies were always repeated with each language activity,

*although new content was presented each time a language activity recurred.

Students therefore could practice strategy applications with new materials.

Explicit directions and cues for using the strategies were faded on

." successive days of treatment for each activity, until at the posttest only

" a reminder was given to use the same strategies they had rehearsed before.

Pretesting and posttesting consumed the full first and last days out of the

10 day period, leaving 8 full days at 50 minutes per day for Instruction

and interim performance testings, which on the average used about 30

percent of the total time for instruction. The following description

provides an overview of each language learning task, followed by a detailed

description of the treatment conditions for each activity. All

instructional procedures described were pilot tested on a separate group of

intermediate level English as a second language students in a different

school from those used in treatment.

VOCABULARY I NSTRUCT ION

General Procedures

The vocabulary words used in the training were selected to represent a

range of concreteness and Imagery values. An example of a high

i.agery word is web; this was presented pictor., ly in training with

I 1-9

L-'* ' o'-''-' '-*.'-''.' ' ................................................................................... -• • ,
r7 .-. 1-m -- ._ - - .

.I U%

a. 4L4- Z z

-v 0S

ArA

U ~ 96

IL

11-10
a slide showing a spider's web. Conversely, a low Imagery word, such as

quarrel,, was presented to the students verbally by way of definition.

Only words representing objects that could be photographed with little

*chance for misinterpretation ware presented pictorially. For example,

* while the word fangs represents a concrete object, a photograph of a fang

could easily be Interpreted by the student as "tooth" or "Incisor." Thus,

* If a slide could not communicate the precise meaning of the word In

* question, the word was not presented pictorially. This resu.lted In

unavoidable overlap between presented method (pictorial, definition) and

* imagery value, so that some of the words presented with definitions had

*high Imagery ratings.

Of the 70 training words, 42 werea presented using slides. The remaining 28

words were presented by way of a definition. A list of these words, their

definitions and the manner In which they were presented In training is

*presented in Appendix K. As noted earlier, all words were posttested in

*the same manner that they were presented during training. (For a

description of how the words were selected for Inclusion In the training,

- refer to the previous discussion related to vocabulary testing which

* appears under the Instruments section.)

The vocabulary words were presented In two cycles of two successive days

*each for a total of four days during the 8 days of Instruction. The two

*cycles were essentially Identical In presentation except for content. On

each of the four days, the presentation of the vocabulary lasted about 6

minutes. Four minutes were then allocated for study time. Thus, the

practice time for learning strategies with vocabulary Items on any one day

was about 10 minute-A for a total of 4.0 minutes throughout the training. A
short test followed each practice session. For the pretest, there was no

* prior training on the vocabulary words, whereas the 32 words appearing on

the posttest had all been presented to the students as part of- the training

described below.

On Day I of Cycle 1, students were asked to learn 20 new words. The words

were presented under controlled circumstances by limiting both the duration

* and type of exposure. The type of exposure as mentioned above, was either

pictorial, In which words such as dove and worm, were presented using a

slide projector as they were pronounced, or verbal, where words such as

widow,, downpour or leak were def ined orally by the teacher af ter being

pronounced. Definitions of the verbally presented words were brief and

* used vocabulary that was familiar to the students. The verbally presented

* words varied In content but Included nouns, adjectives, and verbs. After

the vocabulary presentation was completed, all groups were given an-

*opportunity to study what they had learned. All students, regardless of

treatment group, were given equal exposure and study time and were tested

Immediately following the study period. On Day 2p students were asked to

learn 15 new words, plus the 5 most commnonly missed words repeated from the

*previous day's presentation. None of these words was repeated into the

* next vocabulary presentation In Cycle 2.

* Cycle 2 was identical In presentation, with 20 new words to be learned on

the first day, and 15 new words Plus 5 repeated words to be learned on the

subsequent day. Thus, a total of 70 new words were presented during the

study, 32 of which appeared. on the posttest. Posttest words were evenly

* divided between Cycle I (delayed posttest), and Cycle 2 (recent posttest)

* words, and between pictorial aad verbal words within each cycle.

11-12
Vocabulary Treatment Conditions

; Metacognitive Group. Before the Introduction of the first list of

". vocabulary words, the metacognitive group received instruction on the use

of one metacognitive strategy and two cognitive strategies in learning

*vocabulary. The metacognitive strategy was self-evaluation, and the

cognitive strategies were grouping and imagery. For the grouping strategy,

students were taught that a long list of words often can be separated into

parts that share semantic or other features. Words used in the vocabulary

lists had been preselected for obvious grouping on semantic (meaning)

* similarity. For example, Items that can be used in a kitchen, such as a

" skillet, a kettle, and a mug would be Included In a single list. Students

- were instructed to scan through the list and group the words that to them

- had common features. For the Imagery strategy, students were instructed to

close their eyes and vividly create a mental Image that incorporated all of

* the key words they had grouped together. For example, a student might

imagine placing each of the objects on the "kitchen" group together in a

kitchen, making certain to couple each object with Its corresponding label.

Recall was to be facilitated by the student reentering the scene and

extracting the required word. (The teacher's script for strategy

Instruction in grouping and Imagery is provided in Appendix L.)

The metacognitive strategy, self-evaluation, was implemented by giving

students journals In which to record the number of words they had learned

that day, the words they found to be difficult, and the method they used to

. remember the words. The self-evaluation process was Introduced after use

of the other strategies and testing of vocabulary knowledge. (The

11-13

- .- :-.....-..... ......... ...- .. ... ,-. 1.,' -. - ..
N7 7 _-: 17 -- - -I: -.

teacher's script for strategy instruction in self-evaluation is provided In

Appendix M.)

Cognitive Group. Students assigned to the cognitive group received

Instruction In grouping and Imagery that was Identical to that given the

metacognitive group (see Appendix L for the teacher's script.) What

differentiated this group's approach to vocabulary learning was the absence

of. the metacognitive self-evaluation. These students were tested

immediately after their study period.

Control Group. The control group received no strategy instruction but

instead were told to learn the words in whatever way they normally did.

The time spent on strategy instruction In the other groups was used in the

control group to collect Information about how students studied the

vocabulary words. (The teacher's script for Introducing vocabulary to the

control group, as well as the questions to which they responded, are

included in Appendix N.) The time they were given to study the words

equaled the time the other groups spent in grouping and imagizing. The

- control group was also tested immediately after their study period.

Implementation of Strategy Training for Vocabulary

*' The vocabulary instruction was difficult to implement In both the

metacognitive and cognitive groups and required extensive revision

throughout the training. This difficulty resulted mainly from the need to

keep the time on task equal across all three treatment conditions. The

time restrictions Impacted on the grouping strategy but also had

'11
!

-* implications for the imaging and self-evaluation strategies. A discussion

of each strategy in turn will illustrate these problems.

For the grouping strategy, the instructor gave stuients in the

metecognitive and cognitive groups worksheets with several boxes drawn upon

" them. These boxes had been pre-labeled with titles such as OBJECTS FOUND

IN A KITCHEN or WEATHER. Each student also received a small booklet mmde

from 20 slips of paper, each containing one vocabulary word and its

definition. When the word was presented to the class, the students were

2" instructed to tear its corresponding strip of paper from the booklet and

glue it into the'one box they felt represented an appropriate

categorization (or grouping) for the word. For example, the word lapel

" could be placed in the box labeled CLOTHING, along with other words such as

kerchief and cuff.

As originally planned, 6 minutes would be devoted in all treatment groups

to presenting the vocabulary, followed by 4 minutes of study time.

Instructors soon found that students in the metacognitive and cognitive

groups spent the entire presentation and study time fumbling with the

*materials and deciding how they wanted to group the vocabulary words. They

were devoting no time at *ll to using the imagery strategy. In many cases,

students lagged several words behind the instructor. Meanwhile, students

In the control group pored over a simple list of words and definitions

without distraction.

To remedy this problem, the Instructors modified the general approach so

that students In the metacognitive and cognitive groups recei0,d the list

11-15

..... ... ,. ,** * .. . d u J..S*,. , ss*, *.*.. .. , .. .. ._ . .. .- ,'.- . ".:.. -S . .',. * * ,s .-... . . .
*~~~~~~~~~ -7:IL LL~~~wc- I2 *

of words already divided Into groups sharing a common feature. A typical

*vocabulary worksheet Is displayed on the following page. Thus, the

grouping strategy was already performed for themi. To mitigate the loss of

this key action on their part, the students were asked to examine the word

*groupings and create a title-for each set of words. This, It was felt,

would establish the crucial semantic linkage between the words and

- accomplish the Intended goal of the grouping strategy.

While using predetermined but unlabeled groupings lessened the time

students required to prepare for using of the learning strategies,

* instructors were concerned about the short time left for actual study of

the words. Students seemed to be falling back upon the use of the highly

- efficient rote strategies so In evidence In the control group, and did not

- appear to be using the grouping and Imagery strategies at all. To provide

umore structure to the application of the learning strategies, instructors

-. made one further modification to the general approach used in the

metacognitive and cognitive groups. The 6 minutes of presentation and 14

minutes of study time were combined Into a 10-minute block In which each

*group of words was presented, titled, and imaglzed before moving on to the

*next group. In this way, students were forced to concentrate on one

vocabulary grouping at a time, with the Instructor leading the class from

one box of words to another at a supervised pace. The pace depended on the

number of words In the group. For example, a box with four words received

the following allocation of time: 48 seconds for presentation of all words

In the box, either by slides or by definitions, 214 seconds for creating a

* title for the group, and 48 seconds for creating an Image that Incorporated

all the words in the group.

11-16
VOCABULARY WORKSHEET

TITLE; TITLE:._________________

fiLL!! e pawem £dfatcati or dies in

Aiiflnet Is ased for "opl food. us e ters he drum".

A*lif~is is aned for boiling water. W48-6-0 pmele d1iagr. fight

Appisvc" ar eecticmthluas used

CORK ~* omma on is bued down.

A cork is a stopper for a bottle. YOU take

* the cork out of a bottler Of wine Wofrn you

drink the wine.

TITLE: _____________ __TITLE:_ _______________

Ki-se is waft a~f" th Now Cu 5PrIs thing an cars that is

u pe - easOr'd bon to Clowf the rain ftm tio

a lake. pad n aIe rO idsuield.

Me. is a wall that momn build 1Wyou hav a look i% youir reef . thold but wing later such as later camn In use. It rains.

a river.

Adizeis witon roln Is var fine

Ilse is a tuft thot Carries later. a"light.

Pepsl. sommlrns as a Ma da te

rck is ue mats art tied up. herdi.ranSvay Iy 

TITLE:_____________ __ TITLE: OTHER

I~b O~ectW" s "led W17&Pl is the part of the csat

lgive lctrit light- hear the shoulder that Iiifled

FI"is a pillow or aeft ped tt

y" %it am. kneel eo. Or yawsk Au isd a~ Imp of birds or

10 is a Mail bud tunt a bab

slesin.

d ~~~~~~~~~11-17 ___________________
Presenting and rehearsing the words in Individually paced subsets seemed

more promising for guiding and encouraging the students In the appslication

*of strategies. Student worksheets were collected after each vocabulary

activity and examined for appropriateness of the group titles created for

each box. These showed consistently that students had indeed captured the

semantic connections between the words in each group, as evidenced by

*titles they had created. An example of this Is the title ABOUT RAIN,

created by a student to label a box containing the words wiper, leak, and

* drizzle.

The principal difficulty In implementing imagery was in determining whether

*or not students were using the strategy. Gathering evidence to determine

* if students u'rtually used Imagery was much more difficult than with

grouping. There was insufficient time to ask students to describe or to

sketch the image they had developed to connect a group of words in some

meaningful way. In the absence of any other reliable method, Instructors

- could only spot check occasionally, stopping vocabulary presentation to

question a student or two about the Image they had created. When asked,

* most students were able to relate a picture that incorporated the words in

a specific group. However, some students appeared to feel ill at ease and

* embarrassed at this active use of the Imagination, and resisted the use of

- Imagery.

A time-related difficulty developed in Implementing self-evaluation for the

macognitive group. This strategy required students to evaluate their own

progessin learning vocabulary. The implementation problem arose, not
because students found the strategy difficult, but rather because there was

seldom enough time for them to write In their journals. The 3 minutes

allotted to this task seemed to disappear in distributing and collecting

papers and in attending to normal classroom activities such as answering

questions. The inconsistent application of the self-evaluation strategy

resulted in only minimal differences in the approach of the metacognitive

group and the cognitive group to learning vocabulary.

. Because the time devoted to vocabulary instruction in the control group

involved no training in the use of strategies, students had an opportunity

to apply their customary approaches to learning. The students in this

group were given a list of the vocabulary words and their definitions and

sat quietly while the instructor presented the words with slide or

definition. They were told simply to learn the words in whatever way they

normally did. Observation of the students at work revealed far more

Information about their typical strategies than the answers they provided

. to the worksheet (shown In Appendix N). The students seemed to rely upon

rote strategies such as repetition (either sub-vocal or written),

* translation into their native language, or a form of imagery where they

* drew a tiny picture of what a word represented. This latter strategy

seemed to be coupled most frequently with the words presented pictorially.

I*, They used the 4 minutes of study time to concentrate deeply on the word

- list. No students were observed to quiz each other as a means of study;

r all worked alone In their own particular manner.

I1-19

=~. . .-. ....... • . *••-o.. . ,o ...... .
J

", LISTENING INSTRUCTION

General Procedures

The listening task that students were requested to perform was to remember

information presented in a five minute videotape on an academic subject

such as history or geography. The videotapes were specifically designed

for the project to simulate a lecture experience the students might

encounter in school. There were four videotapes presented on different

* days that covered the following topics: the River Themes, uses of pigs,

the life of Houdini, and bilingual education. A short listening

* comprehension test following each lecture contained items designed to

" assess Bloom's knowledge, comprehension, and analysis levels. Videotapes

-were presented sequentially In order of judged difficulty of the content

based on the pilot test. In addition to the training videotapes and their

* corresponding tests, a pretest videotape was presented on Lewis and Clark's

journey to the Pacific Coast, and a posttest videotape was presented on

Captain Cookts three trips to the South Pacific.

Listening Treatment Conditions

Metacognitive Group. The metacognitive group received instruction on one

*' metacognitive strategy, one cognitive strategy and one social mediating

* strategy. The metacognitive strategy was selective attention, the

*. cognitive strategy was note-taking, and the social mediating strategy was

cooperation (see Appendix 0 for the teacher's script). Fur selective

attention, students were Instructed to 'isten selectively for important

11-20

. * U- .t*.of ~ ' n ~ * . . -

%* 4El** * % % . *

' . -" ( * . ' " " . . , . . . , , . . . . . . . . . .. . - .,. .. ,.. * . .
words typically used in lectures to present an overview, a main topic, main

points, examples, and a conclusion or summary (see Appendix P for a list of

these phrases). For example, a phrase such as "Today I want to tell you

about..." suggests that the speaker is signalling the main topic, while

S"first," "second," etc. indicate that main points are likely to follow.

The videotapes had been designed specifically to Include these and other

markers (see typical lecture script in Appendix Q). Students were

instructed on note-taking by means of a T-list (Hamp-Lyons, 1983) in which

main points are entered on the left side of a page and corresponding

examples or details are entered adjacently to the right (see Appendix R).

Thus, by selectively attending to phrases or words that often preceded

important lecture points, students were able to facilitate note-taking.

The instructors were to observe students taking notes and to collect the

notes after a brief study period. Students Initially were provided a

T-List that supplied main points so that students had to write in relevant

examples and details in the blanks. Subsequent T-lists had diminishing

cues where only one or two main points were provided and the student filled

in the rest. The final T-list had no cues and contained only a "T" on the

,. paper.

As a final step, students were instructed to use cooperation as a strategy

to verify the accuracy of their notes, enabling them to fill in gaps in

information or clarify areas of confusion by using their peers as a

resource. Students were to check their own notes against those of one or

several peers to fill in missing information or to correct Inaccuracies

after coming to a consensus with a peer. After each lecture the students

, completed a short 8- or 9-Item listening comprehension test (see Appendix S

*.. f.r copies of the four daily listening tests).

11-21

," X," ":. ; :,''." . , ', ," "'.v-;-','. . ...... ." , • "v ., .... • . .. " .",,-'. '. ,.." " "-. .. .... ".....•.-.. ",. 
Cogn It Ive Group. The strategies taught to the cognitive group for the

listening activity were note-taking and cooperation. Instruction In these

strategies was Identical to that received by the metacognitive group.

However,, they did not receive any Information regarding selective attention

SI or markers that often occur In lectures to highlight Important Information.

Control Group. Students In the control group received no strategy

-Instruction. They were simply told to listen to the videotapes and do

whatever they normally did to help them understand and remember a lecture.

* Implementation of Strategy Training for Listening

* The listening training for the metacognitive group was Implemented without

difficulty. Instructors observed students taking notes, and the note

sheets were collected and compared to a teacher's key. Students were

-. observed selectively listening as they physically prepared themselves to

take notes when they heard the phrases that Introduced main points and

* summnaries. They poised their pencils whenever they heard the expressions,

seemed to listen more Intently, and wrote furiously when the Information

*followed the special expressions. The students also took full advantage of

the cooperation period by conferring with those around them or someone

-across the room. Initially, students were allowed the full study time to

- cooperate. However, some students spent the whole study time copying notes

* when the lectures got more difficult and had no time to look over their

notes. This was remedied by limiting the cooperation time to three minutes

and the study of notes to two minutes. Students were cautioned before the

lecture that they were to merely fill In the main Ideas during the

* cooperatio6t' if they had failed to understand them during 'he lecture

* Itself.

11-22
Students with particularly low comprehension seemed unable to use selective

attention profitably. While they understood the special expressions, they

were not able to extract important words out of the imformation that

followed these expressions and missed main points. Obviously, some basic

work In the use of inferencing would have helped these students. For the

majority of the metacognitive students, however, selectively attending was

. very useful. Alerting them to the special expressions gave them a way of

sifting out important from unimportant parts. This was evident in their

• .ability to take notes accurately or to approximate information that they

heard after the special expressions, as evidenced by their notes.

The cognitive group appeared to have difficulty anticipating the lecture

content and preparing themselves to receive important Information. While

the T-List provided a framework, these students reported being overwhelmed

by the rapidity of the lecture. This presumably stemmed from their

. inability to selectively attend to some parts and to ignore others. They

seemed to be processing every part of the Input equally and had few ways of

. determining the relative Importance of the input. The more proficient

• :students, however, either consciously or unconsciously made use of

- selective attention of the special expressions. This was evident in their

notes, their listening scores, and in their later use of the special

* expressions in their oral presentations as reported later in the speaking

* Instruct ion.

The control group was also observed by Instructors as they listened to the

lecture. Some students took notes that consisted of Isolated phrases and

sporadic words in't.,air native language. Only one or two students

11-23

p...
discussed the lecture during the study time even though they were

explicitly told that they could discuss the lecture with each other if they

wanted to. The majority of the students sat and stared Into space or

*nervously tapped their pencils. As far as the Instructors could surmise,

5 the students did not structure their study time and felt that the few

minutes given them were a waste of time. One highly proficient student

* even remarked that the test should be given Immdiately after the lecture

*so that the students would not forget the material. If the listening test

had been delayed a greater amount of time, e.g., a day, the control group

might have exhibited more strategies. It was evident that the control

group was relying on some sort of short term memory to recall the

Information required to complete the test.

SPEAKING INSTRUCTION

General Procedures

In the speaking task, students were asked to present a brief oral report on

one of six subjects that had personal or cultural significance. The topics

included the following possibilities; My first day In the United States,

two differences between people of my country and people In the United

States, special traditions In my country, and the most Interesting person I

have known. Four separate oral presentations were made on four separate

days. Report preparation was completed in class to ensure comparable time

on task across treatment groups. In presenting the report, students sat in

small groups, spoke or read from written notes, and used a tape recorder.

The tape recorder was used to obtain pretest and posttest measures on oral

proficiency, but was also used In practice sessions so students would

become comfortable with speaking while a tape recorder was running.
Speaking Treatment Conditions

Metacognitive Group. The metecognitive group received instruction on one

metacognitive strategy, functional planning, and one social mediating

strategy, cooperation. Functional planning, similar to procedures

described by Stevick (1984), involves having the learner analyze the

* requirements of a communication task, and determine if he or she has the

language skills required to fulfill those requirements. During Instruction

on the use of this strategy, students were first led by the teacher through

an analysis of the purposes language serves in an oral report (see Appendix

T for the teacher's script for Introducing speaking strategies.) For

• "example, one must first tell the audience what the report is about. One or

two main ideas have to be communicated and some support for these ideas has

to be furnished. The report must also have an ending. The Instructor

.. elicited many of these functions from the students and supplied missing

- functions as needed. In the next step, the instructor had the students

* speculate on the language needed to fulfill the functions, e.g., to tell ,4.

"'. the audience what the report is about, one could say "this report is about

two important customs." After a series of important expressions had been

*elicited from the students, the Instructor asked the students to reorder

* the expressions according to the logical organization found in oral

* presentations, e.g., introduction, main body, and conclusion. These parts

*were labeled on the board and a list of functions and the English

expressions signalling those functions was distributed (see Appendix P).

.* These expressions were essentially the same ones found in the listening

task and overlapped with the list elicited from the students at the

beginning of the speaking activity. The Instructor explicated the list to

7 11-25

.h * ' *4.°. , . ,
* ensure comprehension and then supplied a handout (see Appendix U) with

Important functions filled in and blanks where the students were to write

their reports. The Instructor selected one student to reveal his or her

topic and one or two main ideas and *rally walked the students once again

through the process of Identifying the functions and selecting the

appropriate English for those functions. After the Instructor checked that

each student had selected a topic from the list, the students were given

* fifteen minutes to complete a draft of their oral presentation.

* For the cooperation strategy, students practiced presenting their reports

with a smell group of other students. The Instructor assigned members to

each group and gave each student a specific responsibility (see Appendix V

*for the teacher's script on cooperation). The students listening to the

* report were to listen to specific factors of volume, pace, organization,

and comprehensibility. After a student read a report once., the other

*students were to give specific feedback on the factors. The performing

student was given a sheet of questions to ask the other students (see the

* sheet entitled "For the Person Reporting" in Appendix W) and the listening

* students were given a sheet of questions that would help them concentrate

on the specific factor (see the sheet entitled "For the Team Members" in

Appendix W) and provide valuable feedback. The performing student then had

to adjust his perfomance according to these coimments and get help from his

peers regarding the pronunciation of certain Items, the pace, volume, and

organization of the report. The final performance was then recorded.

Cognitive Group. This group received Instruction using cooperation as a

strategy to Improve their reports. They were not offered any other

strategies In conjunction with the speaking activity.

11-26
Control Group. The control group received no strategy Instruction but was

given the list of topic possibilities and told to prepare an oral report on

the-topic of their choice in whatever manner they normally prepared for

such an activity. This group also tape recorded their report In the

presence of a small group of students during practice sessions, but was not

Instructed to provide systematic feedback to their peers.

* Implementation of the Strategy Training for Speaking

* Instructors Initially expected that students could make an oral

presentation by following rough notes. However, this proved to be too

threatening and too difficult of a task for ESL high school students.

* Therefore, students were encouraged to look up occasionally from their

papers, but were permitted to read the report. While this may be similar

* to a "read aloud" activity, the fact that students were using expressions

-s found only in formal oral presentations and were encouraged to be

* expressive and use vocal qualifiers made It an oral activity as opposed to

c a reading activity.

* While the metacognitive group was slow Initially to think of functions

found In oral reports, once the activity was underway, they were able to

*contribute many functions to the list. Because they were cued to use

* expressions signalling Important functions, these expressions appeared In

all of their reports. When an expression was used Inappropriately, the

* Instructor gave the whole class feedback on the expression without

* approaching the Individual student who had misused the expression. Because

* time was limited, this was the only type of feedback that students received

11-27
from the Instructor on their oral reports. Most students were able to

complete the task In the allotted time and were enthusiastic about the

framework provided them to facilitate composing the reports. They were

*also very enthusiastic about recording their reports. They enjoyed

listening to themselves after all the reports had been recorded for the

group.

* Using cooperation with the speaking activity was difficult to Implement

Initially because students were reluctant to provide feedback to their

peers. Instructors had simply written guidelines for providing feedback on

the board. Subsequently, the Instructors prepared two sets of more

structured guidelines and questions about the oral presentation; the first

* was distributed to each student making a presentation and contained several

* questions s/he was to ask the students listening to the presentation. The

second set of guidelines was distributed to the listeners, and each student

was assigned a particular question to answer regarding the pace, volume or

-organization of the report. Instructors collected these sheets after the

* activity and checked for answers to the questions. Instructors also

- observed and coached students on the cooperation segment by circulating

among groups while the activity was occurring. The entire speaking

activity was very popular among students In general. Students who were

very shy and reluctant to speak Initially were very verbal by the end of

the treatment and looked forward to working In their groups and recording

* the report.

* The only other problem encountered In the cooperation segment of the

speaking activity was that students had to be assigned to groups by sex,

native language, and oral proficiency. At first, students groupeo

11.-28
themselves with others who shared their native language and tended to speak

their native language to discuss the reports. Instructors quickly

reassigned students to mixed native language and same sex groups, and tried

* to pair several proficient students with several less proficient students.

Groups of-same sex were assigned because female Asian students tended to be

Inhibited around the opposite sx. These changes proved beneficial to the

smooth running of the cooperation segment, and students were observed

*" actively helping one another.

The cognitive group also enjoyed the cooperation and recording phases of

the oral activity. While they had no problem writing a report of half a

*page in the allotted time as instructed, their reports showed little

*. organization as evidenced by the lower speaking scores given by the

independent judges (see Results Section). Interestingly enough, some

expressions that had been explicitly Introduced to the metacognitive group

were used by one highly proficient student in the cognitive group.

Apparently, the student noticed the use of these expressions in the

listening activity and appropriately incorporated them into her own report.

The control group was allowed the same amount of time to write reports and

to practice them. In lieu of the strategy training, they were given

unrelated written vocabulary and reading exercises at the end of the hour

to fill the time normally used for the strategy training. These written

exercises were graded and returned every day so that students would feel

that the written exercises were part of the program. The control group was

observed to write reports and record them. Even though they were put into

small groups, the students did not offer any feedback to each other and for

the most irt silently read their reports until it was their turn to

11-29

%.........-% " •o... ... .. *..*.-.-...
record. The presentations were unorganized and reflected little ability to

highlight main points, to Introduce a topic, or to close the presentation.

Many students said "that's all" after a long pause when they ended the

* report. Students often spoke so softly and so disjointedly that the topic

of the report was not identifiable, and most of the production was

Incomprehensible. For those-students whose proficiency was high enough to

* be comprehensible, their reports usually consisted of utterances strung

together in an unplanned way. As a consequence, when they recorded, they

* sounded as If they had less confidence than either the cognitive or the

metacognitive students.

OVERALL ANALYSIS OF TRAINING IMPLEMENTATION

* The major difficulty In Implementing the treatment was with vocabulary

Instruction. For both metacognitive and cognitive groups, the combined

grouping and Imagery strategies proved exceptionally problemuatic due to

time constraints. The combined strategy approach had been pilot-tested

with a small group of Hispanic students who had been demonstrably

enthusiastic about its successes. The failure of attempts to Implement the

* strategy In the present study Indicated that this success of the combined

strategy approach was limited to a specific context. A variety of

modifications were attempted in the original treatment to assure that

students In the present study would use the strategy and that there would

be sufficient opportunity to rehearse. For the metacognitive group, there

was Insufficient opportunity to use self-evaluation before the students

were required to take the criterion test on the day's lasson. Because of

the adjustments made due to time constraints, students exposed to

vocabulary instructlan with both the metacognitive and cognitive groups did

11-30

*~~~~~% P*.O* .*.ka -
not have a single, coherent treatment that was consistently across the

sc hoolIs. Students In the control group for vocabulary Instruction, unlike

the controls for listening and speaking, used their preferred strategies

and rehearsed persistently In preparation for the criterion test. 'The

* vocabulary Instruction Implementation difficulties and the control group's

use of strategies can be expected to emerge as Influential factors In

analyses of quantitative data from the study. Future attempts to Implement

grouping and Imagery strategies should begin with the last Instructional

modification used for this study.

* One Implementation Issue should be noted In relation to how the training

deviated from typical classroom practice. Normally, review and correction

- of student work form an Integral part of Improvement in the classroom and

provide students with valuable Insight Into their performance. The

schedule In the metacognitive and cognitive groups was so tight that there

was little time available to provide the students with constructive

feedback about their progress. All Instructors felt the lack of this

critical element. Therefore, any future strategy training should allocate

* sufficient time to give the student more feedback about their work with the

strategies and materials In question than was possible in this study.

11-31
(THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK)

P1

.3 ° Q ° m - . • o - • " I • " J o " t . . . . . . ° • o

*0* _ " i" o ' , . - . , '. , , '- o '- ."." , -o - ,, .' .. , . .. o °" - o o~o o. ..
111. RESULTS

Data analyses for this study will be presented in four categories. The

* first analysis Is a preliminary analysis of the comparability of treatment

*and control groups at the pretest and the range of pretest scores. The

second analysis shows comparisons of treatment groups at the posttest on

measures of vocabulary, listening, and speaking. The prediction is that

the order of effects on each outcome variable will be the metacognitive

over the cognitive group, and the cognitive group over the controls. A

* related analysis presents the results of comparing the treatment groups on

listening tests administered after each of the four listening strategies

training sessions. The third analysis shows ethnic group differences for

the different treatment conditions. The final analysis Is a process

analysis of the degree to which students trained on specific strategies

actually used them In performing the learning task relative to controls.

This analysis is based on questionnaire data on learning strategy uses, and

worksheets.

Preliminary Analyses

A number of preliminary analyses were performed to determine the Initial

* comparability of the treatment groups and to determine the range of test

scores at the pretest. Although random procedures had been used in

* assigning students to treatment groups, It would still be possible to find

* marked differences between students In the different treatment conditions

*that could distort the findings. The range of scores was of Interest to

determine If ceiling or floor effects could Influence the results.
- Means and standard deviations of pretest and posttest data on the three

* treatment groups for each measure (vocabulary, listening, speaking) are

presented in Table 3. Analyses of variance testing the significance of

* differences among the three groups are presented In Table 4. The treatment

group differences for the combined pretest and posttest data approached

significance at the .05 level for vocabulary and listening and were

*significant beyond the .01 level for speaking. Further analysis of

differences among the three groups for each measure at the pretest

indicated that there were no significant differences among the groups in

* vocabulary, but significant differences for listening (beyond .01), and no

pretest differences on speaking. On the listening pretest, the cognitive

* group performed more poorly than the metacognitive group or the control

group. Interpretation of the analysis of covariance for listening shown

later should allow for this finding.

Inspection of the mean vocabulary scores at pretest and posttest relative

to the total number of items showed that the pretest means ranged from 66

- to 73 percent of the total Items. On the listening test, the pretest means

* ranged from 47 to 58 percent of the Items. The possibility of a ceiling or

floor effect was therefore negligible on the total vocabulary and listening

scores. As will be discussed In a later section, however, there may have

been a vocabulary posttest ceiling effect for recognition but not for

recall Items. Scores for speaking were based on a range from 0 to 5. The

means ranged from 2.80 to 3.59, and the standard deviations ranged from .69

to .94t suggesting that floor and ceiling effects were negligible for

speaking as well.

The most dr...mat Ic fi1nd Ing revealIed I n Table s 3 and 4. is the significant

Increase from pretest to posttest on all three measu- s. As woulId be

111-2
TABLE 3

Means and Standard Deviations of Treatment and Control Groups at

Pretest and Posttest on Measures of Vocabulary, Listening, and Speaking

Metacognitive Cognitive Control

(n=27) (n=26) (n=22)

*Variable Value Z eJIDs Mean soMean s

Vocabulary Pre 14.04 2.81 13.04 3.04 13.95 3.77

(32 items) Post 22.85 4.84 21.08 4.34 23.36 4.81

Listening Pre 7.00 2.60 5.65 2.70 6.82 2.11

(12 items) Post 8.48 2.16 7.81 2.02 7.45 2.34

Speaking Pre 2.93 .83 2.81 .94 2.52 .87

(0-5 scale) Post 3.58 .88 3.08 .80 2.82 .73

111-3
TABLE 4

Analyses of Variance for Treatment and Control Groups at

Pretest and Posttest on Vocabulary, Listening, and Speaking

Mean

Variable Source df Square F p

Vocabulary A Treatment 2 44.05 2.75 .07

B Pre/Post 1 2847.75 177.77 <.01

AS Interaction 2 6.49 .41 .67

Error 140

Listening A Treatment 2 13.46 2.42 .09

B Pre/Post 1 78.46 14.08 <.01

AB Interaction 2 7.14 1.28 .28

Error 140

, Speaking A Treatment 2 3.92 5.48 <.01

B Pre/Post 1 6.17 8.65 <.01

AS Interaction 2 .59 .83 .44

Error 140

.

I II-11
expected in vocabulary, all three groups exposed to word lists during

training performed better then they had earlier without exposure. With

listening, the results were significant but were not so clearly

interpretable: While all pretest groups had equal exposure to the

videotapes and had study opportunities throughout training, the listening

posttest had never bee seen by any group. Under these circumstances, the

control group would not be expected to show protest-posttest improvements,

given their lack of prior exposure and strategy training. Differences in

the content and test difficulty may have accounted for some of the

difference that was found. With speaking, the findings reveal improvements

for the metacognitive group and less so for the cognitive group but

virtually no improvement for the control group.

Posttest Analyses

.-5 Posttest scores are shown in Table 5. Results are displayed of an analysis

of covariance contrasting differences among metacognitive, cognitive, and

control groups on each of three posttest variables: the vocabulary,

listening, and speaking posttests. In each analysis, the coveriate was the

pretest for the corresponding outcome variable. Values shown in the table

are the group adjusted means and standard deviations, the p-value, or the

probability that the obtained F-value was significant, and the R , a

measure of association between the treatment and the outcomes.

Vocabulary. For the vocabulary posttest, it is evident that the results of

training are not statistically significant, shown by the p-value of .349,

and that the mean score for the control group Is slightly higher then the

mean for the treatment groups. What this suggests Is that students not

only had difficulty in Implementing th3 strategies, but were even somewhat

| 11-5
TABLE 5

*- The Effect of Learning Strategy Training on

Selected Language Skills Controlling for Pretest Scores

Metacognitive Cognitive Control

- Variable (n=27) n-26) (n=22)

Adj Adj Adj

Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD p-value R2

Posttests

Vocabulary 22.66 4.76 21.41 4 23 23.21 4.90 .349 .17

(32 items)

Listening 8.25 2.12 8.18 2.00 7.30 2.31 .162 .30

(13 items)

Speaking 3.60 .88 3.04 .80 2.88 .73 .008 .20

(0-5 scale)

111-6
less efficient in their learning than students using their customary

strategies. This is consistent with the experiences of other investigators

who have tried to train students to use strategies that compete w.ith

techniques to which the students have become accustomed (Brown, Bransford,

Ferarra, & Campione, 1983). One explanation for these results is that the

key to enhancing memory for vocabulary, as Levin (in press) suggests, may

be exclusively In one-to-one interactive verbal/imagery associations rather

than in imagery alone. However, it could also be that using grouping and

imagery as a combined strategy is sufficiently difficult for most persons

that only individuals with high imagery can make use of the unified

strategy, suggesting differences in cognitive styles. The difficulty of

.using the combined strategy might make It advisable to present the training

individually, as has been discussed with other associational strategies

(Hall, Wilson, & Patterson, 1981; Levin, Pressley, McCormick, Miller, &

Schriberg, 1979; Pressley, Levin, Oigdon, Bryante, McGivern, & Ray, 1982).

We plan in the future to explore the difficulty question further through

additional interviews with expert learners.before using the grouping and

imagery treatment in an additional study. Analyses of daily vocabulary

tests did not show any significant differences between the treatment

groups.

Additional analyses of the vocabulary posttest were conducted to determine

if differences occurred depending on the task, the stimulus, or the recency

of vocabulary presentation. There were two types of items on the

vocabulary test defining the task: recognition and recall Items. For each

type of item, there were two types of stimuli: pictorial (presented with

slides) and verbal (presented by reading a definition). For recognition

items, students were required to select one of four words on their answer

sheet which corresponded to either the slide presented or the definition.

IL

* 111-7

.4* ..- , -4- - S * . ...--..-.. . .*., . ,. . .. ., .-... . .. .. . .. .. . ..... :. .... . . . . .
* For recall Items, students were required to produce the word corresponding

to the presented slide or definition, and write this on their answer sheet.

Additionally, half the vocabulary items had been presented during the first

week of training (a delayed list), while half had been presented during the

second week of training (a recent list). Conceivably, differences between

treatment groups could have been manifested depending on the task, the

stimulus, or the recency of presentation, given that the difficulty of the

task would be greater for recall, verbal, and delayed lists. The results

of these analyses are shown In Tables 6 and 7.

*Table 6 presents only the mean test scores for each treatment group for

each type of test item. Data for pictorial vs. verbal stimulus

presentations are collapsed in Tables 6 and 7 due to the small numbers of

Items involved. Table 7 presents the two-way analyses of variance for the

treatment (matacognitive, cognitive, control) and testing (pre, post)

conditions on each variable. Analyses of variance rather than covariance

are presented because in some cases the number of Items representing a

posttest variable was small and the pre-post correlation was not sizeable

enough to warrant a covariance analysis.

Discussion will focus on the mean scores and the analysis of variance

values for treatment and interaction between treatment and pre/post

results. Although the Interaction term in Table 7 has meaning, the

analysis of variance results for the pre-post difference is not. Pretest

Items could not be differentiated Into "recent" and "delayed," making such

a pre-post analysis of variance Inappropriate. The posttest values for

"irecent" and "delayed" vocabulary items are subsets of the full vocabulary

posttest and correspond to the duration between training exposure and the

posttest. The duration for recent Items was 3-5 days, whereas the duration

for delayed items was 7-10 days.
TABLE 6

eans and Standard Deviations of Treatment and Control Groups at

Pretest and Pottest on Vocabulary Subtests

JI

Training Metacognitive Cognitive Control

Pre- or Type of to Testing (n-27) (n-26) (n=22)

Posttest Task Interval

Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD

Pre Total N/A* 14.04 2.81 13.04 3.04 13.95 3.77

(32 items)

Post Recognition Recent 8.41 1.37 8.34 1.55 8.82 1.40

(10 items)

Delayed 8.22 2.01 7.54 1.88 8.77 1.51

(10 items)

Recall Recent 3.85 1.77 3.35 1.50 3.41 1.79

(6 items)

Delayed 2.37 1.57 1.85 1.49 2.36 1 40

(6 items)

Post Total Recent 12.26 2.71 11.69 2.51 12.23 2.82

(16 items)

Delayed 10.59 3.08 9.38 2.80 11.14 2.46

(16 Items)

"Recent" and "delayed" items refer to the training-to-testing interval relative to the posttest.

The interval for delayed items was roughly 7-10 days, whereas the interval on recent items was

about 3-5 days. This distinction does not apply to the pretest.

111-9

,1.
TABLE 7

Analyses of Variance for Treatment and Control Groups at

Pretest and Posttest on Vocabulary Recognition and Recall Tasks by Testing Interval

Type of to Testing Mean

Task Interval Source df Square F

Recognition Recent A Treatment 2 4.21 1.3 .29

B Pre/Post 1 25.63 7.7 .01

AB Interaction 2 .82 .25 .78

Error 144 3.33

Delayed A Treatment 2 11.83 2.99 .05

B Pre/Post 1 52.81 13.33 <.01

AB Interaction 2 .86 .22 .80

Error 144 3.96

Recall Recent A Treatment 2 3.14 1.11 .33

B Pre/Post 1 23.21 8.18 <.01

AS Interaction 2 .13 .05 .96

Error 144 2.84'

Delayed A Treatment 2 3.28 1.30 .28

8 Pre/Post 1 172.81 68.20 (.01

AB Interaction 2 .31 .12 .89

Error, 144 2.53

Total Recent A Treatment 2 9.78 1.13 .33

8 Pre/Post 1 97.61 11.23 <.01

AB Interaction! 2 .72 .08 .92

Error 144 8.69

Delayed A Treatment 2 25.39 2.80 .06

B Pro/Post 1 416.67 46.01 <.01

AB Interaction 2 2.21 .24 .78

Error 144 9.06

% % -l
CA_94

* 0Examining the analysis of variance results presented in Table 7, the only

significant difference between treatment group performance (p1.05) was on

the recognition-delayed items. Inspection of the mean scores presented in

Table 6 reveals that this difference favors the control group. This

finding is the reverse of hypothesized results; although the metacognitive

group did outscore the cognitive group, both groups were outscored by the

control group. Pretest results show that there were only modest but

nonsignificant differences between the groups at the beginning of training

and that there was no ceiling effect in any of the group's performance.

Table 6 also shows that, while there may been a ceiling effect for posttest

items of recognition, there was none for recall, especially for the delayed

recall items. Further, there was a consistent difference between the mean

* scores on recent recall items and delayed Items; as hypothesized, more

* recent items were recalled than delayed items. This finding did not extend

to recognition Items, where there was only a minimal difference in mean

scores between recent and delayed Items favoring the recent Items.

Overall, students correctly Identified the recent Items more frequently

* than the delayed Items.

Listening. Analyses of posttest scores on listening approached but failed

to reach significance, although the scores fell in the predicted direction.

To explore this finding further, analyses of the daily tests on listening

are presented In Table 8. To understand these results, It Is important to

know that Listening Tests 1 and 2 had 8 items, and Listening Tests 3 and 4

had 9 items. In contrast, there were 13 Items used on the poIsttest. The

approximate difficulty level of the daily tests can be seen from inspection

of the mean scores for the conti-ol group, bearing in mind the differences

In numbers of items on which these scores are based. It is evident from

the results presented in Table 8 that slinifIcant effects were obtained on • W:.''' "p : 4: -\ %.-r.v* ll-l ~~*~~ m ''% ) " ' !:":,'- ,.",. w, , .. ,, ..t.:,- .. . . 1 ,,L-:-.--. ,-.- .- ,-.- -,-M.... .. - . M e...•-, " .,.,• _6L . s-i: :- - 7. * : ' :'
.1.

TABLE 8

The Effects of Learning Strategies Training on

Listening Skills, Controlling for Pretest Score

Metacognitive Cognitive Control

Daily (n-27) (na26) (n=22)

Listening Adj Adi Adi

Tests

Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD p-value R2

1 6.03 1.29 5.91 1.45 5.46 1.47 .096 .26

2 6.45 1.48 6.54 1.22 5.45 1.50 .004 .36

' 3 6.27 2.33 6.95 1.61 5.17 2.31 .043 .29

4 5.25 1.32 5.10 1.68 5.09 1.57 .626 .10

1 ,

S.

III~

.'1,

a?,,

.. f. *

'- a - *
V7 .-.7

Listening Test 1 beyond the .10 level, on Listening Test 2 beyond the .01

level, and on Listening Test 3 beyond the .05 level. In each case, the

treatment groups were superior to the control group, although for Test 2

and 3 the levels for the metacognitive and cognitive group were reversed

from the predicted direction. The Important point was that the treatment

groups outperformed the control group significantly on two out of four

* daily tests, and outperformed the control group to a degree that approached

- significance on a third.

There are at least two possible explanations for the poor performance of

the treatment groups on the fourth listening test and on the posttest. One

Is that the cues were faded too quickly across successive days of training

so that students failed to use the strategies that had proven successful

earlier. We can determine this from the process analyses of daily work

sheets, to be presented In a later section. A second. possibility Is that

* there was an interaction between strategy effectiveness and the difficulty

of the task. As noted earlier, the videotapes and daily tests were

sequenced In order of increasing difficulty leading up to the posttest,

- ~ although Listening Test 4 and videotape 4 were judged even more difficult

than the posttest. One additional factor contributing to the difficulty of

the task was that study time was limited to five minutes. Th Is suggests

* that there may be reasonable limits to the effectiveness of learning

* strategies training. When the material becomes exceedingly difficult, and

the time to study limited, the strategies may fail to Improve performance.

* Speaking. Posttest analyses for the speaking test were significant In the

*predicted direction beyond the .01 level (see Table 5). The adjusted mean

* scores shown can be converted Into a 1-5 FSI-type scale to reveal that the

6.,-1
"* metacognitive. students scored on the average close to the 2+ level, whereas

the control group scores were Just below the 2 level. This amount of

difference represents a substantial increment in language skills over the

,control group. The principal differences between a 2 level and a 2+ level

9on the scoring system we used were that a 2+ person had more organization,

as suggested by clear subordination and sequencing of parts of the report,

and greater comprehensibility.

Ethnic Group Differences

Specific analyses of the results were performed to determine whether or not

the treatment was differentially effective for the three ethnic categories

, in the study: Hispanic, Asian, and other. Table 9 shows posttest results

- for the three types of language tasks for each ethnic group. Table 10

presents the two-way analyses of covariance for treatment groups by

* ethnicity for the posttest variables. The pretest corresponding to the

.. posttest is the relevant covariate in each analysis.

-. Inspection of Table 10 reveals that there was a nearly significant ethnic

effect (p-.0 8 ) for vocabulary tasks at posttest. Examining the adjusted

.* mean scores presented in Table 9, the effect favors the Asian students, who

were followed by the Hispanics and the students in the "other" category, in

that order. This was to be the only ethnic effect nearing significance.

The only significant treatment effect, as noted in prior discussion, was

" found in speaking performance (p-.02). The difference was in the predicted

direction with the metacognitive group outscoring the cognitive group,

which in turn outperformed the control group.

IrII:-I4
4. 00 %0 M - 0 CJ O (J

-n -F * e

&Ju 4c *00 C% i

*1 CJ %D CJ Cn CD M %

C71 -0 - m m

- .0

w CL

* C.1

C7 m O0c

C7 %D 04.n L

*~ 61jenCj ma 

44.

Im m

oo *l li q-0 1. Cr

0 m' ALJ 6~

I-I
TABLE 10

Two-way Analyses of Covariance for Treatment Groups

by Ethnicity for Posttest Variables

Mean

Variable Source df Square F p

Vocabulary A Treatment 2 13.77 .73 .49

8 Ethnicity 2 49.39 2.63 .08

AB Interaction 4 10.04 .53 .71

Error 65 18.01

Listening A Treatment 2 6.59 1.87 .16

B Ethnicity 2 3.30 .94 .40

AB Interaction 4 2.58 .73 .57

Error 65 13.64

4.Speaking A Treatment 2 2.64 3.97 .02

B Ethnicity 2 .15 .22 .80

AB Interaction 4 .28 .43 .79

Error 65 .67
Table 11 shows the relative performance of the three ethnic groups on the

daily listening tests. Table 12 shows the analysis of variance for the

treatment groups (metacognitive, cognitive, control) by ethnicity

(Hispanic, Asian, other) for the four daily listening tests. The purpose

of these analyses is to determine if there were treatment differences by

* ethnicity on these four tests. Because the number of items varied on these

. daily tests, mean scores in Table 11 have been converted to percentages to

simplify comparison. These scores have not been adjusted (as those in

Table 8 were) and represent actual student performance.

For the first two tests, the total scores for combined groups fell in the

predicted direction, with the metacognitive group outperforming the

cognitive group, which in turn scored better than the control group. On

the third test, the treatment groups outscored the control group, but the

direction for the metacognitive and cognitive groups was reversed. On the

fourth listening test, however, all groups did relatively poorly. This

variation in raw scores on daily listening tests reveals a different order

of means than occurred on the pretest, as shown In Table 11 for the total

group. At the pretest, the total cognitive group was substantially below

the other groups, a pattern that is repeated on the posttest. However,

results on the daily listening tests Indicate that the cognitive group

improved relative to the control group, at least through Test 3. This is

consistent with the interpretation offered earlier that the treatment was

affecting the group performance.

Analyses by ethnicity revealed that the Hispanic metacognitive group

performed better than any other ethnic or treatment group except in the

i 1-17%
TABLE 11

Mean and Percent Correct on Daily Listening Tests

by Treatment Group and Ethnicity

Metacognitive Cognitive Control

(nu27) I (n-26) (n=22)

Variable Ethnicity n j Mean z Mean 2 Mean

Pretest Hispanic 21 8.29 64 5.00 39 7.63 59

(13 items) Asian 33 6.85 53 5.36 41 6.56 51

Other 21 6.00 46 6.44 50 6.00 46

Total 75 7.00 54 - 5.65 44 6.82 53

* Listening 1 Hispanic 21 5.86 73 6.00 75 5.63 70

' (8 items) Asian 33 6.15 77 5.73 72 5.56 70

Other 21 6.71 84 5.67 71 5.20 65

Total 75 6.22 78 5.77 72 5.50 69

Listening 2 Hispanic 21 7.29 91 6.50 81 6.13 77

(8 items) Asian 33 6.38 80 6.36 80 5.00 63

Other 21 6.14 77 6.11 76 5.60 70

Total 75 6.56 82 6.31 79 5.45 68

- Listening 3 Hispanic 21 8.00 89 6.33 70 6.00 67

(9 items) Asian 33 6.31 70 6.27 70 5.00 56

Other 21 4.86 54 6.78 75 5.00 56

Total 75 6.37 71 6.46 72 5.36 60

Listening 4 Hispanic 21 6.29 70 5.67 63 5.13 57

(9 items) Asian 33 5.00 56 4.45 49 4.89 54

Other 21 4.71 52 4.89 54 5.60 62

Total 75 5.26 58 4.88 54 5.14 57

1. 111-18
TABLE 12

* Analyses of Variance for Treatment Groups

by Ethnicity for Daily Listening Tests

Mean

Variable Source df Square F p

*Pretest A Treatment 2 11.26 1.87 .16

8 Ethnicity 2 9.25 2.36 .13

AB Interaction 4 6.24 1.52 .24

Error 6

*Listening 1 A Treatment 2 3.29 1.54 .22

B Ethnicity 2 .04 .02 .98

AB Interaction 4 .91 .43 .79

Error 66

*Listening 2 A Treatment 2 7.64 3.93 .02

B Ethnicity 2 3.99 2.05 .14

AB Interaction 4 .83 .43 .79

Error 66

Listening 3 A Treatment 2 10.86 2.69 .08

B Ethnicity 2 8.80 2.18 .12

AB Interaction 4 5.89 1.46 .23

Error 66

Listening 4 A Treatment 2 .91 .45 .64

B Ethnicity 2 5.03 2.50 .09

AB Interaction 4 1.90 .94 .44

Error 66

111-19
first daily test. However, the only test for which the difference in their

• performance approached significance (p.09) was Listening Test 4. There

were no significant differences, either by treatment or ethnicity, for the

students' performance on the pretest of listening skills. However, the

Hispanic students in the metac~gnitive group outscored all other students

at pretest, a pattern that was fairly consistent throughout the daily

listening tests. Examining the percentages listed in Table 11 for each

group reveals that on three of the four listening tests, the Hispanics

achieved the highest listening score in the metacognitive group. The same

is true of the Hispanics in the cognitive group and the control group. In

each case, the only ethnic group to outscore the Hispanics was the "other"

group: for the metacognitive group, this happened on Listening Test 1; for

the cognitive group, on Listening Test 3; and for the control group, on

Listening Test 4.

Process Analysis

Analyses of process data were conducted to determine whether strategies on

which students had been trained were used during task performance, and if

strategy use during task performance Influenced outcomes. The analysis

Involved (1) an examination of daily worksheets in vocabulary, listening

and speaking activities to see that students were incorporating strategy

training into their work; and (2) determining whether or not students who

performed below or above the median on a questionnaire asking about

learning strategies used during training performed differently on selected

posttests.

I 1-20

* .*
Observations and Student Worksheets. As explained in Chapter II where

the implementations of each of the three language learning activities were

discussed, project Instructors were careful to observe students at work and

collect student worksheets in order to monitor student use of strategies.

For example, vocabulary worksheets Involved the creation of a title for

each box of words grouped together on the basis of common features.

. Instructors were able to check the titles created by students and determine

If the grouping strategy was understood and appropriately applied. As

discussed In Chapter 1l, inspection of student worksheets revealed that

students indeed understood the concept behind the grouping strategy, as

evidenced by their creative titling of boxes of words. However, It was

more difficult to monitor student use of the imagery strategy, since only

mental Images were to be generated. Students in both the metacognitive and

cognitive groups seemed to feel awkward about this active use of the

imagination, and many evidenced a reluctance to close their eyes and

participate fully in the imagery process. This led the instructors to

conclude that many students were not applying Imagery In the desired

manner. Any future use of this strategy should therefore embed some way of

formally verifying student use, whether it be through drawing a crude

sketch of the image created or through writing a sentence to describe the

image, thus reinforcing the connection formed between the grouped words.

As discussed in Chapter i1, Instructors verified student use of listening

strategies through examination of the T-lists students used to take notes

on the videotaped lectures. These worksheets revealed that the notes taken

by students in both the metacognitive and cognitive groups matched well

with Instructor keys. Observation of students using €ooperstlin confirmed

111-21

ie

)it •d~ lt 

'

., "e Q~ Ie e . t "G l .- o~ . . . % • 'o qb • . , • • a . - , - - t * . . .
* that information was noisily traded among peers to ensure note-taking

accuracy. The usefulness of the selective attention strategy for the

metacognitive group was most apparent In comparison of T-lists made for the

posttest by the metacognitive and cognitive groups: metacognitive T-!ists

were more complete and showed a clearer subordination of Ideas than those

made by the cognitive group. Further, observation of student behavior at

", posttest showed that students In the metacognitive group more easily

identified and recorded main points and supporting details than any other

group. Clearly, Instructors were able to 'verify that students were using

.. the strategies as planned.

The student use of strategies for speaking was also easily verified. The

linguistic markers taught to the metacognitive group appeared in all of

their speeches. Use of the cooperation strategy taught to the

metacognitive and cognitive group was easily observed by Instructors as

well. Although students were observed to be rather lenient In criticizing

-" each other's reports, the more proficient students did offer others advice

about word choice, pronunciation, or manner of delivery.

In conclusion, instructor observations and analysis of student worksheets

amply verified student use of almost all strategies. The only strategy use

difficult to verify was imagery. Based on their observation, Instructors

felt that students did not fully use this as a way of learning vocabulary.

Learnina Strategies Inventory. Another mans of verifying student use of

-. strategies was to use data from the Learning Strategies Inventory (LS), a

self-report rating scale designed to reveal metecognitive and cognitive

learning strategies used with vocabulary, listening, and speaking tasks.

111-22

..- .
This Inventory is displayed in Appendix J. Students responding to the LSI

indicated on a 1-4 scale the degree to which they used specific strategies

designated for individual language learning tasks. in the general

instructions, students were asked to respond for the two weeks prior to the

test administration, which included the training period. There were 3

questions for each of 14 learning strategies for a total of 42 Items. in

addition to a total score and subscores on metacognitive and cognitive

strategies used or not used during training, three subscores were also

available for each set of items representing the 14 strategies. Analyses

indicated that the instrument has sufficient reliability for research

purposes, as shown in Table 13. The reliability reported is the median of

three correlations computed between subscores for each set of 14 'items and

is shown in the main diagonal of Table 13. The strength of the

off-diagonal relationships displayed in this table does not reveal any

consistent pattern as evidence of subscore validity, as would be suggested

by metacognitive subscores intercorrelating higher than the correlation

between metacognitive and cognitive scores within strategy use category.

*. Analyses of the LSI subscores for strategies used in training were also

conducted to determine the degree to which students in the three treatment

groups reported using strategies. The results of these analyses are

presented in Table 14, which show simple analyses of variance contrasting

the three treatment groups for each variable. Results Indicated that none

of the various comparisons was significant. Additional analyses were

* conducted to determine if the percentage of the total possible score

represented by the mean for the metacognitive group was larger among the

Items used in training than among items not used In training. The mean

score represented about 67 percent of the items used in training, whereas

L 111-23

, .*''%'.L-:\~.-.*-*
Table 13

Intercorrelations and Reliabilities of

Learning Strategies Inventory Variables

Variable

Variable Definition 1 2 3 4 5 6

1. Metacognitive, Used* .67

2. Cognitive, Used* W .72

3. Total, Used* a a b

4. Metacognitive, Not Used* .30 .20 .29 .68

5. Cognitive, Not Used* .49 .39 .51 .jj .71

6. Total, Not Used* .49 .38 .50 a a b

a. Intercorrelation would include pert with whole test and is not reported.

b. Not computed.

c. Reliabilities are on the main diagonal. -5

*Note: The LSI contained items relating to the use of 14 different

learning strategies, 7 of which were presented in the training. The terms

"used" and "not used" are applied here to differentiate the strategies

presented in the training from those tht were not. For a detailed listing

of the strategies included in the LSI and whether or not students received

instruction in their use, see "the LLSI Strategy Interpretation Key" in

Appendix J.

..... .~... . . ~,- ,Z - . - ... .
Table 14

The Effect of Learning Strategy Training on

Reported Use of Learning Strategies

Metacognitive Cognitive Control ' In-271 1n-251(- T

Adj. Adj. Adj.

Variable (i-items) Mean SD Mean SD Mean SD p-value

Used In Training

Metacognitive (1-9) 25;99 4.53 25.60 4.16 25.29 4.20 .82

Cognitive (1-12) 30.34 5.24 31.24 4.98 29.43 4.61 .40

Total 56.32 8.29 56.84 7.17 54.72 7.87 .58

Not Used in Training

" Metacognitive (1-6) 18.30 2.65 18.01 2.30 18.71 2.32 .57

Cognitive (-15) 40.87 7.50 40.93 5.80 40.91 6.47 .99

Total 59.17 8.99 58.94 7.45 59.62 7.94 .95

.

It 1-25

......... 5.-5
the mean was about 70 percent of the items not used in training.

Apparently, In responding to the questionnaire, students failed to

connect the strategy training over the prior two weeks with the items to

which they responded. No specific attempt had been made in constructing

thequestionnaire to pattern the item wording precisely after phrases used

during training, although the Items were Intentionally balanced among

strategies used with vocabulary, listening, and speaking activities.

Further, the precise wording of each item did not reinforce the general

instructions that students respond only in relation to their behavior

4. during the two weeks of training. What results seems to be an indication

of their typical strategy use, not a reflection of their strategy use

during training. If the LSI is to be used in the future as a means of

verifying student strategy use in experiments of this kind, modifications

must be made to ensure that students respond with that purpose clearly in

mind.

* Analyses of covarlance designed to determine if students in the three

treatment groups performed differently on outcome measures depending on

,. their reported uses of learning strategies are shown in Table 15. In each

analysis, the covarlete is the corresponding pretest score. Results

indicated that none of the two-way Interaction effects was significant (LSI

at two levels by three treatment groups). However, the main effects for

". the LSI and the treatment group were significant for speaking, suggesting

that students who reported using learning strategies more in speaking also

scored higher on the posttest. This was the only outcome with significant

main effects. The significant differences for the treatment conditions on

the speaking task were noted earlier in Table 4.

111-26
Table 15

The Effect of Learning Strategy Training on Selected

Language Skills by Level of Strategy Use

Controlling for Pretest

Posttest Variable and Treatment Groups Two way

Learning Strategies Metacognitive Cognitive Control Interaction

Inventory (LSI) Level mean (n) mean (n) Mean (n) p-value

Vocabulary Total (Delayed)

- LSI Median 10,45 (11) 8.54 (13) 11.55 (11) .52

- LSI Median 10.69 (16) 10.23 (13) 10.73 (11)

* Vocabulary Total (Recent)

- LS1 Median 12.18 (11) 10.62 (13) 12.36 (11) .37

* LSI Median 12.31 (16) 12.77 (13) 12.09 (11)

Listening

LSI Median 8.09 (11) 7.62 (13) 7.36 (11) .79

LSI Median 8.75 (16) 8.00 (13) 7.55 (il)

Speaking *

LSI Median 3.90 (10) 3.31 (13) 2.82 (11) .47

LSI Median 3.47 (15) 2.79 (14) 2.82 (11)

* This was the only posttest variable with significant main effects. The

main effects for LSI and treatment group were both significant at p .05.

111-27
* Discussion

The -design of this study focused on determining whether or not learning

strategies training would Influence performance on a variety of language

learning tasks required for academic settings. The training was presented

" in natural classroom instruction rather than as individual laboratory

training, which provides exposure to only a single task and strategy. The

range of tasks specifically included more complicated language activities

to determine whether learning strategies training would be effective with

more complex skills such as listening and speaking. The distinction

between metacognitive and cognitive strategies was introduced as a means of

- identifying the effects of including highly generalizable strategies

- (metacognitive) vs. strategies that were more specific to individual tasks

(cognitive).

. The answer to whether or not strategy training can be generally

effective for vocabulary learning was never in question owing to the

sizeable number of prior studies showing significant results using an associational learning strategy. The question was whether the associational

strategy could be simplified by grouping items on a vocabulary list, and

whether this instruction would work in small groups. The combined grouping

and imagery strategy proved difficult to implement and had to be modified

throughout the study. Quantitative analysis suggested that there is a

tendency for scores of students trained to use grouping and imagery, with

or without self-evaluation, to be suppressed relative to those of a control

group using its customary strategies in learning. Informal observations

indicate thaL Asian students, who otherwise were highly efficient rote

11-1-28 .4.

!. . - . -.- - ...- - ;-' .-.... . .,". ... I-i--.. '-' '. . ? .- .-. .-. . , . -.... .. .
7 -7

I learner s of vocabulIary I Ist s, may have been part IculIarlIy af fected

negatively by the Introduction of grouping and Imagery. There were also

suggestions that Hispanic students in the metacognitive group performed

* consistently better than the cognitive or control groups regardless of the

task. Although these findings with Hispanics In particular should be

explored, we believe that more detailed observation of expert learners is

nevertheless warranted before additional efforts are made to train students

* to use this approach, and that training effectiveness should be

demonstrated Individually before moving to group presentations.

In the listening skills task, there were indications that the difficulty of

* the task and the explicitness of directions to perform the strategies may

*both be important determinants of subsequent performance. Students

* presented with a task that is too difficult may find little assistance in

using learning strategies either because the Initial communication Is too

* complicated or the information is so unfamiliar that learning and retention

*are suppressed. It could also be true that the transfer of strategies to

new tasks may be extemely sensitive, requiring continued prompts and

structured directions until the strategies become autonomous.

* Skills in speaking a second language were clearly Improved through learning

*strategies training relative to a control group. Students were extremely

* adept in learning and applying strategies and, in the process, gained in

*judged organization and comprehensibility. Informal Impressions from

training were that the effectiveness of strategy training could have been

* enhanced even more with more structured directions to peers on providing

*feedback to the student making an oral presentation. The tendency of

students to avoid of'oending another student by being critical, which

9 111-29
*: initially was a problem, was averted by focusing the peer comments on

*formal portions of the oral presentation and by making the speaker

responsible for assuring that feedback was obtained.

By specifically fading cues for the use of learning strategies across the

four presentations of each learning activity, it was anticipated that

transfer of strategy training to new tasks could be demonstrated. Failure

• .to find significant differences on the vocabulary task obscured potential

- relationships between metacognitive strategies and transfer, as did the

failure to find differences on the fourth listening test and on the

- listening posttest. Further, although differences favoring the

*metacognitive group were evident on the speaking test, the cognitive group

also showed differences on the posttest relative to the controls. Thus,

the students may have transferred Initial training even without

metacognitive strategies. One reason for the transfer among the cognitive

group members is that the way in which cooperation was used contained

elements of evaluation, a metacognitive strategy. Apparently, ghe type of

cognitive strategy combined with another cognitive strategy Is as essential

as the metacognitive strategy itself.

In sum, for two highly important academic language skills, listening and

speaking, learning strategies were shown to be effective in enhancing

initial learning. Clear direction Is provided to teachers interested in

helping students to become more effective learners. Teachers should be

confident that there exist a number of strategies which can be embedded

into their existing curricula, that can be taught to students with only

modest extra effort, and that can improve the overall class performance.

This means that teachers need not feel that their role is limited to simply

111-30

.... ......................................... .............. ' . _ ,~~~~~. '. .,..:'.";.._ ... .'.......... ... '....'....,........... '. A '.. ...... -,
providing comprehensible input but can Include a variety of learning

*" strategies which can be paired with specific types of language tasks.

Future research should be directed to refining the strategy training

approaches, Identifyin'g effects associated with individual strategies, and

determining procedures for strengthening the impact of the strategies on

student outcomes.

7

Io -3

........................... %
REFERENCES

Atkinson, R.C. Raugh, M.R. (1975). An application of the mnemonic

keyword method to the acquisition of Russian vocabulary. Journal of

Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 104, 126-133.

Ausubel, D.P. (1960). The use of advance organizers in the learning and

retention of meaningful verbal material. Journal of Educational

Psychology, 51, 267-272.

." Ausubel, D.P. (1978). In defense of advance organizers: A reply to the

critics. Review of Educational Research, 48, 1;1-257.

Bialystok, E. (1983). Some factors in the selection and Implementation of

communication strategies. In C. Faerch & G. Kasper (Eds.),

Strategies In interlanguage communication. London: Longman.

* Bialystok, E. (1979). The role of conscious strategies in second language

* proficiency. Canadian Modern Language Review, , 372-394.

Brown, A.L., Bransford, J.D., Ferrara, R.A., & Camp!one, J.C. (1983).

Learning, remembering, and understanding. In J.H. Flavell & E.M.

Markham (Eds.), Carmichael's manual of child psychology. Vol. 1. New

York: Wiley.

Brown, A.L., & Palincsar, A.S. (1982). Inducing strategic learning from

texts by means of informed, self-control training. Topics in Learning

and Learning Disabilities, 1(1), 1-17.

Chamot, A. U. (1984). Identification of ESL learning strategies. Paper

presented at the annual meetings of the Teachers of English to

Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL), Houston, Texas.

Cohen, A.D., & Aphek, E. (1980). Retention of second-language vocabulary

over time: Investigating the role of mnemonic associations. System,

8, 221-235.

Cohen, A.D., & Aphek, E. (1981). Easifying second language learning.

Studies in Second Language Acquisition, a(2), 221-236.

Dansereau, D.F. (In press). Learning strategy research. In J. Segal, S.

Chipman, & R. Glaser (Eds.), Thinking and learning skills: Relating

learning to basic research. Vol. 1. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum.

Dansereau, D.F., Actkinson, T.R., Long, G.L., & McDonald, B. (1974).

Learning stratecies: A review and synthesis of the current

literature, (AFHRL-TR-74.70, Contract F41609-74-C-0013). Lowry Air

Force Base, Colorado. (AD-A007722)

DIVesta, F.J., & Gray, S. (1972). Listening and note-taking. Journal of

Educational Psychology, §1, 8-14.

Dunkel, P., & Pialorsi, F. (1982). Advanced Ii t ning comprehension:

Developing aural and note-taking skills. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

111-33

,, -,- , ,,. .; ., . , ; .;i," , . e, ;.': . . '. .. ';. . . . ... . ,, .- .* .. . ..-. ...
Hall, J.W., Wilson, K.P., & Patterson, R.J. (1981). Mnemotechnics: Some

limitations of the mnemonic keyword method for the study of foreign

language vocabulary. Journal of Educational Psychology, 22, 345-357.

Hamp-Lyons, L. (1983). Survey of materials for teaching advanced

listening and note-taking. TESOL Quarterly, 1U, 109-122.

" Krashen, S. (1983). The monitor model. In R.S. Gingras (Ed.)., Second

* language acquisition and foreign language teaching. Arlington, VA:

Center for Applied Linguistics.

Levin, J.R. (In press). Educational applications of mnemonic pictures.

In A.A. Sheikt (Ed.), Imagery and the educational process.

Farmingdale, NY: Baywood.

Levin, J.R., Pressley, M., McCormick, C.B., Miller, G.E., & Shriberg, L.K.

(1979). Assessing the classroom potential of the keyword method.

Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 583-594.

Naiman, N., Frohlich, M., Stern, N.H. & Todesco, A. (1978). The good

language learner. Toronto: Modern Language Center, Ontario

Institute for Studies in English.

O'Malley, J.M., Russo, R.P., Chamoc, A.U., Stewner-Manzanares, G.,

Kupper, L. (in press). Learning strategies used by high school

students learning English as a second language. Alexandria, VA: U.S.

Army Research Institute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences.

Pressley, M., Levin, J.R., Oigdon, N., Bryant, S.L., McGivern, J.E., & Ray,

K. (1982). Re-examining the "limitations" of the mnemonic keyword

method. Working Paper No. 329. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Center for

Educational Research, University of Wisconsin.

Pressley, M., Levin, J.R., Kuiper, N.A., Bryant, S.L., & Michener, S.

(1981). Mnemonic versus nonmnemonic vocabulary-learning strategies:

Putting "depth" to rest. Working Paper No. 312. Madison, WI:

Wiconsin Research and Development Center for Individualized Schooling,

University of Wisconsin.

Pressley, M., Levin, J.R., Nakamura, G.V., Hope, D.J., Bisbo, J.G., & Toye,

A.R. (1980). The keyword method of foreign vocabulary learning: An

investigation of its generalizability. Journal of Applied Psychology,

65, 635-642.

Rubin, J. (1975). What the "good language learner" can teach us. TESO.

Quarterly, 2(1), 41-51.

Slavin, R.E. (1983). Cooperative learning. New York: Longman.

Stevick, E.W. (1984). Curriculum development at the Foreign Service

Institute. In T.H. Higgs (Ed.), Teaching for proficiency, the

organizing orinclple. Lincolnwood, IL: National Textbook Company.

. .. .. ... .w. . ... ~~ ., . t , .• r ............ . .. ....- r .. 
Weiland, A., & Kingsbury, S.J. (1979). Immediate and delayed recall of

lecture material as a function of notetaking. Journal of Educational

Research, 72(4), 228-230.

Weinstein, C.E. (1978). Elaboration skills as a learning strategy. in

H.F. O'Neil, Jr. (Ed.), Learning strategies. New York: Academic

.Press.

Yorkey, R.C., Barrutla, R., Chamot, A.U., de Diaz, I.R., Gonzalez, J.8.,

Ney, J.W., and Woolf, W.L. (1984). New InterCom. Boston, hA: Heinle

and Heinle.

1 -

5.

5,

°°;

.4

-1-3

p

bk..

V' 5 S *( i. 5. , .5 -. -%
APPENDIX A

Vocabulary Pretest, Examniner's Directions, and Answer Key !' '

p.

- .,' %*oV%-i
VOCABULARY

NAME: Your first language:

SCHOOL: Other languages you speak:

DATE:

" PART ONE

*: Instructions: Look at the slides and listen to what the teacher says. Then circle

the correct letter.

Example: A B C D

1. A B C 0

2. A B C D

' 3. A B C D

4. A 8 C D

" 5. A a C 0

* 6. A B C 0

7. A B C D

- 8. A B C 0

9. A 8 C 0

10. A B C 0

" PART TWO

Instructions: Listen to the definition the teacher reads. Circle the letter For

the word that has the same meaning.

Example: A. Flowers

S. Oven

C. Nail

0. Arrow

5** . ~ . . . . . . AA. i 

I - -" ""'.." ":.*" " ' .""'.4 - "''*:..'''". . ." ,* ." ," ',- -. " .,- -.-" ..-" ' -,." , " ""- . "-"." "-.--.
II. A. Talons

B. Toenails

C. C laws

D. Hooks

..,

12. A. Spendthrift

B. Skinflint

C. Panderer

D. Bimbo

13. A. Flutter

B. Breeze

C. Draft

D. Gale

14. A. Mouth

B. Eyebrow

" C. Grin

~0 . Crease

15. A. Pounce .-A

B. Gait

C. Strut

0. Trot

16. A. Sink

B. Drip

C. Wash

0. Cup

*

A

". " , -' . . .'- . -,'.r,°.* -;" -. *.,-' *4;4 ' . - -*." 41 
17. A. Lining

B. Blazer

* C. Seam

D. Hem

18. A. Exhale

B. Sigh

C. Gasp

D. Rant

19. A. Sofa

B. Cot

C. Hassock

0. Crib

20. A. Sneeze

B. Cough

C. Whistle

0. Blow

PART THREE

Instructions: Look at the slides. Then, in the blank space below, write the

name of the picture.

Example:

21.

22. etN

23. =

24.

25.

26.

A. ,, A

e , *,, ,-€: *, ., * .. .- .. * 4. ... *.- , .. ".". ". . ". .". , . . .... . . . - . . . . . . . . -.-. .

• • *,. -- , . n - 9,.. , . *. .. . . , . . ;l w ., - .. ' . .. * . , , , ... .,,.' ,, -... ,... . . . ,
Part Four

Instructions: Listen to the definition the teacher reads. Then write the word

that matches the definition.

Example: __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

27. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

*28. __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

29. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

-30. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

~31.

A
VOCABULARY PRETEST

Examiner's Directions

(PASS OUT ANSWER SHEETS TO STUDENTS, SAYING...)

I would like you to answer some questions about words that are often used in

English. I want to see how many of these words you know. This will be useful

* to us in planning how to teach you English.

- Now, be sure to write your name on the answer sheet, and also write the name

of your school, and today's date. Then write the name of your first language

in the space provided. Also write the name of any other languages you speak.

1. MULTIPLE CHOICE SLIDES

The first thing I'll do is show you some slides that have four pictures. Each

* picture has a letter: A, 8, C, or D. When I say a word, look for the picture

* that matches the word. Then on your answer sheet, circle the letter of that

picture. Let's do one together. Here is a slide with four pictures. I want

you to tell me which one is an ARROW by placing a circle around the correct

letter on your answer sheet. The correct letter Is C . A is flowers, B is

oven, C is arrow, and D is nail. You should have drawn a circle around the

* letter C for Arrow. Any questions? Now we'll begin.

(SHOW THE SLIDES ONE AT A TIME, AT ROUGHLY FIVE SECOND INTERVALS, SAYING ...)

1. Snake 6. Tieclip

2. Blender 7. Lobster

3. Feathers 8. Griddle

14. Dirt *9. Scissors

5.Hammer 10. Hive

A
VOCABULARY PRETEST

Examiner's Directions

page 2

II. RECOGNITION OF DEFINITIONS AND WORDS (no slides)

* Now I went you to listen carefully. I will say the definition of a word. Then I

will say the four possible answers that are listed on your answer sheet. Listen

to all four possible answers. Then I will say the definition of the word again.

You will circle the letter on your answer sheet for the word that means the same

as the definition.

- Let's try an example. I will give you the following definition: "You bake a cake

in this." Now I read you the four possible answers: "A - Flower; B - Oven; C - Nail;

or D - Arrow." You circle "B-oven" on your answer sheet because you bake a cake

in an oven. Any questions? Let's begin with number II on your answer sheet.

• (PROCEED TO READ THE FOLLOWING DEFINITIONS"

" 11. The nails on the feet of animals such as cats and dogs.

A - Talons; B - Toenails; C - Claws; D - Hooks.

The nails on the feet of animals such as cats and dogs.

12. A person who does not like to spend money.

A - Spendthrift; B - Skinflint; C - panderer; D - Bimbo.

A person who does not like to spend money.

13. A very strong wind.

A - flutter; B - breeze; C - draft; D - gale.

A very strong wind.

I mA

• i~ e e- "e

~ 

* o e* - - o •."

', m 'l~dl~ I'muudm " *"% ' 9 ". -,- • %'.'% '',', "" "• "+" " ' " """ " " "" %" " ''' ''.' '';'''4 " .. .
VOCABULARY PRETEST

Examiner's Directions

page 3

14. A line on your face that you make when you smile or frown.

A - mouth; B - eyebrow; C - grin; D - crease.

A line on your face that you make when you smile or frown.

15. A kind of walk that shows the person thinks he is very important.

A - pounce; B - gait; C - strut; 0 - trot

A kind of walk that shows the person thinks he is very important.

. 16. When you turn off a water faucet, but a little water still comes out.

What is this called?

A - sink; B - drip; C - wash; D - cup.

When you turn off a water faucet, but a little water still comes out.

What is this called?

17. The bottom edge of a skirt or pair of pants that is turned up and sewn

down.

A - lining; B - blazer; C - seam; D - hem.

The bottom edge of a shirt or pair of pants that is turned up and sewn down.

18. A sudden, short breath.

*A - exhale; B - sigh; C - gasp; D - rant.

"" A sudden, short breath.

19. A small, narrow bed that can be folded up when it is not being used.

A - sofa; B - cot; C - hassock; D - crib.

A small, narrow bed that can be folded up when it is not being used.

20. The noise you make when you have a cold or smell something like pepper.

It sounds like achoo.

A - sneeze; B - cough; C - whistle; D - blow.

The noise you make when you have a cold or smell something like pepper.

It sounds like achoo.

A
VOCABULARY PRETEST

Examiner's Directions

page 4

III. P4ATCH THE WORD TO THE SLIDE

Now I want you to look again at some slides. This time I want you to remember the

name of the picture in the slide. I want you to write down the name of the picture

- on your paper. For example, look at this slide. (SHOW SLIDE OF AN ARROW.)

This is an arrow. Write the word "arrow" on your paper in the space for the

example. Spelling does not count, so spell the word as best you can. Guess if

* you do not know the word. Any questions? OK, let's begin.

* C THE FOLLOWING SLIDES WILL BE SHOWN. YOU WILL SAY ...)

* NUMBER 21 (pause), NUMBER 22 (pause), NUMBER 23 (pause), NUMBER 24 (pause),

NUMBER 25 (pause), and the last one NUMBER 26 (turn off machine).

IV. RECALL FROM DEFINITIONS (no slides)

Now the last thing I want you to do is remember the word that matches the definition

I give you. Listen carefully to the definition I say, then try to think of the word

* that matches the definition. For example, if I say this definition "The water that

-- falls from clouds to the ground" you would write the word "Rain" in the answer space

for the example. Remember, spelling does not count, so spell the words as best you

* can. Guess if you do not know the word. Any questions? OK, let's begin.

27. A light rain that only lasts for a short time.

28. The top of a room. Look up.

29. The opposite of succeed is______

30. The place where zoo animals are kept or the place where you keep a pet bird.

31. The mark that is left on your skin aftr.,- a cut heals.

32. The part of an airport where airplanes land and take off.

%51:
. . . .. . . .. " .. "*"-*,.'

q

VOCABULARY PRETEST KEY

I. MULTIPLE CHOICE SLIDES

1. C 6. s

2. 8 7. C

3. B 8. A

4. D 9. C

5. C 10. C

II. RECOGNITION OF WORDS BY DEFINITIONS (no slides)

11. C 16. B

12. B 17. D

13. D 18. c

14. D 19. B

15. C 20. A

Ill. RECALL FROM SLIDES

21. tools 24. rose

22. flashlight 25. shelf

23. rake 26. shovel

IV. RECALL FROM DEFINITIONS (no slides)

27. shower 30. cage

28. ceiling 31. scar

29. fail 32. runway

A

I.°

L. -
APPENDIX B

Vocabulary Posttest, Examiner's Directions, and Answer Key
NAME:

DAY 10 SCHOOL:

VOCABULARY POSTTEST DATE:

PART ONE

Instructions: Look at the slides, and listen to what the teachers says. Then circle

the correct letter.

, 1. A B C D

- 2. A B C D

. 3. A B C D

4 I. A B C D

5. A B C D

- 6. A B C D

7. A B C D

. 8. A B C D

9. A B C D

- 10. A B C 0

PART TWO

Instructions: Listen to the teacher's definition. Circle the letter for the word

that has the same meaning.

)1. a. crate 12. a. bruise 13. a. sniff

b. dock b. wrinkle b. cough

c. dam C. nod c. drizzle

d. stripe d. limp d. bruise

B

" " .'. .. "- •-. . .. " ... .* * .*.. •.. . **.• • .* .. .. ".. ".• '. - , '- . ,'.. .•-*
7 T

, M.- WT 

. E IC 

-

C .TI

M -7 

*i.a. kerchief

b. cuf 

f

c. l apelI

d . cradle

*15. a. cuff

b b. fangs

c. cough

d. shade

S16. a. l imp

b. cough

C.quarrel

d. leak

17. a. nod

b. wrinkle

c. sniff

d. quarrel

18. a 

. baker

b. plumber

C. mixer

d. farmer

19. a.stripe

b.bake 

r

.5.c. wrinkle

d. bruise
20. a. cradle

b. threshold

C. brick

d. cupboard

* PART THREE

Instructions: Look at the slides. Then, in the blank space below, write the

name of the picture.

* ~21. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

22. __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

23. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

24. _____________

25. __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

26. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

PART FOUR

Instructions: Listen to the teacher's definition. Then write the word that matches

the definition.

27. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

28. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

29. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

30. __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

31. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

32. _ _ _ _ _ _
POSTTEST

VOCABULARY

* Examiner's Directions

PART ONE: MULTIPLE CHOICE SLIDES

* I will show you some slides that have four pictures, just like the daily quizzes

- you have taken. Each picture has a letter: A, 8, C, or D. When I say a word,

look for the picture that matches the word. Then on your answer sheet, circle the

- letter of that picture.

(SHOW THE SLIDES ONE AT A TIME, AT ROUGHLY FIVE SECOND INTERVALS, SAYING ...)

1. Gems 6. rope

2. Worm 7. mixer

3. Mug 8. web

4. Fur 9. tweezers

5. twig 10. dove

PART TWO: RECOGNITION OF DEFINITIONS AND WORDS (no slides)

67 Now I want you to listen carefully. I will say the definition of a word. Then I

will say the four possible answers that are listed on your answer sheet. Listen to

* all four possible answers. Then I will say the definition of the word again. You

will circle the letter on your answer sheet for the word that means the same.

1.A large box made of wood to protect things from being broken.

A - crate; B - dock; C - dam; D - stripe.

A large box made of wood to protect things from being broken.
VOCABULARY POSTTEST

Examiner's Directions

page 2

12. When you walk unevenly. (DEMONSTRATE A LIMP)

A - bruise; B - wrinkle; C - nod; D - limp.

When you walk unevenly. (DEMONSTRATE A LIMP)

- 13. Little noises you make with your nose. (DEMONSTRATE A SNIFF)

A - sniff; B - cough; C - drizzle; 0 - bruise

Little noises you make with your nose. (DEMONSTRATE A SNIFF)

* 14. The part of a coat near the shoulder that is turned back. (POINT TO LAPEL)

A - kerchief; B - cuff; C - lapel; D - cradle.

The part of a coat near the shoulder that is turned back. (POINT TO LAPEL)

15. The long pointed teeth that animals have in the front of their mouths.

A - cuff; 8 - fangs; C - cough; 0 - shade.

The long pointed teeth that animals have in the front of their mouths.

16. A sound you make with your lungs and throat when you have a cold. (DEMONSTRATE COUGF

A - limp; 8 - cough; C - quarrel;D - leak

A sound you make with your lungs and throat when you have a cold. (DEMONSTRATE COUGF

17. When two people disagree or fight with words, they do this.

A - nod; B - wrinkle; C - sniff; D - quarrel.

S

When two people disagree or fight with words, tney do this.

18. A person whose job is to fix things like sinks, pipes, and toilets.

A - baker; B - plumber; C -mixer; D - farmer.

6.-

ooe B

4.*

' '_.'.5,d ; _,,,- ' *.,'., ''.,'_,'_.'',°'- . . . .. _'. o,.' . • -.. " . .. . , . • . . • . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . .
VOCABULARY POSTTEST

Examiner's Directions

page 3

19. The- lines you get an your face when you grow older.

A - stripe; 9 - baker; C - wrinkle; 0 - bruise.

The lines you get on your face when you grow older.

20. A small bed that a baby sleeps in.

* A - cradle; B - threshold; C - brick; D -cupboard.

* A small bed that a baby sleeps in.

PART THREE: RECALL FROM SLIDES

.. Now I want you to look again at some slides. This time I want you to remember the

name of the picture in the slide. I went you to write down the name of the picture

on your paper. Spelling does not count, so spell the word as best you can. Guess

if you do not know the word.

(THE FOLLOWING SLIDES WILL BE SHOWN, YOU WILL SAY...)

NUMBER 21 (pause, change slide), NUMBER 22 (pause, change slide), NUMBER 23 (pause,

change slide), NUMBER 24 (pause, change slide), NUMBER 25 (pause, change slide),

NUMBER 26 (pause, shut off machine).

PART FOUR: RECALL FROM DEFINITIONS (no slides)

* Now the last thing I want you to do is remember the word that matchis the definition

I give you. Listen carefully to the definition I say, then try to think of the word

that matches the definition. Remember, spelling does not count, so spell the words

as best you can. Guess if you do not know the word.

27 Asalojctwt nestati sdt od rmv hns

27 A small object with wheels that is used to hold or move things.
VOCABULARY POSTTEST

Examiner's Directions

page 4

28. When a person suffocates or dies in the water.

When a person suffocates or dies in the water.

29. When it rains very, very hard.

When it rains very, very hard.

30. The dark spot you get on your skin where you have been hurt.

The dark spot you get on your skin where you have been hurt.

31. The part of the entrance of a house that you step over when you come in.

The part of the entrance of a house that you step over when you come in.

32. A woman whose husband has died.

A woman whose husband has died.

L

r

r"S

- . .o. .
VOCABULARY POSTTEST KEY

1 . MULTIPLE CHOICE SLIDES

1. C 6. D

2. A 7. A

3. B 8. B

4. D 9. C

5. C 10. B

11. RECOGNITION OF WORDS BY DEFINITIONS (no slides)

1]. A 16. B

12. 0 17. 0

13. A 18. 5

14. c 19. C

15. B 20. A

111. RECALL FROM SLIDES

21. appliances 24. daffodil

22. wave 25. sill

23. hose 26. curb

IV. RECALL FROM DEFINITIONS (no slides)

21. cart 30. bruise

028. drown 31. threshold

29. downpour 32. widow
APPENDIX C

Listening Pretest and Posttest
(LISTENING PRETEST)

Name:

Date: School:

LEWIS AND CLARK

S •1. Lewis and Clark were sent West to

Find out about the animals, people, and rivers.

Conquer the area near the Pacific Ocean.

c. Find out about the Indians.

d. Test the ability of ordinary men.

2. The most important conclusion of the story on Lewis and Clark is that

. a. The Mississippi was finally reached successfully.

b. Even explorers can get lost on expeditions.

c. The dangers on the .trip included cold weather and high mountains.

G Men of talent, curiosity, and courage can accomplish great things.

3. The major reason that Lewis and Clark worked well together was because

6 They were old friends.

Both men had important knowledge and skills for the trip.

c. They took orders directly from the President. . d. They had warm clothes and good climbing boots.

4. The order in which Lewis and Clark traveled across the country was

a. indian Falls-Pacific Ocean-St. Louis-Minnesota

b. Rockies-Great Falls-St. Louis-Pacific Ocean 9. St. Louis-Great Falls-Rockies-Pacific Ocean

Rockies-St. Louis-Great Falls-Pacific Ocean

5. One way in which Lewis and Clark avoided getting lost was to

T alk to the Indians about what they would find ahead.

Look at a map to find rivers and mountains.

* c. Climb tall mountains so they could see dhead.

d. Use the stars for direction.

* 6. The approximate date when Lewis and Clark reached the Pacific Ocean was

a. 1605

b. 1705 91805

1905

C

• . . .....- . .- .. . .. *. . . 5 . • . . . •~..A 1 -
.- . - -. , ' o . . - - -- --. - - - - ' . 'i ' . -, . - .T . . . . .

7. Clark was outgoing. The word outgoing means

.* Friendly

c. Adventurous

c. A person that likes to be outdoors

d. Happy

8. They came to a fork in the Missouri River. The word fork means

a. Small river

b. Turns of a river

c. Waterfall in a river

ID Division of a river

9. Lewis went down one branch and Clark went down the other. The word branch means

a. Part of a tree

b. High mountain

., Division of a rive"

- 1. Dangerous path

" 10. How was the expedition of Lewis and Clark paid for?

a. By the State of Louisiana.

" b. By a group of rich men.

c. Bythe United States government.

,'"They paid for the trip themselves.

11. Identify each of the following sentences as a main point or a detail about the

Lewis and Clark lecture. Mark one answer for each sentence below by circling M

for "Main Point" and D for "Detail".

SD a. One danger they faced was weather.

M b. They looked for the waterfalls the Indians talked of.

M c. Lewis was a quiet, calm man.

SC

............. ..... - . -.-.- ,. . ...... . .-.. ..... ., ,.,.... . . .
Date; Name:

School:

(LISTEN I NG POSTTEST)

CAPTAIN COOK

I. Captain Cook was sent to the South Pacific to

~.~ See if there was a continent south of Australia other than Antarctica.

Find the Hawaiian Islands and New Zealand.

c. Find out if he could sail around Cape Horn.

d. Make three voyages to the Cook Islands.

2. The most important idea in the story on Captain Cook is

" a. Cook knew mathematics and navigation well.

b. Cape Horn was a dangerous area.

Cook's discoveries helped us understand the Pacific.

• Cook was a humane man.

3. The major reason why Cook was a successful explorer was

a. He was helped by friendly native people.

o b. He discovered Antarctica.

c. He had good maps of the area.

7-4) He was a man of intelligence, courage and humanity.

4. The approximate date when Cook made his expeditions was

a. 1690

Q 1770

c. 1880

d. 1910

J 5. Cook was sent on his expedition by

(j The English Navy.

b. Gilbert and Sullivan.

c. The United States Navy.

d. The Australian Navy. I

6. Before Cook made his expedition, Europeans knew for sure that

a. There was a Northwest Passage.

There was an ice cap around the South Pole.

c. The state of Oregon was on the coast of North America.

d. Australia was the unknown southern land.

I C

'. .* s .

'- " " . .:,.., . : ;:,. .**.. * ' .** ** , " . ." . , '':..: ', .'.: .'.': .? ,... - .. . .. ; -*. '. -... ' .% , -- .
7. One way in which Cook was humane was that he

a. Gave up his life fighting for his men.

b. Was intelligent and understood navigation.

Made sure his men did not get scurvy.

Made friends with New Zealand natives.

8. Here is the very tip of South America. The word tip means:

a. coast

b. highest mountain

end

continent

9. On this voyage Cook proved there was not continent south of Australia. The word

voyage means:

a. ship

trip

• attempt

d. adventure

10. Some of the people on the island were hostile to Cook. The word hostile means:

a. encouraging

-. b. interesting

c. strange

(D unfriendly

11. Identify each of the following sentences as a main point or a detail about the

expeditions of Captain Cook. Mark one answer for each sentence by circling the

M for "Main Point" or the 0 for "Oetail"| .

N a. Cook went as far as Alaska on his third voyage.

r b. Cook did not allow his men to fight with the native people.

M)D c. Cook explored and discovered new lands in the Pacific.

C
APPENDIX D

Topics for Speaking Pretest and Posttest
POSTZST

PT DAY 10 TOPICS FOR SPEAKING

1. The different sports of my country

2. My favorite school subject and why I like it

3. My favorite television program--the good and bad aspects of American

television

4. A comparison of the family in my country and the family in the

United States

S. What I like to do on the weekend and why

6. The major products of my country

.- 7. The most interesting person I have ever met

* 8. Shopping in the United States--the good and bad aspects

9. An unusual place to visit--a description and reasons to visit

10. Two famous people--a comparison of good and bkad aspects of each

o

'Z0

fil-.

S.S. .
APPENDIX E

Rating System for Speaking Samples:

Factor Definitions

irk

. . . . .
FACTOR DEFINITIONS

DELIVERY

The volume and pace used to comunicate ideas. Fluency, or ratio of spoken time

to pause time is also a part of this factor. Access to the lexicon (words) and

* appropriate parsin (division) of syntactic parts are considered part of fluency.

Flexibility, or the ability to recover quickly from performance problems, is

included in the concept of fluency.

APPROPR IATENESS

* The degree to which the style of task performance conforms to the expectations

of the speech conmmunity. That is, the choice of words and the manner in which

the report Is delivered should conform to the task of giving a formal oral

* report to a class. For example, a "chatty" or informal conversational style

is not appropriate for an oral report. Ending a report by saying "this Is all"

* is inappropriate for a formal report. Certain expressions found in Informal

* settings such as at a football game are also Inappropriate.

* ACCURACY

* Phonological, syntactic, and semantic (grammnatical) accuracy of utterances.

This factor includes pronunciation of utterances, word order, word endings, and

* meanings of words.

ORGANIZATION

* The logical progression of parts as they relate to the whole report. Each part

* must relate logically to the part that came before it, to the part that comes

after it, and to the report as a whole. Taken as a whole, the report has a

beginning, a middle, and an end.

E
APPENDIX F

Rating System for Speaking Samples:

Performance Standards
ABOUT THE FACTORS

Each of the factors will be judged according to a performance standard:

blocking, intrusive, acceptable, and successful.

BLOCKING: Performance on a given factor is such that communication

frequently comes to a halt.

INTRUSIVE: Performance is comprehensible but causes distraction or

annoyance to the listener.

ACCEPTABLE: Performance is satisfactory but noticeably imperfect.

SUCCESSFUL: Performance is more than satisfactory, enabling the

subject to succeed fully at the task.

Note that the standard is defined differently for each factor:

DELIVERY

Blocking: Delivery is so halting and filled with pauses that

the listener cannot follow the report. Delivery can

also be so inaudible or monotonic that the listener

cannot comprehend the report or loses interest in

trying to comprehend.

Intrusive: Delivery is somewhat halting causing irritation to the

listener, but not preventing comprehension of the report.

Acceptable: Delivery has not significant impediment or enhancement

of effectiveness.

Successful: Delivery enhances the overall effectiveness of the report.

The report is easy to listen to and follow.

APPROPRIATENESS

Blocking: Choice of words and tyle prevent communication from

occurring. Examples:

'.4 .inappropriate or missing announcement of topic of

report so that listener does not know topic.

,F
.no ending, a long silence is followed by the monitor's

saying "Is that all?"

-inappropriate register, speaking informally to one

person so that listener becomes confused.

Intrusive: Choice of words and style cause irritation to the listener, * but otherwise do not prevent coummunication. Examples:

-inappropriate use of informal expressions such as "you

know:.or "that guy."

.inappropriate ending such as "that's all" or "I finish."

Acceptable: Choice of words and style does not prevent or enhance

communication. Example: announcement of topic: My

topic is ...

Successful: Choice of words and style contribute significantly to the

comunication of ideas. Example: announcement of topic:

I am going to talk about....

* ORGANIZATION

Blocking: Organization is so confusing or nonexistant that listener

does not capture topic or any ideas. Utterances are

strung together reflecting little or no planning.

Intrusive: Organization is at a bare minimum. The listener has to

infer subordination of ideas. Lack of ending causes

listener to feel that the report is incomplete.

Acceptable: Loose structure does not prevent identification of ideas

but does not enhance overall commnunication.

Successful: Organization considerably enhances identification of parts

and ideas. The listener follows the report easily.

* ACCURACY

Blocking: Pronunciation, granmmatical structure, or word usage is

* so inaccurate that all comprehension of the report is lost.

Intrusive: Pronunciation, grammnar, or word usage is inaccurate to

the point that the listener can infer meaning, but is

distracted by the mistakes.

F
Acceptable: Pronunciation, grammnar, or word usage is somewhat

inaccurate, but does not interfere with overall

meaning.

Successful: Pronunciation, grammnar, or word usage is quite accurate

and enhances comprehension of the message.
APPENDIX G

Rating System for Speaking Samples:

Level Definitions
* LEVEL DEFINITIONS

LEVEL 1

The speaker at this level is generally not comprehensible. Only an occasional

word is understood. The topic of the report is not stated or Is incomprehensible

and must be inferred fronm the comprehensible parts of the report. This speaker

is very hesitant, searching for words or producing only occasional strings of

words followed by long pauses which makes the report hard to understand or follow.

Mistakes make comprehension of the report almost impossible. If at all comprehensible, this speaker tends to string utterances together with no plan in mind. - Utterances are often connected by "and" and are often appended as "afterthoughts."'

* This speaker has little confidence as evidenced by inaudibility or a tendency

to "trail off" at the end of the report. Very often the end of the report is

* not known or comes as a surprise to the listener. The listener is left with a - feeling that the report is incomplete or that the speaker wanted to say more than

* he/she was able to.

* LEVEL 1+

The speaker at this level exceeds a 1-level speaker in that this speaker is

* slightly more comprehensible and produces longer utterances. While this speaker

may be more accurate than a 1-level speaker, he/she is still inaudible and,

* therefore, incomprehensible. The voice of this speaker is often monotonic,

making it hard for the listener to follow.

LEVEL 2

The speaker at this level is generally comprehensible and audib'le. Enough of

the report is understood so that incomprehensible parts can easily be inferred.

Mistakes are at times bothersome, but not enough to prevent the listener's

* understanding of the ideas. The topic of the report is clearly stated or easily

inferred from the first few utterances. The speaker is fairly fluent with few

pauses to find words. Pauses are filled with appropriate utterances and the

speaker is able to hold the listener's interest.

* This speaker has some organization in the report in that he/she informs the

listener of the topic and proceeds to give information about the topic. While

the information is usually rich in detail, it is not structured. For example, _ important points and less important points are not clearly indicated. Very

* often) there is no "end" to the report and the student indicates that he/she is

finished by saying "and that's all" or "that's all I have to say." However, in

contrast to lower levels of proficiency, the speaker appears to say all that

he/she intended to say. The choice of words of the speaker may at times be

inappropriate. For example, the "tone"' of the report* may become "chatty" and

D sound like an informal conversation rather than a formal report. The speaker

may begin to sound as if he/she were speaking to one person rather than to a

group.

p G
" LEVEL 2+

. This speaker exceeds the 2-level speaker in that more organization is exhibited.

* Parts of the report are clearly subordinated and/or follow in logical or chrono-

" logical order. A clear end, however, may still be lacking at this level. A

speaker at this level still lacks the accuracy, clarity, and completeness found

"* at the 3-level.

- LEVEL 3

The speaker at this level is completely comprehensible and audible. Accuracy

is high with only occasional acceptable mistakes being committed. The speaker

is very fluent and exhibits confidence in his/her delivery as evidenced by the

pace and volume of the report, and the ability to hold the listener's interest.

The report is well organized in that the listener immediately knows the topic

of the report and the most important ideas. Parts of the report are clearly

indicated and appropriately subordinated. For example, the speaker clearly

indicates main points, examples, and transitions. The "end" of the report is

also clearly indicated. Even though the report may not be lengthy, the listener

feels that the speaker has said all that he/she intended to say and that the

report sounds "complete" and logically organized. Choice of words is appropriate

for a formal academic oral report at the high school level. The performance of

this speaker approaches that of a native speaker of the same age giving an oral

report in an English class, although it may not have the length and richness of

detail found in the native speaker's report.

b.-

IL

,. . :., . . ., . , ., ', -," - .. .. . . - - . . . . .. . . . ", -. -. -
APPENDIX H

Rating System for Speaking Samples:

Rating Sheet
RATING SHEET

RATER________________

TAPE NUMBER ___________SUBJECT NUMBER_______

* LEVEL__________

FACTORS

STANDARD

BLOCKING INRSV-PAL SU SFUL

COMPREHENSION ______ _______ _______ _ _ _ _ _

STRUC PRECISION____________

DISCOURSE COMP ______ ______ _______ ______

LEXICALIZATION __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

FLUENCY _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

NOTES:
APPENDIX I

Rating System for Speaking Samples:

Instructions to Raters
.e

INSTRUCTIONS TO RATERS

1. FIll in tape number and subject number that is on the outside of

the tape for each subject.

2. Listen to the tape once. Estimate a level for that subject. You

" may want to take notes as you listen.

3. Listen to the tape again and fill in the performance standard for

-each factor. Play the tape again if necessary to determine this.

4. Look at the level you have written on the sheet to see if the

score agrees with the factor ratings. If it does not, then adjust

the score.

5. If a score is difficult to'determine, than calibrate It with prescored tapes and reread the level definitions. Take notes on

tapes that are difficult to evaluate so that you can discuss your

reasons later.

OI.

I.

I; . . . . . . ..
APPENDIX J

Language Learning Strategies Inventory

and

LLSI Strategy Interpretation Key

p,

1-"*'% . *, ~ *' ~ . . . .

r •~. .-
LEARNING ENGLISH AS A SECOND LANGUAGE

Student Questionnaire

Instructions

- We want to ask about some things that help you learn English as a second language.

S Students sometimes have special ways of studying, spe2king to others, or listening

that help them In learning how to speak and understand English. We want to know If

you did some of these things in the last two weeks.

On the following pages you will find 42 statements about learning a second language. Please read each statement. Then circle one letter (A to D) that tells if the statement was true of you in the last two weeks.

A. Never true of you In the last two weeks

A. Sometimes true of you in the last two weeks

C. Usually true of you in the last two weeks

D. Always true of you in the last two weeks

There are no right or wrong answers. Try to rate yourself on what you actually

dlid in the last two weeks. Please work as quickly as you can without being careless, and complete all items.

Example

This example will show how to mark the questions on the following pages.

Read the example and draw a circle around the letter -hat tells what you did in the

last two weeks.

AA

,

A B D language so I can be sure to understand it.

In the last two weeks, if you only did this sometimes, draw a circle around the letter

B. but if you did it ~usully., draw a circle around the letter C. Use the other letters

if you did it pever or al was. Remember, draw a circle around the letter that tells

what you actuallyTdid In th last two weeks.

. .

'..':.. .'.,'.---.'.- -:,..;. ,-., 4..;-. ..-..-.. - .'; * * . U . U ... ,- .P .. * ' ...'..--.:-'.. ..- *... .....--.-. '-' . .: :.
Scol Date:____________

Remember to draw a circle around the letter that tells what you actually din the

l ast two weeks.

A B C D 1. When I have a long vocabulary list, I break it up into

parts. Than I try to learn one part before going to

the next.

A B C D 2. 1 make a picture In my head of what a word represents

so that I can remember Its meaning.

A S1 C DI. remember new words because I can hear in my mind how

they are pronounced.

A ' B D 4. After I study, I know If I studied well because I look

back to see If I met my goals for learning.

A B C D 5. When I don't know what a word means, I use the rest of

the sentence to help me understand.

A B C D 6. When I listen to the teacher, I write down the main

Ideas and important points.

A B C D 7. 1 listen most for names and dates when the teacher talk,.

K about history.

A B C 0 8. if I have to give .a talk to the class, I give it to a

friend first so he or she can tell me how It sounds.

A B C D 9. 1 say the same kind of things in English as I did In

my own language when I meet a new person.

A 8 C 0 10. 1 try to plan what kinds of things to say in a

conversation.

A B C D 11. At parties and other social events. I talk to people

who speak my own language.

A B C 0 12. 1 don't correct myself when I make a mistake In talking

because the other person will get the idea anyway.

A B C D 13. When I hear new Information, I try to connect it to

what I already know.

A B C 0 ii.. When I want to learn new words in English, I make up

a sentence' for each one.
p,,-

do

A C D 15. I try to divide what I am studing into parts, and

remember something important about each part.

A I C 0 16. I think about myself doiig" the action thMa a:new word"

describes.

A B C 0 17. Music helps me remember new words because I can say

the words to the music.

A B C D IS. I remember things I say in English and look back

at what my mistakes were.

A ' C D 19. When people speak too fast for me, I look for single

words that help me understand what they are saying.

* A B C D 20. I do not take notes when the teacher gives directions.

• A B C D 21. When I listen to the teacher, I listen carefully for

words she repeats or stresses.

A B C D 22. I ask people who speak English well to help me practic

A B C D 23. I make use of words or parts of words that are similar

in English and in my own language in order to learn

their meanings.

A B C D 24. After I think about what might happen in a conversatiot

I find out If I know the English for what I want to sa,.

A B C D 25. I go to movies or watch TV so I can learn English.

A B C D 26. I listen carefully to my own pronuncation and try

to correct It as I am talking.

A B C D 27. i think about how to apply new things that I hear to

my everyday life.

A B C D 28. When I hear a pew sentence, I try to think of a

conversation in which I can use it.

A B C 0 29. When I have a long vocabulary list, I divide it up

Into parts, and give each part a name that has special

meaning.

A B C' D 30. I try to Imagine new words In a special situation or

setting.

A a C 0 31. In order to remember how to say a word, I think of a

word that sounds like it.

i,'- ' j
*A I C D 32. 1 keep a diary or a journal In which I record my

experiences learning Enlih.

A I C A.D 33. When I don't understand a person, I think about where

we are and what we are doing,and this helps me

understand.

*A 9 C D 34. 1 do not write down most new words because I won't

hear them. again anyway.

A B C D 35. When I hear a story, I listen for the beginning, middlt

and end.

A 8 C D 36. I ask my friends to comu-ent on my English.

A B C D 37. What I already know in my own language helps me understand what the teacher is saying In English.

A B C D 38. if I have to give a talk to the class, I plan to say

things in the right order and stress things that are

important.

*A B C D 39. 1 try to make friends with people who speak English

to me.

A B C D 40Q. If I make a mistake in grammar, I stop and correct

what I said.

A B C D 41. 1 try to connect what I am hearing in a lecture to my

own experiences.

A 0 C D 42- 1 try to use words in a conversation as soon as I learn

them.
Please answer the following questions to the best of your ability. Mark

1.Nwln aeyube li iIn teUnited States?

2. Howmany years did your mother go to school?

Did not go to school

__1-8 years

__9-11 years

4 ___Graduated from high school or secondary school

__Went to or graduated from college or university

* Don't know

Ho3. many years did your father go to school?

Did not go to school

1-8 years

9-11 years

-Grailuated from high school or secondary school

__Went to or graduated from college or university

__Don't know
Whatwasthelost job your fathier had before you left your own country?

Fsherman

Other laborer such as washes dishes or cleans office buildings

or homes

Secretary/typist (bookkeeper, accountant, bank clerk)

Military or policeman

Farm owner or manager

Craftsman (carpenter, plumber, painter, fixes cars)*

Businessman ( owns a business, manages abusiness or sells

business products)

Professional (doctor, lawyer, scientist, teacher)

Never worked

Don't know

J
-. - -.

p 

Read each of the following reasons".for learning English. Circle the one letter ( A to D ) that tells If the statement is:

A. Not at all my reason for learning English

S. Sometimes my reason for learning English

C., Usually my reason for learning English

6, *D. Always my reason for learning English

J J"

j ~i~ i ,e Reasons for Learning English

A C 0 1. Learning English will help me to understand

Americans and their way of life.

A B C D" 2. Learning English will help me to make good

friends among Americans.

A B C D 3. Learning English will help me to think and

act like Americans.

A B C 0 . Learning English will help me meet and

talk to more different kinds of people.

* A B C 0 5. Learning English will be useful in getting

a Job.

A B C D 6, I need to learn English. because people respect

you more If you know at least two languages.

A B C D 7. 1 feel that no one Is really educated unless

they know at least two languages.

A B C D 8. I need to learn English in order to finish

high school.

THANK YOU

, ', ...., ... " ,. ' * ...,. W. . P * .3 . 3 • , . -. .-. . -w. .. , .' ." *t.. v .". -".."."".".-..".. ..... '."....
cm 0

4) 04U v 2~f 04~i.3

-; a' 1; Q. 

4) a r -U N a 0 a0c

*~ 2J .3 1s - -

.4 )at cm s m M Ma (AU u 0E ~ nv0 0L. 0L *l LE Au 00

*m 0C 0 U 3. w - U) 

LI01 610 -Z1 C a E Em -m 0 m - - =mCm m C -~ a) 00 moa -> - > o IA~CM C3- C1 1 0M ~ Cb0-C1 8- L.C - =U f-C C 0

m cnI -nI =U 0L CL mUO vuC

*- - L # .

C ) u CA 0 -c LC 01. .N 

mU 61 =U 61 MC-)= CL 0 ~ UCCLE 0.- . =61- 06E -. 0 >E E

M i3 M -0 C0

611 EU 0n CEL CUC um 0i 4) . 0 610 0.. I4M

41 4-0 61 4C 0 .c( Lu a C1 -C 06 0.0 0.0

'aC0.- L M LE61 L > L. E

61 0 mEU0IA 0cIA04 L .- 44 LU 1A 0 .%b6 LI .C m 6 Im 0LI W. LL 0.L EU LC 4) 'm cmm :LI) EU 06 mC1~LE6 A*4 L1 06- v'O .9 . L4 VC ~ V -- g

C 4-0 -. CEU IA InC c0 0 InA4)4 L. - Vj 616 at k1C 0 L C6 M C> =16 

u CL VC c 0 0 ~ Ca Cm 4 6 * 00 04- Cm Ch6 - A1 4> L - 0- L0

61> E EUU=6. 01 -. CU4EE .- 6 04 -0 41I~ Z LI-O E0 "~ EU m = c cm um cm1 m c6 1~ m C CC L L c1E c ca LI 0.E' MU 0EL A .

'A ICC - 06 061 LI6 01 0 E4a -001 £0 61- 4 M~ .

-I~ C 01I0 cU~ 010 CL4L.EU

6- 00 CCA CC CEU L.0 C 4zi u cCm -0E T 41 -- EU

EUz C - 1 CC 4) -- 0a . IC

0116 EUEU L. 0- 00 C1

= uE -EU6 CC mL LICMC o 6C 61 .C. 66

wI- mI -0 61 L CE. m L41 EUL C: 6UL

'aj 4a Ad 4.'

01 C CA C) C)

6 101 01 01 01 41 4a

"~~~c CC C' A

IA4. 614 6 1A

416V 4-' 01 61

1 EU # m.0 61 - 01 4 c 'V 61C - EU EUL'

j 4- & 46 IC 4A 4A 01 - CEU - - - - "00
LA

4V 0v. r-. mw

t; 00 > > 0C 0C N0t 

(D c C 46 -Z Z 4)C 4 N4

IA an M #

4) mU

0 .0

4)C C- - Sc ci 4)C) C

c-C I 1- M m 0

4'EU CJ "U "E 41Oao A 06 0A O 06 06 -0L c -

0 0.c 4 2 -m C

CE u 4- c CA 5)"o) b) m- c U UL ___0____t) )

W 0 Ln u 1 0A JA C. 0 I - I nI 0A C -; C 4)- 0. 41~ EU 1-- .E 0 4)> -C C" 0- -ML (A %

C UA 0 0 C. - A 0 0)L CL C) 4) -6 N

*~~4 -) E-4)OC * '-E M' 2a C) :1- I 41) 4) A 0 0 C .O cc 41 Cc 4-a C InC EU-U E -L 4) 1- 0C.J)CI l I *6 M * 60 :I u LA V 0 1A N4 C. -D 0- - 0) LC 6m -6 * 4)*

4)0 ~''In-- ~ > 

C~~F 6 * -- 4E -L

- CL -00 -U 0 )0 - L 00~- -U4 "C-* 3U 

SiC . 4 4) m 3 0 NE 

>.l i.J -W C u) y)~ c. 14

4)l UA ( c 60v 0 I

JA - L 4) = L 4) -4 a: E

>--

LEU COcmu

0LA00N Z lLA 

4) a~4 0 6r - M4

0 0 0i >

*~. AO V0 

EU- 0.~A 3CC C 
0 C0

X >U

cm o M5

Sii 4)

"0- .

-

Um -

C M~ C m 0

0i .- C6

CA C L. 4j 00

0i 0 - cmI 1

-) m-C 0

&A SCW~ 0 4).

L.-CO ' ~ =- 

-t) M 4A I.0

- L in'.

o Si

-S0 V 410 

I- V 

c 0

0-

In c 1A

Si .. iOm0

0 0

.2 V

C ~0 >

.bJ 4-

0 u 41
APPENDIX K

List of Vocabulary, Definitions, and

Method of Presentation

(All Groups)
LIST OF VOCABULARY WORDS

USED IN TRAINING

Word' Definition 1 Method of Presentation

appliances Appliances are electric machines used in Slide

the kitchen.

*awkward You are awkward when you are clumsy and find Definition

it hard to play sports or dance.

baker A person who makes bread and sells it. Definition

basin A basin is a bowl with sloping sides Definition

that is usually used for holding water

for washing.

blizzard A blizzard is when it snows very hard and Definition

the wind blows.

blossoms Blossoms are young flowers. Slide

*brick A clay block used in making a building Slide

or a wall.

bruise The dark spot that appears on your skin Definition

where you have been hurt.

bulb A bulb is a round object used to give .Slide

electric light.

cart A cart is a small object with wheels Definition

and is used to hold or move things.

cheapskate A cheapskate is someone who does not like Defin*,tion

to spend money.

cork A cork is a stopper for a bottle. Slide

*cough A sound you make with your lungs and Definition

m throat when you have a cold.

cradle A cradle is a small bed that a baby Definition

sleeps in.

caeAcrate is a large box made of wood. Definition

cuff A cuff is the part of the shirt or pants leg Definition

that is folded at the end.

K
LIST OF VOCABULARY WORDS

USED IN TRAINING

Word DefinitionMehdf

*cufflinks Cufflinks are buttons you put on shirts Slide

every time you wear thoen.

*cupboard A cupboard is where you keep dishes, Slide

glasses, or food.

curb The concrete edge where the street meets Slide

the side of the road.

*cushion A cushion is a pillow or soft pad that you sit Slide

on, kneel on, or put your head on.

daffodil A yellow flower with a large petal like a Slide

trumpet.

dam A dam is a wall that men build to hold back Slide

moving water such as a river.

-dock A dock is where boats are tied up. Slide

dove A dove is a white bird that makes a Slide

cooing sound.

downpour A downpour is when it rains very, very hard. Definition

drizzle A drizzle is when rain is very fine and light. Definition.

drown When a person suffocates or dies in the Definition

water, he drowns.

fangs Fangs are the long pointed teeth that Definition

K animals have in the front of their mouths.

farmer A person whose job is to grow food and Definition

take care of animals.

fisherman A person who catches fish out of a river Definition

or the sea.

flock A flock is a group of birds or animals. Slide

fur The hair of an animal. Slide

gems Gems are jewels such as diamonds or Slide

amethysts.

K

..........~ -4.
LIST OF VOCABULARY WORDS

USED IN TRAINING

Method of

Wo rd Definition Presentation_

hairpin A pin to hold the hair in place. Slide

-headlights Headlights are the lights on the front Slide

of the car.

hedge A hedge is a row of bushes or short trees. Slide

hose A hose is a tube that carries water. Slide

*ivy A vine or plant that climbs. Slide

-kerchief A kerchief is a square of cloth used as Slide

a head covering or worn around the neck.

-kettle A kettle is used for boiling water. Slide

*knot A knot is the tied part of a string. Slide

lapel A lapel is the part of the coat near the Definition

shoulder that is turned back.

leak When you have a leak in your roof, water Definition

comes in when it rains.

*limp When you walk unevenly, you limp. Definition

*mixer A mixer is a machine in the kitchen Slide

that stirs food.

mug A mug is a large round cup for drinking. Slide

nod When someone moves his head down. Definition

*oar A flat piece of wood used to make a boat Slide

move.

path A path is a narrow place to walk. Slide

pickle A pickle is green and tastes of vinegar. Slide

*plumber A plumber is a person whose job is to fix Definition

things like sinks, pipes, and toilets.

propeller Part of a boat or airplane that has arms Slide

which turn around like a fan.

K
411 ip WN

LIST OF VOCABULARY WORDS

USED IN TRAINING

Word efiniion ethod of * Wod DfiniionPresentation

*quarrel When two people disagree or fight with Definition

words, they quarrel.

rattle A rattle is a baby's toy that makes a noise Slide

when you shake it.

rope A thick cord used to tie large or heavy Slide

objects.

*shade When you are in the shade, it is when you are Definition

protected from direct sunlight.

shore The land along the edge of the sea or a lake. Slide

*sill A sill is the flat piece of wood at the Slide

bottom of a window.

skillJet A skillet is used for frying food. Slide

sniff Little noises you make with your nose. Definition

stripe A stripe is a design of straight lines Slide

made of different colors.

threshold The threshold of a house is part of its Definition

entrance.

tweezers Small instruments used to pick up very small Slide

objects or pull out hairs.

twig A small, thin branch of a tree. Slide

wave A wave is made when the water comes up Slide

or goes down on the ocean or on a lake.

web A web is made by a spider in order to catch Slide

flies.

widow A widow is a woman whose husband has died. Definition

pwiper A wiper is something on cars that is used Slide

to clean the rain from the windshield.

IK
LIST OF VOCABULARY WORDS

USED IN TRAINING

Method of

* Word Definition Peetto

worm A worm is a small animal that lives in Slide

the ground and looks like a very small snake.

*wrinkle Wrinkles are the lines you get on your Definition

face when you grow older.

'aK
APPENDIX L

Teacher's Script for Instruction

in

Imagery and Grouping

(Netacognitive and Cognitive Groups)

5-

-S

I-:

p.

U.
SERIES: DAY 4

ACTIVITY: 2 VOCABULARY INSTRUCTIONS

TIME: 15 Minutes

GROUP: METACOGNITIVE/COGNITIVE

SCRIPT:

One way to learn vocabulary Is to group-together words or expressions

that have something in commnon. For example, here is a list with the

words table, dishes, sink, refrigerator. Do you know these words?

(if not, T explains). You know that they are things found in the kitchen

so you can group them under the title "kitchen" like this: (T writes on

board). The words swim, run, throw and jump also appear on the list and you

* can group them together under what title? (T elicits from class) What do

they have in commnon? (That's right) They are actions found in sports.

Which. other words might go together that are on the list? What title can

* you give these groups? (Use board) (Third list that appears on hand out).

O.K. Fine. Now how will we remember the groups of words and their

* meanings? Well, one way is to close your eyes and imagine a kitchen.

Now everyone close (their) eyes and Imagine a kitchen. It can be any

* kitchen. The kitchen at home, or a your grandparents' house or a friend's

kitchen. Can you see it? Now look at the words for a few seconds and close

your eysagain. Imagine the table (pause), the sink (pause) and now the

dishes in the sink (pause), then the refrigerator (pause). Can you see

* each thing clearly? What color are they? (Elicit) Describe your kitchen

(Juan). O.K.

Now you have two ways of studying a long list of words. One is to group

* the words that have something in commnon and the other is to imagine these

* objects together in some place or situation. Now let's imagine the other

* set. Swim, run, jump, and throw. Let's imagine the Olympic Games. Close

your eyes and try to imagine a person swimmning in a large swimmning pool.

- Now imagine a track with someone running. Now a person jumping far. Now

* a person throwing a ball. Now picture each person again. (Erase words

from blackboard) Now try to remember what words were in that group. Use

the picture in your mind to help you remember. (Elicit words) Which

.4 words were in the first group? (Elicit) What was the title? (If time,

elicit other groups and titles).

* L
VOCABULARY

Trial List of Words

table

dishes

sink

refrigerator

swi1m

run

.4 th row

jump

GROUP 1 GROUP 2

- base

bank

money

bat

account

homerun

check TITLE 1 TITLE 2

foul

4 team

savings

1~L
*" SERIES: DAY 4

ACTIVITY: 3 VOCABULARY PRESENTATION

-" TIME: 10 Minutes

GROUP: HETACOGN IT IE/COGN IT IVE

SCRIPT:

O.K. Now we'll have 20 new words. L will give you a little booklet of

words with. their defTnitions like thlts one. You will tear off a word as

" I read it and put a little glue on the 6ack like this. Then you

immediately put the word Unto one of the groups that you have on thrs page

CT hands out grouping page and booklets.

(Read titles.

•.After you have grouped the words you have only L minutes to study the

groups. Remember to imag[ne the words In each. group just as we did

earlier with the groups. Try to th.lnk. of charactertstics that the words

share with each, other to group the words. Then think of the pictures

created by each word. Put each word Into one group only. Are there any

questions? Let's begrn.

(After presentation T circulates to make sure that Ss are studying groups

and imagining items.

L
• ~- 4 .. .. --. . - - . - . - " -- . -- " - J . -, - - -

' 

- .

APPENDIX H

Teacher's Script for Instruction

in Self-Evaluation

(Metacogni tive Group)

'o

oS S S' * .
SERIES: DAY 4

ACTI'IITY: 6 VOCABULARY -SELF EVALUATION JOURNALS

T IME.: 2 Minutes

GROUP: METACOGNITIVE

SCRIPT:

Now, as we go through each vocabulary exercise, I will give you a minute

or two to write something in your journals. (T hands out journals).

* In these Journals you are to make notes on your progress. You can write

down anything you want to write regarding your progress in learning the

vocabulary.

Today, I would like you to answer these questions in your journals.

(Put on board).

* 1. Write down the number of words that you learned today

* 2. Write the words that were difficult for you

3. Write the method you used to remember the words (grouping,

pictures, etc.)

4. Write one sentence about your progress in vocabulary.

Be sure that you write about your progress in the area of vocabulary.

I will give you a minute or so each day after you have completed the

short vocabulary quiz. The quizzes are for you to evaluate your own

progress only.

M
APPENDIX N

Teacher's Script for Control Group Instruction

in Vocabulary

Vocabulary Questions for Control Group
DAY 4

ACTIVITY: Vocabulary Instruction

- TIME: 3 minutes

* GROUP: Control

Today we are going to begin the third activity we will do together. This will

• be vocabulary. I want to give you a list of new words, words you don't know.

I will show you a picture of some of the words. I will also tell you what some

of the words mean. You are to learn them. You can learn them in any way you

* want. Do whatever you usually do to learn new words. I'm going to walk around

and see what you do. I may ask you questions because I am interested in how

you learn new words. The important thing Is to be natural. Do whatever you

normally do to learn vocabulary. Remember that what you tell us about learning

English is very useful information. You are giving us new information that will

help other students like yourselves.

O.K. Now for the new words. Have you ever heard the saying that "a picture is

worth a thousand words?" I am going to show you some slides, or pictures, of - what these words represent. However, some of the words do not have a picture.

For these words, I will tell you what they mean. I will also give you a list

of the words so you can see the definitions and how the words are spelled.

Then you will have several minutes to study the words and learn their meanings.

You can learn the words in whatever way you want. I am not going to tell you

how to learn them. I want to see how you learn new words. So remember, be

natural and learn them as you usually learn new words. You can do anything

you want.

Afterwards, I will give you a quiz to see if you learned the words. Ready to

begin?

N
DAY 4

*ACTIVITY: Questions on vocabulary

TIME: 5 minutes

GROUP: Control

Now I want to ask you some questions. Since I cannot talk to each of you

* individually -- there is not enough time -- I'd like you to answer these questions

in writing. These questions are about learning vocabulary words in English.

* I want you to answer these questions carefully.

Think about how you learn vocabulary. Think about what Is hard to learn and

what is easy. These are not yes or no questions, they are questions you have

to answer with a sentence or two. Don't worry about spelling or grammar --

* I'm interested in what you think and what Is true for you. In other words,

your ideas. This is not a quiz or test. I just want to know more about how

* you learn new words in English.

O.K. Here are the questions. If you don't understand any words, please ask

me and I'll explain. (T hands out list of questions)

(WITH REMAINING TIME YOU CAN HAVE CONTROL GROUP WORK ON THE READING EXERCISES)

-4N

wr '
VOCABULARY

DAY 4

-:Name: __________ ____School: ____________

Date: ____________ __

Please complete thi following sentences.

1. When I first heard today's vocabulary words, I tried to understand them

* by

2. In order to remember these new words, I _________________

3. The way I studied for today's vocabulary test was to ___________

4t. In the future, I plan to remember today's new vocabulary words by _____

5.Which vocabulary. words were easiest to remember, the ones with the pictures or

the ones with definitions?

Why?
APPENDrX 0

Teacher's Script for Instruction

in

Selective Attention, Note-taking, and Cooperation

(Metacogni tive Group)

L%
7 , - ±, .p 4r : . d W & W7.- -,

SERIES: Day 2.

ACTIVITY: 2 LISTENING AND NOTETAKING INSTRUCTION

TIME: 20 Minutes

GROUP: METACOGNMtVE

SCRIPT:

The next activity Involves learning ways to listen and understand

a lecture. In the days that you are here you will listen to

four lectures on four different topics. One of the lectures will

be on an animal, another on a current social Issue, one on

geography, and finally one on the life of an Interesting person.

We have chosen topics that are unrelated or different to give

you an opportunity to apply the new skills in different situations.

This way, you can use these skills in your science class, your

chemistry class, your history class, and in your literature

(English) classes.

Before listening to a short lecture, however, we will talk about

taking notes (and important things to pay attention to when you

hear a lecture In school or watch a T.V. program),

First, I'll review the reasons why we take notes, second, tell you

about one way you can take notes, third, explain how to take

notes (and finally, how to recognize parts of a lecture).

Now, notetaking is very useful for two reasons. One is that it

helps you follow and actively organize what you hear. While you

are listening to a lecture you decide which points are important

points and which points are details or examples, The second

reason is that notetaking helps you remember what was said AFTER

the lecture is over. So notetaking is important for (1)

understanding a lecture, and (2) remembering a lecture.

O.K. Here is one way to take notes. One way is to list things

as you hear them. This is a list. This is just a list of points.

We don't know which points are the important points, which are

general and which are specific (see following page),

Now look at this (handout). This is a T-List. Notice a big T on

the paper. What Is on the left side? (Elicit) Right. The

important or main points. What is on the right side? (Elicit)

Right. The generalizations or examples, and the details.

Now, how do you take notes? (Elicit) O.K. First, you concentrate

on the main ideas, With the T-List method, where do you write

the main ideas? Right. On the left. Why do you want to

0
* LIST

TAKING NOTES

it's useful

understand and remember lecture

2 ways to take notes

lists and outlines

how to take notes

concentrate on principle ideas

show importance

write short phrases

reorganize notes

how to organize

use parts of lecture

introduction

main body

points repeated

examples

conclusion

summnary

implications

special phrases that indicate parts of lecture

% 1
T LIST

TAKING NOTES

useful ness understand, -remember lecture

ways to take notes lists

outlines

how to take notes get main ideas

show importance of parts

write short phrases

reorganize notes afte lecture
ACTIVITY 2 page 2

separate the main ideas? Right, You can Indicate the relative

importance of parts of the lecture, This helps you organize your

*. thoughts, Now. This brings us to the third potnt, Do you

write everything that the lecturer says? No, You write short

phrases in your own words, or Just ENOUGH to help you remember

what was said, tf you write too much you miss the next thing

that the person says. If you write too little, you wonkt remember

what was said, So, remember to write short phrases, (Here write

whole sentences on board and elicit from class key items--

erase that rest to illustrate what key words are.)

Let's say that you don't have time to indicate Important points

and you write a list of facts from the lecture, what do you do

with this list? (Elicit) O.K. You can reorganize the facts so

that the main points are on the left and the details and examples

are on the right, Somtimes its difficult to decide which points

are the main points during the lecture. In this case you have

to take a few minute at after the lecture to decide which

points are important, You might want to add your own interpretations of some points as well.

So, to summarize how to take notes, (1) you concentrate on main

ideas, (2) try to show the relative importance of points by

the T-List method, (3) write short clear phrases or key words

and (4) reorganize your notes right after the lecture.

Now we come to the third important point about notetaking, How

do you recognize a main point? Well, you can listen for certain

expressions that signal or Indicate to you that this is a main

point.

Now, an important thing about lectures is that there are expressions

you can listen for that will tell you when something is a main

" . point, or an example, or a detail. What are some of these expressions? (Elicit--list on board) Now here's a list of those

expressions, (T reads each on list--makes sure that students

understand each and how each expression signals a point.)

(With this, introduce parts of a lecture: introduction, body, and

conclusion.) So there is one thing to help you orqanize your notes.

You recognize expressions that indicate or signal main points

and details,

To summarize what I have said, notetaking is helpful for

understanding a lecture and for remembering a lecture. Two

possible ways of taking notes are (1) lists and (2) T-Lists.

The way to take notes is to (1) concentrate on main ideas, (2) show

the relative importance of parts, (3) write only key phrases

and words and (4) reorganize the notes after the lecture.

": 0
ACTIVITY 2 page 3

One way to organize notes Is to pay attention to phrases that -.signal main point*, details, and the structure of the lecture.

In conclusion, ft ts evident that notes that are well organized

will help you to understand and remember more of a lecture.

Not only do you have somethtng to look at to help you remember,

but you also are more familiar w-ith the material because you have

organized It yourself,

0

a .. o~
SERIES: Day 2

* ACTIVITY: 3 TRIAL LISTENING LECTURE

TIME: 5 minutes

GROUP: METACOGNtTIVE

SCRIPT:

Now that you know something about notetaking we're going to

practice by taking notes during a short lecture. The lecture is

five minutes long and ts about a famous river in another country,

What famous river do you know about? (Elicit) Do you know any

famous American rivers? CElicit) The river we're going to

hear about is the Thames River. Here is a practice T-List to help

you follow.

Now listen closely to the Instructions:

1. You are to follow the lecture by reading what is on the T-List

2. Fill in the blanks when you hear the missing Information

(T plays tape and gives students a minute to look over notes

after tape is over. T plays tape again and stops after

introduction, T elicits markers and main points and checks notes

asking individual students what they wrote into the blanks.

T supplies coaching as needed.)

Now that you have taken some notes, did you notice that It

helped you to understand and remember the main points? Now

without looking at your T-"ist, what were the three main points?

"* Can you remember any details? (Elicit)

Now in a few days you will listen to a lecture, takes notes,

and then have a short quiz to see how much you understand

and remember. You will be given a short quiz after you listen

to the lecture. These quizzes are for you to check your own

progress.

0

• m 

m

4 ., e o e . -. . • . • . .. . . - . . . . ° ° . . . . . . . . .
7.o

SERIES: DAY 2

ACTIVITY: 4 STUDY COOPERATtON

TIME: 5 Minutes

GROUP: METACOGNITYVE/COGNITtVE

SCRIPT:

Now you will study In small groups. I want you to compare your notes

and get as many fact* as you can on the lecture, Remember. you are

responsible for helptng each other to understand the lecture

as well as possible. Compare your notes for a few minutes

and discuss any points that you did not understand well, Then

look over your T-List for a few minutes before we take the listening

comprehension test. This time I will play the tape once more

before we take the test. You can check your notes against the

tape, See If your notes are accurate and If your Impressions

are correct. Remember to concentrate on separating the main

ideas and details, Listen for those special expressions to

help you decide which are main Ideas and which are details or

examples.

(REWIND TAPE)

LECTURE REPETITION (5 minutes)

STUDY COOPERATION (5 minutes)

LISTENING TEST (6 minutes)

I0

O

'S

I . . .- . -. ... ..- .. * -. . -* . ****... .-.- S . .* . . .- .....- .- . .
TEACHER KEY TO TRIAL LECTURE

THE RIVER'THAMES

Basic facts Location Southern England -(off

coast of Europe)

p Length 236 miles long

Usefulness Industry

- boats movin-g cargo (materials)

- ship Industry (clipper ships)-

Tourism

- boat races

- theater (cultural events)

Source of water (for 12 million I' peoplIe

Problems Control of flow

- system of weirs (to control water)

r - 1400*million gallons a da

Purity of water

- pollution from industry

- clean up program, fish appear again

0
."

APPENDIX P

List of Markers Used in Speaking Activities

(Metacognitiye rroup)

4.

.4.

4. 5 4 5° .. . . . - 5- . . .
NAM _ _ _

MARKERS

INTRODUCTION

To introduce-the topic of the report:

Today, I'm going to tell you about

I would like to tell you about

I would like to report on

This report is about

To summarize the points of the report in the introduction:

First, I'll tell you about.... Second,....

I will speak on three main points. They are...

First of all, I will report on.... Second,

BODY

To introduce main Points:

The first thing is... Another thing is...

The first important point is.... The second thing is ...

Now we come to the second important point...

This brings us to the second important point...

To introduce examples:

*For example, ... Another example is...

As an example,.....

* Let me give you an example...

For instance...

* CONCLUSION

To summarize the points of the report in the conclusion:

To conclude, I have covered the following points. They are..

In conclusion, I have spoken about...

To summarize, I have told you two important points about____

They are....
APPENDIX Q

Sam~ple Videotaped Lecture Script

(All Groups)
THE RIVER THAMES

Do you know what river is the longest and most famous river in the United States?

That's right. It's the Mississippi River which is 2,470 miles. long. Do you know

what the most famous river of England is? Well, today we're going to talk about

- the River Thames. Notice that it is spelled with a T-H-A, but it's pronounced

T-E-Ms. It isn't as long as the Mississippi, but It has a long and interesting

history.

- First I'll tell you some basic facts about the river, then, how it is used by

- the people, and finally some of the problems that have evolved around the river.

. The Thames River is located in southern England. England is located off the

west coast of Europe as you see here on the map. London, the capital, is

located here on the river. The river flows across southern England and is

236 miles: long.

Now. How is this river useful to the people of England? It is useful in at

least three ways. One Is that it is useful for industry, the second is that it

is useful for tourism and recreation or fun, and the third is that it supplies

75% of the water needed by 12 million people who live by the banks of the river.

The first use, industry, is characterized by boats that move valuable cargo or

materials needed by industries such as the car industry. There used to be a

ship industry as well which produced famous ships such as the clipper ships.

The second use, tourism, is evident in the number of visitors to ship races and

other tourist attractions located on the river. One of the attractions is the

famous London's Globe Theatre where Shakespeare held his plays.

-' a. . .
THE RIVER THAMES (continued)

The third use of the river is perhaps the most important -- water for the land

1 and people. The river supplies water for 12 million Inhabitants of the river

* basin.

* Now. The final point about this beautiful river Is that there are two problems

that exist. One is the control or flow or how much water is permitted to go

* past, and the other is the purity of the water or how clean the water is.

The flow of the river is controlled by a system of weirs or fences designed

* to stop or diminish the amount of water that goes by. Only 11400 gallons a day

* are allowed to flow to prevent flooding.

- The second probLem, the purity of the water, is a serious one. While the river

used to be a popular fishing area, it no longer is. Industries along the river

caused pollution of the water. However, after a cleaning project that began

in 1950, the fish are once more appearing. Here !s an 11-pound salmon caught*

in the river.

So, in summnary, the Thames River is located in southern England and is 236 miles

* long. It is used for industry, tourism, and as a source of water for 12 million

* people. There are two problems with the river. The first is the control of

flow and the second is the purity of the water. To solve these problems, the

* English have created a system of weirs to control water flow and a program to

clean the water. Still, the Thames continues to be one of the most beautiful

and interesting rivers of the world.
APPENDIX R

Sample T-List
* ~NAM_ _ _ _

T-LIST DAY 10 PT DATE

CAPTAIN COOK

(MAIN IDEAS) (DETAILS AND EXAMPLES)

o.

I

' l .4

. . . .. :
APPENDIX S

Daily Listening Tests

(All Groups)
(DAILY TEST 11)

Name: _____________Date:___________

* RIVER THAMES

* 1. Which number is closest to the length of the River Thames?

a. 2 500 miles

b. 1,000 miles

500 miles

250 miles

*2. The River Thames flows across:

a. Northern England

SSouthern England

c. Eastern England

d. Western England

3. The most important point of the story about the River Thames is

6The Thames is one of the most beautiful rivers in the world.

TeRiver Thames has many important uses hut it also has problems.

c. The River Thames was polluted by industries.

d. The River Thames is important for tourism.

4. Industrial pollution on the River Thames was very bad for

afishing.

6. tourism.

c. shipping

d. boat races.

5. The most important use of the Thames River is for

water for the land and people.

Sindustrial shipping.

c. recreation and tourism.

d. fishing for salmon.

6. A system of weirs is used on the Thames to

a. encourage tourism.

*b. clean the water.

Scontrol the flow of water

i.permit shipping.

S
7. Identify each of the following sentences as a main point or a detail

about the lecture on the River Thames. Mark one answer for each

sentence by circling the M for "Main Point" or D for "Detail".-

R.mcThmes ~~;h 43 a sourec of t. item eliminated I The Thames is useful for Industry.

c. Clipper ships used to be built on the Thames.

S
(DAILY TEST #2)

Name:__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

-. ~~~~Date:__________

PI GS

1. The most important idea of the story on pigs is that

C)Pigs are useful to us in a number of important ways.

~7Many different foods come from Digs.

c. Pigs are used in scientific studies.

d. Pigs can be ciood pets.

2. Pigs are used in France to hunt for truffles. A Truffle is a

a. Minor nuisance. ()Plant that can be eaten.

SLost horse.

d. French wine.

*3. The pig's anatomy is similar to that of man. The most Important

result of this is that pigs

a. Can become alcoholics.

b. Prevent humans from being burned.

Make good pets.

Are useful in treating human diseases.

4. Scientists sometimes give pigs vodka to make them drunk. The reason

they do this is that they

Swant to test the effects on the pig's heart.

try to find cures for humam alcoholism.

c. want to see how long it takes a pig to get drunk.

d. are trying to make the pig's feet pickled.

5. Different food products are processed from pigs. Processed means:

a. Seen

Given

6. OneCanned

. adeof the most valuable things scientists do with part of the pig is

a.help p;eople who cannot breathe.

b.help people with poor hearing.

c.help people who cannot drink.

help people with bad hearts.

S
7. Identify each of the following sentences as a main point or a detail

about the lecture on pigs. Mark one answer for each sentence by

circlling the M for "Main Point" or the D for "D-et-t1

K a. kigs are used to hunt for truffles. p b. Pig leather helps relieve the pain of burns. - 0--of the pi . n be used for food. item eliminated

L.O

,°,

.5* . . . S' 5 . . . *.-.I.°*5 ~ S
(DAILY TEST #3)

Name: Date:

HOUDINI

1. Houdini was best known as a famous escape artist, but he was also

an aviator and a movie actor. ..W. a politician and an actor.

c. a musician and a doctor.

d. a television actor and a magician.

2. Houdini was a sensation as a magician. This mean that he

a. Saw how to do tricks.

~W as very popular to many persons.

T" Made people disappear.

d. Sensed the importance of magic.

3. Houdini's most famous magic trick was

a. to take off a straitjacket.

b. to hold his breath under water for long periods.

(E ) to make an elephant disappear.

Y to use his toes like fingers.

4. To become famous as an escape artist like Houdini, you would have to

a. make an elephant disappear. , exercise and practice daily.

I!_escape from handcuffs.

d. become a man of mystory.

o 5. He made Quarters disappear and reapoear. The word reappear means:

a. Go away

Come back

Change

d. Get lost

* 6. He admired Robert Houdin so much that he changed his name to Houdini.

The vid "Tdmred means

a. watched

believed

Liked

Looked at

S
7. Identify each of the following sentences as a main point or a detail

about the lecture on Harry Houdini. Mark one answer for each sentence

by circling the M for "Main Point" or D for "Detail".

Sa. Houdini was famous for his escape tricks.

b. Houdini's real name was Erich Weiss.

c. Houdtnt escaped from the water torture cell in two minutes.

-

".

i

r:
(DAILY TEST #4.)

Name: ______________Date:_________

BILINGUAL EDUCATION

1. You could speak in favor of bilingual education because it

a. encourages cultural separation.

b. is practical for all schools.

Smay help students get better jobs.

maintains your home language.

2. In bilingual education in the United States, students study

a. English and their own language before studying sciences and math.

b. Sciences and math in their own language before learning English.

c. English first and later sciences and math through their own language.

English while at the same time studying sciences and math through

ther own language.

3. In other countries, what two languages would students use in bilingual

education?

(ithe main language of the country and the student's home language.

'bthe main language of the country and English.

c. the student's home language and English.

d. the two languages spoken by the student's parents.

4. Bilingual education is more practical for schools when all the students

who do not speak English

a. use different languages.

b. understand each other's languages.

use the same language at home.

d. are from different countries.

5. The United States does business with many countries. Because of this,

you could say that

a. bilingual students should only study Business.

5)bilingual people are needed for communication.

~.other countries should learn English.

d. our schools should teach Business in other languages.

6. Which sentence explains k=j the main idea of the lecture on bilingual

education?

a. Bilinqual education is the best way to teach English. (5)There are arguments for and arguments against bilingual education.

'~"Bilingual education helps students keep up in subject areas.

d. Bilingual education does not teach English.

I. S
7. Identify each of the following sentences as a main point or a detail

* about the lecture on bilingual education. Mark one answer for each

*sentence by circling the J1 for "Main Pointu or the IL. for "Detail".

c~ia. There are three reasons why bilingual. education is good.

c . The United States does business with many countries.

M c. Bilingual education is not practical for some schools.

S
APPENDIX T

Teacher's Script for Instruction

in Speaking Strategies

(lKetacogni tive Group)
SERIES: Day 3

ACTIVITY: 2; SPEAKING INSTRUCTION -FUNCTIONAL PLANNING

TIME: 15 minutes

GROUP: METACOGN IT IVE

* SCRIPT:

Now we come to the speaking activity. In this activity you will learn:

1) how to prepare for an oral presentation

2) and how to work with a friend or family member to help you prepare.

This method of preparation will help you in school, at work, or in situations

where you have to speak such as making a school announcement, giving a short

oral presentation In class, or summnarizing Information for a friend.

* You will prepare and present a short oral presentation on a familiar topic.

(Hand out TOPIC LIST here and have a student select a topic. Then elicit the

following)

O.K. If you want to give a short oral presentation, what do you have to do?

(Elicit one or two ideas)

O.K. Organize your ideas. How will you organize your ideas? What will you

begin with? O.K. The introduction. How do you tell people what the report

is about? After the introduction? O.K. Elaboration of the main ideas. And

after that? Yes, the conclusion. O.K. Here you have some organization.

Now. What are the main Ideas that you want to mention? (Teacher lists on

board.) O.K. This is the essential part of the introduction. Now, how do

we introduce the subject of the report? (Elicit -- write on board with student

suggestions edited to grammatical and appropriate English with no overt correction.

T may elicit introductory phrase such as: I will speak on, this paper is about,

etc. If Ss have no suggestions-- T goes on to main body.)

O.K. How about the main points or main ideas? How do you want to introduce

them? (Elicit-- T writes student suggestions on board.) How about ending the

report? (Elicit--write on board-- make sure that Ss know which phrases introduce which section by drawing an obvious line between each set of phrases.)

(On board, T should have:)

INTRODUCTION: Introduce topic of report

Summarize main points

BODY: Introduce 1st point

-Example

Introduce 2nd point

-Example

IT
CONCLUSION: Signal end

Summarize points

(T hands out list.) Here is a list of markers to use in writing your report.

You can select the marker that you need for each part of report from this list.

Here is a form for writing your report. (T gives examples using marker list,

e.g., to introduce the topic of the report I can say: Today I want to tell you

about... That is what you can write in the first blank. T goes through several

more examples.)

P1

I

~i
APPENDIX U

Worksheet for Speech Preparation

CMetacogn iti ye Group)
NA____

DATE_________

INTRODUCTION

-~~ Introduce the topic of the report:___________________

* ~Summnarize the main points of the report:_________________

BODY

Introduce the first main point:_______ _______________

* ~Give one or two examples:_______________________

Introduce the second main point: _____________________

Give one or two examples:_______________________

* ~CONCLUSION: Introduce the conclusion and swumary of the report: _____

________________________________(then sunmmarize the points that you

- ~talked about)____________________________
°

APPENDIX V

Teacher's Script for Instruction

in Cooperation in Speaking Activities

(#etacognitive and Cognitive Groups)

.5

-i

* .. P pS,*
SERIES: Day 3

ACTIVITY: 4; PRACTICE I COOPERATION

TIME: 15 minutes

GROUP: METACOGNITIVE/COGNITIVE

- SCRIPT:

Before I assign the groups to practice your reports, I want to give you the

steps to follow for this practice:

1. One person in each group will practice. The other members will help that

person to produce the best report possible. Each member that is listening

will be assigned to listen for certain things In the report. (T hands

out QUESTIONS TO ANSWER.)

* 2. One person will be assigned to question A and another to question B and

another to question C. Some will be assigned to two questions to answer

if there are only 3 people on your team.

* 3. The person who is practicing the report will read the report once. Then

the team members will answer the questions that s/he asks. So, team members,

you must listen for certain things during the first practice of the report.

"" 4 I will collect your reports now and assign the people in each team. (T

collects reports and assigns groups. Then, addressing each group, each

person is assigned either to a specific question or to give the report.

The T hands back the report to the person practicing and indicates to

team members the questions that they are responsible for. T then circulates

to see that each team is following Instructions.)

I.

[1%

V
z,7L,

APPENDIX W

Speaking Cooperation Handouts

-a.

e acogn...ve *"- a an-*Cognitive Groups

* w .. A. d*
FOR THE PERSON REPORTING

QUESTIONS TO ASK YOUR TEAM

1. Did you understand everything I said? Were there any words that

-, were hard to understand? Which ones?

2. Could you hear me? Was I speaking too fast or too slow?

Was I speaking too softly or too loudly?

* 3. Was the report organized well?

Could you follow the ideas easily?

p-f

I 2'

S- "w