Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Autonomous learning in a CALL EFL classroom: an exploratory case study Vakhnenko, Yevheniy 2014

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
24-ubc_2014_spring_vakhnenko_yevheniy.pdf [ 883.47kB ]
Metadata
JSON: 24-1.0166872.json
JSON-LD: 24-1.0166872-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 24-1.0166872-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 24-1.0166872-rdf.json
Turtle: 24-1.0166872-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 24-1.0166872-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 24-1.0166872-source.json
Full Text
24-1.0166872-fulltext.txt
Citation
24-1.0166872.ris

Full Text

AUTONOMOUS LEARNING IN A CALL EFL CLASSROOM: AN EXPLORATORY CASE STUDY  by  Yevheniy Vakhnenko    A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF  MASTER OF ARTS  in  THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE AND POSTDOCTORAL STUDIES (Teaching English as a Second Language)   THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA (Vancouver)  March 2014 ? Yevheniy Vakhnenko, 2014 ii  Abstract The increasing use of both computers and the Internet in universities and other Higher Education institutions in recent decades has had widespread effects on the EFL education programs (Kim, 2008; Terrill, 2000). The appearance of new forms of digital media, online learning communities, science simulations and electronic software presents new learning opportunities for EFL learners, which do not require the constant intervention of a teacher or which can be pursued outside the framework of a formal educational institution (Reeder, 2012; Warschauer, 1996). Computer and internet technologies are in many ways driving self-directed approaches to learning. We are starting to see a change in our understanding of self-directed learning as a set of specific abilities to access and effectively employ different learning environments with technology playing an important facilitative and enhancing role. The focus of this study is materials analysis of a Self-Study Listening Project (SSLP), which was implemented in the context of CALL EFL class at a Japanese university. This study uses an exploratory case study approach to address its two questions: (1) is SSLP, as documented in the CALL-course syllabus, likely to promote autonomous learning inside and outside the classroom? And (2) is SSLP, as documented in the CALL-course syllabus, likely to promote the development of the EFL listening skills?  The materials analysis of SSLP revealed two main findings: (1) SSLP is likely to have impact on development of the interdependent autonomous learning skills of students; (2) SSLP is likely to have impact on development of the listening skills of students; a balanced strategy approach to listening instruction was taken in the course iii  of implementation of SSLP; top-down and bottom-up approaches to listening were utilized; the use of various audiovisual materials coincided with multiple cognitive, metacognitive, and socioaffective activities. There appears to be a small number of studies investigating the effectiveness of computer-based literacy tools in promoting autonomous learning and listening comprehension skills, among university EFL learners. This study makes a unique and valuable contribution to the understanding of such tools in promoting autonomous learning with the use of audiovisual materials.                iv  Preface I hereby declare that this submission is my own work and that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, it contains no material previously published or written by another person, nor material which has been accepted for the award of any other degree or diploma of the university or other institute of higher learning, except where due acknowledgment has been made in the text.  This study did not use any of student responses or require direct student participation and therefore is beyond the scope of UBC?s Behavioral Research Ethics guidelines. PGU?s curriculum materials investigated in the study were used with the permission of its creator, Professor Alan Bessette. The copy of an email message consenting to the use of the materials can be found in the Appendices (Appendix A).             v  Table of Contents Abstract .......................................................................................................................... ii Preface .......................................................................................................................... iv Table of Contents .......................................................................................................... v List of Figures .............................................................................................................. ix Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................... x Dedication ..................................................................................................................... xi Chapter 1: Introduction ................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................ 1 1.2 Background and Rationale ..................................................................................... 2 1.3 Statement of the Problem ...................................................................................... 4 1.4 Statement of the Purpose ...................................................................................... 5 1.5 Research Questions .............................................................................................. 6 1.6 Significance and Outcomes of the Study ............................................................... 6 1.7 Definition of Terms ................................................................................................. 7 Chapter 2: Relevant Theory and Research ............................................................... 11 2.1 Computer-assisted Language Learning (CALL) ................................................... 11 2.2 CALL: Historical Overview ................................................................................... 13 2.2.1 Behaviorist Phase of CALL ............................................................................ 14 2.2.2 Communicative Phase of CALL ..................................................................... 16 vi  2.2.3 Integrative Phase of CALL ............................................................................. 20 2.3 CALL and Autonomous Learning ......................................................................... 26 2.3.1 Zimmerman .................................................................................................... 27 2.3.2 Deci and Ryan ............................................................................................... 35 2.3.3 Flavell ............................................................................................................ 38 2.3.4 Cotterall ......................................................................................................... 40 2.3.4.1 Learner Goals ......................................................................................... 41 2.3.4.2 Language Learning Process ................................................................... 41 2.3.4.3 Real-world Tasks .................................................................................... 43 2.3.4.4 Learner Strategies .................................................................................. 43 2.3.4.5 Reflection on Learning ............................................................................ 44 2.3.5 Besette........................................................................................................... 45 2.4 CALL and Listening Instruction ............................................................................ 49 2.4.1 Listening Approaches .................................................................................... 50 2.4.2 Listening Strategies ....................................................................................... 50 2.5 CALL and Case Study Research ......................................................................... 51 2.5.1 Case Study Research in TESL ...................................................................... 53 2.5.2 Exploratory Case Study ................................................................................. 55 2.5.3 Materials Analysis .......................................................................................... 56 2.5.4 Materials Evaluation ...................................................................................... 62 vii  Chapter 3: Research Methods .................................................................................... 67 3.1 Participants .......................................................................................................... 67 3.2 Research Setting ................................................................................................. 67 3.3 Program of Study ................................................................................................. 69 3.4 Data Sources ....................................................................................................... 70 3.5 Data Analysis ....................................................................................................... 70 Chapter 4: Results and Discussion ........................................................................... 74 4.1 Research Question One....................................................................................... 74 4.1.1 Learner Goals ................................................................................................ 74 4.1.2 Language Learning Process .......................................................................... 78 4.1.3 Real-world Tasks ........................................................................................... 80 4.1.4 Learner Strategies ......................................................................................... 81 4.1.5 Reflection on Learning ................................................................................... 81 4.2 Research Question Two....................................................................................... 83 4.2.1 SSLP Listening Approaches .......................................................................... 83 4.2.1.1 Task 1 ..................................................................................................... 84 4.2.1.2 Task 2 ..................................................................................................... 86 4.2.1.3 Task 3 ..................................................................................................... 87 4.2.1.4 Task 4 ..................................................................................................... 90 4.2.2 SSLP Listening Strategies ............................................................................. 93 viii  4.2.2.1 Task 2 and Task 3 .................................................................................. 93 4.2.2.2 Task 4 ..................................................................................................... 94 4.3 Overall Summary of Findings ............................................................................... 95 Chapter 5: Conclusion and Implications ................................................................... 97 5.1 Limitations of the Study ........................................................................................ 97 5.2 Discussion of Findings, Implications and Recommendations ............................... 99 5.3 Contributions of the Study .................................................................................. 102 References ................................................................................................................. 105 Appendices ................................................................................................................ 123 Appendix A: Permission to Use Materials ................................................................ 123 Appendix B: Listening Self-study Project Explanation .............................................. 124 Appendix C: Listening Self-Study Project Resources .............................................. 127 Appendix D: Worksheet 1 ........................................................................................ 128 Appendix E: Worksheet 2......................................................................................... 132 Appendix F: Worksheet 3 ......................................................................................... 134 Appendix G: Self-Evaluation Sheet .......................................................................... 136 Appendix H: Self-study Listening Project Template ................................................. 138    ix  List of Figures Figure 1  Components of Self-Regulated Learning (Schraw, 2006) ........................... 30 Figure 2  Simplified model of the language learning process (Cotterall, 2000). .......... 42 Figure 3  Basic proceeding of qualitative content analysis (Kohlbacher, 2005). ......... 61 Figure 4  Simplified model of the language learning process (Cotterall, 2000). .......... 79                    x  Acknowledgements I offer my enduring gratitude to the faculty, staff and my fellow students at the Department of Language and Literacy Education at UBC, who have inspired me to continue my work in the field of TESOL. I would like to extend my sincere thanks to my supervisory committee of Dr. Kenneth Reeder, Dr. Ling Shi and Dr. Stephen Petrina who have been most helpful in shaping this research. I would like to say a special thank you to Dr. Kenneth Reeder, my supervisor for his unfailing support during my M.A. program at UBC. This study would not have materialized without his input, advice and guidance. Also, I am grateful to the Professor Alan Besette, for his kind assistance, support and encouragement through the course of my research. Last but not least to my friends, family and colleagues ? thank you for making my M.A. program a pleasant experience.         xi  Dedication To Dr. Kenneth Reeder, who has been an unfailing source of inspiration, cunning advice and constant support during my M.A. program at UBC.                1  Chapter 1: Introduction This introductory chapter presents the background, rationale and the purpose of the study. Sections of this chapter also include the research questions and significance of the study. 1.1 Introduction The increasing use of both computers and the Internet in universities and other Higher Education institutions has widespread effects on the EFL education programs around the world (Kim, 2008; Terrill, 2000). The appearance of new forms of digital media, online learning communities, science simulations and electronic software presents new learning opportunities for EFL learners, which do not require the constant intervention of a teacher or which can be pursued outside the framework of a formal educational institution (Reeder, 2012; Warschauer, 1996). Such new opportunities for an empowered, self-directed learning have considerably improved, and the level of interest is driven even further by the developments in mobile, tablet and smart phone technologies and the revolution in social networking (Yang, 2013). As a result of such rapid technological and educational changes, many EFL education programs have consistently incorporated computers and internet technologies in their curriculum. This made possible to approach language learning as the provision of a collection of possibilities available for both students and instructors, which have become more realistically feasible and methodologically easier to examine (Eison, 2010; Fisser, 2006). We are also starting to see a change in our understanding of self-directed learning as a set of specific abilities to access and effectively employ 2  independent learning environments with technology playing an important facilitative and enhancing role (Chapelle, 1999). 1.2 Background and Rationale Although the notion of autonomous learning existed long before digital computing and is found in the studies of the enlightenment philosophers, such as Kant (1785) and Mill (1859), a majority of scholars reference Henri Holec's Autonomy and Foreign Language Learning, the product of a study commissioned by the Council of Europe and first published in 1979, as the starting point for the work in the area of autonomous learning. After that study was published, the topic of autonomous learning has been attended my many language scholars and a significant body of literature bears testimony to wide-spread interest in this issue (Cotterall, 2000).  In later years, a number of theories were developed that dealt with the theoretical background of learner autonomy, and the role played by learner variables such as attitudes, beliefs and learner strategies (Cotterall, 2000). Among such theories is the self-determination theory (SDT) that closely connects learner psychology with intrinsic motivation, and assumes that autonomy is an innate basic psychological need (Deci & Ryan, 1985; Ryan & Deci, 2000) and self-regulated learning theory, which sprang from Bandura?s (1997) social-cognitive theory and postulates that learning is governed by a variety of interacting cognitive, metacognitive, and motivational components (Butler & Winne, 1995; Zimmerman, 2000). Many of these theories present various propositions to the causes and effects of learner motivation (Deci & Ryan, 1985; Flavell, 1979; Zimmerman, 1986); and suggest that there seems to be a strong correlation between the learner autonomy and motivation (Lyddon, 2011).  3  Even more so, various scholars in recent years have devoted their research to the study of motivation and de-motivation factors of EFL learners in the Japanese context. A large body of literature exists on this topic (Apple et al., 2013; Irie, 2003; Lockley & Promnitz-Hayashi, 2012; Lyddon, 2012). Studies such as by Usuki (2007) found that a significant language growth was shown by those students who had clear long-term goals, metacognitive awareness of their motivation and strategies for achieving them (as cited in Lyddon, 2011). Therefore, as Degen (2004) states ?apart from the ideas that autonomy is characteristic of a "western" cultural context and need not to be implemented into an East Asian or Japanese context, there are still some practical reasons why learner autonomy should be encouraged in the Japanese educational system, and especially in language classes at a university? (p. 8). To mention a few reasons (Degen, 2004, p. 7):  ? most language classes are not given by trained language teachers;  ? Japanese language teachers have only but limited communicative proficiency in the target language;  ? foreign language teachers are monolingual and cannot rely on their own experience as successful and efficient language learners;  ? grammar translation method is the most commonly used approach to language learning; ? number of language lessons at higher educational establishments is often not enough; ? large differences of students' level in class (no placement tests or streamlining); 4  ? obligation to earn too many credits (not enough time left to learn outside class); ? motivated students have to take classes together with unmotivated students who are only interested in credit acquisition. Given these factors, ?learner autonomy would seem to be what motivated students in the Japanese context need most, as autonomous learning itself is much more motivating than enforced and controlled learning. More autonomy and the ability of metacognitive reflection should give students a chance to reconsider their own learner socialization and to overcome their learned helplessness? (Degen, 2004, p. 7). 1.3 Statement of the Problem Since the mid-1990s, Japanese higher education has shown a slow but definite growth toward replacing traditional ?General English? courses with ones targeting specific disciplines or English for Specific Purposes (ESP; e.g.: 'English for Chemists') (Anthony, 1998; Lyddon, 2011). This happened due to the change of policies made by the Ministry of Education in 1994 that handed over control of university curriculums to the universities themselves (Anthony, 1998). However, as Lyddon (2011, 2012) contends, to effectively use a language for academic and professional purposes, students generally need a level of proficiency equivalent to a B2, identified as Independent User, on the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (Council of Europe, 2001, p. 24): Independent User. B2. Can understand the main ideas of complex text on both concrete and abstract topics, including technical discussions in his/her field of specialization. Can interact with a degree of fluency and spontaneity that makes 5  regular interaction with native speakers quite possible without strain for either party. Can produce clear, detailed text on a wide range of subjects and explain a viewpoint on a topical issue giving the advantages and disadvantages of various options.  However, as Lyddon (2011) further explains, since ?first-year university students in Japan respectively average only 228 and 184 in listening and reading (Educational Testing Service, 2010b) and 84.1 and 94.3 in speaking and writing (Educational Testing Service, 2010a)?, ?they would need an estimated 1,000 additional study hours to reach the given targets (Prolingua Executive Language Services, 2000), whereas most university learners receive only a fraction of this amount of time in class? (p. 1). Therefore, if students at Japanese universities are expected to achieve such advanced level of English, they will be required to ?supplement their in-class instruction with other learning opportunities, and in order to do so they need to become more autonomous in this regard? (Lyddon, 2011, p. 1). Based on this data, the focus of this study is a materials analysis of a Self-Study Listening Project (SSLP), which was implemented in the context of computer-assisted language learning (CALL) EFL class at a private Japanese university, to investigate if this educational activity is likely to enhance autonomous learning skills in its undergraduate students; as well as to investigate if SSLP tasks have impact on the development of listening skills. 1.4 Statement of the Purpose The main purpose of this study is to reflect on and evaluate the overall efficacy of the Self-Study Listening Project (SSLP), while suggesting ways of improving this specific educational activity. Furthermore, it is also hoped that the sufficient details of 6  the course context, objectives, organization, and implementation will provided so that higher educational institutions will have a framework of adapting this particular activity to their curricular. The specific objectives of this study are: (1) to investigate the efficacy of SSLP in promotion of autonomous learning, and (2) to investigate the efficacy of SSLP in development of listening skills. Following the findings of the study, implications and recommendations will also be discussed. 1.5 Research Questions The study was guided by the following questions: 1. Is SSLP, as documented in the CALL-course syllabus, likely to promote autonomous learning inside and outside the classroom? 2. Is SSLP, as documented in the CALL-course syllabus, likely to promote the development of the EFL listening skills? 1.6 Significance and Outcomes of the Study This study might provide valuable information to the development of CALL EFL as a complement to traditional teaching approaches. It is hoped that the study will contribute to a better understanding of the nature of CALL EFL. This study is also designed to investigate the development of listening comprehension skills, since the quality of the aural input, syllabus, instructional support and materials provided by the teacher are of utmost importance. Therefore, the researcher also hopes that the study will contribute to set up a feasible task model, as well as offer suggestions for classroom practices and policy making. 7  1.7 Definition of Terms Authentic materials ? are materials, both written and oral, created by highly proficient users of the target language for highly proficient users of the target language, and not created or edited expressly for language learners or language teaching purposes (Martinez, 2002). Computer-assisted instruction (CAI) - is an interactive instructional technique whereby a computer is used to present the instructional material and monitor the learning that takes place.CAI uses a combination of text, graphics, sound and video in enhancing the learning process. The computer has many purposes in the classroom, and it can be utilized to help a student in all areas of the curriculum. CAI refers to the use of the computer as a tool to facilitate and improve instruction.CAI programs use tutorials, drill and practice, simulation, and problem solving approaches to present topics, and they test the student's understanding. Computer-assisted language learning (CALL) ? is a search for and study of applications of the computer in language teaching and learning (Levy, 1997).In this study, CALL will refer to the use of computers, media that can be used with computers such as DVDs, and the Internet to learn or teach language (Besette, 2009). Digital literacy ? is an ability to effectively and critically navigate, evaluate and create information using a range of digital technologies. It requires one "to recognize and use that power, to manipulate and transform digital media, to distribute pervasively, and to easily adapt them to new forms" (Jenkins, 2009). English as a foreign language (EFL) - indicates the teaching of English in a non?English-speaking region. 8  EFL listening comprehension ? is a mental process that requires cognitive effort on the part of the listener such as interpreting the sounds, figuring out the meaning of the words, and activating the background knowledge of the target language (Abdalhamid, 2012). Learner autonomy (autonomous learning, self-directed learning) ? in this study, is defined as an educational approach that encourages learners to take charge of their own learning (Holec, 1979). It incorporates means of transferring responsibility for aspects of the language learning process (such as setting goals, selecting learning strategies, and evaluating progress) from the teacher to the learner (Cotterall, 2004). Natural language processing (NLP) - is a field of computer science, artificial intelligence, and linguistics concerned with the interactions between computers and human (natural) languages. As such, NLP is related to the area of human?computer interaction (Bird, 2009). Open source platform (OSP) - is a computer platform with its source code made available and licensed with a license in which the copyright holder provides the rights to study, change and distribute the software to anyone and for any purpose (St. Laurent, 2008). Personal learning environment - is a system that helps learners take control of and manage their own learning. This includes providing support for learners to set their own learning goals, manage their learning; managing both content and process communicate with others in the process of learning and thereby achieve learning goals. A PLE may be composed of one or more subsystems. It may be a desktop application, or composed of one or more web-based services (Harmelen, 2006). 9  Self-access facility ? is an educational facility designed for student learning that is at least partially, if not fully self-directed. Students have access to resources ranging from photocopied exercises with answer keys to computer software for language learning. The theory behind this style of learning is that students, especially foreign language students, learn better if they have a say in how they learn (Klassen et al., 1998). Simulation (game) ?is a game that attempts to copy various activities in "real life" in the form of a game for various purposes such as training, analysis, or prediction. Usually there are no strictly defined goals in the game, with players instead allowed to freely control a character (Jones, 1995). Virtual learning environment (VLE, or learning platform) - is an e-learning education system based on the web that models conventional in-person education by providing equivalent virtual access to classes, class content, tests, homework, grades, assessments, and other external resources such as academic or museum website links. It is also a social space where students and teacher can interact through threaded discussions or chat. It typically uses Web 2.0 tools for 2-way interaction, and includes a content management system (Weller, 2007). Virtual reality ? is a computer-simulated environment that can simulate physical presence in places in the real world or imagined worlds. Most current virtual reality environments are primarily visual experiences, displayed either on a computer screen or through special stereoscopic displays, but some simulations include additional sensory information, such as sound through speakers or headphones. 10  Visual cue - is a sensory cue received by the eye in the form of light and processed by the visual system during visual perception. Since the visual system is dominant in many species, especially humans, visual cues are a large source of information in how the world is perceived (Posner, 1976).          11  Chapter 2: Relevant Theory and Research This chapter reviews relevant research in the areas related to computer-assisted language learning (CALL), autonomous learning, EFL listening instruction and case study research. First some historical background information in the area of CALL is reviewed, followed by a section on autonomous learning and EFL listening instruction; a section about case study research in TESL, exploratory case study, materials analysis and materials evaluation conclude the chapter. 2.1 Computer-assisted Language Learning (CALL) In the modern information age, computer technologies have enabled new forms of interaction with cultural, linguistic and non-linguistic information, which has placed new demands on second language learners to develop digital literacy. As was stated by Warschauer (2000), ?new information technologies will transform notions of literacy, making online navigation and research, interpretation and authoring of hypermedia, and synchronous and asynchronous on-line communication critical skills for English as a second language learners? (p. 511). Alongside the traditional language skills, EFL learners need to develop facility to access, measure, analyze, and present digital information efficiently (Eshet, 2004; Kramsch & Anderson, 1999; Landow, 1992; Warschauer, 2009). On the institutional level, higher educational establishments make considerable investment efforts to set up computer labs, Virtual Learning Environments (VLEs), Personal Learning Environments (PLEs) (often viewed as strong alternatives to institutions? Learning Management Systems (LMSs, e.g.: Black Board)), Open Source platforms (e.g.: Second Life, Moodle, Manabu), and self-access facilities to enhance 12  educational experience of their students. Many institutions have also rearranged the delivery of language instruction to maximize the benefits of technology to connect learning to language use and skills beyond the classroom. And for that reason, an enormous amount of research has been carried out to explore the role of computer technology in the learning and teaching, and its impact in and beyond the school setting (Besette, 2009; Chapelle, 1999, 2001, 2002; Kenning & Kenning, 1983; Little, 1998; Muir-Herzig, 2003; Yang, 2013).  One example of an innovative blended learning and teaching approach used in the University of British Columbia (UBC) for instance is a flipped classroom (Ropchan & Stutt, 2013). In a flipped classroom, ?students first receive exposure to course content before class through instructional videos or other means and then they spend time in class deepening their understanding of that content through active learning exercises, activities, labs, and other practical applications? (Ropchan & Stutt, 2013).  This approach is also known as 'flip teaching', the 'inverted classroom', or 'reverse instruction'. In a flipped or inverted model, students experience what would have taken place in a traditional classroom, for example a content-based lecture, at home, using modern technology to assist with self-paced learning (Lage, Platt & Treglia, 2000). Students attend class having pre-prepared for the daily topic by watching/re-watching instructional videos, or other activities as assigned by the teacher. In class, the primary focus of the lesson is to assist students individually with concept-based questions for parts of the lesson they do not understand or need to master (Bergmann & Sams, 2012). 13  A significant portion of CALL-related research emphasizes the positive aspects of computer-assisted language learning on the learning experiences of the students. However, the learning experiences in CALL-endorsed environments are not always as effective (Hara & Kling, 1999). Some research reports that students choose to make only marginal use of various software components, or sometimes may use the software incorrectly (Kenning & Kenning, 1990; Morgan, 2003); language teachers may have resistance towards implementation and use of new technologies because of excessive preparation time, lack of salary benefits and intellectual property rights (Ansorge & Bendus, 2004; D?Silva & Reeder, 2005; O?Quinn & Corry, 2002); and institutional administration may be unable or unwilling to provide sufficient technical support and funding (Barnard et al, 2001; Bower, 2001). Nonetheless, the area of CALL research is moving forward and many instructors and institutions continue to develop programs, where CALL is incorporated as an important facilitative tool (Chapelle, 1999; Levy, 2002). 2.2 CALL: Historical Overview In 1960s, computer-assisted second language learning was occurring in audiovisual language labs on big mainframe computers (Burrus, 2009; Davies et al., 2005). According to researchers Adams, Morrison, and Reedy (1968), computer-assisted instruction (CAI) had ?the potential in its capability both to supervise student performance and to monitor, record, analyze, and summarize data about that performance? (p. 3). Among many researchers supporting the use of technology in education was Lindenau who stated that ?a blackboard and textbook system of 14  education in the age of microelectronics will inevitably promote detrimental and far-reaching consequences? (Lindenau, 1984, p. 119).  CALL-based pedagogy has undergone several historical phases in the past decades (Warschauer, 1996). Most of the changes have a direct mutual connection to the influential educational theories and pedagogical approaches that inspired teaching practice at each historical phase (Burrus, 2009). According to Warschauer (1996) and Warschauer and Healey (1998), there are three historical phases of CALL: behaviorist, communicative and integrative. 2.2.1 Behaviorist Phase of CALL The first pedagogical phase of CALL was behaviorist. This phase of CALL began in the 1950s, and was implemented in practice in the 1960s and 1970s. Behaviorist views of language learning and of language teaching were predominant in the 1940s and 1950s and were based on general theories of learning developed by psychologists such as Watson, Thorndike, Skinner and Dakin (Gohil, 2013). A key feature of CALL during this time was repetitive language drills. The programs were designed to teach through repetition and to check learners? responses to grammatical, vocabulary, or reading exercises and provide them with positive or negative reinforcement on their answers. According to Kern and Warschauer (2000), this was ?consistent with the structuralist approach, which emphasized that repeated drilling on the same materials was beneficial or even essential to learning? (p. 8). One of the most eminent programs characteristic of behaviorist CALL was Programmed Logic/Learning for Automated Teaching Operations (PLATO) (Beatty, 15  2003). PLATO started as the Stanford Language Project and was carried out under the supervision of Van Campen in the Slavic Languages Department who programmed instructional courseware. PLATO was fully developed in 1959 by the University of Illinois (Ahmad et al, 1985). Much of PLATO?s program was designed for teaching Russian using a grammar translation approach and incorporated grammar explanations, vocabulary and other tasks. The program had an ?intelligent? feature still used today (Shute & Psotka, 1994). PLATO provided a student with a question, which they answered and the computer gave feedback or helped until the student could correctly answer the question (Curtin, Clayton & Finch, 1972). Although the PLATO program is not around today, many other subsequent computer programs have adapted and continued to use the same rationale (Warschauer, 1996). The earliest CALL programs were subject to critical appraisal, and in the research by Olsen (1980) a number of problems were described in an effort to explain why some educational institutions would be reluctant to employ CALL. Among of these negative aspects were: the high cost of technology, the lack of technological support for both students and teachers, and the negative attitude of many teachers toward the integration of CALL in the curriculum (Burrus, 2009). This discontent with early CALL programs is what created the need for further scientific investigation and technological advancement. This dissatisfaction became a stimulus for many researchers to look for alternative solutions, and as a result the development was initiated towards what is modern day CALL (Burrus, 2009; Warschauer, 1996). 16  2.2.2 Communicative Phase of CALL The second pedagogical phase of CALL was communicative (sometimes also called cognitive) phase. In connection to a general rejection of behaviorist approaches in education and appearance of a new generation of CALL programs, the 1970s and 1980s began an era of communicative learning (Burrus, 2009; Gohil, 2013). Proponents of this learning approach felt that ?language drills did not provide an authentic form of language learning, and drills were replaced by paced readings, text reconstruction, and language games? (Burrus, 2009, p. 7). A communicative theory of learning regarded second language acquisition as building up of knowledge systems that can eventually be attained automatically for speaking and understanding (Lightbown & Spada, 1993), and language learners as becoming gradually able to use certain parts of their knowledge through experience and practice. Lightbrown and Spada (1993) state that the communicative theories of SLA ?used computer as a metaphor for the mind comparing language acquisition to the capacities of computers for storing, integrating and retrieving information? (as cited in Gohil, 2013, p. 43). The cognitive model for second language acquisition according to Lamy and Hampel (2007) is based on the ?input-process-output model of language acquisition, wherein input is the language the learner is exposed to and output is the language that the learner produces? (as cited in Gohil, 2013, p. 43). The idea of comprehensible input, which was developed by Krashen (1982), becomes very important for communicative theorists.  According to Krashen (1982), comprehensible input is characterized by being:  (a) understandable, (b) interesting and/or relevant to the learner, (c) not grammatically 17  sequenced, (d) provided in sufficient quantity. A computer can provide a high level of ?comprehensible input? by shifting agency to the learner (Beatty, 2003; Kern & Warschauer, 2000). Multimedia CALL programs satisfied all these criteria in line with cognitive views of learning by a wide range of media integrated into them, through sound, images, animation and video (Burrus, 2009). Besides comprehensible input, this generation of CALL programs provided a platform for interaction, by means of which learners can interact with text and negotiate meaning with peers or an instructor (Gohil, 2013). In this model, in a simulated environment multimedia environment which creates realistic contexts for language use and provides opportunities for problem-solving and hypothesis-testing, learners construct new knowledge through exploration of microworlds (Papert, 1980), by utilizing their existing knowledge to develop new understandings.  The landmark multimedia program characteristic of communicative CALL was ?A la rencontre de Philippe? (Furstenberg et al., 1993), developed by the Athena Language Learning Project at the M.I.T. Laboratory for Advanced Technology in the Humanities.  Philippe is an interactive program for intermediate and advanced French learners, which incorporated video, sound, graphics, and text, allowing learners to "walk around" and explore simulated environments by following street signs or floor plans. Filmed in Paris, the video footage creates a sense of realism, and the branching of the story lines maintains the player's interest. To help language learners understand the sometimes challenging spoken French, the program provides optional comprehension tools, such as transcriptions of all audio 18  segments and a glossary, as well as a video album that includes samples of many of the language functions one would teach in a communicative approach such as expressing feelings, saying hello and goodbye, and using gestures appropriately. Students can easily create their own custom video albums, which they store on their own computer diskettes. Typical tasks in Philippe are designed for written and spoken language output. The development of receptive, not productive, skills is pursued, while the goal is for learners to comprehend rapid, spoken colloquial Parisian French and interact with authentic documents (Warschauer & Kern, 2000, p. 9). Another example of a multimedia CALL program is the Longman English Interactive (LEI) online program, which was created by Longman Pearson Publishing. LEI is a four-skill web based courseware that enables students to access the materials from any computer and lets them work through the material at their own pace (Besette, 2009).   The courseware has four levels and the first two levels were used by first year CALL classes in 2008; the high-streamed class used Level 2 and the other classes used Level 1.  The levels are divided into three modules and there are five units in each module.  Each unit consists of two listening activities that are accompanied by video as well as grammar, vocabulary, speaking, pronunciation, and reading activities and a unit quiz.  In addition, there is a summary of the main grammar and vocabulary points and units have cultural explanations, e.g., the use of first names and titles in business contexts in America.  Instructions and help are available in nine languages including Japanese.  Finally, there is a 19  module test at the end of each module and a level test.  The language features that are covered and descriptions of the activities will not be discussed here; however, syllabuses of the software are available at the Longman website for the series (Rost, 2003c and 2003d) and more detailed descriptions are available in two reviews, Hufton (2005) and Taguchi and Schneider (2004). Longman English Interactive provides a direct link with and reinforcement of the Listening & Speaking classes since the Listening & Speaking classes use the textbooks LEI Activity and Resource Book (Rost, 2005a and 2005b) and LEI Communication Companion (Rost, 2003a and 2003b) that are based on the same syllabus. The materials and activities in the textbooks are not the same as in the LEI courseware though (Besette, 2009, p. 3).   LEI enables students to record their voices in free, semi-controlled, or controlled role-plays and play back the entire conversation, with their part and the character?s, and compare their part to the model (Biache, 2004). LEI can become ?a constructive class accompaniment? (Biache, 2004, p. 2), and can be accessed from home or any other place with the Internet connection (Besette, 2009). It also allows teachers to set assignments and monitor students? progress. From a study conducted by Jamieson, Chapelle and Preiss (2005) on validity and authenticity of LEI (specifically, its LEO (Longman English Online) 3 section) the program exhibited desirable qualities appropriate for two community college ESL classes, that were subjects of the study. ?The CALL material had good language learning potential, meaning focus, and learner fit, as well as having an excellent positive impact in this particular setting? (Jamieson, Chapelle & Preiss, 2005, p. 123). 20  However, although communicative generation of CALL was a considerable progress over first drill programs, by the early 90s, many educators felt that CALL was still falling short from its full potential (Kenning & Kenning, 1990; Pusack & Otto, 1990; R?schoff, 1993). Critics pointed out that the computer was being used in an ad hoc and disconnected fashion and thus was "making a greater contribution to marginal rather than to central elements" of the language teaching process (Kenning & Kenning, 1990, p. 90). Despite the apparent advantages of multimedia CALL, today's computer programs are not yet intelligent enough to be truly interactive. ?Although programs like Philippe put the learner in an active stance and provide an effective illusion of communicative interaction, the learner nevertheless acts in a principally consultative mode within a closed system, and does not engage in genuine negotiation of meaning? (Kern & Warschauer, 2000, p. 10).  Thus, the next challenge for CALL researchers and developers became the development of intelligent CALL programs, which require the computer to emulate the highly contextualized feedback and information that can be provided by humans. These CALL programs use Natural Language Processing (NLP) and hence are different from other CALL programs (Salaberry, 2001). This NLP processor is able to analyze human or natural language input, compare it to target language aspects and identify areas of need within the student. 2.2.3 Integrative Phase of CALL The final pedagogical phase of CALL was integrative. The generation of Integrative CALL programs began in the late 1980s and continues through today. The main characteristic of integrative CALL is the combination of computers and the Internet 21  to assist in language learning. Computer programs, social networking websites, email, and instant messengers are all inclusive of integrative CALL. The framework of the socio-cultural theory also known as ?Social Development Theory? is based on Vygotsky?s (1978) ideas about interaction and social aspects of learning. Extensions, elaborations, and refinements of sociocultural theory can be found in studies on activity theory (Chaiklin & Lave, 1993; Leontiev, 1981) and cultural-historical activity theory (Cole, 1996; Cole & Engestrom, 1994). Compared to the cognitive paradigm where interaction is seen as the means by which input is made available to the human mind or as an opportunity for producing output, in the socio-cultural context, mental functioning of the individual is derived from the specific structures and processes in their interactions with others (Gohil, 2013). Vygotsky stressed the importance of social interaction such as peer collaboration in developing cognition (Beatty, 2003).  ?In contrast to prevailing views of his time, in which learning was regarded as an external process and development an internal process, Vygotsky was concerned with the unity and interdependence of learning and development? (Scott, 2003). Vygotsky (1978) proposed:  Learning awakens a variety of internal developmental processes that are able to operate only when the child is interacting with people in his environment and with his peers?. learning is not development; however, properly organized learning results in mental development and sets in motion a variety of developmental processes that would be impossible apart from learning. Thus learning is a 22  necessary and universal aspect of the process of developing culturally organized, specifically human, psychological functions (Vygotsky, 1978, p. 90).  According to Vygotsky, a new approach to learning should be matched with the child's level of development and in support of this perspective Vygotsky (1978) introduced the construct of the zone of proximal development (ZPD). Learning within the ZPD depends on full social interaction; the psychological development and instruction are socially embedded. Very importantly, Vygotsky?s ZPD allowed educators to shift focus from teacher-fronted instruction to student-centered learning (Erben, Ban & Casta?eda, 2009).  From Vygotsky?s theoretical perspective, technology has the potential to mediate students? learning in a multitude of creative situations that leave space for variation and creativity and open up the potential for collaboration in many dynamic zones of proximal development (Erben, Ban & Casta?eda, 2009). Technology may be used as a vehicle for interactive human communication (Kern & Warschauer, 2000), and opportunities for language acquisition offered by technology may entail exposure to new language and engagement in collaboration that promotes negotiation of meaning (Beatty, 2003). One example of a program that belongs to integrative generation of CALL is the Reading Tutor, developed by Project LISTEN, Carnegie Mellon University. The Reading Tutor (RT) is an automated speech recognition software program that displays texts on the screen and listens to the oral reading of these texts from students and offers help when they have difficulty with texts. Using Carnegie Mellon?s Sphinx-II speech 23  recognizer to analyze students? oral reading, ?the RT intervenes when the reader makes mistakes, gets stuck, clicks for help, or is likely to encounter difficulty? (Project Listen, 2007).  The RT provides various levels of help. For instance, the student can click on the word and have it sounded out aloud. Sometimes, the RT also prompts the student to re-read the text. There is also help in the form of video clips that visually demonstrate to the student how to articulate parts of a word. The standard configuration of the RT consists of reading content designed for students from K-7. The features of the software including the user interface are intended to cater to elementary students. In its standard configuration the software promotes or demotes students through reading levels as they orally read the texts presented to them on screen. A unit of reading material in the RT usually ranges from a poem to short units of prose. These units are referred to as ?stories? despite the fact that many passages or units are non-fiction (D?Silva, 2011, p. 63).  ?Noticing errors? is crucial in language error correction and learning according to language acquisition research (Ellis, 2002; Iwabuchi & Fotos, 2004). The feedback provided by the RT promoted noticing errors effectively as the feedback was delivered in a ?subtle, imperfect and private? way with no public failures or distractions. ?Noticing errors? in the RT is done by failure to highlight incorrectly the read text. This signals that the program is waiting for improved input only if there is a major delay or error. Discourse flow is rarely interrupted, thus promoting fluency rather than 100% accuracy. Native English speaking children using the RT for 20 minutes/day made reading gains 24  equal to those in a comparison group who received 30 minutes/day of tutoring in oral reading by trained volunteers. The low English proficiency group made greater gains on most measures than the higher proficiency groups and native speakers, outgaining the three other groups on Word Identification and Passage Comprehension measures (Reeder et al, 2005). Another important example of a program that belongs to the integrative generation of CALL is Edubba, a multimedia program that was designed and developed by university-industry collaboration with the goals of supporting the development of content-based writing for academic purposes in learners who are at an intermediate level of English proficiency or above. The program provided a "fully implemented model of virtual reality (VR) and virtual world (VW) approaches to creating authentic content for language learning, [and] demonstrated the feasibility and educational promise of employing natural language processing to mediate authentic pedagogical tasks", and ?represented a starting point to demonstrate the affordances of VWs, autonomous exploration and technologically mediated linguistic interaction tools? according to its lead designer (Reeder, 2012, p. 176, 184).  Edubba is a simulated small city located on the west coast of North America, set in the near future, whose development is constrained by limited water resources. The city's leaders will hold a referendum in a month's time to poll views about the preferred approach to ensuring a sustainable water supply. Users are cast in the role of intern reporters for The Edubba Sun to investigate each proposal, and report to the Sun's readers. Its editorial board hopes thereby that Edubba's citizens will make informed choices in the referendum. Thus the virtual city of 25  Edubba becomes a place where writing - and critical thinking - take place for its users. The primary point of engagement with the program was through its natural language interface, in which users could query characters to obtain task-oriented as well as personal information about the character and their relationships with others in the VW (Reeder, 2012, p.182). The program design of Edubba involved three main elements: a virtual city that served as a context for the student-reporter's research; a distributed database of selected content; and, an NLP engine (or 'The Learning Engine'), which enabled interaction in English between learners and the program ? the most innovative element of Edubba. Reeder (2012) states the opinion that: On the basis of examination of the specific tasks embedded in Edubba's activities, that simulations offer unique affordances where by the 'world' is indeed imported into the language learning setting in ways that free exploration in cyberspace, or even field experiences in the community, cannot provide efficiently. And it is the availability of the VW, scaffolded with carefully designed tasks, in which working skills can be practiced in an enjoyable, exploratory way that allows good simulation software to meet many of the standards of high-quality task-based language learning and teaching. The incorporation of NLP features offer additional interactivity which moves CALL software from its earlier reliance on receptive skills, or at best, productive skills that are atomized and at worst, reduced to mouse-clicked multiple choice items, to fluent production opportunities in convincing contexts of language use for extra linguistic ends. Advanced speech recognition technology will in turn open up the opportunity to 26  mobilize equally compelling tasks for the development of spoken language (p.193). In recent decades, CALL has truly become mainstream, and while traditional language classes often utilize a passive approach to learning, CALL may provide students with the opportunity for a more direct and active learning (Burrus, 2009). CALL may allow language students to be more autonomous and empowered ?to choose when, how, and what they study? (Burrus, 2009, p. 20). Many of the opportunities provided to students, demonstrate genuine context, language based activities and materials in communicative and academic environments. While some students may not enjoy using technology to help them learn a language, there is substantial evidence of positive perceptions of CALL by students (Felix, 2005; Son, 2007). 2.3 CALL and Autonomous Learning The first question of this study, Is SSLP, as documented in the CALL-course syllabus, likely to promote autonomous learning outside the classroom, makes explicit use of the concept ?autonomous learning?. This section reviews relevant theoretical background and literature in this area. Although the notion of autonomous learning existed long before digital computing and is found in the studies of the enlightenment philosophers, such as Kant (1785) and Mill (1859), a majority of scholars reference Henri Holec's Autonomy and Foreign Language Learning, which was the product of a study commissioned by the Council of Europe and first published in 1979, as the starting point for the work in the area of autonomous learning. In that study, learner autonomy was defined by Holec (1981) as the ?ability to take charge of one?s own learning?, or responsibility for ?all 27  decisions concerning all aspects of one?s own learning?, which is not inborn but must be acquired by formal learning in a systematic way. After that seminal study made a landmark in the SLA scholarship, the topic of autonomous learning has been attended by a number of educators continuously highlighting the importance of incorporating principles of learner autonomy ? ?the ability to take charge of one?s own learning? (Holec, 1981) ? into their practice, as well as the importance of development of personal qualities in language learners that will enable them to become most effective in an environment characterized by rapid social and technological change. As a result of those scholarly endeavors, a number of theories were developed, which have contributed to the theoretical background of learner autonomy, and the role played by learner variables such as attitudes, beliefs and strategies (Cotterall, 2000). The most influential of those theories will be discussed next.  2.3.1 Zimmerman Self-regulated learning theory, which sprang from Bandura?s (1997) social-cognitive theory, contends that learning is governed by a variety of interacting cognitive, metacognitive, and motivational components (Butler & Winne, 1995; Zimmerman, 2000). According to Zimmerman (1989), self-regulation is defined as ''self-generated thoughts, feelings, and actions used to attain goals'' (p. 14), and refers to the degree individuals are ?metacognitively, motivationally and behaviorally active participants in their own learning process? (Zimmerman, 1986, p. 308). Bandura?s social-cognitive theory states that individuals learn to become self-regulated by proceeding through four levels of development: observational, imitative, self-controlled, and self-regulated (Schunk, 1996; Zimmerman, 2000). Observational 28  learning focuses on replicating others? novel behavior through observation and imitation and requires a social model; learning at the imitative level focuses on social guidance and feedback. Both of these levels emphasize a reliance on external social factors. As students develop they begin to rely increasingly on internal, self-regulatory skills. At the self-controlled level, students create ?internal standards for acceptable performance and become self-reinforcing via positive self-talk and feedback? (Toussi, 2012, p. 2365). At the self-regulatory level, individuals possess strong self-efficacy beliefs, the degree to which an individual possesses confidence in his or her capabilities to perform a specific task, as well as a large repertoire of cognitive strategies, which allow them to self-regulate their learning (Schraw, 2006). According to Zimmerman and Schunk (2011), self-regulated learning consists of three main components: cognition, metacognition, and motivation. The cognition component includes the skills and habits that are required to encode, memorize, and recall information; the metacognition component includes skills that enable learners to understand, control and monitor their comprehension; the motivation component surfaces the beliefs and attitudes that affect the use and development of both the cognitive and metacognitive skills (Schraw, 2006). Each of these three components is necessary, but not sufficient, for self-regulation. For example, those who possess cognitive skills but are not motivated to use them do not achieve at the same level of performance as individuals who possess skills and are motivated to use them (Zimmerman, 2000). In the same way, those who are motivated but do not possess the necessary cognitive and metacognitive skills may fail to achieve high levels of self-29  regulation. These three components of self-regulated learning can be further subdivided into the subcomponents (Figure 1).   30        Simple Strategies            Knowledge of Cognition                     Self-efficacy Problem Solving              Regulation of Cognition                     Epistemology Critical Thinking  Figure 1  Components of Self-Regulated Learning (Schraw, 2006)    Self-Regulated Learning Motivation Cognition Metacognition 31  Cognition The cognitive component of self-regulated learning refers to the actual cognitive strategies that students use to learn, remember, and understand the material (Corno & Mandinach, 1983; Pintrich & DeGroot, 1990). This component includes three general types of learning skills, which are referred to as cognitive strategies, problem solving strategies, and critical thinking skills (Schraw, 2006). One example of cognitive strategies in language learning is the use of repetition, organizing new language, summarizing meaning, guessing meaning from context, using imagery for memorization. All of these strategies involve deliberate manipulation of language to improve learning.  Problem solving strategies are more complex than cognitive strategies ?concepts tests, concept map, and Predict-Observe-Explain (P-O-E) are few examples of problem solving strategies. Explicit problem solving instruction may help students develop deeper levels of understanding of a course and improve students? performance (Eison, 2010). Critical thinking involves a variety of skills such as ?identifying the source of information, analyzing credibility of that source, reflecting on whether that information is consistent with one?s prior knowledge, and drawing conclusions based on critical thinking? (Linn, 2000, p. 781). Metacognition Metacognition is often defined as "thinking about thinking" and plays a critical role in ?overseeing and regulation of cognitive processes? (Livingston, 1997). Some research (Schraw, 2006; Schraw & Moshman, 1995) suggests that metacognition includes two main components, which are knowledge of cognition and regulation of cognition. Knowledge of cognition refers to knowledge about one?s cognitive processes, and is 32  considered to include three other subcomponents. Declarative knowledge includes ?knowledge about ourselves as learners and what factors influence our performance? (Schraw, 1997). For instance, a majority of adult learners know the limitations of their memory system and can plan accordingly. Procedural knowledge, or implicit knowledge in contrast, refers to knowledge about strategies and other procedures. For example, most adults possess ?a basic repertoire of useful strategies such as note-taking, slowing down for important information, skimming unimportant information, using mnemonics, summarizing main ideas, and periodic self-testing? (Schraw, 1997). Finally, conditional knowledge includes knowledge of why and when to use a particular strategy. Individuals with a high degree of conditional knowledge are better able to assess the demands of a specific learning situation and, in turn, select strategies that are most appropriate for that situation (Schraw, 1997).  Regulation of cognition involves the control of various cognitive strategies for learning, such as the use of deep processing strategies that result in better learning and performance and is considered to include at least three other components, planning, monitoring, and evaluation (Pintrich, 2000). Planning involves the selection of appropriate strategies and the allocation of resources and includes goal setting, activating relevant background knowledge, and budgeting time. Some research suggests (Schraw, 2006) that experts are more self-regulated compared to novices largely due to effective planning, particularly global planning, that occurs prior to beginning a task. Monitoring includes the self-testing skills necessary to control learning. Evaluation refers to appraising the products of one?s learning. A few examples include re-evaluating one?s goals, revising predictions, and consolidating intellectual gains. 33  Motivation The motivation component is defined as the process that initiates, guides and maintains goal-oriented behaviors and is considered to include two important subcomponents, consisting of self-efficacy and epistemological beliefs (Schraw et al., 2006). Self-efficacy is closely related to social cognitive theory, which examines humans' learning based on interactions between behaviors, beliefs, and environmental conditions (Bandura, 1986; Bayley, 2011) and is referred to as the degree to which an individual is confident that he or she can perform a specific task or accomplish a specific goal (Bandura, 1997). Self-efficacy is particularly important for self-regulated learning because it ?affects the extent to which learners engage and persist at challenging tasks? (Schraw, 2006, p. 115). Students with higher self-efficacy are more likely to engage in a difficult task and more likely to persist at a task even in the face of initial failures compared to low-efficacy students (Pajares, 1996). There are two main ways to increase students? self-efficacy. One is to use both expert and non-expert models in learning. The second is to provide as much informational feedback to students as possible. Feedback should indicate not only whether the skill was performed acceptably, but provide as much information as possible about how to improve subsequent performance. Given detailed informational feedback, performance and self-efficacy can increase even after students experience initial difficulty performing a skill (Schraw, 2006).  Epistemological beliefs are the beliefs about the origin and nature of knowledge. Schommer (1994) created a taxonomy of four beliefs she refers to as, (a) quick learning (i.e., something is learned immediately or not at all), (b) innate ability (i.e., learning is 34  constrained by native ability), (c) simple knowledge (i.e., most important ideas are really quite simple), and (d) certain knowledge (i.e., most important ideas do not change over time). Schommer-Aikins (2002) argued that each of these beliefs affects problem solving and critical thinking. In general, there is growing consensus that students and teachers differ with respect to epistemological worldviews, and that different worldviews shape instruction and student learning in different ways (Roth & Tobin, 2001). Self-regulated learning refers to learners? abilities to understand and control their learning environments. ?Self-regulated learning involves a combination of cognitive strategy use, metacognitive control, and motivational beliefs. Cognitive strategies take the form of simple, problem-solving and critical thinking strategies? (Schraw, 2006, p. 116). Metacognitive processing refers to knowledge and control of cognitive skills, and usually involves planning, monitoring, and evaluating of learning (Livingston, 1997). Finally, the motivational component refers to students? beliefs in their capacity to learn (Zimmerman, 2000). Motivation takes many forms including self-efficacy and personal epistemological beliefs. Each of these components is necessary, but not sufficient, for efficient learning. The role of metacognition is especially important because it ?enables individuals to monitor their current knowledge and skill levels, plan and allocate limited learning resources with optimal efficiency, and evaluate their current learning state? (Schraw, 2006, p. 116).  A number of researchers have argued that cognitive strategies and high motivation alone are insufficient for skilled self-regulation (Butler & Winne, 1995). It is believed that there are a number of ways that self-regulation can be increased in 35  EFL/ESL classrooms to improve learning. For instructors, it is important to remember that self-regulation can be taught, learned and controlled. 2.3.2 Deci and Ryan Ryan and Deci (2006) emphasized that autonomy differs from independence and used the synonym ?self-regulation? for autonomy. The self-determination theory (SDT) that draws on the studies of Deci and Ryan (Deci & Ryan, 1985; Ryan & Deci, 2000) closely connects learner psychology with intrinsic motivation and assumes that autonomy is an innate basic psychological need which has a universal role in learning. Self-Determination Theory (SDT) is a theory of human motivation ?based on the premise that human beings have high levels of intrinsic motivation from the earliest stages of life?, and that ?this may be fostered or undermined by social and contextual conditions" (Abbott, 2008). SDT proposes a broad framework for the study of human motivation, ?paying particular attention to autonomous motivation, controlled motivation, and amotivation as predictors of performance, relational, and well-being outcomes" (Deci & Ryan, 1985, p. 182). Over the past three decades SDT has evolved into a set of five mini-theories that share the organismic-dialectical meta-theory and  represent an approach based on the assumption that "people are active organisms, with evolved tendencies toward growing, mastering ambient challenges, and integrating new experiences into a coherent sense of self" (Deci & Ryan, 2000). These five mini-theories were developed from laboratory and field research to explain a set of motivation-related phenomena. Each of these theories deals with one aspect of motivation.  For instance, Cognitive Evaluation Theory (CET) concerns "how social contexts and interpersonal interaction either facilitate or undermine intrinsic motivation" (Ryan, 36  2009, p. 2). CET is defined as a precursor of self-determination theory and focuses on the distinction between intrinsic and extrinsic motivation (Deci, 1975; Vansteenkiste, Lens, & Deci, 2006). According to postulates of this theory, "when individuals experience intrinsic motivation, they engage in behaviors they perceive as inherently interesting, satisfying, gratifying, enjoyable, fulfilling, and absorbing. When individuals experience extrinsic motivation, they engage in behaviors merely because of the objective consequences they might attract, such as tangible rewards or praise. In contrast to extrinsic motivation, intrinsic motivation tends to enhance persistence, wellbeing, and creativity" (Moss, 2012). The second mini-theory, Organismic Integration Theory (OIT) describes "different forms of extrinsic motivation that vary in their relative autonomy, affecting both persistence and performance" (Ryan & Deci, 2009, p. 2). Extrinsic motivation is identified by Ryan and Deci (2009) as ?behavior that aims toward outcomes extrinsic to the behavior itself?. Extrinsic motivation includes: external regulation, introjection, identification, and integration. These subtypes of motivation are seen as ?falling along a continuum of internalization. The more internalized the extrinsic motivation the more autonomous the person will be when enacting the behaviors? (Deci & Ryan, 2011, p. 203).  The third mini theory Causality Orientations Theory (COT) ?describes individual differences in how people orient to different aspects of the environment in regulating behavior? (Deci, 2009, p. 3). According to COT, there are three causality orientations: an autonomy orientation, a control orientation and an impersonal orientation. ?the autonomy orientation in which persons act out of interest in and valuing of what is 37  occurring; the control orientation in which the focus is on rewards, gains, and approval; and the impersonal or amotivated orientation characterized by anxiety concerning competence? (Deci & Ryan, 1985). Basic Psychological Needs Theory (BPNT) elaborates on supports for psychological health and well-being in connection to motivation; and ?specifies the role of autonomy, competence, and relatedness satisfaction in facilitating and sustaining motivation, and the impact of intrinsic (e.g., health) and extrinsic (e.g., attractiveness) goals in physical activity? (Deci, 2009, p. 3). BPNT contends that ?psychological well-being and optimal functioning is predicated on autonomy, competence, and relatedness?, and ?contexts that support versus thwart these needs should invariantly impact wellness? (Deci & Ryan, 1985). Finally, Goal Contents Theory (GCT) the fifth mini-theory ?grows out of the distinctions between intrinsic and extrinsic goals and their impact on motivation and wellness? (Deci & Ryan, 2000). According to some research (Kasser & Ryan, 1996; Niemiec et al. 2009), materialism and other extrinsic goals such as financial success, appearance, and fame do not tend to enhance need satisfaction, and are perceived as irrelevant to fostering well-being. GCT contends that intrinsic goals such as community, close relationships, and personal growth are ?conducive to need satisfaction, and therefore facilitate health and wellness? (Deci, 2009, p. 2). In addition to formal theory development and contribution, SDT was applied in many domains such as education, organizations, sports and physical activity, religion, health and medicine, parenting, virtual environments and media, close relationships, psychotherapy and sustainability (Deci, 2009). ?Across these domains research has 38  looked at how controlling versus autonomy-supportive environments impact functioning and wellness, as well as performance and persistence. By focusing on the fundamental psychological tendencies toward intrinsic motivation and integration, SDT occupies a unique position in psychology, as it addresses not only the central questions of why people do what they do, but also the costs and benefits of various ways of socially regulating or promoting behavior? (Deci & Ryan, 2000). 2.3.3 Flavell The term "metacognition" is most often associated with John Flavell (1979, 1987), who implied that metacognition is intentional, conscious, foresighted, purposeful, and directed at accomplishing a goal or outcome and consists of both metacognitive knowledge and metacognitive experiences or regulation. Activities such as planning how to approach a given learning task, monitoring comprehension, and evaluating progress toward the completion of a task are metacognitive in nature. Because metacognition plays a critical role in successful learning, metacognition-related studies are essential to enable instructors to apply better methodologies and students to exercise their cognitive resources through metacognitive control.  Flavell (1971) used the term metamemory in regard to an individual's ability to manage and monitor the input, storage, search and retrieval of the contents of one?s own memory. In his later study, Flavell (1979) proposed a formal model of metacognitive monitoring which included four classes of phenomena and their relationships. The four classes were (a) metacognitive knowledge, (b) metacognitive experiences, (c) tasks and goals, and (d) strategies or actions. Flavell further defined metacognitive knowledge as one's knowledge about the factors that affect cognitive 39  activities. The distinction between cognitive and metacognitive knowledge is contained in the ways the information is used. Cognitive and metacognitive abilities are mutually interrelated and interdependent. Metacognitive capacity according to Flavell (1979) influences the individual?s choice to engage or abandon a particular cognitive activity, which is strongly related to their interests, abilities and goals.  Flavell's (1979) second class of phenomena, metacognitive experiences, include the subjective internal reactions of a learner toward their own metacognitive knowledge, goals, or strategies. Metacognitive experiences provide feedback about the current progress, completion, degree of comprehension or connections of the new information to old. Tasks which are new or challenging may entail more experiential interaction, while more habitual tasks may incur less metacognitive experience. Metacognitive experience also encompasses the affective response to tasks. Success, failure, frustration, satisfaction have an effect on the moment-to-moment engagement in a task and may determine personal willingness to pursue similar tasks in the future. Flavell's third major category, metacognitive goals are referred to the desired outcomes of engagement in a cognitive activity. They may include general comprehension, memorization, answering a math problem, or simply expanding one's knowledge about a topic. Achievement of metacognitive goals depends on both metacognitive knowledge and metacognitive experiences (Flavell, 1979). In his subsequent paper, Flavell (1987) elaborated on a number of aspects of the theory he proposed in 1979. In the category of metacognitive knowledge, he suggested subcategories of person variables. Flavell defined additional intra-individual variables such as knowledge or beliefs about the interests, propensities, aptitudes and abilities. 40  These inter-individual variables provide comparisons between people in a relativistic manner (Schmorrow & Fidopiastis, 2011). In this study, Flavell (1987) also emphasized the importance of cultural influences on the formation of beliefs about learning (Flavell, n.d). 2.3.4 Cotterall Of particular importance to this study is the article by Cotterall (2000), which described the principles for promotion of learner autonomy in language courses and served as the theoretic framework for this study. In this article, Cotterall (2000) asserted that learner autonomy should be seen as a goal of all learning.  Language courses which aim to promote learner autonomy should ?incorporate means of transferring responsibility for aspects of the language learning process from the teacher to the learner? (Cotterall, 2000, p. 110). Ideally, ?transferring of responsibility? should encompass all learning decisions, including objectives, scope and sequence, methods and techniques, locations and schedules, and outcome evaluations (Holec, 1981). As was stated by Nunan (1988) ?no curriculum can claim to be truly learner-centered unless the learner?s subjective needs and perceptions relating to the process of learning are taken into account? (p. 179). In order to promote learner autonomy in language courses, which would ?incorporate means of transferring responsibility for aspects of the language learning process (such as setting goals, selecting learning strategies, and evaluating progress) from the teacher to the learner? (Cotterall, 2000, p. 110; Nation & Macalister (2010), teachers and curriculum designers are advised to take into consideration following principles: 41  2.3.4.1 Learner Goals The course should reflect learners? goals in its language, tasks, and strategies. Learners involved in a course should understand well the objectives of a lesson or an exercise, and, therefore, time should be taken to make learners realize the ways of ?identifying goals, specifying objectives and identifying resources and strategies needed to achieve goals, and measuring progress. Decisions about language, texts, tasks, and strategies to focus on during the course are made in relation to the stated goals of the learners? (Cotterall, 2000, p. 111). This can be achieved through reviewing the lesson objectives, taking notes about the objectives of the exercise, and adhering to the instructions the teacher gives while introducing course content. 2.3.4.2 Language Learning Process Course tasks should be explicitly linked to a simplified model of the language learning process. Being aware of the language learning process means being aware of learning options available, and understanding ?the consequences of choices they [learners] make? (Cotterall, 2000, p. 111). If learners are equipped with the language learning model, they will be able to critically approach ?texts and tasks, trial alternative strategies, and to seek feedback on their performance" (Cotterall, 2000, p. 111). See the figure below:   42             Figure 2  Simplified model of the language learning process (Cotterall, 2000).   Motivation Needs Goals Input Language Awareness Language Knowledge Practice Output Feedback Reflection 43  2.3.4.3 Real-world Tasks Course tasks should either replicate real-world communicative tasks or provide rehearsal for such tasks. The tasks in which the learners are involved should be those, which the learners will perform in real life settings in the future. Such tasks that are likely to model independent learning are characterized by certain features: the performance goal of the task is transparent; the task, or a version of it, is easily staged by someone working on their own; the learners are able to perceive improved performance in doing the task. 2.3.4.4 Learner Strategies The course should incorporate discussion and practice with strategies known to facilitate task performance. Learners should be aware of learning strategies to be able to make a choice of a strategic behavior most appropriate for the completion of a task. Learning strategies are the mental inclinations and actions we engage in to attain new information, abilities and dispositions. The purpose of teaching learning strategies is to enable students to consciously control their learning to become proficient, motivated, confident and self-directed language learners (Chamot et al, 1999). According to Vandergrift (2003), cognitive strategies involve organizing, summarizing, and elaborating on information to help students understand what the input language; metacognitive strategies involve listeners using language in a way that makes them predict, plan, and evaluate what is being heard (Vandergrift, 2004); and socioaffective strategies involve students 44  interacting with each other by reinforcing the language they are exposed to (O?Malley & Chamot, 1990). 2.3.4.5 Reflection on Learning The course should promote reflection on learning. Learners should engage in reflection activities about their learning, which will ?enhance the insight on their learning process? (Cotterall, 2000, p. 112). Awareness of one's own thinking processes or metacognition (Pressley & Afflerbach, 1995; Rivers, 2001) leads to reflection, to planning how to proceed with a learning task, to monitoring one's own performance on an ongoing basis, and to self-evaluation upon task completion. This type of self-knowledge leads to self-regulation of one?s learning. The metacognitive activity of reviewing past and future learning experiences with the purpose of self-improvement is ?viewed as the pivot of a good learning/teaching cycle? (Dam & Legenhausen,1999, p. 90). Reflection is an essential part of the process of exercising autonomy and enables students to critically think about their own strengths and weaknesses in order to improve themselves in the future. Recent research on autonomous learning has begun to see autonomy as inclusive of interdependence, which implies working collaboratively with instructors and other learners towards shared goals (Benson, 2001). Autonomy should develop out of the learner?s reciprocal dialogue with the world to which they belong. Learners need to develop their capacity for autonomous learning in the process of interaction resembling developmental and experiential learning (Little, 1994). Therefore it is important to 45  distinguish between activities, which are designed to promote collaborative learning or learner autonomy interdependence (Macaro, 1997). Five criteria discussed in this section will provide the standards by which the first question of this study will be implemented. The SSLP project as documented in the CALL-course syllabus will be analyzed in chapter four according to these criteria. 2.3.5 Besette Another important study in the context of this study is the paper by Alan Besette (2009), in which the perceptions of students and instructors of PGU towards CALL and SSLP were studied and analyzed. The difference between the study by Besette (2009) and this study is contained within its foci. The study by Besette (2009), focused on the perceptions of students and instructors about the CALL course at PGU, while this study is focused on the materials analysis related to the same CALL course. The study by Besette (2009) was based on the questionnaires about CALL that was administered to both teachers and students involved in CALL course at PGU. The questionnaires were designed to explore the perceptions of students and instructors about computer use in language teaching, which benefits CALL might provide and their concerns towards computer use in a CALL class; students were asked to respond to a closed-ended questionnaire that asked about their experience using computers to learn languages and what the benefits in using computers for language learning were (Besette, 2009).  The study by Besette (2009), extended over one semester when the SSLP was first implemented. The questionnaire was administered twice, in the beginning of the semester and at the end. At the end of semester, teachers participated in a round table 46  discussion that covered all Core English classes and students were given a second questionnaire that focused on using computers to learn languages. The items on this second questionnaire were substantively the same as the first questionnaire and were designed to see how perceptions of students might have changed in the end of the first semester. Students were also interviewed in small groups with the focus on the following questions (Besette, 2009, p. 6): ? Do you think that the activities done in your CALL class were beneficial? ? How do you think that the activities have benefited you? ? Which activities, LEI, listening, webpage project, grammar, learning journals, or Typing Pal, were interesting/enjoyable? Useful? Difficult to use/do? ? Were there any activities that were not interesting/enjoyable? Useful? ? Have the CALL activities helped you in your Listening & Speaking / Reading & Writing class? If so, how? ? Was having a website for classes useful for you? The findings of the study by Besette (2009) had revealed that the teachers? opinions were in general positive towards CALL use for language instruction in spite the fact that most of them had not used computers in their previous teaching practice. Immediate feedback and enjoyment were perceived as two advantages of using computers.  Another advantage was that computers permit students to go at their own pace. Teachers did not think that using computers was difficult, nor a waste of time. Teachers were also asked about how useful computers were to practice the four language skills, to which they responded that computers provided the most benefit for reading, writing, and listening.  47  Before starting their CALL classes, only one third of the students had used computers to learn language. Student opinions about using computers were positive.  The one difference between teachers and students? opinions about using computers was that the students were more worried about having difficulties.  By the end of the semester, after experiencing CALL for three months, student opinions became slightly more positive. Students also agreed that computers are helpful for practicing language skills although in the beginning of the course their opinions were not as high as teachers? opinions. In the end of the term, they were more positive about using computers to practice listening and speaking. They were slightly less positive about reading and they felt that their writing skills did not benefit from using computers. The follow-up interviews reinforced many of the positive opinions expressed in the questionnaires. Most students said that (Besette, 2009, p. 9):  ? They enjoyed using LEI and found it beneficial. ? They thought that the overlap between LEI in the CALL and in Listening & Speaking classes was helpful. ? They thought that being able to do CALL activities anywhere and anytime was important. ? They enjoyed doing the webpage project and found it beneficial. Specifically, ? They learned to express themselves in English. ? They improved their writing because of corrections made by teachers. ? They learned about classmates in the webpage projects. However, the interviews uncovered some problems and difficulties. Some students expressed concern because (Besette, 2009, p. 9): 48  ? They found LEI grammar explanations difficult to understand. ? They were bored because of the similarities between LEI in the CALL and Listening & Speaking classes. ? They did not have access to computers or the Internet at home. ? They thought that there were too many activities. ? They thought the webpage project was too difficult. Study by Besette (2009) revealed that the CALL classes at PGU were successful.  Both teachers and students? attitudes towards the classes were positive.  In addition, most students agreed in the interviews that CALL reinforced what they learned in that class. Most of them appreciated being able to read about their classmates in the SSLP projects and some communication between students occurred in comments on their classmates? webpages. The SSLP project provided them with an opportunity to use language ? they had to explain what was important to them ? and most students felt that it helped them learn to express themselves in English. A majority of the students enjoyed using LEI and enjoyed doing the SSLP project (Besette, 2009). Student performances on their LEI quizzes and tests supported their opinions that the CALL classes had been beneficial. Average class quiz scores ranged from 86.5 to 92.2 and average class module test scores ranged from 85.5 to 90.8 (Besette, 2009).   Study by Besette (2009) also revealed a few negative results. Teachers had difficulty deciding which activities to emphasize and students were not sure which activities were the most important ones. As a result, teachers decided that, in the next semester, more emphasis should be put on LEI, typing, and SSLP. A second concern was that students had difficulty with the LEI grammar explanations. Teachers decided 49  that students would benefit more from teacher explanations of grammar and from supplementary grammar exercises. The third concern was the lack of overlap between the CALL classes and Reading & Writing classes. Teachers decided that Reading & Writing teachers would help students write drafts for their SSLP projects in the next semester. 2.4 CALL and Listening Instruction Some listening instruction-related research (Brown, 2007; Cross, 2009; Vandergrift, 2003, 2004) suggests that listening can be better taught through the use of a balanced approach to listening instruction. According to Vandergrift (2004), as L2 listeners need to learn how to use all processes to their advantage, depending on their purpose for listening (Vandergrift, 2004), the balanced approach to listening instruction has to include both top-down and bottom-up processing to exploit students? past knowledge of social contexts and grammar. It was suggested also that by using previously acquired knowledge, learners will better understand both the context and linguistic content that are present in everyday conversations (Greenleaf, 2011). In order to enhance this approach, specific listening strategies should be used to make audible language even more comprehensible (Oxford, 2001; Vandergrift, 2004). These strategies are defined as cognitive, metacognitive, and socioaffective in nature (Greenleaf, 2011).  With the advent of multimedia computing and the Internet, the role of computers in language instruction has now become a key factor in how foreign languages are taught in higher educational institutions around the world. EFL instructors are able to implement in their curricular websites like YouTube that offer ?an infinite array of 50  possibilities to enhance the efficacy of listening instruction? (Greenleaf, 2011, p. 2). According to Jones (2008), when various audiovisual materials are used and the listening strategies are applied in practice, ?aural comprehension within a multimedia environment? may improve.  2.4.1 Listening Approaches Two main approaches to listening instruction have been emphasized in the research literature ? the top-down approach and the bottom-up approach (Cross, 2009; Peterson, 2001; Richards, 1990; Vandergrift, 2003). In the top-down approach, learners use background information, also known as schemata, in order to form connections with an aural text. In the bottom-up approach, learners use their knowledge to interpret the meaning of an aural text. Teachers need to closely consider the needs, proficiency level and knowledge of topical content of their students in order to strike the balance of top-down and bottom-up processing to meet specific learning goals ?to achieve optimal listening outcomes? (Greenleaf, 2011, p. 83). 2.4.2 Listening Strategies In addition to a balanced use of top-down and bottom-up processes to teaching listening, it is also considered imperative for teachers to utilize and explicitly teach a mix of cognitive, metacognitive, and socioaffective listening strategies (Vandergrift, 2003). ?Cognitive strategies involve organizing, summarizing, and elaborating on information to help students understand what they are listening to?; ?metacognitive strategies involve listeners using language in a way that makes them predict, plan, and evaluate what is being heard?; and ?socioaffective strategies involve students interacting with each other by reinforcing the language they are listening to? (Greenleaf, 2011, pp. 56-57). By 51  becoming more proficient in use of these listening strategies, students will have multiple ways at their disposal to complete a task, which will enhance their listening abilities. If the balanced approach to listening instruction is followed, authentic audiovisual materials may considerably benefit the students. With the spread of the internet, such materials are now freely available to EFL instructors and the introduction of such visual and aural stimuli into CALL EFL classroom may fundamentally transform listening instruction (Vandergrift, 2004). Audiovisual stimuli, specifically those which contain visual aids, captions or subtitles, have been shown to benefit the listening ability of EFL students (Baltova, 1999; Chung, 1994; Morley, 1994). Such resources are now available in the form of DVDs, online videos and video podcasts. According to the researchers Guichon and McLornan (2008), audiovisual materials with subtitles may significantly increase students? understanding of audiovisual data through a better knowledge of the context in which a discourse is taking place; this effect can be achieved when two visual modes, pictorial and verbal, are present (Jones, 2008; Morley, 1997; Smidt & Hegelheimer, 2004). The use of audiovisual materials embedded with visual cues has been shown to have a great benefit to students by providing them with exposure to visual and aural content, and access to materials for practice in their own time, place and at their preferred pace (Greenleaf, 2011). 2.5 CALL and Case Study Research Case studies are extensively used in organizational studies (e.g.: psychology, anthropology, political science.) and across the social sciences, and there is growing 52  confidence in the case study method as a ?rigorous research strategy in its own right? (Hartley, 1994, p. 2008). Stake (2000) states that case studies have become "one of the most common ways to do qualitative inquiry" (p. 435), but, at the same time, acknowledges that "they are neither new nor essentially qualitative". At any rate, quoting one of the most prominent experts in case study research, Robert K. Yin, we can say that "using case studies for research purposes remains one of the most challenging of all social science endeavors" (Yin, 2003, p. 1). Qualitative case study provides tools for researchers to study complex phenomena within their contexts (Baxter, 2008). According to Stake (1995) and Yin (2003) a case study is a study of the particularity and complexity of a single case. The distinctive need for case studies arises out of the desire to understand complex social phenomena because "the case study method allows investigators to retain the holistic and meaningful characteristics of real-life events" (Yin, 2003, p. 2). According to Yin (2003), there are several types of case study research: explanatory, exploratory and descriptive case studies. A case study would be an explanatory one, when the in-depth focus is on a modern-day phenomenon within some real-life context, when the investigator has little control over actual events or when "how or "why" questions are being posed; a case study would be exploratory or descriptive depending on the extent of control an investigator has over actual behavioral events and the degree of focus on contemporary as opposed to historical events (Yin, 2003). Yin (2003, p.13) offers a following definition of a case study research: A case study is an empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context, especially when the boundaries between 53  phenomenon and context are not clearly evident. The case study inquiry copes with the technically distinctive situation in which there will be many more variables of interest than data points, and as one result relies on multiple sources of evidence, with data needing to converge in a triangulating fashion, and as another result benefits from the prior development of theoretical propositions to guide data collection and analysis. Via this definition, case study research can be also defined as a study that consists of an open-ended inquiry, often with data collected over a period of time, of phenomena, within their context, with the aim being to build theory and generate hypotheses rather than primarily to test them (Hartley, 2004). In this respect, case studies have an imperative function in generating hypotheses and building theory (Hartley, 1994, 2004). While case study is frequently categorized as a ?method?, it is appropriate to consider it a ?research strategy? (Hartley, 2004; Kohlbacher, 2005; Titscher et al., 2000). Case study is ?not a methodological choice but a choice of what is to be studied. By whatever methods, we choose to study the case" (Stake, 2000, p. 435). Therefore, case study as a research strategy constitutes a comprehensive and all-encompassing method, in which a number of qualitative, quantitative or both methods may be used (Hartley, 2004; Kohlbacher, 2005; Stake, 2000; Yin, 2003). 2.5.1 Case Study Research in TESL Case study research in second language acquisition (SLA), second language education (SLE) and TESOL is originated from the research in psychology and linguistics (Brown, 1991; Doughty, 2000; Duff, 2008; Hatch, 1978), with a focus on the acquisition of discrete linguistic elements, such as development of L2 syntax, 54  morphology, phonology, etc. TESL case studies more recently have adopted the more inductive and interpretive stance typical of case studies in the field of education and other fields (Johnson, 1992; Stake, 1994). However, the emphasis in more recent years shifted towards such issues as language learning and language behavior in connection with such factors as identity, agency and language socialization (Duff, 2012). In TESL, case studies provide ?completeness, depth of analysis, and readability?, and the potential to generate new hypotheses, models and understandings about linguistic processes, and the verifications possible in longitudinal case studies (Duff, 2008). They may be included in larger quantitative or qualitative studies to provide a concrete illustration of findings. A study may feature single cases or multiple cases referring to a person, either a learner or a teacher, or an entity, such as a school, a university, a classroom, or a program (Johnson, 1992; Nunan, 1992). The main drawbacks ascribed to case study research have long been limited generalizability, lack of objectivity and lack of theoretical grounding. Duff (2008) nonetheless argues strongly that case studies do not purport to make general statements about the population at large, but ?can be seen as a small step toward grand generalizations? (Stake, 2005, p. 445). When conducting a case study, the researcher investigates the details and meanings of experience by identifying important patterns and themes in the data. The nature of the research questions will impact all subsequent decisions concerning data collection, analysis and interpretation. The researcher must engage in the research design with a comprehensive understanding of the investigative focus and objectives (Duff, 2008). Thus, the richness of case studies depends on the sufficient amount of 55  detail and contextual information when only one or a small number of focal cases are analyzed (Chapelle & Duff, 2003). The writer's ability to provide a compelling and engaging profile of the case with suitable examples and linkages to broader issues is also very important (TESOL International Association, 2014). 2.5.2 Exploratory Case Study Yin (1993) has identified exploratory case study as means to define the necessary questions and hypotheses for developing consecutive studies playing ?supportive role in developing continuative social research in general? (Streb, 2010). According to Yin (1993) there are three conditions for the design of exploratory case studies: (a) the type of research question posed, (b) the extent of control an investigator has over actual behavioral events, and (c) the degree of focus on contemporary events (Yin, 1984). According to an exhaustive definition of exploratory case study given by Streb (2010): The exploratory case study investigates distinct phenomena characterized by a lack of detailed preliminary research, especially formulated hypotheses that can be tested, and/or by a specific research environment that limits the choice of methodology. This form of case study is very often applied as a preliminary step of an overall causal or explanatory research design exploring a relatively new field of scientific investigation in which the research questions have either not been clearly identified and formulated or the data required for a hypothetical formulation have not yet been obtained. Since exploratory case studies are by definition often applied in a research context that is not clearly specified and still requires data for the formulation of valid hypotheses, their 56  broad concept provides the researcher with a high degree of flexibility and independence with regard to the research design as well as the data collection (p. 373).  A typical example of exploratory case study research can be found in Levy's (1988) study of information technology at the University of Arizona. That study was justified by the absence of preliminary research related to ?the pace of acquisition of information technology at institutions of higher education? (Tellis, 1997). The goals of that study were to examine aspects of the Internet, the World Wide Web and Client/Server computing and to establish a basis for understanding the current and future economic aspects of information technology acquisition. The examination of informational technologies was an emerging topic that was scarcely researched at that time. Levy (1988) consequently decided on a highly flexible and adaptive exploratory case study approach and established its use as appropriate for the research project he was conducting. Levy (1988) was able to develop the necessary definitions and hypotheses for the subsequent explanatory research. That single-case study methodology was later adopted and replicated by Tellis (1997) in his study, which was designed to assess aspects of the rapid introduction of Information Technology at Fairfield University. 2.5.3 Materials Analysis Materials or content analysis is ?a research tool used to determine the presence of certain concepts within texts? (Klenke, 2008, p. 89) and is "the longest established method of text analysis among the set of empirical methods of social investigation" (Titscher et al., 2000, p. 55). Content analysis is essentially a coding operation of 57  transforming raw data into a standardized form (Babbie, 2001). Ryan and Bernard (2000) identify content analysis as the heart and soul of whole-text analysis. The text data may be presented in ?verbal, print, or electronic form and may be obtained from narrative responses, open-ended survey questions, interviews, focus groups, observations, or print media such as articles, books, or manuals? (Klenke, 2008, p. 64). According to Ryan and Bernard (2000), classical content analysis includes ?techniques for reducing texts to a unit-by-variable matrix and analyzing that matrix quantitatively to test hypotheses? (p. 780). The researcher can produce a matrix by applying a set of codes to a set of qualitative data (e.g. written texts), with the assumption being that the codes of interest have already been discovered and described beforehand (Ryan & Bernard, 2000).  Classical content analysis is essentially ?a research technique for the objective, systematic, and quantitative description of the manifest content of communication? (Berelson, 1952, p. 489). It is ?focused on the generations of codes, code clusters, categories, or families based on interrelated codes which are derived from word frequencies? (Klenke, 2008). The simplest type of content evaluation consists of counting the number of instances or occurrences in a content category; however, more complex procedures can also be used for evaluation given that the investigation is of explorative nature (Kohlbacher, 2005; Titscher et al., 2000). According to Titscher et al. (2000), in the 1950s a controversy was already developing about research strategies in content analysis. Berelson (1952) was the first to put together the methods and goals of quantitative content analysis in his book Content Analysis in Communication Research, which concentrated on assessment on 58  the basis of frequency analyses (Titscher et al., 2000). Kracauer (1952) reacted critically to this quantitative orientation in his article "The Challenge Of Qualitative Content Analysis", in which he contended that the meaning content is a particular quality of texts and that ?particular attention should be paid to the reconstruction of contexts? (Titscher et al., 2000, p. 66). According to Kracauer (1952), ?what counts alone in quantitative analysis is the selection and rational organization of such categories as condense substantive meanings of the given text, with a view to testing related assumptions and hypothesis" (p. 637), and the emphasis should rather be given to the meaning of particular instances. Ritsert (1972), for instance, criticized that especially the following four aspects are not taken into account appropriately by quantitative content analysis: ? The context of text components; ? latent structures of sense; ? distinctive individual cases; ? things that do not appear in the text. A qualitative model of content analysis developed by Mayring attempts to overcome shortcomings of classical quantitative content analysis by applying a systematic, theory-guided approach to text analysis using a category system (Klenke, 2008). This newer model preserved the advantages of quantitative content analysis, which developed within communication science and further developed those advanages into qualitative-interpretative steps of analysis (Kohlbacher, 2005; Mayring, 2000). Mayring (2000) developed this form of analysis in his longitudinal study about psycho-social consequences of unemployment. In this study, about 600 open-ended interviews were received and more than 20000 pages of transcripts were produced, which had to 59  be analyzed in a qualitative oriented way (Mayring, 2000). Mayring identified three distinct procedures which may be carried out independently or in combination depending on specific research questions (Kohlbacher, 2005; Titscher et al., 2000): Summary. Summary attempts to reduce the material in such a way as to preserve the essential content and by abstraction to create a manageable corpus which still reflects the original material. For this the text is paraphrased, generalized or abstracted and reduced. Explication Explication involves explaining, clarifying and annotating the material. As a first step a lexico-grammatical definition is attempted, then the material for explication is determined, and this is followed by a narrow context analysis, and a broad context analysis. Finally an "explicatory paraphrase" is made of the particular portion of text and the explication is examined with reference to the total context. Structuring Structuring corresponds more or less to the procedures used in classical content analysis and is also viewed as the most crucial technique of content analysis, the goal of which is to filter out a particular structure from the material. Here the text can be structured according to content, form and scaling. The first stage is the determination of the units of analysis, after which the dimensions of 60  the structuring are established on some theoretical basis and the features of the system of categories are fixed. Subsequently definitions are formulated and key examples, with rules for coding in separate categories, are agreed upon. In the course of a first appraisal of the material the data locations are marked, and in a second scrutiny these are processed and extracted. If necessary the system of categories is re-examined and revised, which necessitates a reappraisal of the material.  As a final stage the results are processed. Figure 3, from the study of Gl?ser & Laudel (1999) (as cited in Kohlbacher, 2005) summarizes the basic proceeding of qualitative content analysis from the initial theory to the final analysis and interpretation.    61   Figure 3  Basic proceeding of qualitative content analysis (Kohlbacher, 2005).   62  2.5.4 Materials Evaluation Tomlinson (1998) defined materials evaluation as ?the systematic appraisal of the value of materials in relation to their objectives and to the objectives of the learners using them? (p. 82). He also pointed out that the most significant role of materials is to involve students in decision-making about their own learning to determine whether the learning points are potentially useful to them (Tomlinson, 2003). Such definition of materials evaluation was in line with the learner-centered approach, according to which materials? evaluator is recommended to reflect on the learners? opinions about the materials in focus, in combination with the goals specified by the author of the book. Tomlinson considered order and systematicity as important characteristics of materials evaluation (Tomlinson et al., 2001). In order to determine whether a textbook adequately serves its purpose for a particular context, a description of a textbook can be compared with a description of a context (McGrath, 2002). Materials analysis distinguishes itself from analysis in the sense of context-suitability and should therefore be seen as an initial step to materials evaluation. Similarly, Hutchinson & Waters (1987) also see evaluation as ?a matter of judging the fitness of something for a particular purpose?, since ?there is no absolute good or bad ? only degrees of fitness for the required purposes? (Hutchinson & Waters, 1987, p. 96). Hutchinson & Waters (1987) emphasized the same view expressed by Tomlinson that ?the evaluation process should be systematic and is best seen as a matching exercise: matching your analyzed needs to available solutions? (Tomlinson, 1987, p. 105). The undermining principle of this definition is that the evaluation of the 63  educational materials is to be conducted with attentive consideration of the students? needs.  A significant number of research emphasized an advantage of using the checklist approach to help teachers become more economic and systematic (Ansary & Babaie, (2002); Candlin & Breen, (1979); Byrd, (2001); Cunningsworth, (1995); (Garinger, 2002); Hutchinson (1996); Krug, (2002); Miekley, (2005)). Ansary and Babaie (2002) analyzed a corpus of ten EFL/ESL textbook reviews in addition to ten EFL/ESL textbook evaluation checklists in order to present a summary of common-core characteristics of EFL/ESL textbooks and draw up some guidelines for their systematic evaluation. In their investigation, they managed to draw common-core characteristics of a standard EFL/ESL textbook (Ansary and Babaie, 2002). Miekley, J. (2005) in his study proposed a multifactorial specification of principal evaluation elements found in previously published textbook reviews, characterizations and checklists. Therefore, research shows that in addition to explicit content-based teaching, EFL/ ESL instructors should focus on the development of communicative skills of their students; they should enable learners to conceptualize their learning goals and exercise critical reflection about what strategies they should use to meet the learning goals. As was stated by Smith (1996), there is now a sufficient consensus of opinion for SLA research to be used as an informative base for the formulation of criteria for the teaching of languages. As summarized by Tomlinson (1998), the basic principles of second language acquisitions relevant to the development of materials for the teaching of languages are described below (Thanh, 2010, pp. 23-25): 64  ? Materials should achieve impact through novelty, variety, attractive presentation, and appealing content. As it is believed that the materials will be taken in for processing when the learners? curiosity, interest and attention are attracted. ? Materials should help learners to feel at ease with spacious, culture-friendly texts and illustrations, and techniques to help them to learn rather than testing them all the time. The reason for that is ?Research has shown ? the effects of various forms of anxiety on acquisition: the less anxious the learner, the better language acquisition proceeds. Similarly, relaxed and comfortable students apparently can learn more in shorter periods of time.? (Dulay, Burt & Krashen 1982) ? Materials should help learners to develop confidence, which coincides with Dlay, Burt and Krashen?s (1982) findings that ?relaxed and self-confident learners learn faster.? However, this cannot be achieved by the process of simplification but through activities that try to ?push? learners slightly beyond their existing proficiency by engaging them in tasks that are stimulating, problematic, but still achievable or tasks involving in imaginativity, creativity, and analytical skills.  ? What is being taught should be perceived by learners as relevant and useful by relating them to known learner interest and to ?real-life? tasks that the learner need or might need to perform in the target language. Otherwise, materials should provide the learners with a choice of topics and tasks. 65  Advocates to this point of view include Stevick (1976), Krashen (1982), and Wenden (1987).  ? Materials should require and facilitate learner self-investment by engaging them in learner-centered discovery activities or involving them in finding supplementary materials for particular units in a book and giving them responsibility for making decisions about which texts to use and how to use them. ? Materials should expose the learners to language in authentic use through the advice they give, the instructions for their activities, the spoken and written texts they include provided that the input must be comprehensible and vary in style, mode, medium, and purpose. ? The learners? attention should be drawn to linguistic features of the input either consciously or subconsciously. For example, the learners might be paying conscious attention to working out the attitude of one of the characters in a story but might be paying subconscious attention to the second conditionals that the character uses. ? Materials should provide the learners with opportunities to use the target language to achieve communicative purposes via information or opinion gap activities, post-listening and post-reading activities, creative writing and speaking activities, formal instruction given in the target language either on the language itself or on the subject matter. ? Materials should take into account that the positive effects of instruction are usually delayed, which means that instructions should be recycled. 66  ? Materials should take into account that learners differ in learning styles, which means that activities should be variable and should cater for all learning styles. ? Materials should take into account that learners differ in affective attitudes by providing choices of different types of texts, types of activities, optional extras, etc. ? Materials should permit a silent period at the beginning of instruction that can facilitate the development of an effective internalized grammar before they start to speak. It is, therefore, advisable to arrange activities from comprehension to production.   ? Materials should maximize learning potential by encouraging intellectual, aesthetic, and emotional involvement that stimulates both right and left-brain activities. ? Materials should not rely too much on controlled practice. As most researchers seem to agree with Ellis who says that ?controlled practice appears to have little long-term effect on the accuracy with which new structures are performed? (Ellis, 1990:192) and ?has little effect on fluency? (Ellis and Rathbone, 1987).  ? Materials should provide opportunities for outcome feedback evaluated in relation to the purpose for which the language is used. In other words, the language production activities should have intended outcomes other than just practicing the languages.   67  Chapter 3: Research Methods The methods used in the study are described in this chapter. The chapter begins with a section describing the background of the participants of the study, their academic program and data sources used in this study.  3.1 Participants All CALL EFL course participants were Japanese undergraduate second year students who were studying in the English Education Program at a Japanese university (referred below as GPU). The twenty-two participants consisted of fourteen females and eight males ranging in age between 19-21 years. The Core English and CALL curricula were developed by Professor Alan Besette who was the head of the English Department at PGU at that time. 3.2 Research Setting PGU is a private educational institution, founded by Anglican missionaries in 1879. In 1950 the institution added a women's junior college with a program in English language and literature to its junior and senior high schools. The college moved to Sakai in 1982 and two years later a program in secretarial studies was opened.  In 1995, the college was granted university status and the following year it inaugurated its co-educational four-year Bachelor of Arts program in Intercultural Studies. The establishment of the Graduate School of Intercultural Studies ensued in April of 2000. In March 2001, PGU received formal accreditation from the Japan University Accreditation Association. PGU?s American style liberal arts curriculum begins with a general education emphasizing both basic knowledge and personal growth. Students may also choose a 68  specialized program such as Area Cultural Studies or Intercultural Studies and Service. English is required for Japanese students and a structured two-year course in advanced Japanese language is available for foreign students. Chinese, Korean, French, German and Italian languages are also taught. In addition to regular coursework, students may design and execute their own fieldwork study in a domestic or foreign setting. All students are encouraged to take advantage of the school?s overseas study opportunities. The secretarial program of PGU?s Junior College offers basic skill courses as well as courses in the Biblical Studies, Arts and Social Sciences. Advanced courses include secretarial studies, intercultural communication and information science. While students are given a wide choice of courses, their programs are dynamic in order to satisfy the requirements for certificates in 'Certified Secretary in Advanced Studies,' 'Certified Business Information Administrator' and 'Certified Business Presenter.' All three certificates are a nationally recognized professional qualification awarded to all graduates together with the Associate degree. The graduate program trains students in basic knowledge as well as applied skills for work related to intercultural activities. Three courses of specialization are available: the International Cooperation course, the Intercultural Studies course and the Area Studies Course (including British, American, East Asian, South Asian, and Japanese studies). Students are also required to carry out extended fieldwork, usually abroad, involving volunteer activities. Scholarships and internships are also available. PGU currently counts around 1,300 students (2001) and is located in a residential area in the south of Osaka Prefecture. PGU has a ten-acre campus. Its facilities include classrooms fitted with state-of-the-art audio-visual equipment, computer 69  rooms, a library with 101,560 volumes, a gymnasium, athletic fields, a cafeteria, a student center, club offices and a chapel. 3.3 Program of Study The Core English program consisted of three classes that form the foundation of English language education in the English Department at PGU. The three classes were Listening & Speaking, Reading & Writing, and CALL. Students took these classes in their first and second years. Each class met twice a week for 90 minutes and the classes were taught by a native English-speaking teacher and a Japanese English teacher. In 2008, the Core English program had three sections with about 11 students in each section. One section was streamed higher; students in this section used textbooks and materials that the students in the other sections used in their second year. A total of 11 teachers, 5 native speakers and 6 Japanese, taught these classes. In the Core English program, the CALL classes had four objectives. They were (Besette, 2009, p. 2): ? To reinforce what students learned in their other Core English classes; ? To provide communication opportunities with other learners and native speakers; ? To provide opportunities to use language through task-based activities; ? To develop learner independence. 70  To meet these objectives, the CALL classes incorporated five types of activities. These included Longman English Interactive, supplementary websites, typing practice, a webpage project [SSLP] and learning journals. One of the purposes of the large number of activities was to provide variety?. The SSLP project was initially conceived as a part of the CALL curriculum and was designed to reinforce the acquisition of skills pursued in the main Core English curriculum among the undergraduate students at PGU. 3.4 Data Sources Data sources for this study were materials used in SSLP course. These included the following guides: Permission to Use Materials (Appendix A); Listening Self-study Project Explanation for Students (Appendix B) and Listening Self-study Project Resources for Students (Appendix C); and worksheets: Listening Self-Study Project Worksheet 1 (Appendix D), Listening Self-Study Project Worksheet 2 (Appendix E), Listening Self-Study Project Worksheet 3 (Appendix F),Listening Self-Study Project Self-Evaluation (Appendix G) and Listening Self-Study Project Template (Appendix H). All SSLP-related materials were developed by Professor Alan Besette, head of the English Department at PGU and are presented in the Appendices section of this study. 3.5 Data Analysis The approach taken for the data analysis of this study is of an exploratory and qualitative nature and as such it allowed enough flexibility to address the research questions in an exploratory manner which involves the search of indications and evidence to support conclusions (Cooper & Schindler, 1998). The exploratory case 71  study investigates distinct phenomena characterized by a lack of detailed preliminary research, especially formulated hypotheses that can be tested, and/or by a specific research environment that limits the choice of methodology. In the literature reviewed, promotion of learner autonomy in language courses, which would ?incorporate means of transferring responsibility for aspects of the language learning process from the teacher to the learner? (Cotterall, 2000, p. 110), should be carried out with consideration of the following five principles: learner goals, language learning process, real-world tasks, learner strategies and reflection on learning. The content analysis of the SSLP project was set in a step by step manner, following the order of these principles described in the article by Cotterall (2000) for the research question one. The content analysis of the SSLP project with regard to listening approaches and strategies for question two of the study was set in a likewise, step by step manner, following the order of the tasks that the students carried out. The course materials were brought directly into the text in order to show the primary data that was to be analyzed. Each piece of course material was then briefly described and the analysis of that piece of data was finally carried out.  For example, Cotterall (2000) stated that learners should engage in reflection activities about their learning, which will ?enhance the insight on their learning process? (Cotterall, 2000, p. 112). The metacognitive activity of reflection is an essential part of the process of exercising autonomy and enables students to critically think about their own strengths and weaknesses in order to improve themselves in the future.  72   Listening Self-Study Webpage Project Self-Evaluation  Name: Student Number:  Evaluate your listening self-study project and return this self-evaluation by XX. One word or short answers to the questions below are not acceptable.  Explain in detail!    Poor  Okay  Excellent Self-evaluation  1 2 3 4 5  What do you think was good about the appearance of your webpage?   How do you think you could have improved the appearance your webpage?   What do you think was good about the contents (listening, questions, and vocabulary) of your webpage?   How do you think you could have improved the contents of your webpage?   Do you think that you answered your partners? questions and responded to them well? Explain.   At the last stage of the course, students were required to conduct a self-evaluation of their individual SSLPs and document their evaluationson the 5-grade scale (varying from poor to excellent) in Worksheet 4 (see Appendix G), as well as to elaborate on their responses to the following questions:  ? What do you think was good about the appearance of your webpage?  ? How do you think you could have improved the appearance your webpage?  73  ? What do you think was good about the contents (listening, questions, and vocabulary) of your webpage?  ? How do you think you could have improved the contents of your webpage?  ? Do you think that you answered your partners? questions and responded to them well?  This task was conducive of students? self-reflection on their learning. In addition, as was identified in the printed syllabus for SSLP, students were engaged in the interactive exercise of posting responses to questions of SSLPs of their fellow students.   Doing self-study webpage projects  After everyone has created their self-study materials, you need to: ? Answer the questions on two of your classmates? pages. ? Check and respond to the students who answer the questions for your project.   This activity is an example of socioaffective strategy (Benson, 2001), which calls on social interaction on students? behalf with their peers. Group and pair work, class discussions and cooperative learning involve socioaffective strategies and are congruent with the interdependence aspects of learner autonomy theory (Benson, 2001).     74  Chapter 4: Results and Discussion This chapter presents both the results and discussion of analyses of the data related to the Self-study Listening Project (SSLP) described in chapter three. The SSLP project was initially conceived as a part of the CALL?s curriculum and was designed to reinforce the acquisition of skills pursued in the main Core English course, among the undergraduate students at PGU. The study will now discuss the research questions, which were aimed at providing evidence that SSLP is a project, which is likely to enhance EFL students? autonomous learning classroom and listening skills with the use of the Internet-based technologies. A short summary will be presented at the end of each research question. A section summarizing all the main findings together will conclude this chapter.  4.1 Research Question One Research question one was designed to investigate whether the learning tasks in the course syllabus are likely to promote autonomous learning. The question as listed below will be discussed under this section: Is SSLP, as documented in the CALL-course syllabus, likely to promote inside and outside the classroom? 4.1.1 Learner Goals With regard to learner goals, Listening Self-study Project Explanation sheet had clearly stated goals as shown below: Listening Self-study Project Explanation  Goals: To create self-study listening activity   Description You need to create a self-study listening activity and put it on our website (http://poolececall09-75  10.wetpaint.com/). When all of the activities are complete, other students in the class will use the self-study activities you created.    Creating self-study materials To create your self-study materials, you need to: ? Choose listening (at least 2 minutes in length) materials.  A separate handout lists possible sources. ? Create a pre-listening question. (You can have more than one.) The purpose of this question is get students who use your self-study exercise to think about the topic. ? Provide a glossary of difficult words to help other students understand the listening. You should include at least 10 words.  ? Create comprehension questions for your self-study material so that students can check their understanding of the listening.  There should be at least 10 questions ? Create a post- listening question. (You can have more than one.) The purpose of this question is to think a little deeper about the topic. ? For the pre-listening question, comprehension questions and post-reading or listening questions, you should include a statement telling other students to post their answers.  Doing self-study webpage projects After everyone has created their self-study materials, you need to: ? Answer the questions on two of your classmates? pages. ? Check and respond to the students who answer the questions for your project.  Evaluation Criteria: On time: You complete all assignments related to the self-study project by the assigned due dates. Components: You include all of the required components, pre-listening question(s), 10 vocabulary words, 10 comprehension question, and post-listening question(s), on the webpage. Quality: Your choice of listening is interesting and appropriate and your questions are appropriate. Design: Your webpage is laid out well. Self-study: You answer all of the questions for two other projects. Responses: You check the answers that other students post to your project. Self-evaluation:  What do you think of your webpage project?  How well do you think you have done?   Due dates will be announced by your CALL teachers. Rubric ?See description above   1 2 3 4 5 On time      Components      76  Quality      Design      Self-study      Responses      Self-evaluation       Due Dates: Listening Self-study Project Worksheet 1 is due by May 31st. Listening Self-study Project Worksheet 2 is due by XX. Listening Self-study Project Worksheet 3 is due by XX. Self-study materials should be on webpage by XX. Post answers to two other self-study projects by XX. All responses and postings should be complete by XX. Self-evaluation is due by XX.  According to the principles of course design described by Cotterall (2000) that explicitly promotes autonomous learning learners involved in a course should understand well the objectives of a lesson or an exercise. Decisions about language, texts, tasks, and strategies to focus on during the course should be made in relation to the stated goals of the learners (Cotterall, 2000). A review of the printed syllabus revealed that students received clear instructions about the SSLP?s objectives at the outset of the CALL course. The main objective of the course was to create self-study listening activity and put it on the website. After all SSLP projects were complete, other students in the class were to use the self-study activities. 77  With regard to resources of audiovisual materials, students received a handout, (Listening Self-Study Project Resources Sheet), which was included in the course?s materials and listed possible sources of audiovisual materials: Listening Self-Study Project Resources  CALL 3/4   Videos: ? Real English: http://www.youtube.com/user/realenglish1#g/c/735B4981495522E6 (Topics, themes, & social issues. From "What are the Americans like? to "What's your astrological sign?", to 8 mini-documentaries on the homeless people of Florida, and lots more..) ? Voice of America Videos: http://www.youtube.com/user/VOALearningEnglish#g/p   (Huge and growing number of videos.  General Interest or Health topics might be the most accessible for our students.) ? Rocketboom: http://www.rocketboom.com/A large collection of videos including news broadcasts (Daily News), New York City related news (New York City) and world news topics (Human Wire).   The worksheets (1, 2, 3 and 4 (self-evaluation)) used in the course contained clearly written guidelines as to how to achieve course goals and the last worksheet 4 as shown below contained a scale as to how to measure progress.    Listening Self-Study Webpage Project Self-Evaluation  Name: Student Number:  Evaluate your listening self-study project and return this self-evaluation by XX. One word or short answers to the questions below are not acceptable.  Explain in detail!    Poor  Okay  Excellent Self-evaluation  1 2 3 4 5   78  This task also required students to individually select and decide upon a listening passage for their SSLPs. The decision about the listening passage was made collaboratively with the course instructor. 4.1.2 Language Learning Process According to Cotterall (2000), all tasks in a course promoting learner autonomy should be linked to a simplified model of the language learning process. This model has to be explicitly introduced to students to prompt insightful reflections and support the transfer of responsibility for aspects of the learning process. The analysis of the SSLP course materials however did not reveal any reference to the language learning process model students were supposed to follow, as shown in Figure 4.          79             Figure 4  Simplified model of the language learning process (Cotterall, 2000).      Motivation Needs Goals Input Language Awareness Language Knowledge Practice Output Feedback Reflection 80  4.1.3 Real-world Tasks According to the principles of course design described by Cotterall (2000) the tasks in which the learners are involved should be those, which the learners will perform in real life settings in the future. Such tasks are characterized by certain features: the performance goal of the task is transparent; the task, or a version of it, is easily staged by someone working on their own; the learners are able to perceive improved performance in doing the task.  Listening Self-study Project Explanation  Goals: To create self-study listening activity   Description You need to create a self-study listening activity and put it on our website (http://poolececall09-10.wetpaint.com/). When all of the activities are complete, other students in the class will use the self-study activities you created.     The main performance goal of the tasks in SSLP, according to the course?s materials, was to create a self-study listening activity, which was to be published on the website. Students were required to design their webpage in the form of a blog and to embed a video in it. The audiovisual materials were predominantly from the YouTube website. In this way, the SSLP was not only aiming at the development of students? listening skills, it also had an impact on students? computer and Internet literacy skills development, as the students were working with the authentic, online web-based resources. Students could supposedly perform the task of creating a self-study listening activity easily, as this task required to have only basic web-related designing skills. 81  4.1.4 Learner Strategies As was stated by Cotterall (2000), the course should incorporate learning strategies to enable students to choose a strategic behavior most appropriate for the completion of a task. As yet to be discussed in the analysis of question 2 (4.2.2 SSLP Listening Strategies), students were exposed to cognitive, metacognitive and socioaffective listening strategies through the activities of SSLP. However, as was revealed by the materials analysis, these strategies were not explicitly explained to them. 4.1.5 Reflection on Learning Cotterall (2000) also stated that learners should engage in reflection activities about their learning, which will ?enhance the insight on their learning process? (Cotterall, 2000, p. 112). The metacognitive activity of reflection is an essential part of the process of exercising autonomy and enables students to critically think about their own strengths and weaknesses in order to improve themselves in the future.  Listening Self-Study Webpage Project Self-Evaluation  Name: Student Number:  Evaluate your listening self-study project and return this self-evaluation by XX. One word or short answers to the questions below are not acceptable.  Explain in detail!    Poor  Okay  Excellent Self-evaluation  1 2 3 4 5  What do you think was good about the appearance of your webpage?   82  How do you think you could have improved the appearance your webpage?   What do you think was good about the contents (listening, questions, and vocabulary) of your webpage?   How do you think you could have improved the contents of your webpage?   Do you think that you answered your partners? questions and responded to them well? Explain.   At the last stage of the course, students were required to conduct a self-evaluation of their individual SSLPs and document their evaluations on the 5-grade scale (varying from poor to excellent) in Worksheet 4 (see Appendix G), as well as to elaborate on their responses to the following questions:  ? What do you think was good about the appearance of your webpage?  ? How do you think you could have improved the appearance of your webpage?  ? What do you think was good about the contents (listening, questions, and vocabulary) of your webpage?  ? How do you think you could have improved the contents of your webpage?  ? Do you think that you answered your partners? questions and responded to them well?  83  This task was conducive of students? self-reflection on their learning. In addition, as was identified in the printed syllabus, students were engaged in the interactive exercise of posting responses to questions of SSLPs of their fellow students.   Doing self-study webpage projects  After everyone has created their self-study materials, you need to: ? Answer the questions on two of your classmates? pages. ? Check and respond to the students who answer the questions for your project.   This task is an example of socioaffective strategy (Benson, 2001), which calls on social interaction on students? behalf with their peers. Group and pair work, class discussions and cooperative learning involve socioaffective strategies and are congruent with the interdependence aspects of learner autonomy theory (Benson, 2001). 4.2 Research Question Two Research question two was designed to investigate which listening approaches, according to the research literature reviewed in chapter two, were used in SSLP. The question as listed below will be discussed under this section: Is SSLP, as documented in the CALL-course syllabus, likely to promote the development of the EFL listening skills? What strategies for listening does the SSLP activity promote? 4.2.1 SSLP Listening Approaches The SSLP had four definitive stages, which were designed to make students engage with the listening material. Each stage was described in the SSLP worksheets 1, 2, 3 and 4 (self-evaluation sheet), and contained clearly defined guidelines as to how to 84  proceed with the accomplishment of the project. Students were required to document their progress in the same worksheets 1, 2, 3 and 4 (self-evaluation sheet). 4.2.1.1 Task 1 Task 1 was introduced as shown below:  Listening Self-Study Project ? Choosing a Listening:  Worksheet 1  Name: Student Number:  The first step for this project is to choose a listening.  We would like you to listen to three listenings and choose an important and/or interesting one.  A review of the printed syllabus showed that the task 1 of the course required students to find three listening passages from which they were to choose one video or an audio passage of most interest. Amongst the course materials obtained for the CALL course was a handout that listed possible sources of audiovisual materials.   Listening Self-Study Project Resources  CALL 3/4   Videos: ? Real English: http://www.youtube.com/user/realenglish1#g/c/735B4981495522E6 (Topics, themes, & social issues. From "What are the Americans like? to "What's your astrological sign?", to 8 mini-documentaries on the homeless people of Florida, and lots more..) ? Voice of America Videos: http://www.youtube.com/user/VOALearningEnglish#g/p   (Huge and growing number of videos.  General Interest or Health topics might be the most accessible for our students.) ? Rocketboom: http://www.rocketboom.com/A large collection of videos including news broadcasts (Daily News), New York City related news (New York City) and world news topics (Human Wire).   85  The URLs for audiovisual materials included:  ? Real English http://www.youtube.com/user/realenglish1#g/c/735B4981495522E6: is a YouTube Channel, which contains videos with natural and spontaneous speech. ? Voice of America Videos: http://www.youtube.com/user/VOALearningEnglish#g/p: is a YouTube Channel, which was designed for viewers to learn American English with captioned news reports that are read at a slower speed. ? Rocketboom:  http://www.rocketboom.com/: Rocketboom is a daily vlog produced by Andrew Baron in the format of a newscast with a comedic slant. Since 2004 Rocketboom has presented oddities, vlog excerpts, social and political commentary. The same task 1 also asked students to write a 50-word summary of all three listening passages.  For this worksheet you should briefly summarize (about 50 words) three listenings and explain why each of them is important or interesting.  This task was encouraging students? critical thinking about the choice of the passage, and not random selection. This learning task was documented in the worksheet one of SSLP. After the instructor approved of the students? choice of the passage, students proceeded with the next task.  86  4.2.1.2 Task 2 Task 2 of SSLP required students to identify the URL of the listening passage, its length, main topic, list at least 10 important vocabulary words and 10 important points from the listening passage.  ? What is the URL? ? How long is the listening? ? What is the listening?s topic? ? List at least 10 important vocabulary words: ? List at least 10 important points from the listening: This task required students to segment the audiovisual material (Winke et al., 2010), by noticing and investigating unknown vocabulary. According to the research literature reviewed in chapter two, the approach that calls for initial segmenting of the audiovisual material with the purpose of its better understanding is defined as ?the bottom-up approach to listening comprehension?. Researchers like Vandergrift (2004) suggest that low proficiency level language learners need bottom-up processing to decode what they are listening to; and Morley (2001) explains that bottom-up approach is useful for developing connections to accurate grammatical and lexical knowledge that learners may be familiar with. The most frequently used audiovisual materials were videos in the YouTube?s VOA Learning English Channel Lifestyles section. The videos in this section were short 87  2-3 minute reports about different aspects of life in the United States, embedded with large hard-subbed subtitles on the screen1.  Subtitles and captions, or the textual cues, as was discussed in chapter two, may greatly enhance proficiency in language components and more general listening comprehension of the EFL students. As was suggested by Winke (2010), subtitled videos may help students understand aural information by focusing on the language, which was firstly segmented into different units containing one or more key ideas of a discourse. Videos embedded with captions and subtitles may also enable students to better comprehend vocabulary (Winke et al., 2010). After the data was documented in the worksheet two and checked by the instructor, students would proceed to the next task of SSLP. 4.2.1.3 Task 3 This task 3 of SSLP was introduced as shown below:  Listening Self-Study Project Worksheet 3  Name: Student Number:  Before you post your self-study webpage project, your CALL teacher(s) will check your questions.  Pre-listening question: You should have at least one pre-listening question.  Its purpose is to get your listeners to begin thinking about the listening topic.  1.   (2.)                                             1 For the reason that using screenshots is against the regulations of UBC and fair dealing regulations in the Canadian copyright law, the original screenshots demonstrating the point made by the author were removed. The author was referring to subtitles in the video that can be found by following this link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LtvaBUYVY1I  88    Vocabulary words: Use the words from worksheet 2 and make a list that includes the words, their part of speech (noun, verb, adjective, phrasal verb, etc.), their meanings (in English), and example sentences that show the meanings of the words.    1.   2.   3.   4.   5.   6.   7.   8.   9.   10.  Comprehension questions: Use the list of important points from worksheet 2 and make at least ten comprehension questions.  Their purpose is to make sure that your listeners understand the main points of the listening.    1.   2.   3.   4. 89    5.   6.   7.   8.   9.   10.    Post-listening question: You should have at least one post-listening question.  Its purpose is to get your listeners to think more deeply about the topic.  1.   (2.)   Task 3 of SSLP required students to create at least one, or desirably, two pre-listening questions. These questions were designed to get the listeners think about the listening topic. Students were required also to use the words from worksheet two and make a list of words from the listening identifying their part of speech (noun, verb, adjective, phrasal verb, etc.), their meanings (in English), and example sentences that showed the meanings of the words. Next, students would need to use the list of ten important points from worksheet two and make at least ten comprehension questions to make sure that the listeners understand the main points of the listening passage. Finally, students would need to have at least one post-listening question to get the listeners to 90  think more deeply about the topic. After the worksheet three was checked and improved by instructors, the students were required to finalize their projects by publishing them in the form of a web page on the Mahara learning system website.  You need to create a self-study listening activity and put it on our website (http://poolececall09-10.wetpaint.com/). When all of the activities are complete, other students in the class will use the self-study activities you created.     The web page layout was to follow the same common look and feel template initially created by the instructors, and used as a sample and reference right from the beginning of the project (Appendix H). 4.2.1.4 Task 4 Task 4 of SSLP was introduced as shown below:  Listening Self-Study Webpage Project Self-Evaluation  Name: Student Number:  Evaluate your listening self-study project and return this self-evaluation by XX. One word or short answers to the questions below are not acceptable.  Explain in detail!    Poor  Okay  Excellent Self-evaluation  1 2 3 4 5  What do you think was good about the appearance of your webpage?   How do you think you could have improved the appearance your webpage?   What do you think was good about the contents (listening, questions, and vocabulary) of your webpage? 91    How do you think you could have improved the contents of your webpage?   Do you think that you answered your partners? questions and responded to them well? Explain.  The final task 4 of SSLP required students to publish their individual projects on the Mahara website and to individually evaluate their SSLPs in a specially designed self-evaluation sheet. The self-evaluation was done on the 5-grade evaluation scale varying from poor to excellent. One-word responses or short answers to the questions were not acceptable. This task encouraged students to elaborate on their responses in detail. The self-evaluation open-ended questions were: ? What do you think was good about the appearance of your webpage?  ? How do you think you could have improved the appearance your webpage?  ? What do you think was good about the contents (listening, questions, and vocabulary) of your webpage?  ? How do you think you could have improved the contents of your webpage?  ? Do you think that you answered your partners? questions and responded to them well?  After everyone had created their self-study materials, students were required to post responses to questions of the two SSLPs of their classmates and check and respond to the posts of the students who answered the questions for their project. This 92  had occurred prior to students? self-evaluation and, in this way, students had the opportunity to try their listening activities out on fellow students in order to support this self-evaluation with the experience of a pilot trial. After this was done, the individual SSLP of each student was considered completed. In contrast with the initial activity of segmenting the audiovisual material with the purpose of its better understanding, after students had already familiarized themselves with the subject area of interest during the initial stages of SSLP, they were able to use at this stage their schematic knowledge with the new language they encountered. Therefore, it can be inferred that this task required students to utilize a top-down approach to listening comprehension more frequently at this stage. In this way, students readapted the ?conceptual framework? (Vandergrift, 2003) to newly acquired language within a given learning context. The use of written video transcripts, which were attached to each VOA Learning English Channel?s Lifestyle video, helped students to further improve their comprehension of the audiovisual material2. The SSLP was designed to be carried out with the use of both approaches to listening, which is in accord with the theoretical framework of teaching listening skills found in pertinent research discussed in section 2.4. The use of a bottom-up approach with the purpose of helping students gain a better ?meaning-based comprehension? related to grammatical features is justified. It is combined with the top-down approach to help students better understand listening texts (Cross, 2009).                                             2  For the reason that using screenshots is against the regulations of UBC and fair dealing regulations in the Canadian copyright law, the original screenshots demonstrating the point made by the author were removed. The author was referring to transcripts in the video that can be found by following this link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LtvaBUYVY1I   93  4.2.2 SSLP Listening Strategies 4.2.2.1 Task 2 and Task 3 Tasks 2 and 3 required students to list 10 important points from the listening passage and change those into comprehension questions.   Listening Self-Study Project Worksheet 2  Name: Student Number:   Before you start working on your self-study webpage project, the listening that you are going to use needs to be approved by your CALL teacher(s).  1. What is the URL?   2. How long is the listening?   3. What is the listening?s topic?   4. List at least 10 important vocabulary words:   5. List at least 10 important points from the listening:     Comprehension questions:  Use the list of important points from worksheet 2 and make at least ten comprehension questions.  Their purpose is to make sure that your listeners understand the main points of the listening.     Activities such as organization, summary, and elaboration of material belong to the category of cognitive strategies (Peterson, 2001). The use of cognitive strategies 94  allowed students to better comprehend what they hear by allowing them to focus on specific details of audiovisual aids. Smidt and Hegelheimer (2004) argue that these types of listening strategies are the most used ones between second language learners and may be of the greatest benefit when used in combination with metacognitive strategies. 4.2.2.2 Task 4 Task 4 of SSLP, the self-evaluation task required students to critically evaluate their SSLPs by responding to a number of questions that ranged from the outlook of the finalized webpage to its content.  ? What do you think was good about the appearance of your webpage?  ? How do you think you could have improved the appearance your webpage?  ? What do you think was good about the contents (listening, questions, and vocabulary) of your webpage?  ? How do you think you could have improved the contents of your webpage?  ? Do you think that you answered your partners? questions and responded to them well?  Peterson (2001) categorizes activities that involve evaluating, as a specific metacognitive task, which are considered essential for listeners to regulate listening input on their own (Peterson, 2001), and in ?the development of self-regulated listening? (Vandergrift & Tafaghodtari, 2010). According to Vandergrift (2004) the use of 95  metacognitive strategies is connected to the increase of confidence, improvement of listening skills and formation of meaningful mental connections by using in conjunction metacognitive and cognitive strategies. Finally, the socioaffective strategies were also encouraged by task 4 (self-evaluation) of SSLP. The interactive exercise of posting responses to questions of students? individual SSLPs and SSLPS of their classmates (see Appendix G) is an example of socioaffective strategy. Activities, which entail social interaction, such as group and pair work, class discussions and cooperative learning could be identified as socioaffective. This is congruent with the interdependence aspects of learner autonomy theory (Benson, 2001). Some research also suggests (O?Malley & Chamot, 1990) that socioaffective strategies have the most impact on development of listening skills by having students participate in actual conversation with other people, when dealing with the listening material. Through the tasks of SSLP, students were exposed to authentic listening materials multiple times both inside and outside the classroom, and their progress was well-documented in the form of the project-related worksheets. Implications and recommendations will be discussed in more detail in chapter five of this study. 4.3 Overall Summary of Findings In the process of analyzing the materials? data and incorporating related theoretical framework and research, a number of important findings were made linked to a few themes. These findings may aid answering the research question of this study, as well as may aid in building a better understanding of the instructional needs of the 96  undergraduate students in the CALL classes at PGU, as discussed further in the concluding chapter. The first theme that emerged relates to SSLP and promotion of autonomous learning in the CALL EFL classroom. SSLP is found likely to enhance development of the interdependent autonomous learning skills of students, as was shown in the analysis of SSLP materials in section 4.1. This was done by applying course-designing principles that promote autonomous learning (Cotterall, 2000) described in section 2.3.4 to the SSLP-related materials. The second theme that emerged is related to the development of listening skills in the CALL EFL classroom. A balanced strategy approach to listening instruction was taken in the process of implementation of SSLP with the use of technology. Listening instruction with the use of various audiovisual materials and top-down and bottom-up approaches to listening, together with multiple cognitive, metacognitive, and socioaffective activities may greatly enhance listening comprehension skills of EFL students (Vandergrift, 2004). Likewise, teachers have a responsibility to their students to scaffold the use of technology in conjunction with any listening activity. The third theme that emerged is connected to the second theme and deals with the contribution of authentic materials to listening instruction, and specifically the use of subtitled and captioned videos to help EFL students overcome difficulties. The findings of the study are discussed in light of their implications to theory and practice in the next chapter. In addition, some recommendations for the EFL program that the study findings support are also presented. 97  Chapter 5: Conclusion and Implications This chapter first presents a discussion of the limitations of the study, followed by an overview of the main findings and the implications of findings for practice. The chapter concludes with a brief discussion of the contributions of the study for further research on this topic.  The present study was designed to investigate the efficacy of Self-study Listening Project (SSLP) in its development of autonomous learning and listening skills among undergraduate EFL students at a Japanese university. The study was guided by research questions designed to gather information on autonomous learning and listening approaches and strategies utilized by the undergraduate EFL students participating in a CALL-enhanced EFL course, as documented in the course materials. In all, 30 students from the Japanese university participated in this study. Using an exploratory case study research design, data from course?s syllabus materials were collected for a materials analysis and used to answer the two research questions.  5.1 Limitations of the Study Investigation of autonomous learning has been the main objective of this study. For that reason the absence of the ?time spent on the SSLP? criterion in the self-evaluation sheet and its exclusion from the general evaluation criteria for the course (Appendix B) may be seen as a limitation, which puts constraints on generalizability and utility of findings in this study. A suggestion for any future iteration of the study would be to consider inclusion of this criterion in the self-evaluation sheet and general evaluation criteria for the course, as well as its explicit instruction and explanation to students by instructors involved in course?s facilitation. In addition, future replications of this study 98  may also need to consider ways to evaluate the number of hours a student spends on the completion of the SSLP project inside and outside the classroom. Extending research of an SSLP project over two terms might also be a useful suggestion for any future iteration. If the study was carried out over two terms, a well-documented evaluation of the progress in development of the autonomous skills conducted at the end of both the first and second terms may serve as a useful point of reference in studying the development of autonomous skills of students. Absence of physical worksheets 1, 2, 3 and 4 submitted by students at the end of each stage of SSLP posed a significant obstacle in finding themes and meaningful relationships in the development of autonomous skills of students participating in SSLP. The reason why this data was missing is that worksheets were not considered a valuable source of information to the course instructors at the time the project was carried out. Hence, that data source had to be excluded from the scope and objectives of the present study. Future replications of this study need to consider ways to preserve and interpret the information in the worksheets submitted by students in order to identify themes and meaningful relationships and possibly other sources of student performance. Another limitation of this study was the absence of data on the development of the listening skills of students. A suggestion for any future iteration of the study would be to consider using a pre-listening test in the beginning of the term and a post-listening test in the end of the term, adopted or specifically developed by instructors with the use of audiovisual materials similar to those used in SSLP, with the purpose of evaluating 99  and providing better evidence for the development of listening skills among the undergraduate EFL students at PGU. To increase validity, the listening assessment can also be independent of the course materials, but be conceptually similar. It is also considered desirable to allow more time for the final self-evaluation stage, which was necessary for students to promote use and development of metacognitive strategies. The participants in this study were Japanese students studying at a Japanese university. This should be taken into account when drawing generalizations, as the materials of the course students were involved in might be characteristic of the EFL course designed for a particular group of students in the EFL setting.  Given the limitations of the study discussed above, the findings inform some important questions that may benefit the CALL-enhanced EFL teaching. The main findings and their implications are discussed in the next section with recommendations for enhancing the educational experience of the EFL students. 5.2 Discussion of Findings, Implications and Recommendations The main findings of the study highlighted at the end of chapter four are presented below with brief discussions of implications to practice and recommendations for the CALL-enhanced EFL program. In investigating the efficacy of a Self-study Listening Project (SSLP), the results of the materials analysis revealed that SSLP is likely to have impact on development of autonomous learning in these students. It appeared that academic materials included activities that fostered the transfer of responsibility for some aspects of the language learning process (such as setting goals, selecting materials, developing content and 100  evaluating progress) from the teacher to the learner. Students developed their SSLP projects working individually and in interaction with their classmates, which has been identified in the research literature as conducive of development of interdependent autonomous learning skills (Benson, 2001).  As was reported in the study conducted by Besette (2009) on integration of CALL into the curriculum, the majority of the students enjoyed using Longman English Interactive (LEI) and doing the webpage project. Student performances on their LEI quizzes and tests supported their opinions that the CALL classes were beneficial. Average class quiz scores ranged from 86.5 to 92.2 and average class module test scores ranged from 85.5 to 90.8 (Besette, 2009). Instructors regarded these scores as positive and showing that the students made progress in their English studies. In the same study, Besette (2009) also reported: Most students agreed that the overlap between the CALL and Listening & Speaking classes was helpful and so CALL reinforced what they learned in that class. The number of opportunities to communicate with other learners and native speakers was limited in the first semester, but most of them appreciated being able to read about their classmates in the webpage projects. Some communication between students occurred in comments on their classmates? webpages. The webpages provided them with an opportunity to use language ? they had to explain what was important to them ? and most students felt that it helped them learn to express themselves in English.  They also thought that teacher corrections were beneficial.  Also on the positive side, the students attached importance to being able to do the activities at their own pace, getting 101  immediate feedback and being able to access the websites anytime and anywhere. These benefits should have had a positive influence on the students? motivation (p.11). Activities included in SSLP encouraged students to use metacognitive strategies such as planning and self-evaluation. Such activities were also shown to foster development of autonomous learning skills (Dam & Legenhausen,1999). This materials analysis has also revealed that listening instruction in SSLP was conducted with the use of various audiovisual materials and coincided with top-down and bottom-up approaches to listening, and multiple cognitive, metacognitive, and socioaffective strategies. The use of technology was scaffolded through the various listening activities described in the worksheets of the SSLP project. By implementing such an approach to listening instruction, teachers will be able to enhance exposure to various listening strategies, as well as be able to better monitor the listening level of students through the successful completion of tasks. This materials analysis has also revealed that the use of authentic listening materials makes a significant contribution to students? listening outcomes. Specifically, the use of subtitled and captioned videos may help EFL students overcome comprehension difficulties and considerably increase their understanding of audiovisual data through a better knowledge of the context, in which an aural discourse is taking place. This effect can be achieved when two visual modes, pictorial and verbal, are present (Guichon & McLornan, 2008). Therefore, the technological addition to the SSLP activities may help in overall improvements of students? listening comprehension. 102  Listening projects such as the SSLP are easy to implement and require light supervision from teachers while providing, as evidenced by findings of the present study, an effective means of scaffolding students? English listening skills. This materials analysis has also revealed that the tasks in SSLP were not linked to a simplified model of the language learning process, which is considered imperative by Cotterall (2000). Hence, a recommendation for any future use of the SSLP would be to consider including an explicit instruction of the model of the language learning process to a curriculum of a CALL-enhanced EFL course. This model may prompt insightful reflections, teach necessary terminology and support the transfer of responsibility for aspects of the learning process. If students receive explicit instruction of multiple listening strategies available to them, they may become more interested and motivated to achieve better learning outcomes (Vandergrift, 2004). The result of such instruction may further enhance autonomous learning and listening abilities of EFL students. 5.3 Contributions of the Study The study uncovered some interesting findings that will make a useful contribution to the research available on autonomous learning as well as the use of audiovisual materials in promoting listening skills in EFL students. In addition, the study and the findings also extend the existing research carried out with SSLP and integration of CALL into the curricula. However, there are some limitations such as those discussed in section 5.1, which need to be taken into consideration while interpreting the results of this study. 103  The findings suggest that the use of an activity like SSLP may help students develop autonomous learning skills to help them become more efficient learners. The independent and interdependent practice of planning, designing and evaluating an individual SSLP is an easy way of bolstering students? metacognitive skills. By incorporating CALL into curriculum by means of activities like SSLP and fostering individual and collaborative work, teachers will be able to promote autonomous learning, which will benefit the students long after their formal English language training is finished.  As was aptly stated by Degen (2004), ?the shift to more autonomous, self-directed and therefore more efficient learning has to be initiated through profound reforms of the (Japanese) education system. But since this is not to be expected in the near future, it is the teachers' turn to encourage autonomy in their classes? (p. 8). SSLP may prove to be an effective tool in bringing about such change "within the space that the teacher is able to open up for it [learner autonomy] in their interpretation of the broader constraints on the learners' freedom of action in learning" (Benson, 2000, p. 116). The suggestions in preceding paragraphs may provide some direction and guidance for designing similar projects, which may foster autonomous learning and the development of speaking, reading or writing skills with the use of CALL technology.  More research will be required to determine if a longer period of exposure to SSLP-related activities with more participants may change the degree of learner autonomy with which the completion of the SSLP is approached. The findings documented in this study demonstrate some benefits of using self-study projects like SSLP for EFL learners in the EFL settings. A self-study project like SSLP is an 104  undemanding, easily supervised and obviously efficient means of scaffolding students? English listening skills.                105  References Abbot, P. (2008). Another step towards understanding recovery? Invited commentary on... Self-determination theory. Advances in Psychiatric Treatment, 14, 366-368. Retrieved from: http://apt.rcpsych.org/content/14/5/366.full  Abdalhamid, F. (2012). Listening comprehension strategies of Arabic-speaking ESL learners. (M.A. dissertation). Retrieved from: http://digitool.library.colostate.edu/webclient/DeliveryManager?pid=161917  Adams, E., Morrison, H., & Reedy, J. (1968). Conversation with a computer as a technique of language instruction. Modern Language Journal, 52, 3-16.  Ahmad K., Corbett G., Rogers M., & Sussex R. (1985). Computers, language learning and language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.  Aliponga, J., Gamble, C., Wilkins, M., Koshiyama, Y., Yoshida, K., & Ando, S. (2012). Examining learner autonomy dimensions: Students? perceptions of their responsibility and ability. In A. Stewart & N. Sonda (Eds.), JALT 2011 Conference Proceedings. Tokyo: JALT.  Ansary, H., & Babaie, E. (2002). Universal characteristics of EFL/ESL textbooks: A step towards systematic textbook evaluation. The Internet TESL Journal, 8(2), 1-9.  Ansorge, C. J., & Bendus, O. (2004). The pedagogical impact of course management systems on faculty, students, and institutions. In R. Bruning, C. Horn, & L. M. Pitlyk Zillig (Eds.), Web-based learning: What do we know? Where do we go? (pp.169-190). Information Age Publications, Greenwich, CT.  Anthony, L. (1998). Defining English for specific purposes and the role of the ESP practitioner. In T. Orr (Ed.), Center for Language Research 1997 Annual Review (pp. 115-120). Aizuwakamatsu: University of Aizu.  Aoki, N., & Smith, R. (1999). Learner autonomy in cultural context: The case of Japan. In S. Cotterall, & D. Crabbe (Eds.), Bayreuth Contributions to Glottodidactics, 8, 19-28. Frankfurt: Peter Lang.  Apple, M. T., Da Silva, D. & Fellner, T. (2013) Language Learning Motivation in Japan. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.  Armbruster, P., Johnson, E., & Weiss, M. (2009). Active learning and student-centered pedagogy improve student attitudes and performance in introductory biology. Journal of Life Sciences Education, 8, 203-213.  Babbie, E. (2001).The practice of social research (9th Ed.). Belmont: Wadsworth.  106  Baltova, I. (1999). Multisensory language teaching in a multidimensional curriculum: The use of authentic bimodal video in core French. Canadian Modern Language Review, 56, 31-48.  Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social-cognitive theory. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.  Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. Freeman, New York.  Barnard, D. T., Chretien, G., Lewis, I., Loban, N., Johnston, D., & Mclennan, J. T. (2001). The elearning e-volution: a Pan-Canadian challenge. Ottawa, Canada: Advisory Committee for Online Learning, Information Distribution Centre.  Baxter, P., & Jack, S. (2008). Qualitative case study methodology: Study design and implementation for novice researchers. The Qualitative Report, 13(4), 544-559.  Beatty, K. (2003). Teaching and researching computer-assisted language learning. New York: Longman.  Benson, P. (2001). Teaching and Researching Autonomy in Language Learning. Harlow: Longman Pearson Education.  Berelson, B. (1971). Content analysis in communication research. New York: Hafner.  Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom: Talk to every student in every class every day. Washington, DC: International Society for Technology in Education.   Besette, A. (2009). Integrating CALL into the curriculum. Poole Gakuin University English Education Research Bulletin.  Biache, K. (2004). Longman English interactive review. ESL Magazine.  Bicknell, J. (1999). Promoting writing and computer literacy skills through student-authored web pages. TESOL Journal, 8(1), 20-26.  Bird, S. (2009). Natural language processing with python. O'Reilly Media.  Boud, D. (1988). Developing student autonomy in learning. New York: Kogan Press.  Bower, B. L. (2001). Distance education: facing the faculty challenge. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 4(2). Retrieved from: http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/summer42/bower42.html  Boyatzis, R. E. (1998). Transforming qualitative information: Thematic analysis and code development. Thousand Oaks, London, & New Delhi: SAGE Publications. 107   Breen, M. P., Candlin, C., & Waters, A. (1979). Communicative materials design: some basic principles. RELC Journal, 10(2), 1-13.  Brooks, N. (1960). Language and language learning: Theory and practice. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World.  Brown, J. D. (1991). Statistics as a foreign language - Part 1: What to look for in reading statistical language studies. TESOL Quarterly, 25, 569-586.  Bryman, A. (2004). Social research methods. New York: Oxford University Press.  Burrus, J. (2009). Adult ESL student perceptions on computer assisted language learning. (Unpublished MSc thesis). University of Nevada, Las Vegas.  Butler, D. L., & Winne, P. H. (1995). Feedback and Self-Regulated Learning: A Theoretical Synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 65(3), 245 -281.  Byrd, P. (2001). Textbooks: Evaluation for selection and analysis for implementation. In M. Celce-Murcia. Teaching English as a second or foreign language. (3rd Ed.) (pp. 415-427). US: Heinle & Heinle, Thomson Learning Inc.  Chaiklin, S., & Lave, J. (1993). Understanding practice: Perspectives on activity and context. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.  Chamot, A.U., Barnhardt, S., El-Dinary, P.B., & Robbins, J. (1999). The learning strategies handbook. White Plains, NY: Addison Wesley Longman.  Chapelle, C. (1999). Theory and research: Investigation of "authentic" language learning tasks. In J. Egbert & E. Hanson-Smith (Eds.), CALL environments: Research, practice and critical issues (pp. 101-115). Alexandria, VA: TESOL.   Chapelle, C. (2001). Computer applications in second language acquisition: Foundations for teaching, testing, and research. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.  Chapelle, C. (2002). Computer-assisted language learning. In R. Kaplan (Ed.) Handbook of applied linguistics (pp.499-505). Oxford: Oxford University Press.  Chapelle, C. & Duff, P. (Eds.). (2003). Some guidelines for conducting quantitative and qualitative research in TESOL.TESOL Quarterly, 37, 157-178.   Chung, U. K. (1994). The effect of audio, a single picture, multiple pictures, or video on second-language listening comprehension. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.  108  Cole, M. (1996). Cultural Psychology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.  Cole, M., & Engestr?m, Y. (1994). Introduction: Mind, culture and activity. An International Journal, 1(4), 201.  Cooper, D. R., & Schindler, P. S. (1998). Business Research Methods. Irwin.  Corno, L., & Mandinach, E. B. (1983). The role of cognitive engagement in classroom learning and motivation. Educational Psychologist, 18, 88-108  Coryell, J., & Chlup, T. (2007). Implementing E-learning components with adult English language learners: Vital factors and lessons learned. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 20(3), 263-278.  Cotterall, S. (2000). Promoting learner autonomy through the curriculum: Principles for designing language courses. ELT Journal 54(2), 109-117.  Council of Europe. (2001). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Retrieved from http://www.coe.int/t/dg4/linguistic/ source/Framework_EN.pdf  Cross, J. (2009). Effects of listening strategy instruction on news videotext comprehension.Language Teaching Research, 13, 151-176.  Cunningsworth, A. (1995). Choosing your coursebook. Oxford: Heinemann.  Curtin, C., Clayton, D., & Finch, C. (1972). Teaching the translation of Russian by computer. Modern Language Journal, 56(6), 354?360.  D'Silva, R. (2011). Promoting reading skills of young adult EAL learners through voice recognition software. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from:  http://hdl.handle.net/2429/37665  D?Silva, R., & Reeder, K. (2005).Factors that influence faculty members? uptake and use of course management systems. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36(6), 1071-1073.  Dam, L. (1995). Learner autonomy 3: from theory to classroom practice. Dublin: Authentic Language Learning Resources Ltd.  Dam, L. (2000). Why focus on learning rather than teaching? From theory to practice.In D. Little, L. Dam, & J. Timmer (Eds.), Papers from the IATEFL conference on learner independence (pp. 18-37). Dublin: CLCS, Trinity College Dublin.  Dam, L., & Legenhausen, L. (1999). Language acquisition in an autonomous learning environment: Learners? self-evaluation and external assessments compared. In 109  S. Cotterall, & D. Crabbe (Eds.), Learner autonomy in language learning: Defining the field and effecting change (pp. 89-98). Frankfurt: Peter Lang.  Davies, G., Bangs, P., Frisby, R., & Walton, E. (2005). Setting up effective digital language laboratories and multimedia ICT suites for MFL. Retrieved from: http://www.languages-ict.org.uk/  Deci, E. L. (1975). Intrinsic motivation. New York: Plenum Publishing Co.  Deci, E. L. (2008). Self-determination theory: A macrotheory of human motivation, development and health. Canadian Psychology, 49, 182-185.  Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum.  Degen, R. (2004). Japanese students' foreign language acquisition learner autonomy: Actual situation and some suggestions for its promotion. Kagawa University Departmental Bulletin Paper. Retrieved from: http://shark.lib.kagawa-u.ac.jp/kuir/metadata/57  Doughty, C. (2000). Negotiating the L2 linguistic environment. University of Hawaii Working Papers in ESL, 18, 47-83.  Duff, P. (2008). Case study research in applied linguistics. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.  Duff, P. (2012). Identity, agency, and SLA. In A. Mackey & S. Gass (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp.410-426). London: Routledge.  Dulay, H., Burt, M., & Krashen, S.D. (1982). Language Two. Oxford: OUP.  Ebata, M. (2008). Motivation factors in language learning. The Internet TESL Journal. Retrieved from: http://iteslj.org/Articles/Ebata-MotivationFactors.html  Educational Testing Service. (2010a). TOEIC speaking and writing tests data and analysis 2009: Number of examinees and average scores in FY2009.Princeton: Educational Testing Service. Retrieved from http://www.toeic.or.jp/toeic_en/pdf/data/TOEIC_SW_DAA2009.pdf  Educational Testing Service. (2010b). TOEIC test data and analysis 2009: Number of examinees and average scores in FY2009. Princeton: Educational Testing Service. Retrieved from http://www.toeic.or.jp/toeic_en/pdf/data/TOEIC_DAA2009.pdf  110  Eison, J. (2010). Using active learning instructional strategies to create excitement and enhance learning. Retrieved from http://www.cte.cornell.edu/documents/presentations/Eisen-Handout.pdf  Ellis, R. (1990). Instructed second language acquisition. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.  Ellis, R. (2002). The place of grammar instruction in the second/foreign language curriculum. In E. Hinkel & S. Fotos (Eds.), New perspectives on grammar teaching in second language classrooms (pp. 17-34). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.  Ellis, R., & Rathbone, M. (1987). The acquisition of German in a classroom context. Ealing College of Higher Education.  Erben, T., Ban, R., & Casta?eda, M. (2009).Teaching English language learners through technology. New York: Routledge.  Eshet, Y. (2004). Digital literacy: A conceptual framework for survival skills in the digital era. Journal of Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 13(1), 93-106.  Felix, U. (2005). Analysing recent call effectiveness research--towards a common agenda. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 18, 1-32.  Fisser, P. (2006). Using ICT in higher education: From pilot to implementation, who is involved? 13th International Conference ALT-C 2006, 5-7.  Flavell, J. H.  (1971). First discussant's comments:  What is memory development the development of?  Human Development, 14, 272-278.  Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34, 906-911.  Flavell, J. H. (1987). Speculations about the nature and development of metacognition.  In F. E. Weinert & R. H. Kluwe (Eds.), Metacognition, Motivation and Understanding (pp. 21-29). Hillside, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.  Furstenberg, G., Levet, S., English, K., & Maillet, K. (2001). Giving a virtual voice to the silent language of culture: The Cultura project. Language Learning and Technology, 5(19), 55 ? 102.  Furstenberg, G., Murray, J. H., Malone, S., & Farman-Farmaian, A. (1993). A la rencontre de Philippe. New Haven: Yale University Press.  Garinger, D. (2002). Textbook selection for the ESL classroom. Center for Applied Linguistics Digest. Retrieved from http://www.cal.org/resources/Digest/0210garinger.html 111   Gohil, S. (2013). Preparation and tryout of multimedia materials to enhance communication skills of students at the UG Level in Digital Language Laboratory. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from: http://hdl.handle.net/10603/7321  Gonglewski, M. R. (1999). Linking the Internet to the National Standards for foreign language learning. Foreign Language Annals, 32(3), 348-62.  Guichon, N., & McLornan, S. (2008). The effects of multimodality on L2 learners: implications for CALL resource design. System, 36, 85-93.  Hacker, D. J. (1998). Metacognition: Definitions and empirical foundations. In D. J. Hacker, J. Dunlosky, & A. C. Graesser (Eds.), Metacognition in educational theory and practice (pp. 1-23). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.  Hara, N. & Kling, R. (1999).Students' frustrations with a web-based distance education course. First Monday. Retrieved from: http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/710/620  Harmelen, M. (2006). Personal Learning Environments. Retrieved from: http://wiki.ties.k12.mn.us/file/view/PLEs_draft.pdf  Hartley, J. (1994). Case studies in organizational research. In C. Cassell & G. Symon (Eds.), Qualitative methods in organizational research, a practical guide (pp. 208-229). London: Sage.    Hartley, J. (2004). Case study research. In C. Cassell & G. Symon (Eds.), Essential guide to qualitative methods in organizational research (pp. 323-333). London: Sage.  Hatch, E. (1978). Second language acquisition: A book of readings. Rowley, MA: Newbury House.  Healey, D., & Johnson, N. (1995). A brief introduction to CALL. In D. Healey & N. Johnson, (Eds.), 1995 TESOL CALL (pp. iii-vii). VA: TESOL Publications.  Holec, H. (1979). Autonomy and foreign language learning. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.  Holec, H. (1981). Autonomy and foreign language learning. Oxford: Pergamon.  Hufton, C. (2005). Longman English Interactive. TESL-EL, 9(2).  112  Hutchinson, E. (1996). What do teachers and learners actually do with textbooks? Teacher and learner use of a fisheries-based ELT textbook in the Philippines. (Unpublished PhD thesis, Lancaster University).  Hutchinson, T., & Waters, A. (1987).English for specific purposes: A learning- centered approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.  Iwabuchi, T., & Fotos, S. (2004). Creating course-specific CD-ROMs for interactive language learning. In: S. Fotos & C. Browne (Eds.), New perspectives on CALL for second language classrooms (pp. 149-167). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.  Irie, K. (2003). What do we know about the learning motivation of university students in Japan? Some patterns in survey studies. JALT Journal, 25(1), 86-100.  Jamieson, J., Chapelle, C.A., & Preiss, S. (2005). CALL Evaluation by developers, a teacher, and students, CALICO Journal, 23(1), 93-138.   Jenkins, H. (2009). Confronting the challenges of participatory culture: Media education for the 21st century. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.  Johnson, D. M. (1992). Approaches to research in second language learning. New York: Longman.  Jones, K. (1995). Simulations: A handbook for teachers and trainers.  Jones, L. (2008). Listening comprehension technology: Building the bridge from analog to digital. CALICO Journal, 25, 400-419.  Kant, E. (1785). The Groundwork for the Metaphysics of Morals.  Kasser, T., & Ryan, R. M. (1996).Further examining the American dream: Differential correlates of intrinsic and extrinsic goals. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 280?287.  Kenning, M. M., & Kenning, M. J. (1983). An introduction to computer assisted language teaching. Cambridge: CUP.  Kenning, M. M., & Kenning, M. J. (1990). Computers and Language Learning: Current Theory and Practice. New York: Ellis Horwood.  Kentridge, R. W., & Heywood, C. A. (2000). Metacognition & awareness. Consciousness & Cognition, 9, 308-312.  Kern, R. & Warschauer, M. (2000). Theory and practice of network-based language teaching.  In M. Warschauer & R. Kern (Eds.), Network-based language 113  teaching: Concepts and practice (pp. 1?19). New York: Cambridge University Press.  Kilickaya, F. (2004). Authentic materials and cultural content in EFL classrooms. The Internet TESL Journal. Retrieved from: http://iteslj.org/Techniques/Kilickaya-AutenticMaterial  Kim, H.K. (2008). Beyond Motivation: ESL/EFL Teachers? Perceptions of the Role of Computers. CALICO Journal, 25(2), 241-259.  Klassen, J., Detaramani, C., Lui, E., Patri, M., & Wu, J. (1998). Does self-access language learning at the tertiary level really work? Asian Journal of English Language Teaching, 8. Retrieved from http://www.cuhk.edu.hk/ajelt/vol8/art4.htm  Klenke, K. (2008). Qualitative research in the study of leadership. Emerald Group: UK.  Kohlbacher, F. (2005). The use of qualitative content analysis in case study research. Qualitative Social Research, 7(1). Retrieved from: http://www.qualitative-research.net/index.php/fqs/article/%20view/75/153January%202006  Kracauer, S. (1952). The challenge of qualitative content analysis. Public Opinion Quarterly, 16(4), 631-642.  Kramsch, C., & Anderson, R. (1999).Teaching text and context through multimedia. Language Learning and Technology, 2(2), 31-42.  Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Pergamon Press.  Krug, K. (2002). Some points to ponder in textbook evaluation. Retrieved from http://www.kutztown.edu/library/materials/textbookeval.htm  Lage, M. J., Platt, G. J., & Treglia, M. (2000).Inverting the classroom: A gateway to creating an inclusive learning environment. Journal of Economic Education, 31(1), 30-43.   Lamy, M., & Hampel, R. (2007).Online communication in language learning and teaching. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.  Landow, G. (1992). Hypertext: The convergence of contemporary critical theory and technology. Baltimore, MD: The Johns Hopkins University Press.  Lee, K. (2000). English teachers? barriers to the use of computer assisted language learning. The Internet TESL Journal. Retrieved from: http://iteslj.org/Articles/Lee-CALLbarriers.html 114   Leontiev, A. N. (1981). Problems of the development of mind. Moscow: Progress Press.  Levy, M. (1997). CALL: Context and conceptualization. Oxford: Oxford University Press.  Levy, M. (2002). CALL by design: Discourse, products and processes. ReCALL, 14(1), 58?84.  Levy, P. (2002). Interactive Whiteboards in learning and teaching in two Sheffield schools: a developmental study. Sheffield: Department of Information Studies, University of Sheffield.  Levy, S. (1988). Information technologies in universities: An institutional case study. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff.  Lieberman, A. (1995). Practices that support teacher development: Transforming conceptions of professional learning. Phi Delta Kappan, 76, 591-596.  Lightbrown, P., & Spada, N. (2006). How languages are learned. New York: Oxford University Press.  Lindenau, S. (1984). The teacher and technology in the humanities and arts. Modern Language Journal, 68(2), 119-124.  Linn, M. C. (2000). Designing the knowledge integration environment. International Journal of Science Education, 22, 781-796.  Little, D. (1994). Learner autonomy: A theoretical construct and its practical application. Die Neueren Sprachen, 93(5): 430?442.  Little, D. (1998). Seminar on research in CALL. ReCALL, 10(1), 127?128.  Little, J. W. (1999).Organizing schools for teacher learning. In L. Darling-Hammond & G. Sykes (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice (pp. 233-262). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.  Livingston, J. (1997) Metacognition: An overview. Retrieved from:  http://www.gse.buffalo.edu/fas/shuell/cep564/Metacog.htm  Lockley, T., & Promnitz-Hayashi, L. (2012). Japanese university students? CALL attitudes, aspirations and motivations. CALL-EJ online, 13(1), 1-16.  Lyddon, P. A. (2011). Training Japanese university English learners for greater autonomy. In A. Stewart (Ed.), JALT 2010 Conference Proceedings  (pp. 700-713). Tokyo: JALT.  115  Lyddon, P. A. (2012). Japanese university student self-motivation and language learning autonomy. In A. Stewart & N. Sonda (Eds.), JALT 2011 Conference Proceedings. Tokyo: JALT.  Macaro, E. (1997). Target language, collaborative learning and autonomy. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.  Martinez, A. (2002). Authentic materials: An overview. Karen's Linguistic Issues. Retrieved from http://www3.telus.net/linguisticsissues/authenticmaterials.html  Mayring, P. (2000). Qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Social Research, 1(2), 120-130.  McGrath, I. (2002). Materials evaluation and design for language teaching. Edinburgh.  Miekley, J. (2005). ESL Textbook Evaluation Checklist. The Reading Matrix, 5(2), 1-19.  Mill, J. (1859). On liberty. London: Longman, Roberts & Green.  Morgan, G. (2003). Faculty use of course management systems. Retrieved from http://www.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ecar_so/ers/ERS0302/ekf0302.pdf  Morley, J. (1994). A multidimensional curriculum design for speech-pronunciation instruction. In J. Morley (Ed.), Pronunciation pedagogy and theory. Bloomington: TESOL, Inc.  Morley, J. (2001). Aural comprehension instruction: Principles and practices. In M. Celce-Murcia (Ed.). Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language. Boston, MA: Heinle, Cengage Learning.  Moss, S. (2012). Cognitive evaluation theory. Retrieved from: http://www.psych-it.com.au/Psychlopedia/article.asp?id=439  Nation, I. S. P., & Macalister, J. (2010). Language Curriculum Design. New York and London: Routledge/Taylor & Francis.  Niemiec, C. P., Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2009). The path taken: Consequences of attaining intrinsic and extrinsic aspirations in post-college life. Journal of Research in Personality, 43, 291?306.  Nunan, D. (1988). The learner-centred curriculum. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.  Nunan, D. (1992). Research methods in language learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.  116  O?Malley, J. M., & Chamot, A. U. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.  O?Quinn, L., & Corry, M. (2002). Factors that deter faculty from participating in distance education. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 5(4). Retrieved from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/winter54/Quinn54.htm  Olsen, S. (1980). Foreign language departments and computer-assisted instruction: A survey. Modern Language Journal, 64(3), 341-349.  Pajares, F. (1996). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of Educational Research, 66(4), 543?578.  Papert, S. (1980).Computer-based microworlds as incubators for powerful ideas. In R. Taylor (Ed.), The computer in the school: Tutor, tool, tutee (pp. 1-10). New York: Teacher?s College Press.  Peterson, P. W. (2001). Skills and strategies for proficient listening.In M.Celce-Murcia (Ed.), Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language. Boston, MA: Heinle, Cengage Learning.  Pintrich, P. R., & DeGroot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82 (1), 33-40.  Pintrich, P. R. (2000b). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 451?502). San Diego, CA: Academic.  Poore, M. (2011). Digital Literacy: Human Flourishing and Collective Intelligence in a Knowledge Society. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 19(2), 20-26.  Posner, M. (1976). Visual dominance: An information-processing account of its origins and significance. Psychological Review, 83(2), 157-171.  Pressley, M., & Afflerbach, P. (1995).Verbal protocols of reading: The nature of constructively responsive reading. Hillsdale NJ: Erlbaum.  Prolingua Executive Language Services. (2000). TOEIC info. Retrieved from http://www.prolingua.co.jp/toeic_e.html  Pusack, J. & Otto, S. (1990). Applying instructional technologies. Foreign Language Annals, 23(5), 409-417.  117  Reder, L., & Schunn, C. D. (1996). Metacognition does not imply awareness: Strategy choice is governed by implicit learning and memory. In L. M. Reder (Ed.), Implicit memory and metacognition (pp. 45-78). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.  Reeder, K. (2012). Edubba: Real-world writing tasks in a virtual world. In M. Thomas & H. Reinders (Eds.), Task-based language teaching and technology (pp. 176-196). London and New York: Continuum.   Reeder, K., Early, M., Kendrick, M., Shapiro, J., D'Silva, R., Hong, L., et al. (2005). Listening to diverse learners: The effectiveness and appropriateness of a computer-based Reading Tutor. Department of Language & Literacy Education, The University of British Columbia.  Reinking, D. (1997). Me and my hypertext: a multiple digression analysis of technology and literacy. The Reading Teacher, 50, 626-643.  Richards, J. (1990). The language teaching matrix. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.  Rivers, W. P. (2001). Autonomy at all costs: An ethnography of metacognitive self-assessment and self-management among experienced language learners. Modern Language Journal, 85(2), 279-290.  Ropchan, K., & Stutt, G. (2013). Flipped Classroom. Retrieved from:  http://etec.ctlt.ubc.ca/510wiki/Flipped_Classroom  Rost, M. (2003). Longman English Interactive 1 Communication Companion. New York: Pearson Longman.  Rost, M. (2003). Longman English Interactive 1 Scope & Sequence. Pearson Longman.  Rost, M. (2003). Longman English Interactive 2 Communication Companion. New York: Pearson Longman.  Rost, M. (2003). Longman English Interactive 2 Scope & Sequence. New York: Pearson Longman.   Rost, M. (2005). Longman English Interactive 1 Activity and Resource Book. New York: Pearson Longman.  Rost, M. (2005). Longman English Interactive 2 Activity and Resource Book. New York: Pearson Longman.  Roth, W., & Tobin, K. (2001). The implications of coteaching/cogenerative dialogue for teacher evaluation: Learning from multiple perspectives of everyday practice. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 15(1), 7?29. 118   R?schoff, B. (1993). Language learning and information technology: State of the art. CALICO Journal, 10(3), 5-17.  Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55, 68-78.   Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2006). Self-regulation and the problem of human autonomy: Does psychology need choice, self-determiniation, and will? Journal of Personality, 74, 1557-1586.  Ryan, R. M., Williams, G. C., Patrick, H., & Deci, E. L. (2009). Self-determination theory and physical activity: The dynamics of motivation in development and wellness. Hellenic Journal of Psychology, 6, 107-124.  Ryan, R.M., Lynch, M.F., Vansteenkiste, M., & Deci, E.L. (2011). Motivation and autonomy in counseling, psychotherapy and behavior change: A look at theory and practice. Counseling Psychologist, 39, 193-260.  Ryan, W., & Bernard, R. (2000).Data management and analysis methods. In Norman K. Denzin & Yvonna S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 769-802). Thousand Oaks: Sage.  Salaberry, M. R. (2001). The use of technology for second language learning and teaching: A retrospective. The Modern Language Journal, 85(1), 39?56.  Schmorrow, D. D., & Fidopiastis, C. M. (2011). Foundations of augmented cognition. Lecture notes in artificial intelligence, 6780, 578-587, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg.  Schommer, M. (1994). Synthesizing epistemological belief research: Tentative understandings and provocative confusions. Educational Psychology Review, 6(4), 293?320.  Schommer-Aikins, M. (2002). An evolving theoretical framework for an epistemological beliefs system. In B. Hofer & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Personal epistemology: The psychology of beliefs about knowledge and knowing (pp. 103?177). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.  Schunk, D. H. (1996). Learning theories: An educational perspective (2nd Ed.).Merrill, Englewood Cliffs, NJ.  119  Schraw, G. (2006). Knowledge: Structures and processes. In P. Alexander & P. Winne (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 245?264). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.  Schraw, G., & Moshman, D. (1995). Metacognitive theories. Educational Psychology Review, 7(4), 351-371.  Scott, S. (2003). Sociocultural theory. Retrieved from: http://www.education.com/reference/article/sociocultural-theory/  Shute, V., & Psotka, J. (1994). Intelligent tutoring systems: Past, present and future. Technical report, Human Resources Directorate, Manpower and Personnel Research Division, Brooks Air Force Base.  Smidt, E., & Hegelheimer, V. (2004).Effects of online academic lectures on ESL listening comprehension, incidental vocabulary acquisition, and strategy use. Computer  Assisted Language Learning, 17, 517-556.  Smit, R. (2012). Towards a clearer understanding of student disadvantage in higher education: Problematising deficit thinking. Higher Education Research & Development, 31(3), 369?380.  Smith, N. L. (1996). Evaluation modules and approaches. In T. Plomp & D. P. Ely (Eds.), The international encyclopedia of educational technology (pp. 238-246). Elsevier Science Ltd, Oxford, UK.  Son, J. (2007).Learner experiences in web-based language learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 20(1), 21-36.  St. Laurent, A. (2008). Understanding open source and free software licensing. O'Reilly Media.  Stake, R. E. (1994).Identification of the case. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 236-247). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.  Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks: Sage.  Stake, R. E. (2000). Case studies. In Norman K. Denzin & Yvonna S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp.435-453). Thousand Oaks: Sage.  Stake, R.E. (2005).Qualitative case studies. In Norman K. Denzin & Yvonna S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (pp. 443-466). Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.  Stevick, E. W. (1976). Memory, meaning and method: Some psychological perspectives on language learning. Boston: Heinle 86 Heinle. 120   Streb, C. (2010). Exploratory case study. In A. Mills, G. Durepos, & E. Wiebe (Eds.), Encyclopedia of case study research (pp. 373-375). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.  Taguchi, N., & Schneider, K. (2004). Longman English interactive. CALICO Journal, 6.  Tannenbaum, R. J., & Wylie, E. C. (2007). Mapping the TOEIC and TOEIC Bridge tests on the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages. Princeton: Educational Testing Service.  Tellis, W. (1997). Introduction to case study. The Qualitative Report, 3(2).  TESOL International Association. (2014). Qualitative research: Case study guidelines. Retrieved from: http://www.tesol.org/read-and-publish/journals/tesol-quarterly/tesol-quarterly-research-guidelines/qualitative-research-case-study-guidelines  Terrill, L. (2000). Benefits and Challenges in Using Computers and the Internet with Adult English Learners. Retrieved from: http://www.cal.org/caela/esl_resources/usetech.html  Titscher, S., Meyer, M., Wodak, R., & Vetter, E. (2000). Methods of text and discourse analysis. London: Sage.  Tomlinson, B. (1998). Materials development in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.  Tomlinson, B. Dat, B., Masuhara, H., & Rubdy, R. (2001). ELT courses for adults. ELT Journal, 55(1), 80-101.  Tomlinson, B. (2003). Developing materials for language teaching. London: Continuum Press.  Toussi, M. (2012).  A study of EFL teachers' locus of control and self-regulation and the moderating role of self- efficacy. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2(11), 2363-2371.  Thanh, T. N. (2010). English for electronics and telecommunications. (M.A. dissertation). Retrieved from: http://hdl.handle.net/123456789/752  Usuki, M. (2003). Learner beliefs about language learning and learner autonomy: A reconsideration. In A. Barfield, & M. Nix (Eds.), Everything you wanted to know about autonomy but you were too busy teaching to ask. (The Learner Development Special Interest Group of JALT).  121  Usuki, M. (2007). Autonomy in language learning: Japanese students? exploratory analysis. Nagoya: Sankeisha.  Vansteenkiste, M., Lens, W., & Deci, E. L. (2006). Intrinsic versus extrinsic goal contents in self-determination theory: Another look at the quality of academic motivation. Educational Psychologist, 41, 19-31.  Vandergrift, L. (2003). From prediction through reflection: Guiding students through the process of L2 listening. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 59, 425-440.  Vandergrift, L. (2004). Listening to learners or learning to listen? Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24, 3-25.  Vandergrift, L., & Tafaghodtari, M. (2010). Teaching L2 learners how to listen does make a difference: An empirical study. Language Learning, 60, 470-497.  Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.  Waltz, J. (1998).Meeting standards for foreign language learning with World Wide Web activities. Foreign Language Annals, 31(1), 103-14.  Warschauer, M. (1996). Computer assisted language learning: An introduction. In S. Fotos (Ed.), Multimedia language teaching (pp. 3-20). Tokyo: Logos International.   Warschauer, M., & Healy, D. (1998). Computers and language learning: An overview. Language Teaching, 31, 57-71. Retrieved from: http://www.gse.uci.edu/markw/overview.html.  Warschauer, M., & Cook, J. (1999). Service learning and technology in TESOL. Prospect, 14(3), 32-39.  Warschauer, M., & Kern, R. (2000). Network-based language teaching: Concepts and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Applied Linguistics Series.  Warschauer, M., & Meskill, C. (2000). Technology and second language learning. In J. Rosenthal (Ed.), Handbook of undergraduate second language education (pp. 303-318). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum. Retrieved from: http://www.gse.uci.edu/person/warschauer_m/tslt.html  Warschauer, M. (2009). Digital literacy studies: progress and prospects. In: Baynham, M. & Prinsloo, M. (Eds.), The future of literacy studies (pp. 123-140). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.  122  Weller, M. (2007).Virtual learning environments: Using, choosing and developing your VLE. London: Routledge.  Wenden, A. (1987). How to be a successful language learner: Insights and prescriptions from L2 learners. In A. Wenden & J. Rubin, J. (Eds.), Learner Strategies in Language Learning. Cambridge: Prentice-Hall.  Winke, P., Gass, S., & Sydorenko, T. (2010). The effects of captioning videos used for foreign language listening activities. Language Learning & Technology, 14, 65-86.  Yang, J. (2013). Mobile assisted language learning: Review of the recent applications of emerging mobile technologies. English Language Teaching, 6(7).  Yin, R. (1984). Case study research: Design and methods. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publishing.          Yin, R. (1993). Applications of case study research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publishing.  Yin, R. (2003). Case study research, design and methods. Thousand Oaks: Sage.  Zimmerman, B. J. (1986). Development of self-regulated learning: Which are the key subprocesses? Contemporary Educational Psychology, 16, 307-313.  Zimmerman, B.J. (1989). A social cognitive view of self-regulated academic learning. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 329-339.  Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. R., Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13?39). San Diego: Academic Press.  Zimmerman, B. J., & Schunk, D. (2011). Handbook of self- regulation of learning and performance. New York: Routledge.    123  Appendices Appendix A: Permission to Use Materials  Eugene Vakhnenko <vakhnenko.eugene@gmail.com> material analysis bessette@poole.ac.jp <bessette@poole.ac.jp>  Wed, Mar 27, 2013 at 7:39 PM To: Eugene Vakhnenko <vakhnenko.eugene@gmail.com> Hi Eugene,  Glad to hear from you again. I assume that from your email that your studies are going well and that life in Vancouver is good. Yes?  As for your request to use the guidelines, there is absolutely no problem in using them. I only ask that I be cited as the author of the guidelines and that at some point - when you the analysis is finished - you send me a copy.   Cheers, Alan  On 03? 26? 10:25, Eugene Vakhnenko <vakhnenko.eugene@gmail.com> wrote: > > ??: material analysis [Quoted text hidden]   124  Appendix B: Listening Self-study Project Explanation  Goals: To create self-study listening activity   Description You need to create a self-study listening activity and put it on our website (http://poolececall09-10.wetpaint.com/). When all of the activities are complete, other students in the class will use the self-study activities you created.    Creating self-study materials To create your self-study materials, you need to: ? Choose listening (at least 2 minutes in length) materials.  A separate handout lists possible sources. ? Create a pre-listening question. (You can have more than one.) The purpose of this question is get students who use your self-study exercise to think about the topic. ? Provide a glossary of difficult words to help other students understand the listening. You should include at least 10 words.  ? Create comprehension questions for your self-study material so that students can check their understanding of the listening.  There should be at least 10 questions ? Create a post- listening question. (You can have more than one.) The purpose of this question is to think a little deeper about the topic. ? For the pre-listening question, comprehension questions and post-reading or listening questions, you should include a statement telling other students to post their answers.  Doing self-study webpage projects After everyone has created their self-study materials, you need to: ? Answer the questions on two of your classmates? pages. ? Check and respond to the students who answer the questions for your project.  Evaluation Criteria: On time: You complete all assignments related to the self-study project by the assigned due dates. 125  Components: You include all of the required components, pre-listening question(s), 10 vocabulary words, 10 comprehension question, and post-listening question(s), on the webpage. Quality: Your choice of listening is interesting and appropriate and your questions are appropriate. Design: Your webpage is laid out well. Self-study: You answer all of the questions for two other projects. Responses: You check the answers that other students post to your project. Self-evaluation:  What do you think of your webpage project?  How well do you think you have done?   Due dates will be announced by your CALL teachers. Rubric ?See description above   1 2 3 4 5 On time      Components      Quality      Design      Self-study      Responses      Self-evaluation       126  Due Dates: Listening Self-study Project Worksheet 1 is due by May 31st. Listening Self-study Project Worksheet 2 is due by XX. Listening Self-study Project Worksheet 3 is due by XX. Self-study materials should be on webpage by XX. Post answers to two other self-study projects by XX. All responses and postings should be complete by XX. Self-evaluation is due by XX.                    127  Appendix C: Listening Self-Study Project Resources  CALL 3/4   Videos: ? Real English: http://www.youtube.com/user/realenglish1#g/c/735B4981495522E6 (Topics, themes, & social issues. From "What are the Americans like? to "What's your astrological sign?", to 8 mini-documentaries on the homeless people of Florida, and lots more..) ? Voice of America Videos: http://www.youtube.com/user/VOALearningEnglish#g/p   (Huge and growing number of videos.  General Interest or Health topics might be the most accessible for our students.) ? Rocketboom: http://www.rocketboom.com/A large collection of videos including news broadcasts (Daily News), New York City related news (New York City) and world news topics (Human Wire).    Audio ? ESL Podcast: http://www.eslpod.com/website/show_all.php  (644+ podcasts on various topics.  Searchable by tags and categories. ? Podcasts in English: http://www.podcastsinenglish.com/index.htm  (About 150 podcasts, some with YouTube video clips.  Organized into three levels.)            128  Appendix D: Worksheet 1  Listening Self-Study Project ? Choosing a Listening:  Worksheet 1  Name: Student Number:  The first step for this project is to choose a listening.  We would like you to listen to threelistenings and choose an important and/or interesting one.  For this worksheet you should briefly summarize (about 50 words) three listenings and explain why each of them is important or interesting.    Talk to your teacher for help in finding listening, but here are a few possible sources: Video ? Real English: http://www.youtube.com/user/realenglish1#g/c/735B4981495522E6 ? Voice of America Videos: http://www.youtube.com/user/VOALearningEnglish#g/p ? Rocketboom: http://www.rocketboom.com/  Audio ? ESL Podcast: http://www.eslpod.com/website/show_all.php ? Podcasts in English: http://www.podcastsinenglish.com/index.htm  When you hand in this worksheet, make sure that you have included the URL of the listenings and put a check next to the one you want to use.        129  ?Listening 1 URL: Summary:           Why do you think this listening is important or interesting? 130  ?Listening 2 URL: Summary:           Why do you think this listening is important or interesting?               131  ?Listening 3 URL: Summary:          Why do you think this listening is important or interesting?                132  Appendix E: Worksheet 2  Listening Self-Study Project Worksheet 2  Name: Student Number:   Before you start working on your self-study webpage project, the listening that you are going to use needs to be approved by your CALL teacher(s).  6. What is the URL?    7. How long is the listening?    8. What is the listening?s topic?    9. List at least 10 important vocabulary words: 133  10. List at least 10 important points from the listening:                            134  Appendix F: Worksheet 3  Listening Self-Study Project Worksheet 3  Name: Student Number:  Before you post your self-study webpage project, your CALL teacher(s) will check your questions.  Pre-listening question: You should have at least one pre-listening question.  Its purpose is to get your listeners to begin thinking about the listening topic.  1.   (2.)   Vocabulary words: Use the words from worksheet 2 and make a list that includes the words, their part of speech (noun, verb, adjective, phrasal verb, etc.), their meanings (in English), and example sentences that show the meanings of the words.    1.  2.  3.  4.  5.  6.  7.  8.  9.  10. 135  Comprehension questions: Use the list of important points from worksheet 2 and make at least ten comprehension questions.  Their purpose is to make sure that your listeners understand the main points of the listening.    1.   2.   3.   4.   5.   6.   7.   8.   9.   10.    Post-listening question: You should have at least one post-listening question.  Its purpose is to get your listeners to think more deeply about the topic.  1.   (2.)   136  Appendix G: Self-Evaluation Sheet  Listening Self-Study Webpage Project Self-Evaluation  Name: Student Number:  Evaluate your listening self-study project and return this self-evaluation by XX. One word or short answers to the questions below are not acceptable.  Explain in detail!    Poor  Okay  Excellent Self-evaluation  1 2 3 4 5  What do you think was good about the appearance of your webpage?      How do you think you could have improved the appearance your webpage?     What do you think was good about the contents (listening, questions, and vocabulary) of your webpage?  137        How do you think you could have improved the contents of your webpage?         Do you think that you answered your partners? questions and responded to them well? Explain.           138  Appendix H: Self-study Listening Project Template  This is my listening self-study webpage project. Pre-listening Question Do you know Walt Disney? What do you know about Mickey Mouse? Vocabulary Read through these vocabulary words, their meanings and the example sentences before you do the listening. 1. cancer(n): a desease that often causes death     Smoking causes lung cancer. 2. achievement(n): a result gained by one?s own effort and skill     I feel a sense of achievement after finishing my job. 3. motion(v): to signal by a gesture, or a movement     She motioned to him not to speak here. 4. private(a): not for public use     I had a private talk with her. 5.success(n): achievement of something that you have been trying to do     She was a success as a singer. 6. steamboat(n): boat or ship that has an engine powered by steam     The steamboat hooted on the river. 7. bouncing(a): moves upwards from a surface or away from it immediately after hitting it     Basketballs are bouncing on the floors. 8. labor(a): activity that take a lot of time and effort     If you wish to be at rest, you must labor. 9. strike(n): a temporary stoppage of activities to try to get better pay or conditions     These people are holding a strike. 10. general(n): affecting all or most people, place or things     She is a nurse at General Hospital.      139  Listening Comprehension Questions Here are the listening comprehension questions for the listening.   1. What is this video about? 2. What is the museum? 3. Who is the head of the Walt Disney Family Museum? 4. When was Walt Disney born? 5. How many awards did Walt Disney receive? 6. Who is Mickey Mouse? 7. Which movies did Disney company produce? 8. Was Walt Disney a successful showman of this generation? 9. Was an animated story about Mickey Mouse a success? 10. What happened when Walt Disney died?   Listen as many times as necessary and then post your answers as new feedback. Listening video   Post-Listening Question What did you know about Walt Disney after watching this video? Which part of the video was most interesting to you?    

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.24.1-0166872/manifest

Comment

Related Items