A Taxonomy for Teaching Second Language Listening

A Taxonomy for Teaching Second Language Listening

Randall J Lund Brigham Young University

ABSTRACT This article describes a taxonomy of real-world listening tasks as a conceptual framework for teaching listening. The key elements of the taxonomy are listener function and listener response. In listening, function is defined as ‘‘the aspects of the message the Ihtener attempts to proms.” The six functions significant to second language teaching are identification, orientation, main idea comprehension, detail comprehension, full comprehension, and replication. Listener response is also a key feature of any listening task. Nine categories are

selected independently of each other, as suggested by the function-response mat& allowing for wide variation in task diffinty for any given text.

The implications of the taxonomy for the design of listening instruction and the selection of authentic texts are discussed. The taxonomy suggests that growth in listeningproficienqy is a process of expanding to new function and response categories in familiar contexts. The many options in the taxonomy enable one to structure effective listening tasks involving

described. Function and response can be authentic texts at even novice levels.

Listening has emerged as an exiremely important modality in language learning. The receptive skills of listening and reading have become the basis for language acquisition in comprehension-based methodologies and ap- proaches - listening to learn. At the same time, the focus on communicative competence and proficiency emphasizes functional ability in each modality as the preferred goal of language study. The ACTFL Proficiency Guidelines (1) reinforce the concept that listening is a distinct modality in which proficiency must be uniquely defined and acquired-learning to listen. As the importance of listening has emerged,

&llJ Lund~h.D.,UniversityofMinnesota)isAssistant Professor of German at Brigham Young University, Prove, Utah.

the profession has also discovered that relatively little is known about listening in a second language, even though there are several recent discussions of listening that offer sound pedagogical principles and excellent suggestions for activities. Generally these authors acknowledge the lack of research and theory specific to second language listening (Richards, 22; Joiner, 18; Bemhardt and James, 3) or to the need to further develop the implications of the proficiency guidelines for listening (Byrnes, 6; Glisan, 15). In this partial vacuum of knowledge, the authors have generally drawn on other sources of data, theory, and applications, particularly the litemtm in reading and first language listening. These sources are useful, but it is also important to consider second language listening as a unique

&reign Language Anna& 23, No. 2,1990 105

106 FOREIGN LANGUAGE ANNALS -APRIL 1990

domain that differs from others in both its nature and its implications for pedagogy.

This article will present a conceptual framework for teaching second language listening proficiency. A core taxonomy of listening tasks will

ly significant categories-listener function and listener response. The taxonomy will be applied to such pedagogical questions as whether, when, and how to use authentic tasks, how to select and sequence listening activities, how to deal with the concept of the “difficulty” or “proficiency level” of listening tasks, and how listening proficiency may develop. The approach to listening described herewas developed in methods and instructional design courses as a partial, but specific, answer to the fundamental question: “What do the proficiency guidelines for listening mean for teaching?”

The taxonomy describes real-world listening behaviors that can be incorporated in listening tasks in the instructional environment. Task as used here means a general statement of a pedagogical listening opportunity or assign- ment. ’Ibks are defmed essentially by the text or text type chosen, the listener function, and the listener response. W e the text is a key element of listening tasks, listening texts are not categorized in this article (see Child, 8). Rather, the emphasis is on defining and describing listener functions and listener responses and showing how these two elements of listening af- fect the practical pedagogical choices in the teaching of listening proficiency.

be described, Which Consists of two pedagogical-

Listener hnction The first and most important task element is

listener function. The guidelines are generally structured around functional statements, but their purpose is not to define functions. Rather, the secondary literature on the guidelines provides the most useful information in terms of analyzing the components that make up proficiency. For example, the functional trisection of oral proficiency (Clifford and Lowe, 10) defines function as one of the three principal components of oral proficiency. The speaking functions have been well defined in the literature!, but this is certainly not the case with listening. W e

several authors have discussed the importance of the listener’s “purpose” (Beile, 2; Richards, 22, Ur,.26; Joiner, 18), listener function as used in the guidelines has yet to be specifically defined and described, it deserves a much more central place in the theory and practice of listening pedagogy.

Because listening can be associated with speaking as a conversational skill, the speaking functions are sometimes associated with listening as well (Guntermann and Phillips, 17). The assumption here is that the listener’s function is simply to comprehend the speaker’s function, e.g., to comprehend the speaker’s gossiping, promising, apologizing, and so forth. This approach to functions is appropriate for face-to- face conversations where speakers are also listeners, but is inadequate for a broad description of listening as a distinct modality. Clearly, the general function, or purpose, of listening is to comprehend a message. Yet to allow the listener’s function to be dictated solely by that of the speaker is to reduce the communication to a one-directional, stimulus-response experience (Galloway, 14, p. 26). Clifford, Herzog, and Lowe (9), in looking at the other receptive modality (reading), recognized that the reader’s intent must be considered separately from that of the author. The five categories of their quin- tasection for reading are (1) reader function, (2) reader accuracy, (3) text type, (4) author accuracy, and (5) author function. Similarly, a distinctlistener functionmustbeconsidemlpart of listening proficiency. An independent listener function is also recognized by many scholars in the area of first language listening (Goss, 16; Ridge, 23; Thomlison, 25; Coakley and Wolvin, 11; Pellowe, 21). McGregor (20) points out that many listeners are “eavesdroppers,” that is, not intended recipients of the text. Such listeners have no necessary obligation to consider the speaker’s function. Listening as “eavesdrop- ping” is more characteristic of many classroom listening exerCses than is participatory listening.

Agreement that there is an independent listener function does not imply agreement on what the functions axe.. What concept should be described by the term “listener function”? In- tuitively, one feels that listener function should

FOREIGN LANGUAGE ANNALS - APRIL 1990 107

answer the question “Why is the listener listening?” However, the highest-level answers to that question will refer more to basic psychological motivations than to psycholinguistic concerns. These motivations may range from showing courtesy, to showing love, to trying to learn something. Coakley and Wolvin (11) reflect this broader motivation in their categorization of listener purposes as discriminative, comprehen- sive, therapeutic (or empathic), critical, and ap- preciative listening. This kind of typology is common in the first language listening litmature., much of which exists in fields such as psychological counseling and business management. The motivation in these areas is to improve listening m individuals who are asnrmed to be linguistically competent. Second language teachers are primarily interested in building linguistic competence. The “why” should therefore be inter- preted more narrowly as “What is the listener listening for?” or “How is the listener ap- proaching the text?” Our purpose, after all, is to teach learners how to listen, and listener function should define the options available.

Listener function should not, however, be equated with skills or strategies. Galloway (14), in discussing reading, distinguishes between strategies (such as skimming, scanning, and sorting) and the linguistic task itself. Fellowe (21) differentiates intentions and the techniques used to reach them. The several recent discussions of listening skills are valuable, but the various categories they contain do not-nor were they intended to-constitute definitions of listener function as something to be distinguished from and perhaps intermediate between either process skills or the psychological motivation. The motivation affects the function, which in turn influences the skills or strategies that are brought to bear.

How, then, should we define and describe listener function? Galloway (14), in discussing the guidelines, suggests that the receptive functions define “what the reader [listener] does with a given text-i.e., what tasks are performed” (p. 35). She identifies only the end points of a possible range of functions: recognition and comprehension. In fact, the guidelines use two functional terms, understanding and com-

prehension, almost exclusively and, basically, synonymously. (Recognition applies only to the novice level.) In order to differentiate among proficiency levels, the term understand is com- plemented by other elements in the predicate, such as the length of the text, the topic, the learner’s familiarity with the material, the amount and type of context that is present, or most significantly, how much of the text can be processed. The guidelines imply that, as far as teaching and evaluating second language proficiency are concerned, listener function must be specified in reference to the text.

Listener function must therefore include three elements: the listener’s choice, independence from the speaker function, and reference to the text. Listener function may be defined as “the aspects of the message the listener attempts to process.” The concept of message is intended to include message+e&rds such as topic, setting, participants,roles,andgenre,aswellasmessage- internals such as the actual language, or code, and the meaning itself. Galloway’s recognition- comprehension continuum can be expanded and articulated to include all possibilities that can be practiced, taught, and tested. Six functions seem to describe adequately the

listening behaviors important to second language instruction. Each defines what part or parts of the text the listener intends to process. Note that the functions are statements of poten- tial; the listener may or may not have the skill to cany out the intention. Tb emphasize that all the functionsareoptionspotentiallyavailabletothe listener regdess of the text, the examples given for each function will include an application for the same text type, namely, radio advertisements.

Identification Listeners focus on some aspect of the code

itself, rather than on the content of the message. Identification incorporates such terms as mgnition and discrimination Identification is particularly associated with the novice level becausethatisallnavicescandowithsometerts. But identification can be an appropriate function at the highest levels of proficiency if the focus is on form rather than content. Examples are:

108 FOREIGN LANGUAGE ANNALS -APRIL 19%

Recognizing familiar words. Looking for categories of words, such as personal names, place names, or food words. Discriminating between minimal phonemic pairs or intonation patterns. Discriminating between singular and plural or between present and past tense. Radio ad: Writing down all the adjectives (words that describe the product).

Orientation This category involves determining essential

facts about the text, including such message- externals as participants, their roles, the situation or context, the general topic, the motional tone, the genre, perhaps even the speaker function. All of this information can help the listener process the message, but in many cases a listener cannot go much beyond this function. Orientation is essentially “tuning in” to or preparhg to proms the message. Some of the information may come from the visual context or nonlinguistic acoustical context. Examples are:

- Determining that one is hearing a news broadcast and that the news involves sports.

- Determining that a man and a woman are arguing.

- Determining that a conversation is taking place in an airport and that a man is buying something from a woman.

- Radio a d Determining the text type (advertisement, newscast, radio play, talk show, etc).

Main idea comprehension This function is the first to involve actual com-

prehension of the message. Initially, understanding main ideas depends heavily on recognition of vocabulary. With live, filmed, or videotaped texts the visual context may also contribute heavily to understanding. The main idea function typically distinguishes the intermediate listener from the novice. Examples are:

- Deciding if a weather report indicates a nice day for an outing.

- Determining from a travelogue what countries someone visited.

- Identifying a caller’s problem and the host’s solution on a talk show.

- Understanding directions well enough to arrive at the correct location.

- Understanding a lecture well enough to summarize the main points or complete a basic outline.

- Radio ad: Deciding what kind of products are being promoted.

Detail comprehension The listener focuses on getting specific infor-

mation. This function may be performed independently of the main idea function, as when one knows in advance what information one is listening for; or the facts can be details in support of main ideas. The amount of detail one can understand typically distinguishes the advanced listener from the intermediate. Examples are: - Following a series of precise instructions. - Getting the departure times and the

platform numbers for several trains to Berlin.

- Finding out why the mechanic says the car won’t start.

- Finding out if it will rain today. - Radio ad: Finding three selling points

for the product.

Full comprehension This function applies when one is intexsted in

the whole message, essentially the main ideas plus the details. The ability to function at this level is clearly the goal of instruction in listening proficiency. With a given text, a listener who can do this function will have a higher proficiency than one who is limited to either main ideas or facts, but full cornprehension is possible even for the novice with certain texts. Full comprehension is, of course, a relative concept intended to distinguish the “whole text” function from strategies that deliberately focus on parts of the message. Examples are:

- Understanding interview questions so that one can give highly appropriate answers.


- Understanding a lecture so that one can take detailed notes or make a detailed outline.

- Understanding a news flash so that one can tell friends about it and answer all their questions.

- Understanding a story well enough to select the most consistent of several alternative endings and defend one’s choice.

- Radio ad: Selecting the best ad for an industry award (Clio) and justifying the choice.

Replication The listener’s main objective is to reproduce

the message in either the same or a different modality, as in oral repetition, dictation, or transcription. The listener’s attention is focused more on the fidelity of the replication than on the depth of comprehension, more on surface processing than meaningful processing. Conse- quently, replication does not imply a higher proficiency than comprehension, but rather defines a different way of attending to the text. Examples are:

- Traditional classroom dictation. - Taking an important phone message

where the caller says, “Write this down exactly.’ ’

- Interpreter role playing, e.g., a police officer is arresting a friend who doesn’t speak the language.

- Radio a d lhnscribing the script for the ad.

These six listener functions-identification, orientation, main idea comprehension, detail comprehension, full comprehension, and replication-can give both teacher and learner a sense of clarity and direction in listening activities. The listener function is perhaps the most important aspect of listening instruction, because the function is what defines how the learner must approach the text and suggests what must be derived from the text. These functions are generic. When they are embodied in specific requirements, combined with

specific texts, and when the learner is given a par- ticular way to respond to the text, alistening task is defined.

Listener Response While listener function is an important

category in both theory and teaching, the listener’s response is primarily of pedagogical importance. Listener response is defined as what the listener does to demonstrate successful listening. The nature of the response is often related to or suggested by the listening function required by the task. A main-idea function requires a response dealing with main ideas. Within this constraint, however, there are still a variety of ways, involving most of the categories listed below, in which listeners can respond to main ideas; consequently, the listener response categories must be considered largely independent of function.

The nature of the listener’s response has been discussed in various contexts (Brown, 4; Richards, 22; Ur, 26; Bymes, 6; Burbidge, 5; Dunkel, 12; Joiner, 18), but the examples or lists are often quite dissimilar, primarily because the lists are made up of items that reflect different criteria. Richards’ (22) list is perhaps the most complete to date. His purpose was to categorize listening tasks, of which the response is only one component. Most of his items are indeed based on response categories, such as matching, transferring, transcribing, extending, condensing, and answering. However, the list also in- cludes scanning and predicting, which are listening strategies, and Burbidge (5 ) adds inferring and recalling, which pertain to cognition that precedes the response, rather than to the response itself.

There is, of course, a close connection between the mental activity and the response. An effective response may require some level of thinking beyond a one-for-one, stimulus- response d o n to the text. Thinking about the text is highly desirable because it keeps students interested in the meaning of the message and engaged in the activity. Bernhardt and James (3) suggest that thinking about what one has understood separates good and poor com- prehenders. Nevertheless, the overt response,

110 FOREIGN LANGUAGE ANNALS - APRIL 1990

rather than the cognition behind it, constitutes the second component of the listening taxonomy because it can be directly structured, observed, and evaluated by the teacher.

The assigned response is one of the best guaranteesthatthelistenerwillactuallyperform the assigned listener function. For example, if a listener is to match a text with one of several pictures of diverse content, the text is very likely to be processed in a way that will quickly sort out the main ideas. Careful selection of the response is important to proficiency-based teaching because a realistic response contributes to the sense of authentic environment. Where text, function, and response all have a natural feel, learners are more apt to consider that “real” language is being learned, or that they are actual- lyleamingtousethelanguage,andtheirmotiva- tion will be increased.

The response categories listed below are intended to describe behaviors or products of behaviors, both of which are observable, although the terms may also be suggestive of mental processes. Once again, to illustrate that responses are independent of texts or text types, all response categories will include examples for the text type of radio advertisements.

Doing The listener responds physically, rather than

linguistically, usually with largemuscle activity. Most TPR activities qualify, such as following movement directions. The activity may also be more complex, such as building something or making a recipe. With a radio ad, for example, the listener may pantomime the use of the product as described in the ad.

Choosing The listener selects from alternatives such as

pictures, objects, graphics, texts, or actions. As Richards (22) suggests, this may involve making a match or placing pictures in order. Other examples include selecting from alternative story titles, picking up objects according to their description, and, for radio ads, matching them with pictures of the products.

lhmferring Richards (22) defines this category as ‘‘receiv-

ing information in one form and transferring.. .it into another form” (p. 235). Genedy, the other form consists of either drawings or graphics. The listener may draw a picture or sketch, make a map, trace a route on an existing map, or con- struct or fill in a table or a chart. With radio ads, students could lay out a magazine ad for the same product with the same approach.

Answering The listener simply answers questions about

the text or responds to an information require- ment, cg., fmding out what time the train leaves. A radio ad example would be to answer three questions on each a d What is the product? What is the brand name? What is its most important quality?

Condensing The message is reduced. Richards (22) men-

tions outlines and notetaking. Bernhardt and James (3) suggest using native language recall protocols. Other kinds of written or oraI sum- maries, abstracts, or outlines are also possible. For the radio example, students may prepare a brief close-captioned text for the ad.

Extending The listener provides text that goes beyond

what is given, such as providing the ending, changing the ending, continuing the story beyond the ending, or solving a problem. The text may also be filled in internally, as when the listener fills in missing lines or completes partial lines. For a radio ad, students could write a script for a second ad giving the same basic message from a different angle.

DupIicating The exact message is replicated, often in

another modality or language. Fmmples include dictation, translation, and simple oral repetition, any of which would work with radio ads.

Modeling The text is used as a model for imitation.

Modeling may apply to a discrete feature, such as intonation, or to the text as a whole, such as ordering ameal after listening to the model, or,


dentitication

for the radio example, creating one’s own advertisement.

Conversing Whereas the previous categories generally in-

volve reading to a text, this category reminds us that the listener may be an active, even a control- ling, participant in face-to-face conversations. With radio ads, one might “talk back” to a particularly silly or offensive ad.

Within the nine response categories significant variety is possible. Specific responses will vary, both within and across categories, in terms of the skill needed in listening, as well as in speaking, reading, or writing. The teacher can vary the response component of a task to make it possible for learners over a wide range of proficiency levels to respond within their different capabilities to a great variety of authentic texts.

The Listening Taxonomy The separate consideration of function and

Replication Mail Full Orientalion Mein Idea Comprehendon Comprohen~h COmpr~honrh

Pantomime the product

response in the listening taxonomy is illustrated by Figure 1, which presents the two components as a matrix of independent possibilities. Func- tions are chosen bc$ore listening; responses oc- cur Mter. Each function potentially causes a different kind or amount of information to be ex- tracted from the text. As long as the response does not require more information than the listener initially tried to obtain, almost any response category is possible. The only necessary function-response pairing would appear to be replication with duplicating. The independence of function and response is also shown by the response examples for radio ads, each of which can be associated with the main idea function, although the amount of comprehension required may differ in each case. Some combinations in the matrix will be more effective or natural than others; some may be quite impractical. The choice may depend on the exact nature of the response and the text itself.

I Malch ad@ and pictures

%

Figure 1 finction-Response Matrix for Listening

(Advertisement Example)

List adjectives

unction L22L

Write u l t he m m a selling points

Whatkind Hmatgoodrare of texl? advertized?

Write dose- caplion text

Seoondedh oampalan

Transcribe he text - - - - - - -

1 - Transferring

Answering

C-d-hJ

Duplicating

Convening

I I I I I I I I I I I

112 FOREIGN LANGUAGE A N N A L S - APRIL 1990

Each component and subcategory in the taxonomy is based on a distinctive feature, but these features are not mutually exclusive. A given listening task may share aspects of different categories i n e a c h c o m p o n e n t . A p ~ t o g e t t h e ~ t of a text may well key on discrete vocabulary in a way that resembles the identification or detail functions. Yet each function clearly stresses a different aspect of text processing. Similarly, a response may share attributes of two or more response categories. A Simon Says game requires essentially a “doing” response because of the physical activity, although the game also involves making choices and a certain kind of physical “modeling” or imitation. On the other hand, the choosing category is characterized by the simultaneous presence of alternative choices pro- vided for the student, and modeling refers to linguistic, rather than physical behavior. In practice, how one chooses to categorize a specific listening task is less important than understanding the essential attribute of each category and maintaining the taxonomic independence of function and response. Fbr pedagogical purposes, function and mponse

can also be considered independent of the text. Thematrixrepresentsvisuallythegmtt varietyin listening tasks that is possible for a given text, in thiscase,Izldioads. obviously,onecannotbefully proficient with a text unless one can process it as the author or speaker intended, but tads need not be limited to applications at the corresponding proficiency level. When proficiency levels are defined by text type or when texts are associated with specific proficiency levels, what is really meant is that the specified level is the lowest one at which the text can be used as intended. HQW- ever, below that level listeners can, must, and will pmms texts- ie , choose their functions-in any way they can. Listening is not an all-or-nothing proposition, but involves a wide range of options.

Implications The listening taxonomy presented here has im-

portant implications for a range of issues in listening instruction, including the developmental stages of second language listening, the design of listening tasks, the use of authentic texts, and the issue of text difficulty.

The Developmental Sequence Instructional choices in listening should be

guided by a concept of the development of listening proficiency, something we are only beginning to understand. One view emphasizes the use of “whole” language, that we learn by doing. We become proficient by accumulating authentic experiences with language. For optimal learning, the experiences need to be structured so that they amount to more than mere exposure. The taxonomy assists in guiding and planning such experiences so that learners are practicing the full range of listening functions, some of them with fully authentic texts.

In terms of the taxonomy, growth in proficiency can be seen as progressing through the functions, e.g., learning to do new functionS with old texts and to do old functions with new topics or more difficult texts. Within lessons and units the concept of functional progression suggests the recurrent use of texts. Learners can be led to orient themselves to a text, then to process main ideas, then to fill in details. As learners acquire skill in selecting and performing functions, they should be able to apply these abilities in other situations. Xxts can also be reused over greater time spans or in different levels of instruction. The familiarity obtained earlier with an identification task will facilitate the successful processing of a text much later for full comprehension, with an accompanying sense of linguistic progress in the learners.

This view of listening development is not linear, but follows Byrnes (7) and Joiner (18) in assuming that learners work on several fronts, or functions, at once. The proficiency guidelines appear as a linear scale only because they iden- tify the highest function that can be performed on the wide and unselected range of texts that can be expected in the target culture. The guidelines are not intended to define the internal stages of development within individuals.

A comment is necessary on the order in which the functions appear in the taxonomy, particularly with regard to understanding main ideas and details. Except for the special case of replication, which may or may not involve full comprehension, the order is that suggested by the guidelines. In terms of the larger syllabus, the

FOREIGN LANGUAGE ANNALS -APRIL 1990 113

order is not so important, since both functions (main idea and detail) should be taught and practiced from the beginning (Beile, 2). Byrnes (7) suggests that the manner of processing may be affected by the learner’s style, although she tentatively suggests that detail work should precede global work. In terms of specific activities, however, main idea work is recommended before work with details. The global level proceeds most naturally from the orientation function and from the oft-recommended prelistening phase, which has the purpose of in- voking the topic and activating general scripts and schemata. In practice, the choice may be in- fluenced by the nature of the text.

The taxonomy provides a means of planning a functional, experienced-based approach to the teaching of listening. An alternative but com- plementary view of listening development is represented by Richards (22), who suggests that listening ability consists of an accumulation of micro-skills that can be diagnosed, targeted, taught, and learned. A fruitful extension of the function-response taxonomy would incorporate these micro-skills, indicating in the cells of the matrix which micro-skills most essentially underlie the various functions and which responses are appropriate ways of demonstmting successful use of those skills. Perhaps a separate matrix for skills would be helpful at each instructional or proficiency level.

The Design of Listening Tasks At least five elements are essential to the

design of effective listening tasks: the function, the response, the text, the topic, and the method of presentation (prelistening activity, context, repetition, use of scripts, video, etc.) A task should have an objective or objectives, which may relate to either skill-using or skill-getting (Rivers, 24). In the case of skill-using, the objectives should ordinarily be stated as listener functions, perhaps in connection with text types or topics. In the case of skill-getting, the objectives may well be taken from Richards’ (22) list of micro-skills or other suitable listening strategies (Ur, 26; Byrnes, 6; Dunkel, 12, Joiner, 18), but presented in a functional context. The response and the method of presentation follow logically

from the choices made at this point. A course syllabus should include work with all the functions, text types, and topics appropriate for the targeted proficiency level. Of these elements, topics are generally suggested by the textbook, and there may be accompanying listening texts. Published materials have in the past been ex- tremely limited in comparison with the possibilities of the function-response matrix, often dealing only with the recall of facts in some kind of answering or choosing format. For- tunately, this is beginning to change Even so, the best language courses involve personalization and adaptation. The matrix can be used to en- sure that the full breadth of listening proficiency is practiced.

Authentic lkxh and the Concept of “D&Jinrlty” In order to expand and enrich the listening

syllabus, many authentic texts will be needed. Some authors (Ur, 26; Dunkel, 12) have recommended caution in the use of authentic, un- graded materials, but recent consensus seems to favor their use to amuch larger degree. Thepmb- lem with authentic texts is that they have long been perceived as being too “difficult.” Byrnes (6), Fish (13), and Joiner (18) argue that difficulty should be considered an attribute of tasks rather than t m . The function-response matrix suggests many options for simplifyins tasks. When tsrts, functions, and responses are all considered indefiningatask,theteachercanadjustthedif- ficulty to be suitable for any group. The appropriate question for teachers is not “Can I use this text?” or “When can I use this text?” but “How can I use this text?” The when question often pushes texts into higher levels of proficiency where students can already fully comprehend or “appreciate” them and away from the learners who need them most. The how question encourages teachers to consider using any text at the novice level, with an appropriate task, structured by a wise and creative choice of function and response. Tkachers with this attitude may find they no longer have a shortage of material.

At lower proficiency levels, some objectives may indeed require graded texts. Novices can normally perform the fullcomprehension function only on learned material, but we must

114 FOREIGN LANGUAGE ANNALS - APRIL 1990

member that they wiU have no proficiency at all unless they can do something in the taxonomy with authentic texts. On the other hand, the taxonomy suggests that novices must not wait un- til later to practice full comprehension. As proficiency incmases, more and more of the taxonomy can be applied with authentic texts.

These arguments do not suggest that we should use texts simply because we have them. Nor should we be discouraged from using them because the text type has been linked with a different proficiency level. Individual texts should be selected because they are suitable for the task as defined by the listening functions, micro- skills, or topics we have selected as objectives.

Conclusion The function-response taxonomy deals more

with goals, objectives, and the planning of instruction than with its implementation. The references provide information on other important considerations, such as the actual psycho-

niques, specific activities, and the categorization of texts. The link that connects all of these concerns is the design or planning of instruction: determining what it means to be proficient, defining the teachable components of proficiency, and designing realistic and pedagogically effective listening tasks that will indeed prepare learners to listen in the real world of the target culture. ’lb prepare more proficient listeners, we stillneedmorespecificresearchonlist.ening,better curricular models of listening, more and better listening materials, and better-informed teachers. The taxonomy presented here suggests a way to conceptualize and operationalize the development of listening proficiency that may benefit all these areas.

linguistic process of listening, teaching tech-

REFERENCES ACXFL Ptqficiency Guidelines. Hastings-on- Hudson, Ny: American Council on the %aching of Foreign Languages, 1988. Beile, Werner. “Methodische hrlegungen zur Entwicklung der Hdrverstehensfiihigkeit.” Zielspmche Deutsch 2 (1980): 7-15. Bernhardt, Elizabeth B. and Charles J. James. “The ’&aching and %sting of Comprehension in Foreign Language Learning," in Diane W. Birck-

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

bichler, ed., Ptqficiency, Policy, and Pmfa- sionalh in Foreign Language Education. Lm- colnwood, I L National Wtbook Company

Brown, Gillian. “Understanding Spoken Language.” m 0 L Quarterly 12 (1978): 271-83. Burbidge, Bob. “Looking at Volcanoes and Listening Comprehension.” 27SOL Newsletter

Bymes, Heidi. ‘‘%aching toward Proficiency: The Receptive Skills,” in Alice C. Omaggio, ed., Ptqficiency, cicrriculum, Articulatiorc The Ties That Bind Middlebury, Vl’! Northeast Con- ference on the Whing of Foreign Languages

. “The Role of Listening Com- prehension: A Theoretical Base.” Foreign Lunguage Annals 17 (1984): 317-29. Child, James R. “Language Proficiency Levels and the l3pology of ’Rrxts,” in Heidi Byrnes and Michael Canale, eds., D@ing andDeveloping proficiency: Guidelina Implementations, and Concepts. Lincolnwood, IL: National %xt- book Company (1987): 97-106. Clifford, Ray T., Martha Herzog, and Pardee Lowe, Jr. Functional Quin fasection of Reading Proficiency. Monterey, CA: The Defense Language Institute Foreign Language Center, 1982.

, and Wee Lowe, Jr. Functional lhkt ion of Omlhfciency. Washington, DC: The Central Intelligence Agency, 1980. Coakley, Carolyn G. and Andrew D. Wolvin. “Listening in the Native Language,” in Barbara H. Wing, ed., Listening, Reading, Writing: Analysis and Application. Middlebury, VT NortheastConferenceonthe~hingofFo~ Languages (1986): 11-42. Dunkel, Patricia A. “Developing Listening Fluency in L 2 Theoretical Principles and R.Aagogical Considerations.” Modern Language Journal 70 (1986): 99-106. Fish, Harold. “Graded Activities andhthentic Materials for Listening Comprehension.” The lkaching of Listening Compehension. ELT Documents Special. London: British Council (1981): 107-115. [ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 258 4651. Galloway, Vicki. “From Defining to Developing Proficiency: A Look at the Decisions,” in Heidi Byrnes and Michael Canale, eds., W n i n g and Developing hficiemy: Guidelines, Implemen- tations and Concepts. Lincolnwood, IL:

(1987): 65-81.

20,s (1986): 7-11.

(1985): 77-107.


National M b o o k Company (1987): 25-73. 15. Glisan, Eileen W. “A Plan for %aching Listen-

ing Comprehension: Adaptation of an Instruc- tional Reading Model.” Foreign Language An- nals 21 (1988): 9-16.

16. Goss, Blaine Rvmsing Communication‘ Idor- mation Rvcesing in Intmpmnal Communica- tion. Belmont, C A Wadsworth Publishing Co., 1982.

17. Guntermann, Gail and June K. Phillips. fictional-Notional Concepts Adapting the FL Zkrtbook. Language in Education: Theory and Practice, No. 44. Washington, Dc: Center for Applied Linguistics, 1982.

18. Joiner, Elizabeth G. “Listening in the Foreign Language,” in Barbara H. Wing, ed., Listening, Reading, Writing: Anarysis and Application. Middlebury, V’I? Northeast Conference on the %aching of Foreign Languages (1986): 43-70.

19. hwe, Pardee, Jr. “The ILR Proficiency Scale as a Synthesizing Research Principle: The View from the Mountain,” in Charles J. James, ed., Foreign Language Pxficiency in the Classmom and Eeyond. Lincolnwood, IL: National l h t - book Company (1985): 9-53.

20. McGregor, Graham. “Listening Outside the Par- ticipation Framework,” in Graham McGregor and R.S. White, eds., The Art of Liktening. Lon- don: Croom Helm (1986): 55-72.

21. PeU- John. “Heams’ Intentions,”inGraham McGregor and R.S. White, eds., The Art of Listening. London: Croom Helm (1986): 5-16.

22. Richards, Jack C. “Listening Comprehension: Approach, Design, Procedure.” TESOL Quarter& 17 (1983): 219-240.

23. Ridge, Alice “Assessing Listening Skills.” Paper presented at the First Annual International Listening Association Summer Conference, St. Paul, MN, July 1213.1984.

24. Rivers, Wilga M. =aching Foreign Lunguage Skills. 2nd ed. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1981.

25. Thomlison, T. Dean. “Relational Listening.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the In- ternational Listening Association, scottsdale, AZ, March 7-10, 1984 [ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 257 1651.

26. Ur, Penny. Zkzching Lislening Comprehension Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1984.

NmICE REGARDING MEMBERS’ CHANGE OF ADDRESS

Please help ACTFL by forwarding changes of address as soon as this information is available to you. Copies of Foreign Language Annals that are returned to ACTFL with a forwarding address notification cost ACTFL $1.65!

Returned issues will be re-mailed to the new address and a charge of $1.65 will be assessed.

ACTFL CAN NOW BE REACHED BY FAX FAX NUMBER (914) 963-1275