Listening by Sam Ducker

  • Upload
    mychief

  • View
    241

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

  • 7/29/2019 Listening by Sam Ducker

    1/8

    CHAPTER IIIListening

    SAM DUKER

    LISTENINGIS no longer considered a peripheral aspect of the communica-tive process. During the past three years a large body of research dealtwith this topic; relativelyfew of these studies are consideredin this chap-ter. For example, 36 master's theses on various aspects of listening werecompleted during this period. The mere quantitative increase would, initself, be of little importance f there had not also been an improvement nquality. Happily,research on listening showed a greaterdegree of creativeexcellence than was reportedin previous three-yearperiods. This is not tosay, however,that a completelysatisfactorylevel of researchhas yet beenreached. There is still a regrettableamount of work that is done in aslovenly, careless, and indifferent manner on minor and unimportantquestions. However, the better studies compare favorably with good re-search in any field.

    BibliographiesA bibliographyof 743 referenceswas compiled by Duker (1961). Listsof 107 master'stheses and of 128 doctoraldissertationstogetherwith clas-sifications and comments were separately published by Duker (1962,1963). Extensivebibliographiesand reviews of research on hearing werecontributedby Pollack (1961), Wever (1962), and Small (1963). Becauseof the continuing increase of material on listening, there is need for anannotatedbibliography.This could serve as a guide to sources that wouldmeet specific needs of research workers, since an examination of all thematerial available is becoming an impractical task for an individualinvestigator.

    Teaching ListeningThe basic assumption that listening is a teachable skill, accepted bymany investigators,was challenged by Petrie (1961). In an experimentinvolving712 college freshmenas subjects,he found that a group receivingfour hours of training in listening along the lines generally advocatedshowed no greater improvementin listening skills than did two groupswithout such training. Petrie concluded that not enough is known aboutlistening to warrant the kinds of precise generalizations on which arebased most present-day programs of listening instruction in industry,

    156

  • 7/29/2019 Listening by Sam Ducker

    2/8

    April 1964 LISTENINGcolleges, and schools. He arguedthat existing researchis contradictoryor,at best, inconclusive and that satisfactorymeans of testing listening skillsdo not exist. This sort of refreshingand thought-provoking ritical analysisof previous research should have beneficent effects on future researchwork. Petrie's argumentis weakenedby the doubt that any skill, let aloneone as complex as listening, can be taught in as short a time as four 50-minuteperiods. To a considerableextent, therefore,his researchis subjectto many of his own criticismsof previous research.Additional References: Brown and Keller (1962); Devine (1961);Duker (1961, 1962); Edgar (1961); Hancock (1960); Hill (1961);Merson (1961).Listening and Foreign Language Teaching

    Does training in listening skills aid in the aural comprehensionof aforeign language? Tezza (1962) reported experimental findings that 10weeks of listening training in English did not significantly affect auralcomprehensionof Russian. On the other hand, Ehrmann (1963) reportedthat training in listening improved the aural comprehensionof Hebrew.The approachesand methods of these two studies were so similar that thediscrepancyin findings is not readily explainable.Listening Tests

    Notwithstandingthe criticism of existing listening tests by Kelly (1962)and Petrie (1961), no researchreportedduring the period under exami-nation led to the constructionof new tests. Johnson and Frandsen (1963)carried out a well-designed and carefully executed study on methods ofadministering the Brown-CarlsenListening ComprehensionTest. Becauseadhering to time requirementsin the live administrationof this test wasdifficult,Johnson administered a filmedversion and a taped version to twoexperimentalgroups.The controlgroup receiveda live administration.Thetaped presentationhad the greatestreliability and also yielded the highestscores. The least reliable was the filmed version. The subjects were 2,400college freshmen. Johnson also reportedthat the second part of this test,which purports to test lecture comprehension, appeared to evaluate adifferentset of skills from that tested by the first part.Additional References: Brown (1962); Hannah (1961); Williams(1962).Listening Relationships

    Since reading and listening are the two major receptive skills in thecommunicativeprocess, much interest was shown by investigatorsin rela-tionships existing between these two abilities. Using 400 high school stu-157

    LISTENINGApril 1964

  • 7/29/2019 Listening by Sam Ducker

    3/8

    dents as subjects, Holmes and Singer (1961) used factor analysis todeterminethe factors involved in reading. They found the correlationbe-tween speed of reading and listening as measured by the CaliforniaAuding Test to be .60. The corresponding correlation with power ofreading was reported as .74. Holmes and Singer reported that listeningaccountedfor 14 percentof the variance in speed of reading; this was 25percent of that portion of the variance for which the factor analysisaccounted.Of the variance in power of reading, listening accountedfor16 percent;this was 21 percentof the portionof the varianceexplained. Intheir substrata analysis, Holmes and Singer reported that 68 percentof the variance of the listening factor in the case of speed of readingcouldbe accountedfor by the subfactorsof verbalanalysis, range of information,vocabulary in context, Latin and Greek roots, and prefixes. Subfactorsthat accountedfor 58 percent of the variance of listening as a factor ofpower of reading were musicality, range of information, reasoning, pre-fixes, Latin and Greekroots, and speed of addition.Toussaint (1961) conducted an elaboratetesting programto determinewhich factors would best serve to estimatereading potential. She reportedthat a weighted combinationof listening, arithmetic,and intelligence testresults yielded the best estimate.

    The two studies just noted are of twofold importance.First, they repre-sent careful, painstaking,thorough research-one at the postdoctoralandone at the doctoral level. Too much research is, or at least appears tobe, governed in very large part by expediency in setting time limits indeterminingthe degree of thoroughnessin the treatment to be affordeddata once collected.Secondly, the clarification of the interrelationshipbe-tween listening and reading is importantto the reading teacher who mayfind therein a reason for emphasizingan aural approachto parts of read-ing instruction.Additional References:Bonner (1960); Evertts (1961).Speech and Listening

    In a sense, all speech can be judged in terms of its effectivenessonlyafter a study of the impressionmade on the listener. Therefore, it some-times is difficultto determine whether a study is one of listening as suchor one of speech. Casambre(1962) reportedon a comparisonof listeners'levels of comprehension of live and taped presentations. He found nosignificantdifference.However,the addition of visual clues to oral speechwas found to aid comprehensionboth on immediateand on delayed recall.Casambrefurther comparedthe results of administeringthe test of com-prehensionorally to those results associated with the usual visual admin-istration. On immediate recall there was no difference; on delayed recallthere was a significant differencein favor of the visual presentation.AdditionalReference:Kibler (1962).158

    REVIEW OF EDUCATIONALRESEARCH Vol. XXXIV, No. 2

  • 7/29/2019 Listening by Sam Ducker

    4/8

    April 1964Learning and Listening

    The extentto whichlearningis aided by the possessionof listening skillshas intrigued many investigators. Kielsmeier (1960) selected 30 eighthgrade pupils who had listening test scores at least one standarddeviationbelow the mean and a correspondinggroup whose scores were at leastone standarddeviation above the mean. He reportedthat, on a task con-sisting of learning a word list, the better listeners learned faster than thepoorer ones. Surprisingly,when the groups were retested 24 hours laterand again 7 days after the original test, there was no differencebetweenthem on recall.The statement is often made that there is a high positive relationshipbetween school achievementand listening ability. Baldauf (1960) investi-gated this relationship by administering to 352 fifth grade pupils thelistening test of the Sequential Tests of Educational Progress, the OtisQuick-ScoringMental Ability Tests, and the Stanford Achievement Testbattery.He found the over-all correlation between intelligence and schoolachievementand betweenlistening and school achievement o be identical:.82. However,when intelligencewas held constant, the partial correlationbetween school achievement and listening was .20. These findings con-firmed that many listening test items are the same type as items usedon tests of intelligence.If listeningtests actuallydo tend to measureintelli-gence ratherthan listening, a problemworthy of research work would beto find ways of developinga valid test of listening that would not duplicatethe items of an intelligence test.AdditionalReference:Murphy(1962).

    Visual Versus Oral PresentationsNo subject connectedwith listening has been of greater interest to re-searchers than the relative value of visual and oral presentations forlearning purposes.Almost one hundred investigations covering a span ofmore than 75 years have presentedsharply conflicting results. This dis-crepancy may be explained in part by the different circumstancesunderwhich materials were presented,by differences between subjects, by thedifferentnatures of the materialsused, and by the different methods usedto test results. Consequently, t is impossible to compare most of thesestudies. It is doubtful that much knowledge is to be gained from stillanotherstudy with a uniquepattern, yet such studies continue to be made.Using 132 twelfth grade students as subjects, Cody (1962) performedanexperimenton the presentationof 1,200-wordbiographicalsketches. Somepupils simply read them; some read them while the passages were alsobeing read to them; others had the passages read to them while they tooknotes; one group listened, but did not take notes. Cody reported thatreading was the most effective operation in terms of comprehensionand

    159

    LISTENING

  • 7/29/2019 Listening by Sam Ducker

    5/8

    REVIEW OF EDUCATIONALRESEARCH

    retention; reading and simultaneous istening was the next most effective;and listening while taking notes was superior to listening without takingnotes.AdditionalReferences:Jones (1962) ; Martin (1961).

    Listening Behavior Versus Listening AbilityKelly (1962) studied the differencebetween (a) listening ability meas-ured by listening tests of persons who knew they were being tested and(b) listening performanceof persons who did not know they were being

    tested. Kelly gave tests on materialpresentedas a lecture and found thatthe results were different from those obtained in a listening test situation.The Brown-CarlsenListening ComprehensionTest was found to correlateto a greater degree with an Otis intelligence test than with the listeningperformancetest. Managementand employee judgments of the listeningeffectiveness of foremen did not correlate significantly either with thelistening ability test or with the listening performance test. Personalityfactors were more closely related to the listeningperformancescore than tothe listening ability score. Although the samples used by Kelly were verysmall, there can be no doubt that the distinctionbetween ability and per-formance is one worthy of further investigation. The mere possession oflistening ability is of little moment if this ability is not used in day-to-daylistening situations. Whetherthis distinction between ability and perform-ance is a testing problem as much as a teaching problem is an openquestion.

    Rapid ListeningFoulke (1962) made a preliminary report of the study being carriedon by him and his associatesto determine the feasibility of using speededspeech to present aural material to blind children. Previous researchhasestablishedthat taped speech can be speeded without distortion by elimi-nating part of it and that it is possible to retainperfect intelligibility evenwhen as much as one-halfof the speechhas been compressed.Foulke useda Tempo-Regulator,manufacturedin Germany, to increase the rate ofmaterialfrom 175 wordsper minute (wpm) to 225, 275, 325, and 375 wpmwithout any distortion. Subjects were 291 braille readers in grades 6-8.Two 2,000-wordpassageswerepresentedon tape at the severalspeeds justnoted. A test of 36 multiple-choice tems was used to test comprehensionin both cases. A reliability of .75-.80 was reportedfor these tests. Therewas no appreciable fall in degree of comprehension up to 275 wpm.Thereafter,the decline in performancewas rapid, but even at 375 wpmthere was some indication of comprehension.The potential importanceofthis studycan be gauged by Foulke'sestimatethat the median reading rate

    160

    Vol. XXXIV, No. 2

  • 7/29/2019 Listening by Sam Ducker

    6/8

    April 1964 LISTENINGof high school seniors is 250 wpm, the mean braille reading rate of highschool students is 90 wpm, and the mean speaking rate used in recording"talking books" is 175 wpm. A question remains: What effect mightspecific training have in increasing comprehensionat even higher rates?The subjects used in this study had no previous experiencewith speededspeech.

    SummaryThe research completed during the past three years has increased con-

    siderably knowledge about listening. Many questions raised by this re-searchneed furtherstudy: In what way can what is known aboutlisteningaid the teaching of listening skills? How valid and reliable are the devicespresentlyused to measurelistening? To what extent do items on listeningtests duplicatethose used on intelligencetests? Is therea differencebetweenlistening ability as measuredby listeningtests and actuallistening perform-ance? If there is such a difference,does it pose a problemof measurementor of teaching? What are the possibilities inherent in the concept ofspeeded speech? What practical uses can be made of the potential time-saving qualities of such speech?One area that remainsneglectedis the teachingof discriminating,criticallistening. Being able to go beyond knowing merelywhat is said is of majorimportancein the age of aural mass communication; researchersshouldexplore all aspectsof this topic.Coordination of research on listening is poor, as it is in other areas.Duplication of investigations is seriously wasteful when so much remainsto be done. Availability of completed studies has been improved by theuse of microfilm for most doctoral dissertations, but previous researchreportsare still not sufficientlyaccessible.

    BibliographyBALDAUF,ROBERTJOHN. A Study of a Measure of Listening Comprehension and ItsRelation to the School Achievement of Fifth Grade Pupils. Doctor's thesis. Boulder:University of Colorado, 1960. 83 pp. Abstract: Dissertation Abstracts 21: 2979-80;No. 10, 1961.CASAMBRE,ALEJANDRO IMENEZ.The Effects of Certain Variables in Informative Speak-ing on Listener Comprehension. Doctor's thesis. Columbus: Ohio State University,

    1962. 221 pp. Abstract: Dissertation Abstracts 23: 3022-23; No. 8, 1963.CODY, MOTHERM. IRENE.An Investigation of the Relative Effectiveness of Four Modesof Presenting Meaningful Material to Twelfth-Grade Students. Doctor's thesis. NewYork: Fordham University, 1962. 213 pp. Abstract: Dissertation Abstracts 23: 1270-71; No. 4, 1962.DUKER, SAM. A Bibliography on Listening. Brooklyn, N.Y.: Office of Testing and Re-search, Brooklyn College, 1961. 52 pp.DUKER, SAM. "Master's Theses on Listening." Journal of Communication 12: 234-42;December 1962.161

    LISTENINGApril 1964

  • 7/29/2019 Listening by Sam Ducker

    7/8

    REVIEW OF EDUCATIONALRESEARCH Vol. XXXIV, No. 2DUKER,SAM. "Doctoral Dissertations on Listening." Journal of Communication 13:106-17; June 1963.EHRMANN, LIEZER . "Listening Comprehension in the Teaching of a Foreign Lan-guage." Modern Language Journal 47: 18-20; January 1963.FOULKE, MERSON,nd OTHERS.The Comprehension of Rapid Speech by the Blind."Exceptional Children 29: 134-41; November 1962.HOLMES,ACKA., and SINGER, ARRY.The Substrata-Factor Theory: Substrata FactorDifferences Underlying Reading Ability in Known-Groups at the High School Level.Final Report covering Contracts No. 538, SAE-8176, and No. 538A, SAE-8660. U.S.Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Office of Education. Berkeley: Schoolof Education, University of California, 1961. 317 pp.JOHNSON, . CRAIG,nd FRANDSEN,ENNETH. Administering the Brown-Carlsen Lis-tening Comprehension Test." Journal of Communication 13: 38-45; March 1963.KELLY,CHARLESMILBURN. Actual Listening Behavior" of Industrial Supervisors, asRelated to "Listening Ability," General Mental Ability, Selected Personality Factors,and Supervisory Effectiveness. Doctor's thesis. Lafayette, Ind.: Purdue University,1962. 215 pp. Abstract: Dissertation Abstracts 23: 4019; No. 10, 1963.KIELSMEIER,ILTON.Learning Differences Between High and Low Auding Subjects.Doctor's thesis. Los Angeles: University of Southern California, 1960. 110 pp.Abstract: Dissertation Abstracts 21: 1460; No. 6, 1960.PETRIE,CHARLES OBERT,R. An Experimental Evaluation of Two Methods for Im-proving Listening Comprehension Abilities. Doctor's thesis. Lafayette, Ind.: PurdueUniversity, 1961. 454 pp. Abstract: Dissertation Abstracts 22: 2511-12; No. 7, 1962.POLLACK,RWIN. Hearing." Annual Review of Psychology. (Edited by Paul R. Farns-worth, Olga McNemar, and Quinn McNemar.) Palo Alto, Calif.: Annual Reviews,1961. Vol. 12, pp. 335-62.SMALL,ARNOLDM., JR."Audition." Annual Review of Psychology. (Edited by Paul R.

    Farnsworth, Olga McNemar, and Quinn McNemar.) Palo Alto, Calif.: Annual Re-views, 1963. Vol. 14, pp. 115-54.TEZZA,OSEPH . The Effects of Listening Training on Audio-Lingual Learning. Doc-tor's thesis. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh, 1962. 202 pp. Abstract: Disserta-tion Abstracts 23: 2035; No. 6, 1962.TOUSSAINT,SABELLAASTIE.nterrelationships of Reading, Listening, Arithmetic, andIntelligence and Their Implications. Doctor's thesis. Pittsburgh: University of Pitts-burgh, 1961. 106 pp. Abstract: Dissertation Abstracts 22: 819; No. 3, 1961.WEVER, RNESTGLEN."Hearing." Annual Review of Psychology. (Edited by Paul R.Farnsworth, Olga McNemar, and Quinn McNemar.) Palo Alto, Calif.: Annual Re-views, 1962. Vol. 13, pp. 225-50.

    Additional ReferencesBONNER,MYRTLE LARATUDDARD.Critical Analysis of the Relationship of ReadingAbility to Listening Ability. Doctor's thesis. Auburn, Ala.: Auburn University, 1960.236 pp. Abstract: Dissertation Abstracts 21: 2167-68; No. 8, 1961.BROWN,CHARLES . "Introductory Study of Breathing as an Index of Listening."Speech Monographs 29: 79-83; June 1962.BROWN,CHARLES., and KELLER, AULW. "A Modest Proposal for Listening Train-ing." Quarterly Journal of Speech 48: 395-99; December 1962.DEVINE, HOMASGERARD.he Development and Evaluation of a Series of Recordingsfor Teaching Certain Critical Listening Abilities. Doctor's thesis. Boston: School of

    Education, Boston University, 1961. 251 pp. Abstract: Dissertation Abstracts 22:3546-47; No. 10, 1962.DUKER, AM."Goals of Teaching Listening Skills in the Elementary School." Elemen-tary English 38: 170-74; March 1961.DUKER,SAM. "Basics in Critical Listening." English Journal 51: 565-67; November1962.EDGAR,KENNETHFRANK.The Validation of Four Methods of Improving ListeningAbility. Doctor's thesis. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh, 1961. 326 pp. Ab-stract: Dissertation Abstracts 22: 1084; No. 4, 1961.162

    REVIEW OF EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Vol. XXXIV, No. 2

  • 7/29/2019 Listening by Sam Ducker

    8/8

    EVERTTS,LDONNA . An Investigation of the Structure of Children's Oral LanguageCompared with Silent Reading, Oral Reading, and Listening Comprehension. Doc-tor's thesis. Bloomington: Indiana University, 1961. 358 pp. Abstract: DissertationAbstracts 22: 3038; No. 9, 1962.HANCOCK,EWELL AZELTHOMPSON. he Effect of Listening and Discussion on theSocial Values Held by Sixth-Grade Children. Doctor's thesis. Boulder: University ofColorado, 1960. 252 pp. Abstract: Dissertation Abstracts 21: 3377; No. 11, 1961.HANNAH,Jo MORISON.A Study of Listening from the Reusch-Bateson Theory ofCommunication. Doctor's thesis. Denver: University of Denver, 1961. 76 pp. Ab-stract: Dissertation Abstracts 22: 3775; No. 10, 1962.HILL,EDWIN . An Analysis of the Results of Special Training in Listening Comparedto Special Training in Reading Skills. Doctor's thesis. Bloomington: Indiana Univer-sity, 1961. 131 pp. Abstract: Dissertation Abstracts 22: 3093-94; No. 9, 1962.JONES,WILLIAMMICHAEL. n Explanatory Study of the Efects of Two Media ofPresentation on Performance in Reasoning. Doctor's thesis. Seattle: University ofWashington, 1962. 53 pp. Abstract: Dissertation Abstracts 24: 434-35; No. 1, 1963.KIBLER,ROBERTOSEPH,I. The Impact of Message Style and Channel in Communi-cation. Doctor's thesis. Columbus: Ohio State University, 1962. 317 pp. Abstract:Dissertation Abstracts 24: 893; No. 2, 1963.MARTIN,WILLIAMVAN,JR. A Comparative Study of Listening Comprehension andReading Comprehension in the Teaching of Literature to Seventh Grade Pupils.Doctor's thesis. Evanston, Ill.: Northwestern University, 1961. 204 pp. Abstract: Dis-sertation Abstracts 23: 2806-2807; No. 8, 1963.MERSON, DNAMAY. The Influence of Definite Listening Lessons on the Improvementof Listening and Reading Comprehension and Reading Vocabulary. Doctor's thesis.College Park: University of Maryland, 1961. 267 pp. Abstract: Dissertation Ab-stracts 22: 3120-21; No. 9, 1962.MURPHY,WILLIAM ARL.A Study of the Relationships Between Listening Ability andHigh School Grades in Four Major Academic Areas. Doctor's thesis. University:University of Alabama, 1962. 115 pp. Abstract: Dissertation Abstracts 23: 3693;No. 10, 1963.WILLIAMS,REDERICKOWELL. n Experimental Application of the Semantic Differen-tial and "Cloze"Procedure as Measurement Techniques in Listening Comprehension.Doctor's thesis. Los Angeles: University of Southern California, 1962. 219 pp. Ab-stract: Dissertation Abstracts 23: 2628-29; No. 7, 1963.

    163

    April 1964 LISTENING