Speaking Self-efficacy Through Audio-journals

Abbas Ali Zarei

Associate professor, Imam Khomeini International University, Qazvin, Iran

Shabnam Sepehri,

MA, Islamic Azad University, Qazvin, Iran

Contents

Chapter One: Introduction

1.1 Introduction

According to Oxford (1990), the mental aspect of the learner is one of the most important

factors on language learning achievement or defeat. According to Shumin (1996), feelings,

self-esteem, sympathy, worry, thoughts, and enthusiasm are the mental parts related to L2

or foreign language learning. He also stated that language learning is a difficult assignment

that is disposed to human apprehension, and is linked with feelings of nervousness,

irritation, uncertainty, and fear. Moreover, he believed that speaking a foreign language in

front of others may generate stress. Sometimes, EFL learners lost the words in an

unpredictable situation so that they feel discouraged.

According to Brown (1994), teachers should offer a friendly and comfortable

condition that makes students speak, however their efforts are problematic and

inconvenient. According to Celce-Murcia (2014), some important kinds of speaking

activities are discussions, role plays, conversations and oral dialogue journals. In oral

dialogue journals, usually, the teacher begins the journal. He recommends a topic and a

time constraint for the first audio exchange. After that the student provides a response to

the teacher, using a sound file, a CD or audiotape. At the end the teacher gives an audio

feedback. In this activity learners can receive feedback from both teacher and other

students. By observing the implementation of audio journal, learners will be conscious of

their abilities and weaknesses, so try hard to improve.

Through observing their success in speaking, they feel more confident and more

efficacious. Bandura (1977) defined self- view in his or her own

ability to succeed. Learners need to be aware of their own abilities by receiving approval

for their efforts. As Brown (1994) stated, one of the principles for designing speaking

activities such as oral journals is to encourage the development of speaking strategies.

The purpose of the present study is to find out how using oral journals affects Iranian

speaking self-efficacy.

1.2 Statement of the problem

According to Huei-yu Chen (2007), for students to learn they must first want to learn and

believe that they can learn. They must have not only the motivation to learn but also the

confidence in performing the given learning task. The basic sign of motivation is effort that

strongly influences the performance. As Keller (1999) asserted, it is possible for a

motivated learner to make minimum effort in learning because of some internal factors

such as confidence. This means they do not believe their abilities to perform the learning

tasks.

The motivational reness of their own abilities to

learn or performing learning tasks is self-efficacy, which is defined by social learning

theorists (Lorsbach

& Jinks, 1999, p.158).

When people consider themselves able to do special tasks, they are highly possible to

perform the task perfectly. Conversely, when the task goes beyond their abilities, people

find it threatening (Yang, 1999).

Although many studies have concentrated on the relationship between language

rformance, few have examined second/foreign

language lear and its effect on their learning (Huei-Yuchen, 2007).

According to Brown (1994), speaking techniques should inspire the learners and

teachers should guide learners to see how useful the activity is. There are some activities

which are emphasized to be done in EFL classrooms for developing oral communication

proficiency and preparing students for performing in real life context, such as

conversations, role plays, presentations and oral dialogue journals (Celce-Murcia, 2014).

Among these activities, as Brown (1994) points out, oral dialogue practice provide the

students with the opportunity to communicate verbally without being afraid of the other

. In this activity students record their dialogue. So they can observe

their successes and failures and they can access not only self and peer feedback but also

teacher feedback.

The present study is aimed to investigate the effect of using audio-journals on the

improvement of Iranian intermediate level speaking self-efficacy.

1.3 Research question

The present study aims to address the following research question:

1.3.1 Does using audio-journals have any statistically significant effect on the

improvement of speaking self-efficacy?

1.4 Research hypothesis

In line with the above question, the following null hypothesis is formulated:

1.4.1 Using audio- journals has no significant effect on Iranian intermediate

EFL -efficacy.

1.5 Definition of the key terms

The key terms and concepts of the present study are defined as follows:

Speaking: Speaking, especially in a foreign language, is the most difficult skill for

learners. He/she needs to find the most suitable words and also the correct grammar to

convey meaning precisely, fluently and accurately. One needs to arrange the discourse for

the addressee to understand what the speaker says (Cameron, 2001).

Harmer (2001) adds that speaking happens when two people are involved in talking to

each other and they are aware that they are doing it for good reason.

Oral dialogue journal: According to Celce-Murcia (2014), one major task that

both fluency and accuracy is the oral dialogue journal.

The teacher begins the journal. He explains to the learners what they need to do and

recommends a topic and a time constraint for the first audio. The learners provide a

response to the teacher, using a sound file, a CD or audio taped, or other voice-based

technology gadgets. At the end, the teacher provides an audio response. Moreover, the

students can exchange journals and . Teachers need

to remind students to speak without planning because the purpose of task is to work on

spontaneous speaking. Student voices are the best document for the teacher to present

individual feedback about their phonological and grammatical problems.

Self-efficacy: Self-efficacy, according to Bandura (1993), refers to viewpoints of

personal abilities for various stages of attainment in a special task field on the basis of

master standard.

For the purpose of the present study, speaking self-efficacy is operationally defined

and measured as the participants scores on specially designed and administered

questionnaires.

1.6 Significance of study

Speaking is an important skill in learning English as a foreign language (EFL), as learners

need to interact (Nunan, 2001). According to Nakagawa (2011), there are different

viewpoints about a successful speaking. Bailey and Savage (1994), believe that speaking

in a second/foreign language has often viewed as the most demanding of the four skills

(pp.6-7). A remarkable amount of factors should be taken into consideration in speaking

because at least two people are involved. For example, observing and following the other

speakers, considering part, constructing that role, considering its results, and so

on. Consequently, many second/foreign speakers are upset and frustrated. They are not

ready for unplanned interaction and cannot handle all of its immediate requirements

(Celce-Murcia, 2001).

According to Azizifar, Fariadian and Gowhary (2014), feeling of stress is common

among second/foreign language learners. Because of such feeling in the learners they may

not achieve the specific goals. The major factors of stress are lack of confidence, lack of

preparation and fear of losing marks or failing. All these negative factors can easily affect

their effort to learn English. Therefore, they cause the learners to do poorly.

Among some different speaking activities which are popular in teaching speaking

classes, the researcher is concerned with audio-taped journals. As Ho (2003), has

-

(p. 269). Audio-taped dialogue journals are journals recorded on the tape. One type of the

audio-taped journals is oral dialogue journals. According to McGrath (1992), the oral

dialogue journals are journals that help students recognize their ego. The students who use

the oral dialogue journals talk about a specific topic through, which they can express their

own opinions and thoughts openly with no constraints (Henry, 1989). Oral dialogue

journals can lead to interaction between the students and the teacher. Ho (2003),

explained that through audio-taped dialogue journals, the teacher could be aware of his

earning goals, language level, motivation, needs and problems. According to

Bandura (1994), perceived self-efficacy is defined as people's opinions about their abilities

to produce specific levels of performance. Self-efficacy beliefs influence the way people

feel, think, motivate themselves and behave. People with a strong sense of efficacy are not

afraid of doing difficult task, but find them as challenges to be performed as well as

possible. The most effective way of creating a strong sense of efficacy is through mastery

experiences. Successes build a strong belief in one's self- efficacy. Failures threaten it. A

strong sense of efficacy requires experience in mastering difficulty through constant effort.

After people accept they have what is needed to succeed, they keep on in the presence of

trouble and quickly come back from disappointment.

A highly successful language teacher, as pointed out by Gilakjani (2012), should have

personal features like enthusiasm and skills in a range of teaching methods that create a

positive classroom practice

and self-efficacy.

The motivation behind this study is to demonstrate what using audio-journals

speaking self-efficacy.

1.7 Limitations and delimitations

The present study, as mentioned already, was an attempt to explore the effect of using oral

journals speaking self-efficacy. The interpretation of this study

should be subject to the following limitation and delimitation.

First, findings cannot be generalized beyond variables. Then, it was carried out in one

institute in Karaj. Also, the learners who were the participants of this study were at

intermediate level and they were female. They were at the range of thirteen to seventeen.

Additionally, the study was done in twelve sessions, otherwise, the result may have

changed.

Finally, the limitations of this study were some factors such as,

traits, cognitive variables and their learning experience.

Chapter Two: Review of Literature

2.1 Introduction

This chapter is divided into different parts. 1- the definition of speaking, 2- components

underlying speaking effectiveness, 3-significance of speaking, 4- how speaking skills

have been taught, 5- skills and strategies for speaking, 6- approaches to teaching speaking,

7- the goal of speaking, 8- explanation of oral dialogue journal and its theoretical

framework, 9- feedback, 10- speaking development activities, 11- self-efficacy, 12-

speaking self-efficacy.

2.2 What is speaking?

Speaking is defined as an interactive process of making meaning that needs producing,

receiving and processing information. Its form and meaning are influenced by the setting

in which it occurs, the participants, and the purposes of speaking (Burns & Joyce, 1997).

Speaking is the most important part of second language learning. In spite of its importance

it has been principally ignored in teaching and testing. According to Hornby (1995),

speaking is the ability to point outs ideas, feeling and demands verbally. It is the ability to

fulfill the linguistic knowledge in real interaction.

Communicative competence refers to the knowledge of grammar, words and sounds, as

well as social knowledge of when and how to apply statements correctly. Actually, to

interact with others effectively (Hymes, 1971). Oral communication involves verbal

communication as well as non-linguistic and paralinguistic features such as gestures, facial

expressions and intonation. An effective oral communication demands a high level of

familiarity with nonverbal interaction system, so different cultural beliefs influence

interactions. Consequently, these features has made it difficult for foreign language learners

to speak like a native (Shumin, 1997).

Because in teaching there has always been an emphasis on grammar and in testing it has

been difficult to organize either appropriate speaking tests or ways to evaluate (Egan,

1999). The students are considered as competent users of a special language when they can

understand the language they are faced with and respond correctly. So communication in

each language underlines the integration of listening and speaking skills. Teaching these

skills separately can have a negative effect on the communication in the classroom.

by providing the students with

opportunities to practice speaking and make the students able to communicate in real life

(Tavil, 2010).

According to Bygat (1998), speaking involves much effort of the central nervous

system , so it is a complicated mental activity. As Harmer points out, it involves well-

defined parts of planning. It occurs in the situation of limited processing abilities because of

restrictions of memory. So, there is a need for automation in each part of production (2001).

According to Skehan (1998), three aspects of linguistic performance in speaking are

accuracy, fluency and complexity. As Ellis (2003) points out, accuracy is determined by

the extent to which learners produce grammar, vocabulary, discourse and pragmatic

features correctly .

organizational structures (p.104).

speaking competencies in real time without unsuitable hesitations (Segowitz, 2000).

2.3 Components underlying speaking effectiveness

According to Canale and swain (1980), communicative competence includes grammatical

competence, discourse competence, sociolinguistic competence and strategic competence.

Grammatical competence: It is related to the knowledge of words and sentences. So that

the speakers are able to produce the forms accurately and at a reasonable speed related to

their fluency (Shumin, 1997).

Discourse competence: It is related to the rules of cohesion and coherence. To

understand and convey meaning according to previous and next sentences. The ability to

use discourse markers to convey ideas, to show comparison, stress, attention and reason

(Scarcella & Oxford, 1992).

Sociolinguistic competence: According to Shumin (1997), to communicate effectively

the speakers needs to have not only the sufficient knowledge of the language but also the

knowledge of the target language culture and appropriate use of the language. For

example, using speech acts, nonverbal responses and time management .

Strategic competence: He also believes that strategic competence is the most

important element. It is the ability to know how and when to start and end a conversation

and how to deal with the failures during the conversation.

2.4 Significance of speaking

As Rivers (1981) argued, people use speaking much more than reading and writing in

communication. Speaking is the most important factor of communication. It is very

important for teachers to pay attention to the elements and situations that make the

instruction effective with a large amount of authentic language input and speaking practice

activities (Shumin, 1997).

Speaking as a productive skill is closely related to listening (a receptive skill) as two

interconnected ways to carry out communication. Every speaker is at once a listener and

every listener is a speaker (EL Menoufy, 1997; Oprandy, 1994). Speaking has two main

functions: transactional (communicating of information) to convey ideas and interactional

(preservation of social relationships) (Brown & Yule, 1983).

Nunan (1999) and Burkartand Sheppard (2004), argued that success in learning a

language is considered according to the ability to accomplish a conversation in the target

language. Therefore, speaking is a main concern for most learners of English (Florez,

1999).

Teaching speaking is important because it helps students get EFL speaking skills to

communicate with native speakers. Moreover, if instructors use the correct speaking

activities in classes, speaking will motivate learners highly and make the English language

class an active place for learners (Celce-Murcia, 2001; Nunan, 1999).

2.5 How speaking skills have been taught

There have been different ways of teaching speaking skills. One of them is the Grammar-

Translation Method; another one is the Audio-Lingual Method; the third one is

Communicative Language teaching.

2.5.1 The Grammar -Translation Method

According to Richards and Rodgers (1986), in this method the primary focus is on reading

and writing rather than speaking. Grammar rules are taught deductively through translating.

Likewise, the learners are not given the opportunities for speaking about their feelings,

ideas and thoughts. They can speak just around the grammar exercises and when they

translate reading texts (Bailey, 2006).

2.5.2 The Audio-lingual Method

In this method students have to repeat the sentences and memorize the conversations.

Moreover, teachers have to correct Students practice grammatical

rules and sounds through repetition drills. It is believed that good speaking habits are

formed through regular repetition and learners become fluent and automatic. However,

there is no opportunity for learners to express their ideas, thoughts and beliefs. On the other

hand, there is no opportunity for learners to be prepared for voluntary interaction outside

the classroom (Bailey, 2006).

2.5.3 Communicative Language Teaching

Communicative language teaching methods include the activities in which learners have to

use English for interaction. Such as, task-based activities, role plays, pair and group work.

In this method, there is an emphasis on both accuracy and fluency. Accuracy is not given

the primary emphasis. Teachers correct just notable errors. Minor errors are ignored. So

teachers try to help learners convey their meanings and be prepared for interaction outside

the class (Bailey, 2006).

learners discuss meaning through

communication and using different kinds of strategies to get a reciprocal understanding.

This kind of communication promotes language development. According to communicative

competence theory, tasks help learners involve correctly with target situation by doing it

(Dinapoli, 2000; Ellis, 2003; McCarthy & Carter, 2001).

Moreover, Torky (2006), argued that from analysis of the preceding researches

associated to the success of communicative tasks in developing speaking it was concluded

that communicative tasks demonstrate a general increase in students' speaking ability,

linguistic proficiency, pragmatic competence which is related to the students' ability to use

language properly and discourse competence which involves their ability to share meaning

and organize conversation.

Tasks like problem solving tasks, jigsaw and information gap activities can be

organized to allow learners to concentrate on grammatical structures when engaged in

meaningful communication. Most important, in role-play tasks the students do not repeat

the dialogue to memorize it, but they have a real purpose for communication and they play

real roles. These tasks push the learners to speak automatically. The students are also have

sufficient time to correct themselves. They are not corrected by teacher.

2.5.4 The Language Awareness Movement

can use in teaching all the language skills. A focus on adults interaction needs and

purposes makes adult teachers able to put an important attention to form. For example, by

getting information about the ways native speakers talk about their own ideas and feelings

(Bailey, 2006). According to Van Lier (1992), the major feature of teaching influenced by

task-based (based on real life projects) and critical (examining the role of

(p.91).

2.6 Skills and Strategies for speaking

Florez (1999) highlighted the following skills underlying speaking:

To use grammar structures correctly; assess features of the target listener; select

vocabulary that is comprehensible and suitable for the listener, the subject of discussion,

and the context in which the speech act takes place; to use strategies for more

comprehension, such as stressing key words, rewording, or ensuring listener's

understanding ; to concentrate on the success of the communication and to fix elements of

speech like language, pace of speech, and difficulty of form to exploit listener's

understanding.

Speaking strategies as Brown (2001) stated are:

1. Asking for illumination.

2. Demanding someone to say something again.

3. Employing protective materials.

4. Employing discussion continuation signs.

5. Catch interest.

6. Manipulating rewordings for difficult structures.

7. Asking for help from the partner.

8. Applying act out and facial expressions to express ideas.

2.7 Approaches to teaching speaking

Through studying different approaches to teaching EFL speaking, it is proved that two

views are more important: a direct approach and an indirect one. The direct approach

involves "skill getting". It gets the learners to focus on specific and isolated parts of

speaking skills (Ernst, 1994; Littlewood, 1992). Activities like drills, studying of spoken

genres, and activities that make learners form rules inductively, are used in this approach

(Ellis, 1994).

The indirect approach, however, promotes learners' autonomy by having them

concentrate on the constructing functional language. The main focus is on communicative

tasks and sharing of information (Ellis, 2003). By practicing activities such as: discussion,

inf

communications (Bremer & Simonot, 1996).

The association between these two approaches is complicated. The single reliance on

only one of these approaches can affect EFL speaking skills negatively. The indirect

approach helps the learners develop their communicative skills and does nothing for

improving accuracy of production. (Burns & Bygate, 1998; McCarthy & Carter, 2001). So,

the two approaches need to be combined to help learners get effective speaking skills

(Aston, 1997).

In addition, Fotos (1998) and Finch (1999) showed that communicative tasks by

applying communication strategies, let learners experience unplanned interaction. Lee

(1995) and Ellis (2003) argued that tasks improve all three aspects of oral communication

like expression, analysis and negotiation of meaning.

2.7.1 Explicit vs. implicit speaking instruction

In the implicit approach of teaching speaking, learners get communicative competence

skills through practicing language in a communicative way in the classroom. By

establishing real life like situations learners they exchange meaning (Burns, 1998; Celce-

Murcia et al., 1997; Hedge, 2000). On the other hand, in explicit approach learners acquire

speaking skills and strategies through direct instruction (Dornyei & Thurrell, 1994; Hedge,

2000). According to Ellis (2003), Cognitive theorists emphasize on explicit instruction.

Learners are able to monitor themselves and they notice the forms. The most important

strategy is raising consciousness.

Consciousness raising

that cannot be seen in synthetic spoken discourse but in natural inductive ways (Fotos,

1993). There is an emphasis on not only grammatical rules but on the rules control

language use further than the sentence level (conversation rules, communicative

approaches, and pragmatic competency) (Bardovi-Harlig & Mahan-Taylor, 2003; Dornyei

& Thurrell, 1994 ).

There are two ways for getting consciousness raising. One way is to help students

concentrate on features of authentic spoken discourse by themselves (discourse analysis).

Another way is to support them to think about their own spoken action (self-monitoring)

(Jones, 2001).

According to Torky (2006), explicit teaching is proved to have a great role in learners'

d by this instruction are

pragmatic competence, discourse competence and strategic competence (interaction

Explicit instruction does not only foster the learners' understanding of spoken discourse

characteristics, however, it helps them to use these characteristics as well as competencies in

actual speaking activities that even casual everyday conversation can be taught explicitly.

Thus, explicit teaching and consciousness raising activities motivate the students to learn

how to speak (Torky, 2006).

2.8 The goals of speaking.

As stated by (Azizfar etal, 2014) mastering of oral aspects of language implies that students

understand what others say and try to express what they want in a language class. Speaking

skill is essential for each person who wants to learn second or foreign languages. Feelings

of tension and apprehension are usually existed among second or foreign language learners.

Different learners use different strategies when they speak a foreign language. Such

feelings in the learners may hold them back from the ultimate goal. Some speak in public

with no tenses, but some wait for a time to gain necessary knowledge, and some never

speak a foreign language (Azizfar et al., 2014).

Language competence is equal to language use and language acquisition is both

affected by and affects the conditions of its use (Goodwin, 1995). Language learning

ability to use the language for social interactions in real-

purpose for studying a language is to get the ability to use the language in a communicative

way not only to get grammatical competence (Cekaite, 2007; Hall, 1995; Hellermann,

2006; Kanagy, 1999; Kramsch, 1986; Markee, 2000; Young, 1999, 2000, 2002; Young &

Miller, 2004). To be able to speak a language requires not only the ability to process

information and language but also the knowledge of language items (Harmer, 2001).

2.9 Audio-taped journal

A learner's ability to use grammatical structures, make correct sentences, and use these

sentences in an appropriate context is referred to communicative competence (Hymes,

1971). With the advent of communicative language teaching, many techniques have been

employed in English language classes to provide the learners with the opportunity to use

language in a communicative way (Ramazanzade, 2011).

In addition, Hymes (1972), argued that this approach has emphasized on learners'

speaking fluency not only accuracy in real world communication, and focused on using

language for communicative purposes. According to Canale and Swain (1980),

communicative competence is included structural competence, sociolinguistic competence,

and strategic competence. Structural competence is referred to the knowledge of language

rules, meaning, and sounds. They explain that sociolinguistic competence is related to

discourse rules. They mean how to use language rules in a meaningful way in social

interactions. Thus, we can convey our intentions as speakers and interpret the other

-verbal

strategies which are used to make up for interaction failure. These are three important parts

of the language use.

Equally important, according to Ramazanzade (2011), in EFL learning context there is a

lack of communicative

language in a communicative way.

Oral dialogue journals by their interactive nature help the teachers to open a channel

of communication with individual students and can be used for working on accuracy

and fluency. These journals can be used for sharing ideas or asking questions

about how to use the language, to interact and to communicate competently. In fact

dialogue journals give the learners this opportunity to use the language in learning

atmosphere and in the classes of teaching English as a foreign language, which

many students are deprived from (p.165).

Also, Peyton (1993), argued that dialogue journals are conversations between a student

and a teacher during a period of time. He explains that "dialogue journals not only open a

new channel of communication but also provide context for language development" (p.1).

By using dialogue journals, learners can find a time to use language to convey meaning and

they are also corrected without being judged. Furthermore, according to Ramazanzade

(2011), oral dialogue journals can be a technique that provide the learners with the

opportunity of speaking when they have little time to speak in classes. Finally, Wertsch

(1997), believes that social constructivism views the learner single, complicated and as an

inseparable part of the learning route. This individuality and complexity is regarded in

using dialogue journals.

2.9.1 Theoretical Framework

Sutudenama and Ramazanzade (2011) explained that social constructivism theory considers

more energetic and effective roles for students in the classrooms. As Vygotsky (1978)

explained, learning is a group activity and students create their own knowledge.

Moreover, social constructivist theory reveals that learners learn when they establish

new meanings. In using dialogue journals, it is possible for learners to have a more

participatory role in learning and to convey their own meaning. Social constructivism

considers each learner as a single person with exclusive needs and conditions (Sutudenama

& Ramazanzade, 2001).

Likewise, Wertsch (1997), believes that social constructivism views the learner single,

complicated and as an inseparable part of the learning route. This individuality and

complexity is regarded in using dialogue journals.

Equally important, through oral dialogue journals, students freely share their ideas with

the same tape as the response (Sutudenama & Ramazanzade, 2001).

Finally, They also state that the purpose of using this technique is practicing

communication without being concerned about assessment.

2.10 Corrective feedback

Learners should continuously evaluate and compare the language they have been learning

with the target to develop their linguistic knowledge. So they need to pay attention to this

dissimilarity between the two to get the break or the hole. The significance of considering a

form to get it is stated Schmidt, 1990).

According to Havranek (2002), On the other hand, to detect new forms as practicing the

target language contribution for meaning, or to correspond the received information and

Corrective feedback offers solution to cope with the matching trouble. Setting the

learners to distinguish the forms that have not been learnt completely. Unluckily,

adjustments do not always do well in having learners conscious of what is to be found out.

Because regular happening in the input does not guarantee acquisition, corrective feedback

iciency.

Therefore, approaches in relation to corrective feedback differ among students, instructors,

and investigators (Havranek, 2002).

Many learners of second and foreign language consider corrections necessary and tend

to be acceptable repeatedly (Havranek, 2002; Schulz, 2001). On the contrary, lots of

learners view corrections uncomfortable. Most teachers also believe that corrections are

essential; but they commonly are concerned about negative emotional responses that are

possible to cancel out the p ).

According to Lyster and Saito (2010), a large number of SLA studies illustrate that CF

Lyster and Saito (2010) argued about

Lyster and Saito (2010) argued prompts consist of exploitation, signs which are not

related to the language itself, explanation requirements, and rehearsal. While prompts

comprise a series of CF forms, they share one main element in general that separates them

from reinvention shifts: They refuse to give right structures but they offer hints to quick

students to recover these right structures from their current information. Thus, clear

modification offers both unhelpful and constructive support, recasts offer helpful and

encouraging support and perhaps unhelpful support as well, and prompts provide only

unhelpful and discouraging support.

According to Lyster and Saito (2010) Since prompts can contain either implied or clear

CF shifts, Ellis (2006) suggested that separating implied and clear strategies in relation with

implicit and explicit

judgments of CF efficiency in second language environment to only implied and hidden

opposed to precise difference in this manner not only believes the reality of dissimilar

explanations of CF forms that is possible to allow definite juxtapositions of implies with

clear interferences but also misjudges either the academic worth or probability of

differentiating implied and direct CF forms in language situations. investigators have

compared CF forms in relation with directness, but this has demonstrated challenging.

Recasts, are regarded definitely indirect (Long, 1996; Long & Robinson, 1998.

Also, quite a few studies concerning adult students revealed the advantage of corrective

feedback over simple input (Ayoun, 2001; Carroll & Swain, 1993; Carroll, Swain, &

Roberge, 1992; Mackey & Philp,1998). Additionally, the researches explain that corrective

feedback is more possible to terminate in learning as long as the learners are all set to get

the rule in question. Learners in content-based and communicative language classes

illustrate a significant growth in accuracy as long as they are given corrective feedback and

other sorts of guides on structure (Doughty & Varela, 1998; Lightbown & Spada, 1990;

Spada & Lightbown, 1993; Trahey & White, 1993; White, 1991; Williams, 2001; Williams

& Evans, 1998).

Most important, Havranek (2002), argued that not only the learner who did the error

and the classmates can benefit the corrected form well in the assessment as long as the

learner is encouraged to self-correct and is competent to apply it. If the learner is not able to

fix the mistake himself, restatement of the accurate form appears to be beneficial.

Elicitation of self-correction is beneficial as long as the correct structure is repeated after it

be the least frightening kind of correction for the learners. It is undoubtedly the most

ineffective sort of corrective feedback as well.

According to Nagano and Kitao (2008), as in relation to first language acquisition the

function of negative evidence which is correction

investigated so it has been examined in second language acquisition, too. From one side,

those investigators who firmly believe in intrinsic potential for first language acquisition

(FLA) ignore the role of negative evidence in second language acquisition (SLA). Those

investigators argue that only positive evidence, in company with the intrinsic language

acquisition mechanism, can lead to SLA. Alternatively, several SLA investigators suggest

that negative evidence is basic for second language learning. Those investigators state that

implicit evidence such as recasting and modeling

rationally required since L2 learners should recognize what structures are not grammatical

in the intended language.

Moreover, according to Nagano and Kitao (2008), supposing negative evidence is basic,

to teach grammar in an explicit way will be practical and beneficial. On the other hand,

communicative teaching techniques are supposed to be more efficient than the grammar-

based approach assuming a second language can be mastered merely from positive

evidence the same as kids acquire their L1.

Instead, Schwartz (1993) clearly rejected the role of negative evidence in L2

acquisition. Schwartz states that direct L2 teaching with direct corrections (negative

Long (1996), claims that negative evidence is normally promoting L2 acquisition and is

needed for mastering of particular kinds of L2 forms. Long points out parents regularly take

advantages of clarification and corrective recast which are indirect kinds of negative

feedback r than grammatical ones.

Also, Nagano and Kitao (2008), believe that Clarification is a hidden and indirect

demand to say the statement again and recasts

statements by varying some aspects of the sentence with maintaining the similar inner

meaning.

Furthermore, Long claims that although parents do not apply explicit negative feedback

mistakes. He additionally believes that the advantage of implicit negative feedback is to

make specific rules prominent for children/ L2 learners, which guides learners to pay

Hirsch-Pasek, Treiman, and Schneiderman (1984) primarily established no relationship

research by Brown and Hanlon (1970). Another research by Tomasello and Herron (1988)

also suggested advantages of negative feedback on the contrary with explicit lessons about

the exclusions to extensible principles. Tomasello and Herron managed two groups of

college French learners with (1) explicit lessons of target forms and exclusions to the

standard principles and (2) merely common and standard patterns. Tomaesello and Herron

called the last procedure the Garden Path condition. It encourages students to make

mistakes and offers corrective recast instead of direct lessons of forms. They announced the

Garden Path group did better than the explicit rule group, so negative feedback is more

useful than explicit lessons. The Garden Path condition makes the students concentrate on

the principles and identifies exclusions to the common principles.

2.11 Speaking development activities

According to Trent (2009), learners like instructors should be director of classroom

discussions. So that they determine the subject matters. As Graham (2006), believes that

allowing the students to manage classroom procedures

and agency, which may lead p. 27). Trent refers to the role of the

teacher as the modifier to manage this student-centered tendency.

According to Celce-Murcia (2014, pp.112-115), speaking activities are:

1. Discussion and group work

2. Presentations

3. Role plays

4. Conversations

5. Dialogue journals

6. Accuracy based activities

According to Brown (2001, p.283), some interactive skills that can be done in

classroom are :

1. Interviews

2. Guessing games

3. Jigsaw tasks

4. Ranking exercises

5. Discussion

6. Values clarification

7. Problem solving activities

8. Role-play

9. Simulations

In discussion, as Kayi (2006) points out the students in different groups talk about a

given topic. They share their ideas and they practice critical thinking and decision making.

They also practice how to show their disagreement politely.

Role play has attraction for students because it makes the students be inventive and to

situate position (Richard, 2003). Widiastuti (2007) refers to

simulation as an activity which is very similar to role-play but here students are allowed to

take objects to the class to construct a practical setting. Widiastuti also argued the role of

interviews in promoting speaking skills not only in classroom context but also outside the

classroom since learners speak about themselves with another person outside the class. It

also has an important role in socializing the learners.In reporting activities according to

Witiastuti students talk about interesting experiences happened to them in their daily lives.

According to Harmer (2002), a very common speaking activity is a prepared talk

which is a presentation on a topic. These talks are more formal than conversations because

the students prepare themselves and they are not spontaneous.

Nation (1989) also argued one of the most effective technique which aims at

developing fluency is 4/3/2 technique. A learner is given two or three

minutes to think about a given topic. Then he should talk on the topic for four minutes to

his partner and the partner should just listen. After that he should change his partner and

talk on the same topic for three minutes to his new partner. Finally he should change his

partner again and he should talk on that topic for two minutes to his new partner. Nation

points out three important features of this technique. The first point is that fluency is

improved through repetition and in this activity speaker has enough opportunity to repeat

the message he wants to communicate. Another point is that the speaker does not try to

keep the listener interested by adding new materials because his partner will change and at

each time he has a new partner, so he just concentrates on conveying the meaning and the

language itself. The last benefit of this technique is that the speaker becomes automatically

fast and so fluent because the time is given reduces at each step and he tries to be faster.

As he refers using this technique leads to accuracy too. It is shown that there is a

considerable reduction of errors in second and third talks. There are two other techniques

that Nation refers to as beneficial ones in improving speaking ability. They are

Marketplace and Messenger techniques. In Marketplace, there will be two groups of

learners buyers and sellers. The sellers are given some minutes to think about what they are

going to sell. Then they give a talk about it. Buyers listen to them and should decide what

to buy. Each seller gives the same talk several times to all the buyers. In Messenger

techniques, there are three groups of learners. Describers, messengers and makers.

Describers are given a copy or a plan to describe. The messengers should listen to

them carefully and convey the message to the makers to tell them what to do.

2.11.1 Speech technology

According to Egan (1999), using CALL (Computer-Assisted Language Learning)

programs and technology can encourage the learners liveliness and involve them in

different events. Technology helps them improve self-directed actions and makes it

possible for them to control the speed of their interactions. They also feel safe. They are

given appropriate feedbacks on their errors and they are provided with exercises related to

their errors to make sure they do not repeat them again.

According to Nunan (1991), CALL program emphasizes on communicating meaning

instead of form. Egan argued CALL systems that contain ASR (Automated Speech

Recognition) can help increase language abilities. Because learners have the opportunities

to hear a large number of native speakers, they will be able to differentiate sounds and

structures well. They also increase their speaking skills as they need to produce speech.

Egan is not sure whether this progress influences fluency, self-reliance, or practical

conversational skills but she believes that because CALL is creative and communicative,

does not let learners stay silent.

2.12 Self-efficacy

According to Bandura (1994), Perceived self-efficacy is defined as people's ideas about

their strengths to produce selected levels of working. Self-efficacy beliefs decide on the

way people experience, believe, encourage themselves and perform. Such beliefs create

these effects through four main stages. They are cognitive, motivational, emotional and

selection stages.

A well-built sense of efficacy increases human achievement and personal success in

many ways. People who strongly believe in their competence view difficult tasks as

challenges and they are not afraid of performing them. They set themselves special

objectives and are committed to them. They make hard efforts in the face of breakdown.

They rapidly get well their feeling of efficacy after break downs. They believe that failure

is because of inadequate effort or poor knowledge which is achievable. Such an effective

idea causes personal success, decreases anxiety and reduces depression.

According to Pajares (2000), beliefs that students create, generate and keep are very

important factors in their achievement or breakdown in school. So it is concluded that why

-efficacy beliefs.

2.12.1 Gender Differences

The connection between gender and self-efficacy has been concentrated in studies. In

general, researchers state that boys and men are likely to be more positive than girls and

women in educational fields which are linked to mathematics, science, and technology

(Meece, 1991; Pajares & Miller, 1994; Wigfield, Eccles, & Pintrich, 1996), regardless of

the truth that success differences in these fields are largely reducing (Eisenberg, Martin &

Fabes, 1996).

Boys and girls also are likely to agree to a contrary position while reacting to

self-efficacy tools. Researchers have examined that boys are likely to be more self-

admiring in their reactions but girls are more humble (Wigfield et al., 1996).

Some researchers have illustrated that gender differences in group, individuality, and

educational variables may really be a role of gender adoption rather than of gender

(Eisenberg et al., 1996; Hackett, 1985; Harter, Waters, & Whitesell, 1997; Matsui, 1994).

According to Eccles's (1987), cultural beliefs like students' gender role beliefs to some

extent cause differences in lessons and occupation choice and in self-belief ideas and

perceived significance of responsibilities and behaviors.

2.12.2 Self-efficacy and its dimensions

According to Zimmerman (2000) and Bandura (1997) considered people motivation mainly

in name of outcome expectations before he developed self-efficacy as a main factor in

social cognitive theory. Through the therapy of phobic humans, he found individual

differences in their perceived potential to use mastery modeling methods outside the

remedial situation in spite of the fact that all individuals were able to communicate

effectively with the aim of their fear without unpleasant results at the end of the treatment.

However, they established a strong outcome hope that right methods would keep them safe

from unpleasant results. Bandura called this individual distinction self-efficacy. Even if

self-efficacy and outcome expectations were equally assumed to influence motivation, he

considered a greater role for self-

depend largely on their judgments of how well they will be able to perform in given

p.392).

According to Zimmerman (2000), Self-efficacy determines focus on performance

competence instead of individual traits. Subjects evaluate their abilities to accomplish

certain task requirements, rather than who they are individually or what ideas they have

about themselves most of the time. Self-efficacy values are multidimensional in type and

they are different according to the function.

2.12.3 Sources of Self-Efficacy

According to Bandura (1994), the most efficient way of generating a powerful sense of

efficacy is through accomplishment of experiences in an excellent way. Successes establish

a strong belief in one's personal efficacy. Failures weaken it, especially when failures

happen before a feeling of efficacy is strongly formed.

The second way of getting self-beliefs of efficacy is through the indirect practices

offered by social models. When they see people similar to themselves succeed by making

effort, they believe that they also have too much to do similar activities to succeed. By the

same token, observing others' fail despite high effort lowers observers' judgments of their

own efficacy and undermines their efforts. The impact of modeling on perceived self-

efficacy is strongly influenced by perceived similarity to the models.

Moreover, social assurance is a third way that causes people to believe that they have

what they need to be successful. People who are encouraged orally that they have the

qualities which are necessary for controlling given activities, are highly possible to make

greater effort and maintain it than if they feel apprehensive about their personal

imperfection when problems occur. The fourth way of reforming self-beliefs of efficacy is

to decrease people's stress and help them adjust their negative emotional tendency.

Last, the way people interpret their mental and physical responses is very important.

People with high feeling of efficacy view their situation of emotional excitement as a

stimulating mean of performance, but people with a low sense of efficacy see their

excitement as an obstruction.

2.12.4 Achievement goals and self-efficacy

In goal theory which is a new way for understanding the idea of motivation (Midgeley et

-aimed actions that learners do to

. , 1999, 549).

According to (Meece et al., 1988), there are two kinds of different goals, mastery and

performance goals. According to (He, 2004), learners with mastery goals are concerned

with acquiring efficiency and growing their abilities. However, for performance oriented

learners the aim of learning is to indicate their abilities to others and they try to get an

approval from their teachers or parents.

Also, academic self-efficacy works such as a major aspect that adjusts learners to

prefer dissimilar aims. So, self-efficacy appears to be an originator of achievement goal

implementations (Elliot & Church, 1997).

As He (2004) refers, learners with a great self-belief in their talent to complete a

learning task and forming their major aim of their learning to develop self-value tend to

implement a mastery aim. Learners with low confidence in their academic ability tend to

select an avoidance goal. This means that when a task is impossible to be carried out,

learners prefer to move away from their learning in order to stay away from being

considered as unintelligent and unqualified by others. In contrast, when learners with high

academic self-efficacy meet a difficult task try hard to succeed because they tend to prove

their special ability over other people. Through effectively performances they keep their

able-beliefs.

Clearly, as Elliot (1999) refers, when learners accept an approach goal, their actions

actions of

2.12.5 Self-efficacy theoretical framework

Self-efficacy theory derived from social-cognitive learning theory, introduced by Bandura

(1997).The foundation of social cognitive theory is an observation of human activity or

sense of agency in which people are actively occupied in their own progress and can create

things by their effort and movements. It is pointed out individuals possess self-beliefs that

make it possible for them to assess a special control over their ideas, emotions, and

performances that what people believe, consider, and experience influence the way they act

(Bandura, 1986).

According to Bandura (1986), Among all the beliefs that influence individual

performance, and at the heart of social cognitive theory, are self-efficacy beliefs, which are

people's findings of their powers to sort out and accomplish what is needed to get selected

kinds of actions.

Moreover, according to Norman and Conner (1995), in this theory individual behaviors

are determined according to situation-consequence, performance-consequence and noticed

self-efficacy.

Also, situation-consequence anticipations include ideas about which outcomes people

will face without intervening their performance. Performance-consequence is the idea that

for a special action will or will not be a special consequence. Self-efficacy anticipation is a

thought whether a special is controlled by individuals.

she is able to accomplish a special learning task would determine a self-efficacy

anticipation. Context-

performance through their effects on performance-consequence anticipations. Action or

performance-consequence anticipations influence performance through their result on aims

and self-efficacy anticipations. Association of situation-consequence anticipation with

performance-consequence anticipation would form special goals and plans to carry out a

special task. Actions will be successful through decreasing a known venture conducts plans

to do such actions.

Self-efficacy anticipations have an explicit effect on actions and an implicit result on

goals and plans.

individual features (e.g., ideas, views), and contextual circumstances (Bandura, 1986, 1997).

Learners get knowledge to assess their self-efficacy from their real behaviors, their practices,

the influences they get from others, and their mental and emotional feedback. Self-efficacy

ideas affect task preference, attempt, patience, purposefulness, flexibility and accomplishment

(Bandura, 1997; Schunk, 1995).

2.13 Speaking self-efficacy

a positive relationship between

speaking skills achievement and satisfaction with speaking classes and speaking skills self-

efficacy beliefs. Speaking self-efficacy belief is a stronger predicator of Iranian EFL

(p.353).

As Asakereh and Dehghannejad (2015) argued, learners with higher speaking skills

self-efficacy tend to perform better in speaking skills. Moreover, the extent of effort,

insistence and flexibility are organized on the basis of self-efficacy beliefs. And self

efficacy-beliefs can chan

Learners with high self-efficacy tend to be more confident and are more positive to

accomplish speaking activities with special complexity levels. Those with a high self-

efficacy belief tend to do complex assignments, whereas those with low self-efficacy may

consider tasks more difficult than they actually are. This kind of belief may cause a feeling

of anxiety and hopelessness (Pajares, 1996).

Also, there are a lot of studies that examined relati -

efficacy and their language skills proficiency. Some studies (Kargar & Zamanian, 2014;

Naseri & Zaferanieh, 2012; Shang, 2011) discovered a positive relationship between self-

efficacy beliefs and reading comprehension skills success.

Chen (2007) studied the relationship between self-efficacy and EFL listening success.

-

s (2009) argued that

listening comprehension self-efficacy remarkably relates to listening ability. Hosseini,

Fatemi and Vahidnia (2013), for example, illustrated a considerable association between

-efficacy beliefs.

According to Liu (2013), a lot of studies suggested that the use of strategies is largely

associated to self-efficacy ideas. Magogwe and Oliver (2007) illustrated that there was a

eir self-efficacy feelings.

-efficacy

feelings. Wang and Li (2010) argued that readers with advanced levels of self-efficacy

applied more reading strategies than readers who had little self-efficacy.

Liu (2013) found that whereas many investigations have been carried out on self-

efficacy in association with writing, reading and listening skills, investigation on self-

efficacy of speaking capability in foreign language learning has been ignored.

Moreover, he also

speaking self-efficacy. He argued that that students who often speak English at t ,

tend to have a high level of self-efficacy in comparison to their classmates who hardly ever

. Liu considere . First, students were

allowed to choose either their co-workers or subjects to decrease their stress. Second,

students without an appropriate level of proficiency in speaking skills were motivated by

the overseas instructors and their co-workers. Thir self-efficacy was developed

who were proficient speakers. At the end, students try

harder as they found out that they were making development to talk about themselves in

English. According to Asakereh and Dehghannezhad (2015), few studies have investigated

the relationship between self-efficacy beliefs and speaking proficiency.

In addition, Saeidi and Ebrahimi Farshchi (2012) found out, communication strategies

help the learners become more positive about their capabilities to handle circumstances

which are fearful to them because of their language imperfections. Teachers are able to

guide the students to promote an idea that they have enough ability to become successful in

their speaking objectives regardless of their language weakness through teaching

communication strategies. hing communicative strategies in content-based courses is

an innovative idea to get the student familiar with the strategies that help them overcome

(p.231).

To conclude, as the above mentioned studies showed using audio-journals has positive

the

effect of self-efficacy beliefs in writing, reading and listening proficiency. Few studies

investigated self-efficacy beliefs in speaking. Therefore, the present study aims to explore

the effect of using audio- -efficacy.

Chapter 3: Method

3.1 Introduction

The aim of this chapter is to report the methodology of this research in order to

answer the research question and to test the hypothesis proposed. The aim of this

study is to examine the effect of using audio journals on Iranian EFL learners

speaking self-efficacy. This chapter gives the description of the participants and

presents a brief justification for the design of the research. Moreover, it consists of

an explanation of the instruments, the elicitation procedures used for gathering data

and data analysis.

3.2 Participants

This study was conducted with 53 female language learners at intermediate level of

proficiency who studied English in Simin language institute in Karaj. They ranged

from 13 to 17 in terms of age. The treatment took over 12 sessions. The experimental

group consisted of 26 learners and the control group consisted of 27 learners. Both

groups were instructed by the same teacher.

3.3 Materials and instruments

The instructional material was a four-level course written specifically for

secondary school students and the main course book at intermediate level, which is

introduced by the institute and is obligatory to be taught there. Each level contains

eight units in two books. The instruction is also followed by some other activities in

relation to the grammar and vocabulary parts of the course book. The students are

supposed to be taught two units each term that takes about two months and fifteen

sessions. All the learners in both groups were studying the same level book (level 3).

Moreover, every session one subject was introduced to the students of the

experimental group to record their ideas about for 5 to 10 minutes, using a CD, USB

flash drive and their mobile phones. The subjects were all related to their everyday

life and interest such as their future goals, their parents, their friends and schools,

their ideas about education, job and money, the country they like to live in and so on.

Another instrument the researcher made use of was Speaking Self-efficacy (SSE)

Scale. The questionnaire was adopted from Rahimi and Abedini (2009),

Dehghannezhad and Asakereh (2015), Gahangu (2007) and Wang et al (2013). It

comprised 27 items, based on a Likert scale ranging from strongly disagree to

strongly agree, and the score given to each question ranged from zero for the first

option to four for the last option. The sample of questionnaire is given in Appendix

A.

3.4 Procedure

To achieve the purpose of the study, the following procedures were followed.

At first session, the speaking self-efficacy questionnaire administered to both groups.

After 12 sessions of treatment which was using the oral journals techniques on

experimental group, the questionnaire was administered to both groups to see

whether treatment has been effective or not. The students were reminded to speak

extemporaneously. Further, they received individual feedback on pronunciation or

grammar problems for each subject they talked about every session. Before

distributing the questionnaire to the participants, they were informed that their

personal information would remain strictly confidential and would be used only for

research purposes. The information on how to complete the questionnaires was

further explained to the participants. No time limit was specified. The name of

participants were requested in order to match with their scores that were obtained

later.

3.5 Data analysis

After administering the questionnaire and gathering the data, in order to answer the

research question, ANCOVA procedures were run to measure the differences

between the control and experimental group on the basis of their speaking self-

efficacy.

Chapter 4: Results and Discussions

4.1 Restatement of the problem

This study considers the effect of using audio-journals on the improvement of Iranian EFL

-efficacy. This chapter presents the quantitative results of the

performances on the pre-test and post-test of both control and experimental

groups. The results are presented in tables.

4.2 Results

The question attempted to investigate the effect of using audio-journals on the improvement

king self-efficacy. Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) used to

compare the post-test scores of the control and experimental groups, using the pre-tests of the

two groups as the covariate variable. The results of the ANCOVA procedure are given in Table

1.

Table 1.

Descriptive Statistics for the ANCOVA on Speaking Self-efficacy Posttest

group Mean Std. Deviation N

experimental 85.5000 11.59051 26

comparison 81.0000 11.68497 27

Total 83.2075 11.74793 53

As Table 1 indicates, the mean and standard deviation of the comparison group is 81.00 and

11.68, respectively, and the mean and standard deviation of the experimental group is

85.500 and 11.59, respectively, on the post-test To see whether or not the difference between

the means is statistically significant, Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) was run. The

results are shown in Table 2.

Table 2.

Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) Comparing Post-test Scores Across Groups

Source Type quares df Mean Square F Sig. Partial Eta

Squared

Corrected model 4150.858 2 2075.429 34.295 .000 .578

Intercept 660.127 1 660.127 10.908 .002 .179

Pretest 3882.641 1 3882.641 64.158 .000 .562

Group 216.281 1 216.281 3.574 .064 .067

Error 3025.859 50 60.517

Total 374122.000 53

Corrected Total 7176.717 52

a. R Squared= .578 (Adjusted R Squared= .562

As the result of ANCOVA in Table 2 indicates, F= 3.57, P

difference in speaking self-efficacy on the post-test. So the null hypothesis that is using

audio-journals does not -

In other words, using audio- -efficacy

in speaking.

Moreover, on the basis of Table 2, speaking self-efficacy showed a significant difference

in favor of the experimental group on the pre-test. Considering the results of the post-test,

this means that speaking self-efficacy has increased more in the comparison group than in the

experimental one.

4.3 Discussion

The present study attempted to investigate the effect of using audio-journals on the

-efficacy. The results indicated no

significance difference in speaking self-efficacy difference between the comparison and

experimental groups on the post-test, suggesting that using audio-journals cannot improve

-efficacy.

The finding of this study goes against Ramazanzade (2011) belief that audio-journals

with their interactive essence can provide the learners with the opportunity to communicate

competently. In fact the result of this study is in contradiction with what Sutudenama and

Ramazanzade (2011), McGrath (1992), Peyton (1993), Henry (1996), Brown (2000), and Ho

(2003) have reported about the advantages of oral dialogue journals for language

improvement.

Furthermore, the finding of this study is not compatible with Peyton and Reed (1990),

who emphasized that audio-journals can provide the students who are afraid of speaking in

class with the chance of talking in order to raise their self-assurance. They also stated audio-

journals can decrease apprehension of speaking.

Moreover, this study is incompatible with that of Brown (2000), who emphasized that

through oral dialogue journal, the students can indicate themselves verbally, can communicate

their real worries and thoughts, and can generate speaking. Oral dialogue journals offer the

students the opportunity to have individual conversation. Accordingly, the students become more

sensitive of their voices in the foreign language. Henry (1996) also confirmed that through oral

dialogue journals, learners practice speaking in their privacy. He further states that students

through dialogue journals concentrate on "pronunciation, communicating personal needs,

introducing elements of their personal lives, overcoming oral communication problems,

grammar, vocabulary, and self-evaluation"(p.15).

On the other hand, the result of this study supports that of Siyli (2012), who states that

learners were very agitated and worried while recording their voices. They were unable to

act calmly while recording their voices. They also had irregular pauses because they

They were also worried to listen to their

own voices. (2008) findings which

claim that there is a significant relationship between recorded mastery experiences

and their self-efficacy.

This study also contradicts what Warren (2011), who reported speaking students obtain

mastery experiences in their speaking classes when they present speeches. When students do

well at presenting a talk in class, their self-efficacy for speaking will grow. On the other hand,

according to Warren, even when people do not succeed, self-efficacy can be improved if their

self-efficacy seems pretty resilient, and they until they make it. They recognize

that they can succeed if they try more on the task. But, in the present study their self-efficacy

could not be improved when they found themselves not successful in speaking.

This study does not support Bandura (1997) belief that people who get encouragement

that they own the ability to overcome given assignments seem to organize more attempt and

continue it than if they live with personal imperfections and shortcomings when problems

come up. According to Warren (2011), social persuasion , which leads to self-efficacy

growth, comes in the form of feedback from instructors. In this study, however, such

persuation does not -efficacy.

audio dialog journals,

with their encouraging essence, could help learners improve their proficiency in speaking.

According to Siyli, the personal observation learners achieve in this task helps raise their

self-assurance, since it is completely a student lead and first step. They can also take

complete role for recognizing and directing their aims.

Additionally, the finding of this study contradicts Liu (2013) findings which

emphasize -efficacy. He considers

some factors at this Bar -efficacy. Although some

of these factors were similar to the conditions of this study, in this study they did not

contribute to self-efficacy in speaking. One of them is that the topics that the students had to

talk about were relevant to the stud iences and interests. So, they were encouraged

to talk. Another similar factor is that they were not afraid of being judged, and they were not

going to get any scores on their performance; so they could speak comfortably, and they

were relaxed. The other advantage of the English Bar was that the students were making

more effort at each session as they realized they were able enough to speak. Although these

factors are the same as the conditions of using audio-journals but here, in this study they did

not contribute to speaking self-efficacy that much.

A number of factors may have contributed to the findings of the present study. First, the

participants of this study were all female and they may have been less willing to make use of

technology and they may have preferred traditional ways of teaching and learning, as

educational system in Iran is traditional and learners are not familiar with new techniques.

Moreover, girls are more nervous than boys and they are also afraid of making

mistakes and being judged. Furthermore, they received an oral feedback after their speech

and most people are less willing to get such feedback, so it was possible that such kind of

feedback affected them negatively. Finally, learners have been asked to do this task for just

twelve sessions. The period of time may have been too short for them to benefit the positive

aspects of using audio-journals. The above mentioned conflicting areas are indicative of the

need for further research.

Chapter Five: Conclusions and Implications

5.1 Introduction

In this section, the findings of the study are summarized. After a brief summary, some

pedagogical implications, limitations and delimitations of the study and suggestions for

further research are provided.

5.2 Summary of the findings

The present study aimed at investigating the effect of using audio-journals on Iranian EFL

-efficacy. In this regard, the results of ANCOVA procedures

indicated that there was no significant difference in speaking self-efficacy between the

comparison and the experimental groups on the post-test, suggesting that using audio-

journals cannot -efficacy.

It is concluded that using audio-journals does not

self-efficacy in speaking. Moreover, speaking self-efficacy showed a significant difference

in favor of experimental group on the pre-test. Considering the results of the post-test, it

may be concluded that speaking self-efficacy has increased more in the comparison group

than in the experimental one.

5.3 Conclusion

The present study aimed at investigating the effect of using audio-journals on Iranian EFL

-efficacy. Based on data collected over a six-week period from 53

participants and using ANCOVA procedures, it was indicated that there was no significant

difference in speaking self-efficacy between the comparison and the experimental groups

on the post-test, suggesting that using audio-

self-efficacy.

According to the result of ANCOVA, (F= 3.57, P> .05), it may be concluded that

using audio- -efficacy in speaking.

Moreover, speaking self-efficacy showed a significant difference in favor of experimental

group on the pre-test. Considering the results of the post-test, it may be concluded that

speaking self-efficacy has increased more in the comparison group than in the

experimental one.

From an educational perspective, one major task tha

and accuracy is the oral dialogue journal. The teacher recommends a topic and a time

constraint for the audio. The learners provide an audio to the teacher, using a sound file, a

CD or audio taped, or other voice-based technology gadgets. At the end, the teacher

provides an audio response. Moreover, the students can exchange journals and provide

because the purpose of task is to work on spontaneous speaking. Student voices are the best

document for the teacher to present individual feedback about their phonological and

grammatical problems.

By using dialogue journals, it is claimed that learners can find a time to use language to

convey meaning and they are also corrected without being judged. Additionally, oral

dialogue journals can be a technique that provides the learners with the opportunity of

speaking when they have little time to speak in classes. Moreover, social constructivism

views the learner single, complicated and as an inseparable part of the learning route. This

individuality and complexity is regarded in using dialogue journals. Audio-journals can

provide the students who are afraid of speaking in class with the chance of talking in order

to raise their self-assurance. It is also stated audio-journals can decrease apprehension of

speaking.

The finding of this study goes against previous claims about the advantages of using

audio-journals. Despite those significant advantages, in this study, audio-journals failed to

help students to achieve good results. Such failure may be due to the fact that most learners

may be less willing to make use of technology and they may prefer traditional ways of

teaching and learning, as educational system in Iran is traditional and learners are not

familiar with new techniques.

Therefore, learners may have been very agitated and worried while recording their

voices. They may have been unable to act calmly while recording their voices. They also

had irregular pauses because they could not find right words to convey their meanings.

They were also worried to listen to their own voices.

There may also have been other possible factors to the findings of the present study.

First, the participants of this study were all female and they may have been less familiar to

technology.

Moreover, girls may be more nervous than boys and they are also afraid of making

mistakes and being judged. Furthermore, they received an oral feedback after their speech

and most people are less willing to get such feedback, so it was possible that such kind of

feedback affected them negatively. Finally, learners have been asked to do this task for just

twelve sessions. The period of time may have been too short for them to benefit the positive

aspects of using audio-journals. So, it is concluded that using audio journals as a modern

technique, should not completely take the place of pretty traditional techniques like lectures

and presentations.

5.4 Implications of the study

The findings of the present study may have implications for teachers, learners and materials

designers. First, it may be more rewarding not to put aside traditional ways of teaching and

to replace them with modern techniques completely. Most Iranian learners typically prefer

traditional techniques in educational contexts. They feel worried to make use of modern

means and unfamiliar techniques to do their classroom tasks. So, teachers can take

advantage of both modern and traditional techniques. Teachers can make students aware of

the purpose of using a special technique and assure the students that they will not be

evaluated and scored according to this special technique. Teachers need to realize that using

audio journals should not take the place of lectures and presentations. Secondly, direct oral

feedback that learners receive from teachers in using audio-journals may affect the

may think they are not good enough and they may lose

their confidence. Teachers can provide the students with indirect feedback.

The present study can have some implications for students in that instead of the

traditional ways of doing their tasks they can also make use of technology and not to feel

defensive about modern techniques. Students should be willing to make use of new

techniques that they have never used. They should be aware of the advantages of using new

techniques and know that practice makes perfect. Additionally, they should be aware that

teachers are to help them improve and they are not their enemies. Moreover, they had better

focus on the process of doing a task and not feel worried about the result.

This study can also have some implications for syllabus designers. They should not

insist on abandoning traditional ways of teaching and educational techniques. They need to

consider the negative feelings of learners about unknown and completely new techniques.

They can -

beliefs and feelings.

5.5 Limitations and Delimitations of the Study

The present study has the following limitations and delimitations. One delimitation of this

study was that it was carried out only with intermediate level students. Accordingly,

learners at other proficiency levels were not considered in this study. Gender was not a

variable in this study, and all of the participants were females. So, another limitation is the

possible differences between the performance of male and female participants. Further, this

study was done in EFL context. Consequently, the results must be carefully interpreted.

The length of this study was another limitation. This study lasted for twelve sessions.

Another limitation of this study was that only 53learners participated in the present study; a

larger number of participants may enhance the generalizability of the findings of this study.

In addition, the effect of other variables like cultural and social factors, which may

influence the findings, were not considered in this study.

5.6 Suggestion for Further Research

For those who are interested in carrying out research in the area of speaking, the following

suggestions are made. This study investigated the effectiveness of the using audio-journals

on intermediate level EFL learners' speaking self-efficacy. It seems very valuable to carry

out the same research at other proficiency levels.

Moreover, the age and gender of the participants were not considered as variables, so

further research can take these variables into consideration. Furthermore, the sample size

in the present study was small. So, this research can be replicated with a larger sample.

Additionally, this study investigated the impact of using audio-

speaking self- efficacy. So investigating the impact of using audio-journals on other traits

like self-concept, self-assessment, self-management, self-regulation and self-esteem in

speaking can be other areas for research.

References

Asakereh A., & Dehghannezhad M. (2015). Student satisfaction with EFL speaking

classes: Relating speaking self-efficacy and skills achievement. Issues in

Educational Research, 25(4), 345-363.

Aston, G. (1995). Corpora in language pedagogy: matching theory and practice in G.

Cook and B. Seidlhofer (Eds.): Principle and Practice in Applied Linguistics

(pp.257-270). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Avoseh, M. B. (2005). The power of voice: Analysis of dialogue as a method in both

elementary and adult education. International Journal of Case Method Research

&

Application, 17(3), 1554-7752.

Ayoun, D. (2001). The role of negative and positive feedback in the second language

acquisition of the passé composé and imparfait. The Modern Language Journal,

85(2), 226-243.

Azizifar A., Fariadian E., & Gowhary H. (2014).The Effect of anxiety on Iranian EFL

learners speaking skill. International Research Journal of Applied and Basic

Sciences, 8(10), 1747-1754.

Bailey, K. M., & Savage, L. (1994). New Ways in Teaching Speaking. New Ways in

TESOL Series: Innovative Classroom Techniques. Alexandria: John Benjamins.

Bailey, K. M. (2006). Issues in teaching speaking skills to adult ESOL learners. Review of

adult learning and literacy, 6, 113-164. Mahwah, New Jersey: Taylor & Francis.

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory.

Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Bandura, A. (1994). Self-efficacy. In, VS Ramachaudran (Ed.) Encyclopedia of human

behavior (pp.71-81). New York: Academic Press.

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.

Bardovi-Harlig, K., & Mahan-Taylor, R. (2003). Teaching pragmatics.

Washinton DC: United States Department of State.

Bremer, K., & Simonot, M. (1996). Preventing problems of understanding.

Achieving understanding: Discourse in intercultural encounters (pp.159-180).

London: Longman.

Bremer, K. et al. (1996). Achieving Understanding: Discourse in intercultural

Encounters. London: Longman.

Brown, R. & Hanlon, C. (1970). Derivational complexity and order of acquisition in child

speech. In J. Hayes (Ed.), Cognition and the Development of Language (pp.11

54),

New York, NY: Wiley.

Brown, G., & Yule, G. (1983). Teaching the spoken language. Cambridge University

Press.

Burkart, G. S., Sheppard, K., & No, C. E. G. (1994). Content-ESL Across the USA: A

Training Packet.

Burns, A. (1998). Teaching Speaking. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 18(3), 102-

123.

Burns, A., & Joyce, H. (1997). Focus on Speaking. Sydney, Australia: National Centre

for English Language Teaching and Research.

Bygate, M. (1998).Theoretical perspectives on speaking. Annual Review of Applied

Linguistics, 18, 20-42.

Canale, M. (1984). A communicative approach to language proficiency assessment in a

minority setting. Centre de recherches en éducationfranco-ontarienne,

Institutd'étudespédagogiques de l'Ontario= The Ontario Institute for Studies in

Education.

Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to

second language teaching and testing. Applied linguistics, 1(1), 1-47.

Carroll, S., & Swain, M. (1993). Explicit and implicit negative feedback. Studies in

second language acquisition, 15(03), 357-386.

Carroll, S., Swain, M., & Roberge, Y. (1992). The role of feedback in adult second

language acquisition: Error correction and morphological generalizations. Applied

Psycholinguistics, 13(2), 173-198.

Cekaite, A. (2007). A child's development of interactional competence in a Swedish L2

classroom. The Modern Language Journal, 91(1), 45-62.

Celce-Murcia, M. (2001). Language teaching approaches: An overview. Teaching English

as a second or foreign language, 2, 3-10.

Celce-Murcia, M.; Dornyei, Z. and Thurrel, S. (1997). Direct Approaches in L2

Instruction: A Turning Point in Communicative Language Teaching?.

TESOLQuarterly, 31(1), 141-152.

Celce-Murcia, M., and McIntosh, L. (1991). Teaching English as a second or foreign

language (p. 244). Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.

Chen, H. Y. (2007). The relationship between EFL learners' self-efficacy beliefs and

English performance. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. The Florida State

University, Florida, USA. Retrieved from

http://diginole.lib.fsu.edu/etd/3846

Cheng, Y. S., Horwitz, E. K., and Schallert, D. L. (1999). Language anxiety:

Differentiating writing and speaking components. Language learning, 49(3), 417-

446.

Chularut, P., & Debacker, T. K. (2004).The influence of concept mapping on

achievement, self-regulation, and self-efficacy in students of English as a second

language. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 29(3), 248-263.

Dinapoli, R. (2000, September). Promoting Discourse with Task-Based Scenario

Interaction. Paper presented at the International Conference on Language

for Specific Purposes, Barcelona, Spain.

Dornyei, Z. & Thurrell, S . (1994). Teaching Conversation Skills Intensively: Course

Content and Rational. ELT Journal, 48(1), 40- 49.

Dorshomal, N., Gorjian, B., &Pazhakh, A. the role of pedagogical films in developing

Iranian pre-intermediate EFL

International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistic World, 4(4),

254-268..

Doughty, C., & Varela, E. (1998). Communicative focus on form. In C. Doughty,

& J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in second language acquisition (pp.

114 138). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Eccles, J. S. (1987). Gender roles and women's achievement-related decisions. Psychology

of women quarterly, 11(2), 135-172.

Egan, K. (1999). Speaking: A Critical Skill and a Challenge. CALLICO journal, 16(3),

277-293.

Eisenberg, N., Martin, C. L., & Fabes, R. A. (1996). Gender development and gender

effects. In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational

psychology (pp. 358-396). New York: Macmillan.

El-

Foreign Cultural Issues in the Classroom.

Elliot, A. J. (1999). Approach and avoidance motivation and achievement goals.

Educational Psychologist, 34(3), 169-189.

Elliot, A. J., & Church, M. A. (1997). A hierarchical model of approach and

avoidance achievement motivation. Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, 72(1), 218-232.

Elliot, A. J., McGregor, H. A., & Gable, S. (1999). Achievement goals, study

strategies, and exam performance: A mediational analysis. Journal of

Educational Psychology, 91(3), 549-563.

El Menoufy, A. (1997). Speaking.The Neglected Skill.In New Directions in

Speaking.Proceedings of the Fourth EFL Skills Conference, Cairo, Egypt.

Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition.Oxford University Press.

Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching.Oxford University Press.

Ellis, R., & Sheen, Y. (2006). Reexamining the role of recasts in second language

acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(4), 575-600.

Ernst, G. (1994). Talking circle: Conversation and negotiation in the ESL

classroom. TESOL Quarterly, 28(2), 293-322.

Farahian, M., Branch, K., & Rajabi, S. (2014). The Impact of Self-Assessment on Self-

Regulation and Critical Thinking of EFL Learners.

Finch, A. (1999, October).The task-based classroom in practice. Paper presented at The

Second Pan Asian Conference, Seoul, Korea.

Florez, M. A. C. (1999). Improving Adult English Language Learners. Speaking Skills.

Fotos, S. (1993). Consciousness Raising and Noticing Through Focus on Form:

Grammar

Task Performance versus Formal Instruction. Applied Linguistics,14(4), 385-407.

Fotos, S. (1998). Shifting the focus from forms to form in the EFL classroom. ELT

Journal, 52(4), 301-307.

Gilakjani, A. P., Leong, L. M., and Sabouri, N. B. (2012). A study on the role of

motivation in foreign language learning and teaching. International Journal of

Modern Education and Computer Science (IJMECS), 4(7), 9.

Goodwin, C. (1995). Seeing in depth. Social studies of science, 25(2), 237-274.

. Essential

Teacher, 3(3), 26-29.

Graham, S., and Weiner, B. (1996).Theories and principles of motivation. DC Berliner,

RC Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 63-84). New York:

Simon & Schuster.

Greeno, J. G. (1997). On claims that answer the wrong questions. Educational

researcher, 26(1), 5-17.

Hackett, G. (1985). Role of mathematics self-efficacy in the choice of math-related

majors of college women and men: A path analysis. Journal of counseling

psychology, 32(1), 47.

Harmer, J. (1991).The practice of English language teaching. London/New York.

Harmer, J. (2002). The practice of English Language Teaching. England: Longman.

Harter, S., Waters, P. L., & Whitesell, N. R. (1997). Lack of voice as a manifestation of

false self-behavior among adolescents: The school setting as a stage upon which the

drama of authenticity is enacted. Educational Psychologist, 32(3), 153-173.

Havranek, G. (2002). When is corrective feedback most likely to succeed?.

International Journal of Educational Research, 37(3), 255-270.

Kayi, H. (2006). Teaching Speaking: Activities to Promote Speaking in a Second

Language. The Internet TESL Journal, 12(11), 2.

He, T. (2004). The Relations Among Trichotomous Achievement Goals, Self-Efficacy,

and Self-Regulation in EFL Sixth-Grade Classes in Taiwan. Journal of National

Taipei Teachers College,17(1), 111-134

Hedge, T. (2000). Teaching and Learning in the Language Classroom. Oxford: Oxford

University Press.

Hekmat, M. (2014).Sociological characteristics and their effect on developing the

entrepreneurship of production cooperatives managers. Indian Journal of

Fundamental and Applied Life Sciences, 4(S3), 1537-1547.

Hellermann, J. (2006). Classroom interactive practices for developing L2 literacy: A

microethnographic study of two beginning adult learners of English. Applied

Linguistics, 27(3), 377-404.

Henry, L. M. (1994). Oral Dialog Journals: A Learner-Centered Approach (

thesis).

Hirsh-Pasek, K., Treiman, R., & Schneiderman, M. (1984). Brown & Hanlon revisited:

Mothers' sensitivity to ungrammatical forms. Journal of child language,

11(01), 81- 88.

Ho, Y. K. (2003). Audio-taped dialogue journals: An alternative form of speaking

practice. ELT Journal, 57(3), 269-277.

Hornby, A.S. (1995).

(p.826). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hosseini Fatemi, A. & Vahidnia, F. (2013).

level of writing self-efficacy. Theory and Practice in Language Studies,3(9),1698-

1704.

Hymes, D. (1971). Sociolinguistics and the ethnography of speaking. Social anthropology

and language (pp. 47-93). London : Rutledge.

Hymes, D. (1972). Reinventing Anthropology. New York: Pantheon.

Jones, R. ( 2001). A Consciousness- Raising Approach to the Teaching of

Conversational Storytelling Skills. ELT Journal, 55(2), 155-169.

Kanagy, C. L., & Kraybill, D. B. (1999). The riddles of human society. London: Sage.

Kargar, M. & Zamanian, M. (2014). The relationship between self-efficacy and reading

comprehension strategies used by Iranian male and female EFL learners.

International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World 7(2),

313-325.

Keller, J. M. (1999). Motivation in Cyber Learning Environments. International Journal

of Educational Technology, 1(1), 7-30.

Lee, J. F. (1995). Using Task-Based Activities to Restructure Class Discussion. Foreign

Language Annals, 28(3), 437-446.

Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language

acquisition. In W. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), Handbook of language

acquisition: Second language acquisition (pp. 413 468). San Diego,

CA: Academic Press.

Long, M. H., & Robinson, P. (1998). Focus on form: Theory, research, and practice. In C.

J. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language

acquisition (pp. 15 41). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (1990). Focus-on-form and corrective feedback in

communicative language teaching. Studies in second language acquisition,

12(4), 429-448.

Littlewood, W. T. (1992). Teaching oral communications: a methodological framework.

Oxford: Blackwell.

Liu, M. (2013). English Bar as a venue to boost students' speaking self-efficacy at the

tertiary level. English Language Teaching, 6(12), 27-38.

Lorsbach, A., & Jinks, J. (1999). Self-efficacy theory and learning environment

research. Learning environments research, 2(2), 157-167.

Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake. Studies in second

language acquisition, 19(1), 37-66.

Lyster, R., & Saito, K. (2010). Oral feedback in classroom SLA. Studies in Second

Language Acquisition, 32(02), 265-302.

Mackey, A., & Philp, J. (1998). Conversational interaction and second language

development: Recasts, responses, and red herrings?. The Modern Language

Journal,

82(3), 338-356.

Magogwe, J. M., & Oliver, R. (2007). The relationship between language learning

strategies, proficiency, age and self-efficacy beliefs: A study of language learners in

Botswana. System, 35(3), 338-352.

Marefat, F. &Moladoust, E. (2011). Audiotaped oral dialogue journal and vocabulary

acquisition and retention. Paper presented at International Conference on

Languages, Literature and Linguistics, Singapore.

Matsui, T. (1994). Mechanisms underlying sex differences in career self-efficacy

expectations of university students. Journal of vocational behavior, 45(2), 177-184.

McGrath, M. M. (1992). Writing before Speaking: How the Dialogue Journal Stimulates

Conversation thesis). Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED347830.

McCarthy, M., and Carter, R. (2001).Designing the discourse syllabus.Innovation in

English Language Teaching (pp.55-63). London: Routledge.

Maehr & P. R. Pintrich (Eds.), Advances in motivation and achievement (pp. 261-285).

Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.

Meece, J. L., & Holt, K. (1993). A pattern analysis

Journal of Educational Psychology, 85 (4), 582-590.

Middleton, M. J., & Midgley, C. (1997). Avoiding the demonstration of lack of

ability: An underexplored aspect of goal theory. Journal of Educational

Psychology, 89 (4), 710- 718.

Midgley, C., Kaplan, A., Middleton, M., Maehr, M. L., Urdan, T., Anderman, L. H., ..&

Roeser, R. (1998). The development and validation of scales assessing students'

achievement goal orientations. Contemporary educational psychology, 23(2), 113-

131.

Nagano, T., & Kitao, K. (2008). The necessity of negative feedback for learning L2

collocations. Journal of Culture and Information Science, 3(1), 1-13.

Naseri, M. & Zaferanieh, E. (2012). The relationship between reading self-efficacy

beliefs, reading strategy use and reading comprehension level of Iranian EFL

learners. World Journal of Education, 2(2), 64-75.

Nation, P. (1989). Improving speaking fluency. System, 17(3), 377-384.

Norman, P. and Conner, M. (1995). The role of social cognition models in predicting health behaviours: future directions. In M.Conner and P.Norman (Eds), PREDICTING HEALTH BEHAVIOUR:

(pp.197-225). Milton Keynes: Open University Press.

Nicholas, H., Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (2001). Recasts as feedback to language learners. Language learning, 51(4), 719-758.

Nunan, D. (1989). Designing tasks for the communicative classroom. Cambridge

University Press: Cambridge.

Nunan, D. (1991). Language teaching methodology. New York: Prentice Hall

International

Nunan, D. (1999). Second Language Teaching & Learning. Boston, USA: Heinle &

Heinle.

Nunan, D. (2006). Task-based language teaching. The Asian EFL Journal Quarterly, 3(8),

12-18.

Oprandy, R. (1994). Listening/speaking in second and foreign language teaching.

System, 22(2), 153-175.

Pajares, F. (1996). Self efficacy beliefs in academic settings. Review of Educational Research, 66(4), 543-578.

Pajares, F. (2000). Self-efficacy beliefs and current directions in self-efficacy research.

http://www.emory.edu/EDUCATION/mfp/effpage.html.

Pajares, F., & Miller, M. D. (1994). Role of self-efficacy and self-concept beliefs in

mathematical problem solving: A path analysis. Journal of educational

psychology, 86(2), 193-203.

Peyton, J. K. (1993). Dialogue Journals: Interactive Writing to Develop Language and

Literacy. ERIC Digest: 1-7.

Peyton, J.K. (1988). Dialogue writing Bridge from talk to essay. In J. Staton, R.W.

Shuy, J.K. Peyton, & L.Reed (Eds.). Dialogue journal communication: Classroom,

linguistic, social, and cognitive views (pp. 88-106). Norwood, NJ: Ablex

Peyton, J. K., & Reed, L. (1990). Dialogue Journal Writing with Nonnative English

Speakers. A Handbook for Teachers and An Instructional Packet for Teachers and

Workshop Leaders. TESOL, Alexandria, VA 22314.

Pintrich, P. R. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. Handbook of

self-regulated (pp. 451-502). San Diego, CA, US: Academic Press.

-efficacy

concerning listening comprehension and listening proficiency. NOVITAS ROYAL,

3(1) 14-28.

Ramazanzadeh, A. (2011). The Effect of Oral Dialogue Journals on Iranian EFL

Learners' Communicative Competence Journal of English Language

Teaching and Learning, 2(222), 161-182.

Richard, A., & Patricia, A. ( 2003). Making It Happen, Third Edition. United States:

Pearson Education.

Richards, J.C., & Rodgers. T. (1986). Approaches and methods in language teaching: A

descriptive analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Rivers, W. M. (1981). Teaching foreign-language skills. Chicago University Press:

Chicago.

Rivers, W. M. (1987). Interactive Language Teaching. Cambridge University Press: New

York.

Saeidi, M., & Ebrahimi Farshchi, E. (2012). The effect of teaching communication

strategies on Iranian EFL learners' speaking self-efficacy in content-based courses.

Applied Linguistics Journal, 9(2), 220-238.

Saktiyani, F. (2015). The effectiveness of group investigation to teach speaking viewed

-confidence (Doctoral dissertation). Retreived from

http://eprints.uns.ac.id/18628/

Savignon, S. J. (2007). Beyond communicative language teaching: What's ahead?. Journal

of Pragmatics, 39(1), 207-220.

Scarcella, R. C., & Oxford, R. L. (1992). The tapestry of language learning: The

individual in the communicative classroom (p. 63). Boston: Heinle & Heinle.

Schraw, G., Horn, C., Thorndike-Christ, T., and Bruning, R. (1995). Academic goal

orientations and student classroom achievement. Contemporary Educational

Psychology, 20(3), 359-368.

Schulz, R. A. (2001). Cultural differences in student and teacher perceptions concerning

the role of grammar instruction and corrective feedback: USA Colombia. The

Modern Language Journal, 85(2), 244-258.

Schunk, D. H. (1995). Self-efficacy and education and instruction. In J. E. Maddux (Ed.),

Self-efficacy, adaptation, and adjustment: Theory, research, and application (pp.

281-303). New York: Plenum Press.

Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (1994). Self-regulation of learning and performance:

Issues and educational applications. England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (2003). Self regulation and learning. Handbook of

psychology. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.

Shang, H. F. (2011). Exploring the relationship between EFL proficiency level and

reading strategy use. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, (1)3,

18-27.

Sheen, Y. (2004). Corrective feedback and learner uptake in communicative classrooms

across instructional settings. Language teaching research, 8(3), 263-300.

Sheen, Y. (2006). Exploring the relationship between characteristics of recasts and learner

uptake. Language Teaching Research, 10(4), 361-392.

Forum Journal, 35(3), 8.

Siyli, N. A., & Kafes, H. (2012). Audio Journal in an ELT Context. International Journal

of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 1(4), 66-75.

Skaalvik, E. M. (1997). Self-enhancing and self-defeating ego orientation: Relations with task and avoidance orientation, achievement, self-perceptions, and anxiety. Journal of Educational Psychology, 89 (1), 71-81.

Spada, N., & Lightbown, P. M. (1993). Instruction and the development of questions in L2

classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15(2), 205-224.

perceived self-efficacy. European Journal of Social Sciences, 27(3), 335-345.

Suchman, L. (2000). Embodied practices of engineering work. Mind, Culture, and

activity, 7(1-2), 4-18.

Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford, New York:

Oxford University Press. Doi:10.1016/J.SBSPRO2010.12.231.

Tavil, Z. M. (2010). Integrating listening and speaking skills to facilitate English language

Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 9,

765-770

Thornbury, S. (2005). How to teach speaking. Harlow: Longman.

Tomasello, M., & Herron, C. (1988). Down the garden path: Inducing and correcting

overgeneralization errors in the foreign language classroom. Applied

Psycholinguistics,

9(3), 237-246.

Torky, S. A. E. (2006). The Effectiveness of a Task-Based Instruction Program in

Developing the English Language Speaking Skills of Secondary Stage Students

(Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/

Trent, J. (2009). Enhancing Oral Participation Across the Curriculum: Some Lessons from

the EAP Classroom. Asian EFL Journal, 11(1), 256-270.

Trahey, M., & White, L. (1993). Positive evidence and preemption in the second language

classroom. Studies in second language acquisition, 15(2), 181-204.

Vanl

grammar. Language awareness, 1(2), 91-108.

Vygotsky, L. (1978). Interaction between learning and development. Readings on the

development of children, 23(3), 34-41.

Wang, C., & Li, Y. (2010). An empirical study of reading self-efficacy and the use of

reading strategies in the Chinese EFL context. The Asian EFL Journal

Quarterly,

12(2), 144-162.

Warren, J. (2011). The relationship between service learning and public speaking

Retrieved from http://uknowledge.uky.edu/comm_etds/1

White, L. (1991). Adverb placement in second language acquisition: Some effects of

positive and negative evidence in the classroom. Second language research, 7(2),

133-161.

Widiastuti, R. (2008). Teaching Speaking Through Dialogue To The Eleventh Year

Student: A Case Study At SMK Muhammadiyah 1 Jatinom (Doctoral dissertation,

Universitas Muhammadiyah Surakarta). Retrieved from

http://eprints.ums.ac.id/332/.

Wigfield, A., Eccles, J. S., & Pintrich, P. R. (1996). Development between the ages of

and 25. In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational

psychology (pp. 148-185). New York: Macmillan.

Williams, J. (2001). The effectiveness of spontaneous attention to form. System, 29(3),

325-340.

Williams, J., & Evans, J. (1998). What kind of focus and on which forms. In C. Doughty

& J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in second language acquisition (pp. 139 155).

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Willis, J. (1996). A Flexible framework for Task-based Learning in J. Willis, & D. Willis

(Eds.), Challenge and change in language teaching. Retrieved

fromhttp://btkteszt.ppke.hu/uploads/articles/5839/file/readings_in_methodology.pdf

#page=13

Willis, J. (1998). Task-based learning? What kind of adventure. Jalt publications.

Retrieved from http://www.jalt-publications.org/tlt/articles/2333-task-based-

learning-what-kind-adventure

Yang, N. D. (1999).The relationship between EFL learners' beliefs and learning strategy

use. System, 27(4), 515-535

Young, D. J. (1990).An investigation of students' perspectives on anxiety and

speaking. Foreign Language Annals, 23(6), 539-553.

Young, R. F. (2000, March). Interactional Competence: Challenges for Validity.

Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Association for

Applied Linguistics, Vancouver, BC, Canada. Abstract retrieved from

http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED444361.

Young, R. F. (2002). Discourse approaches to oral language assessment. Annual

Review of Applied Linguistics (pp. 243-262). USA: Cambridge University

Press.

Young, R. F., & Miller, E. R. (2004). Learning as changing participation: Discourse

roles in ESL writing conferences. The Modern Language Journal, 88(4), 519-535.

Zimmerman, B.J. (1990). Self-regulated learning and academic achievement: an

overview. Educational Psychologist, 25(1), 3-17.

Zimmerman, B. J., and Bandura, A. (1994).Impact of self-regulatory influences on writing

course attainment. American Educational Research Journal, 31(4), 845-862.

Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Self-efficacy: An essential motive to learn. Contemporary

educational psychology, 25(1), 82-91.

Zimmerman, B. J., Boekarts, M., Pintrich, P. R. and Zeidner, M. (2000). A Social

Cognitive Perspective. Handbook of Self-Regulation (pp.13-34). California:

Academic Press.