The Effects of Negotiated Syllabus on Iranian EFL Learners’ speaking fluency and Self-efficacy

Journal of Teaching English Lnaguage Studies

مقاله 1، دوره 1، شماره 4، مرداد 2013، صفحه 7-21   

نویسندگان

Bahador Sadeqi؛ Javad Sarvi

Islamic Azad University; Takestan Branch

چکیده

The history of pedagogy and education shows that syllabus has always had a crucial role in the success of every course. Nowadays, the course designers allocate an especial room for learners’ needs which are continuously changing in an expanding world. This demands a new vision in education through cooperation with others via negotiation for syllabus. Although a great body of research has been conducted in this area, little studies have been made about negotiated syllabus. This study attempted to investigate possible correlation between negotiated syllabus, speaking fluency and self-efficacy. To do so, sixty-two participants from intermediate level were chosen based on the results of PET and an oral interview to make sure that they enjoy the same level of proficiency. Then, they were randomly divided into two groups. The E-group was treated based on negotiated syllabus. The control group was exposed to a conventional speaking instruction. Finally, both groups were examined again as post-tests. To collect required data, four instruments including: The PET, an 8-items Academic Self-efficacy scale questionnaire, Speaking PET test and Real-Time Analysis of Speech Fluency were utilized. The results indicated that negotiated syllabus developed learners’ speaking fluency. Also some improvement was observed in self-efficacy of E-group. 

کلیدواژه‌ها

Negotiation؛ syllabus؛ negotiated syllabus؛ Speaking fluency؛ Need Analysis and Self-Efficacy

مراجع

Bloor, M. & Bloor, T. (1988). Syllabus negotiation: The basis for learner autonomy .In Brookes & P. Grundy (Eds.) Individualization and autonomy in language learning (pp.62-74). London England: Modern English Publications & the British Council.

Boomer, G., Lester, N., Onore, C. &Cook, J.(1992).Negotiating the curriculum. Educatingfor the twenty first century. London: Falmer.

Brumfit, C.J. (1984). Communicative Methodology in Language Teaching: The Roles of Fluency and Accuracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Cambridge International Dictionary of English. 1995. London: Cambridge University Press.

Chambers, F. (1997). What do we mean by fluency?

Day, E., and Shapson, S. (1987). Assessment of oral communicative skills in early French immersion programs. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development. 8(3), 237-260.

Dörnyei, Z. (2001). Teaching and researching motivation. Longman: New York.

Ehrman, M. (1996). An exploration of adult language learner motivation, self-efficacy andanxiety. In Language Learning Motivation: Pathways to the New Century, R. Oxford (Ed.). University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu, 81-103.

Fillmore, L W (1979) Individual differences in second language acquisition, in Fillmore, C,

Gardner, R. C.,& MacIntyre, P. D. (1993). A student‟s contribution to second language learning. Language Teaching, 26, 1-11.

Grunert, J. 1997. The course syllabus: A learning-centered approach. Bolton, MA: Anker Publishing Company.

Hayes, J. R. (1996). A new framework for unders tanding cognition and affect in writing. In C.

Horwitz, E. K., Horwitz, M. B., &Cope, J. (1986). Foreign language classroom anxiety. The Modern

Iwai, T., Kondo, K., Limm, S. J. D., Ray, E. G., Shimizu, H., and Brown, J. D. (1999). Japanese language needs analysis. Available at: http://www.nflrc.hawaii.edu/Networks/NW13/NW13.pdf

Koponen, M., & Riggenbach, H. (2000). Overview: Varying perspectives on fluency. In H. Riggenbach (Ed.), Perspectives on fluency (pp. 5–24). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press Language Journal, 70, 125-132.

Lavelle, E. (2005).Understanding teacher writing: Processes, outcomes and instructional strategies. Unpublished Manuscript.

Lavelle, E. (2006). Teachers' self-efficacy for writing. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 4 (1), 73–84.

Lennon, P. (1990). Investigating fluency in EFL: A quantitative approach. Language Learning, 40(3), 387–417.

Lo, J & Hyland, F. (2007). Enhancing students’ engagement and motivation in writing. institute of Education, University of London. United Kingdom

M. P. Breen and Littlejoh n A. (2000). Introduction and Overview: The significance of negotiation. In M. P. Breen and A.  Littlejohn (eds.) Classroom Decision- Making Negotiation and process syllabus in practice, pp. 5 - 38. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

MacIntyre, P. D., & Gardner, R. C. (1989). Anxiety and second language learning: Toward a theoretical clarification. Language Learning, 39, 251-257.

McKillip, J. (1987). Need Analysis:  Tools for the Human Service and Education Applied Social Research Methods Series, Volume 10.  Sage Publications:  Thousand Oaks, CA.

Nation, I.S.P. and Macalister, J. (2010). Language Curriculum Design. Routledge, New York.

Nunan, D. (1998). Approaches to Teaching Listening in the Language Classroom. Paper presented at the Korea TESOL Conference, Seoul.

Pajares,  F., & Valiante, G. (2006). Self-efficacy  beliefs  and  motivation  in writing development. In C. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (pp. 158–170).  New York:Guilford Press.

Pastorino, E. E. 1999. Students with academic difficulty: Prevention and assistance. APS Observer 10–11, 26.

Pienemann, M. (1985). Learnability and syllabus construction. In K. Hyltenstam, and M. Pienemann (Eds.), Modelling and assessing second language acquisition. Clevedon, Avon: Multilingual Matters.

Schmidt, R., Boraie, D., & Kassabgy, O. (1996). Foreign language motivation: Internal structure and external connections. In Language learning motivation: Pathways to the new century, Oxford (Ed.). University of Hawaii Press. Honolulu, 9-70.

Schunk, D. H. (1990). Goal setting and self-efficacy during self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 25, 71-86.

Segalowitz, N. (2010). The cognitive bases of second language fluency. New York: Routledge. (Winner of the Modern Language Association of America's Kenneth W. Mildenberger Prize, January 2012.)

Tudor, I. (1996). Learner-centredness as language education. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

West, R. (1998).ESP- State of the art. Available at:www.man.ac.uk/CELSE/esp/west.htm

White, R.V. (1988). The ELT Curriculum. Oxford: Blackwell.

Wood, R., & Locke, E. (1987). The relation of self-efficacy and grade goals to academic performance. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 47, 1013-1024.

Woolfolk Hoy, A. W., & Burke Spero, R. (2005). Changes in teacher efficacy during the early years of teaching: A comparison of four measures. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21 (4), 343–356.

Yaruss, J.S. (1998), “Real-Time Analysis of Speech Fluency: Procedures and Reliability Training.” AJSLP, Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, Vol. 7, No.@, pp25-37.

Zimmerman, B. J. & Bandura, A. (1994). Impact of self-regulatory influences on writing course attainment. American Educational Research Journal, 31(4), 845-862.

Zimmerman, B. J. (2000). Attaining self-regulation: A social cognitive perspective. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation (pp. 13-39). San Diego: Academic Press