DI-UMONS : Dépôt institutionnel de l’université de Mons

Recherche transversale
(titres de publication, de périodique et noms de colloque inclus)
2016-09-23 - Colloque/Abstract - Anglais - 1 page(s)

Piccaluga Myriam , Delvaux Véronique , Huet Kathy , Harmegnies Bernard , "Teaching listening in L2: Low-level decoding processes vs. high-level cognitive strategies" in première journée du Groupe de Contact Psycholinguistique et Neurolinguistique, p.9, Bruxelles, Belgique, 2016

  • Codes CREF : Psycholinguistique (DI5321), Phonétique (DI5312), Traitement du langage (DI4299), Enseignement des langues étrangères (DI5328), Phonologie (DI5311)
  • Unités de recherche UMONS : Métrologie et Sciences du langage (P362)
  • Instituts UMONS : Institut de recherche en sciences et technologies du langage (Langage), Institut des Sciences et Technologies de la Santé (Santé)

Abstract(s) :

(Anglais) In this paper, we discuss the results of two studies which, using a pre-test/post-test design, assessed the efficiency of two learning sequences implementing contrasting methods for teaching listening to teenage French EFL learners from Belgium. Study 1 tested a learning sequence based on both implicit (using the word-spotting task) and explicit teaching of word boundary detection using two cues that have proven useful for native English speakers: (i) lexical stress, and (ii) phonotactic constraints. Study 2 evaluated the success of a learning sequence focussing on listening strategies in an integrated teaching approach. First, the efficiency of the learning sequences were assessed by comparing performances in pre- vs. post-tests. Second, learning processes were investigated by analyzing performances in similar exercices included within the learning sequences. Third, the attitudes and self-reported practices of the participants in relation with listening comprehension were documented (before & after intervention), as well as their opinion on the usefulness of the learning sequence (after intervention), to be confronted with the learners' performances at each step of the procedure. Results show that (i) the learning sequence focussing on "low-level" word segmentation processes was more effective than the learning sequence based on cognitive listening strategies; (ii) the improvement in the performances from pre-test to post-test did not result from a particular didactic mean, but from a combination of teaching practices and speech materials (including individual exercises and theory building in group sessions, implicit and explicit learning, etc.); (iii) students who were self-reportedly focused on the listening task and approached it with a positive attitude performed better.