Teaching Listening skills with UR’s miniseries : A study of 2 miniseries’ pedagogical material’s approaches to listening comprehension strategies

(1)

Subject: English for Subject Teachers, 61-90 credits Degree project (15 credits)

Term: Spring 2021

Author: Johanna Tornberg Supervisor: Annika Denke Examiner: Leon Yousif Barkho

1

Teaching Listening skills

with UR’s miniseries

A study of 2 miniseries’ pedagogical material’s

approaches to listening comprehension strategies

(2)

Abstract

The aim of this study was to find out how Utbildningsverket’s (UR) pedagogical material, belonging to two miniseries aimed at upper secondary school, use top-down- and bottom-up strategies to teach listening comprehension. For this purpose, a case study method was used where the materials worked as the case to be studied. Furthermore, the approaches that were used for this study were based on taxonomies established by previous research: First, a taxonomy of strategies for listening comprehension illustrated by Graham and Santos (2015). Secondly, a taxonomy relating to listening types, illustrated by Field (2009). With these taxonomies and the English 5 syllabus, the materials were studied as a qualitative case study. The results show that the two criteria in the English 5 syllabus, which relate to strategies, are addressed within the teacher’s guide of both miniseries. Moreover, My English Mistakes and The Great Debate, both implicitly instruct students to use various strategies. The results also show that the top-down strategies are overrepresented in frequency but less varied in listening type variation. However, the strategies that are instructed are not explained or motivated in the materials.

Key words: Listening, EFL teaching, Strategies, English 5, UR, top-down, bottom-up, comprehension, listening types

Word count: 7904 Number of pages: 24

(3)

1 Introduction

Teachers in Sweden have the freedom to choose materials for their students if it fits within the content of communication of the syllabus. Sweden is one of few countries that do not have a literary canon with a set list of literary works that teachers must use in their education. Consequently, this creates a time-consuming task of gathering materials for the teacher’s course. All the while, The Education Act (Skollagen) describes the foundation of the Swedish education system as twofold; well-tried experience (beprövad erfarenhet) and scientific basis (Vetenskaplig grund). Thus, teachers need to both consider the scientific basis of their methods and material as well as theirs and other teachers’ experience (SFS 2010:800), something that many teachers find difficult to interpret and balance (Skrak 2020, p. 66).

Teachers may therefore use materials found online that are free for them to use. One such resource is Utbildningsradion (UR), whose website shows statistics displaying 75% teacher satisfaction with UR’s materials as a resource for students’ learning (UR UR i skolan n.d). UR also provides a blog aimed at new teachers with tips and inspiration, furthering its connection to the Swedish education system.

UR promotes its products as produced with the Swedish syllabus for English 5-7 in mind. The Swedish syllabus, in turn, covers the four main language skills: reading, writing, speaking and the often-neglected skill: listening (Field, 2009, p. 1). Siegel (2015) argues that it is through listening to English that English as a foreign language learners (EFL) develop their understanding of spoken input, making the listening skill fundamental for language learning. Yet, it is often the skill that teachers overlook. Furthermore, teachers rarely explicitly present students with listening tools, such as strategies, to aid their listening comprehension (Siegel, 2015, p. 638). Therefore, it would be interesting to investigate how UR works with strategies for listening comprehension, given that they promote themselves as an educational service provider. Moreover, Graham and Santos (2015) show that teachers have less theoretical approaches to teaching the listening skill than they do with the other skills. Often, language teachers create exercises or structure the listening task based on experience, without having the theoretical background as to why the method is effective (Graham & Santos, 2015, p 19). Thus, the question that need

(6)

answering is how UR’s pedagogical materials use strategies to work with listening comprehension.

2 Background

2.1 Utbildningsradion (UR)

UR is a tax funded company that produces content for different educational purposes, both for school use and for private learning (UR.se Om skolan, Skatteverket.se 2021 Public service-avgift). The Swedish government has granted permission for UR to broadcast nationwide television, analogue radio, and searchable text-television. However, UR is obligated to do so with integrity and without affiliation to the state or any other economic or political interests (KU 2019/02008/MD, p. 3). The government has certain requirements regarding the quality of the content produced by UR, displayed in paragraph 6 in the Radio- and Television Act. The act addresses freedom of speech, licensing, commercial and distribution platforms such as the terrestrial network. According to the Radio-and Television Act, paragraph 7, UR’s content must be conducted with equality and diversity in mind as well as in an innovative way. Furthermore, it needs to reflect the changing interests and prerequisites of the Swedish population (KU 2019/02008/MD, p 5). In paragraph 8 of the renewed agreement between UR and the government spanning through 2020-2025 UR is required to broaden its educational programs and make the educational aspect its concentrated area. The 8th paragraph includes all levels of education, such as children’s, young adults, folkhögskola, and other instances that educate adults (KU 2019/02008/MD, p. 5).

Under the section named UR in school [my translation], UR describes its work as being greatly influenced by teachers, scientists, pedagogues, and government agencies. Further, working for the company are teachers who carry dialogue with schools and the target groups of the content before, during and after production. UR describes its content as containing various methods to support struggling students, although, the methods are not specified(UR ur i skolan n.d).

2.2 The Listening Skill and EFL classroom

The classical form of teaching listening, which is prevalent in modern classrooms, emerged in the 1970’s (Field, 2009, p.13). In comparison to reading, writing, and speaking, the

(7)

listening skill had a later appearance within EFL teaching as a separate skill to be taught. Since both reading and listening share the same comprehension process, relating content to previous knowledge and inferring meaning, the methods and view of the listening skill shows resemblance to that of the reading skill. The difference, then, is at which speed the learner must process and relate the new information. The reader can go back and read the text again, slow down or take a break. The listener must process the information faster and does not have control over the speed or form of the speaker (Field, 2009, pp. 27-28).

Listening comprehension was, and still often is, taught through three stages. First, the teacher presents new vocabulary which the students might not be familiar with. Then, the listening process takes place in two steps. Step one, where general questions are asked, and step two where listening comprehension questions are asked for more details. Finally, new vocabulary is practiced, and language is analyzed. The steps may then be repeated (Field, 2009, p.14).

Field (2009) points out that good EFL classrooms may base their methodology on the classical model but do so with adjustments. The first step includes giving motivation for listening as well as creating context for the listeners. The second step also includes questions before listening, not only after. The final step sometimes includes transcription and trying to infer meanings to words students do not know (Field, 2009, pp 16-17).

Since the miniseries and their materials are still available, as of June 2021, UR deems them relevant for modern EFL teaching. An aspect to look for in the materials is thus if the listening skill is targeted individually or in combination with the other skills, as well as the structure of the listening comprehension process. Teaching listening as a skill in EFL classrooms has, according to Hinkel, moved towards methods where the four skills are combined through communicative approaches to simulate first language (L1) environments (Hinkel, 2006, p 113). Moreover, Hinkel describes that modern textbooks and syllabi often address the skills both from a schematic and linguistic approach, through both top-down and bottom-up abilities (Hinkel, 2006, p 111).

(8)

Language processing constitutes two overarching processes: Discourse and units. To process the information heard, the listener needs both to be able to understand units and grammar in the target language, but also to relate or infer meaning to fit within their schema. The terms top-down and bottom-up are used within the field, instead of discourse and units, to demonstrate how comprehension can be approached differently. With bottom-up processes the listener comprehends meaning by processing phonemes (sounds) to create words which, thereafter, create sentences (Lundahl, 2012, p. 231). In contrast, top-down processes create meaning by using the listeners’ acquired and learned knowledge (schema) to infer meaning of utterances, words, and phonemes (Lundahl, 2012, p. 232).

There are studies that show the importance of both comprehension processes. Carrell & Eisterhold’s (1983) study came to find that language learner’s previous knowledge and experience when comprehending texts impacted the results (1983, p 554). However, Call’s study from 1985 also showed that syntactic knowledge is of importance when remembering and comprehending texts or utterances. Call’s (1985) study indicated that students remembered words better if they were structured as sentences rather than randomized (p. 777). Thus, both top-down and bottom-up processes are important when comprehending heard or read texts. However, as Field (2009) argues, most often it is the discourse or top-down strategies that teachers use (p.14).

Syntactic differences between languages play a major role in listening comprehension. Anderson (2015) exemplifies this by pointing to English, where the dominant syntactic cue is word order rather than inflections of words to show the semantic role. In English, sentences are most often sequenced in the order of ‘a noun action a noun’ which overrules grammatical signs that contradict the sequencing (Anderson, 2015, pp. 318-319). Swedish has a richer inflectional system than English does, which can affect EFL students negatively in the comprehension process (Anderson, 2015, p. 319). Syntactic knowledge can therefore play a major part in listening comprehension where students do not have the same time to process the utterance as they do when reading. The importance of syntax, or bottom-up strategies, for comprehension is evident and will be kept in mind while studying UR’s material.

When learning a foreign language, the prevalence of strategies for learning is also important. Research shows that students who use strategies in their learning have higher

(9)

motivation to learn. Whether the motivation stems from the usage of strategies or that higher motivated students are keener to use strategies is not fully known. However, that strategies are correlated with better results as well as motivation is evident (Oxford & Nyikos, 1989, p.295).

To test which strategy works best for listening comprehension, Siegel (2015) set out to study the effects of working with students’ syntactic knowledge through bottom-up listening strategies (p. 645). The results of the study showed that the students both felt like they had improved their listening ability, demonstrating better results in the post course test (Siegel, 2015, p. 651). Thus, Siegel (2015) argues that listening comprehension teaching in EFL classrooms needs to include more bottom-up strategies. Furthermore, Siegel argues that education should not solely focus on the top-down strategies which feature schema, script, and concept as the main strategies to develop listening comprehension (2015, pp. 655-657). Graham and Santos (2015) do not only argue that EFL learners should be taught listening strategies, but they should also be made aware of which strategies they use. Their research shows that EFL teachers lack both theoretical knowledge to provide students with learning tools, such as strategies, but also that the textbooks they use do not provide sufficient information about them (Graham & Santos, 2015, p. 136). Graham and Santos (2015) point at a plethora of research within the field of listening comprehension to show how low-level language learners achieve greater listening comprehension when actively applying listening strategies (p. 46). Finally, they argue that when teachers instruct students to use strategies, they need to explicitly explain why they are using them and how they will benefit their listening comprehension long-term. Moreover, students should reflect on the process and their choices of strategies when using them in listening tasks (Graham & Santos 2015, p. 139).

Graham and Santos (2015) comprised a taxonomy of various listening strategies which they used to verify that language learners who use listening strategies achieve better comprehension results (p.46). Due to the level of the current study and its time-constraint, the established taxonomy will be used to study the miniseries (see figure 1), motivated by the authors’ experience in the field.

As this study is aimed at both listening comprehension as well as audiovisual media, Becker and Sturm’s (2017) study is highly relevant. They found that although the target

(10)

group and the control group had started off with nearly identical listening skills, the target group had better results both on the post-test and the two-week delayed post-test because of their continuous work with audiovisual tools (Becker & Sturm, 2017, pp. 159-160). Thus, audiovisual tools have a proven effect on students’ listening comprehension and therefore it is relevant to examine how UR’s pedagogical materials make use of them.

The relevancy of Siegel’s (2015) work to the present study is reflected both in the results but also in the theoretical framework. The results of Siegel’s (2015) study lift the importance of revealing listening strategies to students. Moreover, the strategies Graham and Santos (2015) present become a valuable tool to examine UR’s material. Furthermore, Call’s (1984) work highlights the importance of syntactic knowledge which Siegel (2015), through strategies, successfully address and work with. Therefore, it becomes of interest to see if any of the strategies are prevalent in UR’s educational materials. Which strategies are presented to work with listening comprehension?

3 Aims

The aims of this study are to find out how Utbildningsradion (UR)’s miniseries address top-down and bottom-up listening comprehension through their pedagogical materials and how the listening tasks are structured. To organize the study a focus on strategies and listening types will be applied and Field’s (2009) description of good EFL listening task structure will be used. Furthermore, the materials provided by UR will be studied along with the syllabus as a framework to see how the materials can be used to teach listening comprehension in English 5.

3.1 Research questions

● How do the miniseries’ pedagogical materials address the reception skill “listening” described in the syllabus for English 5?

● How do the miniseries’ pedagogical material structure listening tasks through listening strategies and listening types?

(11)

The choice of material is motivated by the miniseries being sanctioned by the Swedish government to broadcast educational content on national television (KU 2019/02008/MD, p. 5). The selection was made using UR’s filter of audio-visual miniseries, produced in 2019, aimed at English 5-7. More, UR is the only, to the author’s knowledge, state-funded producer of educational audiovisual content with open online access to the Swedish public. Moreover, the website has an explicit educational purpose with a spelled-out connection to the syllabus and work materials beyond the videos.

The two series that UR aim towards upper secondary school education with accompanying pedagogical material that will be studied are:

● My English Mistakes: the series consist of six episodes addressing pragmatics and sociolinguistics within British culture from a Swedish perspective and comes with a teacher’s guide. The guide contains connections to the syllabus, descriptions of how the teachers are to work with the materials and worksheets for each episode, using different exercises for students.

● The Great Debate: The series consist of four episodes where students compete in debating each other in front of an audience and a jury. Along with the episodes there is a teacher’s guide containing syllabus connections and guidance on how to use the worksheets belonging to each episode.

5 Method

This study will be conducted through a case study where the teacher’s guide written to accompany UR’s miniseries will act as the case to study. Subsequently, the materials will be examined through the theoretical framework of listening strategies and listening types, presented in figures 1, and 2.

5.1 Case Studies

A case study is, as quoted by Cohen et al (2018), the “detailed examination of a small sample” where the sample or case is studied both in itself and within its context (p.375). This enables the investigation of the selected materials where they can be interpreted and

(12)

studied within the context of education, on the basis of the research on reading and listening comprehension. There is no set definition of what a ‘case’ is, and it is often used in a broad sense to include organizations, groups of people, persons, institutes, and samples (Cohen et al, 2018. p 376). Although case studies are often associated with different groups of people, it is appropriate here for its flexibility in acceptance of variables. Cohen et al (2018) describe how case studies sometimes require more than one tool for their data collection. Furthermore, it often aims to gather a more holistic view of the studied case, looking at multiple aspects (Cohen et al, 2018, p. 376). Therefore, the method enables the twofold perspective of the research questions to be studied: The materials' different approaches to teaching listening comprehension and the material connection to the syllabus. More specifically, the nature of this study is based on accumulate data about a particular phenomenon (Hamilton & Corbett-Whittier, 2013, pp. 15–19).

There are issues when conducting a qualitative case study, just as there are with any qualitative method. Hermeneutic sciences, such as qualitative research methods, aim to clarify meanings in relation to their social context. For this it is necessary to interpret what is seen and heard by the researcher. This, in extension, means that two different researchers may come to different conclusions based on, for example, sociocultural backgrounds (Cohen et al, 2018, p.52). However, it is a necessary step to interpret information within the humanistic field (Cohen et al, 2018, p. 53).

Case studies have both advantages and disadvantages. Nisbet and Watts (1984) discuss both aspects and conclude that case studies can show unique details which might be lost in a larger pool of data. Case studies bring more understanding to the phenomena and do not require a full research team to be conducted. However, the disadvantages are that the results are not generalizable and are prone to observer bias if the case study is based on the observer’s memory alone (Nisbet & Watts, 1984, p. 90). The reliability of this study is heightened by its accessibility through the case study of online audiovisuals and worksheets. The accessibility of the case material therefore enables other researchers to recreate or to further study the case. Although many of the issues to the case study method have been avoided by using texts and audiovisuals as the case, the issue with interpretation remains.

(13)

5.2 Current Case Study Approaches

To study the materials a close reading will be carried out using a combination of taxonomies. First, a listening strategy taxonomy will be used, illustrated by Graham and Santos (2015) in Strategies for Second Language Listening. Furthermore, when studying the material, the definitions will act as an aid when looking for implicitly instructed strategies. The taxonomy below names and defines the strategies that will be looked for.

Figure 1

Strategy name Definition

Prediction of lexis Activates L2 lexical knowledge prior to Listening

Prediction of theme Activates general knowledge of topic prior to listening.

Prediction of possible answers Prior to listening, predicts what might be possible answers.

Questioning prior/world knowledge Probes particular background knowledge Match lexis heard to lexis in options** Hears item in text then chooses option**

containing that item

Elaboration Builds up meaning from one or two items heard, using prior/world knowledge to fill in gaps

Hypothesis formation Suggests a possible answer/interpretation Identification of chunk Identifies a chunk

Identification of word Identifies a word

Selective attention Decides in advance of listening to listen out for certain items

Monitoring:

Hypothesis monitoring Hypothesis confirmation

Monitoring for sense

Monitoring against the question Monitoring against the passage

Comprehension monitoring

Double-check monitoring

Checks whether hypothesis is verified or contradicted by text or subsequent information.

Confirms that interpretation or hypothesis is correct.

Checks whether interpretation makes sense. Checks to see if one’s interpretation makes sense in the light of the comprehension question posed.

Checks whether interpretation fits the rest of the passage.

Establishes whether one has or has not understood.

Tracks, across the task, previously

(14)

Planning Decides on a course of action to complete the task

Integration Draws together more two or more pieces of information to reach a conclusion

Strategy evaluation Judges how appropriate a chosen strategy is, whether it needs changing or adapting Self evaluation Assesses one’s own listening ability or

knowledge

Task evaluation Assesses how the task works

Vocalisation Reproduces French heard on tape, orally Visual/written prompt Writes down ‘key’ words next to options** Visualisation Holds’ word or phrase in mind

Problem identification Locates point, while listening, in text that contains essential information for question; identifies word/phrase that holds key to answer

Deduction evaluation Assesses how appropriate deduction is Deduction:

General deduction Frequency deduction Negative deduction Saliency deduction

Prior knowledge deduction Elimination deduction

Deduction based on general information. Deduction based on frequency of item heard. Deduction based on what is not heard. Deduction based on what is the most perceptually salient item.

Deduction based on prior knowledge.

Deduction based on a process of elimination.

Gives up/Avoidance Gives up

Self-questioning Interrogates oneself about possible answers or the best way to proceed

Transfer Hears an item in one section of the passage but then applies it to interpretation of another part of passage

(Graham & Santos 2015, pp. 28-30)

Secondly, this study will categorize the strategies depending on what type of listening is required. Field (2009) divides listening into different types which are employed for different reasons. The types are further divided into global and local sections, ranging from shallow to deep. The listening types become relevant for this study as the syllabus for English 5 requires students to use both listening types, local along with global, for main points and details (Skolverket 2017).

(15)

Figure 2

Field’s (2009) types of listening:

Global Local

Skimming(shallow): (listening generally)

to establish discourse topic and main ideas. ‘What is it about?’ e.g. TV channel hopping, TV advertisements,

eavesdropping

Phatic communion(shallow): ‘What are

the speaker’s intentions?’ e.g. greetings.

Listening for plot; listening to commentary(medium): ‘What happened

next?’ e.g. film/TV drama, TV/radio interview.

Conversational listening(medium):

‘What is the speaker’s message?’ e.g. everyday chat.

Information Exchange(medium): ‘How

much do I need to know?’ e.g. tour guide

Close listening(deep): to establish the

speaker’s main points and to trace connections between them.

‘What is important?’ e.g. lecture listening

Listening to check critical facts(deep): ‘Is

this consistent?’ e.g. witness evidence

Unfocused scanning (shallow): to locate

information relevant to the listener.

‘Does the speaker mention anything of interest to me?’ e.g. news headlines.

Focused scanning(medium): to locate one

area of information needed by the listener. ‘When will the speaker mention X?’ e.g. airport announcement, weather forecast

Search listening (medium): to locate and

understand information relevant to predetermined needs. ‘What is the answer to these questions?’ e.g. hotel/travel information

Message listening(medium): ‘How many

details do I need to retain?’ e.g. answerphone

Close listening (deep): to record in depth

the speaker’s main points and supporting detail. ‘I assume that everything is relevant.’ e.g. negotiation

Listening to vital instructions (very

deep): ‘I assume that everything is important.’ e.g. street directions

Listening to the form of words (very

deep): ‘What precisely did he say?’ e.g. listening to quote somebody

(16)

6 Results

The results will be presented individually for each miniseries and follow the structure of their’ teacher’s guide. First, syllabus connection will be addressed. Secondly, the focus will be moved to the work materials and how they address listening comprehension through explicit or implicit strategies and listening types. A table will be provided for the two miniseries where the strategies and listening types detected will be displayed. The strategies and listening types used in this study are illustrated in figures 1 and 2 in the method chapter.

6.1 My English Mistakes

My English Mistakes comes with an overarching teacher’s guide, written in English by Sara Håkansson (2019), including worksheets connected to each episode. The worksheets have before, during, and after viewing activities. The guide also includes “aim and purpose”, “alignment with learning outcomes” and “about the teacher’s guide” sections. These will be dealt with, in turn.

6.1.1 Aim and Purpose

The material is aimed towards Swedish upper secondary school students and all episodes have been created for English levels 5-7. Students are asked to discuss and reflect on the use of English in Ireland as well as in the United Kingdom. A spelled-out aim for the miniseries is to waken students’ curiosity to the English language and culture, in connection to interaction between languages (Håkansson, 2019, p.1)

6.1.2 Alignment with Learning Outcomes

The miniseries concretizes the core content, which corresponds with the content of communication for English 5 (Skolverket, 2017 p 3).

Within the teacher’s guide, two of three points of reception specifically target listening through spoken communication within the miniseries. One point explicitly mentions strategies, where Håkansson (2019) describes that each episode gives students linguistic facts and strategies to manage their language learning (p. 3).

(17)

The teacher’s guide targets language processing within the production and interaction section where “…students are encouraged to process their language in various contexts …” (Håkansson, 2019, p.3). Furthermore, the concretization of the reception skills that Håkansson (2019) presents in the teacher’s guide correspond to the English 5 reception skills through: dialectic features, spoken language of different kinds and structure of language (Skolverket 2017).

6.1.3 About the Teacher’s Guide

In the “about the teacher’s guide” the outline is presented with elaboration of the activities that reoccur with each episode, with some variation. The exercises are divided into sections of questions to be used before viewing the episode, while viewing and after viewing. Håkansson (2019) points out that there is a gradual increase in difficulty within each episode’s exercises (p.4).

Discussions in pairs or groups are encouraged activities before viewing the miniseries. Teachers are asked to work with vocabulary before viewing the series by choosing some of the presented idioms, concepts, or words that students should pay extra attention to. Therefore, the teacher is instructed to ask the students to use the strategy of selective attention and Identification of word or chunk by using the local listening type focused scanning (Håkansson, 2019, p.3).

Håkansson (2019) specifies that “[f]ocused listening and viewing is a significant part of the active learning…” which can be achieved by giving students words, concepts, ideas, and questions to listen for (p 4). Within the same section, there is a clarification that teachers need to adjust the expectations depending on grade level. English 5 students are suggested to listen for contexts more than details, thus asking for global listening types (Håkansson, 2019, p 5).

Håkansson (2019) states that “focused listening” is explicitly targeted but does not fully elaborate to as what focused listening entails. Only that it “can be encouraged by asking students to pay particular attention to certain ideas, concepts or circumstances” (Håkansson, 2019, p 4). After closer observation, the work materials generally focus on what Field (2009) calls search listening or focused scanning with the use of ‘while viewing’ questions (finding and understanding relevant information and answering the

(18)

listener’s question or locating a chunk of information). Conversational listening is also targeted when suggesting that students work in pairs or groups (see figure 3). ‘Focused listening’ is therefore used as a term for any intentional listening activity.

After listening there are more questions for the teacher to use with a focus on vocabulary and for students to display their listening comprehension in English. Vocabulary is addressed as important for students to express themselves and to communicate. Håkansson (2019) argues that the after viewing exercises develop student’s reading, listening, and discussing skills (p.5).

6.1.4 Before Viewing

Håkansson (2019) advises teachers to work with vocabulary beforehand as the series contain “a great deal of colloquial language and idioms...” (p.4). There is no key to the vocabulary list, but the explanation and usage of words can be found in the episodes. Instead, there are “before viewing” activities available, where students are asked to recognize both known and unfamiliar words. The vocabulary lists provide teachers with material for pre-listening activities such as hearing the words spoken and explained by the teacher, activating the students’ knowledge in the target language. Through the local listening type listening for the form of words the students would use the strategy prediction of lexis, by hearing the teacher use the word/term and processing it.

The words that are unfamiliar to the students are instructed to be written down and later listened for when viewing the episode (Håkansson, 2019, p. 11). Håkansson is implicitly instructing the students to use the listening style focused scanning for those words or idioms but also a type of the strategy visualization through keeping the words in mind while viewing. The student is also implicitly instructed to use Elaboration when asked “[c]ould the context they [new words] are used in explain what they mean?” (Håkansson, 2019, p 21). The strategy Elaboration entails that the students use the other words in surrounding context to conclude the answer, using a top-down strategy. The strategy requires the listening type of search listening to listen out for the chunk of language where the word is used.

The questions implicitly instruct the students to use the strategy planning by intentionally setting out to listen for the written down word. Moreover, the strategy identification of

(19)

word by listening for the word to later use Elaboration to conclude its meaning. The theme of each episode is also addressed and instructed to be discussed and related to with multiple questions (Håkansson, 2019, p. 4). Thus, students are to use the strategy questioning world/prior knowledge regarding the theme in connection with listening to classmates’ ideas and opinions about it. Furthermore, the theme related questions implicitly lead the students to use the strategy prediction of theme before viewing as well as prediction of lexis by activating the students’ knowledge about the foreign language which is used in the miniseries.

6.1.5 While Viewing

The episodes have questions asking the listener to identify terms such as “banter” and “PG-swear word” as well as to explain them. There are also questions regarding, for example, direct translation of Swedish idioms and the miscommunications they produce; implicitly asking students to use the strategy problem identification. The strategy problem identification is employed when the listener identifies words or phrases, while listening, that are key to answering a question. For example, the listener may recognize words such as “translate” and/or “cultural reference” and their importance to answering the questions in episode 1, where cross-cultural humor is discussed.

Generally, the questions posed while viewing ask students to use the style focused scanning and search listening to gather information to answer the questions. For example, “[w]hat part of e-sport does Lillie enjoy the most?” (Håkansson, 2019, p.17) requires the student to localize and understand the information heard to answer the question.

6.1.6 After Viewing

Questions available “after viewing” are suggested to be used either individually, in pairs or groups. The questions request clarifications of terms and words such as “culturally specific references”, “dry humor”, “sarcasm”, and “puns” (Håkansson 2019, p. 7). Mainly, the listening styles and strategies students could employ occur in the scenario of group work where students use the listening type conversational listening. Then, the students are implicitly asked to use the strategies of monitoring for sense and comprehension monitoring. The strategies are used to see if the student’s concluded answer makes sense and that they have understood what they heard correctly.

(20)

6.1.7 Using your Language (in Depth)

Most activities under the section “using your language (in depth)” are not related to listening, with a few exceptions to be found in episodes 2, 3 and 6. Episode 2 has one question addressing listening comprehension. Students are asked to create their own dating form with information about their character. They are also asked to write questions asking for information that they want to know about their dating partner (Håkansson, 2019 p.13). Here, the students are implicitly asked to use the listening strategy of identifying word/chunk and the listening type detailed close listening to fill in the information needed in their dating form. Episode 3 requires students to use conversational listening as a listening type when asking students to work on an online bullying paper (p.17). Episode 6 asks students to interview each other about their experiences in English, once more employing student’s conversational listening skills if they converse in English (p 32). Thus, whenever students are instructed to use production skills, the listening that is required is generally the global conversational listening type.

6.1.8 Strategy and Listening Type Overview

To structure the strategies and related listening types that occur and that have been presented, a table has been made for overview purposes. The strategies may use different listening types in different contexts. Here, the strategies have been shown in connection to which listening type that the pedagogical material’s context imply.

My English Mistakes strategies matched with listening type

Strategy Global listening

type

Local listening type

Selective attention Focused scanning

Identification of word Focused scanning + Detailed close

listening

Identification of chunk Focused scanning + Detailed close

listening

Visualization Focused scanning

Elaboration Search listening

(21)

Problem identification Close listening Monitoring for sense Conversational

listening Comprehension monitoring Conversational

listening Questioning world/prior

knowledge

Conversational listening Prediction of theme Conversational

listening Prediction of lexis Conversational

listening

Listening for the form of words

The strategies that are instructed are more of the local listening type than the global, as seen by the table above. However, there is a higher frequency of questions asking for the global strategy types and students’ schematic knowledge. The global listening type mainly used is conversational listening apart from monitoring for sense which is the global close listening type. Thus, the variation of local listening types is greater than the variation of global listening types, with two kinds of global and four kinds of local.

Planning is vaguely seen in the material as implicitly instructed whenever students accept tasks that require them to keep the question in mind while viewing, and thus planning to listen out for something. Therefore, planning is categorized as neither, or both.

6.2 The Great Debate

The Great debate has a rhetoric focus where students are divided into teams for debating competitions. The teams are mentored by American rhetoric experts and judged by an English-speaking board. Thus, all participants always speak English. The Great Debate comes with a teacher’s guide written in English by Jenny Ryderborn (2019).

6.2.1 Aims and Purpose

Under “Aims and Purpose”, Ryderborn (2019) describes that the show lifts the importance of arguing your point in front of an audience. The language is both formal and informal. There is a practical and informal part in each episode, where one gets to follow the

(22)

preparation for the debate. There is also the final, formal debate and the jury’s and mentors’ feedback to the participants (Ryderborn 2019, p. 2).

6.2.2 Links to the Syllabus

Under the heading “Links to syllabus” there are three categories for the different upper secondary school English courses: English 5, 6 and 7. Ryderborn (2019) has not concretized or separated the core content, reception, or production within the sections, but simply quoted the syllabus (p, 3). Furthermore, the quoted syllabus aims are all concerned with listening comprehension apart from the content of communication. One of the aims mention strategies; for listening in different ways (Ryderborn, 2019, p.3).

6.2.3 About the Teacher’s Guide

This section has the subsections: “The significance of concepts”, “before viewing”, “after viewing”, and “working in depth”. The Great Debate’s worksheets do not contain, at least not spelled out, a during viewing section.

Under the section “The Significance of Concepts” Ryderborn (2019) argues that the vocabulary used in the series is heavily connected to rhetoric, and that it is therefore important to know the vocabulary before viewing. She suggests that teachers should instruct “students to place words into a specific context” because “When words and concepts are seen and can be understood in context, their meaning becomes clearer” (Ryderborn, 2019, p. 4). Ryderborn (2019) also argues for the importance of such words and connectives to scholarly language and argumentation, showing syntactical patterns within this kind of language (p. 4). The questions that order students to place words into contexts implicitly instruct them to use the listening type of local search listening to find the context in the text and answer the question (In what context is this word used?). Moreover, the strategy which Ryderborn (2019) implicitly describes is selective attention.

6.2.4 Before Viewing

The discussion questions belonging to each episode enable students to use the strategy Prediction of theme and Questioning prior/world knowledge. The students discuss the topic and their own view of the world which introduces the topic as well as a theme, so that the student is prepared for the episode. The show then provides points of information

(23)

which the students can use to adjust and develop their world view, since the episode provides many arguments for and against the debate statements (Utbildningsradion, 2019b). Furthermore, since the questions are in English, the target language is activated and the strategy prediction of lexis is engaged. Through the discussion questions the students also engage the listening type conversational listening if the discussions are held in English.

6.2.5 Vocabulary Tasks

The list of terms and important vocabulary comes with a separate key in Swedish (Ryderborn, 2019, pp, 17-18). The vocabulary list also has its own instructions and tasks such as asking that students to “[t]ry listening to the exact sentences where the vocabulary is used and write it down” (Ryderborn, 2019, pp. 7, 9, 11, 13). Doing so activates the Local listening type focused scanning to locate the area of information and then switching to the listening type Listening to the form of words to hear exact quotes. Furthermore, the students are implicitly instructed to use the strategies planning (plan to listen out for quote), through selective attention to further use identification of word or identification of chunk. Other questions posed with the vocabulary list ask for the listening type of search listening when students are asked to listen for grammar mistakes, informal language, or accents (Ryderborn, 2019 p.7, 9, 13).

Another activity suggested with the vocabulary list in episode 3 is to listen for words connected to the theme of ‘monarchy’ (Ryderborn, 2019 p. 11). Students are then implicitly asked to use search listening and the strategies identification of words/chunks but also integration, where the students use different points of information to reach a conclusion about the words connected to the theme of monarchy.

6.2.6 After Viewing

The section ‘Discussion after the programme’ makes students pay attention to the main points of the show to be able to answer the questions. The teacher’s guide asks the teacher to “[e]ncourage students to look at the questions for discussion in advance. Ask them to keep these questions in mind while viewing, for example, by taking notes” (Ryderborn, 2019, p.5). The discussion questions vary from global, top-down, questions about a topic to more local, bottom-up, ones where words or phrases are asked for. However, a majority of the questions make use of the students’ schema, being top-down oriented. The questions

(24)

posed commonly ask for global close listening to show the students general comprehension of the episode and to answer questions such as “[w]ho won the debate, in your opinion? Explain your answer” (Håkansson, 2019, pp. 6, 8). Furthermore, the discussion questions enable students to use conversational listening when listening to their classmates and using the strategy monitoring for sense as well as comprehension monitoring. With the strategies they can see if their interpretation of questions regarding terms or words makes sense and to see if they have understood the topic questions correctly.

6.2.7 Strategy and Listening Type Overview

The following is an overview of the different strategies presented in connection to the listening type they engage.

The Great Debate strategies matched with listening type

Strategy Global listening

type

Local listening type

Prediction of Theme Conversational listening Prediction of Lexis Conversational

listening

Selective attention Search listening + Focused

scanning Questioning prior/world knowledge Conversational listening + Close listening

Integration Search listening

Planning Following instruction

Identification of word Listening to the form of words + Search listening

Identification of chunk Listening to the form of words + Search listening

Monitoring for sense Conversational listening

(25)

Comprehension monitoring Conversational listening

As shown above, there is an even distribution of local and global listening type strategies. The strategies using a global listening type are slightly fewer: 6 strategies using 2 different listening types. In comparison, there are 7 strategies using 3 local listening types. However, there are more discussion questions than any other type of questions, which require students to use the global, top-down strategies.

7 Discussion

7.1 Field’s Modern EFL Listening Structure

A good EFL listening classroom has activities before, during and after listening, for both top-down and bottom-up processing according to Field (2009, pp. 16-17). Field’s (2009) description of good language teaching activities are reflected in My English Mistakes’ pedagogical material. Håkansson (2019) presents activities before the students are shown the episode to activate their knowledge of the topic but also to motivate why they are to listen. Furthermore, students are presented with questions to answer while viewing which further establishes motivation to listen, in accordance with Field (2009, p 16). After viewing, students are presented with discussion questions including materials to work in depth, each step activating a listening type and some strategies. While the working in depth in majority targets other language skills, some questions target listening as well.

My English Mistakes follows the adjustments which Field (2009) argues that good listening teaching should contain in modern classrooms. The Great Debate’s pedagogical materials, written by Ryderborn (2019), contains the parts which Field (2009) lifts, but does not structure the content as clearly as Håkansson (2019). There are questions which the teacher can use for the students while listening, but it is up to the teacher to re-arrange the questions. Instead of having a ‘while viewing’ section, some questions are constructed to be read before viewing, such as the vocabulary tasks. Thus, although the material is not laid out as structured as the material for My English Mistakes, it does contain the parts which Field (2009) deems necessary for good EFL listening tasks.

(26)

7.2 Strategies, Listening Types and English 5

Skolverket (2017) requires students to be able to use at least two different listening types to be able to get an E on the knowledge requirement as it writes: “Pupils can understand the main content and basic details of English spoken at a varying speed” (Skolverket, 2017). My English Mistake’s and The Great Debate’s pedagogical materials provide instructions to make students use both Global conversational listening, local and global close listening, Global focused scanning, and Global search listening. Therefore, there are varying listening types that are approached in the materials, which can be used to attain the knowledge requirement set by Skolverket (2017).

Both top-down and bottom-up listening strategies are instructed within the teacher’s guide, although not proportionately. The top-down strategies are used with global listening types, which are fewer in variation of strategies but more recurring within the worksheets because of the discussion questions. The bottom-up strategies ask students to listen for a word or chunk in the episodes to then write it down or vice versa, typically through local listening types, which occur less frequently. The materials do not address morphological, parsing or syntax differences between Swedish and English, which can hinder listening comprehension for EFL students, according to Andersen (2015). Apart from different word recognition strategies, there are no other variations of bottom-up listening strategies instructed. Meanwhile, top-down strategies ask students to reflect and question students’ knowledge, as well as draw conclusions from previous knowledge of the meanings of words and idioms. Thus, Field’s (2009) claim, that top-down listening strategies are overrepresented, is supported by the present study.

Although both My English Mistakes and The Great Debate’s pedagogical materials list the knowledge requirements containing the usage of strategies, none of them instructs teachers to explain the strategies to the students. Even so, the materials implicitly ask students to use strategies. However, the students do not get any explanation to what the strategies are, what they can help them accomplish or for what other tasks the students could use them. Santos and Graham (2015) argue that students should be made aware of the strategies they use, which the pedagogical materials for both miniseries fail to do. Thus, the materials do not promote strategy awareness which Oxford and Nyinkos (1989) have shown to be related to motivation and improved results.

(27)

The strategies that are used in the pedagogical material correspond to the listening strategies which can be used in the students’ day to day life. However, neither of the guides demonstrate strategies which are often used in exam situations, such as the various deduction strategies, hypothesis formation or visual/written prompt. As a result, the students may improve their listening ability but not be able to display it during classical listening tests, such as the national test, if they only use the strategies which UR instructs. Skolverket describes the foundation of the Swedish education system as twofold; well-tried experience (beprövad erfarenhet) and scientific basis (Vetenskaplig grund). The listening strategies and their benefits have, through both proven experience and scientific basis, been shown to be effective (Siegel, 2015; Graham & Santos, 2015; Oxford & Nyinkos, 1989; Carrel & Eisterhold, 1983). Furthermore, the acknowledged benefits of strategies are reflected in the syllabus for English 5 through the knowledge requirements (Skolverket, 2017). However, the issue of which strategies to pursue is left open, with emphasis only placed on the effect that they are supposed to have on the students’ learning (To be able to listen in various ways). Teachers therefore must learn about strategies, find them, and instruct the students without any theoretical support from Skolverket. The pedagogical materials that are provided by UR give a resource for strategies and an outlet for well-tried experience, but neither of the pedagogical materials presents scientific basis to the methods used.

8 Conclusion

My English Mistakes’ and The Great Debate’s pedagogical material contain multiple listening strategies, with both local and global listening types. There is a greater variation of strategies using local listening types than global types. Even so, the materials more often address global listening types and top-down strategies through the frequency of discussion questions and tasks. Moreover, the English 5 knowledge requirements of strategies are acknowledged and addressed within the pedagogical material, as well as the topics relevance to the content of communication. Additionally, the pedagogical materials to a different extent follow the listening task structure that Field (2009) recognize to be optimal for the EFL classroom.

Finally, there is an absence of theoretical content that lifts and explain the strategies which are implicitly instructed for both miniseries. I argue that by understanding how you can

(28)

use strategies, you take control of your learning which I think is a powerful tool. To develop the material further and to align more with the research in the field, the pedagogical material should include more top-down strategies, explanations and explicit instructions of the strategies implicitly instructed.

9 Further Research

More research of this essay’s nature is needed. Since strategies are an important tool for learning, it would be interesting to further study the occurrences of strategies within other pedagogical materials. In particular, the present study’s material still has unanswered questions regarding the other skills: Reading, writing, and speaking. Specifically: Is there a different distribution of top-down and bottom-up strategies when teaching the other skills?

(29)

10 References

Anderson, J.R. (2015) Cognitive psychology and its implications (8th ed) Worth Publishers. Becker, S., & Sturm, J. (2017). Effects of Audiovisual Media on L2 Listening Comprehension: A

Preliminary Study in French. CALICO Journal, 34(2), 147-177. doi:10.2307/3586613 Carrell, P., & Eisterhold, J. (1983). Schema Theory and ESL Reading Pedagogy. TESOL

Quarterly, 17(4), 553-573. doi:10.2307/3586613

Cohen, L., Manion, L. & Morrison, K. (2018). Research Methods in Education. Routledge. Field, J. (2009). Listening in the language classroom. Cambridge university press.

Graham, S., & Santos, D. (2015). Strategies for Second Language Listening; Current Scenarios and Improved Pedagogy. Palgrave Macmillan.

Håkansson, S. (2019). My English Mistakes; Lärarhandledning. Utbildningsradion.

Hamilton, L., & Corbett-Whittier, C. (2013). Using case study in Education Research. Sage publications.

Hinkel, E. (2006). Current Perspectives on Teaching the Four Skills. TESOL Quarterly, 40(1), 109-131. doi:10.2307/40264513

Kulturdepartementet dnr. 2019/02008/MD, 05.12.2019 [27.05.2021]

https://www.regeringen.se/4abd4b/contentassets/8c24422cf3ce41848af8d36a8983638a/ti llstand-for-sveriges-utbildningsradio-ab-att-sanda-ljudradio-tv-och-sokbar-text-tv.pdf

Lundahl, B. (2012) Engelsk språkdidaktik: texter, kommunikation, språkutveckling. Studentlitteratur.

Nisbet, J. and Watt, J. (1984) Case study. In J. Bell, T. Bush, A. Fox, J. Goodey and S. Goulding (eds) Conducting Small-Scale Investigations in Educational Management. London: Harper & Row, pp. 79–92. Carrel.

Oxford, R., & Nyikos, M. (1989). Variables Affecting Choice of Language Learning Strategies by University Students. The Modern Language Journal, 73(3), 291-300. doi:10.2307/327003 Ryderborn, J. (2019) The Great Debate; Lärarhandledning. Utbildningsradion.

Siegel, A.& Siegel, J. (2015) Getting to the bottom of L2 listening instruction: Making a case for bottom-up activities. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching 5(4):637-662. doi: 10.14746/ssllt.2015.5.4.6

(30)

https://skatteverket.se/privat/skatter/arbeteochinkomst/skattetabeller/publicserviceavgift. 4.22501d9e166a8cb399f31dd.html

Skolverket (2017) Läroplan för gymnasieskolan 2011; English. Revised 2017. [Available through Canvas 18.05.2021]

Skrak, A. (2020) An Education Based on Research and Well-Tried Experience, but How?: Interpretation and Examples in Teacher's Daily Practices [Degree project] Linköping University. DiVA, id: diva2:1478312

URaccess (n.d) Om UR. Uraccess. [20.04.2021]

http://www.uraccess.se/vad-ar-utbildningsradion-ur/

Utbildningsradion (2019a) My English Mistakes. URplay. [20.04.2021]

https://urplay.se/serie/213853-my-english-mistakes

Utbildningsradion (2019b) The Great Debate. URplay. [20.04.2021]

https://urplay.se/serie/213877-the-great-debate

Utbildningsradion (n.d) UR i skolan. UR. [20.04.2021]

Teaching Listening skills with UR’s miniseries : A study of 2 miniseries’ pedagogical material’s approaches to listening comprehension strategies

1

Teaching Listening skills

with UR’s miniseries

A study of 2 miniseries’ pedagogical material’s

approaches to listening comprehension strategies

Abstract

Table of contents

1 Introduction

2 Background

3 Aims

5 Method

Field’s (2009) types of listening:

6 Results

7 Discussion

8 Conclusion

9 Further Research

10 References