Chapter published in:
Usage-inspired L2 Instruction: Researched pedagogy
Edited by Andrea E. Tyler, Lourdes Ortega, Mariko Uno and Hae In Park
[Language Learning & Language Teaching 49] 2018
► pp. 165–185

Using metacognitive strategies to induce phase shifts

A complex systems approach to L2 listening instruction

| Northern Illinois University
| Purdue University
In this chapter, we critically self-evaluate a previously published study through the lens of Complex Adaptive Systems (CAS) theory. In this way we propose a Complex Adaptive Systems approach to second language (L2) language development in order to examine the effectiveness of explicit listening instruction and metacognition. We do this by conceiving of problems in listening comprehension as attractors in the state space of L2 language development and interpreting explicit instruction as a way of inducing a phase shift. The original study used a traditional pretest-posttest design to evaluate the effectiveness of a teaching method using metacognitive listening strategies and audiovisual media. We present the original design and results, discuss why this method is insufficient for considering language from a usage-inspired complexity perspective, and offer some suggestions for how it may be re-conceptualized via CAS theory. We argue that a complex systems perspective allows for more freedom in interpreting results by taking into account the nonlinear nature of language development and its inherent variability.
Published online: 13 February 2018
https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.49.08bec
References

References

Ahmadian, M. J., & Tavakoli, M.
(2011) Exploring the utility of action research to investigate second-language classrooms as complex systems. Educational Action Research, 19(2), 121–136. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bates, E., & MacWhinney, B.
(1987) Competition, variation, and language learning. In B. MacWhinney (Ed.), Mechanisms of language acquisition (pp. 157–194). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Becker, S. R., & Sturm, J. L.
(2017) Effects of audiovisual media on L2 listening comprehension: A preliminary study in French. CALICO, 34(2), 1–31.Google Scholar
Bradlow, A. R.
(2008) Training non-native language sound patterns: Lessons from training Japanese adults on the English /ɹ/ – /l/ contrast. In M. L. Zampini & J. G. Hansen Edwards (Eds.), Phonology and second language acquisition (pp. 287–308). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Bybee, J.
(2006) From usage to grammar: The mind’s response to repetition. Language, 82(4), 711–733. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Calais, G. J.
(2008) Microgenetic analysis of learning: Measuring change as it occurs. National Forum of Applied Educational Research Journal, 21(3), 1–7.Google Scholar
Dörnyei, Z.
(2009) Individual differences: Interplay of learner characteristics and learning environment. Language Learning, 59, 230–248. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, N. C.
(1998) Emergentism, connectionism, and language learning. Language Learning, 48, 631–664. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2008) The dynamics of second language emergence: Cycles of language use, language change, and language acquisition. Modern Language Journal, 92, 232–249. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Goh, C.
(2000) A cognitive perspective on language learners’ listening comprehension problems. System, 28, 55–75. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2008) Metacognitive instruction for second language listening development: Theory, practice and research implications. RELC Journal, 39(2), 188–213. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hasan, A. S.
(2000) Learners’ perceptions of listening comprehension problems. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 13, 137–153. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Hohenberger, A., & Peltzer-Karpf, A.
(2009) Language learning from the perspective of nonlinear dynamic systems. Linguistics, 47(2), 481–511. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Holland, J. H.
(1998) Emergence: From chaos to order. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Holt, R. F.
(2011) Enhancing speech discrimination through stimulus repetition. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 54, 1431–1447. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Kauffman, S. A.
(1995) At home in the universe: The search for the laws of self-organization and complexity. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Klein, W., & Perdue, C.
(1997) The basic variety (or: Couldn’t natural languages be much simpler?). Second Language Research, 14, 301–347. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Larsen-Freeman, D.
(1997) Chaos/complexity science and second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 18(2), 141–165. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2006) The emergence of complexity, fluency, and accuracy in the oral and written production of five Chinese learners of English. Applied Linguistics, 27(4), 590–619. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Larsen-Freeman, D., & Cameron, L.
(2008) Complex systems and applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Levy, E. S., & Strange, W.
(2008) Perception of French vowels by American English adults with and without French language experience. Journal of Phonetics, 36, 141–157. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Lorenz, E. N.
(1963) Deterministic nonperiodic flow. Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences, 20, 130–141. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Thelen, E., & Smith, L. B.
(1994) A dynamic systems approach to the development of cognition and action. Cambridge, MA: The MIT PressGoogle Scholar
Thomson, R.
(2012) Improving L2 listeners’ perception of English vowels: A computer-mediated approach. Language Learning, 62(4), 1231–1258. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Tyler, A. E., & Ortega, L.
(2018) Usage-inspired L2 instruction: An emergent, researched pedagogy. In A. E. Tyler, L. Ortega, M. Uno, & H. I. Park (Eds.), Usage-inspired L2 instruction: Researched pedagogy. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. (this volume) CrossrefGoogle Scholar
van Geert, P.
(1994) Vygotskian dynamics of development. Human Development, 37, 346–365. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
van Geert, P., & Van Dijk, M.
(2002) Focus on variability: New tools to study intra-individual variability in developmental data. Infant Behavior & Development, 25, 340–374. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Vandergrift, L.
(1998) La métacognition et la compréhension auditive en langue seconde. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1, 83–105.Google Scholar
(2002) ‘It was nice to see that our predictions were right’: Developing metacognition in L2 listening comprehension. Canadian Modern Language Review, 58(4), 555–575. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2003) From prediction through reflection: Guiding students through the process of L2 listening. Canadian Modern Language Review, 59, 425–440. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
(2004) Listening to learn or learning to listen? Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24, 3–25. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Vandergrift, L., & Tafaghodtari, M. H.
(2010) Teaching L2 learners how to listen does make a difference: An empirical study. Language Learning, 60(2), 470–497. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Veenman, M. V. J., Van Hout-Wolters, B. H., & Afflerbach, P.
(2006) Metacognition and learning: Conceptual and methodological considerations. Metacognition and Learning, 1(1), 3–14. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Verspoor, M., Lowie, W., & Van Dijk, M.
(2008) Variability in second language development from a dynamic systems perspective. Modern Language Journal, 92, 214–231. CrossrefGoogle Scholar
Cited by

Cited by 2 other publications

Dickinson, Paul
2020.  In CALL for widening participation: short papers from EUROCALL 2020, ► pp. 57 ff. Crossref logo
Godwin-Jones, Robert
2019.  In CALL and complexity – short papers from EUROCALL 2019, ► pp. 151 ff. Crossref logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 23 november 2021. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.