THE INTERFACE BETWEEN EFL LEARNERS’ SELF-EFFICACY CONCERNING LISTENING COMPREHENSION AND LISTENING PROFICIENCY

Ali RAHIMI * and Atiyeh ABEDINI *

Abstract: Since the focus of education has shifted from teacher-directed to learner-oriented instruction in recent decades, a growing body of research in the field of EFL/ESL learning involves issues relevant to learners and their individual differences. It should be pointed out that one of the important factors affecting test scores is test takers’ characteristics. Therefore, the present study concentrated on one of these individual differences; namely self-efficacy. To narrow down the focus of investigation, this study aimed at exploring the role of EFL learner's self-efficacy regarding listening comprehension in their listening test performance. Hence, the main research question addressed by the present study was ‘Are there any relationships between EFL learners’ self-efficacy regarding listening comprehension and listening proficiency?’ A group of 61 freshmen undergraduate learners of English consented to participate in the present study. Data on the learners’ self-efficacy were collected through an author-designed questionnaire. The listening proficiency was quantified and extracted based on the students’ answers to a listening test performance titled as 'Listening Diagnostic Pre-test' adopted from paper-based Longman TOEFL(2001, pp.3-6). The results of statistical analyses indicated that listening comprehension self- efficacy was significantly related to listening proficiency.

Key words: Foreign language learning, self-efficacy, listening proficiency, learners’ beliefs

Özet: Son yıllarda eğitimde odak, öğretmen güdümlü öğretimden öğrenci odaklı öğretime kaydığı için, İngilizce’nin ikinci/yabancı dil olarak öğretimi alanındaki araştırmalar öğrenciler ve bireysel farklılıklarını kapsamaya başlamıştır. Test sonuçlarını etkileyen faktörlerden en önemlilerinden birisi öğrenci karakterleridir. Bu sebeple, bu çalışma bireysel farklılıklardan biri olan öz yeterliliğe yoğunlaşmaktadır. Araştırmanın odağını daraltmak amacıyla, bu makale öğrencilerin dinleme-algılamadaki öz yeterliliklerinin test performanslarındaki rolünü incelemeyi amaçlamıştır. Bu sebeple, ana araştırma sorusu şu olmuştur: ‘İngilizce öğrencilerinin dinleme-algılamadaki öz yeterliliklerinin dinleme becerileriyle bir ilişkisi var mıdır?’ Çalışmaya 61 üniversite öğrencisi katılmıştır. Öğrencilerin öz yeterlilikleri ile ilgili veri yazarlar tarafından hazırlanan bir anket ile toplanmıştır. Dinleme becerilerinin sayısal ölçümü için Longman TOEFL (2001, pp.3-6) testine verilen cevaplar kullanılmıştır. Analizin sonuçları dinleme-algılamadaki öz yeterliliğin dinleme becerisi ile önemli ölçüde ilişkili olduğunu göstermiştir.

Anahtar Sözcükler: Yabancı dil öğrenimi, öz yeterlilik, dinleme yeterliliği, öğrencilerin inançları

1. Introduction

1.1. Background

The necessity in foreign language (FL) research and teaching to investigate learner’s affective variables as a means of explaining differences in one’s ability to learn a new language has been emphasized in recent years. Savignon (1983), for example, reviewed many affective studies and claimed that affective variables contribute more to the result of foreign or second language learning than do aptitude, intelligence, method of teaching used in the classroom, or time spent learning the language (see Kennedy et al., 2000, p. 279). Interest in affective issues in educational contexts is not new but has gained importance with the evolution of humanistic psychology in the 1960s when the purely cognitive theories of learning were rejected and the integration of cognition and affect was emphasized (Arnold & Brown, 1999). Affect has been considered by many scholars (e.g., Clement et al., 1994 and Gardner & Lambert, 1972) to be one of the main determining factors of success in learning foreign or second languages.

Affect involves variables such as attitudes, motivation, interest, learners’ beliefs, needs, expectations, and prior experiences (McKenna et al., 1995, cited in Gee, 1999, p.3). As the given definition shows, an overwhelming set of variables is implied in considering the affective side of foreign language learning. Within this complex web variables are learners’ beliefs, which are the focus of the present study. Regarding the theoretical construct of learners’ beliefs, different but nonetheless clearly related views have been produced. This study has been based on the model proposed by Yang (1999), as it seems to include all the elements emphasized in the other models. In Yang’s model, beliefs are composed of two motivational and meta-cognitive dimensions. The components of the motivational dimension are learners’ self-efficacy, their emotional reactions, i.e., their attitudes to FL learning, and their beliefs about the importance of learning a second language. Meta-cognitive dimension refers to learners’ knowledge about foreign language learning and about themselves as foreign language learners. The researchers made an attempt to investigate the possible contribution of one of the components related to motivational dimension which, here, is self-efficacy.

1.2. Statement of the Problem

It is supposed by many English instructors that the low achievement of EFL learners is basically related to their low general aptitude. They believe that these learners do not have the special abilities required for academic studies in general and for English in particular. While we do not deny the role of intellectual abilities in learning a foreign language, the notion that aptitude is the whole story seems to be controversial. In fact, the relevant literature (Brown, 1987; Chastain, 1988) supports the idea that variation in foreign language learning can be explained by aptitude only to a certain extent. In this connection, Chastain (1988) posits that in addition to linguistic aptitude, there must be another equally important variable determining whether or not a student learns a foreign language. He continues, “the affective domain plays a larger role in developing second-language skills than does the cognitive because the emotions control the will to activate or shut down the cognitive function.” (p. 122). A relevant view comes from Pajares (2000) who asserts that what people know, the skills they possess, or the attainments they have previously accomplished are often poor predictors of subsequent attainments because the beliefs they hold about their abilities and about the outcome of their efforts powerfully influence the ways in which they behave.

While there is ample reason to view affective issues as powerful variables which may strongly predict EFL learners’ performance, a little attempt has been made to examine the variables as related to English achievement of Iranian EFL learners. This motivated us to focus on the effects of self-efficacy regarding a group of Iranian EFL learners’ proficiency in listening skills. Therefore, the main research question addressed by the present study is ‘Is there any significant relationship between a group of Iranian EFL learners’ self-efficacy about listening comprehension and their listening proficiency?’

2. Literature review

Bernhard (1997) defines the concept of ‘self-efficacy’ as learners’ beliefs about their abilities to accomplish a task. For Pajares (2000), it is the students’ judgments of their academic competence. The concept is also defined by Ehrman (1996) as the degree to which the student thinks he or she has the capacity to cope with the learning challenge. (Cited in Arnold & Brown, 1999, p. 16). If people have high positive self-efficacy about learning a second language, then they believe that they have the power and abilities to reach this goal. On the other hand, people with low self-efficacy feel that they do not have the power and abilities to learn a language, thus admitting failure from the start (Bernhardt, 1997).

Nearly two decades of research revealed that self beliefs are strong predictors of academic achievements so that a new wave of educational psychologists are calling for attention to self-beliefs related to their academic pursuits (Pajasres, 2000). Of all beliefs, self-efficacy is the most influential arbiter in human agency and plays powerful role in determining the choices people make, the effort they will persevere in the face of challenge, and the degree of anxiety or confidence they will bring to the task at hand (Bandura, 1986, p. 397). It is this perceived self-efficacy that helps explain why people’s behaviors differ widely even when they have similar knowledge and skills.

The concept of self-efficacy is recognized by Oxford and Shearin (1994) as “a broadened view of expectancy which is drawn from social cognition theory” (p.21). They define the term as “one’s judgment of how well one can execute courses of action required to deal with prospective situations” (ibid). According to Bandura (1977), self-efficacy refers to "an individual’s judgment about his or her ability to accomplish a given task or activity." (Cited in Choi et al. 2001, p. 1). For him, self-efficacy is a much more consistent predictor of behavior than any of the other closely related variables. This view is supported by Graham and Weiner (1995) (Cited in Pajares, 2000) who observed that the acquisition of new skills and the performance of previously learned skills have been related to efficacy beliefs at a level not found in any of the other expectancy constructs.

According to Pajares (2000), beliefs that individuals create and develop and hold to be true are vital forces in their success or failure in school. This would lead one to infer that research on achievement, on why students achieve or fail to achieve, and on why they do things they do in school should naturally focus, at least in great part, on students’ self-efficacy beliefs.

According to Bandura (1986), self-beliefs affect behavior in four ways. First, they influence choice of behavior. He proposed that “our assessment of our own capabilities is basically responsible for the outcomes we expect and for the knowledge and skills we seek and require. Hence, self-efficacy is a more powerful determiner of the choices that individuals make” (p. 394). Second, self-beliefs help determine how much effort people will expend on an activity and how long they will persevere. Low self-efficacy in a student, for example, creates a self-doubt that may keep him away from trying. So, higher sense of efficacy results in a greater effort, expenditure, and persistence. The third way that self-beliefs influence human agency is by affecting an individual’s thought patterns and emotional reactions. People with low efficacy, for example, may think that things are tougher than they really are. This belief may foster stress and may make them attribute failure in difficult tasks to deficient ability rather than to insufficient efforts. The last way self-beliefs influence behavior is by recognizing humans as producers rather than simply foretellers of behavior.

In addition to theoretical evidences, the relevant literature holds practical evidences of strong effects of self-efficacy beliefs on academic performances too. Based on her study on the key variables in language learning, Cotterall (1999) considered self-efficacy as a crucial variable in success of language learners.

Wigfield (1994, cited in Pintrich and Schunk, 1996) is one of the scholars who investigated the role of self-efficacy construct in achievement. The subjects in his study were given self-report measures of self-perceptions of ability and expectancy for success in math and English at the beginning of one school year and at the end of that same year. At the same time, the researcher also collected data on the students’ actual achievement on standardized tests and course grades. The study showed that learners’ self-perception of ability and their expectancies for success are the strongest predictors of subsequent grades in math and English.

To investigate the links between self-efficacy beliefs and language learning strategies, Magogwe and Oliver (2007) did a study on 480 students from primary schools, secondary schools, and a tertiary institution. A modified version of the Strategy Inventory for Language Learning (SILL) developed by Oxford (1989) for collecting information on strategies and the Morgan-Jinks Student Efficacy Scale (MJSES) developed by Jinks and Morgan (1999) for collecting information on self-efficacy were used in this study. Findings of the research indicated that there is a significant and positive relationship between self-efficacy beliefs and overall use of language learning strategies for the students with the three proficiency levels mentioned.

Chen and Deborah (2007) contributed to this literature by conducting a research on the relationship between EFL learners’ self-efficacy beliefs and English listening achievement. The study was conducted within college-level English listening comprehension classes at two large universities in Taiwan. The students’ listening course grades were used as the students’ listening proficiency level. A survey questionnaire which consisted of two sub-scales of 1) English listening self-efficacy scale constructed by the researcher, and 2) English anxiety and perceived English value scale adapted respectively from Betz’s (1987) Mathematics Anxiety Scale (MAS) and Eccles’ (1983) Student Attitude Questionnaire was performed in this study. Results of this study indicated that there was a significant and positive relationship between self-efficacy beliefs and listening achievement. The results also showed that students’ self-efficay beliefs were much stronger predicators of language performance in the area of listening than students’ anxiety and perceived value were.

Siew and Wong (2005) surveyed the relationship between language learning self-efficacy and language learning strategies, and carried out a study on Seventy-four graduate English-as-a-second-language (ESL) pre-service teachers (13 males, 61 females) from a teachers’ college in Kuching, Sarawak, Malaysia. Two author-designed questionnaires, one on self-efficacy about English language learning and the other on language learning strategy use were used in this study. Pearson correlation coefficients showed that there was a significant positive relationship between language learning strategies and language self-efficacy. Interview findings were in agreement with the above findings. High self-efficacy pre-service teachers reported more frequent use of more number of language learning strategies than did low self-efficacy pre-service teachers.

As Pajares (2000) assert, the study of the concept of self-efficacy in relation to language achievement is still new and there has been little research in the area in comparison to the work done in other areas. Aim of this study is to explore effects of this salient concept on one of language skills which, here, is listening skill. In accordance with Nunnan (1998), listening is the Cinderella skill in second language learning and all too often, it has been overlooked by its elder sister: speaking (cited in Anderson & Lynch, 1989).

3. Method

3.1. Participants

Sixty one undergraduate EFL learners learning English for a BA degree consented to participate in the current study. Of 61 students, 28 students were studying at the University of Kashan and, 33 students were studying at the Payamenur University of Naragh. All of the participants were English literature freshmen, with intermediate level, whose ages ranged between 19 and 23. Also all of them had passed at least four courses in EFL in high school. From 61 students, 18 were male and 43 were female. They took the research instruments as part of their class activities and consented to the collection of data from their records. The participants were selected randomly in this study.

3.2. Instrumentation

Two instruments were used to collect data in this study: One of them was an author-designed questionnaire on self-efficacy about listening comprehension. This questionnaire was constructed based on three questionnaires of Beliefs About Language Learning (BALLI) developed by Hortwiz (1985), Persian Adaptation of the General Self-efficacy Scale constructed by Nezami, Schwarzer and Jerusalem (1996) and Morgan-Links Student Efficacy Scale (MJSES) made by Jinks and Morgan (1999). The authors-designed questionnaire consisted of 20 Likert-scale items generated from items in the questionnaires mentioned and the additional items developed by the researchers themselves in accordance with research questions. The students were asked to read a statement and decide if they: (1) strongly disagree (2) moderately disagree (3) slightly disagree (4) moderately agree (5) strongly agree. The Cronbach alpha of this questionnaire was 0.73.

The other one was ‘Listening Diagnostic Pre-test’ adopted from paper-based Longman TOEFL test. This test consisted of thirty multiple-choice questions designed to measure the level of listening proficiency. The Cronbach alpha of this instrument was 0.69. (A sample of this test is presented in Appendix B)

Both instruments were pilot tested on a representative of 18 freshmen EFL learners who were not involved in the actual study.

3.3. Procedure

As it was mentioned in the section of instrumentation, one questionnaire on the students’ self-efficacy and a multiple-choice test on listening proficiency were used for collecting data in the current study.

Before the administration of the two instruments, some demographical questions, including Name, Age, Major and Semester were added to both of them and, for the sake of clarity, the self-efficacy questionnaire was translated into Persian. For the reasons of anonymity and confidentiality, students were advised that their identities would be removed from the questionnaire and the test (by the researcher) prior to data analysis and they would be assigned a code number to protect the students’ privacy.

For administration of the listening test, the participants were asked to answer the questions of the test in a time-limitation of 20 minutes after listening to a tape, and then they were allowed to listen to it again for checking their answers.

The research instruments (the questionnaire and the test) were administered during one class session with the assistance of their relevant professors. The total response rate was 95.31%, because 61 out of 64 students responded to both research instruments.

4. Data analysis

In analyzing the data, some statistical procedures were carried out in this study: (1) Descriptive statistics including Cronbach alphas, means and standard deviations computed to summarize the students' responses to the self-efficacy questionnaire and listening comprehension test. (2) Pearson correlation was conducted to examine the relationship between the students’ self-efficacy and listening proficiency (3) Paired sample T-Tests were done to explore the effects of high and low self-efficacy on listening proficiency.

5. Results and discussion

5.1. Descriptive statistics

Table 1 presents Cronbach alphas, means and standard deviations of the questionnaire and the test.

Table 1

Descriptive statistics of the self-efficacy questionnaire

and listening comprehension test

	Number of items	Cronbach’s alpha	Mean	Standard deviation
Self-efficacy Questionnaire	20	0.73	47.36	5.812
Listening comprehension test	50	0.69	27.63	5.18

As it is shown in table 1, the reliability of the self-efficacy questionnaire designed for this study was 0.73 and that of the listening comprehension test selected for the present study was 0.69. The reliabilities of both research instruments were satisfactory. Means of the self-efficacy questionnaire and the listening test were 47.36 and 27.63, respectively.

5.2. Pearson Correlations

Table 2 contains the findings obtained from performing Pearson correlations between the total scores of the questionnaire and the test.

Table 2

Pearson correlation between the attitude questionnaire

and the strategy use questionnaire

Self-efficacy	Listening test scores
Pearson correlation	0.78
Significance	0.03

As it is reported in table 2, findings of data analysis in terms of Pearson correlation showed us that there was a direct and significant correlation between the learners’ self-efficacy beliefs about language learning and their listening proficiency. Being in agreement with findings of other studies mentioned in the section of Literature Review, this finding supports Bandura 's (1997) claim that an individual’s level of self-efficacy is thought to relate to the individual’s choice of activities, effort in those activities, and perseverance in the activities.

5.3. Paired sample T-test

Table 3 illustrates the results of carrying out paired samples tests to determine if the degree of self-efficacy has any effect on listening test performance. For doing this statistical procedure the students were divided into two groups: one group with high self-efficacy and the other group with low self-efficacy. The total score of the questionnaire on self-efficacy in this study was 100. After consulting with statistical consultant of this study, the students' self-efficacy whose scores were above 40 was considered as high and the students' self-efficacy whose scores were below 40 was regarded as low. Out of 61 participants, 35 students belonged to the first group and the other 26 belonged to the second group.

Table 3

Paired samples T- tests for the Pair 1 (high self-efficacy – Listening test scores)

and Pair 2 (low self-efficacy – Listening test scores)

Mean

St. Deviation

Sig (2-tailed)

Pair 1

High self-efficacy - Listening test scores

-2.47

6.89

1.45

0.041

Pair 2

Low self-efficacy - Listening test scores

4.19

8.87

- 3.78

0.015

As it was reported in the tables 2 and 3 above, findings of data analysis in terms of both Pearson correlation and T-test in this study revealed that high self-efficacy affected listening test performance significantly and positively, but low self-efficacy affected listening test performance significantly and negatively. Findings of this study support the literature, confirming the importance of EFL learners’ self-efficacy about language learning.

5.4 Limitations

One limitation of the present study was the small number of participants which was 61 students. Hatch and Farhady (1982), however, state that to have a sample close to a normal distribution; a number of thirty or more subjects are needed. Besides, this study was limited to Iranian participants. Test-takers of other nationalities were not included in the research. So caution should be exercised in generalizing the current findings beyond this student population, or indeed to other wider populations.

Although there can be a two-way relationship between personal characteristics and test performance, the current study has investigated only the one-way direction from self-efficacy to test performance. Two-way directions are expected to be relatively more complex, and include more qualitative approaches such as verbal protocol analysis.

The questionnaire used for collecting data on self-efficacy was a quantitative instrument which can be subjected in a number of criticisms, including the impact of response bias. It might generate results with a higher level of reliability if an interview, as a qualitative instrument, is also used. By doing it, we could complementarily interpret the data driven from the questionnaire.

5.6. Pedagogical implications

Despite the limitations above, the current study’s findings are of use to both the instructional and second/foreign language research communities. The findings provide valuable information to second/foreign language educators. They indicate that the students’ self-beliefs of language ability can influence their language achievement negatively or positively depending on the strength of their efficacy beliefs. Pajares (2000) holds that “Many, if not most, academic crises are crises of confidence.”

Since studying the relevant literature shows us that self-efficacy is one significant predictor of learners’ achievement, it is necessary for instructors to help learners believe in their abilities and encourage them to expend greater efforts and time when facing failures rather than to attribute all their failures to their lack of abilities.

The view of considering learners’ affect can also offer significant implications for curriculum designers. Through designing a learner-centered language curriculum, which takes affect into account in many ways, they may help language learners develop positive beliefs of their ability. Regarding the role that this kind of curriculum may play in fostering positive self-beliefs, Arnold and Brown (1999) declare:

Participation in the decision-making process opens greater possibilities for learners to develop their whole potential. In addition to the language content, they also learn responsibility, negotiating skills, and self-evaluation, all of which lead to greater self-efficacy and self-awareness. (p. 7)

5.5. Further studies

The future research on learner self-efficacy may focus on the following topics:

1. Examining the interaction of learner beliefs with other variables such as cognitive styles or learning strategies to better understand why and how these variables have an impact on language learning.

2. Investigating gender differences regarding the construct of self-efficacy and other constructs related to the concept of affect.

3. Exploring sources of negative self-efficacy beliefs about EFL/ESL learning. The results of such studies can help teachers and strategy trainers to aid students in overcoming these beliefs more feasibly.

4. Replicating the survey in a different context in order to gain comparatively more comprehensive results.

As Gardner (1985) claims, “It is only with repeated investigations that the complexities of an area can be truly appreciated and comprehended” (p. 5).

6. Conclusion

As it was mentioned in the section of ‘Results and Discussion’, listening achievement differed significantly across the EFL students with high self-efficacy and those with low self-efficacy, Therefore, in line with previous research findings, this study provided further evidence to support Pajares’ (2000) argument that inner processes of students and the beliefs they create and hold about their capabilities must be given due attention, since they come to grip with what is clearly one of the major tasks in human life cycle – success or failure in school. He also suggested that ordinary practices of schooling must be reexamined with a view to the contributions they make to students’ sense of self-efficacy:

We can aid our students by helping them develop the habit of excellence in schooling, while at the same time nurturing the self-beliefs necessary to maintain that excellence through their adult lives. This will require not only frequent intellectual challenge and simulation, but also frequent emotional support and encouragement. (p. 35)

Teachers, as well as parents, therefore need to nurture healthy academic self-efficacy in their students. Pajares (2006) suggests that this can be done, for example, by emphasizing students’ skill development than self-enhancement, praising what is praiseworthy, fostering optimism and a positive look on life, promoting authentic mastery and successful experiences, or helping students set proximal rather than distal learning goals.

7. Acknowledgements

We wish to express our gratitude to students who participated in this study. We would also like to express our appreciation for the co-operation of English professors in the University of Kashan and Payamenoor University of Kashan. As well, we wish to acknowledge the assistance of statistical advisor, Mr. Hosseini. The mentioned individuals’ willingness to assist us helped to make the study possible, and their interest in our research was a constant source of encouragement to us.

References

Anderson, Anine & Lynch, Tony. (1989). Listening. New York: Oxford University Press. Arnold, J. & Brown, H.D. (1999). A map of the terrain. In J. Arnold (Ed.), Affect in Language

Learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

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

Bandura, A. (1986). Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. Englewood Cliffs. N.J. :Prentice-Hall.

Bernhardt, S. (1997). Self-efficacy and second language learning. The NCLRC Language Resource, 1 (5).

Bobbet, Jacqline J. , Dellinger, Amy B. , Ellett, Chad D. & Oliver, Dianne F. . Measuring teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs: Development and use of the TEBS-Self. Teaching and Teacher Education, Vol. 24, pp. 751-766.

Brown, H. Douglas. (2000). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching (4^th). New York: Longman. In Rubin, Joan & Wenden Anita (Ed). Learner strategies in language learning (pp.71-83). London: Prentice Hall.

Chastain, K. (1988). Developing Second Language Skills: Theory and Practice (3th). U.S.A. :Hartcourt Brace Jovanovich.

Chen, Huei-Yu & Hasson, Deborah J. (2007). The Relationship between EFL Learners’ Self-efficacy Beliefs and English Performance. Retrieved June, 2008 from http://www.coe.fsu.edu/core/abstracts/mse/Huei-Yu_Chen_Abstract.doc.

Choi, N. , Fuqua, D. & Griffin, B. (2001). Exploratory Analysis of the Structure of Scores from

the Multidimensional Scales of Perceived Self-efficacy. Educational and Psychological

Measurement journal, 61; 475.

Clement, R. , Dorneyei, Z. & Noels, K.A. (1994). Motivation, self-confidence, and group

cohesion in the foreign language classroom. Language Learning, Vol. 44, No. 3, pp.

417-448.

Cotterall, S. (1999). Key variables in language learning: what do learners believe about them? System, 27 (4), 493-513.

Ellis, Rod. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. New York: Oxford University Press.

Gardner, R.C. (1985). Social Psychology and Second Language Learning: The Role of

Attitudes and Motivation. London: Edward Arnold.

Gardner, R.C. & Lambert, W.E. (1972). Attitudes and Motivation in Second Language

Learning. Rowley, Mass: Newbury House.

Gee, W.R. (1999). Encouraging ESL students to read. TESOL Journal, Vol. 8, No. 1, pp.

3-7.

Kennedy, T.J. , Nelson, J.K. , Odell, M. R. L. , & Austin, L. K. (2000). The ELES

attitudinal inventory. Foreign Language Annuals, 33 (3), 278-287.

Klassen, Robert M. , Krawchunk, Lindsey L. & Rajani, Sukaina. (2007). Contemporary Educational Psychology. Vol. 3, pp. 1-17.

Lau, Shun & Liem Arief Darmanegara. (2007). The role of self-efficacy, task value, and achievement goals in predicting learning strategies, task disengagement, peer relationship, and achievement outcome. Contemporary Educational Psychology, Vol. 3, pp. 1-26.

Magogwe, Joel Mokuedi & Oliver, Rhonda. (2007). The relationship between language learning strategies, proficiency, age and self-efficacy beliefs: A study of language learners in Botswana. System, Vol. 35, pp. 338-352.

Oxford, R. & Shearin, J.(1994). Language learning motivation: Expanding the theoretical

framework. The Modern Language Journal, 78 (1), 12-25.

Pajares, F. (2000). Self-efficacy beliefs and current directions in self-efficacy research.

Retrieved June, 2008 from http://www.emory.edu/EDUCATION/mfp/effpage.html.

Pajares, F. (2006). Self-efficacyduring childhood and adolescence: Implications for teachers

and parents. In F. Pajares & T. Urden (Eds.), Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents (pp. 339 –

367). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.

Pintrich, P. & Schunk, D. (1996). Motivation in Education: Theory, Research &

Applications. Englewood Cliffs, N.J. :Prentice Hall.

Philips, Deborah. (2001). Longman COMPLETE COURSE FOR THE TOEFL TEST.

Longman: New York.

Stern, H.H. (1991). Fundamental Concepts of Language Teaching. New York: Oxford.

Scholz, Urte, Schwarzer, Ralf & Sud, Shonali. (2001). Is general self-efficacy a

universal construct? Psychometric findings from 25 countries.

Retrieved June, 2008 from http://wwwu serpage.fu-

berlin.de/~health/materials/gse_scholz2002.pdf.

Siew, Lian & Wong, Mary. (2005). Language Learning Strategies and Language Self-

Efficacy: Investigating the Relationship in Malaysia. Eric Journal. Vol. 36, No. 3 pp. 245-

269.

Yang, N.D. (1999). The relationship between EFL learners’ beliefs and learning strategy

use. System, Vol. 27, No. 4, pp. 515-535.

Appendix A

A Questionnaire on EFL Learners'

Self-efficacy about Listening Skill

Name: Major:

Age: Semester:

1) I have a special ability for improving listening skill.

Strongly Agree

Agree

No idea

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

2) In a listening practice, although I understand almost every word, the big problem is that I do not have the ability to keep all of them in my mind.

Strongly Agree

Agree

No idea

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

3) I have the ability to concentrate on the content to which I listen.

Strongly Agree

Agree

No idea

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

4) I believe that my proficiency in listening skill will improve very soon.

Strongly Agree

Agree

No idea

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

5) I am sure that if I practice listening more, I will get better grades in the course.

Strongly Agree

Agree

No idea

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

6) I can understand the tape in listening classes better than other students.

Strongly Agree

Agree

No idea

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

7) I cannot understand an English film without English subtitles.

Strongly Agree

Agree

No idea

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

8) No one cares if I do well in listening course.

Strongly Agree

Agree

No idea

I Disagree

Strongly Disagree

9) My listening teacher thinks that I am smart.

Strongly Agree

Agree

No idea

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

10) My classmates usually get better grades than I do.

Strongly Agree

Agree

No idea

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

11) Even if the listening practice in the class is difficult and I can not understand it completely, I can find a strategy to answer most of the related questions.

Strongly Agree

Agree

No idea

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

12) I am very stressful during the listening class.

Strongly Agree

Agree

No idea

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

13) I enjoy doing listening practice, when the speaker speaks fast.

Strongly Agree

Agree

No idea

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

14) I enjoy doing listening practice with a proficient partner.

Strongly Agree

Agree

No idea

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

15) I am one of the best students in listening course.

Strongly Agree

Agree

No idea

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

16) When I am doing a listening practice with a tape at home, it is not important that how difficult it is because I repeat it so much that I can understand it.

Strongly Agree

Agree

No idea

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

17) I enjoy meeting tourists because I can understand them well.

Strongly Agree

Agree

No idea

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

18) The more difficult the listening practice it is, the more challenging and enjoyable it is.

Strongly Agree

Agree

No idea

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

19) In the listening class, when the teacher asks a question I raise my hand to answer it even if I am not sure about it.

Strongly Agree

Agree

No idea

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

20) Women are more proficient than men at listening skill.

Strongly Agree

Agree

No idea

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Appendix B

Listening Comprehension Test

Name: Major:

Age: Semester:

Directions: In Part A you will hear short conversations between two people. After each conversation, you will hear a question about the conversation. The conversations and questions will not be repeated. After you hear a question, read the four possible answers in your test book and choose the best answer. Then on your answer sheet, find the number of the question and fill in the space that corresponds to the letter of the answer you have chosen.

One example:

On the recording, you hear:

(man) That exam was just awful.

(woman) Oh, it could have been worse.

(narrator) What does the woman mean?

In your test book, you read: (A) The exam was really awful.

(B) It was the worst exam she had ever seen.

(D) It wasn't that hard.

You learn from the conversation that the man thought the exam was very difficult and that the woman disagreed with the man. The best answer to the question, "What does the woman mean?" is (D), "It wasn't that hard." Therefore, the correct choice is (D).

Questions:

1. (A) The coffee is much better this morning.

(B) The coffee tastes extremely good.

(D) This morning he definitely wants some coffee.

2. (A) The two classes meet in an hour and a half.

(B) The class meets three hours per week.

(D) Two times a week the class meets for an hour.

3. (A) A few minutes ago, the flight departed.

(B) The flight will start in a while.

(D) The plane is going to take off soon.

4. (A) He hasn't yet begun his project.

(B) He's supposed to do his science project next week.

(D) He's been working steadily on his science project.

5. (A) At the post office.

(B) In a florist shop.

(D) In a hospital delivery room.

* University of Kashan, Iran, rahimijah@yahoo.com

* University of Kashan, Iran, abedini_atieh@yahoo.com