Developing students' listening metacognitive strategies using online videotext self-dictation-generation learning activity


  • Ching Chang National University of Tainan
  • Chih-Kai Chang National University of Tainan



Listening strategy, metacognitive learning, listening strategy instruction, student question generation, metacognitive listening training model


The study is based on the use of a flexible learning framework to help students improve information processes underlying strategy instruction in EFL listening. By exploiting the online videotext self-dictation-generation (video-SDG) learning activity implemented on the YouTube caption manager platform, the learning cycle was emphasized to promote metacognitive listening development. Two theories were used to guide the online video-SDG learning activity: a student question-generation method and a metacognitive listening training model in a second language (L2). The study investigated how college students in the online video-SDG activity enhanced the use of listening strategies by developing metacognitive listening skills. With emphasis on the metacognitive instructional process, students could promote their listening comprehension of advertisement videos (AVs). Forty-eight students were recruited to participate in the study. Through data collected from the online learning platform, questionnaires, a focus-group interview, and pre- and post- achievement tests, the results revealed that the online video-SDG learning activity could effectively engage students in reflecting upon their perceptions of specific problems countered, listening strategy usages, and strategic knowledge exploited in the metacognitive instructional process. The importance of employing cost-effective online video-SGD learning activities is worthy of consideration in developing students’ metacognitive listening knowledge for enhancing EFL listening strategy instruction.


Download data is not yet available.


Birjandi, P. & Rahimi, A. H. (2011). The effect of metacognitive strategy instruction on the listening performance of EFL Students. International Journal of Linguistics, 4(2), 495-517.

Bozorgian, H. (2013). Metacognitive instruction does improve listening comprehension. International Scholarly Research Network. ISRN Education, 1-6.

Chamot, A. U., & O'Malley, J. M. (1987). The cognitive academic language learning approach: A bridge to the mainstream. TESOL Quarterly, 21(2), 227-249.

Chamot, A. U., & O'Malley, J. M. (1994). The CALLA handbook: Implementing the cognitive academic language learning approach. White Plains, NY: Addison Wesley Longman.

Coşkun, A. (2010). The effect of metacognitive strategy training on the listening performance of beginner students. Research on Youth and Language, 4(1), 35-50.

Choi, I., Land, S.M. & Turgeon, A.Y. (2005). Scaffolding peer-questioning strategies to facilitate metacognition during online small group discussion. Instructional science, 33(5-6), 483–511.

Cross, D. R. & Paris, S. G. (1988). Developmental and instructional analyses of children's metacognition and reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(2), 131-142.

Cross, J. (2009). Effects of listening strategy instruction on news videotext comprehension. Language Teaching Research, 13(2), 151-176.

Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34, 906- 911.

King, A. (1994). Guiding knowledge construction in the classroom: effects of teaching children how to question and how to explain. American Educational Research Journal, 31(2), 338-368.

Koch, A. & Echstein, S. G. (1991). Improvement of reading comprehension of physics texts by students' question formulation. International Journal of Science Education, 13, 473-485.

Kuhn, D., & Dean, D. (2004). A bridge between cognitive psychology and educational practice. Theory into Practice, 43(4), 268-273.

Lai, C. & Gu, M. (2011). Self-regulated out-of-class language learning with technology. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 21(4), 317-335.

Leveridge, A. N., & Yang, J. C. (2013). Testing learner reliance on caption supports in second language listening comprehension multimedia environments. ReCALL, 25(2), 199-214.

McGruddy, R. (1998). The effect of listening comprehension strategy training with advanced level ESL students. Dissertation Abstracts International, 59 (12), 4416. (UMI No. 9916234).

Montero Pérez, M., Peters, E., & Desmet, P. (2014). Is less more? Effectiveness and perceived usefulness of keyword and full captioned video for L2 listening comprehension. ReCALL: Journal of Eurocall.

O'Malley, J. M. & Chamot, A. U. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. NY: Cambridge University Press.

O'Malley, J. M., Chamot, A. U., Stewner-Manzanares, G., Russo, R. P., & Kupper, L. (1985). Learning strategy applications with students of English as a second language. TESOL Quarterly, 19(3), 557-584.

Oxford, R. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. New York: Newbury House.

Ogle, D.M. (1986). K-W-L: A teaching model that develops active reading of expository text. Reading Teacher, 39, 564-570.

Park, G. P. (2011). The validation process of the SILL: a Confirmatory factor analysis. English Language Teaching. 4(4), 21-27.

Rasouli, M. Mollakhan, K. and Karbalaei, A. (2013).The effect of metacognitive listening strategy training on listening comprehension in Iranian EFL context. European Online Journal of Natural and Social Science, 2(1),115-128.

Ratebi, Z. & Amirian, Z. (2013). Use of metacognitive strategies in listening comprehension by Iranian university students majoring in English: a comparison between high and low Proficient listeners. Journal of Studies in Education, 3(1), 140-154.

Rosenshine, B. Meister, C. & Chapman, S. (1996). Teaching students to generate questions: A review of the intervention studies. Review of Educational Research, 66, 181-221.

Smidt, E. & Hegelheimer, V. (2004). Effects of online academic lectures on ESL listening comprehension, incidental vocabulary Acquisition, and strategy use, Computer Assisted Language Learning. 17(5), 517-556.

Wenden, A. L. (1998). Metacognitive knowledge and language learning. Applied Linguistics, 19, 515-37.

Whitebread, D., Coltman, P., Pasternak, D. P., Sangster, C., Grau, V., Bingham, S., Almeqdad, Q., & Demetriou, D. (2009). The development of two observational tools for assessing metacognition and self-regulated learning in young children. Metacognition and Learning, 4(1), 63-85.

Sarani, A. and Jabbari, A. (2010). The effect of generative study strategies on EFL learners' reading comprehension and recall of short stories. Proceedings of the3rd international conference of ICT for Language Learning. Italy: Florence.

Schraw, G., Crippen, K. J., & Hartley, K. (2006). Promoting self-regulation in science education: Metacognition as part of a broader perspective on learning. Research in Science Education, 36, 111-139.

Singer, H., & Donlan, D. (1982). Active comprehension: Problem-solving schema with question generation for comprehension of complex short stories. Reading Research Quarterly, 17, 166-18.

Soonthornmanee, R. (2002). The effect of the reciprocal teaching approach: on the reading comprehension of EFL students. RELC Journal, 33(2), 125-141.

Vandergrift, L. (1997). The comprehension strategies of second language listeners: A descriptive study. Foreign Language Annals, 30, 387-409.

Vandergrift, L. (1999). Facilitating second language listening comprehension: acquiring successful strategies. English Language Teaching, 53(3),168-176.

Yu, F. Y. (2005). Promoting metacognitive strategy development through online question-generation instructional approach. Proceeding of International Conference on Computers in Education, 564-571. Singapore: Nanyang Technological University.

Yu. F. Y., Liu, Y. H. & Chan, T. W. (2005). A Web-based learning system for question-posing and peer assessment. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 42(4), 337-348.

Yu, F. Y. (2009). Scaffolding student-generated questions: design and development of a customizable online learning system. Computers in Human Behaviour, 25(5), 1129-1138.






Research papers