Home The effect of linguistic choices in note-taking on academic listening performance: a pedagogical translanguaging perspective
Article
Licensed
Unlicensed Requires Authentication

The effect of linguistic choices in note-taking on academic listening performance: a pedagogical translanguaging perspective

  • Xiaozhou (Emily) Zhou EMAIL logo , Xinran Chen and Ziyang Wang
Published/Copyright: December 5, 2022
International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching
From the journal International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching Volume 62 Issue 2

Abstract

The inherent complexity of listening activities poses considerable challenges to second language listeners. For decades, researchers have been exploring effective strategies to help improve L2 learners’ listening proficiency. Note-taking, which is frequently and strategically employed to complete listening tasks and to learn content, has also been examined extensively from various perspectives. However, it seems that little is known about the effect of L2 learners’ linguistic choices in note-taking on their listening performance. Employing pedagogical translanguaging as an analytical lens, the current research sets out to investigate whether or not L2 learners’ multilingual notes, compared to monolingual notes, significantly enhance their performance in academic listening activities. Conducted in a Chinese university EFL context, this study adopts a mixed-methods approach. A total of 90 participants were assigned to three groups and were asked to take notes in Chinese, English, and a combination of all languages, symbols, drawings, etc., respectively. Data were collected from the results of two listening tasks (a listening comprehension test and a retelling task), a questionnaire survey designed to focus on their attitudes to the linguistic choices they made in note-taking, and the multilingual notes taken. The findings revealed that students who were allowed to make full use of their linguistic and semiotic resources in note-taking were able to perform significantly better in both listening tasks. The same group of students also demonstrated a diverse and flexible mobilization of their multilingual and multimodal assets in the notes they took. This study provides evidence for applying pedagogical translanguaging as an effective approach in designing note-taking instructions. It is suggested that L2 learners should be encouraged to deploy their entire linguistic repertoire when taking notes during listening activities, which could lead to improved performance.

Keywords: academic listening; note-taking; pedagogical translanguaging
Corresponding author: Xiaozhou (Emily) Zhou, Shanghai International Studies University, 550 West Dalian Rd, Shanghai, 200083, China, E-mail:

Funding source: Shanghai Municipal Education Commission

Award Identifier / Grant number: C2021236

Funding source: Shanghai International Studies University

Award Identifier / Grant number: 2019114018

Appendices

Appendix A Transcript of the Ted talk

Every day, a sea of decisions stretches before us. Some are small and unimportant, but others have a larger impact on our lives. For example, which politician should I vote for? Should I try the latest diet craze? Or will email make me a millionaire? We’re bombarded with so many decisions that it’s impossible to make a perfect choice every time. But there are many ways to improve our chances, and one particularly effective technique is critical thinking. This is a way of approaching a question that allows us to carefully deconstruct a situation, reveal its hidden issues, such as bias and manipulation, and make the best decision. If the critical part sounds negative that’s because in a way it is. Rather than choosing an answer because it feels right, a person who uses critical thinking subjects all available options to scrutiny and skepticism. Using the tools at their disposal, they’ll eliminate everything but the most useful and reliable information. There are many different ways of approaching critical thinking, but here’s one five-step process that may help you solve any number of problems. One: formulate your question. In other words, know what you’re looking for. This is not always as straightforward as it sounds. For example, if you’re deciding whether to try out the newest diet craze, your reasons for doing so may be obscured by other factors, like claims that you’ll see results in just two weeks. But if you approach the situation with a clear view of what you’re actually trying to accomplish by dieting, whether that’s weight loss, better nutrition, or having more energy, that’ll equip you to sift through this information critically, find what you’re looking for, and decide whether the new fad really suits your needs. Two: gather your information. There’s lots of it out there, so having a clear idea of your question will help you determine what’s relevant. If you’re trying to decide on a diet to improve your nutrition, you may ask an expert for their advice, or seek other people’s testimonies. Information gathering helps you weigh different options, moving you closer to a decision that meets your goal. Three: apply the information, something you do by asking critical questions. Facing a decision, ask yourself, “What concepts are at work?” “What assumptions exist?” “Is my interpretation of the information logically sound?” For example, in an email that promises you millions, you should consider, “What is shaping my approach to this situation?” “Do I assume the sender is telling the truth?” “Based on the evidence, is it logical to assume I’ll win any money?” Four: consider the implications. Imagine it’s election time, and you’ve selected a political candidate based on their promise to make it cheaper for drivers to fill up on gas. At first glance, that seems great. But what about the long-term environmental effects? If gasoline use is less restricted by cost, this could also cause a huge surge in air pollution, an unintended consequence that’s important to think about. Five: explore other points of view. Ask yourself why so many people are drawn to the policies of the opposing political candidate. Even if you disagree with everything that candidate says, exploring the full spectrum of viewpoints might explain why some policies that don’t seem valid to you appeal to others. This will allow you to explore alternatives, evaluate your own choices, and ultimately help you make more informed decisions. This five-step process is just one tool, and it certainly will not eradicate difficult decisions from our lives. But it can help us increase the number of positive choices we make. Critical thinking can give us the tools to sift through a sea of information and find what we’re looking for. And if enough of us use it, it has the power to make the world a more reasonable place.

Appendix B Questions in the listening comprehension test

  1. What is this Ted talk mainly about?

    1. Decisions that largely affect our lives

    2. How to vote for the right politician

    3. How to improve your critical thinking abilities

    4. Making a perfect choice every time

  2. A person who uses critical thinking will:

    1. Subject all available options to scrutiny and skepticism

    2. Choose an answer because it feels right

    3. Eliminate everything regardless of whether it is useful or not

    4. Not use the tools at their disposal

  3. What are the five tips to improve your critical thinking?

  4. As for the second tip, how would it help if we have a clear idea of our question?

  5. As for the fifth tip, why should we explore the full spectrum of viewpoints when voting?

  6. What other advantages do you think that critical thinking would provide? (open-ended question)

Appendix C Survey questions

  1. What languages do you usually use to make notes in?

    1. All English

    2. All Chinese

    3. A mix of English, Chinese, numbers, symbols, etc.

  2. Do you think linguistic choices have any impact on your performance in the listening comprehension test?

    1. They have a large impact.

    2. They have some impact.

    3. They have little impact.

  3. Do you think linguistic choices have any impact on your performance in the retelling task?

    1. They have a large impact.

    2. They have some impact.

    3. They have little impact.

  4. Have you received any formal training on how to take notes?

    1. Yes

    2. No

  5. Do you think it is necessary to receive formal training on how to take notes?

    1. Yes

    2. No

Appendix D Assessment template for the retelling task

Fluency and coherence 20/100 Grammatical accuracy 15/100 Lexical diversity 15/100 Content coverage 50/100
100 Can express fluently, few repetitions or self-corrections; can express themselves coherently and use proper conjunctions Can use correct grammatical structures, except for mistakes that native-speakers of English would also make Can accurately and freely use vocabulary to discuss any topics Can cover 90% or more of the content
90 Can express themselves relatively fluently, with a few repetitions and self-corrections; sometimes hesitates when thinking about the content Can use different grammatical structures flexibly except for occasional simple mistakes Can use rich vocabulary flexibly, with occasional minor inaccuracies Can cover 80% or more of the content
80 Can express themselves without obvious difficulties; can flexibly use conjunctions and discourse markers; some repetitions and self-corrections Can use complicated grammatical structures except for some repeated mistakes; most of the sentences are correct Can use common vocabulary and idioms but sometimes choose inappropriate words Can cover 70% or more of the content
70 Lacks fluency due to repetitions and self-corrections; cannot guarantee the appropriateness of the use of conjunctions and discourse markers Can use a combination of simple and complex sentences, but lack flexibility; mistakes happen when using complex sentences but will not hinder comprehension Has sufficient vocabulary to discuss different topics but sometimes use words inappropriately Can cover 60% or more of the content
60 Can keep normal speed but has to slow down sometimes for the purpose of self-expression; can use simple conjunctions but lack fluency when expressing complicated meanings Can use basic sentence structures and a limited number of complex sentences; makes frequent mistakes that can hinder comprehension Can discuss familiar or unfamiliar topics but can only use limited vocabulary Can cover 50% or more of the content
50 Obvious pauses, speaks slowly, frequent repetitions and self-corrections Can try to use basic sentence structures but lacks accuracy or only replies with previously recited sentences Can talk about familiar topics but can only discuss unfamiliar topics at a basic level; inappropriate use of words happens frequently Can cover 40% or more of the content

Appendix E Chauvenet’s Criterion Table

n Critical value
2 1.150
3 1.383
4 1.534
5 1.645
6 1.732
7 1.803
8 1.863
9 1.915
10 1.960
11 2.000
12 2.037
13 2.070
14 2.100
15 2.128
16 2.154
17 2.178
18 2.200
19 2.222
20 2.241
21 2.260
22 2.278
23 2.295
24 2.311
25 2.326
26 2.341
27 2.355
28 2.369
29 2.382
30 2.394
31 2.406
32 2.418
33 2.429
34 2.440
35 2.450
36 2.460
37 2.470
38 2.479
39 2.489
40 2.498
50 2.576
100 2.807
500 3.291
1,000 3.481

  1. Research funding: This work was supported by Shanghai Municipal Education Commission (C2021236) and Shanghai International Studies University (2019114018).

References

Anderson, John R. 1985. Cognitive psychology and its implications. New York: Freeman.Search in Google Scholar

Aoyama, Ryosuke. 2020. Exploring Japanese high school students’ L1 use in translanguaging in the communicative EFL classroom. The Electronic Journal for English as a Second Language 23(4). 1–18.Search in Google Scholar

Attaway, Stormy. 2018. MATLAB: A practical introduction to programming and problem solving, 5th edn. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.Search in Google Scholar

Austin, Jennifer L., Melissa Lee & Jeffery P. Carr. 2004. The effect of guided notes on undergraduate students’ recording of lecture content. Journal of Instructional Psychology 31(4). 314–320.Search in Google Scholar

Badger, Richard, Goodith White, Peter Sutherland & Tasmin Haggis. 2001. Note perfect: An investigation of how students view taking notes in lectures. System 29. 405–417. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0346-251x(01)00028-8.Search in Google Scholar

Bakhtiarvand, Morteza & Forough Ghalavandi. 2019. The comparative study of the effects of shadowing and note-taking on EFL students’ listening comprehension improvement. Applied Linguistics Research Journal 3(3). 31–40.Search in Google Scholar

Barnett, Vic & Toby Lewis. 1994. Outliers in statistical data, 3rd edn. Chichester: J. Wiley and Sons.Search in Google Scholar

Buck, Gary. 2001. Assessing listening. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511732959Search in Google Scholar

Canagarajah, Suresh. 2011. Translanguaging in the classroom: Emerging issues for research and pedagogy. Applied Linguistics Review 2(1). 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110239331.1.Search in Google Scholar

Cenoz, Jasone. 2017. Translanguaging in school context. International perspectives: An introduction. Journal of Language, Identity and Education 16. 193–198. https://doi.org/10.1080/15348458.2017.1327816.Search in Google Scholar

Cenoz, Jasone & Durk Gorter. 2021. Pedagogical translanguaging (elements in language teaching). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781009029384Search in Google Scholar

Chaudron, Craig. 1995. Academic listening. In David Mendelsohn & Joan Rubin (eds.), A guide for the teaching of second language listening, 74–96. San Diego, CA: Dominie Press.Search in Google Scholar

Chaudron, Craig, Lester Loschky & Janice Cook. 1994. Second language listening comprehension and lecture notetaking. In John Flowerdew (ed.), Academic listening: Research perspectives, 75–92. New York: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139524612.008Search in Google Scholar

Clerehan, Rosemary. 1995. Taking it down: Note-taking practices of L1 and L2 students. English for Specific Purposes 14(2). 137–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/0889-4906(95)00003-a.Search in Google Scholar

Cohen, Andrew. 1998. Strategies in learning and using a second language. Harlow: Longman.Search in Google Scholar

Cook, Vivian. 2016. Premises of multi-competence. In Vivian Cook & Wei Li (eds.), The Cambridge handbook of linguistic multi-competence, 1–25. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781107425965.001Search in Google Scholar

Crawford, Michael. 2015. A study on note taking in EFL listening instruction. In Peter Clements, Aleda Krause & Howard Brown (eds.), JALT2014 conference proceedings, 416–424. Tokyo: JALT.Search in Google Scholar

Creese, Angela & Adrian Blackledge. 2019. Translanguaging and public service encounters: Language learning in the library. The Modern Language Journal 103(4). 800–814. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12601.Search in Google Scholar

Cubilo, Justin & Paula Winke. 2013. Redefining the L2 listening construct within an integrated writing task: Considering the impacts of visual-cue interpretation and note-taking. Language Assessment Quarterly 10(4). 371–397. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2013.824972.Search in Google Scholar

Cummins, Jim. 2019. The emergence of translanguaging pedagogy: A dialogue between theory and practice. Journal of Multilingual Education Research 9(13). 19–36.Search in Google Scholar

Du, Guohui, Zuwati Hasim & Fong Peng Chew. 2021. Contribution of English aural vocabulary size levels to L2 listening comprehension. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 60(4). 937–956. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2020-0004.Search in Google Scholar

Dunkel, Patricia. 1988. The content of L1 and L2 students’ lecture notes and its relation to test performance. Tesol Quarterly 22(2). 259–281. https://doi.org/10.2307/3586936.Search in Google Scholar

Fang, Fan & Yang Liu. 2020. ‘Using all English is not always meaningful’: Stakeholders’ perspectives on the use of and attitudes towards translanguaging at a Chinese university. Lingua 247. 102959. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2020.102959.Search in Google Scholar

Ferris, Dana & Tracy Tagg. 1996. Academic oral communication needs for EAP learners: What subject-matter instructors actually require. Tesol Quarterly 30(1). 31–58. https://doi.org/10.2307/3587606.Search in Google Scholar

Field, John. 2008. Listening in the language classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Field, John. 2011. Into the mind of the academic listener. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 10(2). 102–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2011.04.002.Search in Google Scholar

Flowerdew, John. 1994. Academic listening: Research perspectives. New York: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139524612Search in Google Scholar

Flowerdew, John & Lindsay Miller. 2005. Second language listening: Theory and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Galante, Angelica. 2020. Pedagogical translanguaging in a multilingual English program in Canada: Student and teacher perspectives of challenges. System 92. 102274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2020.102274.Search in Google Scholar

García, Ofelia & Naomi Kano. 2014. Translanguaging as process and pedagogy: Developing the English writing of Japanese students in the US. In Conteh Jean & Gabriela Meier (eds.), The multilingual turn in languages education: Opportunities and challenges, 258–277. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.10.21832/9781783092246-018Search in Google Scholar

García, Ofelia, Susana Ibarra Johnson & Kate Seltzer. 2017. The translanguaging classroom: Leveraging student bilingualism for learning. Philadelphia, PA: Caslon.Search in Google Scholar

García, Ofelia & Wei Li. 2014. Translanguaging: Language, bilingualism and education. London: Palgrave Pivot.10.1057/9781137385765_4Search in Google Scholar

Graham, Suzanne. 2011. Self-efficacy and academic listening. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 10(2). 113–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2011.04.001.Search in Google Scholar

Hayati, Abdolmajid & Alireza Jalilifar. 2009. The impact of note-taking strategies on listening comprehension of EFL learners. English Language Teaching 2(1). 101–111. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v2n1p101.Search in Google Scholar

Hornberger, Nancy H. & Holly Link. 2012. Translanguaging and transnational literacies in multilingual classrooms: A biliteracy lens. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 15(3). 261–278. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2012.658016.Search in Google Scholar

İpek, Hülya. 2018. Perceptions of ELT students on their listening and note taking skills. International Online Journal of Education and Teaching (IOJET) 5(1). 206–217.Search in Google Scholar

Johnson, R. Burke, Anthony J. Onwuegbuzie & Lisa A. Turner. 2007. Toward a definition of mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research 1(2). 112–133. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689806298224.Search in Google Scholar

Khavazi, Mehri, Mandana Yousefi & Naeemeh Kharaghani. 2018. The effect of note taking vs. summarizing strategy on Iranian EFL learners’ listening comprehension. International Journal of Applied Linguistics & English Literature 7(2). 42–51. https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.7n.2p.42.Search in Google Scholar

Kim, Jung-Hyun. 2012. Effects of notetaking strategy training in listening comprehension tests. Korean Journal of Applied Linguistics 28(1). 233–260. https://doi.org/10.17154/kjal.2012.03.28.1.233.Search in Google Scholar

King, Philip. 1994. Visual and verbal messages in the engineering lecture: Note taking by postgraduate L2 students. In John Flowerdew (ed.), Academic listening: Research perspectives, 219–238. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9781139524612.017Search in Google Scholar

Kobayashi, Keiichi. 2005. What limits the encoding effect of note-taking? A meta-analytic examination. Contemporary Educational Psychology 30(2). 242–262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cedpsych.2004.10.001.Search in Google Scholar

Kusumoto, Yoko. 2019. EFL students’ perception of note-taking and the effect of note-taking instruction. The Kyushu Academic Society of English Language Education Bulletin 47. 47–56.Search in Google Scholar

Lee, On-Soon. 2017. Notetaking strategy use in EFL Learners’ listening comprehension and integrated speaking performance. The Journal of Linguistics Science 81. 257–276. https://doi.org/10.21296/jls.2017.06.81.257.Search in Google Scholar

Li, Wei. 2018. Translanguaging as a practical theory of Language. Applied Linguistics 39(1). 9–30. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amx044.Search in Google Scholar

Li, Wei & Hua Zhu. 2019. Tranßcripting: Playful subversion with Chinese characters. International Journal of Multilingualism 16(2). 145–161. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2019.1575834.Search in Google Scholar

Lin, Angel & Peichang He. 2017. Translanguaging as dynamic activity flows in CLIL classrooms. Journal of Language, Identity and Education 16(4). 228–244. https://doi.org/10.1080/15348458.2017.1328283.Search in Google Scholar

Luo, Linlin, Kenneth A. Kiewra, Abraham E. Flanigan & Markeya S. Peteranetz. 2018. Laptop versus longhand note taking: Effects on lecture notes and achievement. Instructional Science 46. 947–971. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-018-9458-0.Search in Google Scholar

Lynch, Tony. 2011. Academic listening in the 21st century: Reviewing a decade of research. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 10(2). 79–88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2011.03.001.Search in Google Scholar

Macaro, Ernesto, Suzanne Graham & Robert Vanderplank. 2007. A review of listening strategies: Focus on sources of knowledge and on success. In Andrew Cohen & Ernesto Macaro (eds.), Language learner strategies: 30 years of research and practice, 165–185. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar

Makalela, Leketi. 2015. Moving out of linguistic boxes: The effects of translanguaging strategies for multilingual classrooms. Language and Education 29(3). 200–217. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500782.2014.994524.Search in Google Scholar

Moody, Stephanie, Mahjabin Chowdhury & Zohreh Eslami. 2019. Graduate students’ perceptions of translanguaging. English Teaching & Learning 43. 85–103. https://doi.org/10.1007/s42321-018-0019-z.Search in Google Scholar

Morell, Teresa, Miguel Garcia & Inés Sanchez. 2008. Multimodal strategies for effective academic presentation in English for non-native speakers. In Rafael Monroy & Aquilino Sanchez (eds.), 25 years of applied linguistics in Spain: Milestones and challenges, 557–568. Editum: Universidad de Murcia.Search in Google Scholar

Mueller, Pam A. & Daniel M. Oppenheimer. 2014. The pen is mightier than the keyboard: Advantages of longhand over laptop note taking. Psychological Science 25(6). 1159–1168. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614524581.Search in Google Scholar

Parra, Marcela Ossa & Patrick Proctor. 2022. The Translanguaging pedagogies continuum. Journal of Education. https://doi.org/10.1177/00220574211053587.Search in Google Scholar

Piolat, Annie, Thierry Olive & Ronald T. Kellogg. 2005. Cognitive effort during note taking. Applied Cognitive Psychology 19(3). 291–312. https://doi.org/10.1002/acp.1086.Search in Google Scholar

Richards, Jack. 1983. Listening comprehension: Approach, design, procedure. Tesol Quarterly 17(2). 219–240. https://doi.org/10.2307/3586651.Search in Google Scholar

Richards, Keith, Steven Ross & Seedhouse Paul. 2012. Research methods for applied language studies: An advanced resource book for students. London: Routledge.Search in Google Scholar

Rost, Detlef H. 1993. Assessing the difference components of reading comprehension: Fact or fiction? Language Testing 10(1). 79–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/026553229301000105.Search in Google Scholar

Sakurai, Shizuka. 2018. Promoting skills and strategies of lecture listening and note-taking in L2. Fukuoka University Journal of Humanities 49(4). 1019–1046.Search in Google Scholar

Sano, Aiko. 2018. The effects of translanguaging in discussion as a prewriting activity for writing in a second language. Annual Review of English Language Education in Japan 29. 193–208.Search in Google Scholar

Shin, Hye Won, Sarah Sok & Juhyun Do. 2022. Role of individual differences in incidental L2 vocabulary acquisition through listening to stories: Metacognitive awareness and motivation. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2021-0212.Search in Google Scholar

Siegel, Joseph. 2016. A pedagogic cycle for EFL note-taking. ELT Journal 70(3). 275–286. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccv073.Search in Google Scholar

Siegel, Joseph. 2020. Appreciating translanguaging in student notes. ELT Journal 74(1). 86–88. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccz052.Search in Google Scholar

Siegel, Joseph. 2022a. Factors affecting note-taking performance. International Journal of Listening. https://doi.org/10.1080/10904018.2022.2059484.Search in Google Scholar

Siegel, Joseph. 2022b. Translanguaging options for note-taking in EAP and EMI. ELT Journal. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccac027.Search in Google Scholar

Siegel, Joseph. 2022c. Translanguaging in notes: A Swedish perspective. ASLA: s skriftserie/ASLA Studies in Applied Linguistics 29. 99–118.Search in Google Scholar

Song, Min-Young. 2008. Do divisible subskills exist in second language (L2) comprehension?: A structural equation modeling approach. Language Testing 25(4). 435–464. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532208094272.Search in Google Scholar

Song, Min-Young. 2011. Note-taking quality and performance on an L2 academic listening test. Language Testing 29(1). 67–89. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532211415379.Search in Google Scholar

Sueyoshi, Ayano & Debra M. Hardison. 2005. The role of gestures and facial cues in second-language listening comprehension. Language Learning 55(4). 661–699. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0023-8333.2005.00320.x.Search in Google Scholar

Swain, Merrill & Sharon Lapkin. 2013. A Vygotskian sociocultural perspective on immersion education: The L1/L2 debate. Journal of Immersion and Content-Based Language Education 1(1). 101–129. https://doi.org/10.1075/jicb.1.1.05swa.Search in Google Scholar

Tai, Kevin W. H. & Wei Li. 2021. Constructing playful talk through translanguaging in English Medium Instruction mathematics classrooms. Applied Linguistics 42(4). 607–640. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amaa043.Search in Google Scholar

Taylor, Linda & Ardeshir Geranpayeh. 2011. Assessing listening for academic purposes: Defining and operationalising the test construct. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 10(2). 89–101. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2011.03.002.Search in Google Scholar

Tsai, Tsai-Fu & Yongan Wu. 2010. Effects of note-taking instruction and note-taking languages on college EFL students’ listening comprehension. New Horizons in Education 58(1). 120–132.Search in Google Scholar

Turnbull, Blake. 2018. Is there a potential for a translanguaging approach to English education in Japan? Perspectives of tertiary learners and teachers. JALT Journal 40(2). 101–134. https://doi.org/10.37546/jaltjj40.2-3.Search in Google Scholar

Vandergrift, Larry. 2006. Second language listening: Listening ability or language proficiency? The Modern Language Journal 90(1). 6–18. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2006.00381.x.Search in Google Scholar

Velasco, Patricia & Ofelia García. 2014. Translanguaging and the writing of bilingual learners. Bilingual Research Journal 37(1). 6–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/15235882.2014.893270.Search in Google Scholar

Wagner, Elvis. 2010. The effect of the use of video texts on ESL listening test-taker performance. Language Testing 27(4). 493–513. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532209355668.Search in Google Scholar

Wang, Danping. 2019. Translanguaging in Chinese foreign language classrooms: Students and teachers’ attitudes and practices. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism 22(2). 138–149. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2016.1231773.Search in Google Scholar

Williams, Cen. 2002. A language gained: A study of language immersion at 11–16 years of age. Bangor, UK: School of Education.Search in Google Scholar

Wingrove, Peter. 2017. How suitable are TED talks for academic listening? Journal of English for Academic Purposes 30. 79–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2017.10.010.Search in Google Scholar

Yeldham, Michael. 2016. Examining the usefulness to learners of processes taught in L2 English listening courses. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching 54(1). 43–72. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2016-0016.Search in Google Scholar

Yeldham, Michael. 2021. Second language listening instruction and learners’ vocabulary knowledge. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2021-0021.Search in Google Scholar

Yuan, Rui & Min Yang. 2020. Towards an understanding of translanguaging in EMI teacher education classrooms. Language Teaching Research. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168820964123.Search in Google Scholar

Zhou, Xiaozhou (Emily), Chenke Li & Xuesong (Andy) Gao. 2021. Towards a sustainable classroom ecology: Translanguaging in English as a medium of instruction (EMI) in a finance course at an International School in Shanghai. Sustainability 13(19). 10719. https://doi.org/10.3390/su131910719.Search in Google Scholar

Zhou, Xiaozhou (Emily) & Mann Steve. 2021. Translanguaging in a Chinese University CLIL classroom: Teacher Strategies and Student Attitudes. Studies in Second. Language Learning and Teaching 11(2). 265–289.10.14746/ssllt.2021.11.2.5Search in Google Scholar
Received: 2022-06-27
Accepted: 2022-11-16
Published Online: 2022-12-05
Published in Print: 2024-06-25

© 2022 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Research Articles
  3. Consolidating EFL content and vocabulary learning via interactive reading
  4. Understanding salient trajectories and emerging profiles in the development of Chinese learners’ motivation: a growth mixture modeling approach
  5. Multilingual pedagogies in first versus foreign language contexts: a cross-country study of language teachers
  6. Classroom assessment and learning motivation: insights from secondary school EFL classrooms
  7. Interculturality and Islam in Indonesia’s high-school EFL classrooms
  8. Collaborative writing in an EFL secondary setting: the role of task complexity
  9. Spanish heritage speakers’ processing of lexical stress
  10. Effectiveness of second language collocation instruction: a meta-analysis
  11. Understanding the Usefulness of E-Portfolios: Linking Artefacts, Reflection, and Validation
  12. Syntactic prediction in L2 learners: evidence from English disjunction processing
  13. The cognitive construction-grammar approach to teaching the Chinese Ba construction in a foreign language classroom
  14. The predictive roles of enjoyment, anxiety, willingness to communicate on students’ performance in English public speaking classes
  15. Speaking proficiency development in EFL classrooms: measuring the differential effect of TBLT and PPP teaching approaches
  16. L2 textbook input and L2 written production: a case of Korean locative postposition–verb construction
  17. What does the processing of chunks by learners of Chinese tell us? An acceptability judgment investigation
  18. Comparative analysis of written corrective feedback strategies: a linear growth modeling approach
  19. Enjoyment in language teaching: a study into EFL teachers’ subjectivities
  20. Students’ attitude and motivation towards concept mapping-based prewriting strategies
  21. Pronunciation pedagogy in English as a foreign language teacher education programs in Vietnam
  22. The role of language aptitude probed within extensive instruction experience: morphosyntactic knowledge of advanced users of L2 English
  23. The impact of different glossing conditions on the learning of EFL single words and collocations in reading
  24. Patterns of motivational beliefs among high-, medium-, and low-achieving English learners in China
  25. The effect of linguistic choices in note-taking on academic listening performance: a pedagogical translanguaging perspective
  26. A latent profile analysis of Chinese EFL learners’ enjoyment and anxiety in reading and writing: associations with imaginative capacity and story continuation writing performance
  27. Effects of monolingual and bilingual subtitles on L2 vocabulary acquisition
  28. Task complexity, task repetition, and L2 writing complexity: exploring interactions in the TBLT domain
  29. Expansion of verb-argument construction repertoires in L2 English writing
  30. Immediate versus delayed prompts, field dependence and independence cognitive style and L2 development
  31. Aural vocabulary, orthographic vocabulary, and listening comprehension
  32. The use of metadiscourse by secondary-level Chinese learners of English in examination scripts: insights from a corpus-based study
  33. Scoping review of research methodologies across language studies with deaf and hard-of-hearing multilingual learners
  34. Exploring immediate and prolonged effects of collaborative writing on young learners’ texts: L2 versus FL
  35. Discrepancy in prosodic disambiguation strategies between Chinese EFL learners and native English speakers
  36. Exploring the state of research on motivation in second language learning: a review and a reliability generalization meta-analysis
  37. Japanese complaint responses in textbook dialogues and ordinary conversations: learning objects to expand interactional repertoires
https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2022-0127
Keywords for this article
academic listening; note-taking; pedagogical translanguaging

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Research Articles
  3. Consolidating EFL content and vocabulary learning via interactive reading
  4. Understanding salient trajectories and emerging profiles in the development of Chinese learners’ motivation: a growth mixture modeling approach
  5. Multilingual pedagogies in first versus foreign language contexts: a cross-country study of language teachers
  6. Classroom assessment and learning motivation: insights from secondary school EFL classrooms
  7. Interculturality and Islam in Indonesia’s high-school EFL classrooms
  8. Collaborative writing in an EFL secondary setting: the role of task complexity
  9. Spanish heritage speakers’ processing of lexical stress
  10. Effectiveness of second language collocation instruction: a meta-analysis
  11. Understanding the Usefulness of E-Portfolios: Linking Artefacts, Reflection, and Validation
  12. Syntactic prediction in L2 learners: evidence from English disjunction processing
  13. The cognitive construction-grammar approach to teaching the Chinese Ba construction in a foreign language classroom
  14. The predictive roles of enjoyment, anxiety, willingness to communicate on students’ performance in English public speaking classes
  15. Speaking proficiency development in EFL classrooms: measuring the differential effect of TBLT and PPP teaching approaches
  16. L2 textbook input and L2 written production: a case of Korean locative postposition–verb construction
  17. What does the processing of chunks by learners of Chinese tell us? An acceptability judgment investigation
  18. Comparative analysis of written corrective feedback strategies: a linear growth modeling approach
  19. Enjoyment in language teaching: a study into EFL teachers’ subjectivities
  20. Students’ attitude and motivation towards concept mapping-based prewriting strategies
  21. Pronunciation pedagogy in English as a foreign language teacher education programs in Vietnam
  22. The role of language aptitude probed within extensive instruction experience: morphosyntactic knowledge of advanced users of L2 English
  23. The impact of different glossing conditions on the learning of EFL single words and collocations in reading
  24. Patterns of motivational beliefs among high-, medium-, and low-achieving English learners in China
  25. The effect of linguistic choices in note-taking on academic listening performance: a pedagogical translanguaging perspective
  26. A latent profile analysis of Chinese EFL learners’ enjoyment and anxiety in reading and writing: associations with imaginative capacity and story continuation writing performance
  27. Effects of monolingual and bilingual subtitles on L2 vocabulary acquisition
  28. Task complexity, task repetition, and L2 writing complexity: exploring interactions in the TBLT domain
  29. Expansion of verb-argument construction repertoires in L2 English writing
  30. Immediate versus delayed prompts, field dependence and independence cognitive style and L2 development
  31. Aural vocabulary, orthographic vocabulary, and listening comprehension
  32. The use of metadiscourse by secondary-level Chinese learners of English in examination scripts: insights from a corpus-based study
  33. Scoping review of research methodologies across language studies with deaf and hard-of-hearing multilingual learners
  34. Exploring immediate and prolonged effects of collaborative writing on young learners’ texts: L2 versus FL
  35. Discrepancy in prosodic disambiguation strategies between Chinese EFL learners and native English speakers
  36. Exploring the state of research on motivation in second language learning: a review and a reliability generalization meta-analysis
  37. Japanese complaint responses in textbook dialogues and ordinary conversations: learning objects to expand interactional repertoires
Sign up now to receive a 20% welcome discount
Institutional Access
How does access work?
Have an idea on how to improve our website?
Please write us.
© 2025 De Gruyter Brill
Downloaded on 23.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/iral-2022-0127/html
Scroll to top button