Cover not available

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

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload Book EPUB
authorization required

Chapter 8
Using metacognitive strategies to induce phase shifts

A complex systems approach to L2 listening instruction

 | Northern Illinois University
 | Purdue University
Published online: 13 February 2018
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.49.08bec
Abstract
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.
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • Complexity theory and language development
  • Critical features of complex systems
  • Systems and timescales in L2 instruction
  • Complexity theory, listening, and metacognition in the classroom
  • The original study
  • A critical self-analysis using complexity theory: Design problems from a complexity perspective
  • Re-conceptualizing the research questions
  • Designing studies and interpreting results with CAS theory
  • Conclusion
  • Note
  • References
References (34)
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. Google Scholar logo with link to Google 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 logo with link to 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 logo with link to 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. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bybee, J. (2006). From usage to grammar: The mind’s response to repetition. Language, 82(4), 711–733. Google Scholar logo with link to Google 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 logo with link to Google Scholar
Dörnyei, Z. (2009). Individual differences: Interplay of learner characteristics and learning environment. Language Learning, 59, 230–248. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ellis, N. C. (1998). Emergentism, connectionism, and language learning. Language Learning, 48, 631–664. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2008). The dynamics of second language emergence: Cycles of language use, language change, and language acquisition. Modern Language Journal, 92, 232–249. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goh, C. (2000). A cognitive perspective on language learners’ listening comprehension problems. System, 28, 55–75. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2008). Metacognitive instruction for second language listening development: Theory, practice and research implications. RELC Journal, 39(2), 188–213. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hasan, A. S. (2000). Learners’ perceptions of listening comprehension problems. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 13, 137–153. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hohenberger, A., & Peltzer-Karpf, A. (2009). Language learning from the perspective of nonlinear dynamic systems. Linguistics, 47(2), 481–511. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Holland, J. H. (1998). Emergence: From chaos to order. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Holt, R. F. (2011). Enhancing speech discrimination through stimulus repetition. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 54, 1431–1447. Google Scholar logo with link to Google 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 logo with link to Google Scholar
Klein, W., & Perdue, C. (1997). The basic variety (or: Couldn’t natural languages be much simpler?). Second Language Research, 14, 301–347. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Larsen-Freeman, D. (1997). Chaos/complexity science and second language acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 18(2), 141–165. Google Scholar logo with link to Google 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. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Larsen-Freeman, D., & Cameron, L. (2008). Complex systems and applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to 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. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lorenz, E. N. (1963). Deterministic nonperiodic flow. Journal of the Atmospheric Sciences, 20, 130–141. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thelen, E., & Smith, L. B. (1994). A dynamic systems approach to the development of cognition and action. Cambridge, MA: The MIT PressGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thomson, R. (2012). Improving L2 listeners’ perception of English vowels: A computer-mediated approach. Language Learning, 62(4), 1231–1258. Google Scholar logo with link to Google 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) Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
van Geert, P. (1994). Vygotskian dynamics of development. Human Development, 37, 346–365. Google Scholar logo with link to Google 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. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vandergrift, L. (1998). La métacognition et la compréhension auditive en langue seconde. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 1, 83–105.Google Scholar logo with link to 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. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2003). From prediction through reflection: Guiding students through the process of L2 listening. Canadian Modern Language Review, 59, 425–440. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2004). Listening to learn or learning to listen? Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24, 3–25. Google Scholar logo with link to Google 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. Google Scholar logo with link to Google 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. Google Scholar logo with link to Google 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. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Dickinson, Paul
2020. Understanding participation in CALL vocabulary tasks through complexity theory. In CALL for widening participation: short papers from EUROCALL 2020, ► pp. 57 ff. DOI logo
Godwin-Jones, Robert
2019. Re-orienting CALL through the lens of complexity theory. In CALL and complexity – short papers from EUROCALL 2019, ► pp. 151 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 26 november 2025. 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.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue