Intervention Analysis and Listening Comprehension Strategy Instruction: Insights from Clinical Supervision


  •  Amir Rakhshan    
  •  Massood Yazdani Moghaddam    
  •  Gholamreza Abbassian    

Abstract

The present study sought to investigate the effects of adapting the intervention provision framework put forward by John Heron, entitled Six-Category Intervention Analysis, into strategy instruction on listening comprehension performance of EFL learners. This model of intervention provision, having its genesis in clinical supervision, can regulate the verbal behavior and actual sentences used by teachers to intervene in language learning contexts. 175 Iranian intermediate level EFL learners participated in the study. The learners were divided into five 35-member groups including control; written mediation in which no oral intervention was provided; authoritative intervention in which the teacher suggested what had to be done, provided information, or confronted the students; facilitative, in which the teacher drew out ideas, solutions, or self-confidence; and synergetic authoritative-facilitative interventions. These groups received listening comprehension strategy instruction on three strategies of “guessing the meanings of unfamiliar words from the context”, “listening for gist”, and, “understanding cohesive devices”. Preliminary English Test was employed to assess the performance of language learners on their listening comprehension. Results indicated that the application of Six-Category Intervention Analysis while providing strategy instruction induced significant changes in the performance of the groups. In general, facilitative intervention and synergetic authoritative-facilitative intervention groups outperformed the control, written mediation, and authoritative intervention groups.



This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.
  • ISSN(Print): 1923-869X
  • ISSN(Online): 1923-8703
  • Started: 2011
  • Frequency: bimonthly

Journal Metrics

Google-based Impact Factor (2021): 1.43

h-index (July 2022): 45

i10-index (July 2022): 283

h5-index (2017-2021): 25

h5-median (2017-2021): 37

Learn more

Contact