Chapter 1

1

Chapter I

THE PROBLEM* please use Arial 12, pages which start a chapter are counted

but numbering should not be seen. Like this page, it’s counted

but number should not be seen.

1.1 Introduction

The world today sits on a knowledge-based economy where man

conscientiously seeks to become globally competitive. Since 21st

century knowledge and skills are more published in English

and the artificial intelligence of computerization is based on

the English language, English has turned out to be the “lingua

franca” of the world (rephrase this sentence in such a way that

the term English won’t be repeatedly mentioned in near

succession). Hence, communicative competence in English, the

ability to employ the target language in an appropriate manner, as well

as the capacity to suitably respond to various types of conversations

along with familiarity of speaking rules and detailed knowledge of

syntax and lexis (Ellis, 1985), is basic to survival today.

The Philippines acknowledges the fact that to be globally

competitive, the need to strengthen its educational system especially

in the aspect of communication and the strengthening(look for

2

another term for strengthening) of the four macro skills as basic

components of the English language are urgent (ANY STUDY OR

DATA TO SUPPORT SUCH CLAIM? PLEASE INCLUDE IT). If the

country aims to level up with the global standard, it is imperative to

exert more effort in improving the quality of life of its people through

education.

At Capitol University, training students to become globally

competitive is translated into attaining higher levels of communicative

competence in English. This is evidenced by the “Speak English”

policy; well maintained and sustained related laboratories (i.e. Speech

Laboratories, Writing Laboratory, Computer Aided Language Learning

Laboratories); the use of English as medium of instruction in all

subjects, except Filipino; and support for the dynamic and continuous

faculty development.

Specifically, in teaching students at the College of Education,

teachers are concerned about how to accelerate the development of

the students’ English proficiency (You used communicative

competence in previous paragraph and at the start of this

chapter, what differentiates it with the term English

proficiency?) by focusing on each of the macro skills (listening,

reading, speaking and writing) of communication through specific

subjects. (reconcile the terms you are using from the first

3

paragraph til this part, esp. communicative competence,

English proficiency, macro skills..make sure the right terms are

used)

Among the four macro skills in communication, listening is one

of the aspects of the subject, Interactive English: Listening, Speaking

and Grammar (otherwise known as English 3a in the College of

Education). It could be inferred that this course encourages teacher

trainees to develop a high level of listening skills especially with

the English language as the medium of instruction of the academe.

(listening, reception strategies are introduced in this part of

your chapter 1. Perhaps you can find a way to introduce it in

your earlier paragraphs but still maintaining the thought of

these paragraphs.)

In communication, listening is the dimension on receiving

messages. Received data undergo decoding which eventually make or

unmake the meaning that is attached to the original message. So, it is

more imperative that the source gives appropriate attention to how

messages are received as they are expressed and delivered to the

receiver/s. A number of reception strategies or external messages

(Frey, Botan, Friedman, & Kreps, 1991) are observable and recordable

(how is this last sentence relevant to the previous sentences in

4

the paragraph and the paragraph that follows? Is it relevant in

this part of the paragraph?).

Reception is always linked to communication such that

communication is a two-way process, sending and receiving

(rephrase this sentence). This process makes communication an

active interaction among interlocutors not only because it transmits

internal messages but also because it is coupled with external

messages. Reception plays a significant role in the communication

process because it shows that the receiver is never passive. The

interlocutors cannot actually gauge the mind of the receiver as far as

how much information, understanding or learning he has received from

the sender. However, his gestures and manner of speaking will speak

for his ability to understand inputs.

The recipients of the message naturally exhibit reception

strategies and (is it reception strategies and external messages

or reception strategies or external messages?) external

messages that play an active role in building and expressing meaning

and delivering their message to others which in a way would indicate

their current level of understanding.

Exhibiting skills in expressing meaning and in the delivery of

message entails oral proficiency skills. Oral proficiency pertains to

individual competency in employing language to perform a specific

5

communicative purpose. In this study, it refers to the degree or level

with which a student can speak English.           

In the context of classroom learning, reception strategies or

external messages in communication enable students to productively

express meaning and deliver messages to others. Reception subsumes

listening in a face – to – face discussion, in which this study is focused

on. The specific reception strategies and external messages under

consideration, includes: global reprise, specific reprise, hypothesis

testing, and kinesics, uptaking and faking provide positive or negative

evidence of comprehension and thus serve to establish high and low

proficiency level among students. The term “reception” typically

denotes linguistic input in opposition to production or linguistic output.

Thus, this study took place in the context of the classroom

(English 3a); and focused on the various reception strategies or

external messages displayed by students in the class to pave the way

for a more student – centered learning process. The interpersonal

communication took place between the teacher (as the source) and

the students (as the receivers). It could be inferred that the receivers

in this study are non-native English speakers. These non-native English

receivers/listeners should be conscientious about learning the right

thing and getting the right information so that in return, they would be

able to give accurate, wholesome and quality information in English.

6

Hence, two aspects are explored in this study: the aspect of message

comprehension (in listening or receiving; whilst exhibiting reception

strategies or external messages) and the validation of message

comprehension through message production (which in this case is in

the spoken form) that may be triggered through systematic soliciting

of disclosures through verbal interaction.

(there seems to be no coherence with the previous

paragraph and this next paragraph. Make sure to establish a

connection between them.

The teacher-student communication patterns in classes differ.

The difference is in accordance to the methods and approaches used.

It has been a common observation among college instructors that most

of the students who graduated high school from the barangays exhibit

more difficulty in expressing themselves orally in English (why is this

singled out? Is the school where they graduated in HS a

variable?).

Furthermore, these students (are all your respondents in

this study graduates of barangay high schools?) hardly take the

initiative to express their confusion about the topic by asking questions

or requesting for clarifications in class. Thus, oftentimes, teachers have

to resort to administering feedback through a written quiz or oral

recitation that merely fall under the simple recall level (referring to

7

Benjamin Bloom’s Taxonomy of Comprehension). And when the graded

recitation moves to the higher levels of comprehension, the students

just withdraw with shyness or fall into silence. In effect, instructors find

that in employing this traditional method of teaching, students may

become enriched with jargons in the subject they are teaching but

without an authentic person to person interaction. The interpersonal

communication between student and teacher may just fall on the lower

levels of evaluating the contents of the text or course. This is a

scenario which is not considered favorable to total person

development.

The researcher, being one of the college instructors of Capitol

University, believes that there is a great need to look into the receptive

strategies employed by students in class. It is one way wherein a

teacher can have a better understanding of his students’ needs. It is

hoped that through this study, the students would be provided with a

special program that would develop their skills to elicit input or ask for

clarifications. In this sense, reception strategies in interactive listening

would enable them to: develop their communication skills in English

by actually communicating in interactive situations; facilitate

comprehension in any listening activity by soliciting input and

negotiating meaning in exhibiting higher level of listening proficiency

(which is considered highly desirable); and surmount the challenge of

8

learning in the academe and as would-be teachers of tomorrow

(you’ve got to reestablish the fact that your respondents were

education students or at least just make it explicit again in this

paragraph coz the paragraph mentioning the respondents are

several pages before this). This study may extend, intend and

revolutionize approaches used in developing the listening skills of the

students in the subject, Interactive English: Listening, Speaking and

Grammar at the College of Education.

1.2 Statement of the Problem (this should be 1.4) THE

QUESTIONS BELOW COULD PROBABLY CHANGE AS I CONTINUE

READING YOUR STUDY.

            This study aimed to identify and record all reception strategies

used by the Capitol University (CU) second year college Education

students to achieve comprehension or solicit further input in a

discussion during the second semester of the school year 2010-2011.

Specifically, it sought answers to the following questions:

1. What are the variables included in the testing of

respondents’ oral proficiency level through Texas Oral

Proficiency Test (TOPT)?

9

2. What is the English oral proficiency level of the respondents

in terms of function, content, vocabulary, grammar,

comprehensibility and fluency?

3. What types of reception strategies are used by students

while engaged in group discussion?

4. What is the frequency of the students’ use of the different

types of reception strategies considering their English Oral

Proficiency Test?

5. Is there a significant difference between high oral proficiency

(HOP) and Low oral Proficiency (LOP) levels of students?

6. Is there a significant relationship between the respondents’

reception strategies used and their oral proficiency level?

7. What interactive listening program can be developed to

enhance the reception strategies of the students?

1.3 Hypotheses (this should be 1.5)

Ho1 There is no significant difference between students with

High Oral proficiency level and Low Oral proficiency Level.

Ho2 There is no significant relationship between the students’

Oral Proficiency and the reception strategies used by the students.

1.4 Significance of the Study (this should be 1.6)

10

            This study would benefit the following:

            Commission on Higher Education (CHED). Being the

agency in-charge of the tertiary education in the country, the

Commission on Higher Education could employ the findings of this

endeavor for whatever innovations (perhaps you should improve

on the phrase “for whatever innovations”. Can this phrase

apply to changes, advancement in the teaching of English?)

they would take to strengthen the teaching of English in the

tertiary level of the Philippine educational system by giving attention

and focus on interactive communication particularly in the listening

skills of students. This skill, as part of the macro skills, should also be

given importance and should have its place in the curriculum.

            Students.  Primarily, they would benefit from this study in as

much as their reception strategies will be identified which would serve

as basis for the creation of an instructional design to enrich their

reception strategies. They would be guided clearly as to how they are

supposed to interact and deal with interactions (rephrase this

statement). The lesson guides will most benefit the students as it will

give them the idea on proper reception strategies which will eventually

result to a beautiful output or produc (rephrase this statement.

make the last two sentences more direct and concise).

11

            Instructors. The college instructors will also be helped in this

study because through the students’ skill in soliciting input or

clarifications, they will be able to receive the appropriate feedback that

could signal them to redirect or conduct their lectures and discussions

in a manner that would enhance effective communication between

them and their students (rephrase statement. Start with “Results

of this study would help them….).

            Administrators. Through the findings of this study, the

administrators will be able to discover the students’ needs in

expressing their ideas, and therefore can support in the preparation of

an instructional design to address the specific needs of the students in

interactive activities.

            Educational Researchers. Through the findings of this study,

educational researchers can gain insights and gather information

which may be valuable to their research endeavors.

1.5 Scope and Limitations of the Study (this should be 1.7)

            This study focused mainly on the reception strategies of the

Second Year students in English 3A (Interactive English – Speaking,

Listening and Grammar) class in the College of Education, Capitol

University, Cagayan de Oro City during the second semester of school

year 2010-2011.

12

The reception strategies were identified as students engaged in

interactive activities in group and individual discussion. This study

mainly looked into the oral proficiency level of the respondents in

terms of function, grammar, comprehensibility, vocabulary, fluency,

and content but this does not include the Intelligence Quotient (IQ) of

the respondents.

Further, this study is focused on the relationship of the

reception strategies used by respondents to their oral proficiency

level. The gender, family background, social status, and age of the

respondents do not have any bearing in the study (what do you

mean do not have any bearing? If it means that they were not

included then say, “Other variables such as gender, family

background, social status and age of respondents were not

included”).

1.6 Theoretical Framework (this should be after the

Introduction. This should be 1.2)

            This study is anchored on the following theories: Interactionist

Theory of Ellis (1995), Krashen’s Comprehensible Input or Input

Hypothesis (1985) and Flowerdew and Miller’s Interactive Model

Theory of Rumelhart (2005) (is rumelhart”s theory on reading?

Have you not found any theory on reception or listening?).

13

Ellis, in his Interactionists’ Learning Theory (how is this theory

applied in your study?), emphasizes the joint contribution of the

linguistic environment (did you look into the environment as one

of your variables? How is linguistic environment defined by

ellis?) and the learner’s internal mechanism in language development,

and that learning results from an interaction between the learner’s

mental abilities and the linguistic input. He substantiated this theory in

his Discourse Theory, which he posits that through communicating with

others, students accomplish actions in the world and develop the rules

of language structure and use (can you look further into his

discourse theory?).

Again, Interactionist’s’ learning theory greatly capitalizes the

contribution of the linguistic environment, that is, the students’

classroom where communication sets in and language learning takes

place. The learner’s internal mechanism in language development,

which is referring to his stored language input, is maximized and is

being tested for use and once employed, interaction would set in

where interlocutors learn not only from each other but also from the

medium used. In relation to the study, this theory supports the idea

that learning results from an interaction between the learner’s mental

abilities (but one of your study’s limitations is that it does not

include your respondents’ IQ.)and the linguistic input. Linguistic

14

input practically is denoted with the term “reception” (is linguistic

input here really denoting to “reception”?).

Furthermore, Krashen, in his Input Hypothesis or

Comprehensible Input, a part of his Comprehension Hypothesis Model

of L2 Learning (Five Hypotheses), posits that 'humans acquire

language in only one way - by understanding messages or by receiving

"comprehensible input"; (Krashen, 1985)

These and his other theories are very much significant to the

study such that it strengthens the argument that communication is a

two-way process, which is not a manipulation by the sender of the

message but that the receiver is also an active participant of the

process. There could never be interaction without the receiver, one

who gets the inputs after which, he gives his output. Reception

strategies are the styles by which the receiver employs on

communication, and in this particular study, in class discussion or

interaction, to deliver and express the students’ understanding of the

message/s received.

           Vandergrift (1997) posits that reception is in juxtaposition with

listening. They stand side by side in communication as it allows

communicator to project what the listener has listened to via his

reception styles (reception strategies) by which he delivers or

expresses the message received.

15

            Block (1997) believes that the best listeners keep an open

mind, search for new ideas and integrate what they hear with what

they already know. They evaluate points of view and pose questions

that aid speakers to expand their ideas.

            The most basic social interactions are asking questions from

which learners get closer to their intended meaning and this aids

comprehension. Asking questions for clarification, verification and

correction and cooperating with the interlocutor is therefore imperative

for language learners.

This study extends mainly two of the principles of language

teaching and learning. These are the Linguistic Principle on

communicative competence and the cognitive principle on strategic

investment. Foremost, communicative competence is the goal of a

language classroom, instruction needs to point toward all its

components: organizational, pragmatic, strategic, and psychomotor.

Communicative goals are best achieved by giving due attention to

language use and not just usage, to fluency and not just accuracy, to

authentic language and contexts, and to student’s eventual need to

apply classroom learning to previously unrehearsed contexts in the

real world (Brown, 2000).

Second, the cognitive principle on strategic investment provides

that successful mastery of the language will be due to a large extent to

16

a learners’ own personal investment of time, effort, and attention to

the language in the form of an individualized battery of strategies for

comprehending and producing the language. (Brown, 2000).

Finally, the Interactive Model Theory of Rumelhart (1975)

provides the top-down and bottom up models of listening. He posits in

this model that language is processed simultaneously at different

levels. To have concrete understanding of the information being heard,

there is an interaction among phonological syntactic, semantic, and

pragmatic information in the parallel process of listening. The

hierarchical listening models - top-down and bottom-up models

substantiated such theory thereby encouraging language teachers to

incorporate those processes in the teaching of listening.

Top-down listening refers to the use of background knowledge in

understanding the meaning of the spoken message. Background

knowledge consists of context, that is, the situation and topic, and co-

text, what came before and after.

While in the bottom-up listening, the learner only understands

very few words from the incoming signal. Thus, the learner still gets

lost for he lacks focus even with the influence of his knowledge about

the context. It is deduced that listening skills should valuably be given

utmost consideration in the teaching process (Sinodlay, 2011).

1.7 Conceptual Framework (this should be 1.3)

17

              Effective listening-speaking interaction is a critical

communication skill wherein the listeners’ associate new information

with what is already known; they question the accuracy of what they

hear, they paraphrase or stop the speaker and request the message be

repeated or explained when it is not meaningful.

In social interaction, the listener uses different sets of

observable strategies to clarify meaning and to further interaction.

Littlewood, as cited by Villamin (1996) stresses that for a person to be

communicatively competent he must develop skills and strategies for

using language to communicate meaning as effectively as possible in

concrete situations. In addition, Vandergrift (1997) avers that the roles

of the speaker and listener pass back and forth and occasionally

overlap. Interlocutors use two kinds of strategies: (a) production

strategies to resolve a communication problem caused by lack of

linguistic knowledge or to further communications through

clarifications, repetitions, or modifications; and (b) reception strategies

to clarify meaning or to further conversation by moves that signal

comprehension to the interlocutor.

            Reception strategies (Ellis, 1995), are strategies used by

listeners to clarify meaning, signal understanding or advance

conversation. In this study, Vandergrifts’(1997) adaptation of Rost and

Ross’(1991) formulation of reception strategies used in interactive

18

listening will be used in the analysis of the CU College of Education

Second Year Students’ performance in interactive listening activities.

Table 1 below shows such strategies.

Table 1. Reception Strategies in Interactive Listening (Vandegrift 1997, adapted from Rost and Ross, 1991)

Reception Strategies

Definitions/Explanations Examples

Global reprise

Listener asks for outright repetition, rephrasing, or simplification of preceding utterance. This may be a statement that nothing was understood.

What was the question? I’m not sure what you mean. Pardon?

Specific reprise

Listener asks a question referring to a specific word, term or fragment that was not understood in the previous utterance.

Where? Is that dinner?

Hypothesis testing

Listener asks specific questions about facts in the preceding utterance to verify that he or she has understood and/or what he or she is expected to do.

… the last book?

Kinesics Listener indicates a need for clarification by means of kinesics and/or para-linguistics.

Throws arm in the air, look up, chuckle, shake head, confused looks, blank looks, squint eyes, Furrowed eyebrows, intense looks, shake head, etc.

Uptaking Listener uses kinesics and verbal or other nonverbal signals to indicate to the interlocutor to continue, that he or she understands.

Nods, ‘mmmmmmm’ ‘ah’, ‘oh’ Laughing at the appropriate  time

Faking Listener sends uptaking signals or noncommittal responses in order to

Agreeing to a “What” question

19

avoid seeking clarification, and admitting to the interlocutor that he or she has not understood.

Comprehension itself is not externally observable. Mentors

cannot peer into a learner’s brain through a little window of some kind

and empirically observe what is exactly stored there after someone

else has said something. One can only infer that certain things have

been comprehended or not through student’s overt responses (verbal

or nonverbal) to speech. It is therefore significant for teachers to

design techniques in such a way that students’ responses indicate

whether or not comprehension has taken place.

            Given the importance of interactive listening in ordinary social

discourse, teachers need to look into its significance in second

language classrooms. Regular classroom practice that equips students

with useful strategies would facilitate the development of interactive

listening skills and further enhance second language learning and

acquisition.

            In situation where target language is seldom used outside the

classroom, the students’ exposure to the target language is therefore

mainly in the classroom, the kind of input and interaction that is made

available is particularly important (Tsui, 1995). In the language

classroom, be it first, second or foreign language, interactions are even

20

more significant because language is at once the subject of study as

well as the medium for learning. When students listen to the teacher’s

instruction and explanations, when they express their views, answer

questions and carry out tasks and activities, they are not only learning

about the language but also putting the language that they are

learning to use.

            Guided by the aforementioned theories and ideas and through

an interaction analysis, the students will be given interactive activity

through an interview to draw out their oral proficiency levels as well as

analyze the reception strategies displayed by students in group

discussions. Through that undertaking, an appropriate interactive

listening program can be created. Through this program, the students

are hoped to eventually develop their reception strategies in order to

actively participate in interactions to enhance comprehension and

language learning.

21

RECEPTION STRATEGIES

Global RepriseSpecific Reprise

Hypothesis TestingKinesicsUptaking

FakingCommunication

Strategies

INTERACTIVE ACTIVITIES

WITH TEXAS ORAL PROFICIENCY TEST

ORAL PROFICIENCY

LEVEL OF STUDENTS

FunctionContent

VocabularyGrammar

ComprehensibilityFluency

INTERACTIVE LISTENING PROGRAM

22

Figure 1The Schematic Diagram of the Study

1.9 Definitions of Terms (this should be 1.8)

To facilitate better comprehension of the concepts and

important ideas in this work, the following terms are conceptually and /

or operationally defined:

Communicative competence – This term refers to the

respondents’ ability to employ the target language in an appropriate

manner, as well as the capacity for suitably responding to various

types of conversations operating different registers along with

familiarity with the rules of speaking (turn-taking patterns), and

detailed knowledge of syntax and lexis (Ellis, 1985).

Communication strategies. These refer to strategies used by

listeners to clarify meaning, and signal understanding to advance

conversation which the researcher lumped as one reception strategy

and included in the reception strategies interactional checklist.

Comprehensibility. This term refers to the respondents’ skills

in pronunciation, expression and sentence structure in the process of

measurement using Texas Oral Proficiency Test in the interactive

activities.

Content. This refers to the adequacy and organization of

information by the respondents which is also included in the

23

performance proficiency feature to be measured by the researcher

using Texas Oral Proficiency Test.

Fluency. This pertains to the ease and speed of the flow of

speech of the respondents at the time of conducting the study as

measured by the researcher using the Texas Oral Proficiency Test.

.

Function. Refers to the respondents’ communicative purpose in

conveying their ideas in the interactive activities.

Grammar. This refers to the respondents’ skill in the use and

structure of sentence as they give their ideas where Texas Oral

Proficiency Test measures their number of errors in syntax, meaning

and use.

Interaction. It refers to a co-operative effort among

participants doing something collectively (Tsui, 1995).

Interaction Analysis. It is a research procedure used to

investigate classroom communication. It involves a system of

categories to record and analyze the different ways in which teachers

and students use language (Ellis, 1995).

Interactive Listening. A listening situation plays an active role

in cooperation with the interlocutor to fulfill the goals of the interaction

(Vandergrift, 1997).      

24

Linguistic Competence. It is the basic knowledge of linguistic

forms such as specific sounds, grammar patterns and vocabulary

terms in the traditional skills of listening, reading, writing, and

speaking (Savignon, 1983). In this study, it simply means the

knowledge of grammar such as the use of correct verb

forms/tenses/subject-verb concordance, pronouns, genders, modifiers,

as well as voice of verbs.

Listening. It is a complex skill that requires attention and

energy. It involves recognition, short-term memory, and inference. The

listener recognizes the sounds and the words he engages in a process

of selection on two levels –selecting sounds and words and grouping

them into meaningful units as well as selecting the information

relevant to his purpose in listening (Villamin, et al. 1996).

Oral Proficiency. This pertains to an individual competency in

employing language to perform a specific communicative purpose. In

this study, it refers to the degree or level with which a student can

speak English. This is gauged using Texas Oral Proficiency Test through

the oral interview designed to determine one’s oral expression or

verbal skills in terms of fluency, content, vocabulary, grammar,

function and comprehensibility.            

25

Organization of Ideas. This refers to the expression of ideas in

a smooth, clear and logical sequence with a clear beginning;

substantial body and logical ending (Prejoles, 1997).

Proficiency. It consists of the learner’s knowledge of the target

language; it can be considered synonymous with ‘competence’.

‘Proficiency’ can be viewed as linguistic competence or communicative

competence. Second language proficiency is usually measured in

relation to native speaker proficiency (Ellis, 1995).

Reception Strategies. These refer to the strategies used by

respondents who listened to instructions and questions given to clarify

meaning, signal understanding or advance conversation (Vandergrift,

1997).

Vocabulary. Refers to the respondents’ appropriateness of

word choice for the level. This is also measured using Texas Oral

Proficiency Test.

.