Investigating the impact of self-pacing on the L2 listening performance of young learner candidates with differing L1 literacy skills

3Citations
Citations of this article
23Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

In online environments, listening involves being able to pause or replay the recording as needed. Previous research indicates that control over the listening input could improve the measurement accuracy of listening assessment. Self-pacing also supports the second language (L2) comprehension processes of test-takers with specific learning difficulties (SpLDs) or, more specifically, of learners with reading-related learning difficulties who might have slower processing speed and limited working memory capacity. Our study examined how L1 literacy skills influence L2 listening performance in the standard single-listening and self-paced administration mode of the listening section of the Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL) Junior Standard test. In a counterbalanced design, 139 Austrian learners of English completed 15 items in a standard single-listening condition and another 15 in a self-paced condition. L1 literacy skills were assessed via a standard reading, non-word reading, word-naming, and non-word repetition test. Generalized Linear Mixed-Effects Modelling revealed that self-pacing had no statistically significant effect on listening scores nor did it boost the performance of test-takers with lower L1 literacy scores indicative of reading-related SpLDs. The results indicate that young test-takers might require training in self-pacing or that self-paced conditions may need to be carefully implemented when they are offered to candidates with SpLDs.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Eberharter, K., Kormos, J., Guggenbichler, E., Ebner, V. S., Suzuki, S., Moser-Frötscher, D., … Kremmel, B. (2023). Investigating the impact of self-pacing on the L2 listening performance of young learner candidates with differing L1 literacy skills. Language Testing, 40(4), 960–983. https://doi.org/10.1177/02655322221149642

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free