IKEDA, Maiko, Ph.D. TAKEUCHI, Osamu, Ph.D. (Kansai University, Japan)

1. Self-regulated EFL Learning Emerging Through Collaborative Learning: Implications for Metacognitive Strategy Intervention October, 16. 2015 Alpen-Adria Universität, Klagenfurt IKEDA, Maiko, Ph.D. TAKEUCHI, Osamu, Ph.D. (Kansai University, Japan)

2. 1. Literature Review - Importance of metacognitive strategies in L2 autonomous learning (e.g., Flavell, 1979; Wenden, 1998) - Effectiveness of the intervention of metacognitive strategies? ( d =0.24 ) (eg., Plonsky, 2011)

3. 1. Literature Review • need of “other-regulation” for using metacognitive strategies and becoming autonomous learners (Ikeda, 2008, 2013) “Please let us continue to study English under your supervision.” (Ikeda, 2008)

4. 1. Literature Review - need of “other-regulation” (Ikeda, 2008, 2013) [ Explaining how external reinforcement was important for the Participant PSMN1’s learning ] To incorporate the new ways of learning (=using metacognitive strategies), I want to have quizzes, assignments, in–class activities, etc. through which I must use these metacognitive strategies taught. I need to put myself in the situation of “I must do.” （Ikeda、2013)

5. 1. Literature Review Cyclic model of learning Intervention of Metacognitive Strategies [ in-class ] Autonomous learning [ out-of-class ] Collaborative learning （Sumi & Takeuchi, 2013)

6. 1. Literature Review Collaborative/Cooperative Learning Positive Interdependence Individual Accountability Equal Participation Simultaneous Interaction (Johnson, Johnson & Holubec, 1993; Kagan, 1988)

7. 1. Literature Review Collaborative vs. Cooperative 1) Degree of teachers’ control 2) Degree of students’ responsibilities (Dooly, 2008; McCafferty, Jacobs, & Iddings, 2006)

8. 1. Literature Review Effectiveness of collaborative learning Autonomous learning? 1) Learners’ affective factors 2) Achievement of a specific task (e.g., Baleghizadeh & Timcheh-Memar, 2011; McCormick & Donato, 2000; Nassaji & Swain, 2000).

9. 1. Literature Review Complex Dynamic Systems Theory (Larsen-Freeman & Cameron, 2008, p. 25) “When an individual participates in a group, the group as a system both affects and is affected by the individual,”

10. 2. Research Question In a series of collaborative learning activities, (1) does autonomous EFL learning emerges (or does not emerge)? (2) how does it emerge (or does not emerge) through the interplay of individual characteristics and contextual factors?

11. 3.1 Participants • 31 Japanese univ. EFL learners • TOEFL 517（SD 38.9) • Experience of SA • 2 Prerequisite English courses • （5 courses at 1st grade）

12. 3.2 Intervention Metacognitive Strategies＋ Other strategies based on 0xford (2011), Ikeda (2013)

13. 3.2 Intervention Intervention of metacognitive strategies (MS) (30 mins.) a) Introduction of strategies b) Collaborative learning c) Reflection sheet (O’Malley & Chamot, 1990)

14. 3.2 Intervention Collaborative learning • in a group of 4 or 5 • (members were changed every 2 weeks) • task: list the examples of metacognitive • strategies introduced and discuss which • one(s) you can adopt to your own learning • → report the discussion results to the class

15. 3.2 Intervention [Week 8: Reflecting the daily learning regularly (macro) ] A: Do you think your English has improved since April? B: Well, as for speaking, no. It’s because I have less chances to communicate with my English here than last year when I was studying abroad. C: I agree with you, but I think my overall English ability has improved because I recently marked a higher score in TOEIC than before. So I think the materials and my way of learning is OK so far. D: Without taking such an external exam, it’s hard to reflect whether my English ability has improved or not. A: I don’t know. I think my English has improved a little bit. I am going to take an internship program overseas during next summer and having an interview. Oh, I’m getting so nervous about it. Anyway, for this, I sometimes do some listening activities by watching English movies with English subtitles. It is useful to me to improve or keep my English skills. D: Good for you! Since we only participate English classes and do assignments of these courses [rather than using English in our daily life anymore,] the courses which give me many assignments help improve my English. …..

16. 3.2 Data Collection & Analysis Inventory１： Affective Factors - Motivation - Self-efficacy - Anxiety Metacognitive Intervention (11 weeks） Reflection sheet of CL - what they discussed - what they think of their own out-of-class learning - Motivation / Anxiety - Interest in Topic Inventory２： Change in the use of metacognitive strategies (Ikeda & Takeuchi, 2014) Questionnaire： perceptions of collaborative learning (Ueki & Takeuchi, 2012)

17. 4. Results & Findings

18. 4. Results & Findings M= 3.00 SD=0.608 Yes, very much. Not at all.

19. 4. Results & Findings

20. 4. Results & Findings post-intervention questionnaire: Change of E. learning by Collaborative learning Aki: Yes. I could have a (clearer) objective to learn E. Koh: No. I thought the others’ ways of learning E. was interesting, but I don’t think of adopting them into my own learning.

21. 4. Results & Findings Motivation

22. 4. Results & Findings Anxiety

23. 4. Results & Findings Interest in Topics

24. 4. Results & Findings Interest in Topics ③ About how to improve our reading skills, I couldn’t think of any ideas other than reading a lot. ⑩ About where we can learn English, I can’t think of any ideas (specific in a sense) other than classroom. ⑥ The topic was abstract somehow.

25. 4. Results & Findings ① Compared to the other group members, I spend less time on learning E., butI am busy with sth else. After I finish things I must do, I will spend more time. ② It was interestingto find out the difference of the other members’ goals of learning E. from mine, but it didn’t influencemy way of learning. Interest in Topics ④ It was interesting to discuss how to improve speaking skills, but we didn’t know about writing skills. ⑥ I know that review is important, but I don’t have time to do so. Also, it may not a good idea to spend too much time on reviewing. ⑦ We didn’t think of how to reflect how much our E. has improved (esp. writing skills). ⑩ During the semester, I am busy with studying and doing part-time job, and don’t have time (and motivation) to visit E. café..

26. 4. Results & Findings post-intervention questionnaire: Importance of the members of Collaborative Learning Aki: Yes. People who are good at leading the discussion. Koh: Yes. People who have similar experiences to mine, who haven’t been abroad (except SA).

27. 5. Limitations 1) Data on autonomous learning beyond the class (e.g., study logs) 2) Characteristics of Collaborative learning （guarantee of Individual Accountability） 3) More data on the interaction of learners with their learning environment

28. 6. Conclusion In a series of collaborative learning activities, (1) autonomous EFL learning emerges to some extent, and (2) with learners’ strong belief, autonomous learning may not emerge.

29. 7.1 Implications ・ Pedagogical： consider learners’ belief ・ Research： consider the method(s) of data collection 　　（study logs, CDST）

30. Refereces Baleghizadeh, S., Timcheh-Memar, A., and Timcheh-Memar, H. (2011). A sociocultural perspective in second language acquisition: The effect f high-structured scaffolding versus low-structured scaffolding n the writing ability f EFL learners. Reflections on English Language Teaching, 10, 43-54. Dooly, M. (2008). Constructing knowledge together. In M. Dooly, (Ed.), Telecollaborative language learning: A guidebook to moderating intercultural collaboration online. (pp. 21-44). Bern: Peter Lang. Flavell, J.H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34, 906-911. Ikeda, M. (2007). EFL reading strategies: Empirical studies and an instructional model. Tokyo: Shohakusha. Ikeda, M. (2008). Use of LMS at university (2): From other- to self- regulation. In O. Takeuchi (Ed.), The development of CALL. Tokyo: Shohakusha. Ikeda, M. (2013). How do learners incorporate the metacognitive strategies taught in the classroom into their strategy repertoires? Journal of Foreign Language Studies, 8, 115-131.

31. References Ikeda, M. & Takeuchi, O. (2014). Do learners' affective factors influence the effectiveness of metacognitive strategy intervention? The 17th World Congress of Applied Linguistics (AILA’14) Brisbane, Australia. Johnson, D.W., Johnson, R.T., & Holubec, E.J. (1993). Circles of learning: Cooperation in the classroom (4th ed.). Edina, MN: Interaction. Kagan, S. (1988). Cooperative learning. San Juan Capistrano, CA: Resources for Teachers. Larsen–Freeman, D., & Cameron, L. (2008). Complex systems and applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. McCafferty, S.G., Jacobs, G.M., & Iddings, A.C.D. (2006). Cooperative learning and second language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. McCormick, D. E., & Donato, R. (2000). Teacher questions as scaffolded assistance in an ESL classroom. In J.K. Hall & L.S. Verplatse (Eds.), Second and Foreign Language Learning through Classroom Interaction. (pp. 183-201). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Nassaji, H., & Swain, M. (2000). Vygotskian perspective on corrective feedback in L2: The effect of random versus negotiated help on the learning of English articles. Language Awareness, 9, 34-51.

32. 参考文献 O’Malley, J.M., & Chamot, A.U. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Oxford, R.L. (2011). Teaching and researching language learning strategies. Harlow, England: Pearson Longman. Plonsky, L. (2011). The effectiveness of second language strategy instruction: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 61, 993-1038. Sumi, S., & Takeuchi, O. (2013). The cyclic model of learning: An attempt based on the DBR in an EFL context. In J.C. Rodriguez, & C. Pardo-Ballester (Eds.), Design-based research in CALL.. (pp. 157-181). CALICO. Ueki, M., & Takeuchi, O. (2012). Validating the L2 motivational self system in a Japanese EFL context: The interplay of L2 motivation, L2 anxiety, self-efficacy, and the perceived amount of information. Language Education and Technology, 49, 1-22. Wenden, A. (1998). Metacognitive knowledge and language learning. Applied Linguistics, 19, 515-537.