







































Putri Anggraeni, et al / Journal of English Language Teaching 6 (1) (2017) 

107 

 

 
ELT FORUM 9 (2) (2020) 

 

Journal of English Language Teaching 

 
http://journal.unnes.ac.id/sju/index.php/elt 

 
 

Listening self-efficacy beliefs, L2 listening proficiency, and listening strategy 

training: An experimental study 

 

Hamideh Hamdi Khosroshahi1, Ali Merç2  
 
1,2Anadolu University, Turkey 

 

Article Info 
________________  
Article History: 

Received in 15 

October 2020  
Approved in 29 

November 2020 

Published in 30 

November 2020 

________________  
Keywords:  
Self-efficacy;  
Listening proficiency; 
Cognitive strategies; 
Metacognitive strategies 
____________________ 

 

 

 

 

 

Abstract  
___________________________________________________________________ 
Self-efficacy plays an important role in language learners’ performances in language 
learning. Studies report that explicit teaching of strategies, self-efficacy, and better 

learner performance are interdependent concepts. This entails the fact that language 

teachers should focus on the first two in order to increase the learners’ performance. 
The aim of this study is to find out how teaching cognitive and metacognitive 

strategies affect EFL learners’ performances and self-efficacy beliefs in listening 
comprehension tasks. Ninety students participated in this study, thirty of whom were 

part of the control group. Their listening self-efficacy and listening proficiency were 
measured before and after a four-week training. During the intervention sessions, 

instructors taught cognitive and metacognitive strategies in an explicit way, which 

included teacher modeling and teacher feedbacks. The results revealed that learners’ 
listening proficiency scores increased while their self-efficacy scores did not change 

significantly after the training. These findings led to the conclusion that low self-
efficacy does not necessarily lead to low listening proficiency. Another finding was 

that teaching only cognitive and metacognitive strategies does not help learners with 
their self-efficacy in a short time period. Implications and suggestions for L2 listening 

are provided considering the results of the study. 

 

 
 © 2020 Universitas Negeri Semarang 

  
 Correspondent Address: p-ISSN 2252-6706 | e-ISSN 2721-4532 

Anadolu Universtiesi Egitim Fakutesi  

26470 Tepebasi, Eskisehir, Turkey  

E-mail: amerc@anadolu.edu.tr  

http://issn.pdii.lipi.go.id/issn.cgi?daftar&1333515478&1&&
http://issn.pdii.lipi.go.id/issn.cgi?daftar&1576658845&1&&


Hamideh Hamdi Khosroshahi, Ali Merç/ ELT Forum 9 (2) (2020) 

108 

 

INTRODUCTION 

Language learners’ individuality is gaining more importance in the ESL/EFL context in recent years, 

and researchers believe that there are many differences among individual learners, concerning their 

perceptions in the context of language learning (Dörnyei, 2005). One such difference emerges in 

language learners’ self-perceptions or what scholars call their ‘self-efficacy beliefs’. Bandura (1997) 

claims that learner’s self-efficacy have a crucial role in their overall success. Hsieh and Schallert (2008) 

also argue that self-efficacy deals with learners’ conscious or sub-conscious beliefs about how well they 

can complete a task. According to Mills, Pajares, and Herron (2006), self-efficacy plays a vital role in 

learning and students with high self-efficacy beliefs are more prepared to learning challenges. Savignon 

(1983) highlights the role of learners’ feelings and claims that they are more important factors 

compared with others such as intelligence or teaching method. Self-efficacy beliefs can vary through 

different language skills and tasks.  

Listening comprehension provides the aural input that learners receive during their 

communications or in classroom setting which makes proficiency in this skill fundamentally important 

for learners. Hasan (2000) claims that “listening comprehension provides the right conditions for 

language acquisition and development of other language skills” (p.138). The importance of both self-

efficacy and listening tasks intrigues the implication that higher self-efficacy would result in better 

performance in listening comprehension tasks, and in return, better listening performance would lead 

students to have higher perceptions of themselves while confronting challenging listening tasks. 

Furthermore, teaching learning strategies particularly metacognitive strategies has been 

reported to increase learners’ performances in listening tasks. As Klingner, Vaughn and Boardman 

(2015) argue improving listening strategies help learners perform their listening activities more 

efficiently; moreover, language learners who utilize metacognitive strategies of planning, evaluating 

and monitoring, tend to achieve their goals with ease. This happens because learners do better at 

storing and processing new information, they apply better listening strategies to each task, (Riding & 

Rayner, 2013). It can be inferred that teaching strategies to learners will also improve their self-efficacy 

as they will start to perform better. As mentioned before, this higher self-efficacy will improve their 

performances even more since a successful listening comprehension skill directly “depends on 

learners’ self-efficacy for listening, on their confidence in their ability to make sense of the input to 

which they are exposed” (Graham, 2011, p. 113). Al-Azzemi and Al-Jamal, (2019) claim that despite 

its valid importance to language learning, listening comprehension has been an undervalued skills in 

second language learning research.  

Although a number of research studies have been conducted to find out the possible effect of 

listening self-efficacy, metacognitive strategy training, and listening comprehension, the possible 

relation among these variables is a genuine gap in the ESL/EFL literature. As a contribution to the 

literature to fill-in this gap, this study attempts to shed light onto the possible relationships among the 

aforementioned important concepts in ESL/EFL contexts. Considering the current gap and the 

interdependent roles of self-efficacy, listening comprehension performance, and listening strategies, 

the aim of this study is to investigate the correlation between these variables in a Turkish context. This 

study tries to find out how teaching listening comprehension strategies would affect learners’ self-

efficacy and listening comprehension. Within this purpose, the following research questions were 

formed: 1) Does teaching listening strategies have an effect on Turkish EFL learners’ listening 

proficiency scores?; 2) Does it have an effect on their listening self-efficacy?; 3) Is there any correlation 

between listening proficiency scores and listening self-efficacy scores of Turkish EFL learners? 

 

Literature Review  

Self-efficacy  

In 1970s, Albert Bandura defined self-efficacy as learners’ beliefs in whether they have enough ability 

to perform a task. He claims that self-efficacy is the core cognitive feature that can affect a person’s 

behavior and these beliefs “vary across activity domains and situational conditions rather than 

manifest uniformly across tasks and contexts in the likeness of a general trait (Bandura, 2012, p.13). 

Bandura (1995) identifies four factors in increasing self-efficacy: experiencing successes or mastery, 

observing peers’ success or modelling, receiving verbal persuasion, and enhancing one’s physiological 

states. The first and the most important source of self-efficacy, mastery, refers to the learner’s previous 

experiences of failure or success. Mastering a task will increase the self-confidence of the learner in 

the related area whereas a failure will cause its decline. The next source of self-efficacy is the modeling 

source. According to Schunk (1987), when learners feel that they can be similar to their models and 



Hamideh Hamdi Khosroshahi, Ali Merç/ ELT Forum 9 (2) (2020) 

109 

 

gain success by following them, they get more motivated. Observing successes that are gained by 

sustained effort boost learners’ beliefs in themselves. The third source of self-efficacy is available when 

learners are persuaded that they are capable and can complete a task successfully. In fact, teachers or 

parents can strengthen students’ beliefs, which would lead them to put more effort on learning tasks. 

Graham (2007) claims that we need to make learners notice that their success or lack of success are 

due to their strategy uses, not their being talented or not. The last source of self-efficacy comes from 

affective and physical states. Depression, for instance, decreases an individual’s confidence in their 

capabilities, and they may show poor performances.  

Self-efficacy has been the focal point of numerous studies in the field of second language 

learning. A group of researchers have attempted to describe the relationship between self-efficacy and 

overall language learning (Gahunga, 2009; Magogwe, & Oliver, 2007; Mahyuddin, Elias, Muhamad, 

Noordin and Abdullah 2006; Mills, Pajares, & Herron, 2007; Raoofi, Tan & Chan, 2012; Woodrow, 

2011). These studies have revealed that there is a significant positive relationship between self-efficacy 

and overall language learning success. For example, Raoofi et al. (2012) shows that learners’ self-

efficacy profiles can be a strong predictor for achieving language skills. Mills et al. (2007) investigated 

the L2 French students’ academic performance in relation with their self-efficacy and found out that 

those who perceived themselves as proficient in using effective metacognitive strategies were more 

successful in French. On the contrary, Anyadubalu, (2010) studied the relationship among anxiety, 

self-efficacy, and students’ performances in the English language and revealed that there was no 

significant relationship between self-efficacy and English language performance. Although this study 

shows no relationship, many studies that highlight the positive relationship between self-efficacy and 

using learning strategies can be an indicator of importance of self-efficacy and students’ beliefs about 

themselves (Diseth, 2011; Kim et al., 2015; Pajares, 2002; Schunk, 1991; Anam & Stracke, 2016; 

Wilfong, 2006; Wong, 2005; Yang, 1992; Yang, 1999; Yang & Wang, 2015). The findings of these 

studies reveal a significant positive relationship between self-efficacy and the using learning strategies 

by students. For instance, Anam & Stracke (2016) studied on Indonesian students' strategy use in 

learning English and its relationship with their self-efficacy beliefs and found out that students with 

high self-efficacy use different strategies compared with those who have low self-efficacy.  In another 

study, Yang and Wang (2015) demonstrated how explicit strategy training increased students’ self-

efficacy and strategy use. Bonyadi, Nikou, and Shahbaz, (2012) explored the relationship between 

Iranian students’ self-efficacy and strategy use; however, the results showed no significant relationship 

between them. Nosratnia et al. (2014) also found out that metacognitive awareness is a better predictor 

for successful strategy use than self-efficacy beliefs.  

Another group of studies have attempted to explore the correlation between students’ self-

efficacy and their anxiety level (Çubukçu, 2008; Ghonsooly & Elahi, 2010; Huerta et al., 2017; Kirmizi 

& Kirmizi, 2015; Martinez, Kock & Cass, 2011; Mills, Pajares & Herron, 2006; Torres & Turner, 

2016; Woodrow, 2011). Significant negative correlation has been found between students’ anxiety and 

their level of self-efficacy in Torres and Turner (2016). Some studies explored the relationship between 

anxiety and self-efficacy regarded with students’ writing skills and they all reported that writing self-

efficacy is a strong predictor for writing anxiety (Huerta et al., 2017; Kirmizi & Kirmizi, 2015; 

Martinez et al., 2011; Woodrow, 2011). Mills et al. (2006) conducted a similar research on students 

reading and listening skills which had similar results. Çubukçu (2008) revealed that there was no 

significant correlation between self-efficacy and anxiety; she argues that students’ anxiety could be 

due to educational settings, not their self-efficacy. Overall majority of these studies have found out 

that self-efficacy has positive effects on individuals as they claim that those with high levels of self-

efficacy could deal better with different tasks, unfamiliar contexts, and interpersonal relationships; 

students with high self-efficacy tend to endure more in difficulties and challenges. They argue that self-

efficacy causes higher level of motivation, since it makes students conscious of their progress in a skill. 

Most of the studies support the strong positive relationships between self-efficacy and learning 

strategies and academic achievement among students, as suggested by Zimmerman and Cleary (2006). 

Students with high self-efficacy are more active in the learning process, in other words, they try harder, 

persist longer, and have fewer negative emotional reactions in facing difficulties. Finally, it can be 

claimed that students with higher self-efficacy have more control over their cognitive processes in 

general.  

 

 

 



Hamideh Hamdi Khosroshahi, Ali Merç/ ELT Forum 9 (2) (2020) 

110 

 

Self-efficacy and Listening Comprehension  

Listening skills are considered to be crucial for success in language learning. According to Dunkel 

(1986), the main path to reach proficient speaking is through listening mastery. Rubin (1994) lists a 

few factors contributing to listening comprehension one of which is the listener’s emotions that the 

listener undergoes in the learning context. In a recent inquiry, Graham (2006) studied a group of 

intermediate learners of French in England and conducted a questionnaire to find out which language 

skill they had been more successful. The results revealed that very few students had seen listening as 

a fulfilled skill; following the interviews from the same group, it is noted that there were statements of 

demotivation regarding listening (Graham, 2006). Such findings have led a group of scholars to study 

the effect of self-efficacy and anxiety on learners’ performance of listening comprehension. For 

example, Chen (2007) compared scores of listening self-efficacy of Taiwanese students with their L2 

listening anxiety and found out that second language listening self-efficacy could predict the listening 

scores better than second language listening anxiety. Mills et al. (2006) found out that self-efficacy in 

listening was positively correlated with listening proficiency and negatively correlated with listening 

anxiety, accordingly, it can be expected that with higher level of self-efficacy, students will experience 

less anxiety.  

Apart from lowering anxiety, Arnold (2000) believes that self-concept can affect overall 

listening comprehension, the change of which as MacIntyre and Gardner (1991) argue, can be 

challenging; however, it is worth it. Boosting self-efficacy and listening performance accordingly can 

be achieved through teaching listening strategies explicitly, which aims at boosting learners’ sense of 

control and expectations of success (Chamot, 1987; Nunan, 1999; Yeldham, 2009). Researchers argue 

that low levels of self-efficacy regarding listening may be caused by the techniques used by teachers to 

teach listening in the classroom (Chambers, 2007; Field, 2008; Graham, 2006). They note that 

listening is considered as an activity to be ‘delivered’ while it should be considered as a skill that needs 

to be developed.  

In most L2 teaching contexts, teachers emphasize more on quantity of practice than quality 

and they rely on repetition of the listening texts and never implement pedagogic principles (Graham 

& Santos, 2013). The importance of listening comprehension, learners’ self-perception and necessity 

of teaching strategies have been the focus of several studies. Graham (2011) notes that both self-

efficacy and performance of listening can be improved by explicit teaching of listening strategies which 

can happen through increasing learners’ sense of control and making them aware of the relationship 

between strategies used and the outcome achieved. Graham and Macaro (2008) showed that learners 

who received listening strategy instruction scored better on a listening test, and their self-efficacy for 

listening also had improved. The same result was reported by Goh and Taib (2006) who claim that 

strategy instruction and discussing strategy uses with students improved their listening strategy 

knowledge and their confidence. Strategies like verbalization or modelling by a teacher are also 

believed to improve self-efficacy among the learners; Schunk and Rice (1983) reported that modelling 

listening strategies leads to higher self-efficacy and better listening performance.  

In addition to cognitive strategies, metacognitive strategies are also believed to increase L2 

learners’ performance (Flavell, 1979; Schoenfeld, 1987). Metacognitive knowledge is about the self-

regulation of language learning such as planning, monitoring, and evaluating the learning process 

(O’Malley & Chamot, 1990; Wenden, 1998). Since listening is a receptive language skill that does not 

push learners to produce language, researchers believe that the use of metacognitive strategies in 

listening comprehension can activate learners’ language knowledge while listening (Goh & Taib, 

2006; Graham & Macaro, 2008; Vandergrift & Tafaghodtari, 2010). It is believed that proficient 

listeners use more metacognitive strategies, which lead to better listening performances. Students need 

to know what they need to achieve, and which strategies can be the most effective.  

Mastery of listening comprehension as well as having high self-efficacy play key roles in overall 

language proficiency. There is also a codependency between high achievements in listening 

comprehension tasks and learners’ high self-efficacy. While Çubukçu (2008) claims that the reason for 

anxiety among Turkish students is not due to their low self-efficacy but the overall educational setting 

in Turkey, it is assumed that explicit strategy training, modelling, and guiding students in self-

regulating themselves will improve learners’ listening comprehension performance, which will result 

in higher self-efficacy and lower anxiety levels. Therefore, this study aims to find out if teaching 

strategies and improving  metacognitive abilities will alleviate learners’ anxiety along with increasing 

their listening comprehension and self-efficacy or not. 

 



Hamideh Hamdi Khosroshahi, Ali Merç/ ELT Forum 9 (2) (2020) 

111 

 

METHODS 

Reseach Design 

This study is a quasi-experimental design with non-equivalent pre-test and post-test control groups. In 

quasi-experimental research design, as opposed to the true experimental designs, the subjects in the 

experiment are assigned to groups in a non-random fashion (Creswell, 2012). Therefore, a quasi-

experimental design was utilized in the present study as there were two experimental groups and one 

control group, the participants of which were not chosen randomly; all three groups took pre-test and 

post-test, the experimental groups received treatment whereas the control group did not. 

 

Participants 

For the purpose of the current study, convenience sampling was used. Ninety students from 

elementary and pre-intermediate levels of a language school located in Eskisehir, Turkey participated 

in the experiment. These levels were preferred because higher-level students might have already been 

familiar with some metacognitive strategies. Before the implementation, a placement test (Macmillian 

Straightforward Placement Test) was held to check the homogeneity of the learners. Participants were 

between the ages of 14 and 16 and the gender of the learners were almost similar in number: 43 males 

and 47 females. Thirty students from B1 level were assigned as the control group and the remaining 

60 were placed in two experimental groups. All of the participants in the control group were in B1 

level, and the experimental group participants were in two levels of A2 and B1 according to CEFR 

that were in different classes.  

 

Trainers 

Three trainers applied the treatment sessions in the study: the trainer of the B1 experimental group 

was a native speaker teacher from the USA. There were an Iranian teacher for the A2 experimental 

group, and a Turkish teacher for the B1 control group. The trainers of the experimental groups were 

already assigned to the related groups by the school administration, which means they were not 

selected by the researcher. Fortunately, the trainers of the experimental groups were also IELTS 

instructors, therefore, they were already familiar with the listening strategies they were going to teach. 

Before the pre-test, a meeting was held with the trainers, and the aim and approach of the study was 

explained to them. Before each treatment session, the listening tasks were given to them, and the 

trainers of the experimental groups were given a list of the related strategies they were going to teach 

to the groups. They taught metacognitive strategies such as planning, and self-monitoring along with 

listening cognitive strategies like guessing, note taking, inferencing, catching the gist of the text as well 

as listening for details. The trainers modeled all of these strategies before asking students to do them 

on their own. 

 

Instruments 

Three instruments were used to collect data for this study: 

• English Listening Self-efficacy Questionnaire  

• Preliminary English Test (PET) 

• Key English Test (KET) 

• British Council Listening Comprehension Tasks 

 

English Listening Self-efficacy Questionnaire 

Learners’ listening self-efficacy beliefs were measured by the Turkish version of an English listening 

self-efficacy questionnaire (See Appendix), which was developed by Rahimi & Abedini  (2009). This 

questionnaire measures learners’ confidence and self-perception during listening comprehension tasks 

and in communicating with native speakers and teachers. The original questionnaire was adapted for 

Turkish students in Turkish by using back-translation method. The questionnaire was first translated 

to Turkish and the translated version was retranslated into English to find out the flaws. The last 

version, which was in Turkish, was then edited and confirmed by an expert in the field. In order to 

prevent any misinterpretation of the questions, the questionnaire was piloted on seven learners who 

were not part of the study. The final questionnaire consisted of 18 Likert-scale items and the 

participants needed to read and decide if they: (1) strongly disagree (2) disagree (3) have no idea (4) 

agree (5) strongly agree. 

 



Hamideh Hamdi Khosroshahi, Ali Merç/ ELT Forum 9 (2) (2020) 

112 

 

Preliminary English Test (PET) 

PET is developed by Cambridge ESOL called the Cambridge Main Suite, which measures the 

participants’ proficiency in B1 level and is designed to be used for teenagers. Considering the age and 

level of the participants of this study, PET was used to measure the participants’ listening 

comprehension in B1 level. This test has three main sections: reading/writing, listening, and speaking. 

The listening part consists of four parts ranging from short exchanges to longer dialogues and 

monologues. It measures learners’ understanding dialogues and monologues on daily topics. The 

listening section has 25 items and takes 35 minutes for the test takers to complete. 

 

Key English Test (KET) 

KET is developed by Cambridge ESOL called the Cambridge Main Suite, which measures the 

participants’ proficiency in A2 level and is designed to be used for teenagers. Considering the age and 

level of the participants of this study, KET was used to measure the participants’ listening 

comprehension in A2 level. KET was used to measure the participants’ listening comprehension in 

A2 level. KET has three main sections of reading/writing, listening, and speaking. The listening part 

consists of five parts ranging from short exchanges to longer dialogues and monologues. The listening 

section has 25 items and takes 30 minutes. 

 

Listening Activities from British Council Website  

Teachers who participated in this study used listening activities from British Council Website for the 

treatment sessions to teach and model metacognitive strategies used during listening activities. This 

website was chosen since the activities were designed for PET and KET exams, which could prepare 

the participants for the post-test exam.   

 

Procedure  

At the onset of the study, a placement test was held to confirm the homogeneity of the participants in 

both control and experimental groups. Later, the questionnaire of listening self-efficacy was given to 

the participants, which took 10-15 minutes. Having finished the survey, the listening comprehension 

tests were given to the participants. The participants in the control group and B1 learners of the 

experimental groups took PET and the rest of the experimental group took KET. Both of the listening 

tests had 25 questions, which took 35 minutes to complete. During the following weeks, the 

participants in the experimental group were trained for one month, by giving them listening activities, 

which were taken from British Council website. The activities were given in every session and the 

trainers were informed about how to train the learners. During the training sessions, the metacognitive 

strategies were taught in the classes. Some other strategies such as listening for gist and the details 

were also practiced. They were also given hints on how to answer different types of listening questions 

(e.g. true-false, fill-in-the-blanks, multiple choices). Other strategies were also used by the trainers to 

increase participants’ self-efficacy. The strategies used for this purpose were adapted from Dörnyei 

(1994): giving affiliative motives, modelling the task first, and giving motivational feedback. 

Meanwhile, the control group was only receiving the activities and there were no instructions and no 

feedback given. To find out the efficacy of the treatments, after one month, the participants of both 

control and experimental groups were given a post-test. For the post-implementation session, students 

responded to the same questionnaire and took the listening test used for the pre-test.  

 

Data Analysis  

Quantitative data analyses were used to answer the three research questions posed for the purpose of 

the present experiment. To answer the first researh question, the learners’ pre-test and post-test scores 

from PET and KET were compared via the paired samples t-tests. To answer the second research 

question, similar to research question 1, paired samples t-test analysis was used. To learn if there was 

any correlation between learners’ post-test listening proficiency and listening self-efficacy scores of 

each group, as an answer to the third research question, Pearson’s correlation analysis was calculated. 

 

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION 

To have an overview of each group’s performance on pre- and post-tests, the mean scores are listed in 

Table 1. 

 

 



Hamideh Hamdi Khosroshahi, Ali Merç/ ELT Forum 9 (2) (2020) 

113 

 

 

Table 1. Descriptive Statistics of Pre and Post-training Scores of the Control Group and 

Experimental Groups in Listening Proficiency Test and Self-efficacy Questionnaire 

 Listening Proficiency Test Self-efficacy Questionnaire 

 Pretest Posttest Pretest Posttest 

  N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD N Mean SD 

Control Group 30 11 3 30 12 4 30 2.99 .78 30 3.31 .51 

A2 30 17 3 30 20 2 30 3.26 .50 30 3.28 .50 

B1 30 17 3 30 21 2 30 3.61 .34 30 3.58 .32 

 

Table 1 demonstrates the number of the participants, minimum and maximum scores, mean 

scores, and standard deviations of the control group and the experimental groups of A2 and B1, both 

before and after the training period. Considering the control group, we can notice a slight 

improvement in their listening comprehension scores; there is also a noticeable amount of 

improvement in their self-efficacy scores. In the experimental groups, the participants of A2 level are 

seen to have improved their listening comprehension scores and their self-efficacy as well; however, 

their self-efficacy improvement is not considerable. The participants of the experimental B1 group 

seems to have a noticeable rise in their listening comprehension scores while their self-efficacy scores 

have slightly declined.  

 

Strategy training and listening proficiency scores (RQ1) 

The first research question was to find out if teaching Turkish EFL learners metacognitive and 

listening strategies improves their listening proficiency in a significant way. As Table 1 shows, the 

mean scores of the experimental and control groups all improved in the post-training listening 

proficiency test. Paired Sample t-tests were also conducted to find out whether these improvements 

were significant. As Table 2 shows, there is no significant difference between the pre and post-test of 

control group (t (29)= -1.992, p=.056). As the analysis indicated, the control group had no progress 

during the one-month time span.  

 

Table 2. Paired Sample T-test Results of Listening Comprehension Pre-test and Post-test for 

Experimental and Control Groups 
 Paired Differences  

 

 

 

t 

 

 

 

 

df 

 

 

 

Sig.(2-

tailed) 

 

 

 

Mean 

 

 

Std. 

Deviation 

 

 

Std.Error 

Mean 

95% Confidence 

interval of the 

Difference 

Lower Upper 

Control Group pre 

and post-training 

self-efficacy 

 -1.267 3.483 .636 -2.567 .034 -1.992 29 .056 

A2 pre and post-

training listening 

scores 

 -3.067 2.449 .447 -3.981 -2.152 -6.860 29 .000 

B1 pre and post-

training listening 

scores 

 -3.967 2.512 .459 -4.905 -3.029 -8.650 29 .000 

 

However, results show that there is a significant difference between pre- (M=17.30, SD= 3.109) 

and post-test (M=20.37, SD= 2.297) scores of A2 level experimental group (t (29) = -6.860, p< .001). 

There is also a significant difference between listening pre- (M= 17.30, SD=3.271) and post-test 

(M=21.27, SD= 2.212) of B1 level experimental group (t (29) = - 8.650, p<001). This means that 

teaching listening strategies helped Turkish EFL learners to make a significant progress in their 

listening proficiency tests. This finding confirms the statement that teaching cognitive and 

metacognitive listening strategies explicitly can improve the learners’ listening comprehension 

performance (Flavell, 1979; Goh & Taib, 2006; Graham & Macaro, 2008; Graham, 2011; Macaro, 



Hamideh Hamdi Khosroshahi, Ali Merç/ ELT Forum 9 (2) (2020) 

114 

 

2008; Schoenfled, 1987; Schunk & Rice, 1983). It can also be understood that listening comprehension 

needs explicit training and development, and learners need to know that they can control their 

performance by implementing appropriate strategies (Graham, 2011). Among the various strategies 

used was modelling of the instructor, which can be notified as an effective way to guide students (Goh 

& Taib, 2006; Schunk & Rice, 1983). Metacognitive strategies, which were also included in the 

training sessions, had noticeable roles played in the post-tense results since their engage learners during 

the listening tasks and help them to process the task deeper (Goh & Taib, 2006; Graham & Macaro, 

2008; Vandergrift & Tafaghodtari, 2010). 

 

 

Strategy training and self-efficacy (RQ2) 

The second research question was about finding out if teaching listening strategies to Turkish EFL 

learners improved their listening self-efficacy in a significant way. Considering the pre- and post-

training mean scores of the three groups, a slight improvement was noticed (Table 3). 

 

Table 3. Paired Samples T-test Table of Listening Self-efficacy Questionnaire Scores of Pre-training 

and Post-training for Experimental and Control Groups 

 Paired Differences  

 

 

 

    t 

 

 

 

 

df 

 

 

 

Sig. 

(2-

tailed) 

 

 

 

Mean 

 

 

Std. 

Deviation 

 

 

Std.Error 

Mean 

95% Confidence 

Interval of the 

Difference 

Lower Upper 

Pair 

1 

Control Group pre and 

post-training self-

efficacy 

-.32281 .89327 .16309 -.65636 .01074 -1.979 29 .057 

Pair 

2 

A2 pre and post-training 

self-efficacy 
-.02807 .45249 .08261 -.19703 .14089 -.340 29 .736 

Pair 

3 

B1 pre and post-training 

self-efficacy 
.02982 .43018 .07854 -.13081 .19046 .380 29 .707 

 

To find out if the self-efficacy improvements were significant or not, paired samples t-tests were 

conducted for the groups. As Table 3 shows, there is no significant difference between the pre and 

post-training scores of control group (t (29) = -1.979, p= .057). Considering the A2 level experimental 

group, there is no significant difference between their pre- and post-training scores either (t (29) = -

.340, p=.736). The same result can be seen for the B1 level group, and there is no significant difference 

between their pre- and post-training scores (t (29) = .389, p=.707). These results reveal that teaching 

listening strategies had no effect on experimental groups’ listening self-efficacy. According to 

Chambers (2007), Field (2008), and Graham (2006), teaching listening strategies can increase the 

learners’ control over the listening tasks, which leads to higher self-efficacy in them. This claim has 

been approved by Graham (2011), Graham and Macaro (2008), Macaro (2008), and Schunk and Rice 

(1983); however, the finding of this study contradicts with these findings. Turkish EFL learners had 

no significant improvement over their self-efficacy scores. According to Bandura (1995), one of the 

most important sources of self-efficacy is mastery, or in other words, the amount of successful 

experiences that learners have had during their educational period. It can be inferred that learners need 

more success to be able to have higher self-efficacy. Another source of self-efficacy according to 

Bandura (1995) is learners’ physiological status, which includes their affective filters. Sparks and 

Ganschow (1991) claim that affective filters consist various emotions like stress, anxiety and lack of 

self-confidence. Similarly, Çubukcu (2008) has recently reported general anxiety among Turkish 

learners, which she relates to the educational system of Turkey. It can be inferred that anxiety affects 

learners’ overall self-efficacy beliefs. 

 

Listening proficiency scores and self-efficacy (RQ3) 

The third research question was to find out if there was any significant correlation between listening 

proficiency scores and listening self-efficacy scores. Table 4 presents the results of the correlation 

analysis.  

 



Hamideh Hamdi Khosroshahi, Ali Merç/ ELT Forum 9 (2) (2020) 

115 

 

Table 4. Correlation between Groups’ Post-training Listening Proficiency Scores and Their Post-

training Listening Self-efficacy Scores 

 N Correlation Sig. 

Control Group Listening Post-test and Post-training self-efficacy            30    .588 .001 

A2 Listening Post-test and Post-training self-efficacy            30    .085 .654 

B1 Listening Post-test and Post-training self-efficacy            30   -.041 .831 

 

Table 4 indicates that there is no statistical correlation between A2 level group’s listening 

proficiency post-test and their post-training listening self-efficacy scores (r=.085); the same result can 

be seen for the B1 group (r= -.041). Considering the control group, though, we can see a significant 

moderate positive relationship between their listening proficiency post-test and their post-training 

listening self-efficacy scores (r= .588, p<05).  This finding contradicts with the studies reporting a 

significant positive relationship between self-efficacy and language performance (Gahunga, 2009; 

Magogwe, & Oliver, 2007; Mahyuddin, et al. 2006; Mills, et al., 2007; Raoofi, Tan, & Chan, 2012; 

Woodrow, 2011). Nevertheless, it is in parallel with Anyadubalu (2010) and Bonyadi et al. (2012) 

who had found no significant correlation between performance and self-efficacy. Anyadubalu (2010), 

found out that the learners who had lower self-efficacy did not necessarily have a poor performance 

in learning English; however self-efficacy was negatively correlated with anxiety. In other words, self-

efficacy does not affect language performance on its own; but higher self-efficacy can lower the 

anxiety, which leads to a better performance. 
 

CONCLUSION  

This study attempted to find out if explicit teaching of listening strategies would increase learners’ 

listening comprehesion scores. The results revealed that the experimental groups had a significant 

improvement in their scores. This implies that the outcome of the listening comprehension tasks would 

be noticeably better if teachers train their learners explicitly in what strategies can be more efficient for 

a particular task and how to implement those strategies. Learners should also be able to monitor their 

actions and evaluate themselves to find out whether they are on the right path or not. As students 

might be confused at the onset of the lessons and considering the fact that metacognitive strategies 

might be intangible for the learners, teachers’ modelling the strategies can be essential during the 

training sessions. Teachers also need to observe their learners carefully to provide efficient feedback 

to them while they are implementing the strategies. To sum up, language teachers need to raise their 

students’ consciousness on the nature of the listening skills and the needed strategies to perform the 

tasks. They should model those strategies, introduce and practice new strategies frequently, and 

remind students to plan and set goals and conduct self-evaluation (Rubin, Chamot, Harris, & 

Anderson, 2007). Another finding of the study was that explicit teaching of strategies had no 

significant effect on learners’ self-efficacy, which led to the finding that there was no correlation 

between listening scores and self-efficacy scores of the experimental groups. Referring to Çubukçu 

(2008), general anxiety that is present in Tukish educational setting might lower learners’ self-efficacy, 

which calls for further research on the elements that cause the anxiety and the ways that the system 

can be revised to lower it. The anxiety factor is one of the factors that this study should have considered 

and controlled. A limitation of the study was the duration of  intervention sessions: the training period 

of the experimental groups took only one month, in a longer time span for training, the participants 

might increase their sense of mastery and accordingly their their self-efficacy scores.  

 

 

REFERENCES 

Al-Azzemy, A. F., & Al-Jamal, D. A. (2019). Evaluating cognitive, metacognitive and social listening 

comprehension teaching strategies in Kuwaiti classrooms. Heliyon, 5(2), e01264. Retrieved from 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e01264 

Anam, S., & Stracke, E. (2016). Language learning strategies of Indonesian primary school students: 

In relation to self-efficacy beliefs. System, (60), 1-10. Retrieved from 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2016.05.001 

Anyadubalu, C. C. (2010). Self-efficacy, anxiety, and performance in the English language among 

middle-school students in English language program in Satri Si Suriyothai School, Bangkok. 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2019.e01264
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2016.05.001


Hamideh Hamdi Khosroshahi, Ali Merç/ ELT Forum 9 (2) (2020) 

116 

 

International Journal of Human and Social Sciences, 5(3), 193-198. Retrieved from 

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.309.5940&rep=rep1&type=pdf 

Arnold, J. (2000). Seeing through listening comprehension exam anxiety. TESOL Quarterly, 34, 777–

786. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/3587791 

Bandura, A. (1995). Self-efficacy in Changing Societies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 

Retrieved from https:// https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511527692 

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: W. H.Freeman. 

Bandura, A. (2012). On the functional properties of perceived self-efficacy revisited. Journal of 

Management 38(1), 9–44. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0149206311410606 

Bidabadi, F. S., & Yamat, H. (2011). The relationship between listening strategies used by Iranian 

EFL freshman university students and their listening proficiency levels. English Language 

Teaching, 4(1), 26-32. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1080439.pdf 

Bonyadi, A., Nikou, F. R., & Shahbaz, S. (2012). The relationship between EFL learners' self-efficacy 

beliefs and their language learning strategy use. English Language Teaching, 5(8), 113-121. 

Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1079780.pdf 

Carrell, P. L, Gajdusek, L., and Wise, T. (1998). Metacognition and EFL/ESL reading. Instructional 

Science. 26(1), 87-112. Retrieved from 

https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1023/A:1003092114195.pdf 

Chambers, G. (2006). Developing listening skills in the modern foreign language. In N. Pachler, A. 

Redondo (Eds.), A practical guide to teaching modern foreign languages in the secondary school (pp. 62-

69). Routledge. Retrieved from http://golshanlc.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/A-

Practical-Guide-to-Teaching-of-Modern-Foreign-Languages.pdf#page=63 

Chamot, A. (1987). The Learning Strategies of ESL Students. In A. Wenden, & J. Rubin (Eds.), 

Learner Strategy in Language Learning (pp. 71-83). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc.  

Chen, H. Y. (2007). Relationship between EFL Learners' Self-Efficacy Beliefs and English 

Performance. Unpublished PhD thesis, The Florida State University.  Retrieved from 

http://purl.flvc.org/fsu/fd/FSU_migr_etd-3846 

Creswell, J. W. (2012). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and 

qualitative research (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson. 

Çubukçu, F. (2008). A Study on the correlation between self efficacy and foreign language learning 

anxiety. Journal of Theory and Practice in Education, 4(1), 148-158. Retrıeved from 

http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED502016.pdf 

Dornyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner: Individual differences in second language 

acquisition. New Jersey: Mahwah. 

Dunkel, P. A. (1986). Developing listening fluency in L2: Theoretical principles and pedagogical 

considerations. The Modern Language Journal, 70(2), 99-106. Retrieved from 

https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/327314.pdf?refreqid=excelsior%3Af09f2b94b408424f88ddc4

f08e05fd2a 

Flavell, J. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive development 

inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906–911. Retrieved from 

https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906 

Gahunga, O. (2009). Are self-efficacy, language learning strategies, and foreign language ability 

interrelated? The Buckingham Journal of Language and Linguistics, 2, 47-60. Retrieved from 

https://doi.org/10.5750/bjll.v2i0.14 

Ghonsooly, B., & Elahi, M. (2011). Learners' self-efficacy in reading and its relation to foreign 

language reading anxiety and reading achievement. Journal of English Language Teaching and 

Learning, 53(217), 45-67. Retrieved from https://www.sid.ir/FileServer/JE/1323201021703.pdf 

Goh, C.C.M.  & Taib, Y. (2006). Metacognitive instruction in listening for young learners. ELT 

Journal, 60, 222-232. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccl002 

Graham, S. (2006). Listening comprehension: the learners’ perspective. System, 34, 165–182. 

Graham, S. (2007). Learner strategies and self-efficacy: Making the connection. Language Learning 

Journal, 35(1), 81-93. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/09571730701315832 

Graham, S. (2011). Self-efficacy and academic listening. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 10(2), 

113-117. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2011.652634 

Graham, S., & Macaro, E. (2008). Strategy instruction in listening for lower-intermediate learners of 

French. Language Learning (58), 747–783. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-

9922.2008.00478.x  

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.309.5940&rep=rep1&type=pdf
https://www.jstor.org/stable/3587791
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511527692
https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0149206311410606
http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1080439.pdf
http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1079780.pdf
https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1023/A:1003092114195.pdf
http://golshanlc.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/A-Practical-Guide-to-Teaching-of-Modern-Foreign-Languages.pdf#page=63
http://golshanlc.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/A-Practical-Guide-to-Teaching-of-Modern-Foreign-Languages.pdf#page=63
http://purl.flvc.org/fsu/fd/FSU_migr_etd-3846
http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED502016.pdf
https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/327314.pdf?refreqid=excelsior%3Af09f2b94b408424f88ddc4f08e05fd2a
https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/327314.pdf?refreqid=excelsior%3Af09f2b94b408424f88ddc4f08e05fd2a
https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906
https://doi.org/10.5750/bjll.v2i0.14
https://www.sid.ir/FileServer/JE/1323201021703.pdf
https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccl002
https://doi.org/10.1080/09571730701315832
https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2011.652634
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2008.00478.x
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2008.00478.x


Hamideh Hamdi Khosroshahi, Ali Merç/ ELT Forum 9 (2) (2020) 

117 

 

Graham, S., & Santos, D. (2013). Selective listening in L2 learners of French. Language Awareness, 

22(1), 56-75.  

Hasan, A.S. (2000). Learners’ perceptions of listening comprehension problems. Language, Culture and 

Curriculum, 13, 137–153. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/07908310008666595 

Huerta, M., Goodson, P., Beigi, M., & Chlup, D. (2017). Graduate students as academic writers: 

writing anxiety, self-efficacy and emotional intelligence. Higher Education Research & Development, 

36(4), 716-729. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2016.1238881 

Kim, D. H., Wang, C., Ahn, H. S., & Bong, M. (2015). English language learners' self-efficacy profiles 

and relationship with self-regulated learning strategies. Learning and Individual Differences, 38, 136-

142. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2015.01.016 

Kirmizi, Ö., & Kirmizi, G. D. (2015). An investigation of L2 learners' writing self-efficacy, writing 

anxiety and its causes at higher education in Turkey. International Journal of Higher Education, 4(2), 

57-66. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1060569.pdf 

Klingner, J.K., Vaughn, S., Boardman, A. (2015). Teaching Reading Comprehension to Students with 

Learning Difficulties. (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford Publications. 

MacIntyre, P. D., & Gardner, R. C. (1991). Investigating language class anxiety using the focused 

essay technique. The Modern Language Journal, 75(3), 296-304. Retrieved from 

https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/328723.pdf?refreqid=excelsior%3Ada280cd34fd5e32d1542a

be58fc6c7c5 

Mahyuddin, R., Elias, H., Cheong, L. S., Muhamad, M. F., Noordin, N., & Abdullah, M. C. (2006). 

The relationship between students' self efficacy and their English language achievement. 

Malaysian Journal of Educators and Education, 21, 61-71. Retrieved from 

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.485.2420&rep=rep1&type=pdf 

Magogwe, J.M. & Oliver, R. 2007. The relationship between language learning strategies, proficiency, 

age and self-efficacy beliefs: A study of language learners in Botswana. System, 35, 338–352. 

Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2007.01.003 

Martinez, C. T., Kock, N., & Cass, J. (2011). Pain and pleasure in short essay writing: Factors 

predicting university students' writing anxiety and writing self‐efficacy. Journal of Adolescent & 

Adult Literacy, 54(5), 351-360. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1598/JAAL.54.5.5 

Mills, N., Pajares, F. & Herron, C. (2006). A reevaluation of the role of anxiety: self-efficacy, anxiety, 

and their relation to reading and listening proficiency. Foreign Language Annals, 39, 276-295. 

Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.2006.tb02266.x 

Mills, N., Pajares, F., & Herron, C. (2007). Self‐efficacy of college intermediate French students: 

Relation to achievement and motivation. Language Learning, 57(3), 417-442. 

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2007.00421.x 

Nosratinia, M., Saveiy, M., & Zaker, A. (2014). EFL learners' self-efficacy, metacognitive awareness, 

and use of language learning strategies: How are they associated. Theory and Practice in Language 

Studies, 4(5), 1080-1092. Retrieved from 

https://www.academia.edu/download/47373588/EFL_Learners_Self 

efficacy_Metacognitiv20160720-10430-i8kyqk.pdf 

Nunan, D. (1999). Second language teaching and learning. Boston: Heinle & Heinle. 

O'Malley, J. M. and Chamot, A.U. (1990). Learning Strategies in Second Language Acquisition. 

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Retrieved from https://books.google.com.tr 

Pajares, F. (2002). Self-efficacy beliefs in academic contexts: An outline. Retrieved from 

http://www.uky.edu/~eushe2/Pajares/efftalk.html 

Rahimi, A., & Abedini, A. (2009). The interface between EFL learners'self-efficacy concerning 

listening comprehension and listening proficiency. Novitas-Royal, 3(1), 14-28. 

Raoofi, S., Tan, B. H., & Chan, S. H. (2012). Self-efficacy in second/foreign language learning 

Contexts. English Language Teaching, 5(11), 60-73. Retrieved from 

http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1080058.pdf 

Riding, R., Rayner, S., 2013. Cognitive Styles and Learning Strategies: Understanding Style Differences in 

Learning and Behavior. Routledge. Retrieved from https://books.google.com.tr/books 

Rubin, J. (1994). A review of second language listening comprehension research. The Modern Language 

Journal, 78(2), 199-221. Retrieved from https://www.jstor.org/stable/329010 

Rubin, J., Chamot, A. U., Harris, V., & Anderson, N. J. (2007). Intervening in the use of strategies. 

Language Learner Strategies, 30, 29-45. Retrieved from 

https://doi.org/10.1080/07908310008666595
https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2016.1238881
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lindif.2015.01.016
http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1060569.pdf
https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/328723.pdf?refreqid=excelsior%3Ada280cd34fd5e32d1542abe58fc6c7c5
https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/328723.pdf?refreqid=excelsior%3Ada280cd34fd5e32d1542abe58fc6c7c5
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.485.2420&rep=rep1&type=pdf
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2007.01.003
https://doi.org/10.1598/JAAL.54.5.5
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944-9720.2006.tb02266.x
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2007.00421.x
https://www.academia.edu/download/47373588/EFL_Learners_Self%20efficacy_Metacognitiv20160720-10430-i8kyqk.pdf
https://www.academia.edu/download/47373588/EFL_Learners_Self%20efficacy_Metacognitiv20160720-10430-i8kyqk.pdf
https://books.google.com.tr/
http://www.uky.edu/~eushe2/Pajares/efftalk.html
http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1080058.pdf
https://books.google.com.tr/books
https://www.jstor.org/stable/329010


Hamideh Hamdi Khosroshahi, Ali Merç/ ELT Forum 9 (2) (2020) 

118 

 

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Vee_Harris/publication/27225122_Intervening_in_the_

Use_of_Strategies/links/0a85e5352dff5b429f000000/Intervening-in-the-Use-of-Strategies.pdf 

Schoenfeld, A. H. (1987). What’s all the fuss about metacognition. Cognitive science and mathematics 

Education, 189-215. Retrieved from https://books.google.com.tr/books. 

Schunk, D. H., & Rice, J. M. (1983). Strategy Verbalization Effects on Self-Efficacy and Listening 

Comprehension. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED233816.pdf 

Schunk, D. H. (1987). Peer models and children’s behavioral change. Review of Educational Research, 

57, 149-174. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.3102%2F00346543057002149 

Schunk, D. H. (1991). ‘Self-efficacy and academic motivation’. Educational Psychologist 26(3-4): 207–

31. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.1991.9653133 

Sparks, R. L., & Ganschow, L. (1991). Foreign language learning differences: Affective or native 

language aptitude differences? The Modern Language Journal, 75(1), 3-16. 

Torres, K. M., & Turner, J. E. (2016). Students’ foreign language anxiety and self-efficacy beliefs 

across different levels of university foreign language coursework. Journal of Spanish Language 

Teaching, 3(1), 57-73. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1080/23247797.2016.1163101 

Wenden, A. L. (1998). Metacognitive knowledge and language learning. Applied Linguistics, 19(4), 515-

537. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/19.4.515 

Wong, M. S. L. (2005). Language learning strategies and language self-efficacy: Investigating the 

relationship in Malaysia. RELC Journal, 36(3), 245-269. Retrieved from 

https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0033688205060050 

Woodrow, L. 2011. College English writing affect: Self efficacy and anxiety. System, 39, 510- 522. 

Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2011.10.017 

Yang, N. D. (1992). Second language learners' beliefs about language learning and their use of learning 

strategies: A study of college students of English in Taiwan. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, ation, 

University of Texas at Austin. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.26153/tsw/2033 

Yang, N.D. 1999. The relationship between EFL learners' beliefs and learning strategy use. System, 

27, 515-535. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(99)00048-2 

Yang, P. L., & Wang, A. L. (2015). Investigation the relationship among language learning strategies, 

English self-efficacy, and explicit strategy instructions. Taiwan Journal of TESOL, 12(1), 35-62. 

Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1078937.pdf 

Yeldham, M. A. (2009). Approaches to second language listening instruction: Investigating the'top-

down/bottom-up debate. Unpublished Doctoral dissertation, University of Melbourne, Australia. 

Zimmerman, B. J., & Cleary, T. J. (2006). Adolescents’ development of personal agency: The role of 

self-efficacy beliefs and self-regulatory skill. In F. Pajares, T. Urdan (Eds.), Self-efficacy beliefs of 

adolescents (pp. 45–69). Greenwich, CT: Information Age. Retrieved from 

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2006.05.002 

 

 
 

 

 

 

  

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Vee_Harris/publication/27225122_Intervening_in_the_Use_of_Strategies/links/0a85e5352dff5b429f000000/Intervening-in-the-Use-of-Strategies.pdf
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Vee_Harris/publication/27225122_Intervening_in_the_Use_of_Strategies/links/0a85e5352dff5b429f000000/Intervening-in-the-Use-of-Strategies.pdf
https://books.google.com.tr/books
http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED233816.pdf
https://doi.org/10.3102%2F00346543057002149
https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.1991.9653133
https://doi.org/10.1080/23247797.2016.1163101
https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/19.4.515
https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0033688205060050
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2011.10.017
http://dx.doi.org/10.26153/tsw/2033
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(99)00048-2
http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1078937.pdf
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2006.05.002


Hamideh Hamdi Khosroshahi, Ali Merç/ ELT Forum 9 (2) (2020) 

119 

 

APPENDIX 

A Questionnaire on EFL Learners' Self-efficacy about Listening Skill 

 

Name:                                                                             Age:  

1) I have a special ability for improving listening skill. 

 

Strongly 

Agree  
  

Agree  

 
  

No idea 

  
  

Disagree 

  
  

Strongly 

Disagree  
 

2)  In a listening practice, although I understand almost 

every word, the big problem is that I do not have the 

ability to keep all of them in my mind.  

Strongly 
Agree  

  

Agree  
 

  

No idea 
  

  

Disagree 
  

  

Strongly 
Disagree  

 

      

   3) I have the ability to concentrate on the content to  

which I listen.  

Strongly 
Agree  

  

Agree  
 

  

No idea 
  

  

Disagree 
  

  

Strongly 
Disagree  

 

      

   4) I believe that my proficiency in listening skill will 

improve very soon. 

Strongly 
Agree  

  

Agree  
 

  

No idea 
  

  

Disagree 
  

  

Strongly 
Disagree  

 

      

5) I am sure that if I practice listening more, I will get 

better grades in the course.  

Strongly 

Agree  
  

Agree  

 
  

No idea 

  
  

Disagree 

  
  

Strongly 

Disagree  
 

      

6) I can understand the tape in listening classes better 

than other students.  

Strongly 

Agree  
  

Agree  

 
  

No idea 

  
  

Disagree 

  
  

Strongly 

Disagree  
 

      

7) I cannot understand an English film without English 

subtitles.  

Strongly 
Agree  

  

Agree  
 

  

No idea 
  

  

Disagree 
  

  

Strongly 
Disagree  

 

      

8) No one cares if I do well in listening course.  Strongly 
Agree  

  

Agree  
 

  

No idea 
  

  

Disagree 
  

  

Strongly 
Disagree  

 

      

9) My classmates usually get better grades than I do.  Strongly 
Agree  

  

Agree  
 

  

No idea 
  

  

Disagree 
  

  

Strongly 
Disagree  

 

 

10) Even if the listening practice in the class is difficult 

and I cannot understand it completely, I can find a 

strategy to answer most of the related questions.  

Strongly 

Agree  
  

Agree  

 
  

No idea 

  
  

Disagree 

  
  

Strongly 

Disagree  
 

      

11) I am very stressful during the listening class.  Strongly 
Agree  

  

Agree  
 

  

No idea 
  

  

Disagree 
  

  

Strongly 
Disagree  

 

      

12) I enjoy doing listening practice, when the speaker 

speaks fast.  

Strongly 

Agree  
  

Agree  

 
  

No idea 

  
  

Disagree 

  
  

Strongly 

Disagree  
 

      



Hamideh Hamdi Khosroshahi, Ali Merç/ ELT Forum 9 (2) (2020) 

120 

 

13) I enjoy doing listening practice with a proficient 

partner.  

 

Strongly 
Agree  

  

Agree  
 

  

No idea 
  

  

Disagree 
  

  

Strongly 
Disagree  

 

14) I am one of the best students in listening course.  Strongly 

Agree  
  

Agree  

 
  

No idea 

  
  

Disagree 

  
  

Strongly 

Disagree  
 

      

15) When I am doing a listening practice with a tape at 

home, it is not important that how difficult it is because 

I repeat it so much that I can understand it.  

Strongly 

Agree  
  

Agree  

 
  

No idea 

  
  

Disagree 

  
  

Strongly 

Disagree  
 

      

16) I enjoy meeting tourists because I can understand 

them well.  

Strongly 

Agree  
  

Agree  

 
  

No idea 

  
  

Disagree 

  
  

Strongly 

Disagree  
 

      

17) The more difficult the listening practice it is, the 

more challenging and enjoyable it is.  

Strongly 
Agree  

  

Agree  
 

  

No idea 
  

  

Disagree 
  

  

Strongly 
Disagree  

 

      

18) In the listening class, when the teacher asks a 

question I raise my hand to answer it even if I am not 

sure about it.  

Strongly 

Agree  
  

Agree  

 
  

No idea 

  
  

Disagree 

  
  

Strongly 

Disagree  
 

      

 


