درخت حوزه‌های تخصصی

Over the past decades, the use of strategies by language learners has been the subject of considerable research. Yet comparatively few studies have examined the direct effects of strategy instruction on the actual writing strategy use of learners, with specific comparisons involving students at different levels of proficiency. This study examined if focused writing strategy instruction can increase the use of writing strategies by EFL learners. Using a mixed-methods design, 64 undergraduate learners in Iran were divided into experimental and control groups. The experimental group received strategy-based instruction grounded in Oxford’s (1990) framework, while the control group received conventional writing instruction. Data were collected through pre- and post-tests, stimulated recall protocols, and a validated strategy-use questionnaire. Findings from a mixed between-within ANOVA revealed significant time-group- proficiency interactions, indicating that strategy instruction benefited learners differently across proficiency levels. Qualitative analysis further highlighted how learners integrated strategies into their writing practices. The results have implications for tailoring writing instruction to proficiency-specific needs.

Listening effectively in a foreign language presents many challenges for students. The aims of this convergent mixed methods study were two-fold. First, to determine whether teaching listening strategies through materials tailored to apply principles related to decreasing Cognitive Load (CL) could help learners improve their L2 listening comprehension. Second, whether using such materials could reduce learners' cognitive load. In doing so, two modes of material presentation (computer-based and text-based) were selected. Eighty-eight TEFL bachelor students in three intact classes were randomly assigned to three treatment conditions: Strategy-Based Cognitive-Load-Decreasing Computer-Based Material (SB-CLD-CBM), Strategy-Based Cognitive-Load-Decreasing Text-Based Material (SB-CLD-TBM), and Strategy-Based Non-Cognitive-Load Decreasing Conventional Learning Material (SB-NCLD-CLM), and received relevant instructions. A general proficiency test was used to examine participants' language proficiency. A listening pretest and posttest, a listening achievement test, and a cognitive load questionnaire were used to collect data in the quantitative phase. A reflection paper, including two questions about students' perceptions administered during the treatment, was used to gather qualitative data. The One-way Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) and Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) showed that CLD-CBM and CLD-TBM outperformed the NCLD-CLM in listening comprehension and experienced lower cognitive load. However, no significant difference was found between the experimental groups. The findings are valuable for teachers and materials developers, suggesting they should include Cognitive Load Theory principles and strategy instruction when designing learning materials and instructional approaches.