本研究旨在探討聽力輔助對台灣技術校院學生在多益聽力成績的效應。聽力輔助在本研究採用的是單字教學及反思學習。在單字教學中，老師透過不同類型活動教導學生聽力所須字詞。而在課後反思學習中，學生在七步驟的聽力練習後，反思自己的弱點並試著找出解決方法。

本研究的參與者是兩班共61名台灣大一技術學院學生，隨機分成實驗組及控制組。實驗組學生在18週大一英文課程中接受聽力輔助的介入，而控制組學生在課程中則先聽光碟，老師之後再解釋其內容。

本研究採用量化及質化資料分析三個研究題目。量化資料包括八次小考、期中考、期末考、多益摹擬前後測及字詞教學問卷，而質化資料包括聽力學習記錄及訪談。三個研究題目為：(1) 聽力輔助對多益聽力成績的影響, (2) 實驗組學生在聽力輔助介入下所呈現的聽力行為及(3) 實驗組學生對聽力輔助的觀感。

量化分析結果顯示，實驗組學生在小考及多益摹擬後測成績顯著高於控制組學生，而且聽力輔助介入效果，實驗組低程度學生大於其高程度學生。另外，質化分析結果顯示，實驗組學生在聽力輔助介入下，啟發他們使用有效的聽力策略。但是，也有策略使用不當的情形發生。這表示，老師必須提供其他額外輔助以改善狀況。有關對聽力輔助的觀感，學生普遍持正面意見。以上這些結果建議，聽力輔助可以用於課程中來增進學生理解多益。不過對於比較長及困難的內容，則須搭配其他形式聽力輔助。本文亦有深入探討，研究結果對英語聽力教學的啟示。

雖然本研究對於改善學生理解多益有正面貢獻，但學生後測平均成績在原使總分分100下只拿53分，表示還有進步空間。未來研究可以探討聽力習得部份，也就是以聽力內容為基礎，分析不同聽後學習活動，對強化學生能力以提升後續聽力理解的影響，這方面的研究有助老師設計更完善的聽力課程。

Listening comprehension can be a profoundly difficult skill for foreign language learners (L2) to develop, and thus it is critical for teachers to offer listening support to L2 learners to facilitate their understanding of aural text (Underwood, 1989). The current study conducted an investigation into the effectiveness of providing listening support to Taiwanese EFL technological students in terms of how such support affected their performance on the TOEIC (Test of English for International Communication), which is regarded as a high-stakes test around the world, particularly in Taiwan and other Asian nations (Gilfert, 1996; Lai, 2008; Miller, 2007; Phillips, 2006). 

This study utilized lexical intervention and reflective learning as forms of listening support. During the course of lexical intervention, the teacher pre-taught related lexical items by employing a variety of oral activities (e.g. reading aloud and practicing conversation). As for extracurricular reflective learning, the students first engaged in seven-step listening, identified the causes of their incomprehension, and then determined methods for resolving those challenges.

Two intact classes with a total of 61 Taiwanese first-year technological college students were randomly assigned to either the experimental (EG) or control (CG) groups. Throughout the course of an 18-week required General English class, the EG received two forms of listening support: lexical instruction and reflective learning. In contrast, the CG received instruction comprised of listening followed by an explanation of the aural text to confirm comprehension.

Data for this study was collected both quantitatively and qualitatively. Quantitative data included test results drawn from eight listening quizzes, midterm and final exams, and the TOEIC listening test as well as responses to lexical intervention questionnaires. Qualitative data was comprised of reflection sheets and interview surveys. Both quantitative and qualitative data were used to determine answers to the three research questions: (1) What were the effects of listening support on the TOEIC aural performance of Taiwanese technological college students? (2) What types of listening behaviors did the treatment group exhibit? and (3) What were students’ perceptions of listening support in regard to their listening tasks?

The TOEIC aural performance of Taiwanese technological college students generally improved as a result of listening support. This determination was reached on the basis of the fact that EG participants earned better scores than their CG participant counterparts on both achievement tests (quizzes) and on the proficiency test (TOEIC listening post-test). In addition, the EG lower-proficiency students benefited more from listening support than their higher-proficiency counterparts did. Furthermore, students activated the use of effective listening behaviors (bottom-up and top-down alike) from listening support. However, counterproductive behaviors were identified during this process, suggesting that students should receive additional support when this occurs. It was also encouraging that students possessed a positive overall opinion of the role that listening support played in relation to their listening task performance. Given the strong and positive effect on L2 listening, educators should utilize listening support in the form of lexical intervention and reflective learning to improve the aural performance of students. It must however be noted that in some situations (e.g. listening to long and difficult text, such as TOEIC Part III: Short Conversations and Part IV: Short Talks), the addition of other alternatives might maximize the effects of listening support. This study provides pedagogical implications drawn from the findings of the three research questions to improve EFL teachers’ understanding of how to instruct listening, a skill that is both critical and difficult to develop.

While the study clearly contributes to improving student TOEIC listening scores, there is still room for improvement, as is evident by the fact that the mean score of the post-test was about 53 out of the total score of 100. Further investigation certainly could be conducted on the acquisition phase of listening by using listening texts as the basis for assisting L2 acquisition. Research undertaken to explore the effects of providing post-listening activities drawn from the listening texts will shed light on whether the acquisition phase of listening actually enhances student comprehension in future listening tasks. This line of study not only complements the present study, which focuses on the comprehension phase of listening, but is also quite valuable in terms of its ability to assist teachers in designing EFL listening courses.

Acknowledgements....i
Chinese Abstract....ii
Abstract............iii
Table of Contents...vi
List of Tables......xi
List of Figures.....xiv

Chapter One  Introduction............1
1.1 Motivation.......................1
1.2 Statement of the Problem.........3
1.3 Theoretical Background...........5
1.4 Purpose of the Study.............9
1.5 Research Questions..............14
1.6 Significance of the Study.......14
1.7 Definition of Terms.............15

Chapter Two  Literature Review.........................19
2.1 Listening Processing and L2 Listener Difficulties..19
2.2 The Role of Vocabulary in Listening................23
2.3 Vocabulary and TOEIC Listening.....................26
2.4 Previous Research on the Effects of Vocabulary Pre-Instruction on Listening Comprehension.................27
2.5 Limitations of the Past Studies in Vocabulary Instruction............................................31
2.6 Lexical Intervention...............................33
2.6.1 Functions of Multiword Units in Listening........33
2.6.2 Positive Empirical Evidence for Multiword Unit Instruction in Listening...............................34
2.6.3 Methods for Instructing Multiword Units..........35
2.7 Reflective Learning................................42
2.7.1 Wilson’s Discovery Listening....................43
2.7.2 The Rationale for Reflective Learning............44
2.7.3 Three Stages of Reflective Learning..............46
2.7.4 The Purposes of Reflective Learning..............49
2.8 Summary of Literature Review.......................50

Chapter Three  Methodology.............................53
3.1 The First Pilot Study..............................54
3.1.1 Participants	.....................................54
3.1.2 Listening materials..............................55
3.1.3 The Instruction Model	............................56
3.1.4 The Procedure....................................56
3.1.5 Data analysis and results........................57
3.1.6 Unexplored issues................................58
3.2 The Second Pilot Study.............................59
3.2.1 Participants.....................................59
3.2.2 Instruments......................................61
3.2.3 The Procedure....................................62
3.2.4 Data Analysis and Results........................63
3.3 The Modifications of the Pilot Studies.............68
3.4The Main Study......................................69
3.4.1 Participants.....................................69
3.4.2 Research Design..................................72
3.4.3 Instruments......................................73
3.4.4 Material.........................................84
3.4.5 The Pedagogical Cycle for the Experimental Group	85
3.4.6 The Pedagogical Cycle for the Control Group......86
3.4.7 Criteria for Choosing Multiword Units............86
3.4.8 Procedure........................................87
3.4.9 Data Analysis....................................89

Chapter Four  Results..................................92
4.1 Results of Research Question One...................93
4.1.1 First Sub-question: Immediate Effects of Lexical Intervention on Student Listening Quiz Performance.....94
4.1.2 Second Sub-question: Effects of Listening Support on Students’ Midterm and Final Exams.....................111
4.1.3 Third Sub-question: Effects of Listening Support on Students’ TOEIC Scores................................117
4.1.4 Fourth Sub-question: Effects of Listening Support on Students of Differing Levels...........................120
4.1.5 A Summary of Results for Research Question One...124
4.2 Results of Research Question Two...................126
4.2.1 Listening Challenges.............................126
4.2.2 Listening Behaviors..............................130
4.2.3 A Summary of Results for Research Question Two...144
4.3 Results of Research Question Three.................145
4.3.1 Students’ Perceptions of Lexical Intervention...146
4.3.2 Students’ Perceptions of Reflective Learning....149
4.3.3 A Summary of Results for Research Question Three.152

Chapter Five  Discussion...............................154
5.1 Research Question 1: What are the Effects of Listening Support on EFL Technological College Students’ Aural Performance?...........................................154
5.1.1 Summary Results of the First Research Question...154
5.1.2 First Sub-Question: Immediate Effects of Lexical Intervention on Student Listening Quiz Performance.....155
5.1.3 Second Sub-Question: Effects of Listening Support on Student Midterm and Final Exams........................163
5.1.4 Third Sub-Question: Effects of Listening Support on Student TOEIC Performance..............................168
5.1.5 Fourth Sub-question: Effects of Listening Support on Students of Differing Levels...........................178
5.1.6 A Summary of Discussion for Research Question One181
5.2 Research Question 2: What Are the Listening Behaviors of Students in the EG?.................................182
5.2.1 Listening Challenges.............................183
5.2.2 Listening Behaviors..............................186
5.2.3 A Summary of Discussion for Research Question Two190
5.3 Research Question 3: What are student perceptions of listening support’s role in their listening tasks?....191
5.3.1 Lexical Intervention.............................192
5.3.2 Reflective Learning..............................200
5.3.3 A Summary of Discussion for Research Question Three
                                                       203

Chapter Six  Conclusions...............................206
6.1 A Summary of the Major Findings....................206
6.2 Pedagogical Implications...........................213
6.3 Limitations of the Study...........................217
6.4 Suggestions for Further Research...................219

References.............................................221

Appendices.............................................242
Appendix A  The Vocabulary Levels Test.................242
Appendix B  Lexical Intervention Questionnaire.........243
Appendix C  Reflection Sheet...........................244
Appendix D  Listening Difficulty Questionnaire.........245

List of Tables
Table 3-1   Descriptive Statistics for TOEIC Listening Pre-test Scores............................................55
Table 3-2   Means and Standard Deviations of TOEIC Listening Pre- and Post-Test Scores....................58
Table 3-3   Descriptive Statistics for TOEIC Listening Pre-test Scores............................................60
Table 3-4   The Number of High and Low Language Proficiency Students in Each Group.................................60
Table 3-5   Instruments Used in the Second Pilot Study.61
Table 3-6   The Sequence of Activities for Each Group..63
Table 3-7   Descriptive Statistics for Two Groups on the Four Listening Quizzes.................................65
Table 3-8   Results of the Univariate GLM Analysis of the Effect of Lexical Support and Listening Proficiency on the Four Listening Quizzes.................................65
Table 3-9   Descriptive Statistics for Two Groups on the Final Exam.............................................66
Table 3-10  Results of the Univariate GLM Analysis of the Effect of Lexical Support and Listening Proficiency on the Final Exam.............................................66
Table 3-11  Descriptive Statistics for Two Groups on the POST TOEIC.............................................67
Table 3-12  Results of the Univariate GLM Analysis of the Eeffect of Lexical Support and Listening Proficiency on the POST TOEIC.............................................67
Table 3-13  Descriptive Statistics for TOEIC Listening Pre-test Scores............................................70
Table 3-14  The Number of High and Low Language Proficiency Students in Each Group.................................71
Table 3-15  Descriptive Statistics for Vocabulary Levels Test Scores............................................71
Table 3-16  Research Design............................73
Table 3-17  Instruments Used in the Study..............73
Table 3-18  TOEIC listening comprehension test.........75
Table 3-19  Listening Difficulties in Listening Process...81
Table 3-20  Listening Difficulties in Listen Factor....82
Table 3-21  Listening Difficulties in Text Factor......83
Table 3-22  The Sequence of Activities for Each Group..88
Table 3-23  Data Analysis Used in the Research.........90
Table 4-1   Summary of the Eight Listening Quizzes.....95
Table 4-2   Descriptive Statistics for Two Groups on the First Listening Quiz...................................96
Table 4-3   Results of the Univariate GLM Analysis of the Effect of Lexical Intervention and Listening Proficiency on the First Listening Quiz...............................97
Table 4-4   Descriptive Statistics for Two Groups on the Second Listening Quiz..................................98
Table 4-5   Results of the Univariate GLM Analysis of the Effect of Lexical Intervention and Listening Proficiency on the Second Listening Quiz..............................99
Table 4-6   Descriptive Statistics for Two Groups on the Third Listening Quiz..................................100
Table 4-7   Results of the Univariate GLM Analysis of the Effect of Lexical Intervention and Listening Proficiency on the Third Listening Quiz..............................100
Table 4-8   Descriptive Statistics for Two Groups on the Fourth Listening Quiz.................................101
Table 4-9   Results of the Univariate GLM Analysis of the Effect of Lexical Intervention and Listening Proficiency on the Fourth Listening Quiz.............................102
Table 4-10  Descriptive Statistics for Two Groups on the Fifth Listening Quiz..................................103
Table 4-11  Results of the Univariate GLM Analysis of the Effect of Lexical Intervention and Listening Proficiency on the Fifth Listening Quiz..............................103
Table 4-12  Descriptive Statistics for Two Groups on the Sixth Listening Quiz..................................104
Table 4-13  Results of the Univariate GLM Analysis of the Effect of Lexical Intervention and Listening Proficiency on the Sixth Listening Quiz..............................105
Table 4-14  Descriptive Statistics for Two Groups on the Seventh Listening Quiz................................106
Table 4-15  Results of the Univariate GLM Analysis of the Effect of Lexical Intervention and Listening Proficiency on the Seventh Listening Quiz............................106
Table 4-16  Descriptive Statistics for Two Groups on the Eighth Listening Quiz.................................108
Table 4-17  Results of the Univariate GLM Analysis of the Effect of Lexical Intervention and Listening Proficiency on the Eighth Listening Quiz.............................109
Table 4-18  Effect Size of Lexical Intervention for Each Listening Quiz........................................110
Table 4-19  Summary of the Midterm and Final Exams....112
Table 4-20  Descriptive Statistics for Two Groups on the Midterm...............................................113
Table 4-21  Results of the Univariate GLM Analysis of the Effect of Listening Support and Listening Proficiency on the Midterm Exam......................................114
Table 4-22  Descriptive Statistics for Two Groups on the Final Exam............................................115
Table 4-23  Results of the Univariate GLM Analysis of the Effect of Listening Support and Listening Proficiency on the Final Exam........................................115
Table 4-24  Descriptive Statistics for Two Groups on the TOEIC.................................................118
Table 4-25  Results of the Univariate GLM Analysis of the Effect of Listening Support and Listening Proficiency on the TOEIC Post-test...................................119
Table 4-26  Significance and Effect Size of Variables for the Each Part of the TOEIC............................120
Table 4-27  Descriptive Statistics for Two Levels on the TOEIC Scores..........................................122
Table 4-28  Means, Standard Deviations, SEMS, and Pared-Sample t Tests at Pre-test and Post-test for TOEIC Performance in Two Levels.............................122
Table 4-29  Effective and Counterproductive Listening Behaviors.............................................131
Table 4-30  Students Responding to Lexical Intervention..........................................147

List of Figures
Figure 4-1  The Effect of Proficiency on Listening Comprehension in Each Group ………...................107
Figure 4-2  Students’ Listening Performances for Eight Quizzes……………………………....................... 110
Figure 4-3  Students’ Listening Performances for Midterm and Final Exams......................................116
Figure 4-4  Students’ Listening Performances for the TOEIC ...............................................117
Figure 4-5  Lower-Level EG Student Pre- and Post- Scores on the TOEIC ...........................................123

Alderson, J. C., & Wall, D. (1993). Does washback exist? Applied Linguistics, 14, 115-129.

Altenberg, B. (1998). On the phraseology of spoken English: The evidence of recurrent 	word-combination. In A. P. Cowie (Ed.), Phraseology: Theory, analysis, and applications (pp. 101-122). Oxford: Clarendon.

Anderson, J. (1993), Rules of the mind. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. 

Ausubel, D. (1961). The use of advance organizers in the learning and retention of meaningful verbal material. Journal of Educational Psychology, 51, 266-274.

Baddeley, A. (1990). Human Memory: Theory and Practice. Needham Heights, MA:Allyn and Bacon.

Berne, J. E. (1995). How does varying pre-listening activities affect second language listening comprehension? Hispania, 78, 316-319.

Berne, J. E. (2004). Listening comprehension strategies: A review of the literature. Foreign Language Annals, 37(4), 521-533.

Bird, S.A., & Williams, J. N. (2002). The effect of bimodal input on implicit and explicit memory: An investigation into the benefits of within-language subtitling. Applied Psycholinguistics, 23(4), 509-533.

Bishop, H. (2004). Noticing formulaic sequences—A problem of measuring the subjective. LSO Working Papers in Linguistics, 4, 15-19.

Blyth, A. (2011). How teachers teach in listening in Japan: Part I. KOTESOL Proceedings 2010: Advancing ELT in the global context. Seoul: KOTESOL.

Boers, F., Eyckmans, J., Kappel, J., Strangers, H., & Demecheleer, M. (2006). Formulaic sequences and perceived oral proficiency: Putting a lexical approach to the test. Language Teaching Research, 10, 245-262.

Bogdan, R., & Biklen, S. K. (1992). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods. London: Allyn & Bacon.

Bonk, W. (2000). Second language lexical knowledge and listening comprehension.International Journal of Listening, 14, 14-31. 

Boyle, J. P. (1984). Factors affecting listening comprehension. ELT Journal, 38, 34-38.

Broersma, M., & Cutler, A. (2008). Phantom word activation in L2. System, 36, 22-34.

Bronawitz, E., Shafto, P., Gweon, H., Goodman, N., Spelke, E., & Schulz, L. (2011). The double-edged sword of pedagogy: Instruction limits spontaneous exploration and discovery. Cognition, 120(3), 322-330.

Brown, D. (2004). Language assessment: Principles and classroom practices. New York: Pearson Education.

Buck, G. (1995). How to become a good listening teacher. In D. J. Mendelsohn & J. Rubin (Eds.), A guide for the teaching of second language listening (pp. 113-128). San Diego: Dominie Press.

Buck, G. (2001). Assessing listening. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Chang, C. S. (1999). The effect of repeated listening on different levels of ESL learners. In Proceedings of the 1st Conference on Applied English Teaching (pp.72-80). Taoyuan, Republic of China: Ming Chuan University, Department of Applied English.

Chang, C. S. (2007). The impact of vocabulary preparation on L2 listening comprehension, confidence and strategy use. System, 35, 534-550.

Chang, C. S. (2008). Sources of listening anxiety in learning English as a foreign language. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 106, 21-34. 

Chang, C. S. (2009). Gains to L2 listeners from reading while listening vs. listening only in comprehending short stories. System, 37, 652-663.

Chang, C. S. (2010). Second-language listening anxiety before and after a 1-yr. intervention in extensive listening compared with standard foreign language instruction. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 110, 2, 355-365.

Chang, C. S. (2011). The effects of reading while listening to audiobooks: Listening fluency and vocabulary gain. Asian Journal of English Language Teaching, 21, 43-64.

Chang, C. S., & Read, J. (2006). The effects of listening support on the listening performance of EFL learners. TESOL Quarterly, 40, 375-397.

Chang, C. S., & Read, J. (2007). Support for foreign language listeners: Its effectiveness and limitations. RELC, 38, 375-395.

Chao, Y.G., & Cheng, Y. P. (2004). Listening difficulties of Taiwanese EFL students in senior 	high schools. Selected Papers from the Thirteenth International Symposium on English Teaching, (pp. 250-258). Taipei: Crane.

Chen, J. C. (2007). Enhancing technology college students’ English listening comprehension by listening journals. Journal of Nanya Institute of Technology, 27, 143-160.

Chen, J., Warden, C., & Chang. (2005). Motivators that do not motivate: The case of Chinese imperativeness as a culturally specific motivating force. TESOL Quarterly, 39(4), 609-634.

Cheng, H. H. (Ed.). (2000). The CEEC English Word List for the Scholastic Aptitude English Test of the College Entrance Examination in Taiwan. Taipei, Taiwan:
College Entrance examination Center.

Cheng, Y. P. (2004). An investigation of listening difficulties encountered by EFL students in senior high schools. Unpublished master’s thesis. National Changhua University of Education.

Chiang, C. C., & Dunkel, P. (1982). The effect of speech modification, prior knowledge, and listening proficiency on EFL lecture learning. TESOL Quarterly, 26, 345-374.

Chien, C.N., & Kao, L.H. (2002). Effects of metacognitive strategy on listening comprehension with EFL learners. Selected Papers from the Eleventh International Symposium on English Teaching (pp.298-307). Taipei: Crane.

Chu, H. Y. (2009). Stakes, needs and washback: An investigation of the English benchmark policy for graduation and EFL education at two technological universities in Taiwan. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, National Taiwan Normal University.

Chujo, K., & Oghigian, K. (2009). How many words do you need to know to understand TOEIC, TOEFL & EIKEN? An examination of text coverage and high frequency vocabulary. Journal of Asia TEFL, 6, 121-148. 

Chung, J. M. (2002). The effects of using two advance organizers with video texts for the teaching of listening in English. Foreign Language Annals, 35, 231-241.

Chung, J. M. & Huang, S. C. (1998). The effects of three aural advance organizers for video viewing in a foreign language classroom. System, 26, 553-565.

Clarke, M. A. (1980). The ‘short circuit’ hypothesis of ESL reading—or when language competence interferes with reading performance. Modern Language Journal, 64,203-209.

Clay, M. (1991). Becoming literature: The construction of inner control. Portsmouth, NH:Heinemann.

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral statistics. Hillsdale, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum.
 
Conklin, K., & Schmitt, N. (2008). Formulaic sequences: Are they process more quickly than nonformulaic language by native and nonnative speakers? Applied Linguistics, 29, 72-89.

Craik, F. I. M., & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: a framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 67-84.

Cross, J. (2009). Effects of listening strategy instruction on news videotext comprehension. Language Teaching Research, 13(2), 151-176.

Cross, J. (2011). Metacognitive instruction for helping less-skilled listeners. ELT Journal, 65(4), 408-416. 

Dansereau, D. F. (1988). Cooperative learning strategies. In C. E. Weisntein, E. T. Goetz, & P. A. Alexander. (Eds.), Learning and student strategies: Issues in assessment, instruction, and evaluation (pp. 103-120). New York: Academic Press. 

Davis, G. (2001). There is no four-object limit on attention. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24(1), 119-120.

DeKeyser, R. M. (2007). Skill acquisition theory. In R. M. Dekeyser (Ed.), Practice in a second language: Perspectives from applied linguistics and cognitive psychology (pp. 97-113). New York: Cambridge University Press.

DeKeyser, R., & Juffs, A. (2005). Cognitive considerations in L2 learning. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 757-771). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Denzin, N. K. (1970). The research act in sociology: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods. London: Butterworths.

Dufva, M., Niemi, P., & Voeten, M. J. M. (2001). The role of phonological memory, word recognition, and comprehension skills in reading development: from preschool to grade 2. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 14, 91-117.

Dupuy, B. C. (1999). Narrow listening: An alternative way to develop and enhance listening comprehension in students of French as a foreign language. System, 27, 351-361.
 
Durrant, P., & Schmitt, N. (2010). Adult learners’ retention of collocations from exposure. Second Language Research, 26(2), 163-188.

Educational Testing Service (2010). TOEIC official test-preparation Guide Vol. 2. Taipei: Chun Shin Limited. 

Elder, C., Bright C., & Bennett S. (2007). The role of language proficiency in academic success: Perspectives from a New Zealand university. Melbourne Papers in Language Testing, 12, 24-58. 

Elkhafaifi, H. (2005). The effect of prelistening activities on listening comprehension in Arabic learners. Foreign Language Annals, 38(4), 505-513.

Ellis, N. (2002). Frequency effects in language processing: A review with implications for theories of implicit and explicit language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 24, 143-188.

Ellis, N. (2003). Constructions, chunking, and connectionism: The emergence of second language structure. In C. J. Doughty, & M. H. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 63-103). Malden, MA: Blackwell.

Erman, B., & Warren, B. (2000). The idiom principle and the open-choice principle. Text, 20, 29-62.

Farrokhi, F., & Modarres, V. (2012). The effects of two pre-task activities on improvement of Iranian EFL learners’ listening comprehension. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 2(1), 144-150. 

Feyten, C. M. (1991). The power of listening ability: An overlooked dimension in language acquisition. The Modern Language Journal, 75(2), 173-180.

Field, J. (1998). Skills and strategies: Towards a new methodology for listening. ELF Journal, 52(2), 338-339.

Field, J. (2000). Lexical segmentation in first and foreign language listening. Unpublished PhD dissertation, Cambridge University.

Field, J. (2003). Promoting perception: Lexical segmentation in L2 listening. ELT Journal, 57, 325-334.

Field, J. (2004). An insight into listeners’ problem: too much bottom-up or too much top-down? System, 32, 363-377.
Field, J. (2008). Listening in the language classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 

Flowerdrew, J., & Miller, L. (2005). Second language listening: Theory and practice. New York: Cambridge University Press. 

Foster, P. (2001). Rules and routines: A consideration of their role in task-based language production of native and non-native speakers. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks: second language learning, teaching, and testing (pp. 75-93). Harlow: Longman. 

Foster, P., & Skehan, P. (1996). The influence of planning and task type on second language performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 299-323.

French, L. M. (2006). Phonological working memory and L2 acquisition: A developmental study of Quebec francophone children learning English. New York: Edwin Mellen Press.

French, L. M. (2009). Phonological memory, intensive language instruction and L2 oralfluency development. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Association of Applied Linguistics, Denver, CO. 

Gass, S. (1997). Input, interaction, and the second language learner. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Gatbonton, E., & Segalowitz, N. (2005). Rethinking communicative language teaching: A focus on access to fluency. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 61(3), 325-353.

Gathercole, S., & Baddeley, A. D. (1989). Evaluation of the role of phonological STM in the development vocabulary in children: A longitudinal study. Journal of Memory and Language, 28, 200-213.

Gilfert, S. (1996). A review of TOEIC, The Internet TESL Journal, 2(8). Retrieved April 2012, from http://iteslj.org/Articles/Gilfert-TOEIC.html

Goh, C. (1999). How much do learners know about the factors that influence their listening comprehension. Hong Kong Journal of Applied Linguistics, 4(1), 17-40.

Goh, C. (2000). A cognitive perspective on language learners'listening comprehension problems. System, 28, 55-75.

Goh, C. (2002). Exploring listening comprehension tactics and their interaction patterns. System, 30, 185-206. 

Goh, C. (2008). Metacognitive instruction for second language listening development: Theory, practice and research implications. RELC, 39(2), 188-213.

Goh, C., & Yusnita, T. (2006). Metacognitive instruction in listening for young learners. ELT Journal, 50, 222-232.

Graham, S. (2002). Experience of learning French: A snapshot at year 11, 12, and 13. Language Learning Journal, 25, 15-20. 

Graham, S. (2003). Learner strategies and advanced level listening comprehension. Language Learning Journal, 28(1), 64-69.
 
Graham, S. (2006). Listening comprehension: The learners’ perspective. System, 34, 165-182.

Graham, S., & Macaro, E. (2007). Designing year 12 strategy training in listening and writing: From theory to practice. Language Learning Journal, 35, 153-173.

Graham, S., & Macaro, E. (2008). Strategy instruction for lower-intermediate learners of French. Language Learning, 58, 747-783.

Gu, Y., & Johnson, R. (1996). Vocabulary learning strategies and language learning outcomes. Language Learning, 46, 643-679. 

Hakuta, K. (1974). Prefabricated patterns and the emergence of structure in second language acquisition. Language Learning, 24, 287-297.

Hasan, A. (2000). Learners’ perceptions of listening comprehension problems. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 13, 137-153. 

Hatori, H. (1979). A handbook for English teaching (4) evaluation. Tokyo: Taishukanshoten.

Hayashi, H. (2002). Teaching English vocabulary. Hiroshima: Keisuisha.

Hayati, A., & Mohmedi, F. (2011). The effect of films with and without subtitles on listening comprehension of EFL learners. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(1), 181-192. 

Hazenberg, S., & Hulstijn, J. H. (1996). Defining a minimal second language vocabulary for non-native university students: An empirical investigation. Applied Linguistics, 17,145-163. 

Henriksen, B., Albrechtsen, D., & Haastrup, K. (2004). The relationship between vocabulary size and reading comprehension in the L2. Angles on the English-Speaking World, 4, 129-140.

Hirsh, D., & Nation, I. S. P. (1992). What vocabulary size is needed to read unsimplified texts for pleasure? Reading in a Foreign Language, 8, 689-696.

Hoing, B. (2001). Teaching our children to read. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Howarth, P. (1998). Phraseology and second language proficiency. Applied Linguistics, 19, 22-44.

Hsu, J.Y, & Hsu, L.C. (2007).Teaching lexical collocations to enhance listening comprehension of English majors in a technological university of Taiwan. Soochow Journal of Foreign Languages and Cultures, 24, 1-34.

Hu, M., & Nation, I. S. P. (2000). Unknown vocabulary density and reading comprehension. Reading in a Foreign Language, 13, 403-430.

Huang, C.-C. (2004). University students’ vocabulary knowledge, content knowledge and reading comprehension. Journal of National Tainan Teachers College, 38(1), 125-153.

Hughes, A. (2003). Testing for language teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hulstijn, J. H. (2003). Connectionist models of language processing and the training of listening skills with the aid of multimedia software. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 16, 413-425.

Hummel, K. M., French, L. M. (2010). Phonological memory and implications for the second language classroom. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 66(3), 371-391.

Hunt, A. & Beglar, D. (2002). Current research and practice in teaching vocabulary. In Richards, J. C. & Renandya, W. A. (Eds.), Methodology in Language Teaching:An Anthology of Current Practice (pp. 258-266). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hwang, S. Y., & Lee, M. K. (2009). Does test taking experience make a difference? In strategy use and test scores. Modern English Education, 10(2), 23-43.

Jenkins, J., Cogo, A., & Dewey, M. (2011) Review of developments in research into English as a lingua franca. Language Teaching, 44(3), 281-315.

Jensen, E. D., & Vinther, T. (2003). Exact repetition as input enhancement in second language acquisition. Language Learning, 53(3), 373-428. 

Jingnan, S. (2011). Autonomy in EFL education. Canadian Social Science, 7(5), 27-32

Juel, C. (1994). Learning to read and write in one elementary school. New York: Springer-Verlag.

Kang, L. (2009).The effects of two enhanced pre-listening supports on Taiwanese junior high students’listening comprehension: Background knowledge pre-instruction versus vocabulary pre-teaching. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Taiwan Normal University.

Kelly, P. (1991). Lexical ignorance: The main obstacle to listening comprehension with advanced foreign language learners. IRAL, 29, 135-149.

Kim, J. (2002). Affective reactions to foreign language listening retrospective interviews with Korean EFL students. Language Research, 38, 117-151.

Kintsch, W. (1998). Comprehension: A paradigm for cognition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kintsch, W. (2005). An overview of top-down and bottom-up effects in comprehension. The CI perspective. Discourse Processes, 39, 125-128.
 
Kjellmer, G. (1994). A dictionary of English collocations: Based on the Brown corpus. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Koster, C.J. (1987). Word recognition in froeign and native language: Effects of context and assimilation. Dordrecht: Foris Publications.

Krashen, S. D. (1996). The case for narrow listening. System, 24(1), 97-100.

Krashen, S. D. (2011). Academic proficiency (language and content) and the role of strategies. TESOL Journal, 2(4), 381-393.

Lai, Y. H. (2008). A study on effectiveness of college English-featured courses on TOEIC. Kaohsiung Normal University Journal, 25, 72-90.

Laufer, B. (1989). What percentage of text-lexis is essential for comprehension? In C. Lauren & M. Nordman (Eds.), Special language: From humans thinking to thinking machines 	(pp. 316-323). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.

Laufer, B. (1992). How much lexis is necessary for reading comprehension? In P. J. L. 	Arnaud& H. Bejoint (Eds.), Vocabulary and applied linguistics (pp. 126-132). London: Macmillan.

LeLoup, J. W. , & Ponterio, R. (2007). Listening: You’ve got to be carefully taught. Language Learning & Technology, 11(1), 4-15.

Lewis, M. (1993). The lexical approach: The state of ELT and a way forward. Hove, England: Language Teaching Publications.

Lewis, M. (2000). Teaching collocation: Further developments in the lexical approach. Hove, England: Language Teaching Publications.

Li, B. J. (2009). The effect of pre-listening activities on the EFL listening comprehension of junior high school students. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology.

Lin, C. I. (2009). A study of the implementation of English education policy at universities of technology in Taiwan. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. National Pingtung University of Education, Pingtung, Taiwan.

Lisha, M. (2007). What do Chinese EFL listeners need to improve: Bottom-up skills or top-down strategies? A cognitive perspective on Chinese EFL listeners root problems. CELEA Journal, 30(3), 3-13.

Long, D. R. (1990). What you don’t know can’t help you. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12, 65-80.

Lotfi, G. (2012). A questionnaire of beliefs on English language listening comprehension problems: Development and Validation. World Applied Science Journal, 16(4), 508-515.

Lynch, T. (1998). Theoretical perspectives on listening. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 18, 3-19. 

Maleki, A., & Zangani, E. (2007). A survey on the relationship between English language proficiency and the academic achievement of Iranian EFL students. Asian EFL journal, 9, 86-96.

Matthews, J.R. (2007), Evaluation and Measurement of Library Services. Westport, CT: Libraries Limited.

Mayberry, M. (2006). The cognitive receptive processes in the development of Spanish phonological perception. Unpublished PhD thesis. The University of Texas at Austin.

Mecartty, F. (2000). Lexical and grammatical knowledge in reading and listening comprehension by foreign language learners of Spanish. Applied Language Learning, 11, 323-348.

Mehrpour, S., & Rahimi, M. (2010). The impact of general and specific vocabulary knowledge on reading and listening comprehension: A case of Iranian EFL learners. System, 38, 292-300.

Mendelsohn, D. J. (1995). Applying learning strategies in the second/foreign language listening comprehension lesson. In D. J. Mendelsohn & J. Rubin (Eds.), A guide for the teaching of second language listening (pp. 132-150). San Diego, CA: Dominie Press.

Mendelsohn, D. J. (2001). Listening comprehension: We’ve come a long way, but … Contact, 27(2), 33-40. 

Millar, N. (2011). The process of malformed formulaic language. Applied Linguistics, 32(2), 129-148.

Miller, K. (2007). The pitfalls of implementing TOEIC preparation courses. Retrieved April 2012, from http://englisheveryday.weebly.com/toeic-pitfalls.html

Mortazavi, S-M. (2011). The relationship between time lapse between introducing lexical advance organizers and video viewing, and comprehension in a foreign language classroom. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 15, 2023-2027. 

Muller, G. (1980). Visual contextual cues and listening comprehension: An experiment. Modern Language Journal, 64, 335-340.

Nathan, P. (2008). Cooperative learning and metacognitive awareness in second language listening comprehension. MA thesis, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore. 

Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Nattinger, J. R., & DeCarrico, J. S. (1992). Lexical phrases and language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

O’Brien, I., Segalowitz, N., Freed, B., & Collentine, J. (2007). Phonological memory predicts second language oral fluency gains in adults. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 29, 557-582.

O’Malley, J. M., & Chamot, A. U. (1990). Learning strategies in second language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Osada, N. (2001). What strategy do less proficient learners employ in listening comprehension. A reappraisal of bottom-up and top-down processing. Journal of the Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics, 5, 73-90.

Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. London: Sage Publication.

Phillips, C. (2006). How can we help students improve their TOEIC scores without “teaching to the test”? Humanities Review, 11, 55-74.

Pressley, M., & Gaskins, I. W. (2006). Metacognitively competent reading comprehension is constructively responsive reading: How can such reading be developed in students? Metacognition Learning, 1, 99-113.

Prince, P. (1996). Second language vocabulary learning: The role of context versustranslations as a function of proficiency. Modern Language Journal, 80,478-493.

Qian, D. D. (1999). Assessing the roles of depth and breadth of vocabulary knowledge in reading comprehension. Canadian Modern Language Review, 56, 282-307.

Qian, D. D. (2002). Investigating the relationship between vocabulary knowledge and academic reading performance: An assessment perspective. Language Learning, 52, 513-536.
 
Read, J. (2000). Assessing vocabulary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Renandya, W. A., & Farrell T. S. C. (2011). ‘Teacher, the tape is too fast!’ Extensive listening in ELT. ELT Journal, 65(1), 52-59. 

Richards, J. C. (1983). Listening comprehension: Approach, design, procedure. TESOL Quarterly, 17(2), 219-239.

Richards, J. C. (2003). Teaching listening and speaking: From theory to practice. New York:Cambridge University Press.

Richards, J. C. (2005). Second thoughts on teaching listening. RELC Journal, 36(1), 85-92.

Robb, T. N., & Ercanbrack, J. (1999). A study of the effect of direct test preparation on the TOEIC scores of Japanese university students. Retrieved Octorber 2010, from  http://www.zait.uni-bremen.de/wwwgast/tesl_ej/ej12/a2.html 

Rodrigo, V. (2004). Assessing the impact of narrow listening: Students’ perceptions and performance. ERIC Document Reproduction Service (NO. ED 503 090). 503090

Rost, M. (2002). Teaching and researching listening. London: Longman.

Rost, M. (2005). L2 listening. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 503-527). London: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Rost, M. (2006). Areas of research that influence L2 listening instruction. In E. Usó-Juan & A. Martínez-Flor (Eds.), Current trend in the development and teaching of the four 	language skills (pp. 47-74). Berlin: Mounton de Gruyter.

Rost, M., & Ross, S. (1991). Learner use of strategies in interaction: Typology and teachability. Language Learning, 41, 235-273.

Rubin, J. (1995). The contribution of video to the development of competence in listening. In D. J. Mendelsohn & J. Rubin (Eds.), A guide for the teaching of second language listening (pp. 151-165). San Diego, CA: Dominie Press.

Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11, 129-158. 

Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 3-32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Schmitt, N. (2008). Instructed second language vocabulary learning. Language Teaching Research, 12, 329-363.

Schmitt, N., & Carter, R. (2004). Formulaic sequences in action: An introduction. In N. Schmitt (Ed.), Formulaic sequences: Acquisition, processing and use (pp. 1-22). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.

Schmitt N., & McCarthy, M. (1997). Vocabulary, description, acquisition and pedagogy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Schmitt, N., & Schmitt, D. (1995). Vocabulary notebooks: Theoretical underpinning and practical suggestions. ELT Journal, 49, 133-143.

Schmitt, N., Schmitt, D., & Clapham, C. (2001). Developing and exploring the behaviour of two new versions of the Vocabulary Levels Test. Language Testing, 18(1), 55-88.

Schneider, W., & Chein, J. M. (2003). Controlled and automatic processing: Behavior, theory, and biological mechanisms. Cognitive Science, 27, 525-559.

Seo, K. (2000). Intervening in tertiary students’ strategic listening in Japanese as a foreign language. Unpublished dissertation, Griffith University, Australia.

Sewell, H. D. (2005). The TOEIC : Reliability and validity with the Korean context. Retrieved February 2012, from http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/Documents/college-artslaw/cels/essays/testing/testing/SewellTesting.pdf

Shang, H. F. (2008). Listening strategy use and linguistic patterns in listening comprehension by EFL learners. International Journal of Listening, 22, 29-45.

Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Snow, R. E. (1997). Aptitudes and symbol systems in adaptive classroom teaching. Phi Delta Kappan, 78(5), 354-360. 

Stahr, L. S. (2008). Vocabulary size and the skills of reading, listening and writing. Language Learning Journal, 36, 139-152.

Stahr, L. S. (2009). Vocabulary knowledge and advanced listening comprehension in English as a foreign language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 31, 577-607.

Sun, K. C. (2002). Investigation of English listening difficulties of Taiwan students.Selected papers from the eleventh international symposium on English teaching. Fourth Pan-Asian conference, 518-526.

Swan, M. (2008). Talking sense about learning strategies. RELC Journal, 39(2), 262-373.

Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology. London: Sage Publications.

Taylor, A. (2006). Target TOEIC®--Upgrading TOEIC® test-taking skills. Tokyo: Compassing Publishing.

Teng, H. C. (1998). The effects of text types and task types on English listening comprehension. English Teaching and Learning Journal, 23, 5-18. 

TOEIC (2011). Newsletter 23. Retrieved October 2011, from http://www.toeic.com.tw/file/11063019.pdf

Toekshi, M. (2003). Listening comprehension processes and strategies of Japanese junior high school students in interactive settings. Unpublished doctoral thesis, University of Wollongong.

Trew, G. (2007). Tactics for TOEIC® listening and reading test. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Tsai, C. H. (2002). The effects of two pre-listening tasks on L2 listening proficiency. Selected papers from the eleventh international symposium on English teaching. Fourth Pan-Asian conference, 546-554.

Tsui, A., & Fullilove, J. (1998). Bottom-up or top-down processing as a discriminator of L2 listening performance. Applied Linguistics, 19, 432-451.

Tyler, M. (2001). Resource consumption as a function of topic knowledge in nonnative and native comprehension. Language Learning, 51, 257-280.

Underwood, M. (1989). Teaching listening. London: Longman.
Ur. P. (1998). Teaching listening comprehension. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Vandergrift, L. (1996). Listening strategies of core French high school students. Canadian Modern Language Review, 52(2), 200-223.

Vandergrift, L. (1998). Constructing meaning in L2 listening: Evidence from protocols. In S. Lapkin (Ed.), French second language education in Canada: Empirical studies (pp. 89-119). Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
 
Vandergrift, L. (1999). Facilitating second language listening comprehension: Acquiring successful strategies. English Language Teaching Journal, 53, 168-176.

Vandergrift, L. (2002). It was nice to see that our predictions were right: Developing metacognition in L2 listening comprehension. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 	58, 556-575. 

Vandergrift, L. (2003). Listening: Theory and practice in modern language foreign language competence. Retrieved April 2012, from http://www.llas.ac.uk/resources/gpg/67

Vandergrift, L. (2004). Learning to listen or listening to learn? Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 24, 3-25.
 
Vandergrift, L. (2006). Second language listening: Listening ability or language proficiency? Modern Language Journal, 90, 6-18.

Vandergrift, L. (2007). Recent developments in second and foreign language listening 	comprehension research. Language Teaching, 40, 191-210.

Vandergrift, L., & Tafaghodtari, M. (2010). Teaching L2 learners how to listen does make a difference: An empirical study. Language Learning, 60(2), 470-497.

Vasiljevic, Z. (2010). Dictogloss as an interactive method of teaching listening comprehension. English Language Teaching, 3, 41-52.

Vinke A. A., & Jochems, W. M. G. (1993). English proficiency and academic success in international postgraduate education. Higher Education, 26, 275-285. 

Wagner, R. K., Torgesen, J. K., & Rashotte, C. A. (1994). Development of reading-related phonological processing abilities: New evidence of bidirectional causality from a latent variable longitudinal study. Developmental psychology, 30, 73-87.

Wajnryb, R. (1990). Grammar dictation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 

Wang, L. (2010) Chinese EFL Learners’ Listening Comprehension Difficulties—A comparison Between Teacher and Student Perspectives. Unpublished MA Thesis. National Institute of Education, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore.

Willingham, D. T. (2006). How knowledge helps. Retrieved December 2009, from http://www.aft.org/pubs-reports/american_educator/issues/spring06/willingham.htm

Willis, J. (1996). A framework for task-based learning. Harlow: Longman.

Wilson, J. J. (2008). How to teach listening. Harlow: Pearson Education.

Wilson, M. (2003). Discovery listening—Improving perceptual processing. ELT Journal, 57, 335-343.

Wiseman, S., & Tulving, E. (1976). Encoding specificity: Relations between recallsuperiority and recognition failure. Journal of Experimental Psychology:
Human Learning and Memory, 2, 349-361.

Wood, D. (2009). Effects of focused instruction of formulaic sequences on fluent expression in second language narratives: A case study. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 12(1), 39-57. 

Wray, A. (2002). Formulaic language and the lexicon. New York: Cambridge University 	Press.

Wray, A., & Namba, K. (2003). Use of formulaic language by a Japanese-English bilingual child: A practical approach to data analysis. Japan Journal of Multilingualism and Multiculturalism, 9, 24-51. 

Yuan, H. L. (2009). A Study of EFL listening difficulties and strategies of senior high school studentsLin, C-I. Unpublished master thesis. National Taiwan University of Science and Technology. 

Zhang, D., & Goh, C. (2006). Strategy knowledge and perceived strategy use: Singaporean students’ awareness of listening and speaking strategies. Language Awareness, 15, 199-219.

Zhang, W. (2005). An investigation of the effects of listening programmes on lower secondary students’ listening comprehension in PRC. Unpublished MA dissertation, MEO Regional Language Centre, Singapore. 

劉明明 (2006). Extensive or repeated listening? A comparison of their effects on the use of listening strategies. 中山女高學報，第六期，63-92。