10.57647/JNTELL.2025.0403.19

Linking Instructional Scaffolding to Listening Outcomes: A Mediating Factor in Iranian EFL Learners’ Comprehension, Metacognitive Awareness and Anxiety Reduction

PDF
  • Maryam Neshaee Moghaddam1,
  • Mehrshad Ahmadian*1,
  • Ebrahim Fakhri Alamdari1,
  1. Department of English Language, Islamic Azad University, Qaemshahr Branch, Qameshahr, Iran

Received: 2025-08-28

Revised: 2025-09-16

Accepted: 2025-09-24

Published in Issue 2025-10-19

Copyright (c) 2025 Maryam Neshaee Moghaddam, Mehrshad Ahmadian, Ebrahim Fakhri Alamdari (Author)

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite

Neshaee Moghaddam, M., Ahmadian, M., & Fakhri Alamdari, E. (2025). Linking Instructional Scaffolding to Listening Outcomes: A Mediating Factor in Iranian EFL Learners’ Comprehension, Metacognitive Awareness and Anxiety Reduction. Journal of New Trends in English Language Learning (JNTELL), 4(3). https://doi.org/10.57647/JNTELL.2025.0403.19
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

PDF views: 51

Abstract

 

English foreign language learning is greatly influenced by pedagogical approaches employed, and of the latter, scaffolding has emerged as a very exceptional teaching technique. The present quasi-experimental study investigated the impact of various scaffolding techniques on Iranian intermediate learners' listening performance, metacognitive awareness, and listening anxiety. The population consisted of 180 female learners, six intact classes of 30 members per class, at a Sari, Iran-based private language school. The procedures were collected employing three instruments: IELTS Listening Test 18, Metacognitive Awareness Listening Questionnaire (MALQ), and Foreign Language Listening Anxiety Scale (FLLAS). Statistical analysis employed descriptive statistics and Multivariate Analysis of Covariance (MANCOVA). The results indicated that the scaffolding strategies—procedural, metacognitive, cognitive, contextual, and motivational—had differential and significant impacts on learners' listening comprehension, reduction in listening anxiety, and enhancement of metacognitive knowledge. The results demonstrate the pedagogical value of scaffolding as a theoretical construct with multiple components that can facilitate cognitive processing, enhance learner autonomy, and overcome affective barriers to foreign language listening. These results have important implications for instructional designers, learners, and EFL teachers who wish to optimize teaching listening in communicative language teaching environments.

Keywords

  • Instructional Scaffolding, Mediating Factor, Listening Comprehension Skill, Metacognitive Awareness, Anxiety Reduction
PDF

References

  1. Abdalhamid, F. (2012). Listening comprehension strategies of Arabic-speaking ESL learners [Master thesis, Colorado State University]. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.
  2. Ableeva, R. (2010). Dynamic assessment of listening comprehension in second language learning. (Doctoral dissertation, Penn State University). https://etda.libraries.psu.edu/files/final_submissions/5374
  3. Ahmadi Safa, M., & Motaghi, F. (2021). Cognitive vs. metacognitive scaffolding strategies and EFL learners’ listening comprehension development. Language Teaching Research, 28(3), 987–1010. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688211021821
  4. Ahmadi Safa, M., & Rozati, F. (2016). The impact of scaffolding and nonscaffolding strategies on the EFL learners’ listening comprehension development. The Journal of Educational Research, 110(5), 447–456. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.2015.1118004
  5. Ahmed Abdel-Al Ibrahim, K., Karimi, A. R., Abdelrasheed, N. S. G., & Shatalebi, V. (2023). Group dynamic assessment vs. computerized dynamic assessment: Impacts on L2 listening development, L2 students’ perfectionism, foreign language anxiety, and intrinsic motivation. Language Testing in Asia, 13(1), Article 32. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40468-023-00245-1
  6. Alameen, G., & Levis, J. M. (2015). Connected speech. In M. Reed, & J. M. Levis (Eds.), The handbook of English pronunciation (pp.157-174). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118346952.ch9
  7. Al- Jarrah, T., Mansor, N., Talafhar, R., & Al-Jarrah, J. (2018). A review of research into metacognitive strategies in the process of education: Teaching and learning of English skill. International Journal of Current Research, 10(12), 76832 - 76838. http s: //doi . org/1 0.24941 /ij er. 33608.12.2018
  8. Alsowat, H. (2016). Foreign language anxiety in higher education: A practical framework for reducing FLA. European Scientific Journal, 12(7), 193-220. doi:10.19044/esj.2016. V.12, n.7, p.193
  9. Al-Yami, S. A. (2008). The effectiveness of scaffolding interactive activities in developing the English listening comprehension skills of the sixth-grade elementary schoolgirls in Jeddah. (Master Thesis, King Abdulaziz University). https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED520563.pdf
  10. Ashraf, H., Motallebzadeh, Kh., & Ghazizadeh, F. (2016). The impact of electronic–based dynamic assessment on the listening skill of Iranian EFL learners. International Journal of Language Testing, 6(1), 24-32.
  11. Bagheri Masoudzade, A. (2022). Relationship between critical thinking ability and listening comprehension strategies: Focus on advanced EFL learners. Journal of New Trends in English Language Learning (JNTELL), 1(1), 1-19.
  12. Bagheri Masoudzade, A., & Fatehi Rad, N. (2022). Cognitive styles and sub-skills: A study on the relationship between reflectivity/ impulsivity dimension and vocabulary/ grammar development among EFL learners. Curriculum Research, 2(4), 1-10.
  13. Barabadi, E., Khajavy, G. H., & Kamrood, A. M. (2018). Applying interventionist and interactionist approaches to dynamic assessment for L2 listening comprehension. International Journal of Instruction, 11(3), 681-700. http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1183409.pdf
  14. Birjandi, P., Estaji, M., & Deyhim, T. (2013). The impact of dynamic assessment on reading comprehension and metacognitive awareness of reading strategy use in Iranian high school learners. Iranian Journal of Language Testing, 3 (2), 43-61.
  15. Bracket, M. A. Palomera, R., Mojsa-Kaja, J., Reyes, M. R., & Salovey, P. (2010). Emotion-regulation ability, burnout, and job satisfaction among British secondary-school teachers. Psychology in the Schools, 47(4), 406–417.
  16. Bruner, J. (1983) Child’s talk: Learning to use language. Oxford University Press.
  17. Chou, M. H. (2016). A task-based language teaching approach to developing metacognitive strategies for listening comprehension. International Journal of Listening, 31(1), 51-70. https://doi.org/10.1080/10904018.2015.1098542
  18. Ghavifekr, S. (2020). Collaborative learning: A key to enhance students’ social interaction skills. MOJES: Malaysian Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 8(4), 9-21.
  19. Goh, C. (2010). Listening as process: Learning activities for self-appraisal and self-regulation. In N. Harwood (Ed.), English language teaching materials: Theory and practice (pp. 179-206). Cambridge University Press.
  20. Gonulal, T., & Loewen, S. (2018). Scaffolding technique. In J.I. Liontas, T. International Association and M. DelliCarpini (Eds.), The TESOL encyclopedia of English language teaching (pp. 1-5). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118784235.eelt0180
  21. Karimi, M., Ghorbanchian, E., Chalak, A., & Tabrizi, H. H. (2020). Instructional scaffolding with graphic organizers to improve EFL learners' listening comprehension and incidental vocabulary acquisition. Elixir Social Science, 149(1), 50-60.
  22. Kim, J. (2000). Foreign language listening anxiety: A study of Korean students learning English. University of Texas.
  23. Kula, S. S., & Budak, Y. (2020). The effects of reciprocal teaching on reading comprehension, retention on learning and self-efficacy perception. Journal of Education and Instruction, 10(2), 493-522. http://dx.doi.org/10.14527/pegegog.2020.017
  24. Margolis, A. A. (2020). Zone of Proximal Development, scaffolding and teaching practice. Cultural-Historical Psychology, 16(3), 15–26. https://doi.org/10.17759/chp.2020160303
  25. Maspufah, M. (2019). Improving students’ reading comprehension by using reciprocal teaching strategy. J-SHMIC: Journal of English for Academic, 6(1), 26-32. http://dx.doi.org/10.24815/siele.v2i2.2693
  26. Mosleh, S.M., Kasasbeha, M.A., Aljawarneh, Y.M., Alrimawi, I., & Saifan, A.R. (2022). The impact of online teaching on stress and burnout of academics during the transition to remote teaching from home. BMC Medical Education, 22(1), 1-10.
  27. Munawir, A., Khair, U., & Putriani, N. (2022). The impact of using a reciprocal teaching strategy on reading comprehension by prospective teachers. ETDC: Indonesian Journal of Research and Educational Review, 1(2), 169-175. https://doi.org/10.51574/ijrer.v1i2.334
  28. Puntambekar, S. (2022). Distributed scaffolding: Scaffolding students in classroom environments. Educational Psychology Review, 34(1), 451-472.
  29. Rost, M. (2014). Listening in a multilingual world: The challenges of second language (L2) listening. International Journal of Listening, 28(3), 131-148. https://doi.org/10.1080/10904018.2014.937895
  30. Sage, K. (2022). Zone of proximal development. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780367198459-reprw163-1
  31. Shabani, M. B. (2014). An investigation into the role of Iranian EFL teachers' critical pedagogical views in their educational success. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 5(1), 144-150. http://dx.doi.org/10.4304/jltr.5.1.144-153
  32. Shabani, K. (2011). Assessing teacher’s professional development: A neo-Vygotskian perspective. Paper presented at the 4th Postgraduate Conference on Issues in TEFL and English Literature, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran.
  33. Taheri, P., & Hedayat Zade, M. (2018). The contribution of metacognitive strategies to EFL learners' listening comprehension task types. Teaching English Language, 12(2), 169-198. https://doi.org/10.22132/tel.2018.82864
  34. Tajadini, M., Mahfoozi Fard, S., & Fatehi Rad, N. (2022). An integration of sheltered and reciprocal principles: A metacognitive approach to EFL learners’ writing proficiency and self-efficacy. Quarterly of Iranian Distance Education Journal, 3(3), 45-59. https://doi.org/10.30473/idej.2022.61181.1077
  35. Taka, S. D. (2020). The efficacy of using reciprocal teaching technique in teaching reading to Indonesian English as foreign language (EFL) students. IDEAS: Journal on English Language Teaching and Learning, Linguistics and Literature, 8(1), 197-206. https://doi.org/10.24256/ideas.v8i1.1345
  36. Tran, T. Q., & Duong, T. M. (2020). Insights into listening comprehension problems: A case study in Vietnam. Pasaa, 59(1), 77-100. https://doi.org/10.58837/chula.pasaa.59.1.4
  37. Tsai, S. C. (2022). Learning with mobile augmented reality-and automatic speech recognition-based materials for English listening and speaking skills: Effectiveness and perceptions of non-English major English as a foreign language student. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 2(1), 27-56. https://doi.org/10.1177/07356331221111203
  38. Van de Pol, J., Volman, M., & Beishuizen, J. (2010). Scaffolding in teacher–student interaction: A decade of research. Educational psychology review, 22(3), 271-296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-010-9127-6
  39. Vandergrift, L. (2004). Listening to learn or learning to listen? Annual review of applied linguistics, 24, 3-25. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0267190504000017
  40. Vandergrift, L. (2006). Recent developments in second and foreign language listening comprehension research. Language teaching, 40(3), 191-210. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0261444807004338
  41. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard University Press.
  42. Wallace, M. P. (2022). Individual differences in second language listening: Examining the role of knowledge, metacognitive awareness, memory, and attention. Language Learning, 72(1), 5-44.
  43. Wang, T. H. (2010). Web-based dynamic assessment: Taking assessment as teaching and learning strategy for improving students’ E-Learning effectiveness. Computers & Education, 54(4), 1157-1166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.11.001
  44. Wood, D. J. (1988). How children think and learn. Blackwell.
  45. Yawisah, U. (2017). Reciprocal teaching: One of the methods for poor comprehenders. Pedagogy: Journal of English Language Teaching, 1(1), 21-25.
  46. Zaretsky, V. K. (2021). One more time on the Zone of Proximal Development. Cultural-Historical Psychology, 17(2), 37-49. https://doi.org/10.17759/chp.2021170204
  47. Zhang, Y., & Xi, J. (2022). Fostering self-regulated young writers: Dynamic assessment of metacognitive competence in secondary school EFL class. Language Assessment Quarterly, 20(1), 88-107. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2022.2103702
  48. Zhang, D., & Zhang, L. J. (2019). Metacognition and self-regulated learning (SRL) in second/foreign language teaching. In X. Gao (Ed.), Second handbook of English language teaching (pp. 883-897). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02899-2_47
  49. Zuhra, C. M., Muslem, A., & Daud, B. (2022). The effectiveness of reciprocal scaffolding technique on students’ writing skill. English Education Journal, 13(1), 92-105. https://doi.org/10.24815/eej.v13i1.24549