3.5.1 Questionnaire
3.5.1 questionnaire
to investigate the participants' metacognitive listening awareness at the initial phase of the study, vandergrift et al. 's (2006) metacognitive awareness listening questionnaire (malq, see appendix a) was employed as a standardized measure. the malq was a 21-item instrument devised to assess learners' metacognitive awareness in listening. it investigated such sub-sets as problem solving, planning-evaluation, mental translation, person knowledge, and directed attention. the malq had a 6-point scale assessment (from strongly disagree to strongly agree), indicating the participants' metacognitive awareness. data were collected and analyzed in terms of the five different sub-sets.
to make sure that the participants would fully understand the questionnaire, both english and chinese versions of the questionnaire were prepared. the english version of the questionnaire was translated into chinese by the researcher, and the chinese version was then back-translated into english by an efl lecturer. the two english versions were compared and any differences were discussed in order to improve the quality of the chinese translation.
to investigate the participants' metacognitive listening awareness at the initial phase of the study, vandergrift et al. 's (2006) metacognitive awareness listening questionnaire (malq, see appendix a) was employed as a standardized measure. the malq was a 21-item instrument devised to assess learners' metacognitive awareness in listening. it investigated such sub-sets as problem solving, planning-evaluation, mental translation, person knowledge, and directed attention. the malq had a 6-point scale assessment (from strongly disagree to strongly agree), indicating the participants' metacognitive awareness. data were collected and analyzed in terms of the five different sub-sets.
to make sure that the participants would fully understand the questionnaire, both english and chinese versions of the questionnaire were prepared. the english version of the questionnaire was translated into chinese by the researcher, and the chinese version was then back-translated into english by an efl lecturer. the two english versions were compared and any differences were discussed in order to improve the quality of the chinese translation.