6.2.2 Descriptive Statistics for Metacognitive Listening Awareness for Cycle 2
6.2.2 descriptive statistics for metacognitive listening awareness for cycle 2
the descriptive statistics for metacognitive listening awareness for cycle 2 are shown in table 55. scores are presented for each instructional group and for the 4 groups as a whole, as well as for each aspect of vandergrift's metacognitive listening awareness construct and for total metacognitive listening awareness scores. as can be seen from the table, the possible maximum mean score for each aspect is 6.0, and all the groups scored close to a mean of 4.0 (the mean for the whole sample was 3.90). it should be noted that the range in scores was also considerable (1.00-6.00), indicating substantial variance in the sample as a whole.
to establish whether there were any significant group differences in terms of each aspect of metacognitive listening awareness in cycle 2, a two-way anova was computed (see table 2 in appendix f), and the groups were not found to be significantly different in any aspect of metacognitive listening awareness (p＞0.1 in all conditions).
table 55 descriptive statistics for metacognitive listening awareness for cycle 2
note. group a=listening one time; group b=listening three times; group c=schema raising+three times; group d=inferencing training+three times; pe=planning-evaluation; da=directed attention; pk=person knowledge; mt=mental translation; ps=problem solving; m=mean; sd=standard deviation.
the descriptive statistics for metacognitive listening awareness for cycle 2 are shown in table 55. scores are presented for each instructional group and for the 4 groups as a whole, as well as for each aspect of vandergrift's metacognitive listening awareness construct and for total metacognitive listening awareness scores. as can be seen from the table, the possible maximum mean score for each aspect is 6.0, and all the groups scored close to a mean of 4.0 (the mean for the whole sample was 3.90). it should be noted that the range in scores was also considerable (1.00-6.00), indicating substantial variance in the sample as a whole.
to establish whether there were any significant group differences in terms of each aspect of metacognitive listening awareness in cycle 2, a two-way anova was computed (see table 2 in appendix f), and the groups were not found to be significantly different in any aspect of metacognitive listening awareness (p＞0.1 in all conditions).
table 55 descriptive statistics for metacognitive listening awareness for cycle 2
note. group a=listening one time; group b=listening three times; group c=schema raising+three times; group d=inferencing training+three times; pe=planning-evaluation; da=directed attention; pk=person knowledge; mt=mental translation; ps=problem solving; m=mean; sd=standard deviation.