1.4. Statement of the Research Hypothesis…………………………………….6

1.5. Definition of Key Terms……………………………………………………7

1.6. Significance of the Study……………………………………………………8

1.7. Limitations, Delimitations, Assumptions………………………………….9

1.7.1. Limitations…………………………………………………………….9

1.7.2. Delimitations………………………………………………………….10

1.7.3. Assumption……………………………………………………………10

CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF THE RELATED LITERATURE…………………..11

2.1. Introduction……………………………………………………………….12

2.2. Autonomy…………………………………………………………………12

2.2.1. Definitions of Autonomy……………………………………………….13

2.2.2. Learner Autonomy………………………………………………………14

2.2.3. What Does Autonomy Mean? …………………………………………………….18

2.2.4. Autonomous Learner’s Features……………………………………….20

2.2.5. Elements of Autonomous Learning……………………………………..20

2.2.6. Models for Autonomy……………………………………………………21

2.2.7. Kinds of Autonomy………………………………………………………22

2.2.8. Autonomy in the Classroom……………………………………………..23

2.2.9. Dimensions of Autonomy………………………………………………..25

2.3. Critical Thinking……………………………………………………………26

2.3.1. What is Critical Thinking? ..……………………………………………..29

2.3.2. What Does Critical Thinking Mean? ……………………………………30

2.3.3. A Five Step Model to Improve CT Skills…………………………………31

2.3.4. The Importance of Teaching CT in L2 Classrooms………………………35

2.3.5. Content-based Instructions for Improving CT Skills………………………35

2.3.6. Critical Thinker’s Features…………………………………………………35

2.3.7. Relationship Between CT and Learning……………………………………36

2.3.8. Strategies of Critical Thinking……………………………………………..38

2.4. Writing………………………………………………………………………..39

2.4.1. Writing Strategies…………………………………………………………..41

2.4.2. Writing Modes……………………………………………………………..42

2.4.3. Writing Process Approach and Product Approach…………………………43

2.4.4. General and Specific Components of Writing Tasks………………………44

CHAPTER III: METHOD………………………………………………………..48

3.1. Introduction………………………………………………………………….49

3.2. Participants………………………………………………………………….49

3.3. Instrumentation……………………………………………………………50

3.3.1. PET for Homogenization…………………………………………….50

3.3.2. Writing Posttest………………………………………………………51

3.3.3. Writing Scale/Rubric…………………………………………………52

3.3.4. Textbook……………………………………………………………..52

3.3.5.Materialsfor Practicing Autonomy and Critical Thinking…………52

3.4. Procedure………………………………………………………………….53

3.4.1. Practicing CT Techniques……………………………………………54

3.4.2. Practicing AUT Techniques…………………………………………56

3.5. Design……………………………………………………………………..58

3.6. Statistical Analysis……………………………………………………….58

CHAPTER IV: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION…………………………………60

4.1. Introduction………………………………………………………………..61

4.2. Descriptive Statistics of the Pre-treatment Writing Scores………………67

4.3. Descriptive Statistics of the Raters’ Scores to the CT Posttest Writing…69

4.4. Descriptive Statistics of the Posttest Writing Scores…………………….73

4.5. Testing the Null Hypothesis………………………………………………74

4.6. Discussion………………………………………………………………….75

CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION AND PEDAGOGICAL IMPLICATIONS………78

5.1. Introduction…………………………………………………………………79

5.2. Restatement of the Hypothesis…………………………………………..79

5.3. Conclusion…………………………………………………………………79

5.4. Pedagogical Implications……………………………………………………80

5.5. Implications for EFL Teachers, Learners, and Syllabus Designers………81

5.5.1. Implications for EFL Teachers…………………………………………81

5.5.2. Implications for EFL Learners……………………………………….82

5.5.3. Implications for EFL Syllabus Designers…………………………….83

5.6. Suggestions for Further Studies……………………………………………83

REFERENCES……………………………………………………………………85

APPENDICES……………………………………………………………………123

Appendix A: PTE 1 (used for homogenization)………………………………124

Appendix B: PET 2 (used as post-treatment test)………………………….144

 

CHAPTER I

 

BACKGROUD AND PURPOSE

 

 

 

1.1. Introduction

Education and learning need some special techniques to indulge learners more deeply and efficiently- techniques that involve learners to become more independent and at the same time more thoughtful. It is a rather recent issue that educators are focusing their attention to critical thinking and autonomy on different skills, although “ critical thinking is as integral part of education and training in schools of foreign and second language instruction” ( Shangarffam & Mamipour, 2011, p.1 ), and so is autonomy.

Writing is one of the most effective ways of conveying ideas and thoughts to others, so learning to write is important because without it education, and more important, communications will be defective and will face problems.

According to Pemberton and Nix (2012), writing, autonomy, and critical thinking seem to be linked to each other, and proficiency in writing can be a sign of students’ autonomy, critical thinking ,and reasoning skills on the other hand. Critical thinking and autonomy are both considered desirable educational goals. Raya, Lamb, and Vieira (2007), mention that “The competence to think critically is coextensive with the notion of autonomy and self-sufficiency” (p.43). And in the same way, Little (1991) explains autonomy as an ability “for detachment, critical reflection, decision making, and independent action”(p.4). Therefore, it is important that teachers help students develop exploring ways for autonomy and critical thinking (Pemberton & Nix, 2012). Consequently, it seems that teaching learners to become autonomous and at the same time critical thinkers is probably a vital factor in their progress.

In line with the ongoing development in communication and definitely writing, the methods that teachers use to help foster learners’ autonomy, and make a “paradigm shift from teacher-centered to learner-centered instruction” (Jacobs & Farrell, 2002, 12) are considered very important ,and as Wu Li-li (2008) mentions with the growing need of language teaching in communication-oriented way nowadays, language teaching is facing a challenge and is being substituted by the learner-centered one. As a result, the learner-centered approach made the concept of learners’ autonomy emerge (Bagheri & Aeen, 2011).

Nowadays, learner autonomy is considered as “an unquestionable goal and integral part of language learning methodologies throughout the world. Large amounts of time, energy, and money are spent on its promotion and implementation” (Reinders, 2000, p.2). In fact learner autonomy seems to become important because of the motive that it creates in learners. Learning autonomy emphasizes language learners’ role as an active participant in his/her learning who has “a choice as what and how of the curriculum can be used in learning”, and also, “has a responsible feeling for his/her own learning” (Jacobs & Farrell, 2001, p.7).

2.4. Language and Culture. 29

2.5. Translation and Culture. 33

2.6. Translation Problems 36

2.6.1. Linguistics Differences. 37

2.6.2. Social Differences. 41

2.6.3. Cultural Differences. 42

2.7. Presuppositions 47

2.7.1. Philosophical Presupposition. 48

2.7.2. Semantic Presupposition. 48

2.7.3. Pragmatic Presupposition. 49

2.7.4. Cultural Presupposition. 50

2.8. Cultural Presuppositions 50

2.9. Different Classifications of Cultural Presuppositions 52

2.9.1. Newmark’s Classification. 53

2.9.2. Thriveni’s Classification. 58

2.9.3. Pavlovic’s Classification. 60

2.10. Translation Strategies 63

2.11. Translation Strategies for Cultural Presuppositions 66

2.11.1. House’s Strategies. 67

2.11.2. Newmark’s Strategies. 68

2.11.3. Baker’s Strategies. 72

2.11.4. Hervey and Higgins’ Strategies. 74

2.11.5. Aixela’s Strategies. 77

2.11.6. Vinay and Darblenet’s Strategies. 81

2.11.7. Wiersema’s Strategies. 82

2.12. Concluding Points 83

Chapter III: Methodology.. 84

3.1. Introduction. 85

3.2. Corpus 86

3.3. Theoretical Framework. 88

3.4. Design. 97

3.5. Procedure. 97

3.6. Data Collection. 98

3.7. Data Analysis 98

Chapter IV: Results and Discussions. 100

4.1. Introduction. 101

4.2. Description of the Data. 101

4.2.1. Cultural Presuppositions. 102

4.2.1.1. Ecology. 102

4.2.1.2. Material Culture (Artifacts) 102

4.2.1.3. Social Culture. 104

4.2.1.4. Organizations, Customs, Ideas. 105

4.2.1.5. Gestures and Habits. 107

4.2.2. Translation Strategies. 108

4.2.2.1. Transference. 108

4.2.2.2. Naturalization. 109

4.2.2.3. Cultural Equivalent 110

4.2.2.4. Functional Equivalent 110

4.2.2.5. Descriptive Equivalent 111

4.2.2.6. Synonymy. 112

4.2.2.7. Through-translation. 113

4.2.2.8. Shifts or Transposition. 114

4.2.2.9. Reduction and Expansion. 115

4.2.2.10. Couplets, Triplets, and Quadruplets. 116

4.2.2.11. Notes, Additions, and Glosses. 117

4.3. Analysis of the Data. 121

Chapter V: Conclusion, Implications, and Suggestions for Further Research.. 126

5.1. Introduction. 127

5.2. Conclusion. 128

5.3. Pedagogical Implications 130

5.4. Suggestions for Further Research. 132

References 134

Appendixes 139

 

List of Tables

Table 1: Food. 18

Table 2: Clothes. 18

Table 3: Housing. 18

Table 4: Transport 18

Table 5: Work. 18

Table 6: Leisure. 18

Table 7: Political and Administrative. 18

Table 8: Religious. 18

Table 9: Artistic. 18

Table 10: Historical Terms. 18

Table 11: Gestures and Habits. 18

Table 12: Transference. 18

Table 13: Naturalization. 18

Table 14: Cultural Equivalent 18

Table 15: Functional Equivalent 18

Table 16: Descriptive Equivalent 18

Table 17: Synonymy. 18

Table 18: Through-translation. 18

Table 19: Shifts. 18

Table 20: Reduction. 18

Table 21: Couplets. 18

Table 22: Triplets. 18

Table 23: Additions. 18

Table 24: Notes. 18

Table 25: Overall frequencies of cultural presuppositions. 18

Table 26: Overall frequencies of translation strategies. 18

Table 27: All cultural presuppositions separately for each short story. 18

Table 28: All cultural presuppositions and their translation strategies. 18

List of Graphs

Graph 1: Percentages of Cultural Presuppositions. 18

Graph 2: Percentages of Translation Strategies. 18

Conditions………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 24

2.7. The Locutionary, Illocutionary and Perlocutionary Acts………………………………………………. 28

2.7.1. Locutionary Acts………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 29

2.7.2. Illocutionary Acts…………………………………………………………………………………………………. 31

2.7.3. Perlocutionary Acts………………………………………………………………………………………………. 33

2.8. Cooperative Learning………………………………………………………………………………………………. 34

2.8.1. Social Interdependence Perspective………………………………………………………………………… 37

2.8.2. Cognitive Development Perspectives………………………………………………………………………. 38

2.8.3. Behavioral Social Perspectives……………………………………………………………………………….. 38

2.8.3.1. Positive Interdependence……………………………………………………………………………………. 39

2.8.3.2. Individual Accountability/Personal Responsibility…………………………………………………. 40

2.8.3.3. Face-to-Face Promotive Interaction……………………………………………………………………… 41

2.8.3.4. Teamwork Skills………………………………………………………………………………………………… 42

2.8.3.5. Group Processing ………………………………………………………………………………………………. 42

2.8.4. Structuring Cooperative Learning…………………………………………………………………………… 45

2.8.5. Interactions in Groups…………………………………………………………………………………………… 47

2.8.6. Students Perceptions of Cooperative Learning…………………………………………………………. 50

2.9. Competitive Learning………………………………………………………………………………………………. 52

CHAPTER III: Methodology…………………………………………………………………………………………. 57

3.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 58

3.2. Participants…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 58

3.3. Instrumentation………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 59

3.3.1 Preliminary English Test (PET)……………………………………………………………………………….. 59

3.3.2 Discourse Completion Test……………………………………………………………………………………… 60

3.3.2.1 Reliability and validity of the instrument……………………………………………………………….. 63

3.4.Materials………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 63

3.5. Procedure……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 63

3.5.1. Pretest ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 63

3.5.2. Treatment…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 64

3.5.3. Posttest……………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 66

3.6. Design……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 67

3.7. Statistical Analyses………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 67

CHAPTER IV: Results and Discussions………………………………………………………………………….. 68

4.1 Pilot study of Preliminary English Test (PET)……………………………………………………………… 69

4.2. Subject-Selection Statistics………………………………………………………………………………………. 70

4.3 Pilot study of MCDCT …………………………………………………………………………………………….. 70

4.4. Proficiency Test (PET)…………………………………………………………………………………………….. 71

4.5. Pretest of Speech acts………………………………………………………………………………………………. 73

4.6 Post test of speech acts……………………………………………………………………………………………… 73

4.7 Testing Assumptions………………………………………………………………………………………………… 74

4.8. Empirical Validity…………………………………………………………………………………………………… 76

4.9. Reliability Indices……………………………………………………………………………………………………. 77

4.10 Reliability of the Writing Tasks in the PET test………………………………………………………….. 77

4.11. Discussion…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 79

CHAPTER V: Conclusion and Pedagogical Implications…………………………………………………… 83

5.1 Restatement of the Problem………………………………………………………………………………………. 84

5.2 Conclusion………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 86

5.3 Pedagogical Implications…………………………………………………………………………………………… 87

5.4. Suggestions for Further Research………………………………………………………………………………. 88

REFERENCES…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. 91

APPENDIX A……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 105

APPENDIXI B…………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 128

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Table 4.1 Descriptive statistics of PET pilot study…………………………………………………………….. 89

Table 4.2 Descriptive Statistics of subject selection……………………………………………………………. 70

Table 4.3 descriptive statistics of pilot study of MCDCT pre/post test ………………………………… 70

Table 4.4 Descriptive statistics of PET by groups………………………………………………………………. 71

Table 4.5 Independent samples t-test of PET scores…………………………………………………………… 72

Table 4.6 Descriptive statistics of speech acts posttest by groups………………………………………… 73

Table 4.7 normality tests…………………………………………………………………………………………………. 74

Table 4.8 Independent samples t-test of Posttest scores……………………………………………………… 75

Table 4.9 Pearson Correlation PET with Pretest and Posttest of Speech Acts……………………….. 76

Table 4.10 K-R21 Reliability…………………………………………………………………………………………… 77

Table 4.11Inter-Rater Reliability of the Writing Pretest …………………………………………………….. 78

Table 4.12 Intra-Rater Reliability of the Writing Pretest…………………………………………………….. 78

 

 

 

 

CHAPTER I

 

 

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

• Introduction

It is generally recognized that the goal of language teaching is to develop learner’s ability to communicate appropriately in a given target language and culture. This means that it is not enough for teaching practices to exclusively focus on the features of the target language linguistic system. Otherwise, inappropriate use of language can lead to pragmatic failure and those speakers who do not use pragmatically appropriate language run the risk of appearing uncooperative at very least or more seriously, rude or uncultured (Bardovi-Harlig, Hartford, Mahan-Taylor, Morgam, & Reynols, 1991).

Pragmatic ability in a second or foreign language is part of a nonnative speaker’s (NNS) communicative competence and therefore has to be located in a model of communicative ability (Savignon, 1991). In Bachman’s model (1990, p. 87ff), ‘language competence’ is subdivided into two components, ‘organizational competence’ and ‘pragmatic competence’. Organizational competence comprises knowledge of linguistic units and the rules of joining them together at the levels of sentence (‘grammatical competence’) and discourse (‘textual competence’). Pragmatic competence subdivides into ‘illocutionary competence’ and ‘sociolinguistic competence’. ‘Illocutionary competence’ can be glossed as ‘knowledge of communicative action and how to carry it out’. The term ‘communicative action’ is often more accurate than the more familiar term ‘speech act’ because communicative action is neutral between the spoken and written mode, and the term acknowledges the fact that communicative action can also be implemented by silence or non-verbally. ‘Sociolinguistic competence’ comprises the ability to use language appropriately according to context. It thus includes the ability to select communicative acts and appropriate strategies to implement them depending on the current status of the ‘conversational contract’ (Fraser, 1990).

12

2.2. History of Storytelling 15

2.2.1. Storytelling in the English Language Classroom 16

2.2.2. Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) and

Storytelling 17

2.2.3. Storytelling and Task-based Language Teaching 19

2.2.4. The National Curriculum, Communicative Language 20

Teaching (CLT) and Storytelling

2.2.5. Learner Autonomy and Storytelling 21

2.2.6. Multiple Intelligences (MI) and Storytelling 22

2.2.7. Rationale for Storytelling 24

2.2.8. Studies on Storytelling 24

2.3. Role playing 26

2.3.1. Role playing and Task-based Language Teaching 26

(TBLT)

2.3.2. Advantages of Role playing 27

2.3.3 Disadvantages of Role playing 31

2.3.4. Rationale for Using Role playing 32

2.4 Motivation 34

2.4.1. Types of Motivation 37

2.4.1.1 Instrumental and Integrative Motivation 37

2.4.1.2 Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivation 38

2.5.Theories and Constructs Reflecting Motivational Beliefs 39

and Attitudes

2.5.1 Attribution Theory 39

2.5.2 Self- efficacy 41

2.5.3 Mastery Experience 41

2.5.4Social Modeling 41

2.5.5.Social Persuasion 42

2.5.6.Psychological Response 42

2.5.7.Self – worth Theory 43

2.5.8.Goal Theories 43

2.5.9. Self – Determination Theory (SDT) 44

 

CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY 46

3.1. Introduction 47

3.2. Participants 47

3.3. Instrumentations andMaterials 48

3.3.1. Tests 48

3.3.1.1. The Preliminary English Test (PET) 48

3.3.1.2. Attitude and Motivation Test Battery a 50

Pretest and a Posttest

3.3.2. Materials 51

3.3.2.1. Main Course Book for Both Groups

3.3.2.2. Flashcards and Posters for Both Groups 51

3.4. Procedure 51

3.5. Design 54

3.6. Statistical Analyses 55

CHAPTER IV: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 56

4.1. Introduction 57

4.2. Participant Selection 57

4.2.1 PET Pilot Study 58

4.2.1.1 PET Administration for Homogenizing 59

the Participants

4.2.2. Inferential Statics 67

4.2.2.1. Post-Test Results 71

4.2.2.2. Post-Test Descriptive Statistics 71

4.3. Testing the Null Hypotheses 74

4.4. Discussion 75

CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION AND PEDAGOGICAL 82

IMPLICATIONS

5.1. Introduction 83

5.2. Summary of the Findings 83

5.3. Pedagogical Implications 85

5.3.1. Implication for EFL Teachers 85

5.3.2. Implication for EFL Syllabus Designers 86

5.4. Suggestions for Further Research 87

REFERENCES 89

APPENDICES 97

Appendix A: Preliminary English Test (PET) 98

Appendix B: Appendix B: Writing Rating Scale 120

Appendix C: Attitude and Motivation Test Battery 122

by Gardner, 1985 (AMTB)

Appendix D: Sample Lesson 126

 

LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES

 

Table 4.1 Descriptive Statistics of the PET Pilot Administration 58

Table 4.2 Reliability Estimates of the PET before and after Removing 59

Malfunctioning Items

Table 4.3 Reliability of the PET in First Homogenization 60

Table 4.4 Descriptive Statistics of the Two Ratings of PET Writing 60

Section (First Homogenization)

Table 4.5 Correlation between the Two Ratings of the PET 61

Writing Tasks (First Homogenization)

Table 4.6: Descriptive Statistics of Total PET (First Homogenization) 62

Table 4.7 Reliability of the PET (Second Homogenization) 62

Table 4.8 Descriptive Statistics of the Two Ratings of PET Writing 63

Section (First Second Homogenization)

Table 4.9 Correlation between the Two Ratings of the PET Writing 64

Tasks (Second Homogenization)

Table 4.10 Descriptive Statistics of Total PET (Second Homogenization) 64

Table 4.11 Descriptive Statistics of the Total PET Scores of the Two 65

Experimental Groups

Table 4.12: Independent Samples Test on the Total PET at the Onset 66

Table 4.13: T-test for both experimental groups 67

Table 4.14: Paired Samples Test for the experimental group 1 68

Table 4.15: Paired Samples Test for the experimental group 2 69

Table 4.16: Independent Samples Test Experimental 1 70

and Experimental 2 (Pretest)

Table 4.17: Descriptive Statistics of the motivation Post-test 72

Table 4.18: Independent Samples Test Experimental 1 74

and Experimental 2(Posttest)

Figure 4.1: Scatter Plot of Descriptive Statistics of the motivation Post-test

 

 

 

 

 

CHAPTER I

 

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

 

 

 

1.1 Introduction

Scholars in the field of teaching and learning English as a foreign or second language have long been concerned with finding ways to increase the learners’ motivation and removing the barriers they bring with themselves into the educational environment. Incorporating different instructions and techniques into the classroom adds variety as well as opportunities for a lot of language production. Some believe that these techniques can be used as integral part of the class. Using storytelling and role playing in EFL classes have gained special attention in recent years. If the teacher believes that the activity will work and the necessary support is provided, it can be very successful. However, if the teacher is not convinced about the validity of using role-play, the activity “will fall flat on its face just as you expected it to” (Ladousse, 1987, p.7). A widely spread and one of the best communicative activities as well as cooperative learning is a role play which trains the students in the classroom to cope with unpredictable real-life situations in an English speaking environment. Ladousse (1987) points out the special reasons for using role play in the lessons. It puts students in situations in which they are required to use and develop language necessary in social relationships and helps them to build up their social skills. Using role play is useful especially while teaching shy students who have difficulty participating in conversations about themselves. Through this activity they are put into various roles and no longer feel that their own personality is implicated. Role play is an essential communicative technique which develops fluency, promotes interaction in the classroom and increases motivation.

Nowadays, with the development of communication technology, the necessity of learning English as one of the most important languages of the world became more apparent. Therefore, the need for learning communicative skills increases. On important issue in teaching – learning settings is psychological ones like stress, anxiety, and motivation. The present study deals with the effect of two applicable instructions of teaching on motivation. It is important that educators recognize the impact of the tasks on their students and ensuring that they are considering learners academic and emotional needs.

However, storytelling has a strong effect on learners’ perception and comprehension. Baker and Greene (1977) assert “storytelling increases the listeners’ awareness-sense of wonder, of mystery, of reverence for life” (p.17).

Equivalents …