Chris Esson

Developmental Record

Trinity LTCL Diploma

Unit 2 Section 2

Developmental Record
Teaching Listening Skills
Chris Esson

International House Bristol May 2015

Word Count: 3078
1

Chris Esson

Developmental Record

Developmental Record
Teaching Listening Skills
Rationale
A question that I am often asked by students is how can I improve my listening? Each
time I embarrassed that my answer amounts to little more than the suggestion to listen
more. In my opinion listening is the most difficult skill to teach. I can model
pronunciation and provide frames for speech, I can set reading strategies and provide
models for writing. What listening I do in the class, on the other hand, tends to follow a
coursebooks tasks. Listening, according to Michael Rost, is still often considered a black
box for which the best approach seems to be more practice (Rost, 2001:13). Similarly
John Field talks of listening taking place hidden in the reaches of the learner's mind
(Field, 2008:1). This hidden black box fairly accurately describes the frustration I feel with
my lack of knowledge when it has come to teaching listening. For this reason I have chosen
as my developmental record to focus on teaching listening skills.
John Field in Listening in the Language Classroom (2008) critiques the comprehension
approach to listening the traditional listening practice in which a number of questions are
set to students. Field argues that comprehension questions enable us to judge but they do
not enable us to remedy (2008:31) students' listening capabilities and needs. Beyond this,
the listening practice which is done does not properly prepare students for the demands of
listening beyond the classroom. The comprehension approach does not teach strategies
which will help students when listening in real-world situations. Field's criticisms chime
with my own feeling that the listening practice I do in class may be an uncritical repetition
of a methodology that does not do all it could to help my students to develop genuine
listening skills.
Richard Cauldwell makes similar criticisms of current teaching of listening, especially with
regard to giving students the awareness and the strategies they need to decode authentic
connected speech. Current methodology focuses too much on testing and the practising of
understanding and focuses too little on teaching learners to decode the sound substance of
the stream of speech (Cauldwell, 2013:1). By sound substance Cauldwell means the way in

Chris Esson

Developmental Record

which in connected speech words are squeezed into soundshapes which differ greatly from
the citation form, and [] vary greatly according to the way speakers say them
(Cauldwell, 2013:1). Although research by Jenkins into ELF suggests that many of the
features of connected speech weak forms, elision, assimilation are a detriment to
students reaching a productive level of comfortable intelligibility, to raise awareness of
these features in order to build receptive comprehension is an important skill for students.
Especially for my own students in a native English speaking environment, but also for
exam students, the ability to become comfortable decoding stretches of connected speech
would boost confidence and their ability to function in situations beyond the classroom.
Field (2008), Cauldwell (2013), and Thorn (2013) all make suggestions for diagnostic and
remedial activities to help students build genuine listening skills. I am interested in using
coursebook listening texts of the same type that I currently use in new ways. By
adapting or adding to the tasks I will use the texts to develop my students listening skills.
In particular I will focus on short sections of speech with the following tasks:

Gapping functional words which are squeezed and non-prominent.

Gap contractions.

Dicta-gloss where a short section of speech is repeated for students to transcribe

as they hear it.

Listening with script and highlighting differences and difficult to understand

phrases.

These activities will help me to diagnose what my students can and cannot decode. In
addition to this I will use listening scripts to highlight and work on the common
phonological features of connected speech. When I diagnose a need in my students'
listening I will investigate the cause of the difficulty and highlight the features of speech
which create the problem.
The aim of this developmental record is ultimately to enable me to better support my
students in developing genuine, autonomous listening skills. In the shorter term however,
this record is also to build my own confidence in presenting listening materials and tasks to
my classes. By investigating the theory behind the development of listening skills, and by
experimenting with classroom activities I aim to support my own development. The
3

Chris Esson

Developmental Record

activities taken from the authors mentioned above will be for my students, but also for
myself in exploring the process of listening in the classroom and supporting students in
extending this process to listening in the real-world.

Chris Esson

Developmental Record

Classes Taught
09/02/15 10:55 IH5
I set a listening task taken from a coursebook, but also ran a dicta-gloss activity on a short
section. The short segment was an answer phone message for a doctors surgery. My
instructions were to record first the important words that were heard, and with each
subsequent listening add more. After playing the segment three times students worked in
pairs to recreate the full text. As a class we compared what they had written with the
script. On the board I highlighted a section many students had had problems with oh, and
our hours of operation are.... Students could not hear the separation of the words and put
in their own guesses.
17/02/15 10:55 IH5
I took a listening from a coursebook and ran the comprehension tasks. I then ran a gap fill
activity which I had created. Using the script I gapped the grammar words in selected
third conditional sentences (the grammar focus of the lesson and the original material).
This gapped listening came before we had explicitly studied the grammar in the class. The
students found the gaps very difficult to complete, and in many cases did not fill them
correctly. They often did not hear negatives, and have as an auxiliary. Some students
recorded will in place of would. When we looked at the grammar structure we also
looked at the phonology, especially the contractions, weak syllables and elision.
23/02/15 10:55 IH5
Based on the grammar and listening exercise from the previous week (17/02 and 18/02) I
created a short listening text. The text contained examples of past modals and the third
conditionals. The phonological features of connected speech in relation to these grammar
structures had been a focus of our classes in the previous week. I recorded the text with a
colleague, speaking at a pace approaching rapid casual speech (Roach, 2009). The task was
a gapped text, with the grammar words (modals, verbs and auxiliaries) having been
removed. The students completed the task much more successfully that the listening on the
17/02. This listening was completed as a revision exercise at the start of the lesson.
05/03/15 10:55 IH5
Using a short section of a Youtube video I ran a comprehension exercise, where students
5

Chris Esson

Developmental Record

had made predictions based on a series of questions I had set. Following this I divided
students into groups and told them to work together to write the script of a twenty-fivesecond section of the video. The groups took their smartphones to different rooms and
together accessed the recording to listen and write what they heard. The recording was a
video presentation in which the presenter spoke very fast. The students found the listening
hard, and did not complete some sections. We compared what they had written with the
script and noticed the squeeze zones (Cauldwell, 2013). It was interesting to note that I
had taken the script from Youtube's automated subtitles. The voice-recognition program
used by Youtube made mistakes in the same areas that the students did parts of speech
that were squeezed so much that they were not fully articulated. Elements of drafting were
among those that students struggled with, especially repetition and the phrase you know.
05/03/15 14:25 IH5
My afternoon class requested that we focus on the pronunciation of rapid, causal English
speech especially coulda, shoulda and woulda. To these three I added gonna, and
the unreal past. The first half of the lesson was extremely difficult, as I had not considered
how much grammar there was to cover. However, when I ran a listening including the
target language the students did well, and they finally produced some excellent dialogues
themselves in which they used the informal contractions. The listening text was two short
dialogues from which I gapped the grammar words. Having drilled the contracted forms
the students were aware of their changed articulation and completed the gaps. Some of the
students used the rapid, causal pronunciation in their own performed dialogues.
30/04/15 9:00 IH6
On the 29/04 I ran a dicta-gloss activity from a coursebook listening task. I played a
twelve second section with elements of connected speech and asked students to write what
they heard. All but one of the students mistook want for one in the sentence Choices
make people want things. I highlighted the assimilation of the final consonant. Based on
this created five sentences, which I recorded five different colleagues saying at rapid, casual
speed. For each short sentence I gave a basic description of the situation and asked
students whether they heard one or want. They completed this task excellently,
although only one student noticed the trick sentence in which I had included both: That's
the one that I want. The purpose of this activity was to reinforce the focus of the previous
6

Chris Esson

Developmental Record

day and to encourage them in their ability to make these distinctions.

30/04/15 10:55 IH7
I ran a comprehension task taken from a coursebook with the students using a piece of
authentic radio interview. I chose a forty second section and asked students to notice the
drafting phenomena (Cauldwell, 2013:81) used repeatedly by the speaker: erm, you
know,

and repetition. I asked students to raise their left, right and both hands

respectively when they heard these phenomena. Students enjoyed the sometimes frantic
flapping of their hands as the speaker drafted his words. They were also surprised at how
many times in such a short section the same phenomena occurred. It was an interesting
diagnostic tool as a teacher, because in some instance I was able to see stronger students
hear and respond to phenomena and watch less strong students responding occasionally
not to the listening but to their peers. The purpose of this exercise was to make students
aware of the ways in which native speakers draft their words in spontaneous speech.
01/05/15 09:00 IH6
I ran a dicta-gloss activity taken from the coursebook. I played five short sentences which
included conditional structures. I asked the students for feedback after each play-through
and repeated the text three times at their request. Once complete the students compared
their sentences against the script. Although we had studied the grammar rules, we had not
highlighted any of the phonological features of the structures. It was apparent that the
students did not hear the contracted modal verbs will ('ll) and would ('d). Following
this we looked at the stressed words in the phrases and the relative weak forms and fast
pace of all the unstressed words. Based on another teachers experience of the same task I
included some context in the fifth sentence which I said was outside a club. Despite this,
however, only one student heard you can't come in unless you're a member, instead of
...you remember which the rest of the class decoded incorrectly. In the final part of the
lesson students wrote their own examples and placed in it word stress and features of
connected speech. They performed their sentences to the other groups.
05/05/15 09:00 IH6
I completed a gap-fill listening activity with the students taken from the coursebook. In
addition to this I asked them to notice what happened to the words around four of the five
7

Chris Esson

Developmental Record

gaps. They noticed that in three of the four sentences their was assimilation as the
soundshapes changed in connected speech. Interestingly, they did not notice that the fourth
sentence contained no features of connected speech and was in fact unnaturally stressed
(probably because the speaker was being recorded for a language text book). In the
authentic interviews that followed the students raised questions about some of the
speakers. Working from the script we noticed the elisions and assimilations that occurred.

Chris Esson

Developmental Record

Evaluation and Conclusions

The research that I have done has been extremely interesting not only in raising my
students' awareness of the features of connected speech, but also in raising my own
awareness. It has, for the most part, been easy to prepare and teach these lessons. Except
in a small number of lessons in which I created my own, I have used and adapted listening
texts taken from coursebooks. By listening to the texts and focusing on features which I
think are worth highlighting to my classes I have chosen sections with which I can set new
tasks to check students ability to decode the speech. As recommended by Field, Cauldwell
and Thorn, these sections are short, only a few seconds, but provide enough material to
really engage students.
Of primary importance to me in this research has been that students have responded very
positively to these activities. They are interested in the ways people speak English, and
appreciate the focus on this in the classroom. In particular, it has been rewarding to see
how students engaged with activities which focused on those features they find most
difficult to understand. In diagnostic exercises following listening tasks we have worked
together with listening scripts to understand the differences between the written text and
the spoken articulation of this text. Where features are reasonably consistent, for example
functional words and contractions, I have highlighted and drilled these features. Students
have occasionally expressed amazement that the sound substance can be related to the
text, especially where there is zero realisation of certain sounds. It has been my aim,
however, to make students aware of this and indicate features of the speech they can use to
decode these sections.
The most valuable activities have been when I ran a diagnostic listening exercise and
followed this up with repeated practice in the features disclosed by this diagnosis. Where I
have given students a gapped text or a dictagloss and become aware of features that they
find difficult, I have sometimes created my own listening texts to focus attention on these
features. The best of these have followed a phonological focus on sound features of
connected speech, and students have performed better in these repeated activities than in
the earlier diagnostic activities.
Much of my focus in the series of lessons has been on connected speech and non-prominent
9

Chris Esson

Developmental Record

syllables. I discovered early on in my practice that it was the contracted forms of

functional grammar words, for example modals and contractions, that students found most
difficult. This is backed up by Cauldwell who argues that essential meanings are often
communicated in fast non-prominent syllables [...] non-prominent syllables constitute a
very important part of the rhythmic flow of the substance of speech. Therefore if learners
want to become affective listeners then they need to become familiar and comfortable with
such stretches of spontaneous speech (2013:114). This focus on the grammatical features
becoming non-prominent has perhaps drawn me away from a more general focus on
teaching listening skills. This may be a deficiency in my original rationale, which would
have benefited from being more focused. However, as I began my lesson practices I quickly
realised that this was an area that interested me and proved a challenge to my students.
Because my lessons have focused on the phonological features of connected speech, my
original rationale stands as a point of departure for further professional development. Their
are areas of listening, and in particular other listening skills, which I have not addressed.
Having taken suggestions from my reading on this subject, I would like to do further
research in strengthening listening further beyond the phonological focus of this record.
One point to consider in relation to the lessons I have taught with this focus is that the
level of the students has been from intermediate to advanced (CEFR B1 to C1). This has
been as a result of my timetable. Nevertheless, it is a point to bear in mind as I move on
from this practice that the tasks I have set may need to be adapted again if I were teach
lower level classes. In particular the use of authentic materials (on two occasions), the
focus on fast connected speech, and the original listening I have created would need some
consideration before being used with lower levels. This is not to say that the similar
activities could not be used with lower level students. Both Cauldwell and Field
recommend the use of authentic materials with lower level students.
Overall, the focus of this record had been teaching listening as a skill by raising awareness
of the phonological features of connected speech. The justification for this approach is to
help students to decode the speech they will encounter outside the classroom in the realworld and in an exam setting. Ultimately, teaching in this way is about encouraging learner
autonomy. Focusing on listening involves preparing learners so that they can take full
10

Chris Esson

Developmental Record

advantage of the sources of linguistic information that the real world provides (Field,
2008:5).
Based on my research and classroom experience I have set myself three classroom goals:
1. I will consider and adapt where necessary the listening tasks which coursebooks set.
It is not necessary to create new materials, and listening texts can be adapted.
Following the suggestion to use short section of listening it is also easy to extract
sections which exemplify certain phonological features.
2. If I have diagnosed a need in students listening I will draw attention to this area
repeatedly. My most successful lessons were those where I set listening tasks based
on feature we had previously covered. After I raised their awareness students found
that they could better decode the same features in different texts. This reinforced
the lessons of the original session and encouraged the students by showing them
evidence of their improvement.
3. I will teach the phonological features of connected speech wherever possible. In
lessons where I have had a both a grammatical and a vocabulary focus I have
considered the ways in which the soundshape of words change and highlighted this
to the students. Phonology is a consistent feature of my lessons and I now consider
this for productive and receptive justifications for this.

11

Chris Esson

Developmental Record

Bibliography
Cauldwell, R.(2013) Phonology for Listening. Speech in Action, Birmingham.
Field, J. (2008) Listening in the Language Classroom. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge.
Rost, M. (2001) Listening, in The Cambridge Guide to Teaching English to Speakers of
Other Languages, eds. Ronald Carter & David Nunan. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge.
Roach, P. (2009) English Phonetics and Phonology. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge.
Thorn, S. (2013) Practical guidance on training students to cope with authentic spoken
English, online. Available at:
http://englishagenda.britishcouncil.org/seminars/practical-guidance-training-studentscope-authentic-spoken-english [Accessed 12/04/15].
Underhill, A. (2005) Sound Foundations: Learning and Teaching Pronunciation. Macmillan
Education, Oxford.

12