1. 研究目的与意义（文献综述包含参考文献）

Study on Correlation between Metacognitive Awareness and Listening Competence 元认知意识与听力能力的相关性研究 1. Introduction Metacognition has been regarded as an important role in academic learning (Borkowski, 1996) and language learning (Victori amp; Lockhart, 1995; Wenden, 1991). It is also recognized to be a predictor of learning (Van Hout-Wolters, Veenman, amp; Afflerbach, 2006). Despite the fact that metacognition is important to learning, its position in foreign language learning has only been confirmed in recent two decades (Cross, 2010; Goh, 1997; Vandergrift amp; Tafaghodtari, 2010). Empirical studies that support the efficacy of instruction that raises learners#8217; awareness of listening process through strategy training are becoming more and more (Cross, 2001; Liu amp; Goh, 2006; Vandergrift amp; Tafaghodtari, 2010). L2 listening is an cognitive, interactive process, which involves neurological, semantic, and pragmatic processing (Rost, 2011). Hence, the factors may show impact on the listening are considered crucial. Since the studies of metacognitive awareness and listening are relatively new in learning and teaching of English listening, it is necessary to explore the relationship between the two variables more broadly and more deeply. In China, there is a lack of studies on the difference in metacognitive awareness between skilled and unskilled listeners (Shi, 2009). This study was designed to investigate this kind of correlation, and specially the influence five sub-factors of metacognitive awareness may exert on L2 listening competence. The Metacognitive Awareness Listening Questionnaire (MALQ) was adopted to represent learners#8217; knowledge of their use of listening strategies and perceptions of themselves. In spite of the fact that some studies have used MALQ to study the concept, this paper would present a more detail-oriented illustration of the correlation between metacognitive awareness and listening competence. 2. Literature Review 2.1. Definition of metacognitive awareness Flavell, the foundation researcher in the area of metacognition, made a definition of metacognition as the following: "In any kind of cognitive transaction with the human or non-human environment, a variety of information processing activities may go on. Metacognition refers, among other things, to the active monitoring and consequent regulation and orchestration of these processes in relation to the cognitive objects or data on which they bear, usually in service of some concrete goal or objective." (Flavell, 1976). Paris and Winograd (1990) summarized numerous definitions and they thought that metacognition, which featured by self-evaluation and self-management, included declarative knowledge and procedural knowledge. Second language researchers have reached an agreement that metacognition plays a significant role in improving the ability of thinking and understanding (Byrnes, 1996; Costa, 2001). The present paper adopts Flavell#8217;s definition. After many years of research, the problems come up that how can second language researchers extract the language learners#8217; awareness during listening process by an effective tooling system on the base of metacognition theory. After reading a lot of literature and repeating modifying, Vandergrift designed Metacognitive Awareness Listening Questionnaire (MALQ) in 2006 to evaluate the metacognitive awareness during listening process. When designing the questionnaire, Vandergrift used Flavell#8217;s (1979) metacognition model (person knowledge, task knowledge, and strategy knowledge) and Wenden#8217;s (1998) metacognition process model (planning, monitoring, evaluating and problem-solving) for reference. He divided metacognition knowledge into five aspects: problem-solving, planning amp; evaluation, mental translation, person knowledge and directed attention. 2.2 Metacognitive awareness and L2 listening Basing on Flavell#8217;s (1979) conception of metacognition, Vandergrift and Goh proposed a metacognitive framework L2 listening (Vandergrift amp; Goh, 2012). They claimed that features of metacognition could be demonstrated in three ways: metacognitive experience, metacognitive knowledge and strategy use (Vandergrift amp; Goh, 2012). Metacognitive experience and metacognitive knowledge are both crucial dimensions of metacognition as they can encourage learners to form a system of plans, managements and self-control awareness in the learning process in various ways. Like the above two dimensions, the use of special learning strategies or skills is also a key component of metacognition. It is helpful in facilitating the listening process and reducing the difficulty of materials. Listening strategies are categorized as cognitive, metacognitive, and social-affective (Cross, 2009; Goh, 1998; Goh amp; Hu, 2014). Cognitive strategies are used to manipulate listening input directly in order to arrive at meanings of words and interpretations of a message. Metacognitive strategies are used to manage these cognitive processes by influencing their operations through processes of planning, monitoring, problem-solving and evaluation. Social interaction strategies involve getting the help and input of other participants in an interaction, while affective strategies are needed to help learners manage some debilitating emotions such as nervousness and anxiety (Elkhafaifi, 2005; Goh amp; Hu, 2014; Vogely, 1999). 2.3 Empirical studies The last three decades witnessed a growing number of research focusing on L2 listeners#8217; metacognitive awareness. Researchers home and abroad conducted empirical studies on metacognitive strategies used by second language listeners, for example, Vandergrift (2005) explored relationships among metacognitive awareness, motivation orientations and proficiency in the second language Listening. In 2009, Chang and Li conducted an empirical study on the correlation among metacognitive strategies, listening comprehension and incidental vocabulary acquisition. Some studies indicated that there was a link between metacognitive knowledge and listening level (Suzanah amp; Gurnam, 2013; Vandergrift, 2006; Yang, 2003). Suzanah and Gurnam (2013) found that students who frequently use metacognitive strategies in the lecture listening tended to score higher in the listening test. By comparing the students#8217; scores before and after the metacognitive awareness training, Yang drawn the conclusion pointing to the importance of metacognitive awareness. There are also studies found that good listeners would use appropriate strategies to help themselves succeed more frequently (Chen, 2009; Goh,1998; Goh, 2002; Vandergrift, 1997; Zeng, 2012). Goh (2002) found that language learners with higher listening level were more likely to be aware of the problems encountered in the listening process. Zeng (2012) reached a conclusion that Chinese students had a fairly high degree of metacognitive awareness of listening in aspects like problem-solving, person knowledge and planning and evaluation. Some researchers claimed that weak listeners would easily blocked by vocabulary of information they had predicted before the listening process and did not tend to facilitate their understanding with their contextual knowledge (Christing C.M. Goh amp; Guangwei Hu; Graham, Santos amp; Vanderplank (2008). Research that studied L2 listeners#8217; self-knowledge of the listening process has claimed that listeners do have the ability to evaluate their learning outcomes or metacognitive knowledge about themselves more or less (Cross, 2010; Goh, 1997). Variations as knowledge about the listening and usage of strategies could be influenced by other personal or social factors such as age (Goh amp; Taib, 2006), motivation (Vandergrift), nature of peer dialogues (Cross, 2010), and listening ability (Goh, 1999). Goh (1999) made the conclusion that low-competence listeners were less clear about strategies and techniques which could facilitate their listening comprehension. Not only that, their knowledge about how other factors such as speakers#8217; positions may impact on their listening was limited. Furthermore, diachronic studies on metacognitive awareness and listening also could not be ignored. In 2014, Yu and Zhang combined MALQ and the listening test, and finally found that in the different periods of listening process, the regulatory effect of five aspects of metacognitive awareness on listening are different too (Yu amp; Zhang, 2014). In general, the results of the previous studies have been similar broadly, but there still exists the necessity to explore the issue more deeply. 2.4 Limitations of previous studies In the past few decades, an increasing number of researchers and scholars have come into notice the necessities of studying the potential correlation between metacognitive awareness and listening proficiency. However, there are still some insufficiencies in former researches. On one hand, as mentioned before, previously studies which adopt MALQ as the instrument are relatively new, especially in China. Furthermore, there are fewer studies on the correlation between metacognitive awareness and listening proficiency compared with those on the metacognitive awareness and reading comprehension. Therefore, more studies are needed to enlarge the research field. On the other hand, lots of research just take the metacognitive awareness as a whole and explore the potential correlation from a macro perspective. In other words, both macro and micro analyses should be taken into consideration. To sum up, there are still many gaps in the previous studies that need to be filled, which call for the implement of the current study.

2. 研究的基本内容、问题解决措施及方案

3. Methodology 3.1 Research Questions The study explores the relationship metacognitive awareness and listening competence. The specific research questions are the following: Question 1: Is there any correlation between L2 learners#8217; metacognitive awareness of listening and their listening performance? Question 2: Is there any correlation between the five aspects of metacognitive awareness and listening competence? Question 3: What is the difference between high-score group and low-score group in metacognitive awareness? 3.2 Participants The participants will be 48 English majors in their first academic year in Nanjing Tech University. The subjects are not chosen on purpose because they are having college English classes together when the study is carried out. Most of them start learning English in middle school. All of the participants are native speakers of Chinese and they learn English as the second language. What's more, they pass the entrance examination to college and have studied college English for one year. They all aim to improve their English proficiency, especially listening competence to a higher level. 3.3 Instrument and procedure listening test When assessing listening, the investigation adopts a TOEFL test to make the listening competence observable. To guarantee the proper difficulty of the research, the recording script, which will last for about 3 minutes, will be chosen from TOEFL. The test will include the multiple-choice, true or false questions and short-answer questions. The question types are diversified enough to ensure the comprehensiveness. One point for every one right, and the total score is 10. The participants who score higher or equal to 7 are the high-score group and the rest are the low-score group. MALQ The MALQ, a self-report instrument, consists of 21 randomly ordered options related to L2 listening comprehension (Vandergrift and Susan, 2015). All the 21 options adopt the form of Likert Scale six component table (from ”1#8217; to ”6#8217; represents ”strongly disagree#8217; to ”strongly agree#8217;). Statements 3,4,16 are worded negatively and items 4, 11 and 18 are sub-factors of mental translation#8212;strategies that ESL learners should avoid. Therefore, when it comes to these 6 items, researchers has to exchange the score of 1 and 5 and of 2 and 4. The scores participants get are regarded as their own level of metacognitive awareness and of listening processes. the interview After completing the questionnaire, ten randomly selected students will be invited to conduct an interview, which may enhance the reliability of the study and shed more light on the details. 3.4 Data collection and analysis A listening test will be conducted twice among the 48 English major students in Nanjing Tech University. Ten minutes after those questions are finished, questionnaires will be distributed to the students. Then the researcher gathers the papers. In order to make sure they finish the questions naturally, the researcher won#8217;t tell them about our research purpose. After 10 minutes break, ten of the participants will be interviewed. The data will be analyzed through SPSS 16.0