Page 93 - The SpeakTeach method - Esther de Vrind

1. to what extent the students were motivated to carry out the different main activities of the self-evaluation procedure;
2. to what extent students’ speaking anxiety changed after carrying out the self-evaluation procedure;
and we performed two different analyses:
Learners’ motivation for the different students’ main activities of the self-evaluation procedure
We first calculated the reliability (Cronbach's alpha) of the items in the questionnaire that should measure the same constructs, namely the different students’ main activities of the self- evaluation procedure: 1) recording and re-listening to their own speaking performance; 2) doing a self-evaluation of their own speaking performance; 3) producing a plan for improvement; 4) executing the plan for improvement. All proved to be reliable (respectively: α = .81; α =.79; α = .80; α = .79).
As in the analysis above for adaptivity, the data were structured hierarchically and linear multilevel analyses were applied, with teacher added as random intercept. Mixed repeated measures analyses (SPSS version 25, using the Satterwaithe’s approximation to calculate denominator degrees of freedom) were carried out in order to investigate whether there were differences in students’ motivation between the separate components of the self- evaluation procedure. Because student-ID was recorded for the four components, this factor was treated as a within-subjects factor in the analyses.
As before, we tested whether adding teacher (as random intercept) contributed significantly to the model by comparing the simpler with more complex models by comparing the difference in Log Likelihood and chi-squares. Analyses revealed that teacher contributed to the model.
Since significant differences were found between students’ motivation for the different main activities, we carried out pairwise comparisons with Bonferroni adjustment, to interpret the differences.
Speaking Anxiety
We investigated to what extent students’ speaking anxiety changed in a pre-test and after a few cycles (post-test). To do this we first calculated the reliability (Cronbach's alpha) of the 33
90
91
4