ABSTRACT

 

The present study was an attempt to investigate the potential relationship among three variables, namely English Language Teachers’ Teaching Styles(TS), Neuro-Linguistic Programming(NLP), and Autonomy (Au). To this end, at the onset of the study, a group of 200 experienced English language teachers at various language schools in Tehran, inter alia Asre Zaban Language Academy, with at least two years of teaching experience were given three questionnaires relevant to the  variables of the study, among which 162 instruments were returned. After being verified, 129 questionnaires, which had been thoroughly completed, were selected. In order to seek the relationship between the variables, non-parametric Kruskal Wallis and Mann Whitney tests as well as Spearman rho were employed; as a result of which a significant relationship was detected between TS and AU and NLP and TS; however, in terms of the third null hypothesis, NLP was found to be significantly related only to General autonomy. In addition, regression analysis was performed to see whether or not the degree of prediction between the five teaching styles and NLP as predictor variables was different towards teachers’ autonomy as predicted variable; to this end, preparatory analyses were conducted to ensure no violation of the assumptions of normality, multicollinearity and homoscedasticity. Consequently, teachers’ teaching styles turned out to be the superior variable in predicting teachers’ autonomy.

 

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

 

Title Page .. I

 

ABSTRACT IV

 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .. … ..V

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS …VII

 

LIST OF TABLES         ..XI

 

LIST OF FIGURES ..XIV

 

CHAPTER I: BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE .. .1

 

1.1     Introduction .2

 

1.2.    Statement of the Problem . .. .4

 

1.3.    Statement of the Research Questions ……….. . ..5

 

1.4.    Statement of the Research Hypotheses       … 6

 

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

 

1.5.1. Teachers’ teaching Styles: …………………. …..7

 

1.5.2. Autonomy: … 8

 

1.5.3. Neuro-Linguistic Programming: .. ….9

 

1.6.    Significance of the Study .. … .10

 

1.7.    Limitations, Delimitations …. 11

 

1.7.1. Limitations … . .11

 

1.7.2. Delimitations . 12

 

CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF THE RELATED LITERATURE ..13

 

2.1.    Introduction … 14

 

2.2.    Teachers’ Teaching Styles .15

 

2.2.1. Definition & Influencing Factors .. … 15

 

2.2.2. Learners’ side: learning styles, strategies, prefer..ences and nee . …..17

 

2.2.3.          Performance and Context . .20

 

2.2.4.          Teaching Approaches and Methodologies … .21

 

2.3.    Neuro-Linguistic Programming .. . .24

 

2.3.1. History …25

 

2.3.2.          Definition . …. .26

 

2.3.3.          NLP Fundamentals, Products & Essence .. 29

 

2.4.    Autonomy ..31

 

2.4.1.   Definition .. ..31

 

2.4.2. Learners’ Autonomy vs. Teachers’ Autonomy . 34

 

2.4.3. Autonomy in Language Learning Setting .. .. .38

 

CHAPTER III: METHODOLOGY .. . ….41

 

3.1.    Introduction .. .42

 

3.2.    Participants … . 42

 

3.3.    Instrumentation .. 43

 

3.3.1. Grasha Teaching Style Inventory Questionnaire ..44

 

3.3.2. Neuro-Linguistic Programming Questionnaire … .45

 

3.3.3.          Teacher Autonomy Survey 48

 

3.4.    Procedure….. ……49

 

3.5.    Design ….50

 

3.6.    Statistical Analyses …51

 

CHAPTER IV: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION …52

 

4.1.    Introduction …53

 

4.2.    The Results of the Study . ..54

 

4.2.1.          Reliability of the Instruments .. ..54

 

4.2.1.1.       Reliability of Teachers’ Autonomy Scale………. .54

 

4.2.1.2.       Reliability of Grasha Teaching Style Inventory . 55

 

4.2.1.3.       Reliability of NLP Scale .56

 

4.2.2. Testing the First Null Hypothesis: . .. .56

 

4.2.2.1. Frequency Statistics of Different Teaching Styles .57

 

4.2.2.2. Descriptive Statistics ..58

 

4.2.2.3. Tests of Normality ..    72

 

4.2.2.4. Final Results                                                                                                 75

مقالات و پایان نامه ارشد

 

 

4.2.3. Testing the Second Null Hypothesis .78

 

4.2.3.1. Frequency Statistics of Different Teaching Styles.     ……. .78

 

4.2.3.2. Descriptive Statistics ..80

 

4.2.3.3.  Tests of Normality .86

 

4.2.3.4. Final Results …87

 

4.2.4.. Testing the Third Null Hypothesis ………………………………………..90

 

4.2.4.1. Assumption of Linearity .. … 90

 

4.2.4.2.Assumption of Normality .. …………..92

 

4.2.4.3. Final Results                                                                                       92

 

4.2.4. Testing the Fourth Null Hypothesis.. 93

 

4.2.4.1. Assumption of Multicollinearity 94

 

4.2.4.2. Assumption of Normality …97

 

4.2.4.3. Assumption of Homoscedasticity .. 99

 

4.3. Discussion …110

 

CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION AND PEDAGOGICAL IMPLICATIONS ….113

 

5.1.    Introduction .. …114

 

5.2.    Procedure and Summary of the Findings . ..114

 

5.3.    Conclusion ..116

 

5.4.    Pedagogical Implications .. ..117

 

5.4.1. Implications for EFL Teachers 117

 

5.4.2. Implications for EFL Learners .. ..118

 

5.4.3.           Implications for Language School Managers … ..119

 

5.4.4. Implications for Syllabus Designers …120

 

5.5.    Suggestions for Further Research …121

 

REFERENCES ..122

 

APPENDICES …131

 

Teaching Autonomy Scale  (Pearson & Moomaw, 2005)……………………………….132

 

Neuro-Linguistic Programming (Reza Pishghadam, 2011) ..135

 

Teaching Style Inventory: Version 3.0 (Grasha, 1994) .136

 

 

LIST OF TABLES

 

 

 

Table 3.1 Distribution of Questions with Relevant Teaching Styles                                          45

 

Table 3.2 Distribution of Questions with Relevant Autonomy Types                                                 49

 

Table 3.3 The Categories of the Variables                                                                                           50

 

Table 4.1 Reliability of Each Factor of NLP Questionnaire                                                      .56

 

Table 4.2 Expert Frequency Statistics .                                  57

 

Table 4.3 Formal Authority Frequency Statistics                                                                                  57

 

Table 4.4 Personal Model Frequency Statistics                                                                                     57

 

Table 4.5 Facilitator Frequency Statistics                                                                                    57

 

Table 4.6 Delegator Frequency Statistics                                                                                              58

 

Table 4.7 General, Curriculum and Total Autonomy Descriptives                                             58

 

Table 4.8 Autonomy Descriptives for Different Levels of Expert Teaching Style                                    60

 

Table 4.9 Autonomy Descriptives for Different Levels of Formal Authority Teaching Stylee              62

 

Table 4.10 Autonomy Descriptives for Different Levels of Personal Model Teaching Style                    65

 

Table 4.11 Autonomy Descriptives for Different Levels of Facilitator Teaching Style                          67

 

 

Table 4.12 Autonomy Descriptives for Different Levels of Delegator Teaching Style                          70

 

Table 4.13 Tests of Normality Regarding Expert                                                                                      73

 

Table 4.14 Tests of Normality Regarding Formal Authority                                                           73

 

Table 4.15Tests of Normality Regarding Personal Model                                                                         74

 

Table 4.16 Tests of Normality Regarding Facilitator                                                                         74

 

Table 4.17 Tests of Normality Regarding Delegator                                                                         74

 

Table 4.18 Comparing Autonomy across Categories of Expert                                                                  75

 

Table 4.19 Comparing Autonomy acrossCategories of Formal Authority                                                  76

 

Table 4.20 Comparing Autonomy acrossCategories of Personal Model                                                    76

 

Table 4.21 Comparing Autonomy across Categories of Facilitator                                                          77

 

Table 4.22 Comparing Autonomy across Categories of Delegator                                         77

 

Table 4.23 Expert Frequency Statistics                                                                                                     78

 

Table 4.24 Formal Authority Frequency Statistics                                                                                    78

 

Table 4.25  Personal Model Frequency Statistics                                                                                      78

 

Table 4.26 Facilitator Frequency Statistics                                                                                                78

 

Table 4.27 Delegator Frequency Statistics                                                                                                79

 

Table 4.28 NLP Descriptive Statistics                                                                                             80

 

Table 4.29 NLP Descriptives for Different Levels of Expert Teaching Style                                  80

 

Table 4.30 NLP Descriptives for Different Levels of Formal Authority Teaching Style                             82

 

Table 4.31 NLP Descriptives for Different Levels of Personal Model Teaching Style                    83

 

Table 4.32 NLP Descriptives for Different Levels of Facilitator Teaching Style                                     84

 

Table 4.33 NLP Descriptives for Different Levels of Delegator Teaching Style                                         85

 

Table 4.34 Tests of Normality Regarding Expert Style                                                                   86

 

Table 4.35 Tests of Normality Regarding Formal Authority Style                                                               86

 

Table 4.36 Tests of Normality Regarding Personal Model Style                                                                 87

 

Table 4.37 Tests of Normality Regarding Facilitator Style                                                             87

 

Table 4.38 Tests of Normality Regarding Delegator Style                                                              87

 

Table 4.39 Comparing NLP across Categories of Expert                                                                           88

 

Table 4.40 Comparing NLP across Categories of Formal Authority                                                88

 

Table 4.41 Comparing NLP across Categories of Personal Model                                                              88

 

Table 4.42 Comparing NLP across Categories of Facilitator                                                           89

 

Table 4.43 Comparing NLP across Categories of Delegator                                                            89

 

Table 4.44 Tests of Normality                                                                                                        92

 

Table 4.45 Correlations among Curriculum, General and Total Autonomy and NLP                      93

 

Table 4.46 General Autonomy Correlations                                                                                94

 

  Table 4.47 Curriculum Autonomy Correlations                                                                                        95

 

Table 4.48 Total Autonomy Correlations                                                                                                    96

 

Table 4.49 Descriptive Statistics of General Autonomy, Styles and NLP                                                  101

 

Table 4.50 Descriptive Statistics of Curriculum Autonomy, Styles and NLP                                102

 

Table 4.51 Descriptive Statistics of Total Autonomy, Styles and NLP                                          102

 

Table 4.52 Variables Entered/Removed                                                                                                    102

 

Table 4.53 Variables Entered/Removed                                                                                                    103

 

Table 4.54 Variables Entered/Removed                                                                                                    103

 

Table 4.55 Model Summary (General Autonomy)                                                                        104

 

Table 4.56 Model Summary (Total Autonomy)                                                                                        104

 

Table 4.57 Model Summary (Curriculum Autonomy)                                                                  104

 

Table 4.58 ANOVA (General Autonomy)                                                                                    105

 

Table 4.59 ANOVA (Curriculum Autonomy)                                                                               105

 

Table 4.60 ANOVA (Total Autonomy)                                                                                                    105

 

Table 4.61 Coefficientsa (Dependent Variable: General Autonomy)                                            107

 

Table 4.62 Coefficientsa (Dependent Variable: Curriculum Autonomy)                                                  108

 

Table 4.63 Coefficientsa (Dependent Variable: Total Autonomy)                                                            110

LIST OF FIGURES

 

 

 

Figure 4.1 General Autonomy Scatter Plot                                                                              90

 

Figure 4.2 Curriculum Autonomy Scatter Plot                                                                         90

 

Figure 4.3 Total Autonomy Scatter Plot                                                                                                90

 

Figure 4.4 The Normal Probability Plot of the Regression Standardized Residuals

 

Dependent Variable: General Autonomy                                                                                     98

 

Figure 4.5 The Normal Probability Plot of the Regression Standardized Residuals

 

Dependent Variable: Curriculum Autonomy                                                                               98

 

Figure 4.6 The Normal Probability Plot of the Regression Standardized Residuals

 

 Dependent Variable: Total Autonomy                                                                                                   99

 

Figure 4.7 Scatter plot of the Standardized Residuals Dependent Variable: General Autonomy        100

 

Figure 4.8 Scatter plot of the Standardized Residuals Dependent Variable: Total Autonomy    100

 

Figure 4.9 Scatter Plot of the Standardized Residuals Dependent Variable: Curriculum Autonomy         101

 

 

CHAPTER

 

BACKGROUND & PURPOSE

موضوعات: بدون موضوع  لینک ثابت


فرم در حال بارگذاری ...