both teachers and students are analyzed and compared to extract the principle
components that construct“task demands”and probe into different perspectives
from the two data sets as well. RQ 2.1 is very important as it addresses the
interaction between“task targets”and“cognitive processes”. In fact,“task targets”
influence both“task demands”and“cognitive processes”. RQ 2.2 again addresses
the relationship between cognitive processes and language competence in our
framework–“competence domain”. In academic listening, cognitive processes could
be regarded asindicatorsof test-takers’academic listening competence.
8.3 Linking Task Targets, Task Demands and Cognitive
Processes
8.3.1 Key-Point Gaps
Due to the limitation of key-point gaps available in the two research versions, we
cannot draw a conclusion whether this gap type only attains the decoding process.
On the other hand, based on the teachers’questionnaire data analysis, thefirst main
factor, dominant enough to catch our attention, is represented by the items centering
upon identifying key points of the lecture. So, ideally speaking, key-point gaps
should also target discourse-level comprehension. But the current TAP data cannot
support this task demand. A very obvious reason is that the key word to befilled in
the gap is neighbored by some given information as a clue for test-takers to retrieve
the exact words in their notes. In another word, they can get the key word for the
key point without comprehending or summarizing the details listed below the key
point.
8.3.2 Details Gaps
Details gaps aim to elicit detailed information, the supporting details of the main
points in the mini-lecture. Both teachers’and students’questionnaire data reflect the
task demands of decoding words. According to the teachers’as well as students’
perception, input decoding, i.e., decoding the acoustic variation in pronunciation,
intonation and accent, following the lecturer’s speed, etc., is also a main component
of the mini-lecture task demands. The Phase 1 verbal protocols have also proved
that unsuccessful decoding of words leads to failure in lexical selection and the
further meaning-construction process.
Referring back to the quantitative data, we canfind one of the main components
extracted from both teachers’and students’questionnaires is building details. This
component is represented by items containing repeated key words such as detailed
information, micro discourse markers, etc. Grasp of details is important in terms of
8.2 Research Questions Revisited 133