6.5.3 Coding Schemes of the Three Phases.................
Cohen (1998) used cognitive processes and strategies interchangeably while
describing the test-takers’cognitive behavior in the test-taking process. In Goh’s
(2002) research upon L2 learners’cognitive and metacognitive listening strategies,
she used the term‘tactic’to refer to individual techniques through which a general
strategy, i.e., cognitive and metacognitive strategies, is operationalised. Richard and
Yan (2012) followed Goh’s category of strategies and tactics in analyzing the
think-aloud protocols of native speakers of Chinese while they were taking an
IELTS listening test. So far, there have emerged quite a number of influential
strategy frameworks that encompass different categorization of learner strategies
(e.g., Cohen 1998, 2002, 2007; Dörnyei 1997; Faerch and Kasper 1983; Macaro
2001; O’Malley and Chamot 1990; Oxford 1990; Vandergrift 2003).
However, in Chap. 3 , we already discussed the shift from product to process
orientation in language testing. In order to clarify the coding scheme and assist the
analysis of coded protocols, I only employ the term“cognitive processes”and their
corresponding specific“cognitive operations”in the protocol inventories and the
corresponding analysis.
There are three causes leading to the consistent use of the term“processes”:1.
Simplify terminology and make my analysis rigorous and readable; 2. Follow
Field’s argument that listening is a process instead of a result; 3. Help sequence
those complicated operations and present a comprehensive framework of lecture
comprehension construct, because taking an academic listening test involves
complicated cognitive behavior.
On the other hand, since test-wiseness strategies involve“using knowledge of
testing formats and other peripheral information to answer test items without going
through the expected cognitive processes”(Cohen 2012: 264), the test-wiseness
strategies are listed as independent of the test-taking cognitive processes.
The following (Table6.9) is an inventory of cognitive operations in Phase 1-
test-taking process:
In this coding scheme, there are two coding levels. Thefirst level is the cognitive
processes test-takers’underwent while they were completing the gap-filling task.
This level is significant in constructing the lecture comprehension construct
framework. Self-evidently, those cognitive processes are not coming from TAPs
directly. The individual codes should be the second level of this coding scheme. For
example, in the decoding plus selective attention process, participants naturally
need to read the information in the task, so, in the coding scheme and further
analysis, we will just employ cognitive process to categorize test-takers’cognitive
behavior during their test-taking period.
6.5 Transcription of TAPs, Retelling Protocols and Interviews 83