Using neuro-linguistic programming and transactional analysis tools to measure the English proficiency of Fl learners

Abdulrahman Almosa
{"title":"Using neuro-linguistic programming and transactional analysis tools to measure the English proficiency of Fl learners","authors":"Abdulrahman Almosa","doi":"10.58256/5ryw2v96","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Various methods are used to evaluate the English skills of non-native learners. Two approaches within cognitive science have garnered attention lately due to their potential usefulness in learning a foreign language and improving an individual's interpersonal and communicative skills. They include Transactional Analysis (TA) and Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP). Self-improvement, psychoeducation, and language teaching extensively use these psychological methods for assessing and evaluating students' behaviour. Communication skills, such as consciousness, fearlessness, and others, are essential to teach English in the classroom and can be trained through methods like NLP and TA. This study focused on measuring different variables that underpin proficiency in a foreign language. The six variables measured in this study include speaking, listening, reading, and writing skills. Grammar and vocabulary proficiency were also measured. The measuring instrument was the NLP and TA tools, and the method adopted for the study is an experimental approach. Two hundred high school students participated in both the pretest and posttest. Both the researcher and some selected teachers administered the tests. The findings of the study affirm that the participants generally performed better across the skill sets for proficiency in the posttest, more than what is seen in the pretest. This indicates that the tools help measure and facilitate learning different FL proficiency skills. The study further revealed that the students performed better during the posttest in the TA test than in the NLP test. The findings also indicated that the students performed better in speaking and listening skills in both the posttests of NLP and TA tests. It is thus concluded that TA and NLP are critical tools to measure students' progress in certain areas of FL learning.","PeriodicalId":516818,"journal":{"name":"Research Journal in Advanced Humanities","volume":"108 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research Journal in Advanced Humanities","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.58256/5ryw2v96","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Various methods are used to evaluate the English skills of non-native learners. Two approaches within cognitive science have garnered attention lately due to their potential usefulness in learning a foreign language and improving an individual's interpersonal and communicative skills. They include Transactional Analysis (TA) and Neuro-Linguistic Programming (NLP). Self-improvement, psychoeducation, and language teaching extensively use these psychological methods for assessing and evaluating students' behaviour. Communication skills, such as consciousness, fearlessness, and others, are essential to teach English in the classroom and can be trained through methods like NLP and TA. This study focused on measuring different variables that underpin proficiency in a foreign language. The six variables measured in this study include speaking, listening, reading, and writing skills. Grammar and vocabulary proficiency were also measured. The measuring instrument was the NLP and TA tools, and the method adopted for the study is an experimental approach. Two hundred high school students participated in both the pretest and posttest. Both the researcher and some selected teachers administered the tests. The findings of the study affirm that the participants generally performed better across the skill sets for proficiency in the posttest, more than what is seen in the pretest. This indicates that the tools help measure and facilitate learning different FL proficiency skills. The study further revealed that the students performed better during the posttest in the TA test than in the NLP test. The findings also indicated that the students performed better in speaking and listening skills in both the posttests of NLP and TA tests. It is thus concluded that TA and NLP are critical tools to measure students' progress in certain areas of FL learning.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
使用神经语言程序设计和交易分析工具衡量 Fl 学习者的英语水平
评估非母语学习者英语技能的方法多种多样。最近,认知科学中的两种方法因其在学习外语和提高个人人际交往与沟通技能方面的潜在作用而备受关注。这两种方法包括事务分析法(TA)和神经语言程序学(NLP)。自我提高、心理教育和语言教学广泛使用这些心理学方法来评估和评价学生的行为。意识、无畏等交流技能是课堂英语教学的基本要素,可以通过 NLP 和 TA 等方法进行训练。本研究侧重于测量支撑外语熟练程度的不同变量。本研究测量的六个变量包括口语、听力、阅读和写作技能。此外,还对语法和词汇水平进行了测量。测量工具是 NLP 和 TA 工具,研究采用的方法是实验法。200 名高中生参加了前测和后测。研究人员和一些选定的教师共同进行了测试。研究结果表明,参加后测的学生在熟练掌握各套技能方面的表现普遍优于前测。这表明,这些工具有助于测量和促进不同语言技能的学习。研究进一步显示,在后测期间,学生在 TA 测试中的表现优于 NLP 测试。研究结果还表明,在 NLP 和 TA 测试的后测中,学生在口语和听力技能方面的表现都更好。因此,我们得出结论,TA 和 NLP 是衡量学生在某些语言学习领域取得进步的重要工具。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Investigating the impact of automated instruments used for assessing the writing skill: Perspectives of language e-learners Reflection of gender divisions and feminine consciousness in Caryl Churchill’s ‘Owners’ Hybrid Idol in Virtual Idols: Constructing a New Perspective on Idol Studies in Film and Media The componential semantic reflection of Russian energy industry terms in scientific articles Enhancing pedagogical creativity: A comprehensive study of self-professional development among ESL educators
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1