The Effect of the Neuro-linguistic Programming (NLP) on PFL learners' Autonomy and Self-efficacy

Document Type : Research

Authors

1 Department of English and Linguistics, Zanjan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Zanjan, Iran.

2 Department of English and Linguistics, Zanjan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Zanjan, Iran

3 Department of English and Linguistics, Zanjan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Zanjan, Iran,

4 Department of English and Linguistics, Zanjan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Zanjan, Iran.,

Abstract

Neuro Linguistic Programing (NPL) is an approach that offers strategies to deal with life’s opportunities. It makes us aware of how things work, encouraging us to study and model successful people in different situations. This, in turn, can help us improve our communication both consciously and unconsciously. Besides, it enhances our ability to master changes. The term “neuro”, reflects the impact of our sensory input on our neurological function. It suggests that becoming a better learner involves listening better and are more observant, so we are more open to our own and other people’s experience. This helps us to make good decisions. The term “linguistic” emphasizes the importance of language awareness in getting better information to make decisions. By “programing”, we mean habits. NLP teaches us how we can develop and encourage useful habits. In general, NLP means using language to program our nervous system into more useful habits. NLP teaches that people can directly perceive a small part of the world using their conscious awareness, and that this view of the world is filtered by experience, beliefs, values, assumptions, and biological sensory system. NLP argues that people act and feel based on their perception of the world and their subjective experience of it. Using NLP, a person can model the more successful parts of their own behaviors to reproduce them in areas where they are less successful. It is believed that learners must develop their linguistic strategies to become independent (Harmer, 2001). The outcomes of some studies on Neuro-linguistic programing illustrate that these techniques will be helpful in second language learning. To highlight NLP techniques in second language learning, Tosey and Mathison (2003) have gone to great lengths. On the other hand, scientists believe that the use of these techniques and programs is one of the ways to reach independence (Holec, 1981). Unfortunately, so far, there has been a scarcity in the studies of the role of NLP in different fields (Moore, 2009). Teachers as well as students mostly focus their education on the content, without caring about the dominance over the learners’ minds. The authors of this study found limited research on NLP techniques within the scope of teaching Persian to speakers of other languages (TPSOL). In English, the study of the relationship between NLP and other variables such as gender, education level, experience, and academic achievements has been accounted for (Pishghadam, Shapoori, & Shayesteh, 2011). This study is significant for several reasons. First, it aims to improve learner independence, which is crucial for foreign language learning. Second, it explores the impact of NLP on the psychological aspect of language learning. Additionally, NLP techniques can lead to learner autonomy.

Keywords

References

  1. Arkoç, E. Ş. (2008). The impact of learner autonomy on the success of listening Comprehension [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Trakya University. https://unis.trakya.edu.tr/tez-detay/2_CJauE30_23/the-impact-of-learner-autonomy-on-the-success-of-listening-comprehension
  2. Bandler, R., & Grinder, J. (1979). Frogs into princes. Real People Press. https://archive.org/details/frogsintoprinces00band_0
  3. Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191-215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.84.2.191
  4. Bernhardt, E. (1997). Victim narratives or victimizing narratives? Discussions of the reinvention of language departments and language programs. ADFL Bulletin 29 (i), 13-19. https://www.Eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ555696
  5. Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy. Addison Wesley Longman, Inc. https://www.scirp.org/reference/referencespapers?referenceid=1690483
  6. Chan, V., Spratt, M., & Humphreys, G. (2002). Autonomous language learning: Hong Kong tertiary students’ attitudes and behaviours. Journal of Evaluation and Research in Education, 16(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500790208667003
  7. Dilts, R., Bandler, R., & DeLozier, J. (1980). Neuro-linguistic programming: The study of the structure of subjective experience. Meta Publications. https://www.amazon.com/Neuro-Linguistic-Programming-Structure-Subjective-Experience/dp/0916990079
  8. Einspruch, E. L. & Forman, B. D. (1985). Observations concerning research literature on neuro-linguistic programming. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 32(4), 589-596. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.32.4.589
  9. Fathi, J., Samadi,M., Nourzadeh,S., & Saharkhiz Arabani, A. (2021). The relationship among self-efficacy, self-concept, and burnout among Iranian EFL teachers: A structural equation modelling analysis. Journal of Language Research, 13(39), 33-55. https://doi.org/10.22051/jlr.2020.31200.1872. [In Persian].
  10. Freeth, P. (2003). NLP-skills for learning: A practical handbook for increasing learning potential. Communications in Action. https://repository.vnu.edu.vn/handle/VNU_123/75753?mode=simple
  11. Gist, M. E. (1987). Self-efficacy: Implications for organizational behavior and human resource management. Academy of management review, 12(3), 472-485. https://doi.org/10.2307/258514
  12. Haghi, M. (2009). The relationship between perceived self-efficacy and Iranian EFL learners’ autonomy [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch. https://journals.aiac.org.au/index.php/IJALEL/article/view/958
  13. Harmer, J. (2001). The practice of English language teaching. Pearson Education Limited.
  14. Heap, M. (2008) The validity of some early claims of neuro-linguistic programming. Skeptical Intelligencer, 11, 6-13. https://www.aske-skeptics.org.uk/nlp5.pdf
  15. Helm, D. J. (1990). Neuro-linguistic programming: Equality as to distribution of learning modalities. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 17(3), 159-160. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Improving-English-Instruction-through-Programming.-Helm/299aa90dfe604a2b47e856be8e8e65a1d3f72ef3
  16. Helm, D. J. (2009). Improving English instruction through Neuro-Linguistic Programming. Education, 130 (1), 110-113. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Improving-English-Instruction-through-Programming.-Helm/299aa90dfe604a2b47e856be8e8e65a1d3f72ef3
  17. Holec, H. (1981). Autonomy in foreign language learning. Pergamon. https://www.scirp.org/reference/referencespapers?referenceid=1454927
  18. Karunaratne, M. (2010). Neuro-linguistic programming and application in treatment of phobias. Complementary Therapies in Clinical Practice, 16(4), 203-207. https://www.Pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20920803
  19. Kashefian-Naeeini, S., & Riazi, A. M. (2011). Beliefs and autonomy: A case of Iranian students. European Journal of Social Sciences, 20(3), 425-430. https://researchers.mq.edu.au/en/publications/beliefs-and-autonomy-a-case-of-iranian-students  
  20. Kostina, M. V. (2011). Exploration of student perceptions of autonomy, student-instructor dialogue and satisfaction in a web-based distance Russian language classroom: A mixed methods study [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Iowa. https://iro.uiowa.edu/esploro/outputs/doctoral/Exploration-of-student-perceptions-of-autonomy/9983776995302771
  21. Kudliskis, V., & Burden, R. (2009). Applying “what works” in psychology to enhancing examination success in schools: The potential contribution of NLP. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 4(3), 170-177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2009.09.002
  22. Legall, J., & Dondon, P. (2006, October 16-18). Neuro-linguistic programming: A personal development tool applied to the pedagogy and to the improvement of teachers/ students relations. [Conference presentation]. The 5th WSEAS International Conference on Education and Educational Technology, Glasgow, UK. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/237262144_Neuro_linguistic_programming_a_personnal_development_
  23. Lei, W & Yu-mei, L (2012). An empirical study of listening comprehension strategies in autonomous learning environment. Sino-US English Teaching, 9(11), 1695-1701. article_561135_3ff440e7f6e4aa6c163a4b75d06b3c19.pdf (iau.ir)
  24. Little, D. (1991). Learner autonomy, definitions, issues, and problems. Authentic. https://www.scirp.org/reference/referencespapers?referenceid=1822071
  25. McWhirter, J. (1992). Sensory systems training manual. Sensory Systems. https://sensorysystems.co.uk/
  26. Millrood, R. (2004). The use of NLP in teachers’ classroom discourse. ELT Journal, 58(1), 27-37. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/58.1.28
  27. Moore, C. (2009). NLP in education [Unpublished master’s thesis]. Nui Maynooth University.
  28. Nematipour, M. (2012). A study of Iranian EFL learners’ autonomy level and its relationship with learning style. English Linguistics Research, 1(1), 26-35. https://doi.org/10.5430/elr.v1n1p126
  29. Nosratinia, M., Eftekhari, N., & Sarabchian, E. (2013). An exploration of the relationship between autonomy and vocabulary learning strategies. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World, 4(3), 71-80. https://www.academia.edu/5007088/AN_EXPLORATION_OF_THE_RELATIONSHIP_BETWEEN_AUTONOMY_AND_
  30. O’Connor, J. (2001). NLP workbook: A practical guide book to achieving the results you want. Harper Collins. https://www.amazon.com/NLP-Workbook-Practical-Achieving-Results/dp/1573246158
  31. Pajares, F (2006). Self-efficacy during childhood and adolescence: Implications for teachers and parents. In Pajares, F. and Urdan, T. (Eds.), Self-Efficacy Beliefs of Adolescents (pp. 339-367). Cambridge University Press. https://www.infoagepub.com/products/Self-Efficacy-Beliefs-of-Adolescents
  32. Pallant, J., (2010). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using the SPSS program. 4th Edition, McGraw Hill, New York.
  33. Pintrich, P. R., & Schunk, D. H. (1996). Motivation in Education: Theory, Research, and Applications. Prentice-Hall.
  34. Pishghadam, Reza & Shayesteh, Shaghayegh & Shapoori, Mitra. (2011). Validation of an NLP Scale and its Relationship with Teacher Success in High Schools. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 2, 1798-4769.  https://doi.org/10.4304/jltr.2.4.909-917
  35. Rahemi. J. (2020). A combined study of the relationship between self-efficacy and academic achievement in high school students in English with the role of academic role. Journal of Foreign Language Research, 10(1), 152-135. https://doi.org/10.22059. [In Persian]
  36. Revell, J., & Norman, S. (1999). Handing over: NLP-based activities for language learning. London: Saffire Press. https://www.amazon.com/Handing-over-Nlp-Based-Activities-Language/dp/1901564029
  37. Richards, J., & Rodgers, T. (2001). Approaches and methods in language teaching. Cambridge University Press. https://www.novaconcursos.com.br/blog/pdf/richards-jack-c.-&-rodgers.pdf?srsltid=AfmBOooyOSJ1pcrWN7EKvu_7AM0JgXU5Q0IfK3OqCTt-pOVJxvl8qPvF
  38. Salomon, G. (1984). Television is "easy" and print is "tough": The differential investment of mental effort in learning as a function of perceptions and attributions. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(4), 647-658. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.76.4.647
  39. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). Allyn & Bacon/Pearson Education. https://www.scirp.org/reference/ReferencesPapers?ReferenceID=188728
  40. Tosey, P. & Mathison, J. (2003). Neuro-linguistic Programming and Learning Theory: A response. The Curriculum Journal, 14 (3), 361-378. https://doi.org/10.1080/0958517032000137667
  41. Tosey, P., & Mathison, J. (2010). Neuro-linguistic programming as an innovation in education and teaching. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 47(3), 317-326. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2010.498183
  42. Tosey, P., Mathison, J., & Michelli, D. (2005). Mapping transformative learning: The potential of neuro-linguistic programming. Journal of Transformative Education, 3, 140-167. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541344604270233
  43. Wigfield, A. (1994). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation: A developmental perspective. Educ. Psychol. Rev., 6, 49–78. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02209024
  44. Winch, S. (2005). From frustration to satisfaction: Using NLP to improve self-expression. [Conference presentation]. 18th Annual EA Education Conference, Essex. http://www.englishaustralia.com.au/ea_conference05/proceedings/pdf/Winch.pdf
  45. Witkowski, T. (2010). Thirty-five years of research on neuro-linguistic programming. NLP research data base. State of the art or pseudoscientific decoration? Polish Psychological Bulletin, 41(2), 58-66. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10059-010-0008-0
  46. Yero, J. L. (2001). NLP and education: A shift of focus. Anchor Point Magazine, 15(9), 37-41. https://doi.org/10.5430/wjel.v1n2p2
  47. Zastrow, C., Dotson, V., & Koch, M. (1987). The neuro-linguistic programming treatment approach. Journal of Independent Social Work, 1(1), 29-38.
  48. Zhang, L.X., & Li, X.X. (2004). A comparative study on learner autonomy between Chinese students and west European students. Foreign Language World, 4, 15-23. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:157006675
  49. Zimmerman, B. J., and Cleary, T. J. (2006). Adolescents’ development of personal agency: The role of self-efficacy beliefs and self-regulatory Skill. In F. Pajares and T. Urdan (Eds.), Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents (pp. 45-69). Information Age. https://www.scirp.org/reference/referencespapers?referenceid=1504664
  50. Zohrabi, M. (2011). Course book development and evaluation for English for general purposes course. English Language Teaching, 4(2), 213-222. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics