| This study explores empirical evidence in support of Dickerson's (1989, 1994a, 2000; Hahn & Dickerson, 1999a, 1999b) instructional model that claims to empower students with pronunciation learning strategies they can use in private outside of class, that is, in periods of covert rehearsal. It evaluates the long-term effectiveness of such instruction by analyzing student progress in reading English phrase stress, construction stress, and word stress during and after a one-semester ESL pronunciation course that was taught eight consecutive semesters from Fall '03 to Spring '07. The researcher collected reading-aloud data at the beginning (Time 1/T1) and end of intensive instruction (Time 2/T2) and once again at different times---from five months to almost three years---after the course ended (Time 3/T3). She also collected data from some of the participants nine months after T3 (Time 4/T4). Finally, she identified student behavior during covert rehearsal by examining learners' responses to follow-up questionnaires.;The results indicate that (a) intensive instruction in the use of pronunciation learning strategies was effective for improving students' reading of English primary stress, construction stress, and word stress; (b) despite a decrease in accuracy after intensive instruction, students maintained a significant improvement over time (i.e., from T1 to T3/4); (c) students' progress was roughly the same for the three varieties of English stress from T1 to T3/4; and (d) although low proficiency entering students scored as a group consistently lower than high entering proficiency students on all tests, half of the low entering proficiency students equaled the high entering proficiency students in absolute accuracy when tested of T3.;In addition, qualitative data gathered from students' responses to the questionnaires suggest a number of factors that seem to contribute to individual differences in students' progress from T1 to T3/4: (a) an urgent need to improve one particular pronunciation area, (b) students' own prioritizing of target area(s) for focused practice, (c) students' entering proficiency levels, (d) students' internal and external motivations, (e) students' degree of improvement from T1 to T2, and (f) students' quantity, frequency, and quality of practice.;The study concludes with pedagogical implications and suggestions for future research. |
