Comparing traditional and task-based approaches to teaching pragmatics: Task design processes and learning outcomes

IF 3.3 1区 文学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Language Teaching Research Pub Date : 2023-10-15 DOI:10.1177/13621688231195876
YouJin Kim, Sanghee Kang, Meredith D’Arienzo, Naoko Taguchi
{"title":"Comparing traditional and task-based approaches to teaching pragmatics: Task design processes and learning outcomes","authors":"YouJin Kim, Sanghee Kang, Meredith D’Arienzo, Naoko Taguchi","doi":"10.1177/13621688231195876","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The goal of the current study is twofold: (1) to demonstrate how to design authentic blog-posting tasks for Korean learners of English as a foreign language (EFL); and (2) to compare traditional (textbook-based) and task-based instruction in Korean high school students’ learning of advice-giving strategies in English. Fifty high school students in Korea were assigned to either a traditional or a task-based instruction condition. The traditional group was taught advice-giving strategies using their required textbook. For the task-based instruction group, advice-giving tasks were designed simulating online Q&A communities. Participants were asked to read other high school students’ blogs about their personal concerns and respond to the concerns by posting their advice in a forum. Both groups completed a background survey, a pretest, instructional treatment (a textbook exercise for the traditional condition and individual advice-giving tasks for the task-based condition), a reflection survey, and immediate and delayed posttests over three months. Both groups’ pretest/posttest responses were analysed in terms of the occurrence of advice-giving strategies (e.g. expressing sympathy) based on existing coding frameworks and what students produced. In addition, linguistic forms in each strategy were coded for syntactic complexity (e.g. bi-clausal or mono-clausal constructions). The frequency of different advice-giving strategies and linguistic forms on posttests was compared between the two groups, and between the pretest and posttests for each group. The results showed that the task-based group outperformed the traditional group on the immediate posttest only. However, both groups demonstrated significant gains in advice-giving knowledge at the immediate posttest, and the learning was sustained for 8 weeks. In terms of learning complex constructions of advice-giving head acts (i.e. bi-clausal constructions), there were immediate learning benefits for the task-based group only.","PeriodicalId":47852,"journal":{"name":"Language Teaching Research","volume":"50 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Language Teaching Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688231195876","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The goal of the current study is twofold: (1) to demonstrate how to design authentic blog-posting tasks for Korean learners of English as a foreign language (EFL); and (2) to compare traditional (textbook-based) and task-based instruction in Korean high school students’ learning of advice-giving strategies in English. Fifty high school students in Korea were assigned to either a traditional or a task-based instruction condition. The traditional group was taught advice-giving strategies using their required textbook. For the task-based instruction group, advice-giving tasks were designed simulating online Q&A communities. Participants were asked to read other high school students’ blogs about their personal concerns and respond to the concerns by posting their advice in a forum. Both groups completed a background survey, a pretest, instructional treatment (a textbook exercise for the traditional condition and individual advice-giving tasks for the task-based condition), a reflection survey, and immediate and delayed posttests over three months. Both groups’ pretest/posttest responses were analysed in terms of the occurrence of advice-giving strategies (e.g. expressing sympathy) based on existing coding frameworks and what students produced. In addition, linguistic forms in each strategy were coded for syntactic complexity (e.g. bi-clausal or mono-clausal constructions). The frequency of different advice-giving strategies and linguistic forms on posttests was compared between the two groups, and between the pretest and posttests for each group. The results showed that the task-based group outperformed the traditional group on the immediate posttest only. However, both groups demonstrated significant gains in advice-giving knowledge at the immediate posttest, and the learning was sustained for 8 weeks. In terms of learning complex constructions of advice-giving head acts (i.e. bi-clausal constructions), there were immediate learning benefits for the task-based group only.
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
比较传统和基于任务的语用学教学方法:任务设计过程和学习成果
本研究的目的有两个:(1)展示如何为韩国英语学习者设计真实的博客发布任务;(2)比较传统(教科书型)和任务型教学对韩国高中生英语建议策略学习的影响。50名韩国高中生被分配到传统和任务型教学环境中。传统的一组学习的是根据他们所要求的教科书提供建议的策略。对于任务型教学组,设计建议任务,模拟在线问答社区。参与者被要求阅读其他高中生关于他们个人担忧的博客,并通过在论坛上发表他们的建议来回应这些担忧。两组都完成了背景调查、预测试、指导性治疗(传统条件下的课本练习和基于任务的条件下的个人建议提供任务)、反思调查以及三个月的即时和延迟后测试。两组的测试前/测试后的反应根据现有的编码框架和学生产生的建议给出策略(例如表达同情)的发生情况进行了分析。此外,每种策略中的语言形式都根据句法复杂性进行了编码(例如双小句或单小句结构)。比较两组之间以及每组测试前和测试后不同建议策略和语言形式的频率。结果表明,任务型组仅在即时后测中表现优于传统组。然而,两组在立即的后测中都表现出在建议知识方面的显著进步,并且这种学习持续了8周。在学习给出建议的头部行为的复杂结构(即双句结构)方面,只有任务型组有直接的学习益处。
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
13.20
自引率
7.10%
发文量
116
期刊介绍: Language Teaching Research is a peer-reviewed journal that publishes research within the area of second or foreign language teaching. Although articles are written in English, the journal welcomes studies dealing with the teaching of languages other than English as well. The journal is a venue for studies that demonstrate sound research methods and which report findings that have clear pedagogical implications. A wide range of topics in the area of language teaching is covered, including: -Programme -Syllabus -Materials design -Methodology -The teaching of specific skills and language for specific purposes Thorough investigation and research ensures this journal is: -International in focus, publishing work from countries worldwide -Interdisciplinary, encouraging work which seeks to break down barriers that have isolated language teaching professionals from others concerned with pedagogy -Innovative, seeking to stimulate new avenues of enquiry, including ''action'' research
期刊最新文献
Understanding student engagement with teacher feedback in Chinese-to-English consecutive interpreting courses Creating and evaluating corpus-informed word lists for adolescent, beginner-to-low-intermediate learners of French, German, and Spanish Beyond pleasantries: University teachers’ responses to students’ favor-asking in asynchronous online communication Investigating EFL teachers’ use of generative AI to develop reading materials: A practice and perception study Analysing the use of particle verbs in German as a foreign language: Unproductive particle separation and a proposal for a data-driven learning intervention
×
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