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

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.

Keywords

advice-giving speech acts English as a foreign language L2 pragmatics task-based language teaching task design

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Al Muhaimeed

S.A

. (2013). Task-based language teaching vs. traditional way of English language teaching in Saudi intermediate schools: A comparative study. Kent State University.

Barón

Celaya

M.L.

Levkina

. (2020). Learning pragmatics through tasks: When interaction plays a role. Applied Pragmatics, 2, 1–25.

Brown

Levinson

S.C

. (1987). Politeness: Some universals in language use. Cambridge University Press.

Bryfonski

McKay

T.H

. (2019). TBLT implementation and evaluation: A meta-analysis. Language Teaching Research, 23, 603–632.

Bygate

Norris

J.M.

Van den Branden

. (2015). Task-based language teaching. In Chapelle

(Ed.), Encyclopedia of applied linguistics (pp. 1–8). Wiley-Blackwell.

de la Fuente

M.J

. (2006). Classroom L2 vocabulary acquisition: Investigating the role of pedagogical tasks and form-focused instruction. Language Teaching Research, 10, 263–295.

East

. (2021). Foundational principles of task-based language teaching. Routledge.

Ellis

. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford University Press.

Ellis

. (2009). Task-based language teaching: Sorting out the misunderstandings. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 19, 221–246.

10.

Ellis

Shintani

. (2014). Exploring language pedagogy through second language acquisition research. Routledge.

11.

Ellis

Skehan

Shintani

Lambert

. (2020). Task-based language teaching: Theory and practice. Cambridge University Press.

12.

González-Lloret

. (2019). Task-based language teaching and L2 pragmatics. In Taguchi

(Ed.), The Routledge handbook of SLA and pragmatics (pp. 333–352). Routledge.

13.

González-Lloret

Nielson

K.B

. (2015). Evaluating TBLT: The case of a task-based Spanish program. Language Teaching Research, 19, 525–549.

14.

González-Lloret

Ortega

. (2018). Pragmatics, tasks, and technology: A synergy. In Taguchi

Kim

(Eds.), Task-based approaches to teaching and assessing pragmatics (pp. 191–216). John Benjamins.

15.

Halici Page

Mede

. (2018). Comparing task-based instruction and traditional instruction on task engagement and vocabulary development in secondary language education. The Journal of Educational Research, 111, 371–381.

16.

Harris

Leeming

. (2022). The impact of teaching approach on growth in L2 proficiency and self-efficacy: A longitudinal classroom-based study of TBLT and PPP. Journal of Second Language Studies, 5, 114–143.

17.

Hashimoto

B.J.

Nelson

. (2020). Using a corpus in creating and evaluating a DCT. Applied Pragmatics, 2, 80–120.

18.

Kim

Yoon

Koo

Chun

Seo

Lee

Kim

Kang

Kim

Choi

K. J.

Shin

(2017). High school English. NE Neunyule.

19.

Kim

. (2008). The contribution of collaborative and individual tasks to the acquisition of L2 vocabulary. The Modern Language Journal, 92, 114–130.

20.

Kim

. (2015). The role of tasks as vehicles for learning in classroom interaction. In Markee

(Ed.), Handbook of classroom discourse and interaction (pp. 163–181). Wiley-Blackwell.

21.

Kim

Jung

Tracy-Ventura

. (2017). Implementation of a localized task-based course in an EFL context: A study of students’ evolving perceptions. TESOL Quarterly, 51, 632–660.

22.

Kim

Taguchi

. (2015). Promoting task-based pragmatics instruction in EFL classroom context: The role of task complexity. Modern Language Journal, 99, 656–677.

23.

Kim

Taguchi

. (2016). Learner-learner interaction during collaborative pragmatic tasks: The role of cognitive and pragmatic task demands. Foreign Language Annals, 49, 42–57.

24.

Koike

D.A.

Pearson

. (2005). The effect of instruction and feedback in the development of pragmatic competence. System, 33, 481–501.

25.

Loewen

. (2005). Incidental focus on form and second language learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 361–386.

26.

Long

. (1985). A role for instruction in second language acquisition: Task-based language teaching. In Hyltenstam

Pienemann

(Eds.), Modelling and assessing second language acquisition (pp. 77–99). Multilingual Matters.

27.

Long

. (2015). Second language acquisition and task-based language teaching. Wiley Blackwell.

28.

Long

. (2016). In defense of tasks and TBLT: Nonissues and real issues. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 36, 5–33.

29.

Malicka

Gilabert

Norris

. (2019). From needs analysis to task design: Insights from an English for specific purposes context. Language Teaching Research, 23, 78–106.

30.

Martínez-Flor

. (2003). Non-native speakers’ production of advice acts: The effects of proficiency. Revista Española de Lingüística Aplicada, 16, 139–153.

31.

Martínez-Flor

. (2006). The effectiveness of explicit and implicit treatments on EFL learners’ confidence in recognizing appropriate suggestions. In Bardovi-Harlig

Félix Brasdefer

Omar

A.S.

(Eds.), Pragmatics and language learning: Volume 11 (pp. 199–225). University of Hawai’i Press.

32.

Nunan

. (1989). Designing tasks for the communicative classroom. Cambridge University Press.

33.

Phuong

H.Y.

Van den Branden

Van Steendam

Sercu

. (2015). The impact of PPP and TBLT on Vietnamese students’ writing performance and self-regulatory writing strategies. ITL – International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 166, 37–93.

34.

Pica

Kang

H.S.

Sauro

. (2006). Information gap tasks: Their multiple roles and contributions to interaction research methodology. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28, 301–338.

35.

Plonsky

Kim

. (2016). Task-based learner production: A substantive and methodological review. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 36, 73–97.

36.

Prabhu

N.S

. (1987). Second language pedagogy. Oxford University Press.

37.

Salemi

Rabiee

Ketabi

. (2012). The effects of explicit/implicit instruction and feedback on the development of Persian EFL learners’ pragmatic competence in suggestion structures. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 3, 188–199.

38.

Samuda

Bygate

. (2008). Tasks in second language learning. Palgrave Macmillan.

39.

Serafini

E.J.

Torres

. (2015). The utility of needs analysis for non-domain expert teachers in designing task-based Spanish for the professions curricula. Foreign Language Annals, 48, 447–472.

40.

Shintani

. (2016). Input-based tasks in foreign language instruction for young learners: Volume 9. John Benjamins.

41.

Skehan

. (1996). A framework for the implementation of task-based instruction. Applied Linguistics, 17, 38–62.

42.

Taguchi

. (2015). Instructed pragmatics at a glance: Where instructional studies were, are, and should be going. Language Teaching, 48, 1–50.

43.

Taguchi

. (2019). Second language acquisition and pragmatics: An overview. In Taguchi

, (Ed.), Routledge handbook of second language acquisition and pragmatics. Routledge.

44.

Taguchi

Kim

. (2016). Collaborative dialogue in learning pragmatics: Pragmatics-related episodes as an opportunity for learning request-making. Applied Linguistics, 37, 416–437.

45.

Taguchi

Kim

(Eds.). (2018). Task-based approaches to teaching and assessing pragmatics. John Benjamins.

46.

Taguchi

Youn

S.-J

. (2022). Pragmatics: Assessing learning outcomes in instructional studies. In Gurzynski-Weiss

Kim

(Eds.), Instructed second language acquisition research methods. John Benjamins, pp. 149–180.

47.

. (1996). A course in language teaching: Practice and theory. Cambridge University Press.

48.

Van den Branden

. (2016). Task-based language teaching. In Hall

(Ed.), The Routledge handbook of English language teaching (pp. 238–251). Routledge.

49.

Van den Branden

Bygate

Norris

J.M

. (2009). Task-based language teaching: A reader. John Benjamins.