Developing EFL Learners’ Pragmatic Competence through a Blended Learning Model: A Quasi-Experimental Study

  • Mohamed Bouftira University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, China
  • Mohammed El Messaoudi Moulay Ismail University, Morocco
  • Shuai Li Shandong University, China
Keywords: Blended learning, ICT, Foreign Language Teaching, Pragmatics, Pragmatic Competence

Abstract

In the era of globalization, EFL (English as a Foreign Language) teachers have nominated to weld EFL instruction and aspects of intercultural competence together.  Howbeit, the literature on the topic promulgates that procuring pragmatic competence remains a high-priority quest for EFL learners worldwide. This paper delineates the use of a blended learning model to teach pragmatic competence in an EFL context. This quasi-experimental study sought to probe into the potential of a blended learning model on participants’ levels of pragmatic competence. 62 students from a junior high school participated in the study. 32 participants belonged to the control group and 30 participants belonged to the experimental group. The main findings demonstrated that the three-week blended learning model resulted in a statistically significant impact on participants’ levels of pragmatic competence; that is, the experimental group participants (M=16.40; SD=2.54) remarkably outperformed the control group participants (M=11.87; SD=3.49) on the posttest. This implies that foreign language teachers are highly encouraged to attach much importance to amalgamating classroom teaching and the use of interactive websites (blended learning) as a way to develop the pragmatic competence of language learners.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

1. Abrams, Z. I. (2002). Surfing to cross-cultural awareness: Using internet-mediated projects to explore cultural stereotypes. Foreign Language Annals, 35, 141-160. doi:10.1111/j.1944-9720.2002.tb03151.x
2. Alcon Soler, E. (2008). Investigating pragmatic language learning in foreign language classrooms. International Review of Applied Linguistics, 46, 173e196.
3. Atkinson, D., Churchill, E., Nishino, T., & Okada, H. (2007). Alignment and interaction in a sociocognitive approach to second language acquisition. The Modern Language Journal, 91(2), 169e188.
4. Bachman, L.F. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press.
5. Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2001). Evaluating the empirical evidence: Grounds for instruction in pragmatics? In K. R. Rose & G. Kasper (Eds.), Pragmatics in language teaching (pp. 13–32). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
6. Beetham, H and Sharpe, R (2007) ‘An introduction to rethinking pedagogy for a digital age’, in Beetham, H and Sharpe, R (eds) Rethinking Pedagogy for a Digital Age. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge, 1–10
7. Belz, J. A. (2003). Linguistic perspectives on the development of intercultural competence in telecollaboration. Language Learning & Technology, 7(2), 68-117. Retrieved from http://llt.msu.edu/vol7num2/belz/default.html
8. Birjandi, P. & Rezaei, S. (2010). Developing a multiple-choice discourse completion test of interlanguage pragmatics for Iranian EFL learners. ILI LanguageTeaching Journal, 6 (1, 2), 43-58
9. Blum-Kulka, S., & Olshtain, E. (1984). Requests and apologies: A cross-cultural study of speech act realization patterns (CCSARP). Applied Linguistics, 5, 196-213.
10. Blum-Kulka, S., House, J., & Kasper, G. (1989). Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies. Norwood, NJ: Alblex Publishing Corporation.
11. Blum-Kulka, S., House, J., & Kasper, G. (1989). Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
12. Bouton, L. F. (1994a). Can NNS skill in interpreting implicature in American English be improved through explicit instruction? A pilot study. In L. F. Bouton & Y. Kachru (Eds.), Pragmatics and language learning (Vol. 5, pp. 89–109). Urbana-Champaign, IL: University of Illinois.
13. Bouton, L. F. (1994b). Conversational implicature in a second language: Learned slowly when not deliberately taught. Journal of Pragmatics, 22(2), 157–167.
14. Brown, P. and Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: some universals in language usage. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
15. Canale, M. (1984). A communicative approach to language proficiency assessment in a minority setting. In Rivera, C. (Ed.), Communicative competence approaches to language proficiency assessment: Research and application, 107-122. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
16. Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics,1, 1-47.
17. Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1981). A Theoretical framework for communicative competence. In Palmer, A., Groot, P., & Trosper, G. (Eds.), The construct validation of a test of communicative competence, 31-36.
18. Chun, D. M., & Wade, E. R. (2004). Collaborative cultural exchanges with CMC. In L. Lomicka & J. CookePlagwitz (Eds.), Teaching with technology (pp. 220-247). Boston: Heinle
19. Cohen, A. (2016). The design and construction of websites to promote L2 pragmatics. In K. Bardovi-Harlig & C. Félix-Brasdefer (eds.), Pragmatics and language learning (Vol. 14, pp. 341-356). Honolulu: University of Hawai'i, National Foreign Language Resource Center.
20. Cohen, A. D., & Ishihara, N. (2005). A Web-based approach to strategic learning of speech act. Minneapolis: Center for Advanced Research on Language Acquisition (CARLA), University of Minnesota. Retrieved June 06, 2019, from http://www.carla.umn.edu/speechacts/Japanese%20Speech%20Act%20Report%20Rev.%20June05.pdf
21. Cook, V. J. (1999). Going beyond the native speaker in language teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 33, 2, 185‑209.
22. De Vaus. D. (2001). Research design in social research. London: SAGE.
23. Cruse, A. (2006). A glossary of semantics and pragmatics. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
24. Crystal, D. (2008). Dictionary of linguistics and phonetics. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.
25. Dickinson, D., & Smith, M. (1994). Long-term effects of preschool teachers’ book readings on low-income children’s vocabulary and story comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 29, 105–122.
26. Dudeney, & Hockly, N (2007). How to… Teach English with Technology. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited
27. Dzuiban, CD, Hartman, JL and Moskal, PD (2004) Blended Learning. Available online at http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/erb0407.pdf
28. Eisenstein, M. & Bodman, J. (1993). Expressing gratitude in American English. In G. Kasper & S. Blum-Kulka (Eds.), Interlanguage pragmatics, Oxford University Press, Cary,64-81.
29. Elley, W. (1989). Vocabulary acquisition from listening to stories. Reading Research Quarterly, 24, 175–187.
30. Ertmer, P. A., & Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T. (2010). Teacher technology change: How knowledge, confidence, beliefs, and culture intersect. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(3), 255-284.
31. Facer, K., Furlong, J., Furlong R. & Sutherland, R. (2003). Screenplay: children and computing in the home. London: Routledge Falmer.
32. Finch, G. (2000). Linguistic terms and concepts. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
33. Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. E. (1993). How to design and evaluate research in education (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw Hill
34. Fraser, B. (2010). Pragmatic competence: The case of hedging. In G. Kaltenböck, W. Mihatsch, & S. Schneider (Eds.), New approaches to hedging (pp. 15-34). Bingley, UK: Emerald.
35. Goffman, E. (1967). Interaction ritual: Essays on face-to-face behavior. New York: Doubleday.
36. Gonzalez, D., & St.Louis, R. (2008). The use of web 2.0 tools to develop autonomy. Technology, pp. 28-32. Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.454.3536&rep=rep1&type=pdf
37. Grundy, P. (2000). Doing pragmatics. London: Arnold.
38. Halenko, N. & Jones, C. (2011). Teaching pragmatic awareness of spoken requests to Chinese EAP learners in the UK: Is explicit instruction effective? System 39, 240–250
39. Harker, M and Koutsantoni, D (2005) Can it be as effective? Distance versus blended learning in a web-based EAP programme. ReCALL 17/2: 197–216
40. Heerwegh, Dirk & Loosveldt, Geert. (2008). Face-to-Face Versus Web Surveying in a High-Internet-Coverage Population: Differences in Response Quality. Public Opinion Quarterly - PUBLIC OPIN QUART. 72. 836-846. 10.1093/poq/nfn045.
41. Hymes, D. H. (1972). On communicative competence. In Pride, J. B., & Holmes, J. (Eds.), Sociolinguistics, 269-293. Baltimore, USA: Penguin Education, Penguin Books Ltd.
42. Ishihara, N. & Cohen, A. D. (2010). Teaching and learning pragmatics: Where language and culture meet. Harlow, England: Pearson Education Limited.
43. Verschueren J. (2009). Introduction: The pragmatic perspective. In Verschueren, J. & Ostman, J. (Eds), Key notions in pragmatics, 2-27. Netherlands: John Benjamins.
44. Jenney, T. (1995). Meaning in interaction: An introduction to pragmatics. New York, NY: Routledge.
45. Jeon, E. H., & Kaya, T. (2006). Effects of L2 instruction on interlanguage pragmatic development: A meta-analysis. In J. M. Norris, & L. Ortega (Eds.), Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching (pp. 165e211). Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.
46. Kasper, G. (1997). Can pragmatic competence be taught? (NFLRC NetWork #6). Honolulu, HI: University of Hawai’i, Second Language Teaching and Curriculum Center. Retrieved from http://www.nflrc.hawaii.edu/networks/NW06/default.html
47. Kasper, G. (2001). Classroom research on interlanguage pragmatics. In K. Rose & G. Kasper (Eds.), Pragmatics in language teaching (pp. 33–60). New York, NY: Cambridge University
48. Kasper, G., & Roever, C. (2005). Pragmatics in second language learning. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of Research in Second Language Teaching and Learning (pp. 317-334). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associations.
49. Kasper, G., & Rose, K. R. (2002). Pragmatic development in a second language. USA: Blackwell Publishing.
50. Klesius, J. P., & Griffith, P. L. (1996). Interactive storybook reading for at-risk learners. The Reading Teacher, 49, 552–560.
51. Kramsch, C., & Thorne, S. (2002). Foreign language learning as global communicative practice. In D. Block & D. Cameron (Eds.), Language learning and teaching in the age of globalization (pp. 83-100). London: Routledge.
52. Larsen-Freeman, D. (2000). Techniques and principles in language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
53. Lawless, K. A., & Pellegrino, J. W. (2007). Professional development in integrating technology into teaching and learning: Knowns, unknowns, and ways to pursue better questions and answers. Review of educational research, 77, 575-614. DOI:10.3102/0034654307309921
54. Leech, G. (1983). Principles of pragmatics. London: Longman.
55. Levinson, S. C. (1983). Pragmatics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
56. Márquez Reiter, R. (2000). Linguistic politeness in Britain and Uruguay: a contrastive study of requests and apologies. Netherlands: John Benjamins.
57. Moeschler, J. (2002). Speech act theory and the analysis of conversation. In D. Vanderveken & S. Kubo (Eds.), Essays in speech act theory, pp. 239-261. Amsterdam: Benjamins.
58. Neumeier, P (2005) A closer look at blended learning – parameters for designing a blended learning environment for language teaching and learning. ReCALL 17/2: 163–178.

59. Norouzian, R., & Eslami, Z. (2016). Critical perspectives on interlanguage pragmatics development: An agenda for research. Issues in Applied Linguistics, 20(2), 25-5
60. Osguthorpe, RT and Graham, CR (2003) Blended learning environments: Definitions and directions. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education 4/3: 227–233.
61. Rogers, M. E. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th Ed.), New York: The Free Press.
62. Rose, K., & Kwai-fun, C. N. (2001). Inductive and deductive teaching of compliments and compliment responses. In K. R. Rose, & G. Kasper (Eds.), Pragmatics in language teaching (pp. 145e170). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
63. Rossett, A, Douglis, F and Frazee, RV (2003). Strategies for Building Blended Learning. Available online at https://files.pbworks.com/download/P3s9Jzj67I/ablendedmaricopa/1240589/Strategies%20Building%20Blended%20Learning.pdf.
64. Salsbury, T., & Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2000). Oppositional talk and the acquisition of modality in L2 English. In B. Swierzbin, F. Morris, M. E. Anderson, C. A. Klee, & E. Tarone (Eds.), Social and cognitive factors in second language acquisition: Selected proceedings of the 1999 second language research forum (pp. 57-76). Somerville: Cascadilla Press.
65. Savignon, S. J. (1983). Communicative competence: Theory and classroom practice. Texts and contexts in second language learning. Reading, Massachusetts at all: Addison- Wesley Publishing Company.
66. Sbisà, M. (1995). Speech act theory. In J. Verschueren, J. Östman & Jan Blommaert (eds.), Handbook of Pragmatics – Manual, 495–506. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
67. Scarcella, R., (1979). On speaking politely in a second language. In C. Yorio, K. Perkins & J.
68. Schachter, (Eds.), On TESOL ’79: The Learners in Focus. TESOL, pp. 274–287. Washington, DC.
69. Schmidt, R. (1983). Interaction, acculturation and the acquisition of communicative competence. In N. Wolfson & E. Judd (Eds.), Sociolinguistics and second language acquisition (pp. 137-174). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.
70. Searle, J. (1975). Indirect speech act. In P. Cole and J. Morgan (eds.), Syntax and Semantics: Speech act, 59–82. New York: Academic Press.
71. Searle, J. R. (1976). A classification of illocutionary acts. Language in Society, 5(1), 1-23. Seuren, P. A. M. (1998). Western Linguistics: An Historical Introduction. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
72. Sharwood Smith, M. (1991). Speaking to many minds. Second Language Research, 7,118-132.
73. Sharwood Smith, M. A. (1993). Input enhancement in instructed SLA: Theoretical bases. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15, 165-179. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100011943.
74. Snow, C., & Goldfield, B. (1983). Turn the page please: Situation-specific language acquisition. Journal of Child Language, 10, 551–569.
75. Strickland, D. S., & Taylor, D. (1989). Family storybook reading: Implications for children, families, and curriculum. In D. S. Strickland & L. M. Morrow (Eds.), Emerging literacy: Young children learn to read and write (pp. 27–34). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
76. Taguchi, N. (2013). Teaching pragmatics. In C. A. Chapelle (ed.) The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics, (vol. IX). Oxford: Wiley Blackwell. doi:10.1002/9781405198431.wbeal1172
77. Takahashi, S. (2001). The role of input enhancement in developing pragmatic competence. In K. Rose, & G.
78. Takahashi, T. & Beebe, L.M. (1987). The development of pragmatic competence by Japanese learners of English. JALT Journal 8, 131-155.
79. Taylor, S., & Todd, P. A. (1995). Understanding information technology usage: A test of competing models. Information Systems Research, 6 (2), 144-176.
80. Thomas, M., Reinders, H., & Warschauer, M. (Eds.). (2013). Contemporary computer-assisted language learning. London/New York: Bloomsbury.
81. Tienson, J. (1983). Linguistic competence transactions of the Nebraska Academy of Sciences and Affiliated Societies. Available at http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/tnas/259
82. Venkatesh, V., & Davis, F. D. (2000). A theoretical extension of the technology acceptance model: Four longitudinal field studies. Management Science, 46 (2), 186-204.
83. Wade, E. R. (2005). Enhancing German language learners’ intercultural communicative competence through the on-line exchange project ICE (unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of California, Santa Barbara.
84. Walker, G (2005) Critical thinking in asynchronous discussion. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning 2/6. Available online at http://itdl.org/ journal/jun_05/article02.htm.
85. Walters, J. (1980). Grammar, meaning, and sociological appropriateness in second language acquisition. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 34, 337-345.
86. Westbrook, K (2008) The beginning of the end for blended learning? IATEFL CALL Review, Summer: 12–1.
87. Widdowson, H. G. (1983). Learning purpose and language use. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
88. Yang, SC (2001) Integrating computer-mediated tools into the language curriculum. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 17: 85–93.
Published
2022-05-31
How to Cite
Bouftira, M., El Messaoudi, M., & Li, S. (2022). Developing EFL Learners’ Pragmatic Competence through a Blended Learning Model: A Quasi-Experimental Study. European Scientific Journal, ESJ, 18(16), 105. https://doi.org/10.19044/esj.2022.v18n16p105
Section
ESJ Humanities