Dissertation Titles
- The Development of Pragmatic Competence: Integrating Authentic Materials into English Language Teaching to teach Discourse Markers to Saudi Arabian Students
The significance of this research topic lies in the fact that there is a shortage of studies on the development of pragmatic competence in Saudi Arabian students learning English as a foreign language. While some prior research does emphasise the need for EFL teachers working with Saudi Arabian students to make a shift from the memorisation of grammar patterns and structures to the development of communicative competence (e.g. Azhar and Ali, 2014; Abahussain, 2016). Within the field of pragmatic competence, the development of discourse markers is key as studies such as Alraddadi (2016) show. However, most research does not specify what practical measures should be taken to endow students with the input that facilitates their acquisition of pragmatic competence in general and discourse markers in particular. Discourse markers a key part in pragmatic competence as they are used to provide important textual information (Schiffrin, 1988).
This dissertation will focus on the integration of authentic audio-visual materials into English language teaching of discourse markers for Arabian students. Two groups will be selected for this study – experimental and control. The experimental group will receive instruction on discourse markers, whilst the control group will follow their existing syllabus. For the purpose of this study, a short number of discourse markers will be chosen due to time restrictions. The study will focus on the following common written discourse markers: moreover, after all and besides. Pre-tests will be administered to gauge the levels of pragmatic competence of the students on discourse markers. The type of test employed will be a discourse completion test. This test is particularly useful to provide knowledge of speech strategies and linguistic forms. The results from the pre-test will be compared with post-tests to assess the potential effectiveness of using authentic audio-visual materials to teach discourse markers.
Important sources:
1) Lamri (2014);
2) Moradkhan and Jalayer (2010);
3) Reid (2014);
4) Gilmore (2007);
5) Washburn (2001);
6) Gesuato, Bianchi, and Cheng (2015);
7) Jernigan (2012).
8) Schiffrin (1988)
- Juxtaposing Communicative Activities and Oral Corrective Feedback to Improve the Saudi Arabian Students’ Pragmatic Performance of Politeness Markers
This study will make a significant contribution to the research in pragmatics by investigating how pragmatic performance of students may be improved using communicative activities and oral corrective feedback combined. In particular, it will explore the impact that such techniques may have on the acquisition of Politeness Markers. This is a pragmatic feature that has been noted as presenting issues for Arab EFL students (Ahmed and Maros, 2017). This study different from others in that the focus is put on Saudi Arabian students and on the use of a mixed-method approach to teaching Politeness Markers when English is a second language. Previous research has examined either the impact of corrective feedback on students’ pragmatic competence (e.g. Koike and Pearson, 2005; Guo, 2013) or the use of communicative tasks for developing students’ communicative skills (e.g. Fang, 2010; Oradee, 2012). However, this study will combine both.
The present study endows EFL students with both the possibility for communicative practice and with the possibility to be corrected in the process of communication. For two weeks, Saudi Arabian students will participate in such communicative activities as role plays and peer and group discussions. Throughout all communicative activities, students will receive the teacher’s oral corrective feedback, paying particular attention to Politeness Markers. Then students will be asked to complete a discourse completion test to identify improvements in students’ pragmatic performance. The results will be compared to a test administered pre-instruction.
Sources:
1) Kim (1998);
2) Han (2002);
3) Abaya (2014);
4) Ajabshir (2014);
5) Han and Burgucu-Tazegul (2016);
6) Moghadam and Ghafournia (2016).
7) Ahmed and Maros (2017)
List of References
Abahussain, M. (2016). Implementing communicative language teaching method in Saudi Arabia: Challenges faced by formative year teachers in state schools (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from: [Accessed 12 October, 2016]
Abaya, R. (2014). Corrective feedback in English language teaching and learning: Which way to go? International Journal on Studies in English Language and Literature, 2 (10), 5-12.
Ahmadzadeh, R. & Zabardast, S. (2014). Learner autonomy in practice. International Journal on New Trends in Education and Their Implications, 5 (4), 49-57.
Ahmed, W. K., & Maros, M. (2017). Using Hedges as Relational Work by Arab EFL Students in Student-Supervisor Consultations. GEMA Online® Journal of Language Studies, 17(1).
Ajabshir, Z. (2014). The effect of implicit and explicit types of feedback on learners’ pragmatic development. Procedia – Social and Behavioural Sciences, 463-471.
Alraddadi, B. (2016). The effect of teaching structural discourse markers in an EFL classroom setting. English Language Teaching, 9 (7), 16-31.
Azhar, S. & Ali, S. (2014). Teaching English in professional colleges of Saudi Arabia: Trend and challenges. The Criterion: An International Journal in English, 5 (1), 253-261.
Behroozizad, S. & Bakhtiyarzadeh, H. (2012). Pragmatic meaning and EFL learners’ text-understanding ability. English Language and Literature Studies, 2 (1), 28-34.
Bocanegra, A. & Haidl, A. (1999). Language learner autonomy in practice: Possibilities in a foreign language situation. Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses, 12, 7-17.
Cifuentes, L. & Shih, Y. (2001). Teaching and learning online: A collaboration between U.S. and Taiwanese students. Journal of Research on Computing in Education, 33 (4), 456-474.
Eslami-Rasekh, Z. (2005). Raising the pragmatic awareness of language learners. ELT Journal, 59 (3), 199-208.
Eslami, Z., Mirzaei, A., & Dini, S. (2015). The role of asynchronous computer mediated communication in the instruction and development of EFL learners’ pragmatic competence. System, 48, 99-111.
Esteban, E. (2016). Two different approaches to improve linguistic, pragmatic, and cultural competence in SLA using a graphic novel (Master’s dissertation).
Fang, F. (2010). A discussion on developing students’ communicative competence in college English teaching in China. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 1 (2), 111-116.
Gesuato, S., Bianchi, F., & Cheng, W. (Eds.). (2015). Teaching, learning and investigating pragmatics: Principles, methods and practices. Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Guo, L. (2013). Effects of recasts and metalinguistic feedback on developing ESL learners’ pragmatic competence (Doctoral dissertation).Han, Z. (2002). Rethinking the role of corrective feedback in communicative language teaching. RELC Journal, 33 (1), 1-34.
Han, T. & Burgucu-Tazegul, A. (2016). Realisation of speech acts and pragmatic competence by Turkish EFL learners. The Reading Matrix: An International Online Journal, 16 (1), 161-178.
Ishihara, N. & Takamiya, Y. (2014). Pragmatic development through blogs: A longitudinal study of telecollaboration and language socialization. In S. Li (Ed.), Engaging language learners through technology integration: Theory, applications, and outcomes (pp.137-161). Hershey: IGI Global.
Jernigan, J. (2012). Output and English as a second language pragmatic development: The effectiveness of output-focused video-based instruction. English Language Teaching, 5 (4), 1-14.
Kim, D. (1998). Developing pragmatic competence of young EFL learners through interactive book reading and role playing. English Teaching, 53 (4), 31-61.
Kim, D. & Hall, J. (2002). The role of an interactive book reading program in the development of second language pragmatic competence. The Modern Language Journal, 86 (3), 332-348.
Koike, D. & Pearson, L. (2005). The effect of instruction and feedback in the development of pragmatic competence, System, 33 (3), 481-501.
Lamri, S. (2014). Developing pragmatic competence in the EFL context: Opportunities and challenges. Revue des Sciences Humaines, 34/35, 7-23.
Larsari, V. (2011). Learners’ communicative competence in English as a foreign language (EFL). Journal of English and Literature, 2 (7), 161-165.
Moghadam, E. & Ghafournia, N. (2016). The effect of explicit and implicit corrective feedback on the use of collocations in speaking assignments by Iranian EFL learners. International Journal of Research Studies in Language Learning, 6 (1), 79-93.
Moradkhan, D. & Jalayer, B. (2010). The impact of using authentic audio-taped and video-taped materials on the level of EFL learners’ pragmatic competence. Journal of English Language Studies, 1 (3), 33-52.
Naidu, S. (Ed.). (2003). Learning and teaching with technology: Principles and practices. London: Kogan Page Limited.
Oradee, T. (2012). Developing speaking skills using three communicative activities. International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, 2 (6), 533-535.
Pershey, M. (1997). Teaching pragmatic language awareness as an integral aspect of reading and language arts instruction. Reading Horizons, 37 (4), 299-314.
Reid, E. (2014). Authentic materials in developing intercultural communicative competences. Language, Literature and Culture in Education: Conference Proceedings, 160-167.
Schauer, G. (2009). Interlanguage pragmatics development: The study abroad context. London: Continuum.
Schiffrin, D. (1988). Discourse markers (No. 5). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sinclair, M. (1994). Reading comprehension research and linguistic pragmatics: Mapping out some unrecognised interdisciplinary common ground. Stellenbosch Papers in Linguistics, 28, 83-108.
Smith, R. (2008). Learner autonomy. ELT Journal, 62 (4), 395-397.
Sykes, J. (2005). Synchronous CMC and pragmatic development: Effects of oral and written chat. CALICO Journal, 22 (3), 399-431.
Taguchi, N. (2011). Teaching pragmatics: Trends and issues. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 31, 289-310.
Vick, R., Crosby, M., & Ashworth, D. (2000). Japanese and American students meet on the web: Collaborative language learning through everyday dialogue with peers. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 13, 199-219.
Wang, J., Spencer, K., & Wang, D. (2012). A double-channel model for developing learner autonomy in an EFL context. International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching, 2 (3), 1-16.
Washburn, G. (2001). Using situation comedies for pragmatic language teaching and learning. TESOL Journal, 10 (4), 21-26.
Zadeh, N., Gorijan, B., & Pazhakh, A. (2014). The effect of instruction and consciousness-raising (CR) on teaching pragmatic functions in writing among Iranian high school EFL learners. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World, 5 (2), 430-442.
Zhao, Y. (2003). Recent developments in technology and language learning: A literature review and meta-analysis. CALICO Journal, 21, 7-28.
Zumbihl, H. (2012). Learner autonomy in acquiring intercultural communicative competence for study abroad. Proceedings of Intercultural Competence Conference, 2, 227-237.
