Kurdish EFL University Students’ Perception of Computer-mediated Pragmatics Learning
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.23813/FA/28/3/20Keywords:
pragmatics, Computer-mediated learning, Kurdish university studentsAbstract
Pragmatics learning is as vital as learning the vocabulary and the grammar of the target language. It is concerned with the appropriate use of language to achieve different daily communicative goals. The present qualitative study, therefore, sheds light on how Kurdish EFL university students view their pragmatics learning experience, particularly via computer-mediated communication. Fifty-three students responded to a survey of eight items, seeking both, their perception of receiving pragmatic instruction via Zoom platform, and the content of the activities they pursued as well. The collected data was analyzed following Boyatzis’s (1998) thematic analysis; an analysis designed to encode qualitative data. The qualitative analysis revealed a positive perception of learning pragmatics in general, and learning it via online-mediated communication in particular. It also revealed a positive attitude toward the pragmatic activities that were carried out. Finally, the study recommended that educators should incorporate computer-mediated communication to help Kurdish university students develop their pragmatic competence.
References
Al-Rifaee, A. J. F. (2018). The reality of the use of the university of Jordan’s students of the Moodle system in the process of learning and instruction from their perspectives. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 15(4-5-6), 1-74.
Al-zabun, M. (2015). The effect of teaching on the use of electronic courses in the achievement of Jordanian university students in computer skills and in the development of their self-learning and social communication skills. Unpublished Dissertation, University of Jordan: Amman, Jordan.
Bachelor, J. W., & Bachelor, R. B. (2016). Classroom currency as a means of formative feedback, reflection, and assessment in the world language classroom. NECTFL Review, 78, 31-42.
Bachelor, J.W. (2015). Conexión intrínseca entre la pragmática y la gramática. Educación, 24(47), 7-26.
Bachman, L. F. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Baxter, G., & Hainey, T. (2019). Student perceptions of virtual reality use in higher education. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education, 12(3), 413-424.
Belz, J. (2008). The role of computer mediation in the instruction and development of L2 pragmatic competence. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 27, 45-75.
Betancourt, M. V. (2012). Adquisición de pragmática en segunda lengua. Un modelo didáctico para la enseñanza de la pragmática (Unpublished Master’s Thesis). Indiana University, Bloomington, IN.
Boyatzis, R.E. (1998). Transforming qualitative information. London: Sage Publications.
Crystal, D. (1985). A dictionary of linguistics and phonetics (2nd edition). Oxford: Blackwell.
Eljinini, M. A. H., Alsamarai, S., Hameed, S., & Amawi, A. (2012). The impact of e-assessments system on the success of the implementation process. International Journal of Modern Education and Computer Science, 4(11), 76.
Erben, T., Bau, R., Jin, L., Summers, R., & Eisenhower, K. (2008). Using technology for foreign language instruction: Creative innovations, research and applications. In T. Erben & I. Sarieva (Eds.), CALLing all foreign language teachers: Computer assisted language learning in the classroom (pp. 13-35). Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.
Gedik, N., Kiraz, E., & Ozden, M. Y. (2012). The optimum blend: Affordances and challenges of blended learning for students. Turkish Online Journal of Qualitative Inquiry, 3(3), 102-117.
Gillis, A., & Krull, L. M. (2020). <? covid19?> COVID-19 remote learning transition in spring 2020: class structures, student perceptions, and inequality in college courses. Teaching Sociology, 48(4), 283-299.
Hilton, J., Hilton, B., Ikahihifo, T. K., Chaffee, R., Darrow, J., Guilmett, J., & Wiley, D. (2020). Identifying student perceptions of different instantiations of open pedagogy. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, 21(4), 1-19.
Kilfoil, W. R. (Ed.). (2015). Moving beyond the hype: A contextualised view of learning with technology in higher education. Pretoria: Universities South Africa.
Liu, Ch. (2007). Pragmatics in foreign language instruction: The effects of pedagogical intervention and technology on the development of EFL learners’ realization of “request” [Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation]. Texas A&M University.
Mahariyanti, E., & Suyanto, S. (2019, July). The effectiveness of using quipper school teaching materials towards students’ cognitive outcomes of eleventh grade students of MIPA. In 6th International Conference on Educational Research and Innovation (ICERI 2018) (pp. 44-47). Atlantis Press.
Sastranegara, T., Suryo, D., & Setiawan, J. (2020). A study of the use of Quipper School in history learning during COVID-19 pandemic era. International Journal of Learning and Development, 10(3), 20.
Sykes, J., Oskoz, A., & Thorne, S. (2008). Web 2.0, synthetic immersive environments and mobile resources for language education. CALICO, 25(3), 528- 546.
Taguchi, N. (2015). “Contextually” speaking: A survey of pragmatic learning abroad, in class, and online. System, 48, 3–20. doi:10.1016/j.system.2014.09.001
V. G., L., & Rajan, P. (2012). Non-native student’s communication is affected due to the lack of pragmatic competence. English Language Teaching, 5(2), 50-57.
Yorio, C. A. (1986). Conventionalized language forms and the development of communicative competence. Tesol Quarterly, 433-442.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
