Cover not available
Article published In:
Applied Pragmatics
Vol. 1:1 (2019) ► pp.68–91

Pragmatic outcomes in the English-medium instruction context

The influence of intensity of instruction

| Universitat Jaume I
| Universitat Jaume I
This study investigates pragmatic development in the English-medium instruction (EMI) setting of the Valencian Community in Spain. More specifically, the study examines whether the intensity of EMI influences functional adequacy (FA) in second language (L2) writing. Participants were 102 EMI learners, each of whom wrote three motivation letters over one academic year in English. The rating scales designed by Kuiken and Vedder (2017) were used to examine the FA of the written texts in terms of cohesion, coherence, task requirements, content, and comprehensibility. Quantitative results revealed significant differences among the EMI groups under analysis, suggesting that the intensity of instruction may exert an influence on FA in L2 writing. Results from this study show the importance of intensity of exposure to EMI for L2 writing.
Keywords: English-medium instruction, EMI, functional adequacy, pragmatics, intensity of exposure
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Background research
    • 2.1Written pragmatic production in EMI settings
    • 2.2The role of intensity of exposure in English-medium instruction
    • 2.3Functional adequacy and pragmatics
      • 2.3.1Studies assessing the functional dimension of the language
  • 3.Method
    • 3.1Participants
    • 3.2Data collection instruments
    • 3.3Data analysis
  • 4.Results
  • 5.Discussion
  • 6.Conclusion, limitations and pedagogical implications
  • References


This article is currently available as a sample article.

Published online: 20 May 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ap.00004.her
References (42)
References
Ament, J. R., & Pérez-Vidal, C. (2015). Linguistic outcomes of English medium instruction programmes in higher education: A study on economics undergraduates at a Catalan university. Higher Learning Research Communications, 5(1), 47–68. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. (1996). Language testing in practice: Designing and developing useful language tests. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2013). Developing L2 pragmatics. Language Learning, 63(1), 68–86. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Burmeister, P., & Daniel, A. (2002). How effective is late partial immersion? Some findings from a secondary school program in Germany. In P. Burmeister, T. Piske, & A. Rohde (Eds.), An integrated view of language development: Papers in honor of Henning Wode (pp. 499–516). Trier, Germany: Wissenschaftlicher Verlag Triet.Google Scholar
Council of Europe. (2001). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
De Jong, N. H., Steinel, M. P., Florijn, A. F., Schoonen, R., & Hulstijn, J. H. (2012a). The effect of task complexity on functional adequacy, fluency and lexical diversity in speaking performances of native and non-native speakers. In A. Housen, F. Kuiken, & I. Vedder (Eds.), Dimensions of L2 performance and proficiency: Complexity, accuracy and fluency in SLA (pp. 121–142). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012b). Facets of speaking proficiency. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34(1), 5–34. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fragai, E. (2001). La programmazione didattica: Il Glotto-Kit come strumento per valutare i liv- elli in entrata. In M. Barni & A. Villarini (Eds.), La questione della lingua per gli immigrati stranieri. Insegnare, valutare e certificare l’Italiano L2 (pp. 191–208). Milan, IT: Franco Angeli Editore.Google Scholar
(2003). Valutare la competenza linguistico-comunicativa in italiano L2: Il Glotto-Kit per bambini e adolescenti stranieri. Didattica & Classe Plurilingue, 71, 1–5.Google Scholar
Fulcher, G. (1987). Tests of oral performance: The need for data-based criteria. ELT Journal, 41(4), 287–291. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gomez-Laich, M. P., & Taguchi, N. (2018). Task complexity effects on interaction during a collaborative persuasive writing task: A conversation analytic perspective. In N. Taguchi & Y. Kim (Eds.), Task-Based Approaches to Teaching and Assessing Pragmatics (pp. 84–109). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grice, H. P. (1975). Logic and conversation. In P. Cole & J. L. Morgan (Eds.), Syntax and semantic, Vol. 31 (pp. 41–58). New York, NY: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Gu, Q. (2009). Maturity and interculturality: Chinese students’ experience in UK higher education. European Journal of Education, 44(1), 37–51. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Herraiz-Martinez, A., & Alcón-Soler, E. (2018). English-medium instruction and functional adequacy in L2 writing. In A. Sánchez-Hernández & A. Herraiz-Martinez (Eds.), Learning second language pragmatics beyond traditional contexts (pp. 145–170). New York, NY: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Housen, A. (2012). Time and amount of L2 contact inside and outside the school: Insights from European schools. In C. Muñoz (Ed.), Intensive exposure experiences in second language learning (pp. 111–140). Bristol, UK: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Huizhu, J. H. (2012). Mutual influences between learners’ identity construction and English language learning in the first year of university study in China. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, The University of Hong Kong, China.Google Scholar
Knoch, U. (2009). Diagnostic assessment of writing: A comparison of two rating scales. Language Testing, 26(2), 275. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2011). Rating scales for diagnostic assessment of writing: What should they look like and where should the criteria come from? Assessing Writing, 16(2), 81–96. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuiken, F., & Vedder, I. (2017). Functional adequacy in L2 writing: Towards a new rating scale. Language Testing, 34(3), 321–336. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kuiken, F., Vedder, I., & Gilabert, R. (2010). Communicative adequacy and linguistic complexity in L2 writing. In I. Bartning, M. Martin, & I. Vedder (Eds.), Communicative proficiency and linguistic development: Intersections between SLA and language testing research (pp. 81–100). Eurosla Monographs Series 1.Google Scholar
Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (1991). Étude des effets à long terme de l’apprentissage intensif de l’anglais, langue seconde, au primaire. The Canadian Modern Language Review, 48(1), 90–117. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Loranc-Paszylk, B. (2007). Evaluation of foreign language achievement based upon a CLIL programme in tertiary education: A Polish perspective. In R. Wilkinson & V. Zegers (Eds.), Integrating content and language in higher education. Maastrich, The Netherlands: Maastricht University Language Centre.Google Scholar
Martín-Laguna, S. (2018). Learning pragmatics in the multilingual classroom: Exploring multicompetence across types of discourse-pragmatic markers. In A. Sánchez-Hernández & A. Herraiz-Martínez (Eds.) Learning second language pragmatics beyond traditional contexts (pp. 205–223). New York, NY: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
McNamara, T., & Roever, C. (2007). Language testing: The social dimension. Oxford, UK: Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ohta, A. S. (2001). A longitudinal study of the development of expression of alignment in Japanese as a foreign language. In G. Kasper & K. Rose (Eds.), Pragmatics and language teaching (pp.103–120). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pallotti, G. (2009). CAF: Defining, refining and differentiating constructs. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 590–601. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Revesz, A., Ekiert, M., & Torgersen, E. (2016). The effects of complexity, accuracy, and fluency on communicative adequacy in oral task performance. Applied Linguistics, 37(6), 828–848.Google Scholar
Salaberri, M. S., & Sánchez-Pérez, M. M. (2015). Analyzing writing in English-medium instruction at university. Linguarum Arena, 61, 45–58.Google Scholar
Sánchez-Hernández, A. (2017). Acculturation and acquisition of pragmatic routines in the study abroad context (Unpublished Ph.D. thesis). Universitat Jaume I, Castelló, Spain. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sato, T. (2012). The contribution of test-takers’ speech content to scores on an English oral proficiency test. Language Testing, 29(2), 223–241. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, R. (1993). Consciousness, learning, and interlanguage pragmatics. In G. Kasper & S. Blum-Kulka (Eds.), Interlanguage pragmatics (pp. 21–42). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Serrano, R., & Muñoz, C. (2007). Same hours, different time distribution: Any difference in EFL? System, 35(3), 305–321. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sheela, S. K., & Ravikumar, K. (2016). The importance of exposure in learning English as a second language: Strategies to be employed to improve the students’ language exposure in the context of rapid changes in the field of technology. Research Journal of English Language and Literature (RJELAL), 4(2), 770–774.Google Scholar
Taguchi, N. (2012). Context, individual differences, and pragmatic competence. New York/Bristol: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015). ‘Contextually’ speaking: A survey of pragmatic learning abroad, in class, and online. System, 481, 3–20. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taguchi, N., Naganuma, N., & Budding, C. (2015). Does instruction alter the naturalistic pattern of pragmatic development? A case of request speech act. TESL-EJ, 19(3), 1–25.Google Scholar
UCLES (University of Cambridge Local Examinations Syndicate). (2001). Quick placement test. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Upshur, J. A., & Turner, C. E. (1995). Constructing rating scales for second language tests. ELT Journal, 49(1), 3–12. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Usó-Juan, E., & Martínez-Flor, A. (2006). Approaches to language learning and teaching: Towards acquiring communicative competence through the four skills. In E. Usó-Juan & A. Martínez-Flor (Eds.), Current trends in the development and teaching of the four language skills (pp. 3–26). Berlin, Germany: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wong, R. (2010). The effectiveness of using English as the sole medium of instruction in English classes: Student responses and improved English proficiency. Porta Linguarum, 131, 119–130.Google Scholar
Zhang, L. J., & Yan, R. (2012). Impact of immersion teaching on English sociopragmatic awareness of Chinese kindergarten children: A polite study. International Education, 41(2), 33–45.Google Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Kuiken, Folkert & Ineke Vedder
2022. Measurement of functional adequacy in different learning contexts. TASK. Journal on Task-Based Language Teaching and Learning 2:1 ► pp. 8 ff. DOI logo
Kuiken, Folkert & Ineke Vedder
2022. Chapter 14. Speaking. In Instructed Second Language Acquisition Research Methods [Research Methods in Applied Linguistics, 3], ► pp. 329 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 3 october 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.