Cover not available
Article published In:
Pedagogical Linguistics
Vol. 5:2 (2024) ► pp.189–214

Project-based learning in an Eigogaku course

Bridging the gap between (English) linguistics and language pedagogy

ORCID logo | Miyazaki Municipal University,
This exploratory study examines the role of project-based learning (PBL) in an Eigogaku (English linguistics) course for preservice English teachers studying at an English medium college in Japan. Three projects were designed to connect the course modules on phonetics/phonology, morphology, and syntax with language teaching applications. At the start and conclusion of the course, students completed a survey that included an open-ended question about the role of linguistics in language teaching and 29 Likert-scale response items targeting their understanding of linguistic concepts, pedagogical applications of linguistics, their beliefs and values about language teaching and learning, and learner autonomy. Responses to the open-ended question showed an increase in explanations of how linguistics can inform pedagogical practices and increase teacher agency. Responses to the Likert-scale items indicated greater understanding of linguistic concepts, pedagogical practices, and learner autonomy, but minimal change regarding beliefs about language learning and teaching. Implications for these findings and recommendations for future research on linguistics education for language teachers are discussed.
Keywords: project-based learning (PBL), teaching linguistics, language teacher training, Eigogaku
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Literature review
    • 2.1Linguistics in language teaching
    • 2.2English language teaching curriculum in Japan
    • 2.3Project-based learning
  • 3.Method
    • 3.1Participants
    • 3.2Course description
    • 3.3Description of projects
      • 3.3.1Project 1: Designing pronunciation materials
      • 3.3.2Project 2: Making a morphology supported reader
      • 3.3.3Project 3: Corpus analysis of English teaching materials
      • 3.3.4In class mini projects
  • 4.Procedure and analysis
  • 5.Results
    • 5.1Responses to open-ended question
      • 5.1.1Participant level analysis
    • 5.2Self-assessment ratings
      • 5.2.1Linguistic content knowledge
      • 5.2.2Self-assessment of pedagogical applications of linguistic knowledge
      • 5.2.3Language beliefs and learner autonomy
  • 6.Discussion
    • 6.1Limitations and future research
  • 7.Conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 12 September 2023
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/pl.23005.ric
References (31)
References
Anderson, C. (2018). Essentials of linguistics. Pressbooks.Google Scholar
Backley, P. (2016). Varieties of English: Teaching Englishes, not English. English Language & Literature, 101 1, 87–96. [URL]
Bardovi-Harlig, K. (2020). Pedagogical linguistics: A view from L2 pragmatics. Pedagogical Linguistics, 1 (1), 44–65. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bateman, N. (2019). Linguistics in middle school: Incorporating linguistics into project-based learning. Language, 95 (2), 300–326. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baumgartner, E., & Zabin, C. (2008). A Case Study of Project-Based Instruction in the Ninth Grade: A Semester Long Study of Intertidal Biodiversity. Environmental Education Research, 14 (2), 97–114. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, J. D. (2011). Likert items and scales of measurement? Shiken: JALT Testing & Evaluation SIG Newsletter, 15 (1), 1–14.Google Scholar
Chomsky, N. (1966). Linguistic theory. In R. G. Mead (Ed.), Language teaching: Broader contexts. Northeast Conference on the Teaching of Modern Languages: Reports of the working committees. New York, NY: MLA Materials Center
Davies, M. (2004). BRITISH NATIONAL CORPUS. Oxford University Press. [URL]
Dawson, H., & Phelan, M. (Eds.). (2016). The language files: Materials for an introduction to language and linguistics. (12th ed.). Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dochy, F., Segers, M., Van den Bossche, P., & Gijbels, D. (2003). Effects of problem-based learning: a meta-analysis. Learning and Instruction, 13 (5), 533–568. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Filimonova, V. (2020). Problem-based learning in introductory linguistics. Langauge, 96 1, e1–e21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gass, S., Mackey, A., & Ross-Feldman, L. (2011). Task-based interactions in classroom and laboratory settings. Language Learning, 61 1 (Special issue), 189–220. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halliday, M. (1982). Linguistics in teacher education. In R. Carter (Ed.), Linguistics and the teacher (pp. 10–15). London: The Gresham Press.Google Scholar
Holm, M. (2011). Project-based instruction: A review of the literature on the effectiveness in pre-kindergarten through 12th grade classrooms. InSight: Rivier Academic Journal, 7 (2), 1–12.Google Scholar
Hudson, R. (2020). Towards a pedagogical linguistics. Pedagogical Linguistics, 1 (1), 8–13. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ikeuchi, M., Kubozono, H., & Kosuge, K. (Eds.). (2018). Eigogaku wo eigo jugyou ni ikasu [English linguistics in the English language classroom]. Kaitakusha.Google Scholar
Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2010). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41 (2), 75–86. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Köylü, Y. (2021). Teaching linguistics through language construction: A project-based approach. Pedagogical Linguistics, e1–e41. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Larsen-Freeman, D., & Celce-Murcia, M. (2015). The grammar book: Form, meaning, and use for English language teachers (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: National Geographic Learning/Cengage Publishing Company.Google Scholar
Larmer, J., Mergendoller, J., & Boss, S. (2015). Setting the standard for project based learning. The Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.Google Scholar
Lightbown, P., & Spada, N. (2013). How languages are learned. (4th ed.) Oxford. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19 (1), 37–66. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lyster, R., & Saito, K. (2010). Oral feedback in classroom SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32 (Special Issue 2), 265–302. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
MEXT. (2019). Gaikokugo no core curriculum ni tsuite [Regarding the foreign language core curriculum]. [URL]
Park-Johnson, S. K., & Shin, S. J. (2020). Linguistics for language teachers: Lessons for classroom practice. New York, NY: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Riddle, M. (1982). Linguistics for education. In R. Carter (Ed.), Linguistics and the teacher (pp. 31–51). London: The Gresham Press.Google Scholar
Rogerson-Revell, P. (2011). English phonology and pronunciation teaching. London: Bloomsbury Publishing. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sanders, N. (2016). Constructed languages in the classroom. Language, 92 (3), 192–204. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sawada, O. (2008). Two types of adverbial polarity items in Japanese: Absolute and relative. Proceedings of the 10th Conference of the Pragmatics Society of Japan, 3 1, 263–270. [URL]
Sinclair, J. (1966). Linguistics and the teaching of English. Study Group Paper, 8 1,1–13.Google Scholar
Thomas, J. W. (2000). A review of research on project-based learning. [URL]