Empowering International Teaching Assistants: Consciousness-Raising Activities in English-Language Pragmatics Instruction
Eric L. Moore, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio, USA
Pragmatic competence is imperative for effective communication in academic, professional, and social settings. Pragmatics, using language strategically in context, is an often-overlooked area of English language education. International graduate students (IGSs) may have strong grammar and vocabulary skills but have difficulties understanding and using language involving indirect expressions, politeness strategies, register, and cultural nuances.
For IGSs, misunderstanding pragmatic elements can lead to communication breakdowns, especially in academic discourse (Taguchi & Roever, 2017). IGSs may come across as rude, difficult to communicate with, and/or lacking in comprehension of societal norms of behavior. This article explores tools which can aid pragmatic instruction to IGSs, especially through consciousness-raising. A description of a framework and key strategies educators can use will be described.
The Role of Pragmatic Skills in Academic, Professional, and Social Contexts
Whether in discussions in the classroom, serving as a teaching assistant (ITA), working collaboratively in research, professionally networking, or buying a café latte, IGS benefit from having robust pragmatic skills. The success of office-hour consultations, group projects, conference presentations, and the negotiation of obtaining goods and services all depend to an extent upon being able to use and comprehend pragmatic aspects of language.
There are many instances in which IGSs in North American higher education are at a disadvantage if their previous language education compounds with a lack of experience in target language culture. Without this experience and skill, IGS may have trouble interpreting indirect language and politeness strategies. An attempt to use sarcastic speech by an IGS, for example, can seem impolite or worse to L1 speakers of many languages. In addition, it may be difficult for IGSs to understand idiomatic expressions or adjust their level of formality in speech (Taguchi, 2012). Cultural differences in communication norms can lead to misunderstandings. For instance, in a role-play section of ITA readiness assessment, an ITA responded to a request to explain a concept to an undergraduate student by instead stating that the student should already know the answer, so no assistance would be provided.
Pragmatics is rarely the focus of language lessons. In addition, items assessing pragmatic usage on high-stakes proficiency tests are rare, so skill may be lacking in IGSs. Also, since skill is not typically needed in the English as a Foreign Language environment, educators and textbooks often downplay pragmatic instruction. There is then a need for exposing IGSs to pragmatic usage in English, with students especially benefitting from explicit teaching and guided, implicit practice (Roever, 2022).
Teaching Pragmatics
Pragmatic skills do not just develop through exposure as grammar skills may. IGSs need a certain level of overall L2 proficiency to comprehend certain pragmatic actions. Roever believes it is necessary to have pragmatic acts explicitly pointed out and have students participate in structured activities for increasing pragmatic awareness (Roever, 2022). Practice activities in which students take pragmatic actions in a defined role, such as service encounters, office hour conversations, or making small talk in a job interview are particularly important to increasing IGSs’ ability to successfully operate in the target language setting.
A three-step framework can be employed for the instruction of pragmatics to IGSs. First, the instructor can expose students to authentic and near-authentic language samples, such as those found in transcripts, videos, written texts, and recorded audio (Roever, 2022). Authentic texts are important due to the unpredictability of real spoken and written language. Near-authentic texts, such as a clip from a movie scene, are easy to locate and use. With the assistance of AI tools to search for specific instances of pragmatic usage and services such as YouTube, opportunities to increase exposure are readily available. This writer used this Chat GPT prompt to find an example of “funny instances of sarcastic language use in The Big Bang Theory.” The tool gave a response of a specific instance, including season and episode number, which allowed for the quick location of the clip for later viewing.
Next, instructors can give learners opportunities to analyze pragmatic features (Fulcher, 2013). This consciousness-raising approach can work by activating students’ prior knowledge of a situation in which pragmatic language usage is present. Educators can induce IGS awareness by providing activities such as having students listen to authentic recorded instances of native or near-native speakers’ responses to a question like “How are you?” or the statement “Good morning!” The students can count the number of words used by responders, to see if the response grammatically matches the actual wording of the question, or to pay particular attention to the intonation, stress, and context of the response (Taguchi, 2012). Counting the number of words in responses to “How are you?” works well as students notice that most responses are noticeably short – “Good,” “Great,” and “Not bad.” Longer responses are rare. When asked to listen to responses to the greeting “Good morning,” several of the writers’ students were surprised to hear more than one response to the question “How are you?”, as noted below.
Speaker A: Good morning!
Speaker B: Great, thanks!
Students can apply what they have learned through role-plays, discussions, and written tasks. IGSs can practice service encounters through targeted role plays. A visit to the agency responsible for drivers’ licenses is often one of the tasks that IGSs will undertake. The instructor, class assistants, and more experienced students can play the part of customer service representatives while others serve as visitors. Discussions can be helpful for practicing situations in which a misunderstanding may be a result of non-typical pragmatic behavior. An instructor can ask students to practice sending an email to their advisor in which they need to request an extension on an assignment. Students can then analyze email responses which lack pragmatic success in class or privately. Next, instructors can give a series of statements to students to practice a politeness awareness task in which they rank them from most to least polite. Finally, students can employ critical reflection, review and discuss instances of miscommunication and their cultural implications. Students and instructors, if they are willing, may share their authentic experiences in class or workshop, providing IGSs with the opportunity to gain insight into the misunderstandings.
Outside of class or workshops, students can observe and document interactions involving themselves and others, noting whether they feel the communication was successful, partially successful, or unsuccessful. Daily/weekly reflection journals on pragmatic use can be helpful for noticing and reflection. An instructor may assign students to listen and note an apology they give or hear over the weekend.
For effective implementation of pragmatic instruction, educators can employ progressive scaffolding (Coombe, Folse, & Hubley, 2007). Instructors can start with basic politeness strategies before progressing to nuanced implicature, for example. Instructors may provide expert feedback to students, highlighting cultural norms in politeness and formality, such as explaining why "What a fantastic dinner!” is preferable to "Thank you for the dinner." Educators can encourage self-assessment, group discussions in which students evaluate each other’s pragmatic performance in role-plays, and reflection journals to track individual progress.
Tailoring Instruction for CEFR Levels
It is difficult to teach specific pragmatic skills to students until they have reached an appropriate overall proficiency level (Roever, 2022). For learners at the CEFR B2 (Upper Intermediate) level, instruction can focus on comprehension and production of indirect speech acts, discourse markers, and basic politeness strategies. For the study of indirect speech acts, instructors can introduce various settings with a particular social action in a role play, for example requesting a clean fork from a waiter. To explore the use of discourse markers employed to manage conversation flow, indicate shifts in topic, or express attitudes, the instructor can provide examples from authentic speech. IGSs can view examples of basic politeness strategies at this level, including an exploration of the influence of social distance and power dynamics at play. The author used fellow teachers’ real ratings of pragmatic success or failure in working with students on moving from producing “I want my TOEFL score” to “Could I meet with you to get my TOEFL score?”
IGSs at the CEFR C1 (Advanced) level can add further skills to their pragmatic repertoire. Pragmatic items appropriate for students at this level include nuanced implicature, advanced discourse management, and a more in-depth study of cultural pragmatic norms. Interpreting and conveying subtle implied meanings, including sarcasm, humor, and indirect criticism are possible. Instructors can show clips of humor from movies, series, or stand-up comedy and ask students to analyze them. Students can practice managing extended interactions, including turn-taking, topic initiation and closure, and repairing misunderstandings. Instructors can provide students with a script from a talk show or an interview and ask them to identify instances of discourse management. IGSs can suggest substitutions which other students judge to be pragmatically successful or not. Lastly, students can explore navigating and adapting to diverse cultural norms and expectations in communication, such as listening to instances of polite disagreement.
Conclusion
Pragmatic competence is essential for IGSs navigating academic, professional, and social settings. Without explicit instruction, they may struggle with indirect expressions, politeness, and cultural norms, leading to miscommunication. Consciousness-raising activities, such as role-plays and authentic dialogue analysis, help develop these skills. A structured input-noticing-output framework, along with progressive scaffolding, enables students to advance from basic politeness to nuanced discourse management. By fostering pragmatic awareness and adaptability, educators equip students with the tools to communicate effectively, enhancing their confidence in academic discussions, professional networking, and daily interactions.
References
Coombe, C., Folse, K., & Hubley, N. (2007). A practical guide to assessing English language learners. University of Michigan Press.
Fulcher, G. (2013). Practical language testing. Routledge.
Roever, C. (2022). Teaching and testing second language pragmatics and interaction: A practical guide. Routledge.
Taguchi, N. (2012). Context, individual differences, and pragmatic competence. Multilingual Matters.
Taguchi, N., & Roever, C. (2017). Second language pragmatics. Oxford University Press.
Eric Moore serves as the Director of Spoken English Language Programs at Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland, Ohio, USA. He holds a master’s in TESOL and Applied Linguistics from Leicester University. Mr. Moore’s research interests include pragmatics and oral language assessment.