In this article, the researcher examined the value of a video-based instructional intervention for the pragmatic language development of a group of adult second language learners. The main concept underpinning the research was the idea that pragmatic competence requires the student not only to develop linguistic competence, but also an understanding of relevant social and cultural issues (Jernigan, 2012). However, helping students achieve mastery in all of these areas can be a major challenge for English as a Second Language (ESL) instructors (Jernigan, 2012). Previous researchers had explored different teaching methods to promote pragmatic competence, but the results were mixed: some of the teaching methods led to significant improvements in pragmatic competence, while others did not produce the desired results (Jernigan, 2012). Therefore, the author decided to explore whether a video-based teaching tool could be effective for building the pragmatic competence of adult English language learners (Jernigan, 2012).
After introducing the study, the researcher provided some background on key concepts related to the study. He started with an overview of the literature related to intercultural pragmatic development, focusing on two key concepts in the field: output pragmatic development and speech acts. In relation to the first concept, the researcher highlighted Swain’s Output Hypothesis, which proposes that the purpose of output in the learning process is to encourage English language learners to identify gaps in their knowledge, test their own predictions about the new language, and increase their awareness of different forms and functions within the new language (Jernigan, 2012). The author also defined the term “speech act” as any activity that facilitates communication, including oral speech, the written word, and even drawings (Jernigan, 2012).
Having provided a background to the study, the author laid out two research questions for exploration. The first question was whether students perceived that the output-focused, video-based teaching tool was more appropriate for pragmatic development than a traditional, comprehension-based instructional approach (Jernigan, 2012). The second question was whether one of the approaches was more effective than the other in developing the students’ abilities to produce written speech acts (Jernigan, 2012). To answer these questions, the author designed a method similar to one that was used by a previous researcher, with a few key distinctions. The researcher recruited 34 study participants from a class of adult English language learners who were in an intensive English program at a university in the United States (Jernigan, 2012). They were randomly assigned to a control group and a treatment group. The students in both groups watched 12 video vignettes. Those in the treatment group were assigned to reconstruct the vignettes (an output-focused task), while those in the control group were assigned to answer comprehension questions about the vignette (Jernigan, 2012). After the intervention, the students in both the treatment and the control group completed a pragmatic acceptability judgment task (PAJT) and a written discourse completion task (DCT) (Jernigan, 2012).
The PAJT was designed to address the first research question, while the DCT was intended to address the second research question (Jernigan, 2012). A statistical analysis revealed that the intervention had a significant effect on the PAJT, so the author was able to conclude that the output-focused, video-based instructional method could improve student performance on a perception-oriented test (Jernigan, 2012). However, for the DCT, the results were mixed, so the researcher was unable to reach a clear conclusion on the second question of whether or not the intervention increased students’ abilities to produce language in the desired pragmalinguistic forms (Jernigan, 2012). Ultimately, this provides some support for Swain’s Output Hypothesis, but it also suggests that it is important for future researchers to explore how output-based teaching tools affect different aspects of pragmatic development (Jernigan, 2012). To conclude, the author recommended that the video-based pragmatic instruction method be used in both research and classroom settings (Jernigan, 2012).
- 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), 2-14.
