3. To study the opinion of experts on the effectiveness of measures to counteract the spread of HIV infection.
4. Improve measures to counteract the spread of HIV infection by modeling the process of teaching differentiated groups of the population knowledge, skills and habits of self-control of preventive measures for HIV infection based on neurolinguistic theory.
Materials and research methods. sociological, analytical, statistical.
Scientific novelty: a medical and social educational program for the population practicing «risk behavior» will be developed. Teaching technology for individuals with «risk behavior» based on neurolinguistic modeling of didactic material.
Practical significance, expected results: recommendations will be developed and implemented on the use of monitoring data on the medical and social characteristics of persons at high risk of HIV infection in the AIDS center.
Zhorabekova Aruzhan
The importance of teaching pragmatic competence in higher education: analysis of emails to the instructors
(Suleyman Demirel University)
Abstract:
Pragmatic competence has become an integral part of language acquisition, as good linguistic knowledge would not be enough to have a successful communication. Emailing has become an official communication tool between instructors and students in higher education. In universities teachers usually use corporate mail to announce deadlines, to share with course materials and for other educational purposes. Students often use corporate mail for requesting, which might be in and out of educators’ responsibilities, for instance, asking for extra tasks, to make a personal appointment, asking for recommendation letters.This means making requests tends to be common discourse in higher educational institutions, however, it is still face-threatening act for students.By taking into consideration power relations, cultural norms and other socio-linguistic factors, writing emails to teachers requires sufficient knowledge of pragmatics. This article is intended to provide a brief review of pragmatic competence and the role of pragmatic development in achieving positive outcomes in communication.
Key words: pragmatic competence, pragmatic development in higher education
Introduction
Effective communication is crucial for success in academic and professional settings. Pragmatic competence, which refers to the ability to use language appropriately in social contexts, is essential for effective communication. In higher education, students need to communicate effectively with their instructors, peers, and potential employers. This article review examines the importance of teaching pragmatic competence in higher education, with a focus on the analysis of emails to instructors.
Pragmatic competence refers to the ability to use language effectively in social interactions, taking into account the context, the speaker’s intentions, and the listener’s expectations. It is a crucial aspect of communication that is often overlooked in traditional language teaching. In recent years, there has been growing recognition of the importance of teaching pragmatic competence in higher education, as it is essential for success in academic, professional, and social contexts.
Email communication is an essential aspect of higher education, with students often sending emails to instructors to ask for clarification on assignments, to schedule appointments, or to request feedback. However, many students struggle with writing effective emails, which can lead to misunderstandings and miscommunication. Research has shown that teaching pragmatic competence can help students write more effective emails. A study by Lee and Lim (2017) analyzed emails sent by Korean students to their instructors and found that students who had received training in pragmatic competence were more successful in communicating their needs and concerns in their emails.The study also found that students who had not received such training tended to write emails that were too direct, informal, or impolite, which could be perceived as disrespectful or unprofessional by instructors. These findings highlight the importance of teaching pragmatic competence in higher education to help students communicate more effectively in academic and professional settings.
Main part
Email communication is a common form of communication between students and instructors in higher education. However, many students struggle with writing effective emails, which can lead to misunderstandings and miscommunication. Research has shown that teaching pragmatic competence can help students write more effective emails.According to Alcón-Soler and Safont-Jordà (2012), «pragmatic competence is essential for effective communication, as it enables individuals to express their intended meanings appropriately, understand the intentions of others, and negotiate meaning in complex social interactions» (p. 77). In the academic context, pragmatic competence is particularly important for students who are required to participate in group discussions, debates, and presentations, as well as to interact with professors and peers in a variety of settings.
A study by Lee and Lim (2017) analyzed emails sent by Korean students to their instructors and found that students who had received training in pragmatic competence were more successful in communicating their needs and concerns in their emails. The study also found that students who had not received such training tended to write emails that were too direct, informal, or impolite, which could be perceived as disrespectful or unprofessional by instructors.For example, Lu (2017) found that Chinese students tended to use overly formal language in their emails, which can be perceived as impolite or insincere by native English-speaking instructors. Similarly, Park (2017) found that Korean students tended to use overly deferential language, which can be seen as lacking confidence or assertiveness. Other studies have focused on specific aspects of pragmatic competence in emails to instructors. For example, Sert (2018) examined how Turkish students used politeness strategies in their emails to instructors. The study found that students used various forms of politeness, such as indirectness and hedging, to show respect and deference to instructors. However, some students overused politeness strategies, which can make their emails sound insincere or ambiguous.Research has also investigated how instructors perceive students’ emails in terms of pragmatic competence. For example, Kuo and Anderson (2010) asked instructors to rate the politeness and appropriateness of emails written by Taiwanese students. The study found that instructors rated emails that used more direct language as more polite and appropriate. This suggests that students may need to balance their use of politeness strategies with directness and clarity.
Al-Issa and Al-Mekhlafi (2017) investigated the pragmatic competence of Yemeni EFL learners in requesting strategies. The study found that the learners’ use of request strategies was influenced by their L1 culture, which prioritizes indirectness and politeness. The authors suggest that EFL learners need explicit instruction and practice in the target language culture’s communication styles to develop pragmatic competence. Similarly Huang (2016) investigated the pragmatic competence of Chinese EFL learners in email communication. The study analyzed the learners’ email messages using the discourse analysis framework and found that the learners had difficulty in employing appropriate language functions, such as requests, apologies, and suggestions, in email communication. The study suggested that EFL instructors should focus on teaching language functions and providing authentic email writing tasks to improve learners’ pragmatic competence.
Another study by Lee and Huang (2018) examined the effect of explicit instruction on the pragmatic competence of Taiwanese EFL learners. The learners received instruction on the use of hedging strategies in English emails, and their pre- and post-instruction emails were analyzed for pragmatic competence. The study found that the explicit instruction significantly improved the learners’ use of hedging strategies, indicating the effectiveness of explicit instruction in developing pragmatic competence.
In a different