Communicative Linguistic Competence of English for International Communication Undergraduates on the Basis of the Common European Framework of Reference for Language
Keywords:
Communicative linguistic competence, Communicative competence, Common European Framework of Reference for LanguagesAbstract
This study aimed to examine the level of the communicative linguistic competence on the basis of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages of the English for International Communication (EIC) program students, Faculty of Business Administration and Liberal Arts, Rajamangala University of Technology Lanna, Chiang Mai, Thailand. The participants were 47 EIC senior students who enrolled in the internship program in 2019 academic year. The data were collected by the questionnaire including three parts. The first part was the demographic data. The second part was a five point- rating scale items of communicative linguistic competence which were divided into six parts including the general linguistic range, the vocabulary range, the grammatical accuracy, the vocabulary control, the phonological control, and the orthography control. The third part was the open-ended questions, which involve the need of EIC senior students to improve communicative linguistic competence. The data were analyzed by mean and standard deviation.
The results revealed that the overall linguistic competence of EIC senior students was all at the A2 level based on the CEFR framework (= 3.52). The core competency that EIC senior students are good at was vocabulary range (
= 3.65), followed by vocabulary control (
= 3.64). Moreover, most of them wanted to improve the grammatical accuracy. In addition, the most common suggestion was to participate activities with foreigners so as to enable EIC senior students to improve their English skills and gain more confidence to speak English while they are student-interns.
References
Bachman, L. (1990). Fundamental Considerations in Language Testing. New York, USA: Oxford University Press.
Belinda, H. (2014). Dealing with the English Communicatiob Difficuties Faced by Computer Science Students during their Internship. Quest Journalch in Humanities and Social Siceince, 11(3), 47-50.
Berns, M. (1990). Social and Cultural Considerations in Communicative Language Teaching. In Contexts of Competence (1-27). West Lafayette, Indiana: Purdue University.
Canale, M. (1983). Communicative Competence to Communicative Language Pedagogy. Longman Press, New York: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.
Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical Bases of Communicative Approaches to Second Language Teaching and Testing. In Appied Linguistics (1). New York, USA: Oxford University Press.
Celce-Murcia, M, Dornyei, Z, & Thunrrel, S. (1995). Communicative Competence: A Pedagogically Motivated Model with Content Specifications. In Issue in Applied Linguistics (5-35). Los Angeles, USA: University of California.
Chetchumlong, S., & Hoonnoi, N. (2018). Problems and English Speaking Abilities of Thai Employees of Business Online Public Company Limited. Chonburi, Thailand: Burapha University.
Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of The Theory of Syntax. Cambridge, United Kingdom: The Massachusetts Institute of Technology Press.
Council of Europe. (2018, Fabruary). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment Companion Volume with New Descriptors. In N. Brain , G.
Tim, & P. Enrica. Council of Europe. Retrieved from Council of European Portal:https://www.coe.int/en/web/common-european-framework-reference -languages
Crosling, G., & Ward, I. (2002). Oral communication: The Workplace Needs and Uses of Business Graduate Employees. In English for Specific Purpose 21 (41-57). Clayton, Australia: Monarch University.
Dannels, A., & Darling, D. (2003). Practicing engineers talk about the importance of talk: A Report on the role of oral communication in the workplace. Communication Education, 52(2), 1-16.
Herrero, A. H. (2005). Content-based instruction in an English oral communication course at the University of Costa Rica. Actualidades Investigativas en Educación. San Pedro de Montes de Oca, Costa Rica: Universidad de Costa Rica.
Hymes, D. (1966). Two types of linguistic relativity. In Bright, W. (ed.). Sociolinguistics. The Hague: Mouton. 114–158.
Hymes, D. (1972). On communicative competence. Penguin: Harmondsworth. Retrieved from http://smjegupr.net/ wp-content/uploads/2012/05/ESPA-32 46-On CommunicativeCompetenc e-p-53-73.pdf.
Kamonpan, B. (2009). Enhancing the Development of Speaking Skills for Non-Native Speakers of English. Nakhon Pathom, Thailand: Faculty of Arts, Silpakorn University.
Kanoksilapatham, A. & Khamhien, B. (2012). English Vocabulary Instruction via Educational TV Programs in Retrospect. TESOL Journal, 17(5), 71-85.
Lasala, C. (2014). Communicative Competence of Secondary Senior Students: Language Instructional Pocket. Colon, Philippines: University of the Visayas.
McAll, C. (2003). Language Dynamics in The Bi-and Multilingual Workplace. In R. Bayley, & S.Schecter, Language Socialization in Bilingual and Multilingual Societies (235-250). Clevedon, UK: Multilingual.
Matters.Mert, T., & Hakan, D. (2014). Effects of Studying Vocabulary Enhancement Activities on Students’ Vocabulary Production Levels. In Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences (931-936). Yalova, Turkey: Naval Petty Officer Vocational School Command, Yalova, Turkey & Maltepe University, Department of English Language Teaching, Island, Turkey.
Mofareh, A. (2015). The Importance of Vocabulary in Language Learning and How to be Taught. Internayional Journal of Teaching and Education, 11(3), 4-9.
Nguyen, T. (2015). Problems Affecting Learning Writing Skill Of Grade 11 At Thong Linh High School. Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam: Dong Thap University.
Panjaluck, T. (2014). A Study of English Vocabulary Achievement and Retention of Prathomsuksa Five Students at the Elementary Demonstration School of Bansomdejchaopraya Rajabhat University by Using Reading Plus Vocabulary Enhancement Activitie. Phra Nakhon, Bangkok, Thailand: Faculty of Education, Silpakorn University.
Pitchayapa, K. (2019). The Development of English Writing Competency of Thai EFL Students by Using Peer Review. Phichit Province Thailand: Phichitpittayakom School.
Poolsawad, K., Kanjanawasee, S., & Wudthayagorn, J. (2014). Development of an English Communicative Competence Diagnostic Approach. In Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences (759-763). Bangkok, Thailand: Chulalongkorn University.
Prashneel, R. (2015). Vocabulary Learning Strategies of English as Foreign Language (EFL) Learners: a Literature Review. Suva, Fiji: Fiji National University.
Próxima, Z. (2015). Exploring Communicative Competence Development in an EFLT Classroom at Cursos Libres. Barranquilla, Colombia: Universidad del Norte.
Richards, J., & Renandya, W. (2002). An Anthology of Current Practice. In Methodology in Language Teaching (5-17). New York, USA: Cambridge University Press.
Rico, F. (2016). Linguistic Competence Analysis and the Development of Speaking Instructional Material. Zambales, Philippine: Ramon Magsaysay Technological University.
Rohmatillah, R. (2014). A study on students’ difficulties in learning vocabulary. Retrieved from https://www.semantic scholar.org/paper/A-STUDY-ON-STUDENTS %E2%80%99-DIFFICULTIES-IN-LEARNIN GRohmatillah/b62892458dbca499f19fe08782d93dabb24a741d#citing-pap ers
Savignon, S. (2017, March 07). Communicative Competence. Retrieved from Wiley Online Library: https://doi.org/10.1002/ 9781118784235.eelt0047
Siikonen, M. (2015). The other at the workplace: Power and Language in a Multicultural Workplace. Jyväskylä, Finnland: University of Jyväskylä.
Srutirupa, P., & Rabindra, N. (2014). Problems of Student Teacher during Internship Program: Issues and Concern. BEST Journals 12(4), 61-66.
Supatra, W., Kavintra, S., & Kittiporn, N. (2013). Technical Vocabulary Proficiencies and Vocabulary Learning Strategies of Engineering Students. In Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences (88, 312-320). Udon Thani, Thailand: Udon Thani Rajabhat University.
Supika, N., & Thanyapa, C. (2014). Vocabulary Learning Strategies of Thai University Students and Its Relationship to Vocabulary Size. Thailand: Prince of Songkla University, Hat Yai Campus, Songkla, Thailand: Macrothink Institute TM.
Tarif, R., & Noor, R. (2009). Connecting Language Needs in the Workplace to the Learning of. English at Tertiary Level. Selangor, Malaysia: University Putra Malaysia.
Thanawan, S., & Punchalee, W. (2012). Effects of Using Facebook as a Medium for Discussions of English Grammar and Writing of Low-Intermediate EFL Students. In Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching (194-214). Bangkok, Thailand: Chulalongkorn University.
Tuan, V. (2017). Communicative Competence of The Fourth Year Students: Basis for Proposed English Language Program. Hanoi, Vietnam: Hanoi University of Business and Technology.
Wuthinan, I. (2016). Investigating Thai EFL Students’ English Vocabulary Learning Strategies at a Private University. Pathum Thani, Thailand: Thammasat University.
Wuttiwongsa, N. (2014). Motivation Strategies: Enhancing English Language Skills. PathumThani, Thailand: Bangkok University.
Zhag, Y. (2009). Reading to speak: Integrating oral communication skills. English Teaching. In English Teaching Forum (32-34). Tianjin: Taijin University of Commerce
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
บทความวิจัยนี้เป็นของลิขสิทธิ์
