عاطفه رضانژاد

This study sought to examine the type and frequency of tasks in the Iranian high school English course books (Prospect 1, 2, 3 & English Book 1, 2, 3). The corpus was analyzed based on Nunan’s (1999) framework composed of five main task types, namely cognitive, interpersonal, linguistics, affective, and creative. To this end, the whole content of the aforementioned course books went through content analysis separately and accordingly descriptive and inferential results were reported regarding the frequency of each task type. The results showed that the linguistic tasks were the most recurrent type, whereas some task types (e.g., affective and creative) were totally absent. Furthermore, based on the results of Chi Square test, a significant difference was observed in the frequency of task types. While, according to communicative approach, communicative competence necessitates the inclusion of grammatical, discourse, sociolinguistic, and strategic competencies, the findings of the current study revealed that linguistic competence was overemphasized in these course books. This fact may lead to learners who are competent in producing linguistically appropriate utterances, which may at the same time be inappropriate with regard to context. The findings can have significant implications for EFL teachers and materials developers in making them conscious of the fact that the application of different types of tasks in textbooks is an important standard leading to more competent language users, especially in an EFL context like Iran.

With increasing intercultural communication among people from diverse linguistic and cultural backgrounds, the integration of language and culture has recently been foregrounded in language education. This has led to a growing need for studies on intercultural communicative competence. To address this need, this study aimed to afford an insight into the beliefs of 20 Iranian language teachers on intercultural language teaching (ICLT). Based on a mixed-method design, two different instruments were used to collect the data. First, an ICLT questionnaire which included 12 items was administered to 20 teachers. This study also used semi-structured interviews to obtain an in-depth understanding of the EFL teachers’ attitudes toward ICLT. The findings from the questionnaire revealed that the teachers were favorably disposed toward ICLT and thought that culture teaching is as important as language teaching. They believed that language teachers are required to inform the learners of intercultural issues. Also, the thematic content analysis of the interviews led to the discovery of four main themes, namely definition of culture, ICLT and its significance, challenges in ICLT, and sources used by the teachers to improve their intercultural knowledge. However, many teachers’ responses in the interviews indicated some degree of uncertainty regarding the concept of ICLT, as they were not confident how to integrate language and culture or how to deal with challenges in implementation of ICLT. These findings imply as the teachers’ perceptions would guide their practices in the classroom, more attention needs to be devoted to the inclusion of ICLT-related topics in language teacher education courses to equip the teachers with requisite skills and expertise.

Pragmatic assessment and consistency in rating are among the subject matters which are still in need of more profound investigations. The importance of the issue is highlighted when remembering that inconsistency in ratings would surely damage the test fairness issue in assessment and lead to much diversity in ratings. Our principal concern in this study was observing the criteria that American and Iranian EFL/ESL teachers consider when rating Iranian EFL learners’ pragmatic productions regarding the speech act of compliment. The instrument utilized in this study was WDCTs and a speech act rating questionnaire administered to sixty American and sixty Iranian EFL/ESL teachers. In order to come up with the criteria, the reasoning and justifications of the raters when rating learners’ pragmatic productions were analyzed carefully through content analysis. The results showed that overall the raters considered nine general criteria when rating. They included: “Strategy use”, “Affective factors”, “Politeness”, “Interlocutors’ relationships”, “Linguistic accuracy”, “Sincerity”, “Authenticity”, “Fluency”, and “Cultural issues”. Also, the most frequent criterion among the native and non-native raters was “Strategy use” and “Politeness” respectively. Finally, it was concluded that due to some inconsistencies and variations in the ratings and criteria of both native and non-native raters, it seems that both groups are in need of pragmatic workshops and training sessions. The results of this study can have important implications for EFL/ESL teacher educators who are considerate of the importance of pragmatic training and instruction.