Cultural Blind Spots in Task-based Language Teaching: A Study of Implicit Cultural Assumptions in Task Design and Learners' Cultural Identity Conflict

Jia Liu; Yu Zhang

doi:10.54691/m5tn2q03

Authors

Jia Liu
Yu Zhang

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54691/m5tn2q03

Keywords:

Task-based Language Teaching; Cultural Blind Spots; Implicit Cultural Assumptions; Cultural Identity; Foreign Language Teaching.

Abstract

Task-based Language Teaching method (TBLT), as one of the mainstream methods of foreign language teaching worldwide, emphasizes the development of communicative competence through authentic tasks. However, the implicit cultural assumptions latent in its task design are often overlooked, leading to conflicts with learners' cultural identities. Taking Chinese foreign language teaching as a background, this paper analyzes the manifestations of hidden cultural assumptions in TBLT task design, such as the implantation of Western socio-cultural scenarios, the individualistic-oriented role assignment, and the evaluation criteria dominated by Western communicative norms, and explores the mechanisms of their conflicts with Chinese learners' cultural identities, such as their collectivist values and their indirect communicative preferences. The study found that these conflicts may trigger learners' cultural cognitive biases, communicative behavioral conflicts and value collisions, which may weaken teaching effectiveness and cultural confidence. Based on this, this paper proposes optimization strategies such as diversified task context design, balanced role allocation and communicative evaluation, and enhanced cultural awareness and learner autonomy. This study aims to provide theoretical and empirical support for the construction of a foreign language teaching practice that meets China's national conditions, and responds to the need for contextual sensitivity in teaching in the “post-methodological era”.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

[1] Richards J and Rodgers T. Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching(2nd edition)[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001.

[2] Prabhu N S. There is no best method-why?[J]. TESOL Quarterly,1990,(24):161-176.

[3] Pennycook A.The Cultural Politics of English as An International Language[M]. London: Longman,1994.

[4] Richards, J. C. Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching [Ml. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1986.

[5] Candlin, C. & Murphy, J. Language Learning Tasks [M]. London: Prentice Hall, 1987.

[6] Ellis, R. Task-based language learning and teaching [M]. Oxford: Oxford University Press,2003.

[7] Willis, J.A Framework for Task-Based Learning [M]. London: Longman,1996.

[8] Vygotsky. Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press,131-132,1978.

[9] Long, M.H&P. Robinson. Focus on form [A]. In C. Doughty &J. Williams (eds.). Focus on Form in Classroom Second Language Acquisition [C]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1998.

[10] Chang K. & M. Beaumont. Collaborative Learning in the Korean Secondary ELT Classroom, Manuscript, Korea Institute for Curriculum and Evaluation [C]. London: University of Manchester,2004.

[11] Cortazzi,M. & L. Jin. Cultures of learning: Language classrooms in China [A]. In H. Coleman (ed.). Society and the Language Classroom [C].Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press,169-206,1996.

[12] Miller,T. Japanese learners' reactions to communicative English lessons [J]. JALT Journal17: 31-53,1995.

[13] Flowerdew,J. Corpora in language teaching [A]. In M. H. Long & C.J. Doughty (eds.). The Handbook of Language Teaching [C].Oxford:Wiley-Blackwell,327-350,2009.

[14] Cameron,D. Globalization and the teaching of "communication skills" [A]. In D. Block & D. Cameron (eds.). Globalization and Language Teaching [C]. London, UK.: Routledge,67-82,2002.

[15] Krashen, S. D. Principles and practice in second language acquisition. Oxford: Pergamon Press,1982.

[16] Hofstede, Geert. Culture's Consequences, Comparing Values, Behaviors, institutions, and Organizations Across Nations[M].Thousand Oaks CA:Sage Publications, 2001.

[17] Brown, P. & Levinson, S: Universals in Language Usage: Politeness Phonomena. In Goody, E. N. (ed.) Questions and Politeness: Strategies in Social Interaction, Cambridge University Press, 1978.

[18] Nunan, D. Designing Tasks for the Communicative Classroom.[M] Cambridge University Press,1989.

[19] Byram, Michael. Teaching and Assessing Intercultural Communicative Competence. Multilingual Matters, 1997.

[20] Palizhati Reheman. Research on the Application of Task-based Language Teaching Method in English Teaching--A Review of Task-based Language Teaching[J]. News and Writing, 2016(11):119.

[21] Xing Wei. Misinterpretation and Innovation of Task-based Language Teaching Method--Taking English Teaching as an Example[J]. Shanghai Journal of Educational Research, 2022(04):48-53.

[22] Lu Ziwen. On Practical Theories of Real-task Teaching in Primary and Secondary English Education[M]. Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press, 2003.

[23] Wang Rongsheng. A Brief Analysis of Inquiry Learning in "Problem Situation"--Investigation and Analysis Based on Relevant Translated Works[J]. Journal of the Chinese Society of Education, 2021(03):71-76+81.

[24] Gu Jiazu. An Analysis of the Mirror Reflection of Individualism in English Language[J]. Journal of PLA University of Foreign Languages, 1996(02):28-34.

[25] Ma Yonghui, Liu Fenghui. A Comparison of Chinese and Western Values in Cross-cultural Communication[J]. Academic Exchange, 2007(07):132-134.

[26] Ye Fan. Sino-Western Cultural Communication from the Perspective of High- and Low-Context Culture[J]. Journal of Shanxi University of Finance and Economics, 2013,35(S1):167-168.