The acquisition of English language proficiency involves the mastery of specific communicative competencies, including the linguistic knowledge and the associated actions and operations required for effective language use. Pedagogical approaches to English language instruction prioritize the development of four essential skills: listening, speaking, reading, and writing. These skills are inherently intertwined and serve as the foundation for practical language application.  Within the context of specialized English language instruction, various methodologies have proven effective in fostering language awareness and fluency.  Integrating self-assessment into the curriculum offers a valuable tool for promoting autonomous learning in key linguistic domains such as phonetics, vocabulary, and communication. 

Therefore, it is recommended that curricular materials incorporate self-assessment activities specifically designed to cultivate both linguistic knowledge and the strategic application of language skills.  A focus on practical language development should encompass exercises that cater to diverse learner proficiencies and utilize linguistic units of varying complexity, such as phrase-level exercises, to provide appropriate scaffolding for language acquisition.  Furthermore, the teaching content should encompass a comprehensive exploration of linguistic forms and their corresponding systems of usage to foster a deeper understanding of English language structure and function.

This study employed a mixed-methods approach, combining quantitative and qualitative data collection and analysis techniques. Participants are from sophomore course a group of 40 B2 level students in an English as a Foreign Language (EFL) program participated in the study. Achieving true fluency in a foreign language extends beyond grammatical accuracy and a rich vocabulary; it demands a nuanced understanding of how language functions in real-world contexts. This is where pragmatics, the study of how meaning is conveyed and interpreted in social interaction, becomes essential, particularly for language learners striving for authentic communication. Intervention students were exposed to a 12-week intervention program incorporating: To cultivate pragmatic self-assessment competence in B2 English language learners, students participated in a comprehensive 12-week intervention program. This program incorporated a multifaceted approach, blending explicit instruction, exposure to authentic materials, interactive feedback sessions, and structured self-assessment exercises.  Specifically, the intervention involved the following key elements:

Explicit Instruction on Pragmatic Concepts:  Students received direct instruction on core pragmatic principles, including:

Speech Acts: Understanding how utterances perform actions as requesting, apologizing, and inviting.

Politeness Strategies:  Learning to use language appropriately to maintain social harmony indirectness, hedging, and formality.

Cultural Norms:  Exploring how cultural differences influence communication styles and pragmatic choices.

Analysis of Authentic English Language Materials:  Students engaged with a variety of authentic materials.

Provide Constructive Feedback: Offering each other specific and actionable suggestions for improving pragmatic choices in spoken and written communication. Collaborative activities fostered metapragmatic awareness by encouraging students.

This multifaceted intervention aimed to equip B2 learners with the knowledge, skills, and reflective practices necessary to become more aware of their pragmatic choices and develop the ability to critically assess their own communicative effectiveness. Explicit instruction on pragmatic concepts (speech acts, politeness strategies, cultural norms). More detailed breakdown of the explicit instruction component, focusing on speech acts, politeness strategies, and cultural norms:

Explicit Instruction on Pragmatic Concepts[1]

This part of the intervention aimed to provide students with a clear understanding of key pragmatic principles.  Each concept was introduced through a combination of interactive lectures, group discussions, and practical exercises.

1. Speech Acts:

Students learned how utterances can be used to perform actions beyond their literal meaning (e.g., "It’s cold in here" can be a request to close a window).

2. Politeness Strategies:

According to the politeness strategy there some attitudes to pragmatic self-assessment competence in B2 level English language learners such as: Face Theory- students learned about the concept of "face" (public self-image) and how politeness strategies aim to mitigate potential threats to face in social interaction. Positive Politeness-strategies to show solidarity and approval using compliments, showing agreement, informal language. Along with the given strategies there is Negative Politeness strategies to minimize imposition and show deference (e.g., using indirect requests, apologizing, formal language). As stated by - Contextual Appropriateness: which is also crucial factor where students discuss how the choice of politeness strategy depends on factors like social distance, power dynamics, and the weight of the request. Moreover, while teaching process we have to mind - Cross-Cultural Variations- it is essential for students who explore examples of how politeness norms can vary across cultures, highlighting the potential for misinterpretations.

3. Cultural Norms:

Impact on Communication: Students learned how cultural norms influence various aspects of communication, such as (Turn-taking, Nonverbal Communication, Forms of Address, Topics of Conversation, Cross-Cultural Comparisons, Developing Cultural Sensitivity). 

Through explicit instruction on these core pragmatic concepts, the intervention equipped B2 learners with a framework for understanding how language functions in social interaction, ultimately empowering them to make more informed and effective choices in their own communication. Analysis of authentic English language materials (video clips, dialogues, written texts). Here’s a more detailed explanation of how authentic materials were used in the intervention:

Analysis of Authentic English Language Materials[2]

Authentic materials played a central role in exposing students to real-world examples of pragmatics in action. These materials were carefully selected to represent a range of communicative contexts and speech events, providing students with a rich dataset for analysis and discussion.

Video - materials: videos were drawn from popular TV shows, movies, and online videos, chosen for their relevance to everyday conversations, workplace interactions, and informal social settings. Students analyzed the clips to identify how characters used language to make requests, express opinions, apologize, offer advice. Politeness Strategies due to the choice of direct vs. indirect language, formal vs. informal register, and other strategies to manage face and maintain social harmony. Nonverbal Cues where the role of facial expressions, gestures, and body language in conveying meaning and reinforcing pragmatic intent. Information gap activity - are excerpted from pictures, novels, and online forums, showcasing different genres and communication skills. Students examined the logical connection and description of pictures or other authentic materials to understand and practice. Turn-Taking Patterns-characters navigated conversational turns, interrupted, and signaled agreement or disagreement. How meaning was conveyed indirectly through hints, suggestions, and unspoken assumptions. Contextual Influences-the setting, relationship between characters, and overall communicative purpose shaped their language choices.

Written Texts- texts included emails, online reviews, blog posts, and news articles, representing a range of genres and purposes. Students analyzed the texts to identify the writer’s Stance; how authors used language to express opinions, build arguments, and persuade readers. Analyze Audience Awareness as well as how writers tailored their language choices to the intended audience formal vs. informal style, use of technical jargon. Evaluate Effectiveness where the written communication achieved its intended purpose based on pragmatic choices. Incorporating the Materials students who work collaboratively to analyze the materials, sharing their observations, interpretations, and questions. Role-Plays are also effective method to students recreated dialogues, experimenting with different pragmatic choices to see how they affected the meaning and impact.

By engaging with authentic materials, students gained a deeper understanding of how pragmatic principles operate in real-world communication. This exposure fostered their ability to recognize and analyze pragmatic features, paving the way for developing their own self-assessment skills. Peer feedback activities to develop metapragmatic awareness.

An elaboration on how peer feedback activities were integrated into the intervention.

Peer Feedback Activities[3] for Metapragmatic Awareness

These activities provided students with opportunities to practice analyzing pragmatic choices, receive constructive feedback from their peers, and refine their understanding of how language functions in social interaction.

1. Dialogue Analysis and Feedback are effective ways to students who work in small groups to analyze pre-selected dialogues or video clips containing instances of potentially ambiguous or inappropriate pragmatic choices. Identifying Pragmatic Features of students pinpointed specific language choices, nonverbal cues, and contextual factors that might influence the interpretation of the message. Analyzing Potential Misunderstandings in groups which discuss how the intended meaning might differ from the perceived meaning based on the chosen pragmatic features.

The scaffolding approach to develop communicative skills are ‘Generating Alternative Approaches’ students brainstorm alternative ways to express the same message, considering different politeness strategies, speech acts, and cultural considerations.

2. Role-Play and Peer Evaluation is also one of the basic styles to participate in role-playing activities where students have to navigate a specific communicative situation making a complaint, asking for a favor, expressing disagreement. The objectives of peers’ observation in the role-plays, paying attention to the speaker’s language choices, tone of voice, nonverbal cues, and overall communicative effectiveness. Teacher manages students to provide ‘Constructive Feedback’ observers offered specific and actionable feedback on how the speaker could improve their pragmatic performance, suggesting alternative approaches or highlighting areas for greater cultural sensitivity. Organizing reflecting on feedback to Role-players reflected on the feedback they received, considering how they can incorporate the suggestions into future interactions.

3. Collaborative Writing and Peer Review actually students work in pairs or small groups to write short texts, emails, online forum posts, and short dialogues targeting a specific audience and purpose. Writers consciously considered the intended audience, purpose of the text, and appropriate register when making language choices. Peer Review is effective way for students exchange their written work and provide feedback on the effectiveness of the pragmatic choices, suggesting revisions to enhance clarity, politeness, or cultural appropriateness. There are mainly two ways of feedback which is useful to follow. Structured Feedback Frameworks provide students with clear guidelines or rubrics to focus their feedback on specific pragmatic criteria. Modeling Effective Feedback which demonstrates examples of constructive criticism, highlighting the importance of specificity and actionable suggestions. Throughout the class teacher creates a safe and supportive environment that encourage respectful communication and fostering a culture where students feel comfortable sharing their perspectives and receiving feedback. By engaging in peer feedback activities, students developed metapragmatic awareness - the ability to consciously reflect on and evaluate their own pragmatic choices and those of others. This critical reflection is crucial for ongoing learning and improvement in communicative competence.

Self-assessment rubrics focused on specific pragmatic features.[4]

Self-Assessment Rubrics for Pragmatic Competence is devoted to encourage self-reflection and monitor progress, students used rubrics to assess their own pragmatic performance in various communicative tasks. These rubrics were designed to focus on specific pragmatic features, allowing for targeted assessment and improvement. Each rubric outlined specific criteria related to different aspects of pragmatic competence. These criteria varied depending on the task being assessed but generally included clarity of intention, politeness strategies, cultural sensitivity, appropriateness of register, and nonverbal communication. Each criterion included a scale of performance levels excellent, good, fair, needs improvement. Each level was accompanied by a detailed description of what constitutes that level of performance for the specific criterion.

Sample Rubric Criteria:

Excellent: The intended message was clear, concise, and easily understood by the listener.

Good:  The message was generally clear, but there might have been some minor ambiguity or room for interpretation.

Fair: The message was partially clear, but there were some significant points of confusion or misinterpretation.

Needs Improvement:  The intended message was not clear, and the listener was unable to understand the speaker’s intent.

Benefits of Self-Assessment:[5]

Self-assessment is a powerful tool in education and personal development. It offers a range of benefits, especially when learning about complex skills like pragmatic language use. Self-assessment prompts learners to step back and think critically about their own communication choices. Students become more conscious of ‘how’ they use language to achieve their goals in social situations. This heightened awareness is essential for recognizing potential problems, avoiding misunderstandings, and refining their approach.

In Personalized Learning self-assessment takes place crucial role like rubrics often target specific aspects of pragmatics such as politeness, clarity, cultural norms. Learners can identify the areas where ‘they’ personally need the most work. This allows them to tailor their learning efforts for maximum impact. In Self-assessment Greater Ownership of Learning moves learners away from a passive role where they rely solely on external evaluation like teacher grades it empowers them to become active agents in their own development. This ownership can increase motivation and a sense of responsibility for improvement.

Regular self-assessment trains learners to become more attuned to their communication habits improve Self-Monitoring Skills this leads to better self-monitoring, even outside of formal learning settings. They are more likely to catch themselves making pragmatic errors in real-time and make adjustments on the fly. When learners identify their own weaknesses, they are often more motivated to address them. Enhanced Motivation for Improvement this way of method similarly beneficial to develop self-assessment competence, it can make the need for change more apparent and personal. It shifts the focus from avoiding failure to achieving personal growth. In the process of self-assessment requires careful analysis, reflection, and judgment. Development of Critical Thinking Skills strengthens critical thinking skills that are transferable to other areas of learning and life. Thus, self-assessment is a valuable component of pragmatics learning, fostering self-awareness, critical thinking, and a proactive approach to personal development.

Integration with Other Activities:

By incorporating self-assessment rubrics, the intervention promoted a more metacognitive approach to learning, empowering students to take ownership of their pragmatic development and strive for greater communicative effectiveness.

Pre-Task Preparation: Students could review the rubrics before engaging in communicative activities, setting clear goals for their pragmatic performance.[6]

Post-Task Reflection: Students could use the rubrics to self-assess immediately after a task, identifying strengths and weaknesses in their performance.

Teacher Feedback: The rubrics could be shared with teachers, providing a common framework for discussion and targeted feedback. By collecting responses to these questions, educators can gain insights into students’ self-perceived progress and identify areas for further development in pragmatic comprehension.

Quantitative Findings according to the pre- and post-intervention test scores revealed a statistically significant improvement in students’ pragmatic comprehension.

That is great statistically significant improvement in students’ pragmatic comprehension from pre- to post-intervention test scores indicates that the intervention had a positive impact on their understanding of pragmatic aspects of communication. It suggests that the activities or strategies implemented during the intervention were effective in enhancing students’ abilities in interpreting implied meanings, indirect speech acts, and non-literal language cues. These quantitative findings can be further supported by qualitative data from self-assessment questionnaires or other feedback mechanisms to gain a more comprehensive understanding of the intervention’s impact on students’ pragmatic skills. The analysis of self-assessment questionnaires and interview transcripts indicated that students developed a more nuanced understanding of their own pragmatic strengths and weaknesses. They were able to identify specific areas for improvement and articulate the rationale behind their self-assessments.

The findings suggest that targeted interventions can effectively enhance B2 students’ pragmatic self-assessment competence. Explicit instruction, authentic materials, and peer feedback activities play a crucial role in raising metapragmatic awareness and equipping learners with the tools to critically evaluate their own pragmatic performance.

Absolutely, the findings which are mentioned are quite significant. It is clear that targeted interventions can indeed have a positive impact on B2 students’ pragmatic self-assessment competence. The use of explicit instruction, authentic materials, and peer feedback activities seems to be effective in raising metapragmatic awareness among learners. This, in turn, enables them to critically evaluate their own pragmatic performance. It’s encouraging to see that such strategies can help students develop a more nuanced understanding of language use in context. This can ultimately lead to improved communication skills and a deeper appreciation for the subtleties of language.

The study was limited to a relatively small sample size and focused on a specific EFL context. Further research is needed to investigate the generalizability of the findings to other learner populations and instructional settings.

That is a valid point regarding the limitations of the study. Generalizability is indeed a crucial aspect of research, and expanding the scope to include a more diverse range of learner populations and instructional settings would provide a more comprehensive understanding of the impact of targeted interventions on pragmatic self-assessment competence. By replicating the study in different contexts and with larger sample sizes, researchers can gain insights into the broader applicability of the findings and identify potential variations across various educational settings. This would contribute to a more robust and nuanced understanding of how such interventions can be tailored to different learner groups for maximum effectiveness.

Fostering pragmatic self-assessment competence should be a key objective in B2 level EFL instruction. By integrating explicit instruction, authentic materials, and reflective activities, educators can empower learners to become more self-aware and effective communicators in English. This approach contributes to bridging the gap between language acquisition and successful real-world interaction.

Absolutely, fostering pragmatic self-assessment competence is crucial in B2 level EFL instruction. By integrating explicit instruction, authentic materials, and reflective activities, educators can help learners develop a deeper understanding of how language is used in real-world communication contexts. This approach not only enhances their language skills but also equips them with the ability to adapt their communication style based on the social and cultural norms of English-speaking environments.

Encouraging learners to reflect on their own language use and understand the impact of their words and actions on interlocutors can lead to more effective communication outcomes. By providing opportunities for self-assessment and feedback, educators can empower learners to take ownership of their learning process and make continuous improvements in their language proficiency.

Furthermore, bridging the gap between language acquisition and real-world interaction is essential for preparing learners to navigate diverse linguistic and cultural settings with confidence. By focusing on pragmatic self-assessment competence, educators can help learners develop the skills needed to communicate effectively, build relationships, and achieve their goals in English-speaking contexts.

This study highlights the significant contributions of pragmatic self-assessment methodology to foreign language pedagogy, particularly at the early educational levels.  It discusses the effective methods of self-assessment in learning foreign languages. This approach enables educators to tailor instructional activities to meet the specific cognitive and linguistic needs of learners, leveraging the insights gained from observing individual speech patterns and thought processes.  Game-based learning exercises, in particular, have demonstrated notable effectiveness in promoting pragmatic development. Moreover, the implementation of self-assessment appears to foster a positive learning environment by mitigating students’ anxieties and fostering a sense of confidence.  This, in turn, enhances motivation, facilitates the acquisition and retention of new linguistic information, and cultivates greater self-efficacy in students’ overall language learning journeys