Teaching family vocabulary during Ukrainian language lessons (communicative approach)

Tetiana V. Rudiuk

doi:10.21744/lingcure.v5nS4.1763

Authors

Tetiana V. Rudiuk
t.rudiuk6836@uohk.com.cn
National Pedagogical Dragomanov University, Kyiv, Ukraine and Nizhyn Mykola Gogol State University, Nizhyn, Ukraine

Keywords:

competence, language activities, language and methodological content, linguistic approaches, teaching methods

Abstract

The relevance of the study derives from the modern objective reality, which is represented by lack of attention to family lexical nominations of family members, the features of the names of communication lines and situational options for the latest use; identifying factors for improvement of interpersonal contacts; fostering a culture of mutual support, etc. (communicative approach). The purpose of the study is to theoretically substantiate and experimentally verify the effectiveness of this model and the chosen approach for the development of family lexical competence in high school. Research methods were theoretical (comparative and systematic analysis of philosophical, methodical, psychological, didactic and sociological literature); empirical (analysis of conceptual scientific principles of school education and universal ideas about family nomination, observation, comparison, survey (conversation, questionnaire for teachers and students), study and generalization of pedagogical experience); practical (problem-searching, modeling, pedagogical experiment, mathematical statistics, including quantitative and qualitative analysis of the results of experimental training). They allowed for comprehensive analysis of the problem and influenced it. Ivano-Frankivsk Vocational College of Vasyl Stefanyk at Precarpathian National University served as the basis for the experiment. The study discusses the implementation of the proposed methodological model (communicative approach) in high school and proves the effectiveness of application.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Abreu-Tardelli, L. S., & Apostolo, M. C. (2018). The role of the didactic model of textual genres in language teaching. Calidoscopio, 16(3), 361-368.

Al-Muslim, M., & Ismail, M. F. (2020). Language Teacher Quality Characteristics: What the Literature Shows. Journal of Education and e-Learning Research, 7(4), 430-436.

Azimov, E. G., & Shchukin, A. N. (2009). New dictionary of methodological terms and concepts (theory and practice of teaching languages). M.: IKAR Publishing House, 448.

Blaginin, V. M., & Belkina, N. I. (1996). Family encyclopedia. Kyiv: Bogdana.

Buryachok, A. A. (1961). Names of kinship and kinship. Kyiv: ANURSR Publishing House.

Darmawan, T., Dewi, A. A., Mashuri, H., & Setiana, S. M. (2020). Teaching speaking with Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) approach. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 1477(4), article number 042017.

Demir, S., & Erdogan, A. (2018). The Role of Teaching Grammar in First Language Education. European Journal of Educational Research, 7(14), 87-101.

Farashahi, M., & Tajeddin, M. (2018). Effectiveness of teaching methods in business education: A comparison study on the learning outcomes of lectures, case studies and simulations. The International Journal of Management Education, 16(1), 131-142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2018.01.003

Fleming, L., & Slotta, J. (2018). The pragmatics of kin address: A sociolinguistic universal and its semantic affordances. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 22(4), 375-405.

Grein, M. (2018). Progress in language teaching. From Pragmatics to Dialogue, 31, 61.

Hamre, B. K., Justice, L. M., Pianta, R. C., Kilday, C., Sweeney, B., Downer, J. T., & Leach, A. (2010). Implementation fidelity of MyTeachingPartner literacy and language activities: Association with preschoolers’ language and literacy growth. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 25(3), 329-347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2009.07.002

Imahori, T. T., & Lanigan, M. L. (1989). Relational model of intercultural communication competence. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 13(3), 269-286. https://doi.org/10.1016/0147-1767(89)90013-8

Khatib, M., & Tootkaboni, A. A. (2019). Attitudes Toward Communicative Language Teaching: The Case of efl Learners and Teachers. Íkala, Revista de Lenguaje y Cultura, 24(3).

Koester, J., & Lustig, M. W. (2015). Intercultural communication competence: Theory, measurement, and application. International journal of intercultural relations, 48, 20-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijintrel.2015.03.006

Kumar, S. S., Kumar, R. S., & Sankar, G. (2016). Creative thinking of English language teaching to the secondary language learners. International Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Culture, 2(4), 150-155.

Matsko, L. I., Gruba, T. L., Semenog, O. M., & Symonenko, T. V. (2017). Ukrainian language 10-11 grades. Program for specialized training of students of secondary schools. Philological direction, profile – Ukrainian philology. Kyiv: Project. Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine.

Mehler, J., Dupoux, E., Pallier, C., & Dehaene-Lambertz, G. (1994). Cross-linguistic approaches to speech processing. Current opinion in neurobiology, 4(2), 171-176. https://doi.org/10.1016/0959-4388(94)90068-X

Mukaddas, A., & Nilufar, D. (2021). The use of interactive methods in teaching professional speech to students. Linguistics and Culture Review, 5(S2), 1122-1130. https://doi.org/10.21744/lingcure.v5nS2.1801

Nagy, I. K. (2019). In between Language Teaching Methods: Do We Need (to Know About) Methods at All?. Acta Universitatis Sapientiae, Philologica, 11(3), 119-139.

Natividad, M. R. A., & Batang, B. L. (2018). Students' Perceptual Learning Styles and Attitudes toward Communicative Language Teaching. TESOL International Journal, 13(4), 104-120.

Nyandra, M., Kartiko, B.H., Susanto, P.C., Supriyati, A., Suryasa, W. (2018). Education and training improve quality of life and decrease depression score in elderly population. Eurasian Journal of Analytical Chemistry, 13(2), 371-377.

Peacock, M. (2001). Pre-service ESL teachers' beliefs about second language learning: A longitudinal study. System, 29(2), 177-195. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(01)00010-0

Pentilyuk, M. I. (2000). Methods of teaching the native language in secondary schools. Kyiv: Lenvit.

Ponomarev, O. D. (2012). Ukrainian word for everyone and for everyone. Kyiv: Lybid.

Rao, Z. (2002). Chinese students' perceptions of communicative and non-communicative activities in EFL classroom. System, 30(1), 85-105. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(01)00050-1

Rasna, I. W., & Tantra, D. K. (2017). The local wisdom in Bahasa Indonesia text books in a low class: Ethno-pedagogy study. International Journal of Linguistics, Literature and Culture, 3(1), 117-125.

Rivera, G. S., Tesoriero, R., & Gallud, J. A. (2018). Model-based approach to develop learning exercises in language-learning applications. IET Software, 12(3), 206-214.

Rodríguez, R. M., Mart??nez, L., & Herrera, F. (2013). A group decision making model dealing with comparative linguistic expressions based on hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets. Information Sciences, 241, 28-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2013.04.006

Sarfraz, S., Mansoor, Z., & Tariq, R. (2015). teachers’ and students’ perceptions of the communicative language teaching methodology in the CALL environment: A case study. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 199, 730-736. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.07.604

Sasstos, L. M. D. (2020). The discussion of communicative language teaching approach hi language classrooms. Journal of Education and e-Learning Research, 7(2), 104-109.

Shadiev, R., & Yang, M. (2020). Review of studies on technology-enhanced language learning and teaching. Sustainability, 12(2), 524.

Shcherban, P. M. (2000). Natsionalne vykhovannia v simi.[National upbringing in the family].

Solmaz, O. (2018). A critical review of research on social networking sites in language teaching and learning. Contemporary Educational Technology, 9(3), 315-330.

Vovchuk, L., Iovcheva, A., Habro, I., Pohorielova, I., & Oleksenko, R. (2021). Peculiarities of teaching the students of the specialty international relations, low and history professional disciplines. Linguistics and Culture Review, 5(S4), 442-453. https://doi.org/10.21744/lingcure.v5nS4.1642

Yakovleva, N. O., & Yakovlev, E. V. (2014). Interactive teaching methods in contemporary higher education. Pacific Science Review, 16(2), 75-80. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pscr.2014.08.016