The Effect of Flipped Classroom Instruction on Appropriacy of English Apology by Thai EFL Learners

Pornthep Katchamat


Pragmatic competence plays a crucial role in EFL learners’ communicative competence. In order to communicate successfully and appropriately, the effective potential of using pragmatic competence cannot be disregarded. A number of studies have aimed to investigate its production, but how EFL learners acquire and use those production appropriately has not been fully explored. To fulfill this gap, this research article attempted to investigate the effect of the flipped classroom on pragmatic development focused on apology strategies. The participants were 22 English-major students in their third and fourth year of study. The study made use of an experimental design in which the participants were homogenized and taught by the flipped classroom instruction. The data collection was done by using a Discourse Completion Test (DCT) as pre-test and post-test. The findings revealed that the frequency of use in some categories of apology speech act set significantly differed between the two groups, but the overall number of frequency was not significantly different. In addition, the result from the paired sample t-test of the pre-test and post-test showed that the learners who were taught by the flipped classroom instruction used English apology more appropriate and accurate than the pre-test.

Full Text:



Bardovi-Harlig, K., & Hartford, B.S. (1991). Saying “No” in English: Native and nonnative rejection. Pragmatics and Language Learning, Vol.7, monograph series Vol.2. Urbana-Campaign: Division of English as an International Language, University of Illinois, Urbana-Campaign.

Beebe, L. M. & Cummings, M.C. (1996). “Natural speech act versus written questionnaire data: How data collection method affects speech act performance”. In S.M. Gass and J. Neu (Eds.). Speech Acts across Cultures (pp. 65-86).

Bergman, M. L., & Kasper, G. (1993). Perception and Performance in Native and Nonnative Apology. In G. Kasper & S. Blum-Kulka (Eds.), Interlanguage Pragmatics (pp. 82-107). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every day. International Society for Technology in Education.

Berrett, D. (2012). How ‘flipping’ the classroom can improve the traditional lecture. The Education Digest, 78(1), 36.

Blum-Kulka, S., House, J., & Kasper, G. (1989). Cross-cultural pragmatics: Requests and apologies. Norwood, NJ :Ablex Pub.

Cohen, A., Olshtain, E., & Rosenstein, D. S. (1986). Advanced EFL apologies: what remains to be learned? International Journal of Second Language, 62, 51-74.

Fraser, B. (2010). Pragmatic Competence: The case of Hedging. In G. Kaltenböck, W. Mihatsch, & S. Schneider. (Eds.) New approaches to hedging. Bingley, UK: Emerald.

House, J. (1996). Developing pragmatic fluency in English as a foreign language: Routines and metapragmatic awareness. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 225-252.

House, J., & Kasper, G. (1981). Politeness markers in English and German. In F. Coulmas, (Ed.), Conversational Routine: Explorations in Standardized Communication Situations and Prepatterned Speech (pp. 157-185). New York: Mouton de Gruyter.

Hudson, J. (2001). Indicators for Pragmatic Instruction: some quantitative tools. In K. R. Rose & G. Kasper (Eds.), Pragmatics in language teaching (p. 283-300). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Hudson, J., Detmer, E. & Brown, J.D. (1992). A framework for testing cross-cultural pragmatics. Honolulu: Second Language Teaching & Curriculum Center, University of Hawai’i at Manoa.

Hudson, J., Detmer, E. & Brown, J.D. (1995). Developing prototypic measures of cross-cultural pragmatics. Honolulu: Second Language Teaching & Curriculum Center, University of Hawai’i at Manoa.

Istifci, I. & Kampusu, Y. (2009). The Use of Apologies by EFL Learners. English Language Teaching, 2(3), 15-25.

Kachru, Y. (1998). Culture and speech acts: Evidence from Indian and Singaporean English. Studies in the Linguistic Sciences, 28(1), 79-98.

Kasper, g. & Dahl, M. (1991). Research Methods in Interlanguage Pragmatics. SSLA, 13, 215-247.

Kasper, G. (1997). Can Pragmatic Competence be Taught? Retrieved June 26, 2015, from

Olshtain, E. & Cohen, A. D. (1983). Apology: A speech act set. In N. Wolfson & E. Judd (Eds.), Sociolinguistics and language acquisition (pp. 18-35). Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

Rastegar, S., & Yasami, F. (2014). Iranian EFL Learners' Proficiency Levels and Their Use of Apology Strategies. International Conference on Current Trends in ELT, 1535-1540.

Rovinelli, R. J., & Hambleton, R. K. (1976). On the Use of Content Specialists in the Assessment of Criterion Referenced Test Item Validity. ERIC, 37.

Salehi, R. (2014). A Comparative Analysis of Apology Strategy: Iranian EFL Learners and Native English Speakers. Social and Behavioral Science: International Conference on Current Trends in ELT, 98, 1658-1665.

Tateyama, Y., Kasper, G., Mui, L., Tay, H., & Thananart, O., (1997). Explicit and implicit teaching of pragmatics routines. In L. Bouton (Ed.), Pragmatics and language learning, Vol. 8. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

Thijittang, S. (2010). A Study of Pragmatic Strategies of English of Thai University Students: Apology Speech Acts. Ph.D. Thesis. University of Tasmania: Australia.

Wierzbicka, A. (1985). “Different cultures, different languages, different speech acts: Polish vs. English.” Journal of Pragmatics 9, 145-178.



  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2018 Pornthep Katchamat

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.


International Journal of Pedagogy and Teacher Education

Print ISSN: 2597-7792
Online ISSN: 2549-8525
Published by: Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, Universitas Sebelas Maret
Ir. Sutami Street, No. 36A, Surakarta, Jawa Tengah Indonesia