TEACHING MEDICAL ENGLISH VOCABULARY THROUGH TASK-BASED LEARNING: A CASE STUDY OF MEDICAL STUDENTS
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
The growing dominance of English as the language of global medicine has increased the demand for effective Medical English instruction in non-English-speaking countries. Medical students are expected not only to understand specialized terminology but also to apply it accurately in professional communication. However, traditional vocabulary teaching methods often fail to provide sufficient contextualization and communicative practice. This study investigates the effectiveness of Task-Based Learning (TBL) in teaching Medical English vocabulary to university medical students in an English as a Foreign Language (EFL) context. Using a mixed-methods research design, data were collected through pre- and post-tests, task-based classroom interventions, questionnaires, and classroom observations. The results demonstrate a significant improvement in students’ medical vocabulary knowledge and their ability to use terminology in realistic communicative situations. Furthermore, students expressed positive attitudes toward task-based instruction, highlighting increased motivation and confidence. The findings suggest that TBL is a pedagogically effective approach for Medical English vocabulary instruction and should be integrated more widely into English for Specific Purposes (ESP) curricula.
Downloads
Article Details
Section
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors retain the copyright of their manuscripts, and all Open Access articles are disseminated under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (CC-BY), which licenses unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided that the original work is appropriately cited. The use of general descriptive names, trade names, trademarks, and so forth in this publication, even if not specifically identified, does not imply that these names are not protected by the relevant laws and regulations.
How to Cite
References
1.Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., & Nacke, L. (2011). From game design elements to gamefulness: Defining “gamification.” Proceedings of the 15th International Academic MindTrek Conference, 9–15.
2.Nation, I. S. P. (2013). Learning vocabulary in another language (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
3.Oxford, R. L. (2017). Teaching and researching language learning strategies. Routledge.
4.Zarzycka-Piskorz, E. (2016). Kahoot it or not? Can games be motivating in learning grammar? Teaching English with Technology, 16(3), 17–36.
5.Bauer, L. (2003). Introducing linguistic morphology. Edinburgh University Press.
6.Bowers, P., & Kirby, J. (2010). Effects of morphological instruction on vocabulary acquisition. Reading and Writing, 23(5), 515–537.
7.Carlisle, J. F. (2000). Awareness of the structure and meaning of morphologically complex words: Impact on reading. Reading and Writing, 12(3), 169–190.
8.Karimov, A. (2023). Morphological challenges in learning English for Uzbek EFL students. Central Asian Journal of Language Studies, 5(2), 45–59.
9.Kieffer, M. J., & Lesaux, N. K. (2012). Morphology, vocabulary, and reading comprehension in second-language learners. Journal of Literacy Research, 44(3), 271–300.
10.Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge University Press.
11.Schmitt, N. (2010). Researching vocabulary: A vocabulary research manual. Palgrave Macmillan.
12.Tursunova, D. (2021). Word formation difficulties among Uzbek EFL learners. Journal of English Language Teaching in Central Asia, 3(1), 12–25.
13.Zhang, D., & Koda, K. (2018). Morphological awareness and vocabulary development in EFL learners. Language Teaching Research, 22(4), 439–458.