$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$
$$\longleftharp{xx}$$,
$$\longrightharp{xx}$$,
This protocol presents a pilot protocol for implementing and evaluating task-based teaching for cross-cultural communication in university-level international Chinese classrooms, rather than an efficacy trial intended to support strong comparative claims. In international Chinese programs, learners are increasingly expected to do more than produce grammatically acceptable utterances. They are also expected to respond appropriately in socially and culturally sensitive situations, in which successful interaction depends on pragmatic choice, relational positioning, and the ability to adjust language under time pressure1,2,3. For adult university learners, this remains a persistent instructional challenge because progress in vocabulary and grammar does not necessarily transfer to contextually appropriate performance in spontaneous cross-cultural interaction4.
Task-based learning has often been proposed as a suitable approach to this challenge because it places meaning-focused activity at the center of instruction and creates opportunities for learners to mobilize linguistic resources in response to communicative need. By contrast, Presentation-Practice-Production typically moves from explicit presentation to controlled practice and then to constrained production, which can support form-focused learning but may not consistently elicit the contingent pragmatic decisions required in cross-cultural communication5,6. At the same time, performance in this domain cannot be understood through a single outcome type alone. Pragmatic appropriateness, interactional performance, learner-reported intercultural orientation, speaking-related anxiety, and speech-based fluency, accuracy, and complexity each capture different aspects of how learners participate in cross-cultural communication tasks7,8.
Despite sustained interest in comparing instructional sequences, prior classroom studies have often remained difficult to interpret and replicate. Task procedures are not always described in sufficient detail; instructional content may differ across conditions; intercultural situations are sometimes only loosely operationalized; and scoring, rater training, and data-processing steps are often underreported. As a result, observed differences may reflect not only instructional sequencing but also variation in task design, teacher delivery, measurement procedures, or analytic choices9,10. These concerns are especially important in intact-classroom research, where class-level allocation is often the only practical option but also introduces teacher effects, class effects, and contamination risks that can be difficult to disentangle, particularly in a single-site pilot with a very small number of clusters11.
The contribution of the present protocol is therefore methodological. It combines matched communicative scenarios and target expressions across conditions, locked teaching and assessment materials, blinded rubric-based scoring with calibration, reproducible extraction of speech-based fluency-accuracy-complexity features, and a scripted clustered analysis workflow within a single auditable classroom design12,13. Cross-cultural communication is operationalized through an oral discourse completion task and filmed role-play scenarios that require learners to respond to socially situated interactional problems, while intercultural sensitivity and speaking anxiety are measured through structured questionnaires with fixed scoring rules. This combination is intended to capture complementary aspects of learner performance rather than rely on a single indicator of instructional impact14.
Because the present implementation is restricted to one institution, adult university learners at Chinese Proficiency Test level 3 or above, and four intact classes, it should be interpreted as a pilot feasibility application of the protocol. Under these conditions, unresolved teacher- and class-level confounding cannot be excluded, and any between-condition differences should be treated as descriptive representative outputs rather than robust evidence of comparative effectiveness15. Within these limits, the protocol is designed to provide a transparent and reproducible framework for classroom delivery, assessment, rating, transcription, speech-feature extraction, and clustered longitudinal analysis that can be refined in future multi-class or multi-site studies in international Chinese education and related second-language settings16.