Using communicative tasks to enhance learners speaking ability

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONCLT: Communicative Language Teaching AGU: An Giang University EFL: English as a foreign language IM: Intrinsic motivation... The focuses of this study were a on how c

_ _

PHAN V N CHÍ

USING COMMUNICATIVE TASKS TO ENHANCE

LEARNERS’ SPEAKING ABILITY

LU N V N TH C S Chuyên ngành: Lý Lu n và Ph ng pháp

_ _

PHAN V N CHÍ

USING COMMUNICATIVE TASKS TO ENHANCE

LEARNERS’ SPEAKING ABILITY

M.A THESIS

Major: Principles and Methodology in English Language Education Course code: 60 14 18 Supervisor: M.A Nguy n Thành c

Can Tho October, 2008

MINISTRY OF EDUCATON AND TRAINING

CAN THO UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF EDUCATION

_

PHAN V N CHÍ

USING COMMUNICATIVE TASKS TO ENHANCE

LEARNERS’ SPEAKING ABILITY

LU N V N TH C S Chuyên ngành: Lý Lu n và Ph ng pháp

Above all, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my supervisor, Mr Nguyen Thanh Duc for his excellent insights and his considerate, experienced guidance throughout the entire development of the study Without his valuable comments, my research would be far from being finished.

This study owes much to Dr Nguyen Thu Huong and Dr Trinh Quoc Lap for their valuable encouragement and suggestions from the beginning of the study.

I am also especially indebted to Dr Truong Vien who has been my source of support and constructive criticism His invaluable advice and profound ideas have aided me in writing this research.

I would also like to acknowledge my colleagues and students at An Giang University for their collaboration and their willingness in working with me during experimental period, completing the questionnaires and providing precious information for my research.

Lastly, I wish to thank my family for their love, devotion and encouragement they gave me while I was doing the course and the thesis.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Statement of Authorship ….i

Acknowledgement …ii

Table of contents ….iii

List of abbreviations vii

List of tables viii

List of figures … ix

Abstract … x

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background … 1

1.2 Topic ….2

1.3 Rationale ….2

1.4 Research questions ….3

1.5 Objectives 3

1.6 Scope of the study ….3

1.7 Structure of the Thesis ….3

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Introduction 4

2.2 Definitions of key terms 4

2.2.1 What is a task? 4

2.2.2 What is motivation? 7

2.2.2.1 Definitions of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation 8

2.2.2.2 Operationalization of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation 9

2.2.2.3 Conceptualization of self-determination 10

2.2.2.4 Learner beliefs 13

2.2.3 Speaking ability 14

2.3 Principles of communicative tasks design 15

2.3.1 The principle of meaningful tasks 15

2.3.2 The principle of focusing on language form .16

2.3.3 The authenticity principle 17

2.3.3.1 Through genuine task purposes .19

2.3.3.2.Through real world targets 19

2.3.3.3 Through classroom interactions 19

2.3.3.4 Through learners’ engagement 20

2.3.4 The principle of reasonable task difficulty 20

2.4 Three phases of a task- based instruction 20

2.4.1 The pre-task phase 22

2.4.1.1.Performing a similar task 22

2.4.1.2 Providing a model 23

2.4.1.3 Non-task preparation activities 24

2.4.1.4 Strategic planning 24

2.4.1.5 Summary and final comment 26

2.4.2 The during-task phase 27

2.4.2.1 Task performance options 27

2.4.2.2 Process options 29

2.4.3 The post-task phase 36

2.4.3.2 Reflecting on the task 37

2.4.3.3 Focusing on forms 38

2.4.3.4 Review of learner’s errors 39

2.4.3.5 Consciousness-raising tasks 39

2.4.3.6 Production practice activities 40

2.4.3.7 Noticing activities 40

2.4.3.8.Summarization and comment 41

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY 3.1 Introduction 42

3.2 Research design 42

3.2.1 Participants .42

3.2.2 Instruments 43

3.4.1 Questionnaire 43

3.4.2 Language test 43

3.4.3 Interview checklist 44

3.2.3 Materials .44

3.2.4 Study time-frame 45

CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION 4.1 Introduction 46

4.2 Experimental study profiles ….47

4.3 Findings and discussion ….48

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION, IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY 5.1 Conclusion 56

5.2 Teaching implications 57

5.3 Limitations of study 61

5.4 Further study 62

REFERENCES …….63

APPENDICES 73

APPENDIX 1: Questionnaire for students

APPENDIX 2: Speaking test

APPENDIX 3: Interview check list

APPENDIX 4: Experimental Lesson 1

APPENDIX 5: Experimental Lesson 2

APPENDIX 6: Experimental Lesson 3

APPENDIX 7: Experimental Lesson 4

LIST OF ABBREVIATION

CLT: Communicative Language Teaching

AGU: An Giang University

EFL: English as a foreign language

IM: Intrinsic motivation

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1: A framework for designing task-based lessons ………21

Table 2.2: Options for strategic planning (based on Foster and Skehan 1999)………26

Table 2.3: Stereotypical classroom processes in traditional form-focused pedagogy and task- based pedagogy 31

Table 2.4: Implicit and explicit techniques for focusing on form during a task 36

Table 3.1: Procedure of the study 45

Table 4.1: Experimental students’ profiles 47

Table 4.2: Student’s mean scores in pre-speaking test 49

Table 4.3: Student’s mean score in the post speaking test 50

Table 4.4: GMT repeated measure test on student’s mean score difference between pre-and post-speaking test 50

Table 4.5: Student’s motivation mean score in pre-questionnaire 51

Table 4.6: Student’s motivation mean score in the post-test 52

Table 4.7: GMT test: difference between student’s motivation mean score in pre- and post-questionnaire 53

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 2.1: Orientation subtypes along the self-determination continuum (adapted

from Ryan & Deci, 2000, p.72) 8

Figure 4.1: A general picture of chapter four “findings and discussion” 46

Figure 4.2: Student’s mean score in pre- and post-speaking test 50

Figure 4.3: Student’s motivation mean score Pre-test vs Post-test 53

This study investigated the impact of communicative task on learner’s speaking ability in term of teaching English to non-English major students at An Giang University (AGU) The focuses of this study were (a) on how communicative tasks enhance learner’s speaking ability in term of teaching English to non-English major, (b) how communicative tasks motivate students in speaking English, and (c) student’s reactions to communicative task language teaching.

In this study, one experimental programme was designed for 39 non-English major students at AGU These subjects were chosen randomly among non-English major classes at AGU The materials used for experimental programme were the innovated lesson plans- lesson plans with communicative task were employed The programme lasted for 8 weeks in which students covered five topics in the textbook At the beginning of the programme, students were tested to check for input motivation and speaking ability At the end of the experimental period they were tested again to check for learner’s speaking ability and motivation in speaking Besides, an interview was carried out to explore learner’s feedback after the treated lessons.

The results of the study reveal that learner’s speaking ability and motivation in speaking were enhanced after students were treated with communicative task lessons Moreover, the study received positive feedbacks on communicative task lessons from learners Students showed their enjoyment when learning with communicative tasks More importantly, the study attempted to provide practical teaching implications as well as professional advice on how to effectively create communicative tasks in non-English major classes in EFL teaching contexts.

TÓM L C

tài nghiên c u tác ng c a quá trình giao ti p thông qua th c hi n nhi m v h c t p lên n ng

c nói ti ng Anh c a sinh viên không chuyên ngành ng v n Anh t i tr ng i h c An Giang tài t p trung nghiên c u ba v n chính: m t là tìm hi u quá trình giao ti p thông qua th c

hi n nhi m v h c t p c a ng i h c có tác ng nh th nào i v i n ng l c nói ti ng Anh c a sinh viên không chuyên nhành ng v n Anh, hai là tìm hi u quá trình giao ti p thông qua th c

hi n nhi m v h c t p tác ng nh th nào i v i ng c nói ti ng Anh c a sinh viên, ba là tìm hi u ý ki n ph n h i c a sinh viên v quá trình giao ti p thông qua th c hi n nhi m v c a

ng i h c.

Qua tài nghiên c u tác gi xây d ng ch ng trình th c nghi m cho m t nhóm g m 39 sinh viên không chuyên ngành ng v n Anh t i tr ng i h c An Giang Tài li u s d ng trong th c nghi m g m 6 giáo án cho 6 n v bài h c trong giáo trình Know How One c thi t k theo

ph ng pháp “giao ti p thông qua th c hi n nhi m v h c t p c a ng i h c” Tr c khi th c nghi m h c sinh ã c g i t p trung ki m tra n ng l c nói và ng c nói ti ng Anh b ng hai công c chính “speaking test” và “questionnaire” Sau khi k t thúc giai n th c nghi m kéo dài

8 tu n, sinh viên ã c ki m tra l n hai c ki m tra n ng l c nói ti ng Anh và ng c nói ti ng Anh Ngoài ra tác gi còn t ch c bu i ph ng v n l y ý ki n ph n h i c a sinh viên v các bu i h c theo ch ng trình th c nghi m.

t qu phân tích s li u cho th y c hai n ng l c nói ti ng Anh và ng c nói ti ng Anh c a sinh viên ã c t ng c ng Ngoài ra sinh viên có ý ki n ph n h i r t tích c c qua các bài h c

th c nghi m Sinh viên t ra r t thích thú khi c h c theo ph ng pháp này c bi t là qua tài nghiên c u tác gi ã rút ra k t lu n sâu s c ng th i úc k t c bài h c kinh nghi m t

th c t d y và h c.

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION 1.1 Background.

In the context of political renovation and open-door policy in the past decades inVietnam, the demand for foreign languages, especially English, has soared and thenumber of learners of English has therefore increased remarkably Various methodologieswith different ways of teaching foreign languages have also been introduced intoVietnamese schools Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) as an approach has beenhighly appreciated and has prevailed all over the world during the decades Thiscommunicative approach has really given great contribution to changing the environment

of teaching foreign languages in Vietnam, especially in the higher education system and ithas helped to build communicative competence for language learners, which is verynecessary for their jobs and which may meet, to some extent, the current requirements ofthe society

However, according to the evaluation of some employers and language educators, manyschool-leavers seem to be incompetent despite studying English in the direction of CLTfor three years or more at colleges and universities Director of Saigon Tourist, NguyenHuu Tho, gave a really shocking comment at the Conference on “the Teaching Quality ofHigher Education in Ho Chi Minh city” in May, 2006 : “At our company, most of theapplicants graduating from universities of foreign languages get ‘dumb’ by fifty percentand ‘deaf’ by forty percent when being interviewed.”

Similarly, according to Director of the Southeast Asian Ministers of EducationOrganization Centre in Vietnam, “many BA holders could not express everyday notions,

or perform basic communicative functions; they lack productive and receptive skills andstrategies; they are unable to negotiate meaning successfully; they create text that iscohesive but not coherent and are not successful in relating code to context; in generalthey lack communicative competence” It can be said that the current higher educationtraining programs fail to produce graduates with the necessary skills for modernworkplaces especially speaking ability

Consequently, in order to successfully build communicative skills for language learnersand to successfully produce employees who are really able to meet the urgent demands ofthe society in the development trend of the country, English language teachers shouldtake into consideration the idea of using communicative task

It is obvious that the communicative-style teaching really requires authentic task use and

classroom exchanges where students actually engage in real communication with oneanother.

With an attempt to follow that trend, Vietnamese teachers of English have tried their best

to create more tasks in the classroom through the use of authentic materials and textbooksfor years Many language teaching materials used in most Vietnamese schools in general,are “authentic” in the sense that they contain “authentic language, authentic tasks, and anauthentic focus of communication” (Candlin and Edelhoff,1982:7) However, the tasksand the topics found in the textbook are limited and proved not to meet all of the need andinterest of students of different kinds Therefore, students are often passive and do notlike to participate in the classroom activities This reality may be hard to achieve the maingoals of teaching and learning programs for higher education made by the Ministry ofEducation and Training that practicality and effectiveness should be assured

As a result, this study aimed to investigate the impact of communicative task on learners’speaking ability, to find out the degree of motivation which this teaching methodologybrings to students as well as to explore the student’s reaction after working withcommunicative task

1.2 Topic

Therefore, in this thesis, I would like to focus my research on the topic:

“Using communicative task to enhance learner’s speaking ability”

With this title, some main reasons and purposes for our research would be listed out as inthe next section “Rationale”

1.3 Rationale

Firstly, communicative task has played a very important role in the communicativelanguage teaching in recent years It really helps motivate students to use the language inreal communication and is therefore of every teacher’s concern In the era of teachingforeign languages with the communicative approach, language teachers are beingencouraged to make their teaching “more communicative” However, the concept ofcommunicative task and its vital roles in developing learners’ ability to use the language

in real social interaction seem to cause some confusion to many EFL teachers and EFLstudents as well

Secondly, the reality of teaching and learning English in many Vietnamese classrooms,especially in non-English major classes at An Giang University fail to match the aforesaidperspectives and significance of task-based language teaching The teachers might notfollow the basic steps in task-based instruction What goes on in a classroom tends to be

unreal to the language learners Classrooms cannot recreate the reality of the outsideworld and the language use in EFL classes is not really authentic.

Thirdly, as a teacher of English at An Giang University, I find it quite essential to havemore insights into the teaching strategies that may help the English faculty members ofour college to make the teaching and learning process more effective and practical in thisparticular context through the use of communicative task instruction The experiencefrom this study is also necessary for me in evaluating, selecting and adapting teachingplans in foreign language classrooms

1.4 Research questions

This study is conducted based on the following research questions:

v Does the use of communicative tasks enhance learner’s speaking ability?

v Does the use of communicative tasks motivate learners to speak English?

v What are learner’s reactions to communicative tasks used in teaching non-Englishmajor classes at An Giang University?

1.5 Objectives:

This study aims to (1) find out the impact of communicative task on learner’s speakingskill in term of teaching English for non English major students at AGU (2) to investigatehow communicative task motivates students in speaking English and (3) to explore thelearner’s reactions when studying with communicative task

1.6 Scope of the study

This study was conducted with 39 students from geography class which was chosenrandomly among non-English major classes These classes use the same course-book:Know How, book one

1.7 Structure of the thesis

This thesis consists of five chapters Chapter one introduces general information of theresearch Chapter two reviews the literature and chapter three discusses researchmethodology Findings and discussion are presented in chapter four Chapter five givesthe summary of the study, implications and suggestions for further study

2.2 Definitions of key terms

2.2.1 What is communicative task?

What is a task? Definitions of tasks abound in the literature cited in Trinh (2005), (Long,(1985); Richards, Platt, & Weber (1985); Prabhu (1987); Breen (1989); Nunan (1989);Willis (1996); Lee (2000); Bygate, Skehan & Swain (2001)) There is no completeagreement in the field of SLA research and language pedagogy on what exactly a task is.Various dimensions of tasks are used to describe what a task is: (1) The scope of a task,(2) the perspective from which a task is viewed, (3) the authenticity of the task, (4) thelinguistic skills required to perform the task, (5) the psychological processes involved intask performance and (6) the outcome of the task (Ellis 2003) The scope of a task refers

to which kind of knowledge is required from learners to perform the task, or which kind

of knowledge should be developed in learners in performing the task The scope of a taskrefers to the continuum of form-focused or meaning-focused The knowledge requiredcould be non-linguistic or linguistic

In his definition of task, Long (1985) views a task as a piece of work undertaken foroneself or the others, freely or with some reward such as painting a fence, dressing achild, making an airline reservation or borrowing a book from the library From Long’sdefinition, a task can require language to perform (i.e., making an airline reservation) orrequire no linguistic knowledge (i.e., painting a fence) Nunan (1989) limits the scope of atask to the requirement of language use to do the task He defines a communicative task

as a piece of classroom work which involves learners in comprehending, manipulating,producing, or interacting in the target language while their attention is principally focused

on meaning rather than form The task should also have a sense of completeness, beingable to stand alone as a communicative act in its own right (Nunan, 1989) Focus on form

or focus on meaning is used as criteria to distinguish a language activity from task WhileBreen’s (1989) definition incorporates all kinds of language activity, including exercises

as tasks, Nunan (1989) and Skehan (1996) restrict the term “tasks” to activities wheremeaning is primary The distinction between a task and an exercise is clarified by Ellis(2003) In his view, both tasks and exercises are language activities Tasks are activitiesthat primarily call for meaning focused language use; exercises are activities thatprimarily call for form-focused language use Widdowson (1998) further narrows thedefinition of task Both tasks and exercises need to require learners to pay attention toboth meaning and form What distinguishes a task from an exercise is the kind ofmeaning involved Whereas a task is concerned with pragmatic meaning (the use oflanguage in context), an exercise is concerned with semantic meaning (the systematicmeanings that specific forms can convey irrespective of context) However, Widdowson’s(ibid.) argument is mainly based on the distinction between the terms “form-focused” and

“meaning-focused”, so the distinction is based on terminology alone (Ellis, 2003) Indoing tasks, learners work primarily as language users and in doing exercises, learnerswork primarily as language learners, which means that learners not always focus onmeaning and act primarily as language users when performing a task The perspectivefrom which the task is viewed refers to whether a task is seen from the task designers’ orthe task executors’ point of view Prabhu (1987), Breen (1989), Nunan (1989), Lee(2000) and Ellis (2003) adopt the task-designer’s perspective to view tasks They seethem as “work plans” that intend to engage learners in meaning-focused communication

In some definitions (i.e., Bachman & Palmer, 1996; Lee, 2000) rubrics in the plan ofdoing the task (e.g., the outcome of the task and the sequences of task execution toachieve the outcome) are specified The authenticity of the task refers to whether theactivities correspond to real-life or at least manifest some relationship to real-world

activities (Skehan, 1996) so that upon completion of the task, learners can transfer thelanguage they have learned and/or used while executing the tasks to perform real-worldtasks Activities that are situationally authentic and/or seek to achieve interactionalauthenticity are classified as tasks (Ellis, 2003) One learns a foreign language to meettheir authentic communicative purposes For this reason, tasks through which the targetlanguage is learned or used, aiming to transfer its use to real-life world, should be labeled

as sub-tasks, while activities corresponding to real-life world are labeled as tasks.Language skills involved in performing the activities are not always explicitly stated indefinitions of tasks Long’s (1985) activities require oral and written language Richards,Platt and Weber (1985) explicitly state that a task “may or may not involve the production

of language” Other authors on task-based teaching such as Bygate, Skehan and Swain(2001) assume that tasks are directed at oral, mainly speaking skills Ellis (2003)explicitly states that activities involving any of the four language skills are tasks If thepurpose of a language activity is to help learners to learn (via using) the language, thisactivity must create opportunities for them to use the four language skills so that they canlearn how to communicate Then the activity can be classified as a task A cognitivedimension is embodied in executing language activities In Nunan’s (1989) definition,tasks involving learners in comprehending, manipulating, producing or interacting in thetarget language only address the linguistic dimension of tasks In Prabhu’s (1987)definition, tasks should ideally involve learners in reasoning- making connectionsbetween pieces of information, deducing information and evaluating information.Knowledge of the cognitive processing required in doing tasks will help to design propertasks that enhance second language acquisition Robinson (2001) proposes the variety oftasks in terms of their complexity of the cognitive demands that tasks require on the part

of the learners All authors deal with the outcomes of a task Ellis (2003) distinguishes theoutcome of the task from the aim of the task The outcome concerns what learners arrive

at upon completing the task (i.e., a story) and the aim “refers to the pedagogic purpose ofthe task, which is to elicit meaning-focused language use, receptive and/or productive”(Ellis, 2003: 8) If the pedagogical purpose of the task were to elicit meaning-focused

language use, both receptively and/or productively, we would say it is not enough for anactivity to be classified as the aim of the task The pedagogical purpose of the task is toelicit meaning-focused language use, both receptively and productively, and to elicittextual features of language input that learners have come across or have been presentedto.

Working definition: Various definitions of tasks focus on one or more of the sixmentioned dimensions One component of communicative competence, metacognitiveskills (strategic competence), has not yet been included Therefore, tasks that are used todevelop communicative competence should create opportunities for learners to getexposed to “rich” language input (authenticity) so that learners can employ their cognitiveskills (cognitive dimension) to interact and evaluate the input and opportunities forlearners to use (negotiation of meaning) the four language skills integratively (scope,language skills), to plan how to do the task, monitor task execution (meta-cognitiveskills), and to arrive at a real-life outcome, from which learners can evaluate taskexecution to adjust later task executions Trinh & Rijlaarsdam, (2003) defined an activitythat creates opportunities for learners (motivates learners) to use the target languageauthentically (i.e., negotiating meaning, exchanging information on planning work,problem solving, evaluating language input and the effects of their performance) toexecute real-life work (for oneself or for the other) is a task The target language is usedfor knowledge constructing and for knowledge activating Knowledge includesknowledge of the language and knowledge of other fields In other words, a genuinelanguage task must create an opportunity (i.e., a social context) in which learners canpractice real life language use, with interaction mainly with peers working together tofulfill that task and with self-evaluate task execution and to reflect on their languagelearning

2.2.2 What is motivation?

According to Deci and Ryan’s (1985) self-determination theory, there are two types ofmotivation, namely intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation Figure 2.1 shows that

determined to non-determined An individual with a high level of self-determination islikely to demonstrate autonomy in his or her learning and lead to higher achievement.

Non self-determined self-determined

Figure 2.1: Orientation subtypes along the self-determination continuum (adapted from Ryan & Deci, 2000, p.72)

2.2.2.1 Definitions of intrinsic and extrinsic motivations

Intrinsic motivation is defined as “motivation to engage in an activity because thatactivity is enjoyable and satisfying to do” (Deci and Ryan, 1985, p 39) whereas extrinsicmotivation refers to “actions carried out to achieve some instrumental end such as earning

a reward or avoiding a punishment”

Deci and Ryan (1985) hypothesized that people will seek challenges if they are givenfreedom to choose what activities to perform They will then develop a sense of

orientation

Intrinsicmotivation

Non-regulation

Externalregulation

Introjectedregulation

Identifiedregulation

Accomplishment

competence in their abilities and internalize it into the self-concept Extrinsic motivation,

in a similar vein, lies at one point on a continuum of self-determination, depending on thetype of extrinsic motivation

2.2.2.2 Operationalization of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation

Three-part taxonomy of intrinsic motivation (IM) and three levels of extrinsic motivation(EM) were developed by Vallerand (1997)

Intrinsic motivation is derived from humans’ innate needs for competence and determination According to cognitive evaluation theory, a sub-theory of self-determination theory, intrinsic motivation is characterized by people’s need for meeting

self-“optimal challenges” that “stretch personal abilities by a small but significant amounteach time, and promote feelings of competence and skill development” (Deci & Ryan1980) Furthermore, it is hypothesized that “when people are free to choose to perform anactivity, they will seek interesting situations where they can rise to the challenges that theactivity presents” (Noels et al 2000) The first type of intrinsic motivation in thetaxonomy, IM-Knowledge, relates to the sensations stimulated by discovering newknowledge The second type of intrinsic motivation, IM-Accomplishment, refers tofeelings associated with task completion or goal attainment Lastly, the third category ofintrinsic motivation, IM-Stimulation, is the motivation for doing an activity for thefeeling and sensations associated with performing pleasurable tasks Individuals willexperience pleasurable sensations when they are performing tasks which are initiated bythe individual and challenging enough

In contrast to intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation lies on the continuum from self-determination to self-determination: external regulation, introjected regulation, andidentified regulation

non-External-regulated extrinsic motivation holds only when external incentive is present Thebehaviors of an externally-regulated individual are determined by sources external to theindividual such as monetary rewards If the external incentive is taken away fromindividuals, they will discontinue the engagement in the activity This is the most extreme

form of extrinsic motivation which represents least self-determination and can becomparable to Gardner’s (1985) instrumental orientation.

Introjected-regulated extrinsic motivation takes place when the external pressure has beentransferred to the self of the individual The basis for introjected regulation is “taking inbut not accepting a regulation as one’s own” (Deci, Vallerand, Pelletier, & Ryan 1991, p.329) Although introjected regulation is internal to an individual, task engagement onlyresults from threatened sanctions or promised rewards and the regulation is not part of theintegrated self (Deci & Ryan 1991) As a result of internal coercion (force) and seduction,the behaviors exhibited resemble external control rather than self-determined forms ofregulation where true choice is not present

The final type of extrinsic motivation, identified regulation, refers to a state whereindividuals will do an activity for a good cause Identified-regulated individuals wouldengage in an activity at their own will because they identify with the values it entails Asense of choice or volition about behaving in the absence of external contingencies andintrojects is essential to the development of autonomy and self-determination Thoughthis form of extrinsic motivated behaviors is not fully self-determined as the behaviors aremotivated by the usefulness or instrumentality for the activity itself, it is relatively self-determined because the individual would carry out the activity “willingly, for personalreasons, rather than external pressure” (Deci, Vallerand et al 1991, p 330)

On the far left of the model (Figure 2.1), a motivation, which is independent of intrinsicand extrinsic motivation, presents the absence of either intrinsic or extrinsic reasons forperforming an activity It refers to the situation in which the individual sees nocorrespondence between his action and the consequences of that action, and theconsequences result from factors beyond his control

of extrinsic motivation can be classified along a continuum according to the extent towhich they are internalized into the self concept” (p 61) Nunan (1997) points out that

“autonomy is not an all-or-nothing concept, that there are degrees of autonomy” (p 192).Deci and Ryan (1985) argue that self-determination “is integral to intrinsically motivatedbehavior and is also in evidence in some extrinsically motivated behaviors” (p 38) Theyconceive of self-determination not only as a capacity, but also a need which embodies “abasic, innate propensity to be self-determining that leads organisms to engage ininteresting behaviors, which typically has the benefit of developing competencies, and ofworking toward a flexible accommodation with the social environment” (p 38) As aresult of such tendency toward adequate accommodation in the service of one’s self-determination, the choices made by an individual “are based on an awareness of[his]…organismic needs and a flexible interpretation of external events” (p 38).Individuals can choose to exert control over their own environment or his outcomes, andaccording to Deci and Ryan (1985), giving up control willingly is also a form of self-determined behavior In other words, extrinsically-motivated behaviors could beconsidered to be self-determined if the individual has made an informed choice of beingother-regulated instead of self-regulated In fact, there are a number of studies whichattempt to link intrinsic motivation and autonomous forms of extrinsic motivation topositive academic performance (e.g., Grolnick, Ryan, & Deci 1991; Pintrich, & De Groot1990)

No activity in reality, especially in the L2 learning context, would guarantee to induceintrinsically-motivated behaviors for all individuals Deci, Vallerand et al (1991) assumethat “people are motivated to internalize the regulation of uninteresting behaviors that arevaluable for effective functioning” (p 338) if 1) they identify with the personal utility ofthe activity; 2) they are offered choices about the activity in an autonomy supportiveenvironment; and 3) their sentiment and views are respected and acknowledged bysignificant others Internalization is the central concept of self-determination and it is “aproactive process through which people transform regulation by external contingenciesinto regulation by internal processes Deci, Vallerand et al (1991) Internalization of a

personally-valued behavior as a result of increased perceived competence, relatednesswith significant others and autonomy would give rise to willingness to perform theactivity although the activity may remain uninteresting.

Competence, relatedness and autonomy are the three basic psychological needs inherent

in human beings Deci, Vallerand et al (1991) conceptualize competence to be theunderstanding of “how to attain various external and internal outcomes and beingefficacious in performing the requisite action” (p 327); relatedness to be the development

of “secure and satisfying connections with others in one’s social milieu” (ibid.); andautonomy to be the state of “being self-initiating and self-regulatory of one’s ownactions” (ibid.) According to self-determination theory, autonomy-supportive social andinterpersonal contexts are essential for fulfilling the three psychological needs and, inturn, facilitate intrinsic motivation and self-determination

Controlling contextual events such as promised rewards and threatened punishment arefound to have the tendency of fostering an external perceived locus of causality,compromising intrinsic motivation for interesting tasks and hampering the internalization

of regulations for uninteresting tasks (Deci, Vallerand et al 1991; Deci et al 1994) Onthe contrary, where choices are offered about what tasks to engage in and the amount oftime spent on the task, learners of all ages would become more self-regulated and moreable to internalize the regulation (Deci et al 1994; Swann & Pitman 1977; Zuckerman,Porac, Lahin, Smith, & Deci 1978) Acknowledging learners’ negative feelings about thetask or the way in which they are requested to complete the task is found to reinforcelearners’ self-determination (Koestner, Ryan, Bernieri, & Holt 1984)

Similarly, learners’ self-determined regulation differs depending on the interpersonalstyle a person, especially the teacher in the language classroom, employs in administeringevents and presenting feedback Deci et al (1994) observed that non-controlling styles ofpresenting feedback to learners promotes the internalization of regulation and subsequentautonomous self-regulation In addition, classrooms with autonomy-supportive teachersare shown to have positive effects on learners’ intrinsic motivation, perceived competenceand self-esteem (Ryan & Grolnick 1986)

2.2.2.4 Learner beliefs

In Deci and Ryan’s (1985) theory of self-determination, the intrapersonal aspect ofmotivation has been accounted for in terms of the internalization of regulation To a largeextent, internalization of regulations could only be made possible when the orientationsare compatible with the individuals’ value and belief system Learners’ subjective valuesystem is “a more or less organized collection of internalized perceptions, beliefs andfeelings related to one’s position in the social world, developed during the past as areaction to past experiences” (Benson 2001, p 124) and it determines the internalregulation of learners’ approaches to learning and motivation to complete languagelearning tasks Developing learners’ positive language-related values and attitudes is,therefore, conceived of as having the most far-reaching consequences in motivatinglearners to become more self-regulated Among the beliefs that learners hold which have

a direct impact on their motivation, self-efficacy refers to beliefs about their possession ofthe capability to accomplish a task Learners’ self-efficacy has been shown to bepositively correlated with the tendency of engaging in more self-regulatory activities anddemonstrating greater intrinsic interest in their studies (Miller, Behrens, Greene, &Newman (1993) Ushioda (1996) argues that differing beliefs are also likely to affect andshape motivation, and the ways in which learners perceive the experiences of learningitself is a crucial motivational dimension She proposes the notion of motivationalthinking which encompasses learners’ beliefs about their past learning experiences;motivational and learning goals; intrinsic value of learning in relation to skilldevelopment, competence and personal satisfaction; self-concept; learning process; andtheir relationships with significant others This new dimension has an implication for thedevelopment of learner autonomy According to Ushioda (1996), it is the learner’s ownthinking which motivates intrinsic, self-regulatory learning behaviors It is, therefore,crucial to help learners shape positive motivational thinking which would facilitate thedevelopment of more self-regulatory language learning behaviors In an investigation oflearner readiness for autonomy, Cotterall (1995) found that learners’ beliefs are likely toreflect their readiness for autonomy, and autonomous language learning behaviors are

supported or impeded by specific sets of beliefs She identifies six factors that underlielearners’ readiness for autonomy including learner beliefs about the role of the teacher,role of feedback, learner independence, learner confidence in study ability, experiences oflanguage learning and approach to studying These beliefs may either enhance or inhibit,

“learners’ receptiveness to the ideas and activities presented in the language class,particularly when the approach is not consonant with the learners’ experience”

2.2.3 Speaking ability

2.2.3.1 Definition of speaking:

Speaking is the uniquely human ability to communicate information, ideas, and emotions

to others using oral language Chaney (1998 cited in Kayi) defines speaking as “theprocess of building and sharing meaning through the use of verbal and non-verbalsymbols, in a variety of contexts” Brown (1994), Burns and Joyce (1997 cited inCunningham) refer speaking to an interactive process of constructing meaning thatinvolves producing and receiving and processing information In fact, speaking is acrucial part of foreign language learning and teaching because (in real-lifecommunication) its form and meaning are dependent on the context in which it occurs,including the participants themselves, their collective experiences, the physicalenvironment, and the purposes of speaking

Speaking can be considered the most difficult skill to acquire since it requires learners notonly know how to produce specific points of language such as grammar, pronunciation,

or vocabulary (“linguistic competence”), but also that they understand when, why, and inwhat ways to produce language (“sociolinguistic competence”) According to Murcia andOlshtain (2000 cited in Hoang), speaking requires command of both listeningcomprehension and speech production sub-skills (e.g vocabulary retrieval, pronunciation,choice of grammatical pattern, and so forth) in unpredictable, unplanned situations

2.2.3.2 Speaking skills

Speaking is one of the two productive skills that most of learners aim at when they study

a foreign language, especially in communicating with others in general and in interacting

in classroom settings in particular In other words, we ought to give utterances most of thetime when contacting others Roger Gower, Diane and Steve Walters (1995) assume thatspeaking – a productive skill has two main aspects:

v Accuracy

Accuracy involves the correct use of vocabulary, grammar and pronunciation, so directcorrection is often used during accuracy activities Certainly, in feedback, the teacher willprobably comment not only on the correct use of language but also on the learners’successful communication

v Fluency

Fluency can be thought of as “the ability to keep going when speaking spontaneously”.When speaking fluently, students should be able to get the message across with whateverresources and abilities they have got, ignoring grammatical and other mistakes Usually,students should not be corrected during fluency activities Teachers then give feedback bycommenting favorable on any strategies the students used to increase their fluency

2.3 Principles of Communicative Tasks Design

2.3.1 The Principle of Meaningful Tasks

Halliday (1975) emphasizes that learning a foreign language involves the acquisition of anew system for realizing familiar meanings In natural SLA circumstances, we begin bywanting to mean, (and understand what others mean) and then go on to seek or noticewordings that express those meanings Language does not exist in a vacuum, and it doesnot develop in a vacuum This is why in classroom circumstances lists of words andsample patterns taught as single items very rarely become part of the learners’ deployablesystem Language develops in response to the need to mean and to understand whatothers mean It follows that materials we offer learners should allow them to focus first onmeanings in contexts and then go on to look at the wordings that realize the meanings.From the above viewpoints, we can argue that any pedagogical process which supportsnatural acquisitioned processes should therefore lead from meanings to wordings This is

a major principle behind a task-based approach to course design In setting learners a task

to achieve (e.g., a problem to solve), the emphasis is first on learners’ exchangingmeanings to complete the task, using whatever language they can recall Then theyexamine the language that fluent speakers or writers used to do the same task and focus

on typical words, phrases and patterns (i.e., wordings) that occurred (Willis, 1998a).Language is a meaning system In a meaningful task students are asked to exchangeinformation among themselves in small groups and/or with the teacher This kind ofstudent collaboration has two benefits First, the whole class actively participates in a task

at the same time and students can then compare their findings when the task is over; andsecond, the meaningful task is rehearsed in class for later use in real communicationoutside the classroom

2.3.2 The Principle of Focusing on Language Form

That of focusing on form or focusing on meaning has probably been one of the mostwidely discussed Most applied linguists argue that both are important, and that they are

in fact two sides of a single coin and not the opposing issues However, that should notmean a return to presenting grammar out of context, nor of confronting learners withdecontextualized sentence level structures that they are expected to memorize andinternalize through repetition and manipulation We need to dramatize for learners thefact that effective language use involves achieving harmony between form and function

We need to show them that different forms will enable them to express differentmeanings in different contexts Meanwhile, when designing a task or an activity, we meanthat a good guidance to each task, even a subtask is usually shown in the languageteaching or learning, so as to have learners understand and use language effectively in thecommunicative activity, through a rich array of task practice

Although many students acquire a new language with little focus on language form (Forexample, in CLT class, the learners are exposed to the target language and have lots ofopportunities to use it to express their own meanings), there is now some evidence thatlearners do better if, at some point, their attention is drawn to typical features of language

form (Skehan, 1996a) This can be done in two ways: Through consciousness-raisingexercises highlighting frequently used language items, to help learners perceive patterns(Schmidt, 1990), and systematize what they know By challenging learners tocommunicate in circumstances where accuracy matters (e.g making a public presentation

of their ideas or findings), so they feel the need, at a prior planning stage, to organize theirideas clearly and to check that their lexical choices, their grammar and pronunciation areaccurate (A similar need for a prestige variety was identified in research by Labov,(1970)) The cycle of Task Planning Report, which forms the central part of a TBLTframework, caters to this (Willis, 1996, 1998a)

2.3.3 The Authenticity Principle.

Language data can be divided into authentic data and non-authentic data Authentic dataare samples of spoken and written language that have not been specifically written for thepurposes of language teaching Authentic data are genuine English statement They comeinto being as two or more individuals engage in genuine communication Non-authenticdata are those spoken and written texts, and other samples of language that have beenspecially written for the classroom Before teaching, the authentic data exist in the realworld, and non-authentic data are definite in the classroom or the textbooks We meanthat non-authentic data can provide learners with examples of target grammar andvocabulary in texts that are simple enough to enable learners to understand and processthe language As such, they are valuable resources for learners, particularly in the earlystages of learning However, besides non-authentic data, it is also beneficial for learners

to work with authentic data In such data, learners encounter target language items in thekinds of contexts where they naturally occur If learners never get to listen to or readauthentic texts in the supportive atmosphere of the classroom, if they are only fed with anexclusive diet of contrived dialogs and listening or reading text, the challenge offunctioning effectively in genuine communication outside the classroom will be thatmuch greater (Nunan, 1999) So, When designing a task we have to deal with therelationship between its authenticity and the contents in the texts and try to have learnersunderstand and practise a language in a naturally authentic language situation For

example, if we take the recording in the real life into the classroom, we still don’t think it

is authentic because the learners are not participants but hearers (audience) Theadvantage of using authentic data is that learners encounter target language items in thekinds of contexts where they really occur, rather than in contexts that have beenconcocted by a non-authentic textbook writer Ultimately, this will assist learners becausethey will experience the language item in interaction with other closely related togrammatical and discourse elements Here are two conversations that illustrate thesimilarities and differences between authentic and non-authentic data It is not necessary

to spell out which is which, because it is obvious

Jane: Who’s that boy over there?

Zhou Lan: That’s Tang Lin Come on I’ll introduce you

Jane: All right

Zhou Lan: Tang Lin, I want to introduce my friend, Jane

Tang Lin: Hello

Jane: Hi

Jane: Who’s that boy over there?

Zhou Lan: That’s Tang Lin Come on Let me introduce you

Jane: All right

Zhou Lan: Tang Lin, I’d like to introduce my friend, Jane

Tang Lin: Hello

Jane: Hi

(Adapted from Chen Xiao-tang 2002:63)

The two sentences “I will introduce you” and “I want to introduce my friend, Jane.” arenot genuine English statement They can be changed into “Let me introduce you.” and

“I’d like to introduce my friend, Jane.” respectively Proponents of task-based languageteaching have argued for the importance of incorporating authentic data into theclassroom, although much has been made of the fact that authenticity is a relative matter,

and that as soon as one extracts a piece of language from the communicative context inwhich it occurred and takes it into the classroom, one is “de-authenticating” it to a degree.However, if learners only ever encounter contrived dialogues and listening texts, the task

of learning the language will be made more difficult (Nunan, 1999)

All the above reflect the tasks should be related to the learners’ daily life or social life.The reality is that in EFL contexts, learners need authentic data In many ways,authenticity of tasks can be achieved and pedagogic tasks can have more meanings and bemore related to the real world These include making tasks more authentic though thefollowing means:

2.3.3.1 Through genuine task purposes

Willis (1998) asserts that one of the crucial aspects of task authenticity is whether realcommunication takes place So the first way to make tasks authentic is to find out agenuine purpose for the language to be learned, only when there is a purpose will realmeaningful communication take place In this point Willis argues that with a genuinecommunicative purpose, students have the chance to interact naturally, in “real time” toachieve a communicative goal, which will be far more likely to lead to increased fluencyand natural acquisition than controlled exercises that encourage students to get it rightfrom the very beginning

2.3.3.2 Through real world targets

Working within a needs-analysis framework, Long and Crookes (1992) argue thatpedagogic tasks must be related to real-world target tasks Examples given by them are:buying a train ticket, renting an apartment, reporting a chemistry experiment takinglecture notes and so on From this perspective, although classroom-based pedagogic tasksare not the same as the target tasks, they can be said to be authentic if they have a clearrelationship with real-world needs

2.3.3.3 Through classroom interactions

A classroom is a special society Students and teachers get together for a common

purpose So, pedagogic tasks can be authentic through classroom interactions Teachersshould have the ability to explore the potential authenticity of the learning situation inclassrooms Breen (1985) argues in his book that all of the everyday procedures, thelearning tasks, types of data, and the materials are to be selected and worked on, theactual needs, interests, and all preferred ways of working of all people have gathered inthe classroom, all provide sufficient authentic potentials for communication.

2.3.3.4 Through learners’ engagement

Another crucial element of task is whether it is relevant to the learners So in order tomake tasks more authentic, task designers must take learners’ engagement intoconsideration It’s true that some tasks are authentic to some learners but not at all toothers So how to make students all engaged in the task is in fact one of the ways to maketasks more authentic

2.3.4 The Principle of Reasonable Task Difficulty

Researches have proved that task difficulty have great influences on the effect of tasksnamely the accuracy, complexity and fluency of the learners’ language outcomes So,proper choice of difficulty in different stage of a TBLT class is of great importance Inorder to control the difficulty of tasks, teachers must know what elements contribute totask difficulty In other words teachers should know how to make tasks easy and difficult

to meet different needs Nunan reviews some factors relating to task difficulty

2.4 The three phases of a task- based instruction

The design of a task-based lesson involves consideration of the stages or components of alesson that has a task as its principal component Various designs have been proposed(e.g Estaire and Zanon 1994; Lee 2000; Prabhu 1987; Skehan 1996; Willis 1996).However, they all have in common three principal phases, which are shown in Figure 1.These phases reflect the chronology of a task-based lesson Thus, the first phase is ‘pre-task’ and concerns the various activities that teachers and students can undertake beforethey start the task, such as whether students are given time to plan the performance of thetask The second phase, the ‘during task’ phase, centers around the task itself and affords

various instructional options, including whether students are required to operate undertime-pressure or not The final phase is ‘post-task’ and involves procedures for following-

up on the task performance Only the ‘during task’ phase is obligatory in task-basedteaching Thus, minimally, a task-based lesson consists of the students just performing atask Options selected from the ‘pre-task’ or ‘post-task’ phases are non-obligatory but, as

we will see, can serve a crucial role in ensuring that the task performance is maximallyeffective for language development

Table 2.1: A framework for designing task-based lessons (Ellis, R 2006)

Phases Examples of options

outcome of the task)-Planning time

- Doing a similar task

- Number of participants

- Consciousness-raising

- Repeat taskAccess to a clear framework for a task-based lesson is of obvious advantage to bothteachers and learners Richards (1996) shows how many experienced teachers adhere to amaxim of planning (‘Plan your teaching and try to follow your plan’) while Numrich(1996) reports on how novice teachers feel the ‘need to be creative and varied inteaching’ A framework such as the one outlined in Table 2.1 caters to both needs Itprovides a clear structure for a lesson and it also allows for creativity and variety in thechoice of options in each phase

2.4.1 The pre-task phase

The purpose of the pre-task phase is to prepare students to perform the task in ways thatwill promote acquisition Lee (2000) describes the importance of ‘framing’ the task to beperformed and suggests that one way of doing this is to provide an advance organizer ofwhat the students will be required to do and the nature of the outcome they will arrive at.Dornyei (2001) emphasizes the importance of presenting a task in a way that motivateslearners Like Lee, he sees value in explaining the purpose and utility of the task Thismay be especially important for learners from traditional ‘studial’ classrooms; they mayneed to be convinced of the value of a more ‘experiential’ approach Dornyei alsosuggests that task preparation should involve strategies for whetting students’ appetites toperform the task (e.g by asking them to guess what the task will involve) and for helpingthem to perform the task Strategies in this latter category are discussed below

Skehan (1996) refers to two broad alternatives available to the teacher during the pre-taskphrase: an emphasis on the general cognitive demands of the task, and/or an emphasis onlinguistic factors Attentional capacity is limited, and it is needed to respond to bothlinguistic and cognitive demands … then engaging in activities which reduce cognitiveload will release attentional capacity for the learner to concentrate more on linguisticfactors (p 25) These alternatives can be tackled procedurally in one of four ways; (1)supporting learners in performing a task similar to the task they will perform in theduring-task phase of the lesson, (2) asking students to observe a model of how to performthe task, (3) engaging learners in non-task activities designed to prepare them to performthe task or (4) strategic planning of the main task performance We will consider each insome detail

2.4.1.1 Performing a similar task

The use of a ‘pre-task’ was a key feature of the Communicational Teaching Project(Prabhu 1987) It was carried out as a whole-class activity with the teacher and involvedthe learners in completing a task of the same kind as and with similar content to the maintask Thus, it served as a preparation for performing the main task individually For

example, if the main task involved working out a class timetable from the timetables ofindividual teachers, then the pre-task would be the same but with different information inthe teachers’ timetables.

Prabhu explains that the pre-task was conducted through interaction of the answer type The teacher was expected to lead the class step-by-step to the expectedoutcome, to break down a step into smaller steps if the learners encountered difficulty and

question-and-to offer one of more parallels question-and-to a step in the reasoning process question-and-to ensure that mixedability learners could understand what was required The teacher was provided with alesson plan that included (1) the pre-task and (2) a set of graded questions or instructionstogether with parallel questions to be used as needed When implemented in theclassroom, the plan results in a ‘pedagogic dialogue’ Prabhu emphasises that the pre-taskwas not a ‘demonstration’ but ‘a task in its own right’ It is clear from this account thatthe ‘pre-task’ serves as a mediational tool for the kind of ‘instructional conversation’ thatsociocultural theorists advocate The teacher, as an expert, uses the pre-task to scaffoldlearners’ performance of the task with the expectancy that this ‘other-regulation’facilitates the ‘self-regulation’ learners will need to perform the main task on their own

2.4.1.2 Providing a model

An alternative is to ask the students to observe a model of how the task can be performedwithout requiring them to undertake a trial performance of the task Minimally thisinvolves presenting them with a text (oral or written) to demonstrate an ‘ideal’performance of the task Both Skehan (1996) and Willis (1996) suggest than simply

‘observing’ others perform a task can help reduce the cognitive load on the learner.However, the model can also be accompanied by activities designed to raise learners’consciousness about specific features of the task performance – for example, thestrategies that can be employed to overcome communication problems, the conversationalgambits for holding the floor during a discussion or the pragmalinguistic devices forperforming key language functions Such activities might require the learners to identifyand analyze these features in the model texts Alternatively, they might involve pre-

strategies (e.g ‘Learning to live with uncertainty’ and ‘Learning to make intelligentguesses’) that students can be taught to help them become ‘adaptable, creative, inventiveand above all independent’ (p 81) and thus more effective performers of a task However,the effectiveness of such strategy training remains to be convincingly demonstrated.

2.4.1.3 Non-task preparation activities

There are a variety of non-task preparation activities that teachers can choose from Thesecan centre on reducing the cognitive or the linguistic demands placed on the learner.Activating learners’ content schemata or providing them with background informationserves as a means of defining the topic area of a task Willis (1996) provides a list ofactivities for achieving this (e.g brainstorming and mind-maps) When learners knowwhat they are going to talk or write about they have more processing space available forformulating the language needed to express their ideas with the result that the quantity ofthe output will be enhanced and also fluency and complexity Recommended activities foraddressing the linguistic demands of a task often focus on vocabulary rather thangrammar, perhaps because vocabulary is seen as more helpful for the successfulperformance of a task than grammar Newton (2001) suggests three ways in whichteachers can target unfamiliar vocabulary in the pre-task phase; predicting (i.e askinglearners to brainstorm a list of words related to the task title or topic), cooperativedictionary search (i.e allocating different learners words to look up in their dictionary),and words and definitions (i.e learners match a list of words to their definitions) Newtonargues that such activities will ‘prevent the struggle with new words overtaking otherimportant goals such as fluency or content-learning’ when learners perform the task.However, there is always the danger that pre-teaching vocabulary will result in learnerstreating the task as an opportunity to practise pre-selected words In the case of task-supported teaching this can be seen as desirable but in the case of task-based teaching itcan threaten the integrity of the task

2.4.1.4 Strategic planning

Finally, learners can be given time to plan how they will perform the task This involves

'strategic planning' and contrasts with the 'online planning' that can occur during theperformance of the task It can be distinguished from other pre-task options in that it doesnot involve students in a trial performance of the task or in observing a model However,

it may involve the provision of linguistic forms/strategies for performing the task but adistinction can still be drawn between the non-task preparation procedures describedabove and strategic planning, as the former occur without the students having access tothe task they will be asked to perform while strategic planning involves the studentsconsidering the forms they will need to execute the task workplan they have been given.There are a number of methodological options available to teachers who opt for strategicplanning The first concerns whether the students are simply given the task workplan andleft to decide for themselves what to plan, which typically results in priority being given

to content over form, or whether they are given guidance in what to plan In the case ofthe latter option, the guidance may focus learners' attention on form or content or, as inSangarun's (2001) study, form and content together Skehan (1996) suggests that learnersneed to be made explicitly aware of where they are focusing their attention - whether onfluency, complexity or accuracy These planning options are illustrated in Figure 2 Herethe context is a task involving a balloon debate (i.e deciding who should be ejected from

a balloon to keep it afloat) The guidance can also be 'detailed' or 'undetailed' (Foster andSkehan 1996) The examples in Table 2.2 are of the undetailed kinds Skehan (1998)gives an example of detailed planning for a personal task involving asking someone to go

to your house to turn off the oven that you have left on This involved instructionsrelating to planning content (e.g 'think about what problems your listener could have andhow you might help her') and language (e.g 'think what grammar you need to do thetask') These options do not just provide for variety in planning activities; they also enablethe teacher to channel the learners' attention onto different aspects of language use Forexample, Foster and Skehan (1996) found that when students were given detailedguidance they tended to prioritize content with resulting gains in complexity when theyperformed the task