UNIVERSITY TEACHER’S CONCEPTUALIZATION OF TASK-BASED TEACHING: A CASE study IN taybac university

UNIVERSITY TEACHER’S CONCEPTUALIZATION OF TASK-BASED TEACHING: A CASE study IN taybac university

I, Nguyen Viet Hung, hereby state that this thesis is the result of my own research

and the substance of the thesis has not, wholly or in part, been submitted for any degree toany other universities or institutions.

Signature: Time: March, 2009.

ABSTRACT

In today’s classrooms, language teaching method is undergoing tremendoustransformations towards the integration of different methods according to the learner andteacher as well as contextual variables Language teaching is, therefore, a challenging jobin any country The purpose of this qualitative case study was to examine how task-basedlanguage teaching supports the emergence of language study, within the context ofnortheast university students More importantly, how TBU teachers know about thismethod and their implementation of TBLT in order to improve their teaching quality Thetask-based language teaching provides students multiple opportunities to work for targetsand to learn, both as form and meaning First, task-based language teaching is useful as itallows to treat learners as individual with their own needs and interests Second, it allowslearners to take input from authentic sources which are communicative andcomprehensible data, really relevant to their own needs and interests Third, theparticipants are provided with opportunities to engage in communicative use of the targetlanguage in a wide range of activities Working in groups or in individuals, students fulfilltasks in which they visually represent their personal interpretations of the world around.They focus deliberately on various language forms, skills and strategies in order to supportthe process of language acquisition As teachers, they should conceptualize, research, ofthis method so as to fully exploit the potential of the available teaching materials The task-based language teaching can create a learning environment in which students interact witheach other as they made sense of and access the available information for communication.In particular, naturally unconscious learning occurs through threaded discussions andcooperation when they accomplish tasks Educators must be responsive to today’s learners.This study illuminates the expanded possibilities for integrating tasks within the context oflearning and teaching Findings of the study suggest task integration supports theemergence of language learning and teaching.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

My sincere appreciation is extended to all teachers at College of Foreign Language,Vietnam National University, Hanoi, especially who taught me methodological subjectsand research methods, such as Mr Le Hung Tien, Mr Le Van Canh, and Mrs Nguyen ThiThuy Minh Those by their interesting lessons and precious suggestions for teaching andresearching engaged me in this field

My gracefulness is also expanded to all university teachers of TBU for both theirparticipations into my interviews and their opening classroom doors and inviting me tostay for my observations and their kind offer of teaching plans.

My deepest thanks go to my supervisor, Mr Le Van Canh, M.A., for alwaysbringing out the best in me Without his wisdom, high expectations, and his unwaveringsupport for materials, continued guidance, thorough suggestions and corrections, my thesiscould not be completed

I credit my family in Thai Nguyen for providing me the courage to embark on thisjourney and for teaching me to never, ever give up

DEDICATION

This thesis is dedicated to the true lover of my life, Bui Thi Huong, whom I lovedfor years She with her warm and gentle heart for love was an inspiration to me, and Icould overcome all hardships She is remembered for her character by everyone with thetalent, intelligence, and beauty Though we could not be together because of differentinevitable reasons, my affections and thanks from the depth of my heart would go to herevermore.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.4 Significance of the Study ……… ………. 2

1.5 Limitations of the Study ……… 2

1.6 Scope of the study……… 3

1.7 Organization of the Study ……… 3

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW……… 4

2.1 Definition of terminology……… 4

2.1.1 Defining ‘task’ and task-based language teaching………. 4

2.1.2 Task-based language teaching to learners………. 9

2.1.3 Tasks, Actvities and Exercises……… 11

2.1.4 Developments of Task-Based Teaching……… 11

2.2 Theoretical Foundations……… 15

2.2.1 Theories of language………

152.2.2 Theories of language learning……… 16

2.2.2.1 Cognitive theory……….

162.2.2.2 Constructivist Theory……….…… 17

2.2.2.3 Generative Learning Theory……… 18

2.3 The nature of Task-based Language Teaching……… 19

2.3.1 How is TBLT different from other teaching methods?

192.3.1.1 Communicative Language Teaching (CLT)………

202.3.1.2 Silent Way………. 21

2.3.1.3 Experiential learning……… 22

2.3.1.4 Co-operative learning……….

232.3.2 Task-based teaching versus other types of teaching instruction models……….

242.3.3 Task-based Teaching Framework……… 25

2.3.4 Task types………

29

2.3.5 Materials for Tasks Initiated……… 32

2.3.6 Syllabus design………. 33

2.3.7 Learner roles……….

342.3.8 Teacher roles……… ………. 34

2.4 The importance of understanding teachers’ interpretation of teaching methodology………

352.5 Teachers’ interpretation of TBLT……… 37

2.6 Teachers’ views of teaching methodology and their classroom teaching………

382.7 Conclusion 40CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY……… 41

3.1 The fitness of case study to the research purpose……… 41

3.2 Restatement of research questions……… 43

3.3 Case description and context of the study……… 43

3.3.1 The setting of the study……… 43

3.3.2 Participants……… 44

3.4 Instruments……… ……… 46

3.4.1 Interviews ………

463.4.2 Observations……… ……… 47

3.5.3 Teaching plan interpretation……… 48

3.5 The procedure: ……… ………. 48

493.5.3 Teaching plan interpretation……… 50

3.6 Data analysis……… 50

3.7 Conclusion ……….……… 50

CHAPTER 4 DISCUSSION OF THE FINDINGS……… 51

4.1 General overview of the findings……… 51

4.1.1 Teachers’ conceptualizations of task………. 51

4.1.2 Teachers’ conceptualizations of task-based teaching………. 53

4.1.3 Teachers’ attitudes toward task-based teaching……… 56

4.1.4 Factors affecting the TBLT implementation ……… 57

4.1.5 The reality of teachers’ class teaching……… 59

4.1.6 Teachers’ class teaching implementation……… 61

4.2 Discussions of the findings……… ……… 63

4.2.1 Congruence and incongruence between teachers’ conceptualizations and the composite view of TBLT ………

4.2.2 Congruence and incongruence between teachers’ classroom teaching 65

practice and teaching plans with the composite view of TBLT………

4.2.3 Consistence and inconsistence between their conceptualization with teaching practices and teaching plans……….

66CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSIONS, PEDAGOGICAL IMPLICATONS ANDSUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY………

685.1 Summary of the major points of the study……… ……. 68

5.1.1 Summary of the study………. 68

5.1.2 Conclusions……… ………. 68

5.1.3 Pedagogical implications……… ……… 70

5.2 Limitation of the study………. 70

5.3 Implications for future research ……… 71LIST OF REFERENCES……… ……… I

Appendix B: Schedule of taped Interviews ……….……….… VIIAppendix C: Samples of classroom observations……… VIIIAppendix D: Samples of teaching plans of university teachers……… … XIV

LISTS OF ABBREVIATIONS

TBU: Tay Bac University

TBLL: Task-Based Language LearningTBLT: Task-Based Language Teaching

TST/ TSI: Task-Supported Teaching/ InstructionELT: English Language Teaching

ESL: English as Second Language

CLT: Communicative Language TeachingPPP: presentation-practice-production TTT: Test-Teach-Test

ESA: Engage-Study-ActivateTM: Teaching methodRQ: Research question IQ: Interview question

ADTBLTOM: Ability to distinguish TBLT from other methods

AC AT: Ability to conceptualize the advantages of TBLTAC DT: Ability to conceptualize the disadvantages of TBLTACT BLLF: Ability to conceptualize the TBLT framework(+): Conceptual, positive, mentioned

(-): Non-conceptual, negative, not mentioned (=): Neutral

Att.: Attitudes

Und.: UnderstandingsTim.: Time

Tb.: TextbookPre Preparation

SLP: Students’ language proficiencyNSs: Number of students in class

Fac.: Facilities

Vs.: versus

Exer.: exercise/ act.: activity

LISTS OF TABLES

TABLE 1: Participants’ Profile

TABLE 2: Participants’ conceptualizations of task (Data from IQ2, IQ9)TABLE 3: Participants’ conceptualizations of task-based teaching

(Data from IQ2, IQ3, IQ 5, IQ6, IQ10, IQ11, IQ12)

TABLE 4: Participants’ attitudes towards TBLT

(Data from IQ2, IQ3, IQ4, IQ 5, IQ6, IQ8, IQ12)

TABLE 5: Factors impacting on extent of TBLT implementation

(Data from IQ2, IQ3, IQ 5, IQ6, IQ7, IQ8, IQ10, IQ11, IQ12, IQ13)

TABLE 6: Participants’ class teaching practice

(Data from class observations)

TABLE 7: Participants’ orientation of teaching instruction

(Data from teaching plan)

TABLE 8: The deviations between teachers’ conceptualizations and their practice

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Rationale

1.1.1 State of the problem.

Task-based language teaching, like other approaches to language teaching, isinitiated in the west (Ellis, 2003) mainly for adult intermediate learners It opens newpotential orientations and hopes to the EFL learners and teachers in some aspects oflearning and teaching The application of this approach depends on a lot of factors, such ascontext of teaching, environment or social variables and as the matter of fact the teacher’sconceptualization Despite its popularity in Vietnam, this approach remains under-researched, especially how teachers conceptualize it according to their own understandingand beliefs In Tay Bac University, English language teachers have been introduced to thisapproach, and they often mention the need to use this approach to the teaching of Englishto the students in the university It is quite rational because Ellis (2003) has stated thattask-based language teaching applied in universities is really a great help However, if thesuccess of any language teaching method or approach depends on many factors, one ofwhich is teachers’ understanding and conceptualization of the intended approach, theinvestigation of how teachers interpret Task-Based Language Teaching (TBLT) is anurgent need This study was intended to respond this need.

1.1.2 Theoretical rationale

Numerous studies suggest that teachers’ teaching approaches are less affected bythe reserachers’ ideas but more by their conceptualization of the approach (Borg, 2003) Infact, there has been an emphasis on research into teachers’ understanding, interpretation orconceptualization of, and attitudes towards, the intended language teaching approach overthe last decades Such conceptualization and attidues of teachers are shaped by variouscontextual and educational factors This study follows the research paradigm which seeksto uncover teachers’ psychology and cognition of TBLT in the context of Tay BacUniversity.

1.2 Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study is to investigate teachers’ conceptualization of TBLT andtheir actual implementation of TBLT in their classroom Specifically, the followingobjectives were set up for the study:

a) to investigate university teachers’ attitudes to TBLT in their teaching contextb) to understand university teachers’ conceptualization of TBLT

c) to find out how university teachers implement TBLT in their own classroom.

ask-3 How do they implement task-based language teaching in their classroom?

In seeking the answers to these research questions, a qualitative case study wasdesigned and conducted in the context of a university in the mountaineous area of NorthVietnam.

1.4 Significance of the Study

Information obtained from this study will help teacher educators and teacherresearchers to make appropriate decisions on how to introduce TBLT in Vietnamesecontexts Aslo, it may inform concerned people of how to help teachers to adapt TBLT totheir teaching context by first of all readjust their mindset and attitudes.

1.5 Limitations of the Study

There are several limitations identified in this study First, the sample size is smalland limited to the context of Tay Bac University Data collection and analysis focus ononly twelve university teachers which were purposefully selected to yield the mostinformation for the research questions Although unique in their own ways, theparticipating teachers are all considered highly proficient teachers and familiar withmethodology as almost all of them have just finished subjects of master course and theyare doing theses This study may help to build knowledge and understanding of teachers’conceptualization of a method, but so it is unable to generalize the research results to thevariety of universities The study purpose is only of the benefit of a method at a specificuniversity, so we are not intended to produce results which can be applied universally

Researcher’s bias may be another limitation in this study The researcher is an avidproponent of this method with extensive classroom experience involving learning throughtasks To minimize the effects of the researcher’s bias, the interviews are recordedcarefully for later data analysis, and the class teaching observations are encrypted withthorough attention on sheets of paper, and teaching plans of teachers are interpretedcarefully to get triangulate data

1.6 Scope of the study

What are univerity teachers’view of TBLT and how such a view of TBLT isimplemented in the classroom by TBU teachers of English? The task-based approach itselfis scattered in this scope

1.7 Organization of the Study

This chapter introduced the study exploring potential of TBLT within the context ofTaybac University The chapter included an overview of the issues, statement of theproblem, purpose of the study, research questions, significance of the study, limitations ofthe study, definition of terms, and organization of the study Chapter 2 provides a review ofthe literature, including a theoretical framework focusing on learning and teaching theory.Chapter 2 also provides research of issues surrounding the concepts and components ofTBLT

Chapter 3 describes the methodology through a description of the case studymethodology and research design An overview of a pilot study that informs the proposedstudy and a description of the selected research site and its participants are also included.In addition, the role of the researcher, the role of the teacher, and the procedures for datacollection and data analysis are discussed through rich description and visualrepresentations Chapter 4 presents the results of the study Finally, Chapter 5 summarizesthe findings, discusses implications for educational implications, and offersrecommendations for further researches

CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW

The purpose of this chapter is to provide an extensive review of the literature as itrelates to the overall perspectives of task-based language learning and task-based languageteaching First, an overview of the literature concerning the TBLT terminologies, its keycomponents, its principles, its features, framework for learning and teaching, and itsdistinctions with other teaching methods is provided Next, the theoretical foundations forthe birth and growth of task-based language teaching are discussed, including cognitivetheory of learning, sociocultural perspectives of constructivist theory of learning, etc.Third, teachers’ interpretation of teaching methodology is mentioned This chapter is alsodesigned to explore and identify how teachers’ views of their classroom teaching are.Lastly, the theoretical underpinnings, review of existing task-based teaching researchbibliography will provide a framework for understanding the concept of TBLT and itspotentials, the methodology and data collection involved in the study, and, ultimately, theanalysis of findings obtained from the study

2.1 Definition of terminology

2.1.1 Defining ‘task’ and task-based language teaching

Before doing anything else, we need to clarify terminologies; therefore, in this part,a basic distinction between real-world or target tasks, and pedagogical tasks, and differentperspectives of TBLT is identified and discussed It is necessary because confusions oftenarise in discussions of task-based teaching when different teachers and writers use differentdefinitions of the term ‘task’ And here is the overview of task definitions.

In the literature, various definitions have been offered that differ widely in scopeand formulation up to a point where almost anything related to educational activity cannow be called a ‘task’ Clearly, in order to prevent the understanding of tasks frombecoming fuzzy and overwhelming, clear definitions of what authors mean when they usethe word ‘task’ are necessary.

Long (1985) defined a task as "… a piece of work undertaken for oneself or forothers, freely or for some reward By 'task' is meant the hundred and one things peopledo in everyday life, at work, at play, and in between" (p 89).

Task also refers to a job responsibility or duty that is a specific part of a particularjob that a person is asked to do For example, the job of an administrative assistant requires

the task of scheduling appointments for the supervisor Jobs can be "task-analyzed" forpersonnel and training purposes (Smith, 1971) This general view of task again implies thatthe task is externally imposed on the person from outside

These three definitions of task defined are what that is called real world or targettasks, which has features of non-linguistics and even non-technical outcome but the realmental-oriented outcome that people intend to do everyday Those may describe the sortsof things that the person in the street would say if asked what they were doing (In thesame way as learners, if asked why they are attending an English course, are more likely tosay, ‘So I can make hotel reservations and buy food when I’m in Australia,’ than ‘So I canmaster the subjunctive.’) The conclusion of the distinction between target tasks andpedagogical tasks may refer to Nunan (1989) He supposes that target tasks, as the nameimplies, refer to uses of language in the world beyond the classroom; pedagogical tasks arethose that occur in the classroom.

So what are pedagogical tasks? When they are transformed from the real world tothe classroom, tasks become pedagogical in nature Nunan (1989) He states that: “acommunicative task is a piece of classroom work which involves learners incomprehending, manipulating, producing, or interacting in the target language while theirattention is principally focused on meaning rather than form The task should also have asense of completeness, being able to stand alone as a communicative act in its own right”.In this definition, we can see that the authors take a pedagogical perspective Tasks aredefined in terms of what the learners will do in class rather than in the world outside theclassroom More detailed definition of task-based language approach of his in anotherbook published in 2001 is the following, cited in Canh (2004): a task-based languageteaching approach is characterized by:

a) An emphasis on learning to communicate through interaction in the target language.b) The introduction of authentic texts into the learning situation.

c) The provision of opportunities for learners to focus, not only on language, but also onthe learning process itself

d) An enhancement of the learner's own personal experiences as important contributingelements to classroom learning

e) An attempt to link classroom language learning with language activation outside theclassroom (p.103).

Another definition of pedagogical task comes from Richards (1986): an activityor action which is carried out as the result of processing or understanding language (i.e asa response) For example, drawing a map while listening to a tape, listening to aninstruction and performing a command may be referred to as tasks Tasks may or may notinvolve the production of language A task usually requires the teacher to specify what willbe regarded as successful completion of the task The use of a variety of different kinds oftasks in language teaching is said to make language teaching more communicative since it provides a purpose for a classroom activity which goes beyond the practice oflanguage for its own sake (p.289)

Breen (1987: 23) offers another definition of a pedagogical task: any structuredlanguage learning endeavour which has a particular objective, appropriate content, aspecified working procedure, and a range of outcomes for those who undertake the task.‘Task’ is therefore assumed to refer to a range of workplans which have the overallpurposes of facilitating language learning – from the simple and brief exercise type, tomore complex and lengthy activities such as group problem-solving or simulations anddecision-making This definition is very broad, implying as it does that just about anythingthe learner does in the classroom qualifies as a task It could, in fact, be used to justify anyprocedure at all as ‘task-based’ and, as such, is not particularly helpful

More circumscribed is the following from Willis (1996), cited in Willis and Willis(2001): a classroom undertaking “ where the target language is used by the learner for acommunicative purpose (goal) in order to achieve an outcome” Here the notion ofmeaning is subsumed in ‘outcome’ Language in a communicative task is seen as bringingabout an outcome through the exchange of meanings (p.173).

Skehan (1996a), drawing on a number of other writers, puts forward four keycharacteristics of a task in a pedagogical aspect:

However, when his book was republished in 1998, he had five keys characteristicsfor a task; one more was added So that she redefined a task as ‘an activity in which:meaning is primary; learners are not given other people’s meaning to regurgitate; there aresome sorts of relationship to the real world; task completion has some priority; and theassessment of task performance is in terms of task outcome’.

In the view of Crookes (1986: 1), a task is a piece of work or an activity, usuallywith a specified objective, undertaken as a part of an educational course, at work, or usedto elicit data or research

According to Richards, Platt, and Weber (1985), a task is an activity or an actionwhich is carried out as the result of processing or understanding language, i.e as aresponse For example, drawing a map while listening to a tape, and listening to aninstruction and performing a comment, may be referred to as tasks Tasks may or may notinvolve the production of language A task usually requires the teacher to specify what willbe regarded as successful completion of the task The use of variety of different kinds oftasks in language teaching is said to make teaching more communicative… since itprovides purpose for classroom activity which go beyond practice of language for its ownsake” (p.289).

Prabhu (1987), one of the first methodologists raising interest and support for TBL,considers a task is “an activity which required learners to arrive at an outcome from giveninformation through some process of thought, and which allowed teachers to control andregulate that process” (p.12) He deserves credit for originating the task-based teaching andlearning, based on the concept that effective learning occurs when students are fullyengaged in a language task, rather than just learning about language (p.17)

Lee (2000) defines a task is ‘(1) a classroom activity or exercise that has: (a) anobjective obtainable only by interaction among participants, (b) a mechanism forstructuring and sequencing interaction, and (c) a focus on meaning exchange; (2) alanguage learning endeavor that requires learners to comprehend, manipulate, and/orproduce the target language as they perform some sets of work plans’ (p.23).

Bygate, Skehan, and Swain (2001) view ‘A task is an activity which requireslearners to use language, with emphasis on meaning, to attain an objective’ (p.288).

Finally, Ellis (2003: 16) defines a pedagogical task in the following way: A task isa workplan that requires learners to process language pragmatically in order to achieve anoutcome that can be evaluated in terms of whether the correct or appropriate propositionalcontent has been conveyed To this end, it requires them to give primary attention tomeaning and to make use of their own linguistic resources, although the design of the taskmay predispose them to choose particular forms A task is intended to result in languageuse that bears a resemblance, direct or indirect, to the way language is used in the realworld Like other language activities, a task can engage productive or receptive, and oral orwritten skills and also various cognitive processes.

From what mentioned above, we go through many viewpoints about and definitionsof task The definitions involved a tax, piece of work, everyday activity, job responsibility,or general activity for learners While these definitions vary somewhat, they all emphasizethe fact that pedagogical tasks involve communicative language use in which the user’sattention is focused on meaning rather than grammatical form However, this does notmean that form is not important In second language teaching and learning, task is nowoften viewed as a linguistically outcome-oriented instructional segment or as a behavioralframework for research or classroom learning

My own view of a pedagogical task is strongly influenced by Willis (1996) andNunan (2001) and Littlewood (1981) In my opinion, task-based language teachingapproach is the implementation of pedagogical tasks, which are inspired from the realworld tasks, fitted well to students’ need and interest, and socially contextualized A task isgoal-oriented, meaning-focused first and form-focused then, contextualized, andimplemented as the basis for teaching and learning It can enable teacher’s teaching in thedirection of strong form realization of CLT, and help students achieve the reachable andcommunicative outcome when they are exposed to authentic and comprehensible input,then do the task through interactions (in pairs or in small groups) in which their ownexperiences of target language are exploited, and lastly access the completeness throughthe outcome My definition refers to the deployment of learners’ knowledge, experienceand skills to express meaning, highlighting the fact that meaning and form are highlyinterrelated, and that grammar exists to enable the language user to express differentcommunicative meanings As Willis (1996) points out: “tasks differ from grammatical

exercises in that learners are free to use a range of language structures to achieve taskoutcomes – the forms are not specified in advance” (p.23).

2.1.2 Task-based language teaching to learners

The task-based approach upon which the curriculum is built aims at providingopportunities for learners to experiment with and explore both spoken and written languagethrough learning activities that are designed to engage learners in the authentic, practicaland functional use of language for meaningful purposes Learners are encouraged toactivate and use whatever language they already have in the process of completing a task.The use of tasks will also give a clear and purposeful context for the teaching and learningof grammar and other language features as well as skills All in all, the role of task-based language teaching is to stimulate a natural desire in learners to improve theirlanguage competence by challenging them to complete meaningful tasks (David Nunan,1999: 41)

Task-based teaching can be regarded as one particular approach to implementingthe broader “communicative approach” and, as with the communicative approach ingeneral The aim of task-based teaching is to develop students’ ability to communicate andcommunication (except in its most simple forms) takes place through using thegrammatical system of the language.

Learners who are not used to TBLT may not at first realise the advantages of it, andthey take some time to understand what is required of them and be persuaded of thebenefit This may be based on the kind of teaching they have had before and then whatbenefit the task make to them This is the report from Willis (1996) about the advantagesof TBLT after his survey to his learners:

• they gain confidence in speaking and interacting quite soon after a task-based course;• they enjoy the challenge of doing tasks and find many of them fun;

• they are able to talk about language itself in addition to other topics;

• they can cope with natural spontaneous speech much more easily, and tackle quite toughreading texts in appropriate way;

• they become far more independent learners (p.137)

Willis also gives out the opinions of teachers and trainers who have justexperimented with TBLT:

• with mix-level classes, a TBLT approach works far better than a PPP one;

• learners bring their own experiences to lessons and often come up with interesting andoriginal ideas;

• by the end of the course they are often surprised at how much their learners haveachieved (pp.137 - 138)

In his view, form learner’s position, doing the tasks in pairs or groups has a numberof advantages Bearing this in mind can also guide teachers in roles of facilitators oflearning.

• It gives learners confidence to find out whatever language they know, or think they know,in the relative privacy of a pair or small group, without fear of be wrong or of being correctin front of the class.

• It gives learners experience of spontaneous interaction, which involves composing whatthey want to say in real time, formulating phrases and units of meaning, while listening towhat is being said.

• It gives learners a chance to benefit from noticing how others express the similarmeanings Research shows they are more likely to provide corrective feedback to eachother (when encouraged to do so) than adopt each other’s errors.

• It gives all learners chances to practise negotiating turns to speak, initiating as well asresponding to questions, and reacting to other’s contribution (where as in teacher-ledinteraction, they only have a responding role).

• It engages learners to use language purposefully and cooperatively, concentrating onbuilding meaning, not just using language for display purpose.

• It makes learners to participate in a complete interaction, not just one-off sentences.Negotiating openings and closings, new stages or changes of direction are theirresponsibility It is likely that discourse skill such as these can only be acquired throughinteraction.

• It gives learners more chances to try out communication strategies like checkingunderstanding, paraphrasing to get round an unknown word, reforming other people’sideas, and supplying words and phrases for other speakers.

• It helps learners gradually gain confidence as they find they can rely on co-operation withtheir fellow students to achieve the goals of the tasks mainly through use of the target language(pp.35 - 36).

2.1.3 Tasks, Actvities and Exercises

In teaching and method discussions, there exist a lot of various and overlappingunderstandings in tasks, activities and exercises The three terms somewhere else are usedwithout distinctions It is worth to clarify the differences here because the knowledge ofthis serves much to the understanding of TBLT At first attempts to distinguish betweenCLT and traditional methods of teaching, some of researchers such as Morris et al.(1996), Nunan (1999), Ellis (2003) and Carless (2004) made a clear cut between tasks asdistinction between tasks and exercises (non-tasks) This clear cut has been on thejourney for a long time to researchers’ minds when they need to conceptualize thedifferences between traditional methods which is familiar to most teachers due to theexploits of non- communicative ‘exercises’ and the new teaching ideas and approachesadopted and mentioned in CLT which bases on the exploits of communicative ‘tasks’.Consequently, “this oversimplified division is an obstacle both to conceptual clarity andto effective implementation” (Littlewood, 2007) Afterwards, it is noticeable that Nunan(2004) has moved from the two-category distinction in Nunan (1999) to a three-category framework of ‘tasks’, ‘communicative activities’ and ‘exercises’ According tohim, a task is a communicative act that does not usually have a restrictive focus on aparticular grammatical structure, and has a non-linguistic outcome An exercise usuallyhas a restrictive focus on a specific language element, and has a linguistic outcome Anactivity usually has a restrictive focus on one or two language items, but also has acommunicative outcome.

2.1.4 Developments of Task-Based Teaching

This section is to discuss about the history of researches and viewpoints of stages inTBLT, and then the clarification between the most well-known and favourable TBLTmodel and other models of instructions

TBLT was first applauded by Prabu (1987); however, it was only shaped intocareful framework later by other methodologists This part is, therefore, to introducebriefly the historical development of TBLT researches on both the concept and its

framework As noted by Richards and Rodgers (2001) and Willis (1996a, 1996b, 1998), atask has a natural series of stages, such as preparation for the task (pre-task), the task itself,and follow-up (post-task) Many second language learner textbooks now follow thispractice In addition, tasks are often placed into a sequence as part of a unit of work orstudy Sequencing is a major issue in a task-based syllabus For Swales (1990), tasks are"…sequenceable goal-directed activities…relatable to the acquisition of pre-genre andgenre skills appropriate to a foreseen or emerging situation" (p 76, cited in Salaberry,2001, p 102) Skehan (1998b) noted that tasks have discernable implementation phases,for which there should be clear criteria for outcome assessment

Nunan (2004) argued in favor of units based on topics or themes in whichHalliday's (1985) three groups of macrofunctions are divided into microfunctions, eachlinked with certain grammatical structures Nunan's task-based syllabus contains six stagesper unit:

• schema building,

• controlled practice embedded in a context (unlike traditional controlled practice), • authentic receptive skills work,

• a focus on form (lexical and/or grammatical),

• freer practice ("communicative activities"), and at last • the (communicative) task itself

It is interesting that Nunan, unlike Ellis (2003) and Long (1985, 1991), waited untilthe very end of the process to include the communicative task In Nunan's model, the taskis a culmination of all other work In this sense, as noted by Feeney (2006), this is not toofar from the PPP format, except that Nunan's controlled practice occurs within more of acommunicative context than is usual with the PPP arrangement Nunan's focus on formoccurs before both freer practice and the task, whereas Willis's (1996b) model employs afocus on form after the task

Long's (1985, 1991) task-based language teaching model presents a focus on form,which involves meaning, structure, and the context of communication The model followsthe following sequence of task development, implementation, and assessment/evaluation:

• Needs analysis to identify target tasks • Classify into target task types

• Derive pedagogic tasks

• Sequence to form a task-based syllabus

• Implement with appropriate methodology and pedagogy • Assess with task-based, criterion-referenced, performance tests • Evaluate program

In Long's model, tasks are selected based on careful analysis of real-worldcommunication needs Such tasks are particularly important-even catalytic-for L2 learningbecause they can generate useful forms of communication breakdown (Long, 1985) Theteacher offers some kind of assistance to help the learner focus on form at the point when itis most needed for communication This is the moment when meaning meets form Whilenot explaining the learner's error, the teacher provides indirect assistance so the learner cansolve his or her own communication problem and can proceed to negotiate meaning stillfurther Long (1997) presented the following typical instructional sequence for a "falsebeginner" class of young adult prospective tourists

• Intensive listening practice: The task is to identify which of 40 telephone requestsfor reservations can be met, and which not, by looking at four charts showing theavailability, dates and cost of hotel rooms, theater and plane seats, and tables at arestaurant

• Role-playing: The learners take roles of customers and airline reservation clerksin situations in which the airline seats required are available.• Role-playing: The learners take roles in situations in which, due to unavailability,learners must choose among progressively more complicated alternatives (seats indifferent sections of the plane, at different prices, on different flights or dates, viadifferent routes, etc.)

In this model, the exact sequence of any given task or set of tasks would depend onthe learners' needs, which shape the goals of instruction

Ellis (2003b) distinguishes between (a) unfocused tasks (e.g., ordinary listeningtasks or interactions) and (b) focused tasks, which are used to elicit a particular linguisticfeature or to center on language as task content He cited three principal designs forfocused tasks: comprehension tasks, consciousness-raising tasks, and structure-basedproduction tasks Elsewhere (Ellis, 2003a) presents a sequence of tasks for helping learners

become more grammatical, rather than for attaining the exlusive goal of mastery Thesequence includes:

• Listening task, in which students listen to a text that they process for meaning) • "Noticing" task, in which students listen to the same text, which is now gapped, and fill in the missing words

• Consciousness-raising task, in which students discover how the target grammar structure works by analyzing the "data" provided by the listening text

• Checking task, in which students complete an activity to check if they have understood how the target structure works

• Production task, in which students have the chance to try out or experiment with the target structure by producing their own sentences

Johnson (1996), Skehan (1998b), and Willis (1996b) discuss sequencing of tasksaccording to methodological task features, such as extent of communication (negotiation ofmeaning), task difficulty, and amount of planning allowed Others have discussed how tosequence tasks to reflect the developmental sequence of language acquisition Skehan(1999) suggested targeting a range of structures rather than a single one and using thecriterion of usefulness rather than necessity as a sequencing criterion

Salaberry (2001) has argued that a successful task sequence leads learners to: (a)communicate with limited resources, (b) become aware of apparent limitations in theirknowledge about linguistic structures that are necessary to convey the messageappropriately and accurately, and finally, (c) look for alternatives to overcome suchlimitations Building on the work of McCarthy (1998), Salaberry offers a pedagogicalsequence of four stages, which for the learner would be involvement, inquiry, induction,and incorporation For the teacher the corresponding four-step sequence is introduction ofthe topic, illustration, implementation, and integration

It is evident that no consensus yet exists about the best way to sequence tasks or tosequence elements within tasks This is one of the key areas of research needed in the field.However, the writer in this thesis take the model of Willis' (1996a, 1996b, 1998) as this isthe one which is very much advocated by other researchers and methodologists because ofits precise design Willis' framework consists of the following phases:

• Pre-task - introduction to the topic and task.

• Task cycle: task planning; doing the task; preparing to report on the task; presenting the task report

• Language focus - analysis and practice (focus on form).

2.2 Theoretical Foundations

Methodologically, task-based language teaching represents a realization of thephilosophy of Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) Other realizations that couldfairly claim to reside within the CLT family include content-based instruction (Brinton2003), text-based syllabuses (Feez 1998), project-based learning (Willis, 1996; Moss &Van Duzer, 1998), problem-based learning, and immersion education (Johnston and Swain1997) It is also possible to find essentially grammar-based teaching that fit comfortablywithin the overarching philosophy of CLT As the matter of fact, CLT is a broad,philosophical approach to the language teaching that draws on theory and research inlinguistics, anthropology, psychology and sociology (For a review of the theoretical andempirical roots of CLT, see Savignon 1993) Consequently, this part is to discuss aboutessential philosophies of TBLT as well as CLT, i.e., the functional view, the interactionalview, cognitive theory, constructivist theory, and humanism.

2.2.1 Theories of language

The two most araised and influenced theories of language that lay the base for CLTand TBLT are functional approach and interactional approach; they are, in turn, discussedbelow.

The functional view considers language as a vehicle for expressing functionalmeaning Thus, in this view, the semantic and communicative dimensions of language aremore emphasised than the grammatical characteristics, although the latter are alsoincluded The target of language learning within the functional view is to learn to expresscommunication functions and categories of meaning The Communicative Approach andthe Natural Approach are based on this view

The interactional view sees language primarily as a means for establishing andmaintaining interpersonal relations and for performing social transactions betweenindividuals The target of language learning in this view, thus, is to learn to initiate and

maintain conversations with other people The Communicative Approach is also informedby this view (Richards and Rodgers, 1986, pp.16-17)

2.2.2 Theories of language learning2.2.2.1 Cognitive theory

Emerging in the late 1950s, and beginning to be dominant theory of learning, butreally having powerful influence on instructional practice after the late 1970s, cognitivepsychology was a new meaningful argumentation from psychologists and methodologists,usually coinciding with names of Chomsky, Jean Piaget and Lev Semenovich Vygotsky,Ausubel, etc Through years cognitive psychology has had a considerable influence onlanguage teaching methodology There are no methodologies that limit themselves tocognitivist theories; TBLT is no exception

Cognitive theories of learning emphasized the role of the mind in actively acquiringnew knowledge The ideas that Ausubel (1968) presented in his book EducationalPsychology: A cognitive view underlies the cognitivist stance in education The mostimportant of these ideas was that learning must be meaningful and relatable to anindividual's cognitive structure if it was to become a permanent part of his or herunderstanding of the world Cognitive teaching treated the learners as thinking beings andplaces them at the centre of the learning process by stressing that learning will only takeplace when learners find the input meaningful, interesting and relevant to their needs Itmeans the learner is an active participant in the learning process, using various mentalstrategies in order to sort out the system of the language to be learned, which would ratheremphasizes the internal mental processes of the mind and how they could be utilized inpromoting effective learning than the external behaviour as behaviourism did; learner, infact, learns by thinking about and trying to make sense of what he or she hears, sees andfeels And, as being retrieved from (Canh, 2004: p.39), cognitive psychology is groundedon the following assumptions:

• People develop at different rates • Development is relatively orderly • Development takes place gradually

The basic teaching technique associated with a cognitive theory of learning is theproblem-solving tasks Thus, the cognitive model of teaching is defined as a model of

teaching in which the teacher selects learning tasks according to the learner'sdevelopmental level, and elicits learner reasoning in relation to those tasks.

Also according to (Canh, 2004: p.37 ), the human mind is a rational processor and accordingly necessary to know how processes such as thinking, attending,knowing, remembering and problem-solving are working Task-based approach ofteaching realized the central viewpoint of cognitivism as one of the main philosophies ofthis method when TBL involves learners in comprehending, manipulating, producing orinteracting in the target language while their attention is focused on mobilizing theirgrammatical knowledge in order to express meaning (Nunan, 1989:10) It certainlyinvolves learners’ efforts of mental work while they interact with others to complete tasks.

information-2.2.2.2 Constructivist Theory

Constructivism is a theory about knowledge and learning in which knowledge isunique to the individual learner and the resulting facet of the individual’s engagement inthe cognitive learning process (Kozulin, 1998) Savery and Duffy (1996) describedconstructivism as a “philosophical view on how to come to understand and know” (p 31).Cambourne (2002) offered three simplified theoretical propositions of constructivism:

1 What is learned cannot be separated from the context in which it is learned 2 The purposes or goals that the learner brings to the learning situation are central

acquire a predetermined set of skills in a pre-specified manner Lastly and mostimportantly, constructivism is naturally emerged as the focus of TBLT Carless (2004)stated that: “Task-oriented curricular was based on constructivist learning principles andargued that pupils needed to be involved in developing their own learning Task-basedlanguage teaching and learning were central to this philosophy”

2.2.2.3 Generative Learning Theory

Another theoretical model of memory based in neural processing that can lay thebase for TBLT as well as modern language learning and teaching is generative learningtheory Originally conceived under the cognitive information processing paradigm byWittrock (1974), generative learning theory has recently also been applied in technology-based constructivist learning environments, experiment learning, cooperation learning,problem-based learning, ect (Grabinger, 1996) The focus of the generative learningtheory model is that the learner is not a passive recipient of information but an activeparticipant in the instructional experience, constructing knowledge through relatinginformation in the instructional environment to his or her previous experiences and priorknowledge (Grabowski, 1996) Correspondingly, the generative learning process requiresthe learner to manipulate, interpret, organize or in some active manner make sense of his orher environment He or she creates meaning through generative associations between andamong elements in the instructional environment and his or her knowledge base

Types of generative strategies include organization (e.g summarizing,diagramming), conceptualization (e.g explaining/clarifying, creating concept maps,identifying important information), integration (e.g., creating relevant examples, relating toprior knowledge, creating analogies and metaphors, synthesizing) and translation(evaluating, questioning, predicting, inferring) (Grabowski, 1996)

In any form of instructional strategy based in this theory, of primary importance is

presenting the opportunity to construct new meaning from the learner’s interaction with the

instructional environment and understanding of specific content This is an importantconsideration since generative theory dictates that learning is not limited to themanipulation of existing cognitive structures but can generate new associations for thelearner (Grabowski, 1997) Grabinger (1996) points out this distinction by stating:

The concept of generative learning is an extension of the concept of constructinglearning Students cannot construct their own learning without generating somethingthrough active involvement (p.675)

Coleman, Perry and Schwen (1997) contend that constructivists are inclined to involvelearners in a generative experience through allocating control of the sequence of instructionto learners Hannafin (1992) states that generative environments need to task the learnerwith creating, elaborating or otherwise constructing representations of individual meaning

2.3 The nature of Task-based Language Teaching

2.3.1 How is TBLT different from other teaching methods?

One of the most raised questions of methodologists is the relationship betweencommunicative language teaching and task-based language teaching Are the termssynonymous? If so, why have two terms for the same notion? If not, wherein lies thedifference? The answer is that CLT is a broad, philosophical approach to the languagecurriculum that draws on theory and research in linguistics, anthropology, psychology andsociology Task-based language teaching represents a realization of this philosophy at thelevels of syllabus design and methodology Other realizations that could fairly claim toreside within the CLT family include content-based instruction (Brinton 2003), text-basedsyllabuses (Feez 1998), problem-based learning, and immersion education (Johnston andSwain 1997).

Littlewood (2003) even stated in his article that:

These approaches have been described under a variety of labels: “experiential learning”,“discovery learning”, “problem-based learning”, “co-operative learning”, the “activity-basedapproach”, and others Underlying all of these approaches is a desire to involve students in somekind of purposeful interaction with information, objects and/or ideas, often in groups, in order todevelop their skills and knowledge In the field of language teaching, the approach which iscurrently best known in this respect is “Task-based teaching”.

It is, therefore, profitable to make a clear distinction between some of thosemethods of language teaching in order for teachers to have the right interpretation of such auseful method of teaching.

2.3.1.1 Communicative Language Teaching (CLT)

Task-based teaching can be regarded as one particular approach to implementingthe broader “communicative approach” and, as with the communicative approach ingeneral, the two teaching approaches have a lot in common, and a little distinction A greatdeal has been said and written about CLT in the last decades, and it is sometimes assumedthat the approach is a unitary one, whereas in reality it consists of a family of approaches.The basic insight that language can be thought of as a tool for communication rather thanas sets of phonological, grammatical and lexical items to be memorized led to the notion ofdeveloping different learning programs to reflect the different communicative needs ofdisparate groups of learners No longer was it necessary to teach an item simply because itis ‘there’ in the language The CLT view of language as action was nicely captured bySavignon (1993), one of the key architects of CLT, in a state-of-the-art survey article inwhich she wrote:

In Europe, during the 1970s, the language needs of a rapidly increasing group of immigrants andguest workers, and a rich British linguistic tradition that included social as well as linguistic context indescription of language behavior, led to the Council of Europe development of a syllabus for learners basedon functional–notional concepts of language use and a threshold level of language ability was described

for each of the languages of Europe in terms of what learners should be able to do with the language (van Ek1975) Functions were based on assessment of learner needs and specified the end result, the product, of aninstructional program The term communicative was used to describe programs that used a functional–

notional syllabus based on needs assessment, and the language for specific purposes (LSP) movement waslaunched (Savignon 1993: 37).

Among various realizations of CLT, Task-based language teaching seems to havethe potential to provide foreign language learners with essential conditions for languagelearning TBLT, the realization of strong version of Communicative Approach, is a goal-oriented teaching method effective in enhancing student motivation It can offer Englishlearners exposure to authentic materials, opportunities to use the target language, andmotivation to learn, which are all considered to be essential conditions for languagelearning (Willis, 1996) Moss reported TBLT helped ESL learners develop various skillsbecause TBLT creates situations where learners need to communicate to get the job done(Moss & Van Duzer, 1998) The negotiation of meaning occurs when some form ofinformation exchange transpires for a real purpose thereby making the context of

communication as relevant as the content (Harmer, 1996; Nunan, 1998) Thedecontextualized communicative activities as in CLT teaching according to the broaderterm is no longer available in TBLT tasks Many of the types of Task-based teaching,consciousness-raising, and discovery learning activities that are not only intended tointroduce language forms in authentic data but also engage them in truly meaningful andeffective communication such as negotiation of meaning for the task completeness TBLTis, therefore, the breaking growth of CLT approach in the routine meeting the desire ofmillions of foreign language learners.

2.3.1.2 Silent Way

As mentioned by Canh (2004), “Another contribution of this method is it has led tothe widespread use of problem-solving activities, which paves the way for the subsequentrise of Task-based teaching” (p.72) The reasons supporting this statement is that thismethod was firstly based on the trend towards "discovery learning', which advocated lesslearning through transmission and more learning by discovering for oneself various factsand principles Secondly, this method emphasizes the independence, autonomy, andresponsibility of learners: “Gattegno believed that learners should develop independence,autonomy, and responsibility in their learning activity and that the teacher's silence helpedto foster self-reliance and learner initiative” (Canh, 2004: p.71) Teachers rarely providenew items unless when learners really need it for their communication If willingless,teachers model new language items just once and then learners take it to incorporate totheir learning Nextly, grammatical patterns are taught inductively

However, this method and TBLT have some differences: First, while TBLT focusmainly and firstly on meaning and the real communication ability to complete tasks, thismethod “adopted a highly structural approach, with language taught through sentences in asequence based on grammatical complexity” (Canh, 2004: p.71) Second, as stated byRichards and Rodgers (1986: p.11), "The indirect role the teacher is required to assume indirecting and monitoring learner performance, the responsibility placed upon learners tofigure out and test their hypotheses about how the language works, and the materials usedto elicit and practice language”, so the teacher is too distant to encourage a communicativeatmosphere as a facilitator and language an adviser And finally, learners’ errors areexpected as a normal part of learning; the teacher rarely takes the role of a monitor And

accordingly, with this method, only highly motivated learners who are willing to generatereal communication from the rigid structures can make benefit from it

2.3.1.3 Experiential learning

An important conceptual basis for task-based language teaching is experientiallearning This approach takes the learner’s immediate personal experience as the point ofdeparture for the learning experience Intellectual growth occurs when learners engage inand reflect on sequences of tasks The active involvement of the learner is therefore centralto the approach, and a rubric that conveniently captures the active, experiential nature ofthe process is ‘learning by doing’ In this, it contrasts with a ‘transmission’ approach toeducation in which the learner acquires knowledge passively from the teacher Experientiallearning has diverse roots in a range of disciplines from social psychology, humanisticeducation, developmental education and cognitive theory The person who pulled thesediverse, though related, strands together was the psychologist David Kolb, who argued foran integration of action and reflection In his model (Kolb, 1984), learners move from whatthey already know and can do to the incorporation of new knowledge and skills They dothis by making sense of some immediate experience, and then going beyond the immediateexperience through a process of reflection and transformation The most articulateapplication of experiential learning to language teaching is provided by Kohonen (1992).In many respects, his model can be seen as a theoretical blueprint for TBLT, as can be seenfrom the following list of precepts for action derived from his work

• Encourage the transformation of knowledge within the learner rather than thetransmission of knowledge from the teacher to the learner

• Encourage learners to participate actively in small, collaborative groups (I see group andpair work as important, although I recognize that there are many contexts where class sizemakes pair and group work difficult).

• Embrace a holistic attitude towards subject matter rather than a static, atomistic andhierarchical attitude.

• Emphasize process rather than product, learning how to learn, self inquiry, social andcommunication skills.

• Encourage self-directed rather than teacher-directed learning.• Promote intrinsic rather than extrinsic motivation.

Kohonen highlights the fit between experiential learning and other teachingapproaches, such as TBLT, learner-centredness and autonomy: Experiential learningtheory provides the basic philosophical view of learning as part of personal growth Thegoal is to enable the learner to become increasingly self-directed and responsible for his orher own learning This process means a gradual shift of the initiative to the learner,encouraging him or her to bring in personal contributions and experiences Instead of theteacher setting the tasks and standards of acceptable performance, the learner isincreasingly in charge of his or her own learning (Kohonen 1992: 37) From thoseperspectives, it is clear that a lot of principles of experiential learning are covered inTBLT Though the two teaching method are descended from the root, CLT with thephilosophy “learning by doing”, TBLT is higher and more perfectly developed becauseTBLT not only bases on learners’ experience and the interactions but also thecontextualized task exploitation.

2.3.1.4 Co-operative learning

Canh defines cooperative learning, or collaborative learning as a range of conceptsand techniques for enhancing the value of learner-learner interaction The theory andpractice of cooperative learning is based on the principle that we can learn from each otheras well as from a teacher and that one of the most important tasks of a teacher is to createsufficient classroom opportunittes for such learning to take place Viewed this way,learning is social interaction (2004: p.100)

Some of the similarities between Cooperative learning and TBLT are that theyemphasize the intereaction between learners to solve learning problem and accumulatelinguistic knowledge and skills by doing and discovering; learners are more independent oftheir teachers because they can interact to one another to share their experiences,knowledge and even error correction; and both method engage learners in meaningfulcommunication and first emphasize on meaning then on form Canh asserts that“Cooperative learning teams therefore provide an effective context for the development ofnew understanding” (2004: 101)

These two methods, on the other hand, have some differences: while TBLT mainlyfocuses the interactions of students on pairs or on small groups, Cooperative learning givesits heed to large groups or teams; TBLT means implementing tasks as core basis for

learning and teaching, and the interactions between students are the way to get tasksaccomplished, Cooperative learning in another way only draws attention to large groupwork or teamwork as the central focus which certainly cannot have specific framework forlearning and teaching as TBLT does.

2.3.2 Task-based teaching versus other types of teaching instruction models

As we discussed in 2.1.3 about the sequencing tasks for TBLT, the model proposedby Willis offers a task cycle and a clear process to reach the goal of communication Thismodel can be easily regconised from other types of instructions

First, TBLT opposes strongly the traditional presentation-practice-production (PPP)teaching/learning cycle which was at one time virtually the only acceptable secondlanguage task sequence In the PPP cycle, grammar presentation came first (“presentation”of a language item by the teacher), followed by controlled and less controlled practice (inthe form of exercises) and then by actual production (“production” of the sentences)

Second, TBLT differs from an alternative teaching model to the PPP model TTT (Test-Teach-Test approach) in which the production stage comes first and thelearners are thrown in and required to perform a particular task This model is morecommunicative and learner-centered than PPP.

-Next, a different three stage model proposed by Jeremy Harmer (1998) is ESAmodel (Engage, Study, Activate) During the engage phase, the teacher tries to arouse thestudents' interest and engage their emotions This might be through a game, the use of apicture, audio recording or video sequence, a dramatic story, an amusing anecdote, etc Theaim is to arouse the students' interest, curiosity and attention The PPP model seems tosuggest that students come to lessons ready motivated to listen and engage with theteacher's presentation The study phase activities are those which focus on language (orinformation) and how it is constructed The focus of study could vary from thepronunciation of one particular sound to the techniques an author uses to create excitementin a longer reading text; from an examination of a verb tense to the study of a transcript ofan informal conversation to study spoken style There are many different styles of study,from group examination of a text to discover topic-related vocabulary to the teacher’sexplanation of a grammatical pattern In the Activate phase, exercises and activities aredesigned to get students to use the language as communicatively as they can During

activate, students do not focus on language construction or practise particular languagepatterns, but use their full language knowledge in the selected situation or task TTT andESA models are accepted widely by teachers apposed CLT and learnered-centeredapproach

In addition, a needed clear cut should be done is the distinction between TBLT andTSI (Task-supported instruction) mentioned by Ellis (2003) when he tried to distinguishbetween unfocused tasks (e.g., ordinary listening tasks or interactions) and focused tasks(which are used to elicit a particular linguistic feature or to center on language as taskcontent) TSI means incorporating tasks into the curriculum, which may also contain othertypes of activities Accordingly, if tasks are used to support the teaching in which teacherprovides opportunities to use the language for communicative purposes, they belong totask-supported teaching This model is in fact the weak form of CLT TBLT is completelyversus TSI because in the pure form of TBLT, the task is the only unit of the curriculum,the basis for teaching, and perhaps even assessment TBI realizes the strong form ofcommunicative teaching which emphasizes that learner’s language is acquired best throughcommunication In a word, the maxim of TSI - ‘learning to use’ versuses the maxim of TBI- ‘using to learn’ or ‘learning by doing’

2.3.3 Task-based Teaching Framework

Jane Willis (1996) designed precisely the framework for TBLT, which was thenadvocated by Richards Frost (2006) including three main phases: pre-task, task-cycle, andlanguage focus Pre-task phase is when teacher introduce topic and task, and students getexposures of linguistic chunks The task cycle can be subdivided into three task stages,including task stage, planning stage, and report stage This is the main task phase in whichstudents use the target language the most to accomplish task requirements; the fluency andmeaning-focus is main attended The last phase is language focus, in which teacher, basingon what learners have done in the previous phase, helps learners to enrich linguistic itemswith more focus on accuracy Here is the thorough discussion of them

Firstly, we come to discuss the first phase – pre-task phase The pre-task is usuallythe shortest stage in the framework It could last between two or twenty minutes,depending on the learners’ degree of familiarity with the topic and the type of task If thereis a pre-task recording to set the scene, it could take slightly longer In this phase, teacher

has to do some of the following jobs: 1) Teacher does some advance preparations, in whichteacher has to bear in mind the students’ need and interest to decide materials and kind oftasks to be introduced (activities in course book or designed by teacher), how to introduceit clearly, what supported visual aids should be brought to class, and what supportedlinguistic input should be put in teacher’s talk for students’ exposure 2) Teacherintroduces the topic of lesson and task’s instruction in a brief and precise way so thatstudents can know what they will have to do to get the goal He or she should be sure thateveryone understands the requirement of the task before they engage in task stage 3)Teacher uses activities to help students to learn useful words or phrases Teacher canencourage students to pool topic-related words and phrases they know already in activitiesof teacher-led brainstorming As students think of words or phrases, teacher writes them onone side of the board and talks something about them If the task involves reading ortalking about a text or listening, teacher could pick out some words or phrases that are vitalfor general understanding of the main theme Lots of things should be put intoconsideration in this phase, but teacher has to bear in mind that this is not the time to teachlarge amounts of new language, and certainly not to teach a specific grammatical structure;it is to boost students’ confidence in handling the task, and give them something to fallback on if necessary (pp.41 - 43).

Secondly, the task cycle phase is to offer learners chance to use whatever languagethey already know to carry out the task, and then to improve that language, under teacherguidance, while planning their report of the task Feedback from teacher can come whenthey want it most, at the planning stage, and after the report Exposure to language in usecan be provided at different points depending on the type of task Either during otherbefore task cycle, students might listen to recordings of other people doing the task or reada text connected to the task topic, and relate this to their own experience of doing the task.In the task stage, students are usually asked to do the task in pairs or in small groups, whileteacher works as a monitor and a facilitator who can provide helps whenever they need Inthe planning stage of task cycle, students are usually asked to prepare to report to thewhole class orally or in writing how they did the task, what they decided or what theydiscovered This stage, in Willis’ view, attaches teacher as the role of a linguistic adviser,who is in charge of giving feedback and helping students to correct, rephrase, rehearse so

as for them to draft the written report The third stage of the task cycle is report stage thatis the chance for students to present their reports of the task to the class orally or in writing.Teacher can choose some groups to choose their representatives to report, and she/heworks as a chairperson to judge their performance and give comments and feedback on thecontent and form if needed.

The last phase in the framework is language focus, which allows students to haveclose study of some of the specific features naturally occurring in the language used duringthe task cycle By this point, the learners will have already worked with the language andprocessed it for meaning, so they are ready to focus on the specific language forms thatcarry the meaning Thus the study of these forms is clearly contextualised through the taskitself This final phase, which includes analysis and practise components, fulfils the fourthdesirable extra condition for learning-explicit study of language form Some of the mainfeatures of TBLT are mentioned as follows:

1) Goals and outcomes

One job of course designer and teacher is to select topics and tasks that willmotivate learners, engage their attention, present a suitable degree of intellectual andlinguistic challenge and promote their language development as efficiently as possible.

It is obvious that all tasks have specific objective that must be achieved, often in agiven time They are ‘goal-oriented’ In other words, the focus is on understanding andconveying meanings in order to complete the task successfully; learners are using languagein a meaningful way while they are doing tasks All tasks should have outcome whichshould be a little challenging to achieve; it is the way that makes TBL a motivatingprocedure in classroom.

2) Meaning before form

An important feature of task is that learners are free to choose whatever languageform they wish to convey what they mean, in order to fulfill, as well as they can, the taskgoals.

It would be defective for the purpose if we dictate or control the language formsthat they must use As the need arises, words and phrases acquired previously but as yetunused will often spring to mind If the need to communicate is strongly felt, learners willfind a way of getting round words or forms they do not yet know or cannot remember If,

for example, learners at a very elementary level want to express something that happenedin the past, they can use the base form of the verb, and an adverb denoting the past time,

like I go yesterday, etc.

The teacher can monitor from the distance, and especially in a monolingual class,should encourage all attempts to communicate in target language But this is not the timefor advice or correction Learners need to feel free to experiment with language on theirown, and to take risks Fluency in communication is what counts In later stages of the taskframework, accuracy does not matter, but it is not so important at the task stage.

Learners need to regard their errors in a positive way, to treat them as a normal partof learning Explain to them that it is better for them to risk getting something wrong, thannot to say anything If their message is understood, then they have been reasonablysuccessful If they remain silent, they are less likely to learn All learners need toexperiment and make errors.

Language then, is the vehicle for attaining task goals, but the emphasis is onmeaning and communication, not on producing language form correctly.

3) Tasks and skills practice

Some approaches on language teaching talk in terms of four separate skills:listening, speaking, reading and writing Skills lessons are principally designed to improveone single skill and often supplement grammar teaching Other approaches talks in termsof integrated skills With the exception of reading or listening for pleasure, it is rare foranyone to use one skill in isolation for any length of time If you are speaking to someone,you will be both observing their reactions and listening for their responses; as you listen tothem, you will be composing what you want to say next Writing usually involves reading,checking and often revising what you have written.

Teachers follow a task-based cycle naturally foster combinations of skillsdepending upon the task The skills form an integral part of the process of achieving thetask goals; they are not being practised singly, in a vacuum.

The task objectives ensure there is always a purpose for any reading and taking, just as there is always an audience for the speaking and writing Carrying out a taskdemands meaningful interaction of some kind.

If teacher is aware of learners’ current or future language needs, he/she can selector adapt tasks that help them to practise relevant skills Some learners may need Englishfor academic purposes, so tasks involving reading and listening, note-taking andsummarizing are bound to be helpful Some students may need translating or oralinterpreting skills and tasks can be devised to practise these, for example, hearing a newitem in one language and comparing it with a news summary in the other For those whoneed only to pass a written examination, but also want to socialise in target language, youcould use text-based tasks with written outcomes, and discussion at various points in thetask cycle.

2.3.4 Task types

Many types of second language tasks exist, particularly in the realm ofcommunicative instruction Here is a listing of some key task types found in the literature:problem-solving (Nunan, 1989; Pica et al., 1993; Willis, 1996a); decision-making (Foster& Skehan, 1996; Nunan, 1989; Pica et al., 1993); opinion-gap or opinion exchange(Nunan, 1989; Pica et al., 1993); information-gap (Doughty & Pica,1986; Nunan, 1989;Oxford, 1990; Pica et al., 1993); comprehension-based (Ikeda & Takeuchi, 2000; Scarcella& Oxford, 1992; Tierney et al., 1995); sharing personal experiences, attitudes, and feelings(Foster & Skehan, 1996; Oxford, 1990; Willis, 1996a, 1996b); basic cognitive processes,such as comparing or matching (Nunan, 1989; Willis, 1998), listing (Willis, 1998), andordering/sorting (Willis, 1998); language analysis (Willis 1996a, 1996b, 1998); narrative(Foster & Skehan, 1996); reasoning-gap (Nunan, 1989); question-and-answer (Nunan1989); structured and semi-structured dialogues (Nunan, 1989); and role-plays andsimulations (Crookall & Oxford, 1990; Richards & Rodgers, 2001).

In addition, task types include picture stories (Nunan, 1989); puzzles and games(Nunan, 1989); interviews, discussions, and debates (Nunan, 1989; Oxford, 1990; Richards& Rodgers, 2001); and everyday functions, such as telephone conversations and serviceencounters (Richards & Rodgers, 2001) Task types also encompass practice withcommunication/conversation strategies, learning strategies, and text-handling strategies(Cohen, 1998; Honeyfield, 1993; Nunan, 1989; O'Malley & Chamot, 1990; Oxford, 1990).Additional task types can lead to communicative videomaking (Talbott & Oxford, 1989,1991) For more on various types of tasks, see Bygate et al (2001) and Yule (1997)

Many task types involve multiple skills and subskills, such as reading a passage forcomprehension and then doing something with the information that has been read, such asanswering questions, discussing the information, making a decision, solving a problem,and expressing how one feels about a given situation And here is the thorough discussionof some focal task types proposed by Willis (1996a), who affects the interpretation ofTBLT the most These tasks are discussed along with the dutifully-designed framework fortask-based language teaching, which is most publicly-discussed by researchers in this field.

These tasks involve four main processes:

• sequencing items, actions or events in logical or chronological order• ranking items according to personal values or specified criteria

• categorizing items in given groups or grouping them under given headings

• classifying items in different ways, where the categories themselves are not given

3) Comparing

Broadly, these tasks involve comparing information of a similar nature but fromdifferent sources or versions in order to identify common points and/or differences Theprocesses involved are:

• matching to identify specific points and relate them to each other• finding similarities and things in common

• finding differences

4) Problem-solving

Problem-solving tasks make demands upon people’s intellectual and reasoningpower, and, though challenging, they are engaging and often satisfying to solve The

processes and time scale will vary enormously depending on the type and the complexityof the problem.

Real-life problems may involve expressing hypotheses, describing experiences,comparing alternatives and evaluating and agreeing a solution Completion tasks are oftenbased on short extracts from texts, where the learners predict the ending or piece togetherclues to guess it The classification ends with case studies, which are more complex, entailan in-depth consideration of many criteria, and often involve additional fact-finding andinvestigating.

5) Sharing personal experiences

These tasks encourage learners to talk more freely about themselves and share theirexperiences with others The resulting interaction is closer to casual social conversation inthat it is not so directly goal-oriented as in other tasks For that reason, however, theseopen tasks may be more difficult to get going in the classroom.

6) Creative tasks

These are often called projects and involve pairs or groups of learners in some kindof freer creative work They also tend to have more stages than other tasks, and can involvecombinations of task types: listing, ordering and sorting, comparing and problem-solving.Out of class research is sometimes needed Organizational skills and team-work areimportant in getting the task done The outcome can often be appreciated by a wideraudience than the students who produced it.

In real-life rehearsals pairs or groups of students predict, plan and rehearse whatthey could say in typical real-life situations (e.g buying stamps) They then perform theirdialogue in front of the class, and/or record it Next, they either hear the recording of thereal-life parallel dialogue, or, if they are in an English-speaking area, they go to the place(e.g post office) and take notes of what people actually say If possible, they also take partin a similar situation themselves (e.g buy the stamps) with another student taking notes.Finally, students compare the real-life versions with their own prepared scripts.

Six task types above can be categorized into three types according to the outcomeand the way to reach the goal: closed tasks (that are highly structured and have specific

goals, for example, work in pairs to find seven differences between these two pictures andwrite them down in note form in two minutes limited This instruction is very precise and