Upload
donald-stafford
View
223
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Task-Based Language Teaching: Sorting Out the MisunderstandingsRod EllisDepartment of Applied language Studies and LinguisticsUniversity of Auckland
Scoping my talk1. Defining and classifying ‘tasks’
2. Defining ‘task-based language teaching’
3. Identifying and addressing misunderstandings
4. Some genuine problems with TBLT
5. Some conclusions about TBLT
PART ONE
Defining and classifying ‘tasks’.
What is a task?
1. A task is goal directed.
2. A task involves a primary focus on meaning.
3. The participants choose the linguistic resources needed to complete the task.
4. A task has a clearly defined outcome.
Types of Tasks
1. Unfocused tasks
a. Pedagogic
b. Real world
2. Focused tasks
An example of a pedagogic unfocused task
1. Four students – each has one picture and describes it to the rest of the class.
2. Students from the rest of the class ask the four students questions about their pictures.
3. One student from the class tries to tell the story.
4. If necessary Steps 2 and 3 are repeated
Example of a real-world unfocused task
Look at the e-mail message below. Listen to Mr. Pointer’s instructions on the tape. Make notes if you want to. Then write a suitable reply to Lesieur.
Dear Mr. PointerPlease send flight number, date and time of arrival and I will arrange for someone to meet you at the airport.Lesieur.
An example of a focused taskYou are the owner of a private language school and have advertised for a new English teacher.
Below are summaries of the CVs of four applicants. Discuss each applicant and then decide which one to offer the job to. JOCK, aged 30 B.A. in social studies. Has spent a year working his way round the world. Has spent six years teaching economics in state school. Has written a highly successful novel about teachers. Has lived in a back-to-nature commune for two years. Has been married twice - now divorced. Two children. Has been running local youth group for three years. BETTY, aged 45 Has been married for 24 years, three children. Has not worked most of that time. Has done evening courses in youth guidance. Has spent the last year teaching pupils privately for state – with good results.Has been constantly active in local government - has been elected to local council twice.
Types of focused tasks
1. Structure-based production tasks
2. Structure-based comprehension tasks
3. Consciousness-raising tasks
Tasks and the four language skills
A common misunderstanding of task-based instruction is that it necessarily involves oral interaction.
But tasks can be designed to develop any of the four language skills (listening, speaking, reading and writing).
Many tasks are ‘integrative’ (i.e. involve more than one skill).
PART TWO
Defining ‘task-based language teaching’
(TBLT)
What is ‘task-based language teaching’?
TBLT is an approach to teaching a second/foreign language that seeks to engage learners in interactionally authentic language use by having them perform a series of tasks. It aims to both enable learners (1) to acquire new linguistic knowledge and (2) to proceduralize their existing knowledge.
Focus on forms vs. focus on form
1. Focus on formsFocus on forms entails the prior selection of a linguistic element which is presented and practised (e.g. PPP).2. Focus on form
‘Focus on form … overtly draws students’ attention to linguistic elements as they arise incidentally in lessons whose overrriding focus is on meaning or communication’.Long (1991; 45-6):
Three ways of focusing on form
1. Reactive focus on form (error correction)
2. Teacher-initiated focus on form
3. Student-initiated focus on form
Types of Instruction
Type Primary Focus Attention to form
Focus on forms Form Intensive
Task-based – incidental focus on form
Meaning Extensive
Task-based – planned focus on form
Meaning Intensive
An important distinction
1. Task-based language teaching involves ‘focus on form’ (i.e. attention to form occurs within the context of performing the task) = a strong form of communicative language teaching
2. Task-supported language teaching involves ‘focus-on-forms’ (i.e. specific forms are pre-taught and tasks are used to provide ‘free practice’) = a weak form of communicative language teaching.
Three Types of Task-Based Courses
1. Entirely unfocused tasks (e.g. Prabhu 1987).
2. Entirely focused tasks (assumes a linguistic syllabus).
3. An amalgam of unfocused and focused tasks.
Methodology of task-based language teaching
1. Pre-task (e.g. opportunity for pre-task planning)
2. Main task (e.g. pre-emptive and reactive focus on form)
3. Post-task (e.g. language practice activities).
Core and peripheral tasks (Mariko Boku)
Core task Peripheral task
learner-centered teacher-fronted
Core and peripheral tasks - sequence
C1 P 1 C1 C2 P2 C2 C3 P3 C3 C4 P4
The TBLT Cavaliers
1. Long (1996)
2. Willis (1996)
3. Skehan (1998)
4. Ellis (2003)
Key Characteristics of TBLT (Swan 2005)
1. ‘Natural’ or ‘naturalistic’ language use
2. Learner-centred rather than teacher controlled
3. Focus on form (intervention while retaining ‘naturalness’).
4. Tasks serve as the means for achieving natural language use.
5. Traditional approaches are ineffective.
Differences in TBLT approaches
Characteristic Long (1996) Skehan (1998)
Ellis (2003)
Natural language use
yes yes yes
Learner-centredness
yes yes Not necessarily
Focus on form Yes – through corrective feedback
Yes – mainly through pre-task
Yes – in all phases of a TBLT lesson
Tasks Yes – unfocused and focused
Yes - unfocused
Yes – unfocused and focused
Rejection of traditional approaches
Yes Yes No
PART THREE
Addressing the misunderstandings
The TBLT roundheads
1. Seedhouse (e.g. 1999; 2005)
2. Sheen (e.g. 1994; 2003)
3. Swan (e.g. 2005a; 2005b)
Misunderstanding (1)Seedhouse (1999) argues that the interaction that results from tasks isoften impoverished and can lead to fossilization.
L1: What?L2: Stop.L3: Dot?L4: Dot?L5: Point?L6: Dot?LL: Point, point, yeh.L1: Point?L5: Small point.L3: Dot(From Lynch 1989, p. 124; cited in Seedhouse 1999).
Response
It all depends on the choice of task inrelation to the developmental level of the learner:* for beginners the extract Seedhouse citesas evidence of impoverished interactionmay not be impoverished at all;* more complex tasks will result in more complex language .
Misunderstanding (2)
Seedhouse (2005) argues that ‘task-as-workplan’ has weak construct validity because the interaction that transpires when learners perform a task (i.e. the ‘task-as-process’) frequently does not match that intended by designers of the task.
Response
This is a serious criticism because, ifcorrect, it means that it will be impossible todesign a task-based course to ensure adequate coverage of the target language.
But, in fact, there is substantial evidence to suggest that it is possible to design tasks that are predictive of language use.
The effects of task characteristics on complexity, accuracy, and fluency (Skehan 2001)
Task characteristic Accuracy Complexity Fluency
Familiarity of information
No effect No effect Slightly greater
Dialogic vs. monologic
Greater Slightly greater Lower
Degree of structure No effect No effect Greater
Complexity of outcome
No effect Greater No effect
Transformations No effect Planned condition leads to greater
No effect
Misunderstanding (3)
Sheen (2003) claims that in TBLT there is
‘no grammar syllabus’.
TBLT writers ‘generally offer little more than a brief list of suggestions regarding the selection and presentation of new language’.
TBLT ‘outlaws’ the grammar syllabus (Swan 2005).
ResponseIt is true that in some versions of TBLT (e.g. Long’sor Skehan’s) there is no grammar syllabus. But this is seenas advantageous in that teaching discrete points of grammar is problematic as learners’ interlanguage does notdevelop incrementally.Ellis’ version of TBLT does allow for a grammar syllabuswhich can be used alongside a task-based syllabus eitheras a separate module in the whole course or as a checklistto guide the selection of grammatical features for focusedtasks.All versions of TBLT allow for attention to grammar through focus onform at some stage in a task-based lesson. In TBLT the focus is on ‘remedial’ grammar.
Misunderstanding (4)
Sheen(2003) also characterizes TBLT as
requiring that any treatment of grammar
take the form of quick corrective feedback
allowing for minimal interruption of the task
activity.
Response
Only Long characterizes focus-on-form as involving brief corrective feedback (recasts).
Skehan sees attention to form originating from design and implementational options (e.g. pre-task planning).
Ellis emphasizes that focus-on-form can involve pre-emptive work as well as corrective feedback and can be quite explicit.
Misunderstanding (5)
Sheen (2003) also claims and that in TBLT
any post-task grammar work is supposed to
take the form of grammar-problem solving
tasks (i.e. CR tasks).
Response
In Willis (1996) and Ellis (2003) post-task work on grammar can take a variety of forms, including explicit instruction, problem-solving tasks and practice activities.
Misunderstanding (6)
Sheen (2003) claims that ‘the only grammar to be dealt with (in TBLT) is that which causes a problem in communication’.
Response
This again reflects Long’s position not Skehan’s or Ellis’s.
Long relates attention to form to contexts where there is a communication problem leading to negotiation of meaning. Ellis acknowledges that attention to form can occur ‘didactically’ as well as ‘conversationally’.
Didactic Focus on Form
T: What were you doing?
S: I was in pub
(2)
S: I was in pub
T: In the pub?
S: Yeh and I was drinking beer with my
friend.
Misunderstanding (6)
The theoretical rationale for TBLT is typically limited to the acquisition of grammar; vocabulary and phonology are ignored (Swan 2005)
Response
This is false. There have been a number of studies that have focused on the acquisition of grammar through TBLT (e.g. Mackey 1999) but several other studies have examined the acquisition of vocabulary (e.g. Ellis et al 1994). There have been few studies that have examined phonology (but see Loewen 2005).
Misunderstanding (7)
TBLT puts the emphasis on output.‘It remains true that TBLT provides learners with
substantially less new language than “traditional” approaches.’
‘In the tiny corpus of a year’s task-based input, even some basic structures may not occur often, much core vocabulary is likely to be absent, and many other lexical items will appear only once or twice’.
(Swan 2005)
Response
This is the most fundamental misunderstanding of TBLT because it assumes that tasks must inevitably involve interaction and production. But, in fact, tasks can also be ‘input-based’ (i.e. involve listening or reading). Indeed, extensive reading activities can be viewed as tasks. Arguably, a task-based course is capable of providing much greater exposure to the target language than a traditional course.
Misunderstanding (8)
‘The thrust of TBLT is to cast the teacher in the role of manager and facilitator of communicative activity rather than an important source of new language’.
That is, TBLT promotes learner-centredness at the expense of teacher-directed instruction.
(Swan 2005)
Response
Again, this depends on the version of TBLT one is considering. Swan’s comment is largely true of Long’s version of TBLT but not of others.Ellis has consistently argued that tasks can be usefully performed in teacher-class interaction (i.e. need not involve group or pair work) and points to the advantages this have for ensuring a teacher-led focus on form. Prabhu (1987) insists that tasks are better performed in lock-step teaching.In fact, all stages of a task-based lesson can be performed in either a ‘learner-centred’ or ‘teacher-led’ way (e.g. pre-task planning).Thus TBLT is largely neutral as to whether it is learner- or teacher-centred way.
Misunderstanding (9)
Beginner learners need to be taught grammar because they will not be able to shift attention to code features in interaction if in fact they know so little basic grammar that they cannot produce discourse to shift from.TBLT is only suitable for ‘acquisition-rich contexts’.Swan (2005)
ResponseOf course beginner learners will not be able to engage productively in discourse. But this is only a problem for TBLT if it is assumed (as Swan wrongly does) that TBLT necessarily involves production. In fact, a TBLT course for beginners would necessarily have to focus on input-based tasks to develop initial proficiency (see Prabhu 1987).
The early stages of L2 acquisition are agrammatical; one does not need grammar to start communicating.
In fact, TBLT may be better suited to acquisition-poor contexts (e.g. EFL in Japan) in that it is more likely to develop communicative confidence and fluency.
The argument comes down to whether it is better to adopt a ‘fluency first’ or ‘accuracy first’ approach.
Misunderstanding (10)
Both Sheen and Swan argue that there is no empirical evidence to support either the hypotheses that construct the theoretical rationale for TBLT or to demonstrate that TBLT is superior to traditional focus-on-forms’ appraoches.
‘Legislation by hypothesis’.
Response
Hypothesis Research
The online hypothesis Online attention to form does result in learning (Mackey and Philp 1998; Mackey 1999; Leeman 2003)
The noticing hypothesis Learners do pay attention to linguistic form and this can result in learning (e.g. Mackey, Gass and McDonough; Loewen 2005).
The teachability hypothesis There is a substantial body of research that shows that L2 acquisition involves both an order and sequence of acquisition (e.g. Ellis 1994; Bardovi Harlig 2000) and that this cannot be easily altered through instruction (e.g. Ellis 1989).
Response (cont.)
Neither Sheen nor Swan make any reference to Prabhu (1987) and Beretta and Davies’ (1985) evaluation of this TBLT project in India.The conclusions of this evaluation were:
• In the tests favouring the ‘traditional group, this group did best• In the tests favouring the TBLT group, this group did best• In the neutral tests (e.g. a contextualized grammar test; dictation;
listening/reading comprehension), the TBLT group did best.
But there are problems with conducting such evaluations and also with the kind of comparative method studies that Sheen constantly asks for.
Part Four
Some real problems and their solutions.
Pedagogic problems
Problem Solution1. Teachers often believe that TBLT is not possible with beginners.
Teachers need to understand that TBLT involves input-based as well as out-put based tasks and that it is possible to build up proficiency initially through a series of simple input-based tasks.
2. Students may be unwilling to risk communicating ‘freely’.
• Allow planning time• Learner-training.
3. Students will resort to communicating in their L1.
This is arguably not a problem; as
proficiency develops learners
automatically begin to use more of
the L2.
4. Teachers may not fully understand the principles or TBLT or have the proficiency to teach ‘communicatively’.
More effective teacher training.
Problems with the Educational System and Solutions
Problems Solutions
1. Emphasis on ‘knowledge learning’
Educational philosophy needs to change
2. Examination system More communicative tests need to be developed.
3. Large classes Use group work; develop tasks suited to large classes.
Conclusions1. Task-based teaching offers the opportunity for ‘natural’
learning inside the classroom.2. It emphasizes meaning over form but can also cater for
learning form.3. It is intrinsically motivating.4. It is compatible with a learner-centred educational
philosophy but also allows for teacher input and direction.5. It caters to the development of communicative fluency while
not neglecting accuracy.6. It can be used alongside a more traditional approach.