8/12/2019 Task-Based Learning & Pedagogy
1/2
The task-based approach to language teaching hasevolved in
response to a better understanding ofthe way languages are learnt.
Traditionally,language learning has been regarded as aprocess of
mastering a succession of steps, eachone building on the one
before. Teachers presentthe target language in ready-to-assimilate
pieces,starting with the easy parts and gradually movingtowards the
harder parts. Learners must mastereach part and incorporate it into
their knowledgeof the target language. The PPP model oflanguage
teaching ( presentation, practice,perform ance ) is based on th e
assumption that alanguage is best presen ted to learners as a
syllabusof structures, and that through controlled practicea fluent
and accurate performance of thestructu re of the day can be
achieved. Error s areevidence of poor learning, requiring more
PPPtreatment.In contrast, the contemporary view of
languagelearning, based upon research findings in bothlinguistics
and psychology, is that learners do notacquire the target language
in the order it ispresented to them, no matter how carefullyteacher
and textbooks organize it. Languagelearning is a developmental,
organic process thatfollows its own internal agenda. Errors are
notnecessarily the result of bad learning, but are partof the
natural process of interlanguage formsgradually moving towards
target forms (Ellis1994).Such a view of language learning has
profoundimplications for language teaching, and has led tothe
development of various task-basedapproaches (for example, Prabhu
1987, Longand Crookes 1991). These approaches aresomewhat
disparate, but they share a commonidea: giving learners tasks to
transact, rather thanitems to learn, provides an environment
whichbest promotes the natural language learningprocess. By
engaging in meaningful activities,such as problem-solving,
discussions, ornarratives, the learn er s interlanguage system
isstretched and encouraged to develop. Interactivetasks are
sometimes considered particularlybeneficial, especially the
information-gap type, inwhich learners have to transfer information
to apartner who does not have it (Pica et al. 1993).These tasks
rely on a successful transfer of
meaning in order to be completed, and aresupposed to focus the
learners attention moreclosely on the comprehensibility of the
languagethey and their partners are using, thus increasingthe
likelihood that interlanguage forms will bepushed towards target
language norms.The danger in a task-based approach to teaching
isthat learners might be encouraged to prioritize afocus on meaning
over a focus on form, and thusbe led to use fluent but
unchallenging orinaccurate language. Because language does nothave
to be well-formed in order to be meaningful,it is easy to see how
learners could successfullycomplete a task using ill-formed or
undemandinglanguage, supplemented by gesture andintonation, rather
than trying out their cuttingedge interlanguage.The challenge for a
task-based pedagogy,therefore, is to choose, sequence, and
implementtasks in ways that will combine a focus on meaningwith a
focus on form. Skehan (1996) hasdeveloped a theoretical framework
for task-based teaching that claims to balance thedevelopment of
fluency with accuracy andinterlanguage restructuring. Willis (1996)
hasproduced a detailed practical framework for thetask-based
classroom in which learners are ledthrough cycles of task planning,
performance,repetition, and, finally, comparison with
native-speaker norms. There is already strong empiricalsupport for
some of these ideas. Foster andSkehan (1996) have shown that giving
learnerstime to plan before they begin a task
significantlyincreases the complexity, accuracy, and fluency ofthe
language they use, and that these effectsincrease in relation to
the cognitive difficulty ofthe task.Continuing research into task
design andimplementation should help task-based teachingdevelop in
ways that have a sound and convincingpsycholinguistic basis. The
final challenge willthen be to persuade teachers of the merit
inadopting a task-based approach in theirclassrooms.PaulineFoster
Thames Valley Universityeferen esEllis R. 1994. The Study of Second
LanguageAcquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
ELTJournal Volume 53 1 January1999 OxfordUniversity Press 1999
69
bygueston
Jun
e1
,2
01
3
http://eltj.oxford
jo
urnals.org
/
Downlo
adedfrom
http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/
