Task-based or task-supported language teaching?

A view from the bridge

William Littlewoodwlittlewood9@gmail.com

1

2

Two sources of CLT since the 1970s A view of learning: ‘learning through

communicating’◦ E.g. Stephen Krashen; N.S. Prabhu; Gertrude

Moskowitz A view of language: ‘doing things with

words’◦ e.g. J.L. Austin; Michael Halliday; Henry

Widdowson The two ‘streams’ from these sources often

convey conflicting messages

3

Result: CLT’s identity problem

From the beginning there has been confusion between:◦A ‘strong version’ of CLT: if people ‘learn

by communicating’, students should communicate all the time (‘experiential’ learning)

◦A ‘weak version’ of CLT: people can also learn how to ‘do things with words’ through conscious learning and practice (‘analytic’ learning)

According to Allwright & Hanks (2009): The strong version stimulated the ‘radical re-

think’ that language teaching needed. However it was not commercially viable as it

could not form the basis for published courses. This ‘commodity problem’ was solved by the

‘much less challenging ideas’ of the weak version).

The ‘strong’ version of CLT

4

The weak version of CLT presents a more familiar framework for teaching: it includes familiar forms of controlled, analytic learning, e.g. grammar practice and exercises.

Thornbury (2011): ‘The old PPP model by another name’

The ‘weak’ version of CLT

5

Both ‘weak’ and ‘strong’ versions involve the teachers in creating and organizing communicative activities for experiential learning.

In this respect ‘tasks’ are a category of communicative activity with special design features

They pose challenges for teachers and learners used to a more transmission–oriented approach.

Communication in the classroom

6

The challenges faced by many teachers include:◦ new organizational skills e.g. for group activities◦ unfamiliar roles in the classroom e.g. ‘facilitator’ not

only ‘knowledge transmitter’◦ classroom management esp. with large classes◦ students resorting to the mother tongue in tasks◦ students performing tasks with minimal use of language ◦ excessive demands on their own language competence◦ conflict with educational traditions and conceptions of

learning◦ incompatibility with public examinations

(e.g. Butler, 2011, Jeon, 2009, Littlewood, 2007, Wang, 2007)

7

CLT and TBLT: Some challenges

‘A strong version where learners choose whatever language forms they wish to convey the meaning required by the task’

‘A weak form of task-supported teaching (analogous to P-P-P) through which tasks provide opportunities to practise language items that have been introduced in a traditional way’

(Carless, 2009)

Strong’ and ‘weak’ versions of TBLT

8

There are many variations and choices for teachers to select from when they are carrying out TBLT.’ (Carless, 2012)

‘There is no single way of doing TBLT.’ (Ellis, 2009)

The variability of TBLT

9

Ellis finds only two common features in the versions advocated by Ellis, Long and Skehan:◦The role of tasks in creating contexts for

natural language use;◦The need to also focus on form.

That is: they recommend both experiential and analytic strategies but offer variation in how to do so.

The variability of TBLT (Ellis, 2009)

10

This flexible conception of TBLT integrates easily into a ‘context-sensitive postmethod pedagogy’ (Kumaravadivelu, 2006, p. 20).

We may look at TBLT and tasks in the broader context of postmethod pedagogy, in which tasks:◦ provide necessary contexts for communicative

language use, which are part of both the strong and the weak versions of CLT and TBLT;

◦ can also serve as focuses for attention to relevant form.

Tasks and TBLT in postmethod pedagogy

11

Three views from the bridge:

The experiential – analytic dimension The communicative continuum Task-engagement

Tasks and TBLT in postmethod pedagogy

12

13

Experiential learning ←→ Analytic learning

Communication (main focus: meaning + message)

←→ Instruction (main focus: form + meaning)

↓ ↓Subconscious learning and

activation← → Controlled practice and

learning↓ ↓

Fluent language becomes increasingly ‘correct’

←→ Learnt language becomes increasingly fluent

↓ ↓Communicative Competence

1. Experiential and analytic learning

‘Strong’ versions of CLT / TBLT ← → ‘Weak’ versions of CLT / TBLT

Communication tasks

Focused tasks

Enabling tasks

Task-based teaching ← → Task-supported teaching

Experiential strategies Analytic strategiesAuthentic

communicationStructured

communicationCommunicative

language practice

Pre-communicative

language practice

Non-communicative

learning

Using language to communicate in situations where the meanings are unpredictable, e.g. creative role-play, more complex problem-solving and discussion

Using language to communicate in situations which elicit pre-learnt language but with some unpredictability, e.g. structured role-play and simple problem-solving

Practising pre-taught language in a context where it communicates new information, e.g. information gap activities or “personalised” questions

Practising language with some attention to meaning but not communicating new messages to others, e.g. “question-and-answer” practice

Focusing on the structures of language, how they are formed and what they mean, e.g. substitution exercises, “discovery” and awareness-raising activities

Focus on meanings and messages

Focus on forms and meanings

‘Communicative tasks’ ‘Focused tasks’ ‘Enabling tasks’

Task-based (May be) Task-supported

2. The ‘communicative continuum’

14

I love music!

How do you feel when you listen to music? Why do you like music? Discuss with your partner. Write down five reasons. •_________________________________________________________________________________________________•_________________________________________________________________________________________________•_________________________________________________________________________________________________•_________________________________________________________________________________________________•_________________________________________________________________________________________________

(adapted from Vidal, 1996)

15

Authentic communication

Designing an alternative world

1 Students and teachers brainstorm aspects of the environment they like and those they would like to see improved. These may include changes to the geographical setting, nature, animal-life, housing, society, family, leisure activities, politics, etc.

2 Students are put into groups according to common interests. The groups identify the language and information they need. The students carry out individual and group research on the selected topics. The students discuss aspects of this ‘Alternative reality’ and then report back. They decide on the different ways (stories, recordings, games, etc.) to link all the research and present the final product.

3 Students present the topic and evaluate the activity.

(adapted from Ribé & Vidal, 1993)

16

Authentic communication

The World Tomorrow

•Students are asked to write down a list of changes they expect to see in the world by a date 50 years in the future. For example:

•We will have a working day of four hours.•Every home will have a video telephone.•People will live to be 100 years old or more.

•The ideas are then read out and discussed. Those that most of the class agree with may be written up on the board.

•Later, students may choose predictions that appeal to them and use them as the topic for a short essay.

(adapted from Ur, 1988/2009)

17

Structured communication

Fill in this chart about your classmates’ preferences

•Name •Favorite male singer

•Favorite female singer

•Favorite TV actor or actress

•Favorite TV series

•Favorite place to visit

18

Communicative language practice

•With your partner, practise asking and answering questions about what John and Rachel have to do and what they would like to do. (The cues could also be in the form of pictures.)

•John •Rachel•Obligations •Clean floors

•Wash windows•Empty the bins

•Type letters•Answer the telephone•Do photocopying

•Desires •Go to evening school•Get a better job•Marry Fiona

•Earn more money•Take holiday abroad•Marry her boss

(adapted from Harmer, 1987)

19

Pre-communicative language practice

•In the examples below, look carefully at the position of the adverbs always, often, sometimes, usually, and never. What are the rules?

•We are usually hungry when we come home.•John is always late.•His parents were often tired in the evening.•I am never sure whether this word is correct.

•I sometimes go to the cinema on Fridays.•We never eat much in the morning.•Jane often arrives at school early.•They always come home late at night.

•They have never written to me again.•You can always come and visit me.•I will never know why he did it.•Pat has often seen him with two dogs.

20

Non-communicative learning

21

HighB: form-oriented but engaging

Form-

engagement

D: message-oriented and engaging

Message-oriented

A: form-oriented and boring

Low

oriented

C: message-oriented but boring

engagement

3. Task engagement

22

The communication - engagement matrix

Field A: form-oriented and not engaging, e.g. a boring drill

Field B: form-oriented and engaging, e.g. a word puzzle

Field C: message-oriented and not engaging, e.g. a role-play not related to Ss’ interests

Field D: message-oriented and engaging, e.g. a personalized role-play or discussion

Neither (or both) We need a broader, encompassing

conceptual framework which will orient us in creating experiences that are:◦ real and meaningful to learners, and◦ help them towards fulfilling their communicative

needs The framework may be called

‘communication-oriented language teaching’ or ‘COLT’ (Littlewood, 2014)

◦ meaningful and motivating, and ◦ lead learners to fulfil their communicative needs

This broader approach may be called simply ‘communication-oriented language teaching’ or ‘COLT’ (Littlewood, 2014)

Task-based or task-supported teaching?

23

Allwright, D. & Hanks, J. (2009). The developing learner: An introduction to exploratory practice. Basingstoke: Palgrave MacMillan.

Butler, Y.G. (2011). The implementation of communicative and task-based language teaching in the Asia-Pacific Region. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 31, 36-57.

Carless, D. (2009). Revisiting the TBLT versus P-P-P Debate: Voices from Hong Kong. Asian Journal of English Language Teaching, 19, 49-66.

Carless, D. (2012). Task-based language teaching in Confucian-heritage settings: Prospects and challenges. On Task, 2, 1, 4-8. Ellis, R. (2009). Task-based language teaching: Sorting out the misunderstandings. International Journal of Applied Linguistics,

19, 3, 221-246. Estaire, S. & Zanon, J. (1994). Planning classwork: A task-based approach. Oxford: MacMillan Heinemann. Harmer, J. (1987). Teaching and learning grammar. London: Longman. Hiep, P.H. (2007). Communicative language teaching: Unity within diversity. ELT Journal, 61, 3, 193-201. Ho, W. K. & Wong, R.Y.L. (Eds.). (2004). English language teaching in East Asia today. Singapore: Eastern Universities Press. Jeon, J.H. (2009). Key issues in applying the communicative approach in Korea: Follow up after 12 years of implementation.

English Teaching, 64, 1, 123-150. Kumaravadivelu, B. (2006). Understanding language teaching: From method to postmethod. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Littlewood, W. (2007). Communicative and task-based language teaching in East Asian classrooms. Language Teaching, 40, 3,

243-249. Littlewood, W. (2014). Communication-oriented language teaching: Where are we now? Where do we go from here? Language

Teaching, 47, 3, 349-362. Ribé, R. & Vidal, N. (1993). Project work: Step by step. Oxford, Heinemann. Thornbury, S. (2011). Language teaching methodology. In J. Simpson (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of applied linguistics

(185-199). London: Routledge. Ur, P. (1988/2009). Grammar practice activities. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Vidal, N. (1996). Teach your teacher music. Madrid: Alhambra Longman. Wang, Q. (2007). The National Curriculum changes and their effects on English language teaching in the People’s Republic of

China. In J. Cummins & C. Davison (Eds.), International handbook of English language teaching (pp. 87-105). Boston, MA : Springer Science & Business Media. Online access via SpringerLink.

References

24

25

Some key issues for context-specific approaches to COLT

Optimal combinations of analytic and experiential strategies.

How to structure classroom interaction more effectively (also without direct teacher control).

How to deepen the content of L2 communication in the classroom.

Appendix

The role of the L1 as a resource in the language classroom

How to create a rich L2 environment in the classroom.

How to create better links between practice, theory and research.

Some key issues for context-specific approaches to COLT

26

Appendix (cont.)