An investigation into the effectiveness of communicative tasks in speaking classes for navigational students at Duyen Hai Vocational College

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST - GRADUATE STUDIES




NGUYỄN THỊ THU THỦY




AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE EFFECTIVENESS OF
COMMUNICATIVE TASKS IN SPEAKING CLASSES
FOR NAVIGATIONAL STUDENTS
AT DUYEN HAI VOCATIONAL COLLEGE

(Nghiên cứu tính hiệu quả của Nhiệm vụ giao tiếp
trong lớp học kỹ năng Nói
cho sinh viên ngành Điều khiển Tàu biển,
trường Cao đẳng nghề Duyên Hải)

Minor Programme Thesis


English Teaching Methodology
60 14 10

HANOI - 2010
VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST - GRADUATE STUDIES



NGUYỄN THỊ THU THỦY


AN INVESTIGATION INTO THE EFFECTIVENESS OF
COMMUNICATIVE TASKS IN SPEAKING CLASSES
FOR NAVIGATIONAL STUDENTS
AT DUYEN HAI VOCATIONAL COLLEGE

(Nghiên cứu tính hiệu quả của Nhiệm vụ giao tiếp
trong lớp học kỹ năng Nói
cho sinh viên ngành Điều khiển Tàu biển,
trường Cao đẳng nghề Duyên Hải)

Minor Programme Thesis


Major: English Teaching Methodology
Code: 60 14 10
Supervisor: NGUYEN TUAN ANH, M.A

HANOI - 2010
v








DECLARATION
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
ABSTRACT
List of Figures and Tables and Abbreviations
Table of contents
PART A: INTRODUCTION
I. Rationale
II. Aims
III. Research questions
IV. Scope of the study
V. Methodology
PART B: DEVELOPMENT
CHAPTER I: LITERATURE REVIEW
I. An overview of Communicative Language Teaching
I.2. An overview of Speaking and Oral communication in CLT
I.2.1. Speaking in Communicative Language Teaching

I.2.3. Characteristics of a successful speaking activity
I.3. Communicative tasks
I.3.1. Definition of communicative tasks
I.3.1.1. Definitions of tasks
I.3.1.2. Definitions of communicative tasks
I.3.1.3. Implications for task design
I.3.1.4. Topic choices
I.3.2. Components of communicative tasks
I.3.2.1. Goals
I.3.2.2. Input
I.3.2.3. Activities
Page
i
ii
iii
iv
v
1
1
1
2
2
3
3
3
3
5
5
5
6

6
6
8
8
9
9
9
10
11
vi

I.3.2.3.1. Activities’ characteristics
I.3.2.3.2. Activity types
I.3.2.4. Teacher role
I.3.2.5. Learner role
I.3.2.6. Settings
I.3.3. Summary
CHAPTER II: METHODOLOGY
II.1. Subjects
II.2. Data collection instruments
II.3. Procedure
CHAPTER III: DATA PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS
III.1. The teacher survey result
III.1.1. Teacher’s choice of communicative task activities
III.1.2. Achievements teachers gain in using communicative tasks
III.1.3. The way teachers monitor the communicative tasks
III.1.4. Teachers’ method(s) of giving instruction
III.1.5. Teachers’ feedback and correction
III.1.6. Teachers’ difficulties in conducting communicative tasks
III.2. The student survey result

III.2.1. Students’ frequency of communicative task activities
III.2.2. Students’ interest in each kind of communicative task activities
III.2.3. Students’ evaluation of communicative task activities
III.2.3.1. Students’ evaluation of the suitability with competency level of
communicative task activities
III.2.3.2. Students’ evaluation of Encouragement to extend speaking time of
communicative task activities
III.2.3.3. Students’ evaluation of Encouragement to peer communication of
communicative task activities
III.2.4. Students’ comments on teacher’s class activities
III.2.5. Students’ suggestions to conduct communicative task activities


11
12
14
15
16
17
20
20
21
24
26
26
26
26
28
29
29

30
30
30
31
31
32

32

33

33
34



vii

CHAPTER IV: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS
IV.1. Findings
IV.1.1. The effectiveness of using communicative tasks in speaking classes for
navigational students at Duyen Hai Vocational College
IV.1.2. Existing problems affecting the effectiveness of using CT in speaking
classes
IV.1.3. Possible reasons affecting the effectiveness in using communicative
tasks in speaking classes to navigation students
IV.1.3.1. Teachers’ inexperience
IV.1.3.2. Facility and material shortages
IV.1.3.3. The heavily grammar-oriented syllabus
IV.1.3.4. Large classes

IV.2. Pedagogical implication and suggestions
IV.2.1. Pedagogical implication
IV.2.1.1. Task preparation
IV.2.1.2. Task implementing
IV.2.1.3. Task evaluation diary
IV.2.2. Some suggested communicative task activities to teach speaking
IV.2.2.1. Role-play and dialogue activities
IV.2.2.1.1. Model
IV.2. 2.1.2. Sample lesson 1: Mechanical Role-play
IV.2.2. 2. Problem solving
IV.2.2.2.1. Model
III.2.2.2.2. Sample lesson 2: Giving opinions
IV.2.2.3. Discussions and decisions
IV.2.2.3.1. Model
IV.2.2.3.2. Sample lesson 3: Discussions
PARTC: CONCLUSION
1. Conclusion
2. Limitations of the study
3. Suggestions for further study
PART D: REFERENCES
35
35

35

36

36
36
36

37
37
38
38
38
39
39
39
39
39
40
40
40
41
42
42
42
43
43
43
44
45
viii

APPENDIX
APPENDIX 1: Questionnaires for Teachers I
APPENDIX 2: Questionnaires for Students IV
APPENDIX 3: Class observation VI
APPENDIX 4: Unit 5 – Meeting with an agent VII
APPENDIX 5: Unit 6 – Manning VIII

APPENDIX 6: IMO CREW LIST IX
APPENDIX 7: EMERGENCY CHECKLIST – FIRE ON BOARD X
APPENDIX 8: Unit 100 – Fire fight drill XI

I
IV
VI
VII
VIII
IX
X
XI

iv

List of Figures, and Tables, and Abbreviations
1. Figures
Figure 1. Teachers’ choice of CTA
Figure 2. Teachers’ method(s) of giving instruction
Figure 3. Students’ frequency of CTA
Figure 4. Students’ evaluation of the suitability with competency level of CTA
Figure 5. Students’ evaluation of Encouragement to extend speaking time of CTA
Figure 6. Students’ evaluation of Encouragement to peer communication of CTA

2. Tables
Table 1. Achievements teachers gain in using communicative tasks
Table 2. Teachers’ way to monitor CTA
Table 3. Teachers’ feedback and correction
Table 4. Teachers’ difficulties in conducting CTA
Table 5. Students’ interest in different kinds of CTA

Table 6. Students’ comments on teacher’s class activities
Table 7. Students’ suggestion to using CTA in classroom

3. Abbreviations
CLT: Communicative Language Teaching
CT: Communicative task
CTA: Communicative task activities
ELT: English Language Teaching
ESP: English Specific for Purposes
L2: second language


1



PART A: INTRODUCTION

I. Rationale
Among English eager-learning ones, Navigation students can be counted for who consider
English a tool of work and a step to promotion. Firstly, Deck cadets, their title when
navigation students go to work on board, are in charge of radio communication on ship. The
fate as well as the success of a vessel depends on communicative skills of Deck seamen. A
mistake while communicating with the Engine Room, or other vessel in traffic, even a
minor wrong order, possibly leads to the damage of the ship, a collision and the shipwreck
in the worst situation. Secondly, English competence helps deck cadets learn their real jobs
on board a ship, for all instructions on ship are made in English. Seamen‟s jobs are varied
from ship to ship, the knowledge they learn at college cannot meet the demands. Thus, they
will be taught again to perform their tasks well. It also means they will be made signed off
once they are not able to communicate in English. Last but seemingly not least,

incompetence at communicating in English is somehow a big obstacle in their promotion.
The examinations to achieve officer rank are in oral English form. The higher rank they
want to achieve, the better at communicating in English they should be.
However, the real situation of the teaching and learning of English in general and speaking
skill in particular somehow do not go together with the life of navigation students. The
traditional methods of teaching are still widely used. Grammar-Translation method, for
example, still outnumbers the classroom time. Students, hence, have very few chances to
learn speaking in class. Furthermore, topics and exercises for speaking are not inspiring
enough for students to take part in the lesson actively. Besides, the not-really-fully oral
examination demotivates students to learn speaking attentively. These lead to the fact of
poor communicative abilities in spoken language among students.
As an ESP teacher, Navigation major, these problems challenge also encourage me to find
activities to improve navigation students‟ speaking skill. Hence, I choose: “An investigation
into the effectiveness of communicative tasks in speaking classes for Navigational
students at Duyen Hai Vocational College” as the topic for my thesis.
II. Aims
My study aims at:
1. Investigating the real situation, focusing mainly on the effectiveness, of using
communicative tasks in speaking classes for navigation students at Duyen Hai Vocational
College find out the achievement, advantages and problems that teachers and students
encounter in teaching and learning speaking.
2



2. Offering some useful suggestions of using communicative tasks to improve speaking
skill to navigation students.
III. Research questions
In my research, I would like to deal with three research questions:
1. How effectively are communicative tasks used in speaking classes to navigational

students at Duyen Hai Vocational College?
2. How effective are their communicative tasks from DVCOL ESP teachers‟ point of view?
3. How effective are their communicative tasks from DVCOL navigational students‟ point
of view?
IV. Scope of the study
In my thesis, I would like to investigate the advantages of using communicative tasks as
activities to teach speaking to navigation students at Duyen Hai Vocational College. There
are two reasons affecting my choice of this frame. Firstly, these activities, which are based
on the students‟ demand for the active learning, possibly motivate students to make effort to
speak. Besides, communicative task activities are various and flexible, the teacher can have
a lot of choices to find some suitable with students‟ need and interest. Last but not least,
navigation students at Duyen Hai Vocational College have had chances to experience some
kinds of communicative activities before, thus, they can provide me some useful
information about the use of these activities in vocational college. Also, it would be
convenient for me when I can take advantage of my teaching time at the vocational college
to carry out questionnaires for the research purpose. Their opinions will help me have an
overall view of how communicative tasks are used in speaking classes effectively.
V. Methodology
To gain the fulfillment of the aims, qualitative and quantitative methods are chosen for the
study. Comments, remarks, comparison, suggestions and conclusions are based on factual
research, observation, experience and discussion. The most important techniques are a
cautious data collection and sharp comparison before leading to a conclusion. Data for
analysis in this study are gained through the following sources:
- Survey questionnaire
- Interviews and discussion.
- Observation
The method can be described in a procedure of data collecting – data analysis – conclusion.
3

PART B: DEVELOPMENT

CHAPTER I
LITERATURE REVIEW
I. An overview of Communicative Language Teaching
Founded later than the other methods and approaches in English language teaching (ELT),
Communicative Language Teaching (CLT), however, is recognised as a prominent
theoretical model in ELT and it is accepted by many applied linguistics and teachers as one
of the effective approaches.
As defined by Richards (1986), CLT is “an approach to foreign or second language teaching
which emphasizes that the goal of language learning is communicative competence”.
„Communicative competence‟, in Hymes‟s theory (1972), is defined as what a speaker
needs to know in order to communicatively competent in a speech community. In his view,
a person who acquires communicative competence acquires both knowledge and ability for
language use with respect to „knowing when and how to say what to whom‟ (Larsen-
Freeman 2000)
Savignon (2002) in her work of „Communicative curriculum design for the 21
st
century‟
stated that “By definition, CLT puts the focus on the learner”. Larsen-Freeman (2000) also
claims the goal of CLT is “to enable students to communicate in the target language”.
It can be referred from these points of view that CLT‟s important goal is learners‟
communicative competence which has great concern with oral communication skill. This
matter will be in much closer analysis in the next presentation as the basic background
theory for the thesis.
At the level of language theory, CLT has a rich, if somewhat eclectic, theoretical base.
According to Richards and Rodgers (1996), CLT has some of the characteristics of this
communicative view of language as follow:
1. Language is a system for the expression of meaning

2. The primary function of language is for interaction and communication.
3. The structure of language reflects its functional and communicative uses
4. The primary units of language are not merely its grammatical and structural features, but
categories of functional and communicative as exemplified in discourse.
These characteristics not only acknowledge the interdependence of language and
communication of CLT, but reveal that meaning plays an undeniably important part in CLT.
Meaning, according to Larsen-Freeman (2000), is derived from the written word through an
interaction between the reader and the writer, just as oral communication becomes
4



meaningful through negotiation between speaker and listener. CLT allows learners to
acquire the linguistic means to perform different kinds of functions. Hence, in CLT,
“meaning is paramount” (Finocchiaro and Brumfit 1983).
In the light of language theory, Nunan (1991) characterises CLT as:
1. An emphasis on learning to communicate through interaction in the target language
2. The introduction of authentic texts into the learning situation
3. The provision of opportunities for learners to focus, not only on language but also on the
learning process itself
4. An enhancement of the learner‟s own personal experiences as important contributing
elements to classroom learning
5. An attempt to link classroom language learning with language activities outside the
classroom
Highlighted in his state, materials are also one important aspect which should be taken into
accounts of CLT. In attempt to make claims for communicative materials, McDonough and
Christopher Shaw (1993) extract and adapt some statements taken from various standards
published materials as follows:
1. „for students interested in using language rather than learning more about structure…
students learn to use the appropriate language they need for communicating in real life.

2. „… is a dynamic, functionally-based coursebook. It is an intensely practice book, giving
the students opportunity for thorough and meaningful rehearsal of the English they will
need for effective communication‟
3. „… teacher students to communicate effectively by understanding and controlling the
relationship between language forms and functions‟
4. „… places emphasis on developing skills of discourse within a wide range
communicative settings. It actively trains the learner in important discourse functions…
All the language practice is presented in real-life contexts and related to the learner‟s
own experience.‟
(extracted and adapted by McDonough and Christopher Shaw 1993)
They all show a typical characteristic of CLT which is defined as “the use of authentic
materials” (Larsen-Freeman 2000). Though they are claims for materials, they somehow
reveal, rather fully and comprehensively, some typical characteristics as well as the ultimate
goal of CLT, which is communicative competence. They also emphasize the authenticity as
the value of effective communications, which will be more closely discussed in the next
part of this Chapter.

5



I.2. An overview of Speaking and Oral communication in CLT
I.2.1. Speaking in Communicative Language Teaching
Speaking is an important skill that each language learner wants to master. Ur (1996) refers
to people who know a language as “speakers” of that language, as if speaking includes all
other kinds of knowledge. Nunan (1989) shares the same opinion “to most people,
mastering the art of speaking is the single most important aspect of learning a second or
foreign language”. From these points of view, it cannot be denied that learning speaking
appears to be the first and foremost goal of all foreign language learners. As a result,
teaching speaking has been in concern of many pedagogic approaches, especially of

Communicative Language Teaching or Communicative Approach. The communicative
approach makes sure that the interactions which take place in the classroom are replications
of, or necessary prerequisites for, a communicative operation. The focus changes from the
accurate production of isolated utterances to the fluent selection of appropriate utterances in
communication.
In deeper view of Speaking and oral communication, Brown and Yule (1983) suggest that
teachers concerned with teaching the spoken language must confront the following types of
questions:
- What is the appropriate form of spoken language to teach?
- From the point of view of pronunciation, what is a reasonable model?
- How important is pronunciation?
- Are those structures which are described in standard grammars the structures which our
students should be expected to produce when they speak English?
- How is it possible to give students any sort of meaningful practice in producing spoken
English?
Obviously, speaking is the skill which generally has to be learned and practiced. Most
language teaching is concerned with developing skills, interactional exchanges in which the
learners is only required to make one or two utterance at a time.
In short, the success of teaching speaking is measured by the students‟ ability to make a
conversation in the target language. It is the learners‟ ability to produce accurate sentences
and connect isolated and appropriate utterances in communication.
I.2.3. Characteristics of a successful speaking activity
According to Nunan (1989), a successful oral communication involves developing:
- The ability to articulate phonological features of the language comprehensibly;
- Mastery of stress, rhythm, intonation patterns;
- An acceptable degree of fluency;
6

- Transactional and interpersonal skills;
- Skills in taking short and long speaking turns;
- Skills in the management of interaction;
- Skills in negotiating meaning;
- Conversational listening skills (successful conversations require good listeners as well as
good speakers);
- Skills in knowing about and negotiating purposes for conversations;
- Using appropriate conversational formulae and fillers.
Ur (1996), in the same point of view, presents his idea of a successful speaking activity
which has characteristics as follows:
- Learners talk a lot: The first criteria to evaluate if a speaking activity is successful or not
is the students‟ talking time. The standard speaking activity is the one in which students talk
most of the time while there is very little teacher‟s talk or pauses.
- Participation is even: Not only do some talkative members of the class but all students
have chance to speak. In other word, their contribution to the activity is equal.
- Motivation is high: It means that the topic should be interesting enough to attract
students. They want to involve in the activities because they have something new to say
about it or would like to contribute to achieving the task objective.
- Language is of an acceptable level: In these exercises, students can express themselves in
utterances that are relevant, easily comprehensible to each other and of an acceptable level
of accuracy.
In short, a speaking activity is considered successful when it can involve all students and
motivate them to use the target language to express their ideas. Teachers only play the role
of facilitator, a conductor and a guide in the teaching and learning process. Also, it raises an
urge for appropriate tasks in speaking classes to achieve task objective. Therefore, the
theory of tasks, with the focus on communicative tasks, will be presented in the next part.
I.3. Communicative tasks
I.3.1. Definition of communicative tasks
I.3.1.1. Definitions of tasks
First and foremost, „task‟ must be made clear by the term itself.

- Tasks defined as a non-technical, non-linguistic one
According to Long (1985):
… [a task is] a piece of work undertaken for oneself or for others, freely or for some
reward. Thus, examples of tasks include painting a fence, dressing a child, filling out a
form, buying a pair of shoes, making an airline reservation, borrowing a library book,
7



taking a driving test, typing a letter, weighing a patient, sorting letters, taking a hotel
reservation, writing a cheque, finding a street destination and helping someone across a
road. In other words, by „task‟ is meant the hundred and one things people do in everyday
life, at work, at play, and in between.
(Long 1985:89)
There are two main points necessary to be highlighted in this definition. Firstly, some of the
examples provided may well not involve language. Secondly, as the result, it raises a major
problem with the concept of „task‟ as a unit of analysis with the concern of its boundaries.
- Tasks defined in pedagogical perspective
According to Richards, Platt and Weber (1986),
… An activity or action which is carried out as the result of processing or understanding
language (i.e. as a response). For example, drawing a map while listening to a tape,
listening to an instruction and performing a command, may be referred to as tasks. Tasks
may or may not involve the production of language. A task usually requires the teacher to
specify what will be regarded as successful completion of the task. The use of variety if
different kinds of tasks 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 of language for its own sake.
(Richards, Platt and Weber 1986)
In this definition, tasks are defined in terms of what the learner will do in the classroom
rather in the outside world. In other word, defining „task‟ in this way somehow does not

fully gain its communicative aspect. Tasks are used as a teaching tool in the boundary of
classroom, not a learning method helping learners manage in their real communication in
real life.
Breen also states that:
… „Task‟ is … assumed to refer to a range of work-plans which have the overall purpose of
facilitating language learning - from the simple and brief exercise type, to more complex
and lengthy activities such as group problem-solving or simulations and decisions making.
(Breen 1987: 23)
Defining „task‟ in this way, Breen implies that the tasks involving communicative language
use in which the user‟s attention is focused on meaning rather than linguistic structure. This
idea can be seen in similarity with Skehan‟s statement:
“A task is an activity in which meaning is primary, there is a communication problem to
solve, and the task is closely related to real-world activities”
(Skehan 1998)
8



This definition points out some important characteristics of a task, such as its focus on
meaning, its involvement of communication and its requirement for authenticity. However,
task, in his point of view, like the authors‟ mentioned previously, is like a pedagogic task
which provides a means of giving learners opportunities for production. Furthermore, they
do not point out clearly a task‟s focus on learners. Learner-centered is one of typical
features of CLT; it should be reflected in definition of a task to be a completely
communicative task.
I.3.1.2. Definitions of communicative tasks
[The communicative task] as a piece of classroom work which involve learners in
comprehending, manipulating, producing or interacting in the target language while
their attention is principally focused on meaning rather than form.
(Nunan 1989)

I would like to state my agreement on this definition in term of the communicative task. The
task, as he claims, is recognised as focused on meaning, communicativeness, authenticity
and learner-centeredness. The task, therefore, has a sense of completeness, being able to
stand alone as communicative act in its own right. Nunan‟s definition of the communicative
task can be regarded as an appropriate one.
When a communicative task, from now on can be stated as „task‟ sometimes, is fully
defined, it leads to a request of task design and an analysis of task components. It is the very
important knowledge to provide a supporting background for an investigation of a task
implementation‟s effectiveness, which is the ultimate goal of this study.
I.3.1.3. Implications for task design
As pointed out in the previous part, a task must be designed with its focus on meaning,
communicativeness, authenticity and learner-centeredness to achieve its fulfillment. I,
therefore, with reference to the view of Nunan (1989), would like to list out three matters
may concern in designing tasks:
1. Firstly, the extent to which it is necessary to focus on linguistic form.
In other word, a linguistic focus, in the form of grammatical consciousness-raising
activities, should be incorporated into task design. (Rutherford 1987)
2. Secondly, the examination of the macroskills relates to the real-world uses the learner has
for the target language.
3. Finally, the learners‟ various needs.
The various uses which a learner has (or, in the case of some foreign language learners,
might potentially have) for learning another language can be revealed through various
forms of need analysis. Tasks are then justified on the grounds that they will help the
9



learner develop the skills they will need for carrying out real-world communicative tasks
beyond the classroom.
(Nunan 1989)

When the former ones deal with language competence matter, the latter one weighs its
concern of personal psychology issue. They all raise an urge of an appropriate choice of
topics, for a suitable topic is an initial step into a success in using communicative tasks.
I.3.1.4. Topic choices
Though this issue is not in concern of task design, as stated, its role is undeniable. Actually,
topic choice can be seen as a key element to the success in task implementation. As
Richards (2002) suggests, chosen topics should be the ones „self- and peer-initiated‟, and
made free to choose for learners, and „socially relevant‟. He argues that choosing topics in
these ways can inspire as well as create „motivation‟, „enthusiasm‟ and „opportunities‟ to
help learners fully engage in the task. Though there are many other arguments on this
matter, Richards‟ suggestions can be viewed as relatively reliable and comprehensive. It
will be used as suggestions to better achieve the task application‟s effectiveness in speaking
classes, which is referred in the last chapter.
I.3.2. Components of communicative tasks
Considering whether communicative tasks are used effectively or not is intensive purpose of
my investigation. However, a task definition and some implications for task design and
topic choice are insufficient to achieve the goal. I, therefore, study on this issue –
„components of communicative tasks‟, aiming at picturing a valued framework on which I
rely to design my questionnaires as well as analyse the investigation at my college.
In appreciation of Nunan‟s definition, I would like to claim an agreement on his framework
of analysing a communicative task which involves its goals, input data, activities, settings
and roles.
Goals


Teacher role
Input
TASKS

Learner role

I.3.2.1. Goals
Nunan (1989) claims goals as „the vague general intentions behind any given learning task‟.
He simply defines the goal as a question of “Why did you get learners to engage in Task
X?”. Also, Nunan (1989) lists out some basic characteristics of goals as follows:
Activities
Settings
A framework for analysing communicative tasks (Nunan 1989)
10



 Possibly related to a range of general outcomes (communicative, affective or cognitive)
or directly describe teacher or learner behavior.
 Not always explicitly stated, although they can be inferred from an examination of a
task.
 Rarely simply involved in one-to-one relationship between goals and tasks. In some
cases a complex task involving a range of activities might be simultaneously moving
learners towards several goals.
 not necessary mutually exclusive, and that there may be tasks which cover more than
one goal
(Nunan 1989)
Communicative goals are subcategorised into three goal areas:
1. Establishing and maintaining interpersonal relationships, and through this to exchange
information, ideas, opinions, attitudes and feelings, and to get things done.
2. Acquiring information from more or less „public‟ sources in the target language (e.g.
books, magazines, newspaper, brochures, documents, signs, notices, films, televisions,
slides, tape, radio, public announcements, lectures or written reports etc.) and using this

information in some way.
3. Listening to, reading, enjoying and responding to creative and imaginative uses of the
target language (e.g. stories, poems, songs, rhymes, drama) and, for certain learners,
creating them themselves.
(Adapted form Clark 1987: 226)
In the light of effectiveness, the first area can be used as a criterion to judge a
communicative task‟s effectiveness in a speaking class, for it is relevant to Nunan‟s (1989)
suggestions of a successful oral communication
I.3.2.2. Input
Referring input to the data forming the point of departure for the task, Nunan (1989)
suggests that input of communicative tasks can be derived from a wide range of sources.
The following provision from Hover (1986) can be used as reference of input:
Letters (formal/informal)
Calorie counter
Newspaper extracts
Recipe
Picture stories
Extract from a play
Telecom account
Weather forecast
Driver‟s licence
Diary
Missing person‟s declaration form
Bus timetable
Social security form
Housing request form
11

Business cards
Star signs
Memo note
Hotel entertainment programme
Photographs
Tennis court booking sheet
Family tree
Extracts from film script
Drawings
High school year book
Shopping lists
Note to a friend
Invoices
Seminar programme
Postcards
Newspaper reporter‟s notes
Hotel brochures
UK travel regulations
Passport photos
Curriculum vitae
Swop shop cards
Economic graphs
Street shop
Menu
This list, with its provided sources, quite looks like an extract of life. It matches the
demands of CLT for its authenticity. It, once again, highlights that input for a
communicative task must be as realistic as possible. Thus, a criterion to scale a
communicative task input is its capacity to prepare learners for coping with the language
they hear and read in the real world outside the classroom. (Nunan 1989)
I.3.2.3. Activities

Nunan (1989) states that: “Activities specify what learners will actually do with the input
which forms the point of departure for the learning task.”
Also, Johnson (1982) suggests: “Activities in which language is used for carrying out
meaningful tasks promote learning”
Both suggestions reveal the importance of activities as one of decisive factors in promoting
learning. Thus, a communicative task activity can be assessed as „effective‟ when it carries
out meaningful tasks.
I.3.2.3.1. Activities’ characteristics
Referring to activities‟ characteristics, Nunan (1989) lists out three ways as follows:
1. Authenticity, which means „parallel the „real world‟ as closely as possible‟ (Clarke and
Silberstein 1977). Nunan (1989) also makes it clear that „in carrying out the activities,
learners are required to practice skills which will be useful in the real world‟ to
distinguish activities‟ authenticity from input‟s authenticity.
2. Skill getting and skill using: This way, as Nunan (1989) argues, is related to the
traditional distinction between controlled practice activities and transfer activities. The
former involves learners‟ manipulating phonological and grammatical forms, and the
12



latter involves learners‟ applying their newly acquired mastery of linguistics forms to the
comprehension and production of communicative language
3. Accuracy and Fluency: Nunan (1989) reveals his agreement with Brumfit (1984) who
suggests accuracy and fluency are not opposites, but complementary in analysing an
activity. He also considers this way as „the degree of teacher/learner control inherent in
any activity‟.
Three ways are not in the same colour; however, they provide a necessary base on which an
analysis of activity effectiveness can be dependent.
I.3.2.3.2. Activity types
There are many researchers showing their concerns in this issue. For the limited frame of

this study, I would like to deal with two authors: Prabhu and Pattinson.
According to Prabhu (1987) three principal activity types are used: information gap,
reasoning gap, opinion gap. These are explained as follows:
1. Information-gap activity, which involves a transfer of given information from one person
to another – or from one form to another, or form one place to another – generally calling
for the decoding or encoding of information form or into language.
2. Reasoning-gap activity, which involves deriving some new information from given
information through processes of inference, deduction, practical reasoning, or a perception
of relationships or patterns.
3. Opinion-gap activity, which involves identifying and articulating a personal preference,
feeling, or attitude in response to a given situation.
(Prabhu 1987)
Pattison (1987) also proposes seven activities. These are as follows:
1. Questions and answers: These activities are based on the notion of creating an
information gap by letting learners make a personal and secret choice from a list of
language items which all fit into a given frame. The aim is for learners to discover their
classmates„ secret choices. This activity can be used to practice almost any structure,
function or notion.
2. Dialogues and role-plays: These can be wholly scripted or improvised. „If learners are
given some choice of what to say in their role-plays, they may aim to be achieved by
what they say in their role-plays, they may participate more willingly and learn more
thoroughly than when they are told to simply repeat a given dialogue in pairs.‟
3. Matching activities: Here, the task for learner is to recognise matching items, or to
complete pairs or sets. „Bingo‟, „Happy families‟ and „Split dialogues‟ (where learners
match given phrases) are examples of matching activities.
13



4. Communication strategies: These are activities designed to encourage learners to

practice communication strategies such as paraphrasing, borrowing or inventing words,
using gesture, asking for feedback, simplifying.
5. Pictures and picture stories: Many communication activities can be stimulated through
the use of pictures (e.g. spot the difference, memory test, sequencing pictures to tell a
story).
6. Puzzles and problems: Once again, there are many different types of puzzles and
problems. These require learners to „make guesses, draw on their general knowledge
and personal experience, use their imagination and test their powers of logical
reasoning‟.
7. Discussions and decisions: These require the learner to collect and share information to
reach a decision (e.g. to decide which items from a list are essential to have on a desert
island)
Of two authors‟ proposals, Pattison‟s seems more favourable, for its being detailed and
concrete. Moreover, following this way, teachers will have more options of activities to
choose. As a matter of fact, it has been applied widely at DVCOL. It is also a focus of my
investigation. Based on it, I would to find out whether these activities are used effectively
through the achievement which teachers and students claim to obtain. This, hence, leads to
an urge of having reliable criteria to judge.
As Nunan (1989), most tasks of any complexity involve more than one macroskill.
Secondly, it provides learners with opportunities to learn from auditory and visual
experiences, which enable them to develop flexibility in their learning styles and also to
demonstrate the optimal use of different learning strategies and behaviours for different
tasks. Not much different, but a little bit more explicit, Richards (2001) characterises an
effective interactive activity as „manipulating‟, „meaningful‟, „communicative‟, and suitable
to various communicative purposes. Specially, they should:
 be based on authentic or naturalistic source materials;
 enable learners to manipulate and practice specific features of language;
 allow learners to rehearse, in class, communicative skills they need in the real world;
 activate psycholinguistic processes of learning.
(Richards 2001)

These aspects discussed above can be all used as criteria to decide the effectiveness of a
communicative task.


14



I.3.2.4. Teacher role
„Role‟, as Nunan (1989), refers to the part that learners and teachers are expected to play in
carrying out learning tasks as well as the social and interpersonal relationships between the
participants. Meanwhile, Richards and Rodgers (1986) point out that teacher roles are
related to the following issues:
- The types of functions are expected to fulfill, e.g. whether that of practice director,
counselor or model
- The degree of control the teacher has over how learning takes place
- The degree to which teacher is responsible for content
- The interactional patterns that develop between teachers and learners
(Richards and Rodgers 1986)
Though defined in different ways, teacher role always stays a big concern of every language
class, especially in CLT. The development of CLT has had a drama effect on the roles that
learners are required to adopt. This is particularly true of oral interaction tasks. The roles of
teacher and learners are, in many ways, complementary. I agree with Nunan (1989) that
giving the learners a different role (such as greater initiative in the classroom) requires the
teacher to adopt a different role.
According to Breen and Candlin (1980), the teacher has three main roles in the
communicative classroom.
- As a facilitator of the communicative process
- As a participant
- As an observer and learner

As an advocator of effective teaching, Blum (1984) suggests a list which can be understood
as implications for teacher to function their role appropriately in communicative classes:
1. Instruction is guided by a preplanned curriculum
2. There are high expectations for student learning
3. Students are carefully oriented to lessons
4. Instruction is clear and focused
5. Learning progress is monitored closely
6. When students do not understand, they are retaught
7. Class time is used for learning
8. There are smooth and efficient classroom routines
9. Instructional groups formed in the classroom fit instructional needs (for settings)
10. Standards for classroom behavior are high
11. Personal interactions between teachers and students are positive
15



12. Incentive and rewards for students are used to promote excellence
Though these criteria is for a general effective teaching, it can be referred as some criteria to
scale the effectiveness of teacher role in Speaking class with the using of communicative
tasks. They can help to give the answer to the questions which role the teacher plays in his
speaking classes using communicative tasks, and to what extent his role contributes to the
effectiveness of his class.
I.3.2.5. Learner role
Like teacher role, learner role remains a great concern in every approach of language
teaching. It can be shown in the table followed:
Approach
Roles
1.
Oral/Situational

- Learner listens to teacher and repeats; no control over content
or methods
2.
Audiolingual
- Learner has little control; reacts to teacher direction; passive,
reactive role
3.
Communicative

- Learner has an active negotiative role; should contribute as
well as receive
4.
Total Physical
Response
- Learner is a listener and performer; little influence over content
and none or methodology
5.
The Silent Way
- Learner learn through systematic analysis; must become
independent and autonomous
6.
Communicative
Language Learning
- Learners are members of a social group or community; move
from dependence to autonomy as learning progresses
7.
The Natural
Approach
- Learners play an active role and have relatively high degree of
control over content language production

8.
Suggestopedia
- Learners are passive, have little control over content or
methods
Richards and Rodgers (1986)
This analysis, as Nunan (1989), demonstrates the wide variety of learner roles which are
possible in the language class, including:
- the learner is the passive recipient of outside stimuli;
- the learner is an interactor and negotiator who is capable of giving as well as taking;
- the learner is a listener and performer who has little control over the content of learning;
- the learner is involved in a process of personal growth;
- the learner is involved in a social activity, and the social and interpersonal roles of the
learner cannot be divorced from psychological learning processes;
16



- learners must take responsibility for their own learning, developing autonomy and skills
in learning-how-to-learn.
The last point, as Nunan (1989) argues, raises the important issue of learners developing an
awareness of themselves as learners. Especially in CLT, which is featured as leaner-
centered, learners are no longer inactive knowledge receivers. They are required to be
„adaptable, creative, inventive, and most of all independent‟ (Rubin and Thompson 1982).
To make it clearer, Rubin and Thompson (1982) also provide a list in detail as follows:
1. Finding your own way
2. Organising information about language
3. Being creative
4. Making your own opportunities
5. Learning to live with uncertainty
6. Using mnemonics

7. Making errors work
8. Using your linguistic knowledge
9. Letting the context help you
10. Learning the make intelligent guesses
11. Learning formalized routine
12. Learning production techniques
13. Using different styles of speech and writing
(Rubin and Thompson 1982)
Pointing out the learner role can reveal a matter of fact that the way learners function
themselves in language class can affect greatly on the effectiveness of the communicative
tasks in Speaking class. The effectiveness depends on whether and how successfully the
learner fulfills their role. Also, the satisfaction they gain in each speaking class using CT or
after every CT activity is a criterion to scales CT‟s success.
I.3.2.6. Settings
Nunan (1989) stated, “„Settings‟ refers to the classroom arrangements specified or implied
in the task, and it also requires consideration of whether the task is to be carried out wholly
or partly outside the classroom”.
Strevens (1987) suggests three particular benefits of using tasks as community resource:
- They provide learners with opportunities for genuine interactions which have a real-life
point to them;
- Learners can adopt communicative roles which bypass the teacher as intermediary;
- They can change the in-class role relationship between teacher and pupils.
17

This framework illustrates the different ways in which learners might be grouped physically
or arranged within the classroom. Classroom researchers such as Pica and Doughty (1985)
have offered evidence for the positive role of group work in promoting a linguistic
environment likely to assist L2 learning (Anderson and Lynch 1988).
In other word, class setting plays a role in forming the effectiveness of communicative tasks
in Speaking classes.
I.3.3. Summary
In this Chapter, a picture of Communicative Language Teaching, Speaking and Oral
Communication and Communicative tasks with their typical aspects have been captured.
The information from the study helps provide an over view of criteria of a communicative
task‟s effectiveness in Speaking class, which will be assessed through:
THE FRAMEWORK OF COMMUNICATIVE TASKS

Goals


Teacher role
Input

TASKS

Learner role
Activities


Settings
(Wright 1987: 58)
18



1. GOAL:
 Possibly related to a range of general outcomes (communicative, affective or cognitive)
or directly describe teacher or learner behavior.
 Not always explicitly stated, although they can be inferred from an examination of a
task.
 Rarely simply involved in one-to-one relationship between goals and tasks. In some
cases a complex task involving a range of activities might be simultaneously moving
learners towards several goals.
 not necessary mutually exclusive, and that there may be tasks which cover more than
one goal
2. INPUT:
Its capacity to prepare learners for coping with the language they hear and read in the
real world outside the classroom (Nunan 1989)
3. ACTIVITIES
 Characteristics: manipulating, meaningful, and communicative
 Types:
1. Questions and answers
2. Dialogues and role-plays

3. Matching activities
4. Communication strategies
5. Pictures and picture stories
6. Puzzles and problems
7. Discussions and decisions
4. TEACHER ROLE
 As a facilitator of the communicative process
 As a participant
 As an observer and learner
5. LEARNER ROLE
 Adaptable
 Creative
 Inventive
 Independent
6. SETTING
 They provide learners with opportunities for genuine interactions which have a real-life
point to them;