A study on the teachers' application of task-based method and the 10th form students' use of learning strategies in their listening lessons at Tran Phu High Sch

Vietnam national university, Hanoi
College of foreign languages
Department of Post-graduate Studies

đặng Thị Thu Thuỷ

A STUDY ON THE TEACHERS APPLICATION OF
TASK-BASED METHOD AND THE 10
TH
FORM
STUDENTS USE OF LEARNING STRATEGIES IN
THEIR LISTENING LESSONS
AT TRAN PHU HIGH SCHOOL IN VINH PHUC

NghiÊn cứu về việc áp dụng ph-ơng pháp
dạy học giao nhiệm vụ của giáo viên và việc sử
dụng các thủ thuật của học sinh lớp 10 trong các
bài học nghe tại tr-ờng T.H.P.T trần phú
- vĩnh phúc

M.A MINOR THESIS








FIELD: English Methodology
CODE: 601410

Hanoi, December 2008
Vietnam national university, Hanoi
College of foreign languages
Department of Post-graduate Studies

đặng Thị Thu Thuỷ

A STUDY ON THE TEACHERS APPLICATION OF
TASK-BASED METHOD AND THE 10
TH
FORM
STUDENTS USE OF LEARNING STRATEGIES IN
THEIR LISTENING LESSONS
AT TRAN PHU HIGH SCHOOL IN VINH PHUC

NghiÊn cứu về việc áp dụng ph-ơng pháp
dạy học giao nhiệm vụ của giáo viên và việc sử
dụng các thủ thuật của học sinh lớp 10 trong các
bài học nghe tại tr-ờng T.H.P.T trần phú
- vĩnh phúc

M.A MINOR THESIS

FIELD: English Methodology
CODE: 601410
SUPERVISOR: Dr. đỗ Tuấn Minh


Hanoi, December 2008

vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS

DECLARATION
i
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
ii
ABSTRACT
iii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
iv
LIST OF TABLES AND CHARTS
v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
vi
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION
1
I. Rationale
1
II. Aims and research questions of the study

2
II. Scopes of the study
2
IV. Methods of the study
2
V. Design of the study
2
CHAPTER II : THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
4
I. Innovations in language teaching method
4
I.1. Language teaching methods focusing on developing grammatical competence
5
I.2. Language teaching methods focusing on developing communicative
competence
6
I.3. Task-based Method – the strong version of CLT
10
II. Innovations in syllabus design
11
II.1. Synthetic syllabus versus analytic syllabus
12
II.2. Tasks in task-based syllabus
15
III. Theory in listening
17
III.1. Definition of listening
17
III.2. Classification of listening
18

III.3. Common methods in teaching listening
19
III.4. Three stages in a listening lesson
20
III.5. Foreign language learners’ listening problems
21
III.6. Foreign language learners’ listening comprehension strategies
22

vii
CHAPTER III: FINDINGS, DISCUSSIONS AND SOLLUTIONS
25
I. Methodology
25
II. Data analysis, findings and discussions
27
II.1. The students’ performance in listening lessons
27
II.2. The students’ preparation for listening lessons
28
II.3. The students’ motivation before listening
29
II.4. The student’s learning strategies used in listening lessons and their
experiences to listen effectively
30
II.5. The frequency of the teachers’ activities to motivate the students before
listening
32
II.6. The pre-listening activities
32

II.7. The frequency of using pair-work and group-work in listening lessons
33
II.8. The teachers’ treatment with listening tasks
34
II.9. The combination of reading, speaking, and writing skills in listening lessons
35
III. Some possible solutions
36
III.1. More effective warm-up activities
36
III.2. Facilitating the students with the language inputs before listening
37
III.3. More meaningful listening tasks
37
III.4. Using more pair-work and group-work in listening lessons
38
III.5. Using more reading, speaking and writing skills in listening lessons
38
III.6. The students’ better preparation before listening
39
III.7. The students’ better learning strategies in listening lessons
39
CHAPTER V: CONCLUSION
41
REFERENCES
I
APPENDIX I Survey questionnaire (for students)
III
APPENDIX II Survey questionnaire (for teachers)
V

APPENDIX III The tape-scripts of listening texts
VII
APPENDIX IV Different kinds of tasks in listening lessons
XVIII
APPENDIX V Class observations
XX

iv
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
CLT : Communicative Language Teaching
L1: First language
P-P-P: Presentation-Practice-Production
L2: Second language
SLA: Second Language Acquisition
TBM: Task-Based Method
TPHS: Tran Phu High School

v
LIST OF TABLES AND CHARTS
TABLES
Table 1: The students’ performance in listening lessons
Table 2: The students’ preparation for listening lessons
Table 3: The students’ learning strategies used in listening lessons
Table 4: The pre-listening activities
CHARTS
Chart 1: The students’ motivation before listening
Chart 2: The students’ learning experiences to listen effectively
Chart 3: The frequency of teachers’ activities to motivate the students before
listening
Chart 4: The frequency of using pair-work and group-work in listening lessons
Chart 5: The teachers’ treatment with listening tasks
Chart 6: The combination of reading, speaking and writing skills in listening
lessons

1
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION

I. RATIONALE
Together with the development of international relationships between Vietnam and
other countries in the world, the need to learn English in our country is sharply increasing.
English has become a compulsory subject in every Vietnamese school and university.
However, the fact in Vietnam shows that there is now not only an urgent lack of the number
of people speaking English fluently somewhere but also an impressive demand for the quality
of English teaching and learning in the whole Vietnamese education system. In order to solve
these problems, we have no alternation but to apply innovations to the process of teaching
and learning English in our country.
Theoretically, the innovations in second language (L2) teaching and learning over the
time have always based on the findings that come from Second Language Acquisition (SLA)
Research. Moreover, they can take place in two parallel directions: changing in teaching
method as well as in syllabus design. The theories also state that there must be a mutual
relationship between innovations in these two directions. They must be relevant to each other
to contribute to the success of language teaching and learning.
In the late twentieth century, we have witnessed the successful application of TBM in
Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) in many places all over world. In Vietnam, TBM
has gradually replaced traditional teaching methods. Together with the new textbook series, it
has resulted in outstanding outcomes in teaching and learning English, especially in improving
speaking and listening skills. However, we must confess that these outcomes are quite
different when we observe various English classes in Vietnam.

Being an English teacher at high school, I myself have seen not only the success of the
new method and the new textbook series but also the difficulties and sometimes failures when
applying them. One of these failures that attracts my most attention is my students‟ bad
performance in listening lessons. This explains why I choose to carry out a study on the use of
the new method in teaching listening for my students in this thesis, which is hopefully
designed to help my students to overcome the problems.

2
II. AIMS AND RESEARCH QUESTIONS OF THE STUDY
The study firstly aims to draw out the mutual relationship between the new method and
the new textbook which ensures the success of our lessons. In addition, the thesis is designed
to investigate the teachers‟ application of TBM and the 10
th
form students‟ use of learning
strategies in their listening lessons at TPHS in Vinh Phuc. Next, a comparison is made to test
whether the application of the new method here is relevant to the new textbook. Last but far
from least, the study is concluded with some solutions, which help these students improve
their listening skill.
In order to implement the study, two research questions are raised: (1) Whether the
teachers‟ application of TBM and the 10
th
form students‟ use of learning strategies are
effective in their listening lessons at TPHS in Vinh Phuc? and (2) Is there a close relevance
between the teaching methods used to teach listening for these students and the textbook?
III. SCOPES OF THE STUDY
Due to the time limit as well as the lack of knowledge on the part of the writer , it is
impossible to cover all aspects of teaching listening in this thesis. Therefore, my study will
only discuss the effect of using TBM in teaching listening, which is considered one the most
important factors contributing to the success of each lesson.
IV. METHODS OF THE STUDY

It is obvious that the thesis would not be in this form without qualitative method used
during the writing process. First of all, the data were collected from two survey questionnaires,
informal interviews with the teachers and classroom observations. The data, then, required
systematical classification to put them into different parts. Finally, logical contrastive analysis
was of great help.
V. DESIGN OF THE STUDY
While this thesis generally presents the topic: “A Study on the Effect of Using TBM in
Teaching Listening for 10
th
Form Students at TPHS in Vinh Phuc”, each of the chapters
carries out its own task far different from that of the others. The first chapter states rationales
for, aims, scope, method and organization of the study. The theoretical background in the
chapter II covers issues most relevant to the topic. The next one focuses on analyzing figures

3
and giving out some findings. We also find in this chapter some solutions to solve the given
problems. Finally, the forth chapter concludes the study.

4
CHAPTER II: THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

Before studying the teachers‟ application of TBM and the 10
th
form students‟ use of
learning strategies in their listening lessons at TPHS in Vinh Phuc, we should now have an
overview of changes in language teaching and learning through out the history with two
directions: innovations in language teaching methods and innovations in syllabus design.
I. INNOVATIONS IN LANGUAGE TEACHING METHOD
It is necessary now to distinguish these three confusing concepts: approach, method
and technique. A scheme was proposed by Edward Anthony (1963, pp.63-67). In his view
point, approach is at the top, method is in the middle and technique is at the bottom of a
vertically hierarchical line. Approach determines method, then method determines technique.
Here three concepts is distinguished clearly. However, the limited point of this distinction is
that the hierarchical line only goes downward. The determination is only in one direction,
there is no interaction between these three concepts.
Richards and Rodgers (1986, pp.18-20) make this distinction quite clear. In their point

of view, approaches are views of the nature of language or language teaching. An approach is
axiomatic. Whereas method is an overall plan for the orderly presentation of language
material. A method is procedural. No part of a method contradicts and all of the method is
based upon a selected approach. And lastly, techniques are the actual activities the teachers
do in the classroom. In the expression „innovations in language teaching methods‟, the term
„method‟ is used with a broad meaning so that it takes over other terms.
Looking at the flowered development of SLA Research and the history of language
teaching methods in the past few decades, we can find that there is a close relationship
between researches in SLA and the changes in language teaching methods, that is, the latter
has reflected recognition of changes both in the kind of proficiency learners need and in theory
of the nature of language and language learning, resulted from the former.
Based on the proficiency learners need, we can classify language teaching methods
through out the history into two groups. The first group helps to develop grammatical
competence and the second one communicative competence.

5
I.1. Language teaching methods focusing on developing grammatical competence
Most of traditional teaching methods belong to the first group which concentrates on
the development of grammatical competence, that is the ability to recognize and produce the
grammar with a set of distinctive forms and rules, the lexicon and the phonology of a language
and the ability to use them effectively in producing grammatically or phonologically accurate
sentences in the target language.
Focusing on developing grammatical competence, traditional language teaching
methods have undergone two different periods: focusing on meaning and on forms. The
former aims at developing learners‟ proficiency of reading comprehension and sentence
writing, whereas the latter pays much more attention to the rules and structures.
The Grammar-Translation Method is one example of teaching language focus on
meaning. With this method, the students‟ native language (L1) is the medium of instruction. It
is used to explain new items and to enable comparisons to be made between L2 and L1.
Furthermore, grammar is taught deductively and explicitly, that is, by presentation and study

of grammar rules, which are then practiced through translation exercises. From these aspects,
we can see the distinctive feature of the method, i.e. the sentence is the basic unit of teaching
and language practice and much of the lesson is devoted to translating sentences into and out
of the target language.
Although this method has been used widely and considered a very effective one, it still
has some drawbacks. A lot of SLA researchers have shown that numerous errors appearing in
the process of L2 acquisition are the result of L1 transfer. That is because the two languages
are not the same, so we cannot have a proper translation between them. In addition, when the
method has been put into practice it has only been proved effective for the very beginners of
language teaching. All these problems cause the Grammar-Translation Method in particular
and language teaching methods focusing on meaning in general to change.
The second period of language teaching methods, focusing on forms, is evident in the
Traditional Approach. Under the light of this approach, language learning is a process of
accumulating distinct entities. Learners are required to treat language primarily as an object to
be studied and practiced bit by bit and to function as students rather than as users of the

6
language. Grammar is also taught explicitly. Moreover, each lesson is traditionally carried out
in three fixed steps : presentation, practice and production (P-P-P).
Although the procedure with three steps P-P-P has been quite famous and applied in
many English classes all over the world, Traditional Approach in particular and teaching
methods focusing on forms in general have still revealed some unreasonable aspects. Firstly,
the approach does not motivate learners‟ creation. The rules and the forms are quite fixed and
it is the teacher but not the learners who decide which ones to teach and how the lesson takes
place in the classroom. Secondly, the aim of the method is to ensure the accuracy of the rules
and structures but not the meaning and the actual use of language in communication. That is
why there is a restriction in the use of language outside the classroom.
From the investigation of the two above language teaching methods, we find that
concentrating on developing only grammatical competence will not provide the learners with
the ability to produce sentences or utterances which are appropriate to the context or to

interpret perfectly such utterances.
I.2. Language teaching methods focusing on developing communicative competence
Now, it is time for us to discuss the second group of teaching methods which
concentrates on developing communicative competence.
The term communicative competence, which was coined by Dell Hymes (1971, p.96),
is the development of Noam Chomsky‟s notion of linguistic competence cited in Ellis (1994,
p.12). Chomsky defines linguistic competence as the ability of a speaker-hearer to speak and
understand language in a grammatically correct manner. In other words, linguistic competence
is the use of grammatical rules of a language in communication. Hymes then expands on
Chomsky‟s view by considering the social factors of a culture‟s language. So, communicative
competence, in Hyme‟s definition, is the use of not only grammatical rules of a language but
also social language rules in communication.
According to Hymes (1971, p.98) communicative competence consists of four
components: grammatical competence, discourse competence, sociolinguistic competence and
strategic competence. He states that the first two components, which constitute linguistic
competence, reflect the use of the linguistic system itself and the last two, which constitute

7
pragmatic competence, define the functional aspects of communication.
Now, let us consider these four components in detail. Grammatical competence is
knowledge of lexical items and of rules of morphology, syntax, sentence-grammar semantics
and phonology. It is the competence that we associate with mastering the linguistic code of a
language. Next, discourse competence is considered the complement of grammatical
competence in many ways. It is the ability we have to come at sentences in stretches of
discourse and to form a meaningful whole out of a series of utterance. The third component,
sociolinguistic competence, is defined as the knowledge of socio-cultural rules of language
and of discourse. This type of competence reveals an understanding of the social context in
which language is used, of the roles of the participant, of the information they share and of
the function of the interaction. Only in a full context of this kind can judgments be made on
the appropriateness of a particular utterance. Finally, strategic competence is the verbal and

nonverbal strategies that may be called into action to compensate for breakdowns in
communication due to performance variable or due to insufficient competence.
We can explain the shift from language teaching methods focusing on develop
grammatical competence to those concentrating on developing communicative competence
under the lights of the researches in SLA. Firstly, many researchers such as Krashen (1981,
p.72) makes a clear distinction between acquisition, that is, the subconscious process of
picking up a language through exposure and learning, that is, the conscious process of
studying a language. These researches also indicate that acquisition is much promoted in a
communicative classroom where students are exposed to continuous communication. Besides,
Krashen‟s Comprehensible Hypothesis (1981, p.206) states that an important condition for
language acquisition to occur is that the acquirer must understand the inputs and the inputs
must be comprehensible, i.e. slightly beyond his or her current level of proficiency. This
rejects the teacher‟s opportunity to teach what they want without paying attention to learners.
Then, Long‟s Interaction Hypothesis cited in Brown (2007, p.132) adds explanation for the
shift. The hypothesis claims that inputs can be made comprehensible via interactional
adjustments or negotiation of meaning in interlanguage talk (the communication among
learners) and in teacher talk (the communication between teacher and learners). Finally, we

8
can consider innovations in teaching method according to Skehan‟s Motivation Hypothesis
cited in Ellis (1994, p.258) which concludes that motivation promotes L2 acquisition and
learners quickly acquire what they pay attention to.
With the theories of communicative competence, we have seen the emergence of
Communicative Approach in the late 1960s and the wide application of Communicative
Language Teaching (CLT) in the last two decades. The preference of this new teaching
method can be attributed to the fact that it provides learners with activities selected according
to how well they engage the learner in meaningful and authentic language use rather than
merely mechanical practice of language patterns. In order to promote learning, these activities
must ensure the CLT principles of communication, task, and meaningfulness. That is,
activities in CLT classes are designed in form of different tasks which exposing learners to

real and meaningful communication.
Howatt (1984, p.279) distinguishes between a strong and a weak version of CLT. The
former which has become more or less standard practice in the last 10 years, stresses the
importance of providing learners with opportunities to use their English for communicative
purpose and characteristically attempts to integrate such activities into a wider program of
language teaching. The latter, on the other hand, advances the claim that language is acquired
through communication, so that it is not merely a question of activating an existing but inert
knowledge of the language, but also a question of stimulating the development of the language
system itself. We can see that while the week version of CLT could be described as learning to
use English, the strong one entails using English to learn it.
In order to have a clearer look at characteristics of CLT, Finocchiaro and Brumfit
(1983, p.91) contrast the major distinctive features of the Audio-Lingual Method and the
Communicative Approach:
Audio-Lingual
Communicative Language Teaching
Attends to structure and form not meaning
Meaning is paramount
Demands memorization of structure based
dialogues
Dialogues if used center around
communicative function and are not
normally memorized
Language items are not necessarily
contextualized
Contextualization is a basic premise

9
Language learning is language structures,
sounds or words
Language learning is learning to

communicate
Mastery or over-learning is sought
Effective communicative is sought
Drilling is a central technique
Drilling may occur but peripherally
Native speaker like pronunciation is sought
Comprehensible pronunciation is sought
Grammatical explanation is avoided
Any device that helps the learners is
accepted varying according to their age,
interest, …
Communicative activities only come after a
long process or rigid drills and exercises
Attempts to communicate may be encourage
from the very beginning
The use of the students‟ native language is
forbidden
Judicious use of native language is accepted
where feasible
Translation is forbidden at early level
Translation may be used where students
need or benefit from it
Reading and writing are deferred till speech
is mastered
Reading and writing can start from the first
day if desired
The target linguistic system will be learned
through the overt teaching of the patterns of
the system
The target linguistic system will be learn

best through the process of struggling to
communicate
Linguistic competence is the desired goal
Communicative competence is the desired
goal (the ability to use the linguistic system
effectively and appropriately)
Varieties of language are recognized but not
emphasized
Linguistic variation is a central concept in
material and methodology
The sequence of units is determined solely
by principles of linguistic complexity
Sequencing is determined by any
consideration of context, function, or
meaning that maintains interest
The teacher controls the learners and
prevents them from doing anything that
conflicts with the theory
Teacher helps learners in any way that
motivate them to work with the language
Language is habit so errors must be
prevented at any cost
Language is created by the individual, often
through trial and error
Accuracy in terms of formal correctness is a
primary goal
Fluency and acceptable language is the
primary goal. Accuracy is judged not in the
abstract but in context
Students are expected to interact with the

language system, embodied in machines or
control materials
Students are expected to interact with other
people either in the flesh, through pair or
group work or in their writing
The teacher is expected to specify the
language that students are to use
The teacher cannot know exactly what
language students will use
Intrinsic motivation will spring from an
interest in the structure of the language
Intrinsic motivation will spring an interest
in what is being communicated by the
language.

10
I.3. Task-based Method – the strong version of CLT
Task – based Teaching can be regarded as a strong and recent version of
communicative methodology and seeks to reconcile methodology with current theories of
SLA. Many researches indicate that while traditional teaching methods focus on meaning and
on forms in order to develop grammatical competence, Task-based Teaching focuses on form
to develop communicative competence. According to Ellis, the term form is intended to
include not only phonological, lexical and grammatical aspects of language but also pragma-
linguistics ones.
Being a version of CLT, TBM has all the above listed characteristics. We now repeat
the most important ones. Firstly, the focus of teaching is on process rather than product.
Secondly, basic elements are purposeful activities and tasks that emphasize communication
and meaning. Last but not least, learners learn language by interacting communicatively and
purposefully while engaged in the activities and tasks.
From the characteristics of CLT in general and of TBM as particular, we can see that

in a task-based lesson, the teacher does not predetermine what language will be studied.
Instead, the lesson is based around the completion of a central task and the language studied is
determined by what happens as the students complete it.
Now it is time to consider what exactly takes place within a task. Willis (1996, pp.52-
62) recommends different components in a framework of tasks: the pre-task stage, the task
cycle and the language focus.
At the pre-task stage, the teacher first introduces the topic in the way that most
motivates the students. Then, clear instructions on what they will have to do with the task are
also given. If these steps are well planned and successfully complimented, they might help the
students to recall some language from their outcomes that may be useful for the task. The pre-
task stage can also include playing a record of people doing the task. This gives the students a
clear demonstration of what they will be expected in the task. Lastly, the students can take
notes and spend time preparing for the task.
The task cycle consists of some certain activities: task, planning and report. In task
activities, the students complete a task in pairs or groups using the language resources while

11
the teacher monitors and offers encouragement. Then, it is the time for planning: A short oral
or written report is prepared by pairs or groups of students to tell the rest of the class what
happened during their task. They then practise what they are going to say in their pairs or
groups. Meanwhile the teacher is available for the students to ask any language related
question they may have. At the report stage, the students report back to the class orally or read
the written report. The teacher decides when they present their reports and may give them
some quick feedback on the content and their performance.
At the language focus stage, both analysis and practice activities take place. First of all,
that is the case of analysis activities. The teacher highlights interesting features on the content
and the performance of the students‟ reports. Some serious errors that the students make in
their reports can also be raised. The students then discuss these interesting features as well as
errors in their pairs or groups. In practice activities, the teacher selects language aspects to
practise based on the needs of the students and what emerged from the task and report phases.

The students then do their practice activities to build up their confidence and make a note of
useful language contents.
II. INNOVATIONS IN SYLLABUS DESIGN
As said above, in order to ensure the success of English classes there must be a mutual
relationship between teaching method and syllabus. Therefore, SLA researches cause not only
teaching methods but also syllabuses to change.
Before looking at the innovations in syllabus, it is necessary to look at different views
of the importance of inputs in L2 acquisition. It is self-evident that L2 acquisition can only
take place when the learner has access to inputs in the L2, but the idea of the importance of
inputs for and their contribution to the success of language classrooms is controversial.
Behaviorist theories emphasize the importance of inputs. They claim that the whole
process of acquisition can be controlled by presenting learners with inputs in right-sized doses
and then reinforcing their attempts to practice them. However, Chomsky challenged the
theories in the 1960s and concluded that there was a very poor match between the kind of
language found in the inputs learners received and the kind of language they themselves
produced.

12
On the contrary, the mentalist view underemphasizes the importance of inputs. It
states that the mind or the „black - box‟ of learners is most important for L2 acquisition while
inputs only function as a trigger setting off some internal language acquisition devices. The
mentalist view of inputs hypothesizes a set of mental processes which take place inside the
mind of the learner and which convert the language in inputs into a form that the learner could
store and handle in production. However, researches in SLA took this view into consideration
by showing that interaction can provide learners with “scaffolding” that enables them to
produce structures that would be beyond them.
Next comes the interactionist view of inputs. It emphasizes the importance of both
inputs and interaction. Researchers who advocate this view suggests that learners acquire a
language through the process of learning how to communicate in it and inputs shaped through
interaction contribute directly and powerfully to acquisition .

Now, it is time we distinguished three confusing concepts: curriculum, syllabus and
textbook. According to Richards (2001, p.16), curriculum is on the top of a hierarchically
vertical line and is the most complicated. It is a generalization of needs of a group of learners,
aims or objectives for a program to address those need, appropriate syllabus, course structure,
teaching method and materials, and an evaluation of the application of the language program
as well. Whereas, a syllabus is at the next descending step of the line. It is a specification of
the content of a course of instruction and list what will be taught and tested. A textbook, on the
contrary, is the conveyance of the content of the course raised in the syllabus in forms of
different activities such as tasks, exercises, and drills. In this thesis, „syllabus‟ is used as a
common term which takes over the two others.
II.1. Synthetic syllabus versus analytic syllabus
According to Beglar and Hunt (1987, p.96), there are two kinds of syllabus: synthetic
syllabus and analytic syllabus. The former divides the target language into discrete linguistic
items such as points of grammar, lexical items and functions. The designers who use this type
of syllabus assume that learners will be capable of resynthesizing these discrete pieces of
language into a coherent whole which they can use in communicative situations. The latter is a
noninterventionist, experiential approach which aims to expose learners to real-life

13
communication. This type of syllabus supplies learners with samples of the target language
which are selected with the purposes for which people use language. In this case, the
assumption is that learners will be able to analyze grammatical and lexical usage during the
process of using the target language to communicate.
Grammar-Translation syllabus is an example of synthetic syllabus. The textbook here
consists of statements of abstract grammar rules, lists of vocabulary, and sentences for
translation. In addition, speaking foreign language is not the goal when the syllabus is
designed, and oral practice is limited to students reading aloud the sentences they translate. All
the sentences found in the textbook are constructed to illustrate the grammatical system of the
language and bore no relation to the language of real communication.
From the description of Grammar-Translation syllabus as well as the characteristics of

Grammar-Translation Method, we can see a clear relevance between how to teach (teaching
method) and what to teach (syllabus). Theoretically, all the grammar rules, lists of vocabulary
as well as different kinds of sentences in the syllabus perfectly match the method of translation
from L1 to L2. This helps to explain for the success of Grammar-Translation classrooms over
the history of language teaching and learning.
For analytic syllabus, White cited in Murphy (2003, p.352) lists its most salient
characteristics as follows: (a) it is primarily concerned with how materials are learned
(processes–oriented ); (b) some degree of negotiation between learners and teachers occurs;
(c) the content is fundamentally defined as what the subject means to the learner and what the
learner brings to the subject in terms of knowledge and interest; (d) assessment is partially
decided based on the learners‟ own criteria of success; (e) the instructional situation is far
more cooperative than in traditional classrooms.
Task - based syllabus is an example of analytic syllabus. According to Crookes and
Long (1992, p.131), beside the characteristics just described above, task-based syllabuses are
largely derived from what is known about SLA. For instance, SLA Research supports a focus
on form which uses pedagogical tasks to draw learners‟ attention to particular aspects of the
language code which are naturally embedded in the tasks. Tasks also provide inputs to learners
and opportunities for meaningful language use, both of which are generally considered

14
valuable in promoting language acquisition. That explains why tasks hold a core position in
the syllabus. Moreover, the conclusion of some types of instructions on the formal aspects of
the target language can be found in most recent formulations of task-based language
instructions. All these aspects of task-based syllabus enable real communication to take place
naturally and frequently in the classroom.
Here, we find another example of the relevance between teaching method and syllabus.
We all see that tasks are not only the main activities in TBM to expose students to real-world
communication but also the core element in task-based syllabus which are designed to
promote students to communicate in real contexts.
We now take an example of the irrelevance between how to teach and what to teach.

That is the case of the weak version of CLT. While the syllabus is communicative, i.e. a list
of notions and functions, the teaching method is traditional and non communicative, i.e. P-P-P.
Advocators of the weak version of CLT base on the assumptions that the components of
communicative competence can be identified and systematically taught in order to explain for
the irrelevance to which its failure is attributed when the weak version of CLT has been put
into practiced.
From these above examples, we find that in order to theoretically ensure the success of
language teaching and learning there must be a relevance between teaching method and
syllabus.
Now, let us have a brief look at the textbook designed to teach English for 10
th
form
students in Vietnam in general and at TPHS in Vinh Phuc in particular who are the subjects of
this thesis.
The textbook “Tiếng Anh 10” compiled by Van et al. (2006) is among a new series of
textbooks which are designed in task-based orientation in order to teach English for
Vietnamese students in the school education system. The design of the whole series of
textbooks has adopted „the principle of relevance‟ that we mentioned above. In this case, that
is the relevance between the use of the task-based textbooks and the application of TBM in
every English classroom in Vietnam.


15
II.2. Tasks in task-based syllabus
As can be seen from the characteristics of task-based syllabus, tasks can function as a
useful device for planning a communicative curriculum, and that is why they provide the basis
for the whole language curriculum in Task- based Language Teaching. However the question
“What is exactly a task?” is quite controversial.
Long cited in Ellis (2003, p.2) gives a broad definition which includes two types of
tasks: tasks that requires language, for example, making an airline reservation and tasks that

can be performed without language, for example, painting a fence. Whereas Nunan‟s
definition of task cited in Ellis (2003, p.2) is much narrower. He defines task as an activity
that necessarily involves language. In my study, I advocate the definition by Bygate, Skehan
and Swain (2001, p.57) “A task is an activity which requires learners to use language, with the
emphasis on meaning, to attain an objective, and which is chosen so that it is most likely to
provide information for learners and teachers which will help them in their own learning”
From the definition by Bygate, Skehan, and Swain, six criterial features of a task are
listed (Ellis, 2003, p.9): (a) a task is a workplan; (b) a task involves a primarily focus on
meaning; (c) a task involves real-world process of language use; (d) a task can involves any of
the four language skills; (e) a task engages cognitive process; and (f) a task has clearly defined
communicative outcome.
There is a need to distinguish between task, i.e. the core unit of task-based syllabus
and exercise, i.e. the main activities in traditional one. Tasks and exercises have the same
overall purpose, i.e learning a language. The difference lies in the means by which this
purpose is to be achieved. While tasks are activities that call for primarily meaning-focused
language use, exercise activities call for primarily form-focused language use. A task is
concerned with pragmatic meaning, i.e. the use of language in context. However, an exercise
is concerned with semantic meaning, i.e. the systemic meanings that specific forms can
convey irrespective of context.
Before looking at the tasks in a task-based syllabus, it is necessary to make a
distinction between different kinds of tasks: focused versus unfocused tasks, one-way versus
two-way tasks, open versus close tasks.

16
Both unfocused and focused tasks are used to stimulate communicative language use
but the former is not designed with the use of a specific linguistic feature in mind. On the
contrary, when being designed the latter targets the use of a particular, predetermined feature
of language.
One-way tasks and two-way tasks are distinguished in terms of whether the
information to be shared is split one-way, i.e. held by a single person or between two or more

people. In the case of one-way tasks, the burden of completing the task successfully is placed
on the participant who holds the information, although other participants can contribute by
demonstrating when they comprehend or when they do not. Conversely, in two-way tasks all
the participants are obligated to participate in the tasks in order to complete it.
Open tasks are those in which there is no predetermined solution. In this case, many
options can gap the task and learners are free to decide on the solution. In contrast, close tasks
are those that require the students to reach a single, correct solution or one of a small finite set
of solutions.
Let us now look at listening activities designed in the textbook “Tiếng Anh 10” which
is also one of the subject of this study and shown in appendix IV. There is a fact that some of
these activities are only pseudo-tasks. That is because they do not meet all the criteria of tasks
given above. For example, the exercises of true/false, numbering, and ticking in appropriate
information do not involve real-world process of language uses and have not clearly defined
communicative outcome.
The rest of listening activities in the textbook, however, are of various kinds of tasks
ranging from one-way tasks (e.g. Work in groups, retell the story then report your result –
After you listen, Unit 4) to two-way tasks (e.g. Work in pairs, discuss the change in your own
hometown or home village – After you listen, Unit 8); from closed tasks (e.g. Match the
pictures with the conversation – While you listen, Unit 2) to opened tasks (Work in group,
answer the questions: what would you plan for a picnic with your class? – After you listen,
Unit 6); from unfocused tasks (e.g. Fill in the blanks with the exact words you hear - While
you listen, Unit 6 ) to focused tasks (e.g. Work in pairs or groups, ask and answer about Mr
Lam then report your result – After you listen, Unit 1).

17
Breen (1987, p.184) distinguished between two terms task-as-workplan, i.e. the
designed task with the intension of the designer and task-as-process, i.e. the learners‟ actual
performance of the task. Then, these two terms have widely used by other researchers.
In Murphy‟s article (2003, pp.352-360), he states that learning outcomes are a product
of three main factors: the task-as-workplan, the task-as-process, and the situation in which the

task is carried out. So, the task itself is not enough to ensure the intended pedagogical
objectives of the task designers. In many cases, the task-as-workplan does not match the task-
as-process. That is because any pre-designed tasks can be changed by the way the learners
interact it.
According to Breen (1987, p.226), there are two main ways in which learners interact
with the task. If learners find that a task relates closely to their own learning needs, they will
adopt an achievement orientation. On the other hand, if they are unable to see the relevance of
the task to their perceived needs, learners are likely to adopt a survival orientation and perform
the tasks with minimal effort. He also claims that even if the purpose of the task is found
relevant and learners adopt an achievement orientation, they may still select procedures to
carry out the task which differ from the direction given in the task-as-workplan. That is why it
is vital for the pedagogical objectives of the tasks to be made clear to the learners.
III. THEORY IN LISTENING
III.1. Definition of listening
Among four language skills: reading, speaking, listening and writing, listening is often
considered the most difficult one which challenges both teacher and learners in language
classroom. Now, it is time we had a look at the definition of this skill.
According to Field (1998, p.38), “Listening is an invisible metal process, making it
difficult to describe. Listeners must discriminate between sounds, understand vocabulary and
grammatical structures, interpret stress and intention, retain and interpret this within the
immediate as well as the larger socio-cultural context of the utterance”
In my study, I adopt a simpler definition of listening by Anderson and Lynch (1988,
p.21): “Listening comprehension means to understand what a speaker says: the listener has a
crucial part to play in the process by activating various types of knowledge, by applying what

18
he knows to what he hears and trying to understand what the speaker means.”
From the second definition we can find that listening is a complex, active process of
interpretation in which listeners not only recall their comprehensive knowledge but also match
what they hear with what they have already known.

III. 2. Classification of listening
Anderson and Lynch (1998, p.315) distinguish between reciprocal listening and
nonreciprocal listening. The former refers to listening tasks where there is the opportunities for
the listener to interact with the speaker and to negotiate the content of the interaction. The
latter refers to tasks such as listening to the radio or a formal lecture where the transfer of
information is in a direction only – from the speaker to listener.
Let us take listening in classrooms as examples of these types of listening. For
reciprocal listening, it is the case of listening tasks that expose learners to communicate with
each other or with their teacher. Nonreciprocal listening takes place when students listen to the
tape in the listening session.
Richards and Schmidt (1983, p.129) classifies listening according to whether they
require the learners to engage in bottom-up or top-down processing. In bottom-up processing,
learners rely on their linguistic knowledge to recognize linguistic elements – vowels,
consonants, words, sentences to do the construction of meaning. They build meaning from
lower lever sounds to words, to grammatical relationship, and to lexical meaning in order to
arrive at the final message. In top-down processing, learners use their prior knowledge to
make prediction about the text. Prior knowledge can be that of the topic, the listening context,
the text-type, the culture or other information stored in long-term as well as short-term
memory.
Listening comprehension is not either bottom-up or top-down processing but is an both
interactive and interpretive process where listeners use both prior knowledge and linguistic
knowledge in understanding message. The degree to which learners use this process or the
other will depend on their knowledge being familiar with the topic as well as the purpose for
listening.


19
III.3. Common methods in teaching listening
Underwood (1990, p.90) states that there are at least four common methods of
teaching L2 listening: Grammar-Translation Method, Grammar Method, Audio-Lingual

Method and TBM.
When Grammar-Translation Method is applied in a classroom, the students certainly
listen to a description of the rules of L2 in their L1. As a result, when L2 is used, the focus of
any listening is on translation of lexical items or grammar structures.
To follow Grammar Method, the teacher requires students to look at a written text
while they listen to a recording. This focuses the students to do several things: identify words
by their position in the sentence, work out the relationship between words and phrases, use
forward and backward related cues, and make intelligent guesses based on textual cues.
Audio-lingual Method of teaching listening emphasizes listening to pronunciation and
grammatical forms and then imitating those forms by way of drills and exercises. Dialogues
and drills are the basis of classroom practice with this method. Students are encouraged to
listen carefully either to a taped recording of or a teacher reading out a dialogue or a drill.
Basically, the more the students repeat a correct phrase or sentence, the stronger of their
memory of structures will be.
In TBM, a stress is placed on activities or tasks that learners do in class in order to
develop their communicative competence. A task-based syllabus should be constructed
according to the difficulty of the tasks required of the learners at different stages in a course.
To sum up, the four methods of teaching L2 listening are not mutually exclusive and in
reality they may be mixed in any particular course or classroom. However, nowadays, with the
appearance of CLT, teaching listening seems to be more meaningful to students due to the fact
that they have chance to develop their listening skills and other language skills as well.
III.4. Three stages of the listening lesson
In order to help learners get most from a listening lesson, a lesson plan of listening is
usually divided into three stages: (a) things learners do before listening, i.e. pre-listening; (b)
tasks, exercises or activities are done by learners when the discourse is played, i.e. while-
listening; (3) things learners do after listening, i.e. post-listening.