Nhận thức của giáo viên đối với việc sử dụng phương pháp giao nhiệm vụ trong sách giáo khoa Tiếng Anh 11 chuẩn tại trường Trung học phổ thông Nguyễn Viết Xuân,

Vietnam national university, Hanoi
College of foreign languages
Post graduate department


Nguyễn thị nga



Teachers conceptualization of using Task-Based Method
in the standard English 11 coursebook at nguyen viet
xuan high school, vinh phuc

Nhận thức của giáo viên đối với việc sử dụng ph-ơng pháp
giao nhiệm vụ trong sách giáo khoa tiếng anh 11 chuẩn tại
tr-ờng trung học phổ thông nguyễn viết xuân, vĩnh phúc


MA. Minor Thesis


Field: English Teaching Methodology
Code: 601410



hà nội - 2009


Vietnam national university, Hanoi

College of foreign languages
Post graduate department


Nguyễn thị nga



Teachers conceptualization of using Task-Based Method
in the standard English 11 coursebook at nguyen viet
xuan high school, vinh phuc

Nhận thức của giáo viên đối với việc sử dụng ph-ơng pháp
giao nhiệm vụ trong sách giáo khoa tiếng anh 11 chuẩn tại
tr-ờng trung học phổ thông nguyễn viết xuân, vĩnh phúc


MA. Minor Thesis


Field: English Teaching Methodology
Code: 601410
Supervisor: d-ơng thị nụ, ph.d


hà nội - 2009


iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page
Declaration i
Acknowledgements ii
Abstract iii
Table of contents iv
List of abbreviations vii
List of tables viii
PART I: INTRODUCTION 1
1. Rationale for the study 1
2. Aims of the study 2
3. Research questions 2
4. Scope of the study 2
5. Significance of the study 2
6. Methodology 3
6.1. Participants 3
6.2. Instruments 3
6.2.1. Interviews 3
6.2.2. Teaching plan interpretations 3
6.2.3. Classroom observations 3
7. Structure of the study 3
PART II: DEVELOPMENT 5
CHAPTER ONE: LITERATURE REVIEW 5
1.1. Theoretical foundations 6
1.1.1. Theories of language 7
1.1.1.1. The functional view 7
1.1.1.2. The interactional view 7
1.1.2. Theories of language teaching 7
1.1.2.1. Cognitive theory 7

v

1.1.2.2. Constructivist theory 8
1.1.2.3. Generative Learning Theory 8
1.2. Task-Based Language Teaching 8
1.2.1. Definition of terminology 8
1.2.1.1. What is task-based language teaching? 9
1.2.1.2. Definition of task 9
1.2.1.3. Tasks, activities and exercises 11
1.2.1.4. Varieties of task 12
1.2.2. Task-Based Language Teaching framework 13
1.2.2.1. Pre-task stage 13
1.2.2.2. Task cycle stage 14
1.2.2.3. Language focus 14
1.2.3. Components of Task-Based Language Teaching framework 14
1.3. Task-Based Instruction versus the traditional approach to language teaching 15
1.4. Teacher’s interpretation of task-based language teaching 17
1.4.1. Teacher’s role in task-based instruction 17
1.4.2. Teachers’ interpretation of task-based language teaching 17
1.5. Summary 19
CHAPTER 2: METHODOLOGY 20
2.1. The fitness of case study to the research 20
2.2. The setting of the study 21
2.2.1. An introduction to Nguyen Viet Xuan high school 21
2.2.2. Participants 22
2.3. Methodology 23
2.3.1. Interviews 23
2.3.2. Teaching plan interpretations 23
2.3.3. Class observations 24
2.4. Data analysis 25
2.5. Summary 25

vi
CHAPTER 3: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION OF THE FINDINGS 26
3.1. Findings 26
3.1.1. Findings of the interviews 26
3.1.1.1. Teachers’ conceptualization of teaching methodology and tasked-based language
teaching approach 26
3.1.1.2. Teachers’ conceptualization of task 27
3.1.1.3. Teachers’ task-based language teaching implementation 29
3.1.1.4. Teachers’ main issues in task-based language teaching implementation 29
3.1.1.5. Students’ achievements learning in task-based language learning 30
3.1.2. Findings of the teaching plan interpretations 32
3.1.3. Findings of the classroom observations 33
3.2. Discussion of the findings 35
3.3. Summary 38
PART III: CONCLUSION 39
1. Summary of the study 39
2. Conclusions 39
3. Implications 40
4. Limitations of the study 41
5. Implications for further study 41
REFERENCES 42
APPENDIXES

vii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

CLT: Communicative Language Teaching
ELT: English Language Teaching
NVX: Nguyen Viet Xuan
PPP: Presentation – Practice - Production

TBL: Task-based learning
TBLT: Task-Based Language Teaching



















viii
LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Teachers’ qualifications and teaching specification
Table 2: Teachers’ conceptualization of task
Table 3: Teachers’ teaching plans
Table 4: Teachers’ teaching practice

1


PART I: INTRODUCTION
1. Rationale for the study
The ongoing process of regional and global integration in Vietnam has resulted in an
increasing demand for English teaching and learning. English not only is now taught at tertiary
level but also becomes a compulsory subject at almost every senior high school. Such great
demand is one of the most important reasons causing the innovation at secondary level driven
by the Ministry of Education and Training. The innovation started with the change of
coursebooks. In 2003-2004 academic year, grade 10 students in 46 pilot secondary schools
nationwide studied one of the two new English coursebooks: “English 10 – the piloted
coursebook 1” and “English 10 - the piloted coursebook 2 ”. The two following academic
years, grade 11 and 12 students in those schools worked with the new piloted coursebooks of
English 11 and 12 respectively. Since 2006-2007 academic year, after the trials with

evaluation and accordingly appropriate changes, the piloted coursebooks have been officially
adopted to replace the old ones nationwide. The introduction of the new set of coursebooks is
actually an innovation in Vietnam’s education. Under the light of this innovation, the course
objectives, content and methodology have been changed to meet the increasing demand for
education quality in the new development period of the country.
Being a teacher of English at a high school in Vinh Phuc, a province in the North of
Vietnam, and having worked with all new coursebooks, I realize that the change in course
methodology is the most important factor that leads to the success of the innovation.
It can be easily seen from the change of course methodology in coursebooks,
particularly in the standard English 11 coursebook that different approaches and methods of
teaching are used combinatively. They are theme-based approach, communicative approach,
task-based learning and learner-centered teaching. Among these, task-based learning seems to
be the most outstanding one. In fact, although task-based language teaching (TBLT) approach
is very popular in Vietnam now; it is quite new to teachers of English at high schools in Vinh
Phuc. The question raised here is that how well teachers understand TBLT and that with their
degree of such understandings how they implement this approach to teach tasks in the set
coursebook. With this idea, the study follows the research paradigm that seeks to discover

2


teachers’ conceptualization of Task-based Method in the standard English 11 coursebook in
the context of Nguyen Viet Xuan (NVX) high school, a typical high school in Vinh Phuc
province.
2. Aims of the study
In attempt to investigate teachers’ conceptualization of TBLT, the study examines
teachers’ understanding of TBLT concepts, and teachers’ views on TBLT implementation in
the standard English 11 coursebook, and makes clear the relationship between the
conceptualization of high school teachers of TBLT and the degree of success in its
implementation.

3. Reasearch questions
In the light of the aims of the study, the following research questions are posed:
(1). How well do teachers at Nguyen Viet Xuan high school understand task-based language
teaching concepts?
(2). How do they implement task-based language teaching in classroom?
(3). How does teachers’ conceptualization of task-based language teaching influence the
achievements of students’ learning?
4. Scope of the study
The study focuses on the teachers’ conceptualization of TBLT and their points of view
on implementation of this method in the classroom with the material of the standard English
11 coursebook at NVX high school, which is one of the high schools having the best
achievements in teaching and learning English in Vinh Phuc. The study was conducted in the
second term of school year 2008-2009.
5. Significance of the study
Information obtained from the study firstly will help teachers to realize the role of
keeping themselves updated with the new knowledge of approaches they are working with.
More importantly, the information also helps teacher trainers to make appropriate decisions on
how to introduce TBLT in Vietnam contexts as well as to recommend suitable strategies of
teacher development. Besides, it may inform concerned people such as education managers of

3


how to provide teachers with necessary facilities and encouragement to adapt and apply TBLT
to their teaching context.
6. Methodology
A qualitative case study is designed and conducted in the context of a high school in
the countryside of Vinh Phuc.
6.1. Participants
The sample consists of five teachers of English at NVX high school.

6.2. Instruments
6.2.1. Interviews
As the sample size is small, interviewing has been adopted as the major instrument to
obtain detailed information in this research. Interviews are conducted with individual teachers
to get their interpretations of TBLT, their views on implementing this method in the
classroom, issues in TBLT implementation in the classroom, and factors inhibiting TBLT
implementation.
6.2.2. Teaching plan interpretations
The interpretation of teaching plan of teachers is used to find out how the teachers
realize their understandings of TBLT in the preparation for lessons.
6.2.3. Classroom observations
Classroom observations are used to clarify the validity of the interviews of the teachers
and their realization of teaching plans.
7. Structure of the study
Part I: Introduction - is used to introduce the study presenting the rationale, the aims,
the scope, the significance, the methodology and the structure of the study.
Part II: Development - includes three chapters. Chapter one deals with a review of the
literature. It provides a theoretical framework focusing on learning and teaching theories. It is
also concerned with the concepts and components of TBLT. Chapter two first refers to the
context of the study. Besides, it describes the methodology, the procedure of data collection
and data analysis of the study. Chapter three presents all the findings and discussion of the
findings.

4


Part III: Conclusion - presents summary of the study, the conclusions and pedagogical
implications, and limitations as well as recommendations for further study.

5

PART II: DEVELOPMENT
CHAPTER ONE: LITERATURE REVIEW
There have been a lot of studies on the conceptualization of teaching methodology,
particularly CLT and TBLT that were conducted in both foreign countries and Vietnam. Some
outstanding studies among them can be mentioned below.
Karavas-Dou-kas (1995) carries out a study on the implementation of a communicative
approach in Greek secondary school, in which she shows that teachers exhibited incomplete
understanding of the innovation which they were adopting. In the Korean context, Li (1998)
also reported that misconceptions about the nature of communicative approaches to language
teaching were a barrier to their implementation. After that, Clark et al. (1999) found similar
evidence that Hong Kong teachers had unclear conceptions about task-based teaching and
learning, and this hindered its implementation. In 2004, David Carless also studied issues in
teachers’ reinterpretation of a task-based innovation in primary schools in the context of Hong
Kong. In his study, Carless finds out issues in TBT implementation like mother tongue use
and classroom management. In 2006, two authors In-Jae Jeon and Jung-won Hahn did the
research “Exploring EFL teachers’ perceptions of task-based language teaching: A case study
of Korean secondary school classroom practice”. These two authors studied teachers’
understandings of TBLT concepts, their attitudes toward and views on TBLT implementation,
and the reasons why teachers use or avoid to TBLT in the classroom.
In Vietnam, there are also many researchers who have studied this issue. However, the
author of this thesis only mentions two names, whose studies, to some extent, have something
in common with mine. Firstly, Canh (2004) made a research on “Understanding foreign
language teaching methodology”. In this research, he gave out understanding of different
methods and approaches of teaching, including TBLT. Secondly, Hung (2008) carried out a
study on university teachers’ conceptualization of task-based teaching in Tay Bac University.
He finds out that there exist congruence and incongruence between teachers’
conceptualization of task-based teaching and the composite view of TBLT, congruence
between teachers’ practice of task-based teaching and teachers’ teaching plan with the

6


composite view of TBLT, and consistence and inconsistence between teachers’
conceptualization with teaching practices and teaching plans.
For the researcher of this study, the conceptualization of high school teachers who
have just accessed TBLT through the renovation of methodology plays a very important role
in TBLT implementation. Nearly no studies have been conducted in order to explore the
current situation of high school teachers in understanding TBLT and its implementation into
reality. Therefore, the researcher decided to do this study on purpose of filling this gap.
This chapter aims to provide a theoretical framework focusing on learning and
teaching theories. The first issue addressed in this chapter relates to the theoretical foundations
for TBLT, including theories of language and theories of language teaching. The second part
presents the TBLT terminologies, its key definitions, its varieties, its component, and the
framework for learning and teaching. The third part discusses the traditional method of
language teaching in comparison with TBLT. Teachers’ interpretation of TBLT is also
mentioned in this chapter. This chapter helps to provide the basic literature that is crucial for
understanding TBLT and its potentials, the methodology and data collection in the study, and
also the analysis of findings obtained from the study.
1.1. Theoretical foundations
The 1970s ushered in an era of change and innovation in language teaching
methodology. This was the decade during which Communicative Language Teaching (CLT)
came to replace Audiolingualism and the Structural-Situational Approach. Thirty years later
CLT is still alive. Perhaps the difference in orientation explains why CLT has survived into
the new millennium. Because it refers to a diverse set of rather and uncontroversial principles
that CLT can be interpreted in many different ways and used to support a wide variety of
classroom procedures. Some contemporary teaching approaches such as Content Based
Instruction, Cooperative Language Learning, and Task-Based Instruction can all claim to be
applications of CLT principles and hence continue as mainstream approaches today.Task-

based language teaching is one particular integrated communicative approach to teaching
second language that can enable us to achieve the dual requirements of natural integration of
skills and meaningful language use. It represents a realization of the philosophy of

7


Communicative Language Teaching (CLT). In other words, CLT is a broad and philosophical
approach to language teaching that draws on the theory and research in linguistics,
anthropology, psychology, and sociology. Therefore, it is very necessary to discuss
philosophies of TBLT, including theories of language and theories of language learning.
1.1.1. Theories of language
The functional view and interactional view are the two influential theories that lay the
foundation for CLT and TBLT. The following points of view on these two theories language
are based on those of Richards and Rodgers (Richards and Rodgers, 1986, pp.16-17)
1.1.1.1. The functional view
The functional view is the one in which language is a vehicle for the expressing of
functional meaning. Thus, in this view, the semantic and communicative dimensions of
language are more emphasized than the grammatical characteristics, although the latter are
also included. The target of language learning within the functional view is to learn to express
communication functions and categories of meaning. The two outstanding approaches that are
based on this view are the Natural Approach and the CLT. It does mean that TBLT is not an
exception.
1.1.1.2. The interactional view
The interactional view sees language primarily as a means for establishing and
maintaining interpersonal relations and for performing social transactions between individuals.
The target of language learning in this view, thus, is to learn to initiate and maintain
conversation with other people. Therefore, the CLT and TBLT are also informed by this view.
1.1.2. Theories of language teaching
1.1.2.1. Cognitive theory

Cognitive theory of learning focuses on the role of the mind in actively acquiring new
knowledge. According to Ausubel (1985), learning must be meaningful and relatable to an
individual’s cognitive structure if it was to become a permanent part of his or her
understanding of the world. Cognitive teaching treats learners as thinking beings and places
them at the center of learning process by emphasizing that learning will only take place when
learners find the input meaningful, interesting and relevant to their needs.

8


The basic teaching technique associated with cognitive theory of learning is the
problem-solving tasks. Therefore, the cognitive model of teaching is defined as a model of
teaching in which the teacher selects learning tasks according to the learner’s developmental
level, and elicits learner reasoning in relation to those tasks.
1.1.2.2. Constructivist theory
Constructivist theory is the theory about knowledge and learning in which knowledge
is unique to the individual learner and the resulting facet of the individual’s engagement in the
cognitive learning process (Kozulin, 1998).
Constructivists believe that a learner individually interprets his or her experience,
building a unique internal representation of knowledge. According to them, learning outcomes
are largely metacognitive in nature, and that learners are required to actively participate in the
learning process to construct meaningful knowledge rather than acquire a predetermined set of
skills in a pre-specified manner.
1.1.2.3. Generative Learning Theory
Generative learning theory is another theoretical model that lays the base for TBLT.
Being originally conceived under the cognitive information processing paradigm by Wittrock
(1974), generative learning theory has lately been used in technology-based constructivist
learning environments, experiment learning, cooperation learning, problem-based learning
(Grabinger, 1996). The focus of the generative learning theory is that the learner is not a
passive recipient of information but an active participant in the instructional experience,

constructing knowledge through relating information in the instructional environment to his or
her previous experiences and prior knowledge (Grabowski, 1996). Corresponding, the
generative learning process requires the learner to manipulate, interpret, organize or in some
active manner make sense of his or her environment. He or she creates meaning through
generative associations between and among elements in the instructional environment and his
or her knowledge base.
1.2. Task-Based Language Teaching
1.2.1. Definition of terminology
1.2.1.1. What is task-based language teaching?

9


Task-based language teaching is one particular integrated communicative approach to
teaching second language. A task-based approach is one that uses meaningful “tasks” to
organize the learning of second language. Richards and Rodgers (2001) describes TBLT as
“an approach based on the use of tasks as the core unit of planning and instruction in language
teaching” (p.223). “In other words, students are given a task to perform” (Harmer, 1998, p.41).
Then they have to figure out how to complete the task using whatever language they know.
Harmer calls it “a kind of ‘deep-end’ strategy” (p.87) whereby the learner is thrown into a task
as a means of making him learn to swim, that is to learn language.
Nunan (1991) offers five characteristics of a task-based approach to language teaching:
(1). An emphasis on learning to communicative through interaction in the target
language.
(2). The introduction of authentic texts into 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 activation outside

classroom.
There are many different interpretations of TBLT related to classroom practice, but
three features of TBLT are exhibited: TBLT is compatible with a learner-centered educational
philosophy; it consists of particular components such as goal, procedure and specific outcome;
it advocates content-oriented meaningful activities rather than linguistic forms. In other words,
from the viewpoint of second language teaching, a task-based approach satisfies the two
identified requirements for effective teaching and learning: the four skills are taught in an
interconnected way, and teaching is structured so that there are always real purposes,
interactions, and meaning involved in language use.
1.2.1.2. Definition of task
The definition of task has received much attention in the literature. This term has been
defined in a variety of ways. Nunan (1989) defines task as “a piece of classroom work which

10


involves learners in comprehending, manipulating, producing or interacting in the target
language while their interaction is principally focused on meaning rather than form. The task
should also have a sense of completeness, being able to stand alone as a communicative act in
its own right” (p.10). This definition has a pedagogical perspective which involves
communicative language use and the activities focus on meaning rather than on language
forms.
Besides this definition, there are many other definitions of task which all emphasize
language use with reference to pedagogical purposes. Richards, Platt, and Weber (1985)
define a task as follows: “a task is an activity or an 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, and listening to an instruction and performing a comment, maybe 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 of different kinds of tasks in language teaching is said to make teaching more

communicative since it provides purpose for classroom activity which go beyond practice of
language for its own sake” (p.289).
Willis (1996) writes: “All tasks should have an outcome” (p.24), and defines a task as
“a goal-oriented communicative activity with a specific outcome, where the emphasis is on
exchanging meanings not producing specific language forms” (p.36).
Skehan (1998) explains that in a task “there is some sort of relationship to comparable
real world activities” (p.3). According to him, a task is an activity in which: meaning is
primary; it works towards a goal; it is outcome-evaluated; and it is related to the world outside
the classroom.
Brown (2001) describes a task as follows: “A task is really a special technique. In
some cases, task and technique may be synonymous (a problem-solving task/technique; a role-
play task/technique for example). But in other cases, a task may be comprised of several
techniques (for example, a problem-solving task that includes, let’s say, grammatical
explanation, teacher-initiated questions, and a specific turn-taking procedure). Tasks are
usually “bigger” in their ultimate ends than techniques” (p.50).

11


Bygate, Skehan, and Swan (2001) state that the definition of task needs to be different
for the different purposes for which tasks are used. Therefore, for an all-purpose definition, “a
task is an activity which requires learners to use language with an emphasis on meaning to
attain an objective” (p.11). Referring to the statement by them, from the language teaching
perspective, a task is “an activity, susceptible to brief or extended pedagogic intervention,
which requires learners to use language with emphasis on meaning to attain an objective”
(p.11).
Ellis (2003) defines a pedagogical task as follows: “A task is a workplan that requires
learners to process language pragmatically in order to achieve an outcome that can be
evaluated in terms of whether the correct or appropriate propositional content has been
conveyed. To this end, it requires them to give primary attention to meaning and to make use

of their own linguistic resources, although the design of the task may predispose them to
choose particular forms. A task is intended to result in language use that bears a resemblance,
direct or indirect, to the way language is used in the real world. Like other language activities,
a task can engage productive or receptive, and oral or written skills and also various cognitive
processes” (p.16).
There are many viewpoints on the definition of task. Although these definitions may
vary from this one to another one, they all come to a conclusion that a task is a posed problem
or an activity that has a goal or an outcome that is not linguistic, but which is reached through
a variety of linguistic skills. Also, they all emphasize that pedagogical tasks involve
communicative language use in which the learner’s attention is focused on meaning rather
than grammatical form. In this study, the author only presents the viewpoints of the
researchers which are used in this study. That is the definition of Willis (1996) and Nunan
(2001), and that viewpoint will go through this study.
1.2.1.3. Tasks, activities and exercises
There exist a lot of overlapping understandings and interpretations between the two
definitions of tasks and exercises. These two terms are used either with a vague distinction or
without distinction. Therefore, it is necessary to clarify the differences between tasks and

12


exercises, especially when this clarification serves much to the understanding of task and
TBLT in the study.
Willis (1996) emphasizes the critical difference between task and practice, “An
example of an activity that lacks an outcome would be to show students a picture and say
‘Write four sentences describing the picture. Say them to your partner’. Here, there is no
communicative purpose, only the practice of language form” (p.24). In contrast, the following
would be a task: “If the picture is shown briefly to the students then concealed, the task could
be: From memory, write four true things and two false things about the picture. Read them out
to see if other pairs remember which are true” (p.24).

Along the same lines, Nunan (2001) writes, “The essential difference between a task
and an exercise is that a task has a nonlinguistic outcome. In other words, exercises will have
purely language related outcome, while tasks will have non-language related outcome” (p.5).
Thus, teachers need to examine the techniques they use to ensure that the problem or activities
posed are meaningful tasks and not just exercises.
To conclude, according to researchers, a task is a communicative activity that does not
usually have a restrictive focus on a particular grammatical structure and has a non-linguistic
outcome, whereas an exercise usually has a restrictive focus on a specific language element,
and has a linguistic outcome.
1.2.1.4. Varieties of task
There are many types of task varying to researchers. In this study, the researcher would
like to introduce the ways of distinguishing tasks of two experts of world-wide reputation,
Nunan and Willis, who have developed slightly different analyses of the kinds of tasks that are
possible and how they are used in TBLT.
Nunan (2001) writes: “I distinguish between real-world or target tasks and pedagogical
tasks” (p.3). According to him, a real-world task is a communicative act that we achieve
through language in the world outside the classroom, whilst a pedagogical task is a piece of
work which involves learners in comprehending, manipulating, or producing in the language
while their attention is principally focused on meaning rather than forms. Furthermore,
“pedagogical tasks have a non-linguistic outcome and can be divided into rehearsal tasks or

13


activation tasks. A rehearsal task is a piece of classroom work in which learners rehearse, in
class, a communicative act they will carry out outside of the class. An activation task is a piece
of classroom work involving communicative interaction, but not one in which learners will be
rehearsing for some out-of-class communication. Rather they are designed to activate the
acquisition process” (p.4).
From Willis’s viewpoint, she focuses more on practical design suggestions for tasks.

She (1996) divides tasks into six types, which can be adjusted for use with almost any topic.
The task types are: listing; ordering and sorting; comparing; problem-solving; sharing personal
experience; and creative tasks. All types of task can integrate the skills, so as to include not
only speaking but also reading and the skills usually lead into a writing stage (pp. 26-28).
According to her, simple tasks may consist of one type only, such as listing; more complex
tasks may incorporate two or more types, such as listing then comparing lists or listing then
ranking. Problem-solving may include listing, comparing and ranking. After the starting points
and examples, this classification also suggests follow-up tasks. All tasks involve speaking and
listening. Many also entail reading and note-taking. All tasks can lead into a more formal or
written presentation (p. 149).
1.2.2. Task-Based Language Teaching framework
TBLT is typically put into practice in three stages, usually called pre-task, task cycle,
and language focus.
1.2.2.1. Pre-task stage
The pre-task stage, according to Willis (1996), “will usually be the shortest stage in the
framework, between two and twenty minutes, depending on the learners’ degree of familiarity
with the topic and the type of task” (p. 42). During this stage, “the teacher explores the topic
with the class and may highlight useful words and phrases, helping students to understand the
task instructions” (Harmer, 1999, p. 87). More detail is supplied by Skehan (1996), who states
“Two broad alternatives are possible: an emphasis on general cognitive demands of the task,
and/ or an emphasis on linguistic factors” (p. 25). The two main purposes of the pre-task stage
identified by Rooney (2000) are: “1) to introduce and create interest in doing the task on the

14


chosen topic, 2) to activate topic-related words, phrases and target sentences that will be useful
in carrying out the task and in the real world” (p. 2).
1.2.2.2. Task cycle stage
In this stage, “the students perform the task in pairs or small groups while the teacher

monitors from a distance. The students then plan how they will tell the rest of the class what
they did and how it went, and they then report on the task either orally or in writing, and/ or
compare notes on what has happened” (Harmer, 1999, p. 87).
According to Willis (1996), the task cycle offers learners the chance to use whatever
language they already know in order to carry out the task, and then to improve that language,
under teacher guidance, while planning their reports of the task. Feedback from the teacher
comes when they want it most, at the planning stage, and after the report. Exposure to
language in use can be provided at different points, depending on the type of the task. Either
before or during the task cycle, students might listen to recordings of other people doing the
task, or read a text connected with the task topic, and relate this to their own experience of
doing the task. So the task-based learning framework so far provides the three basic conditions
for language learning – exposure, use and motivation.
1.2.2.3. Language focus
This last stage often has a linguistic focus. Harmer (1999) explains that “the students
examine and discuss specific features of any listening or reading text which they have looked
at for the task or the text, and/ or the teacher may conduct some form of practice of specific
language features which the task has provoked” (p. 87). Specifically, “language focus allows a
closer study of some of the specific features naturally occurring in the language used during
the task cycle. By this point, the learners will have already worked with the language and
processed it for meaning, so they are ready to focus on the specific language forms that carry
that meaning. Thus the study of these forms is clearly contextualised through the task itself.
This final phase, which includes analysis and practice components, fulfils the fourth desirable
extra condition for learning - explicit study of language form” (Willis, 1996, p. 40).
1.2.3. Components of Task-Based Language Teaching framework

15


According to experts, it can be deduced that tasks have four core features: there is a
goal to be worked towards; the activity is outcome-evaluated; meaning is primary; and there is

a real-world relationship. Candlin and Murphy (1987) assert that tasks can be effectively
organized based on systematic components including goals, input, setting, activities, roles and
feedback. The framework of task components provides second language acquisition
researchers with some meaningful insights in a task-based syllabus design and authentic
materials development, for it can serve as the beginning point for designing task-based
activities. In this study, thus, it is suggested that the central components of task-based
framework include goals, input data, classroom settings, activity types and assessment.
Briefly, goals refer to the general aim for the task and input represents verbal and non-
verbal materials that learners can manipulate. Setting refers to the environment in which the
task is performed and activities involve the things participants will be doing in a given setting.
The roles for teachers and learners are closely related to the successful implementation of the
task, and feedback concerns the task evaluation. It can be deduced that in spite of pedagogical
benefits in language learning contexts, a task in itself does not necessarily guarantee its
successful implementation without the teacher, the facilitator, the controller of the task
performance – who understands how tasks actually work in the classroom. It is also suggested
that TBLT as an instructional method is more than just giving tasks to learners and evaluating
their performance. More importantly, the teacher who wants to try to implement TBLT
successfully is required to have sufficient knowledge about the instructional framework
related to its plan, procedure and assessment.
1.3. Task-Based Instruction versus the traditional approach to language teaching
The traditional approach to language teaching is PPP: presentation, practice and
production. This approach was at one time virtually the only acceptable second language task
sequence. In the PPP cycle, a focused presentation stage in which grammar presentation
comes first is followed by practice activities. These practice activities are designed to enable
learners to produce rapidly and easily the material which has been presented. In the production
stage, opportunities are provided to use language freely and flexibly in the expectation that
this will consolidate what is being learned and extend its range of applicability.

16

For a long time, this approach seems to be very powerful, and proves to have a lot of
advantages. Firstly, it is very comforting for the teacher. The teacher is in charge of
proceedings, and has a clear professional role which is relatively easy to organize because it
requires the teacher to take “structure of the day” and do whatever is necessary to ensure that
the structure is learned. Secondly, the approach lends itself to accountability since there will
be clear and tangible lesson goals, which can then be evaluated. There is a belief that learners
will learn what is taught in the order in which it is taught. Finally, there is the possibility of
clear connection with underlying theory. Learning is focused on rules which are then
automatized as a set of habits.
However, as time goes by with an increasing demand of language learning and
teaching process, this approach has become out of date. It reveals to be unimpressive. Levels
of learning achievement are proved to be poor, and most of the learners leave school with very
little knowledge in terms of language use. Moreover, the underlying theory for PPP has now
been discredited. The belief that a focus on a particular form leads to learning and
automatization no longer carries much credibility in linguistics. Instead, the contemporary
view of language development is that learning is constrained by internal processes. Learners
do not simply acquire the language to which they are exposed, however carefully that
exposure may be prepared by the teacher. It is not simply a matter of converting input into
output. To put it in another way, such a teacher-focused approach needs to be replaced by
another one that can avoid the problems of PPP and may promote learning process more
rapidly and efficiently.
With the appearance of TBLT in the 1980s, it seems to meet the contemporary
demands of language learning and teaching process. The teachers’ concern for meaning-based
activities and researchers’ investigation of patterns of interaction suggest a task-based
approach to foreign language instruction. Tasks, in this viewpoint, are activities which have
meaning as their primary focus. Success in the task is evaluated in terms of achievement of an
outcome, and tasks generally bear some resemblance to real-life language use. Therefore, task-
based instruction takes a fairly strong view of communicative language teaching. It is the task
which drives learner’s system forward by engaging acquisitional process (Long and Crookes

17


(1993)). In short, on the one hand, a PPP approach looks on the learning process as learning a
series of discrete items and then bringing these items together in communication to provide
further practice and consolidation. On the other hand, a task-based approach sees the learning
process as one of learning through doing – it is by primarily engaging in meaning that the
learner’s system is encouraged to develop.
1.4. Teacher’s interpretation of task-based language teaching
1.4.1. Teacher’s role in task-based instruction
Teachers may take many different roles in regard to second language tasks. The roles
of teachers are to promote favorable conditions which provide optimum opportunities for the
learning process.
In this study, the author adopts the opinion of Willis (1996) on the teacher role in
TBLT when she says that in task-based learning the teacher is generally a “facilitator”, always
keeping the key conditions for learning in mind. According to her, facilitating learning
involves balancing the amount of exposure and use of language, and ensuring they are both of
suitable quality. In a TBL framework, most of the emphasis is on learners doing things, often
in pairs or groups, using language to achieve the task outcomes and guided by the teacher. The
teacher is involved in setting tasks up, ensuring that learners understand and get on with them,
and drawing them to a close. Though learners do tasks independently, the teacher still has
overall control and the power to intervene in the learning process anytime if necessary. The
part the teacher plays during each component of the task framework also varies according to
its aim. For example, at the end of the framework, where the focus turns to language form, the
teacher acts as language guide.
In order to complete the roles in a task-based approach, teachers need to command a
significantly wide range of skills, including: an ability to select and sequence tasks for
supplementary activities; the competence to organize, appropriately, pre- and post-task
activities; a willingness to adapt task difficulty during the actual task phrase; and a sensitivity

to individual differences and the capacity to adapt tasks to take account of differences in
learner orientation.
1.4.2. Teachers’ interpretation of task-based language teaching

18


In the first place, we must confirm that any language teacher could not finish his duty
without using any approach or any method. In other words, no language teachers can teach a
language without a theory of language teaching. It does also mean at the same time that the
first condition to ensure for teaching to take place is the teachers’ right conceptualization of
teaching approaches and methods. However, this condition is not sufficient for the success of
teaching since from the right conceptualization of approaches and methods to appropriate
using of these ones by teachers in the context of classroom reality is quite a big matter. More
importantly, the issue here is that what and how aspects of such approaches and methods are
used by teachers in the classroom.
All the things above are not exceptional with teachers’ interpretation of TBLT. It can
be seen that there exist a lot of different ideas of researchers around TBLT, including its
definitions and its features. These ideas may either vary from this researcher to another one or
have something in common. The most important thing is that language teachers need to have a
right conceptualization about TBLT from such many ideas and theories so that they can apply
them appropriately in their teaching process. Otherwise, their misunderstandings of TBLT can
lead to the failure or be off the goals of the language learning and teaching process. In brief
words, researchers share a common opinion that TBLT can be regarded as a learner-centered
approach which is to create opportunities for learners to experiment with and explore both
spoken and written language through tasks. These tasks are learning activities which are
designed to engage learners in the authentic, practical and functional use of language for
meaningful purposes. Learners are encouraged to activate and use whatever language they
already have in the process of completing a task. The use of tasks will also give a clear and
purposeful context for the teaching and learning grammar and language skills.

In short, having a right interpretation of a method to making it alive and practical is
sometimes not a simple matter; however, the author still would like to emphasize the
importance of teachers’ right conceptualization. It is because only the right conceptualization
at the very beginning of a process may lead to right actions and ensure the success of the
whole process. And it is true to every process, including language teaching.