Nhận thức của giáo viên về đường hướng dạy học theo nhiệm vụ đối với kỹ năng nói Nghiên cứu trường hợp lớp 11, trường PTTH chuyên Nguyễn Huệ, Hà Đông, Hà Nội

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
POST-GRADUATE DEPARTMENT




HOÀNG THÙY HƯƠNG





TEACHERS' PERCEPTIONS OF THE TASK-BASED
APPROACH TO SPEAKING SKILLS: A CASE OF
GRADE 11, NGUYEN HUE GIFTED HIGH SCHOOL,
HA DONG, HANOI
(NHẬN THỨC CỦA GIÁO VIÊN VỀ ĐƯỜNG HƯỚNG
DẠY HỌC THEO NHIỆM VỤ ĐỐI VỚI KỸ NĂNG NÓI:
NGHIÊN CỨU TRƯỜNG HỢP LỚP 11, TRƯỜNG PTTH
CHUYÊN NGUYỄN HUỆ, HÀ ĐÔNG, HÀ NỘI)



M.A Thesis
(Minor Thesis)

Field: TEFL Methodology
Course Code: 60.14.10









HANOI - 2010




VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
POST-GRADUATE DEPARTMENT




HOÀNG THÙY HƯƠNG




TEACHERS' PERCEPTIONS OF THE TASK-BASED

APPROACH TO SPEAKING SKILLS: A CASE OF
GRADE 11, NGUYEN HUE GIFTED HIGH SCHOOL,
HA DONG, HANOI
(NHẬN THỨC CỦA GIÁO VIÊN VỀ ĐƯỜNG HƯỚNG
DẠY HỌC THEO NHIỆM VỤ ĐỐI VỚI KỸ NĂNG NÓI:
NGHIÊN CỨU TRƯỜNG HỢP LỚP 11, TRƯỜNG PTTH
CHUYÊN NGUYỄN HUỆ, HÀ ĐÔNG, HÀ NỘI)

M.A Thesis
(Minor Thesis)




Field: TEFL Methodology
Course Code: 60.14.10
Supervisor: Lê Văn Canh, M.A











HANOI - 2010

iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS

Declaration
i
Acknowledgement
ii
Abstract
iii
Table of contents
iv
List of
abbreviations
vii
List of tables and figures
viii
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
1
1.1. The background of the study
1.2. Aims of the study
1.3. Research questions
1.4. Scope of the study
1.5. Organization of the study
CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1. Task-based approach
1
2
2
2

2
4
4
2.1.1. The development of task-based approach
4
2.1.2. The nature of task-based language teaching
5
2.1.3. Task definition
6
2.1.4. Task types
8
2.2. Task-based teaching framework
9
2.3. Task-based teaching vs. other types of teaching instruction models
11
2.4. Advantages and disadvantages of task-based language teaching
12
2.4.1. Advantages
12
2.4.2. Disadvantages
13
2.5. Implementing tasks in teaching the skills of speaking
14
2.6. The importance of understanding teacher perception of teaching
methodology
15
2.7. Definition of teacher perception
16

v

2.8. Relation between teacher perception and practice
17
2.9. Previous studies on teacher perception of TBLT
17
CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY
20
3.1. The fitness of case study to research purpose
20
3.2. Restatement of research questions
20
3.3. Case description & context of the study
20
3.3.1. The setting of the study
20
3.3.2. Participants
21
3.4. Instrument
23
3.4.1. Interviews
23
3.4.2. Observation
24
3.5. Procedure
25
3.5.1. Interviews
25
3.5.2. Class observation
26
3.6. Data analysis
27

CHAPTER 4. DISCUSSION OF THE FINDINGS
28
4.1. General overview of the findings
28
4.1.1. Teacher perception of tasks
28
4.1.2. Teacher perception of TBLT to speaking skills
30
4.1.3. Teacher perception of advantages and disadvantages in TBLT
implementation to speaking
skills
31
4.1.4. The reality of teachers' class teaching
33
4.2. Discussions of the findings
36
4.2.1. Congruence and incongruence between teachers' perceptions of TBLT
and its theory
37
4.2.2. Consistence and inconsistence between their perceptions and their
classroom behaviours
38
4.2.3. Consistence and inconsistence between teacher perceptions of
advantages and disadvantages and their teaching
practice
38

vi
CHAPTER 5. CONCLUSIONS
40

5.1. Summary of the study major points
40
5.1.1. Summary of the study
40
5.1.2. Conclusions
40
5.1.3. Implications
41
5.2. Limitation of the study
41
REFERENCES
I
APPENDICES
III
APEENDIX A
III
APPENDIX B
III
APPENDIX C
VII

vii
LISTS OF ABBREVIATIONS
CLT: Communicative language teaching
ELT: English language teaching
PPP: Presentation - Practice - Production
TBA: Task-based approach
TBLT: Task-based language teaching
TST: Task-supported teaching
TTT: Test - Teach - Test

(=): Neutral
(-): Non-conceptual, negative, not mentioned

viii
LISTS OF TABLES AND FIGURES
Table 1: Participants' profile
Table 2: Participants' perceptions of task
Table 3: Participants' perception of TBLT to speaking skills
Table 4: Participants' perceptions of TBLT advantages and disadvantages
Table 5: Participants' class teaching practice
Figure 1: Teacher-student perceptions and the quality of learning outcomes



1
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1. The background of the study
In the long history of linguistics, changes and shifts in teaching methodology is
obvious as there is never satisfaction with on-going methods and procedures. It leads to
researchers and scholars' having been trying and seeking better ways of teaching and
learning languages. Each new methodology born out is the result of the feedback to
weaknesses of the previous prevailing one. All of these methodologies are possibly
categorized into the grammatical and conversational approaches which are always in the
opposite trends. They advocate different ways and formats: written vs. oral language,
learning grammar vs. learning speaking, formal vs. informal language use. With these two
scales, the second one - the conversational approach dominates in the twentieth century. In
the second half of the century, the need for communication between people of different
cultures and languages creates a flood of learning language more quickly and effectively.
People are in the need of communicating orally and engaging in real communication.
There is a movement of learning language seen everywhere within society all over the

world. New and more efficient methods appear to meet the demand of the whole societies.
In the last part of the twentieth century, there is a contrariety between what is called focus
on form and focus on content, or in other words, they are shifting to teaching language for
accuracy vs. teaching language for meaning. The task-based approach (TBA) was born out
in this context at the end of the twentieth century. It has been evolving as the response to
limitations of the traditional approach PPP represented by the procedure of presentation,
practice and performance. First known as in 'Bangalore Project' of Prabhu in 1979, task-
based approach has gained its popularity in the field of language teaching since then. Many
researchers, teachers have been using it for their own rights in the teaching contexts.
American Government Language Institutions switched to task-based instruction for foreign
languages for adults in the early 1980s (as cited in Corony Edwards, Jane Willis, 2005,
p.13). Current research are also focusing on task-based language teaching and learning, for
example, Rod Ellis (2003) wrote "task-based language teaching and learning", David
Nunan (1989) 'Designing Tasks for the Communicative Classroom', etc. Other teachers and
institutions are following suit. However, there is no common consent in discussion and
research. TBA is seen from different views and perspectives. The explanation for this


2
variety lies in the difficulty in implementing TBA in the classroom, in designing materials
following TBA and many other reasons. In Vietnam, English is being taught as a foreign
language with the aim of enhancing international communication. However, the
examination systems focus on formal accuracy. As a result, teachers often prioritize the
teaching of grammar which is often taught with PPP approach (presentation, practice,
performance). In its tenets, students are expected to respond using a word or pattern that
has been presented before rather than to convey the meaning or message. Therefore, most
students when leaving school are unable to communicate effectively in English. This
situation has prompted ELT professionals to find a new method more suitable and TBA
has attracted their attention. Nevertheless, the fact is that research on TBA in Vietnam is
little. There exist different views about it. Above all, it is unknown that if TBA is really

applied in classrooms or not and how teachers who partially have direct effects on
language teaching quality understand and apply it in the classroom. For these reasons, the
author is inspired to conduct 'Teachers' perceptions of the task-based approach to speaking
skills: A case of Grade 11, Nguyen Hue gifted high school, Ha Dong, Hanoi'.
1.2. Aims of the study
The study is conducted to investigate teachers' perceptions of the task-based
approach to speaking skills. The author desires to find out what and how they think and
apply TBA in the classroom. Especially, the research tries to explore their views on the
advantages and disadvantages of using the task-based approach to teach speaking in their
context.
1.3. Research questions
The above aims can be realized through the following research questions:
1. What are teachers' understandings of the Task-Based Approach to speaking
skills?
2. What do they perceive of the advantages and disadvantages of using TBA
approach to speaking skills in their context?
1.4. Scope of the study
Though TBA is believed to be used for four skills, however, the researcher has chosen
to focus on speaking for the fact that TBA initially emphasizes meaning whereas speaking
is closely connected to communication. Moreover, she only researches teacher perceptions


3
of advantages and disadvantages of using TBA in the classrooms of non-English major
students but English major ones as they use two different course books.
The study of teacher's perceptions of the task-based approach to other skills would be
beyond the scope of the study. Also, due to the author's limited ability, time constraints and
narrow-scaled study, the subjects in the research only involves a small number of teachers
who are teaching non-English major students of Grade 11, Nguyen Hue gifted high school.
1.5. Organization of the study

Chapter 1 introduced the study exploring potential of TBLT within the context of
Nguyen Hue gifted high school. The chapter included an overview of the issues, aims and
scope of the study, the research questions and the research organization. Chapter 2
provides a review of the literature, including a theoretical framework focusing on learning
and teaching theory. Chapter 2 also provides research of issues related to teacher
perceptions of tasks and TBLT. Chapter 3 describes the methodology through a description
of the case study and research design. It included the study participants, instruments, the
procedure and data analysis. In addition, the role of the researcher, the role of the teacher
are mentioned too. Chapter 4 presents the results of the study. Finally, chapter 5
summarizes the findings and discusses educational implications and limitation of the study.



4
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter briefly covers the theories related to the study relating to nature of task-
based approach and the skill of speaking.
2.1. Task-based Approach
2.1.1. The development of task-based approach
Task-based approach was first used by Prabhu in his Communicational Teaching
Project in 1979. American Government Language Institutes hired task-based instruction to
research adults' foreign languages in the early 1980s. Many researchers such as Little
Woods, Rod Ellis, David Nunan, etc. have been using it as an innovation in methodology.
The reason for this change to task-based approach lies in those innovators' realization.
They see that most language learners under the methods emphasizing mastery of grammar
do not achieve an acceptable level of proficiency in the target language (Corony Edward &
Jane Willis, 2005). Many years ago, along with the belief that language is a system of
wordings governed by a grammar and a lexicon, structural syllabuses were widely used in
schools to teach the target language for students. However, most of them within a
structure-based approach failed to attain a usable level of fluency and proficiency even

after years of instruction. Moreover, the approach established to teach second language at
the time was PPP known as 'Presentation, Practice and Production'. Presentation often
focuses on an item of grammar and usually presented explicitly in a context. This stage is
believed to develop learners' understanding of the language point. Following Presentation
is controlled Practice. It aims to enable learners to use and grasp the new rule or pattern. At
the production stage, the learner is expected to reproduce what has been taught before
more spontaneously and flexibly. Nevertheless, Willis (1996, p.135) points out: 'The
ironing is that the goal of the final production - free production - is often not achieved.
How can production be free if students are required to produce forms that have been
specified in advance?' Students, at the production stage, often focus primarily on form,
making sentence with the new item or they focus on meaning and complete the task
without incorporating the new item. Last but not least, PPP approach is also criticized
when it is based on the assumption that students will learn what is taught in the same order
in which it was taught, but there is no evidence to prove it (Skehan, 1996, p.18). In fact,


5
research has shown that teaching does not determine the way that learners' language
develops. Instead, it is mainly determined by learner-internal factors.
From above reasons, it is essential to have an approach activating acquisition
process in learners and teaching that provides a context to activate these processes.
Consequently, task-based approach is born out as a dispensable result. It is said to
overcome weakness of PPP and that tasks (which is the central component of task-based
approach) 'foster processes of negotiation, modification, rephrasing, and experimentation
that are at the heart of second language learning.' (Richards and Rodgers, 2001, p.228)
2.1.2. The nature of task-based language teaching
TBLT, realized as a strong version of communicative approach, is an effective
teaching method of goal orientation in enhancing students’ motivation. In TBA,
methodologists 'have treated tasks as units of teaching in their own right and have designed
whole courses around them' (Ellis, 2003, p.27).

TBLT offers learners exposure to authentic materials, opportunities to use the target
language, and motivation to learn, which are all considered as essential conditions for
language learning (Willis, 1996).
TBLT embodies the functional and interactional view of language theories,
concentrates primarily on meaning and learners' communicative competence to complete
tasks (Nunan, 1989; Ellis, 2003). Learners are engaged in truly meaningful and effective
communication such as negotiation of meaning for the task completion. It emphasizes the
interaction between learners to handle learning problems and to enrich their knowledge,
skills by doing and discovering. Learners are more independent of their teachers. They can
interact with one another to share experience, knowledge and even error correction. They
are encouraged to learn by discovering various things rather than transmission. In TBLT,
therefore, teachers have different positions in the class. They can take the role as instructor
(in the pre-task phase), a monitor and encourager (in the task stage), a language adviser (in
the planning stage) and a chairperson (in the report stage) (Willis, 1996, p.52).
Moreover, the nature of TBLT can be realized in the discussion on the model for
TBLT of Willis (1996) as below:
1) Goals and outcomes


6
Teachers, in task-based classes, have a duty of selecting topics and tasks that should
be appropriately challenging to motivate learners, to engage their attention, and to promote
their language development most effectively.
Obviously, all tasks are “goal-oriented” as each all has its own specific objective that
must be achieved, often in a given time. Therefore, the focus is on understanding and
conveying meanings in order to complete the task successfully; learners use the language
in a meaningful way while they carry out the tasks. With a little bit challenging outcomes,
it is the way that makes TBL a motivating procedure in classroom.
2) Meaning before form
One important feature of tasks is tasks implementation, which implies that learners

can freely use whatever language they want so as to fulfill the goals. Learners must be
primarily concerned with achieving the outcome, not with displaying language.
Viewed this way, teachers then obtain the role of a facilitator who encourages all
attempts to communicate in target language, but not an intruder to learners’ produced
language. Learners will experiment with the language on their own, and even take risk.
That helps to create an appropriate level of challenge, boosting the effectiveness of TBLT.
3) Tasks and skills practice
The four language skills – listening, speaking, reading and writing – are singled out
to be developed separately, in some approaches on language teaching; while in others, they
are talked in terms of integrated skills. In a task-based cycle, teachers naturally foster skills
combination. The skills form an integral part of the process to achieve the task goals; they
are practiced integratedly.
Being aware of learners’ needs, teachers can select or adapt tasks that help learners to
practice relevant skills. Tasks integrating the skills of reading and listening, note-taking
and summarizing are bound to be helpful for learners who may need English for academic
purposes. For those who not only need to pass a written examination, but also want to
socialize in the target language, text-based tasks with written outcomes and/or discussion
at various points in the task cycle could be used.
2.1.3. Task definition


7
The study and description of task has been approached from different perspectives
and for different purposes. Various definitions offered are different in scope and
formulation where almost anything related to educational activity can be called 'a task'.
Therefore, it is necessary to give clear definitions of what the authors mean when they use
the term 'task'.
Prabhu (1987), one of the first methodologist raising interest and support for task-
based language, considers a task 'an activity which required learners to arrive at an
outcome from given information through some process of thought, and which allowed

teachers to control and regulate that process' (p.12). According to him, effective learning
occurs when students are engaged in a language task rather than learning about language.
Whereas, Long (1985) perceives tasks differently. He argues that 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 pain of shoes,
making an airline reservation, borrowing a library book, 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.' (p.89). Long (1985)'s definition is a non-technical, non-linguistic one. It
describes tasks as sorts of things that do not involve language and tasks may be subsidiary
components of a larger task. Proposing rather quite different opinions, however, Richards,
Platt and Weber (1985) defines tasks in more detail. A task is 'an activity or action which is
carried out 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 command, may be refereed 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 a variety of different kinds of
tasks in language teaching is said to make teaching more communicative since it provides
a purpose for classroom activity which goes beyond practice of language for its own sake'
(as cited in Ellis, 2004, p.4). In these definitions, the authors take a pedagogical
perspective. In other words, tasks here are regarded as what learners do in the classroom
but in the outside world. Nunan (1989) also agrees that the communicative task is 'a piece
of classroom work which involves learners in comprehending, manipulating, producing or


8
interacting in the target language', and express ideas that while doing tasks, learners'
attention is focused on meaning rather than form and that the task must be completed and
is able to 'stand alone as a communicative act in its own right' (p.10). Other authors share

the same opinion with Nunan about tasks' focus on meaning. Skehan (1998) defines a task
as an activity in which:
- meaning is primary
- there is some communication problem to solve
- there is some sort of relationship to comparable real-world activities
- task completion has some priority
- the assessment of the task is in terms of outcome.
Or Bygate, Skehan, and Swain (2001) propose ' a task is an activity which requires learners
to use language, with emphasis on meaning, to attain an objective' (as cited in Ellis, 2004,
p.4).
From what mentioned above, we have gone through many viewpoints about task
definitions. Though they vary in some ways, all emphasize the fact that tasks involve
communicative language use in which users' attention is focused on meaning rather than
grammatical form.
In this study, my own view of tasks is a unit which is goal-oriented, meaning-
focused first and form-focused then, contextualized and implemented as the basis for
teaching and learning.
2.1.4. Task types
It is important to distinguish different task types as it helps teachers to investigate
which types is the most effective in promoting learning. In addition, syllabus designers can
also refer to the classification to ensure that a range of task types are incorporated into the
course. However, tasks are identified in numerous ways since people who have written on
task-based language teaching and learning stand on different viewpoints.
According to Nunan (1989, p.44), communicative tasks can be categorized into two
main types: pedagogic tasks, i.e. tasks practised in the classroom and real world tasks that
are used for the purpose of rehearsing future needs. Prabhu (1987) distinguishes three
general types of tasks based on the kind of cognitive activity involved: Information-gap,
reasoning-gap, opinion-gap activities.

9
Besides Prabhy and Nunan's classifications, Long (1983, p.213) groups tasks into
two types: one-way and two-way tasks. In one-way tasks, only one participant distributes
information, for example, giving instruction and narrative. In a two-way task, each
participant keeps some information or knowledge which is not shared and they have to
match or exchange information to complete the task. Other researchers also present their
own tasks classification. Puff (1986) offers convergent and divergent tasks. Tasks that
require learners to exchange information such as role plays, discussions, problem solving,
etc. to reach a consensus are called 'convergent tasks'. One the contrary, tasks requiring
learners to exchange information but not to reach the consensus are known as divergent
ones. The difference between convergent and divergent tasks lies in their goal. Participants
in convergent tasks need to have a mutual solution whereas participants in divergent ones
do not. They can have independent goals and defend their given positions.
In 1898, Long proposes new labels for tasks namely 'open' and 'closed' tasks.
According to him, open task refers to a task in which participants know there is no
predetermined correct solution. Closed task refers to a task which requires the participants
to attempt to reach a single correct solution or some solutions determined beforehand by
the designer of the task. Ellis (2001) has his own classification. He offers two kinds of
tasks: reciprocal and non-reciprocal tasks. The first one requires a two-way flow of
information between interlocutors, whereas the other is a one-way communication from a
speaker to a hearer (p.49).
Though being given different labels, a task is a mean to enable learners to use the
target languages. It provides chances for learners to comprehend and manipulate the target
language in different social contexts. It can be said that any tasks that encourage the
exchange of ideas from one learner to another, in groups or with the text, through language
in any context, could be described as communicative.
2.2. Task-based teaching framework
A precise model for task-based teaching designed by Willis (1996) and then
supported by Frost (2006) is briefly figured out in the table below:
Phase

Pre-task
Introduction to topic and tasks


10
Task cycle
Task
Planning
Report
Language focus
Analysis
Practice
Willis’s model for task-based instruction (Willis, 1996, p.52)
As access to a clear framework for a task-based lesson is obviously advantageous to
both teachers and learners, a thorough and detailed discussion on these phases is of crucial
point.
In the pre-task phase, the topic to be covered and the tasks to be accomplished in the
lesson are introduced. It is usually the shortest stage in the framework and could last
between two or twenty minutes, depending on the level of learners’ being familiar with the
topic and the task types. This phase may involve the use of texts or the recordings of native
speakers’ carrying out parallel forms of the tasks. Pre-task activities, as supported by
Skehan (1998), should be engaged into introduce new elements into the interlanguage
system; to mobilize and recycle language; to ease processing load and to push learners to
interpret task in more demanding ways.
The task cycle phase can be subdivided into three stages of task, planning and report,
all of which comprise a task cycle itself. In this key phase, students use the target language
the most for the task implementation; fluency and focus on meaning are mainly attended.
Learners are offered chances to use whatever language they already know to complete the
task, and then, with assistance from teachers, while planning their task report, to improve

that language. At the task stage, students are usually required to work in pairs or in small
groups to get the tasks accomplished; teachers’ role here is to monitor and to facilitate but
not to intrude into learners’ production of language. The planning stage, in Willis’s view,
attaches teachers to the role of linguistic advisers, being responsible for feedback and help
when needed; meanwhile, students are encouraged to prepare themselves for the report by
drafting, editing and/or rehearsing the content they are going to present. In the last stage of
reporting, students possess occasions to report on the tasks to the class while teachers work


11
as a chairperson to judge their performance and give comments and feedback on the
content and form if needed.
The last phase in the framework is language focus, which, including analysis and
practice, is used for consolidation and reflection. As learners have already worked with the
language and processed it for meaning by this point, they now in this final phase will
closely study some specific features naturally occurring in the language used during the
task cycle under teachers’ guidance.
2.3. Task-based teaching vs. other types of teaching instruction models
Task-based teaching model proposed by Willis (1996) can be easily distinguished
from other types of teaching instruction models.
For a start, TBLT strongly opposes the traditional PPP (Presentation – Practice –
Production) teaching/learning cycle in which, the presentation of grammar or language
items by teachers comes first, followed by controlled and less controlled practice (in the
form of exercises) and then by actual production of the sentences. TBLT also differs from
the more communicative and learner-centered alternative to the PPP model – the TTT
(Test – Teach – Test) model which begins with the production stage and require learners to
perform a particular task.
Next, TBLT is different from three stage ESA (Engage, Study, and Activate) model
proposed by Jeremy Harmer (1998). During the engage phase, teachers try to arouse the
students’ interest and engage their emotions through perhaps a game, a picture, a record or

video, a dramatic story, an amusing anecdote, etc. Activities in the study phase focus on
language and the way it is constructed, which could vary from the pronunciation of one
particular sound to an examination of a verb tense or to the techniques an author uses to
create excitement in a longer reading text. In the activate phase, exercises and activities are
designed to encourage students to use their full language knowledge in the selected
situation or task as communicatively as they can.
In addition, TBLT should be clearly differentiated from TSI (Task-supported
instruction) which was mentioned by Ellis (2003) when he tried to clarify between
unfocused and focused tasks. TSI means incorporating tasks as a part of the curriculum,
beside other types of activities. It is, thus, completely versus TBLT because in the pure
form of TBLT, task is the only unit of the curriculum, the basis for teaching, and even the


12
assessment. In a word, TSI has the maxim of “learning to use” while the maxim of TBI is
“using to learn” or “learning by doing”
2.4. Advantages and disadvantages of task-based language teaching
Few people would question the pedagogical value of employing tasks as a vehicle
for promoting communication and authentic language use in second language classrooms.
Task-based language teaching, however, has its own drawbacks. It is, therefore, necessary
to weigh the pros and cons of TBLT thoroughly hereafter.
2.4.1. Advantages
Task-Based Language Teaching is an application of second language teaching in-
formed by the most recent research findings on second language acquisition. As such, it
plays an important role in current language pedagogy (Solares, 2006).
TBLT is advantageous to the students because it is more student-centered, allows for
more meaningful communication, and often provides for practical extra-linguistic skill
building. Although teachers may present language in the pre-task, students are ultimately
free to use what grammar constructs and vocabulary they want. This allows them to use all
the language they know and are learning, rather than just the 'target language' of the lesson.

Furthermore, as the tasks are likely to be familiar to the students (e.g.: visiting the doctor),
students are more likely to be engaged, which may further motivate them in their language
learning. Task-based lessons usually provide learners with an active role in participating
and creating the activities, and offer more opportunities for learners to display their
thinking through their actions. Willis (1996, p.137) reports the advantages of TBLT after
his survey to learners:
 they gain confidence in speaking and interacting quite soon after a task-
based course;
 they enjoy the challenge of doing tasks and find many of them fun;
 they are able to talk about language itself in addition to other topics;
 they can cope with natural spontaneous speech much more easily, and
tackle quite tough reading texts in appropriate way;
 they become far more independent learners
In TBLT classes, teachers can be more open to the needs of the students. TBLT
allows students to use the knowledge they have learnt and apply it productively in the task


13
context (procedural knowledge). This practical experience helps learners to appreciate why
certain academic questions are important and provide an experiential substrate for the
development of a further academic discourse.
Naturally, tasks usually require the selection of some objects as an outcome. This can
provide a shared focus for which learners can work together. In the process, different
participants, peer learners of the group, can project different views on the same situation
and develop meaningful discussion on the matter. The task will usually generate objects
that are also open to cross group evaluation. Learners can present their own products and
evaluate others. Everyone can take part in evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of the
work generated within the classroom community. This will induce reflection as well as the
development of critical awareness in the students (Ki, 2000).
Besides benefits it brings to learners, TBLT also facilitates language teaching. Willis

(1996, p.137-138) gives out the opinions of teachers and trainers who have just
experimented with TBLT:
 with mixed-level classes, a TBLT approach works far better than a PPP one
 learners bring their own experiences to lessons and often come up with
interesting and original ideas;
 by the end of the course they are often surprised at how much their learners
have achieved.
2.4.2. Disadvantages
According to Richards and Rogers (2001), Task-Based Language Teaching provides
a more effective basis for teaching than other language teaching approaches, however
many aspects of TBLT like proposed schemes for task types, task sequencing, and
evaluation of task performance, etc. have not been justified, this basic assumption still
remains in ideology rather than fact. Swan (2005) even claims the statement, firmly based
on the findings of current theory and research, that TBLT is an advanced teaching
approach can not be continuous. Supported neither by convincing theoretical argument nor
by experimental evidence, the closely related to TBLT hypotheses, to the effect that
second-language acquisition, being controlled by inflexible developmental sequences,
completely occurs as a result of noticing during communicative activity, are opposed by
common language-learning experience.


14
While Task-Based Instruction may fruitfully develops learners’ authority of what is
known, it is significantly less effective for the systematic teaching of new language.
Depending on tasks as a primary source of pedagogical input in teaching, TBLT is
criticized to be inappropriate in foundation classes for beginning learners. Centering on
tasks implementation, TBLT raises an implication of learners’ being able to interact in the
target language, while in fact they lack this proficiency. This drags on the risk that learners
will overuse their L1 or engage in off-task talks. Furthermore, learner-learner interaction
may result in pidginized use of the L2 and concomitant interlanguage fossilization. (Prabhu,

1987)
Skehan (1996) notices that TBLT holds some dangers if implemented carelessly.
Especially, it is likely to create pressure for instant communication rather than
interlanguage change and growth. Speakers may resort to use some communication
strategies such as paraphrase, repetition, word coinage, etc. The elicited performances,
moreover, may depend on abilities or knowledge rather than language itself. As Norris,
Brown, Hudson, and Bonk (2002) argue, TBLT does not provide any basis for making
interpretations beyond the particular task context and it cannot simulate all of the factors
that define actual language use situations.
It should also be said that task-based interaction is mainly narrow and learners put
great emphasis on communicating meanings, without necessary worry about the exact form
they use. Therefore, the whole organization of interaction is equipped for establishing a
tight and selected focus on the achievement of the task. There are, nonetheless, a large
number of different varieties of interaction in the world outside the L2 classrooms, where
there is certainly a lot more to communication than performing tasks (Seedhouse, 1999).
2.5. Implementing tasks in teaching the skill of speaking
As mentioned in 2.1.2, skills combination is naturally fostered and the four skills of
listening, reading, writing and speaking are practiced intergratedly in task-based lessons. In
teaching speaking, teachers should also be aware of this while selecting or adapting tasks
that boost learners’ oral communication.
In traditional drilling forms for classroom speaking practice, one person asks a
question and another gives an answer. The question and the answer are structured and
often there is only one correct, predetermined answer. Participants then could predict what


15
their partners would say. In real communication (such as conveying a telephone message,
obtaining information, or expressing an opinion), however, everything happens contrarily
and participants must manage uncertainty about what the other person will say. Authentic
communication involves an information gap; each participant has information that the

other does not have and they interact to achieve their purpose. In addition, participants may
have to clarify their meaning, ask for confirmation of their own understanding or negotiate
for agreement.
Teachers (as task designers) need to incorporate a purpose and an information gap
and allow for multiple forms of expression. However, quantity alone will not necessarily
produce competent speakers. Teachers need to combine structured output activities, which
allow for error correction and increased accuracy, with communicative output activities
that give students opportunities to practice language use more freely.
Besides, classroom speaking tasks that will develop communicative competence
needs the thorough support of authentic materials. Here teachers must consider three issues
of authenticity. First is the text authenticity of how natural the language sample is. Second
is the task authenticity showing what learners are supposed to do with that language for
learning or practice opportunities (Nunan, 1989). And third is the response authenticity –
that is, how natural the speech produced by learners may be (McNamara, 2000, p.27 – 29).
Authentic materials must be relevant to the learners’ lives.
Shortly, all these points, together, should be kept in teachers’ mind as the orientation
for tasks design and adaptation.
2.6. The importance of understanding teachers' perceptions of teaching methodology
As Stern (1983) has asserted “no language teacher – however strenuously he may
deny his interest in theory – can teach a language without a theory of language teaching”
(p.27), in order to understand teaching, it is of necessity to understand teachers’
interpretation of teaching methodology. Of all things affecting the result of teaching, the
factor of teachers themselves cannot be ignored. Understanding teachers’ interpretation of
teaching methodology, educators and researchers, who intend to propose necessary
changes, can help answer the question: “Why the interaction between teacher and class
happens that way?” (Canh, 2004, p.109) while interpreting the reality of major class
teaching. Teaching can empower learner-driven experiences and promote cognitive


16

processing if pedagogical considerations are taken into account, and if what applications
related to the teaching can originate to the method teachers chose and how they were aware
of it is shown.
In discussing the appropriateness of teaching and learning: “… language learning,
and therefore language teaching, does not occur in vacuum, the larger context is the society
within which the language or languages are to be learned and used” (p.108), however,
Canh (2004) believed that to a teacher, having the right conceptualization of teaching
methods and approaches is really important but insufficient to the success of teaching. He
argued:
… those approaches or methods share the same shortcomings: (1) “They themselves are
decontextualized, dealing with what to teach, how to teach it, and why to teach it that way,
but saying nothing about who teaches it and to whom; when and where it is taught (to use
Larsen Freeman’s words, 2000a), and (2) they are intuitively prescriptive and ideological,
rather than being based on empirical data collected from diverse classroom realities. To
sum up, all language teaching methods make the oversimplified assumption that what
teachers “do” in the classroom can be conventionalized into a set of procedures that fits all
contexts. We are now all aware that such is clearly not the case (to use Brown’s words,
1994b).
Apparently, everything happening in the classroom reflects beliefs about the nature
of language, the nature of the learning process and the nature of the teaching act. Here then
the issue does not lie in which method is the best or whether or not a new method is
superior to its predecessor but in how teachers learn to vary their method and approach,
and how they rationalize the method or approach they use. In other words, teachers should
be encouraged to move “from ideology to inquiry” (Canh, 2004, p.116).
In short, I would like to regard Canh’s argumentation as a conclusion: “for over
thirty years, the consensus in foreign language teaching community has been shifting
towards the realization that what is used in the classroom is the individual teacher’s
interpretation of any given method” (2004, p.108).
2.7. Definition of teacher perception
In Oxford dictionary, perception is defined as 'an idea, a belief or an image you

have as a result of how you see or understand something'. In the field of psychology,


17
perception is one of the main issues which gets much attention as it plays important roles.
According to Feldman (1990) a psychologist, perception is 'the process by which we sort
out, interpret, analyze, and integrate stimuli to which our senses are exposed.'(p.149). In
the paper, teachers' perception means the process of determining the meaning of what are
sensed. Perception occurs when teachers interpret a given meaning to stimuli in their
classroom environment or in the students' classroom behaviour.
2.8. Relation between teacher perception and practice
Teachers' perception is closely related to their practice. It is shown in figure below:

Figure 1. Teacher-student perceptions and the quality of learning outcomes
(Trigwell, Prosser & Waterhouse, 1999, p.57)
According to these researchers, teachers who perceive learning as the accumulation
of information tend to view learning as the transfer of information. Such teachers are more
likely to use a teacher centre approach where the teacher plays the central role and imparts
information to students. In contrast, teachers who view learning as conceptual change view
teaching as facilitating conceptual change. In other words, those regard learning as
changing a learner's original ideas favour a student centred teaching approach where
independence in learning is encouraged through discussion, debate and questioning among
students (Prosser & Trigwell, 1999, p.57-70). Teachers are facilitators and advisers in
learners' studies.
The figure also points out the close relation between teachers' perception of
learning and teaching and their approaches. They are important elements in deciding the
quality of students' learning outcomes. Therefore, it is said that teachers with different
approaches produce different students.
2.9. Previous studies on teacher perceptions of TBLT

18
TBLT is arising as a useful approach in developing learners' communication in
language learning. It leads to a trend of researching TBA principles and its implementation
in practice. Yet, there are few studies on teacher perception of the field. Bob & Annie
(2008) spent two years doing research on the process of implementing a curriculum reform
- the task-based learning (TBL) innovation in Hong Kong in three secondary schools. They
found out that TBL was being implemented by teachers in ways that diverged from the
intended curriculum. One of the reasons was due to teacher perception. All of them lacked
or misunderstood the concepts of TBL though they participated in workshop, team work,
training course on TBL. Some teachers view tasks as activities to make class learning
atmosphere less boring. Even teachers in school 3 were reluctant to implement TBL as
they believed that 'students learn from teacher instruction' and ' tasks were for 'practising',
'revising', and ' catering for individual differences'. Teachers in school 2 agreed that TBL
took too much time to prepare and implement. Generally, teachers in the research did not
have the right and basic understanding of TBL and met much difficulty in implementation.
Like Bob and Annie, Gulden, Julie & Huly were also interested in TBLT, however,
their study investigated 4
th
grade primary school teachers' and students' perception of task-
based language learning in order to find out the similarities and differences that exist
between the understanding of tasks by two parties. The findings indicated that teachers had
a sound understanding of task-based teaching and they had touched some key elements
such as 'focus on meaning' and 'learner involvement'. However, the implementation of TBL
was limited to language practice activities focusing mainly on form. It also came out that
the students perceive the tasks as a means of revision or prize at the end of a lesson.
Another research which is also related to task-based approach is In-Jae Jeon &
Jung-Won Hahn (2006)'s. It explored EFL teachers' perceptions of TBLT in 38 different
Korean secondary school contexts. The study showed that teachers had a comparatively
clear understanding of the linguistic features of task and the key concepts of TBLT

regardless of their teaching levels. Yet, many of them hesitated to adopt TBLT as an
instructional method in classroom practice as they feared of being confronted with
problems of a lack of knowledge and confidence. The result indicated that teachers'
conceptual understandings of TBLT did not necessarily lead to the actual use of task in the
classroom. The authors found out reasons that teachers used and did not use TBLT in the
classroom.