Graduation Paper: Ho Chi Minh City University of Education English Department

Task-Based Language Teaching
HO CHI MINH CITY UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATION ENGLISH DEPARTMENT
GRADUATION PAPER
SUBMITTED BY: BUI NGUYEN KHANH DO HUYNH QUAN NGOC SUPERVISOR: MR. NGUYEN TUAN PHUC, MA
A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Arts in English Language Teaching
HO CHI MINH CITY, APRIL 2010
Task-Based Language Teaching Running head: TASK-BASED LANGUAGE TEACHING IN TEACHING SPEAKING
The Implementation of Task-Based Language Teaching In Teaching Speaking for 11th Graders of Public High Schools in Ho Chi Minh City
Supervisor: Students:
Mr. Nguyen Tuan Phuc, MA Bui Nguyen Khanh Do Huynh Quan Ngoc
Ho Chi Minh City University of Education English Department
Task-Based Language Teaching Acknowledgements The researchers would like to send our sincere thanks to many teachers,
friends and students in helping us carry out this paper. They play an important role in making the completion of this minor research a success. First of all, we are extremely grateful to our supervisor, Mr. Nguyen Tuan Phuc. His timely and insightful at every stage in the preparation of this research, and his encouraging and guidance have made a writing process a pleasure. He has kindly given up his valuable time to read every chapter and give much-needed critical feedback. Any shortcomings remain solely our responsibility. Without his incessant support, this research cannot come to this successful closing stage. Secondly, a special thank is needed for our Department of English, Ho Chi Minh City University of Education, especially Mr. Pham Tan, in recommending Mr. Tuan Phuc. We also thanks Dr. Nguyen Thanh Tung, who spent his valuable time providing us with basic knowledge of writing a research paper. Besides we want to thank Ms. Hanh Nguyen for keeping track our progress. Thirdly, we really appreciate the special help from Ms. Ta Thanh Huyen, a lecturer from English Department and Ms. Vu Thi The Mai, a teacher from Bui Thi Xuan High School in observing and evaluating our trial classes. Moreover, they spent their valuable time joining our interview. Fourthly, we also express our gratitude to the teachers and the students from three different public high schools in Ho Chi Minh City: Bui Thi Xuan, Hung Vuong and Ly Thuong Kiet for their precious help and cooperation during our survey at their schools.
Task-Based Language Teaching Last but not least, millions of thanks are sent to our beloved family and our friends from University of Education due to their endless support and encouragement, which really motivates us in writing this research paper.
Task-Based Language Teaching Table of Contents
Page ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS................................................................................................ 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS.................................................................................................... 3 LIST OF TABLES.............................................................................................................. 5 ABSTRACT........................................................................................................................ 7 Introduction......................................................................................................................... 8 Literature Review................................................................................................................ 13 Communicative Language Teaching ............................................................................................................................ 14 The Task-based Approach ............................................................................................................................ 15 The Implementation of Task-based in teaching speaking ............................................................................................................................ 16 Methodology....................................................................................................................... 24 Locations
............................................................................................................................ 24 Subjects ............................................................................................................................ 25 Materials ............................................................................................................................ 26 Procedures ............................................................................................................................ 27 Results of Findings and Data Analysis............................................................................... 29 Questionnaire ............................................................................................................................ 29 Interview ............................................................................................................................ 34 Controlled experiment ............................................................................................................................ 38 Discussion........................................................................................................................... 47 Conclusion and Recommendations..................................................................................... 53 REFERENCES................................................................................................................... 57
APPENDIX A Students Questionnaire.......................................................................... 59 APPENDIX B Teachers Questionnaire.......................................................................... 64 APPENDIX C Data collected from Students Questionnaires........................................ 68 APPENDIX D Data collected from Teachers Questionnaires....................................... 70 APPENDIX E Interview Questions for Students............................................................. 72 APPENDIX F Interview Questions for Teachers............................................................ 73 APPENDIX G Lesson Plan for the first trial period........................................................ 74 APPENDIX H Lesson Plan for the second trial period................................................... 76 APPENDIX I Observation for the first trial period......................................................... 79 APPENDIX J Observation for the second trial period.................................................... 81 APPENDIX K Data collected from questionnaires for students feedback after the first trial period..................................................................................................... 83 APPENDIX L Data collected from questionnaires for students feedback
after the second trial period................................................................................................. 84 APPENDIX M Tables...................................................................................................... 85 APPENDIX N Tables of Chi-square (Critical values).................................................... 91
List of Tables Page Table 1 25 Table 2 30 Table 3 Opinions about teachers less attention and help in speaking classes.......................................................................... 32 Table 4 33 Table 5 34 Table 6 34 Table 7 41 Table 8 43 Table 9 43 Table 10 44 The suitability of the tasks with students ability........................... Students opinions about tasks in the trial period........................... Students general opinions about the trial period........................... Comparisons between the two trial classes..................................... Problems of the lack of confidence among students....................... Problems of the lack of fluency and accuracy among students...... The Frequency of learning at high schools..................................... The sources of the activities in speaking classes............................ Distribution of students among the three high schools...................
Task-Based Language Teaching Table 11 44 Table 12 45 Table 13 45 Table 14 Reasons Why Students find it interesting
10
Teachers instructions.....................................................................
Communication in the class............................................................
The practicability of the tasks.........................................................
to learn speaking at high schools.................................................... 85 Table 15 Reasons Why Students find it uninteresting to learn speaking at high schools.................................................... 86 Table 16 87 Table 17 88 Table 18 The Benefits of Implementation of TBT in teaching speaking at high schools................................................................................. 89 Table 19 The Problems of Implementation of TBT in teaching speaking at high schools................................................................................. 90 Factors which may decide the success of a speaking period.......... The Frequency of Activity Types used in speaking classes...........
11
Abstract Teaching and learning speaking are showing a remarkable improvement in high schools since the innovation of the new textbooks. It is a promising sign for students to develop their communicative skills. However, students still do not have lots of interest in the speaking tasks in the recent textbook. Therefore, this research is intended to investigate the effects of implementing the framework of Task-Based Language Teaching in teaching speaking for 11th graders in our public high school so that students can have much more opportunities to enhance their communicative skills. The survey is carried out on two hundred and forty nine students and thirty five teachers in three public high schools: Bui Thi Xuan, Hung Vuong, Ly Thuong Kiet. At first, the researchers deliver sets of questionnaires and interview some respondents to explore students and teachers attitudes towards the speaking tasks in the textbook and their desire for a successful speaking period. In the second place, the two trial classes, one with the tasks in the textbook, and one with the implementation of TBLT framework are conducted to attest the merits and drawbacks of TBLT under the observation and evaluation of one lecturer in English Department and the supervisor in Bui Thi Xuan High School. The three interactive instruments questionnaires, interviews and classroom observation show their values in conveying students and teachers thoughts about the applying TBLT in teaching and learning speaking in high school context. Then some solutions to better the weaknesses are laid out and put into practice by one of the researchers. The findings reveal the pros and cons of TBLT and its effects on improving students speaking ability, which exerts a strong influence on advancing students speaking skills in Vietnamese high school context.
12
The Implementation of Task-Based Language Teaching In Teaching Speaking for 11th Graders of Public High Schools in Ho Chi Minh City
It is disheartening to note that there is not much provisions made to provide students with opportunities to speak in English within the classroom, including English lessons. Mrs. Rabia Shahul, Head of Department, English Language, Compassvale Secondary School This is a problem not only in the Asian countries, where English is considered as a foreign language but also in Vietnam. We are living in the era where English is the key to ones success to gain a position in this competitive market, and Vietnam is not an exception, especially at the time when Vietnam is in the process of international integration. However, one striking fact is that 86.8% of the students graduating from high school admit that they dont have enough confidence in communicating in English even if using simple sentences (Kim Lien, 2006). Many parents and educators also feel worried about the fact that students cannot speak English fluently even after seven years studying in high school. A series of articles also raises an alarming warning for this issue. For example, on Dan Tri Newspaper (2007) came an article Km ngoi ng, sinh vin Vit Nam mi tt hu (Bad at English, Vietnamese students always fall behind). This article says Khng t cc tn c nhn sm b loi khi cc cuc tuyn dng ch v vn ting Anh qu ngho nn (Lan Anh, 2007) (The newly-graduated are quickly knocked out in the the
Task-Based Language Teaching jobs recruitment due to the incompetence in English). Moreover, on Nguoi Lao Dong (The Labor) exists an article Su im yu ca sinh vin Vit Nam (Six
13
weaknesses of Vietnamese Students). Dong Trieu (2004) clearly pointed out that one of the weaknesses is the limited ability in communicating in English. Therefore, students speaking ability should be paid more attention to. Up until now, many efforts have been put to enhance students speaking ability. Obviously, it is the adoption of series of new text books that puts an improvement in students speaking competence. However, teaching speaking at high schools still doesnt get satisfactory results. This brings us into the idea of using Taskbasked Language Teaching, an approach of Communicative Language Teaching, in redesigning the tasks in the current official textbooks with the hope to bring a new wind of change in teaching and learning speaking in Vietnamese high schools context. However, before we can make any achievements, we first have to take many problems into thorough consideration. First of all, The Grammar Translation Method (GTM) has been profoundly used in Vietnam for a long time. We have been continuously paying too much attention to teaching grammar and too little to teaching other communicative skills such as speaking or listening. In other words, it is the form rather than the meaning is focused on in class. Therefore, students may find it very difficult to talk with other people in the target language. Furthermore, we are also influenced by the Chinese ideology (Confucianism). Confucianism, a system of teaching moral, social, political thought, became the foundation of Vietnam's educational system. Under this philosophy, students become more and more passive in class and dare not to ask teachers what they dont understand. Moreover, according to Kramsch and Sullivan (2006), Vietnamese teachers usually treat the class in a classroom-as-family way. It means students chorally repeats after
Task-Based Language Teaching teachers. Some can mimic the others and it is very difficult for teachers to know students ability or even the teachers cannot identify students can actually speak or not. Secondly, the new English series is a big improvement in teaching 4 skills: Reading, Speaking, Listening, and Writing. However, students find it difficult to acquire the speaking skills due to the fact that there is too little time spent on teaching speaking. With three periods a week, it is difficult for teachers to
14
simultaneously cover the four skills. Thus, teachers sometimes neglect the speaking section to focus on the other points, i.e. grammar, reading, and listening. Especially, when there are too many students in one class, it is difficult for teachers to handle the class in teaching speaking. Importantly, reading and grammar rather than the speaking, as a matter of routine, are preferable to be taught in class. Moreover, under the influence of the backwash of our testing system, where there is no test on speaking, students seem to ignore the speaking skills. Obviously, students just study what they need for the exam, and take no notice of the speaking skills. In order to find a solution for the above problems, our research proposes the application of the Task-Based Language Teaching, an approach of the Communicative Language Teaching in teaching speaking for 11th graders in high school to develop the students speaking ability. The purpose of the Communicative language teaching is to bring real life situations into the classroom so that the learners can have a chance to communicate in the target language, and the learning of a second language, thus, emerges naturally. On the other hand, task-based approach gives a more specific and practical usage in the framework of communicative language teaching. Task-based approach is focusing on the functional purposes for which language must be used and on the learners language
Task-Based Language Teaching competence. Thus, implementing communicative language teaching and tasked-
15
based approach in high school classrooms is a change from the traditional instruction which focuses on the structure of language towards the usage of language in an authentic way. Overall, with this research, we aim at investigating the effectiveness of the implementation of Task-Based Language Teaching (TBLT) in teaching speaking for 11th graders of Ho Chi Minhs public high schools. Moreover, the merits and problems when applying this approach as well as some possible solutions to these obstacles are also proposed in this research. Besides, we choose the 11th graders because they have already exposed to the series of this new textbook in the 10th form. Therefore, they can give a deeper thought over the tasks in the textbook. Hence our findings of investigating the implementation of TBLT in teaching speaking for 11th grade students are predicted to be more comparatively precise and reliable. In order to accomplish these goals, our research aims at the following issues: 1. How is Speaking taught for the 11th graders? Has the Task-Based Language Teaching been implemented in teaching speaking for the 11th graders? 2. What are the advantages and the difficulties in using task-based in teaching speaking for 11th grade students in our public high schools? 3. How can English teachers apply the task-based to teaching speaking for 11th graders effectively? There are six chapters in this research. In Chapter 1, we look at the current situation of teaching speaking in Vietnam and students speaking ability. The research questions are also raised in this chapter. Chapter 2 points out a conceptual framework for teaching speaking by using the Task-Based Language Teaching. Chapter 3 gives further information about the process of conducting this research,
Task-Based Language Teaching i.e. how the questionnaire is delivered, or how we conduct the interview with the participants,Chapter 4 includes the data analysis and the interpretation from the data. In Chapter 5, we focus on the issues mentioned in the research questions and end up with some suggestions for carrying out this method. In the last chapter, chapter 6, we draw conclusions towards implementing the Task-Based Language Teaching in teaching speaking for 11th graders so that it can be widely used in the
16
high school to improve students speaking ability. With this research, we hope it can provide a valuable resource for English teachers who have a strong desire to conduct the successful communicative classroom in the high school by using the Task-Based Language Teaching. The second chapter will present the conceptual framework which serves as a solid foundation for the survey.
Task-Based Language Teaching Literature Review
17
This chapter is devoted to building a conceptual framework for our research which centers on the implementation of Task-Based Language Teaching in teaching speaking skills. It provides a basic framework to develop our research. For many decades the Grammar Translation Method (GTM) is the predominant method in language teaching in all the high schools in Vietnam. This method stems from the teaching of the nineteenth century and is extensively used for the first half of the last century to teach foreign languages. As for GTM, there is usually a list of vocabulary and rule explanations, as what can be seen in the series of the old English textbooks. Moreover, students just do the translation or some grammar exercises in class. Therefore, little oral fluency in using target language would result from the GTM. In 1960s, many questions concerning students communication outside the classroom was raised among the linguistics. Students, in order to be a fluent speaker, are often expected to go abroad to acquire the target language. This does not seem to be the problem since the implementation of the Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) in promoting students language acquisition. CLT then is generally regarded as an approach to language teaching (Richards and Rodgers, 2001). Particularly, the Task-based Language Teaching (TBLT) is more favorable among other communicative approaches such as the content-based or the theme-based. TBLT gives a more specific and practical outcome in the framework of communicative language teaching. What makes taskbased approach different from other communicative approaches, such as the contentbased or the theme-based, is that it is considered to be more language-based. Language-based, in this case, is not in a traditional sense of focusing on the
18
structure of language, but rather, it is focusing on the functional purposes for which language must be used and on the learners pragmatic language competence (Brown, 1994). Overall, Communicative Language Teaching together with TaskedBased Language Teaching is regarded as a way for successful language learning and is worthwhile to be implemented in EFL (English as a Foreign Language) classrooms, especially in teaching speaking. As a result, students in high schools can find learning speaking interesting, which may improve their speaking skills. The following sections build up a more comprehensive picture of the Communicative Language Teaching and the Task-Based Language Teaching. Communicative Language Teaching The CLT stems from the notion that the main purpose of learning a foreign language is communication. It is to develop the fluency rather than the accuracy. In other words, students can use the language to communicate not only in the classroom but also in the social context. The ability to communicate (communicative competence knowing when and how to say what to whom) is more challenging than learning linguistic structures (linguistic competence rules of linguistic usage). It requires that students perform certain functions within a social context. Here come definitions of the CLT. A communicative (or functional/notional) approach is organized on the basis of communicative functions (e.g. apologizing, describing, inviting, promising) that a given learner of group of learners needs to know and emphasizes the ways in which particular grammatical forms may be used to express these functions appropriately (Canale and Swain, 1980:1). According to Brown, such a teaching method is to move significantly beyond the teaching of rules, patterns, definitions, and other knowledge about language to the point that we are teaching our students to communicate genuinely, spontaneously, and
19
meaningfully in the second language (Brown, 2000, P. 14). From these definitions, we can learn that language, in CLT, is regarded as a social tool which speakers use to make meaning. It is essential that learners be involved in using target language for a diversity of purposes in all phases of learning. This notion entails a wide range of abilities: the knowledge of grammar and vocabulary (linguistic competence); the ability to say the appropriate thing in a certain social situation (communicative competence); the ability to start, or end a conversation (discourse competence). Therefore, with CLT, students can make a flying leap, from knowing simple rules of grammar or a mountain of vocabulary to the way to use and apply them in appropriate context. This will enhance students competence in speaking, and thus they may communicate well outside the classroom. Among the approaches in CLT, Task-based Language Teaching seems to be the most outstanding and favorable. In the following section, we will explore the theory of Task-based Language Teaching so that we can implement this theory in teaching speaking for high school students to improve students speaking skills. The Task-based Approach There are many definitions of tasks, which center on different features of what makes up a task. A well-known definition is proposed by Nunan (1989), who defines communicative task as a piece of classroom work which involves learners in comprehending, manipulating, producing or interacting in the target language while their attention is principally focused on meaning rather than form. As for Brown (1994, p.229), A task-based curriculum, then, specifies what a learner needs to do with the English language in terms of target tasks and organizes a series of pedagogical tasks intended to reach those goals. More recently, Skehan (1998,
20
p.147) summarizes the criteria for a task activity in the following way: (a) meaning is primary; (b) learners are not given other peoples meanings to regurgitate, (c) there is some sort of relationship to comparable real-world activities, (d) task completion has a priority, and (e), the assessment of tasks are done in terms of outcome. Despite the different elucidations from these three definitions, several common characteristics can be acknowledged. All three definitions give emphasis to the importance of focus on meaning. This decisive factor supports the notion that conveying an intended meaning is important to the use of language. Skehan (1998)s definitions call attention to the use of real-world tasks that are similar to authentic behavior in real life. Skehan (1998) also further suggests that task performance often involves accomplish a goal and put on the final outcome. In general, tasks can be extensively used in many aspects of language teaching including four separate skills, grammar, etc. In this study, we focus on investigating speaking tasks, which can be seen as activities that involve speakers in using language for the purpose of achieving a particular goal or subjective in a particular speaking situation. (Bachman and Palmer, 1996) Implementation of TBT in teaching speaking In any second language teaching and learning, speaking is always believed to be the most vital skill. Learning a target language makes no sense if you cannot communicate in it successfully. With the rapid progress of globalization, English speaking skill is thought to be the key to ones success in his career. However, teaching speaking has been held in low esteem in Vietnam for many years. It hasnt been taught in classroom, or many teachers still have persisted in teaching speaking by having student repeat and memorize the dialogues. Thanks to the
21
innovations of new textbooks which apply tasks in teaching English skills, teaching speaking is showing signs of remarkable improvements. However, the implementation of task-based teaching still hasnt exerted far-reaching consequences as expected.
Willis (1996) describes the model cycle of task-based learning as a threestage process: Pre-Task Introduction to topic and task Task Cycle Task Planning Report
Language Focus Analysis Practice The first phase is call pre-task in which the topic is introduced and students are familiarized with some essential topic-related words ort some useful structures that can encourage learners to tackle the task better. The second phase is labeled task cycle with three sub-stages (task, planning and report) in which students do the task in pairs or groups, and then prepare their report before presenting it in front of the class. Through the task cycle, students can gain fluency and confidence in themselves as communicators as well as upgrade their language. The last phase language focus with two steps analysis and practice gives students an
Task-Based Language Teaching opportunity to focus their attention on forms which can be skipped in teaching speaking.
22
Among various approach, TBT is considered effective and beneficial because it is more student-centered. According to Willis (1996), tasks encourage learners to activate and genuinely use their language to communicate. Learners become far more independent and autonomous when bringing their own experiences to lessons and adjusting their language. Furthermore, they can enjoy the challenge of tasks. Teachers, who no longer maintain the dominion over learners learning process, play the role of facilitator and linguistic adviser by ensuring an environment where learners can get natural acquisition to accomplish the task and guiding them to discover what ways of learning work best for them. With those above advantages, new series of English textbooks apply tasks in teaching English skills, especially speaking skill. However, because of some drawbacks of TBT itself and the limitation of implementation of TBT to the Vietnamese teaching and learning context, the effectiveness of teaching speaking hasnt come up to expectations. Firstly, many linguists claim that TBT is time-consuming. With the limited time in public high schools in Vietnam, the adoption of TBT seems to be ineffective. If the allowed time is not lengthened, teachers have to prepare more carefully and use the time more wisely in the classroom.
Task-Based Language Teaching Secondly, the success of TBT depends on how good the conditions for language learning are. Willis (1996) summarizes three essential conditions for language learning in the following diagram: Conditions for Language Learning
23
Exposure
Use
Motivation
Willis states that the exposure needs to be as rich as possible. This requires teachers to use a wide variety of materials from different sources, such as texts, photographs, multimedia sources, etc. One more important thing is materials need to be authentic to reflect real-life situations and requirements. Authentic materials prepare for students to cope with the language they contact in the real world outside the classroom. Some examples of authentic materials are letters, newspaper extracts, shopping lists, menu, recipe, weather forecast, hotel brochures, real-life telephone conversations After receiving input, learners need opportunities to communicate, socialize and exchange experiences with their partners through activities. Like exposure, the activities need to fulfill the quality of authenticity which learners will encounter in the real world. Pattison (1987) proposes seven activity types: Questions and answer Dialogues and role-plays Matching activities Communication strategies
Task-Based Language Teaching Pictures and pictures stories Puzzles and problems Discussions and decisions Harmer (1983) also suggests some common kinds of communicative
24
activities including communication games, problem solving, interpersonal exchange, role play. Otherwise, Clark (1987) asserts that the most interactive activity types are role play, discussion and problem solving. Here are some examples about communicative activities that can be used in the class which are taken from the book New English File, Intermediate. The first one is a discussion activity.
25
And this is a role-play activity.
26
This is an interview activity, which is very common among communicative activity types.
27
Back to three conditions suggested by Willis, through the process of receiving and using the target language, learners need motivation achieve tasks with success. Confidence and satisfaction are the key factors in nourishing motivation. Therefore, its indispensible that teachers select topics and activities which can stimulate interest and involve the whole class. In general, although TBT is less teacher-centered, teachers missions are not less burdensome. They have to select materials, design tasks, set up optimal condition for learning. The English textbooks for Vietnamese high schools have tasks in but there are few genuinely communicative, so very few opportunities for true communication. For that reason, teachers should make some minor changes in the way to use the tasks in the course books, as well as supplement existing textbook material with authentic materials. The next chapter will wholly deal with the methodology we exploited to investigate our research thesis.
Task-Based Language Teaching Methodology Location Schools. Our research is carried out in three public schools in Ho Chi Minh City: Bui Thi Xuan, Hung Vuong, and Ly Thuong Kiet. The students in Bui Thi Xuan and Hung Vuong high school are supposed to be better than the rest. The
28
students in Bui Thi Xuan High School allocated in two sections: A (Math, Physics, and Chemistry) from 11A1 to 11A13, and one class, 11A14 in section D (Math, Literature, and English). In Ly Thuong Kiet High School, there is only one class, 11A, where students focus on Math, Physics, and Chemistry, while the rest follow the basic textbook. The first two are the public schools situated in the center of the city, while the rest is in the outskirts of our city. Those three schools are chosen due to the variety of location as well as the diversity of students level. All these criteria accounts for the generality of our research, which leads to a reliable result. Subjects Students. There are two hundred and forty-nine students taking part in the survey. The students from three schools follow the Basic version of the new series of the textbook. The detail of the students is described in the following table.
Task-Based Language Teaching Table 1 Distribution of students among three high schools Number of School Bui Thi Xuan 11A13 and Chemistry) D (Math, 11A14 Literature, and English) 42 Class Section students A (Math, Physics, 41
29
D Hung Vuong Ly Thuong Kiet 11A20 11A21 11A 11B6 D A Basic
41 43 34 48
We choose the students whose major is in English, and one is not to generalize the precise and the reliability of our result. Teachers. It is highly appreciated that many teachers agree to help us in doing the survey, conducting an interview and making the observations. In total, there are thirty-five teachers taking part in the survey: twelve teachers from Bui Thi Xuan, twelve teachers from Hung Vuong, and eleven teachers from Ly Thuong Kiet. All of them have a good command of English and have a great deal of experience in teaching English. Twenty of them have been teaching English for more than ten years. Moreover, all of them have been trained to adopt the new series of the textbook, which exploit the four skills: Reading, Listening, Speaking and Writing. Materials Questionnaire
Task-Based Language Teaching In order to find out the speaking problems in high school and students expectation towards the speaking tasks, we designed two separate sets of questionnaires, one for teachers and one for students. Each contains a variety of
30
questions: multiple choice, check lists and open-ended questions about teaching and learning speaking at high school and the implementation of TBT in teaching speaking. This is a useful way for us to handle and explore the opinions of such a large number of respondents for a short period of time. We also design a short questionnaire, containing six multiple choice questions to obtain students opinion about the two trial classes. Interview We conduct two separate interviews, one with four students in the class 11A14 from Bui Thi Xuan high school and one with two teachers Ms. Vu Tran The Mai, a teacher from Bui Thi Xuan High School and Ms. Ta Thanh Huyen, a lecturer from English Department, Ho Chi Minh City University of Education. Ms. The Mai has been teaching in Bui Thi Xuan High school for more than ten years. As for Ms. Thanh Huyen, she is experienced in training would-be-teachers as well as teaching speaking at English Department, Ho Chi Minh City University of Education. Each interview, as a friendly conversation to share experience, lasted about ten minutes. Two separate sheets of questions were also prepared to take note the information obtained from the interview. In these interviews, the interviewees could have an opportunity to express their own ideas about the issues addressed in this research paper. The opinion gained from the interview helps validate the results we get from the questionnaires. Controlled Experiment
Task-Based Language Teaching We conducted two periods, one with tasks in the textbook and one with the TBLT.
31
The two periods were carried out in class 11A14. This class consists of 41 students, who all have a good command of English. We chose the same class when conducting the two periods, so the result will be more reliable when comparing students attitude and performance towards the two periods. Classroom observation To conduct the two trial periods, one of the researchers taught and the other observed. The result from the observation also assures validity of the data we get from the questionnaires. The observation also helps us find out some of the problems when applying the TBLT in high school context, whether they are the same with our expectations. Procedures At first, the questionnaires were delivered to teachers and students of the four high schools mentioned above. These questionnaires were supposed to be collected one day after the distribution. All the students in these six classes were required to return all the questionnaires to the researchers. This survey is carried out in the third week of the practicum, from February 1st, 2010 to February 6th, 2010. Simultaneously, the researchers also held two interviews with students and teachers. Those instruments set a background for the researchers about the respondents opinions about implementation of TBT in teaching speaking. Then the researchers conducted two trials. The first trial using original tasks in the textbook under the observation of Ms. The Mai, and the other researcher was conducted in the fourth week of the practicum. After this class, the questionnaires were delivered to get students opinion about the effect of this speaking period. Then the second class with TBLT under the observation of Ms. The Mai, Ms. Thanh Huyen, and the other
Task-Based Language Teaching researchers was conducted in the fifth week of the practicum. After this class, the questionnaires are also distributed to obtain students opinion.
32
To sum up, the findings are analyzed from two major sources quantitative data (including the questionnaires for the students and the teachers) and qualitative data (including classroom observation and interviews with both the students and the teachers). In the following chapter we will come up with the discussion of our findings.
Task-Based Language Teaching Results and Data Analysis Questionnaire Students vs Teachers Two hundred and forty-nine questionnaires for students and thirty-five questionnaires for teachers were sent out and all are returned to the researchers, making up 100% response rate.
33
Almost all the teachers (approximately 90%) acknowledge that they spend a separate period on teaching speaking (as illustrated in Appendix D; Q1) almost equivalent to that percentage of students (86.35%). About elements that can determine the success of a speaking period, both students and teachers show a high rate of agreement as shown in table 17. Generally, tasks are vital to the success of teaching speaking. Tasks must be interesting, diverse, practical and they should satisfy students concerns. Nearly 80% of the students frankly answer that learning speaking at high schools is not interesting. The reasons for students disapproval are boring, unrealistic tasks in the textbook. More than half of the students even think learning speaking at high school does not help them improve their speaking skills. There was even an opinion of a student showing his frustration about the fact that speaking periods are just for good, active students. With respect to respondents opinions about speaking tasks in textbooks, students and teachers also share the same attitude that those tasks are uninteresting and impractical. As for the authenticity and practicability of speaking materials and activities in the textbooks, the majority (more than 70% of the students and more
Task-Based Language Teaching than 80% of the teachers) falls into the option that students just sometimes apply what they learn to real-life situations. Meanwhile, as weve all known, the practicability plays an important role in the success of teaching speaking.
34
However, teachers and students were in disagreement when asked about the sources of the activities used in speaking classes. Table 2 - The sources of the activities in speaking classes Taken from textbooks Students Teachers 105 48.84% 3 9.38% Supplemented 107 49.77% 29 90.62% Newly designed 3 1.39% 0 0%
The Chi Square value of this item is 8.22, higher than the critical value (5.99), which shows a significant difference in the beliefs of teachers and students. As shown in the table above, most of the teachers (90.62%) state that they often redesign the speaking tasks in textbooks as well as supplement them with their materials. Meanwhile, just about 50% of the students say the same thing. In regard to activity types, we can easily realize that many kinds are used in speaking classes from Appendix M, table 16. Surprisingly, dialogue receives the highest percentage of frequency from both students and teachers. Besides, discussion, problem solving are also frequently used as more than half of respondents stated that these activities are usually or sometimes applied in speaking periods. However, theres a slight difference in the activity types of role play, interview and information gap. More than 80% of the teachers believe they often or sometimes operate role play and interview in class while just about 50% share the
Task-Based Language Teaching same opinion. On the other hand, information gap receives affirmation from more than 80% of the students but only about 60% from the teachers.
35
As for the procedure of task cycle, almost teachers and students agree that all the steps are carried out. However, contrary to the belief of the teachers that they always follow the task process, a small number of students still complain that some stages of tasks are neglected, especially the report stage (12%). In addition, the revelation by both teachers and students that the phases of the task cycle are just accomplished occasionally, not all the time (30-40%) is really worth concerning. This is closely related with the deficient time allotted for speaking. As the researchers expected, both teachers and students have the same belief with high rate of agreement about the various merits of TBTL in teaching speaking. It is claimed to offer more opportunities for students to communicate and improve their speaking skills. They also agree with TBT, students can apply what they learn to real life as well as they will be more motivated, more energetic and more selfconfident. In contrast to the advantages, the respondents admit that the implementation of TBT also has some unavoidable problems. The biggest problem that receives high percentage of supporting responses from both teachers and students (over 85%) is the limited amount of time for speaking period. Noise is also a real problem as it receives a high rate of agreement from the majority of respondents. However, more than one fourth of the students dont consider noise as a problem. This shows that students want to be free to practice their speaking, although it can cause noises. It is important to know that not many respondents regard unsuitable seating arrangement, students lack of fluency and accuracy and students lack of
36
confidence as obstacles of implementation of TBT. Consequently, it is reasonable to infer that the respondents are confident about students ability. Additionally, they think they can overcome the problems of unsuitable seating arrangement. However, there is a slight difference between teachers and students in the option teachers less control. Approximately 60% of the students assume these are problems while just 40% of the teachers share the same opinion. Particularly, the conflict about teachers less attention and help is really obvious: Table 3 - Opinions about teachers less attention and help in the classrooms Strongly agree Students Teachers 76 30.52% 2 5.71% Agree 114 45.78% 13 37.14% Disagree 52 20.88% 16 45.71% Strongly disagree 7 2.81% 4 11.44
The Chi Square value of this item is 9.87, higher than the critical value (7.82), which proves a crucial difference in the ideas of teachers and students. As it is shown in the table above, about 75% of students believe teachers less attention and help is an obstacle, which shows that students require the help from teachers during their activities. On the contrary, teachers do not think this is a considerable problem, maybe because they presume that its not difficult to give help and monitor the class. At the end of the teachers questionnaires, some solutions to overcome the problems of TBT implementation are suggested. As teachers do not care much about the seating arrangement in the classrooms, not many of them choose re-arranging seats as a solution. Only half of them care about preparing the lessons well beforehand. In contrast, the two proposals about going around during students
37
activities and giving clear, sufficient instructions and input are shared by most of the teachers. Students from good schools vs students from not quite good school In general, students from the three schools share the same opinions about almost all the aspects. The most basic divergence between students from quality schools like Hung Vuong or Bui Thi Xuan and Ly Thuong Kiet high school is the frequency of learning speaking in classrooms. Table 4 - The frequency of learning speaking at high schools Yes HV + BTX LTK 167 100% 48 58.54% No 0 0% 34 41.46%
As the table below, all the students from Hung Vuong and Bui Thi Xuan high school have a separate speaking period for each unit. In the meantime, 41.46% of students from Ly Thuong Kiet revealed that they do not learn speaking in class. Among those students learn speaking at Ly Thuong Kiet high school, the majority agree that learning speaking is uninteresting, which is the same as students from Hung Vuong and Bui Thi Xuan high school. They also concur about the criteria of a good speaking period, the benefits of TBT and also some of their problems. Nonetheless, it is significant that they have some basic dissimilarities about some problems of TBT.
Task-Based Language Teaching Table 5 - Problem of the lack of fluency and accuracy strongly agree BTX + HV LTK (Chi square value 2 = 8.55) Table 6 - Problem of the lack of confidence strongly agree BTX + HV LTK (Chi square value 2 = 9.64) The Chi Square value of the first item is 8.55, and the Chi Square value of the second item is 9.64, higher than the critical value (7.82), which proves a significant difference in the opinions of students from Hung Vuong, Bui Thi Xuan high school and Ly Thuong Kiet high school. While most of students from Hung Vuong and Bui Thi Xuan high school (60-70%) dont think that they lack 21 12.57% 21 25.61% agree 46 27.55% 42 51.22% disagree 64 38.32% 15 18.29% 13 7.79% 17 20.73% agree 31 18.56% 50 57.32% disagree 82 49.10% 9 15.85%
38
strongly disagree 41 24.55% 6 6.10%
strongly disagree 36 21.56% 4 4.88%
competence or confidence to learn with TBTL, those from Ly Thuong Kiet consider these two as serious problems. This raises a key question about TBT: Can TBTL be applied successfully in every school with students of different levels? Interview Interview with the students To begin with, the students acknowledge they had the chance to learn speaking with one period for each unit as assigned in the textbooks. Like teachers, students think speaking is an important skill and learning speaking is useful and
Task-Based Language Teaching more interesting than other skills. However, they honestly admitted that learning speaking at high school was boring. The reasons they pointed out are boring,
39
unrealistic tasks in the textbooks, the limited time allotted, and uninspiring teachers who cannot involve the whole class, especially those who are shy in speaking activities. With regard to speaking tasks in the textbooks, students are of the same mind that their content does not accord with young learners. Most of them are uninspired, old-fashioned, impracticable and cannot awake students interest. The activities are in the same condition with monotonous types like dialogue, questions and answers. When asked about Task-based learning, students eagerly show their approvals. They believe in the merits of TBTL such as it can help them improve their speaking skills and make them more motivated. However, they affirmed that the tasks play a very important role in the success of implementation of TBTL. Tasks must be interesting and realistic so that students find it interesting to learn speaking. So they expressed their wish that teachers can determinedly ignore uninteresting tasks in the textbooks and replace them with more authentic, exciting tasks. As for some problems of TBTL, students seemed to mind a lot about the time for speaking. They said, with some irritation, that 45 minutes is originally not sufficient and the student talking time is too limited. Furthermore, teachers usually tend to cut it down for other skills which appear in the English exam at high schools. About the noise, though they confessed this is a problem, they still hoped for teachers tolerance. They give some excuses for this matter. They claim that the noise stems from their discussion and argument when doing the tasks. Concerning the seating arrangement, there are some different opinions. One of them expressed that the seating arrangement at high school is not suitable and its hard to form group
Task-Based Language Teaching of four or five. Fortunately, they believe they can overcome it because they dont
40
hesitate to move as well as turn their back to interact with their friends. In addition, almost all the students were confident about their ability to learn speaking with tasks. What they expected, they emphasized, is the enthusiasm from the teachers. They hoped that teachers are more concerned for speaking skills and handle more interesting and authentic activities. When it comes to speaking activities, students openly admitted that just some students in the class really worked, especially group work. Active students are often eager to do the tasks, while shy and incompetent students rarely join in the tasks. Sometimes, because of the big class size, students neglect to work and gossip in mother tongue in speaking classes under the inefficient management of the teachers. Interview with the teachers At the outset of the interview, Ms. Mai reveals it is heartening that students seem to like learning speaking compared to other skills. When English now becomes ELF (English as lingua franca), speaking is the most important and preferable skill. As for the tasks in the textbooks, the two teachers dont show an optimistic attitude. They are not appealing and the topics do not match students interests; therefore, they often feel bored and gossip in the speaking class. The activity types cannot generate motivation in the students either. Almost all of them require students to ask and answer in pairs while some of them have students discuss in group about dry, insipid matters. Some are easy so that students have no need to use their own words to speak, but substitute the sample dialogue in the textbook. She explained, with the pressure of time and the curriculum, there is no way but follow the tasks in
Task-Based Language Teaching the textbook. In fact, the design of the new textbooks is directed to Task-based teaching and learning. However, it hasnt showed good effects so far. Regarding Task-based Teaching and Learning, Ms. Huyen says TBLT is really a good method to help students in enhancing their speaking ability. It can
41
actively involve students in learning with interesting tasks which suit students taste. Remarkably, if the materials and the content of tasks are authentic, they can help students prepare for real-life circumstances. As for Ms. Mai, she stated that TBTL can give students a lot of opportunity to communicate in class. With respect to some common problems that task-based teaching can cause, the two teachers seem so down-to-earth. The first problem is the noise. Although noise is inevitable and the teachers can be tolerant of it, noises can disturb the neighboring classes and it seems that the school administrations still hold a bad impression of noises in classrooms. Another biggest problem of this method is the large size of the class which brings about some bad effect on classroom management. The fact that the class is crowded makes teachers difficult to monitor the class, so some students in the class may gossip and neglect the lessons. Furthermore, those whose level is lower than that of their friends may find it difficult to keep up with their friends. With regard to solutions for this problem, Ms. Mai suggested teachers should go around the class more often to make sure all the students are doing the tasks, as well as give help when necessary. Ms. Huyen, additionally, pointed that time limit is the major obstacle in implementing TBT. Within only forty-five minutes, students do not have enough to practice. Shes worried that the student talking time is really short since teachers have to spend some time giving input in that forty-five minutes. Eventually, she affirmed that if we want to implement TBT in teaching speaking, we should improve the tasks in the
Task-Based Language Teaching textbooks based on students interests and students ability. As for good-quality schools like Bui Thi Xuan or Hung Vuong, students are dynamic and have a high
42
level of competence in English to learn with this method. On the contrary, if students lack fluency and accuracy to speak, this method seems inappropriate. To solve this problem, teachers are required to prepare well in advance, give clear instructions and comprehensible input. Ms Huyen also raises the researchers awareness towards the teachers talking time. Because of the characteristics of TBLT, where teachers are supposed to provide students with the input, set the context and explain the students roles, teacher talking time may constitute the class. As in this phrase, students may lose their attention and turn to talk with their friends. Therefore, teacher should also let students involve in the pre- task stage. Controlled experiment Classroom observation Classroom observation, providing direct information about language, language learning, or language learning situations (Brown 2001 4), is the best way for us to know how students can interact in class, and how the TBLT is when being implemented in the real situation. Therefore, we conduct two classes, one with the TBLT, and one with the tasks in the textbook. These two classes are carried out in class 11A14, consisting of forty one students, who all have a good command of English. The first trial The first trial class with the tasks in the textbook is carried out in the fourth week of the practicum, under the observation of Ms. The Mai, and the other researcher (The
43
classroom observation sheet can be seen in Appendix I and J). One of the researchers regarded as a teacher who conducts the class, while the other observes. On the observed day, students have finished the Reading and the Listening of Unit 12: The Asian Games (English 11, The Basic version), and on the day of conducting the trial, they continue the Speaking of Unit 12. In this class, the researcher uses the tasks in the textbook. There is still communication in class, but it is too little. There are also three phases for each task: the pre-speaking, while- speaking and post-speaking. In task 1, teacher asks students to read aloud the dialogue in the textbook at first. Then, students work in pair and take turn to ask and answer the questions using the information from the table. After this task, teacher has student report back and gives feedback on students performance. From task 1, we realize that there is interaction, but not too much, between students and teachers, students and students. This task lacks the communicative elements due to the fact that there are no information gaps in the textbook, which really bores the students. There are no challenges in this task because all students know the answer. It is observed that some students dont want to do the tasks, but turn to talk with their friends in mother tongue. In addition, when students stand up in the post-task, they just look at the sample dialogues in the textbook and read aloud with the substitutions. This is not actually what happens in real life. Then students move to task 2 in which they work in groups and take turn to talk about the sports results of Vietnamese athletes at 14th Asian Games. This task, again, consists of no communicative elements. Thus, they have no interest and pay no attention to what happens in class. Some even learn for other subjects instead of doing the task.
Task-Based Language Teaching The second trial In the second trial class, the framework of TBLT is implemented in teaching speaking (The classroom observation sheet can be seen in Appendix J). Instead of saying tasks in the textbook, the teacher has designed the tasks with his own materials. In the pre-task 1, teacher explores the topic language and provides students with some input about how to start a conversation with strangers. Then in the while-task, students go around, greet other people, and ask them about their hobbies. During the task, teacher goes around to help and takes note the mistakes
44
made by students. In the post task, teacher calls some close pairs to perform the task in front of class. After that, teacher gives comments on the students performance and corrects some of their mistakes. Starting task 2, teacher help students recall and activate the process of opening a by asking some lead-in questions (see Appendix H). In the while-task, students work in group of four. First, each of them has to go around and interview their friends with the questions in the interview sheet. Then students work in their group, comparing the results they get from the interview and decide which shop they are going to open. During the task, teacher goes around and helps students with their problems or comments briefly on the content. Then in the post task, two groups come in front and report the plan to the whole class. After the performance, teacher gives feedback about their performance. In the second trial class, it can be observed that students are very interested in carrying out the tasks. They have a free space to communicate with their friends in English and involve actively in the task. Besides, the tasks are somewhat likely to be similar with the real-world situation. The use of the target language outgrows that of the mother tongue. Students speaking time constitutes 70% of the speaking class.
Task-Based Language Teaching Obviously, TBLT proves to be effective in enhancing students speaking ability.
45
Moreover, all students can gain confidence in speaking and interacting well not only in class but also in the social context. However, there are some problems as we are expected when carrying out the TBLT that should be taken into consideration. The first problem seems to be the noise. Students always make noise when they go around the class and discuss in groups and it really annoys teachers from neighboring classes. Next, the classroom management is also another problem. Although the teacher tries to go around, he cannot control whats going on in each group due to the big class size. Besides, from the observation, we can learn that the talkative students always dominate the group or the pair work, which makes some shy or weak students keep silent during the speaking period. Overall, the observation of the two classes can be described in the following table. Table 7 Comparisons between two trial classes The first class Tasks Used in the textbooks. The second class Redesigned by researchers, using TBLT. Exposure Students have to follow the sample dialogue and the structures in the textbooks. Students take full advantage of exposure to the target language during the framework of TBLT. Use of the language Students focus on form more than the meaning. Students just read aloud the sample dialogues with Students have a chance to recall and use the language they know to convey meaning.
Task-Based Language Teaching substitution in the textbook.
46
They are expected to make real use of the target language themselves.
Motivation
Students have no motivation in performing the tasks.
Students have a lot of interest in performing the tasks. Students can actually communicate with their friends. Noise. Classroom management. Students ability.
The quality of students speaking time
The mother tongue is overused to gossip during this speaking class.
Problems
Boring. Not much communication. Impracticability.
The aforesaid analysis is the qualitative data gained from the classroom observation. After these two classes, we also deliver questionnaires to get students opinion about the effects of two classes in improving students speaking ability.
Feedback from students Table 8 Students general opinion about the speaking period Very interesting Period 1 0% Interesting 4.88% Normal 31.71% Boring 63.41%
Task-Based Language Teaching Period 2 36.58% 58.53% 4.87%
47 0%
As can be seen from this table, 63.41% of students in this class feel bored in this period in comparison to 0% of students in the second period. Moreover, 95.11% of students in the second class, which is 4.87% greater than that of students in the first class, feel interested in the second period. This proves the effect of TBLT in motivating students in the speaking class, which makes students feel interested in speaking. Table 9 Students opinion about the tasks Very interesting Period 1 Period 2 0% 26.83% Interesting 0% 65.85% Normal 29.27% 7.31% Boring 70.73% 0%
Table 9 tells us about students opinions towards the tasks used in the speaking class. Its striking fact that no one feels interested in the tasks in the textbook. The tasks in the text book make students (70.73%) feel bored, while 92.68% of students feels interested in the tasks applying the TBLT. It can be explained that in TBLT students have to think, have their own choice, and find it necessary to communicate, which leads to the success of the speaking tasks. Table 10 The suitability of the tasks with students ability Difficult Period 1 0% Suitable 58.54% Easy 41.46%
Task-Based Language Teaching Period 2 4.88% 75.51%
48 19.51%
From the above results, we can learn that the speaking tasks in the textbook seems to be very easy with 41.46% of students choose this option; therefore, students have no difficult in performing the tasks. On the other side of the coin, the tasks with the implementation of TBLT seem to be more challenging to students. It requires students ability to perform the tasks. It may be too difficult for the weak students. Table 11 Teachers instructions Yes Period 1 Period 2 85.37% 75.60% Sometimes 9.75% 12.20% No 4.88% 12.20%
In class, teachers instruction is very important for students to conduct the speaking tasks. While 85.37% of students find the teachers instruction very easy to understand in the first class, 75.6% of them share the same feeling in the second class. In the first class, the instructions are available in the textbook, moreover the tasks are also very simple, so it is very easy for them to follow teachers instruction. However, in the second class, where teacher has to set the context, and explain the roles, so it may confuse the students. Generally speaking, the result makes the researchers take into consideration the teachers instruction in applying the TBLT. It should be clearer so that students can know their roles and what they are supposed to do during the tasks. Table 12
Task-Based Language Teaching Communication in the class Very much Period 1 Period 2 4.87% 14.63% Much 43.90% 63.42% Little 48.78% 21.95%
49
None 2.44% 0%
As can be seen from table 12, in the first class, 48.77% of students feel that they can communicate with their friends. This number is much smaller than that of the second class (78.05%). From this result, we can learn that TBLT can help to enhance students speaking ability in a way that students can have a great deal of time to communicate in class. Table 13 The practicability of the tasks Yes Period 1 Period 2 26.83% 100% No 73.17% 0%
From table 13, it is very striking to learn that 100% of students find the tasks in the second class very useful for them in the real life. Moreover, the second task where students have to find out the teenagers hobbies to open a shop is really interesting to students. This really suits well with students practicality because many of them nowadays have many great ideas of opening a shop for themselves. However, the task in the textbooks is just the sequence of asking and answering, which rarely happens in real life. This leads to the number of 73.17% students find the tasks impractical.
Task-Based Language Teaching In general, students have a good point of view towards the second class, which
50
shows a promising sign for the TBLT in teaching speaking for high school students.
Task-Based Language Teaching Discussion This research is projected with the aim of exploring the upshot of
51
implementing Task-Based Language Teaching (TBLT) in teaching speaking for 11th graders. TBLT has been applied in teaching speaking in many foreign language centers. It proves to be very effective in enhancing students speaking ability; moreover, students seem to be very interested in the speaking lessons. Thus, TBLT should be put into operation by high school teachers. It is respectable that most of teachers, as can be seen from the data analysis, have devoted one period to teaching speaking. To put it another way, high school teachers and students nowadays have conceded the importance of speaking in acquiring a foreign language, especially at the time when Vietnam is in the process of international integration. However, this raises the questions on the effects of a speaking period when teachers just use the tasks in the textbook. From the data analysis, we can learn that both students and teachers come to terms with the importance of tasks in teaching and learning speaking. Sadly enough, the tasks in the textbook show no promising signs of motivating let alone improve students speaking skills. Support for this interpretation comes from the fact that the tasks in the textbooks seems to be very boring. Equally relevant to the issue are the questions of teachers responsibility to better the tasks in the textbooks so as to increase students talking time. However, the majority of students, as can be seen from the data analysis, make a clean breast that teachers just use the tasks in the textbooks in the speaking period. We could perhaps go further and ask ourselves whether teachers take no notice of the speaking skills, which leads to their lack of investments in supplementing the tasks in the textbooks. We should, however, not forget that teachers in high school have to suffer from ocean of burdens. This comes from not
Task-Based Language Teaching only the rigid curriculum, which allots only forty five minutes to one speaking period but also the influence of our deep-rooted testing system, in which speaking skills are not tested. In order to have students get high marks in the exam, teachers find no ways, but get the speaking done quickly or even sacrifice the speaking
52
periods to other skills or language areas which emerge in the exam. As a result, the boring and monotonous tasks in the textbooks are usually exploited in the speaking periods. Consequently, it is necessary to blow a new wind of approach into redesigning speaking tasks for high school students, so that we can involve students interest in learning speaking. Concerning the types of activities in the textbook, the analysis shows us a high percentage of dialogues which are brought into play, while the other activities (role play, interview, problem solving ) acquires the high degree of sometimes. It is advisable to include a wide range of activities in teaching speaking, for students are really active and fun-oriented. They can easily get bored with the simple routine of one similar task. Moreover, the data shows a conflict between students and teachers in the approach of activities used in class. It can be explained that students may not know exactly what kind of activities they are doing which leads to their misunderstanding in defining the type of activities, or even the goal of each activity whereas teachers seem to be slapdash in organizing these speaking activities in class. This raises a question about teachers circumspection in conducting the activities, so that students can benefit from the goal of each activity to the fullest. Moreover, from the two classroom observations and the data analysis, it can be learnt that TBLT seems to be very effective in teaching speaking for 11th graders. Many students and teachers seem to be very interested in the implementation of this method. It can be proved by the fact that with TBLT students can have a free space
53
to exchange ideas with their friends in the target language and provoke their fluency in speaking. Importantly, they become far more independent learners. Moreover, they enjoy the challenge of doing tasks, as well as have fun in working with their friends. Besides, teachers have also recognized the significance of TBLT in promoting students speaking ability because learners can bring their own experiences to lessons and often come up with interesting and original ideas. In short, TBLT encompasses many merits in teaching speaking for high school students. Firstly, the tasks corresponding to TBLT follow the three criteria for a communicative task as mentioned above in chapter Two. Secondly, with TBLT, students are usually allocated into pairs or groups, which can increase the students speaking time. It gives learners confidence to try out whatever language they know and share whatever they think without fear of teachers correction. In addition, working in pairs or groups engages students in using language purposefully, concentrating on building meaning. These proposals, as analyzed from the data, are perfectly in tune with the majority of students. Thirdly, it gives learners more chances to try out communication strategies like checking understand, paraphrasing an unknown word, reconstructing other peoples ideas, and providing words and phrases to their friends in groups. Last but not least, TBLT adopts the learnercentered approached, removing teachers domination, therefore, students have chance to interact naturally. From the above reasons, we can learn that TBLT provides a good platform for students to improve their speaking skills. Besides the aforesaid merits, there are some drawbacks towards the implementation of TBLT. One of the most striking features of this problem is the noise. According to the data analysis, both teachers and students reach the consensus that the class is rather noisy not only when students do the tasks but also when
54
teachers provide students with input. Needless to say, noise is the obvious evidence to show students interest and liveliness in the speaking class. One should, nevertheless, consider the problem from another angle. It really annoys the neighboring class. Conducting the TBLT equates with receiving complaints from not only the neighboring class but the supervisors as well. Due to the strict rules in high school, students are supposed to keep quiet in class. Moreover, the noisy class, to some extent, really discourages teachers now that they have to spend lots of time calming down the class. Fortunately, the both sides, teachers and students, agree that they should handle the noise in class to take full advantage of the implementation of TBLT. All of these points to the conclusion that students can make noise in class, but it should be within the acceptability and teachers tolerance. Furthermore, TBLT requires lots of efforts from teachers, which entails a gloomy picture of teachers using the tasks in textbook. It needs a profound preparation from the handouts to the situation, and ways to provide input. Moreover, forty five minutes is not enough to conduct the TBLT cycle of providing input, doing the tasks, and giving feedback. In addition, high school teachers have to work under the pressure of the condensed curriculum; therefore, teachers usually devoted the speaking period to teaching grammar or make revisions to the exam. Consequently, teachers should change their deep-rooted perception to get insights into the importance of speaking so that speaking will not be replaced to give room for other skills. In addition, time management might not be a problem if teachers have a meticulous preparation to make every minutes in one period worthwhile and effective. Equally relevant to the issue are the questions of classroom management. There are usually forty five to fifty students in a heterogeneous class with different
55
students level. It is really challenging for teachers to handle such a big mixed class. Teachers are supposed to be the facilitators to support each groups, however, they cannot carefully observe every groups, let alone pay attention to the inattentive individuals. Lacking of teachers help may be an obstacle to students as 75% of them come to this conclusion. It is really a concerning problems in relation to the implementation of TBLT. In the same way, teachers have to cope with the fixed chairs and tables to get students into groups. The above predicaments may hinder the implementation of TBLT in high school context. This, again, requires lots of efforts from teachers to go around and direct students in the speaking period. To some extent, we cannot ignore the fact that students are used to the security of a teacher-led PPP (Presentation Practice Produce), a teacher-centered class. There are some students, especially the weak students, who prefer choral drills and copying from the board, because these are safe activities. TBLT, in fact, tends to moderate explicit grammar instructions, or ignore it altogether. It cannot be denied that students may feel they are not being taught enough. It is very possible that some students may hold a strong objection to the implementation of TBLT. However, it just constitutes a small proportion in a whole picture where all students have a hopeful craving to develop their speaking skills. Therefore, the application of TBLT is welcomed by all students and teachers. It is also clear from the observation that teachers should take students ability into consideration. The gifted students or even the talkative ones may dominate the group discussion, giving no room for the shy and weak students to complete the tasks. Therefore, teachers should provide students with equal chance to express their opinion, encouraging the timid ones to join the activities. Furthermore, one should not forget that students from the outskirts are much more behind in comparison to
56
those from the city. The TBLT may get them into trouble. As for educators, it can be a conundrum for us to research on. Though the merits and drawbacks coexist in the TBLT, the former outnumbers the latter in a sense of improving students speaking ability. We could perhaps go further and ask ourselves whether the TBLT can be applied to the 10th and 12th graders, especially the 12th graders whose speaking periods are usually ignored to give room for other skills due to the preparation for the graduation exam. In the second place, although this study may answer many important questions, other questions related to this subject may remain unanswered. It is worth concerning the speaking lessons for students in the outskirts, where students are not as good as those from the downtown. If so, we can help students to communicate and use English fluently after seven years studying in high school. All of these points to a satisfactory conclusion that TBLT, though it per se is not an ideal method, can contribute a great deal in the race to boost the students speaking ability. Teachers and students are perfectly in tune with our own thoughts on the implementation of TBLT in teaching speaking for the high school students. Doubtless, it is a promising sign for the achievement of TBLT in the high school context. The next chapter will come to some conclusions and put forward several trial recommendations.
Task-Based Language Teaching Conclusion and Recommendations In order to make inroads into the implementation of TBLT in teaching speaking for 11th graders, the researchers have addressed three research questions
57
brought up at the very first of this research paper. Subsequent to a careful analysis of obtainable data and an extensive research, we come to these final conclusions towards the implementation of TBLT. 1. It is really encouraging that teachers devote one period to teaching speaking for their students. On the other side, students from the outskirts still dont usually have a separate speaking period. Moreover, the tasks in textbook are frequently exploited in the speaking period. Not often do the teachers redesign the tasks or supplement students with some other materials, let alone conduct a variety of activities in class. The boring, unrealistic tasks in textbook, needless to say, really dishearten students. That leads to the conclusion that teaching and learning speaking end up with almost no results. Therefore, students might not use the target language to communicate in the social context. Obviously, the tasks in the textbook are directed at TBT. However, because of some reasons that weve analyzed, the effects do not come up to our expectation. 2. In view of these findings, it is quite likely that TBLT has a great number of merits in promoting students speaking ability. Firstly, the classroom where the TBLT is applied could be considered as a real life situations in which students can freely use the target language to convey their opinion without the fear of being corrected in front of class. Moreover, students can have a chance to express the original ideas. In the second place, TBLT facilitates students to work in groups or pairs, thus they have enough confidence and feel secure in doing the tasks. Undoubtedly, TBLT can provoke students interest, which leads to their excitement
Task-Based Language Teaching and inspiration in the speaking period. TBLT also remove teachers domination,
58
therefore, students can freely express their own opinions and develop their learning autonomy. It would be unfair not to mention the fact that TBLT also encompasses some obstacles. It emerges that the noise seems to be the first problem. Moreover, the classroom management, by which teachers have to allocate students into pairs or groups, is another obstacle. It is quite strenuous for teachers to handle such a big mixed class. Moreover, designing the tasks, which needs teachers thorough preparation, requires lots of efforts from teachers. Problematically, teachers have to deal with the time pressure and the overloaded curriculum. By and large, students ability seems to be another problem that teachers need to take into consideration when conducting the TBLT. 3. It is noticeable that TBLT possesses both merits and drawbacks. Optimistically, there exist some solutions to overcome the obstacles which help teachers effectively put the TBLT into practice. To begin with, teachers should equip themselves with the careful preparation. It is advisable to prepare the handouts, or some extra materials, the input to supply the students. Likewise, teachers should have clear instructions so that students can know their roles in details and be au fait with the situation carefully. Furthermore, teachers should keep an eye on the working in groups or pairs so that they can prevent the domination of the talkative students as well as the neglect or gossip of some students. Last but not least, it is respectable to giving students motivating feedback in the end. To some extent, through the feedback and the language analysis, students can inductively learn the grammar points and the vocabulary.
Task-Based Language Teaching We also have some other recommendations, which were put into trial to investigate their effectiveness in helping teachers conduct the TBLT.
59
Trials 1. Conducting the speaking class with the implementation of TBLT. The TBLT cycle is applied in teaching speaking for 11th graders. It shows a promising result. Students seem to be very interested in the speaking period. Importantly, students can use the target language to communicate with their friends. The class seem to be very exciting and all students can do the tasks very well. 2. Noise - Closing the door and giving feedback. Students are asked to lower their voice. Besides, all the doors are closed while the class in the speaking period. Moreover, some other solutions are also applied to prevent the noise. If one from any group makes noise, his or her groups will receive minus marks or even will not receive the gift from teachers. Moreover, students are required to observe then give feedback to their friends. If the feedback is constructive enough students can get bonus marks or in our case a small present. If not, they will receive a punishment from teacher like minus marks, sing a song, 3. Grouping During the speaking lesson, many ways to group students have been put into practice. When students work in pairs, they are asked to do the tasks with students next to them, then we ask them to change partners by turning round and interview one facing them. On the other hand, to put students into groups of four, we ask two from one desk to turn round and work with the other two at the back.
Task-Based Language Teaching 4. Classroom management. We give students clear instructions in a loud voice so students can easily listen to teachers. Moreover, teachers should have a quick look at every group to
60
prevent students from doing other things. In addition, when students work in groups or pairs, teachers should go around often the class to help students in need immediately.
Task-Based Language Teaching References Bachman, L. F. and Palmer, A. S. (1996) Language Testing in Practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Brown, H. D. (1994) Teaching by Principles: Interactive Language Teaching Methodology. New York: Prentice Hall Regents. Brown, H. D. (2000) Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. Fourth Edition. New York: Prentice Hall Regents. Brown, J. (2001). Using Surveys in Language Programs. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Byagte, M. (1987) Speaking. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
61
Canale, M. and Swain, M. (1980) Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1: 1-47. Clark, J. (1987) Curriculum Renewal in School Foreign Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Dong Trieu, Nguyen (2004, July 28). Su im yu ca sinh vin Vit Nam [Six weaknesses of Vietnamese Students]. Nguoi Lao Dong Online. Retrieved from March 2, 2010, from http://nld.com.vn/96926P1014C1017/sau-diemyeu-cua-sinh-vien-vn.htm Harmer, J. (1983) The Practice of English Language Teaching. London: Longman. Kim Lien (2006, October 12). 7 nm hc ph thng: Ti sao khng bit ni ting Anh? [7 years of learning English at school: Why still unable to speak English?]. Tuoi Tre Online Newspaper. Retrieved Febuary 22, 2010, from http://www.tuoitre.com.vn/tianyon/Index.aspx? ArticleID=166558&ChannelID=13 Kramsch, C., and Sullivan, P. (1996). Appropriate pedagogy. ELT Journal, 50(3), 199-212.
62
Lan Anh (2007, March 29). Km ngoi ng, sinh vin Vit Nam mi tt hu [Bad at English, Vietnamese students always fall behind]. Dan Tri Online Neswpaper. Retrieved February 23, 2010, from http://dantri.com.vn/c25/s25172631/kem-ngoai-ngu-sinh-vien-viet-nam-mai-tut-hau.htm Nunan, D. (1989) Designing Tasks for The Communicative Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Oxenden, C. and Latham-Koenig, C. 2006. New English File, Intermediate Student's Book. Oxford: Oxford University Press Pattison, P. (1987) Developing Communication Skills. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Richards, C. and Rodgers S (2001) Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Shahul, R., Tan, F., and Annual, S. Raising the Standard of Spoken English Insights from Compassvale Secondary School. Retrieved March 15, 2010, from http://conference.nie.edu.sg/paper/new%20converted/ab00586.pdf Skehan, P. (1998) A Cognitive Approach to Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Willis, J. (1996) A Framework for Task-based Learning. Harlow, U.K.: Longman Addison- Wesley.
Task-Based Language Teaching Appendix Appendix A Students Questionnaire
63
Chng ti l Bi Nguyn Khnh v Hunh Qun Ngc sinh vin lp 4A thuc khoa Anh, trng i hc S Phm TP.H Ch Minh. Hin nay chng ti ang thc hin ti nghin cu v hiu qu ca vic hc speaking bng tasks cc trng ph thng cng lp TP.H Ch Minh. c th hon thnh tt ti, chng ti rt mong nhn c kin ng gp ca cc bn i vi nhng vn di y. Xin chn thnh cm n. Bn l hc sinh trng: _____________________________ Lp: __________ Nam N Nm sinh: ____________________
Xin bn nh du ( ) vo bn cho l thch hp nht. 1. Bn c c hc ring mt tit luyn ni (speaking) theo nh phn b trong sch gio khoa (SGK) khng? C Khng
Nu bn chn c, xin bn tip tc tr li cu 2. Nu bn chn khng, xin mi bn tr li t cu s 12. 2. Bn thy vic hc speaking trong trng ph thng l? Rt hng th Hng th Bnh thng Chn
Nu bn chn rt hng th/ hng th xin bn tr li cu s 3. Nu bn chn bnh thng/chn, xin bn tr li cu 4
3. L do bn thy tit luyn ni (speaking) hng th l: (1 = Hon ton ng , 2 = ng , 3 = Khng ng , 4 = Hon ton khng ng ) L do a. Bn c giao tip vi bn b bng ting anh. b. Bn c nng cao k nng speaking trong ting Anh 1 2 3 4
Task-Based Language Teaching c. Cc hot ng speaking trong lp rt a dng v th v L do khc:
64
_____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ Mi bn tr li tip t cu 5 (b qua cu 4).
4. L do bn thy tit luyn ni (speaking) km hng th l: (1 = Hon ton ng , 2 = ng , 3 = Khng ng , 4 = Hon ton khng ng ) L do a. Tit speaking trong lp khng gip c g cho bn trong vic nng cao k nng speaking. b. Cc hot ng speaking trong lp khng a dng, nhm chn. c. Topic khng ph hp vi s thch, tm sinh l ca bn d. Cc task khng mang tnh thc tin cuc sng e. K nng speaking qu kh L do khc: _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ 5. Nhng hot ng thy/c t chc trong gi luyn ni (speaking) thng l c sn trong SGK hay l c thy/c bn t son thm? C sn hon ton trong SGK sung, sa cha Do thy/c t son hon ton mi 6. Bn thy cc task v speaking trong sch gio khoa Ting Anh ph thng nh th no? Rt th v Th v Bnh thng Chn Trong SGK nhng thy/c c b 1 2 3 4
7. Theo bn, cc task trong SGK c mang tnh thc tin cuc sng khng, bn c th p dng chng trong cuc sng khng? C Thnh thong Hon ton khng
8. Nhng hot ng no thy/c thng p dng trong tit speaking?
Task-Based Language Teaching Hot ng ng vai (role play) Gii quyt vn (problem solving) Tho lun v 1 topic (discussion) i thoi (dialogue) Phng vn (interview) Hi p in thong tin vo ch trng (information gap) Cc hot ng khc: Lun lun Thng xuyn Thnh thong Him khi
65 Cha bao gi
_____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ 9. Trc khi tin hnh cc hot ng (activities) cc thy c c cho cc bn hc mt s t vng/ cu trc hoc mt vi tng gip cc bn thc hin hot ng tt hn khng? C Thnh thong Khng
10. Cc thy c c cho cc bn ln trnh by bi ni khng? C Thnh thong Khng
11. Sau khi cc bn trnh by, thy c c sa li cho cc bn khng: C Thnh thong Khng
12. Theo bn, mt tit speaking thnh cng l nh th no?
Hon ton ng Cc task phi th v Cc task phi a dng (interview, role
ng
Khng ng
Hon ton khng ng
Task-Based Language Teaching play, discussion) Hnh thc phi a dng, lun c pair work, group work Topic phi ph hp vi s thch, tm sinh l ca hc sinh Gio vin chun b k, c tranh nh, handout, worksheet, Bn c th vn dng nhng task trong bi hc ra ngoi cuc sng. Yu t khc:
66
_____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________
13. Theo bn, vic hc speaking bng tasks s c li g? Hot ng Bn s hng th hn Bn c nhiu c hi s dng ting Anh giao tip vi cc bn cng lp hn Kh nng ni ting Anh ca bn s tt hn Bn c th ng dng nhng g c hc vo cuc sng Bn ch ng, tch cc hn trong tit hc Bn t tin hn khi ni ting Anh Cc thun li khc: _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ Hon ton ng ng Khng ng Hon ton khng ng
14. Theo bn, vic hc speaking bng tasks c nhng vn kh khn g? Hot ng Hon ton ng ng Khng ng Hon ton khng ng
Task-Based Language Teaching Lp n B tr lp hc cha ph hp (ch ngi cha hp l) Thy/c kh c th quan tm v gip tng c nhn. Thy c kh qun l lp Thi lng khng cho bn luyn tp Trnh bn khng theo kp Bn thiu t tin Cc kh khn khc:
67
_____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________
BNG KHO ST N Y L HT. XIN CHN THNH CM N S CNG TC CA CC BN.
Task-Based Language Teaching Appendix B Teachers Questionnaire We are Bi Nguyn Khnh and Hunh Qun Ngc students of class 4A of
68
English Department, University of Education. At the moment, we are doing research on Implementation Task-based Teaching in teaching speaking for 11th grade students of public high schools in Ho Chi Minh City. We would very much appreciate it if you could spend time providing us with the necessary information. It is confirmed that your personal identity will remain strictly confidential. I. Respondents background. 1. Gender: Male 1-5 years 6-10 years 10th Female 11 years+ 11th 12th 2. Teaching experience: How long have you been teaching English? 3. Which grade are you teaching?
4. Name of the high school in which you are working now: ________________ II. Task-based teaching in speaking. Please tick ( ) the most appropriate boxes. 1. Do you spare a separated period for teaching the speaking section as assigned in the textbook? Yes to question 9. 2. What do you think about tasks designed in the textbook at high schools? Very interesting Normal Interesting Boring No If you choose Yes, please go on to question 2. If you choose No, please move
3. According to you, can students apply speaking tasks in the textbooks to real life? Yes from the textbooks? Taken from textbooks Sometimes No
4. Are most of the activities in your speaking classes designed by yourself or taken
Task-Based Language Teaching Taken from textbooks with some changes and supplements Designed newly by yourself 5. Which of the following tasks are often assigned in your speaking classes? Tasks Always Usually Sometimes Rarely a. Role play b. Problem solving c. Discussions d. Dialogues e. Interviews f. Information-gap 6. Before the speaking activities, do you give students some input/exposure? Always Sometimes Never 7. Do you have students report in front of the class? Always Sometimes Never 8. After students report, do you give them feedback and correct their mistakes? Always Sometimes Never 9. In your opinion, what factors may decide the success of a speaking class? Factors a. Interesting tasks b. A variety of tasks (role play, interview) c. A variety of pair work and group work activities d. Appropriate topics that match students interests e. Teachers preparation f. Students can apply what they learn to real life. Others (please specify): Strongly disagree Disagree Agree
69
Never
Strongly agree
_____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ 10. In your opinion, what are the benefits of implementing TBT in teaching speaking at high schools? Merits a. It can motivate students to learn better. b. Students will have more opportunities to Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree
Task-Based Language Teaching communicate in English. c. Students can improve their speaking skills. d. Students can apply what they learn to reallife situations. e. Students are more active in the class. f. Students feel more confident when speaking English. Others (please specify):
70
_____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ 11. In your opinion, what can be problems if TBT is implemented to teaching speaking in high school? Problems a. Noise b. Unsuitable seating arrangement in the class b. Teachers less help and attention given to individuals d. Teachers little control of the whole class e. The amount of time suggested in the syllabus is not sufficient f. Students lack of fluency and accuracy g. Students lack of confidence Others (please specify): _____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ Q14. What do you think can be the solutions to the problems mentioned above? (You can choose as many options as you like.) Ask students to re-arrange the tables and chairs before the speaking lessons. Go around the class more often when the students are doing tasks to check their work and give help if they need it. Prepare carefully for every task. Give clear instructions and sufficient exposure. Others (please specify): _____________________________________________________________________ Strongly disagree Disagree Agree Strongly agree
71
_____________________________________________________________________ THIS IS THE END OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION.
72
Appendix C Data Collected From Questionnaires for Students Gender: Male: 35% Female: 65%
Q1. Do you have a separated speaking period for each unit as assigned in the textbook? Yes: 86.35% No: 13.65%
Q2. What do you think about learning speaking at high schools? Very interesting: 5.58% Normal: 50.23% Interesting: 16.28% Boring: 27.91%
Q3. Why do you find it interesting to learn speaking at high school? Shown in Table 14 Q4. Why do you find it not interesting to learn speaking at high school? Shown in Table 15 Q5. Are most of the activities in your speaking classes designed newly by your teacher or taken from textbooks? Totally taken from textbooks: 48.84% Taken from textbook with some changes and supplements from teachers: 49.77% Designed newly by teacher: 1.39% Q6. What do you think about speaking tasks in the textbook? Very interesting: 0.93% Normal: 59.54% Interesting: 7.44% Boring: 32.09%
Q7. Can you apply what you learn in speaking periods at high school to real-life situations? Yes: 10.23% Sometimes: 73.95% No: 15.82%
Task-Based Language Teaching Q8. What activities do teachers often organize in speaking class? Shown in table 16 Q9. Before doing the activities, do teachers give you some input? Yes: 61.86% Sometimes: 32.56% No: 5.58%
73
Q10. Do teachers let you report in front of the class? Yes: 49.30% Sometimes: 38.61% No: 12.09%
Q11. After you report, do teachers give feedback and correct your mistakes? Yes: 82.33% Sometimes: 13.95% No: 3.72%
Q12. According to you, how is a successful speaking period? Shown in table 17 Q13. In your opinion, what are the benefits of learning speaking with tasks? Shown in Table 18 Q14. In your opinion, what can be problems if the implementation of tasks is carried out in your speaking classes?? Shown in Table 19
74
Appendix D Data Collected From Questionnaires for Teachers I. Respondents background 1. Gender: Male: 20% 2. Years of teaching: 1-5: 22.86% 3. Grade teaching: 10th: 62.86% 11th: 71.43% 12th: 51.43% 6-10: 14.28% 11+: 62.86% Female: 80%
4. Speaking training session participation: Yes: 74.29% No: 25.71%
II. Pair work and group work in teaching speaking. Q1. Do you spare a separated period for teaching the speaking section as assigned in the textbook? Yes: 91.43% No: 8.57%
Q2. What do you think about speaking tasks in the textbooks? Very interesting: 0% Normal: 62.5% Interesting: 6.25% Boring: 31.25%
Q3. Do you think students can apply what they learn in speaking classes at high schools to real life? Yes: 6.25% Sometimes: 87.5% No: 6.25%
Q4. Are most of the activities in your speaking classes taken from textbooks or designed by yourself?
Task-Based Language Teaching Taken from textbooks: 9.38% In the textbook but have been implemented and adjusted: 90.63% Newly designed by yourself: 0% Q5. What activities do you often organize in speaking class? Shown in table 16 Q6. Before doing the activities, do you give students some input/exposure? Yes: 65.63% Sometimes: 34.38% No: 0%
75
Q7. Do you let you report in front of the class? Yes: 68.57% Sometimes: 31.25% No: 0%
Q8. After you report, do go give feedback? Yes: 65.625% Sometimes: 34.375% No: 0%
Q9. In your opinion, what factors may decide the success of a speaking class? Shown in table 17 Q10. In your opinion, what are the benefits of learning speaking with tasks? Shown in Table 18 Q11. In your opinion, what can be problems if task-based teaching is implemented in teaching speaking at high schools? Shown in Table 19 Q12. What can be solutions for problems mentioned above? Re-arrange the tables and chairs: 22.86% Go around to help: 82.86% Prepare well: 57.14% Give clear instruction and sufficient input: 80%
76
Appendix E Interview Questions for Students Date: February, 2010 Time: 8:20 8: 45 a.m. Place: 11A14, Bui Thi Xuan High School 1. Do you have a separated speaking period for each unit? Do you like to learn speaking at high school? Why? 2. What do you think about speaking tasks in textbook? 3. Have you ever learnt speaking English in foreign language center? What activities are often used there? Do you find them interesting? Why? 4. Do you want those tasks like you learn at high school are implemented in teaching speaking at high schools? Why? 5. What problems that implementation of tasks in teaching speaking can cause?
77
Appendix F Interview Questions for Teachers Date: March 10, 2010 Time: 10:20 11:00 a.m. Place: 11A14, Bui Thi Xuan High School
1. Do students like learning speaking at high schools? Why? 2. What do you think about the tasks designed in the textbooks? How can you improve them? 3. Do you think Task-based teaching can be carried out widely at high schools? Do you think this is a good method to teach speaking? 4. In your opinion, what are the advantages of implementation of Task-based teaching to teach speaking at high schools? 5. In your opinion, what are the problems when applying Task-based teaching to teach speaking at high schools? Can you suggest some effective solutions to solve those problems?
Task-Based Language Teaching Appendix G Lesson Plan for the first trial period Unit 12: THE ASIAN GAMES Speaking Time: Priod 2, February 23rd, 2010 Class: 11A14 Stages & Content Ts activities
78
Ss activi ties
I. WARM-UP: Games: Stop the bus - Put Ss in teams Country . Sports . Sport For example: Malaysia Mountain climbing Country Suggested ideas: - T: Thailand Table tennis Tennis - P: Philippines/Pakistan Ping pong - V: Vietnam - Volleyball - B: Brunei Basketball / boxing / body building / billiards - C: Cambodia chess - M: Malaysia / Myanmar mountain biking / climbing - S: Singapore Snookers / Squash - Draw two lines on the board and label them with two categories. - Give Ss a letter from the alphabet, for example letter M. As quickly as possible, they should think of a word connected with each category beginning with letter M and write them down. - The first team to write down one word for each category should shout: Stop the bus. If the word is correct, give the team one point the choose another letter. - Declare the winning group. Look at Liste n
II. PRE-SPEAKING: What Asian countries have taken part in the Asian Games? What sports have been introduced in the - Ask Ss to work in 4 groups to find out the answers (2 groups find the countries
Task-Based Language Teaching Asian Games? E.g.: The first Asian Games was held in 1951 in New Delhi, India. - Check Ss answer and then practise speaking - Ask Ss to open their books and look at the information about the Asian Games in the table to check which countries have been the host countries in the Asian games until now. and 2 groups find the sports) Feedback: Ask Ss to copy them on the board
79
Wor k in 4 grou ps to find out the answ ers
III. WHILE_SPEAKING: Task 1: Repetition and substitution - Ask Ss to look at the dialogue on page 139 - Elicit the language from Ss - Ask Ss to look at the dialogue on page 139 and repeat the conservation. - Ask Ss to use the information in the table to substitute for the suitable information. - Teacher moves around to give help. - Ask some pairs to come to the front of the class and act out their conversation. - Ask Ss to take turns to talk about the
th
Example: A: When and where was the 2nd Asian Games held? B: It was held in 1954 in the Philippines. A: How many countries took part in the games? B: 18 A: How many sports were there at the Games? B: 8 Feedback: Task 2: Reporting about the sport results For example: At the 14 Asian Games held in Busan, Korea, in bodybuilding, the Vietnamese athletes won one medal and one bronze medal. In billiards, they won
- Sts do task 1 - Some pairs to come to the front of the class and act out the
sport results of the Vietnamese athletes at the 14th Asian Games, using the information from the table on page 140 task 2. - Teacher moves around to give help.
Task-Based Language Teaching one gold medal and one silver medal. - Feedback: Ask Sts make reports.
80 conversation.
Com e to the boar d to do the repor t.
81
Appendix H Lesson Plan for the first trial period
Unit 13: HOBBIES - SPEAKING A) Objectives: By the end of the lesson, Ss will be able to - talk about a hobby - talk about collections. B) Preparation: - Materials: Textbook, pictures, blackboard, wall chart. - Teacher prepares the handout, pictures for students. - Students prepare the lesson at home. C) Procedure: 1) Greeting and Put the class in order 2) Check up: - Checking students attendance. 3) Teaching lesson: Students activities - Describe hobbies to their friends - Answer Ts questions.
Contents I. WARM UP (5m): Guess the hobbies. Sts use gesture and words to explain the hobbies to their friends. II. TASK 1 (15m) (see the following handout): A. Pre-Speaking: Input: Some useful ways of starting a conversation with a stranger: What a nice day, isnt it? Dreadful weather, dont you think? Excuse me, is anybody sitting here? Excuse me, havent we met somewhere -
Teachers activities - Ask one St to come in front of the class and use gesture or words to explain the hobbies to their friends. Ask Sts: What are your hobbies? When choosing a friend, who do you prefer, a person with the same hobbies or different one? Explain the task to sts: Imagine now you are at the cocktail party with all the strangers. Start a conversation with them by using a suitable phrase. Then ask about their hobbies. If you
- Listen to teacher.
Task-Based Language Teaching before? Sorry, I couldnt help overhearing did Excuse me, could you tell me the time? Er, could you help me, Im trying to you mention something about.? two have the same hobbies, you can make friends with him or her.
82
find my way to.. B. While- speaking: Sts make the role play. C. Post Speaking: Sts make the dialogue in front of the class. Call some Sts to make the dialogue in front of the class. Give feedback. Go around to help Sts. - Come in front of the class and present their ideas - Do the task
- Listen to II. A. Pre-speaking: T explains the situation. TASK 2 (25m): Explain the situation: Imagine that you are a businessman or a businesswoman. You are going to open a shop for teenagers. First, you will be the researchers. Go around and interview the teenagers. Then you are the businessman or business woman, work in your group and decide which shop you are going to open. - Do the task. B. While speaking: Sts interview and discuss in group. - Report their C. Post speaking: Sts talk about their plans. Call 2 groups to present their plans. Give feedback. plan. Go around to help Sts. teachers instructions. (See the following handout)
83
Handout
Some useful ways of starting a conversation with a stranger: What a nice day, isnt it? Dreadful weather, dont you think? Excuse me, is anybody sitting here? Excuse me, havent we met somewhere before? Sorry, I couldnt help overhearing did you mention something about.? Excuse me, could you tell me the time? Er, could you help me, Im trying to find my way to.. TASK 1 Imagine that you are all strangers at a cocktail party. Go around and try to make friends with as many people as you can. You are supposed to: Greet and start a conversation with a stranger. Ask about their hobbies and try to find the people who have the same hobbies with you. Write down your hobbies in the following space: What you like to do? Why? What you dislike to do? Why?
TASK 2: You are a businessman or a businesswoman You are going to open a shop for teenagers. Make a survey to find out teenagers interest. Then decide which shop you are going to open. You may use the following questions. Hobby How to practise your hobbies? Where practise hobbies? to your
Why do have these hobbies? Your plan for the future? The shop to open:
Task-Based Language Teaching Appendix I Classroom Observation for the first trial period Date: February 23, 2008 Time: 8:45 9:30 a.m.
84
Place: 11A4, Bui Thi Xuan High School Unit 12: THE ASIAN GAMES (11th English textbook) Speaking section Content Warm-up (5) Game: Stop the bus Country Sports Teachers activities - Explain the rule. - Give a letter. Think of a word connected with the two categories beginning with the letter that teacher gives. Task 1 (15) Repetition and Substitution. - Ask students to read aloud the dialogue - Repeat the dialogue in the - Students feel bored, some gossip. - No real communication, just repetition and substitution - No information gap in the task. Fun Students activities General judgments
- Ask students to work textbook. in pairs, ask and answer questions about Asian Games, using the information from the table in the textbook. - Use the information in the table to substitute for the suitable information.
Task-Based Language Teaching - Give feedback. Task 2. Report about the sport results. - Give an example. - Ask Ss to take turns to talk about the sport results at the 14th Asian Games from the table in the textbook. - Ask some Ss to come to the board to report. - Give feedback and correct some students mistakes. - Present the results. - Talk about sport results, using the table.
85
- The task seems easy. - Ss feel demotivated. - Some Ss gossip, some take out the exercises of other subjects to do.
86
Appendix J Classroom Observation for the second trial period Date: March 2, 2008 Time: 8:45 9:30 a.m.
Place: 11A4, Bui Thi Xuan High School Unit 13: HOBBIES (11th English textbook) Speaking section Content Warm-up (5) Guess the hobbies Teachers activities Ask one St to come in front of the class and use gesture or words to explain the hobbies to Task 1 (15) Pre-speaking: their friends. - Give some useful ways of starting a conversation with a stranger - Giving instructions about the task While-speaking: Role-play - Asks students to stand up and start a conversation with a stranger in a party. - Goes around and - Start a conversation with a stranger. - Ask about their hobbies and try to - Good class involvement. - Students stand up interesting but noisy. - Some students do not - Students pay little attention. Students activities Describe hobbies to their friends General judgments Fun Students actively join in the activity
Task-Based Language Teaching gives help if necessary. find the people who have the same hobbies. Post-speaking: - Asks some students to make the conversation in front of the class. - Give feedback and correct some students mistakes. Task 2. (25) Pre-speaking: While-speaking: Interview & Discussion - Explain the situation. - Ask students to play their roles as a businessman or a businesswoman and interview teenagers. - Have students discuss in their groups. Post-speaking: - Call 2 groups to present their ideas. - Give feedback and correct some students mistakes. - Present their plans. - Students make a survey to find out teenagers interests, then discuss in their groups. - Some students report in front of the class.
87
stand up to work Teacher reminds them.
- The classs atmosphere is very interesting but rather noisy.
Appendix K
88
Data collected from Questionnaires for feedback of students after learning the first trial period Q1. In general, what do you think about the speaking period youve just learnt? Very interesting: 0% Normal: 31.71% Interesting: 4.88% Boring: 63.41%
Q2. What do you think about the tasks in the period? Very interesting: 0% Normal: 29.27% Interesting: 0% Boring: 70.73%
Q3. Are the tasks in the period suitable for your ability? Difficult to your level: 0% Easy to your level: 41.46% Q4. Can you follow teachers instructions in the period? Yes: 7.32% Sometimes not: 14.63% No: 78.05% Suitable for your level: 58.54%
Q5. How did you communicate in English in the period? Very much: 4.87% Little: 48.78% Q6. Are the tasks useful to real life? Yes: 26.83% No: 73.17% Much: 43.90% None: 2.44%
89
Appendix L Data collected from Questionnaires for feedback of students after learning the second trial period Q1. In general, what do you think about the speaking period youve just learnt? Very interesting: 36.58% Normal: 4.87% Interesting: 58.53% Boring: 0%
Q2. What do you think about the tasks in the period? Very interesting: 26.83% Normal: 7.31% Interesting: 65.85% Boring: 0%
Q3. Are the tasks in the period suitable for your ability? Difficult to your level: 0% Easy to your level: 19.51% Q4. Can you follow teachers instructions in the period? Yes: 75.60% Sometimes not: 12.20% No: 12.20% Suitable for your level: 80.49%
Q5. How did you communicate in English in the period? Very much: 14.63% Little: 21.95% Q6. Are the tasks useful to real life? Yes: 100% No: 0% A lot: 63.41% None: 0%
90
Appendix M Tables Table 14 Reasons why Students find it interesting to learn speaking at high schools Reasons a. You have opportunities to communicate in English. b. You can speaking skills. c. Speaking tasks in classrooms are various and interesting 25.53% 44.68% 14.89% 14.89% improve your 36.17% 55.32% 8.51% 0% Strongly disagree 23.41% Disagree 59.57% Agree 17.02% Strongly Agree 0%
91
Table 15 Reasons why Students find it not interesting to learn speaking at high schools Reasons a. Learning speaking at high schools cannot help you .improve your speaking skills. b. Speaking tasks in classrooms are boring. c. The topics do not match students interests. d. The tasks do not satisfy reallife demands. e. Speaking is a difficult skill. 15.48% 22.62% 32.74% 29.17% 32.12% 42.26% 19.64% 2.98% 45.83% 39.28% 13.10% 1.79% 41.67% 37.5% 19.05% 1.79% Strongly disagree 25.59% Disagree 32.74% Agree 30.36% Strongly Agree 11.31%
92
Table 16 The Frequency of the Activity Types used in speaking class The frequency Role play S T Problem solving S T Discussion S T Dialogue S T Interview S T Information gap S T Always 2.33% 3.13% 2.79% 0% 11.16% 0% 16.75% 6.25% 3.26% 0% 17.21% 0% Usually 12.56% 28.13% 21.86% 21.88% 35.35% 40.63% 40% 50% 9.3% 12.5% 32.09% 15.63% Sometimes 40.93% 59.38% 34.42% 65.63% 26.98% 43.75% 30.23% 40.63% 33.02% 62.5% 32.09% 43.75% Rarely 26.51% 6.25% 22.79% 3.13% 13.95% 15.63% 9.3% 3.13% 30.23% 18.75% 13.02% 37.5% Never 17.67% 3.13% 18.14% 9.38% 12.56% 0% 3.72% 0% 24.19% 6.25% 5.58% 3.13%
93
Table 17 What factors may decide the success of a speaking class The benefits a. Interesting tasks S T b. A variety of tasks S T c. A variety of pair work and group work activities d. Topics match students interests. S T S T e. Teachers good preparations S T f. Students can apply what they learn to real-life situations S T Strongly disagree 48.6% 74.29% 46.19% 65.71% 42.97% 62.86% 37.75% 77.14% 37.75% 71.43% 48.59% 42.86% Disagree 48.19% 25.71% 49.8% 34.29% 43.37% 34.28% 53.82% 22.86% 51.41% 28.57% 41.77% 57.14% Agree 2.81% 0% 3.21% 0% 12.05% 2.86% 6.42% 0% 8.03% 0% 8.43% 0% Strongly agree 0.4% 0% 0.8% 0% 1.61% % 2.01% 0% 2.81% 0% 1.21% 0%
94
Table 18 The Benefits of Implementation of TBT in teaching speaking at high school The benefits a. It can motivate students to learn better. S T b. Students will have more opportunities to communicate in English. c. Students can improve their speaking skills. d. Students can apply what they learn to real-life situations. e. Students are more active in the class. S T S T S T S T f. Students feel more confident when speaking English. S T Strongly disagree 31.73% 57.14% 39.76% 51.43% 45.78% 42.86% 30.12% 37.14% 32.13% 42.86% 42.17% 40% Disagree 55.42% 42.86% 50.2% 48.57% 47.79% 57.14% 52.21% 60% 55.02% 54.28% 43.37% 60% Agree 12.05% 0% 7.23% .% 5.22% 0% 15.26% 0% 9.64% 2.86% 10.04% 0% Strongly agree 0.8% 0% 2.81% .% 1.21% 0% 2.41% 2.86% 3.21% 0% 4.42% 0%
95
Table 19 The Problems of Implementation of TBT in teaching speaking at high school Problems a. Noise S T b. Unsuitable seating arrangement S T c. Teachers less help and attention given to individuals d. Teachers little control of the whole class e. Limited time S T S T S T f. Lack of fluency and accuracy to communicate g. Lack of confidence S T S T Strongly disagree 24.1% 17.14% 18.07% 0% 30.52% 5.71% 16.87% 5.71% 37.75% 40% 12.05% 0% 16.87% 0% Disagree 49% 65.71% 35.34% 34.29% 45.78% 37.14% 46.58% 31.43% 51.01% 45.71% 32.53% 31.43% 36.34% 20% Agree 23.29% 11.43% 37.75% 57.14% 20.88% 45.71% 31.33% 54.29% 8.03% 14.29% 36.55% 62.86% 31.73% 62.86% Strongly agree 3.61% 5.71% 8.84% 8.57% 2.81% 11.43% 5.22% 8.57% 3.21% 0% 18.87% 5.71% 16.06% 17.14%
Task-Based Language Teaching Appendix N Table of Chi-squared 2 Degrees of Freedom / df 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 0.99 0.000 0.020 0.115 0.297 0.554 0.872 1.239 1.646 2.088 2.558 3.05 3.57 4.11 4.66 5.23 5.81 6.41 7.02 7.63 8.26 8.90 9.54 10.20 10.86 11.52 12.20 12.88 13.57 14.26 14.95 0.95 0.004 0.103 0.352 0.711 1.145 1.635 2.167 2.733 3.325 3.940 4.58 5.23 5.89 6.57 7.26 7.96 8.67 9.39 10.12 10.85 11.59 12.34 13.09 13.85 14.61 15.38 16.15 16.93 17.71 18.49 0.05 3.84 5.99 7.82 9.49 11.07 12.59 14.07 15.51 16.92 18.31 19.68 21.03 22.36 23.69 25.00 26.30 27.59 28.87 30.14 31.41 32.67 33.92 35.17 36.42 37.65 38.89 40.11 41.34 42.56 43.77 0.01 6.64 9.21 11.35 13.28 15.09 16.81 18.48 20.09 21.67 23.21 24.73 26.22 27.69 29.14 30.58 32.00 33.41 34.81 36.19 37.57 38.93 40.29 41.64 42.98 44.31 45.64 46.96 48.28 49.59 50.89 0.001 10.83 13.82 16.27 18.47 20.52 22.46 24.32 26.13 27.88 29.59 31.26 32.91 34.53 36.12 37.70 39.25 40.79 42.31 43.82 45.32 46.80 48.27 49.73 51.18 52.62 54.05 55.48 56.89 58.30 59.70 Probability, p
96

Graduation Paper: Ho Chi Minh City University of Education English Department

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Graduation Paper: Ho Chi Minh City University of Education English Department

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Task-Based Language Teaching

HO CHI MINH CITY UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATION ENGLISH DEPARTMENT

HO CHI MINH CITY, APRIL 2010

Ho Chi Minh City University of Education English Department

Task-Based Language Teaching Table of Contents

Task-Based Language Teaching

Task-Based Language Teaching

Task-Based Language Teaching

Task-Based Language Teaching

Communication in the class............................................................

The practicability of the tasks.........................................................

Task-Based Language Teaching

Task-Based Language Teaching

Task-Based Language Teaching Literature Review

Task-Based Language Teaching

Task-Based Language Teaching

Task-Based Language Teaching

Task-Based Language Teaching

Task-Based Language Teaching

And this is a role-play activity.

Task-Based Language Teaching

Task-Based Language Teaching

D Hung Vuong Ly Thuong Kiet 11A20 11A21 11A 11B6 D A Basic

Task-Based Language Teaching

Task-Based Language Teaching

strongly disagree 41 24.55% 6 6.10%

strongly disagree 36 21.56% 4 4.88%

Task-Based Language Teaching

Task-Based Language Teaching substitution in the textbook.

Students have no motivation in performing the tasks.

The quality of students speaking time

The mother tongue is overused to gossip during this speaking class.

Boring. Not much communication. Impracticability.

Task-Based Language Teaching Period 2 36.58% 58.53% 4.87%

Task-Based Language Teaching Period 2 4.88% 75.51%

Task-Based Language Teaching

Task-Based Language Teaching

Task-Based Language Teaching

Task-Based Language Teaching

Task-Based Language Teaching

Task-Based Language Teaching Appendix Appendix A Students Questionnaire

Nu bn chn rt hng th/ hng th xin bn tr li cu s 3. Nu bn chn bnh thng/chn, xin bn tr li cu 4

Task-Based Language Teaching c. Cc hot ng speaking trong lp rt a dng v th v L do khc:

_____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________ Mi bn tr li tip t cu 5 (b qua cu 4).

8. Nhng hot ng no thy/c thng p dng trong tit speaking?

10. Cc thy c c cho cc bn ln trnh by bi ni khng? C Thnh thong Khng

12. Theo bn, mt tit speaking thnh cng l nh th no?

Hon ton ng Cc task phi th v Cc task phi a dng (interview, role

Hon ton khng ng

BNG KHO ST N Y L HT. XIN CHN THNH CM N S CNG TC CA CC BN.

Task-Based Language Teaching

Task-Based Language Teaching

Task-Based Language Teaching

4. Speaking training session participation: Yes: 74.29% No: 25.71%

Task-Based Language Teaching

Task-Based Language Teaching

Wor k in 4 grou ps to find out the answ ers

Com e to the boar d to do the repor t.

Task-Based Language Teaching

Appendix H Lesson Plan for the first trial period

Task-Based Language Teaching

Task-Based Language Teaching

_ _ Mi bn tr li tip t cu 5 (b qua cu 4).