Date post: | 07-Apr-2018 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | tran-thanh-linh |
View: | 226 times |
Download: | 0 times |
of 31
8/3/2019 Van Den Branden
1/31
Task-based language education:Fromtheory to practice and back again
Kris Van den Branden
Katholieke Universiteit Leuven
8/3/2019 Van Den Branden
2/31
TBLT on Google
Task: 275.000.000 hits Task-based: 1.320.000 hits
Task-based language: 607.000 hits
Task-based language teaching: 311.000
Task-based language education: 320.000
8/3/2019 Van Den Branden
3/31
Task as a crucial concept in
Theories of language learning SLA research
The theory and practice of language education
The assessment of language proficiency/skills
Real life
8/3/2019 Van Den Branden
4/31
Defining task
by task is meant the hundred and one thingspeople doin everyday life, at work, at play, andin between. Tasks are the things people will tell
you they do if you ask them and they are not
applied linguists (Long, 1985: 89)
8/3/2019 Van Den Branden
5/31
Target tasks and pedagogic tasks
Pedagogic tasks as increasingly complexapproximations of target tasks (Long, 1996;Long and Norris, 2000)
Example: Following street directions
Listen to fragments of elaborated descriptionswhile tracing them on a very simple 2-D map.
Virtual reality map task. Using video from the
target location and audio of the target discourse,complete a simulation of the target task.
(Long, 2007: 129)
8/3/2019 Van Den Branden
6/31
Target tasks and pedagogic tasks
Tasks should result in a kind of language usethat resembles that in the outside world (Ellis,2003)
Work with three other students. You are on a
ship that is sinking. You have to swim to anearby island. You have a waterproof container,but can only carry 20 kilos of items in it. Decide
which of the following items you will take
(Remember, you cant take more than 20 kiloswith you)
8/3/2019 Van Den Branden
7/31
Target tasks and pedagogic tasks
Tasks should give rise to a number ofinteractional and cognitive processes, believedto enhance language learning
Interaction Hypothesis (Long, 1996: 451-452):
... negotiation for meaning, and especially negotiation
work that triggers interactional adjustments by the NS
or the more competent interlocutor, facilitates
acquisition because it connects input, internal learner
capacities, particularly selective attention, and output
in productive ways
---- Jigsaw tasks/Information gap tasks
8/3/2019 Van Den Branden
8/31
Target tasks and pedagogic tasks
Output Hypothesis (Swain, 1985, 1995):production of L2 output --- collaborative speakingand writing tasks, group work/pair work
Cognitive psychology (e.g. DeKeyser, 2001;
Schmidt, 1998; Robinson, 2001; Skehan, 1998;Doughty and Williams, 1998): conscious noticingand analyzing L2 forms ----- input enhancement,
focus on form, error correction, explicit teaching
8/3/2019 Van Den Branden
9/31
Methodological principles for TBLT
1 Use tasks, not texts, as the unit of analysis2 Promote learning by doing
3 Elaborate input
4 Provide rich input
5 Encourage inductive learning6 Focus on form
7 Provide negative feedback
8 Respect learner syllabuses/develop-mental processes
9 Promote collaborative learning
10 Individualize instruction
(Doughty and Long, 2003)
8/3/2019 Van Den Branden
10/31
Two questions
1 To what extent can we expect these cleverlydesigned tasks to elicit the same kind ofinteractional work and cognitive processing inauthentic classrooms?
2 To what extent do these cleverly designedtasks really promote the students ability to use
the target language outside the classroom?
8/3/2019 Van Den Branden
11/31
Teachers working with tasks
Language teachers are active, thinking decision-makers who make instructional choices bydrawing on complex, practically-oriented,
personalized, and context-sensitive networks ofknowledge, thoughts and beliefs (Borg, 2003:
81)
8/3/2019 Van Den Branden
12/31
Putting principles to work
3 Elaborate input4 Provide rich input
Teachers reducing task complexity, avoiding to confront
learners with challenges, with things they havent fullyacquired yet
In task-supported teaching, tasks are seen not as a
means by which learners acquire new knowledge orrestructure their interlanguages but simply as a way bywhich learners can activate their existing knowledge ofthe L2 by developing fluency (Ellis, 2003: 30)
8/3/2019 Van Den Branden
13/31
Putting principles to work
2 Promote learning by doing8 Respect learner syllabuses/developmental
processes
9 Promote cooperative/collaborative learning
Teachers need to maintain control
An example: Radio Tika task (cf. Berben, Van denBranden & Van Gorp, 2007)
8/3/2019 Van Den Branden
14/31
Radio Tika
- Create a radio news bulletin, using Dutch(main medium of instruction) and otherlanguages
- 3 primary school teachers werevideotaped
- Grade 6, children aged 12, multilingual
classes- Result: three different activities
8/3/2019 Van Den Branden
15/31
L1? Topiccontrol?
Explicitteaching?
Freedomfor
students
Teacher 1 No +++ No +/-
Teacher 2 No ++ Yes +
Teacher 3 Yes + No +++
Radio Tika: 3 versions
8/3/2019 Van Den Branden
16/31
Putting principles to work
6 Focus on form7 Provide negative feedback
Poor integration of focus on form in meaningfulactivity
Inconsistent feedback and error correctionbehaviour
8/3/2019 Van Den Branden
17/31
The same task?
Teachers reconstruct a given task, based onTheir cognitions on language education
Their personal needs, skills, and teaching style
The context in which they operate
Their perceptions of their students
= Turning tasks into personal task intentions
(intended tasks)
8/3/2019 Van Den Branden
18/31
Task motivation (Drnyei, 2002)
Task motivation is influenced by:Learner characteristics
Features of the task
Learning environment
Learners task-related beliefs
Expectancy of successful task completion(expected task)
Personal goal setting (intended task)
8/3/2019 Van Den Branden
19/31
A process-oriented model of task motivation
Preactional stage- setting goals that are worthwhile to pursue
- perceiving the task as a reasonable challenge (goalcan be reached, gap can be bridged)
Actional stage:-maintaining task motivation through action-controlprocesses
Postactional stage:
- evaluating past experiences- determining future activities
(Drnyei, 2002)
8/3/2019 Van Den Branden
20/31
School effectiveness research
Teachers tailor their instructional practices to their perception of the
academic level of the group of students.
This refers to the concept ofdidacticfit: adjustment of curriculum,learning materials, method of instruction, effective learning time,
assessment, etc. to the ability level of the class (Dar & Resh, 1986,
1994). In most classes, the content and pace of teaching are geared to
the middle level of ability in that class. In lower classes, there is a
more limited academic focus, poor use of instructional time and areduced opportunity to learn ( De Fraine et al., 2002: 424)
8/3/2019 Van Den Branden
21/31
Overt and covert task activity
Underneath the actual verbal exchange lies aparticularly strong current of highly personalised non-verbal mental activity: task intentions and assessmentsinfluence task activity, and vice versa
Task intentions, expectations and actions are fed byprevious experiences and beliefs
One persons task perceptions and actions can have a
strong impact on interlocutors task perceptions and
actions, and on the earning potential of the task
The need for classroom-based, process-orientedresearch to explore these issues
Teachers crucial role in TBLT
8/3/2019 Van Den Branden
22/31
High-quality interaction
Interactional support Integrated in functional
tasks
In line with students
task intentions
Linked with students
current behaviour,needs and level
Assigning active role to
student and promotingactive thinking
Differentiated
Learning is
Situated
Goal-directed
Cumulative
Constructive
Cognitive
Individually different
(De Corte et al, 2003)
8/3/2019 Van Den Branden
23/31
Making interactional decisions
Teacher intuition estimating effect sizes:If learner(s) exhibit behaviour X, and my reaction
is Y, what will be the effect on:
- the process of task performance (estimate
based on analysis of ongoing process)- the product(s) coming out of task performance(based on comparison between task goals andcurrent product)
- language learning (based on knowledge ofcurriculum goals (target tasks) and knowledgeof how language learning comes about)
8/3/2019 Van Den Branden
24/31
Training teachers
Explicit teaching wont suffice
A need for intensive and sustained support
Communication and support networks
Providing teacher aids
Creating favourable conditions
Promoting and supporting teachers professional
development
8/3/2019 Van Den Branden
25/31
Teacher training
Task-based as well
Training in real operating conditions
Alernating action and reflection
Cf. Van den Branden, 2006
8/3/2019 Van Den Branden
26/31
Cycle of reflection (Korthagen, 1993)
Classroom experience
Reflection (detailed analysis)
Raising essential aspects of current andprevious classroom experiences toconsciousness
Searching for alternatives
Trying new ideas out in new classroom
experiences
8/3/2019 Van Den Branden
27/31
Different worlds?
Lack of empirical research
Task-based language assessment
Studies of SLA/FLA in naturalistic settings
Second language studies
Study abroad (foreign language students)
8/3/2019 Van Den Branden
28/31
Integrating the two worlds
Creating favourable conditions for real-world L2use in the classroom and for building self-confidence
Training communication strategies
Assignments with native speakers
Integrated language learning, e.g.:
Vocational training
School-based trainingThrough the use of multimedia
8/3/2019 Van Den Branden
29/31
Conclusions
If task-based teaching is to make the shift fromtheory to practice it will be necessary to go beyond
the psycholinguistic rationale () and to address the
contextual factors that ultimately determine what
materials and procedures teachers choose. (Ellis,2003: 337).
Towards a process-oriented approach to classroom-
based research and teacher training
Focus on people, on how they interact during task
performance, rather than on tasks alone
8/3/2019 Van Den Branden
30/31
References
Berben, M., Van den Branden, K., & Van Gorp, K. (2007). Well see what happens. Tasks on paper and tasks ina multilingual classroom. In K. Van den Branden, K. Van Gorp & M. Verhelst (Eds.), Tasks in Action. Task-based
language education from a classroom-based perspective(pp. 32-67). Cambridge: Cambridge ScholarsPublishing.
Borg, S. (2003). Teacher cognition in language teaching: A review of research on what language teachers think,know, believe, and do. Language Teaching, 36, 81-109.
De Corte, E., Verschaffel, L., Entwhistle, N., & Van Merrinboer, J. (eds.) (2003). Powerful learningenvironments: Unravelling basic components and dimensions. Oxford: Pergamon.
De Fraine, B., J. Van Damme, & P. Onghena, (2002). Accountability of schools and teachers: what should betaken into account? In: European Educational Research Journal, 1. 403-428.
DeKeyser, R. (2001). Automaticity and automatization. In P. Robinson (ed.), Cognition and second languageinstruction(pp. 125-51). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Drnyei, Z. (2002). The motivational basis of language learning tasks. In P. Robinson (ed.), Individual Differencesand Instructed Language Learning(pp. 137-158). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Doughty, C., & Long, M. (2003). Optimal psycholinguistic environments for distance foreign language learning.Language Learning & Technology, 7, 50-80.
Doughty, C., & Williams, J. (1998). Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition. Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Korthagen, F. (1993). Het logboek als middel om reflectie door a.s. leraren te bevorderen. VELON Tijdschrift, 15,
27-34
Long, M. (1985). A role for instruction in second language acquisition: Task-based language teaching. In K.Hylstenstam & M. Pienemann (eds.), Modelling and assessing second language acquisition(pp. 77-99).Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Long, M. (1996), The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition, in W. Ritchie & T. Bhatia(eds.), Handbook of Language Acquisition. Vol. 2: Second Language Acquisition(pp. 413-468). New York:Academic Press.
Long, M. (2007). Problems in SLA. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Long, M., & Norris, J. (2000). Task-based teaching and assessment. In M. Byram (ed.), Encyclopedia of
language teaching(pp. 597-603). London: Routledge.
8/3/2019 Van Den Branden
31/31
References (continued)
Robinson, P. (ed.) (2001). Cognition and second language instruction.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Schmidt, R. (1998). The centrality of attention in SLA. In J. Brown (ed.),
University of Hawaii Working Papers in ESL, 16, 1-34. Honolulu: Universityof Hawaii.
Schmidt, R. (2001). Attention. In P. Robinson (ed.), Cognition and secondlanguage instruction(pp. 3-32). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Skehan, P. (1998). A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford:Oxford University Press.
Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: some roles ofcomprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S.Gass & C. Madden (eds.), Input in Second Language Acquisition(pp. 235-256). Rowley, Mass.: Newbury House.
Swain, M. (1995). Three functions of output in second language learning.
In: G. Cook & B. Seidlhofer (eds.), Principle and Practice in AppliedLinguistics: Studies in Honour of H.G. Widdowson. Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press, 125-144.
Van den Branden, K. (2006). Task-based language teaching: from theoryto practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.