Transcript A paper presented at the 3rd Biennial Conference on Taskbased Language Teaching, Lancaster University, UK, 13-16 September 2009. Alan Waters, Lancaster University E-mail: [email protected].

A paper presented at the 3rd Biennial Conference on Taskbased Language Teaching, Lancaster University, UK,
13-16 September 2009.
Alan Waters,
Lancaster University
E-mail: [email protected]



Increasing focus on pedagogy of language
learning tasks (e.g., Van den Branden 2006,
Carless 2007, Samuda & Bygate 2008)
BUT mainly still ‘laboratory’ investigations and
application of theoretical models (Bygate, Norris
& Van den Branden 2009)
Also need ‘bottom-up’ studies which theorise
from practice of typical language teaching
situation (cf. Waters 2009b)


Textbooks as ‘entrée’ into world of everyday
language teaching
Research questions:
◦ What role do tasks play in ELT textbooks?
◦ To what extent does the picture resemble or differ
from the one in applied linguistics in general, and
why?
◦ What implications might there be for further
research and theorising in this area?



Textbooks focused on = Headway, Cutting Edge,
Innovations, Language to Go and Lifelines, i.e.,
series produced by major UK publishers ->
availability & familiarity
BUT most textbooks local
Intermediate level only -> convenience and
‘representativeness’

Picture at other levels?

Analysis = ‘on paper’ only, vs. classroom use



Numerous lists of numerous ‘candidates’
(e.g., those in Bygate, Skehan & Swain 2001,
Ellis 2003)
‘An activity which involves a primary focus on
using language as communication, i.e., one
intended to achieve some kind of purpose
over and above displaying a knowledge of the
language as an end in itself.’
Term often missing/misapplied in textbooks
-> focus on function of textbook element



‘False positives’, e.g., Headway (Soars & Soars
2003), Unit 4, p. 34 ‘What do you think?’; p. 33,
‘Practice’: item 4; p. 108: item 5).
Interpretation often problematic -> role usually
multi-dimensional
Close matches, e.g., ‘Get Talking’ (Ex. 8) in Unit
4, Language to Go (Crace & Wileman 2002) [see
Appendix 1] - also see, e.g., Hutchinson 1997:
26, item 5; Cunningham & Moor 1999: 42-43;
Dellar et al. 2004: 51, item 8.

Other purposes of ‘Get Talking’ task: links to earlier
exercises
1.
Task language:
◦ Ex. 1: phrasal verbs for describing typical events in a tour;
Exs. 3 – 5: structure of a ‘model’ itinerary; Exs. 6 & 7: use
of present tense forms for talking about the future.
2.
Task content:
◦ Ex. 1: Talking about familiar journeys; Exs. 3 – 5: touring
parts of London via Thames; Exs. 6 & 7: ‘carrier content’
related to day trip theme.

Cf. Hutchinson 1997: 26, item 5; Cunningham &
Moor 1999: 42-43; Dellar et al. 2004: 51, item 8.



Task as means of drawing together discrete
language and content strands of earlier part
of learning unit in order to provide
opportunity to apply them in holistic manner
(see Fig. 1).
Task defined by pedagogic role in sequence
of other items is related to.
Resembles ‘task-supported learning’ (TSL),
vs. ‘task-based learning’ (TBL) (Ellis 2003:
28-34), BUT…



The term ‘TSL’ implies task plays pivotal role,
other elements have only auxiliary role
But data indicate relationship other way
round (cf. Waters 2009a), i.e., it is the rest of
the unit which supports the task
Thus ‘task-enhanced learning’ (TEL) a more
appropriate term: the task supplements
‘traditional’ textbook fare (and is defined in
relation to it), not replaces it.

A more objective definition of ‘task’

Differentiation from ‘exercise’, ‘activity’, etc.

Understanding rationale for textbook
treatment of tasks can create potential for
greater relevance -> Why are tasks
incorporated into textbooks in manner
shown?
1.
2.
Lack of awareness of benefits of TBL by publishers,
authors, teachers, etc?
TEL a better fit in terms of typical ‘situational constraints’
(see, e.g., Carless 2002, 2004, 2007): majority of its
methodology more feasible in ‘TESEP’ (Holliday 1994)
settings
TEL and the ‘out of class’ context:
3.
◦
Textbooks provide visible representation of curriculum
(Hutchinson & Hutchinson 1996)
◦
In TBL/’focus on form’, syllabus emergent, retrospective; in
TEL/’focus on forms’, syllabus explicit, prospective
◦
Latter more suited for textbook as ‘route map’
(etc.)



Task use in textbooks a product of need for
compatibility with defining features of typical
language teaching situation
Study of textbook use of tasks can raise
awareness of how to make them work
effectively in mainstream language teaching
(cf. Waters 2009a)
Also helps ‘R & D’ become more ‘bottom up’,
i.e., more rooted in and able to build more on
typical existing practice (cf. Waters 2009b)
References







Bygate, M., J. Norris & K. Van den Branden (2009). Coda. Undertsanding
TBLT at the interface between research and pedagogy. In Van den Branden,
K., M. Bygate & J. Norris (eds.) Task-based language teaching. Amsterdam:
John Benjamins, 495-499.
Bygate, M., P. Skehan & M. Swain (eds.) (2001). Researching pedagogic tasks
: Second language learning, teaching, and testing. Harlow: Longman.
Carless, D. (2002). Implementing task-based learning with young learners.
ELT Journal 56.4, 389-396.
Carless, D. (2007). The suitability of task-based approaches for secondary
schools: Perspectives from Hong Kong. System 35.4, 595-608.
Carless, D. R. (2004). Issues in teachers' reinterpretation of a task-based
innovation in primary schools. TESOL Quarterly 38.4, 639-662(624).
Crace, A. & R. Wileman (2002). Language to go intermediate student's book.
Harlow, Essex: Pearson Education Limited.
Cunningham, S. & P. Moor (1999). Cutting Edge intermediate student's book.
Harlow, Essex: Pearson Education Limited.
References (contd.)







Dellar, H., A. Walkley & D. Hocking (2004). Innovations intermediate
coursebook. London: Thomson.
Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Holliday, A. (1994). The house of TESEP and the communicative approach:
The special needs of state English language education. ELT Journal 48.1, 311.
Hutchinson, T. (1997). Lifelines : Intermediate student's book. Oxford
University Press.
Hutchinson, T. & E. G. Hutchinson (1996). The textbook as agent of change.
In Hedge, T. & N. Whitney (eds.) Power, pedagogy and practice. Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 307-323.
Hutchinson, T. & A. Waters (1987). English for specific purposes : A learningcentred approach. Cambridge Cambridgeshire: Cambridge University Press.
Samuda, V. & M. Bygate (2008). Tasks in second language learning.
Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
References (contd.)





Soars, L. & J. Soars (2003). New Headway intermediate student's book.
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Van den Branden, K. (ed.) (2006). Task-based language education.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Waters, A. (2009a). Advances in materials design. In Long, M. H. & C. J.
Doughty (eds.) The handbook of language teaching. Wiley-Blackwell, 311326.
Waters, A. (2009b). Ideology in applied linguistics for language teaching.
Applied Linguistics 30.1, 138-143.
Willis, J. (1996). A framework for task-based learning. Harlow, Essex: Pearson
Education Limited.