Language in tasks
4.2.3.1
Freedom of speech
4.2.3.2 Timing of tasks in lessons
4.2.3.3 Task-based lesson stages
4.2.3.4 Spontaneous communication and predictability
of language
4.2.3.5 Language prediction challenge
4.2.3.6 Reflection on tasks
4.2.3.7 Language prediction check
4.2.3.8 'Vague' and 'messy' language
4.2.3.9 Action point
4.2.3.10 Optional reading 2
4.2.3.1
Freedom of speech
By this point you will have realized that a key difference between a
task and many traditional language classroom activities is that in
a task students really are completely free to find whatever language they
can to achieve the task outcome.
Tasks are genuinely not intended as practice activities, not even 'free' practice, of language presented earlier in the lesson or course. An important factor in achieving this is the stage in the lesson at which the task occurs: right at the beginning.
4.2.3.2
Timing of tasks in lessons
What might happen if the task was done at the end of a lesson, after the
teacher had presented (or revised) and provided practice opportunities
for a specified language form? I put this question to Jane: JW03
(see Transcript JW03).
4.2.3.3
Task-based lesson stages
In 4.4 we will look at the details of the stages
of a task-based lesson, but by now you'll already have realized that the
a task-based lesson typically follows the basic order:
INTRODUCTION π TASK CYCLE π INSTRUCTION (ie language focus)
This is not the only possible sequence. For example, Peter Skehan (1998: 128-29) criticizes Jane's approach on the grounds that there is not a clear enough connection with 'broader theorizing about second language acquisition' or research. Instead of a set of lesson stages, he proposes a set of five principles on which task-based instruction can be based, which can be used to inform a loose sequence of:
PRE-TASK PHASE π TASK π POST-TASK PHASE
Skehan's possible pre-task activities include teaching, consciousness-raising and planning, and post-task activities include 'altering attentional balance' to shift attention more towards language form, and to encourage learners to reflect and consolidate learning. Although fundamentally similar to Jane's sequence of stages, Skehan's allows for much more flexibility in terms of what is done before the task, including substantial 'input' by way of traditional teaching. We will continue to work with Jane's sequence in this module, but if you are interested in exploring alternatives, you may like to follow up the reference to Skehan given at the end of this activity cycle.
|
Skehan's five principles for task-based learning (notes in parentheses have been added by me):
See Skehan, P (1998), A Cognitive Approach to Language Learning, Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 129-52, for more detailed explanation. |
4.2.3.4
Spontaneous communication and predictability of language
Instead of practising language, someone doing a task is simply trying
to communicate spontaneously in a natural way. Although it is often assumed
that we can predict the sort of language that fluent speakers would use
for doing this, when we try it out and get some examples of real, spontaneous
spoken language the results are surprising.
For example, Willis (1996a: 34) reports how she planned a lesson on giving advice to holiday travellers in which she anticipated language such as 'If I were you I'd ' and 'Why don't you ?'. But on recording native speaker friends doing the task, none of the predicted language occurred. Instead, she found expressions like 'Well, when I went to Bangkok last, I went to the Grace hotel '.
4.2.3.5
Language prediction challenge
What sort of (English) language would you predict for this task?
|
With your partner / group, work out what each object is for. (Each group of students examines in turn one of five small, unusual household gadgets, including a cherry / olive stoner. They have 2 minutes with each object.) (see picture) Note: the purpose here is NOT to teach the students the names of some rather obscure gadgets, but to present them with a real challenge in order to motivate real communication and later on, to be able to study the sort of language you use when you are discussing something that you don't know the name / function of. |
Make a list of the words, phrases and / or structures you think are likely to occur. Try to think of six words and / or phrases and two grammatical structures.
4.2.3.6
Reflection on tasks
After completing the language prediction challenge / task, spend a few
minutes considering the pros and cons of this type of brainstorming /
listing task. In particular, consider the benefits / drawbacks of setting
a specific number of items to think of.
Would you ask your students to do brainstorming tasks?
4.2.3.7
Language prediction check
You might have predicted phrases that indicate hypotheses like 'I think
it's a
', 'I think it's used for
.', general class words like 'thing'
or 'tool' and modal structures like 'It could be a ...'. Here is the task
transcript of two native speakers, Bob and Judith, who I recorded doing
the task for the cherry stoner (there are occasional interventions at
the beginning and end from me, Corony). Check to see how much of your
predicted language is present.
You can listen to the recording by clicking here.
| 1 | J | Got another one? |
| 2 | B | Next |
| 3 | C | Yeah - there's this one and one more |
| 4 | J | Hmm |
| 5 | B | Well it almost looks like a garlic press |
| 6 | J | Yes yes |
| 7 | B | Umm |
| 8 |
J |
It looks as though it's meant maybe it's oh, I bet it's something like a de- umm, like you get apple corers |
| 9 | B | Hmm |
| 10 |
J |
Looks as though that's meant to push something out, doesn't it, Except it doesn't go very far |
| 11 | B | Hmm. ... Don't know |
| 12 |
J |
So maybe you're meant to slot something in there and then press that in |
| 13 | B | Stick your finger in there and see what happens |
| 14 | J | Laughs No! |
| 15 | B | Umm. It's a sort of an odd shape as well, isn't it? |
| 16 | J | Hmm and there's sort of ridged bits |
| 17 | B | Ahh! Umm is it for olives? To take the, the |
| 18 | J | To take the stones out |
| 19 | B | For coring olives |
| 20 | J | Yes, that sounds a good idea |
| 21 | B | That's what it is, yes? |
| 22 | J | Is that what it is? |
| 23 | C | Yeah, yeah. There's a |
| 24 | B | Ah, OK. I'd like one of them! |
| 25 | J | Yes! |
| 26 | B | There's a what? |
| 27 | J | A de-pit so you can get pitted olives. |
| 28 | B | Oh OK |
| 29 |
J |
Ah, right. So then that makes more sense, 'cos it looks as though you can actually , 'cos otherwise it's like teeny weeny bit that you can move |
| 30 |
C |
I think it's originally designed for cherries but you can use it for olives as well |
| 31 | B | Yes. Ah right. OK |
4.2.3.8
'Vague' and 'messy' language
What struck me when I transcribed and studied the task recordings was
how many ways the speakers had of trying to relate their objects to something
familiar ('it almost looks like a garlic press'), but at the same time
showing a degree of uncertainty or vagueness ('it almost looks
like
', 'maybe you're meant to', 'a sort of an odd shape').
You might also have noticed how 'messy' the transcript is compared with
the sort of language often presented as 'dialogue' in coursebooks. There
are unfinished utterances, repetitions, hesitations, phrases with no subject
or verb (ie non-sentences), lexical phrases, and more. This is what spontaneous
spoken language (in any language) is like, and it is a focus on
this real language that task-based learning aims to achieve. We
will return to the issue of the language generated in tasks and how to
use this to best advantage in class in activity cycle 4 (see 4.4).
4.2.3.9
Action point
Do you (or does your coursebook) set 'free practice' or 'production' tasks
or activities in which language is implicitly or explicitly predicted
in the preceding presentation and practice activities? For the language
you teach, find a task in your teaching materials (or coursebook); record
fluent speakers of the language doing the task; play back the recording
and compare the language used with your (the coursebook's) predictions.
(This is a good experiment to do with two or three colleagues).
Alternatively, find a suitably unusual household gadget and replicate the task above with fluent speakers of your language. Compare the language produced with the sort of things that occurred with the English speakers. Are there equivalents? Are these the sorts of thing covered in your regular teaching materials?
4.2.3.10
Optional reading 2
Now would be a good time to look at the second part (see Reading 2, 4.2.7)
of the recommended reading for this activity cycle.
At this point you may also like to go straight to the assessment task (see 4.2.9) for this activity cycle in order to complete the first part of this.
