the impact of task based language teaching on grammar learning at long thuong high school

This study was conducted with the aim to investigate the impact of Based Language Teaching TBLT on Grade 11 students’ grammar achievementand its influence on learning motivation toward t

NGUYEN THI HONG THAM

THE IMPACT OF TASK-BASED LANGUAGE TEACHING

ON GRAMMAR LEARNING

AT LONG THUONG HIGH SCHOOL

MASTER OF ARTS IN TESOL

HO CHI MINH CITY - 2019

THE IMPACT OF TASK-BASED LANGUAGE TEACHING

ON GRAMMAR LEARNING

AT LONG THUONG HIGH SCHOOL

MASTER OF ARTS IN TESOL

Submitted by NGUYEN THI HONG THAM

Supervisor: Dr LE THI THANH THU

HO CHI MINH CITY - 2019

STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP

I certify that the thesis entitled “The impact of task-based language teaching

on grammar learning at Long Thuong high school”is my original work.

All sources used in this thesis have been documented The work has not beensubmitted to Open University or elsewhere

Ho Chi Minh City, June 25th, 2019

Nguyen Thi Hong Tham

I am really grateful for the help of many people who have assisted and given

me many advice as well as encouragements to complete this thesis

First of all, I would like to express my sincere thanks to my supervisor, Dr LeThi Thanh Thu for her valuable assistance Without her help, I could not completethis study, especially, when I was in difficulty during my nine-month pregnancy.Secondly, I want to send my deep gratitude to my family who constantlyencouraged me whenever I lost confidence and wanted to stop due to my bad health.Finally, I would like to thank to my colleagues as well as the participants intwo Grade 11 classes - 11A3 and 11A4 for their support and cooperation

Ho Chi Minh City, June 25th, 2019

Nguyen Thi Hong Tham

This study was conducted with the aim to investigate the impact of Based Language Teaching (TBLT) on Grade 11 students’ grammar achievementand its influence on learning motivation toward the study of English grammar atLong Thuong high school

Task-Quasi-experimental was employed with the participation of two classesdivided into two groups which are the control group (CG) and the experimentalgroup (EG) As the sample of the study could not be chosen randomly butconveniently, the group with lower result in the pretest was assigned as the EG andthe other was the CG The former was taught with traditional grammar teachingpractice whereas the latter was applied task-based language teaching Tests wereapplied to measure students’ grammar achievement meanwhile Questionnaire wasutilized to investigate students’ motivation toward the learning of grammar withTBLT

The results revealed that TBLT had positive influence on EFL learners’grammar achievement and their motivation in grammar learning Results collectedfrom the tests indicated that though participants in the EG did not surpass the CG inthe mean score, they outperformed the CG in term of grammar’s score improvement.Thus, the implementation of TBLT had positive effects on helping students obtainknowledge of grammar structure Results collected from the Questionnaire reflectedthat a predominant number of participants admitted their original motivation tolearn English grammar was due to its integral role in testing and they might notfully appreciate the role of grammar in developing other English skills But most ofthem showed their awareness of great benefits of TBLT applied in their grammarclass, and showed their interest and expectation to the new task-based grammarclass with attractive task-based activities

Key words: Task-based language teaching (TBLT), task-based grammar, grammar

achievement, grammar learning motivation

ABSTRACT (VIETNAMESE VERSION)

Nghiên cứu này được thực hiện nhằm mục đích điều tra sự tác động củaphương pháp dạy học giao nhiệm vụ đối với thành tích học ngữ pháp và ảnh hưởngcủa phương pháp này đối với động lực học ngữ pháp của học sinh khối 11 ở trườngTHPT Long Thượng

Nghiên cứu định lượng được áp dụng với sự tham gia của học sinh thuộc hailớp 11 tại trường THPT Long Thượng Hai lớp này được chia ra thành hai nhóm đốitượng nghiên cứu gồm nhóm kiểm soát (CG) và nhóm thực nghiệm (EG) Vì đốitượng nghiên cứu không thể đươc chọn một cách ngẫu nhiên mà phải được chọntheo một sự sắp xếp sẵn, để đảm bảo kết quả nghiên cứu có ý nghĩa, nhóm học sinh

có điểm số thấp hơn trong bài kiểm tra đầu khóa được chọn làm nhóm thực nghiệm

và nhóm còn lại với điểm số cao hơn được chọn làm nhóm kiểm soát Trong đónhóm kiểm soát được học ngữ pháp bằng phương pháp truyền thống trước đâytrong khi nhóm thực nghiệm được học ngữ pháp bằng một phương pháp mới -Phương pháp dạy học giao nhiệm vụ Các bài kiểm tra đánh giá được sử dụng để đolường về thành tích học ngữ pháp thông qua sự tác động của phương pháp dạy họcgiao nhiệm vụ, trong khi bảng câu hỏi được sử dụng để điều tra về sự tác động củaphương pháp này đối với động lực học tập ngữ pháp của học sinh

Các kết quả thống kê thu thập được cho thấy phương pháp dạy học giaonhiệm vụ đã có tác động tích cực đến thành tích cũng như động lực học ngữ phápcủa người học trong việc học ngữ pháp tiếng Anh Cụ thể, các kết quả thu thập được

từ các bài kiểm tra trước và sau thực nghiệm cho thấy mặc dù nhóm thực nghiệmkhông vượt trội hơn nhóm kiểm soát về mặt điểm số nhưng họ đã có sự tiến bộ vượttrội hơn về khả năng cải thiện ngữ pháp Tiếng Anh Do đó có thể kết luận rằng việcthực hiện phương pháp dạy học giao nhiệm vụ có ảnh hưởng tích cực trong việcgiúp học sinh lĩnh hội được các cấu trúc ngữ pháp trong Tiếng Anh Các kết quả thuthập được từ bảng câu hỏi cho thấy phần lớn các học sinh nhận định rằng ban đầu

động lực học ngữ pháp Tiếng Anh của họ bắt nguồn từ tầm quan trọng của ngữpháp trong các bài kiểm tra thi cử, và họ cũng chưa hoàn toàn nhận thức được vaitrò của ngữ pháp trong việc phát triển những kĩ năng Tiếng Anh khác Nhưng saukhi được trải nghiệm lớp học ngữ pháp bằng phương pháp dạy học giao nhiệm vụ

họ dần dần nhận ra những lợi ích tuyệt vời từ phương pháp này, từ đó cảm thấyhứng thú và mong chờ đến giờ học ngữ pháp với những hoạt động học tập thú vị

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

CEFR:Common European Framework of Reference for Languages

CG: Control Group

CLT: Communicative Language Teaching

DOET: Department of Education and Training

EFL: English as a Foreign Language

EG: Experimental Group

GTM: Grammar Translation Method

L2: Second Language

MOET: Ministry of Education and Training

PPP: Presentation – Practice – Production

TBLT: Task-based Language Teaching

TESOL: Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages

LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1 Task types 15

Table 2.2 Pre-task phase’s activities 22

Table 2.3 Description of task-based language teaching framework 24

Table 3.1 Description of participants 38

Table 3.2 Grammatical structures for Grade 11 41

Table 3.3 Teaching techniques between the CG and the EG 44

Table 3.4 Sample teaching plan of Unit 5 45

Table 4.1 The Pretest’s results 53

Table 4.2 The Posttest 1’s results 54

Table 4.3 Posttest 1 vs Pretest 56

Table 4.4 The Posttest 2’s results 57

Table 4.5 Posttest 2 vs Posttest 1 58

Table 4.6 The Posttest 3’s results 59

Table 4.7 Posttest 3 vs Posttest 2 60

Table 4.8 Results of Question 1, 2, 3 64

Table 4.9 Results of Question 4, 5, 6, 7 67

Table 4.10 Results of Question 8, 9, 10, 11 70

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 4.1 Test’s data analysis methodology 51Figure 4.2 Mean scores of two groups in the study 61Figure 4.3 Percentage of weak students in the Pretest and Posttests 62

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP i

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ii

ABSTRACT iii

ABSTRACT (VIETNAMESE VERSION) iv

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS vi

LIST OF TABLES vii

LIST OF FIGURES viii

TABLE OF CONTENT ix

CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION 1.1 Statement of the problem 1

1.2 Purpose of the study 4

1.3 Research questions 4

1.4 Scope of the study 5

1.5 Significance of the study 5

1.6 Background of the study 6

1.7 Organization of the study 8

CHAPTER 2 – LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1 Grammar 9

2.1.1 Definitions of grammar 9

2.1.2 The importance of grammar in second language learning 10

2.2 The history of L2 grammar teaching approaches 11

2.2.1 Grammar translation method 11

2.2.2 The direct method (DM) 12

2.2.3 The reading method 12

2.2.4 Audiolingualism 12

2.2.5 Communicative language teaching (CLT) 13

2.3 Task-based language teaching 13

2.3.1 Task 13

2.3.1.1 Definitions of task 13

2.3.1.2 Task types 15

2.3.2 Task-based language teaching 18

2.3.2.1 Concept 18

2.3.2.2 Principles of task-based language teaching 19

2.3.2.3 Task-Based Language Teaching Framework 21

2.3.2.4 Benefits of task-based language teaching 25

2.3.2.5 Difficulties of task-based language teaching in Vietnam 26

2.4 Learner motivation 27

2.4.1 Definitions of motivation 27

2.4.2 The importance of learner motivation 28

2.4.3 Types of learner motivation 28

2.4.4 Learner motivation and language achievement 30

2.5 Previous studies 30

2.5.1 Studies related to TBLT on grammar learning in foreign Countries 31

2.5.2 Studies related to TBLT on grammar learning in Vietnam 33

2.5.3 Implication for the present study 35

2.6 Chapter summary 36

CHAPTER 3 – METHODOLOGY 3.1 Research setting 37

3.2 Participants 38

3.3 Research design 39

3.4 Experimental procedures 41

3.4.1 Grammar teaching procedures for the control group 43

3.4.2 Grammar teaching procedures for the experimental group 43

3.5 Data collection instruments 46

3.5.1 The pretest 46

3.5.2 Posttests 47

3.5.3 The questionnaire 48

3.6 Chapter summary 49

CHAPTER 4 - DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION 4.1 Data analysis methodology 50

4.1.1 Tests 50

4.1.2 Questionnaires 52

4.2 Research question 1’s analysis and discussions 52

4.2.1 Before the treatment 52

4.2.2 Posttest 1 54

4.2.2.1 Posttest 1 between groups 54

4.2.2.2 Posttest 1 within groups 55

4.2.3 Posttest 2 56

4.2.3.1 Posttest 2 between groups 57

4.2.3.2 Posttest 2 within groups 58

4.2.4 Posttest 3 59

4.2.4.1 Posttest 3 between groups 59

4.2.4.2 Posttest 3 within groups 60

4.3 Research question 2’s analysis and discussions 63

4.3.1 Students’ motivation in learning English grammar 64

4.3.2 Students’ recognition of the benefits of learning English grammar with TBLT 66

4.3.3 Students’ attitudes toward the application of TBLT in grammar learning 69

4.4 Chapter summary 72

CHAPTER 5 – CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 Conclusions 73

5.2 Suggestions for implementation 75

5.3 Recommendations for further study 78

5.4 Limitations 78

REFERENCES 80

APPENDIX A: FORM-FOCUS INSTRUCTION LESSON PLAN 89

APPENDIX B: TBLT LESSON PLAN 91

APPENDIX C: SUMMARY OF LESSON PLANS FOR THE CG 94

APPENDIX D: SUMMARY OF TBLT LESSON PLANS FOR THE EG 99

APPENDIX E: PRETEST 107

APPENDIX F: POSTTEST 1 111

APPENDIX G: POSTTEST 2 115

APPENDIX H: POSTTEST 3 119

APPENDIX I: QUESTIONNAIRE (Vietnamese version) 124

APPENDIX J: QUESTIONNAIRE (English version) 127

APPENDIX K: TABLES OF INDEPENDENT AND PAIR SAMPLES T-TESTS 130

CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION

Being a language of internet and modernity, English is utilized by mostpublications and website materials as their powerful means of communication Thus,the need to get as well as exchange information and experience urges people tomaster this kind of dominated language In Viet Nam, English is especiallyimportant as it is chosen as one of the three compulsory subjects together withMathematics and Literature in schooling system However, after many yearsstudying English at school, the English proficiency level of students is generally not

as good as expected One of the main reason of this is due to the lack ofcommunicative opportunity and insufficient knowledge of linguistic elements,especially grammar The study is conducted with an effort to investigate the impact

of a teaching approach that can motivate and improve students’ grammar learning in

a more communicative context – Task-based language teaching

The chapter begins with background of the study Then statement of theproblem in which the necessity of the study is emphasized Followed by the mainpurposes of the study, the two research questions are presented in section four Thescope and significant of the study are orderly mentioned in the last two sections ofthis chapter

1.1 Background of the study

The study was conducted at Long Thuong high school - a small public school

in rural area of Long An province Most of the students are local people SinceEnglish is not widely used in society, students rarely have chance to practice usingEnglish outside the classroom, thus, they cannot apply what have been learned intoreal communication In addition, a large number of students are timid and not veryconfident in learning and using English Though most of them can get good grades

on English grammar tests, they cannot apply those that have been learned to formtheir own sentences, especially for writing and speaking lessons.

Among the four teachers who are assigned to teach English at Long Thuonghigh school, three of them got C1 level provided by SEAMEO RETRACT, theother one is pursuing the Master of TESOL program at Ho Chi Minh City OpenUniversity All of them are young teachers who graduated from university from five

to seven years except one staff who has experienced English teaching for nearlythirty years Though most of the English teachers are young, they are so enthusiasticwith their teaching job and flexible in solving different educational situations

Thanks to the solicitude of the DOET who enacts the policy of givinginteractive board to the school with the English teacher who meets the CEFRquality standard, Long Thuong school is well equipped with two interactive boardsand two projectors which help facilitate teaching and learning process However,students have to move to the specialized rooms in order to experience with thoseteaching and learning devices, which is considered wasting time Normally in class,there are many desks and chairs arranged in rows for more than 40 students in eachclass and this causes difficulty for students working in pairs or in groups andmoving around

Currently, although the MOET as well as the curriculum in textbook’s designrequire the ability of students to communicate in English fluently via the applying

of communicative teaching methods, GTM with the supportive role of students’mother tongue is mostly used to teach grammar for students at Long Thuong highschool due to the dominant role of English grammar in testing This type ofgrammar teaching method is successfully used to enhance the ability of students ingetting various strategies to deal with grammar tests as well as graduationexamination CLT and TBLT are rarely applied because of the inconvenience oflarge class size and other sensitive problems like the English proficiency of bothstudents and teachers The classroom, therefore, is still dominated by teacher-

centered approach in which students are passive learners and passive recipients ofthe knowledge given by their teachers.

1.2 Statement of the problem

No one can deny the crucial role of both receptive and productive skills inusing a language to communicate and exchange information However, according toAfandi, Jufrizal, and Narius (2013), no single skills can be mastered without thesupport of the others In fact, they are like the links of a chain since each of the skill

is a prerequisite of the others In addition, according to Yildiz and Senel (2017), theeffective use of grammar is prerequisite for the effective use of a language, whichmeans that language users have to be initially efficient grammar users in order toperfectly master English’s skills Therefore, the need to learn English grammar isconsidered to be significant and necessary in the process of English learning

According to Long (1983), grammar plays a great contribution to languagelearning due to its significant effects on the rate of acquisition and the attainment ofaccuracy Sharing the same view, Afandi et al (2013) argue a language cannot beframed correctly without its grammar accuracy In other word, a listener may havedifficulty in understanding speaker’s intention, or readers may misunderstand whatthe writer wants to express without grammar correctness Moreover, in Viet Nam,grammar especially plays crucial role in the system of language testing andassessment since a large number of national examinations greatly deal withgrammatical knowledge However, memorizing grammatical structures with variousrules is not an easy work for many EFL learners, especially when they are not givenchance to practice using the target structures regularly in an English environment Inaddition, students’ grammar retention will be gradually fossilized due to the habit ofmechanical memorization of grammar rules and their role as passive recipients ofknowledge of grammar in a boring teacher-centered classroom Thus, innovatingways of teaching and learning to enhance students’ grammar achievement as well as

rousing their motivation toward grammar learning is especially necessary andsignificant.

Many methods of grammar teaching have been introduced with the aim tofoster learners’ grammar competence Among them, it is impossible not to mentionGrammar Translation Method (GTM) which, as what to be presented in its name,allows the translation of English written forms into learner’s mother tongue andmostly focus on those forms in English language teaching Though it helps to learngrammar rules quickly and efficiently, this method has received lots of argumentsfor the lack of developing learners’ communicative abilities (Chang, 2011; Takala,2016) Also, Yule (2010) recognizes that the emphasis on L2 forms only makestudents ignore how the language might be used in everyday conversation Thus,learners of this GTM cannot flexibly and appropriately apply those that have beenlearned into daily communication Another common grammar teaching methodwhich is widely applied in EFL classrooms until now is the three Ps or PPP model(presentation - practice - production) PPP is found as a clear-cut and condensedtechnique through which the main points of grammar can be taught easily (Maftoonand Sarem, 2012) However, this model of grammar teaching has also beencriticized to have some practical problems According to Ellis (1988) and Scrivener(1996), teaching grammar applying PPP is time- consuming, inflexible and, thus,impractical due to the lack of ability to deal with changing classroom situations.Sharing the same view, Skehan (1996, as cited in Maftoon & Sarem, 2012) pointsout that PPP does not reflect principles of second language acquisition sincelanguage learning does not always occur in a “linear fashion” influenced directly bythe taking place instruction but it is a “multifaceted complex process” in whichmany other factors such as learners’ cognitive and their learning characteristic areincluded (p 33) In addition, PPP is found to be helpless to students learningprocess since the opportunity for communication is limited under the tight controlfrom teacher (Willis, 1990)

According to NamazianDost, Bohloulzadeh, and Pazhakh, the most importantgoal of English teaching and learning is that language learners are able to use thetarget language to communicate with others efficiently and successfully (2017).Thus, the most important methodology in English teaching should be in line withcommunicative language teaching (CLT) According to Nunan (2004), not onlydoes TBLT focus on grammatical accuracy and forms, but it also creates chancesfor communication through various interaction in the target language Nunan (1989)defines TBLT as a way of designing teaching syllabuses which comprises a set ofcommunicative tasks and a way to involve learners in comprehending, manipulating,producing or interacting in the target language Therefore, task-based languageteaching (TBLT) which, according to Richards and Rodgers (2001), is a logicaldevelopment of CLT is believed to be one of the most effective methodologies todeal with grammar teaching through communicative use of the target language.Moreover, learner motivation, which is defined by Lumsden (1994) as the desire ofstudents to participate in their learning process, could be considered as one of themost decisive factors in language learning since it could decide whether the studentget failure or success in his language learning The positive influence of TBLT onrousing students motivation in grammar learning has also been proved by variousstudies not only within the country (Hanh, 2017; Lap & Trang, 2017), but all overthe world such as Turkey (Ruso, 2007), China (Lau, 2009; Huang, 2016), Iran(Fazli, 2016; NamazianDost et al, 2017), Japan (Hougham, 2011), etc.

In Vietnam, though the core objectives of the EFL learning curriculum as well

as the requirement from the MOET take great care for developing communicativelanguage teaching approaches, GTM with form-focus instruction is more warmlywelcome due to the heavy focus on grammatical tests and examinations As a result,most of students in Vietnam still hesitate to use English to communicate with otherseven after more than 10 years learning English at public schools In respond to thisproblem, TBLT which focuses both on grammatical achievement andcommunicative competence is encouraged to be employed in the teaching and

learning of English grammar Recently, research about the applying of task-basedlanguage teaching on EFL learning and teaching have been greatly noticed not only

in Vietnam (e.g Sang, 2012; Thy, 2017; Lap & Trang, 2017; Hanh, 2017; etc.) butalso all over the world (e.g Prabhu, 1987; Skehan, 1996; NamazianDost et al., 2017,etc.) However, the effect of task-based language teaching on grammar learning hasnot been deeply investigated in Long An province Noticeably, at Long Thuonghigh school, where English grammar has been taught deductively without contextand communicative activities was nearly ignored, no study was conducted toexamine the effect of task-based instruction on learner motivation and consider it as

a mediating variable on enhancing both grammar achievement and communicative

competence Therefore, the present study entitled “The impact of task-based

language teaching on grammar learning at Long Thuong high school” is conducted

with the aim to investigate the impact of TBLT on EFL learners’ grammarachievement and its influence on learning motivation toward grammar studying ofstudents at Long Thuong high school in particular and in Long An Province ingeneral

1.3 Purpose of the study

The study aims to investigate to what extent task-based language teachingaffects the achievement of English grammar among Grade 11 students at LongThuong high school In addition, whether TBLT plays important role in improvinglearners’ motivation toward grammar learning is another issue that this study wants

to seek for the answer

1.4 Research questions

The study is guided by the two research questions below:

1 To what extent does task-based language teaching affect Long Thuong Grade

11 students’ grammar achievement?

2 How does task-based language teaching affect their motivation towardgrammar learning?

1.5 Scope of the study

This study aims to investigate the impact of TBLT on grammar learning ofGrade 11 students at Long Thuong high school – a small school in Long AnProvince The number of 88 voluntary students from two classes were involved inthe study within three months of the first semester of the school year 2018-2019.The target grammar structures being instructed followed the ones in students’textbook, however, the new grammar points including reported speech withinfinitive, reported speech with gerund, conditional in reported speech, andpronouns (one(s), someone, anyone, no one, everyone) were noticeably included inthe experimental process so as to better locate the effect of TBLT on grammarlearning

1.6 Significance of the study

According to Barnard and Viet (2010), though communicative languageteaching has been espoused as the guiding principle of national curricula inVietnamese schooling system, a number of Vietnamese educators are hesitative andnot ready for such a radical change from more traditional methods and approaches.This unwillingness, according to Canh and Barnard (2009), may be due to thestrong influence of national examinations which give priority to multiple-choicetests to assess grammatical and vocabulary accuracy but ignore the skills ofspeaking and listening Therefore, teaching grammar explicitly with form-focusinstruction is more warmly welcome than the implicit acquisition of grammatical

structures through communicative activities However, getting high results innational examinations has no meaning to the reality that a great number of highschool students cannot use English to communicate with others confidently.

As mentioned above, the effect of TBLT on grammar learning is not widelydemonstrated in the context of EFL learning and teaching in Viet Nam, especially inrural areas of Long An Province This study is of significance since it is an attempt

to investigate the effect of using task-based activities on grammar learning Inparticular, the finding of this study would open a new trend in EFL teaching andlearning at Long Thuong high school that is to help teachers of English enhanceEFL learners’ grammar achievement In addition, the positive influence of TBLT ongrammar learning would be helpful for English teachers in solving the issue of how

to motivate EFL learners in learning English grammar as well as other English skills.Moreover, based on the finding of this study, it is concluded that TBLT isspecifically beneficial for weak levels students in improving their grammaticalachievement since there was no weak students at all after task-based grammar class

1.7 Organization of the study

The study includes five chapters The Introduction chapter which comprisesseven distinguished sections: background of the study, statement of the problem,purpose of the study, research questions, scope, significance, and organization ofthe study are presented in Chapter 1 - Introduction Chapter 2 is Literature reviewwhich explains and demonstrates the theoretical framework of the study In thischapter, concepts about grammar, task, task-based language teaching are alsoclarified Chapter 3 is Methodology which involves a brief description of researchsetting, participants, research design, experimental procedure, data collectioninstrument, and data collection and analysis procedure Chapter 4 is Data analysisand discussion In this chapter, the findings drew from the experimental researchand data collected from questionnaire are analyzed and discussed so that the

recommendation for further research about the application of task-based languageteaching on grammar learning are presented in Chapter 5 – Conclusions andrecommendations.

CHAPTER 2 – LITERATURE REVIEW

As being mentioned in the previous chapter, Long Thuong high schoolstudents have difficulty in using English for communication In addition, they reallyneed to master English grammar to deal with grammatical tests responding to therequirement of Vietnamese language testing and assessment TBLT is supposed to

be an ideal teaching approach that helps students not only study English grammarbut also use the target structures to communicate with others confidently andeffectively In addition, many researchers have proved that TBLT also has a goodimpact on enhancing learners’ motivation in English learning In order to enablestudents to obtain both grammar and communicative competence via the application

of TBLT on grammar learning, it is necessary to examine the theoretical frameworkwhich serves as a basis for establishing conceptual framework for the study.Therefore, Chapter 2 - Literature review, which considers characteristics related togrammar, task - based language teaching, and learning motivation are introduced inthis part The empirical research are also included in this chapter as the evidence forthe positive impacts of TBLT on grammar learning that has been studied previously

grammar is one who has mastered and can apply grammatical rules tocommunicative activities in what would be considered acceptable language form (ascited in Nhu, 2012) Richards, Platt and Platt’s also consider both meanings andfunctions of sentences within the language system Concretely, grammar, in theirview, is defined as a description of the language structure and the way in whichlinguistic units such as words and phrases are formed to produce meaningfulsentences within the language (Richards, Platt & Platt, 1992).

In sum, all these definitions share the same point that grammar plays a crucialrole in the process of language achievement as it consists of rules that languageusers must follow so as to be able to achieve both receptive and productivelanguage skills such as reading, listening, speaking, and writing In other word, thegrammar of a language emphasizes the importance of both forms and meaning ofthis language under contexts

2.1.2 The importance of grammar in second language learning

The importance of grammar on second language acquisition has been proved

by many linguists and researchers

Arnold (1994) confirms the importance of grammar as a skeleton on whichother language skill like reading, speaking, listening and writing are enhanced anddeveloped In other word, without grammar correctness, readers can misunderstand

or have difficulty in understanding writer's intention, and listeners may be in troubleunderstanding the content of speaker’s talks

Moreover, it has been found that grammar construction greatly contributes tolanguage learning due to its significant effects on the rate of acquisition and theattainment of accuracy (Long, 1983) To support for those assertions, Duckart (1995)stated people cannot confidently produce or analyze good writing withoutunderstanding the rules that govern it or the terms being used to discuss it, and “the

study of grammar can be the tool that allows writers to discover the dazzlingkaleidoscope of syntactic possibility of our language and our writing” (p 2).

Sharing quite similar view, Thornbury (1999) argues that knowledge ofgrammatical rules is essential for mastering a language as learners’ interlanguage isoften fossilized without the instruction of grammar Generally, grammar instruction

is important not only in enabling learners to master knowledge of the targetlanguage but also allowing more creative application of language through languageskills According to Littlewood (n.d.), grammar is one of the important factors thatplay a decisive role in communication since the more thoroughly a learners mastersgrammatical system of a language, the more effectively he can use this language forcommunicative activities (as cited in Binh, 2013)

To sum up, due to its important role on language learning, a great attentionshould be paid to grammar instruction especially for young learners in their earlystages of learning so that they are well provided with grammatical base for laterprocesses

2.2 The history of L2 grammar focused teaching approaches

According to Larumbe (2015), there are five main approaches that have beenapplied on language learning and teaching classrooms to help enrich and developthe teaching of grammar in addition to TBLT which will be presented in the nextsection These include as the following:

2.2.1 Grammar translation method

Being considered as the oldest one in the history of grammar teaching, GTM isstill be utilized until recently in some of EFL classrooms The main characteristic ofGTM is that instruction is given in the students’ mother tongue and languagelearning is considered to take place after memorization of grammatical rules and

vocabulary Hence, there is little communicative use of the target language in GTMclassrooms.

2.2.2 The direct method (DM)

This teaching method appeared right after GTM between 19thand 20thcentury

It emphasizes students’ ability to use a language rather than analyze it Students areexpected to use the target language only in their classroom to talk about familiartopics related to everyday conversations In responding to that, teachers must benative or native-like speakers of the target language Grammatical rules are taughtinductively in DM classes

2.2.3 The reading method

In response to the limitations of direct method, the reading method appeareddue to the lack of native and native-like speakers of the target language Centered

on reading comprehension, basic grammar and controlled vocabulary within textswas taught deductively Translation and use of L1 in the classroom was againaccepted meanwhile communication was nearly ignored

2.2.4 Audiolingualism

Reaction to lack of oral skill development in the Reading Method,Audiolingualism is based on the Direct Method but adds features of structurallinguistics and behavioral psychology Listening and speaking are much moreimportant than reading and writing, thus, grammar was sequenced and inductivelytaught

2.2.5 Communicative language teaching (CLT)

Being the most currently accepted language teaching approach, CLTemphasizes the role of communication on L2 learning Thus, L2 teaching is aimedtowards learners’ development of their L2 communicative ability Activities such aspair/group work, role plays, tasks, etc are provided for communicative purposes InCLT, fluency is overemphasized than accuracy, and authentic materials areencouraged to be used Thus, grammar is taught inductively via contexts

In sum, the incessant development of society and education urges linguists tomake great effort in finding out best teaching approaches to fit with educationalneeds The above approaches are considered as evidences for constant debateamong linguists whether to focus L2 teaching on its form or on its communicativefunction As can be inferred, CLT is currently seen as the most acceptable languageteaching approach that has been used to help learners develop language skillsthrough communicative purpose TBLT can be considered as an innovative branch

of CLT since it mainly uses tasks to encourage communicative activities amonglanguage learners so as to arrive at a learning outcome

2.3 Task-based language teaching

2.3.1 Task

2.3.1.1 Definitions of task

Different theorists have various different ways in defining the term “task”.Long (1985) points out that tasks are “the hundred and one things people do ineveryday life, at work, at play, and in between” (p 89) This definition is considered

as the broadest one because it mentions the things people do in their daily life

including both tasks without using language (helping someone across the road) andthose that use the language (making an airline reservation).

In relation to pedagogical activity in class, Prabhu (1987) defines task as anactivity in which learners, under the control of a teacher, are required to arrive at anoutcome through some thinking process rehearsing real world problems Thus, ascan be inferred from this definition, the role of a teacher in controlling both the taskitself and the outcome is emphasized

In addition, Ellis (2003) assumes task as “a workplan that requires learners toprocess language pragmatically in order to achieve an outcome that can beevaluated in terms of whether the correct or appropriate propositional content hasbeen conveyed” (p 16) Ellis’ definition shows that besides indicating the use oftask for pedagogy purposes and the emphasis on outcome, the conveying meaning isprioritized However, according to Huang (2010, as cited in Yildiz and Senel, 2017),not all communicative classroom activities are tasks In order to determine whether

an activity is a task or not, it should satisfy the following four criteria First, there is

a focus on meaning Second, the activity must relate to the real world Next, theremust be a problem to solve Finally, it can be assessed in term of outcome

The above definitions of task can be shortly summarized by Skehan’sdefinition that a) task refers to an activity in which meaning is primary b) there issome sort of relationship to the real world c) priority is given to task completion d)the assessment of task performance is in terms of outcome (Skehan, 1996)

From Willis’s (1996) viewpoint, tasks are defined as activities where targetlanguage is the powerful means that students are expected to use to communicatewith each other in order to achieve an outcome Though Willis’s definition of taskdoes not contrast with the above mentioned ones, he overemphasizes the purpose ofcommunication among learners when participating in a task, and this covers thelearning outcomes stated by the MOET Due to its cover features of task and thefocus on communicative purpose, Willis’s (1996) definition will be chosen as theoperational definition of task in the present study

2.3.1.2 Task types

Task has been categorized into different types depending on different theorists.Among them, the four common ways of task’s classification from Prabhu (1987),Pattison (1987), Willis (1996a), and Nunan (2004) are presented in Table 2.1 below

as cited in Hanh ( 2017, p.9)

Table 2.1 - Task types

Theorist Task types

Prabhu (1987) Information-gap

Opinion-gapReasoning-gapPatison (1987) Questions and answers

Dialogues and role playsMatching activitiesCommunication strategiesPictures and pictures storiesPuzzles and problemsDiscussions and decisionsWillis (1996a) Listing

Ordering and sortingComparing

Problem solvingSharing personal experiencesCreative tasks

Nunan (2004b) Pedagogical task

Real word task

As can be seen from the table, Prabhu (1987) categorizes task into three maintypes namely information-gap, opinion-gap, and reasoning-gap tasks Ininformation-gap tasks, participants are required to exchange information with eachother in order to accomplish a task For example, in pairs or in groups, students taketurn to ask questions interviewing their partners about what they hate and like to do

at weekends so as to accomplish the informational table and report the outcome tothe whole class The second task type is opinion-gap which requires students toshare their personal experiences, feelings or preferences in response to a givensituation For example, students are asked to give their opinion about disadvantages

of cell phone in human social life and suggest ways to limit those weaknesses.Reasoning-gap is a kind of task which requires participant to derive some newinformation from the given one through processes of inference, deduction, practicalreasoning, or a perception of relationships or patterns For example, students might

be given a list of consequences caused by polluted environment and are required torank them in the order of importance then explain the reasons for ranking

By the way, Pattison (1987) identified seven task types including questionsand answers, dialogues and role plays, matching activities, communicationstrategies, pictures and pictures stories, puzzles and problems, and discussion anddecisions The task questions and answers asks students to use a language item list

to make secret choice “which all fit into a given frame” (Nunan, 1989) Dialoguesand role plays ask students to perform a scenario For example, students are asked

to work in pair to practice booking a hotel Matching activities require students tomatch items to complete pairs or sets such as matching words or phrases in column

A with their definitions in column B Communication strategies are defined ascommunicative activities in which students are required to practice some strategies

of communication such as paraphrasing and simplifying Pictures and picture storiesencourage students to describe a given picture to find the differences, or toreorganize a group of pictures to create a logical story Puzzles and problems areactivities in which students have to reason, imagine, guess, and draw on their

personal experience and prior knowledge to solve a problem For instance, studentsare required to imagine and find out the best solutions to be able to survive if theyare lost in a forest Discussions and decisions activities require students to expresstheir ideas and make a decision For example, students might be given a list oftourist attractions and are required to discuss in groups in order to make a decision

of where to go on summer vacation

Willis (1996a) classifies tasks into six main types involving listing, ordering,comparing, problem-solving, sharing personal experiences, and creative tasks.Listing is a type of task which enhances learners' comprehension and inductionbecause learners are required to brainstorm to get a good list For instance, studentsare asked to provide as many ways as possible to protect the environment Orderingtasks provide learners with opportunities to improve comprehension, logic andreasoning ability including sequencing, ranking and categorizing items Incomparing task, learners may be asked to identify the similarities or differences,thus, their ability of differentiation is strongly fostered The fourth type of task,according to Willis, is problem-solving which provides learners with opportunities

to enhance their reasoning and decision-making abilities Meanwhile, sharingexperience helps students to talk more freely about themselves and share theirexperience with each other using the target language as well as target structures.The last one is creative tasks which are the combination of many other activitiesmentioned above Therefore, it can be seen as the most advanced and difficult taskfor student to complete and achieve the requirable outcome However, according toHanh (2017) creative tasks are found not only promote learners comprehensiveproblem-solving abilities but also improve their reasoning and analyzing abilities aswell With the above descriptive characteristics of each task type, it can be inferredthat the level of difficulty increases after each task In other word, it starts with theeasiest task, and the creative task is the most difficult one to achieve since it is thecombination of many other task types

In Nunan’s (2004) viewpoint, tasks are generally divided into two main typesnamely pedagogical task and real world task Pedagogical tasks are defined asclassroom’s communicative activities rehearsing something that happens in the realworld with the purpose of knowledge and language achievement For example,students might be asked to list some species that are going to be in danger anddiscuss ways to protect those endangered species in groups of four Meanwhile, realworld tasks refer to real life interactive communication in society outside theclassroom such as making a hotel reservation or asking for direction in order toarrive at an outcome.

In short, since there are various types of task and these tasks can be combined

in a number of ways basing on the chosen topics, teachers need to plan carefully tointroduce the most appropriate tasks into each lesson so that students are able toachieve a certain outcome of both language and general knowledge The presentstudy focuses on the type of pedagogical tasks commonly found in Textbook 11such as listing, information-gap, opinion-gap, questions and answers, problemsolving, sharing personal experiences, discussions and decisions, dialogues and roleplays as well as pictures and pictures stories to investigate the impact of TBLT onGrade 11 students’ grammar achievement

2.3.2 Task-based language teaching

2.3.2.1 Concepts

As a logical development of communicative language teaching approach,according to Richards and Rodgers (2001), TBLT has drawn an increasing interestamong researchers and educators since the first days of its emergence in 1980s.Therefore, the concept of TBLT has been variously defined

According to Nunan (1989), TBLT is a way of designing teaching syllabuseswhich comprises a set of communicative tasks and a way to involve learners in

comprehending, manipulating, producing or interacting in the target language InBrown’s (2007) viewpoint, TBLT is a meaning-based language teaching approach

in which the use of language meaning to solve real world problems is moreemphasized, and the priority is given to task completion which are assessed in terms

of outcome In addition, Richards and Rodgers (2001) emphasize the role of tasks asthe core unit of planning and instruction during teaching process in which TBLT isemployed In doing such tasks, according to Barnard and Viet (2010), learnersacquire grammar implicitly, and the need for explicit grammar teaching isdiscounted It can be explained that though learners are not informed about thestructures, they get those forms unconsciously at the end of each lesson by theirefforts to convey the meaningful tasks during TBLT process

More recently, Yildiz and Senel (2017) define TBLT by expressing the highestlevel of mutual interaction among learners when they try to perform the given tasks

in classroom environment Recognizing its close relationship with communicativelanguage teaching, Yildiz and Senel point out one of the biggest difference of TBLTfrom its brother - CLT is the use of task as a part of the lesson More specially, thetasks performed in TBLT should be related to the daily life that may happen to allstudents or the society around them so that students will be motivated and interested

in solving different tasks as well as paying more attention to the lesson

In sum, TBLT is a type of language teaching approach which emphasizes onsets of communicative tasks related to real world situations and the use of targetlanguage to achieve a certain outcome

2.3.2.2 Principles of task-based language teaching

According to Nunan (2005), there are seven principles for task-based languageteaching including scaffolding, task dependency, recycling, active learning,integration, reproduction to creation, and reflection

1 Scaffolding: All lessons and materials should provide supporting frameworkswithin which the learning happens.

2 Task dependency: Within a lesson, one task should be built on the previouslypresented task in order to guarantee its logicality

3 Recycling: language should be recycled frequently so as to maximizelearning opportunities and activate language ability

4 Active learning: By actively using the language they are learning, learnersbest learn this language

5 Integration: Learners should be taught in ways that make clear therelationships between form, function, and meaning

6 Reproduction to creation: Learners should be encouraged to move fromreproductive a language to creative language use

7 Reflection: Learners should be given proper opportunities to reflect on whatthey have learned and how well they are doing the task to best practiceusing the language

The present study based on Nunan’s principle of TBLT as a guideline forgrammar instruction as well as communicative activities which was applied toGrade 11 students in the experimental group More specifically, in order to respond

to the first principle - scaffolding, the learning materials should be chosen carefullywithin which the target structure appears frequently in a certain understandablecontext so that students can somehow impress with its use, form, and meaning.Therefore, the two grammar books “English Grammar in Use” (Murphy, 2004) and

“New English File - Intermediate level” (Clive & Christina, 2006) together withmaterials redesigned from the internet were added as extra materials to teachEnglish grammar via contexts In addition, the tasks should depend on each other,for example, the listing task in which students are required to state the causes ofpolluted environment should be followed by the reasoning-gap task in whichstudents are expected to rank the above causes of polluted environment in the order

of importance and then explain the reason for ranking Practicing a target structure

successfully within a lesson does not mean that students can remember itpermanently for later uses but it must be recycled as frequently as possible duringthe learning process so as to guarantee the grammar retention in students’ mind Forinstance, before starting the lesson with cleft sentence, teacher can organize a minigame in which students might be required to make a sentence to describe theirclassmate using relative clause meanwhile the others try to guess who is beingmentioned With new interesting tasks focusing on certain target structures, teachercan activate the learning of grammar among students, thus, helps them best learnthis structure In order to ensure the fifth principle suggested by Nunan (2005), notonly does the learning focus on meaning through communicative activities, but theform and function of the target structure should also be instructed at the nearly end

of the lesson More important, students are required to create new products oflanguage instead of reproduce what has been done For example, at the beginning ofthe lesson, students might be asked to make some sentences which are similar to thegiven sample Latter, they are asked to work in group to write a story retelling theirexperiences using at least three target structures that have been learned recentlywithout any sample paragraph Lastly, at the final stage of the lesson, studentsshould be given chance to reflect on what they have learned or ask questions as well

as receive feedback from the teacher and other friends so that they can best practiceusing the target language for later use

2.3.2.3 Task-Based Language Teaching Procedure

Based on the task-based language teaching framework of Willis (1996b), thetask-based language teaching procedure used in this study has three phasesincluding pre-task, task cycle, and language focus

In the pre-task phase, teacher firstly introduces the topic and task to students,then students get exposures of linguistic chunks by being activated some topic-related words and phrases essential for performing According to Willis (1996a),

there are various interesting activities that teacher can use to apply for pre-taskphase including classifying, matching, odd one out, memory challenge,brainstorming and mind-maps, asking question, and recounting an experience.Table 2.2 below is enclosed as a detailed description of the above mentionedactivities.

Table 2.2 – Pre-task phase’s activities

Pre-task activities Description

Classifying Students are given a list of words and phrases and

are asked to choose the ones related to a certaintopic

Matching Students are asked to match the given words or

phrases to equivalent picturesOdd one out Students are given sets of words or phrases and are

asked to decide which one does not fit with theothers and explain the reason why

Memory challenge Students are allowed to see sets of pictures in a

short time, then, are required to match givenphrases or captions to the pictures from memoryBrainstorming and mind-

maps

Students are asked to think of topic related words

or phrases and decide where to put them in a mapdepending on their relationship to the main topicAsking questions Students think of some related questions to ask

their classmates after being given a certain topicRecounting an experience Students are activated their linguistic chunks by

being recounted an experience relating to thegiven topic

The next phase of TBLT is the task cycle It can be subdivided into threesmaller stages including task stage, planning stage, and report stage The task cycle

is the main task phase in which students mostly use the target language toaccomplish task requirements Particularly, in the task stage, teacher plays the role

of both monitor and encourager when students are required to work collaboratively

in pairs or groups The students are required to work in pairs or groups usingwhatever knowledge of language they can recall to negotiate the task without anyworry of being corrected In other word, the teacher should avoid correcting anymistakes or errors of form at this stage In the planning stage, students are asked toprepare for their report which may be in oral or written form Teacher plays the role

of adviser and facilitator who is willing to facilitate any difficulty happen during theplanning process During the time of preparation, teacher goes around and takesnotes of mistakes and corrects their language since it is appropriate to emphasize onclarity, organization, and accuracy for a public presentation In the report stage,teacher acts as chairperson to give brief feedback and sum up students’ reports butavoid to give public correction

The last phase in TBLT is language focus which is divided into two smallerstages involving the analysis stage and practice stage In the former stage, theteacher highlight the language bases on what learners have done in the report stage

to help them enrich linguistic items with more focus on accuracy to have a deeperunderstanding of the target language Finally, in the practice stage, students areexpected to do extra practice activities of the target structures they have just focused

on to consolidate the language and increase their confidence in using them later.The table below (Table 2.3) is set as the detailed description of each phase inTBLT procedure which is employed to teach English grammar in the present study

Table 2.3 - Description of task-based language teaching procedure

Phase Classroom activities

Pre-task

- Students are firstly introduced topic and tasks andtry to link with their old knowledge to prepare forthe next phase

- Teacher activates linguistic chunks by helpingstudents remember the old and new vocabulary aswell as the previous learning grammar structuresessential for performing

Task

cycle

Task

- Students use whatever language forms they know

to try to perform the tasks given to them either inpairs or in small groups

- Teacher avoids correcting any mistake in this stage

Planning

- Students prepare a report about how they haveperformed the task (target grammar structures areencouraged to be used)

- Teacher observes and helps with grammaticalmistakes

- Students try to understand the usage and the rules

of the target grammar structure

- Teacher based on what students have presented inthe report stage to highlight the language structurewith more focus on accuracy

Practice

- Students practice the patterns by doing some extraexercises to strengthen their understanding about thelanguage form, meaning, and use

2.3.2.4 Benefits of task-based language teaching

Being a type of modern language teaching approach, TBLT has beendemonstrated to have various important contributions to the process of languagelearning

First and foremost, TBLT is reported to promote learners’ confidence sincelearners are provided with plenty of opportunities to use language in the classroomwithout being constantly afraid of making mistakes (Willis & Willis, 2007).According to Willis (1996a), TBLT learners are free to choose whatever languageforms they know to complete the task and express what they want to convey despitelots of inaccurate usages of rules However, thanks to those activities of TBLT,learners can get the language forms unconsciously but effectively at the end of thelearning process as what Yildiz and Senel (2017) has proved in their study about theteaching of grammar through TBLT to young EFL learners

Furthermore, Thornbury (2005) emphasizes that through using a language byfocusing on tasks’ completion, learners may learn this language more effectivelyrather than firstly learning and then using it

TBLT is also found to create a free stress atmosphere classroom, which helpsstudents remember things faster and longer (Sang, 2012) With the application ofTBLT, students forget that they are in classroom since they are not forced to studylots of grammar rules and scare of being punished for inevitable failure in accuracy.Instead, they are guided to participate in communicative activities in the grammarclass without any worry of being corrected, which, according to Ellis (2009), greatlypromotes intrinsic motivation

More importantly, it is impossible not to mention about the role of TBLT inenhancing learners’ communicative competence Through pedagogical tasksperformed in classroom, learners are well prepared for real life situations which isbelieved to bring great benefit to language learning in comparison with form focusinstruction, according to Buyukkarci (2009)