Applying task based approach in teaching english grammar to the 1st year non english majors at ho chi minh university of industry, nghe an branch luận văn thạc sĩ giáo dục học

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAININGVINH UNIVERSITY FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES    ---NGUYEN NU NGOC TRAM APPLYING TASK-BASED APPROACH IN YEAR-NON ENGLISH MAJORS AT HO CHI MINH U

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING

VINH UNIVERSITY

FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES

  

-NGUYEN NU NGOC TRAM

APPLYING TASK-BASED APPROACH IN

YEAR-NON ENGLISH MAJORS AT HO CHI MINH UNIVERSITY OF INDUSTRY, NGHE AN BRANCH

FIELD: THEORY AND METHODOLOGY OF

ENGLISH LANGUAGE TEACHING CODE: 60.14.10

MASTER THESIS IN EDUCATION

VINH - 2011

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Sub cover page……… i

Statement of Authorship……… ii

Acknowledgements……… iii

Abstract……… iv

Table of Contents………1

List of Abbreviations……… 5

List of Tables……… 6

List of Figures……….7

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 8

1.1 Rationale 8

1.2 Aims of the Study 10

1.3 Scope of the Study 10

1.4 Research Questions 10

1.5 The Organization of the Study 11

CHAPTER 2:LITERATURE REVEVIEW AND THEORETICAL BACKGROUND 12

2.1 Previous Studies Related to the Thesis 12

2.2 The Importance of Grammar in Language Teaching and Learning 13

2.2.1 Definitions of Grammar 13

2.2.2 Ways of Teaching Grammar 15

2.2.3 Contents in a Grammar Lesson 16

2.3 A Brief Review of Task-based Language Learning 17

2.4 Tasks 17

2.4.1 Definitions of Tasks 17

2.4.2 Types of Tasks 19

2.4.2.1 Real-world Tasks 22

2.4.2.2 Pedagogical Tasks 22

2.4.3 Characteristics of Tasks 23

2.4.4 Principles of Tasks 25

2.4.5 Tasks, Exercises, and Activities 25

2.5 Task-based Language Teaching and Learning 26

2.5.1 Definitions of TBL 26

2.5.2 Characteristics of TBL 26

2.5.3 Principles of TBL 27

2.6 Characteristics of the Task-based Grammar Class 29

CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY 31

3.1 Overview 31

3.2 Research Design 31

3.3 Context of the Study 32

3.4 Participants 34

3.4.1 Teachers 34

3.4.2 Learner 35

3.5 Data Collection Instruments 37

3.5.1 Questionnaire 37

3.5.2 Interview 38

3.5.3 Test 39

3.6 Data Collection 39

3.7 Data Analysis 40

3.8 Research Procedures 41

3.9 Reliability and Validity 41

3.10 Summary 42

CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS 43

4.1 Findings 43

4.1.1 The Reality of Applying TBL in Teaching English Grammar 43

4.1.1.1 Teachers’ Using Traditional Teaching Methodology 43

4.1.1.2 Teachers’ Implementation of TBL in Teaching English Grammar 43

4.1.1.3 Teachers’ Attitudes towards Applying TBL in Grammar Classes 46

4.1.1.4 Difficulties Teachers Encounter when Applying TBL to Teaching English Grammar 49

4.1.2 The Students’ Attitudes towards the Teacher’s Application of TBL in Teaching English Grammar 55

4.1.2.1 Students’ Attitudes towards English Grammar 55

4.1.2.2 Students’ Attitudes towards Teacher’s Application of TBL 59

4.1.2.3 Students’ Feedbacks to TBL Used in English Grammar Classes 63

4.1.3 The Effectiveness of TBL in Teaching Grammar 65

4.1.3.1 Analysis of Test Results 65

a Results of the Test Scores of the Two Groups 66

b Frequency of Distribution 70

4.1.3.2 The Test Means’ Comparison 73

4.1.3.3 "T-test" 74

4.1.4 What Should Be Done to Promote Teaching English Grammar with TBL .77

4.1.4.1 Students’ Expectations of Applying TBL in Teaching Grammar 77

4.1.4.2 Teachers’ Ability to Adjust Teaching Grammar with TBL 78

4.2 Discussion 80

4.2.1 The Reality of the Application of TBL to Teaching English Grammar 80

4.2.2 The Students’ Reactions to the Application of TBL to Their English Grammar Classes 84

4.2.3 The Assessments of TBL to Teaching English Grammar 86

4.2.4 Solutions for Teaching English Grammar with TBL 87

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS 90

5.1 A Summary of Findings 90

5.2 Implications of the Research 91

5.2.1 Implications for Teaching 91

5.2.2 Sample Grammar Tasks 93

5.3 Limitations of the Research 93

5.4 Further Research 94

REFERENCES 95 APPENDICES

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

AM: Audio-lingual Method

EFL: English as a Foreign Language

ELT: English Language Teaching

ESP: English for Specific Purpose

GTM: Grammar Translation Method

HUI: Ho Chi Minh University of Industry

S: Student

SLA: Second Language Acquisition

P-P-P: Presentation – Practice – Production

T: Teacher

TBL: Task-based Language Teaching and Learning (Task-based Learning)

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.1: Distribution of Time and Units in 2 Semesters 34

Table 3.2: Teachers’ Background Information 35

Table 3.3: Students’ Background Information 36

Table 4.1: Roles of the Teacher During Task-based Grammar Classes…… 45

Table 4.2: Factors Making TBL a Good Choice in English Grammar Classes……… 48

Table 4.3: Students’ Purposes of Learning English………56

Table 4.4: Reasons for Respondents’ Thinking of the Role of English Grammar……… 58

Table 4.5: The Test Score of Pilot Class……….66

Table 4.6: The Test Score of Controlled Class… ……… 68

Table 4.7: Frequency of Distribution of Two Groups… ……….71

Table 4.8: The Statistics Parameters of the Two Groups… ………73

Table 4.9: Number of Students Scored Less from Xi……… ….………….74

Table 4.10: Statistics of % Students Scored Less from Xi…….….……… 74

Table 4.11: Means Test Scores of Two Classes……….…… 86

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 4.1: The Degree of Application of TBL in English Grammar Classes

44

Figure 4.2 : The Importance of Applying TBL in Teaching English Grammar .47

Figure 4.3: Typical Difficulties the Teachers Met When Moving from a Traditional Method Classroom to a Task-based 50

Figure 4.4: Missing Factors that Made TBL Difficult in Grammar Classes 52

Figure 4.5: Factors that Made TBL a Challenge in English Grammar Classes .53

Figure 4.6: Students’ Attitudes towards Learning English 55

Figure 4.7: Students’ Awareness of the Role of Grammar in Reaching Their Purposes 57

Figure 4.8: Students’ Attitudes to Tasks 59

Figure 4.9: Teachers’ Frequent Use Types of Tasks 60

Figure 4.10: The Frequency of Using Interactions Patterns 61

Figure 4.11: Students’ Participation in Tasks 62

Figure 4.12: Benefits of Using TBL in Grammar Classes 63

Figure 4.13: Factors Causing Problems in a Task-based Grammar Class 64

Figure 4.14: Frequency of Distribution in Pilot Class 72

Figure 4.15: Frequency of Distribution in Controlled Class 72

Figure 4.16: Cumulative Frequency Curves of the Two Groups 75 Figure 4.17: Students’ Preferences for Effective Task-based Grammar Classes

77Figure 4.18: Factors Making the Application of TBL Effective in English

Grammar Classes 78

CHAPTER 1:

INTRODUCTION

1.1 Rationale

English has been the most popular international language for ages Specially,

in the new era of high technology and communication, English is playing a moreand more important role and having a strong impact on many fields of the society.Moreover, the economic open-door policy pursued by the government of Vietnamhas increased a demand for studying English Many people are expected to becompetent to communicate verbally with the outside world and to accesstechnology In correspondence to this trend, in almost all of schools, colleges,universities, English is a compulsory subject Ho Chi Minh University of Industry(HUI), Nghe An Branch where I have been working for more than 3 years, is not anexception

Together with the growing demand for learning English, there has been aninnovation in English teaching and learning methods everywhere in Vietnam For along time, language teaching in Vietnam was strongly influenced by the structuralisttradition Emphasis was placed on mastery of language structures Students havebeen taught how to form correct utterances and to understand the structures of thelanguage without any consideration of language use Also, they have been asked tolearn every single word by heart, and translate or analyze grammatically everysentence in the text To speak about the teachers, they have often taken up almostall the time in class explaining the form of language to students who were passiverecipients This kind of teaching and learning, consequently, has been the

“production” of students who were structurally competent but communicativelyincompetent.

However, as the result of psycholinguistic and sociolinguistic research,language teaching has moved from the traditional to a more communicativeapproach In this current approach, language is considered as a form of socialbehavior The objective of language teaching is teaching learners to communicatefluently, appropriately and spontaneously in the cultural context of the targetlanguage Communicative competence, according to Canale and Swain (1980), ismade up of grammatical competence, sociolinguistic competence, discoursecompetence, and strategic competence

With more than 3 years of experience in teaching English at HUI, Nghe AnBranch, I find that students have to learn English in two semesters in the curriculumand English is often taught in the first school - year At the end of each semester,the students have to take a written test, not an oral one Therefore, most of the time

is spent on grammar points because many of the students have never learnt Englishbefore and the teachers have to try to keep to the syllabus, that is, to finish thecourse-book entitled “American Headway 2” In addition, many students are tooshy to speak in class whereas most of the grammar lessons are carried out intraditional methods In each lesson, the teacher presents new grammar verbally, andthen students do, turn by turn, exercises in workbooks Moreover, in teachingpractice, there exist some limitations in conducting Presentation – Practice –Production (P-P-P) grammar lessons Touching this pedagogical context, this studyemphasizes on the investigation into the application of task-based approach toteaching English grammar at HUI, Nghe An Branch The task-based approachmight come as an effective teaching method for the language teachers at HUI Aresearch into the TBL will help the teachers at HUI to interpret and have a thoroughunderstanding of the task-based approach, its theories and characteristics, henceproviding an effective application to teaching grammar at HUI pedagogical context

All the aforementioned reasons urge the author to carry out the study entitled

“Applying Task-based Approach in Teaching English Grammar to the 1 st

year-non English majors at Ho Chi Minh University of Industry – Nghe An Branch” Hopefully, the results could serve as a useful source of reference for those

who concern about the subject matter

1.2 Aims of the Study

With the presented rationale, the specific aims of the study, accordingly, are:a) to examine the reality of applying TBL in teaching English grammar atHUI

b) to find out student’s attitudes towards applying TBL in teaching Englishgrammar of teacher at HUI

c) to evaluate the effectiveness of the application TBL in teaching Englishgrammar at HUI

d) to propose some suggestions and recommendations to promote Englishgrammar teaching in the light of the task-based approach at HUI

1.3 Scope of the Study

This research focuses on investigating how HUI language teachers exploitTBL in teaching English grammar in their classes Due to the limitation of time, theauthor only fulfilled the study among twenty teachers and one hundred the first yearstudents at HUI, Nghe An Branch

2 What are the students’ attitudes towards applying the task-based approach

to teaching English grammar at HUI?

3 How effective is the task-based approach in teaching English grammar atHUI?

4 What should be done to promote English grammar teaching with the based approach at HUI?

task-1.5 The Organization of the Study

The study includes five chapters as follows:

Chapter 1 – Introduction – provides rationale, the aims of the study, the scope

of the study, the research questions

Chapter 2 – Literature Review and Theoretical Background – present theprevious studies related to the thesis and some concepts as theoretical basis for thestudy

Chapter 3 – Research Design and Methodology – describes the researchdesign, instruments for data collection, data collection, data analysis, reliability andvalidity, and research procedures, which gives details of the research method anddescribes how the hypothesis of the thesis is interpreted and explained

Chapter 4 – Findings and Discussions – presents the results and discussionsdeveloped after the linguistics figures are analyzed

Chapter 5 – Conclusion and Implications – summarizes the main issuestouched upon in the research, the limitations of the research and some suggestions forfurther studies Following the chapters are the references and appendices

CHAPTER 2:

LITERATURE REVIEW AND THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

2.1 Previous Studies Related to the Thesis

In recent years, teachers of all subjects have sought ways to make theclassroom more “student-centred” and have investigated the different ways in whichstudents can play more active roles in discovering and processing knowledge Theresult of the research is the outcome of task-based learning

The idea of getting learners to acquire English through tasks was developed inIndia by Prabhu in the 1980s Prabhu made a strong Communicative ApproachProject in Banglore, South India He put forward many kinds of tasks, and designedthe learning contents into all kinds of communicative tasks He thinks learners maylearn more effectively when their minds are focused on tasks, rather than on thelanguage they are using

Harmer found his favour with TBL by saying that, “Many methodologists have concentrated not so much on the nature of language input, but on the learning tasks that students are involved in.” He argued that there seemed to have been an

argument that pure rote learning or de-contextualized practice is giving way tolanguage learning that is required as a result of richer experiences in life

However, historically reviewed, TBL seems to have gained its currency since

the 1996 publication of Willis’s “A Framework for Task-based Learning”

(Longman), in which she defined how tasks can be used as the central focus in asupportive methodological framework In this book, she outlined a mode for TBL in

which she referred to three stages: the pre-task, the task-cycle, and the language focus.

Skehan (1998) showed that learner in task-based instructions are given tasks tocomplete in the classroom and he asserted that transacting tasks in this way will makenaturalistic acquisition He explained that the task-based approach is more favourablethan any other approaches because it focuses very much on meaning, not on form

Jeon and Hahn (2006) addressed their study to the EFL teachers’ perceptions

of task-based language teaching in a Korean secondary school context Theyappreciated the emphasis on learners’ communicative abilities with task-basedteaching and learning in terms of designing communicative tasks to promote learners’actual language use Tseng (2006) indicated the differences between task-basedinstruction and traditional teacher-led, whole class instruction at two primary schoolclassrooms in terms of four-skill performances of the students Also, the factors thatinfluenced the implementation of TBL at primary school were discussed

In Vietnam, there are numerous English M.A theses concerning Vietnameselearning and teaching with TBL Duong Thi Le Thuy (2004) made an investigationinto task-based approach, which is used in the field of ESP, for the current Englishcourse book for construction engineering Additionally, Vo Phuc Anh Vu (2009)presented the application of task-based language teaching and learning to teachingEnglish speaking skills in upper secondary schools in order to find out how TBL canfit into traditional English speaking classes to promote the students’ communicativecompetence

At Ho Chi Minh University of Industry, Nghe An Branch, the traditionalstructural method has no longer been the teachers’ favours The teacher-centredmethod is giving way to a more learner-centred approach This thesis, therefore,focuses on studying the application of TBL in teaching English grammar to probe itsfeasibility and validity in the setting of HUI, Nghe An Branch

2.2 The Importance of Grammar in Language Teaching and Learning

2.2.1 Definitions of Grammar

There have been various ways of defining grammar - a very common andfamiliar term in language teaching and learning

According to Luu Quy Khuong (2006), in the old days, grammar was defined

as “the way words are put together to make correct sentences” However, this

definition is too simple and people need other ones that can cover aspects ofgrammar

The Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English (quoted in Harmer,

1987:1) considers grammar as “the study and practice of the rules by which words change their forms and are combined into sentences” There are two concentrated

basic elements in this definition: the rules of grammar and the study and practice of

the rules Similarly, Harmer (1988:1) defines grammar as “the way in which words change themselves and group together to make sentences The grammar of a language what happens to words when they become plural or negative, or what word order is used when we make questions or join two clauses to make one sentence.” As for Celce – Murcia & Hilles (1988: 16), grammar is “a subset of those rules which govern the configurations that the morphology and syntax of a language assume.”

Additionally, Leech, Deuchar & Hoogenraad (2006) consider grammar as a set

of rules which allow users of a language to create speech and writing by combiningwords together in a meaningful way Whereas users apply grammar all the time, theyfail to perceive them consciously Besides, grammar has a very close, interactiverelationship with semantics (meaning), phonology (sounds or speaking) and writingsystems

However, Brown (1994) approaches grammar in a quite different way Hedefines grammar in a larger unit, not within a sentence but a discourse In fact, hetries to make clear their distinction According to him, grammar is a set of rulescontrolling the order and the connection of words in the level of a sentence only The

system of discourse rules shares this function, but in the broader level – amongsentences Brown also emphasizes that grammatical competence is very important incommunicative competence

To sum up, it can be said that the definition of Brown (1994) has covered allthe main points of grammar the other authors discuss First, grammar is a set of rules

or patterns controlling the sequence and the mutual interaction of words in the level

of a sentence only Secondly, discourse is grammar but active in the larger units.Thirdly, grammar exists in the close and interactive relationship with the other factors

of a language including semantics, phonology and the writing systems Finally,grammar competence is one of the needed conditions for communicativecompetence

2.2.2 Ways of Teaching Grammar

There have been ideas focus on whether to teach grammar explicitly (ordeductive or overt grammar teaching) or implicitly (or inductive or covert teaching)and whether to follow learner-centered or teacher-centered approach

According to implicit approach, the students are presented with examples firstand then they are guided to figure out the rule or generalization from the examples Aclear grammar explanation may never be given from their teacher The explicit one isdifferent because in this approach, a rule or generalization is first given by the teacher

or textbook and then students are allowed to practice various instances of language towhich the rule applies (Brown, 1994)

Many authors (Brown, 1994; Gardner, 2008; Hartnett 1985, and so on)discuss this issue and agree on some points First, generally, the implicit approach ismore in favor because it allows students to discover some aspects of language beforegetting to know grammatical explanations so that it builds more intrinsic motivationamong them However, in some cases, the explicit approach or a blend between thetwo is more appropriate In fact, the distinction between these approaches in a lesson

is not always apparent All in all, the choice should depend on specific teachingcontexts

The learner-centered approach’s principle is that the emphasis in the teachingand learning process at all times should be on the learner, not the teacher (Stevick,1982) Stevick also notes that learner-centeredness does not imply that teachersshould abandon the classroom to the learners, and that there should be a number oflegitimate teacher functions in learner- as well as teacher-centered classrooms

After a large amount of research, authors come to a conclusion that whereasstudents prefer moving from teacher-centered to more learner-centered class, theystill think both of these approaches are useful All in all, it is a good idea for teachers

to make use of all these approaches to satisfy students

2.2.3 Contents in A Grammar Lesson

According to Harmer (1987), language is used actually to do things, to

perform certain functions, like inviting, apologizing, introducing and so on.

Therefore, instead of teaching grammar, teachers should teach functions to studentseven though their grammatical base should be insured as well Clear evidence is thatmodern courses often teach a grammatical structure and then get students to use it aspart of a functional conversation

Freeman (2003) shares Harmer’s ideas to some extent However, she asserts

that teaching grammar includes teaching form, meaning and use as well She clarifies

that teaching those three dimensions is really important because it will make studentshave enough knowledge to reach the primary goal of learning a language which, afterall, is to enable to communicate in the target language However, she also notes that

language functions might be emphasized over forms (Freeman, 2000)

In short, authors confirm the necessity of teaching grammar to students,because if appropriate techniques are used, grammar can effectively assist students inthe language learning process To help learners communicate well and appropriately

in the target language, it is necessary that teachers teach them the form, meaning and

use of any grammar The exclusion of any dimension can badly affect students As a

teacher, we can choose any method or a combination of some to serve best ourstudents’ interests, needs, personalities and experience

2.3 A Brief Review of Task-based Language Learning

The task-based view of language teaching, based on the constructivist theory

of learning and communicative language teaching methodology, has evolved inresponse to some limitations of the traditional PPP approach (Ellis, 2003; Long &

Crookes, 1991) Thus, it has the substantial implication that language teaching is a developmental process promoting communication and social interaction rather than

a product acquired by practicing language items, and that the target language is learned more effectively when the learners are naturally exposed to meaningful task- based activities Such a view of language learning led to the development of various

task-based views in the eighties (Krahnke, Nunan, Nunan & Burton) and in thenineties (Harmer, Larsen-Freeman & Long, Willis, Willis & Willis, Thornbury,Skehan) During the nineties, this view of language learning has developed into adetailed framework for the communicative classroom in which learners perform task-

based activities through cycles of pre-task preparation, task performance, and task feedback through language focus (Sekhan, 1996; Willis, 1996).

post-In conclusion, it is obvious that the task-based approach has drawn fromdisadvantages of PPP traditional model Skehan (1996) summarises the contrast

between PPP and task based learning as follows: “A PPP approach looks on the learning process as learning a series of discrete items and then bringing these items together in communication to provide further practice and consolidation A task based approach sees the learning process as one of learning through doing – it is by primarily engaging in meaning that the learner’s system is encouraged to develop”.

2.4 Tasks

2.4.1 Definitions of Tasks

TBL proposes the notion of “task” as a center unit of planning an teaching.

Originally, task has nothing to do with pedagogy Long (1985: 89) frames a task as

“… a piece of work undertaken for oneself or for others, freely or for some reward By “task” is meant the hundred and one things people do in everyday life, at work, at play, and in between” From his view, tasks have non-linguistics outcome

Prabhu (1987: 12-17), one of the first methodologists raising interest and

support for TBL, defines “a task” is an activity which required learners to arrive at

an outcome from given information through some process of thought, and which allowed teachers to control and regulate that process He thinks that effective

learning occurs when students are fully engaged in a language task, rather than justlearning about language Prabhu indicates a task is an activity of learning process

In order to stimulate students’ thinking, teachers are allowed to guide the process

According to Willis (1996: 23), tasks are “always activities where the target language is used by the learner for a communicative purpose (goal) in order to achieve an outcome” It means that tasks should provide opportunities for free and

meaningful use of the target language The aim of communication tasks is tostimulate real communication in the target language

Nunan (1989) states that the task “is 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 The task should also have a sense of completeness, being able to stand alone

as a communicative act in its own right” In this definition, we can see that the

authors take a pedagogical perspective Nunan claims that for the definition oftasks, we can see communicative language use where the learner’s attention is onmeaning instead of linguistic structure Tasks are defined in terms of what the

learners will do in class such as “filling out a form, buying a pair of shoes, making

an airline reservation, borrowing a library book, weighing a patient, taking a hotel reservation, etc” rather than in the world outside the classroom

Another definition of task comes from Lee (2000): a task is “(1) a classroom activity or exercise that has: (a) an objective obtainable only by interaction among participants, (b) a mechanism for structuring and sequencing interaction, and (c) a focus on meaning exchange; (2) a language learning endeavor that requires learners to comprehend, manipulate, and/or produce the target language as they perform some sets of work plans”.

In summary, the definitions of tasks vary in TBL The definitions involved ineveryday activities, job responsibility, or general activities for learners While thesedefinitions are different somewhat, they all focus on the fact that pedagogical tasksinvolve communicative language use in which the user’s attention is focused onmeaning rather than grammatical form However, this does not mean that form isnot important

In this thesis, my own view of a pedagogical task is strongly influenced byNunan (1989), Willis (1996), and Lee (2000) In my opinion, task-based languageteaching approach is the implementation of pedagogical tasks, which are inspiredfrom the real world tasks, fitted well to students’ need and interest, and sociallycontextualized A task is goal-oriented, meaning-focused first and form-focusedthen, contextualized, and implemented as the basis for teaching and learning Mydefinition refers to the deployment of learners’ knowledge, experience and skills toexpress meaning, highlighting the fact that meaning and form are highlyinterrelated, and that grammar exists to enable the language user to express differentcommunicative meanings

2.4.2 Types of Tasks

According to Pica, Kanagy and Fladun (1993) cited in Jack & Thoedore(2001: 234) tasks are classified into five types:

- Jigsaw tasks: These involve learners combining different pieces of

information to form a whole, i.e three individuals or groups may have threedifferent parts of a story and have to put the pieces of the story together

- Information- gap tasks: One student or a group of students has one set of

information and another student or group has a complimentary set of information.They must negotiate and find out what the other party’s information is in order tocomplete an activity

- Problem-solving tasks: Students are given a problem and a set of

information They must arrive at a solution to the problem There is generally asingle resolution of the outcome

- Decision-making tasks: Students are given a problem for which there are

number of possible outcomes and they must choose one through negotiation anddiscussion

- Opinion- exchange tasks: Learners engage in discussion and exchange of

ideas They do not need to reach agreement

These are different types of tasks Willis (1996) classifies them into differentgroups:

The outcome would be the completed list, or possibly a draft mind map

b) Ordering and sorting

These tasks involve four main processes:

 sequencing items, actions or events in logical or chronological order

 ranking items according to personal values or specified criteria

 categorizing items in given groups or grouping them under given headings

 classifying items in different ways, where the categories themselves are notgiven

The outcome is a set of information ordered and sorted according to specifiedcriteria

c) Comparing

Broadly, these tasks involve comparing information of a similar nature butfrom different sources or versions in order to identify common points and/ordifferences The processes involved are:

 matching to identify specific points and relate them to each other

 finding similarities and things in common

e) Sharing personal experiences

These tasks encourage learners to talk more freely about themselves andshare their experiences with others The resulting interaction is closer to casualsocial conversation in that it is not so directly goal-oriented as in other tasks Forthat reason, however, these open tasks may be more difficult to get going in the

classroom The tasks include narrating, describing, exploring and explainingattitudes, opinions, and reactions The outcome is largely social.

f) Creative tasks

These are often called projects and involve pairs or groups of learners insome kind of freer creative work They also tend to have more stages than othertasks, and can involve combinations of task types: listing, ordering and sorting,comparing and problem-solving Out of class research is sometimes needed.Organizational skills and team-work are important in getting the task done Theoutcome can often be appreciated by a wider audience than the students whoproduced it

In summary, we can see that some of the above-mentioned tasks are world or target tasks and some are pedagogical tasks And here is the thoroughdiscussion of these two types of tasks

real-2.4.2.1 Real-world Tasks

Real-world tasks are tasks that reflect real-world use of language and might

be considered a rehearsal for real-world tasks They are proposed to use language in

the reality beyond the classroom A role-play in which students practice a job interview would be a task of this kind Nunan and Burton (1989) make clear that

real-world tasks are things that learners are expected to do in the world outside theclassroom like filling a form or asking for specific information They indicate that a

crucial step in applying TBL to language class is to “translate real-world tasks into communicative classroom or pedagogical activities.” Obviously, real-world tasks

are goal-guided activities, which encourage learners to apply the language they havepracticed in class to have genuine communication in the world outside theclassroom

According to Nunan (1989), real-world tasks include daily activities such as

filling out a form, making airline preservation, borrowing a library book, taking a

reservation hotel, etc TBL views real-world tasks as the source for pedagogical

tasks in the classroom, which is referred to as classroom tasks

Another definition of pedagogical task comes from Richards (1986: 289):

“…an activity or action which is carried out as the result of processing or understanding language (i.e as a response)

Then, in 2003, the definition of a pedagogical task that Ellis informs is asfollows:

A task is a workplan that requires learners to process languagepragmatically in order to achieve an outcome that can be evaluated in terms

of whether the correct or appropriate propositional content has beenconveyed To this end, it requires them to give primary attention to meaningand to make use of their own linguistic resources, although the design of thetask may predispose them to choose particular forms (p.16)

Obviously, the main key criterial features of Ellis’s tasks are: meaningfocusing, real-world language use, and communicative outcome He considersfocusing on meaning the key criterion to differentiate a task from an activity Itmeans that a task should be using language pragmatically instead of displayinglanguage Additionally, these tasks should be used in the real world, such as forinformation exchanging In other words, the goal of tasks is communicative It doesnot mean tasks will be limited to speaking and listening only Instead, a taskincludes four language skills: speaking, listening, reading, and writing

2.4.3 Characteristics of Tasks

Skehan (1996) puts forward four key characteristics of a task in apedagogical aspect:

• meaning is primary

• there is some sort of relationship to comparable real-world activities

• task completion has some priority

• the assessment of the task is in terms of outcome

However, when his book was republished in 1998, he had five keyscharacteristics for a task; one more was added Therefore, he redefined a task as ‘anactivity in which: meaning is primary; learners are not given other people’smeaning to regurgitate; there are some sorts of relationship to the real world; taskcompletion has some priority; and the assessment of task performance is in terms oftask outcome’

However, according to Jack & Theodore (2001), the characteristics of taskhave been described as follows:

- One way or two ways: Whether the task involves a one way exchange ofinformation or two way exchange

- Convergent or divergent: whether the students achieve a common goal orseveral different goal

- Collaborative or competitive: whether the students collaborate to carry out

a task or complete with each other on a task

- Single or multiple outcomes: whether there is a single outcome or manydifferent outcomes are possible

- Concrete or abstract language: whether the task involves the use of concretelanguage or abstract language

- Simple or complex processing: whether the linguistic demands of the taskare relatively simple or complex

- Reality- based or not reality-based: whether the task mirrors a real world

activity or in a pedagogical activity not found in the real world.

Willis and Willis (1996) suggest that the key characteristic of the task should

be the degree of difficulty of task to which Jane Willis and Dave Willis defines “the aim of effective sequencing is to ensure that the demands on language are of the right level” From this, tasks should be too difficult or too easy If the task goes

beyond the learners’ current knowledge, they will face the lexicalized andgrammatical resources for communication On the other hand, if the task is easierthan the learners’ ability in using the language, they will get bored and are notmotivated to use the language, hence there will be no language development

In conclusion, task is characterized in the point that task plays the center inthe learning process Meaning is primary in communication, so task should involve

a focus on meaning Task is inspired from real-world activities and must be oriented Its completion has priority and the success of task completion is assessed

goal-by the outcome

2.4.4 Principles of Tasks

Willis (1996) indicates that tasks are governed by the following principles:

- Task should engage the learner’s focus on negotiating the meaning, rather than thepractice of form or prescribed forms or patterns

- Task should promote communication and interaction through having studentsengage and negotiate the meaning of the task

- There is some kind of purpose or goal set for the task so that learners know whatthey are expected to achieve by the end of the task

- The task should motivate learners, engage their attention, present suitable degree

of linguistic challenge and promote language development

2.4.5 Tasks, Exercises, and Activities

Nunan (2004) gives a clear distinction between three concepts: tasks,exercises and communicative activities According to him, a task is a

communicative act that does not usually have a restrictive focus on a particulargrammatical structure, and has a non-linguistic outcome With tasks, learners freelyuse language to achieve a goal, and this activity often reflects real life and has a

focus on meaning Solving a problem, sharing information or experience, and so on

are typical examples of tasks An exercise usually focuses on specific languageelement restrictively, and has a linguistic outcome An example of an exercise isthat teacher asks students to work in pairs and make questions and answers usingthe cues: “Do you like….? – Yes, I do / No, I don’t.” An activity usually has arestrictive focus on one or two language items, but also has a communicativeoutcome

2.5 Task-based Language Teaching and Learning

Willis (1996) proposes: “Task-based learning combines the best insights from communicative language teaching with an organized focus on language form.”

She explains that TBL helps learners improve communication by doing differenttasks in different meaningful classroom situations with an organized focus onlanguage form It is an approach where tasks are used as the central focus of alesson within a supportive methodological framework

2.5.2 Characteristics of TBL

Nunan (1991: 279) regards TBL as an overall approach to language learningthat views the “tasks” learners do as central to the learning process in order toachieve communicative goals He describes five characteristics of task-basedapproach to language teaching as follows:

- An emphasis on learning to communicate through interaction in the target language

- The introduction of authentic texts in the learning situation

- The provision of opportunities for learners to focus, not only on language but also

in the learning process itself

- An enhancement of the learners’ own personal experiences as importantcontributing elements to classroom learning

- An attempt to link classroom language learning with language activation outside theclassroom

2.5.3 Principles of TBL

The task-based approach aims at providing opportunities for learners toexperiment with and explore both spoken and written language through learningtasks which are designed to engage learners in authentic, practical and functionaluse of language for meaningful purpose Nunan (2005: 35-38) suggests sevenprinciples for the task-based instruction below:

a) Scaffolding

- A basic role for an educator is to provide a supporting framework withinwhich the learning can take place This is particularly important in TBL as learnerswill encounter holistic “chunks” of language that will often be beyond their presentprocessing capacity

- At the beginning of the learning process, learners should not be expected toproduce language that has not been introduced either explicitly or implicitly

- The “art” of TBL is known when to remove the scaffolding: too early andthe process will collapse; too late, the learners will not develop independence

b) Task dependency

Within one lesson, one task should grow out of previous tasks – and buildupon them Each task exploits and builds upon the one that has gone before Thesequence tells a “pedagogical story”, as learners are led step-by-step to the pointwhere they can carry out the final task in the sequence

c) Recycling

Learning is not an “all-or-nothing” process, but piecemeal and unstable.Recycling language not only maximises opportunities for learning but also allowslearners to encounter target language items over time and in a range of differentenvironments, both linguistic and experiential For example, they will see how

“expressing likes and dislikes”, “yes/no questions” and “do/does” function in arange of content areas, from the world of entertainment to the world of food

d) Active learning

Learners learn best by actively using (experiencing) the language they arelearning A key principle is that learners learn best through doing – through activelyconstructing their knowledge, rather than having it transmitted to them by theteacher Thus, most class time should be devoted to opportunities for students to usethe language The key point is that it is the learner, not the teacher, who is doing thework This does not mean that there is no place at all for input, explanation, etc., butthat such teacher-focussed work should not dominate class time

e) Integration

Learners should be taught in ways that make clear the relationships betweenlinguistic form, communicative function and semantic meaning Recently, appliedlinguists have argued that what is necessary is a pedagogy that makes explicit tolearners the systematic relationship between form, function and meaning

f) Reproduction to creation

Learners should be encouraged to move from reproductive to creativelanguage use In reproductive tasks, learners reproduce models provided by the

teacher, the textbook, or the tape These tasks are designed to give learners amastery of form, meaning and function, and this provides a basis for creative tasks.

In creative tasks, learners recombine familiar elements in novel ways This principlecan be applied not only with intermediate and advanced students, but also withbeginners if the instructional process is carefully sequenced

g) Reflection

Learners should be given opportunities to reflect on what they have learnedand how well they are doing Becoming a reflective learner is part of learnertraining where the focus shifts from language content to learning processes.Research shows that learners who are aware of the strategies driving their learningwill be better learners – and TBL is underpinned by many strategies For learnerswho have done most of their learning in ‘traditional’ classes, TBL can bemystifying, even alienating Therefore, adding a reflective element can help learnerssee the rationale for the new approach

2.6 Characteristics of the Task-based Grammar Class

The focus of the task-based grammar class is accomplishing tasks andactivities in real-life like situations, so task-based grammar class will show thefollowing characteristics:

- The process of learning is a process of obtaining information, dealing withinformation, analyzing problems and solving problems When the students’attention is focused on the problems or activities, it is much easier to learn thegrammar items well

- The purpose of language learning is not just learning grammar knowledge,but the practical use of grammar knowledge It is quite clear that grammar is thefundamental knowledge in English learning, since “practice makes perfect”, the bestway to learn it well is to practice, to use them in our daily life

- Cooperative learning becomes accessible In order to make the tasks moremeaningful and interesting, the grammar class asks for the students’ cooperation

The students can make great ideas by discussion and argument in a group with theirpartners

- Student-centred class is highlighted A teacher is no longer a dominator inclass but a facilitator of learning The new class model welcomes different ideasfrom every student The class focuses more on the students’ behavior and every hastheir own right to express themselves

- Students’ individuality and creative way of thinking and personal views inunderstanding and solving problems are appreciated In task-based class, there isnot only one answer to every question and there is no set answer We appreciatenew ideas from the students As long as the answer given by students is reasonable,

it is acceptable

task-3.2 Research Design

Quantitative method can be defined as “the numerical representation and manipulation of observation for the purpose of describing and explaining the phenomena that those observations reflect” (Babbie, 1983: 537) This method

proved appropriate in this study for the following reasons Firstly, it helped “seek facts or causes of social phenomena without regard to the subjective states of the individuals” (Nunan, 1989: 4) Moreover, thanks to the large number of participants

in the study, that is, 100 1st-year students, the information acquired is “reliable and generalisable” (Nunan, 1989: 4)

However, what is likely to be sacrificed in a quantitative study is theprofoundness of information Therefore, quantitative method proved not adequateenough Qualitative method was, therefore, needed in this study so as to compensatefor what is deficient in a quantitative method

Unlike quantitative method, qualitative method is the “non-numerical examination and interpretation of observation for the purpose of discovering underlying meanings and patterns of relationships” (Babbie, 1983: 537).

Qualitative research aims at a more in-depth and thorough understanding of thephenomena than just answering the questions of how well, how much or howaccurately something is done (Gay, 1996; Wallace, 1998) Qualitative study isbased mainly on three basic data gathering techniques, that is, participantobservation, interview and document or artifact analysis

The researcher also exploited quasi-experimental method since it aims toanswer specific questions by rejecting specific hypothesis and quasi-experiment hasproved itself an appropriate method that has been effectively applied in thisresearch

To conclude, the research design in this thesis consists of the quantitative,qualitative and quasi-experiment method in the forms of questionnaires, interviews,and tests The questionnaires reflect the reality of the application of the task-basedapproach to teaching English grammar, the student’s attitudes towards the teacher’sapplication of TBL in teaching English grammar as well as recommendations forbetter application TBL in grammar lessons The interviews served as helping theauthor to find out more information about the reality of complementing TBL in

teaching grammar Moreover, they also provide further suggestions to promoteteaching English grammar with TBL The test was designed in order to answer the

question: “How effective is the task-based approach in teaching English grammar

at HUI?”

3.3 Context of the Study

The study took place at HUI, Nghe An Branch, where English is acompulsory subject and learnt as a foreign language Until now, it has had morethan 4,000 students On average, the age of students at HUI is from 18 to 25 TheirEnglish level is low and of mixed- ability Before entering HUI, some of studentshave learned English for 7 years; some has 3 years of learning English at highschool where only written English is taught and some did not have a chance to learnEnglish at high school Therefore, they can hardly communicate in English Theyoften feel shy and afraid of making mistakes because of lack of social knowledge aswell as their poor English knowledge Moreover, the traditional methods ofteaching have much affect to the students’ awareness of their needs in term ofcommunication in real life situation

Also, the students’ attitudes towards learning have much influence on theeffect of teaching Some of students think that English is not a major subject and notuseful for their future job So the students have born in their mind that the final goal

is to pass the exams In addition, the majority of the students does not haveappropriate learning strategies or have the habit to learn independently or creatively

As a result, they never prepare the lesson at home or review the lesson regularly

However, the students at HUI are rather highly motivated by some practicalreasons If they do not learn English carefully, they will fail the exams and will not

be able to take B or C English certificate, thus can not graduate from the school As

a result, they may miss the chance to get a job

Teacher of English at HUI are mainly newly-recruited; the most senior ofthem is 10 years teaching Most of them have been doing the M.A course in applied

linguistics and English teaching methodology The number of teachers of Englishare 20, who have to be in charge of teaching non-major English students In aspect

of language teaching method, the teachers at HUI get used to applying traditionalmethods such as GTM and AM in teaching grammar Fortunately, most of themhave a great desire to acquire knowledge of communicative competence and claim

to apply it in teaching English

The teaching material is currently used for the non- English major learners is

the “American Headway 2” by John and Liz Soars This textbook treats the four

skills of listening, speaking, reading and writing thoroughly and combinestraditional methods of language teaching and more recent communicative ones The14-unit textbook is programmed to be taught in 2 semesters and in 106 periods aspresented below in Table 3.1:

Table 3.1: Distribution of Time and Units in 2 Semesters Semester Time (45- minute lesson period/ week) Units Textbook

American-Headway 2

2 45 lesson periods per 10 weeks 9-14

After 14 lesson periods or 1 credit, students are to participate in a choice test that concentrates on grammar, vocabulary, and reading During a period

multiple-of one semester, students are required to do 2 tests in order to be given marks to bequalified to participate in the end- of- semester exam that does not test students’skills of listening and speaking

As far as the teaching of English is concerned, methodological renovation isone of the primary focuses of the university and the Department in an attempt toraise the quality of English language teaching The major orientation for renovation

is the advocacy of TBL However, this orientation is largely verbal rather thanbeing institutionalized by means of an official policy or curriculum renewal This

may lead to the variation in understanding about TBL among the teachers ofEnglish

3.4 Participants

The participants of this research include two groups of respondents: Teachers

of English and students at HUI In this study, no administrators, teachers or studentswere identified by their names

3.4.1 Teachers

The twenty teacher subjects of this research were all trained in Universities

in Vietnam (College of Foreign Languages, Vietnam National University- Hanoiand Vinh University) They are teaching to non- English major students at theuniversity They are from 26 to 34 years of age with at least 5 years of teachingexperience (20%) Eleven teachers (55%) have been teaching for more than 5 years,and other five teachers (5%) are the most experienced with more than 10 yearsteaching

Besides, there is not male teacher of English among twenty teachers Twelve

of them have acquired M.A degree, while the rest (40%) have B.A degree and arepursuing the M.A courses Each teacher is to teach 2-3 first- year classes, each ofclass has more than 60 students They are required to follow the textbook

“American Headway 2” by Liz and John Soars in 105 periods in the trainingprogram Finally, only 5 out of 20 respondents have attended many workshops ongrammar teaching (See Table 3.2)

Table 3.2:Teachers’ Background Information

Background N = 20 %

Qualification B.A degreeM.A degree 128 4060

English Teaching Experience

More than 10 years 5 25

Participated Grammar workshops YesNo 155 75

Years of Learning English

Accounting, Mechanics, Electronics, Information Technology, BusinessAdministration) They were taught grammar by task-based approach and chosen,asked to fill in the questionnaires which helped the researcher have usefulinformation.

The respondents’ ages vary from 19 to 21 Most of them have alreadylearned English However, their time of learning English is quite different Theminimum is less than 3 years, and the maximum is more than 10 years Some hasnever been learnt English because at secondary and high school, they learnt French.This big gap has a certain effect on the students’ learning attitudes

3.5 Data Collection Instruments

In order to get information for the research, survey questionnaires for bothteachers and students, teacher interviews and the test were carried out

3.5.1 Questionnaire

There were 2 questionnaires administrated to the subjects: Questionnaire forteachers and questionnaire for students

The questionnaire for teachers was designed for twenty teachers of English

at HUI, Nghe An Branch (See Appendix 1) It consists of 16 questions andcomprises four sections, namely:

- The teacher’s using traditional teaching methodology in teaching English grammar(Question 1, 2)

- The teacher’s implementation of TBL in teaching English grammar (Question 3, 4,

As for the students, the survey questionnaire including 12 questions (SeeAppendix 2) were distributed to them in class time and they completed them in 15minutes The questionnaire emphasizes on:

- Students’ attitudes towards English grammar (Question 1, 2, 3)

- Students’ attitudes towards teacher’s applying TBL (Question 4, 5, 6, 7, 8)

- Students’ feedbacks to TBL used in English grammar classes (Questions 9, 10, 11,12)

To ensure the students’ accurate misunderstandings before answering thequestions, all of them were written in Vietnamese Their answers were also written

in Vietnamese, which enabled them to express their ideas fully and with ease

The questionnaire was composed of a mix of questions including Yes/Noquestions, Multiple-choice questions, close and open-ended questions Thequestionnaires were not distributed to respondents to complete on their own butwith the researcher’s presence so that clarification and disambiguation could bemade timely In that way, some serious limitations of questionnaires as cited in

Zoltorn Dörnyei (2003: 10) could be tackled, which were “the simplicity and superficiality of answers … respondent literacy problems”

3.5.2 Interview

The interview was conducted after the preliminary analysis of the initialquestionnaires According to Fraenkel and Wallen (1996), interviewing is animportant way for researchers to check the accuracy of the impression they gainfrom observation In this study, the researcher used semi-structure interviews withthe teachers with the views to:

 double-checking the information gained in the 1st stage

 gaining insights into the mental processes underlying observable behavior Three teachers of English working at HUI, Nghean Branch were invited totake part in the interviews All the interviews were conducted face-to-face and were

carried out informally and taken notes so as to create a relaxing interaction betweenthe interviewer and interviewee and to elicit the most information from the teachersinvolved Before the interviews, three teachers are given four questions and they areasked to prepare in advance (See Appendix 3)

3.5.3 Test

This is a final achievement test The test was constructed by the researcherbasing on the grammar in the textbook “American Headway 2” and what theteacher taught in eight units (See Appendix 4) It was done by the researcher in twoclasses to find out the effectiveness of TBL in teaching English grammar incomparison with other methods or approaches However, these two classes weretaught grammar by two different methods: Class A3.7 with traditional methods likeGTM, AM (Controlled class) while class A3.10 was taught with TBL (Pilot class)

At the end of the first semester, the students were asked to do the same test tocompare the results

All the target words in the achievement test came from the eight units of thetextbook “American Headway 2” The test consisted of four different types ofexercises and was written in a set of multiple-choice items including a wordfollowed by four different choices with one correct answer and three differentdistracters'possible answers

In order to highlight the knowledge of grammar structures, exercise 1 andexercise 2 were designed Students are required to put the verbs into the correctforms by choosing the correct answers or identifying and correcting the mistakes

Additionally, gap-filling and reading comprehension were included in thetest The students had to apply all the knowledge of many skills to do these twokinds of exercises (Exercise 3 and 4)

3.6 Data Collection