vii
DECLARATION
I, Nguyen Viet Hung, hereby state that this thesis is the result of my own research and the substance of the thesis has not, wholly or in part, been submitted for any degree to any other universities or institutions.
Signature: ......
Time: March, 2009.
ABSTRACT
In today’s classrooms, language teaching method is undergoing tremendous transformations towards the integration of different methods according to the learner and teacher as well as contextual variables. Language teaching is, therefore, a challenging job in any country. The purpose of this qualitative case study was to examine how task-based language teaching supports the emergence of language study, within the context of northeast university students. More importantly, how TBU teachers know about this method and their implementation of TBLT in order to improve their teaching quality. The task-based language teaching provides students multiple opportunities to work for targets and to learn, both as form and meaning. First, task-based language teaching is useful as it allows to treat learners as individual with their own needs and interests. Second, it allows learners to take input from authentic sources which are communicative and comprehensible data, really relevant to their own needs and interests. Third, the participants are provided with opportunities to engage in communicative use of the target language in a wide range of activities. Working in groups or in individuals, students fulfill tasks in which they visually represent their personal interpretations of the world around. They focus deliberately on various language forms, skills and strategies in order to support the process of language acquisition. As teachers, they should conceptualize, research, of this method so as to fully exploit the potential of the available teaching materials. The task-based language teaching can create a learning environment in which students interact with each other as they made sense of and access the available information for communication. In particular, naturally unconscious learning occurs through threaded discussions and cooperation when they accomplish tasks. Educators must be responsive to today’s learners. This study illuminates the expanded possibilities for integrating tasks within the context of learning and teaching. Findings of the study suggest task integration supports the emergence of language learning and teaching.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
My sincere appreciation is extended to all teachers at College of Foreign Language, Vietnam National University, Hanoi, especially who taught me methodological subjects and research methods, such as Mr. Le Hung Tien, Mr. Le Van Canh, and Mrs. Nguyen Thi Thuy Minh. Those by their interesting lessons and precious suggestions for teaching and researching engaged me in this field.
My gracefulness is also expanded to all university teachers of TBU for both their participations into my interviews and their opening classroom doors and inviting me to stay for my observations and their kind offer of teaching plans.
My deepest thanks go to my supervisor, Mr. Le Van Canh, M.A., for always bringing out the best in me. Without his wisdom, high expectations, and his unwavering support for materials, continued guidance, thorough suggestions and corrections, my thesis could not be completed.
I credit my family in Thai Nguyen for providing me the courage to embark on this journey and for teaching me to never, ever give up.
DEDICATION
This thesis is dedicated to the true lover of my life, Bui Thi Huong, whom I loved for years. She with her warm and gentle heart for love was an inspiration to me, and I could overcome all hardships. She is remembered for her character by everyone with the talent, intelligence, and beauty. Though we could not be together because of different inevitable reasons, my affections and thanks from the depth of my heart would go to her evermore.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DECLARATION………………………………………………………………. / iABSTRACT …………………………………………………………………… / ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ………………………………………………….. / iii
DEDICATION ………………………………………………………………... / iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS……………………………………………………… / v
LISTS OF ABBREVIATIONS……………………………………………….. / viii
LISTS OF TABLES…………………………………………………………… / ix
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION……………………………………………. / 1
1.1. Rationale……………………………………………………...…………… / 1
1.1.1. State of the problem……………………………………………………… / 1
1.1.2. Theoretical rationale …………………………………………………… / 1
1.2. Purpose of the Study …………………………...………………………… / 1
1.3. Research Questions ………………………………………………………. / 2
1.4. Significance of the Study ………………………………………..………. / 2
1.5. Limitations of the Study …………………………………………………. / 2
1.6. Scope of the study…………………………………………………………. / 3
1.7. Organization of the Study ……………………………………………….. / 3
CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW…………………………………….. / 4
2.1. Definition of terminology…………………………………………... / 4
2.1.1. Defining ‘task’ and task-based language teaching………………. / 4
2.1.2. Task-based language teaching to learners………………………. / 9
2.1.3. Tasks, Actvities and Exercises…………………………………… / 11
2.1.4. Developments of Task-Based Teaching………………………… / 11
2.2. Theoretical Foundations…………………………………………… / 15
2.2.1. Theories of language……………………………………………… / 15
2.2.2. Theories of language learning…………………………………… / 16
2.2.2.1. Cognitive theory…………………………………………………. / 16
2.2.2.2. Constructivist Theory…………………………………….…….. / 17
2.2.2.3. Generative Learning Theory……………………………………….. / 18
2.3. The nature of Task-based Language Teaching…………………... / 19
2.3.1. How is TBLT different from other teaching methods?...... / 19
2.3.1.1. Communicative Language Teaching (CLT)………………………… / 20
2.3.1.2. Silent Way………………………………………………………………. / 21
2.3.1.3. Experiential learning………………………………………………….. / 22
2.3.1.4. Co-operative learning…………………………………………………. / 23
2.3.2. Task-based teaching versus other types of teaching instruction models……………………………………………………………………. /
24
2.3.3. Task-based Teaching Framework……………………………….. / 252.3.4. Task types………………………………………………………….. / 29
2.3.5. Materials for Tasks Initiated……………………………………... / 32
2.3.6. Syllabus design……………………………………………………. / 33
2.3.7. Learner roles………………………………………………………. / 34
2.3.8. Teacher roles…………………..…………………………………. / 34
2.4. The importance of understanding teachers’ interpretation of teaching methodology…………………………………………………… / 35
2.5. Teachers’ interpretation of TBLT………………………………… / 37
2.6. Teachers’ views of teaching methodology and their classroom teaching…………………………………………………………………... / 38
2.7. Conclusion / 40
CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY………………………………………….. / 41
3.1. The fitness of case study to the research purpose…………………….. / 41
3.2. Restatement of research questions…………………………………….. / 43
3.3. Case description and context of the study……………………………….. / 43
3.3.1. The setting of the study………………………………………………….. / 43
3.3.2. Participants……………………………………………………………… / 44
3.4. Instruments………………………………………...……………………… / 46
3.4.1. Interviews ………………………………………………………………... / 46
3.4.2. Observations………………………..…………………………………… / 47
3.5.3. Teaching plan interpretation……………………………………………. / 48
3.5. The procedure: ………………………………………..…………………. / 48
3.5.1. Interviews………………………………………………………………… / 48
3.5.2. Class observation………………………………………………………… / 49
3.5.3. Teaching plan interpretation……………………………………………. / 50
3.6. Data analysis………………………………………………………………. / 50
3.7. Conclusion ……………………….…………………….. / 50
CHAPTER 4. DISCUSSION OF THE FINDINGS…………………………. / 51
4.1. General overview of the findings……………………………………….. / 51
4.1.1. Teachers’ conceptualizations of task………………………………. / 51
4.1.2. Teachers’ conceptualizations of task-based teaching……………. / 53
4.1.3. Teachers’ attitudes toward task-based teaching………………………. / 56
4.1.4. Factors affecting the TBLT implementation ……………………….. / 57
4.1.5. The reality of teachers’ class teaching………………………….. / 59
4.1.6. Teachers’ class teaching implementation…………………………... / 61
4.2. Discussions of the findings………………………...…………………….. / 63
4.2.1. Congruence and incongruence between teachers’ conceptualizations and the composite view of TBLT ……………………………………………… / 63
4.2.2. Congruence and incongruence between teachers’ classroom teaching practice and teaching plans with the composite view of TBLT……………….. / 65
4.2.3. Consistence and inconsistence between their conceptualization with teaching practices and teaching plans………………………………………. / 66
CHAPTER 5. CONCLUSIONS, PEDAGOGICAL IMPLICATONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY……………………………….. / 68
5.1. Summary of the major points of the study………………………..……. / 68
5.1.1. Summary of the study…………………………………………………. / 68
5.1.2. Conclusions…………………..…………………………………………. / 68
5.1.3. Pedagogical implications…………………………..…………………… / 70
5.2. Limitation of the study…………………………………………………. / 70
5.3. Implications for future research ………………………………………… / 71
LIST OF REFERENCES………………...…………………………………… / I
APPENDICES……………………..………………………………………….. / VII
Appendix A: Interview Questions………….….………………………………. / VII
Appendix B: Schedule of taped Interviews …………………….…………….… / VII
Appendix C: Samples of classroom observations………………………………. / VIII
Appendix D: Samples of teaching plans of university teachers……………..….. / XIV
72
LISTS OF ABBREVIATIONS
TBU: Tay Bac University
TBLL: Task-Based Language Learning
TBLT: Task-Based Language Teaching
TST/ TSI: Task-Supported Teaching/ Instruction
ELT: English Language Teaching
ESL: English as Second Language
CLT: Communicative Language Teaching
PPP: presentation-practice-production
TTT: Test-Teach-Test
ESA: Engage-Study-Activate
TM: Teaching method
RQ: Research question
IQ: Interview question
ADTBLTOM: Ability to distinguish TBLT from other methods
AC AT: Ability to conceptualize the advantages of TBLT
AC DT: Ability to conceptualize the disadvantages of TBLT
ACT BLLF: Ability to conceptualize the TBLT framework
(+): Conceptual, positive, mentioned
(-): Non-conceptual, negative, not mentioned
(=): Neutral
Att.: Attitudes
Und.: Understandings
Tim.: Time
Tb.: Textbook
Pre. Preparation
SLP: Students’ language proficiency
NSs: Number of students in class
Fac.: Facilities
Vs.: versus
Exer.: exercise/ act.: activity
LISTS OF TABLES
TABLE 1: Participants’ Profile
TABLE 2: Participants’ conceptualizations of task (Data from IQ2, IQ9)
TABLE 3: Participants’ conceptualizations of task-based teaching
(Data from IQ2, IQ3, IQ 5, IQ6, IQ10, IQ11, IQ12)
TABLE 4: Participants’ attitudes towards TBLT
(Data from IQ2, IQ3, IQ4, IQ 5, IQ6, IQ8, IQ12)
TABLE 5: Factors impacting on extent of TBLT implementation
(Data from IQ2, IQ3, IQ 5, IQ6, IQ7, IQ8, IQ10, IQ11, IQ12, IQ13)
TABLE 6: Participants’ class teaching practice
(Data from class observations)
TABLE 7: Participants’ orientation of teaching instruction
(Data from teaching plan)
TABLE 8: The deviations between teachers’ conceptualizations and their practice
72
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. Rationale
1.1.1. State of the problem.
Task-based language teaching, like other approaches to language teaching, is initiated in the west (Ellis, 2003) mainly for adult intermediate learners. It opens new potential orientations and hopes to the EFL learners and teachers in some aspects of learning and teaching. The application of this approach depends on a lot of factors, such as context of teaching, environment or social variables and as the matter of fact the teacher’s conceptualization. Despite its popularity in Vietnam, this approach remains under-researched, especially how teachers conceptualize it according to their own understanding and beliefs. In Tay Bac University, English language teachers have been introduced to this approach, and they often mention the need to use this approach to the teaching of English to the students in the university. It is quite rational because Ellis (2003) has stated that task-based language teaching applied in universities is really a great help. However, if the success of any language teaching method or approach depends on many factors, one of which is teachers’ understanding and conceptualization of the intended approach, the investigation of how teachers interpret Task-Based Language Teaching (TBLT) is an urgent need. This study was intended to respond this need.
1.1.2. Theoretical rationale
Numerous studies suggest that teachers’ teaching approaches are less affected by the reserachers’ ideas but more by their conceptualization of the approach (Borg, 2003). In fact, there has been an emphasis on research into teachers’ understanding, interpretation or conceptualization of, and attitudes towards, the intended language teaching approach over the last decades. Such conceptualization and attidues of teachers are shaped by various contextual and educational factors. This study follows the research paradigm which seeks to uncover teachers’ psychology and cognition of TBLT in the context of Tay Bac University.
1.2. Purpose of the Study
The purpose of this study is to investigate teachers’ conceptualization of TBLT and their actual implementation of TBLT in their classroom. Specifically, the following objectives were set up for the study:
a) to investigate university teachers’ attitudes to TBLT in their teaching context
b) to understand university teachers’ conceptualization of TBLT
c) to find out how university teachers implement TBLT in their own classroom.
1.3. Research Questions
In order to achieve the above-mentioned objectives, the following research questions were raised:
1. What are the university teachers’ conceptualizations of, and attitudes towards, task-based language teaching?
2. To what extent do their conceptualizations match the composite view of task-based language teaching?
3. How do they implement task-based language teaching in their classroom?
In seeking the answers to these research questions, a qualitative case study was designed and conducted in the context of a university in the mountaineous area of North Vietnam.
1.4. Significance of the Study
Information obtained from this study will help teacher educators and teacher researchers to make appropriate decisions on how to introduce TBLT in Vietnamese contexts. Aslo, it may inform concerned people of how to help teachers to adapt TBLT to their teaching context by first of all readjust their mindset and attitudes.
1.5. Limitations of the Study
There are several limitations identified in this study. First, the sample size is small and limited to the context of Tay Bac University. Data collection and analysis focus on only twelve university teachers which were purposefully selected to yield the most information for the research questions. Although unique in their own ways, the participating teachers are all considered highly proficient teachers and familiar with methodology as almost all of them have just finished subjects of master course and they are doing theses. This study may help to build knowledge and understanding of teachers’ conceptualization of a method, but so it is unable to generalize the research results to the variety of universities. The study purpose is only of the benefit of a method at a specific university, so we are not intended to produce results which can be applied universally.
Researcher’s bias may be another limitation in this study. The researcher is an avid proponent of this method with extensive classroom experience involving learning through tasks. To minimize the effects of the researcher’s bias, the interviews are recorded carefully for later data analysis, and the class teaching observations are encrypted with thorough attention on sheets of paper, and teaching plans of teachers are interpreted carefully to get triangulate data.
1.6. Scope of the study
What are univerity teachers’view of TBLT and how such a view of TBLT is implemented in the classroom by TBU teachers of English? The task-based approach itself is scattered in this scope.
1.7. Organization of the Study
This chapter introduced the study exploring potential of TBLT within the context of Taybac University. The chapter included an overview of the issues, statement of the problem, purpose of the study, research questions, significance of the study, limitations of the study, definition of terms, and organization of the study. Chapter 2 provides a review of the literature, including a theoretical framework focusing on learning and teaching theory. Chapter 2 also provides research of issues surrounding the concepts and components of TBLT.