An Analysis of Task-based Materials and Performance: Focused on...

87

영어교육, 60권 2호 2005년 여름

An Analysis of Task-based Materials and Performance: Focused on Korean High School English Textbooks

In-Jae Jeon (Mokpo National University)

Jeon, In-Jae. (2005). An analysis of task-based materials and performance: Focused on Korean high school English textbooks. English Teaching, 60(2), 87-109.

The purpose of this study is to propose some meaningful considerations for communicative material development by exploring the aspects of task-based materials and performance with reference to first year high school English textbooks in Korea. For this purpose, two studies were conducted. The first one was to quantitatively analyze task-based materials in textbooks based on the qualitative analysis criteria supported by Nunan’s (1989) theory of task components. The second study was to examine the level of participants’ satisfaction with task-based performance through questionnaire research. The results of data analysis show, in accordance with core regulations of the 7th national curriculum for English represented by task-based learning and activity-oriented language use, that communicative theory of language learning is adequately reflected in the task-based materials of all textbooks. To conclude, a few suggestions are made to enhance the effectiveness of task-based activities in communicative classroom practices: a) task goals and rationale that encourage the learner’s motivation; b) authenticity of input data based on real-world situations; c) more emphasis on group work containing problem-solving procedures rather than individual ones; d) proportional representation of activity types and themes, etc.

I. INTRODUCTION With the advent of the communicative language teaching (CLT) approach in the early

1980s, the term ‘task’ came into prevalent use in the field of second language acquisition (SLA) and task-based language teaching (TBLT) has since become a controversial issue among linguistic researchers in terms of developing learner-centered curriculum, designing process-oriented syllabus, and producing communicative learning materials. Within the varying interpretations of CLT related to classroom practices, recent research exhibits three recurrent features: CLT is task-based (Ellis, 2003; Tudor, 2001); it puts communication and learners’ needs at its core by focusing on meaningful activities accompanied by the use of

Copyright(c) 2005 NuriMedia Co.,Ltd

Jeon, In-Jae

88

target language rather than knowledge about the language (Bingham-Wesche & Skehan, 2002; Pachler, 2000); it advocates the integration of four language skills and holistic practice from the beginning (Savignon, 2002).

In the Korean EFL context the national curriculum substantially controls the three major parts of English education, including the general objective of language learning, the detailed contents of instruction, and the evaluation procedure. Thus, the overall regulations of the national curriculum play a key role in implementing specific classroom practices as well as selecting applicable syllabi and choosing proper textbooks. For instance, the 7th revision of the national curriculum for English, which was first introduced and applied within secondary schools in 2001, has been characterized by a definite shift toward the use of CLT aimed at improving learners’ communicative competence (Guilloteaux, 2004; Hae- Ri Kim, 2004). Unfortunately, however, a quick review of task-based literature in relation to the CLT approach shows that there are a lack of studies which present a comprehensive analysis and evaluation of the interaction produced by tasks in EFL classrooms (Seedhouse, 1999). Moreover, despite the collective optimism surrounding task-based classroom practice conceptualized by the CLT approach, TBLT has not yet been sufficiently researched or proven empirically in terms of designing task-based syllabus and producing authentic materials for communicative interaction, especially in EFL environments like Korea, Japan, and China.

In light of this, the purpose of this paper is to provide some meaningful considerations for learner-centered curriculum developers and communicative material writers so as to promote the authenticity of task-based materials in the EFL textbook, which is still considered as one of the three indispensable tools (along with teacher and student) necessary in facilitating language learning in classrooms.

To this end, two analytic studies are planned: 1) the aspects of task-based materials in current English textbooks are compared and analyzed with reference to four different categories of task analysis suggested by the theories of task components presented by Nunan (1989); 2) task participants’ (e.g., teachers and students in secondary school settings) opinions about their experience of task performance are reviewed and analyzed through questionnaire research.

As there is a general consensus in language teaching that the use of authentic materials in the classroom is critically beneficial to the learning process in terms of promoting negotiation of meaning (Guariento & Morley, 2001; Tomlinson, 2003), this analytic study of task-based materials and performance will shed some light on designing communicative tasks and enhancing the effectiveness of task performance in classroom practices. It will also contribute to the development of learner-centered curricula and the construction of process-oriented syllabi, which are two prerequisites for producing EFL textbooks best suited for Korean secondary school settings.


An Analysis of Task-based Materials and Performance

89

II. THEORETICAL BACKGROUND

1. A Brief Review of Task-based Pedagogy Nunan (1989) suggests that tasks can be conceptualized in terms of the specific goals

they are intended to serve, the input data, which forms the point of departure for the task, and the related procedures, which the learners undertake in the completion of the task. Because tasks promote classroom interaction processes in a collaborative learning environment, they provide a close fit with CLT that allows learners to practice using the target language as a basic tool in communication.

The task-based view of language teaching, based on constructivist theory of learning and CLT methodology, has evolved in response to some limitations of the traditional PPP approach represented by the procedure of presentation, practice, and performance (Ellis, 2003; Long & Crookes, 1991). Thus, it has the substantial implications that language learning is a developmental process promoting communication and social interaction rather than a product acquired by practicing language items, and that learners learn the target language more effectively when they are naturally exposed to meaningful task-based activities. Such a view of language learning led to the development of various task-based approaches in the eighties (Breen, 1987; Candlin & Murphy, 1987; Nunan, 1989; Prabhu, 1987), and has developed a detailed practical framework for the communicative classroom in which learners are supposed to perform task-based activities through cycles of pre-task preparation, task performance, and post-task feedback through language focus (Skehan, 1996; Willis, 1996). Specifically, Ellis (2003) indicates that TBLT has been re-examined in recent years from different perspectives: oral performance (Mennim, 2003; Tin, 2003); writing performance (Taylor, 2003; Weigle, 2002); and performance assessment (Bachman, 2002; Bonk & Ockey, 2003).

Despite the prevalent use of task in language pedagogy, some significant challenges behind designing proper task-based syllabi and constructing authentic task-based materials, both of which have been considered crucial factors in determining the effectiveness of TBLT in communicative classrooms, still remain unresolved. In response to these challenges, many SLA researchers are currently moving their attention from conceptualizing tasks to sequencing and implementing tasks based on observation of the practical utilities of TBLT methodology in a language-learning environment.

2. A Framework for Analyzing Task-based Materials and Performance

In order to propose a useful framework for analyzing task-based materials, it is first of

all necessary to draw a proper definition of ‘task’ in terms of language learning context and


Jeon, In-Jae

90

to take a careful look at key factors related to performing tasks. In light of this, task is defined as an activity in which the target language is used for a communicative purpose in order to achieve an outcome (Willis, 1996). It also can be effectively organized based on systematic components including goals, input, setting, activities, roles, and feedback (Candlin & Breen, 1987; Nunan, 1989). Briefly, goals refer to the general aim for the task and input represents verbal or non-verbal materials that learners can manipulate. Setting refers to the environment in which task is performed and activities involve the things participants will be doing in a given setting. The roles for teacher and learner are closely related to the successful implementation of task and feedback concerns the task evaluation.

Traditional approaches to analysis of task-based activities, which tend to analyze tasks in terms of macro-skills (e.g., listening, speaking, reading, and writing), reveal some substantial shortcomings in that few tasks involve only one skill, and that it is often difficult to assign tasks to one skill label or another (Nunan, 1989). In addition, the framework of task components provides SLA researchers with some meaningful insights in a task-based syllabus design and authentic material development, for it can serve as the beginning point for analyzing task-based activities. Thus, in this paper, it is suggested that the dimensions of task as the unit of analysis include goals, input data, classroom settings, activity types, and activity themes.

1) Goals

Goals serve as a guideline in the overall process of task performance and provide a point

of contact between the task and the broader curriculum (Nunan, 1989), involving a variety of perspectives based on communicative, socio-cultural, and cognitive awareness (Clark, 1987). Thus, they may cover a broad range of pedagogical objectives from general outcomes (e.g., improving learners’ communicative competence or developing language skills) through specific ones (e.g., making a hotel reservation or making a travel plan in the target language). A key importance, among other things, lies in the explicit statements directing how task participants manipulate given materials and implying what the results of a certain experience will be. Another point worth noting is that goals should properly reflect learners’ needs and interests in order to stimulate their potential motivation of language use.

2) Input Data

Input data refers to verbal or non-verbal materials, which task participants have to deal

with when performing a task. While verbal materials may be spoken or written language, non-verbal materials include pictures, photos, diagrams, charts, maps, etc. Actually, input



91

data can be derived from a wide range of sources in a real world context. For instance, Hover (1986) suggested the long list illustrating all kinds of written sources which exist around us, and Brosnan, Brown and Hood (1984) pointed out the richness and variety of texts that learners will need to face in real life situations. For verbal materials, Brown and Yule (1983) indicated that dialogue texts containing description or instruction, all other things being equal, are much easier for learners to comprehend and manipulate than non- dialogue texts including arguments or abstract concepts. It partially suggests that the proportional representation of dialogue and non-dialogue texts should be considered in order to help learners to evenly develop both written and spoken forms of language. In relation to the status of non-verbal materials in task-based activities, on the other hand, it has been argued that visual materials including illustrated pictures and realistic photos play a complementary role in helping learners to guess the contents of given verbal materials based on communication strategies. In short, input data, which task participants are supposed to comprehend and manipulate in language learning process, should reflect learners’ needs and interests in terms of positively encouraging the use of the target language.

3) Classroom Settings

Every task is performed in a certain environment, which chiefly refers to classroom

arrangements in an EFL context. In relation to classroom settings, Wright (1987) suggested the different ways in which learners might be grouped physically based on individual, pair, small group, and whole class mode. For the relationship between task participants’ roles and each setting, Anderson and Lynch (1988) advocated the effectiveness of group work compared to that of individual work for general pedagogic reasons (e.g., increasing the cooperation and cohesiveness among learners), and Pica and Doughty (1985) mentioned the positive role of group work in promoting a linguistic environment likely to assist L2 learning. In an experimental study of language learning settings, on the other hand, Li and Adamson (1992) indicated that advanced students preferred individual work to group or whole class work based on their beliefs that group activities would not be helpful in improving their academic grades.

As mentioned above, the research results of classroom settings showed some mixed findings. Thus, it suggests that classroom arrangement should be flexible rather than fixed for task participants to make use of different settings in different learning situations, and that roles for the teacher should be dynamic in order to control class modes.

4) Activity Types

The literature review of task-based research shows that many studies of activity have


Jeon, In-Jae

92

been concentrated on exploring activity typologies that best stimulate interactive language use in real world or classroom situations. One of the most general classifications was proposed by Prabhu (1987), based on three principal activity types including information gap, reasoning gap, and opinion gap activity. While Clark (1987) suggested seven broad communicative activity types derived from communicative task goals in real world context, Pattison (1987) proposed seven activity types focused on classroom practice: questions and answers; dialogues and role-plays; matching activities; communication strategies; pictures and picture stories; puzzles and problems; discussions and decisions.

For the most helpful activity in facilitating L2 learning, on the other hand, there have existed some various findings among researchers. Pica and Doughty (1985), for instance, found that so-called two-way information gap games (e.g., all learners in a group discussion have unique information to contribute) stimulated significantly more modified interactions than one-way information gap activities (e.g., one member of the group possesses all the relevant information). Crookall and Oxford (1990) indicated that the effective use of role-plays added variety to the kinds of activities students were asked to perform by encouraging them to develop and practice new language and creating the motivation and involvement necessary for real learning to occur. Grellet (1981) proposed that learners could develop flexible communication strategies through matching activities based on inferring the meaning of unknown elements. In short, researchers’ findings revealed that each activity type had its own strengths to facilitate language learning helping learners develop their specific strategies.

5) Activity Themes

Activity theme, the subject matter to be taught, is chiefly concerned with learners’ needs,

interests, and abilities. Students and teachers alike enjoy reading and writing about topics and ideas that are interesting and challenging because such themes increase confidence, expand concepts, and foster positive attitudes about learning (Cooper, 1993; Walmsley, 1994; Willis, 1995). For intrinsic motivation-driven themes, Haas (1999) indicated they could provide learners with opportunities to think critically and negotiate meaning by involving them as interactive participants in the process of language learning. In light of this, however well organized task-based materials they may be, learners can be hardly expected to actively participate in performing tasks if they feel unfamiliar with or have difficulty comprehending the content of given materials. In other words, learners are likely to use the target language most effectively by manipulating their preferred subjects because they might develop some positive attitudes towards achieving emotional engagement. More importantly, learners’ affective development can be enriched when they are exposed to a broad range of interesting themes from daily routines through integrated cultures (e.g.,



93

leisure and sports, literature and arts, science and information, cross-cultural differences, etc.).

III. RESEARCH DESIGN The purpose of this study is to propose some meaningful considerations for

communicative material development by exploring the aspects of task-based materials and performance in the Korean EFL environment. For this purpose two studies were conducted. The first one was to quantitatively analyze task-based materials in high school English textbooks based on the qualitative analysis criteria presented by Nunan’s (1989) theory of task components. The second study was to review the level of participants’ satisfaction with their task-based performance through questionnaire research.

Study 1: Text Analysis of Task-based Materials

1. Description of the Study

The target text for the present study was task-based materials within a total of 12 high

school English textbooks for first year students in Korea. Current English textbooks in use for Korean secondary school settings were reportedly designed in accordance with the basic philosophy of the 7th national curriculum for English aimed at improving learners’ communicative competence through activity-oriented language use in classrooms.

For an analytic study of task-based materials, two methods were applied. First, the number of tasks in textbooks was examined with reference to an activity in which the learner is expected to use the target language based on one or more than one of the four language skills in order to achieve linguistic competence. My findings revealed that the textbooks contained a total of 400 tasks on average ranging from a minimum of 312 through a maximum of 508. Second, each task was reviewed based on four different categories (including input data, classroom settings, activity types, and activity themes) and its rate of distribution was compared respectively in each textbook. For text analysis of task-based materials, some qualitative criteria based on Nunan’s (1989) theory of task components were proposed as the following:

1. Input data: distribution of verbal and non-verbal materials

verbal materials (dialogue and non-dialogue text) non-verbal materials (illustrated pictures, realistic photos, informative signals)

2. Classroom settings: distribution of each setting


Jeon, In-Jae

94

individual work, pair work, group work 3. Activity types: distribution of each activity type

audio-visual related (matching or describing through audio-visual materials) communication related (exchanging opinions, information-gap games, role-plays) value judgment related (judging true & false, comparing or classifying the contents) problem solving (activities involving planning or discussions to solve problems)

4. Activity themes: distribution of each activity theme daily routine, value education, literature and arts, science and information, leisure and sports, cultural understanding

The following illustrates an example for text analysis of task-based materials. Practice the dialogue with your partner and fill in the blanks.

A: Good morning, Rainbow Bank. B: Can I speak to Nick Enders? A: I’m sorry, but he’s not in the office right now. B: When do you expect him back? A: He should be back by two.

Would you like to leave a message? B: Yes, please. This is Karen Lee.

Would you please ask him to call me? My number is 598-5555.

A: I’ll give him the message as soon as he gets back.B: Thank you.

For ____________________ Date Time _______ While you were out From __________________ Phone No. ______________

TELEPHONED PLEASE CALL BACK WANTS TO SEE YOU WILL CALL AGAIN RETURNED YOUR CALL

Message ________________

(Textbook K, p.96) For the analysis of task-based materials mentioned above, each task is represented as

one unit of analysis. Input data is represented by a dialogue text and an informative signal, while the classroom setting is pair work. The activity type is communication-related and the activity theme concerns daily routines.

2. Analysis Results

1) Input Data

As previously mentioned, input data includes verbal or non-verbal materials, which task



95

participants comprehend and manipulate in performing tasks. Table 1 presents a conspicuous feature that all textbooks commonly contained much more non-dialogue texts than dialogue ones. This partially infers that written forms of language were emphasized at the tenth level of the national curriculum for English (the first year of high school) based on a focus placed on spoken forms of language during the third through the ninth level (elementary and middle school). While most dialogue texts in textbooks were matched with visual materials such as pictures, photos, and signals so that learners could perform listening or speaking tasks, non-dialogue texts were chiefly concerned with a variety of exercises derived from sources in a real world context.

TABLE 1

Distribution of Verbal Materials Criteria A B C D E F G H I J K L

Dialogue text 84 (19.2)

63 (15.7)

102(21.7)

132(31.7)

95(22.7)

111(23.5)

82(26.3)

129(33.1)

123(24.2)

87(21.9)

152 (35.1)

114 (27.0)

Non-dialogue text 353 (80.8)

339 (84.3)

369(78.3)

284(68.3)

324(77.3)

361(76.5)

230(73.7)

261(66.9)

385(75.8)

311 (78.1)

281 (64.9)

308 (73.0)

Total 437 (100)

402 (100)

471(100)

416(100)

419(100)

472(100)

312(100)

390(100)

508(100)

398 (100)

433 (100)

422 (100)

Note: A~L= a total number of 12 high school English textbooks Table 2 shows a distribution of non-verbal materials including illustrated pictures, realistic

photos, and informative signals (charts & diagrams). It is noticeable that the amount of non-verbal materials increased greatly and their types varied strikingly compared to those in textbooks of the 6th national curriculum for English. Specifically, more than 60% of illustrated pictures, 30% of realistic photos, and less than 10% of informative signals were distributed in most textbooks. Given the complementary role of non-verbal materials in task performance, the authenticity of input data needs to be considered in terms of the harmonious relevance between verbal materials and non-verbal ones.

TABLE 2

Distribution of Non-verbal Materials Criteria A B C D E F G H I J K L

Illustrated pictures 273 (72.6)

103 (42.9)

153(67.2)

230(68.9)

241(57.2)

319(64.7)

291(66.9)

327(62.3)

360(63.9)

291 (63.7)

153 (44.9)

262 (77.3)

Realistic photos 65 (17.3)

114 (47.5)

57(25.0)

84(25.1)

122(29.0)

142(28.8)

113(26.0)

154(29.3)

165(29.3)

145 (31.7)

121 (35.5)

59 (17.4)

Informative signals 38 (10.1)

23 (9.6)

18(7.8)

20(6.0)

58(13.8)

32(6.5)

31(7.1)

44(8.4)

38(6.8)

21 (4.6)

67 (19.6)

18 (5.3)

Total 376 (100)

240 (100)

228(100)

334(100)

421(100)

493(100)

435(100)

525(100)

563(100)

457 (100)

341 (100)

339 (100)

Note: A~L= a total number of 12 high school English textbooks


Jeon, In-Jae

96

2) Classroom Settings For distribution of classroom settings, Table 3 indicates that textbooks are mostly

comprised of individual work (approx. 80%), a little pair work (approx. 15%), and a marginal amount of group work (approx. 5%). It proves that individual work, which has long been a mainstream teaching mode in traditional classrooms, is still preferred for such reasons as being helpful in explaining grammar rules and effectively controlling learners’ activities. Yet the increased presentation of group work, which has been considered to have the benefit of promoting social interaction and collaborative learning in communicative classrooms, needs to be considered in that too much individual work is likely to take some of the positive attributes of exercises away from task participants by making the activities monotonous or tedious. It also implies that teachers who wish to use a task-based approach in their classroom are often required to redesign learning materials in textbooks, which are chiefly based on structural or functional syllabus, to be in accordance with the principles of task-based syllabus.

TABLE 3

Distribution of Classroom Settings

Criteria A B C D E F G H I J K L

Individual work 360 (82.4)

327 (81.3)

375(79.6)

336(80.8)

315(75.2)

378(80.1)

257(82.4)

278(71.3)

398(78.4)

328(82.4)

325 (75.1)

327 (77.5)

Pair work 59 (13.5)

54 (13.5)

65(13.8)

58(13.9)

80(19.1)

72(15.3)

42(13.5)

102(26.2)

85(16.7)

60(15.1)

71 (16.4)

83 (19.6)

Group work 18 (4.1)

21 (5.2)

31(6.6)

22(5.3)

24(5.7)

22(4.6)

13(4.1)

10(2.5)

25(4.9)

10(2.5)

37 (8.5)

12 (2.9)

Total 437 (100)

402 (100)

471(100)

416(100)

419(100)

472(100)

312(100)

390(100)

508(100)

398(100)

433 (100)

422 (100)


3) Activity Types Table 4 shows a distribution of four major activity types concerning audio-visual,

communication, value judgment, and problem solving. While more than 40% of activity types were communication related (e.g., role-plays, exchanging opinions, information-gap games, etc.), problem solving related activities (e.g., activities involving planning or discussions before making a decision) were extremely small (approx. 5%). Audio-visual related activities (e.g., matching or describing through audio-visual materials) and value judgment related (e.g., judging true & false, comparing or classifying the contents) were 25% or so respectively.



97

As previously mentioned, each activity type has its own strengths to help task participants develop their own communication strategies. Therefore, a variety of activity types ranging from simple communicative acts such as asking and answering to more complicated ones involving abstract thinking processes need to be presented proportionally so that learners can accumulate a wide range of experiences for the actual use of target language.

TABLE 4

Distribution of Activity Types for Task-based Performance


Audio-visual related

106 (24.3)

88 (21.9)

142(30.1)

76(18.3)

97(23.2)

118(25.0)

71(22.8)

84(21.5)

141(27.8)

98(24.6)

116 (26.8)

142 (33.7)

Communication related

185 (42.3)

173 (43.0)

206(43.8)

195(46.9)

198(47.3)

213(45.1)

148(47.4)

192(49.2)

196(38.6)

175(44.0)

198 (45.7)

187 (44.3)

Value judgment related

110 (25.2)

126 (31.3)

96(20.3)

106(25.4)

89(21.2)

110(23.3)

81(26.0)

108(27.7)

140(27.5)

112(28.1)

97 (22.4)

82 (19.4)

Problem solving related

36 (8.2)

15 (3.8)

27(5.8)

39(9.4)

35(8.3)

31(6.6)

12(3.8)

6 (1.6)

31(6.1)

13(3.3)

22 (5.1)

11 (2.6)

Total 437 (100)

402 (100)

471(100)

416(100)

419(100)

472(100)

312(100)

390(100)

508(100)

398(100)

433 (100)

422 (100)


4) Activity Themes Table 5 presents a distribution of activity themes, which are closely related to

stimulating learners’ needs for performing tasks. Daily routine (40% or so) chiefly concerning school & family life was the prevalent subject in most textbooks, leisure & sports and science & information were 10% or so respectively, and the rest (e.g., value education, literature & arts, cultural understanding, etc.) showed a very small rate of distribution (7% or so respectively). Specifically, a comparatively high distribution of daily routine reflects the necessity for communicative abilities learners are expected to develop and apply in real life context. An extremely low distribution of specific themes (value education and literature & arts), however, needs to be reconsidered in terms of helping learners pursue unbiased affective and cognitive development. More importantly, subjects related to cross-cultural understanding require presentation within a variety of activity themes so that learners can accumulate cultural understanding and experience.


Jeon, In-Jae

98

TABLE 5 Distribution of Activity Themes for Task-based Performance


Daily routine 212 (48.5)

163 (40.5)

177(37.6)

226(54.3)

194(46.3)

234(49.6)

85(27.2)

142(36.4)

159(31.3)

150(37.7)

174 (40.2)

154 (36.5)

Value education 43 (9.8)

25 (6.2)

56(11.9)

23(5.5)

29(6.9)

39(8.3)

28(8.9)

21(5.4)

75(14.7)

27(6.8)

35 (8.1)

50 (11.8)

Literature and arts

12 (2.7)

23 (5.7)

31(6.5)

30(7.2)

25(5.9)

21(4.4)

26(8.3)

34(8.7)

14(2.7)

45(11.3)

23 (5.3)

20 (4.7)

Science and information

60 (13.7)

67 (16.7)

55(11.6)

24(5.8)

36(8.6)

45(9.5)

35(11.2)

60(15.4)

25(4.9)

40(10.1)

37 (8.5)

48 (11.4)

Leisure and sports

43 (9.8)

52 (12.9)

49(10.4)

38(9.1)

43(10.3)

40(8.5)

69(22.1)

59(15.1)

98(19.3)

50(12.6)

62 (14.3)

71 (16.8)

Cultural understanding

21 (4.8)

31 (7.7)

28(5.9)

19(4.5)

25(5.9)

38(8.1)

20(6.4)

33(8.5)

68(13.4)

23(5.8)

54 (12.5)

34 (8.1)

Others 46 (10.5)

41 (10.2)

75(15.9)

56(13.5)

67(15.9)

55(11.6)

49(15.7)

41(10.5)

69(13.6)

63(15.7)

48 (11.1)

45 (10.7)

Total 437 (100)

402 (100)

471(100)

416(100)

419(100)

472(100)

312(100)

390(100)

508(100)

398(100)

433 (100)

422 (100)


3. Discussion The purpose of Study 1 was to quantitatively review task-based materials in high school

English textbooks based on the qualitative analysis criteria presented by Nunan’s (1989) theory of task components. The analysis of data indicated that most learning materials in textbooks were constructed in accordance with the principle of task-based learning and activity-oriented language use, which are closely related to key factors of the 7th national curriculum for English. For input data, it showed that written forms of language were emphasized rather than spoken ones in all textbooks which commonly contained many more non-dialogue texts than dialogues, and that non-verbal materials were derived from a variety of real world sources including illustrated pictures, realistic photos, and informative signals. Regarding classroom settings, textbooks contained too much individual work compared to the extremely small number of pair or group work, and thus, it suggested that more group work containing problem-solving procedures should be presented in terms of giving learners some opportunities to be involved in social interaction through negotiation of meaning. For activity types and themes, it also suggested that a variety of activity types and themes should be distributed proportionally so that learners can be naturally exposed to a wide range of linguistic experiences for language use. Finally, the implication of Study 1 represents that text analysis of task-based materials should be followed by a kind of field investigation concerning task participants’ beliefs and experiences in order to verify the



99

effectiveness of task-based performance.

Study 2: Investigation on Field Validity of Task Performance

1. Description of the Study The purpose of Study 2 was to explore the field validity of task-based performance

through questionnaire research. From text analysis of Study 1, it was revealed that a total of 12 high school English textbooks for first year students, which are currently used nationwide for a compulsory tenth grade course in Korean high schools, were designed in accordance with some key factors (e.g., the actual use of target language through task-based activities) of the 7th national curriculum for English aimed at improving learners’ communicative competence. Thus, it would provide some meaningful insight for communicative material writers to review the level of task participants’ (teachers and students in classroom practices) satisfaction with task performance in their fieldwork.

The target subjects of Study 2 were 144 teachers and 496 students of 25 Korean high schools in large and small cities. Among the 144 teachers from 20 different schools, 47 (33%) were male and 97 (67%) were female. A total of 496 students from 5 different schools took part in the administration of the survey. As the teachers and students were chosen from the tenth level of the national curriculum for English (the first year of high school), all of them had been using one of the first year high school English textbooks (e.g., one out of the 12 approved textbooks) for over one year. It was thought that they had some common experience of task performance as the textbooks in use were first introduced in March of 2002. The data collection was carried out from November through December of 2003.

Survey questions were designed using five different categories (e.g., goals and rationale, input data, classroom settings, activity types, and activity themes) followed by a total number of 16 specific items based on Nunan’s (1989) checklist for evaluating communicative tasks. The questionnaire for data collection consisted of two sections. In the first section task-based terms (e.g., task-based activity, input data, task type, etc.) were explained to help task participants answer the questions. The second section was developed in order to explore participants’ beliefs and experiences about task performance. Questionnaire items were composed of a five-point scale from strong disagreement to strong agreement, three classroom settings, four activity types, and six activity themes. The total number of items were sixteen.

The program SPSS WIN 11.0 including frequency distribution and chi-square analysis, which are applied to capture the difference of responses between teachers and students, was used in order to analyze the data.


Jeon, In-Jae

100

2. Investigation Results

1) Goals and Rationale Table 6 presents a percentage comparison of task participants’ responses to the three

questions on task goals and rationale, which are crucial components in designing communicative tasks. For item 1, it is remarkable that task-based activities provided task participants with some favorable starting point in language learning by positively stimulating the needs for intrinsic motivation (T:51.5%, S:48.8%). In application of task- based learning to the real-world context, item 2 showed that there existed a considerable discrepancy between teachers’ and students’ views (p<.001). While 42.7% of teachers believe that task-based activities encourage learners to apply classroom learning to the real world, 48.2% of students disagree with the assumption that task-based activities promote the application of classroom learning to real-life situations. Given the significance of describing goals, which is believed to play an important role in guaranteeing successful task-based activities, item 3 conveys the implication that both teachers (54.6%) and students (42.0%) are satisfied with the explicit statements and the clear expressions of communicative goals.

TABLE 6

Field Validity of Goals and Rationale

Questionnaire items Task

participants(n)

Strongly agree

%

Agree

%

Undecided

%

Disagree

%

Strongly disagree

% p

1. Task-based activities are likely to be interesting and motivating

T(144) S(496)

5.1 8.5

46.440.3

37.5 24.4

10.5 23.3

0.5 3.5 *.042

2. Task-based activities encourage participants to apply classroom learning to the real world

T(144) S(496)

4.5 0.8

38.215.7

36.1 35.3

14.6 36.5

6.6 11.7 ***.000

3. Goals of task-based activities are clear and obvious to participants

T(144) S(496)

11.2 7.5

43.434.5

28.9 36.4

13.7 19.1

2.8 2.5 *.039

Note: T= teacher, S=student, *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001

2) Input Data Table 7 displays task participants’ awareness about the aspects of verbal and non-verbal

input data serving as the practical sources to implement task-based activities in language learning classrooms. For the question of the difficulty level of verbal input data, some



101

mixed views were shown (p<.001); while 42.3% of teachers responded that the familiarity and complexity of language materials in the text of task-based activities were appropriate for their students’ proficiency, 36.9% of students were unsatisfied with the language materials. On the contrary, more than half of respondents (T:56.9%, S:54.9%) showed a great deal of satisfaction with the addition of non-verbal materials (e.g., pictures, photos, diagrams, graphs, etc.). For item 6 questioning the arrangement between verbal and non-verbal data, teachers (58.0%) rather than students (30.1%) believed that they were well organized in accordance with the principle of mutual complement (p<.001). In the relation between input data and collaborative language learning in item 7, task participants’ opinions were split into the extremes (p<.001). While 38.9% of teachers agreed with the assumption that input data activates and promotes collaborative language learning, 49.7% of students disagreed.

TABLE 7

Field Validity of Input Data


participants(n)

Strongly agree

%

Agree

%

Undecided

%

Disagree

%

Strongly disagree

% P

4. The difficulty level of verbal input data is appropriate for task participants

T(144) S(496)

5.6 7.5

36.724.5

38.4 31.1

15.8 23.1

3.5 13.8

***.000

5. The existence of non-verbal input data is useful for task-based activities

T(144) S(496)

12.5 10.7

44.444.2

34.7 27.4

6.9 12.1

1.5 5.6

.052

6. The relationship between verbal and non-verbal input data is well organized

T(144) S(496)

1.7 2.3

56.327.8

36.1 49.3

5.3 17.7

0.6 2.9

***.000

7. Input data positively activates collaborative language learning

T(144) S(496)

3.5 1.8

35.413.8

51.4 34.7

8.3 35.1

1.4 14.6

***.000


3) Classroom Settings Table 8 presents task participants’ responses to four different questions about classroom

arrangement implied in the task-based activities. For item 8, it is noticeable that the most interesting classroom organization to both teachers (53.5%) and students (53.9%) turned out to be small group work, which, among other benefits, encourages the task performers to exchange information, ideas, opinions, and attitudes. Interestingly, a consensus between teachers (60.4%) and students (65.2%) was also shown in the assumption that pair work,


Jeon, In-Jae

102

which has long been used in traditional language classrooms, was most helpful in the case of pattern drills and dialogue practices. Regarding discussions and decision-making processes closely related to problem solving strategies, however, while the great majority of teachers (85.0%) responded that small group work was most useful, students’ opinions varied (p<.001); small group work (46.3%), pair work (36.3%), and individual work (17.4%). When it comes to the teacher’s help and guidance for each classroom setting, a meaningful contrast was revealed; while 66.7% of teachers believed that small group work was most likely to require facilitation and explanation, 55.9% of students indicated individual work (p<.001).

TABLE 8

Field Validity of Classroom Settings


participants(n)

Individual work

%

Pair work

%

Group work

% p

8. The most interesting setting to task participants

T(144) S(496)

13.2 18.9

33.3 27.2

53.5 53.9 .172

9. The most effective setting for sentence pattern drills and dialogue practices

T(144) S(496)

13.2 10.3

60.4 65.2

26.4 24.5 .498

10. The most useful setting for discussions and decision-making processes

T(144) S(496)

5.5 17.4

9.5 36.3

85.0 46.3 ***.000

11. The setting which is most likely to need teacher’s help and guidance

T(144) S(496)

12.5 55.9

20.8 24.5

66.7 19.6 ***.000

Note: T= teacher, S=student, *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 The responses to item 9, 10, and 11 represent that different learning situations require

different classroom settings, which need to be properly controlled by the teacher as a facilitator of task-based activities. For one thing, given a language classroom composed of students with mixed levels of language proficiency and different linguistic experience, the roles of teachers should be dynamic in activating the use of target language by providing some explicit explanations and arranging proper settings for the difficulty level of tasks.

4) Activity Types

Table 9 presents task participants’ opinions about four principal activity types, which

include audio-visual related, communication related, value judgment, and problem solving activities. The activity type that both teachers (42.8%) and students (38.8%) prefer most turned out to be audio-visual related, while value judgment and problem solving activities



103

were revealed to be the most difficult for task performers (T:37.1%, S:48.6%). Regarding the activity type that is probably most helpful in enhancing communicative competence, 39.3% of teachers and more than half of the students selected communication related activities.

TABLE 9

Field Validity of Activity Types


participants (n)

Audio-visualrelated

%

Communicationrelated

%

Value judgment

%

Problem solving

% p

12. Activity type that participants prefer most

T(144) S(496)

42.8 38.8

36.1 29.2

12.6 6.7

8.5 25.3 ***.000

13. Activity type that participants recognize most difficult to implement

T(144) S(496)

6.9 7.3

23.3 16.1

37.1 28.0

32.7 48.6 ***.000

14. Activity type that participants consider most helpful to enhance communicative competence

T(144) S(496)

16.7 10.3

39.3 52.2

24.6 12.8

19.4 24.7 ***.000

Note: T= teacher, S=student, *p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001 As shown in the Table 9, the activity types that task participants prefer might be quite

different from the ones that they feel are helpful in promoting communicative competence (p<.001). Therefore, communicative task designers must be careful to take into account the strengths each activity type carries so that task performers may be more actively involved in language use.

5) Activity Themes

Table 10 presents task participants’ views of activity themes, which are closely related to

promoting intrinsic motivation for task-based performance. For item 15 and 16, it is noticeable that there existed a considerable discrepancy between teachers’ and students’ preference for activity themes (p<.001). For one thing, while teachers preferred cultural understanding (25.7%) and value education (24.3%), students preferred leisure and sports (41.4%) and daily routine (19.6%). In contrast, daily routine was the least preferred subject for teachers (23.6%) and value education for students (34.8%). As previously mentioned, the ultimate goal of task-based activities concerns helping learners to develop their unbiased


Jeon, In-Jae

104

affective and cognitive domains as well as to acquire communicative competence through language use. In light of this, a variety of themes ranging from daily routines through integrated cultures (e.g., literature and arts, science and information, leisure and sports, cross-cultural understanding, etc.) need to be presented proportionally based on learners’ needs, interests, and abilities.

TABLE 10

Field Validity of Activity Themes

Questionnaire items

Task participants

(n)

Daily routine

%

Value education

%

Literature & arts

%

Science & information

%

Leisure& sports

%

Cultural understanding

% P

15. Participants prefer most

T(144) S(496)

9.7 19.6

24.3 2.2

15.3 8.2

13.2 13.1

11.8 41.4

25.7 15.5 ***.000

16. Participants prefer least

T(144) S(496)

23.6 8.2

9.0 34.8

13.2 24.5

18.8 21.3

22.2 2.9

13.2 8.3 ***.000


3. Discussion Study 2 was conducted to review the level of task participants’ satisfaction for task

performance in language learning classrooms. In light of text analysis of task-based materials in Study 1, the field investigation concerning task participants’ experiences in Study 2 represented some meaningful considerations in five different categories including task goals, input data, classroom settings, activity types, and activity themes. The analysis of questionnaire items showed that task goals and rationale favorably served in motivating task-based activities by using some explicit statements and clear expressions for encouraging task performance. For input data, while a great deal of satisfaction was shown with the addition of non-verbal materials such as illustrated pictures, realistic photos, and informative signals, a considerable discrepancy between teachers’ and students’ views was revealed in the difficulty level of verbal materials, the arrangement of verbal and non-verbal materials, and the activation of collaborative language learning. While the distribution of classroom settings in Study 1 indicated that textbooks were mostly comprised of individual work, the analysis of classroom setting data in Study 2 suggested a general consensus among task participants that the most interesting class mode was small group work. It implies that a teacher’s role should be flexible or dynamic in arranging settings in order to help students to actively participate in language use. It also suggests that teachers are often required to redesign individual work-oriented materials in textbooks to be in accordance with the principles of promoting interaction and collaborative learning because each setting has its own strengths and weaknesses in classroom practice. For



105

activity types, while communication related ones (e.g., role-plays, exchanging opinions, information-gap games, etc.) were believed to be the most helpful in promoting learners’ communicative competence, the activity type that both teachers and students prefer most turned out to be audio-visual related. It represents that task designers who wish to facilitate a task-based approach in communicative language classroom need to consider presenting a variety of communication related activity types which are associated with proper audio- visual materials. The analysis of activity theme data showed that there existed a considerable discrepancy between teachers’ and students’ preference for activity themes. In terms of helping learners to pursue unbiased affective and cognitive development, however, it suggests that a broad range of activity themes, which include subjects related to daily routine through cross-cultural understanding, should be proportionally presented based on learners’ needs and interests.

IV. CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS The concern in the current study was to seek for some meaningful considerations

concerning communicative material development in first year Korean high school English textbooks. For the purpose of exploring the aspects of task-based activities based on materials and performance, two analytic studies were implemented. First, task-based materials in current English textbooks were compared and analyzed by four qualitative criteria of task components. Second, the field validity of task performance was reviewed through questionnaire research focused on the level of task participants’ satisfaction with performance in classroom practices.

The analysis of data in Study 1 and 2 indicates that communicative theory of language learning, which chiefly concerns collaborative learning and social interaction, was properly reflected in the task-based materials of all textbooks. Furthermore, the textbooks were in accordance with the core regulations of the 7th national curriculum for English represented by the principle of task-based learning and activity-oriented language use. It also represents the following implications. First, task goals and rationale should be expressed in explicit statements so that they can encourage the learner’s positive motivation for activities. Second, authenticity of input data including the proper arrangement of verbal and non-verbal materials should be sufficiently considered in terms of real world situations. Third, a greater amount of group work containing problem-solving procedures should be presented rather than individual or pair work related to one-way activities such as simple asking and answering. Fourth, given the reality that Korean EFL classrooms are characterized by different levels of learners’ language proficiency and a large number of students in each class, flexible grouping should be recommended so that the teacher, a


Jeon, In-Jae

106

facilitator and communicator of interaction, can control each setting at all levels for students of all abilities. Finally, a variety of activity types and themes should be distributed proportionally based on learners’ needs and interests so that learners can accumulate a wide range of linguistic experiences for language use.

In conclude, the ultimate goal of task analysis is to create some useful foundation for designing tasks to promote learners’ communicative competence in language learning classrooms. Therefore, it is required that the analysis of task-based materials and performance should be followed by a series of experimental studies related to sequencing or grading tasks as well as exploring the roles for teachers and learners in implementing tasks. It will contribute to the development of task-based syllabus design and construction of effective task models in communicative classroom practices.

REFERENCES

Anderson, A., & Lynch, T. (1988). Listening. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Bachman, L. (2002). Some reflections on task-based language performance assessment.

Language Testing, 19, 453-476. Bingham-Wesche, M., & Skehan, P. (2002). Communicative, task-based, and content-

based language instruction. In R. B. Kaplan (Ed.), Oxford handbook of applied linguistics (pp. 207-228). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Bonk, W. J., & Ockey, G. J. (2003). A many-facet rasch analysis of the second language group oral discussion task. Language Testing, 20(1), 89-110.

Breen, M. P. (1987). Learner contribution to task design. N.J.: Prentice Hall. Brosnan, D., & Brown, K., & Hood, S. (1984). Reading in context. Adelaide: National

Curriculum Resource Centre. Brown, G., & Yule, G. (1983). Teaching the spoken language. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press. Candlin, C. N., & Murphy, D. F. (1987). Language learning tasks. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.:

Prentice Hall International. Clark, J. (1987). Curriculum renewal in school foreign language learning. Oxford: Oxford

University Press. Cooper, J. D. (1993). Literacy: Helping children construct meaning (2nd ed.). Boston:

Houghton Mifflin Company. Crookall, D., & Oxford, R. L. (1990). Linking language learning and simulation/gaming.

In D. Crookall & R. L. Oxford (Eds.), Simulation, gaming, and language learning (pp. 3-24). New York: Newbury House.

Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University



107

Press. Grellet, F. (1981). Developing reading skills. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Guariento, W., & Morley, J. (2001). Text and task authenticity in the EFL classroom. ELT

Journal, 55(4), 347-353. Guilloteaux, M. J. (2004). Korean teachers’ practical understandings of CLT. English

Teaching, 59(3), 53-76. Haas, M. (1999). Thematic, communicative language teaching and learning: Case studies

of FLES teachers and their classes. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Teachers College, Columbia University.

Hover, D. (1986). Think twice: Teacher’s book. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Kim, Hae-Ri. (2004). Exploring the role of a teacher in a literature-based EFL classroom

through communicative language teaching. English Teaching, 59(3), 29-52. Li, A. K., & Adamson, G. (1992). Gifted secondary students’ preferred learning style:

Cooperative, competitive, or individualistic. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 16(1), 46-54.

Long, M., & Crookes, G. (1991). Three approaches to task-based syllabus design. TESOL Quarterly, 26(1), 27-56.

Mennim, P. (2003). Rehearsed oral L2 output and reactive focus on form. ELT Journal, 57(2), 130-138.

Nunan, D. (1989). Designing tasks for the communicative classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Pachler, N. (2000). Re-examining communicative language teaching. In K. Field (Ed.), Issues in modern foreign languages teaching (pp. 22-37). London: Routledge.

Pattison, P. (1987). Developing communication skills. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Pica, T., & Doughty, C. (1985). The role of groupwork in classroom second language acquisition. Studies Second Language Acquisition, 7, 233-248.

Prabhu, N. S. (1987). Second language pedagogy: A perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Savignon, S. J. (2002). Communicative language teaching: Linguistic theory and classroom practice. In S. J. Savignon (Ed.), Interpreting communicative language teaching: Contexts and concerns in teacher education (pp. 1-27). London: Yale University Press.

Seedhouse, P. (1999). Task-based interaction. ELT Journal, 53(3), 149-156. Skehan, P. (1996). A framework for the implementation of task-based instruction. Applied

Linguistics, 17(1), 38-62. Taylor, M. E. (2003). Using collateral material to improve writing performance. ELT

Journal, 57(2), 149-157.


Jeon, In-Jae

108

Tin, T. B. (2003). Does talking with peers help learning? The role of expertise and talk in convergent group discussion tasks. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 2(1), 53-66.

Tomlinson, B. (2003). Materials evaluation. In B. Tomlinson (Ed.), Developing materials for language teaching (pp. 15-36). London: Continuum.

Tudor, I. (2001). The dynamics of the language classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Walmsley, S. (1994). Children exploring their world: Theme teaching in elementary school. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Weigle, S. (2002). Assessing writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Willis, J. (1996). A framework for task-based learning. London: Longman. Willis, S. (1995). Refocusing the curriculum: Making interdisciplinary efforts work. ASCD

Education Update, 37(1), 1-8. Wright, T. (1987). Roles of teachers and learners. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

APPENDIX List of High School English Textbooks

A: 김덕기, 배종언, 안동환, 최종욱, 안병규, 오준일, Anna, 강대철, 신인숙, 김서령. (2001).

HIGH SCHOOL ENGLISH. 서울: (주)금성출판사. B: 이기동, 이정화, 구은영, Sybil. (2001). HIGH SCHOOL ENGLISH. 서울: (주)능률영어사. C: 이찬승, 김혜영, 박영걸, 김명주, Thomas R. Field. (2001). HIGH SCHOOL ENGLISH. 서

울: (주)능률영어사. D: 강흥립, 이민호, 임호열, 신현주, 김강일. (2001). HIGH SCHOOL ENGLISH. 서울: (주)대

한교과서. E: 박영식, 윤정석, 박기원, Stephen R. Piercy. (2001). HIGH SCHOOL ENGLISH. 서울: 법문사. F: 신정현, 황혜숙, 정상준, Leah Miller. (2001). HIGH SCHOOL ENGLISH. 서울: (주)시사영어

사. G: 임병빈, 강용구, 연준흠, 유철, 송해성. (2001). HIGH SCHOOL ENGLISH. 서울: (주)장원

교육. H: 김충배, 최인철, 길준광, 이석. (2001). HIGH SCHOOL ENGLISH. 서울: (주)중앙교육진흥

연구소. I: 이맹성, 황적륜, 김영석, 김길중, 양현권, 김진완, 송민영. (2001). HIGH SCHOOL ENGLISH.

서울: (주)지학사. J: 이병민, 박기화, Kyongjoo H. Ryou, 한정근, 이재원. (2001). HIGH SCHOOL ENGLISH. 서

울: (주)천재교육. K: 이흥수, 전병만, 차경환, 이영식, 신동일, 김석수. (2001). HIGH SCHOOL ENGLISH. 서



109

울: (주)한국교육미디어. L: 김임득, 이병춘, 김기호, 안성호, 김영희. (2001). HIGH SCHOOL ENGLISH. 서울: (주)현

대영어사. Applicable level: secondary education level Key words: task-based language teaching (TBLT), task-based materials, task-based performance, task components, text analysis, task evaluation In-Jae Jeon Dept. of English Language and Literature Mokpo National University 534-729, Dorim-ri, Cheonggye-myeon, Muan-gun, Jeollanam-do, South Korea Tel: (061) 450-2120 / C.P.: 010-3161-8789 Email: [email protected] Received in February, 2005 Reviewed in March, 2005 Revised version received in May, 2005


An Analysis of Task-based Materials and Performance: Focused on...

Documents

Transcript of An Analysis of Task-based Materials and Performance: Focused on...