VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES FALCUTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES LÊ MINH QUÝ APPLICABILITY OF TASK – BASED LANGUAGE TEACHING TO THE TEACHING CONTEXT IN THAI HOA UPPER SECONDARY SCHOOL (KHẢ NĂNG ÁP DỤNG PHƯƠNG PHÁP DẠY HỌC NGÔN NGỮ DỰA VÀO NHIỆM VỤ TRONG BỐI CẢNH TRƯỜNG THPT THÁI HÒA) M.A MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS Field: English Language Teaching Methodology Code: 60.14.10 Hanoi, 2013 VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES FALCUTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES LÊ MINH QUÝ APPLICABILITY OF TASK – BASED LANGUAGE TEACHING TO THE TEACHING CONTEXT IN THAI HOA UPPER SECONDARY SCHOOL (KHẢ NĂNG ÁP DỤNG PHƯƠNG PHÁP DẠY HỌC NGÔN NGỮ DỰA VÀO NHIỆM VỤ TRONG BỐI CẢNH TRƯỜNG THPT THÁI HÒA) M.A MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS Field: English Language Teaching Methodology Code: 60.14.10 Supervisor: Nguyễn Việt Hùng, MA Hanoi , 2013 i CANDIDATE’S STATEMENT I certificate that the minor thesis entitled “Applicability of task-based language teaching to the teaching context in Thai Hoa secondary school” is submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts is the result of my own work This minor thesis or any part of this one has not been submitted for a higher degree to any other university or institution Hanoi, 28th June, 2013 ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First and foremost, I am most grateful to my supervisor, Mr Nguyen Viet Hung MA for his continual support, encouragement, guidance and ideas Without his tireless support, this thesis could not have been completed Secondly, I would like to express my great gratitude to all the teachers and students at Thai Hoa secondary school for their participation and cooperation during the data collection process Thirdly, it is my pleasure to acknowledge my friends, especially Bui Van Hau, , from whom I have received a lot of help, support and encouragement Finally, my sincere thanks go to my family whose support has been of great significance to the success of my thesis iii ABSTRACT Recently task-based language teaching (TBLT) evolving from communicative language instruction has drawn the attention of many researchers towards itself To date, there have not had many studies on applicability of TBLT in a particular context This study has intended to explore the attitudes of students‟ towards TBLT It also seeks the understanding of teachers‟ of TBLT A sample of five teachers and three hundred students participated in this study A questionnaire was used to examine students‟ attitudes towards the friendliness of theoretical issues of TBLT Then, interviews and observations are employed to find out how teachers understand and implement task-based language learning in their classroom The data were analyzed both quantitatively and qualitatively The results of the study showed that while students in general had positive attitudes towards TBLT, teachers lacked conceptualizations of TBLT and their teaching practice did not match TBLT model Therefore, these findings led to the conclusion that it is impossible to apply TBLT to the teaching context in THSS successfully Finally, suggestions were made in order to solve those problems mentioned above: teachers should attend seminars on ELT; they should train themselves through books and articles; there should have had competitions for both teachers and students to enhance teaching and learning English iv LIST OF APPENDICES A QUESTIONNAIRES FOR STUDENTS B INTERVIEW QUESTIONS FOR TEACHERS C OBSERVATION SHEETS D QUANTITATIVE STATISTICAL DATA E INTERVIEW DATA v LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES Tables Table Willis and Skehan‟s views of principles of TBLT Table Ellis and Nunan‟s views of principles of TBLT Table Teachers‟ background information Table Students‟ background information Table Summary of Statistical Models Table Unreliable Items that need being left out the analysis Table Correlation between domains in the whole questionnaire Table Reliability of each domain in the questionnaire Table Factor Analysis of domains in the Questionnaire Table 10 Factor Analysis of Students‟ attitudes towards TBLT Table 11 Descriptive statistics of domains and the whole questionnaire Table 12 Frequency and Percentage of Students‟ Attitude towards domains and TBLT Table 13 Descriptive statistics of Items with unconfirmative answers Table 14 Descriptive statistics of Items with highly confirmative answers Table 15 Descriptive statistics of each item/question in Attitude towards Principles of Teaching domain Table 16 Descriptive statistics of the items in Attitude towards Features of Teaching Table 17 Descriptive statistics of the items in Attitude towards Stages of Teaching Table 18 Descriptive statistics of the items in Attitude towards Techniques of Teaching Table 19 Summary of Mean difference of domains between groups according to age Table 20 Table 21 Table 22 Table 23 Table 24 Table 25 Summary of T-Test Values of Mean difference of domains between groups according to age Summary of Mean difference of domains between groups according to sex Summary of T-Test Values of Mean difference of domains between groups according to sex Mean difference in Attitude towards Task-Based Language Teaching according to Economic condition Multi linear regression analysis of Attitude towards Task-Based Language Teaching Coefficients of multi linear regression analysis of Attitude towards Task- vi Based Language Teaching Table 26 Table 27 Model Summary of multi linear regression analysis of Attitude towards Stages of Teaching ANOVA table of multivariable linear regression analysis of Attitude towards Stages of Teaching Table 28 Teachers‟ conceptualizations of TBLT Table 29 Pros and Cons of Task-based language teaching Table 30 Factors affecting the TBLT implementation Table 31 Summary of teachers‟ classroom practice Table 32 Summary of the results in the questionnaire, semi-structured interview, and classroom observation FIGURES Figure TBL Framework by Willis Figure Attitude towards Task - Based Language Teaching vii LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS THSS Thai Hoa Secondary School TBL Task-Based Learning TBLT Task-Based Language Teaching MOET Ministry of Education and Training CLT Communicative Language Teaching TEFL Teaching English as Foreign Language FL Foreign Language L2 Second Language DT Definition of Task ET Examples of Task TBLTM Task - Based Language Teaching Model TGTBLT Teaching Grammar in Task – Based Language Teaching TBLT vs OTM Task – Based Language Teaching versus Other Teaching Methods T Teachers S Students LC F LE Local Culture Facilities Local Economy viii TABLE OF CONTENT CANDIDATE’S STATEMENTS…………………………………………… i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS…………………………………………………… ii ABSTRACT…………………………………………………………………… iii TABLE OF CONTENTS……………………………………………………… iv LIST OF APPENDICES……………………………………………………… vii LIST OF TABLES…………………………………………………………… viii LIST OF FIGURES…………………………………………………………… ix LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ………………………………………………… x PART A INTRODUCTION………………………………………………… 1.1 Rationale…………………………………………………………………… 1.2 Aim and objectives of the study…………………………………………… 1.3 Research questions………………………………………………………… 1.4 Scope of the study………………………………………………………… 1.5 Significance of the study…………………………………………………… 1.6 Method of the study……………………………………………………… 1.7 Design of the study………………………………………………………… PART B DEVELOPMENT…………………………………………………… Chapter LITERATURE REVIEW………………………………………… 1.1 Theoretical background of TBLT………………………………………… 1.1.1 The learning theory………………………………………………… 1.1.2 Input and learning interactionist theory…………………………… 1.1.3 Communicative language teaching………………………………… 1.1.4 Research on communicative tasks………………………………… Task-based language teaching……………………………………………… 1.2.1 Definition of a task………………………………………………… 1.2.2 Task types………………………………………………………… 11 1.2.3 Teacher‟s roles in TBLT…………………………………………… 12 1.2.4 Some problems in implementing TBLT in Asian context………… 14 Theoretical framework …………………………………………………… 16 1.2 1.3 XLIII N M SD S E df – years 13 17.62 4.011 1.113 – years 74 16.82 3.736 0.434 More than years 213 16.88 3.226 0.221 Total 300 16.90 3.385 F 0.195 297 P-value 0.310 0.733 ANOVA analysis of Attitude towards Features of Teaching Sum of Squares Between Groups df Mean Square 7.141 3.571 Within Groups 3417.859 297 3425.000 P-value 11.508 Total F 0.310 0.733 299 Attitude towards Features of Teaching according to Economic condition in Multiple Comparisons (I) Duration (J) Duration Mean Std Error Sig Difference (I-J) – years 95% Confidence Interval Lower Bound Upper Bound – years 0.791 1.020 0.439 -1.22 2.80 More than years 0.733 0.969 0.450 -1.17 2.64 – years -0.791 1.020 0.439 -2.80 1.22 More than years -0.058 0.458 0.899 -0.96 0.84 More than years – years -0.733 0.969 0.450 -2.64 1.17 – years 0.058 0.458 0.899 -0.84 0.96 – years Appendix 9.5: Mean difference in Attitude towards Stages of Teaching according to learning duration N M SD S E – years 13 55.15 11.335 3.144 – years 74 55.78 9.377 1.090 More than years 212 55.41 9.159 0.629 Total 299 55.49 9.281 0.537 df 296 F 0.054 P-value 0.947 XLIV ANOVA analysis of Attitude towards Stages of Teaching Sum of Squares Between Groups df Mean Square 9.363 4.681 Within Groups 25661.346 296 25670.709 P-value 86.694 Total F 0.054 0.947 298 Attitude towards Stages of Teaching according to Economic condition in Multiple Comparisons (I) Duration (J) Duration Mean Std Error Sig Difference (I-J) – years 95% Confidence Interval Lower Bound Upper Bound – years -0.630 2.800 0.822 -6.14 4.88 More than years -0.252 2.660 0.925 -5.49 4.98 – years 0.630 2.800 0.822 -4.88 6.14 More than years 0.378 1.257 0.764 -2.10 2.85 More than years – years 0.252 2.660 0.925 -4.98 5.49 – years -0.378 1.257 0.764 -2.85 2.10 – years Appendix 9.6: Mean difference in Attitude towards Techniques of Teaching according to learning duration N M SD S E – years 13 21.23 4.850 1.345 – years 74 20.47 4.952 0.576 More than years 213 19.89 3.193 0.219 Total 300 20.09 3.779 df F P-value 297 1.281 0.279 0.218 ANOVA analysis of Attitude towards Techniques of Teaching Sum of Squares Between Groups Within Groups df Mean Square F P-value 36.521 18.260 1.281 0.279 4234.049 297 14.256 XLV ANOVA analysis of Attitude towards Techniques of Teaching Sum of Squares df Mean Square F P-value 36.521 18.260 1.281 0.279 Within Groups 4234.049 297 14.256 Total 4270.570 299 Between Groups Appendix 9.7: Attitude towards Techniques of Teaching according to Economic condition in Multiple Comparisons (I) Duration (J) Duration Mean Std Error Sig Difference (I-J) – years 95% Confidence Interval Lower Bound Upper Bound – years 0.758 1.135 0.505 -1.48 2.99 More than years 1.343 1.079 0.214 -0.78 3.47 – years -0.758 1.135 0.505 -2.99 1.48 More than years 0.586 0.509 0.251 -0.42 1.59 More than years – years -1.343 1.079 0.214 -3.47 0.78 – years -0.586 0.509 0.251 -1.59 0.42 – years Appendix 10: Regression analysis Appendix 10.1: Model Summarye Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std Error of the Estimate 0.930a 0.866 0.865 5.968 0.964b 0.929 0.929 4.343 0.985c 0.970 0.970 2.818 1.000d 1.000 1.000 0.000 a Predictors: (Constant), Attitude towards Stages of Teaching b Predictors: (Constant), Attitude towards Stages of Teaching, Attitude towards Principles of Teaching c Predictors: (Constant), Attitude towards Stages of Teaching, Attitude towards Principles of Teaching, Attitude towards Techniques of Teaching d Predictors: (Constant), Attitude towards Stages of Teaching, Attitude towards Principles of Teaching, Attitude towards Techniques of Teaching, Attitude towards Features of Teaching XLVI Model Summarye Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std Error of the Estimate 0.930a 0.866 0.865 5.968 0.964b 0.929 0.929 4.343 0.985c 0.970 0.970 2.818 1.000d 1.000 1.000 0.000 a Predictors: (Constant), Attitude towards Stages of Teaching b Predictors: (Constant), Attitude towards Stages of Teaching, Attitude towards Principles of Teaching c Predictors: (Constant), Attitude towards Stages of Teaching, Attitude towards Principles of Teaching, Attitude towards Techniques of Teaching d Predictors: (Constant), Attitude towards Stages of Teaching, Attitude towards Principles of Teaching, Attitude towards Techniques of Teaching, Attitude towards Features of Teaching e Dependent Variable: Attitude towards Task-Based Language Teaching Appendix 10.2 ANOVA table of multivariable linear regression analysis of Attitude towards Task-based Language Teaching ANOVAe Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square 68105.898 68105.898 Residual 10576.918 297 78682.816 73099.752 36549.876 5583.064 296 78682.816 Regression 76339.889 25446.630 2342.927 295 78682.816 Regression 78682.816 19670.704 0.000 294 0.000 78682.816 298 3204.007 0.000c 0.000d 298 Residual 0.000b 7.942 Total 1937.783 298 Residual 0.000a 18.862 Total 1912.415 298 Regression Sig 35.613 Total Regression F Residual Total a Predictors: (Constant), Attitude towards Stages of Teaching XLVII b Predictors: (Constant), Attitude towards Stages of Teaching, Attitude towards Principles of Teaching c Predictors: (Constant), Attitude towards Stages of Teaching, Attitude towards Principles of Teaching, Attitude towards Techniques of Teaching d Predictors: (Constant), Attitude towards Stages of Teaching, Attitude towards Principles of Teaching, Attitude towards Techniques of Teaching, Attitude towards Features of Teaching e Dependent Variable: Attitude towards Task-Based Language Teaching Appendix 10.3: Coefficients table of multivariable linear regression analysis of Attitude towards Task-based Language Teaching Coefficientsa Model Unstandardized Standardized Coefficients t Sig Coefficients 13.113 0.000 43.731 0.000 6.441 0.000 B (Constant) Attitude towards Stages of Teaching (Constant) Attitude towards Stages of Teaching Attitude towards Principles of Teaching (Constant) Attitude towards Stages of Teaching Attitude towards Principles of Teaching Attitude towards Techniques of Teaching (Constant) Attitude towards Stages of Teaching Std Error Beta 27.476 2.095 1.629 0.037 11.650 1.809 1.370 0.031 0.783 43.613 0.000 1.188 0.073 0.292 16.271 0.000 3.924 1.234 3.179 0.002 1.162 0.023 0.664 50.826 0.000 1.136 0.047 0.279 23.953 0.000 1.026 0.051 0.239 20.198 0.000 4.306E-14 0.000 0.000 1.000 1.000 0.000 2.296E8 0.000 0.930 0.571 XLVIII Attitude towards Principles of Attitude towards Techniques of Teaching Attitude towards Features of Teaching 1.000 0.000 0.246 1.180E8 0.000 1.000 0.000 0.233 1.117E8 0.000 1.000 Teaching 0.000 0.208 9.749E7 0.000 a Dependent Variable: Attitude towards Task-Based Language Teaching Appendix 10.4: Residual Statistics table of multivariable linear regression analysis of Attitude towards Taskbased Language Teaching Residuals Statisticsa Minimum Maximum Mean Std Deviation N Predicted Value 57.00 169.00 117.86 16.249 299 Residual 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 299 -3.745 3.147 0.000 1.000 299 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 299 Std Predicted Value Std Residual a Dependent Variable: Attitude towards Task-Based Language Teaching Appendix 10.5 Model Summary of multiple linear regression analysis of Attitude towards Stages of Teaching Model Summaryq Model R R Square Adjusted R Square Std Error of the Estimate 0.640a 0.409 0.407 7.146 0.756b 0.572 0.569 6.094 0.818c 0.669 0.666 5.366 0.863d 0.745 0.741 4.722 0.900e 0.810 0807 4.078 0.923f 0.853 0.850 3.600 0.938g 0.879 0.877 3.261 0.950h 0.903 0.901 2.924 0.963i 0.927 0.925 2.544 XLIX 10 0.970j 0.941 0.939 2.290 11 0.976k 0.952 0.950 2.069 12 0.982l 0.965 0.964 1.767 13 0.987m 0.973 0.972 1.551 14 0.991n 0.982 0.981 1.289 15 0.995o 0.991 0.990 0.912 16 1.000p 1.000 1.000 0.000 a Predictors: (Constant), Q32 b Predictors: (Constant), Q32, Q27 c Predictors: (Constant), Q32, Q27, Q30 d Predictors: (Constant), Q32, Q27, Q30, Q19 e Predictors: (Constant), Q32, Q27, Q30, Q19, Q22 f Predictors: (Constant), Q32, Q27, Q30, Q19, Q22, Q23 g Predictors: (Constant), Q32, Q27, Q30, Q19, Q22, Q23, Q18 h Predictors: (Constant), Q32, Q27, Q30, Q19, Q22, Q23, Q18, Q28 i Predictors: (Constant), Q32, Q27, Q30, Q19, Q22, Q23, Q18, Q28, Q29 j Predictors: (Constant), Q32, Q27, Q30, Q19, Q22, Q23, Q18, Q28, Q29, Q33 k Predictors: (Constant), Q32, Q27, Q30, Q19, Q22, Q23, Q18, Q28, Q29, Q33, Q21 l Predictors: (Constant), Q32, Q27, Q30, Q19, Q22, Q23, Q18, Q28, Q29, Q33, Q21, Q25 m Predictors: (Constant), Q32, Q27, Q30, Q19, Q22, Q23, Q18, Q28, Q29, Q33, Q21, Q25, Q26 n Predictors: (Constant), Q32, Q27, Q30, Q19, Q22, Q23, Q18, Q28, Q29, Q33, Q21, Q25, Q26, Q31 o Predictors: (Constant), Q32, Q27, Q30, Q19, Q22, Q23, Q18, Q28, Q29, Q33, Q21, Q25, Q26, Q31, Q20 p Predictors: (Constant), Q32, Q27, Q30, Q19, Q22, Q23, Q18, Q28, Q29, Q33, Q21, Q25, Q26, Q31, Q20, Q17 q Dependent Variable: Attitude towards Stages of Teaching Appendix10 ANOVA table of multivariable linear regression analysis of Attitude towards Stages of Teaching Model Sum of Squares df Mean Square 10506.215 10506.215 Residual 15164.494 297 25670.709 14677.505 205.767 000a 197.601 000b 298 Regression Sig 51.059 Total Regression F 7338.752 L Residual 296 Total 25670.709 298 Regression 17176.539 5725.513 8494.170 295 28.794 Total 25670.709 298 Regression 19114.955 4778.739 6555.754 294 22.298 Total 25670.709 298 Regression 20797.731 4159.546 4872.978 293 16.631 Total 25670.709 298 Regression 21885.441 3647.574 3785.268 292 12.963 Total 25670.709 298 Regression 22575.535 3225.076 3095.174 291 10.636 Total 25670.709 298 Regression 23191.623 2898.953 2479.086 290 8.549 Total 25670.709 298 Regression 23799.771 2644.419 1870.938 289 6.474 Total 25670.709 298 Regression 24159.989 10 2415.999 1510.720 288 5.246 Total 25670.709 298 Regression 24442.563 11 2222.051 1228.146 287 4.279 Total 10993.204 25670.709 298 Regression 24777.687 12 Residual Residual Residual Residual Residual Residual Residual 10 Residual 11 Residual 12 37.139 2064.807 198.845 000c 214.308 000d 250.103 000e 281.378 000f 303.213 000g 339.115 000h 408.478 000i 460.580 000j 519.261 000k 661.277 000l LI Residual 286 Total 25670.709 298 Regression 24985.408 13 1921.954 685.301 285 2.405 Total 25670.709 298 Regression 25198.602 14 1799.900 472.107 284 1.662 Total 25670.709 298 Regression 25435.130 15 1695.675 235.579 283 832 Total 13 893.022 25670.709 298 Regression 25670.709 16 1604.419 000 282 000 25670.709 298 Residual 14 Residual 15 Residual 16 Residual Total 3.122 799.294 000m 1082.746 000n 2037.009 000o 000p a Predictors: (Constant), Q32 b Predictors: (Constant), Q32, Q27 c Predictors: (Constant), Q32, Q27, Q30 d Predictors: (Constant), Q32, Q27, Q30, Q19 e Predictors: (Constant), Q32, Q27, Q30, Q19, Q22 f Predictors: (Constant), Q32, Q27, Q30, Q19, Q22, Q23 g Predictors: (Constant), Q32, Q27, Q30, Q19, Q22, Q23, Q18 h Predictors: (Constant), Q32, Q27, Q30, Q19, Q22, Q23, Q18, Q28 i Predictors: (Constant), Q32, Q27, Q30, Q19, Q22, Q23, Q18, Q28, Q29 j Predictors: (Constant), Q32, Q27, Q30, Q19, Q22, Q23, Q18, Q28, Q29, Q33 k Predictors: (Constant), Q32, Q27, Q30, Q19, Q22, Q23, Q18, Q28, Q29, Q33, Q21 l Predictors: (Constant), Q32, Q27, Q30, Q19, Q22, Q23, Q18, Q28, Q29, Q33, Q21, Q25 m Predictors: (Constant), Q32, Q27, Q30, Q19, Q22, Q23, Q18, Q28, Q29, Q33, Q21, Q25, Q26 n Predictors: (Constant), Q32, Q27, Q30, Q19, Q22, Q23, Q18, Q28, Q29, Q33, Q21, Q25, Q26, Q31 o Predictors: (Constant), Q32, Q27, Q30, Q19, Q22, Q23, Q18, Q28, Q29, Q33, Q21, Q25, Q26, Q31, Q20 p Predictors: (Constant), Q32, Q27, Q30, Q19, Q22, Q23, Q18, Q28, Q29, Q33, Q21, Q25, Q26, Q31, Q20, Q17 LII q Dependent Variable: Attitude towards Stages of Teaching E INTERVIEW DATA Some model transcripts of teacher interviews (two in five interviews) Name: Teacher Interview Question about Teachers’ Perceptions of Task-Based language Teaching (TBLT ) How you understand by task-based language teaching? (Probing indicators: terminology, approaches, framework, principles, techniques…) In my view, task-based language teaching is based on the aims of each unit and there are more specific aims in every lesson to help students to understand easily For example, techniques used in listening lessons are guessing meaning and gap-filling information Can you give an example of tasks? (Probing indicators: Maybe tasks you have carried out with your students…) I take an example about textbooks in grade 12 Students can both read and answer questions in a reading lesson Do you often employ tasks in your teaching? If so, what kinds, and how effective are they? (Probing indicators: communicative task, problem-solving task, gap-information task, language practice task…) While teaching a foreign language, I usually employ tasks For example, communicative tasks and language practice tasks + How effective are they? Of course, when I ask my students such tasks, they are able to develop their language ability and easy to learn Do you know the teaching instruction model in you textbooks is in TBLT? (Probing indicators: Model of language teaching? How many models you know? What is teaching model of CLT? ) I think that the teaching instruction model in textbooks consists of three stages + Do you hear or understand the method mentioned? LIII Although I actually employ it, I not spend much time studying it carefully What you think are positive elements and negative elements of task-based teaching? On the positive side, I think that this method helps students acquire knowledge actively, and students can control situations For example, students are able to read and answer questions in a reading lesson by themselves + Which kinds of skills will students develop when they employ TBL? I think that TBL develops skills such as speaking skill + What about negative elements? Besides advantages that I have just mentioned, TBLT still remains some disadvantages For example, I teach in a mountainous school in which most of my students are ethnic minority Therefore, they are often timid and shy to communicate, which leads to the passiveness in studying a language How many stages you usually go through when you teach according to TBLT? What you in the post task stage of task cycle? (Probing indicators: Remember the lessons you have taught; the design in textbooks…) I think that I go through three stages when I teach according to TBLT In the post-stage, I usually ask them to practise other skills For example, I use the skill of previous lesson to direct students to a new lesson What are the main issues in classroom implementation of tasks? (Probing indicators: Task‟s goals, task procedure, task doing…) I think that my students tasks well, but some of them, as I mentioned above, are timid, which does not lead to high results + Are there any difficulties with the task procedure and the length of a period? No, they are How you see the relationship between task-based teaching and grammar? How you help your students to learn grammar? I think this method also has a relationship with grammar, but grammar is not the focus part Therefore, students themselves draw it from sentences, sentence structures used in tasks in order to help them to acquire grammar forms + How you help your students to learn grammar? LIV Uh, I think that TBLT does not focus on form in lessons, but we have a language focus section at the end of each unit Therefore, we are able to teach grammar in this section and use structures in previous lessons such as listening, reading or speaking What you think makes task-based teaching different from other teaching approaches? (Probing indicators: approaches, instruction model, principles, techniques…) I think that TBT is different from other teaching approaches TBT highlights tasks in lessons and emphasis on communication skills, student-centeredness, and students have more opportunities participating in communicative activities 10 How culturally suitable you think task-based teaching is for your school or students? (Probing indicators: social awareness of learning importance, social learning need, social customs affecting the learning need, students‟ need, students‟ proficiency, students‟ learning strategy, students‟ habits… ) In my opinion, the low level of students and the regional cultural cause some inappropriate sections in units of textbooks + Could you give me an example? Unit Economic Reforms in grade 12 is not suitable to my students 11 How well you think teachers in your school understand task-based teaching? (Probing indicators: terminology, approaches, framework, principles, techniques…) Although we are teachers currently teaching English every day, we not fully understand the terminology and approaches of TBT I think my colleagues too In my opinion, the main factors promoting the application of TBT are that teachers need to be well aware of TBT and students must be more active in their learning 12 What you think are the main factors facilitating or inhibiting the implementation of task-based approaches in your teaching context? (Probing indicators: teacher‟s perception of TBLT, T‟s negative attitudes, Students‟ background/proficiency, Facility, Economy) + What about other factors such as infrastructure, economic and social conditions? In my opinion, higher administrations should provide more modern facilities in order to create a better environment for teaching foreign language For example, cassette players, language teaching rooms, etc LV Name: Teacher Interview Question about Teachers’ Perceptions of Task-Based language Teaching (TBLT ) How you understand by task-based language teaching? (Probing indicators: terminology, approaches, framework, principles, techniques…) To my knowledge, TBLT is based on the requirements of tasks in lessons Can you give an example of tasks? (Probing indicators: Maybe tasks you have carried out with your students…) They are communicative tasks, problem-solving tasks, gap-information tasks or language practice tasks Do you often employ tasks in your teaching? If so, what kinds, and how effective are they? (Probing indicators: communicative task, problem-solving task, gap-information task, language practice task…) I usually employ tasks in my teaching I think that such effective tasks promote students’ thinking and creation in learning Do you know the teaching instruction model in you textbooks is in TBLT? (Probing indicators: Model of language teaching? How many models you know? What is teaching model of CLT? ) In my opinion, the teaching instruction model in the textbooks consists of three phrases The first phrase is to introduce the topic of the lesson Then students practise in the second one and student use what they have learnt to practise in the last phrase What you think are positive elements and negative elements of task-based teaching? I think that TBT has some positive elements The first thing is that TBT promotes four skills of students: listening, speaking, reading, and writing Besides, TBT promotes students’ activeness and creation and enhances students’ motivation through group activities TBT, however, faces some challenges depending on students For example, problems can be easily solved when I teach in classes where students have almost the same high level, but it becomes difficult when I teach in classes having low levels How many stages you usually go through when you teach according to TBLT? What you in the post task stage of task cycle? (Probing indicators: Remember the lessons you have taught; the design in textbooks…) LVI I usually go through three stages In the first stage, for example when I teach in a speaking class, I usually introduce the topic first Then I move to the second stage and the post stage In the post-stage of a speaking class, students are usually spent more time practising speaking What are the main issues in classroom implementation of tasks? (Probing indicators: Task‟s goals, task procedure, task doing…) I think that task’s goals are very clear in textbooks, so teachers sometimes help students easily understand them In addition, I not have any difficulties with the task procedure How you see the relationship between task-based teaching and grammar? How you help your students to learn grammar? In fact, TBT has a close relationship with grammar, and all skills relate to grammar Therefore, in order to help my students learn grammar; I usually help students make up sentences using grammatical forms they have learnt What you think makes task-based teaching different from other teaching approaches? (Probing indicators: approaches, instruction model, principles, techniques…) Compared with other methods, I think that TBLT promotes four language skills: listening, speaking, writing, and reading whereas other methods only develop reading and writing skills 10 How culturally suitable you think task-based teaching is for your school or students? (Probing indicators: social awareness of learning importance, social learning need, social customs affecting the learning need, students‟ need, students‟ proficiency, students‟ learning strategy, students‟ habits… ) It is suitable for most of students, but some knowledge is higher than mountainous students’ current level in my school What is more, some lessons are unfamiliar with students’ need and students’ habits 11 How well you think teachers in your school understand task-based teaching? (Probing indicators: terminology, approaches, framework, principles, techniques…) In my opinion, most of the teachers in my school fully understand task-based teaching 12 What you think are the main factors facilitating or inhibiting the implementation of task-based approaches in your teaching context? LVII (Probing indicators: teacher‟s perception of TBLT, T‟s negative attitudes, Students‟ background/proficiency, Facility, Economy….) Yes Teachers have a supportive attitude toward task-based approaches because these approaches change teaching and learning instructions Besides, most of my students like task-based approaches + How is TBT suitable to students‟ proficiency? I think that task-based teaching is suitable to most of students + What about the infrastructure and economic conditions? There are enough facilities for teaching language, but my province does not have suitable economic conditions to employ this teaching method effectively My school facilities are consistent with local economic conditions In fact, my school located in the area where people not have high living conditions, so they can not create good conditions for their children’s learning ... SECONDARY SCHOOL (KHẢ NĂNG ÁP DỤNG PHƯƠNG PHÁP DẠY HỌC NGÔN NGỮ DỰA VÀO NHIỆM VỤ TRONG BỐI CẢNH TRƯỜNG THPT THÁI HÒA) M.A MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS Field: English Language Teaching Methodology Code:... the minor thesis entitled ? ?Applicability of task-based language teaching to the teaching context in Thai Hoa secondary school? ?? is submitted in fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of. .. perceptions of task-based language learning? 1.4 Scope of the study In order to find out the applicability of TBLT in the teaching context of Thai Hoa secondary school, the study is only focused the