i
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
ii
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

v
DECLARATION………………………………………………………………. i
ABSTRACT …………………………………………………………………… 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…………………………

2.3.2. Task-based teaching versus other types of teaching instruction
models…………………………………………………………………….
24
2.3.3. Task-based Teaching Framework………………………………
25
vi
2.3.4. 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

s

of

task……………………………….
51
4.1.2. T
eacher
s’

conceptualization
s

of

task-based teaching……………. 53
4.1.3.

Tea
chers’

attitud
es

toward

task-b
ased

teaching……………………….

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
t
eaching plans of university teachers…………… … XIV
viii
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

LISTS OF TABLES
ix
TABLE 1: Participants’ Profile
TABLE 2: Participants’
conceptualization
s

of

task
(Data from IQ2, IQ9)
TABLE 3: Participants’
conceptualization
s

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


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:
2
a) to investigate university teachers’ at titudes 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

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.
Chapter 3 describes the methodology through a description of the case study
methodology and research design. An overview of a pilot study that informs the proposed
study and a description of the selected research site and its participants are also included.
In addition, the role of the researcher, the role of the teacher, and the procedures for data
collection and data analysis are discussed through rich description and visual
representations. Chapter 4 presents the results of the study. Finally, Chapter 5 summarizes
the findings, discusses implications for educational implications, and offers
recommendations for further researches.
CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW
4
The purpose of this chapter is to provide an extensive review of the literature as it
relates to the overall perspectives of task-based language learning and task-based language
teaching. First, an overview of the literature concerning the TBLT terminologies, its key
components, its principles, its features, framework for learning and teaching, and its
distinctions with other teaching methods is provided. Next, the theoretical foundations for
the birth and growth of task-based language teaching are discussed, including cognitive
theory of learning, sociocultural perspectives of constructivist theory of learning, etc.
Third, teachers’ interpretation of teaching methodology is mentioned. This chapter is also
designed to explore and identify how teachers’ views of their classroom teaching are.
Lastly, the theoretical underpinnings, review of existing task-based teaching research
bibliography will provide a framework for understanding the concept of TBLT and its
potentials, the methodology and data collection involved in the study, and, ultimately, the
analysis of findings obtained from the study.
2.1. Definition of terminology
2.1.1. Defining ‘task’

and task-based language teaching

the classroom, tasks become pedagogical in nature Nunan (1989). He states that: “a
communicative task is a piece of classroom work which involves learners in
comprehending, manipulating, producing, or interacting in the target language while their
attention is principally focused on meaning rather than form. The task should also have a
sense of completeness, being able to stand alone as a communicative act in its own right”.
In this definition, we can see that the authors take a pedagogical perspective. Tasks are
defined in terms of what the learners will do in class rather than in the world outside the
classroom. More detailed definition of task-based language approach of his in another
book published in 2001 is the following, cited in Canh (2004): a task-based language
teaching approach is characterized by:
a) An emphasis on learning to communicate through interaction in the target language.
b) The introduction of authentic texts into the learning situation.
c) The provision of opportunities for learners to focus, not only on language, but also on
the learning process itself.
d) An enhancement of the learner's own personal experiences as important contributing
elements to classroom learning.
6
e) An attempt to link classroom language learning with language activation outside the
classroom (p.103).
Another definition of pedagogical task comes from Richards (1986): . . . an activity
or action which is carried out as the result of processing or understanding language (i.e. as
a response). For example, drawing a map while listening to a tape, listening to an
instruction and performing a command may be referred to as tasks. Tasks may or may not
involve the production of language. A task usually requires the teacher to specify what will
be regarded as successful completion of the task. The use of a variety of different kinds of
tasks in language teaching is said to make language teaching more communicative . . .
since it provides a purpose for a classroom activity which goes beyond the practice of
language for its own sake. (p.289)
Breen (1987: 23) offers another definition of a pedagogical task: . . . any structured
language learning endeavour which has a particular objective, appropriate content, a

instruction and performing a comment, may be referred to as tasks. Tasks may or may not
involve the production of language. A task usually requires the teacher to specify what will
be regarded as successful completion of the task. The use of variety of different kinds of
tasks in language teaching is said to make teaching more communicative… since it
provides purpose for classroom activity which go beyond practice of language for its own
sake” (p.289).
Prabhu (1987), one of the first methodologists raising interest and support for TBL,
considers a task is “an activity which required learners to arrive at an outcome from given
information through some process of thought, and which allowed teachers to control and
regulate that process” (p.12). He deserves credit for originating the task-based teaching and
learning, based on the concept that effective learning occurs when students are fully
engaged in a language task, rather than just learning about language (p.17).
Lee (2000) defines a task is ‘(1) a classroom activity or exercise that has: (a) an
objective obtainable only by interaction among participants, (b) a mechanism for
structuring and sequencing interaction, and (c) a focus on meaning exchange; (2) a
language learning endeavor that requires learners to comprehend, manipulate, and/or
produce the target language as they perform some sets of work plans’ (p.23).
Bygate, Skehan, and Swain (2001) view ‘A task is an activity which requires
learners to use language, with emphasis on meaning, to attain an objective’ (p.288).
8
Finally, Ellis (2003: 16) defines a pedagogical task in the following way: A task is
a workplan that requires learners to process language pragmatically in order to achieve an
outcome that can be evaluated in terms of whether the correct or appropriate propositional
content has been conveyed. To this end, it requires them to give primary attention to
meaning and to make use of their own linguistic resources, although the design of the task
may predispose them to choose particular forms. A task is intended to result in language
use that bears a resemblance, direct or indirect, to the way language is used in the real
world. Like other language activities, a task can engage productive or receptive, and oral or
written skills and also various cognitive processes.
From what mentioned above, we go through many viewpoints about and definitions

The use of tasks will also give a clear and purposeful context for the teaching and learning
of grammar and other language features as well as skills. . . . All in all, the role of task-
based language teaching is to stimulate a natural desire in learners to improve their
language competence by challenging them to complete meaningful tasks. (David Nunan,
1999: 41)
Task-based teaching can be regarded as one particular approach to implementing
the broader “communicative approach” and, as with the communicative approach in
general. The aim of task-based teaching is to develop students’ ability to communicate and
communication (except in its most simple forms) takes place through using the
grammatical system of the language.
Learners who are not used to TBLT may not at first realise the advantages of it, and
they take some time to understand what is required of them and be persuaded of the
benefit. This may be based on the kind of teaching they have had before and then what
benefit the task make to them. This is the report from Willis (1996) about the advantages
of TBLT after his survey to his learners:
• they gain confidence in speaking and interacting quite soon after a task-based course;
• they enjoy the challenge of doing tasks and find many of them fun;
• they are able to talk about language itself in addition to other topics;
• they can cope with natural spontaneous speech much more easily, and tackle quite tough
reading texts in appropriate way;
• they become far more independent learners. (p.137)
Willis also gives out the opinions of teachers and trainers who have just
experimented with TBLT:
10
• with mix-level classes, a TBLT approach works far better than a PPP one;
• learners bring their own experiences to lessons and often come up with interesting and
original ideas;
• by the end of the course they are often surprised at how much their learners have
achieved. (pp.137 - 138)
In his view, form learner’s position, doing the tasks in pairs or groups has a number

without distinctions. It is worth to clarify the differences here because the knowledge of
this serves much to the understanding of TBLT. At first attempts to distinguish between
CLT and traditional methods of teaching, some of researchers such as Morris et al.
(1996), Nunan (1999), Ellis (2003) and Carless (2004) made a clear cut between tasks as
distinction between tasks and exercises (non-tasks). This clear cut has been on the
journey for a long time to researchers’ minds when they need to conceptualize the
differences between traditional methods which is familiar to most teachers due to the
exploits of non- communicative ‘exercises’ and the new teaching ideas and approaches
adopted and mentioned in CLT which bases on the exploits of communicative ‘tasks’.
Consequently, “this oversimplified division is an obstacle both to conceptual clarity and
to effective implementation” (Littlewood, 2007). Afterwards, it is noticeable that Nunan
(2004) has moved from the two-category distinction in Nunan (1999) to a three-
category framework of ‘tasks’, ‘communicative activities’ and ‘exercises’. According to
him, a task is a communicative act that does not usually have a restrictive focus on a
particular grammatical structure, and has a non-linguistic outcome. An exercise usually
has a restrictive focus on a specific language element, and has a linguistic outcome. An
activity usually has a restrictive focus on one or two language items, but also has a
communicative outcome.
2.1.4. Developments of Task-Based Teaching
This section is to discuss about the history of researches and viewpoints of stages in
TBLT, and then the clarification between the most well-known and favourable TBLT
model and other models of instructions.
TBLT was first applauded by Prabu (1987); however, it was only shaped into
careful framework later by other methodologists. This part is, therefore, to introduce
briefly the historical development of TBLT researches on both the concept and its
12
framework. As noted by Richards and Rodgers (2001) and Willis (1996a, 1996b, 1998), a
task has a natural series of stages, such as preparation for the task (pre-task), the task itself,
and follow-up (post-task). Many second language learner textbooks now follow this
practice. In addition, tasks are often placed into a sequence as part of a unit of work or

the following sequence of task development, implementation, and assessment/evaluation:
•
Needs analysis to identify target tasks
•
Classify into target task types.
13
•
Derive pedagogic tasks.
•
Sequence to form a task-based syllabus.
•
Implement with appropriate methodology and pedagogy.
•
Assess with task-based, criterion-referenced, performance tests.
•
Evaluate program.
In Long's model, tasks are selected based on careful analysis of real-world
communication needs. Such tasks are particularly important-even catalytic-for L2 learning
because they can generate useful forms of communication breakdown (Long, 1985). The
teacher offers some kind of assistance to help the learner focus on form at the point when it
is most needed for communication. This is the moment when meaning meets form. While
not explaining the learner's error, the teacher provides indirect assistance so the learner can
solve his or her own communication problem and can proceed to negotiate meaning still
further. Long (1997) presented the following typical instructional sequence for a "false
beginner" class of young adult prospective tourists.
•
Intensive listening practice: The task is to identify which of 40 telephone requests
for reservations can be met, and which not, by looking at four charts showing the
availability, dates and cost of hotel rooms, theater and plane seats, and tables at a
restaurant.

Production task, in which students have the chance to try out or experiment with
the target structure by producing their own sentences.
Johnson (1996), Skehan (1998b), and Willis (1996b) discuss sequencing of tasks
according to methodological task features, such as extent of communication (negotiation of
meaning), task difficulty, and amount of planning allowed. Others have discussed how to
sequence tasks to reflect the developmental sequence of language acquisition. Skehan
(1999) suggested targeting a range of structures rather than a single one and using the
criterion of usefulness rather than necessity as a sequencing criterion.
Salaberry (2001) has argued that a successful task sequence leads learners to: (a)
communicate with limited resources, (b) become aware of apparent limitations in their
knowledge about linguistic structures that are necessary to convey the message
appropriately and accurately, and finally, (c) look for alternatives to overcome such
limitations. Building on the work of McCarthy (1998), Salaberry offers a pedagogical
sequence of four stages, which for the learner would be involvement, inquiry, induction,
and incorporation. For the teacher the corresponding four-step sequence is introduction of
the topic, illustration, implementation, and integration.
It is evident that no consensus yet exists about the best way to sequence tasks or to
sequence elements within tasks. This is one of the key areas of research needed in the field.
However, the writer in this thesis take the model of Willis' (1996a, 1996b, 1998) as this is
the one which is very much advocated by other researchers and methodologists because of
its precise design. Willis' framework consists of the following phases:
15
•
Pre-task - introduction to the topic and task.
•
Task cycle: task planning; doing the task; preparing to report on the task;
presenting the task report
•
Language focus - analysis and practice (focus on form).
2.2. Theoretical Foundations

Emerging in the late 1950s, and beginning to be dominant theory of learning, but
really having powerful influence on instructional practice after the late 1970s, cognitive
psychology was a new meaningful argumentation from psychologists and methodologists,
usually coinciding with names of Chomsky, Jean Piaget and Lev Semenovich Vygotsky,
Ausubel, etc. Through years cognitive psychology has had a considerable influence on
language teaching methodology. There are no methodologies that limit themselves to
cognitivist theories; TBLT is no exception.
Cognitive theories of learning emphasized the role of the mind in actively acquiring
new knowledge. The ideas that Ausubel (1968) presented in his book Educational
Psychology: A cognitive view underlies the cognitivist stance in education. The most
important of these ideas was that learning must be meaningful and relatable to an
individual's cognitive structure if it was to become a permanent part of his or her
understanding of the world. Cognitive teaching treated the learners as thinking beings and
places them at the centre of the learning process by stressing that learning will only take
place when learners find the input meaningful, interesting and relevant to their needs. It
means the learner is an active participant in the learning process, using various mental
strategies in order to sort out the system of the language to be learned, which would rather
emphasizes the internal mental processes of the mind and how they could be utilized in
promoting effective learning than the external behaviour as behaviourism did; learner, in
fact, learns by thinking about and trying to make sense of what he or she hears, sees and
feels. And, as being retrieved from (Canh, 2004: p.39), cognitive psychology is grounded
on the following assumptions:
• People develop at different rates
• Development is relatively orderly
• Development takes place gradually
The basic teaching technique associated with a cognitive theory of learning is the
problem-solving tasks. Thus, the cognitive model of teaching is defined as a model of