Vietnam national university, Hanoi
College of foreign languages
Department of Post-graduate Studies

đặng Thị Thu Thuỷ

A STUDY ON THE TEACHERS APPLICATION OF
TASK-BASED METHOD AND THE 10
TH
FORM
STUDENTS USE OF LEARNING STRATEGIES IN
THEIR LISTENING LESSONS
AT TRAN PHU HIGH SCHOOL IN VINH PHUC

NghiÊn cứu về việc áp dụng ph-ơng pháp
dạy học giao nhiệm vụ của giáo viên và việc sử
dụng các thủ thuật của học sinh lớp 10 trong các
bài học nghe tại tr-ờng T.H.P.T trần phú
- vĩnh phúc

M.A MINOR THESIS FIELD: English Methodology
CODE: 601410

FIELD: English Methodology
CODE: 601410
SUPERVISOR: Dr. đỗ Tuấn Minh Hanoi, December 2008

vi
TABLE OF CONTENTS

DECLARATION
i
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
ii
ABSTRACT
iii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
iv
LIST OF TABLES AND CHARTS
v
TABLE OF CONTENTS
vi
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION
1
I. Rationale
1
II. Aims and research questions of the study

III.3. Common methods in teaching listening
19
III.4. Three stages in a listening lesson
20
III.5. Foreign language learners’ listening problems
21
III.6. Foreign language learners’ listening comprehension strategies
22

vii
CHAPTER III: FINDINGS, DISCUSSIONS AND SOLLUTIONS
25
I. Methodology
25
II. Data analysis, findings and discussions
27
II.1. The students’ performance in listening lessons
27
II.2. The students’ preparation for listening lessons
28
II.3. The students’ motivation before listening
29
II.4. The student’s learning strategies used in listening lessons and their
experiences to listen effectively
30
II.5. The frequency of the teachers’ activities to motivate the students before
listening
32
II.6. The pre-listening activities
32

APPENDIX III The tape-scripts of listening texts
VII
APPENDIX IV Different kinds of tasks in listening lessons
XVIII
APPENDIX V Class observations
XX

iv
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
CLT : Communicative Language Teaching
L1: First language
P-P-P: Presentation-Practice-Production
L2: Second language
SLA: Second Language Acquisition
TBM: Task-Based Method
TPHS: Tran Phu High School
1
CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION

I. RATIONALE
Together with the development of international relationships between Vietnam and
other countries in the world, the need to learn English in our country is sharply increasing.
English has become a compulsory subject in every Vietnamese school and university.
However, the fact in Vietnam shows that there is now not only an urgent lack of the number
of people speaking English fluently somewhere but also an impressive demand for the quality
of English teaching and learning in the whole Vietnamese education system. In order to solve
these problems, we have no alternation but to apply innovations to the process of teaching
and learning English in our country.
Theoretically, the innovations in second language (L2) teaching and learning over the
time have always based on the findings that come from Second Language Acquisition (SLA)
Research. Moreover, they can take place in two parallel directions: changing in teaching
method as well as in syllabus design. The theories also state that there must be a mutual
relationship between innovations in these two directions. They must be relevant to each other
to contribute to the success of language teaching and learning.
In the late twentieth century, we have witnessed the successful application of TBM in
Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) in many places all over world. In Vietnam, TBM
has gradually replaced traditional teaching methods. Together with the new textbook series, it
has resulted in outstanding outcomes in teaching and learning English, especially in improving
speaking and listening skills. However, we must confess that these outcomes are quite
different when we observe various English classes in Vietnam.

It is obvious that the thesis would not be in this form without qualitative method used
during the writing process. First of all, the data were collected from two survey questionnaires,
informal interviews with the teachers and classroom observations. The data, then, required
systematical classification to put them into different parts. Finally, logical contrastive analysis
was of great help.
V. DESIGN OF THE STUDY
While this thesis generally presents the topic: “A Study on the Effect of Using TBM in
Teaching Listening for 10
th
Form Students at TPHS in Vinh Phuc”, each of the chapters
carries out its own task far different from that of the others. The first chapter states rationales
for, aims, scope, method and organization of the study. The theoretical background in the
chapter II covers issues most relevant to the topic. The next one focuses on analyzing figures

3
and giving out some findings. We also find in this chapter some solutions to solve the given
problems. Finally, the forth chapter concludes the study.


of view, approaches are views of the nature of language or language teaching. An approach is
axiomatic. Whereas method is an overall plan for the orderly presentation of language
material. A method is procedural. No part of a method contradicts and all of the method is
based upon a selected approach. And lastly, techniques are the actual activities the teachers
do in the classroom. In the expression „innovations in language teaching methods‟, the term
„method‟ is used with a broad meaning so that it takes over other terms.
Looking at the flowered development of SLA Research and the history of language
teaching methods in the past few decades, we can find that there is a close relationship
between researches in SLA and the changes in language teaching methods, that is, the latter
has reflected recognition of changes both in the kind of proficiency learners need and in theory
of the nature of language and language learning, resulted from the former.
Based on the proficiency learners need, we can classify language teaching methods
through out the history into two groups. The first group helps to develop grammatical
competence and the second one communicative competence.

5
I.1. Language teaching methods focusing on developing grammatical competence
Most of traditional teaching methods belong to the first group which concentrates on
the development of grammatical competence, that is the ability to recognize and produce the
grammar with a set of distinctive forms and rules, the lexicon and the phonology of a language
and the ability to use them effectively in producing grammatically or phonologically accurate
sentences in the target language.
Focusing on developing grammatical competence, traditional language teaching
methods have undergone two different periods: focusing on meaning and on forms. The
former aims at developing learners‟ proficiency of reading comprehension and sentence
writing, whereas the latter pays much more attention to the rules and structures.
The Grammar-Translation Method is one example of teaching language focus on
meaning. With this method, the students‟ native language (L1) is the medium of instruction. It
is used to explain new items and to enable comparisons to be made between L2 and L1.
Furthermore, grammar is taught deductively and explicitly, that is, by presentation and study

interpret perfectly such utterances.
I.2. Language teaching methods focusing on developing communicative competence
Now, it is time for us to discuss the second group of teaching methods which
concentrates on developing communicative competence.
The term communicative competence, which was coined by Dell Hymes (1971, p.96),
is the development of Noam Chomsky‟s notion of linguistic competence cited in Ellis (1994,
p.12). Chomsky defines linguistic competence as the ability of a speaker-hearer to speak and
understand language in a grammatically correct manner. In other words, linguistic competence
is the use of grammatical rules of a language in communication. Hymes then expands on
Chomsky‟s view by considering the social factors of a culture‟s language. So, communicative
competence, in Hyme‟s definition, is the use of not only grammatical rules of a language but
also social language rules in communication.
According to Hymes (1971, p.98) communicative competence consists of four
components: grammatical competence, discourse competence, sociolinguistic competence and
strategic competence. He states that the first two components, which constitute linguistic
competence, reflect the use of the linguistic system itself and the last two, which constitute

7
pragmatic competence, define the functional aspects of communication.
Now, let us consider these four components in detail. Grammatical competence is
knowledge of lexical items and of rules of morphology, syntax, sentence-grammar semantics
and phonology. It is the competence that we associate with mastering the linguistic code of a
language. Next, discourse competence is considered the complement of grammatical
competence in many ways. It is the ability we have to come at sentences in stretches of
discourse and to form a meaningful whole out of a series of utterance. The third component,
sociolinguistic competence, is defined as the knowledge of socio-cultural rules of language
and of discourse. This type of competence reveals an understanding of the social context in
which language is used, of the roles of the participant, of the information they share and of
the function of the interaction. Only in a full context of this kind can judgments be made on
the appropriateness of a particular utterance. Finally, strategic competence is the verbal and

real and meaningful communication.
Howatt (1984, p.279) distinguishes between a strong and a weak version of CLT. The
former which has become more or less standard practice in the last 10 years, stresses the
importance of providing learners with opportunities to use their English for communicative
purpose and characteristically attempts to integrate such activities into a wider program of
language teaching. The latter, on the other hand, advances the claim that language is acquired
through communication, so that it is not merely a question of activating an existing but inert
knowledge of the language, but also a question of stimulating the development of the language
system itself. We can see that while the week version of CLT could be described as learning to
use English, the strong one entails using English to learn it.
In order to have a clearer look at characteristics of CLT, Finocchiaro and Brumfit
(1983, p.91) contrast the major distinctive features of the Audio-Lingual Method and the
Communicative Approach:
Audio-Lingual
Communicative Language Teaching
Attends to structure and form not meaning
Meaning is paramount
Demands memorization of structure based
dialogues
Dialogues if used center around
communicative function and are not
normally memorized
Language items are not necessarily
contextualized
Contextualization is a basic premise

9
Language learning is language structures,
sounds or words
Language learning is learning to

best through the process of struggling to
communicate
Linguistic competence is the desired goal
Communicative competence is the desired
goal (the ability to use the linguistic system
effectively and appropriately)
Varieties of language are recognized but not
emphasized
Linguistic variation is a central concept in
material and methodology
The sequence of units is determined solely
by principles of linguistic complexity
Sequencing is determined by any
consideration of context, function, or
meaning that maintains interest
The teacher controls the learners and
prevents them from doing anything that
conflicts with the theory
Teacher helps learners in any way that
motivate them to work with the language
Language is habit so errors must be
prevented at any cost
Language is created by the individual, often
through trial and error
Accuracy in terms of formal correctness is a
primary goal
Fluency and acceptable language is the
primary goal. Accuracy is judged not in the
abstract but in context
Students are expected to interact with the

in a task-based lesson, the teacher does not predetermine what language will be studied.
Instead, the lesson is based around the completion of a central task and the language studied is
determined by what happens as the students complete it.
Now it is time to consider what exactly takes place within a task. Willis (1996, pp.52-
62) recommends different components in a framework of tasks: the pre-task stage, the task
cycle and the language focus.
At the pre-task stage, the teacher first introduces the topic in the way that most
motivates the students. Then, clear instructions on what they will have to do with the task are
also given. If these steps are well planned and successfully complimented, they might help the
students to recall some language from their outcomes that may be useful for the task. The pre-
task stage can also include playing a record of people doing the task. This gives the students a
clear demonstration of what they will be expected in the task. Lastly, the students can take
notes and spend time preparing for the task.
The task cycle consists of some certain activities: task, planning and report. In task
activities, the students complete a task in pairs or groups using the language resources while

11
the teacher monitors and offers encouragement. Then, it is the time for planning: A short oral
or written report is prepared by pairs or groups of students to tell the rest of the class what
happened during their task. They then practise what they are going to say in their pairs or
groups. Meanwhile the teacher is available for the students to ask any language related
question they may have. At the report stage, the students report back to the class orally or read
the written report. The teacher decides when they present their reports and may give them
some quick feedback on the content and their performance.
At the language focus stage, both analysis and practice activities take place. First of all,
that is the case of analysis activities. The teacher highlights interesting features on the content
and the performance of the students‟ reports. Some serious errors that the students make in
their reports can also be raised. The students then discuss these interesting features as well as
errors in their pairs or groups. In practice activities, the teacher selects language aspects to
practise based on the needs of the students and what emerged from the task and report phases.

Now, it is time we distinguished three confusing concepts: curriculum, syllabus and
textbook. According to Richards (2001, p.16), curriculum is on the top of a hierarchically
vertical line and is the most complicated. It is a generalization of needs of a group of learners,
aims or objectives for a program to address those need, appropriate syllabus, course structure,
teaching method and materials, and an evaluation of the application of the language program
as well. Whereas, a syllabus is at the next descending step of the line. It is a specification of
the content of a course of instruction and list what will be taught and tested. A textbook, on the
contrary, is the conveyance of the content of the course raised in the syllabus in forms of
different activities such as tasks, exercises, and drills. In this thesis, „syllabus‟ is used as a
common term which takes over the two others.
II.1. Synthetic syllabus versus analytic syllabus
According to Beglar and Hunt (1987, p.96), there are two kinds of syllabus: synthetic
syllabus and analytic syllabus. The former divides the target language into discrete linguistic
items such as points of grammar, lexical items and functions. The designers who use this type
of syllabus assume that learners will be capable of resynthesizing these discrete pieces of
language into a coherent whole which they can use in communicative situations. The latter is a
noninterventionist, experiential approach which aims to expose learners to real-life

13
communication. This type of syllabus supplies learners with samples of the target language
which are selected with the purposes for which people use language. In this case, the
assumption is that learners will be able to analyze grammatical and lexical usage during the
process of using the target language to communicate.
Grammar-Translation syllabus is an example of synthetic syllabus. The textbook here
consists of statements of abstract grammar rules, lists of vocabulary, and sentences for
translation. In addition, speaking foreign language is not the goal when the syllabus is
designed, and oral practice is limited to students reading aloud the sentences they translate. All
the sentences found in the textbook are constructed to illustrate the grammatical system of the
language and bore no relation to the language of real communication.
From the description of Grammar-Translation syllabus as well as the characteristics of

That is the case of the weak version of CLT. While the syllabus is communicative, i.e. a list
of notions and functions, the teaching method is traditional and non communicative, i.e. P-P-P.
Advocators of the weak version of CLT base on the assumptions that the components of
communicative competence can be identified and systematically taught in order to explain for
the irrelevance to which its failure is attributed when the weak version of CLT has been put
into practiced.
From these above examples, we find that in order to theoretically ensure the success of
language teaching and learning there must be a relevance between teaching method and
syllabus.
Now, let us have a brief look at the textbook designed to teach English for 10
th
form
students in Vietnam in general and at TPHS in Vinh Phuc in particular who are the subjects of
this thesis.
The textbook “Tiếng Anh 10” compiled by Van et al. (2006) is among a new series of
textbooks which are designed in task-based orientation in order to teach English for
Vietnamese students in the school education system. The design of the whole series of
textbooks has adopted „the principle of relevance‟ that we mentioned above. In this case, that
is the relevance between the use of the task-based textbooks and the application of TBM in
every English classroom in Vietnam. 15
II.2. Tasks in task-based syllabus
As can be seen from the characteristics of task-based syllabus, tasks can function as a
useful device for planning a communicative curriculum, and that is why they provide the basis
for the whole language curriculum in Task- based Language Teaching. However the question
“What is exactly a task?” is quite controversial.
Long cited in Ellis (2003, p.2) gives a broad definition which includes two types of
tasks: tasks that requires language, for example, making an airline reservation and tasks that

people. In the case of one-way tasks, the burden of completing the task successfully is placed
on the participant who holds the information, although other participants can contribute by
demonstrating when they comprehend or when they do not. Conversely, in two-way tasks all
the participants are obligated to participate in the tasks in order to complete it.
Open tasks are those in which there is no predetermined solution. In this case, many
options can gap the task and learners are free to decide on the solution. In contrast, close tasks
are those that require the students to reach a single, correct solution or one of a small finite set
of solutions.
Let us now look at listening activities designed in the textbook “Tiếng Anh 10” which
is also one of the subject of this study and shown in appendix IV. There is a fact that some of
these activities are only pseudo-tasks. That is because they do not meet all the criteria of tasks
given above. For example, the exercises of true/false, numbering, and ticking in appropriate
information do not involve real-world process of language uses and have not clearly defined
communicative outcome.
The rest of listening activities in the textbook, however, are of various kinds of tasks
ranging from one-way tasks (e.g. Work in groups, retell the story then report your result –
After you listen, Unit 4) to two-way tasks (e.g. Work in pairs, discuss the change in your own
hometown or home village – After you listen, Unit 8); from closed tasks (e.g. Match the
pictures with the conversation – While you listen, Unit 2) to opened tasks (Work in group,
answer the questions: what would you plan for a picnic with your class? – After you listen,
Unit 6); from unfocused tasks (e.g. Fill in the blanks with the exact words you hear - While
you listen, Unit 6 ) to focused tasks (e.g. Work in pairs or groups, ask and answer about Mr
Lam then report your result – After you listen, Unit 1).

17
Breen (1987, p.184) distinguished between two terms task-as-workplan, i.e. the
designed task with the intension of the designer and task-as-process, i.e. the learners‟ actual
performance of the task. Then, these two terms have widely used by other researchers.
In Murphy‟s article (2003, pp.352-360), he states that learning outcomes are a product
of three main factors: the task-as-workplan, the task-as-process, and the situation in which the

III. 2. Classification of listening
Anderson and Lynch (1998, p.315) distinguish between reciprocal listening and
nonreciprocal listening. The former refers to listening tasks where there is the opportunities for
the listener to interact with the speaker and to negotiate the content of the interaction. The
latter refers to tasks such as listening to the radio or a formal lecture where the transfer of
information is in a direction only – from the speaker to listener.
Let us take listening in classrooms as examples of these types of listening. For
reciprocal listening, it is the case of listening tasks that expose learners to communicate with
each other or with their teacher. Nonreciprocal listening takes place when students listen to the
tape in the listening session.
Richards and Schmidt (1983, p.129) classifies listening according to whether they
require the learners to engage in bottom-up or top-down processing. In bottom-up processing,
learners rely on their linguistic knowledge to recognize linguistic elements – vowels,
consonants, words, sentences to do the construction of meaning. They build meaning from
lower lever sounds to words, to grammatical relationship, and to lexical meaning in order to
arrive at the final message. In top-down processing, learners use their prior knowledge to
make prediction about the text. Prior knowledge can be that of the topic, the listening context,
the text-type, the culture or other information stored in long-term as well as short-term
memory.
Listening comprehension is not either bottom-up or top-down processing but is an both
interactive and interpretive process where listeners use both prior knowledge and linguistic
knowledge in understanding message. The degree to which learners use this process or the
other will depend on their knowledge being familiar with the topic as well as the purpose for
listening. 19
III.3. Common methods in teaching listening
Underwood (1990, p.90) states that there are at least four common methods of
teaching L2 listening: Grammar-Translation Method, Grammar Method, Audio-Lingual