Towards a version of task-based approaches suitable for schooling

1. Towards a version of task-based approaches suitable for schooling David Carless University of Hong Kong dcarless@hku.hk

2. Aims of the study • To probe key issues in the implementation of task-based teaching in Hong Kong secondary schools • To work towards a version of task-based teaching suitable for schools in Hong Kong and other comparable settings • To propose some features of a ‘situated version of TBLT’

3. Critiques of TBT relevant to schools • Bruton – limited applicability; new knowledge? accuracy? • Klapper – too close to L1 processes for FL contexts • Seedhouse – task completion but limited linguistic output • Swan – less effective for teaching new language; lack of input

4. Contextual suitability • Espoused methodology needs to be sensitive to the socio-cultural context (Holliday, 1994) • A context approach to language teaching (Bax, 2003) • Ellis (2003): Ch 10 - innovationist perspectives e.g. cultural suitability; ESL vs EFL.

5. Hong Kong context • Façade of progressiveness mixed with generally traditional practices • 1983 CLT syllabus not implemented widely • Recent task-based syllabi (primary c1997, secondary c2000) not implemented widely • Adoption rather than implementation • With pockets of successful implementation

6. Research method • Semi-structured interviews • Purposive sampling • 10 teacher educators • 11 teachers • Extensive data set but single method (no classroom observation) • Analysis including, member checking and reinterpretation

7. Findings: 4 themes • Need for adaptation of TBLT for Hong Kong schools • Role of grammar and PPP • Role of examinations • Oral group work in TBLT vs other modes

8. Need for adaptation • Danger of being too doctrinaire • Risk of underplaying teachers beliefs and practices • ‘TBL with local characteristics’ • ‘An eclectic compromise’

9. Quotation 1 • “Teachers would actually have a lot more confidence if they can see variations suited to the TBLT framework, for example, with the language focus coming in right at the beginning. … My impression is most teachers will tend to be more in favor of a ‘soft’ TBLT approach”

10. Importance of grammar • Grammar teaching emphasised by teachers • Part of their existing beliefs • Deductive rather than inductive approaches • “Students need more grammar” • Sometimes linked to communicative use of language

11. Quotation 2 • “Why not spend more time on more traditional language approaches? Students need to be given more help with basic English grammar before they adopt the task-based approach. You can’t expect them to be able to perform a task successfully without giving them input”.

12. Input, pre-task & PPP • Input: grammar, vocab, presentation, drilling • Some teachers (and teacher educators) suggested that PPP is preferable to TBLT • Invoked limitations of TBLT rather than rebutting limitations of PPP • Developmental readiness; lack of support for PPP in SLA theory.

13. Quotation 3 • “The problem with Hong Kong teachers is that they do a lot of feeding in of language at the beginning of the task cycle but very rarely language analysis at the end. This is something that I always recommend, not just for remediation but for extension”.

14. Exams • Usually presented as a barrier to the implementation of TBLT • Internal – less task-based • External – more task-based (cf School-based assessment – Davison, 2007) • Developments in external examinations impacting incrementally

15. Quotation 4 • “If task-based learning could be tied really firmly with assessment, preparing for exams, passing the test, passing a paper at HKCEE [Hong Kong Certificate of Education Examination], then we would get more teachers actively engaging with TBL. For the reading paper at HKCEE, let’s have some tasks focused on reading”.

16. Beyond the oral group work task • TBLT seems to place too much emphasis on speaking / oral group work • Challenges for oral group work tasks • Need for R & W for exams and future study or work • Balance of individual, pair and group work

17. Quotation 5 • “I don’t know why exactly, but TBL seems to have become equated with group work. It doesn’t have to be so and I think all teachers should realize this” • “Task-based approaches need to focus not just on speaking but on the other skills, too. If we could get more tasks out there on reading or writing, it would be very healthy. And that kind of task would cohere better with assessment and the nature of Hong Kong schools”.

18. Conclusions • Dangers of TBLT being misinterpreted by teachers (and teacher educators) • TBLT relatively complex, especially in terms of implementation • Many variations with task-supported teaching being perhaps most feasible for schooling

19. ‘Situated task-based approach’ • Situated task-based approaches, in which culture, setting and teachers’ existing beliefs, values and practices interact with the principles of task-based teaching

20. Suggested features • Strengthened grammatical options e.g. focused tasks • Strengthened post-task phase, including CR • Exam preparation linked more fully with task-based approaches • Strengthened R & W tasks.

21. Full paper to appear as: • Carless, D. (2007) The suitability of task-based approaches for secondary schools: perspectives from Hong Kong, System, 35(4).