In memoriam: Johannes Eckerth (1965–2009)

GRETA Journal, 2009

RELC Journal, 2019

Q: Prof. Prabhu, thank you for giving me this opportunity to interview you. I know of you as a Professor of English when I was an undergraduate and later as an MA student at NUS in the late 1980s and early 1990s. I was then

International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 2009

Task-based language teaching has become a prominent topic for researchers and practitioners of second language teaching in recent years. In second language acquisition research, little was written about tasks prior to Prabhu's (1987) work. Since then, the use of tasks has become central both as a means of eliciting data from participants and as an object of study in and of itself. The growing prominence of tasks in research is attested by the number of books published on this topic

Background and summary The framework for task-based learning as described in this paper was developed over a period of time in the 1980s, working with students aged 14 and upwards in both multilingual and mono-lingual classes in a number of teaching environments. It is illustrated in more detail in 'A Framework for Task-based Learning' first published in 1996 but now out of print and available as an e-book from http://www.intrinsicbooks.co.uk/title_by_title/framework.html This paper explores the rationale behind task-based learning, defining and giving examples of tasks and their outcomes. It explains the stages in a typical task cycle which focus on using language to exchange meanings, then looks at the importance of a subsequent study of language forms in the context of the task. It shows how the stages in the framework generate optimum conditions for language learning Finally it reports the reactions and findings of novice teacher trainees trying out task-based teaching for the first time. Note: This is a revised version of the paper written originally in 1995 for inclusion in the collection 'Challenge and Change in Language Teaching' (now out of print) alongside a paper on Consciousness-raising activities in TBL, for which see http://www.willis-elt.co.uk/articles/ This Task-based Learning (TBL) framework has since been adapted for use by teachers in many countries round the world – and their experiences are reported in 'Doing Task-based Teaching' Willis and Willis, 2007. For a summary and sample TBL lessons, see http://ihjournal.com/doing-task-based-teaching-2 Sample TBL lesson plans are available free from www.willis-elt.co.uk Introduction We began to experiment with task-based learning in the early eighties, frustrated by the limitations of methodologies that prioritized form-focused language teaching, even when supplemented with`skills' lessons. The Presentation, Practice, Production (PPP) model, which focused on accurate use of the grammatical forms taught at the Presentation stage, was in common use at the time. But very few students who finished their English courses were able to use their English to communicate adequately with others. We were encouraged by the success of Prabhu's Communicational Teaching Project in primary and secondary schools in Bangalore (Prabhu 1987), where the focus throughout was almost entirely on meaning rather than grammatical forms. We felt supported by recent research findings in the field of Second Language Acquisition such as those reported by Ellis (1993) and summarized by Skehan (1996) earlier in this volume. This task-based framework differs from a PPP cycle because the focus on language form comes at the e nd. The communication task itself is central to the framework. Such a task may involve student production of language and/or may be linked to a spoken or written text. A single task would normally involve both productive skills, eg speaking and note-taking, and receptive skills, eg listening and often reading. Learners begin by carrying out a communication task, using the language they have learnt from previous lessons or from other sources. They then talk or write about how they did the task and compare fi ndings. At some point they might listen to recordings of other people doing the same task, or read something related to the theme of the task, again relating this to their own experience of doing the task. Only after that is their attention directed towards specific features of language form-features that occur naturally in the recordings they have heard or the texts they have read. In other words, learners begin with a holistic experience of language in use. They end with a closer look at some of the features naturally occurring in that language. By that point, the learners will have worked with the language and processed it for meaning. It is then that the focus turns to the surface forms that have carried the meanings.

The Task-Based Approach (TBA) has gained popularity in the field of language teaching since the last decade of the 20fh Century and significant scholars have joined the discussion and increased the amount of analytical studies on the issue. Nevertheless experimental research is poor, and the tendency of some of the scholars is nowadays shifting towards a more tempered and moderate stand on their claims. Reasons for that are various: the difficulty in the implementation of the method in the classroom, the difficulty in elaborating materials following the TBA and the scarcity of task-based manuals count as important and perhaps decisive arguments. But there are also theoretical implications in the TBA which do not seem to be fully convincing or may lack sound foundations. In this paper 1 will attempt to describe the TBA criticaIly, pointing out what 1 consider positive in this approach, and underlining the inadequacy of some assumptions and conclusions. The design of a new TBA model is not the goal of this study. But the conclusions suggest that tasks may contribute to the production of a more refined and complete foreign language syllabus, helping to motivate the students and focus the attention of teachers and learners on meaning and communicative language use. 41 is the goal in the first section of this paper. A detailed discussion will follow on what a task is and on the various definitions proposed. This will lay the ground for a 'balanced criticism' of the TBA and will allow the reader to draw some positive and realistic conclusions on the issue.

In the 1980s, the task-based appearance as the implementation of the constructivist theory and application of communicative language teaching (CLT) methodology has significantly affected language learning in terms of teaching strategy, developing syllabus and/or curriculum. The task-based view of language teaching is widely influenced by constructivist theory of learning and communicative language teaching methodology (Jeon and Hahn, 2000). The constructivist theory main concept is that people construct their own understanding and knowledge of the world, through experiencing things and reflecting on those experiences. The constructivist perspective on the nature of learning reflects how people make sense of their experience (Taber: 2011). Alzahrani & Woollard (2013) state that this theory focuses on the belief that solving problem helps individuals in thinking, learning, and development. Constructivism proposes that learner conceptions of knowledge are derived from a meaning-making search in which learners engage in a process of constructing individual interpretations of their experiences (Applefield, Huber & Moallem, 2017). Thus, in constructivism theory of learning, it's very clear that experience is the most influenced factor in determining the success of learning. Richards and Rodgers (2001) state that British applied linguists saw the need to focus in language teaching on communicative proficiency rather than mastery of structure (structuralism view). The work of applied linguist has developed the communicative language teaching theory and application to language learning. As supported by Larsen-Freeman (2000), Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) aims to apply the theoretical perspective of the communicative approach by focusing on the communicative competence as the goal of language learning. According to Berns in Sreehari (2012), in CLT, language teaching is based on a view of language as communication, in which the speaker uses the language for some purposes orally or literally.

This paper begins by offering a definition of 'task' and by emphasizing that there is no single 'task-based teaching' approach. It then evaluates a number of criticisms of TBT, drawing on recent critiques by Widdowson, Seedhouse, Sheen, and Swan. It is argued that many of these criticisms stem from a fundamental misunderstanding of what a 'task' is, and of the theoretical rationales that inform task-based teaching. These criticisms also reflect a failure to acknowledge that multiple versions of task-based teaching exist. In particular , it is argued that task-based teaching need not be seen as an alternative to more traditional, form-focused approaches but can be used alongside them. The paper concludes with an examination of a number of genuine problems with implementing task-based teaching, as reflected in evaluation studies.