Task Based Learning

Contents
1. Background Essay
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5

Introduction,Page 2
Task based learningPage 2
Relevance to learning contexts...Page 5
Objectives for the experimentPage 6
Evaluation of the experiment.Page 6

2. Lesson Plan .Page 8

3. Post-Lesson
3.1
3.2
3.3

Evaluation of the experiment Page 11

Action pointsPage 12
Evaluation of the lesson and action pointsPage 13

4. AppendicesPage 14
Appendix 1: Observation tasks
Appendix 2: Student Questionnaire
5. BibliographyPage 17

1. Background essay
Andrew Basquille

1.1 Introduction
I have been interested in task based learning since I first came across it in my initial
training. Towards the end of the course, which had proposed PPP as a basic approach
to teaching a lesson, one of our trainers introduced task based learning as a
methodology which she was enthusiastic about. My understanding then was that while
she considered it a superior approach to PPP, task based learning wasnt necessarily
the easiest teaching method for new recruits to begin their teaching career with.
However, my curiosity was aroused. While I am aware that I have taught task based
lessons thanks to my use of the Cutting Edge series, I have always wanted the
opportunity to study task based learning and the rationale behind it more closely.

1.2 Task based learning

Historically, task based learning seems to have gained currency since the 1996
publication of Jane Williss A Framework for Task-Based Learning (Longman)
and her paper A flexible framework for task-based learning, published in Willis J. &
Willis D. (ed) Challenge and Change in Language Teaching (Macmillan
Heinemann).
In the latter, Willis acknowledges that she began to experiment with task based
learning in the early 1980s. She was frustrated by the limitations of the PPP model
and was encouraged by the success of Prabhus Communicational Teaching Project in
Bangalore. She also felt supported by research findings in the field of second language
acquisition such as those referred to by Peter Skehan in the same volume.
In his paper, Second language acquisition and task based instruction, Skehan asserts
that PPP is ultimately inadequate yet resistant to change because it is convenient and
comfortable for teachers. He writes that up to the mid 1980s, SLA research
demonstrated that a PPP approach was misguided, but did not propose an alternative
until it was found that the kind of classroom activity which promoted learning most
rapidly and efficiently was meaning based. Tasks are defined by Skehan as activities
which have meaning as their primary focus. He summarises the contrast between PPP
and task based learning: A PPP approach looks on the learning process as learning a
series of discrete items and then bringing these items together in communication to
provide further practice and consolidation. A task based approach sees the learning
process as one of learning through doing it is by primarily engaging in meaning that
the learners system is encouraged to develop (Skehan 1996 p21).
Jane Willis summarises the difference between PPP and task based learning: the
focus on language form comes at the end (Willis 1996 p52).
The task based lesson, based on her framework, is structured as follows:

Andrew Basquille

PRE-TASK
Introduction to topic
and task instructions
--------TASK CYCLE
Task > Planning > Report
(Listen to task recording)
-------------------LANGUAGE FOCUS
Analysis and
practice
The aim of the task based learning framework is to create the optimum conditions for
language learning. Willis (1998, p3) identifies these three essential conditions as:
Exposure to the target language
Opportunities to use the target language for expressing meaning
Motivation to engage with exposure and use what they know.
A fourth desirable condition is:
Focus on language form to prevent fossilisation
A Brief description of the task based lesson
Pre-task
This serves as an introduction to the topic and task. It may involve brainstorming, a
pre-task, introduction of useful words and phrases, preparation time or listening to
native speakers doing the task. New structures are not pre-taught.
The Task Cycle
This cycle has three essential phases and one further optional phase.
a. Task
Learners begin by carrying out a communication task, using whatever language they
already have, in pairs or groups. A task is a goal-oriented activity in which learners
achieve a real outcome. According to Willis, (1996, pp 26-28), there are six main
types of task:
1. Listing
2. Ordering and sorting
3. Comparing
4. Problem solving
5. Sharing personal experiences
6. Creative tasks

Andrew Basquille

Grammar exercises, practice activities are examples of activities which are not tasks.
Tasks have a specific objective that must be achieved in a given time. Learners are
free to choose whatever language forms they like to achieve the goal of the task. The
emphasis is on meaning rather than form. The teacher monitors discreetly and does
not correct errors.
Closed tasks are highly structured with specific goals and relatively predictable
language forms. Open tasks are less structured with less specific goals and less
predictable language forms.
At this stage, the teacher monitors and encourages attempts to communicate meaning
in the target language. While helping students to formulate what they want to say, the
teacher does not correct errors. The emphasis is on spontaneity and fluency.
b. Planning
Having completed the task, students prepare to report on the outcome. Now the
emphasis is on organisation and accuracy. The teacher advises students on language
and helps them correct any errors they make during this phase.
c. Report
Some or all of the groups report briefly to the whole class. The others listen in order
compare findings or conduct a survey. The teacher may rephrase but not correct the
language.
d. Optional post task listening
This phase allows students to listen to native speakers do the same task and to
compare the language.
Language Focus
Analysis
Learners focus on form and ask questions about language features.
Practice
Teacher conducts activities based on the analysis work or examples from the text or
transcript.
The theory behind the TBL framework is that it is the methodology which most
adequately fulfils the key conditions for language learning implied by SLA research
findings. These conditions: exposure to real language, opportunities for real use of
language, motivation and focus on language are provided for at each phase of the task
based learning framework as illustrated by Willis (1996, p60 ):

Andrew Basquille

Exposure -----------------

Use & exposure --------

Focus on form-----------
Use & exposure --------
Exposure ----------------
Exposure ----------------
Focus on form----------

PRE-TASK
Introduction to topic
and task instructions
-----------------------TASK CYCLE
Task
Planning
Report
(Listen to task recording)
---------------------LANGUAGE FOCUS
Analysis
Practice

-------- feedback
-------- feedback

-------- feedback

Willis (1996, p62) asserts that we can do without PPP altogether. She proposes that it
is essential however that both teachers and students understand the principles behind
the approach and the rationale behind each component of the framework. TBL has
been likened to PPP upside down. Willis concludes that it might be better to think
of it as PPP the right way up.
I can understand better why PPP would be seen as the better starting point for the
novice teacher. The TBL teacher faces complex challenges.
The design of tasks and their sequencing in order to achieve balance between
the goals of accuracy, complexity/restructuring and fluency
Syllabus design: it is only with experience that a TBL teacher will be able to
design tasks with a view to highlighting specific language areas.

1.3 Relevance to Learning Contexts

Task based learning is applicable in the widest variety of learning contexts as its
rationale, based on SLA research, is relevant no matter what the level, age, culture,
mother-tongue, motivation and previous learning experience of the students. Tasks
can vary in length and complexity according to the level of the class.
Tasks must be designed with the above factors taken into account. For example, a task
based lesson with a group of elementary teenagers in Turkey is likely to be very
different from a lesson with a multi-lingual group of advanced adults in Dublin.
However, there are opportunities to turn potential difficulties into opportunities. For
example, Willis (1996 p49) proposes that drawing up a set of guidelines for mothertongue use while doing tasks would make an excellent communicative task in itself.
My current upper-intermediate class consists of young adult learners from different
countries who express the desire to speak more. They are very willing to work in pairs
and small groups. They feel that their experience of learning English in their own
respective countries has been excessively grammar-centred. Although it is not always
Andrew Basquille

the case, currently every member of this class is very comfortable learning in a
broadly communicative way.
Although it seems that task based learning has been associated with an emphasis on
fluency rather than accuracy, my reading would indicate that this is a rather unfair and
inaccurate distortion of the methodology. My current class would benefit enormously
from the planning and reporting phases of the task cycle which encourage the learners
to pay attention to fluency AND accuracy.
Currently, I find that I am the one who dictates the structuring and sequencing of
topics and I would be very interested see how I would cope with a lesson where the
language produced is rather less predictable.
TBL rests on the premise that learners learn through direct experience of language in
use (exposure) and through language for themselves (use). (Willis 1998, p6) To me,
this seems universally applicable. In every learning context, it makes sense that
learners should be helped to gain insights gradually rather than be expected to learn
structures in a sequence and at a pace dictated by the teacher. I am interested to see if I
can let go of this role and be a sower of seeds rather than a provider of bricks.

1.4 Objectives for the experiment

I am interested to see how a task based class moves from phase to phase. The class
will be taped so that the language used by the students and my instructions can be
reviewed.
a. To see how the learners react to a pure task based class. Will they find it
interesting, enjoyable, engaging or otherwise.
b. To see whether I can predict the language the students will use in the task
cycle. To see how I monitor the students.
c. To see if the learners language becomes more accurate as the task cycle
progresses. To see how I help the students with their accuracy
d. To see if the learners focus on form and ask questions about language features.

1.5 Evaluation of the experiment

a. My local tutor will observe the class. She will evaluate the reaction of the
students to the class by noting the quality of their engagement with the task
and with each other. I will give her observation tasks relating to the language
the learners use during the task cycle. I will give the learners a questionnaire
after the class, in order to ascertain how they felt about it and to gain some
insight into their reaction to a task based lesson. They will be asked if they
found the class interesting, if the class gave them the opportunity to improve
their reading, writing, listening and speaking. I will also seek their opinion
regarding the classs usefulness with reference to grammar, vocabulary and

Andrew Basquille

pronunciation. Finally, they will be asked what they liked and disliked about
the class.
b. I will ask my observer to note the clarity and quality of my instructions and the
effect these may have on the success of the experiment. During the task phase
of the task cycle, the observer will note if I do not interfere in their discussion,
but rather leave them use whatever language they have to do the task.
c. Particular attention will be paid by the observer to any increase in accuracy as
the students move from the task to the planning and reporting phases. She will
note how my involvement in assisting the students during the planning stage
can help them become more accurate with their language.
d. The observer will note what if any questions come from the learners regarding
form. She will evaluate my answers to such questions.
Background essay word count: 1947

2. Lesson Plan
Date

Andrew Basquille

13/10/04

Time

60 mins

Level

Upper-intermediate

Profile of learners

There are eight students in the class. All of them are attending a
general English course (20 hours per week Monday-Friday) at
Language Learning International, Dublin, Ireland. Two of them
take additional group lessons in the afternoons as part of an
intensive English programme.
They come from different backgrounds and countries. There are
three Italians, one Spaniard, one Brazilian, one Japanese and
one Korean. Most of the students are in their 20s, but the
youngest is 17 and the oldest is 35. Four are full time students
in their respective countries and four have jobs such as dentist,
graphic designer and engineer. Five of them are in Dublin for a
three or four week course. The other three are here for several
months.
They are highly motivated learners. All of them want to
improve their job prospects by improving every in aspect of
English. They are particularly keen to increase their vocabulary
and improve their spoken English. All of them are confident
speakers. They enjoy pair and group work, classroom
discussions and debates.
There is a good atmosphere among the students. Accuracy is
poor for some and in two cases, pronunciation is weak

Learners needs

The learners need to be able to communicate fluently and

accurately outside the classroom. They need to understand the
language as it is spoken. Their classes provide them with the
skills and confidence to use their language in everyday
interactions.

Aims

By the end of the lesson, learners will have had the opportunity
to complete the task of reading, discussing and summarising a
newspaper article. They will have listened to a fluent speaker
do a similar task. Having focused on and analysed his language,
they will have been given the opportunity to practise the
language in the Willis sense, and then go back into the task
cycle and do a similar task.

Main focus: Discourse

Supporting skill: Reading
Timetable Fit

Andrew Basquille

I have been using Cutting Edge Upper Intermediate with this

group. Having completed Unit 11, I have decided to adapt a
portion of Unit 12 in the light of my reading on task based
learning. I propose to continue with a closer analysis of the

language of reporting and summarising what people say in the

media.
Language Analysis

The newspaper articles from Cutting Edge Unit 12 (pp 143,

144, 145) give the students opportunities to report and
summarise. When reporting what someone said, the verb form
usually moves one tense into the past. When summarising what
people said, there is a large number of verbs and a variety of
constructions

Assumptions

I am assuming that the language in the articles will present few

problems to the students

Anticipate problems P: students will not find the task interesting

and solutions
S: stimulate interest during the pre-task stage
P: students will get stuck during the first phase of the task
S: tell them in advance that Im not going to help them then
P: the students wont have enough time
S: be realistic about timing in the lesson plan
Materials/Resources Cutting Edge Upper Intermediate (Cunningham and Moor,
1999, Longman)
Personal aims
To teach a pure task based class
To give students the time to complete the task without interference from me as
this would be a new departure for me
To see if I can cope with unpredicted questions on form
To increase my understanding of how to teach a task based lesson

Detailed Plan
Stage

Aims

Andrew Basquille

Procedure

Interaction

Time

Pre-task

To introduce the
topic

Ask students to look at

headlines and to guess what
the articles are about
Give each group an
article.
Ask them to read it
carefully.
Ask each other about
any unfamiliar words.
Answer the following
questions:
a. What is the article about?
b. What are the two most
important claims made in the
article?
c. Think of one interesting
question arising from the
article that you would like to
discuss with fellow students
Ask students to summarise
their answers in writing. They
may ask T to help them
express their answers
Each pair reports to the whole
class. Other students listen an
may ask questions

Whole
class

0-5
mins

Task

Students read an
article and answer
three question

Pairs. T
monitors

5 15
mins

Planning

Students write out

their answers

Pairs. T
monitors
and makes
suggestions
Whole
class

15-25
mins

Ask students to listen

carefully to a tape of a fluent
speaker summarising a
newspaper article. Play is
once without transcript.
Distribute transcript and play
it again.
To draw the
Ask students to identify any
students attention words or phrases in the
to aspects of the
transcript which might be
native speakers
useful in summarising their
language
own article. Answer questions
about form
To give students
Ask students to read another
the opportunity to article. Answer the three
do the task again
questions using any new
& incorporate new language they have learnt
forms
from the transcript

Whole
class

28-32
mins

Pairs

32-40
mins

Pairs

40-60
mins

Report

Students read out

their answers to
the rest of the
class
Listening To hear a native
speaker talk about
a similar article

Analysis

Practice
T>P>R

25-28
mins

3. Post-Lesson

Andrew Basquille

10

3.1 Evaluation of the experiment

a. I was pleased to see that the class reacted in a positive way to the experiment.
My observer noted that the learners were actively engaged by the class. After
the lesson, I asked them to complete the questionnaire (Appendix 1). The
results of the questionnaire showed that they enjoyed the class and many of
them felt that they had gained something from it.
b. Following the Willis model, I did not help them during the task phase of the
task cycle. The students were left alone to use whatever language they had to
do the task. As they moved to the planning phase, I could see how they put
some thought into expressing their ideas. I told them that during this phase,
they could ask me for help and suggestions. Most of the students took
advantage of this, although some used dictionaries. They presented their
answers to the three questions during the reporting phase. However, I now
realise that I had compromised the objective of the planning and reporting
phases, i.e. the movement towards greater accuracy, by not giving clear
enough instructions. I omitted to tell students that I would not interrupt their
reports. As a result, the students did not actually use summarising language as
frequently as I had hoped
c. There was good overall fluency during the task cycle. I felt at the time that the
learners language was more accurate as the cycle progressed and the observer
confirmed this. However, during the reporting phase, it was observed that I
was prompting the student who was making the report. I had not made it
sufficiently clear to the students that they would have to prepare a written
report and read it out to the class. I can see how a teacher could mistakenly
conclude that the task cycle does not work, as there did not seem to be a
significant qualitative difference between the learners language at the start
and at the end of the cycle.
d. In retrospect, I realise that it may have been more appropriate to state
discourse (the language of summarising) as the lessons main aim because
grammar was only going to be a supporting aim. I invited the learners to focus
on words or phrases in the native speakers summary, which might have been
useful in doing their task. They successfully identified the appropriate
language but did not ask questions about form. I feel that I did the students a
disservice by not spending time on a practice activity. Instead, they re-entered
the task cycle without having spent sufficient time focussing on and practising
the new language.
Overall, this experiment showed me how effective task based learning can be
because I saw how engaged the learners were and how the process of completing
the task created a context for effective language input.

3.2 Action points

Andrew Basquille

11

Having read about task based learning and having taught this class, I feel I
have a much greater appreciation of the pros and cons of this approach. However, it
seems to me that I am only beginning to realise what its potential and drawbacks are.
My first reaction after the class was that I wanted to teach another task based class as
soon as possible. Taking into account what I had learnt from the experience, I would
like to continue researching TBL and using it in as many different teaching contexts as
possible in order to experience for myself how effective it can be,
TBL and long term learners
Since, for the foreseeable future, the classes I am teaching are likely to be
comprised of long term students, I would be very interested to see if teaching task
based lessons on a continuous basis to them would add up to a comprehensive
language syllabus. I would like to investigate this further as I would be curious to see
how new language can be learnt organically rather than systematically.
Task design
The task I chose for the class was adapted from a text book. Already, I have
begun to look at text book material in a new way, asking myself if it would be suitable
for a task-based class. I have noticed that frequently, while the material may be
suitable, very often activities suggested have to be made more concrete with an
identifiable outcome.
I would be interested to see if I could design tasks which would successfully
elicit certain language. This may be a useful in situation in which some learners
specifically request input on a particular area of grammar. Although the temptation
might be to revert to an orthodox PPP approach, I am curious to see if the expressed
need of the learner could be met by the task based approach.
Learner training
In a teaching context such as mine, which is a private language school, there
are commercial demands made on the teacher to satisfy the clients wishes. I foresee
that sometimes the learner style of the client learner might not be compatible with the
task based approach because s/he has learned to learn in a more traditional grammarled way. In the case of long term learners, I would like to experiment with some
learner training in order to help them benefit from this method.

3.3 Evaluation of the lesson and action points

Aims: The learners completed the task as stated in the aims. Although they were
given the opportunity to practise the new language by re-entering the task cycle, not
all the students actually used it.
Andrew Basquille

12

Action: Include specific practice activities such as repetition, gap-filling and memory
challenge as suggested by Willis (pp110-113)
Systems aim: During the planning phase, I answered students questions and helped
them correct their grammatical errors. During the analysis stage, they didnt ask any
questions about form
Action: In future, I would make the analysis stage more of an event by using an
overhead projector. I had handed out transcripts of the native speakers summary and
this was too similar to what had happened during the task cycle. I would also try
preparing specific questions about form, asking them to notice certain features of the
language.
Skills aim: The learners had plenty of opportunities to improve their reading. On the
whole, the very act of doing the task was a successful integrative skills experience.
Although not a stated aim, writing is an essential part of the task based lesson. The
learners did not make the most of the opportunity, largely because my instructions
were not clear enough.
Action: Be more explicit when giving instructions for the planning and reporting
phases.
Teaching Skills: Thanks to the observation comments from my course tutor, I realise
that a key factor in implementing a successful task based lesson is the clarity of
instructions, especially during the task cycle. I have to ensure that they understand that
they will be making a formal presentation, possibly asking them to stand up in front of
the class, so the that they are the focus of attention and not me. I will not start them off
or prompt them. Thus, they will assume the full responsibility of planning and
presenting the report.

4. Appendices
Appendix 1

Andrew Basquille

13

Observation tasks
Objective:
1. To note examples of learners relative fluency and
accuracy as they move through the task cycle phases.
2. To note any questions coming from students regarding
form of NS language

First Task Phase

Fluent

Accurate

First Planning Phase

Fluent

Accurate

First Report Phase

Fluent

Accurate

Analysis stage: what (if anything) did learners notice in the native speakers
language?

Andrew Basquille

14

Second Task Phase

Fluent

Accurate

Second Planning Phase

Fluent

Accurate

Second Report Phase

Fluent

Accurate

Appendix 2
Student Questionnaire
1. Did you find the topic of this class (circle one):
a. very interesting
b. interesting
Andrew Basquille

15

c. not very interesting

Comment:
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
2. Did this class give you the opportunity to improve your: (number 1-4)
a. reading
b. writing
c. listening
d. speaking
Comment:
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
3. How useful was this class for: (number 1-3)
a. grammar
b. vocabulary
c. pronunciation
Comment:
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________

4. What did you like about this class?

_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
5. What did you dislike about this class?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________

5. Bibliography
Background reading

Andrew Basquille

16

Skehan, P. 1996 Second language acquisition research and task-based

instruction in Willis J. & D.(ed) Challenge and Change in Language
Teaching Macmillan Heinemann
Willis, J. 1996 A flexible framework for task-based learning in Willis J. & D.
(ed) Challenge and Change in Language Teaching Macmillan
Heinemann
Willis, J. 1998 Task-based learning ETP Issue 9
Willis, J. & D. 1998 A Framework for Task-Based Learning Longman

Textbook

Cunningham, S & Moor, P 1999 Cutting Edge Upper Intermediate

Longman

Andrew Basquille

17