Practice Activities – FP011 TP
Name and surname(s): Robinson Fernando Copete Mosquera
René Alejandro Salazar
Group:
Date: October 31st, 2019
PRACTICE ACTIVITIES:
TASKS AND PROJECTS
Index
1
Practice Activities – FP011 TP
Introduction………………………………………………………………………….. Page 3
Task 1……………………………………………………………………………….. Page 4-5
Task 2……………………………………………………………...………………….Page 5-7
Task 3……………………………………………………………………...………….Page 7-8
Task 4……………………………………………………………………...…… …...Page 9-10
Conclusion …………………………………………………………………………..Page 10
References…………………………………………………………………………..Page 11
2
Practice Activities – FP011 TP
Introduction
Task-based language teaching (TBLT) or task-based instruction (TBI) was popularised
by Prabhu in the late 80s. His intention was to have students complete meaningful tasks
using their L2. One of the ideas of TBI is the completion of tasks taken from real life,
such as calling customer service for help or visiting the doctor.
There is an important body of literature supporting Prabhu’s view. However, the benefits
of this approach have been debated, questioned and restructured so as to increase its
effectiveness. The following practice activities shed light on these contributions,
innovations and new ways to make the most of TBI.
Practice Activities
3
Practice Activities – FP011 TP
Read the materials and watch the video “Prof. Ellis on task-based pedagogy: the
what, why and how”, available on campus.
Task 1.
Does the following proposal fit the definition of “tasks” according to Ellis? Justify
your answer.
Retrieved from Counihan, G. (1998). The Internet TESL Journal, Vol. IV, No. 11, November
1998. [Link]
The task proposed before can be considered part of a TBLT task according to Ellis (as
cited in TESOLacademic, 2014). Since the teacher aims to meet a communicative
outcome by giving the students an activity, in which each of them has a specific role;
4
Practice Activities – FP011 TP
students can present an assumption of the activity’s goal and enable themselves to
participate easily and naturally in the communication process proposed in this type of
task. (5:30).
Firstly and based on Ellis’ explanation on the types of task the teacher can use to develop
that implicit knowledge that permits them to create the proper conditions to learners
communicate using the target language. This activity first shows a type of unfocused-
task where the students receive a language input that first it seems to be based on
intentional language delivery, but as the activity advanced students would learn from
others’ participation with incidental language acquisition.
On the other hand and regarding the notes section, it can be stated how the teacher
expects that with the language input and context established, the students can come
with their own resources of conversation, language exchange based on the input’s
contexts, and moreover be engaged in creating and eliciting new language in a
collaborative way; primary focusing on meaning by encouraging realistic language forms.
(Ellis as cited in TESOLacademic, 2014; 7:05).
Finally, we think that the activity also appears to be based on an information gap
approach task. Owing to the fact that each student is assigned a certain role and phrase
to elicit the communication in advance. As one learner has one piece of information and
complements it with other’s piece, the necessity to share this information and vice versa
is established. So, students are able to replicate this same scenario of information
exchanging outside the classroom context.
Task 2.
Define “implicit” and “explicit” knowledge and provide an example (Robinson’s
article in the library might complement Ellis’ video).
According to Ellis (1994), Implicit knowledge emerges with "the underplaying structure
of a complex stimulus environment by a process which takes place naturally, simply and
without conscious operations" (p.1). Following the same path, Berry (1994) stated a
similar distinction when expressing learning as an outcome that occurs without a
concerted awareness of it, and more through inference and instances. Therefore, implicit
knowledge is the one that serves as a means to help students communicate, transfer
knowledge and ideas, and enhance their L2 incidentally, hence it is not limited by other
5
Practice Activities – FP011 TP
external factors or activities rules operation. (Ellis as cited in TESOLacademic, 2014;
7:05).
On the other hand, explicit knowledge is intentional. It is acquired throughout a more
conscious notion of the topic’s rules and not its instances. The learner is more aware of
the structures that may emerge in the learning process theories; involving a straight
problem-solving approach based on hypothesis formations and testing. (Berry, 1994;
Dekeyser, 1995; Ellis, 1994; Robinson, 1997a; Robinson, 1997b) In brief, its procedure
and rationale is the intentional delivery of knowledge-based in the organized structural
syllabus that may create a problem of the meaning transfer due to its lack of relation and
extension with the real-world context. (Ellis as cited in TESOL academic, 2014; 10:15).
From Robinson’s (2011) point of view, both types of knowledge need to be developed in
some instances on the second language learning process. As a matter of fact, the type
of knowledge that is initially implicit could become an explicit one since the unintentional
language forms learned in previous lessons are now well known and noticeable (p.16).
Nevertheless, this depends on the number of attempts to complete the task and how well
controlled the language and meaning forms are. Regardless the type of knowledge that
may come as an output in future lessons, and even if the context is a vocabulary or
grammar instruction one, both Ellis (2014) and Robinson (2001) support the idea of using
focused and unfocused type tasks that relies on language forms previously selected and
sequenced by the teacher; allowing the process of elicitation, motivational cognitive
construction and L2 vocabulary acquisition to take place. Consequently, the main
purpose and basis of TBLT is to work on the meaning-content type of activities that can
trustfully promote incidental learning and interlanguage development. (Robinson, 2001;
p.24)
Regarding this type of meaning-content activities, Ellis, Loewen, Elder, Erlam, Philp &
Reinders (2009) proposed the elicited oral imitation activities as a good example to
develop and measure the implicit knowledge created with focused- tasks. Finding out
two important elements on memory and even internalized grammar factors, in which the
learners were able to manipulate grammatical structures in a consistently well way
relating it to their own internal grammar. Due to this, the implicit knowledge is understood
by learning how students learned to control complex grammar structures as a result of
the stimulus received from a positive correction and student’s own interlanguage
reconstructions (p.66).
6
Practice Activities – FP011 TP
In the same way, Ellis et al. (2009) proposed the grammatical judgment tests to develop
and measure both explicit and implicit knowledge in L2. In contrast to implicit tasks, the
explicit ones require some degree of conscious analysis of the knowledge that is being
delivered. For instance, learners can simply be asked to discriminate between well-form
and deviant sentences by using error analysis, locating mistakes, correcting, describing
errors, processing, noticing and reflecting methods to undergo this GJTs process. (p. 94-
96).
Task 3.
What are the main wrong assumptions done about task-based learning? Can you
provide examples that support Ellis’s complaints, i.e. that show task-based
activities that do not fit the prototypical assumptions?
A task is an “activity in which there is a focus on meaning” (n.d, 24) This was Prabhu’s
view of using tasks. Nevertheless, the concept has evolved to the point that negotiation
is necessary “in order to effectively propel language acquisition forward” (n.d, 24). That
is why teachers should provide students with as many meaningful tasks as possible, “a
healthy diet of tasks…, which include plenty of opportunities for the negotiation of
meaning”. Research has shed light on this particular point, suggesting that the many
opportunities a learner has to negotiate meaning might not be as effective as initially
thought.
Foster, for instance, argues that negotiation can be hampered by the dominance of some
“class members who do all the negotiation, while the majority of learners in class may
remain passive” (Foster, 1998). Another author who questions the benefits of negotiation
is Skehan, who after analyzing Foster’s research claims that, “...Unless the the
negotiation set in motion by the small number of individuals then generated interactions
which were vicariously helpful to the silent majority , the value of such interaction
activities for interlanguage modification and readiness for change is debatable.
Another objection regarding task-based is the limited capacity processing human beings
have got, which is the fact that “we cannot process many stimuli simultaneously” (n.d,
25); in other words, for us, it is difficult to perform two tasks efficiently at the same time.
In relation to language learning, “when faced with the task of producing an utterance in
the L2, the learner can either access their ruled based system or their exemplar-based
7
Practice Activities – FP011 TP
system, but cannot access both simultaneously” (n.d, 25)1. In other words, “learners will
attend to the overall meaning of a message before they will focus on the discrete items
of grammar used to convey the message”.
The difficulty here is that in usually this type of exercises do not give learners a lot of
time to complete the exercise (usually called “on-line” communication), discouraging
learners to restructure their interlanguage for they have to rely on their “exemplar vast
system”, it means the array of semi-fixed and fixed expressions.
Example activities of this “wrong” assumptions are the activities proposed by Prabhu’s,
such as:
● Diagrams and formations: Naming parts of a diagram with numbers and letters
of the alphabet, as instructed.
● Maps: finding, naming or describing specific locations on a given map.
● Stories and dialogues: listening to stories and completing them with appropriate
solutions.
An example of activities that do not fit the prototypical assumptions is the ones proposed
by Batstone when the scholar states question the role of negotiation in communicative
tasks (n.d, 34). These are the instructions of one of these activities:
As you listen to the dialogue, decide whether each of these events in the list (a)
happened in the past, (b) began in the past but still going on, (c) is planned for the future.
put a tick in the right column.
Event Happened and finished Still going on Future
Jane applies for a job
Jane gets the result of
her application
Jane’s cat causes
problems for Jane
Jane’s sisters arrives
1 To a great extent, language learning consists of both item learning
(memorizing semi-fixed chunks as holophrases) and system learning
(discovering underlying grammatical rules(n.d, 24).
8
Practice Activities – FP011 TP
Jane and sister go to
concerts
Task 4.
Can an online course be fully task-based? What inconveniences might it encounter?
You might want to read Lee 2016 before answering.
We think that an online course can be fully task-based. The advent of the digital era has
opened an array of possibilities for teachers to create “optimal task-based”. In the words of
Lee, these possibilities are “interaction, contextualization, and authenticity”. Lee also
mentions a variety of studies remarking on the effectiveness of a task-based methodology,
such as collaboration among learners, awareness-raising, and interlanguage enhancement.
In addition, these studies have also demonstrated that task-based “encourage students’
active participation” (Lee 2016).
Although she introduces her investigation with a generous description of the benefits of task-
based, her purpose is to find out “how TBI can be implemented effectively to provide students
with a similar interaction to what they would experience face-to-face”.
We think that TBI fosters individuality and collaboration. However, we also think that an online
course cannot surpass the benefits that a face-to-face methodology can offer. This is the
conclusion that the author reached: “the study concludes that teachers need to invest a
tremendous amount of time and energy to create and develop online courses that meet the
needs of learners in a similar way to face-to-face instruction”.
9
Practice Activities – FP011 TP
References
Foster, P (1998). A classroom perspective on the negotiation of meaning. Applied
linguistics, 19 (1), 1-23
Robinson. P. (1997a). Individual differences and the fundamental similarity of implicit and explicit
adult second language learning. Language Learning, 47. 45-99.
Robinson, P. (1997b). Generalizability and automaticity of second language leaming under implicit,
incidental, enhanced, and instructed conditions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition. 19, 223-
247.
Lee, Lina. Autonomous learning through task-based instruction in fully online language
courses. Language Learning & Technology, 20(2), 81-97, 2016.
[Link]
Skehan, P. (1998). A Cognitive Approach to Language Learning. Oxford: Oxford
University.
10
Practice Activities – FP011 TP
Retrieved from Counihan, G. (1998). The Internet TESL Journal, Vol. IV, No. 11, November 1998.
[Link]
Ellis, N. (1994). Consciousness in second language learning: Psychological perspectives on the
role of conscious processes in vocabulary. AILA Review. 37-46.
Ellis, R. Loewen, S. Elder, C. Erlam, R. Philp, J & Reinders, H. (2009). Implicit and explicit
learning, knowledge and instruction. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data. Bristol;
UK. Retrieved from: [Link]
Ellis, R. (2011). The evaluation of communicative tasks. In: Tomlinson, B. (ed). Materials
development in language teaching. (2nd ed) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 217-238.
Ellis, R. [TESOLacademic]. (2014, July 28). Prof. Ellis on task-based pedagogy: the what, why
and how [Video file]. Retrieved from [Link]
Berry, D. C. (1994) Implicit and explicit learning of complex tasks. In: Ellis, N. C. (ed.) Implicit
and Explicit Learning of Languages. Academic Press, London.
11
