LINGUIST List 16.2504
|
Mon Aug 29 2005
Review: Lang Education: Edwards & Willis (2005)
Editor for this issue: Lindsay Butler
<lindsay linguistlist.org>
|
What follows is a review or discussion note contributed to our Book Discussion Forum. We expect discussions to be informal and interactive; and the author of the book discussed is cordially invited to join in. If you are interested in leading a book discussion, look for books announced on LINGUIST as "available for review." Then contact Sheila Dooley at dooley linguistlist.org.
|
Directory
1. Kevin
Landry,
Teachers Exploring Tasks in English Language Teaching
Message 1: Teachers Exploring Tasks in English Language Teaching
|
Date: 27-Aug-2005
From: Kevin Landry <lklandry gmail.com>
Subject: Teachers Exploring Tasks in English Language Teaching
EDITORS: Edwards, Corony; Willis, Jane TITLE: Teachers Exploring Tasks in English Language Teaching PUBLISHER: Palgrave Macmillan YEAR: 2005 Announced at http://linguistlist.org/issues/16/16-1340.html Kevin Laurence Landry, Department of Liberal Arts, Hongik University, Korea; MA Linguistics (TESOL) University of Surrey This book brings together 19 papers by different authors investigating tasks and task based teaching in the classroom. It connects many distance education projects mostly done towards master programs from the University of Birmingham or Aston University. It is divided into four main sections: describing using tasks in lessons, interaction within tasks, language used in tasks, and variables in task. It is well introduced and organized with information about the individual contributors, abbreviations, aims, an overview, and summary of each project. SYNOPSIS Jane Willis gives advice in an introduction for doing action and classroom research and explains what is meant by task. In a task the principle focus is on exchanging and understanding meanings for some kind of purpose such as: writing a list of differences, completing a route, reporting a solution, etc. She describes that the contributors are teaching English as a Foreign Language and that task-based learning is an approach that centers on meaning. Ali Shehadeh explains the background of task based learning and teaching. She contrasts it with presentation, practice and Production (PPP) approach to second language teaching. She gives a rationale for task based teaching, defines task, identifies types, and offers perspectives for task-based learning. She overviews the work to come and states that grammar -based instruction fails to produce effective language users. Chapter 2 is an article by Lamprini Loumpourdi telling of her adaptation of a teacher centered grammar class into one that learners contributed more. Patricia Pullin Stark reports in Chapter 3, how designing a syllabus for business students incorporated projects. Concordances replace grammar books in Raymond Sheehan's Chapter 4. Patrick Kiernan in Chapter 5 investigates recorded story telling to raise confidence and fluency. Chapter 6 is written by Theron Muller about incorporating tasks into units from a textbook. Jason Moser used action research to focus students' attention on form with a lesson journal in Chapter 7. Chapters 8 - 11 explore interaction. Maria Leedham in Chapter 8 transcribes native speakers to increase turn taking in learners. Chapter 9 by Seung-Min Lee attempted to solve communication problems among students by teaching meaning negotiation skills. Chapter 10 is a study on repeating tasks with young learners by Annamaria Pinter. David Coulson develops team talking in Chapter 11 so his learners can work together in a conversation with international students. Chapters 12 - 14 explore lexical phrases and patterns of the language used in tasks. James Hobbs in Chapter 12 recorded native speakers doing tasks for a basic of an interactive syllabus. Chapter 13 by Maggie Baigent compared her learners and native speakers use of multi-word chunks. In Chapter 14 David Cox tested the prediction of the language needed to perform 5 different tasks. Task conditions and task types are investigated in Chapters 15 - 19. The quality of language in a report stage of a lesson is compared to the language used during a task in Chapter 15 by Craig Johnston. William Essig hypotheses in Chapter 16 how retelling a story under different circumstances affects its improvement. Chapter 17 has Antigone Djapoura testing the benefits of pre-task planning and instruction. Greg Birch in chapter 18 recorded students to see if certain tasks direct attention to accuracy, fluency or complexity of language. Types of interaction to show language acquisition in process are studied in Chapter 19 by Glen Poupore. EVALUATION This book is very inspirational for a new student considering or starting a Masters degree in teaching English as a foreign language. The articles are all about using task based teaching in a classroom and encouraging others to do similar research and share it with the teaching community. Each article is focused on task and has many different interpretations of what a task is. It gives plenty of ideas for teachers to try in their own classroom like recording learners, public reports, and designing your own tasks. However with a large number of inexperienced researchers the work in some papers does seem amateurish. The ideas are fresh and although the book is organized in distinct sections the studies overlap and are not connected in a completely systematic way. The term task has been used to refer to almost any type of exercise or activity done by learners. It is a great way to teach but at times some authors take great pains to criticize other methods. Although task based methods are designed to let the learner find a gap between what he can do with language and what he needs to do with language many of the activities are contrived and learners trying to complete the activity find ways around improving their language. The design of task- based learning seems helpful for fostering communication between students and many of the articles spoke of learners enjoying their classes. Personal experience though would make us wonder how enjoyable gap activities of any kind end up being in some classes and how frustrated learners probably become without improvements on standard tests. Tasks succeed in giving learners something to use the language they know on but fail to convince critics of their value. As long as language tests continue to test Grammar with multiple choice questions and companies hire according to those results some learners will be unwilling to participate fully in class no matter how exciting an activity may have sounded in a report. The positive results and reactions make teaching sound easy but in practice any kind of approach has more to do with a teacher establishing productive rapport with the learners. The language used in many articles is British English and should be easy to understand by Americans as well. However some examples and grammar may seem awkward to those accustomed to American style English. The tenets of tasks seem to be anti-grammar but things like "Conditionals" and "If" and "using "Would" were explored in the second chapter. The lines of grammar teaching and task teaching do seem somewhat blurred. The authors do though explain exactly what they did in their class and make it some easy for other teachers to emulate. In Chapter 3 the author includes criticism from one of her students that preparation time seemed too long for improving a short speech. If students cannot see the benefits of certain procedures it causes friction in the class and Student evaluations of teachers are often based on their perception of the teacher's popularity rather than any measured improvements. In Chapter 4 the data driven learning is much like traditional lessons in other subjects where learners have to follow the rules teachers explain. The researcher admits that a few students would have rather had the teacher just gave them the answer than having to work for it. Learners in Chapter 5 seemed passive and unresponsive when listening to others tell their story. It seems that task based activities are no guarantee to a great class but must be refined and fine-tuned for different situations. It still sounds worthwhile though and experimenting in language teaching adds motivation to classroom exercises. Speaking tests are addressed in Chapter 5 sound like an interesting alternative to paper tests. The task of telling a story though easily falls into many pitfalls such as the ability of your partner, similar personal interests, or in fact having a good story to even tell. It certainly isn't easy to judge a person's speech and task-based approaches offer little in terms of guidelines for good speech. Adapting PPP style textbooks led the researcher in Chapter 6 to omit suggested phrases from handouts. It seems though the learners who are able to do the task then already have the language necessary to complete it so language teaching becomes learners practicing what they already know beforehand. In some instances practicing what you know could be beneficial but it is difficult to sell in a syllabus. In a way though it does allow learners to approach a situation with level appropriate language and elicits material for a teacher to evaluate. In Chapter 7 the researcher had partners switch to escape boredom when talking about the same topic a second or third time. In my experience, learners tire of saying the same thing even to different people if used too often. The researcher offers different topics so may not have had this problem or have noticed. Some articles are more formal than others and his informal use of "I" and 'you" sets him apart from other researchers. The summary of certain articles are also somewhat less formal than what someone might expect in a journal but the hands on approach the foreign language field creates seems to make it acceptable. Chapter 8 identifies long turns students take and the researcher attempted to use native speakers recorded as examples. The researcher sounds British and reports that students felt the task was useful but doesn't go into specifics. Seeing actual native speakers (NS) doing a language- learning task do open our eyes to the language the book expects learners to use and contrasts with sample dialogues usually given. This researchers' suggestions of using NS and students doing dialogues or even high level learners is intriguing and he is right on when criticizing almost any textbook dialogue. Chapter 9 reads much differently than the previous two. The writer's native language seems to be Korean and his style of writing seems affected by how things would be said in his first language. It is interesting to note that as teachers we measure or at least compare how language is used to our own way of speaking or writing. The researcher used a recording of native teachers doing a task as an example for his pupils to follow. The researcher in Chapter 10 teaches her learners expressions that also sound foreign to me. She has them saying such things as, "Have you got a frog on the second floor" and "No. I have got one dog". Rather than use "Have you got" a more familiar expression for me would be "Do you have". I thought while reading this Chapter how obvious and interesting it was that all over the world there are teachers with different notions as to what English is right. In my case I often attribute any unfamiliar expressions to them being British English. However I could be mistaken. This researcher did not have her learners change partners so it just showing that tasks can be used different ways. Her learners give back positive feed back but it begs the question, "How far can student self- evaluation be trusted". Were they happy with the activity and would not have enjoyed another type? Could their prediction of being able to duplicate the task outside of the classroom in a real situation succeed? In Chapter 11 the researcher explains in Japanese culture it is considered rude to interrupt the speaker. It makes me think that our evaluation of fluent English is more cultural than we assume; see Eye movements (2005). The "Team talking" strategy put forward by the researcher is very innovative and sounds like a wonderful way for learners to work together to get control of a conversation. However in Japan International students may feel obligated to talk based on their previous experience speaking with other Japanese. His students were preparing for an English Day so having a definite goal really seemed to help motivate his class. Using recordings of native speakers to improve student performance in pair interviews gave them examples to imitate. The researcher in Chapter 12 noticed learners resorting to using their first language to clarify and comment on answers during a task. The tasks though often seem designed to have students use English to perform correctly. Blaming this oversight on dialogues in language books that no one is interrupted or misunderstood seems logical. A breakdown in communication in fact is a common enough occurrence to warrant a study on its effect in a conversation. Students like teachers experiment with what works in class. Native speaker speech is not perfect and mentioning that it is acceptable to use vague language like 'you know' seems appropriate. While reading the different projects so many related concepts came to mind. Although speaking, writing, listening, and reading are closely related dialogue is not the same when written. Many of the transcripts throughout the book emphasize the value of recording learners' speech and give us an idea of what affect the task had on them during class. Multi-word chunks were divided and sorted according to the researcher in Chapter 13. Facts about native speakers using twice as many chunks as intermediate learners and other information is given in each introduction making each experiment an extension of earlier work. The innovative ways that evaluating language used while doing a task give us insight into what each researcher is interested in. Their recommendations are useful for other researchers and for classroom activities. The difference between what forms are expected or taught and natural language in Chapter 14 raises the question of how real language in any classroom can possibly be. Between each section of the book is an explanation of the part forthcoming. These explanations introduce the next theme but attempt to not give away the results of each piece of research. Phrases like "Read and see", however tend to take away from academic credibility of the field and combined with Summaries that are weak abstracts it is no wonder that language teaching articles are considered soft research compared to true science. Even so, the opportunity for professional development as a teacher by applying tasks in your own classroom are staggering. Chapter 15 focuses on the report stage of a task cycle and is a rather short addition to the book analyzing the task work and report of three students. One didn't have time to improve her solution, so although the experiment did not work very well, the researcher still shares the task they used and is worthwhile for spreading another style of text analysis. The hypothesis in Chapter 16 continues along the same track using public and private post task comparisons. However, one wonders how much fun a learner has telling the same story to the same person over again. Pre-planning time in Chapter 17 leads to another point of view. The conversations of motivated students were compared and planning time shown to be beneficial. Not allowing students to look at their notes does stop them from reading a prepared script but it may be had to enforce and monitor with a large group and especially if they do not understand why and would rather cheat to finish the task. The point of course is to prepare them for real life communication but language in the classroom is real in a sense. Chapter 18 attempts to investigate task characteristics and does so very professionally. Tables from other works are compiled and such information as one-minute preparation time being enough are very helpful for classroom application. The appendices present the handouts used for the tasks and also sample transcripts. Chapter 19 addresses how difficult it is to focus on form while interacting. Problem-solving tasks produced more quality interaction. Even so, the researcher points out that Jigsaw style tasks encourage self-correction and natural self initiated repairs. Some students do object to jigsaw tasks though and complained that the puzzle was not the kind of game they liked. At the end of the book is an Epilogue written by Corony Edwards. He evaluates the research by surveying the contributors. He compiles and examines their concept of classroom research, advises to start small and gives tips for others to move from being a language teacher to a researcher. Time was the main problem identified but rewards of excitement satisfaction and confidence seemed to lead researchers to avoid stagnation as a teacher. Justifying teaching inspired some and other impetuses are discussed. Enthusiasm and flexibility are offered as personality traits desirable for successful classroom research. Appendix 1 contains criteria for exploratory practice, Appendix 2; Methods and techniques for classroom research, Appendix 3; other research carried out by contributors. Teaching English in the context of a foreign language varies from country to country and institution to institution. Tasks are definitely a helpful addition to any classroom even if it is not the only method used in a classroom. The advice acts as a "rescue action" in English Language teaching much like Dogma in Thornbury (2000, no date) suggests learners must be engaged in relevant interaction. This book is a great example of using small-scale projects to investigate certain aspects of the class you are teaching and demonstrates how the teachers in the trenches can give back to the academic community. I would recommend reading it to any teacher of English as a foreign language starting out or looking for a cure to feeling burnt out. REFERENCES Eye movements may betray your culture, Aug. 22, 2005, Courtesy Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences and World Science staff. http://www.world-science.net/othernews/050822_eyeculturefrm.htm Thornbury, S. 2000. A Dogma for EFL. IATEFL Issues,153, 2 Thornbury, S. no date. Dogme: Dancing in the dark? http://www.hltmag.co.uk/mar05/mart03.htm ABOUT THE REVIEWER I'm very interested in teaching English in Korea. I'm teaching freshmen English and living English at Hongik University. The focus on grammar when testing is disturbing and how tests like the TOEIC give an unbalanced impression of someone's ability to communicate. I'm interested in using the tasks laid out in the book in my own class room and commenting on how they worked as well as my impressions before and afterward. I'm always trying to do new things and was reminded of some activities that have worked in the past for me while reading this book. I especially like having my students learn by interacting with each other.
Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue
|
|

Please report any bad links or misclassified data
LINGUIST Homepage | Read
LINGUIST | Contact us

While the LINGUIST List makes every effort to ensure the linguistic relevance of sites listed on its pages, it cannot vouch for their contents.
|
|