This article presents a framework for designing a task-based course based on a distinction between unfocused and focused tasks. Various criteria for sequencing tasks in terms of complexity are identified and discussed. These criteria relate to task input, to task conditions, to the process of performing a task and to task outcomes. While it is recognized that the criteria cannot be applied to task sequencing algorithmically, it is argued that they should inform intuitive decisions about the design of task-based syllabuses. The article also considers two approaches to incorporating a focus on form into a task-based syllabus. In an integrated approach, content-obligatory and content-compatible language forms are identified for each task. In a modu lar approach, the syllabus is conceived of as two separate modules, one consisting of unfocused tasks and the other utilizing a traditional structural syllabus taught through a focus-on-forms approach and/or through focused tasks.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Asher, J.1977Learning Another Language through Actions: The Complete Teachers' Guidebook (Los Gatos, CA: Sky Oaks Publications).
2.
Brindley, G.1989Assessing Achievement in the Learner-Centred Curriculum (Sydney: National Centre for English Language Teaching and Research).
3.
Brown, G., et al. 1984Teaching Talk: Strategies for Production and Assessment (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
4.
Candlin, C.1987 'Towards Task-Based Language Learning', in C. Candlin and D. Murphy (eds.), Language Learning Tasks (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall): 5-22.
5.
Chaudron, C.1988Second Language Classrooms: Research on Teaching and Learning (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
6.
Doughty, C.2001 'Cognitive Underpinnings of Focus on Form', in P. Robinson (ed.), Cognition and Second Language Instruction (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press): 206-57.
7.
Ellis, R.2002 'The Place of Grammar Instruction in the Second/Foreign Language Curriculum', in E. Hinkel and S. Fotos (eds.), New Perspectives on Grammar Teaching in Second Language Classrooms (Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum): 17-34.
8.
2003Task-Based Language Teaching and Learning ( Oxford: Oxford University Press).
9.
Ellis, R., H. Basturkmen and S. Loewen2001 'Learner Uptake in Communicative ESL Lessons', Language Learning51: 281-318.
10.
Ellis, R., Y. Tanaka and A. Yamazaki1994 'Classroom Interaction, Comprehension and the Acquisition of Word Meanings', Language Learning44: 449-91.
11.
Gass, S., and E. Varonis1994 'Input, Interaction, and Second Language Production', Studies in Second Language Acquisition16: 283-302.
12.
Genesee, F.1994 'Integrating Language and Content Instruction', in R. Bostwick (ed.), Immersion Education International Symposium Report (Japan: Katoh Gakuen): 44-66.
13.
Johnston, M.1986 'Second Language Acquisition Research in the Adult Migrant Education Programme', in M. Johnston and M. Pienemann (eds.), Second Language Acquisition: A Classroom Perspective (New South WalesMigrant Education Service).
14.
Lewis, M.1993The Lexical Approach: The State ofEL Tand the Way Forward (Hove, England: Language Teaching Publications).
15.
Long, M.1985 'A Role for Instruction in Second Language Acquisition: Task-Based Language Teaching', in K. Hyltenstam and M. Pienemann (eds.), Modelling and Assessing Second Language Acquisition (Clevedon, OH: Multilingual Matters): 77-99.
16.
Loschky, L., and R. Bley-Vroman1993 'Grammar and Task-Based Methodology', in G. Crookes and S. Gass (eds.), Tasks in a Pedagogical Context: Integrating Theory and Practice (Clevedon: Multilingual Matters ): 123-67.
17.
Markee, N.1997Managing Curricular Innovation (Cambridge : Cambridge University Press).
18.
Met, M.1994 'Teaching Content through a Second Language', in F. Genesee (ed.), Educating Second Language Children (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press): 159-82.
19.
Nunan, D.1989Designing Tasksfor the Communicative Classroom (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).
20.
Oh, S.2001 'Two Types of Input Modification and EFL Reading Comprehension: Simplification vs. Elaboration', TESOL Quarterly35.1: 69-96.
21.
Prabhu, N.S.1987Second Language Pedagogy (Oxford: Oxford University Press). Robinson , P.
22.
1995 'Task Complexity and Second Language Narrative Discourse' , Language Learning45: 99-140.
23.
2001 'Task Complexity, Task Difficulty, and Task Production: Exploring Interactions in a Componential Framework', Applied Linguistics22: 27-57.
24.
Skehan, P.1996a 'A Framework for the Implementation of Task-Based Instruction' , Applied Linguistics17: 38-62.
25.
1996 b 'Second Language Acquisition Research and Task-Based Instruction' , in J. Willis and D. Willis (eds.), Challenge and Change in Language Teaching (Oxford: Heinemann): 17-30.
26.
1998 a A Cognitive Approach to Language Learning ( Oxford: Oxford University Press).
27.
1998b 'Task-Based Instruction', Annual Review of Applied Linguistics18: 268-86.
28.
2001 'Tasks and Language Performance Assessment', in M. Bygate et al (eds.), Researching Pedagogic Tasks, Second Language Learning, Teaching and Testing ( Harlow: Longman): 167-85.
29.
Snow, C., M. Met and F. Genesee
30.
1989 'A Conceptual Framework for the Integration of Language and Content in Second/Foreign Language Instruction', TESOL Quarterly23: 201-217. Stem, H.
31.
1990 'Analysis and Experience as Variables in Second Language Pedagogy' , in B. Harley, P. Allen, J. Cummins and M. Swain (eds.), The Development of Second Language Proficiency (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press): 93-109.
32.
Swain, M.1985 'Communicative Competence: Some Roles of Comprehensible Input and Comprehensible Output in its Development', in S. Gass and C. Madden (eds.), Input in Second language Acquisition (Rowley, MA: Newbury House): 235-52.
33.
Widdowson, H.1990Aspects of Language Teaching (Oxford : Oxford University Press). Yalden, J.
34.
1983The Communicative Syllabus: Evolution, Design and Implementation (Oxford: Pergamon Press).
35.
Yule, G., and D. McDonald1990 'Resolving Referential Conflicts in L2 Interaction: The Effect of Proficiency and Interactive Role', Language Learning40: 539-56.
