CHAPTER 9:MACRO –AND MICRO-

EVALUATIONS OF TASK- BASED

TEACHING

ROD ELLIS

Presented by:Nastaran Rashidi,Mina Keivanlo,and Mahsa Fallah

WHAT TBLT IS GOING TO DO? Engaging students in a series of

communicative tasks. TBLT is based on a view of language

learning that claims a L2 is best learned through learner’s effort to communicate with it.

DEFINING OF TASK Every task has 4 criteria: 1.it should be meaningful(semantic and

pragmatic) 2.there should be a gap 3.learners should rely on their own

resources 4.language is a means to achieve

outcome not as end

DISTINCTION BETWEEN TASK AND SITUATIONAL GRAMMAR EXERCISE Situational grammar exercises satisfy

the criteria 2 and 3 which means there is a gap and learners should rely on their own learning but it doesn’t satisfy criteria 1 and 4 as the outcome is primarily the use of correct language

DISTINCTION BETWEEN TASK-BASED AND TASK-SUPPORTED LANGUAGE TEACHING Task-based:requires a syllabus consisting of

unfocused tasks,the content of the instructional programme is specified in terms of the tasks to be completed

Task-supported language teaching:utilises a structural syllabus and typically involves(presentation,parctice,production)

According to widdowson:task-supported language teaching is likely to result in encoded usage rather than realization as purposeful use

TASKS CAN BE DISTINGUISHED IN A NUMBER OF WAYS Unfocused task:designed to help

learners to use language communicatively in general

Focused task:are designed to help learner to use language communicatively by using specific language features

Input-providing tasks:engage learner in listening and reading

Output-providing tasks:engage learner in speaking and writing

Closed-outcme task:has limited number of outcomes

Oped-outcome task:has many possible outcomes

MACRO EVALUATION Macro-evaluation can be defined as

evaluation that seeks to answer one or both of the following question:

1.to what extent was the programme/project effective and efficient in meeting its goals

2.in what face can the programme/project be improved?

DEFINITION OF MACRO EVALUATION Is an evaluation carried out for

accountability or developmental purposes by collecting information relating to various administrative and curricular aspects of the programme including teaching materials

MICRO EVALUATION A narrow focus on some specific aspects

of the curriculum or the administration of the programme

macro-evaluation may eventually emerge bottom-up from repeated micro evaluations

MACRO-EVALUATION OF TASK-BASED TEACHING

Bretta ,Davies sought to compare the learning outcome of learners involved in the project(experimental group)with those in traditional classes(control group).

Tests that favoured the experimental group (task-based test)….those that favoured the control group(structure-test)…and 3neutral test(contextualized grammar,,,dictation,,,reading/listening comprehension)

In the neutral test ,the experimental group scored higher than the control group.

on the group –biased test the experimental group did better on the task-based tests and control group scored higher in the structural test.

they conclude that the results of the evaluation support the claim that task-based instruction produce different results from form-focused instruction. And this is reflected in the task-based learners superior acquisition of the structure that havenot explicitly taught and also in their ability to deploy what they have learned more readily.

bretta collected historical narrative from 15 teacher and then rated it:

1)orientation:( lack of understanding task based and failed to implement it)

2)routine: understanding the rationale and implement it)

3)renewal (adopt a critical perspective and demonstrate the weakness and strengths).

Bretta found that 40 percent of the teacher were at level 1 ,47 percent at level 2 and 13percent at level 3.

he finally concluded that what he had done in the project cannot be assimilated by regular teacher and this is because lack of proficiency.

there have been a number of evaluation:

the study by Li: context: the introduction of

communicative language teaching into secondary school in south korea where traditionally a grammatical syllabus has been used.

purpose: to investigate the perception of the teacher of south korea of implementation of CLT.

evaluation method:questionnaire:with likert scale items and open question administered to 18 secondary school teacher

Finding:report difficulties in using CLT in korea:

1)difficulties caused by teacher.

2)student

3)educational system

4)CLT

The study by Mitchell and Lee: Context: two settings explored: 1)11-12 year old English students in

secondary school learning french 2)10-11 year old students in a korean

primary school learning english

Purpose:to examine how the communicative approach was interpreted and how the role of good language learner was constructed.

Evaluation method: twenty recorded lessons- interviews and back up documentation.

Findings:both teachers reflected a weak interpretation of CLT:

1)They aimed to provide learners with a fixed body of predetermined expressions and little opportunity for creative language.

2)teacher E adopted an egalitarian,undiffrentiated approach whereas teacher K privileged the more able students to provide the good model

The study by carless: Context: primary school classrooms in

hongkong.the three teacher in these classroom implement task-based syllabus

Purpose:what are the teachers attitude and how they are attempting to implement task-based syllabus?

Evaluation method:1) classroom observation-field notes and transcriptions

2)six-semi structured interview 3)an attitude scale(data analysed

qualitatively)

Findings:the tasks represented language practice activities rather than genuine practice .they identified 3 key issues:

1)use of mother tongue

2)discipline challenges

3)target language production

The study by Butler:

Context:the governments of korea,japan,taiwan have introduced english teaching with the expectancy that the focus will be on the oral communication.

Purpose:to identify teachers concerns regarding communicative activities

Evaluation method: multivocal ethnography involving presenting teacher with videotaped scenes.

Findings:1)teachers in different countries employed similar activity with different motives which led to different activities

2)teachers expressed concerns about how to develop communicative activities that were suitable for higher grade students

3)class harmonisation seen problematic especially in japan

The study by Mcdonough and chaikitmongkol:

Context: replace the traditional form focused course with task-based course in Thailand.key focus of course was the use of English for international communication.

Purpose:1) what were Thai teacher and learner reactions toward task-based course?

2)if they had any concerns how were these concerns addressed?

Evaluation method:task evaluations-students kept learning notebooks-observations by teacher and participant-course evaluation-interviews-field notes

Findings:A)teacher and learner reaction:

1)increased learner independence 2)course content 3)real world relevance B)addressing participants concerns:

1)revision undertaken to help participants adjust to the course

2)providing learner support 3)managing course materials.

An inspection of (purpose)column suggests that these evaluation studies had 2 general aims:

1)to identify teachers perception and attitudes to task-based teaching.

2)to examine how the teacher implemented TBLT.

Butlers observation support sociocultural view of task-.

task : the actual materials that compromise the workplan for the activity

activity:the learners behaviour that ensues when learners perform tasks

Carless reported that teachers he investigated had mixed and confused the notion of (task)

McDonough and Chaikitmonkgol have the most to say about materials. one of the problem they identified is how to interlink task-based materials that specifically developed for the university level with the materials from commercial book.another issue is the quantity of material.they conclude that it’s the curriculum that dictates the use of textbook not the textbook.

Finally we conclude that such macro-evaluation shed light on the viability of TBLT,it offers little insight into effectiveness of specific tasks or types of tasks and it is for this reason that there is a need for micro-evaluation

MICRO EVALUATION OF TASKS In Elis he outlined a procedure for

conducting a micro micro evaluation of a task

1.starting point Is a description of a task in terms of its objectives

2.the next to plan the evaluation by deciding on the objectives and purpose-the scope of the evaluation

3.the timing-the types of information-the data for the evaluation are collected

A NUMBER OF USES OF SUCH MICRO EVALUATION Simons(1997) evaluated an unfocused in formation-gap task.the task was performed

in pairs it required to students A to describe a route marked on the map and student B could draw in the route on his or her map but the 2 maps were not identical and students’ A map included some information that was missing from student B’s map thus creating a number referential differences Simons aim was simply to establish whether the task was successful in eliciting meaningful communication

5 GENERAL FUNCTIONAL CATEGORIES WERE IDENTIFIED 1.telling 2.questioning 3.acknowledging 4.responding 5.miscellaneous Simons concluded because of the

referential differences of this information gap task was an effective device for including learners to use the second language communicating

THE SECOND MICRO_EVALUATION Freeman set out to evaluate a

dicto_gloss task.this required students to a listening text three times

First they were asked to answer a multiple choice question

The second , the students were told to note down the key content words

The third different students should focus and take notes on the use of different linguistic forms

Freeman’s aims of evaluation was designed to establish both accountability and to provide information about how to improve the task so freeman concluded that the students were largely successful in achieving the outcome of the task

THE THIRD TASK EVALUATION Conducted by yuan (1997) examined two decision

_making tasks He was interested in investigating the effect of

implementation of variable pre_task planing and the analysis focused on syntactical complexity ,syntactical variety and lexical variety

The results: an interesting finding is that the opportunity to plan did not affect the learner ‘s performance of the tasks in the same way.

All three evaluations were concerned with establishing whether the tasks achieve what they were designed to achieve but only one (freeman) also considered how the task might be improved.

Only freeman’s study included a student_based approach so it was the best among these evaluations

MICRO BASED TASK -EVALUATION Is a good introspective opportunity for

evaluating teaching tachniques an materials

CONCLUSION This chapter has examined the case for

carring out both macro-and micro-evaluations of the task-based teaching and has reported examples of both types.