Once learners have identified the language they
need, according to Long (1983) it is extremely
important that they perform tasks to try out any new
language (to “negotiate meaning”) in order to be able
to use it correctly; in other words, to “learn by doing”,
as in the second discussion in the example above.
TBLT is also supported by a host of other theories,
such as those concerning collaborative learning (e.g.
Lantolf, 2000), gains in ‘complexity’, ‘accuracy’ and
‘fluency’ (e.g. Skehan, 1998), plus the views of
educational theorists such as Dewey. other words, to
“learn by doing”, as in the second discussion in the
example above.
TBLT is also supported by a host of other theories,
such as those concerning collaborative learning (e.g.
Lantolf, 2000), gains in ‘complexity’, ‘accuracy’ and
‘fluency’ (e.g. Skehan, 1998), plus the views of
educational theorists such as Dewey.
Learning By Discussing – An Example Of
How A TBLT Approach Works (The Proof?)
Having largely satisfied my
curiosity as to why a TBLT
approach was effective in a series
of lessons, I decided to expand
upon the research I had done, by
developing an entire, purely taskbased course.
To this end, I created a course
designed to develop students’
ability to participate and interact
more fully in academic
discussions. The course consists
of a series of (three to four)
academic discussions on topics
determined by students. Each
academic discussion sequence
begins with students informing
themselves on the topic (from a
variety of sources e.g.
ProCon.org, Debatepedia) and
sharing information in small
groups, which is followed by the
whole-class discussion itself
(recorded and uploaded to
Moodle), then student comparison
of their own performances with
those of C2-level speakers
performing a similar task (easily
found on e.g. YouTube) and,
finally, (self- and group-)reflection
and feedback phases (in TBLT
terminology, ‘focuses on form’) to
address their individual language
needs. Following each discussion,
students produce an
argumentative or opinion essay
on the same topic.
In order to ‘push’ students to use
newly-acquired language, I built in
a system of assessment where
two-thirds of the course grade is
based on performance during the
discussions. For this purpose, I
developed CEFR-related scales
with the assessment criteria of
content, flow, grammar and
vocabulary, interaction and
pronunciation. Incorporation of the
assessment scales has proven to
be a major motivating factor as
well as enabling students to know
exactly what they need to do to
reach a certain grade for each
criterion, with any “weak areas”
providing the ‘focuses on form’ in
the feedback phases following
each discussion.
Student results and feedback on
the course (which, at the date of
publication of this article, has
been run five times) have been
extremely positive, with more than
satisfactory improvement of
student oral and written grades,
also in external exams. In their
end-of-course questionnaires,
participants also cite improved
knowledge concerning the course
topics (borne out by their
excellent grades for essay
content) as well as increased
motivation, autonomy, selfawareness and critical thinking.
Most importantly, perhaps,
participants say they value the
usefulness of the course for their
academic studies.
From my perspective, the chance to put TBLT theory into practice in the form of a wholly task-based course has
been extremely valuable, and I feel that, through providing students with the opportunity to improve over a series
of discussions, together with the introduction of assessment criteria and the feedback given in the ‘focuses on
form’, students have been able to further improve their performance and make significantly more gains than in the
single, non-assessed and feedback-less discussion that took place during my MA research.
In short, I would definitely recommend designing courses that are wholly task-based and which incorporate
comprehensive feedback and assessment.
10