TECHNOLOGY AND THE FOUR SKILLS
Most L2 instructors implement their curriculum with an eye to improving the four skills: speaking, listening, reading, and writing. Absent in this vision of language are notions of pragmatic, sociolinguistic, and multicultural competencies. Although current linguistic theories posit a more complex, interactive, and integrated model of language, this review article points out where computer-assisted language learning (CALL) can contribute to L2 language growth in terms of these four skills, especially if carefully situated within a taskbased language teaching (TBLT) framework. New technologies coupled with a TBLT goal-oriented approach ultimately push learners to combine speaking, listening, reading, and writing in ways that resemble more closely how they normally engage with the digital facets of their own lives.
TASK-BASED LANGUAGE TEACHING
The notion of task is central to implementing any language curriculum that addresses the four skills, whether in the classroom or online. What do instructors want their students to be able to do at the end of the course or lesson with respect to speaking, listening, reading, and writing? González-Lloret (2015) describes language tasks with a phrase taken from Dewey’s (1938/1998) ideas on experiential learning: tasks represent learning by doing. Willis (1996) defines a language task as “a goal-oriented activity in which learners use language to achieve a real outcome” (p. 53). They can do this by solving a problem, doing a puzzle, analyzing a text or video from a particular genre, playing a game, or sharing and comparing experiences. Accordingly, language tasks involve communication that is meaning-oriented and as authentic as possible and goal-oriented so that the learners’ performance can be directly evaluated according to how well the participants achieve the desired outcome.
Language Learning & Technology
http://llt.msu.edu/issues/june2016/blake.pdf
More recently, Long (2014) has provided a TBLT framework in which he urges instructors (1) to conduct a needs analysis to identity target tasks that are important to their students, (2) to classify the target tasks into task-types, (3) to develop pedagogic tasks, and (4) to sequence the tasks to form a syllabus. In the process of choosing and sequencing tasks wisely, Robinson (2011) cautioned practitioners to select an appropriate level of complexity, which will vary according the number of task elements, the task length, the allotted planning time, and the extent of the learners’ prior knowledge about the topic. Skehan (2003) also has raised concerns that too much task complexity will adversely affect linguistic accuracy and fluency when performing the task. He categorized the best tasks as those that (a) are carefully structured with both a pre-planning and a post-task phase, (b) are organized around familiar information, (c) require analysis or justification, and (d) are interactive or dialogic in nature by virtue of asking the participants to work together (pp. 394–395).
6 One2One/ Sept. 2016