Talk:Task-based language learning

message: "task-based language learning" is, by definition, a subset of "language learning".  The problem I see is that all language learning seems to be task-based, so the qualifier "task-based" is meaningless.  It gets used by companies in their advertisements, and governments in their public relations work, but that doesn't imply that it means anything.
I've learned multiple foreign languages, and I've yet to come across a language learning method that couldn't be called "task-based".  Every book uses dialogues, and all dialogues can be described as accomplishing a task (the task of introducing yourself, the task of returning an item to a shop, the task of reporting a theft...).
This article talks about a method which isn't "purely" task-based.  It seems to me that "tasks" are just a part of language learning, and all language learning methods are to some degree "task-based".  So, "task-based language learning" is also "grammar-based", because it involves grammar, and it's also "vocabulary-based", because it involves words...
Yep, I think this is nothing but a marketing term masquerading as a topic.  The amount of descriptive test without references reinforces my thinking. Gronky (talk) 10:18, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: I'm dubious.  Does this topic really exist?

message: For language education professionals, like me, this is very much a topic. It is one of the major developments of Communicative Language Teaching. In terms of Related approaches, at the bottom, Dogme should be deleted. I can't imagine, and I hope my suspicions are wrong, who added this. If anything is related, try webquests and communicative language teaching.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by J27325 (talk • contribs) 18:26, 11 April 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: This really is a topic

message: Task-based learning is a valid topic and exhibits the difference between teaching theory or teaching grammar and vocabulary to learning by using the language, not just studying the language. You could say it is a subset of the Communicative Approach. The difference is that it is communicating around a specific task, not just communicating about something. For example, a teacher may give the students the task of calling a 1-800 phone number in the USA to ask how much a pair of Nike shoes would cost. The students will need to anticipate the language required for that task and plan how they will use it and then make the call. They are not just sitting around talking about shoes.
Too much teaching is focused on "theory" and not enough on application. This has been discussed extensively but here is an interesting and recent article about it referring to the research: Make study more effective, the easy way
This is also why Dogme does not belong here. The greatest distinction of Dogme is that they are against using course books. In Dogme, a task or no task are just as valid. Sitting around and talking about shoes is just as valid as trying to achieve a task. I agree with the other poster, reasons for the Dogme reference are dubious.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 116.20.66.153 (talk) 02:23, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Valid topic 

message: There's a lot of confusion and misinterpretation of terms in EFL and ESL. The term "task" is generally very loosely interpreted by teachers and authors of course books and books on pedagogy. I think we need a clear distinction between tasks and exercises. Basically, a task defines WHAT learners have to do, e.g. write a letter, order something on the phone, ask for directions, and an exercise defines HOW learners have to do it, e.g. follow a formula for a letter, use specific linguistic structures. Therefore, a task can be converted into an exercise by prescribing how learners should perform a task rather than letting them decide/discover for themselves.--Matbury (talk) 20:57, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Task vs. exercise

message: This definition (see below) does not belong on a page about TBLL. She frequently defines activities that more closely resemble traditional present-practise-produce type lessons, thereby turning the task phase of the activity a mere vehicle to practice the language presented in the input phase. This goes against the necessary and sufficient conditions of TBLL. I will remove it.
"According to Jane Willis, TBLT consists of the pre-task, the task cycle, and the language focus.
The components of a Task are:
# Goals and objectives
# Input
# Activities
# Teacher role
# learner role
# Settings" --Matbury (talk) 22:11, 26 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title: Willis' definition

message: Dictogloss activities are explicitly form focused and therefore do not qualify as tasks in the context of TBLL. This is a commonly held misconception and only serves to confuse those who are interested in learning about TBLL and communicative language teaching (CLT) in general. As is stated elsewhere in the article, a task must have a central non-linguistic goal or outcome. A task may have a desired linguistic outcome from the teacher's perspective, i.e. a focused task, but the learners main focus must be on an authentic, real world activity. --Matbury (talk) 17:29, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title: Dictogloss is not a legitimate task

message: TASK-BASED LANGUAGE TEACHING: SELECTED REFERENCES (last updated 27 August 2010)
Breen, M. (1987). Learner contributions to task design. In C. Candlin & D. Murphy (Eds.), Language Learning Tasks (pp. 5-22). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. 
Brindley, G. (1987). Factors affecting task difficulty. In D. Nunan (Ed.), Guidelines for the development of curriculum resources (pp. 45-56). Adelaide: National Curriculum Resource Centre. 
Brown, G., & Yule, G. (1983). Teaching the spoken language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bygate, M., Skehan, P., & Swain, M. (Eds.). (2001). Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching and testing. London: Longman. 
Byrnes, H. (2002). The role of task and task-based assessment in a content-oriented collegiate foreign language curriculum. Language Testing, 19(4), 419-437.
Candlin, C. (1987). Toward task-based learning. In C. Candlin & D. Murphy (Eds.), Language learning tasks (pp. 5-22). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. 
Candlin, C., & Murphy, D. (Eds.). (1987). Language learning tasks. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall International.
Coughlan, P., & Duff, P. A. (1994). Same task different activities: Analysis of SLA task from an activity theory perspective. In J. P. Lantolf & G. Appel (Eds.), Vygotskian approaches to second language research (pp. 173-194). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Del Pilar Garcia Mayo, M. (Ed.). (2007). Investigating tasks in formal language learning. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
Doughty, C., & Pica, T. (1986). ‘Information gap’ tasks: Do they facilitate second language acquisition? TESOL Quarterly, 20(2), 205-325. 
Ellis, R. (2001). Task-based language teaching and learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 
Foley, J. (1991). A psycholinguistic framework for task-based approaches to language teaching. Applied Linguistics, 12(1), 63-75.
Foster, P., & Skehan, P. (1996). The influence of planning on performance in task-based learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18, 299-324.
Foster, P., & Skehan, P. (1997). Modifying the task: The effects of surprise, time and planning type on task based foreign language instruction. Thames Valley University working papers in English language teaching, 4, 86-109. 
Fotos, S., & Ellis, R. (1991). Communicating about grammar: A task-based approach. TESOL Quarterly, 25(4), 605-628. 
Loschky, L., & Bley-Vroman, R. (1993). Grammar and task-based methodology. In G. Crookes & S. Gass (Eds.), Tasks and language learning: Integrating theory and practice (pp. 123-167). Clevedon Avon: Multilingual Matters. 
Nunan, D. (1989). Designing tasks for the communicative classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University 
Nunan, D. (2004). Task-based language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 
Pica, T., Kanagy, R., & Falodun, J. (1993). Choosing and using communication tasks for second language instruction and research. In G. Crookes & S. Gass (Eds.) Tasks and language learning: Integrating theory and practice (pp. 9-34). Clevedon Avon: Multilingual Matters.
Richards, J. (1987). Beyond methods: alternative approaches to instructional design in language teaching. Prospect, 3(1), 11-30.
Robinson, P. (in press). Task-based language learning. Oxford: Blackwell.
Robinson, P. (2001). Task complexity, cognitive resources and second language syllabus design. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and Second Language Instruction. (pp. 287-318). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Robinson, P. (2001). Task complexity, task difficulty, and task production: Exploring interactions in a componential framework. Applied Linguistics, 22(1), 27-57. 
Robinson, P., & Ross, S. (1996). The development of task-based assessment in English for academic purposes programs. Applied Linguistics, 17(4), 455-476.
Samuda, V. (2001). Guiding relationships between form and meaning during task performance: The role of the teacher. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching and testing (pp. 119-134). London: Longman. 
Skehan, P. (2001). Tasks and language performance assessment. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan, & M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching, and testing (pp. 167-185). London: Longman. 
Skehan, P., & Foster, P. (1999). The influence of task structure and processing conditions on narrative retellings. Language Learning, 49(1), 93-120. 
Willis, J. (1996). A framework for task-based learning. Harlow: Pearson Education.
Willis, D., & Willis, J. (2001). Task-based language learning. In R. Carter & D. Nunan (Eds.), The Cambridge guide to Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (pp. 173-179). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 
 
Wright, T. (1987). Instructional task and discoursal outcome in the L2 classroom. In C. Candlin & D. Murphy (Eds.), Language learning tasks (pp. 47-68). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.--Matbury (talk) 20:57, 12 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: Useful references

message: I've combined the "advantages" and the "disadvantages" sections into one "reception" section. Mainly this is because in Wikipedia we shouldn't be writing what we as editors think are good and bad about TBLL, but rather what experts think is good and bad about TBLL. It might be helpful to look at the essay Wikipedia:Criticism to see the reasoning behind this, and for the general principle it is a very good idea to read the policy on no original research. When adding to the reception section it is also important to use secondary sources that mention the praise or criticism, rather than primary sources. This ensures that we include only notable opinions, rather than any old likes and dislikes. Let me know if you have any questions about this. Best — Mr. Stradivarius ♪ talk ♪ 03:12, 27 January 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Advantages and disadvantages 

message: I think the title should be changed.  The Wikipedia entry title is Task Based Language Learning, TBLL, but then the contents use TBLT, Task Based Language Teaching.  I think TBLT is the far more popular name these days. After all, TBLT.org ! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ctskelly (talk • contribs) 22:45, 10 January 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  The entry title TBLT or TBLL