Einführung in CALL und TBL

Category: Education

Presentation Description

No description available.


Presentation Transcript

Task Based Learning: The Role of Planning:

Task Based Learning: The Role of Planning Anne-Kathrin Miera Yacoub OStrR‘ i.H. Department of English University of Cologne

Constituents of the Second Language Classroom:

Constituents of the Second Language Classroom CONTENT FEEDBACK language skills lexis grammar meta-cognitive skills INPUT PROCESS OUTPUT T A S K S PROGRESSION meta-linguisitc skills pronunciation DIFFERENTIATION Learning atmosphere

Questioning PPP (Present, Practice, Produce):

Questioning PPP (Present, Practice, Produce) individual learning needs ignored assumption of linear learning processes challenged real encounters missing need of authentic learning environment idea of individual control of learning cognition and social interaction (Little, 2003) autonomous learner

TASK BASED LEARNING (concept favored in CALL research, stems from applied linguistics):

TASK BASED LEARNING (concept favored in CALL research, stems from applied linguistics) Series of tasks (pre- while- post-tasks) Focus on meaning (FonM) Focus on form (FonF)

Bygate, Skehan, and Swain (2001) in Ellis (2003, 5) TASK – A Definition :

Bygate, Skehan, and Swain (2001) in Ellis (2003, 5) TASK – A Definition “A task is an activity which requires learners to use language, with emphasis on meaning, to attain an objective” (# exercise)

Ellis (2003) Criterial features of a task:

Ellis (2003) Criterial features of a task A task… …is a workplan. …involves a primary focus on meaning. …involves real-world processes of language use. …can involve any of the four language skills. …engages cognitive skills. …has a clearly defined communicative outcome.

Design features of unfocused and focused tasks (Ellis):

Design features of unfocused and focused tasks (Ellis) goal purpose (task-as-workplan, not output is described) input verbal/non-verbal information supplied conditions way information is presented (e.g. split vs shared information) procedures methodological procedure (individual/group/pair work; planning time/no planning time ) predicted outcome: product (e.g. open/closed results) process linguistic/cognitive processes aimed at Not to be confused with exercises!

(Legutke) Tasks in the classroom :

(Legutke) Tasks in the classroom

Ellis (2006) TBL Research Results:

Ellis (2006) TBL Research Results Results are inconsistent maybe prediction impossible because tasks co-constructed every time Rel. consistent results of research on task planning: learners given time to plan tasks produce more complex and fluent output Unpressured on-line planning can have positive effects on accuracy

Models of Cognitive Processing :

Models of Cognitive Processing information processing models; computational model (Lantolf 1996) Input Temporary storage of material attended to Long-term storage Mechanisms for accessing material from long-term storage 3 central constructs of language processing - Attention and noticing - Working memory capacity - Focus on form

General Principles of cognitive processing :

General Principles of cognitive processing Limited capacity : bottlenecks in working memory that lead to prioritizing particular language aspects Control mechanism : drawn from stored knowledge, taxes working memory Top-down (encyclopedic knowledge/situational context) and bottom-up processes (signals in the input)

Models of Speech Production:

Models of Speech Production Levelt (1989): 3 autonomous processing stages conceptualizing the message - Communication goal - Developing sub- goals - Identification of speech act of each Formulating the language representation / internal speech - preverbal message ( lemma ( meaning / syntax ) and lexeme ( morphological / phonological information ) Articulating the message - Self-monitoring process (check of original intention , internal speech , overt speech )

Models of Writing Production:

Models of Writing Production Formulation - Planning - Translation Execution - Programming - Execution Monitoring - Reading - Editing

Adaptation of Levelt for SLA De Bot (1992) :

Adaptation of Levelt for SLA De Bot (1992) Macro level (L1 support, L2 connected) Micro level (L2 related)

Skehan (1998):

Skehan (1998) Distinction between exemplar-based system /memory based (lexical in nature; single lexical items and chunks) and rule-based system (abstract representations) Three dimensions of production: Fluency (capacity to communicate in real time) Accuracy (ability to perform to norms/learner controls) Complexity (use of interlanguage that is elaborate and structured/learner takes risks)


Questions What effect does planning have on fluence, accuracy and complexity? How do the findings relate to FonF, noticing and the working capacity?

Ellis (2006) Planning:

Ellis (2006) Planning Pre-task Planning Rehearsal Strategic Planning Planning Pressured Within-task Planning (on-line Planning ) Unpressured Pre-task Planning: Access to actual task material # other types of pre-task activities (brainstorming content, studying model perform., dictionary search, etc.) Rehearsal: Performing the task before `main performance´ (task repetition) Strategic Planning: Preperation of performance (consideration of content and how to express the content) Further categorization possible: (un)guided (e.g. directed towards focus on meaning or form) or Participatory structure (only strategic planning)

Findings of empicirical Studies Pre-task Planning Rehearsals :

Findings of empicirical Studies Pre-task Planning Rehearsals Positive effects on accuracy and fluency for retrail (recycling output ) - low proficiency: accuracy and phonology - higher proficiency: clarity/economy of speech only for the same task; no evidence for new similar task e.g. poster carousel (Lynch/McLean 2000/01)

Findings of empicirical Studies Pre-task Planning Strategic Planning:

Findings of empicirical Studies Pre-task Planning Strategic Planning learners tend to prioritize content ( squencing , find logical order) mixed findings of effects on accuracy enhances fluency ( faster speaking rate; fewer dysfluencies ) - stronger effect for more difficult narrative tasks and decision making tasks ( Skehan 1996) - learners : greater amount of speech /native speaker : less (Foster 2001) - extending planning time did not have major effect - guided planners more fluent than unguided planners ; but Foster/ Skehan (1999) found no effect of asking learners to FonF ; Sanguran finds combination of FonM combined with FonF guidance had effect on fluency - individual learner planning more effective than teacher-led and group - based planning ( Skehan /Foster) - specific form of instruction or group constitution influential

Findings of empicirical Studies Pre-task Planning Strategic Planning:

Findings of empicirical Studies Pre-task Planning Strategic Planning enhances complexity ( more complex sentences ; wider range of lexis ) - incresing planning time positive effect (Mehnert 1998) - individual learner planning works best ( Skehan /Foster) - focos on F or M no effect - guidance how and what to plan helps - no difference made between propositional and formal complexity The Studies sugest that if learners are given enough time to plan stategically they spend more time on conceptualizing . They consider what they want to say rather than planning detailed linguistic plans . Asking learners to FonF while strategically planning may not make learners to do so. If students attend to form they later have difficulties to use the planned forms in the perfomance . Trade-off effects presumed : fluency and complexity at expence of accuracy

Findings of empicirical Studies Within-Task Planning Unpressured :

Findings of empicirical Studies Within -Task Planning Unpressured Impact on accuracy if learners attend to their rule-based system during time given more processing time allows students to monitor language production processes Time- pressure has negative effects on grammatical sturctures that are clearly rule-based ( word order) rather than lexically driven (e.g. irreg. Past tense forms )

Consequences for SLTeaching:

Consequences for SLTeaching Initiate interesting tasks of rehearsals/recycling output (e.g. write statement in forum, then rehearse it as stage peformance, drama) Allow strategic planning time with challenging tasks Guide students in the planning process Allow students to plan individually (…before collaborative tasks – see Norm Green: Think , Pair, Share) Allow unpressured within-task planning Try to initiate structure trapping tasks (Skehan, 1998) in order to provoke a natural FonF without reducing FonM Be aware of the fact that the teacher‘s intention of a task completion might differ from the learner‘s actual task performance

Legutke (2006): Aufgabe – Projekt - Szenario:

Legutke (2006): Aufgabe – Projekt - Szenario task fields: classroom curricula and teaching material teacher training task based research (window to psycholinguistic and social processes)

Consequences for Lesson Design:

Consequences for Lesson Design Tasks (FonM, FonF, Planning) Leaner Autonomy (choice, self-directed learning) Theme Content

Bibliography :

Bibliography Ellis, R. (2003) Task-based Language Learning and Teaching. Oxford Ellis,R. Planning and task-based performance: Theory and research, in: Ellis, R. (ed) (2005) Planning and Task Performance in a Second Language. Philadelphia, 3 -33 Legutke, (2006) Aufgabe – Projekt – Szenario, in: Bausch/Königs (ed) Aufgabenorientierung als Aufgabe: Arbeitspapiere der 26. Frühjahrskonferenz, 14-142 Little, D. (2003) Learner autonomy and second/foreign language learning. retrieved on: http://www.llas.ac.uk/resources/goodpractice.aspx?resourceid=1409#toc_3371