Task Based Teaching and Listening

THE EFFECT OF TASK-BASED LANGUAGE
TEACHING ON IMPROVING SPEAKING AND

LISTENING SKILLS OF YOUNG THAI EFL LEARNERS
BY
MISS KULLANIST KRUTHANGKA
A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE

REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS
PROGRAM IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE STUDIES
(INTERNATIONAL PROGRAM)
DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH AND LINGUISTICS
FACULTY OF LIBERAL ARTS
THAMMASAT UNIVERSITY
ACADEMIC YEAR 2019
COPYRIGHT OF THAMMASAT UNIVERSITY
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

THE EFFECT OF TASK-BASED LANGUAGE
TEACHING ON IMPROVING SPEAKING AND
LISTENING SKILLS OF YOUNG THAI EFL LEARNERS
BY
MISSS KULLANIST KRUTHANGKA
A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE

REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS
PROGRAM IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE STUDIES
(INTERNATIONAL PROGRAM)
DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH AND LINGUISTICS
FACULTY OF LIBERAL ARTS
THAMMASAT UNIVERSITY
ACADEMIC YEAR 2019
COPYRIGHT OF THAMMASAT UNIVERSIT
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

Thesis Title THE EFFECT OF TASK-BASED
LANGUAGE TEACHING ON
IMPROVING ENGLISH SPEAKING
AND LISTENING SKILLS OF
YOUNG THAI EFL LEARNERS
Author Miss Kullanist Kruthangka
Degree Master of Arts
Major Field/Faculty/University English Language Studies (International
Program)
Faculty of Liberal Arts
Thammasat University
Thesis Advisor Assistant Professor Kwanjira
Chatpunnarangsee, Ph.D.
Academic Years 2019
ABSTRACT
This mixed-methods research study aims to examine the effect of TBLT in

teaching English speaking and listening skills on young Thai EFL learners. For this purpose,
60 students from Grade 1 were selected as the participants. The students were divided into 2
groups: the control group and the experimental group. The students in the experimental group
were taught using task-based language teaching instructions, while the students in the control
group received standard teaching technique. The findings of the study reveal that the post-test
mean scores of both speaking and listening skills of the students from the experimental group
were higher the mean scores of the students from the control group at the significance level
.05. Also, the results within the experiment group show that there is a significant difference
between the pre-test and post-test mean scores of both speaking and listening skills at the
significant level .05. Moreover, the results from the observation show that TBLT lessons
were practical and suitable for young EFL Thai learners in terms of lessons and activities,
speaking and listening skills practice, and learning motivation. In addition, the interview
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

(2)
results reveal positive perceptions of the teacher on TBLT implementation as it could

promote communicative and meaningful classroom, as well as learning motivation. The
findings of this study support the benefits of TBLT in teaching young EFL Thai learners the
English speaking and listening skills
Keywords: Task-Based Language Teaching (TBLT), Foreign Language Learners, Speaking

and Listening Skills
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

(3)
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to express my sincere gratitude to the following people, without whom
this thesis would not have been possible.
I would like to thank my thesis advisor, Assistant Professor Dr. Kwanjira
Chatpunnarangsee for the useful remarks and encouragement through the learning process of
this master thesis. I would also like to acknowledge Asstistant Professor. Dr. Passapong
Sripicharn and Dr. Siriporn Lerdpaisalwong, whom I owe a great debt of thanks for their
valuable comments and guidance.
My appreciation also extends to all the participants involved in the experiment
including the school, the students, the teacher, and the validation experts. Without their
participation, this work would not have been successfully conducted.
My special thanks also go to my brother, Mr. Kasidis Kruthangka, who saved me
from my messy presentation and painful statistical analysis.
Last, but definitely not the least, I must express my profound gratitude to my parents
for providing me with unfailing support and continuous encouragement throughout my years
of study. Without your love and faith in me, I would have stopped this study a long time ago.
You deserve all the credit! For my partner in crime, Mr. Sarayut Sintoorahut, thanks for
putting up with my stresses and tears. You have been my beacon of light. Finally, I would
like to thank Dorigo and Rosita for always giving me emotional support and endless love.
Miss Kullanist Kruthangka
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

(4)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ABSTRACT (1)
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS (3)
LIST OF TABLES (7)
LIST OF FIGURES (8)
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS (9)
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Background of the Study 1

1.2 Statement of Problems 4
1.3 Research Objectives 7
1.4 Research Questions 7
1.5 Significance of the Study 7
1.6 Scope of the Study 9
1.7 Definitions of Key Terms 9
CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE 11
2.1 Teaching English Speaking Skills 11

2.2 Teaching English Listening Skills 13
2.3 Teaching Approaches for English Speaking and Listening 15
2.3.1 Audio Lingual Method (ALM) 16
2.3.2 Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) 17
2.4 Task-Based Language Teaching (TBLT) 19
2.4.1 The Definitions of Task 21
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

(5)
2.4.2 Frameworks of Task-based Language Teaching 24

(TBLT)
2.4.3 Components of task 31
2.4.4 Types of Task 34
2.5 Young Learners Language Teaching 42
2.6 Previous Research Studies on TBLT 44
CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 51
3.1 Research Design 51

3.2 Setting and Participants 52
3.3 Duration 53
3.4 Research Instruments 55
3.4.1 Task-based Language Teaching Lesson Plans 55
3.4.2 English Speaking and Listening Test 60
3.4.3 Speaking and Listening Skills Assessments 61
3.4.4 Interview Questions 63
3.4.5 Research Field Notes 63
3.5 Data Collection 63
3.6 Data Analysis 65
3.7 Pilot Study 66
CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 68
4.1 Research Question 1 68

4.2.1 Pre-Task Priming Activity 72
4.2.2 Task Cycle 76
4.2.2.1 Task 76
4.2.2.2 Planning Stage 81
4.2.2.3 Reporting Stage 83
4.2.3 Form-Focused Language Work 84
4.2.3.1 Analysis and Practice 85
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

(6)
4.2.3.2 Task Repetition 86

4.3.1 Advantages of TBLT instructions 88
4.3.2 Disadvantages of TBLT instructions 90
4.4 Summary of the Chapter 93
CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 95
5.1 Summary of the Findings 96

5.2 Discussions 98
5.2.1 TBLT and English Speaking and Listening Skills 99
5.2.2 Students‘ English Proficiency 100
5.2.3 Vocabulary Building Activities 101
5.2.4 Corrective Feedback (CF) 101
5.2.5 Form-Focused Language Work 102
5.2.6 TBLT and Learning Motivation 102
5.2.7 Task Repetition 103
5.3 Pedagogical Implementations 103
5.4 Limitations of the Study 105
5.5 Recommendations for Further Studies 106
REFERENCES 107
APPENDICES 120
APPENDIX A: Task-based Language Teaching Lesson Plans 121

APPENDIX B: An Example of Standard Teaching Lesson Plan 127
APPENDIX C: Lesson Plans Evaluation Form 130
APPENDIX D: Proficiency Test: English Speaking and Listening 132
Test
APPENDIX E: Interview Questions 143
BIOGRAPHY 144
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

(7)
LIST OF TABLES
Tables Page
2.1 Criteria for Defining a Task-as-Workplan 23
2.2 The Summary of Pre-task Methodological Options 26
2.3 The Summary of Within-task Methodological Options 28
2.4 The Summary of Post-task Methodological Options 29
2.5 Components of Tasks 33
2.6 Task Rationale 34
2.7: Summary of TBLT task types 40
2.8 Features of Different Tasks 41
3.1 The Duration of the Experiment 53
3.2 Scope of Task-Based Speaking and Listening Instruction 58
3.3 The Procedures of Data Collection 63
3.4 Research Questions and Analysis 65
4.1 A Comparison of Mean Scores from Pre-Test between the Control and
Experimental Group 69
4.2 A Comparison of the Mean Scores from Post-Test between the Control and
Experimental Group 70
4.3 A Comparison of the Mean Scores of Pre-test and Post-test of the Students within
the Control and Experimental Group 71
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

(8)
LIST OF FIGURES
Figures Page
2.1Task-Based Language Teaching Framework 24
2.2 Generating Task Types from a Topic 37
2.3 Key Learning Principles for Young Learners 43
3.1 Quasi-Experimental Design: Pretest-Posttest Nonequivalent Group 51
3.2 A Framework for Designing Task-based Lessons 56
3.3 Checklists for Task-like Activities 57
3.4 Cambridge ESOL Scale on the CEFR 60
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

(9)
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
Symbols/Abbreviations Terms
ALM Audio-Lingual Method

ASEAN Association of Southeast Asian Nations
CEFR Common European Framework of
Reference for Language
CF Corrective Feedback
CLT Communicative Language Teaching
EFL English as a Foreign Language
ESOL English to Speakers of Other Languages
O-NET Ordinary National Educational Test
TBLT Task-Based Language Teaching
TPR Total Physical Response
UCLES University of Cambridge Local
Examinations Syndicates
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

1
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background of the Study
English is among the most dominant languages in the modern world as it is deemed a
medium for international communication (Crystal, 2003; Kirkpatrick, 2007). A vast amount
of scholarly works stated that English is recognized as one of the most important languages to
the development in today's world as it is used as a worldwide language (Baker 2012; Black,
2009; Crystal, 2003; Hasman, 2004; Jenkins, 1998; Kachru and Smith, 2008; Kam, 2002;
Kirkpatrick, 2007; McKay, 2002; Patel and Jain, 2008; Punthumasen, 2007; Rappa and Wee
2006; Shamim, 2007; Warschauer, 2001). It is the language that connects people from
different parts of the world. Not only in an educational field where the English language has
been made mandatory foreign language subject in many countries, but it is also considered an
powerful language in every industries.
It is widely known that communicative skill is vital for learning foreign language
(Brown, 2000; Crystal, 2003; Nunan, 2013; Savignon, 1987) Key success in teaching and
learning English is that the learners can communicate in English not only inside the
classroom but also outside the classroom. As learning language for communication came
into focus, listening and speaking are important skills. Hymes (1971) originally proposed a
term ‗communicative competence‘ to provide a wider view of language learning. The term
refers to a learner‘s ability to use the language successfully which includes the grammatical
knowledge along with the social knowledge. In other words, not only the learners know all
the linguistic structures but also the rules for appropriate use in social contexts. A success in
learning the English language is not solely derived from an accuracy of grammatical rules
memorization or high score in course test, but also from an ability of knowing how to use the
language appropriately.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

2
According to Kachru‘s Three Concentric Circle of English (Krachu, 2005), Thailand
is placed in the expanding circle, where English is taught as a foreign language. The country
is considered an EFL (English as a Foreign Language) context as there is no official second
language. Thai is the language that almost all Thai people speak (Baker, 2009). Thai people
do not use English in their daily communication, English plays important role in Thailand in
various aspects (Darasawang, 2007; Foley, 2005; Wongsothorn et al., 1996). The core
curriculum for foreign language learning is English which is obligatory for students in Thai
schools to study English in schools for all levels until graduation According to the Basic
Education Core Curriculum 2001 and 2008), it is obligatory for students in Thai schools to study
English in schools for all levels until graduation as English is prescribed for the entire basic
education core curriculum (Ministry of Education, 2001; 2008). In addition, English is
believed to pave the way for better opportunities in people‘s career, especially in Asia as
English was announced as an official language of ASEAN community (Association of
Southeast Asian Nations, 2008). The Thai government has planned to specifically develop
English communication skills for Thai people
However, speaking and listening in a second or foreign language have long been a
challenge for learners (Nations, 2008). Thailand is not an exception. Although English has
been taught in schools in Thailand far more than hundred years and students have been
spending over many years learning English, Thai students still cannot achieve advanced level
(Baker and Jarunthawatchai, 2017; Hayes, 2010; Khamkien, 2010; Prasongsook, 2010). EF
English Proficiency Index score indicated that Thai students‘ English proficiency has been
ranked between ―low‖ and ―very low‖ in the past years (EF English Proficiency Index, 2015;
2016; 2017; 2018). At the very beginning, English teaching in Thailand was mainly through
rote memorization and grammar translation. A big change did not take place until 1999, when
the National Education Act of B.E. 2542 (1999) announced the key focus to develop learner-
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

3
centered teaching-learning process, attaching highest importance to learners (Office of the
National Education Commission, 1999). Following this change, the Thai National Basic
Education Curriculum saw shift in the policy by focusing on active learning, attempting to
transform passive classrooms to learner-centered classrooms (Ministry of Education, 2001;
2008). Communicative Language Teaching or CLT has become popular in English pedagogy
and has been implemented widely due to its alignment with student-centered philosophy.
Task-based language teaching or TBLT is one of the teaching approaches that moves
away from traditional curricular, leaning more towards creating opportunities for English
language learners to have communicative interaction, rather than artificial or constructed
communication situations in which increases the emphasis on natural language and
spontaneous communication (Willis & Willis, 2007). The key characteristics of task proposed
by Skehan (1996) involve the focus on meaning, the relationship to the real-world situation,
task completion, and task outcome. In a nutshell, TBLT establishes a language teaching
method that prioritizes meaning but does not neglect form (Ellis, 2003; Ellis, 2009; Ellis,
Skehan, Li, Shintani, & Lambert, 2020). It is a ‗strong‘ version of CLT in which language is
acquired through use (Larsen-Freeman, 2000) and because TBLT is derived from CLT, it
shares many of the same characteristics including the emphasis on building communicative
competency rather than on grammatical analysis or vocabulary building (Richards &
Rodgers, 2014). However, what differentiates TBLT from CLT is that it is oriented toward
real-world communication situations, rather than artificial or constructed communication
situations. This increases the emphasis on natural language, spontaneous communication and
learner-specific communication situations (Willis & Willis, 2007). In addition, unlike the
conventional communicative approaches in which the main focus is on fluency, TBLT also
attempts to promote accuracy as the form-focused language work are always lying in TBLT
frameworks either in the beginning of the task or the end of the task (Ellis, 2003; Willis &
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

4
Willis, 2007). For many years, TBLT has been largely recognized in the field of language
teaching as there are numbers of researches done under this topic (see, for example, Bygate,
Skehan and Swain, 2001; Ellis, 2003; Foster 2009; Long and Crookes, 1992; Nunan, 2004;
Robinson, 2001; Skehan, 1998, Willis and Willis, 2007). In Thailand, a plethora of research
on the use of TBLT as a major theoretical framework to develop curriculum or enhance
teaching practice has also been conducted (see, for example, Boonkit, 2010; Bunmak, 2015;
McDonough & Chaikitmongkol, 2007; Promruang, 2012; Reunyoot, 2011; Saiyod, 2009;
Thanghun, 2012; Wichitwarit, 2004).
Considering the benefits of TBLT, the researcher is intrigued by the idea of using this
framework to explore its effectiveness in developing speaking and listening skills of Grade 1
students. The problems of learning speaking and listening in Thailand will be discussed at
length in the following section.
1.2 Statement of Problems
As mentioned previously, teaching English for communication in Thailand is still
challenging (Baker &Jarunthawatchai, 2017; Choomthong, 2014; Foley, 2005; Kanoksilp,
2007; Khamkien, 2012; Lim, 2015; Noom-ura, 2013; Prasongporn, 2016; Saengboon, 2004).
There are many factors responsible for this fallback in the development of Thai students‘
English communicative skill.
One of major factors that hinders the development of the English language pedagogy
in Thailand is that English language teaching in Thai classrooms does not quite encourage
communicative language teaching as it heavily revolves around grammar translation method
such as pattern drills and rote memorization (Foley, 2005; Markmee and Taylor, 2001;
Saengboon, 2004; Tangkijmongkol & Wasanasomsithi, 2013; Wongsothorn, Hiranburana &
Chinnawongs, 2002). English classrooms in Thai schools are like a lot of countries in Asia, in
which the dominant approach to teaching the English language is syntactic syllabus which is
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

5
a traditional design where language is dissected in smaller grammatical constituent, and each
part is taught step-by-step (Nunan, 2006). As a result, students struggle to communicate
effectively. It is necessary that activity conducting in class needs to be emphasized on how to
support students to use the language to communicate (Richard, 2008).
Furthermore, it was found that interaction in Thai classroom is most likely to be
teacher-dominated (Foley, 2005; Kwangsawad, 2009; Saiyod, 2009; Supakorn, 2017).
Students are usually set to memorize the structures and required to give factual response after
teachers present the grammatical units. Comparing to western learners, Thai students are
given more of a passive role and tend to stay in a safety zone (Saengboon, 2004;
Wiriyachitra, 2002). Hence, there are limited opportunities for students to have genuine and
spontaneous communicative activities (Khamkhien, 2010). Furthermore, when teaching
revolves mostly around teachers, students feel less engaged, and the class seems to be boring.
According to Littlewood (1981), the development of communicative skills can only take
place if learners have the motivation and opportunity to express their own identity and relate
with the people around them.
In addition, though numbers of research in Thailand have adopted TBLT to develop
learners‘ speaking and listening skills, most of them were conducted on students above
elementary levels (Boonkit, 2010; Bureekaew, 2009; Chitprarop, 2011; Promruang, 2012;
Wongkai, 2004; Worrapattakrit, 2006). Only a few studies have been published on
elementary students (Ruenyoot, 2011; Saiyod, 2009). In other words, although much work on
the potential of TBLT has been carried out, the classroom-based studies for young Thai
learners remain an under-researched area. It is interesting to find out if students at young age
can cope with the approach of TBLT which requires a cognitive ability to process a task such
as analyzing or comparing given information. In addition, another important part that should
not be overlooked is the teachers‘ perceptions toward the TBLT implementation.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

6
In this situation, the researcher believes that the use of Task-based Language
Teaching is useful in improving the English speaking and listening skills of young learners
for several reasons. Because speaking and listening skills are fundamental in foreign
language learning (Nunan, 2010), in order to have an effective learning, it is important to
promote speaking and listening skills in the primary curriculum (Sharpe, 2001). This is
especially true for young learners who have to rely on and learn through their listening as
their reading and writing skills are the very beginner stage. While young learners have a
natural ability to pick up language from interactions, TBLT offers opportunities for this kind
of acquisition (Shintani, 2016). According to the defining features of task proposed by
Skehan (1996), it is obvious that the characteristics of task can really help enhance English
listening and speaking skills. TBLT provides a rehearsal stage for them to practice their
communicative skills through the given tasks which were designed to imitate the real-world
tasks. In addition, because the primary feature is meaning, learners are encouraged to use the
language without fear of making grammatical mistakes during the task performance.
However, TBLT does not seclude language accuracy as vocabulary and linguistic structures
are introduced and highlighted during the pre and post-task stage.
For all these reasons, the researcher believes that task-based language teaching would
be beneficial in teaching speaking and listening English to young learners in Thailand,
especially in the context that the learners may struggle to understand the relevance of learning
English as they have less English exposures or contact with native speakers, particularly in
suburban areas. The place where they have more chance to practice English is at school. The
researcher hopes that TBLT which the aims are to encourage students‘ involvement in
learning and provide students‘ opportunities to use the language for communication would
help enhance their English speaking and listening skills. Thus, the researcher would like to
explore the effectiveness of this approach.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

7
1.3 Research Objectives
1. To compare the improvement of the English speaking and listening skills of the
young learners who have been taught through task-based language teaching with the learners
who have not been taught through task-based language teaching.
2. To examine how the young learners demonstrate their performances in task-based
language teaching lessons.
3. To explore the teacher‘s perception towards the implementation of task-based
language teaching in classroom.
1.4 Research Questions
Specifically, this study aims to answer three research questions as follows.
1. To what extend have the young learners who have been taught through task-based
language teaching improved their English speaking and listening skill when comparing to the
young learners who have not been taught through task-based language teaching?
2. How do the young learners demonstrate their performances in task-based language
teaching lessons?
3. What is the teacher‘s perception towards the implementation of task-based
language teaching in classroom?
1.5 Significance of the Study
The aim of this study was to examine the use of task-based language teaching to
develop young learners‘ English speaking and listening skills. This study examined students‘
actual classroom practices and reveals how the EFL teacher perceives TBLT in terms of
advantages and obstacles during the implementation in the classroom.
As mentioned previously, communicative skills are considered necessary in learning
foreign language. Speaking and listening skills are fundamental in foreign language learning
(Nunan, 2010). However, teaching English speaking and listening in Thailand is still
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

8
challenging. In order to have an effective learning, it is important to promote speaking and
listening skills in the primary curriculum (Sharpe, 2001). This is especially true for young
learners who have to rely on and learn through their listening as their reading and writing
skills are the very beginner stage. While young learners have a natural ability to pick up
language from interactions, TBLT offers opportunities for this kind of acquisition (Shintani,
2016). According to the features of TBLT which were mentioned earlier, it provides a
rehearsal stage for students to practice their communicative skills through the given tasks
which were designed to imitate the real-world tasks. In term of fluency, because the primary
feature is meaning in TBLT, students are encouraged to use the language without fear of
making grammatical mistakes during the task cycle. However, TBLT does not seclude
language accuracy. Students will pick up language accuracy from the pre-task and form-
focused stage where vocabulary and language structures are introduced and highlighted.
Task-based language teaching has been proved to be an effective approach for
language learning (Bailey and Nunan, 2005; Ellis, 2003, 2009; Nunan, 2004; Richards and
Rodgers, 2014; Willis and Willis, 2007). Also, it has been demonstrated that TBLT has
benefits in English classrooms in Thai environments (Boonkit, 2010; Bunmak , 2015; Butler,
2011; Littlewood, 2007; McDonough & Chaikitmongkol, 2007; Promruang , 2012;
Reunyoot, 2011; Saiyod, 2009; Thanghun, 2012; Wichitwarit, 2014). However, few studies
have examined how TBLT works with young Thai learners who actually have been proved to
have a high degree of flexibility in language learning comparing to older learners (Copland,
& Burns, 2011; Dixon, et al., 2012; Donaldson, 1978; Krashen, 1982; Long, 1990;
McLaughlin, 1984/1985; Oyama, 1976; Pinter, 2006; Read, 2003). As mentioned earlier, the
researcher found that the key features of TBLT proposed by Skehan (1996) can probably help
enhance English speaking and listening skills of young Thai learners. To explore the benefits
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

9
of the use of TBLT on teaching young learners, this study aims to fill in the gap by
examining the improvement of the young learners who have been taught through TBLT.
The result of this study would shed new lights on teaching speaking and listening
English to young learners in Thailand. The results are beneficial for teachers who are looking
for a more motivational teaching method to engage young learners during the learning
process. It can be used to call for attention from English teachers especially in the countryside
of Thailand where English is less exposed. In addition, the result of this study will be
beneficial for other schools that share similar context as they can use the information from
the result of this study to improve the curriculum and provide more opportunity for teachers
to utilize TBLT in their teachings.
1.6 Scope of the Study
1. The population for this study is 60 students from Pratomsuksa 1 at School A
2. The variables in this study are: independent variable is task-based language
teaching, dependent variables are students English speaking and listening skills.
1.7 Definitions of Key Terms
Task-based Language Teaching (TBLT)
Task-based Language Teaching or TBLT refers to pedagogic approach that is based
on tasks. TBLT facilitates students‘ participation in meaningful activities in classroom to
enhance students‘ engagement. Students are provided opportunities to perform given tasks
which resemble real life situation by using the language in order to complete the tasks. The
design of task-based instructions in this study is based on a framework for designing task-
based lessons proposed by Willis and Willis (2007). The framework includes three phrases:
pre-task, task cycle, and form-focus language work.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

10
English speaking ability
English speaking ability refers to an oral skill which can accurately and fluently
convey the message the students want to send out. In this study, English speaking ability is
the students‘ mean scores from the pre and post speaking test retrieved from Cambridge
English Young Learner Exam (Cambridge Assessment English, 2018).
English listening ability

English listening ability refers to an ability to comprehend the spoken language. In
this study, English listening ability is the students‘ mean scores from the pre and post
listening test retrieved from Cambridge English Young Learner Exam (Cambridge
Assessment English, 2018).
Young language learners
Young language learners refer to the students who are studying in Grade 1 at School
A at the second semester of the academic year 2018. They are equivalent to Pratomsuksa 1 in
Thai educational system.
English Speaking and Listening Test
Proficiency test refers to the Cambridge English Young Learners Exams – Pre A1
Starters Test, developed by University of Cambridge Local Examinations Syndicate
(UCLES) (Cambridge Assessment English, 2018). In this study the speaking and listening
test is the speaking and listening test which is used as a pre-test before the implementation of
TBLT and a post-test after the implementation of TBLT.
Speaking and Listening Skills Assessments
Speaking and listening skills assessments refers to the Cambridge authorized
examiner who passed the Cambridge qualifications.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

11
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
In the previous chapter, the purpose and objectives of this study were established.
This chapter includes the literature review that was conducted to support the objectives of the
research. The literature review draws on academic and practical sources, including academic
books on teaching English, journal articles and other sources that have described and
critiqued available techniques. The chapter presents (1) an overview of teaching English
speaking and listening skills, (2) teaching approaches for English speaking and listening, (3)
Task-Based Language Teaching (henceforth, TBLT), (4) young learners language teaching,
(5) previous studies on TBLT, both outside and inside Thailand, and (6) the conceptual
framework of the research.
2.1 Teaching English Speaking Skills
Speaking is one of the four fundamental skills of language use, along with listening,
reading, and writing. It is the productive verbal component of a language, in which the
individual receives information then formulates and expresses thoughts and interacts with
others (Brown, 1994). It includes aspects such as pronunciation (ensuring that words are
produced in a way that others understand them according to the rules of the language) and
generation of meaningful phrases for communication (Cooze, 2017). What makes speaking
skill challenging to master is that it requires more than one job at the same time. Learners are
required to process linguistic inputs by choosing words, and produce their thought, then
pronouncing them while trying to put everything together with the correct grammatical
features (Harmer, 2004; Lightbown & Spada, 2006). Thus, according to Ur (2006), speaking
is a very important skill for English learners as people who know the language are in fact
referred to as ―speakers‖ of that particular language as if to become the speakers of the
language, they have to know all of the four language skills.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

12
Teaching speaking skill to young learners can be challenging but the upside is they
are enthusiastic learners by nature (Piaget, 1970). They have willingness to participate in any
activities that seems to be interesting to them but at the same time it is also important to keep
them motivated otherwise we will easily lose interest (Cameron, 2001). According to
Littlewood (1981), motivation is one of the key successes in the development of learners‘
communicative skills. Many of the most useful strategies are motivational strategies intended
to encourage students to overcome shyness and fear of speaking, for example role-playing
and discussion of cultural topics and popular culture. Hamad (2013) noted that it is useful to
use a combination of tools such as classroom discussions and presentations to encourage
planned and spontaneous speech. Other techniques can also be used for younger learners,
such as songs, which allow learners to learn new vocabulary and pronunciation (Duarte,
Tinjacá, and Carrero, 2012)
A typical speaking assessment approach is a speaking test, which can take several
forms. This can include for example oral units of standardized tests, authentic assessments
such as checklists of students‘ progress, recorded speech analysis (Florez, 1999), an interview
or discussion between student and teacher, a presentation or reading of a previously prepared
work, or a passively monitored discussion between students (Khamkhien, 2010). The
difficulty and variety of tasks involved in a speaking assessment vary depending on the
student‘s level (Cooze, 2017). Thus, assessments tools should be designed from the very first
stage of lesson planning to make sure that the instruments are aligned with the instructions.
Also, to prevent confusion, the criteria should be well-defined and logical (Florez, 1999).
According to Mead and Rubin (1985), there are two methods being used for speaking skills
assessment which are the structured approach and the observational approach. The former
focuses on the structural aspects where more specific tasks are given to students to perform
and be evaluated while the latter lies in the observational aspects where behavior of the
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

13
students are observed and assesses unnoticeably. It can be monitored in both settings;
individuals and in group. Fulcher, Davidson, and Kemp (2011) proposed that there are now
two main approaches regarding rating scale design: the measurement-driven approach and the
performance data-driven approach. Similar to the aforementioned approaches, the
measurement-driven approach places value on the scaling methodology of experts while the
performance data-driven approach prioritizes observations of the performance.
2.2 Teaching English Listening Skills
Listening is the receptive complement to the skill of speaking. It is often called the
Cinderella skill as it has somewhat been neglected in the field of foreign language learning
(Nunan and Miller, 1995; Vandergrift, 1997). In fact, the significance of listening skill cannot
be neglected as it is an important component in second language acquisition process (Feyten,
1991). It actually should not be taken as a passive activity due to its complexity during the
process of listening (Byrnes, 1984; Celce-Murcia, 1995; Nunan, 2002; Vandergrift, 1999).
When listening, the learner‘s task is to hear and process the language produced by the speaker
and understands what he or she has communicated. This requires knowledge of both phonetic
and verbal elements of the language and spoken language grammar. Surkamp and Yearwood
(2018) identified several listening situations, which include passive listening (for example
listening to public announcements, media, in an audience or when overhearing conversations)
and participatory listening (listening as part of a debate or discussion). In passive listening,
the listener is expected to understand but will not be called on to produce language, but in
participatory listening the listener must generate speech in response to what he or she hears
(Surkamp & Yearwood, 2018). Effective English listening can also require more knowledge
of slang and informal speech than is necessarily required for speaking or for written English.
Thus, while listening is one of the receptive learning skills, it is also a complex and difficult
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

14
skill to learn as it requires a wide knowledge both linguistic and non-linguistic aspects to
understand the received information (Anderson and Lynch, 1988; Buck, 2001)
There are several strategies in teaching listening skill. Miller (2003) suggested the
process which involves pre-listening (ensuring students are ready to listen), while-listening,
and post-listening (in which student listening knowledge is integrated). During the pre-
listening stage, the context of the material may be introduced, and students may be motivated
for what they are about to hear. During the listening stage, students are exposed to the
material, which could include a dialogue or text read out loud, a song or other type of
entertainment media, or even announcements that they might encounter in natural language.
Listening may occur one or more times depending on the material and the skill of the listener.
In post-listening, students may be asked to analyze the language (for example, identify new
vocabulary or explain what the content meant) or to respond to the content (for example, to
agree or disagree or to explain what they liked or disliked about the content). With careful
selection of tasks, the learners can be given help in order to stay focused on their listening
during these two stages.
There are a number of standardized tests and other measurements that have been
designed to assess listening skill based on the aspects needed to be measured. According to
Mead and Rubin (1985), the key components in listening exams are the listening stimuli, the
questions, and the test environment. It is suggested that the listening stimuli should embody
the spoken language that is used in everyday life, the language that students usually hear in
the classroom, or the language that is used in the media. In addition, the content and the
length of the passage should be taken into consideration as listening performance is
stimulated by motivation and memory. Regarding the questions, for multiple-choice type of
question, the answers should emphasize on the important information, not the minor details.
Furthermore, the answers should be found from the passage, not students‘ experience. Apart
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

15
from the multiple-choice test, a performance test where students are required to perform some
actions according to the oral instructions is another option. The last key component is the
testing environment. It is recommended that the environment for listening assessment should
be distraction-free. The quality of the materials used in the test should be excellent.
2.3 Teaching Approaches for English Speaking and Listening
Since the key success in teaching English speaking and listening skill is for students
to be able to actually communicate in English (Davies and Pearse, 2000), a wide range of
teaching methods emphasizing on developing learners‘ communicative skills have been
proposed and implemented under the umbrella of Communicative Language Teaching or
CLT. Richards (2006) provided definition of CLT as ―a set of principles about the goals of
language teaching, how learners learn a language, the kinds of classroom activities that best
facilitate learning, and the roles of teachers and learners in the classroom‖. The goal of CLT
is the acquiring of communicative competence which students are encouraged to
communicate rather than forced to focus solely on grammatical forms as it seems to be
impractical if the learners can master all the rules of forming sentences but cannot use the
language for meaningful communication (Richards, 2006).
Overtime, various language teaching approaches have been introduced and employed.
Each one developed in the attempt to fill the gap of their predecessors starting from the
traditional approaches such as audio-lingual Method (ALM) to the current communicative
language teaching such as task-based language teaching or TBLT. In this section, the
characteristics of ALM, CLT, and TBLT are explained and evidence for its effectiveness is
reviewed. TBLT, the approach selected for this research, is discussed in more details than the
other two.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

16
2.3.1 Audio Lingual Method (ALM)
The audio-lingual method (ALM) of English speaking and listening was developed in
the early 20th century by the structural linguist, Charles Fries (Fries and Fries, 1961 as cited
in Richards, 1984). The method was based on early psychological and cognitive science
principles such as behaviorism and structural linguistics (Brown, 2001; Savignon, 2018).
Similarly, Richards (2002) stated that ALM was a result of several researches on learning
relating to behavioral psychology. Based on principles of behavioral psychology by B.F.
Skinner, it is believed that learners can be trained through a system of reinforcement
(Richards and Rodgers, 1986). The ALM was based on an earlier teaching technique known
as the direct approach, which focused on natural and active immersion learning (Celce-
Murcia, 2014). The inclusion of behavioral science principles meant that the ALM adopted
the stimulus-organism-response model of psychological interaction, in which positive or
negative feedback was used to discourage or encourage specific behaviors (Richards &
Rodgers, 2014).
The ALM inherited features such as the use of dialogues and natural speech an
emphasis on speaking and listening from the direct approach but varied in several ways as
well. For example, grammar is a major concern of the ALM, with students engaging in
grammar sequencing and learning grammar rules extensively (Celce-Murcia, 2014). In
contrast, the ALM has relatively little emphasis on building vocabulary or on understanding
the meaning of communications, especially in the early stages. Students are taught precise
pronunciation and are strictly prevented from making pronunciation errors, with emphasis
often placed on ‗correct‘ or native-speaker pronunciation styles and accents. ALM also
makes extensive use of rote memorization and drill practices rather than spontaneous
language generation (Richards & Rodgers, 2014). For example, a typical oral practice drill
would include repetition of a set phrase; inflection of a word into different forms (for
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

17
example, spoken conjugation of verbs); replacement; and restatement (Richards & Rodgers,
2014). Another characteristic of the ALM is that the curriculum and lessons are strictly
sequenced and controlled, with specific grammatical structures, drills and vocabulary being
introduced at any given time (Celce-Murcia, 2014; Richards & Rodgers, 2014). Thus,
teachers have a limited requirement for content knowledge, making it theoretically possible
for less skilled teachers to teach the content.
Although the ALM was popular as a teaching method through the 1960s, it was more
or less abandoned by the 1970s or early 1980s (Richards, 2006). In part, this was due to
Noam Chomsky‘s critique of Skinnerian behaviorism as he asserted that the focus on the
language development of the learners or linguistic competence was more creative and the
mimicry-memorization approach that it embodied was ineffective at producing linguistic
competence in language learners (Chomsky, 1959). Furthermore, the ALM was particularly
poor at teaching skills such as listening comprehension, since more emphasis was placed on
speaking repetition of phrases that the listener may not even understand (Osada, 2004).
Instead, students learned a short-term ability to mimic phrases, but did not gain a deep
understanding of the language or build communicative competence (Hymes, 1972). ALM
was used in teaching English as a foreign language in Thailand up until the 1990s, when
national curriculum and teaching reforms took place (Khamkhien, 2010). Although some
aspects of the ALM are still used, such as repetition drills, these now tend to be confined to
parts of lessons, and the use of an ALM-based approach as the entirety of language learning
has been recognized as fruitless (Richards & Rodgers, 2014).
2.3.2 Communicative Language Teaching (CLT)
With the idea that L2 learners need more than impeccable linguistic structures to
interact in the target language outside the classroom, attention then shifted from the focus on
the grammatical competence where the ability to produce grammatically correct sentences is
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

18
prioritized to the emphasis on communicative competence where the ability to use the
language communicatively is more important. The term ‗Communicative Competence‘ was
suggested by Hymes (1972) for ―a knowledge of the rules for understanding and producing
both the referential and the social meaning of the language‖ (Paulston, 1974). As the concept
of communicative competence continued to grow and the question of what implications it
would have for language teaching methodology has been raised, the result was
Communicative Language Teaching or CLT. CLT was proposed in the late 1970 (Richards,
2006; Savignon 1997; Widdowson 1997) and one of the principles of this method is that it
should provide students with plenty of opportunity to express their opinion. The accuracy is
not the most important focus in CLT classroom since some errors are tolerated by teachers
and are not corrected right away like the way they were treated in ALM classroom.
Communicative language teaching (CLT) or the communicative approach was based
on studies in anthropology and linguistics that assumed that the goal of language learning was
to enable the learner to communicate with others (Celce-Murcia, 2014). Thus, rather than the
rote memorization and pronunciation drills of the ALM, CLT emphasizes activities that
encourage students to communicate spontaneously (Richards & Rodgers, 2014). In other
words, CLT is designed to build communicative competence, or the ability to communicate
effectively in multiple modes (Littlewood, 1981). CLT was adopted in Thai English teaching
in the following a series of extensive national curriculum reforms (Khamkhien, 2010).
The basis of CLT is the communicative task or communicative activity, which is an
individual, interactive, or group exercise in which students are aspect to communicate
(Nunan, 1991). Some examples of communicative activities that are used in CLT-based
language teaching include role-playing (where students adopt a specific role and interact and
communicate with each other), interviews and group work, and activities like scavenger
hunts, information gap exercises, and opinion sharing (Richards & Rodgers, 2014). Within
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

19
these activities, scaffolding of learning supports (for example, prepared exercises, flash cards
or vocabulary lists) is used to support learners at the appropriate level (Bailey & Nunan,
2005). However, exercises must be designed to avoid utterances, where students are using
communicative phrases that they have previously encountered without real communication
(Bailey & Nunan, 2005).
As the communicative approach has been widely used in the field of second and
foreign language teaching, numbers of communicative syllabus and methodology have been
developed. The notion of CLT has been evolved and gave birth to several alternative teaching
approaches. Task-based Language Teaching which was selected to use as a treatment in this
study is one of them.
2.4 Task-Based Language Teaching (TBLT)
Task-based language teaching (TBLT) which may also be called task-based teaching
or TBT, is unique among the methods studied because it has its origins in a non-English
primary language context, specifically that of Indian English learners (Harmer, 2001). It was
originally popularized by an Indian scholar N.S Prabhu from the successful ―The Bangalore
Project‖ which was developed from his procedural syllabus (Prabhu, 1987). It was the first
attempt to implement task from theory to task in practice. It can be claimed that the project
was the starting point in TBLT popularity (Rozati S. M., 2014). During the development
stage, it was found that students learned effectively when addressing real-world problems,
rather than focusing on the language itself; thus, TBLT views communication and language
learning not just as a problem of grammar and vocabulary learning, but as a problem-solving
skillset for communications (Willis & Willis, 2007).
In terms of syllabus design, Wilkins (1976), proposed a basic distinction between
what he called ‗synthetic‘ approaches and ‗analytical‘ approaches. The former has been the
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

20
dominant approach to language teaching, especially in Asia (Nunan, 2006). It is the approach
that different units of languages are taught individually and step by step instead of letting
learners be exposed to the language system as a whole. Such approaches present the image of
traditional syllabus design which relates to the old concept called ‗mastery learning‘,
breaking the subject down and leveling it from easy to difficult (Nunan, 2006). On the other
hand, ‗analytic‘ approaches allow learners to be holistically exposed to the language units,
being asked to analyze them or break them down by themselves. The latter has gained its
popularity recently as task-based learning, project-based learning, thematic learning, and
content-based learning all fall into this category where students do not purely rely on the
prior language system analysis (Nunan, 2006). Task-based language teaching then, was no
longer just the alternative approach, but became teaching pedagogy.
Typically, a TBLT language lesson is divided into three parts: the pre-task
(preparatory) stage, in which students are provided context and motivated; the task itself; and
the post-task (review) stage, in which students talk about and integrate what they learned
during the lesson (Ellis, 2003; Hung, 2014; Willis & Willis, 2007). In some cases, grammar
and vocabulary may only be introduced in passing or discussed in the post-task stage, while
in other cases, new grammar and vocabulary may be addressed in the pre-task stage to
prepare students. However, as far as possible the task itself is kept free from the interference
caused by focus on the grammar or vocabulary structures being used, ensuring that the
student is actually focused on the communication rather than only the language itself.
As with other English teaching techniques, TBLT has been subject to critique since its
development (Ellis, 2009). One of the critiques is that the concept of the task is poorly
defined and that it is not clearly distinguished from earlier methods. However, Ellis (2009)
argues that this is intentional, since there is no single type of task that would be appropriate
for all learning situations. Instead, tasks are intentionally defined in a way that allows for the
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

21
task to meet the needs of the learner, rather than the learner bending to fit the task. Thus, this
type of critique stems from misunderstanding of the nature of the task. Another critique
addressed by Ellis (2009) is that the structure of Asian classrooms, with teacher-dominated
communication and lack of communication opportunities, is a poor fit for TBLT. However,
the researcher believes that it is necessary for the classroom structure to change to enable
students to become better communicators and language speakers. TBLT, with its absolute
emphasis on communication and participation, is believed to be an available tool to create
this change in the classroom. Thus, TBLT has been adopted in this research as the best tool to
make the desired change.
2.4.1 The Definitions of Task
The ‗task‘ in task-based learning is deliberately loosely defined to allow for a high
degree of flexibility in meeting learner needs (Ellis, 2009). However, when talking about
task, there are two major kinds. The first one is a task in general, done in real world activities,
carrying non-technical meaning as defined by Long (1985) as follows.
[a task is] a piece of work undertaken for oneself or for others, freely or for some
reward. Thus, examples of tasks include painting a fence, dressing a child, filling out
a form, buying a pair of shoes, making an airline reservation, borrowing a library
book, taking a driving test, typing a letter, weighing a patient, sorting letters, taking a
hotel reservation, writing a cheque, finding a street destination, and helping someone
across a road. In other words, by ‗task‘ is meant the hundred and one things people do
in everyday life, at work, at play, and in between.
(Long, 1985)
The second one is called a ‗pedagogic task‘ or ‗communicative task‘ which is the task
that is carried out in a classroom, having linguistic features. The definitions of a ‗task‘
occurring in the classroom are as follows.
[a task is] an activity which required learners to arrive at an outcome from given
information through some process of thought, and which allowed teachers to control
and regulate that process.‖
(Prabhu, 1987)
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

22
A communicative task is a piece of classroom work which involves learners in

comprehending, manipulating, producing or interacting in the target language while
their attention is principally focused on meaning rather than form. The task should
have a sense of completeness, being able to stand alone as a communicative act in its
own right.
(Nunan, 1989)
[a task is] an activity in which: meaning is primary; there is some sort of relationship
to the real world; task completion has some priority; and the assessment of task
performance is in terms of task outcome.
(Skehan, 1996)
A task is an activity which requires learners to use language, with the emphasis on
meaning, to attain an objective, and which is chosen so that it is most likely to provide
information for learners and teachers which will help them in their own learning.
(Bygate, Skehan, and Swain, 2001)
Pedagogic tasks are the activities and the materials that teachers and/or students or on
in the classroom or other instructional environment. ‗Task‘ is the unit of analysis
throughout the design, implementation, and evaluation of a TBLT program, including
the way student achievement is assessed – by task-based, criterion-referenced
performance tests.
(Long, 2014)
For young learners, Cameron (2001) gives key features of classroom tasks as follows:
Classroom tasks for children learning a foreign language
 have coherence and unity for learners(from topic, activity and / or outcome)
 have meaning and purpose for learners
 have clear language learning goals
 have a beginning and end
 involve the learners actively
Furthermore, Ellis (2003) extends the definition of task by identifying several
characteristics or components of the task. He argues that for a classroom activity to be
considered a task, it must meet the following six criteria:
―(1) A task is a workplan… (2) A task involves a primary focus on meaning… (3) A
task involves real-world processes of language use… (4) A task can involve any of
the four language skills… (5) A task engages cognitive processes… [and] (6) A task
has a clearly defined communicative outcome (Ellis, 2003, pp. 9-10).‖
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

23
How the task is defined here means that if a task does not involve these six
components, then it is considered to be an exercise rather than the task. According to Ellis
(2003), the primary feature of ‗tasks‘ is the use of meaning-focused language while the
primary feature of ‗exercises‘ is the use of form focused language. Widdowson (1998), points
out that it is not the matter of form and meaning that differentiate tasks from exercises but it
is the ‗kind‘ of meaning that is involved. Tasks are involved with ‗pragmatic meaning‘,
concerning the use of language in context, while exercises are involved with ‗syntactic
meaning‘, concerning specific forms that hold the semantic meanings to be correctly
conveyed. To be easily put, ‗tasks‘ allow students to be ‗language users‘ while ‗exercises‘ put
students in a role of ‗language learners‘. An example of an exercise that is not a task is a ―fill
in the blanks‖ activity, where learners are given a set of words to match to a specific language
position (such as an image or sentence framework). Since this does not involve real-world
language and students are not required to use cognitive processes like reasoning, it is not
considered a true task (Ellis, 2003). However, it is not uncommon for tasks and non-task
exercises to be interleaved in the TBLT-based classroom, with activities being commonly
used in the pre-task and post-task stages (Willis & Willis, 2007).
Because Ellis (2003) defined task as a workplan, Ellis and Shintani (2014) proposed
another definition based on criteria that can be used to distinguish whether a given workplan
is a task or not. The criteria are as follows.
Table 2.1 Criteria for Defining a Task-as-Workplan (Ellis and Shintani, 2014)
Criteria Description
The primary focus is on meaning The workplan is intended to ensure that
learners are primarily concerned with
comprehending or/and producing messages
for a communicative purpose (i.e. there is
primary focus on meaning-making).
There is some kind of gap The workplan is designed in such a way as to
incorporate a gap which creates a need to
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

24
convey information, to reason or to express

an opinion.
Learners rely mainly on their own linguistic Learners need to draw on their existing
and non-linguistic resources linguistic resources (potentially both L1 and
L2) and their non-linguistic resources (e.g.
gesture; facial expressions) for
comprehension and production. There is
therefore no explicit presentation of
language.
There is clearly defined communicative The workplan specifies the communicative
outcome outcome of the task. Thus task
accomplishment is to be assessed not in
terms of whether learners use language
correctly but in terms of whether the
communicative outcome is achieved.
2.4.2 The Frameworks of Task-based Language Teaching (TBLT)
TBLT frameworks are different approaches to the division and sequencing of tasks
into specific stages and the cycling of tasks such that a completion of one cycle supports the
next cycle (Hung, 2014). As mentioned earlier, the most commonly used TBLT frameworks
consist of three stages. The TBLT framework proposed by Willis and Willis (2007) is shown
in Figure 2.1.
Figure 2.1 Task-based Language Teaching Framework (Willis and Willis, 2007)
Pre-task Priming Activities
Introduction to topic and task
Teacher explores the topic with the class, highlights useful words and phrases, helps
students understand task instructions and prepare. Students may hear a recording of others
doing a similar task.
Task Cycle
Task
Students do the task, in pairs or small groups. Teacher monitors from a distance
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

25
Planning a report
Students prepare to report to the whole class (orally or in writing) how they did the
task, what they decided or discovered.
Reporting back
Some groups present their reports to the class, or exchange written reports and
compare results.
Form-focused Language Work
Teacher leads students to focus on form by identifying useful words, phrases and
patterns from the texts/recordings from the task cycle to help students systemize what they
know: classify into semantic, functional, notional or structural categories. This stage includes
analysis and practice activities.
Analysis
Students examine and discuss specific features of the text or transcript of recording.
Practice
Teacher conducts practice of new words, phrases and patterns occurring in the data,
either during or after the analysis.
Task repetition
Teacher might ask students to repeat the same task or the same report but with
different partners in more controlled way. Students can use the language they learn from
previous stage.
Willis and Willis‘s (2007) framework divides the task sequence into three stages: pre-
task (introducing the topic and the task), the task cycle (the task, planning, and reporting),
and the language focus stage (analysis and practice). During the pre-task phrase, the topic and
the task will be introduced to learners. Teachers can activate topic-related vocabulary or
phrases. It can be called a priming stage where students are prepared for the topic and made
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

26
available the vocabulary. This can be done through a teacher-led introduction, a questionnaire
or both (Willis and Willis, 2007). To design the activities during the pre-task stage, it is vital
to understand the goals of pre-task activities. According to Ellis et al. (2020), pre-task
activities comprised of three main goals. First, pre-task activities are to motivate learners and
arouse their interest. Second, pre-task activities prepare learners for the main task. By
preparing learners, it means that they have a clear understanding of task instructions and the
expected outcome and also are equipped with adequate resources to perform the task. To be
specific, the resources here refer to lexical or vocabulary knowledge, not grammar or
morphosyntax. Third, pre-task activities provide learning opportunity which may affect task
performance. Learner may be encouraged to work around their cognitive space when being
introduced to new words or responding to a quiz. The summary of pre-task methodological
options proposed by Ellis et al. (2020) is shown in Table 2.2.
Table 2.2 The Summary of Pre-task Methodological Options (Ellis, Skehan, Li, Shintani, &
Lambert; 2020)
Options Descriptions Recommendations

Pre-task planning Learners are given time to  1-3 minutes of
plan the content and panning seem ideal,
language of subsequent task but teachers should
performance. customize the length
of planning according
to learner and task
characteristics.
 During planning,
teachers may consider
allowing students to
make notes, work
with language
materials, and plan in
their L1, L2 or both.
 No planning is an
option.
 Make sparing use of
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

27
Pre-task focus on form Pre-task grammar pre-task grammar

instruction: learners are instruction because it
taught a grammar rule before may affect learners‘
task performance fluency and the
complexity of their
speech production.
 Be careful about what
Pre-task modeling: learners to model because the
are provided with a model model has a
performance significant impact on
learners‘ task
performance.
 Too much
Other options Topic preparation: provide background
knowledge content about the knowledge reduces
topic negotiation
 Help learners with
Teacher scaffolding: perform task procedures
a similar task together with
learners  Teach vocabulary to
Vocabulary preparation prepare learners for
task performance but
do not require them to
use prescribed words
In terms of the effect of pre-task planning on task performance, Ellis (2009b) reported
his synthesis of the research on the effects of pre-task planning in terms of complexity,
accuracy and fluency (CAF) of learners‘ speech production during the task performance that
consistent effects for planning on fluency and complexity were shown while the effects on
accuracy were unstable. The reason that the pre-task planning strongly affects fluency and
complexity was because the learners would spend most of the time on organizing the content
than focusing on the language or conceptualizer, therefore, the language uses during the task
performance seems to be more fluent (Ellis et al., 2020). During the task cycle, there are three
parts involved in this phrase; task, planning, and report. Learners are offered the chance to
actually use the language they learn when they perform the task. After the task is performed,
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

28
learners are asked to plan their reports to the class. During this process, teacher can provide
guidance and this is where learners get a chance to improve their language. After the report,
feedback from teachers is given. Willis (1996) claims that students report on how they
performed the task to evaluate their own performance including accuracy and fluency.
Students can evaluate the task itself if they like or dislike it so teachers can decide whether to
use the similar task in the future. Students can be asked to repeat the full task or parts of it in
front of the whole class or to other groups of students to fully integrate learning process. In
addition, while the task is continuing, if teachers want to draw learners‘ attention to form, it
can be done by using reactive focus on form which has been referred to as corrective
feedback or CF (Ellis et al., 2020). It is an attempt to address linguistic features by
responding to errors learners produce during the task performance. The summary of within-
task methodological options is illustrated in Table 2.3.
Table 2.3 The Summary of Within-task Methodological Options (Ellis et al., 2020)
Options Description Recommendations

Within-task focus on form CF: provide feedback on  Use mixed feedback
errors arising during task  Start with a prompt and
performance provide a recast in the
absence of self-correction
Integrated focus on form  Interrupt a task to address
linguistic forms
Other options Within-task planning: no  Use within-task planning
time constraint is imposed on with beginners
task performance
Access to support  Provide access to
linguistic input such as
word cues
 Do not provide access to
non-linguistic input such
as pictures
A surprise element  Introduce a new element
to increase amount of
production and
motivation
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

29
Interim goals 
Add interim goals to
increase task structure
and task accountability
The last phrase is the language focus where learners study specific language features
which they have used during the task cycle. During this stage, teachers draw students‘
attention to form. After using and understanding the meaning of the language, learners are
ready to focus on the specific forms which carry that meaning. Because providing grammar
instruction during the pre-task stage can have an effect on learners‘ overall task performance
as their primary focus would be shifted to the linguistic features instead of the task, it is best
to prevent this limitation by postponing it to the post-task stage (Willis and Willis, 2007; Ellis
et al., 2020). According to the TBLT framework of Willis and Willis (2007), this phrase
includes analysis and practice components. For the analysis, learners will listen to or read a
sample of native speakers doing the same task to be exposed to the language that could have
been used during the task performance. For the practice, learners are required to use the
language accurately through practice activities. According to Ellis et al. (2020), the analysis
and the practice phases during the post-task stage can be done by employing task repetition,
addressing linguistic forms which learners have struggled with during the task cycle and
engaging learners in reflective activities. The summary of post-task methodological options is
shown in Table 2.4 below.
Table 2.4 The Summary of Post-task Methodological Options (Ellis et al., 2020)
Options Description Recommendations

Task repetition Learners are asked to repeat a  Procedural repetition is
task. Three types of ideal.
repetition are possible: exact  May mix procedural and
repetition, procedural content repetition
repetition and content  Feedback may be
repetition provided between
repeated tasks
Explicit focus on forms Post-task feedback  May ask learners to
perform another task after
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

30
providing feedback on
their task performance
Providing a model  Learners may listen to the
audio recording of a task
 Learners may read a
script of a model
performance
Other options  Learners may engage in
consciousness-raising
(CR) activities where
they extrapolate rules
based on given materials
 Learners may perform
input processing
activities that force
learners to attend to
linguistic forms to
process meaning
 Learners may be asked to
‗grammatize‘ a gapped
text where some
linguistic features (e.g.
plural) are missing
Reflection Reflective accounts  Ask learner to reflect on
various aspects of their
task performance
Transcription  Ask learners to transcribe
their task performance
 Integrate transcription
and other post-task
options such as teacher
feedback
For task repetition, task can be repeated in various ways. To be specific, there are
three types of task repetition: exact repetition, procedural repetition, and content repetition.
The first one is literal, having learners repeat the same content and procedures. In procedural
repetition, the procedures are the same but the content is different. In content repetition, the
content is the same while the procedures are different. For explicit focus on forms, there are
several ways of executing it: post-task feedback, providing a model, and other strategies such
as consciousness raising (CR). For post-task feedback, teachers can provide CF to address the
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

31
errors observed during learners‘ task performance. For providing a model, samples of
performance of the same tasks performed by competent or native speakers can be included so
that learners can self-correct by noticing the difference. Other strategies include
consciousness raising, processing instruction, and grammatizing. Regarding reflection,
teachers can ask students to reflect on the completed task in several aspects. Learners can be
asked to reflect on what they learnt during the task, self-evaluate or give opinions on how to
improve themselves. Also, it can be done through transcription which learners can transcribe
their own or classmate‘s performance and edit or compare with sample performance. In
conclusion, addressing linguistic forms after learners have struggled using the correct forms
during their task performance can give them a meaningful reason of why the need to learn the
grammatical forms. In other words, there is a motivation to learn. Hence, it can be concluded
that the TBLT framework provides three basic conditions of language learning which are
exposure, use and motivation. As you can see, the whole progress within the framework
covers from the holistic to the specific experiment.
2.4.3 Components of task
In order to design task, there are many components to take into account. According to
Nunan (1993), there are mainly five task components which are goals, input, activities, roles
and settings. Goals can be categorized into several types such as communicative, socio-
cultural, language and cultural awareness, etc. (Clark, 1987, as cited in Nunan, 1993). Input
can mean any data that the task provides such as letters, pictures, cards, drawing, menu,
recipe, shopping lists, etc. However, what needs to be taken into account is the authenticity of
the input, by that he means the input should be the one that is used in the real-world situation,
not the one that is specifically created for classroom purposes. Activities are what learners
actually do with the input data. There are three aspects to consider when designing the
activities (Nunan, 1993). The first one is authenticity. It is mentioned above that it is
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

32
important that the input data are from the real world so that learners can be exposed to the
real-world context, therefore, why not the same with activities. It might not be practical to
provide absolute realistic activities but they should work as a rehearsal stage for the real
world, requiring learners to practice what they have to use outside the classroom. The second
one is skill getting and skill using, which both are comparable with an earlier distinction
between controlled practice activities and transfer activities (Rivers and Temperley, 1978).
The former is involved with learning grammatical forms and structure and production in a so
called pseudo communication, while the latter is concerned with learners comprehending and
using their learnt structure to interact in a real communication. The last one is accuracy and
fluency. According to Brumfit (1984, as cited in Nunan, 1993), accuracy concerns
evaluations of rules, structures, explicit knowledge, and sign of skill getting. Fluency is
concerned with expressions, implicit knowledge, and spontaneous interaction. It is not
necessary that these two work in the opposition. Both can be worked to complement one
another. The fourth component is roles. When talking about roles here, there are two
perspectives to look at: roles of learners and roles of teachers. There are many roles of leaners
as they can be varied depending on approaches teachers use and it is important for learners to
know their roles when performing the tasks. For example, if it is a communicative approach a
teacher is using, then students‘ roles will be that they are active, integrating, and negotiative.
Regarding teachers, their roles are concerned with the functions they expect to accomplish
and the degree of control they are supposed to have. In one situation, their roles can be
merely a consultant or a guide, while in another situation; they are expected to be more
active, pushing students to achieve the task. It is vital that teachers‘ roles are matched with
students‘ roles here. It would not make any senses if teachers walk into young elementary
classroom and play their roles a facilitator, only observing and providing little guidance to
their learners from afar. In this case, nobody is likely to earn anything at the end. The last
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

33
component is settings. Settings include both classroom and non-classroom arrangement.
Nunan (1993) grouped roles and settings together and work as the ‗social settings‘. He also
proposes two facets of learning situation which are ‗mode‘ and ‗environment‘. Mode
represents the way learners work on their learning, whether as an individual or a group,
teacher-directed or self-oriented. Environment is where learning takes place. It can be a
conventional classroom, a language center or in a park, totally outside of class.
However, there have been other breakdowns of task components. Candlin (1987)
proposed that task should have seven components: input as a data provided to learners, roles
as the relationship between participants while working on a task, setting as a classroom or out
of classroom setting, actions as procedures performed by learners, monitoring as a direction
of the task during the process, outcome as aims of the task, and feedback as an assessment of
the task. On the other hand, Wright (1987) suggested only two major components: input data
as materials provided for students to operate, and instructional questions as instructions for
students to do the task. According to Ellis (2003), a task contains five components: goal,
input, conditions, procedures, and predicted outcome. It is illustrated in Table 2.5 below.
Table 2.5: Components of Tasks (Ellis, 2003)
Design feature Description

1. Goal The general purpose of the task.
2. Input The verbal or non-verbal information supplied by the task.
3. Conditions The way in which the information presented.
4. Procedures The methodological procedures to be followed in performing the
task.
5. Predicted outcomes:
Product The product that results from completing the task. The predicted
product can be opened or closed.
Process The linguistic and cognitive processes the task is hypothesized to
generate.
In Ellis‘s, goal refers to what communicative aspect the task is aimed to generate. Of
course, one task can contribute more than one goal. For the input, he separates ‗input‘ into
two components—‗input‘ and ‗conditions‘. This is to put an emphasis on the importance of
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

34
the distinguishing between the type of input and how the input data are provided, meaning a
task can have the same input data but different conditions and vice versa. He claims that both
input and conditions have an influence on students‘ task performance. Procedures refer to
choices of methodology to be used by teachers or researchers to use the task. In terms of the
outcome, he specifies it as the ‗predicted outcome‘, carrying two outcomes which are the
‗product outcome‘ as a result from finishing the task, and the ‗process outcome‘ as the
linguistic and cognitive processes the task supposed to be provided. In order to be defined as
tasks, they should have clear and particular outcome or product outcomes to be specific.
2.4.4 Types of Task
There are several distinct tasks that are used in TBLT, which are customized for the
learning environment and needs of the learner (Ellis, 2003; Nunan, 2004; Richards &
Rodgers, 2014; Willis & Willis, 2007). Nunan (1993) generally classified task into two types
based on its rationale: ‗real-world task‘ and ‗pedagogic task‘. The distinction between the two
can be illustrated as in Table 2.6.
Table 2.6: Task Rationale (Nunan, 1993)
Communication classroom tasks
Task type Real-world Pedagogic
Rationale Rehearsal Psycholinguistic
Reference Needs analysis SLA theory/research
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

35
Tasks with real-world rationale expect learners to experience some sorts of real-world
situation or materials. This type of tasks introduces learners to some sorts or situations that
they will encounter outside the classroom. In this sense, the word ‗real‘ is used for the world
outside classroom. It does not mean that what goes on inside the classroom is not real but it
works as a rehearsal of reality beyond classroom. Tasks with pedagogic rationale, on the
other hand, require learners to perform what they are unlikely have to do outside of the
classroom. This type of task takes psycholinguistic stand as it requires learners to do things
that they do not encounter in the real world.
However, it does not mean that these two rationales are working against each other
but rather they are on, what Nunan (1993) called a continuum. He explains that there are
tasks that are considered authentic but learners might rarely come across in their life outside
the classroom such as some part of a task that asks very young learners to formally introduce
themselves. Likewise, there are some tasks that are considered pedagogic but learners likely
to encounter in real life. Also, there are some tasks that are positioned at the center of the
continuum, not being fit in only one category. The rationale of those who support pedagogic
tasks is that even though this type of task cannot provide the real context for learners, skills
that learners mastered in class from pedagogic tasks can help them function when they face
real situation. Pedagogic tasks for listening skill can help improve learners‘ comprehension
when they listen to the radio outside the classroom, is for example. Conversely, there are
many language classes that justify for real-world tasks because they want learners to be
exposed to the context of the target language as much as possible. However, such real-world
tasks that are used in classroom are usually modified or adapted by the teachers. For instance,
teachers might have to adjust the pace of speakers, or allow learners to listen to the audio or
more than one time, or assist learners with some clues which they do not get to have in the
real life situation. Besides, there are some tasks that include non-communicative or pseudo-
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

36
communicative activity such as repetition, and transformation drills which are not similar to
things that learners have to do outside of the classroom. Also, there are communicative tasks
which sometimes do not connect with the real-world situation at all but are considered valid
according to its meaning intellectual, focused features and language in use encouragement.
Prabhu‘s Banglore Project (1987) is for example.
Prabhu (1987) specified task into three types of meaning-focused activity which occur
in the classroom: information-gap activity, reasoning-gap activity, and opinion-gap activity.
The first one, information-gap activity requires learners to transfer the information, either
from one person to another or one form to another, or one place to another. It requires process
of decoding and encoding information, and also selecting relevant information. This one
includes learners‘ interpretation when the information is first introduced, therefore, it can be
used as a useful pre-step of the other two types. It usually takes one-step procedure in order to
transfer the information, involving criteria of relevance and competence. The second one is
reasoning-gap activity which learners are engaged more with meaning than just decoding
information as they have to internally work things out when performing a task. Moreover,
when learners face difficulty when performing this kind of task, teachers can step in and
guide them step by step. It allows process of dialogic reasoning between teachers and learners
where they work together until learners achieve the outcome. Also, there is a degree of
negotiation in this type of task because it is students‘ duty to piece given information together
with shared limitation on how it can be pieced together. It requires learners‘ comprehension
and ability to convey information which involves reasoning to bridge the two. The third one
is opinion-gap activity which refers to activity that requires learners to select and articulate
their personal preference, attractions, or attitudes toward given information. Story completion
is for example. It is not solely about personal issue, it can be issues concerning social
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

37
problems. The activity might require learners to justify their strands but there is no right or
wrong answer as well as the same answer.
According to Willis and Willis (2007), task can be classified into seven types
according to the cognitive processes, starting from listing tasks; ordering and sorting tasks;
matching tasks; comparing tasks; problem solving tasks; sharing personal experience tasks;
and projects and creative tasks. The seven task types suggested by Willis and Willis, 2007
can be illustrated in Figure 2.2 below
Figure 2.2: Generating Task Types from a Topic (Willis & Willis, 2007)
Listing
Sharing
Ordering
personal
and sorting
experience
Topic
Projects and
Matching
creative tasks
Problem
Comparing
solving
The first type of task is a task involving listing which is the simplest type. However,
the language features can be challenged based on what a teacher ask students to make a list
for, varying from a list of words, short phrases to complex sentences. There are usually two
kinds of listing: brainstorming and fact finding. For language learners especially the shy ones,
brainstorming has been found the enormously effective way to get leaners to interact with
class and get involved with the topic being discussed (Cullen, 1998). Fact finding requires
learners to search for specific information from different kinds of sources. After finding out
the specific fact, teachers can then ask the learners to present the gathered information in
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

38
English. There are many tasks to be designed based on listing such as quizzes, memory
challenges, and guessing games. Because of its simplicity yet flexibility, it is very suitable for
beginners as it can be used during the priming stage or pre-task phase to prepare students for
the task cycle stage. The next one, tasks involving sorting and ordering require more
cognitive efforts. This type of task includes a selection of cognitive processes such as
sequencing, ranking and classifying. Sequencing can be done differently from a
chronological sequencing to a memory challenging. Rank ordering can be done after listing.
To stimulate the use of the language, teachers can ask learners to justify their ranking order.
For classifying, learners can work out their own set of classification or allocate items in the
provided categories. With the help of visual support such as charts, tables, mind-maps, etc.,
the tasks involving sorting and ordering are ―less cognitively demanding and give learners a
sense of security‖ (Willis and Willis (2007). The third type of task is matching, which is
claimed to be suitable for all levels and can be done in various ways. One of them is through
‗Total Physical Response‘ or TPR activities, developed by James Asher (1967). The method
is based on the correlation of human physical movement and the language learning process. It
is inspired by how infants can understand their parents‘ language and give answer by the
physical response. Therefore, the TRP is very popular among young learners language
teaching, especially in a beginners‘ level class which students are usually shy and reluctant to
speak as TPR allows them to see and listen first before they speak. However, it does not
mean that it is restricted to only young learners or beginners as it can also be done with adults
or advanced level learners. The next one, tasks involving comparing and contrasting includes
a wide range of topics from personal subjects to cultural subjects. The kind of activities such
as ‗Spot the difference‘ which can be done both ways with two people working cooperatively
or taking turns, is the classic example. These first four types of task are useful for activities
focusing on linguistic form and can also help facilitate the next task type which is problem-
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

39
solving tasks. Tasks involving problem-solving provide learners the opportunity to give
recommendations or solutions on given situations using the language. The problems can be
varied from the very general topics to the very specific ones. This type of task stimulates rich
and wide-ranging discussion among learners. It is suggested that students are given time to
think and prepare their ideas before presenting to the class. It is to be noted that the more
complex and cognitive demanding the problems are, the more time for preparation should be
given to learners, otherwise they will focus heavily on finding the solutions while lightly
spare their thoughts on composing what to say. The next type of task is projects and creative
tasks. Similar to the problem-solving task, the projects and creative tasks can be broken down
into series of shorter tasks and each task has its own objectives and outcomes which can
result in a form of end products such as leaflets, brochures, posters, a performance, a
webpage, etc. Projects usually require longer timespan and collaborative work; therefore
students can work together in pairs or a group of three, four, or more. To motivate learning
process, teachers can invite an expert in particular field to come in to class to educate
students on the particular topic. This way, it does not only create positive learning
environment but also give students an opportunity to learn new life skills that they might
need in life outside the classroom. The last type of task is sharing personal experience. In our
daily life, we normally get to talk about ourselves and share stories to other people. The same
story can get better and smoother each time we tell the story. It is the same way in the
classroom. In order to tell good stories, learners must need plenty of practice. Here, task
repetition can be used to promote fluency and confidence. Teachers have to make sure that
learners have enough time to prepare and plan their story.
Table 2.7 summarizes a brief definition of these tasks and their goals and a sample
activity, from the simplest type of tasks to the most complex tasks.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

40
Table 2.7: Summary of TBLT task types (Ellis, 2003; Nunan, 2004; Richards & Rodgers,
2014; Willis & Willis, 2007)
Task Type Activity Goal of the Task Type Sample Task

Type
Listing task Information Listing things that belong in a Make a list of animals.
gap specific category or are related
in some way.
Ordering and Reasoning From a list previously Sort the animals you
sorting task gap generated, creating an ordering identified from smallest
or classification of the list. to largest.
Matching task Information Matching two different types of Given a set of pictures
gap information (e.g. captions and of animals, identify the
pictures) animal.
Comparing task Reasoning Finding similarities and How are these animals
gap differences in two or more the same? How are they
examples. different?
Problem solving Reasoning Discussing a problem and How can an animal‘s

task gap finding a solution to the habitat be maintained?
problem
Sharing personal Opinion gap Articulating a personal Talk about your pets
experience task experience and the feelings and how you take care
surrounding it of them.
Projects and Opinion gap Making presentations and Write a story about
creative tasks creating new texts such as animals.
Reasoning poems, stories and essays
gap
Recently, Ellis, Skehan, Li, Shintani, & Lambert (2020) proposed another way of
classifying tasks which emerged from research that has investigated the communicative and
cognitive processed involved in performing different tasks. They suggested that any
particular tasks can be described according to the features it integrates. For example, an
information-gap task which asks one learner to give descriptions of a set of pictures to
another learner to identify the item is one-way, monologic, closed, convergent, and
descriptive. The features of different tasks are shown in Table 2.8 below
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

41
Table 2.8 Features of Different Tasks (Ellis et al., 2020)
Task type Description

One way versus two way In a one-way information-gap task, one
participant holds all the information that
needs to be communicated and thus functions
as the information-provider while the other
functions primarily as the receiver of the
information but may interact if
communication becomes problematic. In a
two-way task, the information is split
between the participants so both need to
function as the providers and receivers of the
information.
Monologic versus dialogic A monologic task places the burden of
performing the task entirely on a single
speaker and therefore involves a long,
uninterrupted turn. A dialogic task is
interactive and thus necessitates interaction
between the participants and typically an
information-gap task whereas an open task is
typically an opinion-gap task.
Closed versus open In a closed task, there is single (or very
limited set of) possible outcomes. A closed
task is typically an information-gap task
whereas an open task is typically an opinion-
gap task.
Convergent versus divergent Opinion-gap tasks can require learners to
converge on an agreed solution to the task or
can allow learners to arrive at their own
individual solutions.
Rhetorical mode The task can involve describing, narrating,
instructing, reporting or arguing.
In this study, the first three task types from Willis and Willis (2007) which are listing
tasks, ordering and sorting tasks, and matching tasks are used in designing lesson plans for
the participants according to the age appropriate. The more complex task types such as
problem solving and sharing personal experience might not be suitable for learners at young
age. Most of the tasks designed for this study are two-way, dialogic, closed, convergent, and
descriptive. In addition, as stated earlier, each type of task can be designed to lead into the
next which can give students a sense of security. Teachers can start from a simple listing task
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

42
and move to another task type that with more cognitive and linguistic challenge. In addition,
words and phrases are naturally recycled, making learning process more effective.
2.5 Young Learners Language Teaching
Young learners of foreign languages are children who undertake formal learning of a
second or foreign language from the early childhood education period (Cameron, 2001).
More specifically, the term ‗young learners‘ includes children from age 5 to 14 (Pinter,
2006). Young learners are a distinct set of language learners because of their stage of native
language development (for example existing reading skill), but also because of their learning
processes (Cameron, 2001). A considerable amount of works indicate that second language
acquisition is more effective in young learners, who have a high degree of flexibility with
regard to language learning compared to older learners (Copland, & Burns, 2011; Dixon, et
al., 2012; Donaldson, 1978; Krashen, 1982; Long, 1990; McLaughlin, 1984/1985; Oyama,
1976; Pinter, 2006; Read, 2003). Second language learning at the young learner stage is vital
and highly effective when the special needs of learners at this group are met.
Piaget‘s (1936) theory of cognitive development explains how young learners create
their own learning from their environment. Naturally, children are active learners as they
learn everything by exploring the settings (Piaget, 1970). A useful theoretical perspective on
young learners and their learning processes is that of social development theory, initially
proposed by Vygotsky (1978). Social development theory states that young learners learn
most effectively through social interaction with adult role models and with peers (Vygotsky,
1962). Social development theory proposes that learning occurs first in response to a social
need; for example, young learners may first learn to speak in order to communicate with
others. Following this external (social) development, learning becomes internalized; for
example, over time young learners may use language internally to formulate thoughts. Social
development theory also states that young learners expand their knowledge by moving
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

43
through a Zone of Proximal Development, where help from peers and adults and tools expand
what the learner can do (Vygotsky, 1978). In contrast, young learners who are isolated or
required to learn on their own cannot learn effectively. Bruner (1975), a psychologist who is
interested in children development, like Vygotsky, emphasized children‘s social environment.
He observed the interaction between mothers and their infants and saw the role of the
mothers that enter to assist or ‗scaffold‘ the action, supporting the kids to achieve the
outcome (Bruner, 1975). The notion of scaffolding was elaborated further on adult instruction
of a child in a learning context. It is explained that scaffolding is provided to support the kids
to resolve a question or complete a task in which is beyond their unsupported efforts (Wood,
Bruner and Ross, 1976). Following the theories mentioned above, language teaching for
young learners focuses on social interaction and the use of peer collaboration and adult
assistance appropriately to help expand the young learner‘s knowledge. In addition, Cameron
(2001) summarized key learning principles for young language learners which are beneficial
for those who are interested in the process of young children learning. The key learning
principles are as follows.
Figure: 2.3: Key Learning Principles for Young Learners (Cameron, 2001)
1. Children actively try to construct meaning.
2. Children need space for language growth.
3. Language in use carries cues to meaning that may not be noticed.
4. Development can be seen as internalizing from social interaction.
5. Children‘s foreign language learning depends on what they experience.
From looking at these key learning principles for young learners, it is quite apparent
that there is an alignment between these principles and the aforementioned features of task.
First, children actively try to construct meaning. Similarly, TBLT priority is meaning.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

44
Second, children need space for language growth. According to the Zone of Proximal
Development (Vygotsky, 1978) and scaffolding (Bruner, 1975), it is necessary to make space
for children‘s growth. TBLT offers that kind of distance as the teacher does not dominate the
class, but instead facilitate it. Third, language in use carries cues to meaning that may not be
noticed. In order to make children notice and attend to features of the foreign language which
carry meaning, they need guidance. Because they do not benefit much from formal grammar,
it needs to be done other ways. Fourth, development can be seen as internalizing from social
interaction. Language can develop as the child takes control of the language that is initially
used with other children and adults. TBLT encourages students‘ internalization from
interacting with their classmates and teacher. Lastly, children‘s foreign language learning
depends on what they experience. If we want children to develop particular skills, we have to
make sure that they have experiences in lessons that will form those skills. In this case,
opportunities to use communicative skills are offered through tasks.
Thus, it can be assumed that TBLT is an appropriate approach for young learners as
long as the tasks are appropriately designed to effectively assist these learners to achieve the
goals (Shintani, 2016).
2.6 Previous Research Studies on TBLT
As a final step in investigation of how TBLT can be implemented and what benefits it
has for the classroom, prior studies on TBLT implementation both inside and outside
Thailand have been reviewed. These prior studies bring up important points about the use of
TBLT and how it can succeed or fail.
Studies outside Thailand, reviewed below, have provided some evidence in these
areas to support the formation of a theoretical framework for the research.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

45
Copland, Garton, & Burns (2014) have investigated task-based learning in a global
perspective. This study had an important point to make, which was that young learners‘
speaking and listening skills were often mainly exercised in passive practice drills of the type
associated with ALM, even in classrooms that used nominally task-based approaches.
Sometimes this was due to lack of subject or pedagogic knowledge on the part of instructors
or due to cultural preferences or assumptions about learning. However, it had the effect of
limiting students‘ perceived speaking and listening skills in later learning in a way that it did
not affect their reading and writing skills. The authors also found that young learners may
suffer from a lack of communication confidence rather than a lack of communication
competence. This could lead to instructors assessing them at a lower speaking and listening
competence than they actually had. Thus, there are several reasons why speaking and
listening skills may be especially problematic for young learners. At the same time, there are
also ways to reduce the amount of stress associated with speaking and listening tasks to
improve confidence and competence.
Mudra (2016) studied an effectiveness of TBLT in enhancing speaking skill of
students in Indonesia. The participants were 30 EFL learners in Indonesia. The research
instruments included a speaking test, an observation, and a field note. The result indicated
that TBLT is an appropriate teaching method to enhance learners‘ speaking skill. It was not
only the improvement in term of the speaking scores but the motivation to speak also
increased.
Similarly, Albino (2017) investigated how TBLT approach helps students in Luanda
improve their speaking fluency. The participants were 40 students from Grade 9. A case
study design was used in this research, using audio-recorded picture descriptions and audio-
recorded interviews for research instruments. The finding of the study showed that through
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

46
the use of TBLT, the students improved their speaking fluency. In terms of their perception
on being taught with TBLT, students felt encouraged to speak the language.
In the university level, Huang (2015) investigated the implementation of TBLT in a
comprehensive English class on the university students‘ motivation and language proficiency
as well as their opinions towards the use of the method. The participants were 29 students,
age between 17 to 19 years old. The research instruments included questionnaires, interviews,
classroom observation and a teaching journal. The result of the study revealed that most of
the students expressed positive perceptions towards the implication of TBLT in their class
and agreed that TBLT helped increase their study motivation as well as develop their English
language skills, especially speaking and writing skill. However, there were some limitations
in this study as the data was collected only qualitatively. The data as derived from a form of
self-reflective enquiry, therefore, a choice such as an experimental research design might be a
better alternative.
Regarding young learners, Keyvanfar & Modaresi (2009) investigated the use of
TBLT on Iranian young learners. They investigated an impact of the use of task-based
reading activities whether it helps enhance English text comprehension of Iranian young
learners at the beginner level or not. The participants of the study were 50 female students,
age between 10 to 13 years old. The research design was the pretest-posttest nonequivalent-
groups quasi-experimental research. The research instruments included reading tasks, a
proficiency test, a reading post-test, a follow-up reading assessment, recorded score sheets.
The study proved that TBLT is an effective teaching method in teaching reading skills to
young language learners. It also revealed that TBLT is applicable to learners at the beginner
level and valuable to English language teaching for young learners.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

47
From teachers‘ perspective, Jeon and Hahn (2006) explored EFL teachers‘
perceptions of task-based language teaching (TBLT) in Korea. The study collected data from
questionnaires from 228 teachers from 38 schools in Korea. The data were analyzed
quantitatively and qualitatively through Likert-type and open-ended item analysis. The
findings of the study indicated that the majority of the teachers understand the concept of
TBLT but have some negative views on classroom execution. The study indicated that
teachers‘ conceptual understandings of TBLT do not necessarily lead to the implementation
in the actual classroom.
However, implementing TBLT with students of foreign language is not always
successful. It can be challenging in many cases. Carless (2002) reported on multiple case
studies in Hong Kong English classrooms. He noted that there were several challenges to
implementing TBLT, including classroom conditions (for example, large and crowded
classrooms with inadequate resources), lack of teacher training in TBLT methods and
language knowledge; and the institutional resistance to TBLT, including the focus on
examination and assessment and cultural expectations surrounding teaching and classroom
conduct. Shintani (2016) also noted many of the same problems with institutional factors and
teaching knowledge in her report on TBLT in Japanese young learner classrooms. She
particularly noted that many teachers did not have extensive knowledge of English and were
not trained in TBLT, and it was not incorporated into the curriculum and assessment
techniques
In Thailand, several studies have also investigated the use of task-based language
teaching in Thai classrooms starting from elementary level to adult level. The studies are as
follows.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

48
In the university level, Wichitwarit (2004) investigated what factors lead to successful
TBLT implementation in an undergraduate classroom of management students. The author
conducted her qualitative study in a compulsory language teaching classroom of first-year
undergraduates. She found that there were several characteristics of learning tasks that
promoted effective language use and communication in students. These characteristics
included that they were successful in motivating students and that they encouraged
cooperative learning between students. In general, students were motivated when the
activities were fun, engaging, and relevant. Cooperative learning occurred when students had
respectful and accountable relationships and good rapport. However, there were limitations
on task effectiveness, including time, teacher facilitation skill, and resources like curriculum
and material.
Boonkit (2010) used a qualitative research design as an action research to investigate
how TBLT affected the speaking confidence and communicative competence of Thai EFL
undergraduate students. The participants of the study were 18 students from Listening and
Speaking for Special Communication course. The research instruments included interview
questions and recordings of the participants‘ speaking performance. The study found that a
task-based teaching design provided opportunities for the students to speak English in
different situations and also gave the students‘ confidence to use the language which helped
contribute to effective speaking skill development.
For young learners, Reunyoot (2011) studied the students‘ English listening and
speaking skills through task-based learning from 40 students from Grade 3 in Bangkok. The
researcher used One-Group Pretest-Posttest Design during the experiment. The research
instruments include task-based lesson plans, the pre and post-test, the evaluation form and the
learning log. It was found from this study that the students‘ English listening and speaking
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

49
ability before and after the task-based learning experiment was significantly different at the
level of 0.01.
Promruang (2012) used task-based learning to improve develop English speaking and
listening abilities of 30 students from Grade 7 at Piboonprachasan School in Bangkok. The
research instruments included lesson plans, pre and post listening and speaking test, and a
teacher log. The study indicated that the English speaking and listening abilities of the
students through task-based learning after the experiment were significantly higher and
students‘ opinion toward the task-based learning was positive.
In term of the entire syllabus, McDonough & Chaikitmongkol (2007) investigated
perspectives on the syllabus or course, rather than on individual tasks, which is a useful
insight into how learners and teachers respond to the TBLT method. The authors found that
learners did have some initial resistance to the method because it was not a practice they had
encountered previously. However, over time they did become more comfortable with the
open expression and communication opportunities afforded by the task and agreed that the
course was meeting their academic needs. Teachers had some initial skill gaps and also
showed some resistance, especially when they were required to cede some control of the
classroom to allow for more student communication activities, but they also agreed that
students had a superior learning experience with this practice. Thus, this study shows that
TBLT can be effective at the university level, but also highlights some of the challenges that
students and teachers face in implementing the practice.
From teachers‘ perspective, Bunmak (2015) explored Thai EFL teachers‘
understanding and perceptions of task-based language teaching in Bangkok using a mixed-
method approach. The participants were 80 EFL teachers from 11 secondary schools in
Bangkok. The research instruments were a questionnaire and a semi-structured interview.
The study revealed that most of the teachers have a high level of understanding the concept of
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

50
task-based language teaching and agreed that there are several benefits of applying task-based
language teaching in a classroom. However, the teachers reflected that there are some
difficulties in employing task-based language teaching due to a number of aspects such as
roles of teachers and learners, classroom management, teaching materials and assessment.
In conclusion, these studies both inside and outside Thailand demonstrate that TBLT
has a potential advantage for speaking and listening practice among language learners. These
studies have also provided guidance on possible tasks that could be implemented and ways to
implement such tasks to benefit students. However, while there are a number of studies on
implementing TBLT in teaching speaking and listening skills, studies in young learner
populations are noticeably absent from the literature in the Thai context. A substantial
amount of research in Thailand has been conducted on older students ranging from the upper
secondary to university levels, while very few research focused on young learners. Therefore,
this study is conducted to explore the effectiveness of TBLT on young learners learning
English speaking and listening skills in Thailand using the TBLT framework and task types
proposed by Willis and Willis (2007). The details are discussed further in the next chapter.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

51
CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This chapter presents research methods that were used to assess the effectiveness of
the task-based language teaching in enhancing the speaking and listening skills of young Thai
learners. Specifically, the chapter includes research design, research setting and participants,
duration of the experiment, research instruments, data collection process, data analysis, and
the main findings of a pilot study that was conducted to measure the accuracy and reliability
of the test.
3.1 Research Design
The present study intended to evaluate the effectiveness of TBLT in enhancing the
speaking and listening skills of young Thai learners. For this aim, the researcher opted quasi-
experimental, pre-test & post-test with the control group research design. There were two
groups of participants including the control group and experimental group in order to probe
into the effectiveness of TBTL.
Figure 3.1 illustrates the research design of this study. O1 and O2 represent dependent
variables while X represents the independent variable.
Figure 3.1: Quasi-Experimental Design: Pretest-Posttest Nonequivalent Group
E: O1 X O2
C: O1 - O2
From Figure 3.1, E represents the experimental group while C represents the control
group. O1 is the English speaking and listening skills pre-test which was conducted before
the experiment. The pre-test scores were used to compare with the post-test scores to see the
development of the students. O2 was the English speaking and listening skills post-test. X
was the treatment which was the task-based language teaching.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

52
Research Questions
This study was conducted to answer the following research questions.
1. To what extent have the young learners who have been taught through task-based
language teaching improved their English speaking and listening skill when comparing to the
young learners who have not been taught through task-based language teaching?
2. How do the young learners demonstrate their performances in task-based language
teaching lessons?
3.2 Setting and Participants
The setting selected for this study was School A, a private school located in
Petchabun province. The school offers an education for students from kindergarten to junior
high school levels. Because the setting of the school was in a province, students had less
English exposures comparing to the city. The only place where students had a chance to
practice English was in an English classroom.
The population of this study was students from pratomsuksa 1 or grade 1 at School A
in the second semester of the academic year 2019. The school was located in the upcountry
where English language was less exposed when comparing to other big or touristy cities. The
students were from regular program and students‘ age ranged between 6 to 8 years old.
According the pre-test results taken prior the experiment, their English proficiency in terms
of speaking and listening skills were at a beginner level. The subjects of this study were 60
students from pratomsuksa 1 room 1 and 2 selected by purposive sampling. Thirty students
from Pratomsuksa 1 Room 1 were addressed in the control group and thirty students from
Pratomsuksa 1 Room 2 were addressed in the experimental group. The students in the control
group were taught by regular teaching method whereas; the students in the experimental
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

53
group were taught using the task-based teaching technique. The foreign teacher who taught
both classes was an experienced and licensed teacher who had more than five years of
teaching experience and was fluent in English. In addition, she has been teaching English
subject to elementary students at the school for three years. Prior to the experiment, the
researcher conducted an orientation to provide training for the teacher to ensure that she
understands the procedures and her role as a teacher in TBLT.
3.3 Duration
This study was based on 10 weeks and was conducted during the second semester of
the academic year 2019. The schedule of the English language classes for the participants for
both groups (control and experimental) was 2 hours for 10 weeks as shown in Table 3.1
below.
Table 3.1: The Duration of the Experiment

Experimental Group Control Group
Week Content Class Content Class
1 First class – Pre-test 2 classes First class – Pre-test 2 classes
Second class – Course Second class – Course
explanation explanation
2 Unit 1 – TBLT Lesson 2 classes Unit 1 – Standard 2 classes
Plan No.1 Lesson Plan
Unit 1 – TBLT Lesson Unit 1 – Standard
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

54

Plan No. 16 Lesson Plan
10 Post-test 2 classes Post-test 2 classes
Wrap-up Wrap-up
For the experimental group, there were two English classes in one week. Each class
was with the duration of one hour. It was to be noted that during the first class of the first
week, a pre-test was conducted to assess English language skills of the students. This process
was beneficial in identifying the improvements in learning after and before class. In the
subsequent weeks (2nd – 9th, a total of 18 classes), the experimental group was taught using
the task-based language teaching lesson plans which were adapted from the school textbook
(See Appendix A). In the last week of the experiment, the English speaking and listening
post-test were conducted.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

55
In the control group, there were also two English classes in one week. Each class was
with the duration of one hour. During the first week, the English speaking and listening pre-
test was conducted. The test was the same set with the one conducted in the experiment
group. In the following weeks (2nd – 9th, a total of 18 classes), the control group was taught
using the standard teaching lesson plans developed from the same book, ―Express English 1‖
for the same amount of time. The standard teaching lesson plans were provided in a teacher
manual based on the Basic Education Core Curriculum 2008 (See Appendix B). It was to be
noted here that the textbook, the content, and the learning objectives that were used in both
groups were the same. It was only the teaching method that was different. In the last week,
the English speaking and listening post-test were conducted. The results of the pre-test and
post-test of both groups were compared.
3.4 Research Instruments
3.4.1 Task-based Language Teaching Lesson Plans
In this study the TBLT lesson plans for 16 hours in 8 weeks which covered 4 chapters
were developed from P.1 English textbook, ―Express English 1‖ provided by Institute of
Academic Quality Development, Thailand. Each lesson plan was designed and adjusted
based on a theoretical framework of TBLT, using selected task types from Willis and Willis
(2007) which were tasks involving listing, tasks involving sorting and ordering, and tasks
involving matching. Tasks were simplified and adjusted to fit with young language learners.
In the framework, there were three stages: pre-task priming stage, task cycle stage, and form-
focused stage. The TBLT framework that was used in this study was designed to emphasize
on the speaking and listening skills. To be specific, in the pre-task priming stage, the teacher
would prepare students to be able to perform the task in the task cycle stage by supplying
necessary vocabulary and pronunciation. The teacher had to make sure that the students had
enough supplies for speaking and understanding the language to complete the task. During
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

56
the task cycle, the students were allowed to use the language freely for the task completion.
The tasks were designed to force students to listen to and speak the language in order to
complete the tasks. That means the more task they performed, the more fluent they would
become. After the task cycle, the emphasis would be put on forms in the post-task form
focused language work stage. In this stage, the students‘ attention would be drawn to correct
vocabulary, grammatical structures, and pronunciation. The students would learn how to
accurately use the language. To illustrate an example of TBLT lesson plans, see Appendix A.
Figure 3.2 showed a framework for designing Task-based lessons in this study.
Figure 3.2: A Framework for Designing Task-based Lessons (Willis and Willis, 2007)
Task-Based Speaking and Listening Instruction
Pre-task
Priming - Teacher identifies useful words and phrases.
- Teacher introduces the topic and activates relevant schemata.
- Students write down useful words and phrases.
- Students participate by throwing ideas or answering questions.
Task cycle
Task - Teacher gives task instructions and makes sure that students understand
them clearly.
- Students perform the given tasks individually/in pairs/groups.
- Teacher monitors and circulates around the class to assist students.
Planning - Students plan to report what they have learnt from the task.
- Teacher ensures that students understand clearly of what they have to
report in front of the class.
Report - Teacher chooses some group to report what they have learnt from the
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

57
task.
- Teacher leads students to focus on form by identifying useful words,
phrases and patterns from the texts/recordings from the task cycle to help
students systemize what they know: classify into semantic, functional,
notional or structural categories.
Analysis - Students examine and discuss specific features of the transcript or
recording of native speakers doing the task and pick out useful
expressions.
- Teacher highlights useful words and phrases and clarifies the form used
in the task by writing the structure on board and explains the functions.
Practice - Students practice and write down useful words, phrases and patterns.
Task repetition - Teacher might ask students to repeat the same task with different group
in a more controlled way after learning the language form.
To make sure that the tasks that the researcher designed were distinguished from other
general exercises while designing tasks in each lesson, the researcher followed the checklist
provided by Willis and Willis, (2007) which suggested that a greater number of yes answers
reveal good characteristics of the tasks.
Figure 3.3: Checklists for Task-like Activities (Willis and Willis, 2007)
1. Whether Classroom activity is related to real-world scenarios or not?
2. Whether completion is essential?
3. Is there an outcome?
4. Does the outcome judge the success?
5. Is there a main focus on meaning?
6. Do the planned activities engage the interest of the students?
Scope of task-based speaking and listening instruction used in this study was shown
in Table 3.2 below.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

58
Table 3.2: Scope of Task-Based Speaking and Listening Instruction

Unit Lesson Pre-task Task Form focus
1. Can I 1. What is it? - Class - Tasks involving - Focusing on
have…? 2. Race to brainstorming listing international words
respond (singular - Introducing - Tasks involving that are used in
noun) vocabulary and matching students‘ daily life.
3. Race to pronunciation - Repeating the - Learning the
respond (plural same task by vocabulary of
noun) making polite object(s).
4. Can I have …? requests of items at - Practicing
(real situation) the school minimart making polite
(real situation). request by using
- Reporting what ―can‖
they have learnt - Practicing
from the tasks and making a correct
task completion of response to the
each group. request.
2. Age 5. How old are - Total physical - Tasks involving - Learning
you? response(TPR) matching by vocabulary about
6 What day is it activities listening to the days of the week
today? - Introducing spoken text - Learning
7. When is your vocabulary and - Task involving vocabulary about
birthday? pronunciation listing by collecting months of the year
8. Let‘s make a information from - Practicing asking
birthday classmates people about their
calendar! - Tasks involving age and birthday
ordering and sorting - Practicing
by arranging the providing
given information information about
- Presenting the themselves such as
collected data. age, and birthday
- Collecting data
from classmates
and making a
birthday calendar of
the whole
classroom together
3. Body 9. My body - Total physical - Task involving - Learning
10. Reporting a response(TPR) matching by using vocabulary about
Missing Monster activities picture cards with parts of body.
11. Describing - Introducing total physical - Learning
People vocabulary and response vocabulary
12. Reporting a pronunciation - Task involving necessary to
Missing Animal - Tasks involving matching by giving describe physical
ordering and clues of the given appearance
sorting information - Practicing using
- Task involving imperative
matching by sentence
listening to the - Practicing giving
given information information about
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

59
- Preparing the parts of their body

presentation - Practicing
- Presenting the describing physical
report by using the appearance
language features
that are learnt
through task
performance
4. 13. What is in the - Total physical - Task involving - Learning useful
This/That box? response(TPR) matching by vocabulary
14. Heads up! activities guessing and - Practicing using
15. Listen and - Introducing identifying the demonstratives to
draw vocabulary and objects indicate something
16. What is this? pronunciation - Tasks involving physically nearby
What is that - Tasks involving matching by by using ―This is
sorting listening to the (a pen).‖
spoken text - Practicing using
- Performing the demonstratives to
task in a real indicate something
context physically far
- Preparing the away by using
presentation ―That is (a
- Presenting the banana.)
report by using the - Practicing asking
language features yes-no questions
that are learnt by using ―Is it (a
through task bird)?‖ and giving
performance correct response by
using ―Yes, it is.‖,
―No, it is not.‖,
―It‘s a …‖
- Practicing using
correct
demonstratives to
ask questions by
using ―What‘s
this?‖ and ―What‘s
that?‖
The lesson plans were carefully designed by the researcher and checked by experts in
the field of English language teaching. The researcher adapted checklist for evaluating task
from Nunan (2004) to the evaluation form for the experts to verify the lesson plans. The
checklist contained 30 items from 3 aspects which include objectives, materials and tasks
which include rationale, procedures, implementation, and form-focused language work (See
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

60
Appendix B). The lesson plans were examined to ensure the validity of the tools. Three
experts were asked to evaluate the suitability of the tools. All the items were checked as
appropriate.
3.4.2 English Speaking and Listening Skills Pre and Post-Test
The researcher gathered the data in two settings including pre-test prior to the use of
TBLT lesson plans and post-test. The pre-test and post-test were adopted from the sample
paper of the Cambridge English Young Learners Exams – Pre A1 Starters Test (Cambridge
Assessment English, 2018). The test is categorized as 4-skilled English language proficiency
test which is developed by University of Cambridge Local Examinations Syndicate
(UCLES). There are 3 levels for young learners which are Pre A1 Starters, A1 Movers, and
A2 Flyers. The Starters level is the easiest while the Movers and Flyers are suitable for
higher-proficiency learners. The exams are equivalent to the Common European Framework
of Reference for Languages (CEFR) which was created by the Council of Europe to offer ‗a
common basis for the elaboration of language syllabuses, curriculum guidelines,
examinations, textbooks, etc. across Europe‘ (Council of Europe, 2001 a:1). The following
figure shows the alignment between the Cambridge English Scale and the CEFR.
Figure 3.4: Cambridge ESOL Scale on the CEFR (Cambridge ESOL, 2011)
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

61
This test was preferred over other tests due to a number of different reasons. Firstly,
the main characteristic of this test is its international acceptance as a valid and standardize
testing instrument for measuring English Proficiency among young learners along with its
CEFR equivalence (Bachman et al, 1995; Field, 2018; Figueras et al, 2005; 2006 Jones, 2001;
Jones, 2002 North, 2006; Thighe, 2006; Trim, 2011; Weir and Milanovic, 2003). Secondly,
there is a greater chance of biases in the results between pre-test and post-test due to test
memory instead of proficiency. Cambridge resolved this issue by introducing parallel tests
thereby, making it more effective. Additionally, a numerous researches from different
countries have used this test to measure the young learners‘ English proficiency (Butler and
Lee, 2006; Butler and Lee, 2010; Drew, 2008; Hoti, Heinzmann, and Muller, 2009; Kim,
2000 Sadeghi and Dousti, 2003; Turek, 2013). Moreover, this test can be conducted globally
under a similar condition which makes it easy to replicate it in other regions.
From these justifications, the researcher decided to use the sample exam papers of
Cambridge Pre A1 Starters Test Year 2018 as the pre and post-test in this study (See
Appendix C). This test was used in this study for quantitative assessment of enhancement in
English speaking and listening ability which was an outcome of the use of Task-based
Language Teaching. Only the speaking and listening portions of the test was administered in
this study.
3.4.3 Speaking and Listening Skills Assessments
The pre-test and post-test were conducted and assessed by the Cambridge authorized
speaking examiner to ensure that the tests meet international standards. In order to be
qualified as the examiners, they must be an experienced language teacher with a verified
level of language competency who had been trained both in the roles of interlocutor and
assessor and also understand the principles of the Cambridge ESOL Speaking tests (Thighe,
2006). To keep up with the standards, while they must attend the annual coordination
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

62
meeting, their performance as interlocutor and assessor are monitored every two years by the
team leader with at least two live interviews. With these qualifications, the researcher
believed that the examiner was justified to assess the test.
The speaking test was conducted face-to-face by speaking examiners while the
listening test required students to listen to the audio and give answers in the answer sheets.
For listening test, there were 20 items in the Starters level. In part 1, learners listened for
names and descriptions. In part 2, learners listened for numbers and spelling. In part 3,
learners listened for specific information of various kinds. In part 4, learners listened for
words, colors and prepositions. The time of taking the test was 20 minutes. For speaking test,
there were 4 parts in the Starter level. Part 1 assessed if learners can understand and follow
spoken instructions. In the first phase of Part 1, they were asked to point to correct part of the
picture and place object cards on the scene picture as directed. In the second phase, they were
asked to put two small picture cards on the large picture following the examiner‘s
instructions. In part 2, learners answered 5 questions about the large picture, using as much
language as they could. They answered spoken questions by answering questions with short
answers, including a response to one ‗Tell me about …‘ question. In part 3, learners answered
questions about 4 of the small picture cards. In part 4, learners answered three questions
about themselves. It was to see if learners could understand and respond to personal questions
by answering questions with short answers. Speaking assessment criteria included reception,
concerning listening and interaction, production, concerning words and phrases and
pronunciation. The total scores for speaking part were 15 for 3 aspects which are grammar
and vocabulary, pronunciation, and interaction. Regarding the time of taking the tests, each
student took around 3-5 minutes.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

63
3.4.4 Research Field Notes
During the experiment, the researcher observed the classroom and took notes.
Students‘ performance was observed to see how they demonstrated TBLT lessons. The
researcher wanted to explore how much students demonstrate TBLT features when they
perform in different phases in the framework starting from pre-task priming activities, task
cycle and form-focused language work. During the observation, the researcher did not
intervene in the teaching process.
3.4.5 Interview Questions
The interview was conducted at the end of the experiment. The researcher interviewed
the teacher to explore the perception towards the use of TBLT in a real classroom. The
questions (See Appendix D) included the advantages and disadvantages of the TBLT
implementation in the classroom, the obstacles found during the course, the least and the
most successful task, and whether or not the TBLT help enhance the speaking and listening
skills of young Thai learners.
3.5 Data Collection
The procedures of data collection in the present study were divided into three distinct
phases; instrument development, implementation, data collection and data analysis. See Table
3.3 below.
Table 3.3: The Procedures of Data Collection

Phase 1: - The researcher developed TBLT lesson plans from textbook.
Instrument - The researcher observed the control group class and the experimental
Development group class.
- The researcher modified TBLT lesson plans.
- The researcher provided training to the teachers regarding TBLT and
discussed with the teacher over the TBLT lesson plans.
Phase 2: - Students in both groups were given the English speaking and listening
Implementation skills pre-test.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

64
- The treatment with TBLT lesson plans were to the experimental group.
- The researcher observed the experimental group and recorded field notes
at the end of each class.
- Students in both groups were given the English speaking and listening
skills post-test.
- The researcher conducted an interview with the teacher to explore the
perception towards the implementation of TBLT.
Phase 3: - The researcher collected, analysed and discussed the data.
Data Collection
and Analysis
In phase 1, the researcher developed TBLT lesson plans from textbook. The
researcher observed the students, and then modified TBLT lesson plans. After that, the
researcher provided training to the teachers regarding TBLT and discussed with the teacher
over the TBLT lesson plans.
In phase 2, students in both groups were given the English speaking and listening
skills pre-test; sample exam paper of Cambridge Proficiency Test. Then the treatment with
TBLT lesson plans was given to the experimental group. During this phase, the researcher
observed the experimental group closely and recorded field notes at the end of each class.
Stepping towards the third phase where all the planned lessons were delivered to the students,
the English speaking and listening post-test; sample exam paper of Cambridge Proficiency
Test were given to the students in both the experimental and control group.
In phase 3, as mentioned earlier, this post-test then was used to compare with the pre-
test to evaluate the effectiveness of task-based language teaching for young Thai learners.
This collected data was analyzed using quantitative data analysis technique to ensure the
accuracy and to enhance the generalizability of the findings. After that, the observation from
the researcher field notes were analyzed and reported. Finally, after all the lesson plans had
been taught, the teacher was interviewed for the perception towards the TBLT
implementation and the answers were coded and analyzed.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

65
3.6 Data Analysis
The data collected from this study was analyzed using both quantitative and
qualitative data analysis techniques. The Table 3.4 below deliberates the research questions
along with the technique with which the collected data was analyzed.
Table 3.4: Research Questions and Analysis

Questions Analysis
1. To what extent have the learners who - Descriptive statistics (frequency, mean,
and standard deviation)
have been taught through task-based
- Pre-test and post-test results of the two
language teaching improved their English
groups were compared using dependent and
speaking and listening skill when comparing independent sample t-test.
to the learners who have not been taught
through task-based language teaching?
2. How do the young learners demonstrate - Research fieldnotes from researcher‘s

observation were analyzed using content
their performances in task-based language
analysis.
teaching lessons?
3. What is the teacher‘s perception towards - Interview data were transcribed and
the implementation of task-based language reported.
teaching in classroom?
Quantitative Data Analysis
To answer RQ 1, the data obtained from the pre-test and post-test were analyzed. As
mentioned previously, before the experiment started, the pre-test were conducted on both
groups of the students to check the alignment between the two. In order to check if the
selected samples are of the same level or not, an independent samples t-test was used to
compare the pre-test scores of students between both groups. Because this study focused on
the speaking and listening skills of the control and experimental group before and after the
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

66
treatment, an independent samples t-test was used to compare the pre-test and post-test mean
scores between the control group and experimental group. To check the improvement of the
students‘ scores in the experimental group, a dependent sample t-test was used to compare
the pre-test and post-test within the experimental group.
Qualitative Data Analysis
To answer RQ2, the data obtained from the observation from the researcher fieldnotes
was analyzed. The data from observations were used for integration in the analysis of the
three research questions using thematic analysis. The data were analyzed and divided into
stages of TBLT framework. The topics that the researcher pointed out included the students‘
reaction and task demonstration during the pre-task priming stage, the task cycle, and the
form-focus language work.
To answer RQ3, the interview with the teacher was conducted to examine the
teachers‘ perception towards the use of TBLT in Thai classroom. The data was used for
triangulation in the analysis of the three research questions. The data obtained from the
interview were transcribed and analyzed.
3.7 Pilot Study
To assess the feasibility of this quasi-experiment, the researcher conducted a pilot
study with 18 students from the same school for 2 classes with 2 lesson plans.
Through observation, the researcher found that creating TBLT plans took time in
order to ensure that all the essential points and issues related to the lesson plan were covered.
However, after conducting the pilot study, it was found that once the lesson plans were well-
developed, there was no major problem in the teaching process. Regarding the confusion of
what counts as a task during the planning process, the researcher found it was not a problem
as the researcher followed the standard list by Willis and Willis (2007). The checklist defined
all characteristics of task. Regarding the concern if the TBLT was suitable for beginners and
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

67
low-level learners or not due to their lacks of vocabulary and grammar knowledge; it was
found from the pilot study that it could be solved by giving the students the vocabulary
building pre-task activity. This kind of pre-task activity was found very helpful as it gave
students a clue of what they could use during the task performance. After the task was
performed, the researcher gave the students the form-focused post task activity. It was found
very helpful as the students also learnt the grammar structures of the language that they used
during the task. However, there were some difficulties found during the task instructions as
the language used in class was only English. After conducting the pilot study, the researcher
revised the lesson plans according to the problems addressed during the teaching to ensure
the effectiveness of the tools.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

68
CHAPTER 4
FINDINGS
This chapter presents research findings of the research questions. The first objective is
to examine the comparison of the improvement of the English speaking and listening skills
between the young learners who were taught through task-based language teaching and the
control group. The second objective is to explore how the young learners performed during
and after task-based language teaching lessons. The third objective is to explore the teacher‘s
opinion on task-based language teaching implementation. The results were based on the data
gained from the English speaking and listening skills pre-test and post-test, researcher‘s
fieldnotes, and the interview of the teacher.
4.1 Research Question 1
To what extent have the learners who have been taught through task-based language
teaching improved their English speaking and listening skill when comparing to the
learners who have not been taught through task-based language teaching?
After having the pre and post-test scores of students from both groups, the data were
analyzed using an independent samples t-test. The findings were revealed in 2 parts; the
comparison between the control group and the experimental group and the comparison within
the control group and the experimental group.
The students in both groups were given pre-test before the experiment started with the
purpose to examine their English speaking and listening skills before the initial of the study.
The scores from pre-test between the control group and the experimental group are shown in
Table 4.1
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

69
Table 4.1 A Comparison of Mean Scores from Pre-Test between the Control and
Experimental Group
Group
English Full Control Experimental t df P
Skills Scores
M SD M SD
Speaking 20 4.60 1.85 4.37 1.59 .525 58 .602
Listening 15 4.75 2.05 3.93 1.68 1.69 58 .096
*p<.05
According to the analysis of the pre-test results of both groups, it was found that the
mean scores of English speaking skill pre-test of the students from the control group
(M=4.60, SD=1.85) and the students from the experimental group (M=4.37, SD=1.59) were
insignificantly different at the significant level .05 (t(58)=.525, p=.602). It was shown that
there was no significant difference between the English speaking skills of the students in both
groups. Similarly, the mean scores of English speaking skill pre-test of the students from the
control group (M=4.75, SD=2.05) and the students from the experimental group (M=3.93,
SD=1.68) were insignificantly different at the significant level .05 (t(58)=1.69, p=.096). It
was shown that there was no significant difference between the English listening skills of the
students in both groups. Hence, it can be claimed that there was similarity in terms of the
English speaking and listening skills between both groups before the treatment was given.
After the students from the experimental group were taught through TBLT lessons
and the students from the control group were taught through standard teaching, the mean
scores of English speaking and listening skills post-test of the students from the both groups
were compared to examine the improvement of the English speaking and listening skills of
the students who had been taught through task-based language teaching and the students who
had not been taught through task-based language teaching. The mean scores from post-test
between two groups are shown in Table 4.2
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

70
Table 4.2 A Comparison of the Mean Scores from Post-Test between the Control and
Experimental Group
Group
English Full Control Experimental t df P
Skills Scores
M SD M SD
Speaking 20 4.30 2.68 6.10 2.23 -2.826 58 .006*
Listening 15 5.40 2.46 6.73 2.07 -2.27 58 .027*
*p<.05
From Table 4.2, the mean scores of English speaking and listening skills post-test of
the students from the experimental group after implementing task-based language teaching
lessons were statistically significantly higher than that of the control group. More
specifically, the mean scores of English speaking skill post-test of the students from the
experimental group (M=6.10, SD=2.23) were statistically significantly higher than the mean
scores of English speaking skill post-test of the students from the control group (M=4.30,
SD=2.68) at the significant level .05 (t(58)=-2.826 , p=.006). The mean scores of English
listening skill post-test of the students from the experimental group (M=6.73, SD=2.07) were
significantly higher than the mean scores of English listening skill post-test of the students
from the control group (M=5.40, SD=2.46) at the significant level .05 (t(58)=-2.27 , p=.027).
The statistical analysis revealed that there was a significant effect on speaking and listening
skills of the students who were taught through TBLT lessons and those who were not. It can
be concluded that the mean scores of English speaking and listening skills of the students
from the experimental group were significantly higher than the students from the control
group at the significant level .05.
To examine the improvement between the pre-test and post-test scores of the students
within both groups, the mean scores of pre-test and post-test of the students from both groups
were compared. A comparison of the mean scores of pre-test and post-test within the control
and experimental group were presented in Table 4.3.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

71
Table 4.3 A Comparison of the Mean Scores of Pre-test and Post-test of the Students within
the Control and Experimental Group
Test
English Full Pre-test Post-test
Group t df p
Skills Scores
M SD M SD
Control 4.60 1.85 4.30 2.68 .975 29 .337
Speaking 20
Experimental 4.37 1.59 6.10 2.23 -6.721 29 <.001*
Control 4.75 2.05 5.40 2.46 -2.973 29 .006*
Listening 15
Experimental 3.93 1.68 6.73 2.07 -11.156 29 <.001*
*p<.05
Table 4.3 showed that in the control group, the mean scores of English speaking skill
pre-test (M=4.60, SD=1.85) and the mean scores of post-test (M=4.30, SD=2.68) were
insignificantly different (t(29)=.975 , p=.337). It showed that there was no significant
difference in the speaking skill of the students in the control group. However, in the listening
skill, it was found that the mean scores of English listening skill post-test (M=5.40, SD=2.46)
were significantly higher than the mean scores of pre-test (M=4.75, SD=2.05) at the
significant level .05 (t(29)=-2.973 , p=.006). The results showed there was no significant
difference between the mean scores of English speaking skill pre-test and post-test of the
students from the students in the control group. However, there was a significant difference
between the mean scores of English listening skill pre-test and post-test of the students from
the control group.
In the experimental group, it was revealed that the mean scores of English speaking
skill post-test (M=4.37, SD=1.59) were significantly higher than the mean scores of pre-test
(M=6.10, SD=2.23) at the significant level of .05 (t(29)=-6.721 , p<.001). Also, the mean
scores of English listening skill post-test (M=3.93, SD=1.68) were significantly higher than
the mean scores of pre-test (M=6.73, SD=2.07) at the significant level of .05 (t(29)=-11.156 ,
p<.001). The results showed that there was a significant difference between the mean scores
of English speaking and listening skill pre-test and post-test of the students from the
experimental group.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

72
In conclusion, the findings revealed that the mean scores of English speaking and
listening skills post-test of the students from the experimental group were significantly higher
than the mean scores of English speaking and listening skill post-test of the students from the
control group at the significant level of .05. Also, there was a statistically significant
difference between the mean scores of English speaking and listening skills pre-test and post-
test of the students in the experimental group at the significant level of .05
How do the young learners demonstrate their performances during the task-based
language teaching lessons?
To examine how the young learners perform during and after task-based language
teaching lessons, the researcher explored by observing the experimental group and kept
fieldnotes during the lessons. The data collected from the observation were divided into three
stages: pre-task priming activity, task cycle (task, planning stage, reporting stage), and form-
focused language work (analysis and practice, task repetition). The main points the researcher
would like to point out from the students‘ performances in these three stages included TBLT
lessons and activities, speaking and listening practices, students‘ motivation and interaction.
4.2.1 Pre-Task Priming Activity
TBLT Lessons and Activities
The pre-task activities designed in this study included providing scaffolding and
teaching vocabulary, introducing the topic and activating relevant schemata, brainstorming
and throwing ideas. During the observation, the researcher noticed that the stage of pre-task
priming activity was very helpful for learners who are young and at the beginner level. For
classrooms of young language learners who are also beginners, it might not be easy to get
them to speak at first, especially when they do not have much knowledge of the language.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

73
During the observation, it was found also that the pre-task priming activity could assist the
students in completing the task successfully. It was found that among other kinds of activities
used during the pre-task stage, vocabulary building activities seemed to be helpful in most of
the classes. The teacher would introduce useful words through different task types. For
example, in Unit 1.1 (What is it?), a listing task was used to warm up the class by asking the
students to list international words they know in English. In Unit1.2 (Can I have…?), a
matching task was used to introduce necessary vocabulary by asking the students to guess the
vocabulary from picture cards. The activities were beneficial especially during the beginning
lessons where the students had limited knowledge of the language.
During the observation, it was noticed that the role of the teacher found during the
pre-task priming activity was quite dominant. Because the pre-task activity requires a lot of
explanation and preparation, the teacher could not play a passive role. The teacher‘s role was
more than just a facilitator in this stage. When the teachers asked the students to brainstorm
some ideas, the teacher would have to initiate a discussion by giving some ideas first. In
addition, it was noticed that the teacher focused on the pre-task stage quite a lot during the
beginning lessons. Because the teacher wanted to make sure that everyone knows the
vocabulary and also understands what to do during the task cycle, the time was likely to be
over spent in this stage. As a result, the teacher struggled with time management. However,
after a few classes, the teacher started to loosen up and took less control over the class during
this stage. The time was finally manageable.
Speaking and Listening Practice
During the pre-task priming stage, it was found that the students had several chances
to practice their listening and speaking skills. At first, when the teacher started the class by
asking students basic questions about themselves, most of them seemed to be shy to speak.
They started to speak more when the teacher asked the class to brainstorm lists of words they
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

74
know together. When somebody started to say something, the rest of the class would follow.
At first, the speaking and listening situation seemed to be better when the whole class worked
together as they looked more comfortable to speak. However, in the following classes, the
students were more independent and started to rely on their classmates less. In the first class,
Unit 1.1 (What is it?), when the teacher asked the students to give her some words in English,
the class responded as follows:
Teacher: Anyone?
The Class: (Quiet)
Teacher: I‘m sure you know some, right?
Student A: Yes.
Teacher: Ok. Good. What is it?
Student A: Football.
Teacher: Alright. That‘s correct. Well-done! What else?
Student B: Apple.
Teacher: Yes. Excellent. An apple. What else?
Student C: Banana.
Teacher: Correct! Good job.
(Unit 1.1 (What is it?), 01/15/2020)
Another interesting point to make regarding vocabulary teaching was the
pronunciation. There were oftentimes that the students selected correct words to convey right
meanings but mispronounced them. It was found that the pre-task priming stage gave them an
opportunity to correct themselves first before entering the task cycle. It could be seen that in
the example given above, the teacher also corrected the student‘s pronunciation by repeating
the word ‗apple‘ with the correct pronunciation. In addition, it was found that the vocabulary
would be taught during the pre-task stage to make sure that the students were introduced to
necessary words needed during the task cycle. It was noticed that introducing useful words
and phrases during the pre-task stage could be beneficial in terms of task completion during
the task cycle. For example, in Unit 3.11 (Reporting a Missing Animal), the students were
given a task to describe their missing animals. After introducing the vocabulary necessary for
task completion, the students were able to complete the task smoothly as they could recall the
vocabulary taught at the beginning of the class. Without the pre-task vocabulary building
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

75
activity, they would have struggled trying to perform the task as they have limited lists of
words. The task cycle could have gone rough as they did not know the vocabulary to use in
describing appearance.
However, the students tended to use L1 most of the time. When the teacher asked the
students questions, even though they gave answers without being afraid of giving wrong
answers, the answers were given in Thai. Nevertheless, the teacher kept responding in
English and encouraging the students to use English in giving answers. For example, in Unit
1.2 (Can I have…?), when the teacher started the class by asking the students to guess the
vocabulary from picture cards, they responded as follows:
Teacher: Can anybody tell me what it is?

The class: Yes. (Raising their hands)
Teacher: Ok. What is it?
The class: Look-om
Teacher: What? What is look-om? What is look-om in English?
The class: (Quiet)
Teacher: What do you call look-om in English?
Student A: Candy.
Teacher: Yes. It is a candy. Good job!
(Unit 1.2, 01/17/2020)
Students’ Learning Motivation
In terms of students‘ learning motivation during the pre-task priming activity, it was
found that the use of media including songs and animations and Total Physical Response
(TPR) were quite motivating.
During the observation, it was found that the media being selected to use in class
plays an important role in students‘ motivation. It was obvious that the visuals could gain
students‘ attention and increase their motivation. In this study, the videos that were used were
easy to access as they were available online, so the teacher did not take much time in turning
on the media. The videos were shown before the students started to lose focus.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

76
In addition, throughout the observation, it was found that TPR was very enjoyable. As
mentioned in Chapter 2, TPR is a teaching method based on physical movement, and it
requires learners to react to verbal input. In Unit 3.9 (My Body), it was found that the
students especially enjoyed the TPR activity through songs. In that class, the students were
asked to touch their parts of the body through songs. It was noticed that they showed a sign of
enthusiasm as they kept asking the teacher to repeat the activity over and over again. The
songs that were used were easy and catchy, so the students responded actively to the lesson.
However, while they were having fun, they also learned wordlists about parts of the body as
evidenced in the researcher‘s notes below.
The students seemed to be very enthusiastic, comparing to

other lessons. They were happily dancing and singing with the
songs. It was interesting to see that while they were following the
instructions through songs, they were not only enjoying the music
and the physical responses but they also learned the vocabulary. It
was obvious that many of them did not know the meaning of an
“elbow” but at the end of the activity, they could remember what it
was.
(Researcher‘s notes, 02/11/2020)
4.2.2 Task Cycle
Task cycle consists of three parts: task, planning, and report. Task is where the
students perform the given task with the teacher providing some assistance. Planning is the
stage that the students plan to report their performances or what they have learned from the
task. The last stage during the task cycle is reporting stage. The students report what they
have learned from the task in front of the class.
4.2.2.1 Task
As mentioned in previous chapter, the task designed for this study was based on
Skehan‘s (1996) task features which meaning is primarily focused and the connection with
the real-world situation is necessary and task completion also has some priorities. Therefore,
during the task stage, the students were asked to perform a task in a real context in some
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

77
classes. For example, in Unit 1.4 (Can I have…?), the students were assigned to make a
request of some items from a school shop. In a group of 5, they had to perform a role play.
Each one took turns to be a seller and later switched role to be a buyer. It was noticed that the
students could relate to the task.
Due to their unfamiliarity with the teaching approach and lack of English proficiency,
it was found that there were some difficulties trying to make the students understand the
instructions and goals of the task in English during the beginning of the task performance. It
was important for the teacher to explain the task instructions slowly and in the simplest way
as much as possible to make sure that the students understood the goals of the task. In the
beginning lessons, the students seemed to completely understand what they were expected to
do. However, the content in the earlier units were quite simple, so the students were finally
able to understand and perform the task. In the following lessons where the students were
more familiar with the protocol and the language, the time was less spent on the task
explanation.
In addition, it was evidenced that putting the students in groups was practical during
the task performance. There were some tasks that the teacher asked the students to perform
group by group. To avoid chaos, the task performance was done group by group in most of
the lessons. The result was quite impressive as the teacher was able to pay attention to every
group. However, there was a downside to it as it usually consumed more time. During the
first two weeks, it was found that the teacher spent more time on the task performance stage
than the planned time. It was noticed that the teacher wanted to monitor the students‘
performances and provide correction as much as possible. When the researcher noticed that
there was a problem with time management, the researcher discussed with the teacher and
reminded her that the correction could be provided as much as it does not interrupt the flow
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

78
of the class and consume too much time. After the discussion, the teacher seemed to be able
to manage the time spent in this session.
During the task performance, the students had a chance to actually practice their
speaking and listening skills. From the observation, it was found that even though some of
them did not use grammatically correct sentences, they managed to achieve the goals of the
task. For example, in Unit 1.4, the targeted language was to use ―Can I have…?‖ and to
respond ―Yes. Here it is.‖ When the students performed a role play, some of them used quite
accurate language. However, when some of them did not use the correct form by saying,
―Can have book?‖, the other student was able to understand what was requested. However, it
was addressed and corrected by the teacher later on in the task.
In addition, while the students performed the given task, the teacher consistently
encouraged them to try to communicate and that there was no need to focus on forms.
However, some of them struggled as they could not recall the vocabulary taught during the
pre-task stage or did not have enough knowledge of the language in order to convey the
message. This sometimes resulted in the excessive use of L1. There were several times during
the task performance that the students switched to their L1 when they struggled with the
language. It was found that the teacher needed to interrupt them while they were performing
communicative tasks. For example, in Unit 2.8 (Let‘s make a birthday calendar!), when the
students were asked to find out the information from their classmates, some of the
conversations were as follows:
Student A: Your birthday, when?

Student B: Mee-na.
The teacher: Nah-ah. What‘s Mee-na in English?
Student B: (quiet)
The teacher: (turning to ask student A) Do you know what we call Mee-na in
English?
Student A: March.
The teacher: Yes. That‘s correct. Please ask your friend again.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

79
(Unit 2.8, 02/07/2020)
There were several times during the task performance that the students asked the
teacher in L1 to explain the instructions in L1 as well. However, the teacher consistently
replied in English, thus, they finally gave up their negotiations.
Moreover, it was found during the task stage that the students‘ attention to forms
could be drawn by the teacher‘s corrective feedback (CF). During the observation, it was
noticed that there were many times that the teacher attempted to provide CF to the students
during the task cycle. Throughout the experiment, various ways of providing CF were
spotted. For example, in Unit 2.5 (How old are you?), the linguistic features that were
targeted was ―I am … years old‖ and ―He/She is … years old‖. It was found that for the error
in the utterance ‗I seven‘, where the use of verb to be ‗am‘ was missing, the teacher
responded using a recast technique as follows:
Student A: How old are you?

Student B: I seven.
The teacher: I am seven years old.
Student B: I am seven years old.
(Unit 2.5 (How old are you?), 01/28/2020)
In addition, in the same lesson, for the error in the utterance ‗She is seven year old‘,
where‗s‘ was missed, the teacher responded using an explicit correction as follows:
Student A: She is my friend. She is seven year old.

The teacher: No, not ―year‖, ―years‖.
Student A: Years old.
The teacher: Can you please repeat the whole sentence? She…?
Student A: She is seven years old.
The teacher: Well-done!
(Unit 2.5 (How old are you?), 01/28/2020)
In addition, the students later provided CF to each other. Though, the teacher and the
students were not obligated to give CF every time the mistakes occurred, there were many
times that the CF helped the task go smoothly.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

80
Since the young foreign language learners have less direct reasons to learn foreign
language when comparing to adult learners, it is essential to provide learning situations that
can motivate their interests. From the observation, the researcher found that there were two
motivational orientations found during the class observation: intrinsic and extrinsic
motivation. It was found that the students showed signs of the intrinsic motivation in the
beginning lessons. When they were taught in the situation that required them to activate the
task by themselves, they seemed to be very motivated in learning. For example, in Unit 2.5
(How old are you?), the students were asked to find out how old their classmates are. They
had to ask as many students as possible. It was found that the students were very enthusiastic,
walking around asking for the information. It could be seen that there was a high degree of
learning motivation and engagement.
However, it was noticed that the students seemed to be extrinsically motivated rather
than intrinsically when doing tasks that required less movement. The students seemed to be
less interested. They would show some signs of interest at the beginning of the class but they
seemed to lose interest faster than when doing the lessons that require more active roles from
them.
In Unit 2.6 (What day is it today?), when the students were

asked to listen to the audio and give answers, it was quite obvious that
the students seemed to lose their interests. However, in the following
lesson, in Unit 2.7 (When is your birthday?), in which the content was
similar to Unit 2.6 (What day is it today?), when the teacher told them
that they would be given rewards at the end of the class if they
cooperated, they were actively participated.
However, when the tasks required meaningful communication in an authentic context,
the students were very motivated to learn. One obvious example was from Unit 1.4 (Can I
have…?). The students were asked to perform the task in a real context which was a school
shop. It could be seen that they were very active and ready to participate. They carefully
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

81
listened to the information that they would need to perform the task. During the task
performance, they were focused and not distracted. It was found that their willingness to
speak was very obvious as they did not hesitate to speak at all. In addition, it was probable
that because it was the authentic setting and the task was realistic, the conversation produced
in this task flowed quite easily.
4.2.2.2 Planning Stage
During the planning stage, the students were mostly asked to plan their oral reports in
groups. What the lesson plans usually expected the students to report was to simply present
the items or information they obtained from the task performance. It did not require a lot of
planning steps. However, it was found that the students seemed to lose most attention during
the planning stage. One of the reasons was probably because they were young learners.
Expecting them to discuss their performances without getting distracted was quite difficult.
Thus, it was noticed that the teacher sometimes needed to force the students to participate in
this stage. From the observation, it was found that when the teacher saw that the students
started to get off topic and lose focus, she would jump in and lead the direction.
In the planning stage where the students were expected to have a discussion on the
presentation, it was found that in almost every class, the students used L1 to communicate
among themselves. Even though the teacher encouraged them to use English, it did not seem
to be as successful as it should be. The students would discuss in their mother tongue. They
even asked questions in Thai. However, the teacher would ask them to repeat them in English
and consistently responded in English as follows:
Student A: แกเกิดเดือนสิงหาใช่มยั ้ (Your birthday is in August, right?)

Student B: ใช่ (Yes)
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

82
Student A: ทีชเชอร์ เพื่อนเกิดเดือนสิงหาต้ องบอกว่าอะไรครับ (Teacher, what is Sing-ha in

English?)
The teacher: You mean what is ―Sing-ha-kom‖ in English?
Student A: (nodding)
The teacher: Yes or no?
Student A: Yes.
The teacher: Ok. ―Sing-ha-kom‖ in English is ―August‖.
(Unit 2.8, 02/07/2020)
Moreover, with regard to the teacher‘s corrective feedback, there were many forms of
giving the corrective feedback found during the planning stage including one-way and two-
way interactions. However, the form that was found the most in this stage was a one-way
teacher-student interaction. The teacher usually provided CF after the students completed the
task. After the CF was given, the students started to pick up the linguistic features and the
usage. It was found very helpful as the students were guided to attend to the input during their
struggles. In addition, it was found that this stage was where the students got a chance to
improve their language.
In terms of the students‘ learning motivation, it was found that there was not much of
an external motivation for the students during the planning stage. According to the
observation, it was noticed that the students seemed to be less engaged with the task as
follows:
During the planning stage, the kids tended to lose their interests
very easily. In this class, they were found teasing with each other.
They did not pay attention to what the teacher asked them to do.
However, in Unit 1.3 (Race to respond), for example, when the teacher told them that
if they pay attention to the class and prepare their reports correctly, they would be awarded
with the items they picked up from the task performance, they seemed to be immediately
interested in planning the reports. It could be seen that in some cases, sometimes the extrinsic
motivation was needed to stimulate the students‘ learning enthusiasm.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

83
4.2.2.3 Reporting Stage
Reporting stage took place after the planning stage. Because the time was limited,
some groups were selected to present their reports to the class. However, the groups that were
not selected would have to listen and compare if there were some similarities or differences.
The students were asked to report in groups. The teacher usually avoided selecting the same
groups as the previous lessons. In most lessons, around two to three groups were selected to
present their reports.
During this stage, it was revealed that the students used more accurate language. It
could be seen that part of it resulted from the teacher‘s corrective feedback given during the
previous stages. During the presentation, the students were able to use correct vocabulary and
started to pay more attention to forms. Because the focus was shifted to the linguistic features
in this stage, the students seemed to be more careful with what they were saying as well.
They tended to think more before they said something.
After the students were given corrective feedback during the previous stages by the
teacher, the language that they used to give the presentation was more grammatically correct.
However, during the presentation, the teacher did not interrupt them every time they made
mistakes unless it was a major mistake. In addition, as working in groups, it was found that
peer CF occurred very often during this stage. There were many times that the students would
correct their team members when they spotted some grammatical mistakes being made during
the presentation. When the students started to respond to each other‘s mistakes, it was noticed
that the teacher did not interrupt such actions.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

84
Regarding the students‘ learning motivation, it was found that when the teacher
selected some groups to present their reports, they were hesitant to give the presentation.
When they finally stood in front of the class, it could be seen that they were still not confident
as follows:
The students seemed to be very shy when the teacher asked them
to give a presentation. They would not say anything until the teacher
guided them what to say. It was very obvious that they did not have
confidence to use the language.
(Researcher‘s notes, Unit 2.5, 01/28/2020)
However, in the following lessons, it was noticed that the students were engaged more
with this stage with more confidence. In addition, in the following classes, some students
who seemed to have better understanding of the language would be the ones who volunteered
to speak first. It was found that after these students started to say something, the rest of the
group members started to feel more comfortable as they started to say something as well.
Throughout the experiment, it could be seen that working as a group can be beneficial in
terms of learning motivation as it seemed like they wanted to be a part of the presentation by
making sure that they had some role in front of the class.
4.2.3 Form-Focused Language Work
Form-focused language work is a post-task activity that follows up the main task in
the task cycle stage. During this stage, the emphasis is put on forms, including useful words,
phrases and patterns from the task cycle. The TBLT framework used in this study was the
framework proposed by Willis and Willis (2007) which the focus on forms is delayed to the
post-task stage. This stage includes analysis and practice activities. In addition, it sometimes
involves task repetition which students are asked to repeat a task.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

85
4.2.3.1 Analysis and Practice
In this study, the analysis and practice stages were designed to provide the students
with a model performance. The model contained the particular features taught in the
beginning classes. During the analysis part, the teacher gave sample performances of the
same tasks performed by competent speakers so the students could analyze by noticing the
similarities and differences between their performances and the model‘s which was the
correct version. From the observation, it was found that most of the time, this stage went very
smoothly. The samples given in the analysis stage included the model performed by the
teacher and the co-teacher and the selected videos retrieved from YouTube. It was noticeable
that the students were able to notice their errors when the correct model was provided. During
the practice part, it was found that the students were asked to simply take notes and practice
the forms with their partners because the time in each class was quite limited. It seemed like
the more complicated the main task was, the less time the teacher had for this stage.
In terms of speaking and listening practices, the students had a chance to listen to the
correct forms that they were supposed to use during the task cycle. By the time that they got
to this stage, their English has been adjusted and improved. After they listened to the correct
version, the teacher would ask them to write down the forms and practice with their partners.
It was found that the students were able to spot the differences and similarities between their
versions and the model‘s as follows:
Teacher: Ok. So, this is a ball. (pointing at the ball)

The whole class: (repeating what the teacher said)
Teacher: And that is a bin. (pointing at the bin)
The whole class: (repeating what the teacher said)
Teacher: So, what is the difference? Do you know?
The whole class: This ใกล้ (nearby). That ไกล (far away)
Teacher: Yes. That is correct. This is nearby. That is far away.
(Unit 4.15, 03/02/2020)
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

86
Another example of the improvement of inaccurate language found during the task
cycle in this stage was from Unit 1.2 (Race to respond). In this lesson, the students were
encouraged to give a response by using ―Sure. Here it is‖. It was found that during the task
performance, some of them responded by using only ―Here‖ when handling the requested
item. However, when they saw the model performance in the form focused language work
stage that used the proper response, they were able to notice the difference and it showed in
the next lesson, Unit 1.3, which they were requested to perform a similar task but using plural
nouns. When they were to response, they could recall the model and said ―Sure. Here they
are.‖
In terms of students‘ motivation, it was found that the students usually paid attention
to the model provided as they were curious to know how they were supposed to be using the
language. When the videos were shown, they seemed to pay attention to them. In addition to
this, it was noticed that it was better if the teacher did not spend much time turning on the
media to avoid losing students‘ attention. However, when it came to the practice part, it was
found that the students sometimes lost their attention as they were found playing around and
teasing with each other while the teacher wrote down useful words and structures and
explained the functions. Their motivation to learn during this stage was found quite low.
4.2.3.2 Task Repetition
Another option for having a form-focused activity is to do a task repetition which the
students are asked to repeat a task. As mentioned in the previous chapter, there are many
types of task repetition but the type selected to use in this study was procedural repetition. In
this study, the procedural repetition activity was used during the form-focused language work
stage. In procedural repetition, the students were asked to repeat the same task but with the
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

87
different content. In some units, the procedural repetition was used as a whole task cycle, not
only as a post-task activity. From the observation, the students appeared to understand better
as their task performances went smoother than the original ones. In Unit1.3 (Race to
Respond), the students were asked to repeat the task for the first time. Due to the lack of time,
this task repetition was designed to perform during the task cycle. In this class, it was found
that the students were able to recall what they have done in the previous class. Hence, the
teacher did not have to spend much time explaining the instructions.
According to the characteristics of procedural repetition, the task procedures were the
same but the content was different. In Unit1.3 (Race to Respond), the focused form in this
class was changed from singular nouns to plural nouns. During the task cycle, it could be
seen that the students were more fluent and confident in using the language. It may be
because they were familiar with the procedures. During the reporting stage, most of the
students were able to use the correct form. During the analysis stage, the students were able
to spot the difference between singular nouns and plural nouns. It was found that the use of
task repetition was successful in this class in terms of accuracy.
However, in terms of students‘ motivation, it was found that it also depended on
forms that the task aimed to focus on. In Unit 4.14 (Heads up!), task repetition was used
again but this time in the form-focused language work stage. In this class, the students were
asked to perform the same task by asking yes-no questions and giving correct responses but
with different group. This time the students were encouraged to use the forms they have
learnt. It was noticed that their attentions was drawn to the linguistic forms but their
enthusiasm seemed to be lower than the previous stages.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

88
3. What is the teacher‘s perception on the implementation of task-based language
teaching in classroom?
To explore the teacher‘s perception towards the implementation of TBLT, the teacher
was interviewed after the experiment. The findings from the interview questions were divided
into two parts: advantages and disadvantages of TBLT instructions. In addition, the teacher
also reflected on her role in the TBLT implementation.
4.3.1 Advantages of TBLT instructions
According to the interview answers, the teacher described that there were mainly
three advantages of TBLT instructions: active classroom, meaningful lessons, and students‘
motivation.
1) Active Classroom
In terms of an active classroom, the teacher thought that TBLT played an important
role in transforming a passive classroom into an active one. Speaking from her experience,
students tend to play a passive role in an English classroom. They usually wait for the teacher
to give them an answer. When they are asked to speak, they tend to be uncomfortable and
unconfident to speak the language. When they are asked to listen, they tend to lose focus as
they probably do not see the essence of understanding the message. However, when the
TBLT instructions were implemented in the classroom, the teacher noticed that the role of the
students had shifted automatically. Because tasks were designed to demand participation, the
students needed to take action in order to complete the tasks. The teacher here shared that,
―because the role of the teacher in TBLT instructions is not to dominate the class but to
facilitate it, the students were required to be more active which I think is great.‖
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

89
Even though the students seemed to be uncertain at first due to the unfamiliarity, they
gradually took part in following lessons. When the students were more involved with the
design of their own learning, they tended to have better comprehension of the goals of the
lessons. The benefit of having an active classroom is that it has a positive impact on the
student‘s learning process. Besides, when the students played an active role, the burden of the
performance in the learning environment was shifted from the teacher to the students.
2) Meaningful lessons
In terms of meaningful lessons, the teacher reported that TBLT made learning more
meaningful to the students. She said, ―Before the TBLT implementation, my focus was to get
the lessons across but because of the TBLT lessons, my focus was more on addressing the
reasons.‖ One way to have a meaningful lesson is to create a link to a real-world situation and
TBLT is known for it. The pedagogic tasks given in the TBLT classroom needed to have a
connection with a real-world situation and some tasks were designed to require the students
to perform in a real context. This resulted in students understanding the benefits of learning
particular linguistic features. She said that while they performed a role play at a school shop,
it could be seen that their focuses were on the task which required them to use the particular
forms to accomplish the goals. She indicated that, ―I think it made more sense to them to
learn the language as they actually saw that they needed the knowledge to get their messages
across.‖
3) Learning Motivation
Without a convincing reason, the lesson is meaningless, and without meanings, the
motivation in learning is lacking. In terms of students‘ motivation, the teacher believed that
TBLT instructions stimulated the students‘ learning motivation. Speaking from her
experience, young learners need constant stimulation as they tend to lose focus very easily. In
the TBLT classroom, it was seen that the students were highly motivated and engaged with
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

90
the lessons when comparing to the standard teaching classroom. The tasks are suitable for
students at this age and the use of visual stimulations such as songs and videos evokes
students‘ intrinsic motivation. Tasks involving visual stimulation or physical movement such
as TPR were favorable. In addition, the teacher found that TBLT offers a favorable learning
condition which is an important factor in determining young learners‘ motivation to learn
English language. Because TBLT prioritized meaning over form, the students were
encouraged to communicate regardless of forms at first. She concluded that, ―…as a result,
the students felt comfortable to use the language and felt confident in using it.‖
4.3.2 Disadvantages of TBLT instructions
According to the teacher interview, there were mainly two disadvantages of TBLT
instructions: insufficient time allocation, and students‘ language proficiency.
1) Insufficient Time Allocation
The first limitation is due to the time allocation. The teacher found that it can be
difficult to allocate time to cover the whole process within one lesson. According to the
TBLT framework used in this study, there were three main stages which include pre-task,
task cycle, and post-task stage. To cover all three stages in a one-hour class was not easy,
especially in the beginning classes. The teacher found that in the first two weeks of the
experiment, she was under a lot of pressure regarding time allocation. She felt that she could
not manage the time spent in each stage, ―I usually spent too much time during the pre-task
stage and task cycle and by the time that I explained the forms in the post-task stage, there
was usually not much time left for me‖.
The teacher revealed that she was worried if the students could perform the task in the
task cycle or not, so she wanted to spend more time on the pre-task stage to prepare the
students. Also, in the task cycle, some tasks required a lot of time. However, after a few
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

91
weeks of TBLT implementation, the teacher felt more confident and familiar with the
teaching approach. She was able to take more control of the lessons.
2) Students’ Language Proficiency
The next disadvantage of TBLT instructions that the teacher found during the
implementation was regarding students‘ language proficiency. The teacher revealed that the
students had language limitations from the beginning of the experiment. Their limited
language proficiency had an impact on their task performances as they could not use correct
words, regardless of the correct forms. In the beginning lessons, the teacher needed to explain
task instructions over and over again as the students could not understand what they were
expected to do. In addition, when the students could not deliver their thoughts in English,
they switched to L1. The teacher revealed that she often needed to encourage the students to
communicate in English during the planning stage but it was almost impossible. She said that
during the task performance, they would use L1 when they felt insecure due to their limited
language proficiency.
Apart from the advantages and disadvantages of the TBLT instructions experienced in
this study, the teacher also shared her reflection on her role as a teacher in the TBLT
implementation. One important thing she shared with the researcher was that she felt that her
role in the TBLT lessons was completely different from her usual lessons. In the TBLT
classroom, her role was to assist the students to accomplish the task. It was important for her
to understand the concept of scaffolding as in her usual classes; she usually would not wait
for students to ask for help but instead provided everything they needed to know at the
beginning of the class. However, after seeing how far the students could accomplish from a
minimal amount of scaffolding, she felt more inspired. She added that even though in the
TBLT classroom, the students were expected to be the ones who activated the task, it did not
mean that the teacher could work less. Conversely, she felt that she needed to be more
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

92
cautious to be able to detect mistakes and also provide assistance in time. However, although
it seemed like it consumed more time and required her to be more patient at first when
comparing to her usual teaching style, the results were quite impressive.
In summary, according to the researcher‘s observation and the interview with the
teacher, the English speaking and listening skills of the students were improved after TBLT
implementation using both implicit and explicit strategies. Explicit strategies used in this
study included pre-task vocabulary teaching, within-task corrective feedback, and post-task
form-focused language work. Implicit strategies used in this study included pre-task model
performance, songs and animations, total physical response (TPR), and task repetition.
According to the observation, it can be concluded that it is probable that the explicit
strategies such as vocabulary building activities were beneficial for the task performance,
especially in the class of beginners. In this study, the teacher would teach vocabulary needed
for task completion at the beginning of every class during the pre-task stage and it was found
to be very helpful. As Willis and Willis (2007) suggested that the assistance such as
vocabulary teaching should be given to the students during the pre-task priming stage so that
they would be able to complete the given task.
The findings also suggested that the implicit strategies could successfully draw the
students‘ attention to forms and increase learning motivation. For example, in the TBLT
instructions, sometimes the pre-task would involve the model performance. The aims were to
indirectly provide linguistic support and increase students‘ attention to a particular linguistic
feature. The pre-task model was found to be favorable, especially for the students with low
English proficiency. In addition, to make the students attentive to forms, the sample models
selected to use in this study were mostly in forms of songs and animations that involve
particular language structures. When the students paid attention to the class, they were able to
pick up some linguistic forms and used them during the task cycle.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

93
4.4 Summary of the Chapter
Chapter 4 provides detailed findings from the research results based on the research
questions. The findings were shown in two parts: the quantitative and qualitative data. The
quantitative data obtained from the results from pre- and post-tests were integrated with the
qualitative data obtained from the researcher‘s observation. The interview with the teacher
was used for triangulation. The results showed the effectiveness of TBLT in developing
English speaking and listening skills of young Thai EFL learners.
For the research question 1, the findings revealed that students‘ English speaking and
listening abilities improved after receiving TBLT instructions. The mean scores from the pre-
and post-test of the control and experimental groups were analyzed to examine the
effectiveness of the approach. The findings showed that the English speaking and listening
skills of the students in the experimental group increased after being taught through TBLT.
For the research question 2, the findings revealed the TBLT implication, speaking and
listening practices and the students‘ learning motivation obtained from the researcher‘s
observation. The findings revealed that the implication of TBLT instructions was practical
and also enjoyable. During the instructions, it was found the students seemed to be motivated
to learn as they actively participated in the class activities. Even though the use of L1 was
often found during the task cycle, it was bearable as the students were able to complete the
tasks at the end. In addition, according to the observation, the teacher played an important
role in applying TBLT to the class. It was found that the role of the teacher in this study was
not only as a teacher but also as a facilitator who facilitated the students to achieve the task
outcome. It was revealed that the obstacles of the TBLT instructions were the time allocation
and the use of L1.
For the research question 3, the findings revealed the perceptions of the teacher
towards the advantages and disadvantages of the TBLT implementation. Considering the
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

94
advantages of the TBLT instructions, the teacher believed that TBLT provided an active
classroom and meaningful lessons and also stimulated the students‘ learning motivation.
However, there were some limitations of TBLT instructions including time allocation and the
students‘ language proficiency.
The next chapter will focus on a brief summary of the study, discussion of the
findings, pedagogical implications, and recommendations for future research.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

95
CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSIONS
This chapter consists of a summary and discussions of the implementation of TBLT in
teaching English speaking and listening skills to the young EFL learners and their
performances during TBLT lessons. The chapter starts with a brief summary of the study and
the findings, followed by the discussions of the findings. The next part relates to the
pedagogic implications and limitations of the study, as well as recommendations for further
studies.
The purposes of this study were 1) to compare the improvement of the English
speaking and listening skills of the young learners who have been taught through task-based
language teaching with the learners who have not been taught through task-based language
teaching, 2) to examine how the young learners perform during task-based language teaching
lessons and 3) to explore the teacher‘s perception towards the implementation of task-based
language teaching in classroom.
This study adopted a mixed method research design with a quasi-experimental design,
pre-test and post-test with the control group for the quantitative part as well as observation
and interview for the qualitative part. For the quantitative part, 60 students from Grade 1
were selected as the participants. The students were divided into 2 groups: the control group
and the experimental group. The students in the experimental group were given treatment by
using task-based language teaching instructions, while the students in the control group
received standard teaching technique.
The data collection was divided into three phases. First, the pre-test was given to both
groups at the beginning of the experiment to check the alignment if the selected samples were
of the same caliber or not. The experimental group was taught with the task-based language
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

96
teaching lesson plans and the control group was taught with the standard lesson plans for
eight weeks. During the TBLT instructions, the researcher observed the experimental group
closely and recorded field notes at the end of each class. Then at the end of the experiment,
the post-test was given to both groups to evaluate the effectiveness of the TBLT lessons.
Finally, the data collected through pre and post-tests were analyzed using SPSS and the data
collected through observations and interview were analyzed using content analysis.
The qualitative data were used to integrate with the quantitative data to gain more
insightful information on how the students demonstrate TBLT in the classroom, to support an
understanding of the effects of TBLT on the students‘ speaking and listening development
and also their learning motivation and also to explore the teacher‘s perceptions on TBLT
implementation.
5.1 Summary of the Findings
The findings of the research can be summarized in three parts: the students‘ English
speaking and listening skills, the students‘ performances during the TBLT instructions, and
the teacher‘s perception towards TBLT implementation.
According to the first research question, To what extent have the learners who have
been taught through task-based language teaching improved their English speaking and
listening skills when comparing to the learners who have not been taught through task-based
language teaching?, the English speaking and listening pre- and post-tests were used to
answer this question. The results obtained from the tests pointed out that the students in the
experimental group improved their English speaking and listening skills after receiving
TBLT instructions.
As to the second research question, How do the young learners demonstrate task-
based language teaching lessons?, the researcher‘s field notes taken during the observation
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

97
were used to answer this question. The findings revealed detailed information on the TBLT
implementation in the classroom, how TBLT instructions helped improve the students‘
speaking and listening skills, and their learning motivation with TBLT instructions.
In terms of the TBLT lessons and activities, it can be summarized that TBLT
instructions were practical and suitable for young learners. The types of task selected to use
in the study were appropriate for the level of the students. The students were able to complete
the task and achieve the goals of the task. Although there were some obstacles such as the
language use and time allocation, it was still manageable. In addition, it was noticed that the
teacher understood the concept of TBLT that the teacher was more like a facilitator who
supplied the help when needed.
In terms of speaking and listening skills practice, it was clearly seen that their
speaking and listening skills were improved after the use of TBLT. They were able to
understand the instructions in English and respond to them. After several classes, they were
more fluent in the language during the task performance. Moreover, they were able to use
more accurate language during the post-task form focused stage. The corrective feedback
(CF) was constantly provided during the task performance.
In terms of students‘ learning motivation, it was found that the students were highly
motivated by the use of TBLT in class. The students were actively engaged with the given
tasks and showed a high degree of enthusiasm. In addition, the activities involving Total
Physical response (TPR) received special attention from the students. Moreover, it was
obvious that the students were more confident to speak English after receiving TBLT
instructions. It was clearly seen that they transformed from passive learners into active
learners.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

98
As to the third research question, What are the teacher’s perception towards the
implementation of task-based language teaching in classroom?, the interview with the
teacher revealed that there were advantages and disadvantages of TBLT implementation. The
advantages of the TBLT implementation were in terms of a communicative classroom and
students‘ learning motivation while the disadvantages of the TBLT implementation included
time allocation and language use.
The discussions of the research findings obtained from quantitative and qualitative
data analysis are discussed in the following session.
5.2 Discussions
A number of research findings suggested that the language skills of learners were
improved after the TBLT implementation (Boonkit, 2010; Bunmak, 2015; Kanoksilapatham
and Suranakkharin, 2019; McDonough & Chaikitmongkol, 2007; Promruang, 2012;
Reunyoot, 2011; Saiyod, 2009; Thanghun, 2012; Wichitwarit, 2004). The findings of this
study also supported the findings of the previous research. After implementing the TBLT
instructions, it was found that there was a significant difference between the mean scores of
English speaking and listening skill pre-test and post-test of the students from the
experimental group. In addition, the results showed that the mean scores of English speaking
and listening skills post-test of the students from the experimental group after implementing
task-based language teaching lessons were significantly higher than those of the control
group. To take a closer look at how the students performed the task during the TBLT
instructions, the researcher‘s fieldnotes derived from the observation were also taken into
account. During the observation, it was found that TBLT had a positive effect on the
students‘ speaking and listening abilities. The details from quantitative and qualitative data
were discussed as follows.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

99
5.2.1 TBLT and English Speaking and Listening Skills
According to the statistical results, it was found that the English speaking and
listening skills of the students were significantly improved. The findings revealed that the
students in the experimental group had a higher gain in the mean scores more than the control
group probably due to TBLT instructions as they had opportunities to perform tasks using
English. When taking a closer look, the improvement in the listening skill was found quite
interesting. The difference of the mean scores between the pre-test and post-test of the control
group was 0.65 and the experimental group was 2.80. It was quite noticeable that the post-test
mean scores were significantly higher than the pre-test mean scores and the increase of scores
in the experimental group was higher than the increase in the control group. Hence, it might
be that TBLT lessons could be beneficial for teaching young Thai learners the English
listening skill. According to the observation, one of the possible reasons is that in TBLT
lessons, the students were also involved in the listening process which mentioned in Chapter
2 which includes pre-listening, while-listening, and post-listening (Miller, 2003). They were
first introduced to the context and motivated for what they were about to hear during the pre-
task stage. Then they were involved in the while-listening process during the task cycle as
they were exposed to the materials used in the task which they needed to listen to in order to
perform the task. In the post-task stage, they were asked to analyze the language as part of the
post-listening process. Thus, it is plausible that the use of TBLT instructions in this study
might help improve the students‘ listening skill. The results of this current study are in line
with previous research findings (Chen, 2018; Chou, 2017) which found that the students
considered tasks to be an important medium of input enhancement for increasing listening
skill.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

100
In terms of the improvement in the speaking skills of the students in the experimental
group, it is very likely that their speaking skill might be improved through the use of TBLT
instructions. As mentioned in Chapter 2, young learners are eager learners by nature and tend
to respond to any activities that interest them (Cameron, 2001). However, it is vital to teach
speaking skill to encourage students to overcome their shyness. In this study, the researcher‘s
fieldnotes obtained from the observation supported the statistical results that the speaking
skills of the students in the experimental group were significantly improved after the TBLT
implementation. One of the possible reasons is that TBLT encouraged them to speak during
the task performance by using motivational strategies such as providing them a real context to
perform the task in a more meaningful way. New words and pronunciation were first
introduced to the students to use during the task performance. Also, it was not only that
the meaning was heavily prioritized to promote the fluency but language accuracy in terms of
vocabulary, pronunciation, and sentence structures were also promoted during the post-task
stage to make sense of the forms. Therefore, it is possible that the improvement in the
speaking skills might result from the TBLT instructions.
5.2.2 Students’ English Proficiency
According to the findings, the students in the experimental group had a higher gain in
the mean scores more than the control group. The gain in the mean scores may come from the
fact that the students were engaged in TBLT lessons and had opportunities to perform the
tasks using English. When looking into details, it was worth noting that the speaking and
listening mean scores, in general, of the students from both groups were low. Even though the
post-test mean scores showed that there was a significant increase, the scores were still
considered low which aligned with the national test results like O-Net which revealed that
Thai students have scored less than 40 out of 100 by average in English subject (NIETS,
2019). The findings of this study might represent the English proficiency of this particular
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

101
group of students or it might be able to represent the English proficiency of Thai learners in
general in which TBLT might yield different effects.
5.2.3 Vocabulary Building Activities
According to the observation, it is probable that vocabulary building activities were
beneficial for the task performers, especially in the class of beginners. In this study, the
teacher would teach vocabulary needed for task completion at the beginning of every class
during the pre-task stage and it was found to be very helpful. As Willis and Willis (2007)
suggested that learners should be given assistance such as vocabulary teaching during the
pre-task stage to be able to complete the given task. However Ellis (2003) suggested that
teachers need to be careful with teaching vocabulary during the pre-stage as the learners
might treat the task as a vocabulary exercise. Thus, the amount of help provided during this
stage should be taken into consideration.
5.2.4 Corrective Feedback (CF)
In addition, it is almost certain that the corrective feedback (CR) provided by the
teacher during the task cycle was quite harmless. In this study, two types of CF: recasts and
explicit correction were used due to the simplicity. Due to the limitation of time, other
implicit types of CF were impractical in this study. However, it was found that when the
students were corrected by the teacher, they seemed to improve after receiving the CF for a
few times. It is parallel with what Ellis (2010) suggested that teacher should not be hesitant to
provide CF because it addresses language forms during an ongoing communication which
can help enhance students‘ communicative competence. However, because it happens in a
spontaneous manner, it depends quite heavily on the teacher‘s decision on when and how
much CF should be given. Even though it is quite possible that CF is harmless, teachers need
to make sure that it does not interrupt the communication flow.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

102
5.2.5 Form-Focused Language Work
Furthermore, the findings strongly suggest that the form-focused language work used
during the post-task stage could help the students understand the importance of learning
grammar after they had struggled with it during the task performance. This conclusion is
similar to what Long (2016) has suggested that an explicit form-focused activity in the post-
task stage is advantageous because it addresses occurred problems. Teaching sentence
structures after the students struggled to use the forms to express meanings can motivate them
to see the value of learning (Ellis et al., 2020). Although the form-focused language work
seems to be valuable, there are also some limitations found during the observation. Because
the form-focused activity was delayed to the end of the class to avoid causing the students to
focus only on the linguistic target during the task performance, it was found that oftentimes
there was not enough time in class for this session. Hence, time allocation is needed to be
taken into account. In addition, the form-focused language work used in this stud mostly
regarded vocabulary and structures that were used to produce a spoken language. It would be
interesting to focus on other aspects such as pronunciation.
5.2.6 TBLT and Learning Motivation
Another point regarding the TBLT instructions is that it is important to take students‘
learning motivation into account when designing TBLT instructions for young learners. The
findings of this study suggested that the use of media might affect students‘ motivation which
might be an extraneous factor in improving English speaking and listening skills through the
use of TBLT instructions. Cameron (2001) suggested that young learners have willingness to
contribute in any activities that seem to be interesting to them but it is vital to keep them
motivated as they can easily lose their interest. To draw their attention to class and increase
their learning motivation, the TBLT lesson plans used in this study included the use of songs,
animations, and total physical response (TPR). The results from this study are aligned with
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

103
the results from previous research which suggested a positive progress in the listening and
speaking skills from using motivational teaching strategies such as TPR (Calle, 2016; Oliver,
2012; Shi, 2018). These motivational strategies could create a classroom climate that
facilitates learning motivation as Huang (2011) suggested that because young learners do not
have the urgency and necessity to learn foreign language to contact with foreigners nor to get
a related job or study in higher education, their motivation to learn foreign language is mostly
dominated by learning situations. The results from this study suggested positive feedback in
terms of the learning motivation through the use of TBLT as it promoted learners‘ enjoyment,
reduced learning anxiety and boosted confidence. Similarly, the recent study suggested that
TBLT could increase learners‘ learning motivation (Chau & Lin, 2020). However, the
amount of motivational tools used in class should be in an appropriate amount otherwise, the
students would only focus on the tools rather than the lessons. Thus, the study of task
motivation which specifically deals with what would be an appropriate amount of
entertainment used in class in order to stimulate learners‘ motivation is worth investigating.
5.2.7 Task Repetition
In addition, it is possible that the use of procedural task repetition during the post-task
stage in this study yielded a positive effect on accuracy. In this study, the procedural task
repetition was used during the post-task stage and sometimes as whole task during the task
cycle. The students were asked to repeat the task, following the same procedures but with
different content. It was found that during the second performance, their language accuracy
was improved. This finding is aligned with the results of Patanasorn‘s (2010) study which
showed that the procedural repetition improved the accuracy in the English past tense.
5.3 Pedagogical Implementations
The findings of this study found that the use of task-based language teaching could
work effectively in teaching English speaking and listening skills to young Thai EFL
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

104
learners. However, some suggestions are recommended to make it more suitable for each
particular group of students.
First, the present study could prove that the use of TBLT is practical in teaching
English speaking and listening skills to young learners. During the observation, it was found
that when working with young learners, motivation in learning should be taken into account.
Teachers should select teaching materials that can engage students at young age and also
offer them as many speaking opportunities as possible. The use of media such as songs in
teaching is recommended, especially during the pre-task stage due to their relaxing features.
In addition, the activities that require total physical response (TPR) were found beneficial in
this study. Teachers can add new lyrics, require more movements or even ask students to
create their own lyrics. This process does not only increase students‘ motivation but also
build their confidence in using the language.
Second, the findings suggest that corrective feedback (CF) has a positive effect on
students‘ language accuracy. As mentioned in the discussion session, this study suggests that
teachers should not hesitate to provide corrective feedback. The CF should be provided
instantly during the communication so that students can use the correct forms right away in
right context. Also, teachers can use other types of CF such as elicitation or metalinguistic
clues to examine broader results. However, when selecting types of CF, teacher should make
sure that they are suitable for the level of students and practical in terms of time allocation.
Third, while this study suggests that the practice stage during the post-task form-
focused language work could improve language accuracy; teachers can adjust the design of
the activities to draw attention to meaning. Even though the focus during this stage is on
linguistic forms, teachers could design the activities that require students to decode the
meaning first in order to make sense of the form.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

105
Lastly, in this study, it was found that when working as a group, the students‘
willingness to communicate seemed to be increased. When working with young learners at a
beginner level, students might be lacking confidence or language proficiency during the
beginning lessons. Thus, when designing TBLT lesson plans, tasks should be simplified and
designed to be performed in groups. This way, they would be more willing to communicate
and could encourage each other to speak. When some students do not understand the lesson,
they can explain to each other. In this research, some linguistic forms were even addressed by
peer corrective feedback. Putting students into groups can also be useful when working with
students who have low English proficiency.
5.4 Limitations of the Study
Although the findings of the study suggested that TBLT could improve English
speaking and listening skills of young Thai EFL learners, there are some limitations in the
study.
First of all, the duration of the experiment was 10 weeks. The time for executing
TBLT instructions was 8 weeks as the first and last week were contributed to the pre- and
post-test. In each week, the students only had two hours experiencing TBLT lessons. If the
duration of the experiment is extended, more accurate results could be obtained. Furthermore,
the time for each class was only one hour. Because TBLT believes that students learn better
through task performance, it means that they are required to perform the given tasks by
themselves. However, it consumes more time than the standard teaching classroom.
Sometimes, the teacher needed to rush through some stages in order to finish the lesson plans
on time. In addition, the mean scores of the pre-test revealed that the English proficiency of
the students in two groups were quite low. Moreover, the scope of the study is limited in
terms of the context and population, thus, other studies under the same topic might not
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

106
confirm the same results. Lastly, there might be some external factors beyond the
researcher‘s control during the experiment that could affect the students‘ speaking and
listening skills.
5.5 Recommendations for Further Studies
Based on the results of the study, the researcher would like to make suggestions for
future studies as follows.
1. Further research should extend the duration of the experiment to investigate the
long-term effects of TBLT on the English speaking and listening skills. A longitudinal study
under the similar topic might shed light on the topic. Also, future research should investigate
the effectiveness of TBLT with emphasis on long-term memory retention.
2. The findings of this study confirmed the research hypothesis in terms of speaking
and listening skills. Thus, it is suggested that further research should employ TBLT in
teaching young language learners other language skills such as reading and writing.
3. The English speaking and listening skills of the participants in this study were quite
low. The future research should conduct a TBLT experiment with participants of various
levels of English proficiency.
4. The findings of this study indicated that the use of task repetition was beneficial for
young learners in terms of language accuracy. The future research should investigate the
comparative effectiveness of the other types of repetition or numbers of repetitions.
5. Apart from this, it is interesting to explore further effects of the form-focused pre-
task and the form-focused post-task on language accuracy and fluency.
6. This research explored the perception towards the implementation of task-based
language teaching in classroom from the teacher‘s perspective. The further research should
investigate students‘ perception towards the TBLT implementation.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

REFERENCES
Albino, G. (2017). Improving Speaking Fluency in a Task-Based Language Teaching

Approach: The Case of EFL Learners at PUNIV-Cazenga. SAGE Open, 7(2),
215824401769107. doi:10.1177/2158244017691077
Anderson, A., & Lynch, T. (1988). Listening. Oxford University Press.
Arora, K. (2015). Research methods: The essential knowledge base. Cengage Learning.
Asher, J. J. (1988). Learning another language through actions: The complete teacher's
guidebook. Sky Oaks.
Bachman, L. F. (1995). An investigation into the comparability of two tests of English as a

foreign language. Cambridge University Press.
Bailey, K. M., & Numan, D. (2005). Practical English language teaching: Speaking.
McGraw-Hill.
Baker, W. (2012). From cultural awareness to intercultural awareness: Culture in ELT. ELT
Journal, 66(1), 62-70. doi:10.1093/elt/ccr017
Baker, W., & Jarunthawatchai, W. (2017). English language policy in Thailand. European
Journal of Language Policy, 9(1), 27-44. doi:10.3828/ejlp.2017.3
Black, R. W. (2009). English-Language Learners, Fan Communities, and 21st-Century Skills.

Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 52(8), 688-697. doi:10.1598/jaal.52.8.4
Boonkit, K. (2010). Enhancing the development of speaking skills for non-native speakers of
English. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 1305-1309.
doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.03.191
Brannen, J. (2017). Mixing Methods Qualitative and Quantitative Research. Routledge.
Brown, H. D. (1994). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. Prentice Hall Regents.
Brown, H. D. (2000). Principles of language learning and teaching (4th ed.). Longman.
Bruner, J. S. (1975). The ontogenesis of speech acts. Journal of Child Language, 2(1), 1-19.
doi:10.1017/s0305000900000866
Buck, G. (2001). Assessing listening. Cambridge University Press.
Bunmak, M. N. (2015). Exploring Thai EFL teachers’ understanding and perceptions of

task-based language teaching
(http://ethesisarchive.library.tu.ac.th/thesis/2015/TU_2015_5721042140_4796_3376.pd
f) [Doctoral dissertation, Thammasart University]. ethisis archive Thammasart
University Library.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

108
Bureekaew, N. (2009). Use of Task-Based language teaching focused on interaction patterns

to enhance English listening-speaking abilities and social skills of expanding level
students (http://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/23080) [Master‘s thesis,
Chiangmai University]. CMU Intellectual Repository.
Butler, Y. G. (2011). The Implementation of Communicative and Task-Based Language

Teaching in the Asia-Pacific Region. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 31, 36-57.
doi:10.1017/s0267190511000122
Butler, Y. G., & Lee, J. (2006). On-Task Versus Off-Task Self-Assessments Among Korean
Elementary School Students Studying English. The Modern Language Journal, 90(4),
506-518. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.2006.00463.x
Butler, Y. G., & Lee, J. (2010). The effects of self-assessment among young learners of
English. Language Testing, 27(1), 5-31. doi:10.1177/0265532209346370
Bygate, M., Skehan, P., & Swain, M. (2001). Researching pedagogic tasks, second language
learning, teaching and testing. Longman.
Bygate, M., Skehan, P., & Swain, M. (2013). Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language
learning, teaching and testing. Routledge.
Byrnes, H. (1984). The Role of Listening Comprehension: A Theoretical Base. Foreign

Language Annals, 17(4), 317-329. doi:10.1111/j.1944-9720.1984.tb03235.x
Calle, A. V. A. (2016). Enhancing Learners' Listening Skill Through Total Physical

Response (TPR) (Doctoral dissertation, Universidad Tecnológica de Pereira. Facultad
de Bellas Artes y Humanidades. Licenciatura en Enseñanza de la Lengua Inglesa).
Cambridge ESOL. (2011). Using the CEFR: Principles of Good Practice [Booklet].
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge ESOL.
Cambridge Assessment English. (2018). Pre A1 Starters, A1 Movers and A2 Flyers 2018
Sample papers. Cambridge English. https://www.cambridgeenglish.org/exams-and-
tests/starters/preparation/
Cameron, L. (2001). Teaching Languages to Young Learners. Cambridge University Press.
Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (2015). Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for
Research. Ravenio Books.
Candlin, C. N. (1987). Towards Task-Based Language Learning. In C. Candlin, & D.

Murphy (Eds.), Language Learning Tasks (pp. 5-22). Lancaster University.
Carless, D. (2002). Implementing task-based learning with young learners. ELT Journal,
56(4), 389-396. doi:10.1093/elt/56.4.389
Celce-Murcia, M. (1995). Discourse analysis and the teaching of listening. In G. Cook & B.
Seidlhofer (Eds.), Principle and practice in applied linguistics (pp.363-377).
Oxford University Press.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

109
Celce-Murcia, M. (2014). Language teaching approaches: An overview. In M., Celce-Murcia,

D., M. Brinton, & M., Ann Snow (Eds.), Teaching English as a Second or Foreign
Language (4th ed.). National Geographic Learning.
Chua, H. W., & Lin, C. Y. (2020). The Effect of Task-based Language Teaching in Learning
Motivation. International Journal on Social and Education Sciences (IJonSES), 2(1),
41-48.
Chen, C. (2018). The Research on the Relationship between Task-based Language Teaching
and Listening Motivation of English Majors. Paper presented at the 2017 7th
International Conference on Education and Management (ICEM 2017).
https://doi.org/10.2991/icem-17.2018.161
Chasanachoti, R. (2009). EFL Learning through Language Activities outside the Classroom:
A Case Study of English Education Students in Thailand. (Publication No. 3363815)
[Doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University]. ProQuest Dissertations
Publishing.
Chitprarop, A. (2011). Using Task-based Learning in Business to Promote English Speaking

and Writing Abilities among Higher Vocational Certificate Students.
(http://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/26041) [Master‘s thesis, Chiangmai
University]. CMU Intellectual Repository.
Chomsky, N. (1959). Verbal behavior. Language, 35(1), 26-58. doi:10.2307/411334
Choomthong, D. (2014). Preparing Thai Students‘ English for the ASEAN Economic
Community: Some Pedagogical Implications and Trends. LEARN Journal: Language
Education and Acquisition Research Network, 7(1), 45-57.
Cooze, M. (2017). Approaches to Learning and Teaching English as a Second Language: A

toolkit for international teachers. Cambridge University Press.
Copland, F., & Garton, S. (2014). Key themes and future directions in teaching English to
young learners: Introduction to the Special Issue. ELT Journal, 68(3), 223-230.
Copland, F., Garton, S., & Burns, A. (2014). Challenges in Teaching English to Young
Learners: Global Perspectives and Local Realities. TESOL Quarterly, 48(4), 738-762.
Council of Europe. (2001a). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages:

Learning, teaching, assessment (CFER). Council of Europe.
https://www.coe.int/en/web/portfolio/the-common-european-framework-of-reference-
for-languages-learning-teaching-assessment-cefr-
Crystal, D. (2003). English as a Global Language. Cambridge University Press.
Cullen, B. (1998). Brainstorming before Speaking Tasks. The Internet TESL Journal, 4(7), 1.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

110
Danesi, M. (2012). Second Language Teaching: A view from the right side of the brain.
Springer Science+Business Media.
Davies, P., & Pearse, E. (2000). Success in English Teaching: A Complete Introduction to
Teaching English at Secondary School Level and Above. Oxford University Press.
Deerajviset, P. (2014). The ASEAN Community 2015 and English Language Teaching in
Thailand. Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences, 10, 39-75.
Dixon, L. Q., Zhao, J., Shin, J., Wu, S., Su, J., Burgess-Brigham, R., & Snow, C. (2012).
What We Know About Second Language Acquisition. Review of Educational
Research, 82(1), 5-60.
Donaldson, M. (1978). Children's minds (Vol. 5287). Fontana/Collins.
Drew, I. (2009). Using the Early Years Literacy Programme in Primary EFL Norwegian
Classrooms. In M. Nikolov (Ed.), Early learning of modern foreign languages:
Processes and outcomes (pp.108-120). Multilingual Matters.
Duarte Romero, M., Tinjacá Bernal, L. M., & Carrero Olivares, M. (2012). Using songs to
encourage sixth graders to develop English speaking skills. Profile Issues in Teachers'
Professional Development, 14(1), 11-28. http://www.scielo.org.co/scielo.php?
script=sci_abstract&pid=S165707902012000100002
Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based teaching and learning. Oxford University Press.
Ellis, R. (2009). Task-based language teaching: Sorting out the misunderstandings.

International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 19(3), 221-246.
Ellis, R., Skehan, P., Li, S., Shintani, N., & Lambert, C. (2020). Task-based language
teaching: Theory and practice. Cambridge University Press.
Felix, S. (1991). The Accessibility of Universal Grammar in Second Language Acquisition.

Point Counterpoint Language Acquisition and Language Disorders, 89.
doi:10.1075/lald.3.04fel
Feyten, C. M. (1991). The Power of Listening Ability: An Overlooked Dimension in

Language Acquisition. The Modern Language Journal, 75(2), 173-180.
Figueras, N., North, B., Takala, S., Verhelst, N., & Avermaet, P. V. (2005). Relating
examinations to the Common European Framework: A manual. Language Testing,
22(3), 261-279.
Figueras, N., North, B., Takala, S., Verhelst, N. and Van Avermaet, P. (2005). Relating
examinations to the Common European Framework: a manual. Language Testing,
22(3), pp.261-279.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

111
Florez, M. A. C. (1999, June). Improving Adult English Language Learners’ Speaking Skills.
Eric Digests. https://www.ericdigests.org/2000-3/adult.htm
Foley, J. (2005). English in Thailand. RELC, 36(2), 223-234.
Fries, C. C., & Fries, A. C. (1961). Foundations for English Teaching. Kenkyusha.
Fulcher, G., Davidson, F., & Kemp, J. (2010). Effective rating scale development for
speaking tests: Performance decision trees. Language Testing, 28(1), 5-29.
doi:10.1177/0265532209359514
Garton, S., Copland, F., & Burns, A. (2011). Investigating Global Practices in Teaching
English to Young Learners. British Council and Aston University.
Gordon, T. (2007). Teaching Young Children a Second Language. Greenwood Publishing

Group.
Haenni Hoti, A., Heinzmann, S., & Muller, M. (2009). ‗‗I can you help?‘‘ Assessing speaking
skills and interaction strategies of young learners. In M. Nikolov (Ed.), The Age
Factor and Early Language Learning (pp.119-140). Mouton de Gruyter.
Hamad, M. M. (2013). Factors negatively affect speaking skills at Saudi colleges for girls in
the South. English Language Teaching, 6(12), 87-97.
Harmer, J. (2001). The Practice of English Language Teaching (3rd ed.). Pearson.
Huang, K. M. (2011). Motivating lessons: A classroom-oriented investigation of the effects

of content-based instruction on EFL young learners‘ motivated behaviours and
classroom verbal interaction. System, 39(2), 186-201.
Huang, D. (2015). A study on the application of task-based language teaching method in a

comprehensive English class in China. Journal of Language Teaching and
Research, 7(1), 118-127.
Harmer, J. (2004). The Practice of English Language Teaching (6th ed.). Pearson Education
Limited.
Hayes, D. (2010). Language learning, teaching and educational reform in rural Thailand: An
English teacher's perspective. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 30(3), 305-319.
Hung, N. V. (2014). Review of notion and framework of task-based language teaching.

International Journal of English Language and Linguistics Research, 2(1), 39-48.
Hymes, D. (1971). Competence and performance in linguistic theory. In R. Huxley & E.

Ingram (Eds.), Language acquisition: Models and methods. Academic Press.
Hymes, D. (1972). On communicative competence. In J. Pride & J. Holmes (Eds.),

Sociolinguistics (pp. 269-293). Penguin Books.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

112
Jenkins, J. (2009). World Englishes: A Resource Book for Students (2nd ed.). London:
Routledge.
Jeon, I. J., & Hahn, J. W. (2006). Exploring EFL teachers' perceptions of task-based language
teaching: A case study of Korean secondary school classroom practice. Asian EFL
Journal, 8(1), 123-143.
Jones, N. (2001). The ALTE Can Do Project and the role of measurement in constructing a
proficiency framework. Research Notes, 5, 5-8.
Kachru, B. B. (1985). Standards, codification and sociolinguistic realism: The English

language in the Outer Circle. In R. Quirk & H. Widdowson (Eds.), English in the
World, Teaching and Learning the Language and Literatures (pp. 11–30).
Cambridge University Press.
Kachru, Y., & Smith, L. E. (2008). Cultures, Contexts, and World Englishes. Routledge.
Kanoksilapatham, B. (2007). Navigating pathways to success in ELT. Journal of English

Studies, 3, 6-25.
Kanoksilapatham, B., & Suranakkharin, T. (2019). Tour guide simulation: A task-based

learning activity to enhance young Thai learners‘ English. Malaysian Journal of
Learning and Instruction, 16(2), 1-31.
Keyvanfar, A., & Modarresi, M. (2009). The impact of task-based activity on the reading skill
of Iranian EFL young learners at the beginner level. The Journal of Applied
Linguistic, 2(1), 81-102.
Khamkhien, A. (2010). Teaching English speaking and English speaking tests in the Thai
context: A reflection from Thai perspective. English Language Teaching, 3(1), 184-
190.
Kim, I-S. (2000). Chodueng Hakkyo 5 Haknyunsaengui Daeanjuck Younguh Pyungga

Bangbubae Kwanhan Yeongu. [A study of alternative English testing for 5th grade
students at the elementary school.] Primary English Education, 6(1), 121–151.
Kirkpatrick, A. (2007). World Englishes Paperback with Audio CD: Implications for
International Communication and English Language Teaching. Cambridge University
Press.
Kirkpatrick, A. (2010). English as a Lingua Franca in ASEAN: A Multilingual Model. Hong

Kong University Press.
Krashen, S. (1982). Principles and Practice in Second Language Acquisition. Pergamon

Press.
Krashen, S., Scarcella, R., & Long, M. (Eds.). (1982). Child-Adult Differences in Second
Language Acquisition. Newbury House.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

113
Kwangsawad, T. (2009). Bridging the gap between CLT and CBI theories and practices in
Thai small rural schools. Journal of Administration and Development, Mahasarakham
University, 1(2), 52-63.
Laitila, A. (2016). A book review-Doing mental health research with children and
adolescents–a guide to qualitative methods. European Journal of Psychotherapy and
Counseling, 18(1), 1-3.
Lightbown, P. M., & Spada, N. (2006). How Languages are Learned 3rd edition-Oxford
Handbooks for Language Teachers. Oxford University.
Littlewood, W. (1981). Communicative language teaching: An introduction. Cambridge

University Press.
Littlewood, W. (2007). Communicative and task-based language teaching in East Asian

classrooms. Language Teaching, 40(3), 243-249.
Long, M. H. (1985). Input and Second Language Acquisition Theory. In S. Gass & C.
Madden (Eds.), Input in Second Language Acquisition (pp. 377-393). Newbury
House.
Lim, S. (2015, October). A Blended Learning Case Study: The Application of Station
Rotation Model in ELT Listening and Speaking Class at Phayao Pittayakhom School.
Paper presented at the International Conference on Language, Literature, Culture and
Education.https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/4965/864d7fe15da4e013d0bd9419454a588292b8
.pdf?_ga=2.116831110.1810575552.1598664509-1951068920.1598664509
Long, M. H. (1990). Maturational constraints on language development. Studies in Second

Language Acquisition, 12(3), 251-285.
Long, M. (2014). Second Language Acquisition and Task-based Language Teaching. John
Wiley & Sons.
Markmee, K., & Taylor, S. (2001). Ongoing teacher development initiatives. Thai
TESOL, 14(1), 10-13.
McArthur, T. (2003). English as an Asian Language. English Today. 19(2), 19-22.
McDonough, K., & Chaikitmongkol, W. (2007). Teachers' and learners' reactions to a task-
based EFL course in Thailand. TESOL Quarterly, 41(1), 107-132.
McKay, S. L. (2002). Teaching English as an International Language: Rethinking Goals and

Approaches. Oxford University Press.
McKay, P. (2006). Assessing young language learners. Cambridge University Press.
Mead, N. A., & Rubin, D. L. (1985). Assessing Listening and Speaking Skills. ERIC Digest.
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED263626
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

114
Metcalfe, J., & Noom-Ura, S. (2013). Communication strategy use of high and low
proficiency learners of English at a Thai university. Learn Journal: Language
Education and Acquisition Research Network, 6(1), 68-89.
Meyers, L. S., Gamst, G., & Guarino, A. J. (2016). Applied multivariate research: Design
and interpretation. Sage publications.
Millington, N. T. (2011). Using songs effectively to teach English to young learners.

Language Education in Asia, 2(1), 134-141.
Ministry of Education, Thailand. (2001). Basic Education Curriculum B.E. 2544 (A.D. 2001).
Ministry of Education, Thailand.
Moon, J. (2000). Children Learning English. Macmillan Heinemann English Language

Teaching.
Mudra, H. (2016). Enhancing StudentsSpeaking Skill through Task-Based Language

Teaching (TBLT) at English Tadris Department of STAIN Kerinci. Al-Ta Lim
Journal, 23(1), 78-87.
Nikolov, M., & Curtain, H. (2000). An early start: Young learners and modern languages in
Europe and beyond. Council of Europe.
Noom-Ura, S. (2013). English-Teaching Problems in Thailand and Thai Teachers'

Professional Development Needs. English Language Teaching, 6(11), 139-147.
North, B. (2006, March). The Common European Framework of Reference: Development,

Theoretical and Practical Issues. Paper presented at the Symposium A New Direction
in Foreign Language Education: The Potential of the Common European Framework
of Reference for Languages. Osaka, Japan.
Nunan, D. (1989). Designing Tasks for the Communicative Classroom. Cambridge University
Press.
Nunan, D. (1991). Communicative tasks and the language curriculum. TESOL Quarterly,
25(2), 279-295.
Nunan, D. (1993). Task-based syllabus design: Selecting, grading and sequencing tasks. In G.
Crookes & S. Gass (Eds.), Tasks in a Pedagogical Context: Integrating theory and
practice (pp. 55-66). Multilingual Matters.
Nunan, D. (2002). Listening in language learning. In J. Richards & W. Renandya (Eds.),

Methodology in Language Teaching: An Anthology of Current Practice (pp.238-241).
Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511667190.032
Nunan, D. (2004). Task-based Language Teaching. Cambridge University Press.
Nunan, D. (2006). Task-based language teaching in the Asia context: Defining 'task'. Asian
EFL journal, 8(3), 12-18.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

115
Nunan, D. (2010). Teaching English to young learners. Anaheim: Anaheim University Press.
Nunan, D. (2013). Innovation in the young learner classroom. In K. Hyland & L.L.C. Wong
(Eds.), Innovation and change in English language education (pp.233-247).
Routledge.
Office of the National Education Commission (ONEC). (1999) National Education Act of
B.E.2542(1999). ONEC, Ministry of Education, Thailand.
Oliver, J. S. (2012). Investigating storytelling methods in a beginning-level college class. The

Language Educator, 7(2), 54-56.
Osada, N. (2004). Listening comprehension research: A brief review of the past thirty years.
Dialogue, 3(1), 53-66.
Oyama, S. (1976). A sensitive period for the acquisition of a non-native phonological system.
Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 5, 261-285.
Oyama, S. (1978). The sensitive period and comprehension of speech. Working Papers on
Bilingualism, 16, 1-17.
Papp, S., Rixon, S., & Field, J. (2018). Examining Young Learners: Research and Practice in
Assessing the English of School-Age Learners. Cambridge University Press.
Piaget, J. (1936). Origins of Intelligence in the Children. Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Piaget, J. (1970). Science of Education and the Psychology of the Children (D. Coltman,
Trans.). Orion.
Pinter, A. (2006). Teaching Young Language Learners. Oxford University Press.
Pinter, A. (2017). Teaching Young Language Learners. Oxford University Press.
Pinter, A., & Zandian, S. (2013). ‗I don‘t ever want to leave this room‘: Benefits of
researching ‗with‘ children. ELT journal, 68(1), 64-74.
Prabhu, N. S. (1987). Second Language Pedagogy (Vol. 20). Oxford University Press.
Prasongsook, S. (2010). Teaching and learning English at the grade 3 level of primary school
in Thailand: Evaluating the effectiveness of three teaching methods [Doctoral
dissertation]. University of Canberra.
Promruang, J. (2012). The use of task-based learning to improve English listening and
speaking abilities of Mattayomsuksa 1 Students at Piboonprachasan School
(http://ir.swu.ac.th/jspui/handle/123456789/4217) [Master‘s thesis, Srinakharinwirot
Univerity]. Srinakharinwirot University Institutional Repository.
Rappa, A. L., & Wee, L. (2006). Language Policy and Modernity in Southeast Asia:
Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and Thailand. Springer.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

116
Read, C. (2003). Is younger better? English Teaching Professional,July 2003. CarolRead.

https://www.carolread.com/download/is-younger-better-english-teaching-professional-july-
2003-2/
Richards, J. C. (1984). The secret life of methods. TESOL Quarterly, 18(1), 7-23.
Richards, J. C. (2002). Theories of teaching in language teaching. In J.C. Richards & W. A.

Renandya (Eds.), Methodology in Language Teaching: An Anthology of Current
Practice (pp.19-25). Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (1986). Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching.
Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2014). Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching.
Rivers, W. M. (1981). Teaching Foreign Language Skills (2nd ed.). Chicago University Press.
Rivers, W. M., & Temperley, M. S. (1978). A Practical Guide to the Teaching of English as a
Second or Foreign Language. Oxford University Press.
Rixon, S. (1999). Young Learners of English: Some Research Perspectives. Longman.
Rozati, S. M. (2014). Language teaching and Task Based Approach. Theory and Practice in
Language Studies, 4(6). 1273-1278.
Ruengprapan, C. (2000). Sathiti phư̄nthān: phrō̜m tūayāng kān wikhro̜ dūai prōkrǣm Minitab
SPSS læ SAS (Phim khrang thī 5) [Basic statistics with Minitab, SPSS, and
SPS analysis Examples (5th ed.)]. Khon Kaen: Khon Kaen University.
Ruenyoot, R. (2011). A study of using the task-based approach to enhance listening and
speaking skills of students in primary 3 Bangkhuntien Suksa School, Bangkhuntien
District, Bangkok. Srinakarinwirot Research and Development Journal (Humanities
and Social Sciences), 3(5), 91-101.
Sadeghi, K. and Dousti, M. (2012). The Effect of Length of Exposure to CALL Technology
on Young Iranian EFL Learners‘ Grammar Gain. English Language Teaching, 6(2),
14-26.
Saiyod, P. (2009). Effects of task-based English reading instruction on reading

comprehension ability of elementary school students
(http://cuir.car.chula.ac.th/handle/123456789/16639) [Doctoral dissertation,
Chulalongkorn University]. Chulalongkorn University Intellectual Repository.
Savignon, S. J. (1987). Communicative language teaching. Theory into Practice, 26(4), 235-
242.
Savignon, S. J. (2017, March 7). Communicative Competence. Wiley Online Library.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/9781118784235.eelt0047
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

117
Sharpe, K. (2001). Modern foreign languages in the primary school: the what, why & how of
early MFL teaching. Psychology Press.
Shi, T. (2018). A study of the TPR method in the teaching of English to primary school
students. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 8(8), 1087-1093.
Shintani, N. (2016). Input-based tasks in foreign language instruction for young learners.
John Benjamins Publishing.
Skehan, P. (1996). A framework for the implementation of task-based instruction. Applied

Linguistics, 17(1), 38-62.
Smith, J., & Noble, H. (2014). Bias in research. Evidence-Based Nursing, 17(4), 100-101.
Strevens, P. (1992). English as an international language: Directions in the 1990s. The Other
Tongue: English Across Cultures, 2, 7-47.
Sun, Z., Lin, C. -H., You, J., Shen, H. J., Qi, S., & Luo, L. (2017). Improving the English-
speaking skills of young learners through mobile social networking. Computer
Assisted Language Learning, 30(3-4), 304-324.
Supakorn, S. (2017). Topic development in Thai EFL classes: a conversation analytic
perspective (http://theses.ncl.ac.uk/jspui/handle/10443/3643) [Doctoral dissertation,
Newcastle University]. Newcastle University eTheses.
Surkamp, C., & Yearwood, T. (2018). Receptive competencies - Reading, listening, viewing.
In C. Surkamp & B. Viebrock (Eds.), Teaching English as a foreign language: An
Introduction (pp. 89-108). J B Metzler Verlag.
Swan, M. (1985). A critical look at the communicative approach (2). ELT Journal, 39(2), 76-
87.
Toh, G. (2003). Towards a more critical orientation to elt in Southeast Asia. World Englishes
22(4), 551-58.
Thanghun, K. (2012). Using of task-based learning to develop English speaking

(http://thesis.swu.ac.th/swuthesis/Tea_Eng_For_Lan(M.A.)/Kesda_T.pdf) [Doctoral
dissertation, Srinakharinwirot University]. Integrated Thesis & Research Management
System.
The National Institute of Educational Testing Service (NIETS). (2019). O-NET score reports.
National Institute of Educational Testing Service. http://www.niets.or.th/
Thighe, D. (2006). Placing the International Legal English Certificate on the CEFR. Research
Notes, 24, 5-7. www.CambridgeESOL.org/rs_notes
Trim, J. (2011). Using the CEFR: Principles of good practice. University of Cambridge.
https://www.cambridgeenglish.org/images/126011-using-cefr-principles-of-good-
practice.pdf
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

118
Turek, Agnieszka. (2013). Engaging Young Learners in L2 Research. Language Studies

Working Papers, University of Reading, 5, 32–40.
http://www.reading.ac.uk/web/FILES/english-language/elal_5_Turek.pdf
Ur, P. (1996). A Course in Language Teaching, Practice and Theory. Cambridge University
Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and Language (E. Hanfmann & G. Vakar, Trans.). MIT
Press.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological

Processes. Harvard University Press.
Weir, C. and Milanovic, M. (2003). Continuity and Innovation. Cambridge University Press.
Wichitwarit, N. (2014). Essential elements contributing to the success of task-based

implementation in an English classroom. Panyapiwat Journal, 5, 47-62.
Wilkins, D. (1976). Notional syllabuses. Bulletin CILA (Commission interuniversitaire suisse

de linguistique appliquée)(«Bulletin VALS-ASLA» depuis 1994), 24, 5-17.
Willis, J., & Willis, D. (2007). Doing Task-Based Teaching. Oxford University Press.
Widdowson, H. G. (1994). The ownership of English. TESOL Quarterly, 28(2), 377-389.
Widdowson, H. G. (1998). Context, community, and authentic language. TESOL

Quarterly, 32(4), 705-716.
Wiriyachitra, A. (2002). English language teaching and learning in Thailand in this

decade. Thai TESOL Focus, 15(1), 4-9.
Wongkai, P. (2004). Development of English lessons using task - based learning activities to
promote English speaking ability of adult learners
(http://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/25342) [Master‘s thesis, Chiangmai
University]. CMU Intellectual Repository.
Wongsothorn, A., Sukamolsun, S., Chinthammit, P., Ratanothayanonth, P., & Noparumpa, P.
(1996). National profiles of language education: Thailand. PASAA, 26(1), 89-103.
Wongsothorn, A., Hiranburana, K. & Chinnawongs, S. (2002). English language teaching in

Thailand today. Asia Pacific Journal of Education, 22, 107-116.
Worrapattarakit, S. (2006). Development of English for tourism lessons employing task-based

learning (http://cmuir.cmu.ac.th/jspui/handle/6653943832/25602) [Master‘s thesis,
Chaiangmai University]. CMU Intellectual Repository.
Wood, D., Bruner, J. S., & Ross, G. (1976). The role of tutoring in problem solving. Journal
of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 17(2), 89-100.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

119
Wright, T. (1987). Instructional task and discoursal outcome in the L2 classroom. Language
learning tasks, 47-68.
Yunibandhu, R. (2004). Problems faced by Thai students making the transition from the Thai
school system to the international school system
(http://cuir.car.chula.ac.th/handle/123456789/2713) [Master‘s thesis, Chulalongkorn
Univeristy]. Chulalongkorn University Intellectual Repository.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

APPENDICES
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

121
APPENDIX A
TASK-BASED LANGUGE TEACHING LESSON PLANS
Unit 1: Can I have…? Lesson Plan No.2: Race to respond (singular nouns)
Time: 60 Minutes
Objectives
Terminal Objectives:
At the end of the unit, students will be able to make a polite request by using ―Can I
have (singular noun)?‖, ―Can I have (plural nouns)?‖ and make a correct response to the
request by using ―Sure. Here it its‖, ―Sure. Here they are‖, or ―No. I am sorry‖.
Enabling Objectives:
1. Students will be able to identify the items they want to make a request.
2. Students will be able to make a polite request by using ―Can I have (singular
noun)?‖ in questions.
3. Students will be able to make a correct response by using ―Sure. Here it is‖, or ―No.
I am sorry‖.
4. Students will be able to identify the items being asked.
Materials/sources
1. 30 items
Pre-task Priming Activity
Vocabulary building
1. Teacher starts with letting students guess the vocabulary from flashcards and make
a list on the board.

a candy a cake a fan a cup
a robot a ball
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

122
Task Cycle
Tasks involving matching: Race to respond
2. Teacher explains a task and puts students in group. Students sit together in a group
of 5 in a circle. There is a table at the center among the circles where several items are placed
on. Students have to listen to what the teacher is asking for and run to the table to find the
item and bring it back to their groups. If they cannot find the particular item, they have to tell
their teammates that they cannot find it. Students take turns until the time is over. They are
given 20 minutes to perform this task.
Planning
3. Students prepare to report the items they picked up from the task. Teacher assists
them at this stage.
Report
4. Teacher selects some students to present their reports and other students listen for
differences and similarities.
5. Students present their reports and feedbacks are given by the teacher afterwards.
Form-focused language work
Analysis
6. Teacher performs a model performance of the same task. Students listen for
7. Teacher asks if the students notice the differences and points out the correct form
by writing the whole sentences on board and explains each part of sentence structure.
Practice
8. Students take notes and practice using the particular forms with their partners.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

123
Unit 1: Can I have…? Lesson Plan No.3: Race to respond(plural nouns)
Time: 60 Minutes
Objectives
request by using ―Sure. Here it its‖, ―Sure. Here they are‖, or ―No. I am sorry‖.
2. Students will be able to make a polite request by using ―Can I have (plural nouns)?‖
in questions.
3. Students will be able to make a correct response by using ―Sure. Here they are‖, or
―No. I am sorry‖.
4. Students will be able to identify the items being asked for.
Materials/sources
1. 35 items
Pre-task
Vocabulary building
1. Teacher asks students to guess the vocabulary from flashcards and makes a list on
board.
a candy - candies a fan - fans a hat - hats a book - books
a robot - robot a pencil - pencils a pen - pens

Task cycle
Task involving matching: Race to respond (task repetition)
2. This task is a task repetition of the previous task. Teacher checks if the students can
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

124
recall what they have performed in the previous task. This time students will have to make a
request for the items. Students sit together in groups of 5. There is one table at the center of
the circles where several items are placed on. In groups, students take turns picking one
flashcard from a box. Student A picks one flashcard from the box and makes a request of a
selected picture. For example, Can I have (two pencils)? Student B has to rush to the table
and find the requested item. When they return, they are supposed to give a response with the
forms they have learnt from the previous class. The task ends when the time is over. Students
are given 20 minutes to perform this task.
Planning
3. Students prepare to report the items they picked up from the task. Teacher assists
them at this stage.
Report
Analysis
Practice
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

125
Unit 1: Can I have…? Lesson Plan No.4: Can I have …?(real context)
Time: 60 Minutes
Objectives
request by using ―Sure. Here it its.‖, ―Sure. Here they are.‖, or ―No. I am sorry.‖
noun)?‖ or ―Can I have (plural nouns)?‖ in questions.
3. Students will be able to make a correct response by using ―Sure. Here it is.‖, ―Sure.
Here they are.‖ or ―No. I am sorry.‖
Materials/sources
1. List of products from a school shop
Pre-task Priming Activity
Vocabulary building
1. Teacher asks students to review a set of vocabulary that they have learned from
previous classes.
a candy - candies a fan - fans a hat - hats a book - books
a robot - robot a pencil - pencils a pen - pens
Task Cycle
Task involving matching: Can I have …? (real situation)
2. Teacher talks a little bit about the previous classes to make sure the students can
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

126
recall and then explains the scenery. In this task, students are assigned to make a request of
products from a school minimart. In groups of 5, students have to do a role play. They have
to take turns to be a seller and a buyer. Each group is given a list of what they have to bring
back to class. The time for this task is 20 minutes.
Planning
3. Students prepare to report the items they requested for and the items they received.
Teacher assists the students at this stage.
Report
Analysis
Practice
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

127
APPENDIX B
STANDARD TEACHING LESSON PLANS
Unit 1: Can I have…?
Objectives
request by using ―Sure. Here it its.‖, ―Sure. Here they are.‖, or ―No. I am sorry.‖
noun)?‖ or ―Can I have (plural nouns)?‖ in questions.
3. Students will be able to make a correct response by using ―Sure. Here it is.‖, ―Sure.
Here they are.‖ or ―No. I am sorry.‖
Review and Warm Up ทบทวนและเตรียมความพร้ อม
1. Put students into groups of 4. Provide 2 pictures for each group.
ครู แบ่งกลุ่มนักเรี ยนเป็ น 4 กลุ่ม แจกบัตรภาพคาศัพท์ Unit 5 ให้กลุ่มละ 2 ภาพ
2. Give students a set of vocabulary and ask them to construct a sentence.
ครู เอ่ยคาศัพท์ นักเรี ยนที่มีภาพชูภาพและพูด
T : a robot, a plane
S4 : I have a robot. And I have a plane. เพื่อนๆในกลุ่มชี้ ไปที่เพือ่ น พูดพร้ อมๆกันว่า
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

128
Group 4 : He has a robot. And he has a plane.
3. Explain to students that when making a polite request, they could say, ‗Can I
have a robot?‘
ครู พดู กับนักเรี ยนว่าถ้าครู อยากจะขอสิ่ งของที่นกั เรี ยนมี ครู จะพูดว่า Can I have a robot?
Presentation การดาเนินการสอน
 Vocabulary teaching (a jug, a top, a fan, a cake, a candy, an ice cream)
1. Show a picture and ask students to spell and pronounce each word.
ครู นาบัตรภาพเหยือกน้ าติดบนกระดาน พูดออกเสี ยงเขียนคา a jug ใต้ภาพ ให้นกั เรี ยนพูดตามและสะกดคาศัพท์
T : a jug a jug
Ss : a jug a jug, j-u-g j-u-g
Repeat the same action with other words จากนั้นครู สอนคาศัพท์อื่นๆโดยใช้วิธีการในข้อ 1
2. Point to each picture and ask students to say ―That‘s the cake.‖
ครู พดู ประโยคคาสั่ง Point to ไปยังภาพคาศัพท์ทุกภาพ ดังนี้
T : Point to the cake, please.
Ss : That‘s the cake. (พูดพร้ อมกับชี้ ไปที่ภาพ)
T : Spell a ―cake‖.
Ss : c-a-k-e
 Teach Students to make a polite request by using ―Can I have ?
สอนประโยคขอสิ่ งของ โดยใช้ประโยค Can I have ?
1. Teacher takes out things such as a jug of water, a fan, a top, and a candy and
covers them with a cloth. ครู นาสิ่ งของต่างๆ เช่น เหยือกน้ า พัด ลูกข่าง ลูกอม ใช้ผา้ คลุมปิ ดสิ่ งของไว้
2. Teacher talks about the items and asks if anyone wants any of the items.
Teacher teaches the sentences used for making a response, ―Sure. Here it is.‖,
―Sure. Here they are.‖ or ―No. I am sorry.‖
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

129
ครู สนทนากับนักเรี ยนถึงสิ่ งของต่างๆ บนโต๊ะ 4 อย่าง ถามว่ามีนกั เรี ยนคนใดอยากได้หรื อต้องการสิ่ งของเหล่านี้บา้ งไหม
ครู สอนวิธีพดู ขอ โดยพูดว่าถ้ามีของและไม่มีของจะตอบอย่างไร ให้นกั เรี ยนพูดตาม 2-3 ครั้ง
T : Can I have a candy? Ss : Can I have a candy?
Teacher picks up a candy and says จากนั้นครู หยิบลูกอมให้นกั เรี ยนพร้อมกับพูด
T : Sure. Here it is. Ss : Sure. Here it is.
3. Teacher asks students to practice making a polite request ให้นกั เรี ยนฝึ กพูดขอสิ่ งของ
Ss : Can I have a cake?
T : No. Sorry.
Ss : No. Sorry.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

130
APPENDIX C
LESSON PLANS EVALUATION FORM
Please check the following aspects according to your opinion.
NAME ………………………………………………………………………………………….
Lesson Plan Aspects YES NO

Objectives
1. The enabling objectives are aligned with the terminal objectives.
2. The lesson objectives contain statements of what the students are expected to
do after completing the lessons.
3. The lesson objectives focus on communicative functions.
4. The lesson objectives are practical and able to assess.
Materials and worksheets
5. Materials and worksheets are appropriate with the lessons.
6. Materials and worksheets are easy to use and understand.
7. Materials and worksheets encourage the process of language learning.
Task
Rationale
8. Tasks are appropriate to the learners‘ age and proficiency level.
9. Tasks appropriately reflects a real-world or pedagogic rationale.
10. Tasks encourage learners to apply classroom learning to the real world.
11. Tasks are likely to be interesting and motivating to the students.
12. Tasks encourage students to use the language to communicate.
Procedures
13. Task procedures are designed logically.
14. Task procedures are appropriate to the communicative goals of the task.
15. Task procedures are simplified to make them more appropriate to young
learners.
16. Pre-task priming activities are designed to prepare students for task
performance.
17. During the task, there is an information gap or problem which might prompt
a negotiation of meaning.
18. Task procedures are designed in a way which will allow learners to
communicate and cooperate in groups.
19. There is a focus on form aspect.
Implementation
20. Tasks actually engage the learners‘ interests.
21. Tasks enhance genuine communicative interaction among students.
22. Lessons are mainly students-focused with students taking active roles
during task performance.
23. Real-world or meaningful context is provided to help promote language
understanding to students.
24. The time given for each task is suitable.
25. Tasks exhibit the task continuity principle.
26. Tasks integrate with other activities and exercises designed to provide
learners with mastery of the linguistic system.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

131

27. Learners have an analysis stage of the completed task.
28. Tasks have built into it some means whereby learners might judge how well
they have performed.
29. Learners are exposed to linguistic forms during the form-focused language
work stage.
30. Linguistic forms match with the lessons‘ objectives.
Suggestions:
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

132
APPENDIX D
PROFICIENCY TEST: ENGLISH SPEAKING AND LISTENING SKILLS
PRE-TEST AND POST-TEST
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

133
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

134
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

135
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

136
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

137
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

138
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

139
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

140
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

141
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

142
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW
143
APPENDIX E
INTERVIEW QUESTIONS
1. What do you think are the advantages of TBLT implementation in the classroom?
2. What do you think are the disadvantages of TBLT implementation in the
classroom?
3. What activities do you find the most interesting during the implementation?
4. What are the obstacles you encountered during the implementation?
5. What are the least and the most successful task?
6. How do the students respond to the TBLT lessons comparing to the standard
teaching classrooms?
7. Do you think TBLT help improve students‘ speaking and listening skills or not?
Please explain in details.
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

144
BIOGRAPHY
Name Ms. Kullanist Kruthangka

Date of Birth September 2, 1987
Educational Attainment Bachelor of Communication Arts
(Public Relations)
Work Position Mini English Program Manager,
Kulladiswittayanusorn School
Work Experiences Public Relations, McCann WorldGroup
Thailand
Part-Time Lecturer of English Department,
Southeast Bangkok University
Part-Time Lecturer of Faculty of Arts,
Silpakorn University
Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

Task Based Teaching and Listening

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Task Based Teaching and Listening

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Task Based Teaching and Listening

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

THE EFFECT OF TASK-BASED LANGUAGE

TEACHING ON IMPROVING SPEAKING AND

MISS KULLANIST KRUTHANGKA

A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE

Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

MISSS KULLANIST KRUTHANGKA

A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE

Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

This mixed-methods research study aims to examine the effect of TBLT in

Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

results reveal positive perceptions of the teacher on TBLT implementation as it could

Keywords: Task-Based Language Teaching (TBLT), Foreign Language Learners, Speaking

Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

this thesis would not have been possible.

I would like to thank my thesis advisor, Assistant Professor Dr. Kwanjira

valuable comments and guidance.

My appreciation also extends to all the participants involved in the experiment

participation, this work would not have been successfully conducted.

My special thanks also go to my brother, Mr. Kasidis Kruthangka, who saved me

from my messy presentation and painful statistical analysis.

Miss Kullanist Kruthangka

Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

LIST OF TABLES (7)

LIST OF FIGURES (8)

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS (9)

1.1 Background of the Study 1

CHAPTER 2 REVIEW OF LITERATURE 11

2.1 Teaching English Speaking Skills 11

Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

2.4.2 Frameworks of Task-based Language Teaching 24

CHAPTER 3 RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 51

3.1 Research Design 51

CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 68

4.1 Research Question 1 68

Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

4.2.3.2 Task Repetition 86

CHAPTER 5 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 95

5.1 Summary of the Findings 96

APPENDIX A: Task-based Language Teaching Lesson Plans 121

Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

2.2 The Summary of Pre-task Methodological Options 26

2.3 The Summary of Within-task Methodological Options 28

2.4 The Summary of Post-task Methodological Options 29

2.5 Components of Tasks 33

2.6 Task Rationale 34

2.7: Summary of TBLT task types 40

2.8 Features of Different Tasks 41

3.1 The Duration of the Experiment 53

3.2 Scope of Task-Based Speaking and Listening Instruction 58

3.3 The Procedures of Data Collection 63

3.4 Research Questions and Analysis 65

Ref. code: 25625606040102ONW

2.2 Generating Task Types from a Topic 37

2.3 Key Learning Principles for Young Learners 43

3.1 Quasi-Experimental Design: Pretest-Posttest Nonequivalent Group 51

3.2 A Framework for Designing Task-based Lessons 56

3.3 Checklists for Task-like Activities 57

3.4 Cambridge ESOL Scale on the CEFR 60