Universidad Catlica de la Santsima Concepcin. Facultad de Educacin. Pedagoga en Educacin Media en Ingls.

TASK BASED LEARNING (TBL) AS A PEDAGOGICAL TOOL TO IMPROVE ORAL PRODUCTION AND ENGAGEMENT OF AT-RISK LEARNERS OF ENGLISH.
Research Seminar to Obtain the Degree of Bachelor in Education
Supervising Teacher: Researchers: Mg. Teresa Martinez Ilabaca Sofa Aguilera Vega. Carolina Flores Villagrn. Valentina Gallegos Nez. Natalia Muoz Reyes. Daniela Valenzuela Rodrguez.

RESEARCH PROBLEM AND OBJECTIVES

CONTEXT
Different Ages

Subsidised School,
(in Chiguayante)

At- Risk Students

Low Motivation

Different Contexts

PROBLEM ANALYSIS
At-risk students observed have no interest in learning English
They tend to be not engaged as they do not participate in the lessons

Students are not required to use the English Language

They do a lot of decontextualised pieces of writing activities.

Teachers base their teaching mainly on translations, leaving the oral production behind.
Students do not develop the speaking skill

Research question Is Task Based learning (TBL) an effective pedagogical tool to improve oral production and engagement of at-risk learners of English?

General objective To analyse how Task Based lessons impact on the oral production and engagement of at-risk learners of English.

Specific Objective 1

To determine the aspects of oral production used by students in both traditional and TBL lessons.

Specific Objective 2

To determine students engagement in both traditional and TBL lessons.

To identify students perception about Task Based

Specific Objective 3

learning.

RESEARCH ASSUMPTIONS
Task Based learning might increase not only the oral production of students, but also their engagement within English lessons.

Students perception might be favourable towards learning English through Task Based lessons.

Meaningful tasks might improve the quality of the students communication in the foreign language

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

Task Based Learning

It is a method derived from the communicative approach that attempts to expose learners to situations related to real-life experiences It implies the use of

Their

TASKS

purpose is to achieve an outcome where the emphasis is on exchanging meaning rather than producing specific language forms.
(Willis, 1996)

Their use makes the process of teaching and learning more communicative (Ellis,
2003)

Provide learners with natural context for language use.(Khrane, 1986)

Second Language Acquisition

English as a Foreign Language

Task Based Learning v/s Grammar Translation Method

A subconscious process to gain a language through natural communication . (Krashen, 1981)

EFL is learned in environments where the language of the community is not English. (Gunderson, 2009)

If students can translate from one language into another, they are considered successful language learners (Larsen-Freeman, 1986)
Language form is learned through language use (Khrane, 1987)

At-risk students
They are exposed to some factors that place them at failure in school (Craft,2010) Low academic achievers who exhibit low self-esteem (Donnely,
1987)

Financial troubles Family issues Behavioural problems To help not only at-risk students but also teachers, it is important to link lessons to real life events (Lee, 2011)

ORAL PRODUCTION

Pea and Onatra (2009)

The students oral output that is produced at the moment of speaking.

Jamshidnejad (2011)

The ability to produce responses using the language to communicate.

Hinkel (2011)

Speaking skill: It is the process of generating verbal sentences through the use of the language that is being studied to convey meaning.
The ability to use the language to communicate.

ENGAGEMENT
Barkley (2009) Edgerton (1997)
To really acquire what is being taught students need to carry out tasks that involve content under study

Engagement is composed by two main aspects, motivation and active learning

Engaged students demonstrate interest in learning and are willing to participate in class.

TBL can be considered to be one of the pedagogies of engagement

METHODOLOGY

RESEARCH PARADIGM
Qualitative Paradigm
is uses focuses on the

Descriptive
and

Interpretative Process
and

Results

Two methodological tools

which are

Observation

Description

in order to

Know the impact of TBL on students oral production and engagement

TYPE OF RESEARCH
Plan

Reflect

Action Research

Act

Observe
(Latorre, 2003)

PARTICIPANTS

1st Level High School

24 Students

Men and Women

Different Ages Differences in the level of English

6 Students (Purposive sampling)

Regular Attendance

Instruments
which are

Observation checklist

Likert scale Observational records

aimed at aimed at

aimed at

Diagnosing all students performance in traditional and TBL lessons

Registering six students performance

before

Identifying students perception about TBL lessons

applied

related to

TBL implementation and afterwards Engagement

following

At the end of the TBL intervention

Oral production
to

to

An ESA format for traditional lessons

to

A TBL format for TBL lessons

Achieve specific objective 3

Achieve specific objetives 1 and 2

LIKERT SCALE QUESTIONNARIE

Scoring
Points 5 4 3 2 1 Statement Strongly agree Agree Neither agree nor disagree Disagree Strongly disagree

Formula
Category

PT/NT
Total Statements Maximum Score
(to be obtained)

Oral Performance
Task

20

10

Collaborative Work
Total

15

45

i.e.:

S1

36
(pts)

9
(stmt)

4
(score placed in the attitudinal line)

PROCEDURE
Steps
1 2

Procedure
Design and validation of the instruments Recording of 2 traditional lessons (October 17th and 18th 2012)
Observation Checklist instrument for diagnosis (reflection)

3
4

Design of 2 TBL for intervention

Recording of 2 TBL lessons (October 24th and 25th 2012)

Observation Checklist instrument for intervention

Selection of a purposive sampling of 6 students (video recordings and field notes)

Observational Records

Likert Scale application (at the end of the intervention ) to know students perceptions about TBL lessons.

RESEARCH VALIDITY
* Instruments
-Internal Validity - External Validity

* Analysis and Results

- Observation Checklist
Information summarised content analysis technique.

- Observational Records
2 charts of data: 1 Oral production (3 main categories) L1,L2, Drilling. 2 Engagement (2 categories) Engagement and Interactions.

- Likert Scale Questionnaire

To ascribe quantitative value to qualitative data (Pradeep, 2007).

DATA ANALYSIS

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 1
TO DETERMINE THE ASPECTS OF ORAL PRODUCTION USED BY STUDENTS BOTH TRADITIONAL AND TBL LESSONS
The Observation cheklist was used to analyse the entire class.
IN

Not all the categories were considered due to their low relevance in terms of oral performance

A chart was designed to summarise the information gathered from the Observational records

The chart was focused on Students use of L1, L2 and drilling.

TABLE 4.1 DATA COLLECTED FROM THE OBSERVATION CHECKLIST

RELATED TO ORAL PERFORMANCE CHECKLIST

Category Ss make questions

L1 L2

Traditional 1
8/13 4/13 = 62%

Traditional 2
9/21 6/21 = = 43% 29%

TBL 1
9/15 = 60% 4/15 = 27%

TBL2
11/15 =73% 2/15 = 13%

= 31%

A decrease in the use of L2. An increment in the number of students that ask questions.
Category Ss use classroom language
L1 L2

Traditional 1
7/13 2/13 = 53%

Traditional 2
7/21 4/21 = = 33% 19%

TBL 1
7/15 = 40% 6/15 = 46%

TBL2
5/15 = 33% 6/15 = 40%

= 15%

Spanish remained as the main language used to communicate. An increase in the amount of students that used classroom language during the TBL interventions.

Category
Ss use repetition (drilling)
L1 L2

Traditional 1
/ 11/13 = 81%

Traditional 2
/ 21/21 = 100%

TBL 1
/ 10/15 = 67%

TBL2
/ 10/15 = 67%

Ss used English only when they were asked to repeat. The time devoted to repetition in traditional lessons is significantly higher. Students speak English spontaneously
Trad.1

5/13 = 38% Ss used isolated words. One student spoke English when possible but only to the teacher. 6/21 = 28% Ss used isolated words, one student spoke English to communicate with the teacher.

Trad. 2

TBL 1

11/15 = 73% Students used a mixture of Spanish and English Miss es the control remote es next to the sofa o es in front of the sofa?
13/15 = 86% Ss used isolated words, a mixture of spanish and English. Ss spoke not only to the teacher but within their groups too.

TBL 2

OBSERVATIONAL RECORDS
TABLE 4.2 TRADITIONAL AND TBL CLASSES ORAL PRODUCTION CHART.

Use of L1
Traditional
To communicate with their classmates about non-academic matters.

TBL
To talk about the task itself, by giving instructions or asking questions about it.

For asking questions to the teacher.

For clarification of doubts related to vocabulary.

To communicate with their classmates about non-academic matters.

OBSERVATIONAL RECORDS
TABLE 4.2 TRADITIONAL AND TBL CLASS ORAL PRODUCTION CHART.

Use of L2
Traditional

TBL

Mostly for repetition.

For classroom language they already knew (sorry Im late, may I come in?).

When Ss spoke in English spontaneously (Aylin is next to in Tamara ).

Asking questions (how can I say caro ).

Rarely used to make questions. But S 5 use stood out (how can I say, whats in
letter B?).

Ss used L2 in the task stage by using isolated words.

To answer specific questions asked by Writing some ideas that they needed to the teacher (... there is an oven in the fulfil the task.
kitchen..).

All students spoke in English for reporting their tasks (I chose it because it matches with the chairs).

OBSERVATIONAL RECORDS
TABLE 4.2 TRADITIONAL AND TBL CLASS ORAL PRODUCTION CHART.

Drilling
Traditional Students repeated when asked.
The time dedicated to drilling was extensive. Students repeated as a class or in groups (depending on what the T asked). All students repeated.

TBL Students repeated when were asked.

There were few instances were the teacher use drilling (language focus stage). Some of them did it spontaneously to practice pronunciation (when looking up
some words in the dictionary).

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 2:
TO DETERMINE STUDENTS ENGAGEMENT IN BOTH TRADITIONAL AND

TBL LESSONS

1. Observation checklist
Traditional and TBL engagement.

Traditional Lessons
Ss were not engaged Most of them were passive, they did not volunteer or participate in the lessson

TBL Lessons
Ss were engaged

Ss did the task, each of them participated and followed the specific role they were assigned within their group

2. Observational records

ENGAGEMENT IN BOTH LESSONS

TRADITIONAL LESSONS

TBL LESSONS

INTERACTION Ss-Ss/ Ss-T

ENGAGEMENT

TRADITIONAL LESSONS

TBL LESSONS

Ss barely interacted among them

INTERACTION

Ss interacted among them Ss interacted with the teacher

Ss interaction was mainly with the teacher

Ss were often distracted by their classmates

ENGAGEMENT

Ss were interested in the lesson Some Ss even spoke in English when asking questions

Ss participated when they were asked

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 3
TO IDENTIFY STUDENTS PERCEPTION ABOUT TASK BASED LEARNING

Instrument Likert scale questionnaire, which was applied to all the students, who were present the days these lessons took place.

Oral performance

Categories

Task

Collaborative work

TOTAL LIKERT SCALE PERCEPTION

Categories a) Oral performance b) Task c) Collaborative work d) Total

Average score 4.2 4.36 4.36 4.30

Favourable attitude towards TBL method. All, but one student did not approve the implementation of TBL method.

STUDENTS COMMENTS
Me gust la clase porque aprend un poco ms de ingls Me sent ms cmodo al trabajar en grupo, Los trabajos eran entretenidos Me pareci grato el ambiente, las clases entretenidas y dinmicas igual tuvimos que hablar en ingls pero pasar adelante me fue difcil un poco me gusto hablar en ingls de los objetos que tengo en mi pieza es bueno trabajar en grupo porque as se reparten las tareas y se avanza mas rpido no me gust, fue difcil para mi hablar y pasar adelante

CONCLUSIONS

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 1:
TO DETERMINE THE ASPECTS OF ORAL PRODUCTION USED BY STUDENTS IN BOTH TRADITIONAL AND TBL LESSONS

The predominant language used by the students for communication in both types of lessons was L1.

Traditional
Writing was the predominant skill promoted.

TBL
Ss felt more confident and comfortable when working in groups.

L1 was the main language used for communication, whereas, L2 was primarily used for repetition.

Ss English oral performance increased.

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 2:
TO DETERMINE STUDENTS ENGAGEMENT IN BOTH TRADITIONAL AND TBL LESSONS.

Students were more engaged with TBL lessons rather than with traditional lessons.

Traditional
Students attitude was passive and the main interaction was from the teacher to the students.

TBL
Students changed their attitude and role in the lesson.

Participation was low, there were only two students who volunteered or were heard throughout the lesson. The collaborative work carried out allowed to fulfil the two main aspects of engagement; motivation and active learning .

Teacher talking time (TTT) was extensive.

SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE 3:
TO IDENTIFY STUDENTS PERCEPTION ABOUT TASK BASED LEARNING.

Students perception towards TBL was favourable

Collaborative work had a positive impact on students attitude towards the use of L2.

Students felt more comfortable to work with their classmates and to use English.

Tasks topics were interesting and motivating.

Lee (2011), highlights the relevance that a real life context has on at-risk students in the classroom.

Limitations
related to

Attendance

Students had a poor attendance record

resulted in

which affected

TBL lessons as they require group work

Six students selection to analyse in deep.

Further research

related to

Oral production
concerning

Engagement
TBL implementation in different schools
to evaluate

concerning

Tasks that promote significant development of the speaking skill

considering that

Different tasks and their effect on students engagement in the classroom

considering

Impact on public and private schools

In TBL context all kind of tasks can be developed

Students learning styles, background and ages

REFERENCES

Araneda, A. (2008).Investigacin cualitativa en investigacin y Pedagoga. Universidad Catlica de la Santsima Concepcin. Barkley, E. (2009). Student Engagement Techniques A Handbook for College Faculty (1st ed.).San Francisco, SF: Jossey-Bass. Bridge TEFL, (2012).Teaching English in Chile, TEFL in Santiago, Chile Retrieved on May 23rd, 2012 from: http://www.bridgetefl.com/tefl-chile.php Broughton,G., Brumfit, C., Flavell, R., Hill, P., and Pincas, A. (2003).Teaching English as a Foreign Language. Retrieved on May 30th, 2012 from: http://elt.kashanu.ac.ir/TEFL.pdf Brown, H. (2002).English language teaching in the Post Method Era. New York, USA: Cambridge University Press. Burns, A. (1999). Collaborative Action Research for English Language Teachers. Cambridge university press. Craft, H.(2010).Educating Unmotivated and At-Risk Students. Educational issues. Retrieved on July 11th, 2012 from:http://harvey-craft.suite101.com/educating-unmotivated-and-atrisk-astudents-a186830 Christenson, S., Reschly, A., and Wylie, C. (2012).Handbook of Research on Student Engagement. Retrieved on November 24th, 2012 from:http://link.springer.com/content/pdf/bfm%3A978-1-4614-2018-7%2F1 Cohen, L.,Manion, L., and Morrison, K.(2007).Research methods in Education. London, Routledge Falmer. Cook, V.J. (1996).Competence and multi-competence in G. Brown, K. Malmkjaer& J. Williams (eds.), Performance and Competence in Second Language Acquisition, CUP. Retrieved on March 19th , 2013 from: http://homepage.ntlworld.com/vivian.c/Writings/Papers/Cambridge96.htm Donnelly, M.(1987).At-Risk Students, ERIC Digest Series Number 21. Retrieved on July 11th, 2012 from: http://www.ericdigests.org/pre-928/risk.htm Egan, J. (2007). Marketing Communications. Cengage Learning EMEA. Retrieved on March 22nd, 2013 from: http://books.google.cl/books?id=jEIyXfNHpMC&pg=PA135&dq=purposive+sampling+definition&hl=es&sa=X&ei=ELJMUZe7OsKA0AGmjoHIBw&ved=0C FYQ6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=purposive%20sampling%20definition&f=false

Ellis, R. (2003). Task based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Garca, B. (2010). Manual de mtodos de investigacin para las ciencias sociales. El manual moderno. Mexico. Gebhard, J., and Oprandy, R., (1999). Language Teaching Awareness :A Guide to Exploring Beliefs and Practices. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Guash, M., and Ponce, C. (2002). Qu significa intervenir educativamente en desadaptacin social. Barcelona, ICE Universidad de Barcelona.
Gunderson, L. (2009).ESL (ELL) Literacy Instruction: A Guidebook to Theory and Practice , 2nd ed. Routledge. Hatip, F. (2005). Task-Based Language Learning, Retrieved on August 23th, 2012 from: http://www.yde.yildiz.edu.tr/uddo/belgeler/incaHinkel, E. (2011).Handbook of Research in Second Language Teaching and Learning Retrieved on November 15th, 2012 from: http://mommy.persiangig.com/document/ebooksclub.org__Handbook_of_Research_in_Second_Language_Teaching_ and_Learning__Volume_2__ESL__amp__Applied_Linguistics_Professional_Series_.pdf Jamshidnejad, A. (2011).An innovative approach to understanding oral problems in foreign language learning and communication. Journal of Academic and Applied Studies,1(1). Retrieved on October 11th, 2012 from: http://www.academians.org/Articles/paper3.pdf Khrane, K.(1987).Approaches to Syllabus Design for Language Teaching, U.S.A: Prentice Hall. Krashen, S. (1981), Second Language Acquisition and Second Language Learning. Retrieved on March 7 th, 2013 from: http://sdkrashen.com/ Larsen-Freeman, D.(1986). Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching.New York: Oxford University press. FundaHatip-TBL.htm

Latorre, A. (2003). La investigacin accin, conocer y cambiar la prctica educativa. Grao, Barcelona. Lee, M. (2011), How to Teach English to At-Risk College Students. Do you job better Retrieved on July 11th, 2012 from: http://chronicle.com/article/How-to-Teach-English-to/126719/ Lightbrown, P., and Spada, N. (1999).How languages are learned. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Nunan, D. (1999). Second Language Teaching and Learning. Boston: Heinle and Heinle. Nunan, D. (2003). Practical English language teaching. New York: McGraw-Hill Companies. Pea, M., and Onatra, A. (2009). Promoting Oral Production through Task-Based Learning Approach: A Study in a Public Secondary School in Colombia. Profile Issues in Teachers Professional Development, 11(2). Pradeep, P. (2010). Health Services and Outcomes Research, HSOR NEWS (Issue 2010/5). Retrieved on December 13th, 2012 from: http://www.hsor.nhg.com.sg/Publications/Newsletter/Documents/HSOR%202010-5.pdf Richards, J., and Rodgers, T.(2001).Approaches and methods in language Teaching, Cambridge: CUP Willis, J. (1996).A framework for task-based learning. Harlow, U.K: Longman Addison- Wesley.