Addressing the Grammar Gap in Task Work

doi:10.1017/CBO9780511667190.022

Chapter 14 - Addressing the Grammar Gap in Task Work

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 10 November 2010

Jack C. Richards

Edited by

Jack C. Richards and

Willy A. Renandya

Show author details

Jack C. Richards: Affiliation:
Southeast Asian Ministers of Education Organization (SEAMEO) Regional Language Centre (RELC), Singapore
Willy A. Renandya: Affiliation:
Southeast Asian Ministers of Education Organization (SEAMEO) Regional Language Centre (RELC), Singapore

Book contents

Get access

Summary

INTRODUCTION

A current interest in methodology is task-based approaches to teaching. These involve the use of tasks that engage learners in meaningful interaction and negotiation focusing on completion of a task. Learners' grammar needs are determined on the basis of task performance rather than through a predetermined grammar syllabus. However, whether learners develop acceptable levels of grammatical proficiency through such an approach is problematic. This paper reviews current views about the status of grammar learning through task work and suggests that grammar learning can be addressed at several different stages during task performance: prior to the task, during the task, and after the task. Examples are given of how this can be achieved in materials' design and in the classroom.

The status of grammar-focused teaching or, as it is currently referred to, form-focused instruction (see Doughty & Williams, 1998) has undergone a major reassessment since the 1970s. The advent of communicative language teaching ostensibly saw the demise of grammar-based instruction: Grammatical syllabuses were superseded by communicative ones based on functions or tasks; grammar-based methodologies such as the Presentation-Practice-Production (P-P-P) lesson format underlying the Situational Approach gave way to function- and skill-based teaching; and accuracy activities such as drills and grammar practice were replaced by fluency activities based on interactive small-group work. This led to the emergence of a ‘fluency-first’ pedagogy (Brumfit, 1979) in which students' grammar needs are determined on the basis of their performance on fluency tasks rather than predetermined by a grammatical syllabus.

Information

Type: Chapter
Information: Methodology in Language Teaching
An Anthology of Current Practice
, pp. 153 - 166

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667190.022 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2002

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Allen, P., Swain, M., Harley, B., & Cummins, J. (1990). Aspects of classroom treatment: Towards a more comprehensive view of second language education. In B. Harley, P. Allen, J. Cummins, & M. Swain (Eds.), The development of second language proficiency. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressCrossRef

Brown, G., Anderson, A., Shillcock, R., & Yule, G. (1984). Teaching talk: Strategies for production and assessment. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Brumfit, C. (1979). Communicative language teaching: An educational perspective. In C. J. Brumfit & K. Johnson (Eds.), The communicative approach to language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press

DeKeyser, M. (1998). Beyond focus on form: Cognitive perspectives on learning and practising second language grammar. In C. Doughty & J. Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition. New York: Cambridge University Press

Doughty, C., & Williams, J. (Eds.). (1998). Focus on form in classroom second language acquisition. New York: Cambridge University Press

Ellis, R. (1987). Interlanguage variability in narrative discourse: Style shifting in the use of the past tense. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 9(1), 1–20CrossRef Google Scholar

Ellis, R. (1994). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Foster, P. (1998). A classroom perspective on the negotiation of meaning. Applied Linguistics, 19(1), 1–23CrossRef Google Scholar

Higgs, T., & Clifford, R. (1982). The push towards communication. In T. Higgs (Ed.), Curriculum, competence, and the foreign language teacher. Skokie, IL: National Textbook Company

Krashen, S. (1985). The input hypothesis. Harlow: Longman

Kumaravadivelu, B. (1991). Language-learning tasks: Teacher intention and learner interpretation. ELT Journal, 45(2), 98–107CrossRef Google Scholar

Musumeci, D. (1996). Teacher-learner negotiation in content-based instruction: Communication or cross purposes?Applied Linguistics, 17(3), 286–325CrossRef Google Scholar

Nation, P. (1989). Improving speaking fluency. System, 17(3), 377–384CrossRef Google Scholar

Nunan, D. (1989). Designing tasks for the communicative classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Richards, J. C. (1985). Conversational competence through role-play activities. RELC Journal, 16(1): 82–100CrossRef Google Scholar

Richards, J. C., & Hull, J. (1986). As I was saying. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley

Schmidt, R. (1983). In N. Wolfson & E. Judd (Eds.), Sociolinguistics and second language acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House

Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11(2), 129–158CrossRef Google Scholar

Schmidt, R., & Frota, S. (1986). Developing basic conversational ability in a second language. In R. Day (Ed.), Talking to learn. Rowley, MA: Newbury House

Shortall, T. (1996). What learners know and what they need to learn. In J. Willis & D. Willis (Eds.), Challenge and change in language teaching. Oxford: Heinemann

Skehan, P. 1996a. A framework for the implementation of task-based instruction. Applied Linguistics, 17(1), 38–61CrossRef Google Scholar

Skehan, P. 1996b. Second language acquisition research and task-based instruction. In J. Willis & D. Willis (Eds.), Challenge and change in language teaching. Oxford: Heinemann

Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition. Rowley, MA: Newbury House

Swain. M. (1999, April). Integrating language and content teaching through collaborative tasks. In C. Ward % W. Renandya (Eds.), Language teaching: New insights for the language teacher (pp. 125–147). Anthology Series 40. Singapore: SEAMEO-RELC

Tarone, E., & Liu, G. (1995). Situational context, variation, and second-language aquisition theory. In G. Cook & B. Seidlhofer (Eds.), Principle and practice in applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Thornbury, S. (1998). Comments on direct approaches in L2 instruction. TESOL Quarterly, 32(1), 109–116CrossRef Google Scholar

Patten, W. (1993). Grammar-teaching for the acquisition-rich classroom. Foreign Language Annals, 26(4), 435–450Google Scholar

Willis, J., & Willis, D. (Eds.). (1996). Challenge and change in language teaching. Oxford: Heinemann

Accessibility standard: WCAG

This chapter