Profesores de Enseñanza Secundaria INGLÉS
Tema 6.1
ACTIVIDADES DE COMUNICACIÓN LINGÜÍSTICA (1): LA PRODUCCIÓN
O EXPRESIÓN. ESTRATEGIAS DE EXPRESIÓN ORAL Y ESCRITA.
6
COMMUNICATIVE TASKS (1): PRODUCTION OR
EXPRESSION. STRATEGIES FOR ORAL AND
WRITTEN EXPRESSION.
INDEX
1.
2.
3.
INTRODUCTION .................................................................................
2
1.1. Acts of communication ....................................................................
1.2. Task types, variables and dimensions ................................................
1.3. Instructional sequences around tasks ................................................
4
5
6
FUNDAMENTALS OF ORAL PRODUCTION ............................................
8
2.1. Specific competences in speaking .....................................................
2.2. Microskills of oral production ............................................................
2.3. Principles for designing speaking techniques ......................................
2.4. Oral production activities .................................................................
2.5. Oral production tasks ......................................................................
2.5.1. Listing and sorting ................................................................
2.5.2. Fact-finding ..........................................................................
2.5.3. Games based on listing ..........................................................
2.5.4. Problem solving tasks ............................................................
2.6.Teaching pronunciation ....................................................................
9
10
11
12
14
14
16
17
17
18
FUNDAMENTALS OF WRITTEN PRODUCTION .....................................
19
3.1.
3.2.
3.3.
3.4.
Microskills for writing ....................................................................
Principles for designing writing techniques .......................................
Written production activities ..........................................................
Written production tasks ...............................................................
3.4.1. Visual support .....................................................................
3.4.2. Comparing and contrasting ...................................................
3.4.3. Problem-solving tasks ..........................................................
22
23
26
28
28
29
30
4.
PRODUCTION STRATEGIES ................................................................
31
5.
CONCLUSION .....................................................................................
34
6.
SUMMARY ..........................................................................................
35
7.
BIBLIOGRAPHY ..................................................................................
39
CEDE - C/ Cartagena, 129 - 28002 Madrid
Tel.: 91 564 42 94
C E D E – www.cede.es
Tema 6.2
Profesores de Enseñanza Secundaria INGLÉS
1. INTRODUCTION
In the countries within the scope of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages
(CEF)—as indeed in many others around the world—English has long be taught as a Foreign
Language with a view to enhancing international communication. However, most frequently the
examination system used to put a premium on formal accuracy and, as a result, teachers often
prioritized the teaching of grammar. The teacher would model the target language forms and get
students to repeat them, and then ask questions intended to elicit the target forms in response.
Socioculturally appropriate answers that failed to employ the expected target form were generally
disregarded. This approached stemmed from behaviorist learning theories and produced what is
commonly called ―display‖ language; students are expected to respond using a word or pattern that
conforms to the teacher‘s expectation of the specific form to be used, rather than conveying
meaning or message (D. Willis, 1996b). The label given to such an approach is Presentation,
Practice, Production, also known as PPP. There is now widespread acceptance that most students
taught mainly through conventional approaches such as PPP leave school unable to communicate
effectively in English. This realization, together with the findings of second language acquisition
(SLA) research studies, have prompted many professionals and institutions to turn towards holistic
approaches where meaning is central and where opportunities for language use abound. The aim is
at the development of Communicative Competence. Task-based learning is one such an approach
and matches the action approach adopted in the CEF and the Spanish legislation.
The approach adopted in the CEF and that underpins the Spanish curricula, is ―an action-oriented
one in so far as it views users and learners of a language primarily as ‗social agents‘, i.e. members
of society who have tasks (not exclusively language-related) to accomplish in a given set of
circumstances, in a specific environment and within a particular field of action. While acts of speech
occur within language activities, these activities form part of a wider social context, which alone is
able to give them their full meaning‖. (CEF, p. 9. For a detailed discussion on the action approach,
see Topic 5).
This broad conception of task reflects the distinction that task-based teaching (TBT) makes between
target tasks, which students must accomplish beyond the classroom, and pedagogical tasks,
which form the nucleus of the classroom activity. Brown (2000, p. 242) notes that target tasks are
not unlike the functions of language that are listed in Notional-Functional Syllabuses; however, they
are much more specific and more explicitly related to classroom instruction. If, for example, "giving
personal information" is a communicative function for language, then an appropriately stated target
task might be ―giving personal information in a job interview". Notice that one of the parameters
specified in a task is thus the context, which is to be understood generally as the constellation of
events and situational factors (physical and others), both internal and external to a person, in which
acts of communication are embedded.
© C E D E – www.cede.es
CEDE - C/ Cartagena, 129 - 28002 Madrid
Tel.: 91 564 42 94
Profesores de Enseñanza Secundaria INGLÉS
Tema 6.3
The definition of ―task‖ is far from unique, and so is its classification. The CEF further specifies the
meaning intended as actions ―performed by one or more individuals strategically using their own
specific competences to achieve a given result. The action-based approach therefore also takes into
account the cognitive, emotional and volitional resources and the full range of abilities specific
to and applied by the individual as a social agent‖. While there is no definitive way to classify tasks,
Edwards (2005) provides an ample classification based on cognitive processes that consists of six
categories:
Listing tasks;
Ordering and sorting tasks;
Comparing tasks;
Problem solving tasks;
Sharing personal experiences; and
Creative tasks.
Pedagogical tasks include any of a series of techniques designed ultimately to teach students
to perform the target task; the climactic pedagogical task actually involves students in some form
of simulation of the target task itself (say, through a role-play simulation in which certain roles are
assigned to pairs of learners).
Pedagogical tasks are distinguished by their specific goals that point beyond the language classroom
to the target task. They may, however, include both formal and functional techniques. A
pedagogical task designed to teach students to give personal information in a job interview might,
for example, involve (Brown, 2000):
1. Exercises in comprehension of wh- questions with do-insertion ("When do you work at
Macy's?").
2. Drills in the use of frequency adverbs ("I usually work until five o'clock.").
3. Listening to extracts of job interviews.
4. Analyzing the grammar and discourse of the interviews.
5. Modeling an interview: teacher and one student.
6. Role-playing a simulated interview: students in pairs.
All of the techniques build toward enabling the students to perform the final technique, which more
clearly points beyond the classroom to the real world.
The Spanish curricula for all language studies at Secondary Level mandate that tasks become the
axis around which the didactic units are planned, and that they be used to integrate the necessary
sociolinguistic aspects and linguistic resources in the development of the themes proposed. A taskbased curriculum, then, specifies what a learner needs to do with the English language in terms of
CEDE - C/ Cartagena, 129 - 28002 Madrid
Tel.: 91 564 42 94
C E D E – www.cede.es
Tema 6.4
Profesores de Enseñanza Secundaria INGLÉS
target tasks and organizes a series of pedagogical tasks intended to reach those goals. In taskbased instruction, the priority is not the bits and pieces of language, but rather the functional
purposes for which language must be used. While content-based instruction focuses on subjectmatter content, task-based instruction focuses on a whole set of real-world tasks themselves. Input
for tasks can come from a variety of authentic sources:
speeches
media extracts
textbooks
conversations
games and puzzles
diaries
narratives
photos
songs
public announcements
letters
telephone directories
cartoon strips
poems
menus
interviews
directions
labels...
oral descriptions
invitations
While there is an ultimate focus on communication, purpose and meaning, the goals are linguistic in
nature. They are not linguistic in the traditional sense of just focusing on grammar or phonology;
but by maintaining the centrality of functions like greeting people, expressing opinions, requesting
information, etc., the course goals center on learners' pragmatic language competence.
So we have in task-based teaching a well-integrated approach to language teaching that asks
teachers to organize their classroom around those practical tasks that language users engage in ―out
there‖ in the real world. These tasks virtually always imply several skill areas, not just one, and so
by pointing towards tasks, we disengage ourselves from thinking only in terms of the
separate four skills. Instead, principles of listening, speaking, reading, and writing become
appropriately subsumed under the rubric of what it is our learners are going to do with this
language.
Finally, the language learner/user‘s communicative competence is activated in the performance of
the various language activities, involving reception, production, interaction or mediation. Each
of these types of activity is possible in relation to texts in oral or written form, or both.
This last classification of communicative activities is the one used for the organization of the present
work, as Topics 6 through 9 cover each of the 4 categories. The introduction to this first topic in the
series are thus meant as an explanation of the principles underlying all the other topics as well, each
dealing particularly with a specific set of communicative activities.
1.1. ACTS OF COMMUNICATION
Acts of communication with one or more interlocutors are generally undertaken by a language user
in pursuance of his or her needs in a given situation. In the personal domain, the intention may be
to entertain a visitor by exchanging information on families, friends, likes and dislikes, to compare
© C E D E – www.cede.es
CEDE - C/ Cartagena, 129 - 28002 Madrid
Tel.: 91 564 42 94
Profesores de Enseñanza Secundaria INGLÉS
Tema 6.5
experiences and attitudes, etc. In the public domain, it will usually be to transact business, say, to
buy clothes of good quality at a reasonable price. In the occupational domain, it may be to
understand new regulations and their implications for a client. In the educational domain it may
be to contribute to a role-play or a seminar, or write a paper on a specialized topic for a conference
or for publication, etc. (CEF, p. 53).
1.2. TASK TYPES, VARIABLES AND DIMENSIONS
When designing or selecting tasks for use in the language classroom, teachers have a number of
choices to make in terms of the type of task, the conditions under which students complete the task,
and other task properties. Some of these options will be more effective than others. Classroom
research into tasks often aims to find out the effects of specific task properties. Ellis (in Edwards,
2005: 19) states that ―information about significant task variables acquired through research can
assist teachers in deciding what tasks to use and when‖. In other words, findings of research into
the study of tasks can provide teachers with insights that enable them to make language teaching
more effective. In addition, as useful ways of classifying task types emerge, we will be a step further
towards establishing the basis on which a task-based syllabus might be effectively organized.
Task types can be identified in a number of ways. For example, Nunan suggests two broad
categories: real-world tasks (such as using the telephone) and pedagogic tasks (such as
information gap activities). These can be further subdivided into other categories, by language
function (e.g. giving instructions, apologizing, making suggestions), or by cognitive processes or
knowledge hierarchies (e.g. listing, ordering and sorting, problem solving, being creative). Others
might classify tasks by topic, by the language skills required for completion, or by whether the
outcome is closed or open (sometimes called divergent and convergent tasks). Others take as
their starting point the type of interaction that occurs during task completion, e.g. one-way or twoway information flow, resulting in five types: jigsaw tasks, information gaps, problem-solving,
decision-making, opinion exchange. Richards and Rodgers (ibid.) catalogue others. Distinguishing
different task types is important, as it allows researchers to investigate which types most effectively
promote learning.
So, there are many ways in which task-types can be categorized for both teaching and research
purposes. Nunan (2004: 56) indeed reflects that ―there are as many different task types as there
are people who have written on task-based language teaching‖. Two main methods for classification
are exemplified in the following sections: (a) based on an analysis of communicative language use,
and (b) grouping according to the strategies underpinning the tasks.
In addition to task types, there are also a number of task variables that can be studied. These
include task characteristics such as whether the task is structured (e.g. by providing a series of
prompts to direct the interaction, thus assisting task completion), cognitive difficulty and
CEDE - C/ Cartagena, 129 - 28002 Madrid
Tel.: 91 564 42 94
C E D E – www.cede.es
Tema 6.6
Profesores de Enseñanza Secundaria INGLÉS
familiarity of the task (including the amount of previous practice of the task-type or repetition of
the same or similar tasks). The conditions under which tasks are performed can also be adjusted.
Interlocutor familiarity, whether the interlocutor is a native or non-native speaker, planning time
and performance conditions (e.g. public or private) are all examples.
A slightly different way of looking at task characteristics is to see these in terms of a number of
variable, interacting groups of factors. Robinson (in Edwards, 2005: 20) proposes three such groups
of factors, which together constitute a set of criteria that can be adopted to design tasks with
progressively increasing demands. The resulting triadic framework can also be used for designing
research into task characteristics. Robinson distinguishes ‗task complexity‘ (the task dependent
and proactively manipulable cognitive demands of tasks) such as planning and reasoning demands,
from ‗task difficulty‘ (dependent on learner factors such as aptitude, confidence, motivation, etc.)
and ‗task conditions‘ (the interactive demands of tasks), such as familiarity of participants and
whether tasks require one-way or two-way information flow. These three groups of factors ‗interact
to influence task performance, and learning‘.
Furthermore, the factors that contribute to task complexity are represented by Robinson as
dimensions, or in some cases, continuums, ―along which relatively more of a feature is present or
absent‖. For example, narratives may range from simple to complex, topics from familiar to
unfamiliar, and tasks may be completed under variable time limits.
1.3. INSTRUCTIONAL SEQUENCES AROUND TASKS
The question addressed in this section is that of how to develop instructional sequences around
tasks. That is, how can we create a linked sequence of enabling exercises and activities that will
prepare learners to carry out the task? How do we implement the principles underlying the various
perspectives on task-based learning in a classroom context? Scholars have proposed different
models for task-based instruction. We will look at two of the most favored ones: Willis‘s and
Nunan‘s.
Willis‘s, being quite practical and straightforward, is the model most commonly cited and employed
by classroom teachers and teacher-researchers. Willis‘s framework, reproduced here, falls into three
main parts: pre-task, the task cycle, and language focus.
The pre-task phase provides the necessary background, knowledge and procedure, introduces
students to—and familiarizes them with—the topic and the task to be performed. In the task
phase, learners carry out a meaning-focused activity. It does not matter if the task is achieved
through the use of language which is far from the target in terms of accuracy and complexity. They
are more likely to concentrate on fluency, producing forms of the language that come readily to
them. In the report phase, on the other hand, learners are required to present the results of their
task phase work to the whole class. Willis and Willis argue that in this public performance learners
© C E D E – www.cede.es
CEDE - C/ Cartagena, 129 - 28002 Madrid
Tel.: 91 564 42 94
Profesores de Enseñanza Secundaria INGLÉS
Tema 6.7
will be motivated to produce not only fluent but also accurate language—a more ‗prestige‘ variety.
Thus, the report stage ensures ‗a smooth transition from private to more public interaction‘. To
enable this transition to happen, learners are given a planning phase between task and report.
During the planning phase, learners will attend to form in preparation for the report phase based on
the assumption that when given planning time, learners will focus on form and try to produce more
complex language. As such, this framework provides opportunities for fluency, accuracy and
complexity to develop.
In turn, Nunan proposes a six-step procedure along the same lines (Nunan, 2004: 34), and then
goes on to summarize the seven underlying principles that are drawn on in developing the above
instructional sequence:
Scaffolding. Lessons and materials should provide supporting frameworks within which
the learning takes place. At the beginning of the learning process, learners should not be
expected to produce language that has not been introduced either explicitly or implicitly.
In his words, ―the ‗art‘ of TBLT is knowing when to remove the scaffolding‖.
Task dependency. Within a lesson, one task should grow out of, and build upon, the
ones that have gone before. It subsumes the receptive-to-productive principle, which
mandates a change of the proportion between these two as the sequence advances.
Recycling. Recycling language maximizes opportunities for learning and activates the
‗organic‘ learning principle. If learning is not an all-or-nothing process, but it is piecemeal
and inherently unstable, learners need to be reintroduced to the items over a period of
time.
Active learning. Learners learn best by actively using the language they are learning.
Most class time should be devoted to opportunities for learners to use the language,
which could be many and varied.
Integration. Learners should be taught in ways that make clear the relationships
between linguistic form, communicative function and semantic meaning. It follows the
challenge to ‗reintegrate‘ formal and functional aspects of language, after the split
between proponents of form-based and meaning-based instruction, in a pedagogy that
makes explicit to learners these systematic relationships.
Reproduction
to
recreation.
Learners
should
be
encouraged
to
move
from
reproductive to creative language use. Reproductive tasks are designed to give learners
mastery of form, meaning and function; in creative tasks learners are recombining
familiar elements in novel ways.
Reflection. Learners should be given opportunities to reflect on what they have learned
and how well they are doing. This is part of a learner trainer where the focus shifts from
language content to learning processes. Research suggests that learners who are aware
of the strategies driving their learning will be better learners.
CEDE - C/ Cartagena, 129 - 28002 Madrid
Tel.: 91 564 42 94
C E D E – www.cede.es
Tema 6.8
Profesores de Enseñanza Secundaria INGLÉS
2. FUNDAMENTALS OF ORAL PRODUCTION
Listening and speaking skills and activities are closely intertwined in a communicative, pragmatic
view of the language classroom. Topic 7, on aural reception, while looking closely at teaching
listening comprehension, covers the types of spoken language and the idiosyncrasies that make
listening difficult, together with the listening microskills that are a factor of the oral code. All of these
shall be taken into account as we look at the matter here from the opposite point in this dual
perspective.
Brown (2000) offers a useful highlight of current issues in teaching oral communication.
Conversational discourse plays a prominent role in classroom interaction. Conversation is the
commonly accepted benchmark of successful language acquisition, and it is usually the ability to
carry on a reasonably competent conversation that is enquired with questions like ―Do you speak
English?‖ Topic 8, on oral interaction, deals with this in detail.
The role of pronunciation work in a communicative, interactive course of study has also been
somewhat controversial. Under the tenet that the overwhelming majority of adult learners will never
acquire an accent-free command of a foreign language, the debate is over the extent to which a
language program that emphasizes whole language, meaningful contexts, and automaticity of
production should focus on the tiny phonological details of language.
Yet another pervasive issue is the distinction between accuracy and fluency, and how to balance
clear, articulate, grammatically and phonologically correct language and flowing, natural language.
It is now very clear that fluency and accuracy are both important goals to pursue in the language
classroom. While fluency may in many communicative language courses be an initial goal in
language teaching, accuracy is achieved to some extent by allowing students to focus on the
elements of phonology, grammar, and discourse in their spoken output. Brown (ibid: 269) further
makes a simile with sports: ―if you were learning to play tennis instead of a second language, this
same philosophy would initially get you out on the tennis court to feel what it's like to hold a racket,
to hit the ball, to serve, etc., and then have you focus more cognitively on certain fundamentals‖.
Fluency is probably best achieved by allowing the "stream" of speech to "flow"; then, as some of this
speech spills over beyond comprehensibility, the ―riverbanks‖ of instruction on some details of
phonology, grammar, or discourse can channel the speech on a more purposeful course. The
fluency/accuracy issue often boils down to the extent to which our techniques should be message
oriented (or, as some call it, teaching language use) as opposed to language oriented (also
known as teaching language usage). Current approaches to language teaching lean strongly toward
message orientation with language usage offering a supporting role.
Affective factors are likewise important in speaking. ―Language ego‖ makes many learners feel
that ―you are what you speak‖; learners are reluctant to be judged by hearers. Our job as teachers
© C E D E – www.cede.es
CEDE - C/ Cartagena, 129 - 28002 Madrid
Tel.: 91 564 42 94
Profesores de Enseñanza Secundaria INGLÉS
Tema 6.9
is to provide the kind of warm, embracing climate that encourages students to speak, however
halting or broken their attempts may be.
Finally, the greatest difficulty that learners encounter in attempts to speak is probably the
interactive nature of most communication. Conversations are collaborative as participants engage
in a process of negotiation of meaning. This is discussed at length in Topic 8.
For a discussion on the types of spoken language, see Topic 7, on aural reception activities.
2.1. SPECIFIC COMPETENCES IN SPEAKING
There are a number of special characteristics that should be taken into account in the designing of
lessons and tasks for teaching productive generation of speech. These same characteristics must be
kept in mind in the receptive comprehension of speech, and Topic 7 deals with them at length from
that point of view. The slight twist here is that the learner is the producer. Bear in mind that the
following characteristics of spoken language can make oral performance easy as well as, in some
cases, difficult. The following eight characteristics of spoken language have been compiled by Brown
(2000).
1. Clustering. Fluent speech is phrasal, not word by word. Learners can organize their output
both cognitively and physically (in breath groups) through such clustering.
2. Redundancy. The speaker has an opportunity to make meaning clearer through the
redundancy of language. Learners can capitalize on this feature of spoken language.
3. Reduced forms. Contractions, elisions, reduced vowels, etc., all form special problems in
teaching spoken English. Students who do not learn colloquial contractions can sometimes
develop a stilled, bookish quality of speaking that in turn stigmatizes them.
4. Performance variables. One of the advantages of spoken language is that the process of
thinking as you speak allows you to manifest a certain number of performance hesitations,
pauses, backtracking and corrections. Learners can actually be taught how to pause and
hesitate. For example, in English our ―thinking time‖ is not silent; we insert certain ―fillers‖
such as uh, um, well, you know, I mean, like, etc. One of the most salient differences
between native and nonnative speakers of a language is in their hesitation phenomena.
5. Colloquial language. Students should be reasonably well acquainted with the words,
idioms, and phrases of colloquial language and that they get practice in producing these
forms.
CEDE - C/ Cartagena, 129 - 28002 Madrid
Tel.: 91 564 42 94
C E D E – www.cede.es
Tema 6.10
Profesores de Enseñanza Secundaria INGLÉS
6. Rate of delivery. Another salient characteristic of fluency is rate of delivery. One of the
tasks in teaching spoken English is to help learners achieve an acceptable speed along with
other attributes of fluency.
7. Stress, rhythm, and intonation. This is the most important characteristic of English
pronunciation. The stress-timed rhythm of spoken English and its intonation patterns convey
important messages.
8. Interaction. As noted in Topic 8, learning to produce waves of language in a vacuum—
without interlocutors—would rob speaking skill of its richest component: the creativity of
conversational negotiation.
2.2. MICROSKILLS OF ORAL PRODUCTION
Brown (2000: 271) and other authors emphasize the importance of focusing on clearly
conceptualized objectives when planning for a specific technique or speaking module. He provides a
comprehensive taxonomy of skills involved in oral discourse. Such lists are very useful in helping
you to break down just what it is that your learners need to actually perform as they acquire
effective speaking strategies. Through a checklist of microskills, you can get a good idea of what
your activities need to cover.
1.
Produce chunks of language of different lengths.
2.
Orally produce differences among the English phonemes and allophonic variants.
3.
Produce English stress patterns, words in stressed and unstressed positions,
rhythmic structure, and intonational contours.
4.
Produce reduced forms of words and phrases.
5.
Use an adequate number of lexical units (words) in order to accomplish pragmatic
purposes.
6.
Produce fluent speech at different rates of delivery.
7.
Monitor your own oral production and use various strategic devices—pauses, fillers,
self-corrections, backtracking—to enhance the clarity of the message.
8.
Use grammatical word classes (nouns, verbs, etc.), systems (e.g., tense,
agreement, pluralization), word order, patterns, rules, and elliptical forms.
9.
Produce speech in natural constituents—in appropriate phrases, pause groups,
breath groups, and sentences.
© C E D E – www.cede.es
CEDE - C/ Cartagena, 129 - 28002 Madrid
Tel.: 91 564 42 94
Profesores de Enseñanza Secundaria INGLÉS
Tema 6.11
10. Express a particular meaning in different grammatical forms.
11. Use cohesive devices in spoken discourse.
12. Accomplish
appropriately
communicative
functions
according
to
situations,
participants, and goals.
13. Use
appropriate
registers,
implicature,
pragmatic
conventions,
and
other
sociolinguistic features in face-to-face conversations.
14. Convey links and connections between events and communicate such relations as
main idea, supporting idea, new information, given information, generalization, and
exemplification.
15. Use facial features, kinesics, body language, and other nonverbal cues along with
verbal language to convey meanings.
16. Develop and use a battery of speaking strategies, such as emphasizing key words,
rephrasing, providing a context for interpreting the meaning of words, appealing for
help, and accurately assessing how well your interlocutor is understanding you.
One implication of such a list is the importance of focusing on both the forms of language and the
functions of language. In teaching oral communication, we do not limit students' attention to the
whole picture, even though that whole picture is important. We also help students to see the
pieces—right down to the small parts—of language that make up the whole. Just as you would
instruct a novice artist in composition, the effect of color hues, shading, and brush stroke
techniques, so language students need to be shown the details of how to convey and negotiate the
ever-elusive meanings of language.
2.3. PRINCIPLES FOR DESIGNING SPEAKING TECHNIQUES
There are a number of practical principles for designing techniques that include speaking. Brown
(2000: 275) provides the summary of principles given below.
1. Use techniques that cover the spectrum of learner needs, from language-based focus on
accuracy to message-based focus on interaction, meaning, and fluency. In our current zeal for
interactive language teaching, we can easily slip into a pattern of providing zesty content-based,
interactive activities that do not capitalize on grammatical pointers or pronunciation tips. When you
do a jigsaw group technique, play a game, or discuss solutions to the environmental crisis, make
sure that your tasks include techniques designed to help students to perceive and use the building
blocks of language. At the same time, do not bore your students to death with lifeless, repetitious
drills. Make any drilling you do as meaningful as possible.
CEDE - C/ Cartagena, 129 - 28002 Madrid
Tel.: 91 564 42 94
C E D E – www.cede.es
Tema 6.12
Profesores de Enseñanza Secundaria INGLÉS
2. Provide intrinsically motivating techniques. Try at all times to appeal to students' ultimate
goals and interests, to their need for knowledge, for status, for achieving competence and
autonomy, and for ―being all that they can be.‖ Even in those techniques that do not send students
into ecstasy, help them to see how the activity will benefit them. Often students do not know why
we ask them to do certain things; it usually pays to tell them.
3. Encourage the use of authentic language in meaningful contexts. It is not easy to keep
coming up with meaningful interaction. And it is easy to succumb to the temptation to do, say,
disconnected little grammar exercises where we go around the room calling on students one by one
to pick the right answer. It takes energy and creativity to devise authentic context and meaningful
interaction, but with the help of a storehouse of teacher resource material it can be done. Even drills
can be structured to provide a sense of authenticity.
4. Provide appropriate feedback and correction. In most EFL situations, students are totally
dependent on the teacher for useful linguistic feedback. In ESL situations, they may get such
feedback ―out there" beyond the classroom, but even then you are in a position to be of great
benefit. It is important that you take advantage of your knowledge of English to inject the kinds of
corrective feedback that are appropriate for the moment.
5. Capitalize on the natural link between speaking and listening. Many interactive techniques
that involve speaking will also of course include listening. Do not lose out on opportunities to
integrate these two skills. As you are perhaps focusing on speaking goals, listening goals may
naturally coincide, and the two skills can reinforce each other. Skills in producing language are often
initiated through comprehension.
6. Give students opportunities to initiate oral communication. A good deal of typical classroom
interaction is characterized by teacher initiation of language. We ask questions, give directions, and
provide information, and students have been conditioned only to "speak when spoken to." Part of
oral communication competence is the ability to initiate conversations, to nominate topics, to ask
questions, to control conversations, and to change the subject. As you design and use speaking
techniques, ask yourself if you have allowed students to initiate language.
7. Encourage the development of speaking strategies. The concept of strategic competence is
one that few beginning language students are aware of. They simply have not thought about
developing their own personal strategies for accomplishing oral communicative purposes. Your
classroom can be one in which students become aware of, and have a chance to practice, such
strategies as
Asking for clarification (What?).
Asking someone to repeat something (Hub? Excuse me?).
© C E D E – www.cede.es
CEDE - C/ Cartagena, 129 - 28002 Madrid
Tel.: 91 564 42 94
Profesores de Enseñanza Secundaria INGLÉS
Tema 6.13
Using fillers (Uh, I mean, Well) in order to gain time to process.
Using conversation maintenance cues (Uh hub, Right, Yeah, Okay, Hm).
Getting someone's attention (Hey, Say, So).
Using paraphrases for structures one cannot produce.
Appealing for assistance from the interlocutor (to get a word or phrase, for example).
Using formulaic expressions (at the survival stage) (How much does ___ cost? How do
you gel to the __?).
Using mime and nonverbal expressions to convey meaning.
2.4. ORAL PRODUCTION ACTIVITIES
In oral production (speaking) activities the language user produces an oral text which is received by
an audience of one or more listeners. Examples of speaking activities include:
public address (information, instructions, etc.)
addressing audiences (speeches at public meetings, university lectures, sermons,
entertainment, sports commentaries, sales presentations, etc.).
They may involve, for example:
reading a written text aloud;
speaking from notes, or from a written text or visual aids (diagrams, pictures, charts,
etc.);
acting out a rehearsed role;
speaking spontaneously;
singing.
The CEF (p. 58-60) provides illustrative scales of performance at the different levels for:
Overall spoken production;
Sustained monologue: describing experience;
Sustained monologue: putting a case (e.g. in debate);
Public announcements;
Addressing audiences.
The CEF suggests that users of the framework state the range of oral production activities that the
learner will be required to engage in. As way of example, a typical curriculum for upper-intermediate
levels proposes the following communication activities in oral production as a speaker/user, grouped
under appropriate macrofunctional headings:
CEDE - C/ Cartagena, 129 - 28002 Madrid
Tel.: 91 564 42 94
C E D E – www.cede.es
Tema 6.14
Profesores de Enseñanza Secundaria INGLÉS
Oral production as speaker
Description and narration
To clearly describe and narrate events on a wide range of hot topics, or topics related to
the learner‘s field of expertise and knowledge.
To tell about plots from books or films, to narrate stories, to describe experiences,
dreams, hopes and ambitions, real or imaginary facts, and to express their reactions and
assessment.
To provide the necessary relevant information, and to organize data with logical and
temporal coherence.
To join ideas using frequent connectors and discourse markers with a certain flexibility.
Public argumentation and exposition
To deliver a presentation on any of the most general topics with clarity and at a regular
pace.
To develop argumentation with clarity, going into some extension, and supporting their
points of view with supplementary ideas and appropriate exemplification.
To deliver prepared presentations with clarity, arguing for or against particular points of
view, highlighting the main points and showing pros and cons of a number of options.
To structure discourse, to introduce a topic, to classify ideas, to introduce new points, to
reformulate, to summarize the main ideas, and to conclude.
To keep coherence and to relate data with a certain flexibility.
To entertain questions with such a fluency and spontaneity that it induces no tension in
the learner or the audience.
2.5. ORAL PRODUCTION TASKS
This section offers an overview of some productive, cognitive task-categories, along with some
sample tasks.
2.5.1. Listing and sorting
Just as for text-based tasks, learners would need some priming before the task, so that they can
understand the topic, activate relevant schemata, recall or ask for useful words and phrases and get
ideas flowing. Depending on the topic, you could use pictures, or brainstorm words associated with
the topic, find out if anyone has personal experience of it, and so on.
Listing is the simplest type of task, and one that can lead to abundant oral production. It may
seem at first far too simple, but the linguistic challenge can vary according to what you ask learners
© C E D E – www.cede.es
CEDE - C/ Cartagena, 129 - 28002 Madrid
Tel.: 91 564 42 94
Profesores de Enseñanza Secundaria INGLÉS
Tema 6.15
to list; it could result in a list of words or short phrases or even quite complex sentences. Willis and
Willis (2007: 66) use the topic ―transport‖ as an example. At the elementary level, learners might
simply list the kinds of transport available locally—a list of nouns. At a later stage they could be
asked to produce a list of features of an ideal transport system—probably a mixture of phrases and
sentences. At a more advanced level they could be asked to list reasons for using (or not using)
particular forms of transport. This would probably result in a list of quite complex sentences. Here
we will look specifically at the listing associated with fact-finding and how it can be turned into
games.
Once learners have done the task they can compare their lists in a report stage and possibly collate
their ideas making one longer list. They might hear a recording of other people doing a similar task,
and see if their ideas are on the list they made. Finally, move into a focus-on-form stage, with the
teacher highlighting useful language forms and letting learners practice useful patterns, and record
useful words and phrases.
There is a variety of cognitive processes, including sequencing, ranking and classifying, which all
require a little more thought and cognitive effort than simply listing. Some involve ordering items
according to purely factual criteria, like dates or prices; others involve a certain amount of decision
making, based on personal choice or opinion.
Sequencing may be chronological, for example, arranging a series of jumbled pictures to make a
story, or a jumbled list of events to recreate the order in which they happened. It could entail
describing in sequence the steps of a particular process. It could call upon learners‘ prior knowledge,
their imagination, or knowledge gleaned from a written or spoken or visual source. (For example,
order the steps in a recipe, describe how to make a phone-call overseas from a phone-box...).
Lists can be ranked according to many different criteria like cost, popularity, practicality, or fun
value—different topics obviously need different criteria. With the topic of professions/jobs, criteria
for ranking these could include ranking according to rates of pay, or likelihood of job satisfaction,
working conditions, likely levels of stress, suitability for a working parent with children of school age,
and so on. Learners as individuals arrange a ranked list, according to the chosen criteria, and next
discuss together, debating and justifying their decisions and referring to experience. Willis and Willis
(ibid.) note that beginning with silent ranking helps learners to commit themselves to a solution and
engage personally with the task, as they can get their ideas together and plan how to express them,
before talking to others about it. It is a way of reducing the mental demands and pressure of the
task itself.
Learners can either be asked to work out their own categories for classifying, or to allot items in
a list to categories already given. Different learners will come up with different ways of classifying. It
is this variety of response that can stimulate rich discussion. When priming learners to choose their
CEDE - C/ Cartagena, 129 - 28002 Madrid
Tel.: 91 564 42 94
C E D E – www.cede.es
Tema 6.16
Profesores de Enseñanza Secundaria INGLÉS
own categories, it is helpful to give them one or two ideas first or to do a parallel task with the
whole class, like classifying a comparable set of items. However, if the task instructions give the
categories, learners sometimes feel more secure. It makes it a more straightforward task but may
also reduce the amount of language use it will generate. Which alternative you choose will depend
on the degree of challenge your learners are happy with.
Giving positive/negative categories works well with many themes. For example, foods that you like
or you don‘t; foods that are reasonably healthy or not; places you would like to visit or to live in;
rules that you agree or disagree with. This last example can be worked out into a decision-making
task, by giving slightly controversial statements and asking groups to modify the wording until they
reach a consensus. They then present this to the class, and the adapted statements are compared.
Once again, more than two categories can be used. Additionally, classified lists can be used as a
basis for designing ―Odd word out‖ games and ―What do these have in common?‖ quizzes.
The advantage of starting a sequence of tasks with one or two simple tasks is that they can serve as
useful introduction to the topic, and provide a change for setting the scene and introducing relevant
vocabulary. In fact they act as facilitating tasks, helping to lighten the processing load when learners
are tackling more complex tasks, as by then, many of the topic words and phrases used for listing
will already be familiar.
2.5.2. Fact-finding
Fact-finding involves asking learners to search for specific facts in books or leaflets or on a website,
or to ask other people outside class. If you introduce the topic the lesson before and do a ―priming‖
stage for the task then, you could set a fact-finding task for homework. Then they work out how to
express these facts in English and come to class ready prepared with a draft list. Willis and Willis
(2007: 67) provide the following examples:
Find out five facts about the volcano Mount Etna to share with other students next
lesson. Write them down. Also note down three or four useful words or phrases about
volcanoes you could teach your partner.
Find out what three people outside this class think about cats as pets. Do they like cats
or not? List the reasons they give. Prepare to report their views in English in your next
lesson.
Find out the birthdays of seven people you or your family knows. Write the name of the
person, who they are, and the date of their birthday. Bring your list to class.
Listing often forms a stating point for more complex tasks. For instance, you can give three websites
for ecotourism and ask your advanced learners to design a trip that upholds ecotourism principles.
They may begin by identifying those principles and listing them.
© C E D E – www.cede.es
CEDE - C/ Cartagena, 129 - 28002 Madrid
Tel.: 91 564 42 94
Profesores de Enseñanza Secundaria INGLÉS
Tema 6.17
2.5.3. Games based on listing
The listing process can form the basis for many simple activities like quizzes, memory games and
guessing games. For example, list of facts can be collated in groups and a true/false quiz made by
altering some of the statements, which is then given to other group. This can become a competition
where groups take turns to respond orally.
Guessing games can also incorporate listing. For example, the class may ask the teacher questions
(or vice versa) such as ―Guess what I had for breakfast today‖. Or students can write five short
sentences about their chosen animal, and read them for the class and ask ―Guess what animal this
is‖. Games such as ―Guess what I got in my bag‖/‖Junk we carry around with us‖ work along the
same lines. First, guesses from the class are accepted, then objects are taken out and named one at
a time. This leads to a classification task. Students can then do the same exercise in pairs. Also, a
recording of the same task can be played and the differences noted and reported back.
These tasks, suitable for beginner learners, can also be turned into a memory challenge game to
help consolidate the new vocabulary by covering up the objects once they have been taken out.
Eventually, learners can dictate the order in which they are put back in the bag. The idea is that this
sequence of small tasks offers plenty of opportunities for learners to recycle the names of common
objects as well as exposure to natural interaction.
2.5.4. Problem solving tasks
Willis and Willis (2007:93) discuss problem-solving tasks at some length, reflecting how they invite
learners to offer advice and recommendations on problems ranging from the very general, like
global warming, to the very specific, like what to do if your neighbor‘s dog keeps barking in the
small hours. These tasks can stimulate wide-ranging discussion and also offer scope for a variety of
writing activities, including note-taking, drafting, and finalizing proposals for solutions. The following
table summarizes some of the proposed problem topics they have collected; the list is endless.
Problems as a basis for tasks
Teenage issues
Smoking and peer pressure
Quarrels
Lack of money
Lack of communication between parents
and teenagers
Environmental issues
Lack of parking in town centers
Traffic congestion
Water shortages
River and sea pollution
Overcoming opposition to wind farms
Global/international issues
People smuggling
Illegal immigration—fictitious marriages
Work contexts
Preparing for a job interview
Boring meetings—how to survive them
Selling your products—dealing with market
competitors
Juggling work and family
CEDE - C/ Cartagena, 129 - 28002 Madrid
Tel.: 91 564 42 94
C E D E – www.cede.es
Tema 6.18
Profesores de Enseñanza Secundaria INGLÉS
Problem-solving tasks can stimulate rich discussion if learners have already thought out some ideas
to share. They will benefit from time to think beforehand; they can then get to grips with the
problem and work out possible solutions and how to express them.
Task sequences involving problem-solving often comprise other task types, and it is useful to break
down the discussion into a set of mini-tasks, which might include some of the following, but not
necessarily in this order:
Listing and ranking the effects of the problem in order of severity
Pooling and comparing personal experiences of the problem
Listing and comparing ideas for possible solutions
Listing and evaluating the criteria with which to appraise solutions
Drafting notes for an oral presentation of recommendations or advice
Writing up a final proposal for others to read.
A problem-solving task sequence on a serious topic (like those in the table) might proceed like this:
Preparation and priming: teacher-led class exploration of the topic, possibly sharing
personal views of the effects of the problem.
Task and report phase: small groups or pairs could then be asked to think of two or three
different solutions, compare them and choose one proposal to put forward to the whole
class, justifying their plan of action and saying why they think it is best. Preparing this
proposal becomes a ―target task‖.
Writing phase 1: drafting.
Writing phase 2: finalizing and ―publishing‖ the target task.
Focus on form: reuse materials used for a more explicit focus-on-form stage. If you have
a recoding of other people trying to solve the problem, this could be exploited for useful
language.
These last three stages will be covered with greater detail under problem-solving for written
production tasks. It is worth remembering here that the degree of linguistic challenge of problemsolving tasks will depend on the familiarity with the topic, complexity and breadth of the problem,
the type of initial guidance and/or preparation, how explicit the instructions are, and so on.
2.6. TEACHING PRONUNCIATION
Current approaches to teaching pronunciation are influenced by the necessary trade-off between
fluency and accuracy, while at the same time it goes undisputed that pronunciation is key in
gaining full communicative competence. Brown (2000) notes that rather than attempting only to
build a learner's articulatory competence from the bottom up, and simply as the mastery of a list of
© C E D E – www.cede.es
CEDE - C/ Cartagena, 129 - 28002 Madrid
Tel.: 91 564 42 94
Profesores de Enseñanza Secundaria INGLÉS
Tema 6.19
phonemes and allophones, a top-down approach is taken in which the most relevant features of
pronunciation—stress, rhythm, and intonation—are given high priority. Instead of teaching
only the role of articulation within words, or at best, phrases, we teach its role in a whole stream of
discourse. All aspects of English pronunciation are put into the perspective of a communicative,
interactive, whole language view of human speech. Once again, history taught us the lesson of
maintaining balance.
Many learners of foreign languages feel that their ultimate goal in pronunciation should be accentfree speech that is indistinguishable from that of a native speaker. Such a goal is not only
unattainable for virtually every adult learner, but in a multilingual, multicultural world, accents are
quite acceptable. With the rapid spread of English as an international language, native accents
have become almost irrelevant to cross-cultural communication. Moreover, as the world community
comes to appreciate and value people's heritage, one's accent is just another symbol of that
heritage.
Our goal as teachers of English pronunciation should therefore be more realistically focused on clear,
comprehensible pronunciation. At the beginning levels, we want learners to surpass that threshold
beneath which pronunciation detracts from their ability to communicate. At the advanced levels,
pronunciation goals can focus on elements that enhance communication: intonation features that go
beyond basic patterns, voice quality, phonetic distinctions between registers, and other refinements
that are far more important in the overall stream of clear communication than rolling the English /r/
or getting a vowel to perfectly imitate a ―native speaker."
3. FUNDAMENTALS OF WRITTEN PRODUCTION
The psycholinguist Eric Lenneberg once noted, in a discussion of "species specific‖ human behavior,
that human beings universally learn to walk and to talk, but that swimming and writing are culturally
specific, learned behaviors. We learn to swim if there is a body of water available and usually only if
someone teaches us. We learn to write if we are members of a literate society, and usually only if
someone teaches us. In this section we will briefly discuss a number of issues that have appeared
over the past decades of research in teaching writing to second language learners, and which are
applicable to communicative activities (Brown, 2000: 334).
1. Composing vs. writing. A simplistic view of writing would assume that written language is
simply the graphic representation of spoken language, and that written performance is much like
oral performance, the only difference lying in graphic instead of auditory signals. Fortunately, no one
holds this view today. The process of writing requires an entirely different set of competencies and is
fundamentally different from speaking. The permanence and distance of writing, coupled with its
unique rhetorical conventions, indeed make writing as different from speaking as swimming is from
walking.
CEDE - C/ Cartagena, 129 - 28002 Madrid
Tel.: 91 564 42 94
C E D E – www.cede.es
Tema 6.20
Profesores de Enseñanza Secundaria INGLÉS
One major theme in pedagogical research on writing is the nature of the composing process of
writing. Written products are often the result of thinking, drafting, and revising procedures that
require specialized skills, skills that not every speaker develops naturally. The upshot of the
compositional nature of writing has produced writing pedagogy that focuses students on how to
generate ideas, how to organize them coherently, how to use discourse markers and rhetorical
conventions to put them cohesively into a written text, how to revise text for clearer meaning, how
to edit text for appropriate grammar, and how to produce a final product.
2. Process vs. product. Recognition of the compositional nature of writing has changed the face of
writing classes. A half a century ago, writing teachers were mostly concerned with the final product
of writing: the essay, the report, the story, and what that product should ―look" like. Compositions
were supposed to (a) meet certain standards of prescribed English rhetorical style, (b) reflect
accurate grammar, and (c) be organized in conformity with what the audience would consider to be
conventional. A good deal of attention was placed on ―model‖ compositions that students would
emulate and on how well a student's final product measured up against a list of criteria that included
content, organization, vocabulary use, grammatical use, and mechanical considerations such as
spelling and punctuation.
There is nothing inherently wrong with attention to any of the above criteria. They are still the
concern of writing teachers. But in due course of time, we became better attuned to the advantage
given to learners when they were seen as creators of language, when they were allowed to focus on
content and message, and when their own individual intrinsic motives were put at the center of
learning. We began to develop what is now termed the process approach to writing instruction.
Process approaches do most of the following:
Focus on the process of writing that leads to the final written product;
Help student writers to understand their own composing process;
Help them to build repertoires of strategies for prewriting, drafting, and rewriting;
Give students time to write and rewrite;
Place central importance on the process of revision;
Let students discover what they want to say as they write;
Give students feedback throughout the composing process (not just on the final product)
as they attempt to bring their expression closer and closer to intention;
Encourage feedback from both the instructor and peers;
Include individual conferences between teacher and student during the process of
composition.
The process approach is an attempt to take advantage of the nature of the written code (unlike
conversation, it can be planned and given an unlimited number of revisions before its ―release") to
© C E D E – www.cede.es
CEDE - C/ Cartagena, 129 - 28002 Madrid
Tel.: 91 564 42 94
Profesores de Enseñanza Secundaria INGLÉS
Tema 6.21
give students a chance to think as they write. Another way of putting it is that writing is indeed a
thinking process.
Emphasis on process writing must of course be seen in the perspective of a balance between
process and product. As in most language-teaching approaches, it is quite possible for you to go
to an extreme in emphasizing process to the extent that the final product diminishes in importance.
This is to be avoided. The product is, after all, the ultimate goal; it is the reason that we go through
the process of prewriting, drafting, revising, and editing. Process is not the end; it is the means to
the end.
3. Contrastive rhetoric considers the effect in writing of one's native culture, or one's
predispositions, perhaps as the product of years of schooling, reading, writing, thinking, asserting,
arguing, and defending. In our current paradigm of attending carefully to schemata and scripts,
native language patterns of thinking and writing simply cannot be ruled out. A balanced position on
this issue, then, would uphold the importance of your carefully attending to the rhetorical first
language interference that may be at play in your students' writing, considering a student's
cultural/literary schemata as one of many possible sources of difficulty.
4. Differences between L1 and L2 writing need to be considered by teachers at several levels.
Some pedagogical implications of these questions are that (a) it is important to determine
appropriate approaches to writing instruction for L2 writers in different contexts, (b) writing teachers
need to be equipped to deal effectively with the sociocultural and linguistic differences of L2
students, and (c) the assessment of L2 writing may need to take into account the fundamental
differences between most L1 and L2 writing.
5. Authenticity. Another issue in the teaching of writing surrounds the question of how much of our
classroom writing is "real‖ writing. In the era of electronic communication (video, phone, computer,
etc.) we are less and less called upon to compose. In school writing is a way of life. Across the age
levels from elementary school through university graduate courses, we write in order to succeed in
mastering the subject matter. In English for Academic Purposes writing ranges from short phrases
(as ill fill-in-the-blank tests), to brief paragraphs (as in essay question exercises and tests), to brief
reports of many different kinds, to a full-length research paper. In vocational-technical English
(where students are studying English in connection with a trade or occupation), students need to fill
out forms, write simple messages, write certain conventional reports (for example, a bid on a
contract, an inspection report), and at the most ―creative‖ end of the continuum, write a brief
business letter. In adult education and survival English classes, filling out simple forms and
questionnaires may be as sophisticated as students' needs get.
6. The role of the teacher. As students are encouraged (in reading) to bring their own schemata
to bear on understanding texts, and in writing to develop their own ideas, offer their own critical
CEDE - C/ Cartagena, 129 - 28002 Madrid
Tel.: 91 564 42 94
C E D E – www.cede.es
Tema 6.22
Profesores de Enseñanza Secundaria INGLÉS
analysis, and find their own ―voice‖, the role of teacher must be one of facilitator and coach, not an
authoritative director and arbiter. This facilitative role of the writing teacher has inspired research on
the role of the teacher as a responder to students' writing. We are still exploring ways to offer
optimal feedback to student writing. Some authors have provided useful guidelines for making
teacher commentary more effective. For example, it has been found that when teachers (a)
requested specific information and (b) made summary comments on grammar, more substantive
student revisions ensued than when teachers (a) posed questions and (b) made positive comments.
3.1. MICROSKILLS FOR WRITING
Brown
(2000:343)
and
other
authors
emphasize
the
importance
of
focusing
on
clearly
conceptualized objectives when planning for a specific technique or writing module. He suggests the
use of checklists providing a comprehensive taxonomy of skills involved in written discourse.
Through a checklist of microskills, you can get a good idea of what your techniques need to cover in
the domain of written expression.
1.
Produce graphemes and orthographic patterns of English.
2.
Produce writing at an efficient rate of speed to suit the purpose.
3.
Produce an acceptable core of words and use appropriate word order patterns.
4.
Use acceptable grammatical systems (e.g., tense, agreement, pluralization),
patterns, and rules.
5.
Express a particular meaning in different grammatical forms.
6.
Use cohesive devices in written discourse.
7.
Use the rhetorical forms and conventions of written discourse.
8.
Appropriately accomplish the communicative functions of written texts according to
form and purpose.
9.
Convey links and connections between events and communicate such relations as
main idea, supporting idea, new information, given information, generalization, and
exemplification.
10.
Distinguish between literal and implied meanings when writing.
11.
Correctly convey culturally specific references in the context of the written text.
12.
Develop and use a battery of writing strategies, such as accurately assessing the
audience's interpretation, using prewriting devices, writing with fluency in the first
drafts, using paraphrases and synonyms, soliciting peer and instructor feedback,
and using feedback for revising and editing.
© C E D E – www.cede.es
CEDE - C/ Cartagena, 129 - 28002 Madrid
Tel.: 91 564 42 94
Profesores de Enseñanza Secundaria INGLÉS
Tema 6.23
3.2. PRINCIPLES FOR DESIGNING WRITING TECHNIQUES
A number of specific principles for designing writing techniques emerge out of all of these
characteristics of the written word, along with microskills and research issues. Brown (2000: 347)
offers the following insights.
1. Incorporate practices of "good" writers. This first guideline is sweeping. But as you
contemplate devising a technique that has a writing goal in it, consider the various things that
efficient writers do, and see if your technique includes some of these practices. For example, good
writers:
focus on a goal or main idea in writing,
perceptively gauge their audience,
spend some time (but not too much!) planning to write,
easily let their first ideas flow onto the paper,
follow general organizational plan as they write,
solicit and utilize feedback on their writing,
are not wedded to certain surface structures,
revise their work willingly and efficiently,
patiently make as many revisions as needed.
2. Balance process and product. Because writing is a composing process and usually requires
multiple drafts before an effective product is created, make sure that students are carefully led
through appropriate stages in the process of composing. This includes careful attention to your own
role as a guide and as a responder. At the same time, do not get so caught up in the stages leading
up to the final product that you lose sight of the ultimate attainment; a clear, articulate, wellorganized, effective piece of writing. Make sure students see that everything leading up to this final
creation was worth the effort.
3. Account for cultural/literary backgrounds. Make sure that your techniques do not assume
that your students know English rhetorical conventions.
4. Connect reading and writing. Clearly, students learn to write in part by carefully observing
what is already written. That is, they learn by observing, or reading, the written word. By reading
and studying a variety of relevant types of text, students can gain important insights both about
how they should write and about subject matter that may become the topic of their writing.
5. Provide as much authentic writing as possible. Whether writing is real writing or for display,
it can still be authentic in that the purposes for writing are clear to the students, the audience is
specified overtly, and there is at least some intent to convey meaning. Sharing writing with other
CEDE - C/ Cartagena, 129 - 28002 Madrid
Tel.: 91 564 42 94
C E D E – www.cede.es
Tema 6.24
Profesores de Enseñanza Secundaria INGLÉS
students in the class is one way to add authenticity. Publishing a class newsletter, writing letters to
people outside of class, writing a script for a skit or dramatic presentation, writing a resume, writing
advertisements—all these can be seen as authentic writing.
6. Frame your techniques in terms of prewriting, drafting, and revising stages. Process
writing approaches tend to be framed in three stages of writing. The prewriting stage encourages
the generation of ideas, which can happen in numerous ways:
reading (extensively) a passage
skimming and/or scanning a passage
conducting some outside research
brainstorming
listing (in writing—individually)
clustering (begin with a key word, then add other words, using free association)
discussing a topic or question
instructor-initiated questions and probes
freewriting1
The drafting and revising stages are the core of process writing. In traditional approaches to
writing instruction, students either are given timed in-class compositions to write from start to finish
within a class hour, or they are given a homework writing assignment. The first option gives no
opportunity for systematic drafting, and the second assumes that if students did any drafting at all,
they would simply have to learn the tricks of the trade on their own. In a process approach, drafting
is viewed as an important and complex set of strategies, the mastery of which takes time, patience,
and trained instruction. Several strategies and skills apply to the drafting/revising process in writing:
Getting started (adapting the freewriting technique)
―Optimal‖ monitoring of one's writing (without premature editing and diverted attention
to wording, grammar, etc.)
Peer-reviewing for content (accepting/using classmates' comments)
Using the instructor's feedback
Editing for grammatical errors
―Read aloud‖ technique (in small groups or pairs, students read their almost final drafts
to each other for a formal check on errors, flow of ideas, etc.)
Proofreading
1
For instance, by writing constantly about a topic without stopping for ten minutes. The student is asked (1) to write down
everything that comes to her mind, (2) not to judge her ideas, (3) not to worry about spelling and grammar, and, (4) if
running out of things to say, to continue writing whatever comes to her mind.
© C E D E – www.cede.es
CEDE - C/ Cartagena, 129 - 28002 Madrid
Tel.: 91 564 42 94
Profesores de Enseñanza Secundaria INGLÉS
Tema 6.25
7. Strive to offer techniques that are as interactive as possible. It is no doubt already apparent
that a process-oriented approach to writing instruction is, by definition, interactive (as students
work in pairs and groups to generate ideas and to peer-edit), as well as learner-centered (with
ample opportunities for students to initiate activity and exchange ideas). Writing techniques that
focus on purposes other than compositions (such as letters, forms, memos, directions, short
reports) are also subject to the principles of interactive classrooms. Group collaboration,
brainstorming, and critiquing are as easily and successfully a part of many writing-focused
techniques. Writing is not necessarily a solitary activity. Some of it is, to be sure, but a good deal of
what makes a good writer can be most effectively learned within a community of learners.
8. Sensitively apply methods of responding to and correcting your students' writing. Error
correction in writing must be approached in a specific manner. Because writing, unlike speaking,
often includes an extensive planning stage, error treatment can begin in the drafting and revising
stages, during which time it is more appropriate to consider errors among several features of the
whole process of responding to student writing. As a student receives responses to written work,
errors—just one of several possible things to respond to—are rarely changed outright by the
instructor; rather, they are treated through self-correction, peer-correction, and instructor-initiated
comments.
As you respond to your students' writing, remember that you are there as an ally, as a guide, as a
facilitator. After the final work is turned in, you may indeed have to assume the position of judge
and evaluator, but until then, the role of consultant will be the most productive way to respond.
Ideally, your responses—or at least some of them—will be written and oral as you hold a conference,
however short, with a student. Under less than ideal conditions, written comments may have to
suffice. Here are some guidelines for responding to the first draft.
a. Resist the temptation to treat minor (local) grammatical errors; major (global) errors
within relevant paragraphs can at this stage be indicated either directly (say, by underlining)
or indirectly (for example, by a check next to the line in which an error occurs).
b. Generally resist the temptation to rewrite a student's sentences.
c. Comment holistically, in terms of the clarity of the overall thesis and the general structural
organization.
d. Comment on the introductory paragraph.
e. Comment on features that appear to be irrelevant to the topic.
f. Question clearly inadequate word choices and awkward expression within those
paragraphs/sentences that are relevant to the topic.
CEDE - C/ Cartagena, 129 - 28002 Madrid
Tel.: 91 564 42 94
C E D E – www.cede.es
Tema 6.26
Profesores de Enseñanza Secundaria INGLÉS
For the subsequent drafts, your responses can include all of the above except that (a) now may
change its character slightly:
g. Minor ("local") grammatical and mechanical (spelling, punctuation) errors should be
indicated, but not corrected for the student.
h. Comment on the specific clarity and strength of all main ideas, supporting ideas, and on
argument and logic.
i. Comment on any further word choices and expressions that may not be ―awkward‖ but are
not as clear or direct as they could be.
j. Check cohesive devices within and across paragraphs.
k. In academic papers, comment on documentation, citing sources, evidence, and other
support.
l. Comment on the adequacy and strength of the conclusion.
9. Clearly instruct students on the rhetorical, formal conventions of writing. Each type of
writing has its formal properties. Do not just assume that students will pick these up by absorption.
Make them explicit. A reading approach to writing is very helpful here. For academic writing, for
example, some of the features of English rhetorical discourse that writers use to explain, propose
solutions, debate, and argue are as follows:
a clear statement of the thesis or topic or purpose
use of main ideas to develop or clarify the thesis
use of supporting ideas
supporting by ―telling‖: describing
supporting by "showing": giving evidence, facts, statistics, etc.
supporting by linking cause and effect
supporting by using comparison and/or contrast
3.3. WRITTEN PRODUCTION ACTIVITIES
In written production (writing) activities the language user as writer produces a written text which is
received by a readership of one or more readers.
Examples of writing activities include:
completing forms and questionnaires;
writing articles for magazines, newspapers, newsletters, etc.;
© C E D E – www.cede.es
CEDE - C/ Cartagena, 129 - 28002 Madrid
Tel.: 91 564 42 94
Profesores de Enseñanza Secundaria INGLÉS
Tema 6.27
producing posters for display;
writing reports, memoranda, etc.;
making notes for future reference;
taking down messages from dictation, etc.;
creative and imaginative writing;
writing personal or business letters, etc.
The CEF provides illustrative scales of performance for as many as the following:
Overall written production;
Creative writing;
Reports and essays.
The CEF suggests that users of the framework state the range of writing activities that the learner
will be required to engage in. As way of example, a typical curriculum at upper-intermediate level
proposes the following communication activities in written production, grouped under appropriate
macrofunctional headings:
Written production
Reports, opinion texts, information and other writing
To write up reports on known facts, explaining a situation and highlighting relevant
aspects.
To synthesize and assess information and argumentation from several sources.
To provide well-organized and detailed work or action plans.
To contribute their opinion on particular known facts with a certain assuredness.
To develop argumentation for or against particular points of view, showing pros and cons
of a number of options.
To give instructions on known fields, or fields related to their expertise.
To write up work applications, resumes, and short ads to present a candidacy or to
transmit information.
Creative writing (for themselves and others)
To write clear and structured texts, on a number of topics in their field of interest,
complying with the selected text type.
To make clear descriptions on a number of known topics, or topics related to their field of
expertise.
CEDE - C/ Cartagena, 129 - 28002 Madrid
Tel.: 91 564 42 94
C E D E – www.cede.es
Tema 6.28
Profesores de Enseñanza Secundaria INGLÉS
To tell about their own experiences, describing feelings and reactions in well structured
texts (report, diary, tales...).
To make short reviews for films, books, plays, concerts, etc.
To tell real or fictional events. To narrate a story.
To present short biographies of known people.
To write opinion texts on general topics, or topics of their interest (letters to the editor,
opinions on a blog, etc.)
To write up ads about objects, happenings, places...
To develop the playful function of the language and to create or recreate texts.
3.4. WRITTEN PRODUCTION TASKS
It is often thought that tasks are mainly for improving oral and aural skills, and certainly the tasks
compiled by Willis and Willis (2007) involve a good deal of spoken interaction. This may be because
many of the students have been taught in rather traditional ways with a heavy emphasis on
grammar, reading and writing, or have textbooks with only a small proportion of genuine speaking
activities. Up to now they have lacked opportunities to speak, so teachers have been designing tasks
to get them talking. But if you have learners who are already reasonably fluent, and/or who need to
practice writing, or to focus more on formal accuracy, it is equally possible to ask them to
brainstorm in writing, either individually or in pairs, and then to present their ideas in writing. They
can write by hand in class and pass it round or pin it on a wall for others to read; they can email
their writing to each other, or use their word processing packages to produce a polished piece of
word that can be used for public display or go up on the class website.
3.4.1. Visual support
Tasks also expand the scope of written production from traditional, relatively formal writing
assignments to many applications found on target tasks. This includes visual support in the form
of chart, tables, mind-maps, etc. Willis and Willis (2007: 78) comment on how seeing information
set out within a framework can help learners process and organize information in a more structured
way. This can both make a task less cognitively demanding and give learners a sense of security. It
can also stimulate more interaction, as learners like to add their own ideas to fill any spaces. Very
frequently, the teacher gains a chance here to expand on learners‘ verbal offerings, creating
opportunities for language exposure tailored to learners‘ interests and knowledge levels. Such
exposure should form comprehensible input for most learners.
Willis and Willis (ibid.) quote an example for a task on ―Earthquake safety‖ for low intermediate
learners in Japan. Small groups discuss questions on earthquake preparedness and safety, and are
given chart to add pertinent actions for before, during and after an earthquake. They fill out a top
row with their suggestions. This is followed up with a reading activity with each group reading a
© C E D E – www.cede.es
CEDE - C/ Cartagena, 129 - 28002 Madrid
Tel.: 91 564 42 94
Profesores de Enseñanza Secundaria INGLÉS
Tema 6.29
different pamphlet on earthquake safety, adding locally relevant information to the bottom row of
cells in their charts. They compare charts with other groups and add their ideas, too. So the chart
gives sustained support through several tasks cycles. The degree of challenge for a classifying task
can be controlled by varying the number of headings already provided with the chart at the outset.
Charts and tables with headings can also help learners to think of what aspects of the topic to talk
or write about, and how to organize the information coherently. They have the security of a
framework within which to work; this reduces anxiety which, in turn, should allow language to flow
more freely.
Mind maps have the same advantages as charts but they are more open, flexible, and can be
added to more easily. Learners can make their artistic skills to make them look attractive. Like
charts, they can be started on the board in preliminary discussion and then built on and filled in by
learners. Mind maps are not just good as a springboard for production; they are a most valuable tool
in organizing and relating new vocabulary.
Linear visuals, like time lines and storylines, are excellent for tasks based on sequencing. Pictures
and captions can be attached denoting a series of events in a storey narrative, the stages in a
manufacturing process. The process of making a storyline or a time line involves deciding what to
include and how to draw or verbalize it so that it is clear to others; as such it is an engaging process
and at the end there is a concrete outcome. Different groups can produce their own and then display
them, and present them orally to other groups who can then ask questions about them.
Willis and Willis (ibid: 80) reproduce a sample task of a storyline using pictures/drawings designed
for false beginners. It is based on a dictogloss activity but instead of getting learners to reconstruct
verbally and write down the story, students are made to work in pairs and draw whatever they can.
On a second telling, they refine their drawing and, at a later stage, are encouraged to add any
words they can catch. This results in learners listening out for key words and trying to get the gist of
main events. Finally, they compare their results with neighboring pairs and try to justify their story
pictures to each other by telling the story in English as best as they can, picture by picture. The text
on the picture reveals how wide the gap is between learners‘ receptive abilities and their productive
ones.
3.4.2. Comparing and contrasting
Comparison tasks are a typical, good activity for learners to talk to each other in small groups of
three or four. The number of topics is potentially inexhaustible (Willis, 2007: 90):
their morning routines—who gets up and out the quickest?
the length of their working day and/or their journeys to and from work
what times they go to bed—who is generally the latest?
CEDE - C/ Cartagena, 129 - 28002 Madrid
Tel.: 91 564 42 94
C E D E – www.cede.es
Tema 6.30
Profesores de Enseñanza Secundaria INGLÉS
their best and worst cloths bargains
their favorite holiday places
their language learning strategies...
Let us take for an example a task where intermediate students compare their favorite holiday places
(they may be even asked to bring pictures). They are asked to find out if the other students have
been to the same places, and to compare their travelling experiences.
As a follow up to this, a variety of target tasks are possible: learners could write a comparison of
two of the favorite places they had heard about, or a short summary of the most interesting
travelling experiences. Or they each write a list of what they considered the top five (or fewer)
places, with a brief description of each place and why it was a favorite. This could then be passed
round for the others to read and compare. The places could then be compared in more detail, with
learners listing similarities and differences.
Comparison tasks can also be based on two or more texts or transcripts on a similar theme, for
example texts from two different newspapers. Mail-order catalogues (for cloths or household items
or music) have whole pages where very similar items are illustrated and described. Learners can be
asked to choose three similar items and decide which is best value.
3.4.3. Problem-solving tasks
As noted in the section on problem-solving tasks for oral production, these tasks can stimulate wideranging discussion and also offer scope for a variety of writing activities, including note-taking,
drafting, and finalizing proposals for solutions. In some cases there may be a suitable website or
pamphlet that gives some useful background information. This means that it is often best to
introduce the topic and do a relevant priming phase in a previous lesson, explaining the nature of
the problem and telling learners that the task will be to discuss and agree a solution to this problem.
A table with sample topics and a prototypical task sequence was given there. Here we look again at
that sequence and elaborate on the written stages (Willis and Willis, 2007: 95).
Preparation and priming: teacher-led class exploration of the topic.
Task and report phase: small groups could then be asked to think of two or three
different solutions, compare them and choose one proposal.
Writing phase 1: drafting. After the whole class plenary, learners can be asked to write
up their proposal in draft form, taking into account the class feedback. They could do this
individually at home.
Writing phase 2: finalizing and ―publishing‖ the target task. The next lesson they can
peer edit their writing, or collate ideas and draw up a single final version—identified by a
number—to display on the classroom wall for others to read. Learners can choose three
© C E D E – www.cede.es
CEDE - C/ Cartagena, 129 - 28002 Madrid
Tel.: 91 564 42 94
Profesores de Enseñanza Secundaria INGLÉS
Tema 6.31
or four to read, note the number and write a brief evaluation of each, which could be
shared with the writers in private or put up on the wall for all to see. If the problem is an
authentic topical issue, for example, criticizing the opposition to a local wind farm
proposal where there is a public enquiry underway, the best recommendations could be
sent off to the appropriate official body, and/or sent to a local newspaper as a Letter to
the Editor.
Focus on form: if, in the course of their problem-solving task, learners have used written
sources of material, these can be re-used for a more explicit focus-on-form stage.
It is worth remembering again here that the degree of linguistic challenge of problem-solving tasks
will depend on the familiarity with the topic, complexity and breadth of the problem, the type of
initial guidance and/or preparation, how explicit the instructions are, and so on.
Some problem-solving tasks can begin with a short text setting out the discussion, like a problem
page letter, which promotes class or group or pair discussion. The following example is adapted from
Nunan (in Willis and Willis, 2007: 96).
Task
What advice would you give to the person who wrote this letter? Discuss your ideas and then agree
on the two best suggestions.
Dear Angie,
My husband and I are worried about our daughter. She refuses to do anything we tell her to do and
is very rude to us. Also, she has become very friendly with a girl we don‘t like. We don‘t trust her
anymore because she is always lying to us. Are we pushing her away from us? We don‘t know what
to do, and we‘re worried that she is going to get into trouble.
Worried Parents
Tasks like this could begin with individuals jotting down two bits of advice they would give and then
discussing their ideas, presenting some to the class. They could end with learners drafting a letter of
advice, and reading and evaluating each others‘ according to criteria they select themselves.
4. PRODUCTION STRATEGIES
The CEF (p. 63) provides the following account of production strategies. Production strategies
involve mobilizing resources, balancing between different competences—exploiting strengths and
underplaying weaknesses—in order to match the available potential to the nature of the task.
Internal resources will be activated, possibly involving conscious preparation (Rehearsing), possibly
CEDE - C/ Cartagena, 129 - 28002 Madrid
Tel.: 91 564 42 94
C E D E – www.cede.es
Tema 6.32
Profesores de Enseñanza Secundaria INGLÉS
calculating the effect of different styles, discourse structures or formulations (Considering
audience), possibly looking things up or obtaining assistance when dealing with a deficit (Locating
resources). When adequate resources have not been mobilized or located the language user may
find it advisable to go for a more modest version of the task and, for example, write a postcard
rather than a letter; on the other hand, having located appropriate support, he or she may choose
to do the reverse—scaling up the task (Task adjustment). In a similar way, without sufficient
resources the learner/user may have to compromise what he or she would really like to express in
order to match the linguistic means available; conversely, additional linguistic support, perhaps
available later during re-drafting, may enable him or her to be more ambitious in forming and
expressing his or her thoughts (Message adjustment).
Ways of scaling down ambitions to fit resources in order to ensure success in a more limited area
have been described as Avoidance strategies; scaling up and finding ways to cope have been
described as Achievement strategies. In using achievement strategies the language user adopts a
positive approach with what resources he or she has: approximating and overgeneralizing with
simpler language, paraphrasing or describing aspects of what he or she wants to say, even
‗foreignising‘ L1 (first language) expressions (Compensating); using highly accessible prefabricated language he or she feels sure of—―islands of reliability‖—to create stepping stones
through what for the user is a novel situation or concept he or she wants to express (Building on
previous knowledge), or just having a go with what he or she can half remember and thinks
might work (Trying out). Whether or not the language user is aware of compensating, skating over
thin ice or using language tentatively, feedback in terms of facial expression, gesture and
subsequent moves in the conversation offer him or her the opportunity to monitor the success of the
communication (Monitoring success). In addition, particularly in non-interactive activities (e.g.
giving a presentation, writing a report) the language user may consciously monitor linguistically as
well as communicatively, spot slips and ‗favorite‘ mistakes and correct them (Self-correction).
Planning
Rehearsing;
Locating resources;
Considering audience;
Task adjustment;
Message adjustment.
Execution
Compensating;
Building on previous knowledge;
Trying out.
Evaluation
Monitoring success.
Repair
Self-correction.
© C E D E – www.cede.es
CEDE - C/ Cartagena, 129 - 28002 Madrid
Tel.: 91 564 42 94
Profesores de Enseñanza Secundaria INGLÉS
Tema 6.33
The CEF provides illustrative scales for:
a. Planning;
b. Compensating;
c. Monitoring and repair.
CEDE - C/ Cartagena, 129 - 28002 Madrid
Tel.: 91 564 42 94
C E D E – www.cede.es
Tema 6.34
Profesores de Enseñanza Secundaria INGLÉS
5. CONCLUSION
The persistence of grammar-based instruction in many teaching contexts in the world, despite its
relative failure to produce effective language users, is partly due to the fact that it creates conditions
where teachers feel secure as they can predict the language that will be needed and they feel
comfortable in their roles as knowers. It also lends itself to accountability, since it generates clear
tangible goals, precise syllabuses, and a comfortingly itemizable basis for the evaluation of
effectiveness. For some authors, the difficulty in abandoning grammar-based instruction is also in
part due to the lack of a clear alternative framework, ‗a framework which will translate into
classroom organization, teacher training, and accountability and assessment‘.
Armed with insights from SLA research findings and cognitive psychology, nevertheless, attempts
are being made at effecting a transition from grammar-based to task-based instruction not just by
researchers, but also by language teachers and practitioners. The action-oriented approach of the
CEF and its implementation in the Spanish legislation through the applicable curricula are sure steps
towards this goal. At present time, teachers need to look for ways in which the transition from
grammar-based instruction to task-based instruction can be smooth, enjoyable and
rewarding for both teachers and learners.
A half-way step would be what Ellis (2003) terms ‘task-supported learning’, where tasks are used
alongside other more conventional methods, for example to supplement the text book. The text
book Cutting Edge2 (Cunningham and Moore) is a good example of this, having a task-based strand,
with an emphasis on lexis, alongside, but separate from, a grammar and skills syllabus.
Attempts are also being made to develop task-based frameworks into a fully-fledged
approach to language teaching. Ellis (2003) describes various ways this can be done, and
proposes a modular syllabus: beginners start with a purely task-based module, consisting of a range
of tasks (linguistically unfocused) to help them acquire naturally as much lexis and grammar as
possible; later a separate code-based module is gradually introduced, using focused tasks and
explicit grammar teaching, to draw attention to grammar and lexical refinements that learners may
not have noticed or acquired earlier.
In this topic we deal particularly with oral and written production activities, singling out specific
competences and microskills, and analyzing the explicit types of performance. Further, some
examples of categories of oral and written production tasks are given that illustrate the benefits of
building full-fledged instruction sequences around tasks. As we work on from the principles for
designing speaking techniques and activities, we should always remember the ever-present
2
This is not in any way an endorsement of any particular publication, but an indication of what is
available in the market.
© C E D E – www.cede.es
CEDE - C/ Cartagena, 129 - 28002 Madrid
Tel.: 91 564 42 94
Profesores de Enseñanza Secundaria INGLÉS
Tema 6.35
relationship among all four skills and the necessity in authentic, interactive classes to integrate
these skills even as you focus on the specifics of one skill area.
CEDE - C/ Cartagena, 129 - 28002 Madrid
Tel.: 91 564 42 94
C E D E – www.cede.es
Tema 6.36
Profesores de Enseñanza Secundaria INGLÉS
6. SUMMARY
1. INTRODUCTION
Traditionally, language examination based on formal accuracy. Students generally unable to
communicate in English
Irruption of Communicative Competence and task-based, action-oriented approach
Target tasks (real world) and pedagogical tasks (classroom). Tasks specify a context.
Lack of unanimous definition and classification of tasks
Pedagogical tasks include any of a series of techniques designed ultimately to teach students to
perform the target task
o
Point beyond the classroom, and may use formal and functional techniques
Spanish curricula: tasks as the axis around which the didactic units are planned
o
Specify what a learner needs to do with the English language in terms of target tasks
and organizes a series of pedagogical tasks intended to reach those goals
o
Course goals center on learners' pragmatic language competence
Acts of Communication: personal, public, occupations and educational domain
o
CEF: task as any purposeful action necessary to achieve a given result
Task types, variables and dimensions
o
Real-world/pedagogic tasks; divergent/convergent tasks; one-way/two-way tasks
o
Variables: structure, cognitive difficulty, familiarity, performance conditions
o
Need to consider the user‘s interlocutor in a communicative event
Instructional sequences around tasks. Create a linked sequence of enabling exercises and
activities that will prepare learners to carry out the task
o
Willis: pre-task, task cycle (planning phase and report phase) and language focus
o
Nunan: 7 underlying principles: scaffolding, task dependency and receptive-toproductive principle, recycling, active learning, integration, reproduction to recreation,
reflection.
2. FUNDAMENTALS OF ORAL PRODUCTION
Types of spoken language and related microskills of listening comprehension
Interactive nature. Conversational discourse in classroom interaction
o
the commonly accepted benchmark of successful language acquisition
Teaching pronunciation: debate over the extent to which it should be taught
Accuracy and fluency: how to balance clear, articulate, grammatically and phonologically
correct language and flowing, natural language.
o
Current approaches to language teaching lean strongly toward message orientation
with language usage offering a supporting role.
Affective factors: ―language ego‖. Provide appropriate climate
Specific competences in speaking
o
Clustering: Fluent speech is phrasal, not word by word
o
Redundancy: make meaning clearer through the redundancy of language
© C E D E – www.cede.es
CEDE - C/ Cartagena, 129 - 28002 Madrid
Tel.: 91 564 42 94
Profesores de Enseñanza Secundaria INGLÉS
o
Tema 6.37
Reduced forms: all form special problems in teaching spoken English (contractions,
elisions, reduced vowels)
o
Performance variables: Learners can actually be taught how to pause and hesitate
o
Colloquial language: familiarity with the words, idioms, and phrases of colloquial
language
o
Rate of delivery: to achieve an acceptable speed and other attributes of fluency
o
Stress, rhythm, and intonation: meaning in stress-timed rhythm of spoken English
and its intonation patterns
o
Interaction: creativity of conversational negotiation
Microskills of oral production (16 items dealing with different levels of speech)
o
Focus on form and function of the language
Principles for designing speaking techniques
o
Cover the spectrum of learner needs, from language-based focus on accuracy to
message-based focus on interaction, meaning, and fluency
o
Provide intrinsically motivating techniques.
o
Encourage the use of authentic language in meaningful contexts
o
Provide appropriate feedback and correction
o
Capitalize on the natural link between speaking and listening
o
Give students opportunities to initiate oral communication
o
Encourage the development of speaking strategies
Oral production activities
o
Public address, addressing audiences. Range of activities involved
o
Range of illustrative scales
Oral production tasks
o
Listing and sorting. Progressive degree of difficulty.
o
Variations: sequencing, ranking and classifying (encourage their own categories)
o
Fact-finding
o
Games based on listing(guessing, memory challenge, recycle)
o
Problem-solving tasks. Specific task sequence
Teaching pronunciation
o
Fluency vs. accuracy. Key in gaining full communicative competence
o
Top-bottom rather than bottom-up. Presiding communicative perspective
o
Role of native accent in multilingual, multicultural world
o
Focused on clear, comprehensible pronunciation
o
Factors within learners that affect pronunciation:

Native language, Age, Exposure, Innate phonetic ability, Identity and language
ego, Motivation and concern for good pronunciation
3. FUNDAMENTALS OF WRITTEN PRODUCTION
Writing as a culturally specific, learned behavior; not universally human
Composing vs. writing. The process of writing requires an entirely different set of
competencies and is fundamentally different from speaking
CEDE - C/ Cartagena, 129 - 28002 Madrid
Tel.: 91 564 42 94
C E D E – www.cede.es
Tema 6.38
Profesores de Enseñanza Secundaria INGLÉS
o
Written products are often the result of thinking, drafting, and revising procedures
that require specialized skills
Process vs. product. Process approach to writing instruction. A thinking, re-write process
o
student's final product measured up against a list of criteria that included content,
organization, vocabulary use, grammatical use
o
learners as creators of language, allowed to focus on content and message
Contrastive rhetoric considers the effect in writing of one‘s native culture and predispositions
Differences between L1 and L2 writing need to be considered by teachers at several levels
Authenticity. In the era of electronic communication we are less and less called upon to
compose. Reflection of real writing entails other forms of written production.
The role of the teacher as a responder to student‘s writing. Guidelines for making
commentary more effective
Microskills for writing.
o
Importance of focusing on clearly conceptualized objectives when planning for a
specific technique or writing module
o
Checklist with 12 items to cover in the domain of written expression
Principles for designing writing techniques
o
Incorporate practices of "good" writers, consider the various things that efficient
writers do and try to foster them by incorporation in your techniques
o
Balance process and product, make sure that students are carefully led through
appropriate stages in the process of composing
o
Account for cultural/literary backgrounds
o
Connect reading and writing. Clearly, students learn to write in part by carefully
observing what is already written
o
Provide as much authentic writing as possible. Whether writing is real writing or
for display, it can still be authentic in that:
o

the purposes for writing are clear to the students

the audience is specified overtly

and there is at least some intent to convey meaning
Frame your techniques in terms of prewriting, drafting, and revising stages.
Process writing approaches tend to be framed in three stages of writing

drafting and revising stages are the core of process writing
o
Strive to offer techniques that are as interactive as possible
o
Sensitively apply methods of responding to and correcting your students' writing
o

Teachers‘ roles: first consultant, then evaluator

Guidelines for responding to written drafts
Clearly instruct students on the rhetorical, formal conventions of writing. Each
type of writing has its formal properties
Written production activities
o
Sample activities
o
Illustrative scales of performance
o
Macrofunctions of written production

Reports, opinion texts, information and other writing ; Creative writing (for
themselves and others)
© C E D E – www.cede.es
CEDE - C/ Cartagena, 129 - 28002 Madrid
Tel.: 91 564 42 94
Profesores de Enseñanza Secundaria INGLÉS
Tema 6.39
Written production tasks
o
Often thought that tasks are mainly for improving oral and aural skills, but not
necessarily

brainstorm in writing, individually or in pairs, and then present ideas in writing
write by hand in class and pass it round or pin it on a wall for others to
read;
email their writing to each other,
use word processing packages to produce a polished piece for public
display or for the class website
o
Visual support extends traditional writing assignments to applications on target
tasks
o

visual support in the form of chart, tables, mind-maps

time lines and storylines are excellent for tasks based on sequencing.
Comparing and contrasting. Comparison tasks are a typical, good activity for
learners to talk to each other in small groups. This response can also be directed
towards writing.

o
Also based on two or more texts or a similar text
Problem-solving task.

offer scope for a variety of writing activities: note-taking, drafting, and
finalizing proposals for solutions

Specific task sequence (writing phases and focus on form)
4. PRODUCTION STRATEGIES
To the extent that tasks are neither routine nor automatic, they require the use of strategies in
communicating and learning
Communication strategies seen as the application of the metacognitive principles:
o
Pre-planning, Execution, Monitoring, and Repair Action to the different kinds of
communicative activity: Reception, Interaction, Production and Mediation.
5. CONCLUSION
Endurance of grammar-based instructions: establishment and convenient factors
CEF, Spanish curricula: a clear steps towards task-based language teaching
o
transition from grammar-based instruction to task-based instruction can be smooth
―task-supported learning‖, where tasks are used alongside other more conventional methods,
for example to supplement the text book
Attempts to develop task-based frameworks into a fully-fledged approach to language teaching
Need to consider task types, variables and dimensions in the selection and adaptation of tasks
Need to work on all skills in an integrated fashion.
CEDE - C/ Cartagena, 129 - 28002 Madrid
Tel.: 91 564 42 94
C E D E – www.cede.es
Tema 6.40
Profesores de Enseñanza Secundaria INGLÉS
7. BIBLIOGRAPHY
BROWN, H. Douglas. 2000. Teaching by Principles. An Interactive Approach to Language
Pedagogy. 2nd ed. Pearson ESL.
EDWARDS, C; WILLIS, J. eds. 2005. Teachers Exploring Tasks in English Language
Teaching. Palgrave MacMillan.
ELLIS, R. 2003. Task-Based Language Learning and Teaching. Oxford University Press.
NUNAN, D. 2004. Task-Based Language Teaching. Cambridge University Press.
SCRIVENER, Jim. 1994. Learning Teaching: a guidebook for English language teachers.
Macmillan. 2nd ed.
WILLIS, D; WILLIS, J. 2007. Doing Task-based Teaching. Oxford University Press.
REFERENCES
COUNCIL OF EUROPE. 2001. The Common European Framework of Reference for
Languages. Strasburg: the Cambridge University Press.
Willis D, 1996b ‗Introduction‘ in Willis, J. and D. Willis (eds). Challenge and change in language
teaching. Oxford: Heinemann: iv–vi.
Swain, M. 1988. Manipulating and complementing content teaching to maximise second
language learning. TESL Canada Journal 6(1): 68–93.
Nunan, D. 1989a. Designing tasks for the communicative classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
EDITA Y DISTRIBUYE:
© C E D E – www.cede.es
CEDE - C/ Cartagena, 129 - 28002 Madrid
Tel.: 91 564 42 94