2. The suitability of task-based ap

2. The suitability of task-based approaches for schooling

An overarching concept framing the paper is the need for interplay between any methodology being promoted and the particular context in which it is being implemented (Bax, 2004). It is acknowledged that task-based approaches are of Anglo-American origin and that this may bring them into conflict with cultural contexts outside the western world (Ellis, 2003). For example, in Chinese settings this may involve a compromise between communication-oriented approaches and traditional methodologies, where for example, language teaching is generally seen as the delivery of knowledge rather than the development of communicative skills (Hu, 2005).

There are various critiques of task-based approaches relevant to schooling. A key problem is where the linguistic input comes from in task-based teaching and how new knowledge is developed (Bruton, 2005; Swan, 2005), particularly if the pre-task stage is as Willis (1996) suggests, a short stage comprising mainly ‘Introducing the topic’ and ‘Identifying topic language’. Language acquisition in TBLT is also sometimes seen as being too close to L1 processes to be applicable in EFL contexts (Klapper, 2003). Bruton (2005) concludes that task-based teaching has limited applicability for secondary school foreign language classrooms and similarly Swan (2005) suggests that task-based teaching is most suitable for advanced learners. Whilst detailed and impressively referenced, Bruton, Klapper and Swan do not provide empirical data to support their expert commentary.

The relationship between grammar instruction and task-based approaches is often a cause of concern for teachers and an issue impacting on teachers’ perceptions of the feasibility of task-based instruction (Loumpourdi, 2005). Task-based approaches can provide a way to integrate grammar instruction with meaning-focused language use through performance of communicative tasks (Fotos, 2002). One strategy involves focused tasks which target the use of a particular pre-determined linguistic feature whilst still maintaining a concern for message communication and student choice of linguistic resources (Ellis, 2003). In TBL, grammatical form is often emphasized in the post-task stage as part of a ‘focus on form’ to counter the danger that learners develop fluency at the expense of accuracy (Skehan, 1996). In the model proposed by Willis (1996, p. 101), language focus and language practice are recommended in the post-task phase as ‘‘an opportunity for explicit language instruction’’. A possible tension is that Hong Kong teachers generally present grammar deductively with an emphasis on form rather than meaning (Andrews, 2003). On the basis of her Hong Kong experiences, Tang (2004) claims that PPP is predominant in Asia as it fulfils the need for a clear and direct teacher instructional role and she questions whether Asian teachers are attracted to the notion of covering grammar in the post-task phase.

Hasil (Bahasa Indonesia) 1:

2. kesesuaian pendekatan berbasis tugas sekolahKonsep menyeluruh yang membingkai kertas adalah kebutuhan untuk interaksi antara metodologi yang dipromosikan dan konteks tertentu di mana itu sedang dilaksanakan (Bax, 2004). Diakui bahwa pendekatan berbasis tugas asal Anglo-Amerika dan bahwa hal ini dapat membawa mereka ke dalam konflik dengan konteks budaya di luar dunia Barat (Ellis, 2003). Sebagai contoh, dalam pengaturan Cina ini mungkin melibatkan kompromi antara pendekatan berorientasi komunikasi dan metodologi yang tradisional, dimana misalnya, pengajaran bahasa umumnya dipandang sebagai pengiriman pengetahuan daripada pengembangan keterampilan komunikatif (Hu, 2005).Ada berbagai kritik dari pendekatan berbasis tugas yang relevan dengan sekolah. Masalah utama adalah mana input linguistik berasal di mengajar berbasis tugas dan bagaimana pengetahuan baru dikembangkan (Bruton, 2005; Swan, 2005), terutama jika tahap pra-tugas sebagai Willis (1996) menunjukkan, panggung pendek terdiri dari terutama 'Memperkenalkan topik' dan 'Mengidentifikasi topik bahasa'. Pemerolehan bahasa di TBLT juga kadang-kadang dipandang sebagai menjadi terlalu dekat ke L1 proses yang akan berlaku dalam konteks EFL (Klapper, 2003). Bruton (2005) menyimpulkan bahwa pengajaran berbasis tugas telah terbatas penerapan untuk sekolah menengah kelas bahasa asing dan demikian pula Swan (2005) menunjukkan bahwa pengajaran berbasis tugas paling cocok untuk maju pembelajar. Sementara rinci dan mengesankan direferensikan, Bruton, Klapper dan Swan tidak memberikan data empiris untuk mendukung komentar ahli mereka.The relationship between grammar instruction and task-based approaches is often a cause of concern for teachers and an issue impacting on teachers’ perceptions of the feasibility of task-based instruction (Loumpourdi, 2005). Task-based approaches can provide a way to integrate grammar instruction with meaning-focused language use through performance of communicative tasks (Fotos, 2002). One strategy involves focused tasks which target the use of a particular pre-determined linguistic feature whilst still maintaining a concern for message communication and student choice of linguistic resources (Ellis, 2003). In TBL, grammatical form is often emphasized in the post-task stage as part of a ‘focus on form’ to counter the danger that learners develop fluency at the expense of accuracy (Skehan, 1996). In the model proposed by Willis (1996, p. 101), language focus and language practice are recommended in the post-task phase as ‘‘an opportunity for explicit language instruction’’. A possible tension is that Hong Kong teachers generally present grammar deductively with an emphasis on form rather than meaning (Andrews, 2003). On the basis of her Hong Kong experiences, Tang (2004) claims that PPP is predominant in Asia as it fulfils the need for a clear and direct teacher instructional role and she questions whether Asian teachers are attracted to the notion of covering grammar in the post-task phase.