Input as task specification

Hasan (1985: 69) contends that, in educational processes, learners require exposure in active and a range of genres (texts either written or spoken) with a communicative purpose(s). Like other scholars, Hasan (1985: 85) provides two forms of exposure he calls phonic and graphics. According to Hasan, phonic exposure is when learners contact a given message through air or sound waves. In addition, the graphic exposure is when a message is given to learners in images or written formats. Similarly, Benati and Angelovska (2016: 23) relate input to language that L2 learners get exposed to with a communicative intent. The exposure is either by reading or hearing (listening) this language. Similarly, Nunan (2004: 47) defines input as the written, spoken or visual data and

information that L2 learners work within in the course of completing a task. Nunan argues that Input data/information is either provided by a language teacher, textbook or any other alternative sources, for example, L2 learners themselves. Nunan (2004: 48) uses Hover’s (1986) inventory to list a range of input sources. Such sources include, (i) picture stories, (ii) missing person’s declarations, (iii) extracts from plays, (iv) both informal and formal letters, lastly, (v) family tree. According to Nunan, such a list could be used in a range of tasks to develop skills, such as listening, speaking and or for encouraging literacy skill development across L2 learners.

Regarding the development of writing skills, with reference to Nunan (2004: 48-49), Morris and Stewart-Dore (1984: 158) argue that it is not necessary to teach L2 learners writing styles in their respective language registers. Morris and Stewart-Dore, however, provide a list of writing options that are usually extended to L2 learners. Such options include, (i) reports from a range of groups, (ii) progress reports and plans for future development, (iii) minutes of the meeting, (iv) replies to letters and other kinds of correspondences. (see, for example, Henry & Roseberry 1998: 148, for similar views). Lastly, (v) plays, short stories and poems. On the other hand, Nunan is concerned about the authenticity of the materials that are considered as input.

Nunan (2004: 49) relates authenticity to the use of both spoken and written materials produced purposely for communication rather than for language teaching. According to Nunan, combinations of authentic materials, such as written ones provide L2 learners with optimum language learning opportunities. In a similar way, Nunan (2004: 50) argues that the simplification of input makes it easy for L2 learners to process language and language learning processes. According to Nunan, an increase in the frequency of language learning elements, such as patterns and regularities may appear to be to L2 learners. In addition, Nunan is of the view that slowing down the speed of speech make it easy for L2 learners especially the beginners to comprehend and understand the language better.

Nunan argues that exposing L2 learns to the authentic materials as input is crucial to such learners. Such input includes written texts and language dialogues. Nunan however, argues that such exposure serves only for classrooms purposes rather than preparing an L2 to copy with the language use that they hear or read in the real-world situations. In this regard, Nunan advises that in order for L2 learners to comprehend aural or written language in the real-world contexts, there is a need to provide L2 learners with structured opportunities so that learners can engage in such materials inside the language classrooms. See, for example, Nunan (2004: 50-51), for samples of the extracts of authentic published texts as presented by Nunan (1995: 172 & 152), respectively.

On the other hand, Nunan (2004: 51) holds the view that there are arguments against the use of both written and spoken texts in L2 classrooms. In justifying Nunan’s views above, with reference to Nunan (2004: 51), Brosnan, Brown and Hood (1984) argue that in the contexts of L2 as opposed to foreign language contexts, L2 learners need to read texts as already provided in the environment and contexts that learners engage in. Such contexts include, for example, the banking malls, shop doors, items’ packets, on windows et cetera. In support of their views above, Brosnan et al. (1984: 2-3) provide justifications for the use of the above real-world resources. The justifications include,

(i) [The] language is natural. By simplifying language or altering it for teaching purposes (limiting structures, controlling vocabulary, et cetera.) we risk making the reading task more difficult. We may, in fact, be removing clues to meaning. (ii) It offers the students the chance to deal with small amounts of print which, at the same time, contain complete, meaningful messages. (iii) It provides students with the opportunity to make use of non- linguistics clues (layout, pictures, colours, symbols, the physical setting in which it occurs) and more easily to arrive at meaning from the printed word. (iv) Adults need to be able to see the immediate relevance of what they do in the classroom to what they need to do outside it, and real-life reading material treated realistically makes the connections obvious. Nunan (2004: 51)

Thus, according to Brosnan et al. (1984: 2-3), language teachers need not create such texts for their learners. In a similar way, with reference to Nunan (2004: 51-52), Brown and Menasche (1993) also argue that input data can be placed on a continuum. That is to say from genuinely authentic to non- authentic. Brown and Menasche maintain that there should be at least five distinguishable points along the continuum. According to Brown and Menasche, such points include,

(i) Genuine: created only for the realm of real life, not for the classroom, but used in the classroom for language teaching. (ii) Altered: while there is no meaning change, the original has been altered in other ways (for example, the insertion of glosses, visual resetting, and the addition of visual). (iii) Adapted: Although created for real life, vocabulary and grammatical structures are changed to simplify the text. (iv) Simulated: Although specially written by the author for purpose of language teaching, the author tries to make it look authentic by using characteristics of genuine texts. (v) Minimal/incidental: Created for the classroom with no attempt to make the material appear genuine. Nunan (2004: 52)

Similarly, with reference to Nunan (2004: 52), Snow and Briton (1997) and Briton (2003) argue that in case the language programme is intended to develop learners’ academic skills or preparing learners for further studies, authentic content can be taken from the subject areas in the school curriculum. Activities can be adapted from relevant academic discipline, such as geography, physical education, music and so on. According to scholars, each of the disciplines has a body of literature which presents the content of that area in a language style of its own. In this regard, with reference to Nunan (2004: 52), Morris and Stewart (1984: 21) maintain that classroom learning is

extended beyond to the real-world situations. The above view leads us to the last task specification, which is procedures as will be discussed below.