Types of learning tasks

Nunan (2004: 56-61) and Oxford (2006: 101) argue that the range of tasks is as unlimited as the number of scholars and studies in relation to TBLT (see, for example, Ellis 2009b: 212, on views regarding TBLT scholars). In justifying the above view, Nunan discusses historical developments on a range of proposals for task typologies and strategies. According to Nunan, the Bangalore (1987) project, championed by Prabhu, initiated the basis for task types. Nunan is of the view that the Bangalore project applied three principal tasks. According to Prabhu (1987: 46-47), the three tasks are characterised by communication gaps. The tasks include, (i) Reasoning-gap, (ii) information-gap and (iii) opinion gap. These tasks are among other tasks which are summarised in Table 3:5, on page 144. However, the three tasks will be discussed later in their respective task classification, for instance, in section 3.5.2.3, on page 147.

Similarly, Nunan argues that Pattison’s (1987) proposal, as cited in Nunan (2004: 57-58), on task typology was applied in almost the same period with the Bangalore project. According to Nunan, Pattison’s typology applied seven types of tasks and activities, as summarised in Table 3:4 below.

Table 3:4: Pattison's (1987) types of tasks and activities

Task types Activities

Pictures and picture stories Many communication activities can be stimulated through the use of pictures (e.g. spot the difference, memory test, and sequencing pictures to tell a story).

Discussions and decisions These require the learner to collect and share information to reach a decision (e.g. to decide which items from a list are essential to have on a desert island)

Communication strategies These are activities designed to encourage learners to practice communication strategies, such as paraphrasing, borrowing or inventing words, using gestures, asking for feedback and simplifying.

Question and answers These activities are based on the notion of creating an information gap by letting learners make a personal and secret choice from a list of language items which all fit into a given frame (e.g. the location of a person or object). The aim is for learners to discover their classmates’’ secret choice. This activity can be used to practice almost any structure, function or notion. Matching activities Here, the task for the learner is to recognize the matching item or

to complete pairs or sets. ‘Bingo’, ‘Happy families’ and ‘Split dialogues’ (where learners match the given phrases) are examples of matching activities.

Dialogues and role plays These can be wholly scripted or wholly improvised. However, ‘if learners are given some choice of what to say, and if there is a clear aim to be achieved by what they say in their role plays, they may participate more willingly and learn more thoroughly than when they are told to simply repeat a given dialogue in the pair’ Puzzles and problems Once again, there are many different types of puzzles and

problems. These require learners to ‘make guesses, draw on their general knowledge and personal experience, use their imagination and test their powers of logical reasoning’.

Source: Modified from Nunan (2004: 57-58)

In addition, according to Nunan (2004: 58), the most recent developments on task typology and pedagogical tasks are tasks proposed by Richards (2001: 162). Richards proposes five tasks, as summarised in Table 3:5, on page 144.

Table 3:5: A reflection of Richards's (2001) typology of pedagogical tasks

Task types Descriptions

Decision-making tasks In these tasks, learners are given a problem for which there is are a number of possible outcomes/solutions and they choose one through negotiation and discussion

Information-gap tasks Information-gap tasks involve either a single learner of a group of them with a set of information. With another learner or group of learners with a complementary set of information. The two learners or two groups must negotiate and find out what the other learner or group’s information is in order to complete an activity.

Opinion-exchange tasks In opinion-exchange tasks, learners do engage in discussion and exchange ideas. Learners do not need to reach an agreement.

Jigsaw tasks Jigsaw tasks involve learners in combining different pieces of information to form a whole (e.g. three individual or groups may have three different parts of a story and have to piece the story together).

Problem-solving tasks In problem-solving tasks, learners are given a problem and a set of information. They must arrive at a solution to the problem. There is generally a single resolution of the outcome.

Source: Modified from Nunan (2004: 58-59)

While reflecting on the above typologies of task types and activities, Nunan (2004) maintains the view that such typologies are primarily based on the analysis of communicative language use rather than on the strategies that underlie such tasks. In this context, Nunan proposes another typology of classifying tasks based on the strategies underpinning the attested tasks. According to Nunan, such strategies types include interpersonal, creative, linguistic, cognitive and affective strategies.

Similarly, in relation to task classification, Ellis (2003b: 205) relates task classification to (i) types of tasks that are included in the TBSs and (ii) the order at which such tasks are presented to the L2 learners in the classroom. According to Ellis (2003b: 206), TBSs provide a range of task specifications that are systematically graded based primarily on, (i) their level of difficulty to the learners, and (ii) the thematic content. In this context, unlike structural syllabuses, TBSs are composed of linguistically unfocused tasks. Ellis (2003b: 16) maintains that there ideally two types of tasks i.e. focused and unfocused tasks as discussed below.