Practice Activities – FP011 TP

PRACTICE ACTIVITIES:
TASKS AND PROJECTS

Student full Name:

Yuri Paola Infante Tejada

Group: 2017-06
Date: October 31st/2018

Subject: FP011 – Task and Projects

1
 Practice Activities – FP011 TP

Practice Activities
Task 1.
Do the following proposal fit the definition of “tasks” according to Ellis? Justify your
answer. Retrieved from Counihan, G. (1998). The Internet TESL Journal, Vol. IV, No. 11, November
1998. http://iteslj.org/Lessons/Counihan-Activities/Rejoinders.html

The task proposed before can be considered part of a TBLT task according to Ellis (as cited in
TESOLacademic, 2014). Since the teacher aims to meet a communicative outcome by giving the
students an activity, in which each of them have an specific role; students can present an
assumption of the activity’s goal and enable themselves to participate easily and naturally in the
communication process proposed in this type of task. (5:30).
Firstly and based on Ellis’ explanation on the types of task the teacher can use to develop that
implicit knowledge that permits them to create the proper conditions to learners communicate
using the target language. This activity first shows a type of unfocused- task where the students
receive a language input that first it seems to be based on intentional language delivery, but as the
activity advanced students would learn from others’ participation with incidental language
acquisition.
On the other hand and regarding the notes section, it can be stated how the teacher expects that
with the language input and context stablished, the students can come with their own resources of
conversation, language exchange based on the input’s contexts, and moreover be engaged in
creating and eliciting new language in a collaborative way; primary focusing on meaning by
encouraging realistic language forms. (Ellis as cited in TESOLacademic, 2014; 7:05).
Last but not least, the activity also appears to be based on an information gap approach task.
Owing to the fact that each student is assigned with a certain role and phrase to elicit the
communication in advance. As one learner has one piece of information and complements it with
other’s piece, the necessity to share this information and vice versa is stablished. So that, students
are able to replicate this same scenario of information exchanging outside the classroom context.

Task 2.
Define “implicit” and “explicit” knowledge and provide an example (Robinson’s article in
the library might complement Ellis’ video).

On the one hand, According to Ellis (1994) Implicit knowledge emerge when "the
underplaying structure of a complex stimulus environment by a process which takes place
naturally, simply and without conscious operations" (p.1). Following the same path Berry (1994)
stated a similar distinction when expressing learning as an outcome that occurs without a
concerted awareness of it, and more through inference and instances. Therefore, implicit

2
 Practice Activities – FP011 TP

knowledge is the one that serves as a mean to help students communicate, transfer knowledge and
ideas, and enhance their L2 incidentally, hence it is not limited by other external factors or
activities rules operation. (Ellis as cited in TESOLacademic, 2014; 7:05).
On the other hand, explicit knowledge is intentional. It is acquire throughout a more conscious
notion of topic’s rules and not its instances. The learner is more aware about the structures that
may emerge in the learning process theories; involving a straight problem solving approach based
on hypothesis formations and testing. (Berry, 1994; Dekeyser, 1995; Ellis, 1994; Robinson, 1997a;
Robinson, 1997b) In brief, its procedure and rationale is intentional delivery of knowledge based
in organized structural syllabus that may create a problem of meaning transfer due to its lack of
relation and extension with the real world context. (Ellis as cited in TESOLacademic, 2014;
10:15).
From Robinson’s (2011) point of view, both types of knowledge need to be develop in some
instance on the second language learning process. As a matter of fact, the type of knowledge that
is initially implicit, could become an explicit one since the unintentional language forms learnt in
previous lessons, are now well known and noticeable (p.16). Nevertheless, this depends on the
number of attempts to complete the task and how well controlled the language and meaning forms
are. Regardless the type of knowledge that may come as an output in future lessons, and even if
the context is a vocabulary or grammar instruction one, both Ellis (2014) and Robinson (2001)
support the idea of using focused and unfocused type tasks that relies on language forms
previously selected and sequenced by the teacher; allowing the process of elicitation, motivational
cognitive construction and L2 vocabulary acquisition to take place. Consequently, the main
purpose and basis of TBLT is to work on the meaning-content type of activities that can trustfully
promote incidental learning and interlanguage development. (Robinson, 2001; p.24)
Regarding this type of meaning-content activities Ellis, Loewen, Elder, Erlam, Philp &
Reinders (2009) proposed the elicited oral imitation activities as a good example to develop and
measure the implicit knowledge created with focused- tasks. Finding out two important elements
on memory and even internalised grammar factors, in which the learners were able to manipulate
grammatical structures in a consistently well way relating it to their own internal grammar. Due to
this, the implicit knowledge is understood by learning how students learnt to control complex
grammar structures as a result of the stimulus received from a positive correction and student’s
own interlanguage reconstructions (p.66).
In the same way, Ellis et al. (2009) proposed the grammatically judgment tests to develop and
measure both explicit and implicit knowledge in L2. In contrast to implicit tasks, the explicit ones
requires some degree of conscious analysis of the knowledge that is being delivered. For instance,
learners can simply be asked to discriminate between well-form and deviant sentences by using

3
 Practice Activities – FP011 TP

error analysis, locating mistakes, correcting, describing errors, processing, noticing and reflecting
methods to undergo this GJTs process. (p. 94-96)
Task 3.
What are the main wrong assumptions done about task-based learning? Can you provide
examples that support Ellis complains, i.e. that show task-based activities that do not fit the
prototypical assumptions?
The two main misconceptions done about TBL are firstly, believing that the whole learning
process of these tasks needs to be done organizing the learner into peers or groups. And secondly,
performing speaking activities that more than focusing on meaning are just focused on enhancing
the fluency through the practice of previously known vocabulary. (Ellis as cited in
TESOLacademic, 2014; 10:00-13:00). It is true that TBL is partially focus on peer to peer and
group tasks that can attract students’ attention to linguistic forms which enrich their
communicative skills in the L2. When students work with peers, they share previous and
meaningful knowledge to their peers due to the contexts or in this case the task’ needs.
Consequently, the language input generated by this can increase students’ implicit knowledge,
however, these activities are not entirely about this and teachers’ guidance, participation, language
structures and input is also necessary. (Ellis as cited in TESOLacademic, 2014).
A good example of this misconception it’s when teachers design a role play activity that works
with grammatical structures, vocabulary and language forms the students have theorized before in
previous lessons. On top of that, we as teachers just apply the role play as a practice activity to
improve students’ use of that specific language in pairs or group activities monitoring only the
correct use of this vocabulary and grammar, and not aiming for reflective feedback that actually
cares on students language use on certain situations, on peer to peer knowledge sharing, on how
this activity can be transferred into real life situation based on students’ contexts, and moreover
monitoring meaning and linguistics forms related to this. In fewer words, when teachers design
this type of tasks they are creating more a Presentation, practice and production kind of activities.
As for the misconception of using TBL for increasing fluency and only focusing on the
speaking skill. Ellis (2014) stated the latter is a worrisome misconception, since TBL aims to
practice and foster the 4 major language skills as equally as possible. Unfortunately, this
misconception takes part because most of these tasks are communicative and involved
conversations. Nevertheless, if these tasks are designed as focused-tasks, information gaps tasks
and corrective feedback other skills might be fostered. If teacher create activities such as forums,
debates and discussion activities to only display the language knowledge, and if they do not have a
solid language input expected for a communicative outcome matching the prototypical
assumptions of TBL, they cannot expect students to have a natural learning process of L2 and
replicate it outside the classroom. (Ellis, 2011; Nunan, 1991).
4
 Practice Activities – FP011 TP

Task 4.
Can an online course be fully task-based? What inconveniences it might encounter? You
might want to read Lee 2016 before answering.

Regarding Lee’s (2016) research it seems that task- based activity can be fully performed as
online courses because the computer assisted language learning activities (CALL) and computer-
mediated communication tools (CMC) are emphasis on the users, in this case the learners’
autonomy and awareness on their learning process (p. 82). Since TBL criteria also relies on
developing the creation of communicative understanding, sharing conceptions and opinions, using
learners’ own language resources –linguistics and non-linguistics- and achieving communicative
outcomes (Ellis, 2014) CALL advantages of individualized learning, collaboration increasing and
autonomy reinforcement, proves TBL tasks can be adapted into online courses. Nonetheless, with
these strengths some drawbacks can also be encountered when applying fully TBL online courses.
The following chart demonstrates how with each pro there is a con of its application:
Advantages of online TBL courses Inconveniences
Students are able to manage and adjust Due to the lack of self-own pace on certain assignments some
their own schedules based on their online students might have needed to learn new things quicker for not
assignments. falling behind in the course’s schedule.

Self-regulation, self-management and Some students find it difficult to be successfully self-monitored

self-monitoring are developed in a without receiving some significant guidance before. That is why
significant way at the same time as their Lee (2016) suggests to teach previously what self-management
language skills. and self- monitoring strategies are about to address this
inconvenient.
A better development on students’ Although students presented to have a more active role, still it is
explicit knowledge is fulfilled, enhancing important to remember than more than only developing the
their conscious learning. So that explicit knowledge, TBL has to focus on forms and meaning to
students’ motivation can increased and also emphasis the tasks on implicit knowledge through a
they can be more autonomous when participatory structure. Teachers can fit in examples to it
correcting errors based on teachers’ through recast, providing opportunities to uptake it. (Ellis as
feedback. cited in TESOLacademic, 2014)
It supports social, cognitive, and TBL also has to be regarded as a 4 skills language developer,
affective dimensions of autonomous not only speaking practices for fluency. It would be worthwhile
learning by allowing students to learn to explore how peer feedback affects social interaction and
independently and collaboratively. collaborative engagement on the error revision process and
Hence, CMC tasks related to real-world focus- on-form through self-reflection
language use conduct students to be
more motivated.
Adapted from: Lee, L. (2016). Autonomous Learning through Task-based Instruction in Fully Online
Language Courses. University of New Hampshire, Durham.

Bearing this in mind Lee (2016) agrees that more time to apply these type of tools is necessary
to fully understand its development and real improvement on students’ autonomy, as well as their
communicative abilities since it is the essential goal of TBL. Additionally, the designing of hybrid
activities that are not only based on a fully online TBL program are also recommendable to assure
learners interaction with each other considered real contexts and situations.

5
 Practice Activities – FP011 TP

Bibliography.
Berry, D. C. (1994) Implicit and explicit learning of complex tasks. In: Ellis, N. C. (ed.) Implicit
and Explicit Learning of Languages. Academic Press, London.

DeKeyser, R. (1994). How implicit can adult second language learning be? AILA Review, 11. 83-
96.

Ellis, N. (1994). Consciousness in second language learning: Psychological perspectives on the

role of conscious processes in vocabulary. AILA Review. 37-46

Ellis, R. Loewen, S. Elder, C. Erlam, R. Philp, J & Reinders, H. (2009). Implicit and explicit
learning, knowledge and instruction. British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data. Bristol;
UK. Retrieved from: https://issuu.com/betifca/docs/libro_ingles

Ellis, R. (2011). The evaluation of communicative tasks. In: Tomlinson, B. (ed). Materials
development in language Teaching. (2nd ed) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 217-238.

Ellis, R. [TESOLacademic]. (2014, July 28). Prof. Ellis on task-based pedagogy: the what, why
and how [Video file]. Retrieved from https://youtu.be/zdRibzXW2TI

Lee, L. (2016). Autonomous Learning through Task-based Instruction in Fully Online Language
Courses. University of New Hampshire, Durham. Retrieved from:

Nunan, D. (1991). Designing Tasks for the Communicative Classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.

Robinson. P. (1997a). Individual differences and the fundamental similarity of implicit and
explicit adult second language learning. Language Learning, 47. 45-99.

Robinson, P. (1997b). Generalizability and automaticity of second language leaming under

implicit, incidental, enhanced, and instructed conditions. Studies in Second Language
Acquisition. 19, 223-247.

Robinson, P. (2011). Task- Based Language Learning: A Review of Issues. Article in Language
Learning: May 2011. Retrieved from:
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2011.00641.x