Cover not available

In:TBLT as a Researched Pedagogy
Edited by Virginia Samuda, Kris Van den Branden and Martin Bygate
[Task-Based Language Teaching 12] 2018
► pp. 235–264

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
authorization required

Chapter 9
Tasks in the pedagogic space

Using online discussion forum tasks and formative feedback to develop academic discourse skills at Master’s level

 | King’s College London
 | King’s College London
 | King’s College London
Published online: 1 November 2018
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.12.10and
This chapter discusses two related studies, both carried out at our own institution with participant students enrolled on an MA in Applied Linguistics, and both aimed at exploring the development of academic discourse at Master’s level. Both studies draw on ‘task’ as a unifying point of reference. The first study examines student and tutor posts written in an online discussion forum for a first semester module on the MA programme. The forum, which comprises a series of reading, writing, and discussion tasks, was intended as an opportunity for students to relate concepts covered in the MA to existing beliefs and practices and to discuss the pedagogic implications of theory and research in applied linguistics. Our objective was to better understand how students perceive the purpose and value of online tasks. Student participation in the online tasks raised wider issues of engagement with pedagogic activities. This prompted us to carry out a second study concerning student engagement with feedback on assessed work throughout the academic year. For this, we carried out student interviews, inviting participants to bring with them one assessed assignment from the previous term and discuss their responses to the written comments they had received from tutors. We were especially interested in understanding students’ prior assumptions and expectations regarding feedback, to explore students’ readiness to make use of feedback and examine to what extent feedback can have an impact on academic writing.
In both studies we found a number of telling differences between student and staff perceptions of and orientation to the various tasks and activities being investigated. In our framing of the relevant pedagogic issues we consider the factors to emerge from the studies as components of a wider “pedagogic space”, a framing which has enabled us to make sense of the data by posing some very constructive questions and by reflecting on broader pedagogic, curriculum, and organisational matters.
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • Study one: The task-based discussion forum
    • Background
    • Task design
    • Participating students and tutors
    • Research focus and data handling
    • Findings: Students’ perceptions of and engagement with the online discussion forum
    • Findings: Tutor-student interaction in the online discussion forum
  • Study two: Student engagement with feedback on written assignments
    • Background
    • Research focus
    • Participants and data collection
    • Data coding and analysis
    • Findings: Student engagement with feedback
    • Extract from Amy’s interview
    • Extract from Sadie’s interview
    • Extract from Miguel’s interview
    • Extract from Fe’s interview
    • Implications
  • Pedagogic space: Affordances and limitations
  • Framing tasks within the curriculum: Pedagogic issues for further consideration
  • Notes
  • References
  • Appendix
References (31)
References
Alexander, R. (2008). Towards dialogic teaching: Rethinking classroom talk (4th ed.). Thirsk: Diaogos.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Allwright, D. (2005). From teaching points to learning opportunities and beyond. TESOL Quarterly, 39, 9–31. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bax, S. (2003). The end of CLT: A context approach to language teaching. ELT Journal, 57, 278–287. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Berg, B. (2009). Qualitative research for the social sciences. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Byrnes, H. (2015). Linking ‘task’ and curricular thinking: An affirmation of the TBLT educational agenda. In M. Bygate (Ed.), Domains and directions in the development of TBLT. A decade of plenaries from the international conference (pp.193–224). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Copland, F. (2004). MA courses in TEFL/TESOL: Are we meeting the needs of our Asian students? IATEFL Teacher Development SIG Newsletter Spring 2004, 5–8.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Ellis, R., & Shintani, N. (2014). Exploring language pedagogy through second language acquisition research. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Foster, P. (1999). Task-based learning and pedagogy. ELT Journal, 53, 69–70. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Harmer, J. (2003). Popular culture, methods, and context. ELT Journal, 57, 288–294. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Howatt, A. (1984). A History of English language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hutchinson, T., & Waters, A. (1987). ESP: A learning-centred approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lo, Y. (2005). Relevance of knowledge of second language acquisition: An in-depth case study of a non-native EFL teacher. In N. Bartels. (Ed.), Applied linguistics and language teacher education (pp.135–155). New York, NY: Springer.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Long, M. (2015). Second language acquisition and task-based language teaching. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mann, S. (2011). A critical review of qualitative interviews in applied linguistics. Applied Linguistics, 32, 6–24. doi:.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mohan, B. (1990). LEP students and the integration of language and content: knowledge structures and tasks. In C. Simich-Dudgeon (Ed.), Proceedings of the first research symposium on limited English proficient students’ issues (pp.113–160). Washington, DC: Office of Bilingual Education and Minority Languages Affairs.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(2001). The second language as a medium of learning. In B. Mohan, C. Leung, & C. Davison (Eds.), English as a second language in the mainstream: Teaching, learning and identity (pp.107–126). London: Longman.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mohan, B., & Slater, T. (2004). The evaluation of causal discourse and language as a resource for meaning. In J. A. Foley (Ed.), Language, education, and discourse: Functional approaches (pp.255–269). London: Continuum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mohan, B., Slater, T., Beckett, G., & Tong, E. (2015). Tasks, experiential learning, and meaning making activities. In M. Bygate (Ed.), Domains and Directions in the Development of TBLT. A decade of plenaries from the international conference (pp.157–192). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Norris, J. (2016). Language program evaluation. The Modern Language Journal, 100(S1), 169–189.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Samuda, V. (2015) Tasks, design, and the architecture of pedagogical spaces. In M. Bygate (Ed.), Domains and Directions in the Development of TBLT. A decade of plenaries from the international conference (pp.271–302). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Seedhouse, P. (1995). Needs analysis and the general English classroom. ELT Journal, 49, 59–65. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Skehan, P. (1998a). Task-based instruction. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 18, 268–286. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
(1998b). A cognitive approach to language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Swales, J. (1990). Genre analysis: English in academic and research settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University PressGoogle Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Van den Branden, K. (2006). Task-based language education: From theory to practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Widdowson, H. (1990). Aspects of language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wilkins, D. (1976). Notional syllabuses. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wingate, U., Andon, N., & Cogo, A. (2011). Embedding academic writing instruction into subject teaching: A case study. Active Learning in Higher Education, 12, 69–71. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yule, G., & M. Powers. (1994). Investigating the communicative outcomes of task-based interaction. System, 22, 81–91. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yule, G. (1997). Referential communication tasks. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (3)

Cited by three other publications

Leung, Constant
2020. Learning-Oriented Assessment: More Than the Chalkface. In Toward a Reconceptualization of Second Language Classroom Assessment [Educational Linguistics, 41], ► pp. 85 ff. DOI logo
Rokos, Lukáš
2020. Mikrovyučování jako prostor pro implementaci vrstevnického hodnocení do přípravy studentů učitelství. Pedagogická orientace 30:3 ► pp. 315 ff. DOI logo
[no author supplied]
2022. Pedagogical Realities of Implementing Task-based Language Teaching [Task-Based Language Teaching, 14], DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue