• Save
An Investigation On The Use Of Communicative Tasks To Enhance The 10th Grade Students’ Speaking Competence In Xuan Dinh High School    Dieu Hang   K39 A10
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

An Investigation On The Use Of Communicative Tasks To Enhance The 10th Grade Students’ Speaking Competence In Xuan Dinh High School Dieu Hang K39 A10

on

  • 12,016 views

 

Statistics

Views

Total Views
12,016
Views on SlideShare
11,834
Embed Views
182

Actions

Likes
8
Downloads
0
Comments
0

3 Embeds 182

http://www.englishonecfl.com 179
http://warwickictineltblog.blogspot.com 2
http://static.slidesharecdn.com 1

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft Word

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

An Investigation On The Use Of Communicative Tasks To Enhance The 10th Grade Students’ Speaking Competence In Xuan Dinh High School    Dieu Hang   K39 A10 An Investigation On The Use Of Communicative Tasks To Enhance The 10th Grade Students’ Speaking Competence In Xuan Dinh High School Dieu Hang K39 A10 Document Transcript

  • VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES FACULTY OF BRISTISH AND ANGLO-AMERICAN CULTURES AND LANGUAGES NGUYỄN THỊ DIỆU HẰNG An Investigation on the Use of Communicative Tasks to Enhance the 10th-grade Students’ Speaking Competence in Xuan Dinh High School, Hanoi SUBMITED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF BARCHLOR OF ARTS (TEFL) 1
  • Hanoi, May 2009 ACCEPTANCE I hereby state that I: Nguyen Thi Dieu Hang, 051E10, being a candidate for the degree of Bachelor of Arts (TEFL) accept the requirements of the College relating to the retention and use of Bachelor’s Graduation Paper deposited in the library. In terms of these conditions, I agree that the origin of my paper deposited in the library should be accessible for the purposes of study and research, in accordance with the normal conditions established by the librarian for the care, loan or reproduction of the paper. Signature Nguyen Thi Dieu Hang May 4th, 2009 2
  • ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS In order to finish this the graduation paper, I owe profound indebtedness to so many people whose contribution and spiritual support I would not have accomplished it. First of all, I would love to express my deepest gratitude to my supervisor, Ms. Hoang Thi Xuan Hoa, for her scholarly instruction, critical comments, great encouragement and valuable materials, without which the thesis would not have been completed. I would like to send my heartfelt gratitude to the teachers and students at groups of 10D3, 10A4, 10D6, 10D7 at Xuan Dinh high school. Without their patient and willing participation in doing my survey questionnaires, the study could not be accomplished. Moreover, I would like to send my gratitude to my family, my classmates and my friends for encouraging me and supporting me during the time undertook my study. Without them, I would not have been able to complete this thesis. 3
  • ABSTRACT Communicative tasks are introduced widely all over the world and this is not also a strange conception to the teacher of English in Vietnam. However, due to teacher’s low English proficiency, class size, facilities schedules, using it in class is not a simple duty to the teachers. This study is conducted in an attempt to investigate the current situation of using communicative tasks to enhance the speaking competence of the tenth grade students in Hanoi. In order to achieve the desired aims, the researcher has conducted a survey research using survey questionnaire and an evaluation on the English 10 textbook. The findings from the questionnaire and textbook’s evaluation provide the researcher with a comprehensive understanding of the current situation of using communicative tasks fro the tenth grade students at Xuan Dinh high school. Generally, the students are not interested in doing the speaking tasks that are given in the textbook. They also do not aware of whether these tasks are effective for them or not. However, they show clearly their desire to some types of communicative tasks that they have chances to work with, even though these chances are not abundant. In part of the teachers, most of them admit that they often encounter difficulties in using communicative task in teaching speaking skill for the 10th grade students. With careful and detailed investigations, hopefully this study will serve as a useful source of reference for teachers, students and those who concern about this subject matter. 4
  • CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1. Rationale: English nowadays plays a significant role in the new Vietnamese social context. It is regarded as the key to the innovation, development and global integration after Vietnamese government pursued the economic open – door policy. The needs to use English to communicate verbally are essential and increase more and more. English becomes a compulsory subject in the secondary school and in the examination to get the Secondary School Education Certificate. However, it cannot be said that ELT has succeeded in response to the requirements of training competent English speaking people. Traditional pedagogy, emphasizing on the acquisition of grammar and vocabulary rather than communicative competence is still applied in most classrooms. Teachers are still the manager of students’ activities – the reason why interruption, arguing, asking for clarification hardly happen in classroom. Students may have a throughout grasp of theoretical knowledge but might fail to express their ability in real world. This situation results in the need for applying a new method of teaching English that can encourage students to promote student speaking ability. Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) is the most appropriate because it emphasizes primarily on developing the learners’ communicative competence through the negotiation meaning. It means that students are motivated to participate in the meaningful interactions actively. Communicative tasks in CLT are considered to stimulate students’ maximum participation in the lesson. Communicative tasks have been used widely all over the world since they improve students’ 5
  • motivation for learning English, enhance their fluency and construct many social skills as well. In Vietnam, the term “communicative task” has been introduced but implementing it is not a simple work because of teacher low English proficiency, class size, facilities and schedules, etc. In addition, teachers only have a textbook, a manual book, some grammar books which do not guide clearly how to use communicative tasks effectively in a speaking class. All these factors mentioned above lend the researcher reasons to conduct this study. 1.2. Aims of the study Firstly, this research is carried out in order to investigate the real situation of applying communicative tasks to teach speaking skill for the 10th grade students at Xuan Dinh high school. Additionally, it is planned to find about the attitudes of students in this school towards using communicative tasks in teaching speaking skill, the perception of teachers of using communicative tasks to teach speaking skill for the 10 th grade students, and the difficulties of using communicative tasks to teach speaking skill for the 10th grade students. 1.3. Scope of the study: Within the scope of a graduation paper and due to the limitation of time, the study can not cover all the high schools in Hanoi. The researcher just hopes to concentrate on the situation of the 10th grade in Xuan Dinh high school. Moreover, although the communicative tasks could be used widely in all four skills, the study is in dealing with the speaking skill only. 1.4. Methods of the study: The study firstly employs a quantitative approach in order to accomplish the aims of the study. So far, survey questionnaires for the tenth grade students and survey questionnaire for teachers at Xuan Dinh 6
  • high school are conducted to collect the data as the basis for evaluation and conclusion at the end of the study. Moreover, the researcher also carries out the evaluating of English 10 textbook in order to understand more clearly about the general English teaching context at secondary school. 1.5. Design of the study: The study contains five chapters:  Chapter 1: Introduction  Chapter 2: Literature Review This chapter presents some of the basic issues in relation to some theoretical questions and related studies on communicative tasks; the role of communicative tasks in teaching English and improving speaking competence of students; and teaching speaking skill.  Chapter 3: Methodology: This chapter will cover the research design, the participants of the research, the data collection instruments, the procedure in which the study is undertaken and the data analysis method employed by the researcher.  Chapter 4: Results and Discussion: In this chapter, the data received from the survey questionnaire for students and teachers is analyzed and categorized. The results are used as the cornerstone for the recommendations in the next chapter  Chapter 5: Recommendations and Conclusion: Some communicative tasks adapted from the tasks in the English 10 textbook are presented in this chapter as samples for the secondary teachers to consider. Moreover, the chapter summarizes the work done ahead and gives out suggestions for further researches. 7
  • CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1. An overview of tasks and communicative tasks 2.1.1. Task 2.1.1.1. Task definition A review of literature reveals a range of definitions of task. Firstly, according to Long, a task is “a piece of work undertaken for oneself or for others, freely or for some reward” (Long, 1985:89). Thus, examples of tasks include painting a fence, dressing a child, filling out a form, buying a pair of shoes, making an airline reservation, borrowing a library book, taking a driving test, typing a letter, taking a hotel reservation, writing a cheque, finding a street destination and helping someone to cross a road. In other words, “task” is meant that the hundred and one things people do in everyday life, at work, at play, and in between. It can be seen that this is a non-linguistic definition. Actually, as Nunan (1989) comments, it is the sort of characterization which might be offered by a learner, if asked why he is learning the language. In the second definition offered by Richards, Platt and Weber (1985), task is regarded as “an activity or action which is carried out as the result of processing or understanding language” (Richard, Platt and Weber, 1985: 289). For example, drawing a map while listening to a tape, listening to an instruction and performing a command, may be referred to as tasks. Tasks may or may not involve the production of language. The use of a variety of different kinds of tasks in language teaching is said to make language more communicative since it provides a purpose for a classroom activity which goes beyond the practice of language for its own sake. Here, in contrast with Long, the authors offer a pedagogical 8
  • definition. In other words, tasks are defined in terms of classroom undertakings. The final definition considered is of Breen (1987). Task, according to him, is “any structured language learning endeavor which has a particular objective, appropriate content, a specified working procedure, and a range of outcomes for those who undertake the task” (Breen, 1987: 23) “Task” is therefore assumed to refer to a range of work plans which have the overall purpose of facilitating language learning – from the simple and brief exercise type, to more complex and lengthy activities such as group problem-solving or simulations and decision making. All of these definitions have a common characteristic. They all suggest that tasks are concerned with communicative language use. In other words, they refer to undertakings in which the learners comprehend, produce and interact in the target language in the contexts in which they are focused on meaning rather than form. The role of tasks has been emphasized by Task-Based Learning which is more resolutely communicative application of CLT principles. It advocates the use of a syllabus based on communicatively-oriented tasks rather than linguistic form. In task-based learning, the basic and the initial point of organization is “Task”. Class work is organized as a sequence of tasks, and it is tasks that generate the language to be used, not vice-versa. The main focus is the tasks to be done and the language is seen as an instrument necessary to carry them out. Task-based learning, thus, underscore the instrumental value of language. In designing communicative task, task-based learning has a great effect. Along with presenting tasks themselves as language points, communicating- orientation is an advantage of task-based learning. The accomplishment of a series of designed tasks will help learners obtain certain knowledge, skills and experience as well. 9
  • 2.1.1.2. Task rationale According to Nunan (1989: 40-45), tasks are generally rationalized in either “real world” or “pedagogic terms”. The distinction between real-world and pedagogic tasks have been explored in his book as follows: Tasks with a real-world rationale require learners to approximate, in class, the sorts of behaviors required of them in the real world while tasks with a pedagogic rationale require learners to do things which they are unlikely to perform outside the classroom. The former are justified on the grounds that they are enabling learners to rehearse the real-world behaviors whereas the rationale of the latter takes a psycholinguistic form along the lines of: “Well, although the learners are engaged in tasks which they are unlikely to perform outside the classroom, the tasks are stimulating internal processes of acquisition.” Nunan (1989) also points out that while the selection of real-world tasks will proceed with reference to some theory or model of SLA. As has been discussed, the essence of what teachers have to consider is the learners’ language acquisition rather than the learners with their needs. It should be obvious that real-world tasks would make no sense if they could not stimulate any internal processes of acquisition. Some real-world tasks may be so boring that they result in no language acquisition on the part of learners. Additionally, many real-world tasks are just simply not feasible to practice in class. Applying to the learning- centered approach, all tasks are seen as pedagogic, which does not mean that they would unlikely be called upon to do outside the classroom but that they are justified on the grounds that they stimulate internal psycholinguistic processes of acquisition. In other words, this study 10
  • rationalizes tasks on the grounds that they facilitate language learning processes, hence calls them “learning-facilitating tasks”. The concept of “learning-facilitating tasks” is closely related to “motivating tasks” in the sense that motivation facilities learning. However, they are not the same concept for their presupposing different points of view from which the issue is considered. The former direct themselves to learner. (Motivation is a concept explaining why people decide to do something, how hard they are going to pursue it and how long they are willing to sustain the activity). However, a learning- facilitating task is necessarily a motivating task. It follows that a great number of insights and techniques to design learning-facilitating tasks have been offered by studies on motivation. Dornyei (2001) believes that tasks play a key role in maintaining and protecting motivation. He identifies some most motivating features of task components: challenge, interesting content, the novelty element, the intriguing element, the fantasy element, the personal element, competition, tangible outcome, humor, etc. 2.1.2. Communicative tasks 2.1.2.1 Definition Teachers have always given their learners tasks to do. In the past, however, such tasks were typically of a formal natural like: “Fill on the correct forms of the past tense in the following exercise” or “Form ten sentence with “if” and make sure that you use correct tense in the if- sentence”. Such tasks are called “form-oriented” because the learners have to show that they know which lexical or grammatical form must be interested in a given slot. However, in real life situations, the tasks, which speakers must master, are of a different type. They must know, e.g., how to book a room in a hotel, how to find out when the train leaves, how to order a meal in a restaurant, etc. 11
  • In contrast to the conventionally understood sense of the term “task”, communicative tasks are always activities where the target language is used by the learners for a communicative purpose in order to achieve an outcome. An example of an activity that lacks outcome would be to show students a picture and say: “Write four sentences describing the picture. Say them to your partner”. Here, there is no communicative purpose, only the practice of language forms. It is often possible, though, to redesign an activity without an outcome so that it has one. In the above example, if the picture is shown briefly to the students then concealed, the task could be “from memory, write four true things and two false about the picture. Read them out to see if other pairs remember which are true”. The students would be thinking of things they could remember, and working out how best to express them to challenge the memories of the other pairs. To achieve this outcome, they would be focusing first on meaning, and then on the best ways to express that meaning linguistically. So far there have existed a number of definitions of the concept of communicative tasks in the literature by different educators and researchers. Prabhu (1987:24) defines a communicative task as: “an activity which requires learners to arrive at an outcome from given information through some process of thought, and which allows teachers to control and regulate that process”. Similarly, a communicative task is defined by Jane Willis (1996: 34) as: “a goal-oriented activity with clear purpose. Doing a communicative task involves achieving an outcome, creating a final product that can be appreciated by others. Examples include compiling a list of reasons, features, or things that need doing under particular circumstances; comparing two pictures and/ or texts to find the differences; and solving a problem or designing a brochure.” 12
  • The above-mentioned definitions share one thing in common: they all imply that communicative tasks involve communicative language use in which he user’s attention is focused on meaning rather than linguistic structure. Communicative tasks have a specific objective that must be achieved. In other words, they are goal-oriented. The emphasis is on understanding and conveying meanings in order to complete the task successfully. While learners are doing communicative tasks, they are using language in a meaningful way. The common thread running through definitions of communicative task is its focus on the authentic use of language for meaningful communicative purposes beyond the language classroom. To sum up, a communicative task is a piece of work that involves all the learners in: the comprehension of the foreign languages (spoken or written); the production of the foreign languages (spoken or written) and/ or oral interaction in the foreign languages. During a communicative task, learners’ attention is principally focused on meaning rather than form, that is, on what is being expressed rather than on the linguistic forms used for expressing it. Moreover, as far as possible, a communicative task resemblems activity which students or other people carry out in every day life, thus reproducing processes of everyday communication. A communicative task is usually part of a sequence which often creates a context for the tasks. Beside, both teachers and learners can evaluate this task, in relation to both process and outcome. A communicative task also has a communicative purpose has the ultimate purpose of developing students’ ability to communicate in English, hence has a pedagogic purpose. 2.1.2.2 Components of a communicative task 13
  • In his book: “Designing tasks for communicative classroom” (1989: 11), David Nunan offers a framework for analyzing communicative tasks: TEACHER ROLE GOAL INPUT TASKS LEARNER ROLE ACTIVITIES SETTINGS A framework for analyzing communicative tasks Source: David (1989: 11) 2.1.2.2.1 Goals As mentioned above, communicative tasks are always goal- oriented. Goals provide a point of contact between the task and the broader curriculum. The overall goals of all communicative tasks are to establish and maintain interpersonal relations, and through this to exchange information, ideas, opinions, attitude, and feeling, and to get things done. In each specified task, the goal may differ. For example, the goal of task X is to encourage students to negotiate information between each other to develop their interaction skills while task Y’s goal may be to improve students’ confidence in speaking. However, there is rarely a simple one to one relationship between goals and tasks. In some cases, a complex task involving a range of activities might be simultaneously moving learners towards several goals. 2.1.2.2.2 Input Input refers to the data that forms the point of departure for the communicative tasks. In fact, input for communicative tasks can be derived from a wide range of sources. Hover (1986) suggests the 14
  • following: Letters, newspaper extracts, pictures stories, telecom account, driver’s license, missing person’s declaration form, social security form, business card, memo note, photographs, family tree, drawings, shopping lists, invoices, postcards, hotel brochures, passport photos, street map, menu, magazine quiz, calorie counter, recipe, extract form a play, weather forecast, diary, bus timetable, notice board item, star signs, hotel entertainment programs, etc. 2.1.2.2.3 Activities a. Definition: Activities specify what learners will actually do with the input, which forms the point of the departure for the communicative task. b. Activity types: In the Bangalore project (Prabhu, 1987), three principal activities are used: • Information gap activity, which involves a transfer of given information from one person to another – or from one form to another, or from one place to another – generally calling for the decoding or encoding of information from or into language. One example is pair work in which each member of the pair has a part of the total information (for example an incomplete picture) and attempts to convey it verbally to the others. Another example is completing a tabular representation with information available in a given piece of text. The activity often involves selection of relevant information as well, and learners may have to meet criteria of completeness and correctness in making the transfer. • Reasoning gap activity, which involves deriving some new information from given information through processes of interference, deduction, practical reasoning, or perception of relationships or patterns. One example is working out a teacher’s 15
  • timetable on the basis of given class timetables. Another is deciding what course of action is best (for example cheapest or quickest) for a given purpose and within given constraints. The activity necessarily involves comprehending and conveying information as an information gap activity, but the information to be conveyed is not identical with that initially comprehended. There is a piece of reasoning which connects the two. • Opinion gap activity, which involves identifying and articulating a personal preference, feeling, or attitude in response to a given situation. One example is story completion; another is taking part in the discussion of a social issue. The activity may involve using factual information and formulating arguments to justify one’s opinion, but there is no objective procedure for demonstrating outcomes as right or wrong, and no reason to expect the same outcome from different individual or on different occasions. Pattison (1987) (cited by Nunan, 1989:68) also proposed seven activity types: • Question and answers: These activities are bases 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 choices. This activity can be used to practice almost any structure, function or notion. • Dialogue 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 pairs. 16
  • • Matching activities: The task for learners is to recognize matching items, or to complete pairs or sets. • Communication strategies: These are activities designed to encourage learners to practice communication strategies such as paraphrasing, borrowing or inventing words, using gesture, asking for feedback, simplifying. • Pictures and picture stories: Many communication activities can be stimulated through the use of picture (e.g. spot the difference, memory test, and sequencing pictures to tell a story). • Puzzle and problems: Once again, there are many types of puzzles and problems. These require learners to make guesses, draw on their general knowledge and personal experience, their imagination and test how their power of logical reasoning. • Discussions and decisions: these require the learners 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) 2.1.2.2.4 Learner roles In the traditional approach, learners are the passive recipients of the language learning process. They have little control over their learning or no chance to raise their voice about what and how to teach. They are supposed to wait passively to be scrammed with the huge amount of theoretical knowledge. However, when doing communicative tasks, students are required to put language to a range of uses, to negotiate meaning, to draw on their own resources rather than simply repeating and absorbing language. Moreover, learners are also considered as the negotiators of the learning process, they can negotiate with the teacher what to speak about and how to do it. They are forced to learn how to work well in groups negotiating 17
  • with partners to reach a final product, which then can be appreciated by their classmates. 2.1.2.2.5 Teacher roles In contrast to the traditional role of the teachers as the sole- provider of the knowledge and the decision makers of all class activities, teachers using communicative tasks play the following role: First, he is a facilitator to help the communication among participants run through. He is supposed to help the learners better express their expectation and direct learners’ active participation to what is most beneficial to the educational purposes. Second, the teacher acts as the active participant in the learning process, genuinely engaging in the class and contributing his ideas, opinions or relating personal experiences. Third, the teacher can function as an observer, put himself into learners; position to assume and notify their difficulties. 2.1.2.2.6 Settings Setting prefers to the classroom managements specified or implied in the task, and it also requires consideration of whether the task is to be carried out wholly or partly outside the classroom. Nunan (1985) distinguishes between two aspects of the learning situation. He refers to these as “mode” and “environment”. Learning mode refers to whether the learners are operating on an individual or group basis. If operating on an individual basis, is the learner self-paced but the teacher directed, or self-directed? If the learner is operating as part of a group, is the task mostly the whole class, small group or pair work? Each of these configurations has implications for task design. 18
  • Environment, which is closely connected with mode, refers to where the learning actually takes place. It might be a conventional classroom in a language center, a community class, an industrial or an occupational setting, a self-access learning center and so on. Until comparatively recently, it was assumed that learning would take place inside a conventional classroom. However, in many educational institutions, particularly those catering for adult learners, more flexible arrangements and options are being experimented with. Another analysis of task-components proposed by Estaire and Zanón (1994:13-14) consists of 4 components: (1) a specified working procedure, (2) appropriate materials (if necessary) (3) a concrete language learning purpose and (4) a concrete learning outcome. Wright (1987, cited by Nunan, 1989: 47) suggests that tasks need minimally contain just two elements. These are input data which maybe provided by materials, teachers or learners and an initiating question which instructs learners on what to do with the data (activities). He rejects the notion that objectives or outcome are obligatory on the grounds that, with certain tasks, a variety of outcomes might be possible and that these might be quite different from the ones anticipated by the teacher. It should be noted this framework of task components that will not serve the basis to further the working of this study. Among the six components of a task, only the components important in designing each task type are considered. 2.1.2.3 Features of communicative tasks Communicative tasks are characterized by two key features. Firstly, communicative tasks must contact with authentic target language. Students are required to use real language. In classes where CLT is applied, students’ attention is not on the code of the language but on the 19
  • meaning. If “real” language is not used, systematically, the ability in dwelling on code of student will be reduced, as a result, the linguistic ability will become worse. Students are unable to use language in the most natural way, which is reflected as one learning goal in CLT. The second feature of communicative task is experiential property. In contrast, with analytic factor, experiential feature is global and non- analytic. Learners are invited to use language for a purpose that is to focus on the message rather than specific aspect of the code. Through experiential strategy, students, who become involved in language use, are prompted to become language users. 2.1.2.4 Position of communicative tasks Communicative tasks are more than several techniques which can be used in normal language teaching. They should be viewed as techniques of communicative language teaching, in which the role of the learners is emphasized on active participants rather than passive receptors. Communicative tasks are a useful tool for language development. Tasks provide input to learners and opportunities for meaningful language use (Robinson, 1984; Swain, 1995). In addition, communicative tasks likely create a rich linguistic environment which is capable of activating the learners’ intuitive heuristics. More specifically, tasks provide highly natural contact and communicative situations for the learning and teaching process. Tasks play roles of motivations and stimulations in language classroom. Being switched from dry and theoretical lessons, students now are put in real life situations where they not only use the language but also the capacity, the background knowledge to cope with the tasks. Hence, the students are sure that they are doing the best to achieve the sketched-out targets. Learners learn more about reality and are more willing when they enjoy the learning process. Learners at all levels can benefit from the use of different 20
  • activities which can expand learners’ spoken English rather than mechanical practice and at the same time enrich their knowledge and experience of many social fields such as everyday behavior, culture, tradition, etc. in English. 2.1.2.5 Taxonomy of communicative tasks based on the form of the instruction Jane Willis (1996) categories tasks into six subtypes basing on the form of the instructions of the task, including both closed and open tasks. She demonstrates that with one and the same topic, a teacher can design at least six of the following types of tasks. Listing: Listing seems unimaginative, but in practice, listing tasks tend to generate a lot of talk as learners explain their ideas. The processes involved are: Brainstorming, in which learners draw on their own knowledge and experience either as a class or in pairs/groups; Fact- finding, in which learners find things out by asking each other or other people and referring to books, etc. The outcome would be the completed list or possibly a draft mind map. Ordering and sorting: These tasks involve four main processes: + sequencing items, actions or events in a logical or chronological order + ranking items according to personal values or specified criteria +categorizing items in given groups or grouping them under given headings. + classifying items in different ways, whether the categories are not given. Comparing: Broadly, these tasks involve comparing information of a similar nature but from different sources or versions in order to identify common points and/or differences. The processes involved are: 21
  • + Matching to identify specific points and relate them to each other. +Finding similarities and things in common. + Finding differences Problem solving: Problem solving tasks make upon people’s intellectual and reasoning powers, and though challenging, they are engaging and often satisfying top solve. The processes and time scale will vary enormously depending on the type and complexity of the problem. Sharing personal experiences: these tasks encourage learners to talk more freely about themselves and share their experiences with others. The resulting interaction is closer to casual social conversation in that. It is not as directly goal-oriented as in other tasks. For that reason, however, these open tasks may be more difficult to get doing in the classroom. Creative tasks: these are called projects and involve pairs or groups of learners in some kind of freer creative work. They also tend to have more stages than other tasks and can involve combination of other types: listing, ordering and sorting, comparing and problem solving. Out of class research is sometime needed. Organizational skills and teamwork are important in getting the task done. A wider audience than the students who produced it can often appreciate the outcome. 2.1.2.6 Characteristics of a good communicative task There are some criteria to identify a good communicative task based on its theoretical features. According to David Nunan (1989:65), a good task can be realized if it comes up with the following requirements: - The goals of the task are obvious to both teachers and students. - The task’s difficulty is appropriate. - The task encourages learners to apply what they have learnt to the real world. 22
  • - The task is interesting and motivating. - The input of the task is authentic. - The activities are suitable and closely related to the goal of the task. - There is an information gap which might prompt a negotiation of meaning. - The activities are designed in a way which allows learners to communicate meaningfully. - There is a range of macro skill integrated into the sequence of tasks. - The goal of the task is successfully obtained. Acting as a designer of task, necessarily, teachers should bear in mind all the above criteria so that after designing a task, they can reconsider the task and make it meet all the demands. 2.2. Speaking Skill 2.2.1 The nature of speaking 2.2.1.1. What is speaking? Speaking is an interactive process of constructing meaning that involves producing, receiving and processing information (Brown, 1994; Burn & Joyce, 1997). Its form and meaning are dependent on the context in which it occurs, including the participants themselves, their collective experiences, the physical environment, and the purposes for speaking. It is often spontaneous, open-ended and evolving. However, speech is not always unpredictable. Language functions that tend to recur in certain discourse situations can be identified and charted. Speaking requires that learners not only know how to produce specific points of language such as grammar, pronunciation or vocabulary, but also understand when, why and in what way to produce the language. Finally, speech has its own 23
  • skill, structures and conventions which are different from written language. With regard to pronunciation, speaking skills include three elements that compliment each other namely: fluency, accuracy and complexity. Accuracy is the ability of using appropriate grammar rules, speaking with right stress, intonation and rhythms as well as the ability to use not only simple structures but also complex ones. It is possible to say that complexity can reflect one’s proficiency. To sum up, speaking is the most effective way for people to communicate with each other. It seems that those who are good at speaking are more successful than others. That is the reason why there is no wonder about the role of speaking in casual life and in language teaching. 2.2.1.2. The nature of speaking Taking an insight into the nature of speaking, Brown and Yule (1983) begin by making a clear-cut distinction between spoken and written language. Written language, which is said to have been concerned with the history of language story, is characterized by well-formed sentences which are interrelated into highly structured paragraphs. On the contrary, spoken language is realized by short, incomplete and sometimes ungrammatical utterances and by frequent false starts and repetitions. In the light of communicative language teaching approach (CLT), the spoken language as a subject of language teaching is paid due attentions to. According to Brown and Yule (1983), in terms of syntax and vocabulary, the production of language is relatively undemanding. It is syntactically very much simpler than written language. The vocabulary is usually less specific. Typical spoken language is featured by simple noun phrase, and a very few subordinate declarative structures together with an 24
  • interrogative structure to ask a question. However, it seems at least, plausible that this less specific language is quite hard to understand unless the listener has access to information about context and background knowledge of a source which conventional listening comprehension teaching tends not to supply. Brown and Yule also state that the combination of loosely organized syntax, a number of general specific words and phrases, the use of interactive expressions like “well”, “uh”, “oh”, make the information packed less densely in the spoken language, using heavily modified noun phrases accompanying post modification, heavy adverbial modification and complex subordination syntax. Elsewhere, it is fairly rare to find an adjective modifying a noun. Occasionally in spoken language packs less dense information and less highly structured information is a good reason to suppose that it is much easier understand in the oral mode than “written language spoken aloud”. Brown and Yule (1983) have also distinguished the two basic functions of language as means of communication. The first one named transactional function is primarily concerned with the information transference. When spoken language is purely used to serve the transactional function, the transference of information is the most important. The purpose of the speaker here is to transfer his message rather than to be nice to the listener. A successful transactional speech often involves more use of specific vocabulary than in interactional situations. According to Brown and Yule (1983), normal speakers have much difficulty with communicating their transactional intention at least in a short burst. They also assume that normal speakers have much difficulty with communicating their transactional intentions. It is obvious that foreign learners of English, who wish to learn well the spoken form of language, need to be able to use the language transactionally. The capacity of producing transactional utterances means that they should be 25
  • able to make clear what they want to say. However, when the purpose of speech is interactional, it is not necessary for them to try to do so. With a view to interactional nature of spoken language, in terms of routines which are conventional (and therefore predictable) ways of presenting information, information routines contain frequent recurring types of information structure, either expository (e.g.: description, narration, instruction, comparison, etc) or evaluative (e.g.: explanation, justification, prediction, decision, etc) Interaction routines can also be services (e.g.: job interview) or social (e.g.: a party) Oral interaction is realized by two features. The first one is meaning negotiation which means that speakers must be sure to be understandable by their addresser and the latter one is the management of interaction involves things such as knowing when and how to speak, how to keep a conversation going, when to change a topic, how to invite and persuade someone else to speak and so on. To sum up, speaking skill owns particular characteristics and serves two basic functions, which differentiate itself from other skill. It is necessary for students of a language to have a thorough understanding about this aspect of linguistic theory in order that they can acquire the language successfully. 2.2.2 Basic principles in developing speaking skills 2.2.2.1. Linguistic competence Discussing what is meant by linguistic competence, Chomsky (1965: 4) said that: “Linguistic theory is concerned primarily with an ideal listener-speaker in a completely homogeneous speech community, who knows their language perfectly and is unaffected by such grammatically irrelevant conditions in applying his knowledge of the language in actual performance”. The perfect knowledge referred to here is the abstract system of rule by which any and all the well-formed sentences of his 26
  • knowledge can be properly brought into display. It is the perfect knowledge that a person owns to communicate successfully in real conversation makes up of the linguistic competence. With similar view, Brumfit et al. (1991:192) believe that linguistic competence is concerned with the tactic knowledge of language structure. The knowledge mentioned here is commonly not conscious or available for spontaneous report, but necessarily implicit in what the speaker and listener can say. Linguistic competence, therefore, can be simply understood as the ability to form grammatically correct utterances. It is the linguistic competence that helps to participate in normal discourse and communicate in a foreign language. If we really consider communication the importance goal of language learning, it is well-advised that we should focus on linguistic competence. 2.2.2.2 Communicative competence There is a truth that traditional language teaching has been dominated by “form” approach rather than “meaning” one. However, with changing winds and shifting sands, the language teaching has “shifted its emphasis from language structure to master of language use” (Newmark, 1968: 232). In the light of CLT, it is undeniable that the most important goal in language learning is the ability to use the language for communication. Communication only takes place when we make use of sentences to perform a variety of different acts of an essentially social nature. Hence, we do not communicate by composing sentences but using sentences to make statements of different kinds, to achieve particular communicative goals. For example, sentences to describe, to record, to classify to ask question and so on. Communicative competence, according to Hyme’s opinion, is of “more general sort of grammatically and ability to be grammatical” (Hyme, 1972:269). He listed four factors that are required while striking for communicative competence. 27
  • The first factor concerns with whether or not something is formally possible. It is roughly equivalent to Chomsky’s restricted notion of competence as grammaticality (Chomsky, 1965). The point here is that to what extents a language permits a structure as grammatical or ungrammatical. The second factor deals with feasibility. A sentence can be grammatically correct but its potential for being used in real condition is impossible, then there is a conclusion that it is not feasible. The third factor covers appropriateness to context. The fourth factor relates to what we commonly refer to as “accepted wage”. It concerns whether or not something is in fact done. A sentence may be possible, feasible, and appropriate but may not occur. These mentioned factors can also be considered as criteria to identify the level of communicative competence a learner has gained. To know deeply about linguistic and communicative competence is of great help for language teachers to facilitate the process of language learning, especially learning skill. Consequently, it will be easier for teacher to combine different techniques to develop both linguistic and communicative competence of language learner. 2.2.3. Characteristics of a successful speaking activity According to Penny Ur (1996), there are four features that describe successful speaking activity. They are learners’ attendance, learners’ participation, motivation and appropriate language level. The first one is learners’ attendance. In a lesson, if learners talk a lot, it means they are dominating the learning process. Obviously, this criterion gets on well with one feature of CLT: “learner-centered learning”. Teachers only play the role of facilitators and supervisors while students are encouraged to talk most of the time allotted to speaking activities. Secondly, learners’ even participation also decides the success of a speaking activity. The 28
  • lesson should not be dominated by only some students but all get chances to talk, and “contributions are fairly evenly distributed. Besides, high motivation is one of the characteristics that make a successful speaking activity. By using motivated tasks, teachers involve students in communicating and then achieving task objectives. The final feature of a successful activity is that “language is of acceptable level”. If the language is too easy, the motivation disappears. However, if it is too challenging students can be dejected and eventually give up their work. Apparently, Ur (1996) has a tendency to develop oral fluency practice rather than oral accuracy practice. She hardly pays any heed to how phonological ability reveals through speaking activities. Meanwhile, Richard (1985) mentioned successfully speaking activities with two criteria: accuracy and fluency. After an activity, the phonological attained by students such as pronunciation, stress, intonation, etc must be at a certain level. Besides, an acceptable degree of fluency is also required. Just like Nunan(1989:32), Richard (1985)considers fluency and accuracy as two independent factors in any speaking activity. CLT in which tasks play an important role seems to meet all the demands of a successful speaking activity. Within the scope of the paper, the researcher’s intention is to contribute her knowledge and experience to better the method of teaching speaking by introducing some ideas on how to design communicative tasks. 29
  • CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY This chapter will cover the research design, the participants of the research, the data collection instruments, the procedure in which the study is undertaken and the data analysis method employed by the researcher. 3.1 Type of research This research is a survey research because it used questionnaires to gather and describe the current situation of using communicative task to enhance the speaking competence of the 10th grade students. The research is carried out in order to find information on:  Kinds of CT that are used in teaching speaking skill in Xuan Dinh upper-secondary school  The attitudes of students towards using CT in teaching speaking skill  The teachers’ perception of using CT to teach speaking skill for the 10th grade students in Xuan Dinh upper-secondary school  The difficulties of using CT to teach speaking skill for the 10th grade students. 3.2. Participants 3.2.1. Population The study was conducted at Xuan Dinh high school, Hanoi. In this school year, Xuan Dinh high school has 1946 students. In the twelfth grade, there are 15 classes which are divided into three groups: A, C and 30
  • D. There are 14 classes in grade tenth and grade eleventh grade are divided into two groups: A and D. The A classes belong to Nature Science department. The C classes belong to Social department. The D classes belong to the Basis department. In each department, classes are numbered from 1 to 7. Generally speaking, because the classes A1, A2, D1, D2 or C1, C2 recruit the students that have high graduation marks, learning quality in these classes is better than the others. Specifically, the target population of this study was the tenth grade students and the teachers who teach English for the tenth grade students. 14 classes of 44 students on average make out for about 600 students in total. The number of students joined the survey was 125 informants which come from three classes. Beside, eight teachers of English in Xuan Dinh high school took part in the study. Because this was a small-scale study, this number of subjects seemed to be reasonable and manageable. All of the tenth-grade students had passed an entrance examination to Xuan Dinh high school in August, 2008 and now they are in the second semester of the academic year 2008/2009 at this school. Most of these informants’ level of English proficiency is pre – intermediate though in reality, some students are above or below that level. 3.2.2 Sampling Method In order to guarantee the reliability as well as the validity of the samples, this study chose simple random sampling. Thanks to this sampling strategy, each member of the target population has an equal and independent chance of being selected. The researcher assigned a number to all fourteen tenth-grade classes of the tenth-grade students from one to fourteen and wrote fourteen numbers in fourteen pieces of paper, put all the papers in a box and pulled them out at random. Lastly, three pieces of paper with four numbers: 4, 13, and 14 were selected. In other words, three classes 31
  • including 10A4, 10D6 and 10D7 with about 44 students each class were chosen as informants for the research. 3.3 Descriptions 3.3.1 Students In total, 125 students from three classes joined in this study and did the survey questionnaire. Some information about the respondents including their group name, group size, their gender, and their years of learning English got directly from the respondents from three classes also made their great contribution to the maximization of the diversity of the sampling population. The wide diversity of the target population could be illustrated in this table is described in detailed in this table below. Table 1: Background of the target population Group Group Genders Average years of name size learning English Male Female 0-5 5-10 10A4 44 23 21 32 12 10D6 44 17 27 26 18 10D7 44 25 19 17 27 3.3.2. Teachers As regard to the teachers that took part in this study, each of them has been teaching English for at least 3 years and they have taught the 32
  • 10th grade for at least one year. All of them were females and no one was younger than 27 years old. 3.4 Data collection instruments For a collection of sufficient reliable and valid date for the study, questionnaires are fully employed. 3.4.1 Reasons for choosing survey questionnaire Survey questionnaire was used in data collection of the study due to its unprecedented efficiency in terms of researcher time, researcher effort and financial resources according to Jo and Steve (1997, cited by Nunan, 1998). Thanks to a questionnaire, the researcher could collect a huge amount of information in a short period of time and “if the questionnaire is well – constructed, processing the data can also be fast and relatively straightforward” (Gillian, 2000). Moreover, three types of data including “behavioral”, “factual” and “attitudinal” which can be easily yielded through using questionnaire can provide the researcher with the information to answer the research questions about the current situation of using communicative task to enhance the speaking competence of the 10th grade students. In brief, due to its great effectiveness, the researcher chose survey questionnaire as an effective method of data collecting in this study. 3.4.2 Instrumental Development 3.4.2.1 Piloting All the items of the survey questionnaire were constructed and categorized from a careful review of related literature and the research context. In the initial survey questionnaire, six items for students’ questionnaire and five items for teachers’ questionnaire were written in clear, simple and natural language with definitions of important and uncommon terms to avoid ambiguity and misunderstanding. 33
  • Firstly, two tenth-grade students from 10D3 and one teacher of English in Xuan Dinh high school who were in every way similar to the target population volunteered to participate in the piloting stage. Thanks to observing two students’ and the teacher’s reactions when doing the first version of the survey questionnaire and their answers and based on their direct suggestions for the survey improvement, the researcher added some explanation beside some important or uncommon terms for the tenth grade respondents to avoid misunderstanding. In addition, thanks to the supervisor with her wide knowledge of research methodology and her experiences, the researcher omitted 2 unnecessary items in questionnaire for students and 1 unnecessary item in questionnaire for teacher, edited the overall format and organization of the survey questionnaires with 5 important components including the title, instructions, questionnaire items, additional information and final “thank you” (Dornyei, 2003). After the piloting of the item pool, the researcher created the final version of the survey questionnaires, with 4 meaningful items for students’ questionnaire and 3 meaningful items for teachers’ questionnaire for data collection. The result of the pilot was an official set of questions which will be described in the next part. 3.4.2.2 The design of the questionnaire The two survey questionnaires were both written in Vietnamese and included 2 sections • Section 1: Asking about the gender of the informants and the time that they have been learning/ teaching English • Section 2: Three main areas covered with specific instructions put next to each item or item groups  The students’ interest in speaking tasks (including 1 item written in multiple choice) 34
  •  Students’ evaluation of the effectiveness of speaking tasks at school (including 1 item written in multiple choice form)  Students’ desire for several types of speaking tasks (including 2 items written in ranking scale) 3.5. Data collection procedure The study took place in week 8 of the second term of the 2008-2009 academic years and consisted of 2 main phases as follows. Phase 1: Preparations for questionnaire administration After finishing designing the final version of the survey questionnaires, the researcher began to prepare for the official questionnaire administration. According to Dornyei (2003), a well – designed questionnaire and a well-prepared administration situation in advance can help the researcher achieve good results. To increase the presence and the willingness of all the subjects chosen for the study, the researcher came to meet the informants one week before the official day to deliver the survey questionnaire to give advance notice about the purpose of the study and the nature of the forthcoming questionnaire as well as the specific time of delivering the survey. Phase 2: Administering the questionnaire Questionnaire for students: The researcher had a direct interaction with the respondents and delivered 132 survey questionnaires to each class separately and respectively during break time and therefore, the chances for the questionnaires to be returned were significantly better and more convenient than administration by mail or one-to-one administration. 35
  • Before asking the students to do the survey questionnaire, the researcher briefly explained the format, the length and told them that their questions would be thoroughly answered to clarify any misunderstanding about the survey questions while completing the items, emphasized confidentiality and most importantly emphasized the significance of the results. Besides the written instructions on the handout, oral Vietnamese instructions and explanations were presented to avoid any misunderstanding and ambiguity. With the researcher at present when respondents were giving the answers, the number of handout returned could be guaranteed and any questions related to how to do the survey were properly answered. After about 10 minutes, the respondents finished completing all questionnaires. 125 questionnaires were returned. Finally, the researcher thanked the respondents for their help and promised to send them the study results through their emails or addresses included in the survey. Questionnaire for teacher: At the meeting of the Foreign Language Group, the researcher had chance to directly interact with all the teachers and distribute the questionnaire to them. Ten questionnaires were delivered to the teachers at the end of the meeting. After fifteen minutes, the questionnaires were fulfilled and eight papers were returned. The researcher thanked the respondents for their help and promised to send them the study results through their emails or addresses included in the survey. 3.6. Data analysis method and procedure: Initially, the collected data were examined and classified so as to find out the appropriate answers and classified according to three research questions. That is, all of the data gathered from the survey questionnaire was to answer research questions whereas data got from the student 36
  • writing assignments would help to clarify some findings from the survey questionnaire and most importantly, reply to the third research question. Descriptive statistics method was used to process the data got from the survey questionnaire. Mechanical counting had to be performed to render specific statistics. These numbers were then put in charts for better illustration and explanations. This step also made the study more concise and scientific. After that, all the data were presented in bar charts and pie charts in a reader-friendly way to easily compare different variables in the same category. The number of students’ choice for each letter (A, B, etc) was counted, calculated percentage and summarized in the following categories: • Students’ interest in speaking tasks: • Students’ evaluation on the effectiveness of speaking tasks in class. • The of frequency and desire of communicative tasks in class • Difficulties that the teachers encounter when using communicative tasks: 37
  • CHAPTER 4: RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 4.1 Evaluation of the English 10 textbook: 4.1.1 Overview of English 10 textbook In the era of integration and globalization, having a good command of English has become not only a great interest but also an increasing demand for Vietnamese citizens. Along with this social trend, language teaching and learning in Vietnam has also witnessed a marked positive change, that is, the popular adoption of Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) approach. In the light of CLT, learners’ ability to communicate effectively becomes its first priority. Remarkably, since the 2006-2007 academic year, there has been a change in the curricula for upper-secondary school students with the widespread application of new English 10, English 11, and English 12. Together with English 11 and English 12, the English 10 textbook was designed based on the new national curriculum by the Ministry of Education and Training (MOET) in 2006. The new curriculum is claimed to adopt the communicative approach to language teaching (MOET, 2006: 6). The book aims to cover all four language skills: listening, speaking, reading and writing. Its syllabus is topic-based with 16 teaching units and six review sections titled “Test Yourself”. Each unit covers a topic (See Table 2) and is divided into five sections: reading, speaking, 38
  • listening, writing and a ‘language focus’, with each section having a teaching time of 45 minutes Unit Topic Unit Topic 1 A day in the life of… 9 Undersea world 2 School talks 10 Conservation 3 People’s background 11 National parks 4 Special education 12 Music 5 Technology and you 13 Films and Cinema 6 An excursion 14 7 The mass media 15 Cities 8 The history of my village 16 Historical places Table 2: Topics in English 10 4.1.2 Evaluation of Speaking Skill 4.1.2.1 Overview of speaking section in English 10 textbook The speaking section consists of two to four tasks including different activities. The first and second activities often provide language input and develop specific language functions such as expressing opinions, agreement or disagreement, etc. The remaining activities involve short talks or conversations on a specific topic matching with the topic of the whole unit. 4.1.2.2 Aims and curriculum fit The MOET requires students at this level to be able to give speech on familiar topics (MOET 2006, p.25) Speaking skill’s concrete objectives for students in grade 10 to achieve are: • Ask and answer about the topics 39
  • • Perform some basic language functions such as expressing likes and dislikes, agreement or disagreement, distinguishing facts and opinions; arguing about advantages and disadvantages, etc. In general, units in English 10 textbook are designed with various topics and the speaking section concentrates on helping students achieve the above objectives. The speaking section covers most of what is needed to develop students’ oral ability at Grade 10 and is suitable to students’ level. It is a good resource for students to practice verbal communication. 4.1.2.3. Design and organization It can be seen that the textbook is trying to raise speaking section’s appeal and make it more colorful and attractive in order to enable teachers and students feel more comfortable using it and to pay attention to this section. There appear more pictures and illustrations in speaking section in English 10 textbook which makes it more vivid. However, a close look at the speaking section in English 10 textbook shows that models and pictures supported are still quite limited. Many lessons are designed with no pictures or photos to attract students; for example, in Units 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 11, 13, there is no illustration for the topic of speaking section, which may not motivate students to take part in this section. There should be a supply of further pictures to illustrate this section more vividly because if using more illustrations, teachers do not have to supply more visual aids which takes much time and cost expensively to prepare. 4.1.2.4. Tasks and activities As can be seen, activities in the speaking section in this book are quite interesting and tend to be more communicative than that of the old book. Topics of speaking activities match with topics of the whole unit. 40
  • Therefore, speaking section is a rather good part for students to practice English. Besides, topics are sophisticated enough ranging from personal daily life to social matters, from easy and familiar topics to more complex ones, which helps students enrich experience, awareness of the real society and improve their knowledge of culture. In the textbook, each speaking section starts with some preparation activity so that students can gain enough knowledge as well as structures and language for their speech. Furthermore, some speaking tasks and activities in English 10 textbook are quite well designed and instructed. The speaking section focuses on pair work and group work which are popular communicative activities in classroom speaking period. Students can interact with other students, which means that they take turns to involve a good deal of listening and understanding of how the others are feeling. Students are much more motivated to take part in speaking section. However, tasks and activities are not various in forms and styles. There are always repetitive activities such as “work in pair/group and answer or discuss the questions” in the textbook, which leads to students’ boredom; whereas, role-play with practical and concrete situations, which is a very interesting communicative activity, does not appear much in the speaking section. Additionally, students are required to work in pairs but after that, one of them is called to talk in front of the class while his or her partner is not, which means that not all students have chances to practice what they have discussed. As a result, that part of speaking section is not really efficient because students’ mistakes are not corrected. Instead of that, jigsaw activity should be presented. For example, students should be given more chances to do the matching tasks with numerous illustrations and afterward, they create a story or situation based on what is shown in the pictures and retell to the class. Besides, there are many other activities that should be added to this 41
  • section in the English 10 textbook to make it more plentiful such as guessing games with using Yes-No questions or information gathering activity in which students involve conducting surveys, interviews, etc. Some of speaking lessons just provide students with suggested questions but not any key vocabulary or structures for their speech. Only a few of lessons give useful language, examples or models on given topic to help students in practicing speaking. Besides, some tasks and activities in speaking section are inauthentic. Example: Unit 7: The Mass Media_ Speaking section_ Task 1, task 2. (see Appendix A ) These requirements do not raise learners’ interest and are irrelevant to students’ practical purpose since they can not help students improve their speaking skill if they only match or arrange given sentences into dialogues or talks without brainstorming to produce their own products and practice them. In that way, real communication takes no place in the speaking period. Moreover, there is a lack of meaning-focused speaking and activities that aim at fluency development. Besides, we can see that sometimes students are overloaded with content of tasks and activities. Example: Unit 9 – Undersea World – Speaking section – Task 1 (See Appendix B ) Each speaking section is supposed to be taught in one period of 45 minutes. If the teacher asks students to do all tasks, there may be enough time but students cannot have many chances to practice and use language about both physical characteristics and personalities in their oral speech. They have to deal with them very quickly without practicing deeply. It is suggested that the content should concentrate on either physical 42
  • characteristics or personalities, it is much better for students to learn useful language and practice them. It can be summarized that the speaking section of English 10 textbook has many improvements in terms of layout, forms and styles, which motivates students to learn more attentively. However, the communicative approach has still not been exploited as it is expected. There are existing drawbacks on tasks and activities as well as lack of illustrations to make this section more vivid; therefore, some adaptations should be done so that English 10 textbook becomes an effective and reliable. 4.2 Result from the survey questionnaires 4. 2.1. Students’ interest in speaking tasks Chart 1: Students' interest in speaking tasks in textbook 24.8% 0.0% 25.6% Very excited Interested Norm al Bored 49.6% Very bored It can be seen from the chart that most of the students are not interested in speaking tasks presented in the textbook. This fact is not a surprise as we have discussed above that the speaking tasks in English 10 textbook are not motivate towards the students. Moreover, in general, English subject is not always an interesting for most of secondary school students, excepted for those who intend to take part in the entrance examination to the university that requires English. 4.2.2. Students’ evaluation on the effectiveness of speaking tasks in the textbook. 0% 16% Very Effective Effective Not sure 84% Ineffective Chart 2: Students's evaluation on effectiveness of 43 speaking tasks in the texbook Counter- effective
  • According to the chart, more than three fourth of the students are “Not sure” about the effectiveness that speaking tasks have on their speaking competence while the rest says the tasks are “Effective”. No student regards the tasks either “Very effective” or “Ineffective” and “Counter-effective”. On the one hand, it can be concluded that the students might not understand clearly the goal of the speaking tasks or they could not be aware of the benefits of the speaking tasks that are used in the textbook. On the other hand, it might be because of the fact that the speaking tasks used in class really have not much effect on the students’ speaking competence. 4.2.3. The of frequency and desire of communicative tasks in class 4.2.3.1. Listing tasks 4.2.3.1.1. The Frequency As can be seen from chart 3 most of the students say the speaking tasks in which they “must find things out by asking each others or referring to books” is used relatively often in their speaking class. No student says that this type of communicative task is not applied in their class. 0.0% 18.4% Very often 37.6% Often Sometimes 44.0% Rarely Never Chart 3: Fact given by S about the frequency listing tasks used in class 44
  • Chart 4: Fact given by T about the frequency of listing tasks used in class 12.5% 0.0% 25.0% Very often Often Sometimes Rarely 62.5% Never Chart 4 informs the fact about the frequency of using listing tasks in class by the teachers. More than half of the teachers say that they “Often” use this type of task in their speaking periods. 25% of them says that they use these tasks “Very often” and a fewer (12.5%) says that they “sometimes” use these tasks. There is still no teacher say that they “Rarely” or “Never”. Listing task is the type of task that is simple to prepare and control in the class. That is the reason why it is used relatively often in speaking class by the teacher. 4.2.3.1.2 The students’ desire of listing tasks: Like much 0% 27% Like 35% Not sure No want to do 38% Opposed to Chart 5: doing Students' desire of listing tasks According to chart 5, more than one fourth of students say “Like” to the Listing tasks while the rest says that they are “Not sure” or even they do “Not want to do” this type of communicative task. It can be said that listing task is the favorite of only a minority of students. It does not attract the majority. This type is relatively familiar to students in the speaking class at Xuan Dinh high school. However, not many students 45
  • feel interested in the task and some students even do not want to do this kind of task. 4.2.3.2 Ordering and sorting tasks 4.2.3.1.1 Sequencing tasks a. Frequency: Very often 0% 23% 33% Often Sometimes Rarely 44% Never Chart 6: Fact given by S about the frequency of sequencing tasks used in class Chart 6 shows the information of the frequency of sequencing tasks used in class delivered by students. Approximately 25% of students say that the sequencing tasks are “often” used in class. Most of the students say that they “Sometimes” approach to this type of tasks. 33% of students only “Rarely” work with sequencing tasks but none of them “Never” does this type of task in their speaking lesson. Very often 12.5% 0.0% 25.0% Often 12.5% Sometimes Rarely 50.0% Never Chart 7: Fact given by T about the frequency of sequencing tasks used in class According chart 7, one fourth of the teachers say that they “Often” use this type of task. . It can be seen that to most of the students (49%), 46
  • sequencing tasks are “Sometimes” used. The numbers of teachers that “Rarely” and “Never” use this type of communicative tasks is equal to each other with 13%. b. Desire for sequencing tasks Very Like 0.0% 23.2% 32.0% Like Not sure Do not want to do 44.8% Opposed to doing Chart 8: Students' desire on sequencing tasks According to chart 8, the majority of students “Like” to do this type of task. 23% of them even say they like doing sequencing task very much. However, up to 32% students do “Not sure” about this. This number of students may be those who “rarely” work with this task type (33%). There are no students who do “Not want to do” or “Opposing to do” these tasks. So far, although sequencing tasks are not very common in their speaking lessons, many students express desire to this type of task in their speaking lessons. 4.2.3.2.2 Ranking tasks a. Frequency 0.0% 26.0% Very often Often Sometimes Rarely 74.0% Never Chart 9: Fact given by S about the fequency of ranking tasks used in class 47
  • It can be realized from chart 9 that the students seldom work with ranking tasks in speaking periods: one fourth of students sometimes has these tasks and up to three fourth of them say that they rarely meet this type of communicative task in their speaking lesson. Very often 12.5% 0.0% Often Sometimes 50.0% Rarely 37.5% Never Chart 10: Fact given by T about the frequency of ranking tasks used in class According to chart 10, half of the teachers sometimes use ranking tasks meanwhile the others are rarely or never apply this type of communicative tasks in their speaking lessons. b. Students’ desire: 0.0%6.0% 24.0% Very Like Like Not sure 70.0% Do not want to do Opposed to doing Chart 11: Students' desire on ranking tasks As chart 11 shows, there are few students (6%) having a desire for ranking tasks. The majority of them do not give an explicit answer for this because 70% says “Not sure”. The remained students say that they do not want to do this type of communicative task. Ranking tasks are not only used rarely in speaking lessons at the tenth-grade classes in Xuan Dinh high school but also disliked by most of the students here. 4.2.3.2.3 Categorizing Tasks and Classifying Tasks 48
  • a. Frequency: According to chart 12, 32% of students response that the 18.0% 0.0% 32.0% Very often Often Sometimes 50.0% Rarely Chart 12: Fact given by S about the frequency Never of categorizing tasks and classifying tasks used in class categorizing and classifying tasks are sometimes used in their speaking classes. However, half of the students say that these types of tasks are rarely applied in their class. 18% students never have these tasks surprisingly. 13% 0% 13% Very often Often 25% Sometimes 49% Chart 13: Rarely Fact given by T about the frequency Never of categorizing tasks and classifying tasks used in class It can be seen from chart 13 that half of the teachers used the categorizing and classifying tasks occasionally. There are one teacher often using these types of communicative tasks and one teacher never applying them in teaching speaking skill. One fourth of the teachers rarely use categorizing and classifying tasks. b. Students’ desire: 49
  • 0.0% 16.0% 20.0% Very Like Like 20.0% Not sure 44.0% Chart 14: Students' desire on Do not want to do categorizing and classifyings tasks Opposed to doing According to chart 14, the students’ desire on categorizing and classifying tasks is varied. 16% of students say that they like these tasks very much and more than 20% of student say “Like” to these tasks. Approximately 44% of students are not sure about their opinions and 20% of them do not like these tasks as their friends. So far, the categorizing and classifying tasks are not used very often in the school, however, the students tend to have a positive attitude towards using them in their speaking class. 4.2.3.3. Comparing tasks: 4.2.3.3.1. Frequency 16% 0% Very often 44% Often 40% Sometimes Chart 15: Fact given by S about the frequency Rarely of comparing tasks used in class Never It can be seen that the comparing tasks are said often used in speaking class by the most of the students (44%). 40% of the students say that these tasks are sometimes employed in the speaking period. However, there are still 16% of the students say that they rarely work with this type of communicative task at school. 50
  • 0.0% Very often 12.5% 25.0% Often Sometimes Rarely 62.5% Never Chart 16: Fact given by T about the frequency of comparing tasks used in class According to chart 16, most of the teachers say that they often use this type of task in teaching speaking. One fourth of the teachers say that they apply comparing very often while the rest of teachers say they use it occasionally. 4.2.3.3.2 Students’ desire: 18.0% 0.0% 12.0% Very Like Like Not sure Do not want to do 70.0% Opposed to doing Chart 16: Students' desire on comparing tasks It can be seen from chart 16 that most of the students regard comparing tasks as their favourite tasks in speaking lessons: 12% of them say “Very like” and 70% say “Like”. The minority of the students (18%) are not sure about this. These students may be those who rarely work with this type of tasks. So far, comparing tasks are used relatively often in teaching speaking skill for 10th grade students and it is seemingly interesting to most of the students. 51
  • 4.2.3.4. Problem-solving tasks 4.2.3.4.1. Frequency of using 0.0% 12.0% Very often 26.0% Often Sometimes Rarely 62.0% Never Chart 17: Fact given by S about the frequency of problem-solving tasks used class It can be seen from chart 17 that most of the students agree that problem-solving tasks are rarely used in speaking class. Only 13% of students sometimes work with this type of communicative tasks. One fourth students say that they never do this task in their speaking periods. Chart 18 could partly explain this. From the chart, it could be seen that one fourth of the teacher sometimes use this type of task while the rest of teachers rarely or never use these tasks. 0.0% Very often 25.0% 37.5% Often Sometimes Rarely 37.5% Never Chart 18: Fact given by T about the frequency of problem-solving tasks in class 4.2.3.4.2 Students’ desire of task 52
  • 0% Very Like 24% 38% Like Not sure Do not want to do 38% Opposed to do Chart 19: Students' desire on problem-solving tasks According to chart 19, it is surprised that 24% of students like this type of task very much and 38% say “Like” to it. The same number with the percentage of students that have never worked with problem-solving tasks are not sure about this. In general, the problem-solving tasks are not commonly used in teaching speaking skill for the 10th – grade in Xuan Dinh high school. However, seemingly, most of the students who had chances to do this task express positive attitude to it, showing interest in doing it. 4.2.3.5. Sharing experience tasks 4.2.3.5.1. Frequency Very often 0.0% 38.0% 38.0% Often Sometimes Rarely 24.0% Chart 20: Never Fact given by S about the frequency of sharing experience tasks used in class The chart 20 shows that the sharing experience tasks are not used often in speaking class. Only more than one third of the students sometimes work with these tasks. The majority of students rarely or never ever do this type of task 53
  • 0.0% Very often 37.6% Often Sometimes 62.4% Rarely Chart 21: Never Fact given by T about the frequency of problem -solving tasks used in class Meanwhile, chart 21 shows nearly the opposite thing. Most of the teachers say that they often apply this type of task in teaching speaking skill; 38% of them say that they sometimes use this task in speaking periods. 4.2.3.5.2 Students’ desire 0.0% 18.4% Very Like 44.8% Like Not sure 36.8% Do not want to do Chart 22: Students' desire on sharing experience tasks Opposed to doing It can be said from chart 22 that in general students are interest in this type of task. Meanwhile half of them are not sure about their attitude towards this task. The reason maybe because they do not have chance to work with it, having no clue to orient. There is a contradiction between the answer of th students and that of the teachers about the frequency of using sharing experience task. However, it can be assured that most of the students wish to do this type of task in their speaking lessons. 4.2.3.6. Creative tasks 4.2.3.6.1. Frequency 0.00% 28.8% Very often Often Sometimes 71.20% Rarely Chart 23: Fact given by S about the frequency Never of creative tasks used in class 54
  • According to chart 23, most of the students agree that creative tasks are seldom used in teaching speaking skill. More than 70% of students never do this type of class and approximately of them rarely work on this task. 0.0% 12.5% Very often 12.5% Often Sometimes 75.0% Rarely Chart 24: Fact given by T about the frequency Never of creative tasks used in class According to chart 24, 74% of the teachers say that they never use this type of this task in their speaking class. There are 26% of the teachers sometimes or rarely use this type of task. It means that 4.2.3.6.2. Students’ desire Chart 25 shows that creative task is exciting to students as most of them like this type of task (up to 67%). The rest of the students shows neuter attitude to the tasks. Perhaps they are those students who never work with creative tasks. 0.0% 32.5% 31.3% Very Like Like Not sure Do not want to do 36.3% Opposed to doing Chart 25: Students' desire on creative tasks Creative task is in the same position as problem-solving task: It is not commonly used in class by teachers but still receives students’ desire. If it is introduced more widely, the number of students who say “Like” to it will be higher. 55
  • 4.2.3. Difficulties that the teachers encounter when using communicative tasks 4.2.3.1. Some types of communicative tasks that the teachers encounter difficulties when using in teaching speaking skill Chart 26a: Some types of communicative tasks that the teachers encounter difficulties when using in teaching speaking skill Very often 80 75 Often 70 62.5 Sometimes 60 50 50 5050 Rarely 37.5 37.5 40 Never 25 25 33.3 30 25 20 16.7 12.5 10 0 Listing task Comparing Problem Sharing Creative task task solving task experience task Chart 26a presents the communicative tasks, which are listing task, comparing task, problem-solving task, sharing experience tasks, and creative task, that teachers encounter difficulties in using for teaching speaking skill. As for listing tasks, 37.5% of the teachers response that they usually meet difficulties and the same with those who often meet problems. As regard to comparing tasks, 75% of teachers rarely find it difficult to apply the tasks and only 25% of them sometimes meet difficulties. The trend of using problem-solving tasks appear to be unpredictable to the teachers: 33.3% of them say that they usually have difficulty, half of them say “sometimes” but 16.7% never find it difficult to apply in speaking class. On the part of sharing experience tasks, most of the teachers agree that this type of task sometime gives them problem; 25% of them often while the rest rarely meet difficulties with this task. As regards to creative tasks, half of the teachers often meanwhile the 56
  • other sometimes meets difficulties. In fact, there are only 2 among 8 teacher have applied this type of task in their teaching speaking skill. Chart 26b Very often % 60 57.1 Often Sometimes 50 42.8 42.8 Rarely Never 40 28.6 28.6 30 28.6 20 14.3 14.3 14.3 28.6 10 0 Sequencing task Ranking task Categorizing and Classifying task Chart 26b shows the tasks which are sequencing, ranking, categorizing and classifying tasks that give teachers problems. It can be seen from the chart that nearly half of the teachers never meet any obstacle with sequencing task. The rest of the teachers sometimes or rarely find it hard to using this type of task. According to the chart, the ranking, categorizing and classifying task make the teacher more troubles than sequencing task. As regard to ranking task, 28.6% of teachers often get trouble and 42.8% of them sometimes meet difficulties. With Categorizing and Classifying task, the number of teachers that often meet difficulties with them is also higher: approximately 57%. There are some teachers usually encountering difficulties with this type of task when applying it in speaking periods. 4.2.3.1.The frequency of difficulties 4.2.3.1.1. Listing task As the information given above, there is only one teacher sometime meet difficulty with this task type. The difficulty, according to her, is taking class time. No other difficulty is given for this task. 57
  • 4.2.3.1.2. Sequencing task There are 4 teachers saying that they meet difficulties with this type of task. Chart 27: Difficulties w ith sequencing tasks % 100 100 90 Very often 80 75 75 70 Often 60 Sometimes 50 40 Rarely 30 25 25 Never 20 10 0 Taking time to Taking class time Difficult in manage prepare students It can be seen from the chart that managing students is the most difficult to the teachers when using this type of task. Taking time to prepare is another difficulty that is usually meet by 75% of teachers. Some teachers sometime find this task taking time to prepare. 4.2.3.1.3 Ranking task Chart 28:Difficulties with ranking task 70 66.7 66.7 Very often 60 Often 50 50 Sometimes 40 Rarely 33.3 33.3 30 Never 20 16.7 16.7 16.7 10 0 Taking time to prepare Taking class time Difficult in manage students The chart shows that to most of the teacher, time to prepare and time to do this type of task in class are not a considerable problem, some of them even have no difficulty with class time when applying this task but 58
  • managing students when applying this task is often a problem to one third of them. 4.2.3.1.4 Categorizing and classifying tasks Chart 29: Difficulties with categorizing and classifying tasks 60 57.14 57.1 50 Very often 42.8 Often 40 Som etim es 30 28.6 28.6 28.6 28.6 Rarely 20 Never 14.3 14.3 14.3 10 0 Taking time to Taking class Difficult in Other difficulties prepare time manage students As the chart presents, categorizing and classifying tasks make teachers a lot of troubles. It appears that time to prepare and managing class are the most difficult ones for teachers. Moreover, some teachers also give out another difficulty that they meet with this type of task: the task might be too challenging for the students’ background knowledge as “classifying” often requires analytical thinking. 4.2.3.1.5 Comparing tasks 59
  • Chart 30: Difficulties with comparing tasks 100 87.5 80 75 75 Very often Often 60 Som etim es 40 Rarely 25 25 12.5 Never 20 0 Taking time to Taking class time Difficult in Other difficulties prepare manage students According to the chart, Comparing tasks are not one of those that often make teacher embarrassing. Most of the teachers do not find many difficulties in spending time to much time for the task in class and nearly all the teachers find it easy to manage the students in these tasks. However, it seems that this type of task takes time to be prepared as most of teachers say they often have to spend time on it before the class. 4.2.3.1.6 Problem-solving task There are 5 teachers saying that they meet difficulties with this type of task. Chart 31: Difficulties with problem solving tasks 60 60.0 60 60 60 50 Very often 40 Often 40 Sometimes 30 Rarely 20 20 20 20 20 Never 10 0 Taking time to Taking class time Difficult in manage Other difficulties prepare students As it is clearly illustrated in the chart, the teachers’ answers cover all the difficulties mentioned. Firstly, most of them find difficulties in managing 60
  • the time and the students’ activities in this task. Secondly, some of the teachers have to spend time to prepare for it. 60% of the teachers also give some other difficulties such as the students’ involvement to the task. 4.2.3.1.7 Sharing experience task Chart 32:Difficulties with sharing experience tasks 80 75 70 62.5 62.5 62.5 60 Very often 50 Often 40 25 25 Sometimes 30 20 12.5 12.5 12.5 Rarely 10 Never 0 Taking time to Taking class Difficult in Other difficulties prepare time manage students As shown in the chart, sharing experience task seems not to make many troubles for teacher in general. Time to prepare for the task and students’ management in class might not be a challenge for teachers. Some of them even never or rarely get stuck in this matter. Nevertheless, more than 60% of the teacher usually have problem with class-time. Beside, more than half of the teachers say that students also do not express their confidence when doing such tasks. 4.2.3.1.8 Creative tasks 61
  • Chart 33: Difficulties w ith creative tasks 100 100 100 100 100 Very often 80 Often 60 Som etim es 40 Rarely 20 Never 0 Taking time to Taking class Difficult in Other prepare time manage difficulties students In fact, there are only 2 teachers apply this type of task in their speaking class. Both of them agree that this type of task often taking time to prepare and usually taking time in class. Moreover, doing this type of task also gives teachers another difficulty: hard to evaluate the students’ work. 4.3. Findings and discussions Because the survey is restricted to only a small number of teachers and students, the result surely cannot be an accurate reflection of the real situation of using communicative tasks in teaching speaking at Vietnamese high school. However, the findings here may provide useful information on this matter. Firstly, students do not show an obvious opinion in terms of interest in speaking tasks as the majority keeps neuter attitude to it. The reason might come from the fact that speaking tasks in class are presented on the same way as other skills’ tasks. Most of the tasks are from the textbook which focus on giving students as many as possible grammar structures. Students often see speaking tasks of any other skills in which they have to write down many “useful language” to member without practice them immediately. Another reason may be because of the teachers’ motivation or teaching method which could not exploit the students’ interest in involving in speaking tasks. Meanwhile, motivation 62
  • is among important factors that make a successful speaking activity as discussed above. Moreover, as regard to the students’ evaluation on effectiveness of speaking tasks, it is clear that most of the students also do not understand clearly whether what they have learnt in speaking class are helpful for them or not. One the one hand, perhaps students might not understand clearly the goal of the speaking tasks or they could not aware of the benefits of the speaking tasks that are used in class. On the other hand, it might be true that the speaking tasks used in class have not much effect on the students’ speaking competence. However, it is optimistic that no student says that the speaking tasks are useless for them. To some extent, the students equivocally aware of the benefits that speaking tasks bring to them. Thirdly, concerning the frequency of using communicative tasks, it can be seen that, the most communicative tasks used are listing tasks which require teachers not much time to prepare and do not bring with it many other difficulties to solve when being applied in class. The other tasks, such as categorizing, problem-solving and creative tasks are rarely used by teachers. It is undeniable that these tasks demand the teacher to spend a lot of time and effort to prepare and finish. As there are few CT in the textbook, the teachers have to adapt the tasks or design new ones themselves. However, finding ideas, making visual aids, etc may take the teacher a lot of time to prepare. Beside, using these types of tasks also means that teachers have to “risk” their lesson plan since these tasks often take time and are free for students, giving teacher difficulty in managing them in class. That is also the cause of the contradiction between the fact and the students’ desire. The less commonly the tasks are used, the more interest students have in them. 63
  • CHAPTER 5: RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONCLUSION 5.1 Recommendations: Based on the result of the survey about the learning and teaching English conditions of the 10th grade at Xuan Dinh high school, in this chapter, the author would like to introduce some adaptation typical kinds of communication tasks which are appropriate with the language items in the text book “English 10”. 5.1.1. Overview 5.1.1.1 Listing tasks In Listing tasks, the outcome will be a completed list or draft mind map. The process of this activity, therefore, will be mainly brainstorming and fact-finding. The starting points for listing tasks may be listing the words, things, qualities, people, places, actions, job-related skills, etc  Everyday activities. E.g.: getting up, watching TV, playing sport, preparing dinner, etc (Unit 1: A day in life of..)  Items in a computer. E.g.: CPU, mouse, keyboard, speaker, printer, etc (Unit 5: Technology and you)  Types of music. E.g.: pop, rock, jazz, R&B, blue, country, etc. (Unit 12: Music) 64
  •  Types of films. E.g.: comic, soap, horror, comedy, science, document, etc (Unit 12: Films and Cinema)  The landscapes you have visited in your country (Unit 6: An excursion)  Things to remember when going on a journey. E.g.: Check the ticket and luggage, remembering the timeline, preparation for carsick or food poisoning, maps, etc (Unit 11: National Park)  Some kinds of sport or name of famous players (Unit 14: The World Cup)  Things to mention about a city. E.g.: Its area, population, situation, transport, transport, etc ( Unit 15: Cities) This type of task can be followed by such tasks like  Memory game: the list is hidden and students are asked to recall as many items as possible in an allowed period of time.  Comparing tasks: based on the lists. Teacher can ask the students to order the list and make a comparison. 5.1.1.2 Ordering and sorting tasks The outcome of the ordering and sorting tasks will be a set of information that has been ordered and sorted according to specific criteria which is available or created by students themselves.  Sequencing The initial points may be a jumble list or sets of instructions or texts. The task might be: - Order the following activities based on the time that you do it on a day. - Rearrange the following events into an appropriate order of your village’s history. - Order the following Vietnamese cities according to their position from the North to the South. 65
  •  Ranking This task requires the items that can be sorted according to specific criteria. Personal values are accepted. The task might be: Rank the following items in order of importance, your interest, etc. For examples: - What are the most important features that mass media bring up? (Unit 7) - Rank the following actions to protect the sea in order of their importance. - What are your most favorite modern inventions among the given ones? The task could be followed by the presentation of each group for the class to reach a consensus through discussion and debate.  Categorizing: In this type of task, teacher might ask students to categorize the headings or the half-completed tables or charts followed by set of statements data from various sources, for examples, ask students to group the statements under these headings: agree, disagree, partly agree and then justify their decisions to the class on present their completed table or a section of it.  Classifying The input may be everyday things or events on lists of items or words. For example:  Think of 3 criteria to classify the furniture at home  How many ways to classify the clothes 5.1.1.3 Comparing tasks The outcome of comparing task may vary according to the individual task goal, but could be items appropriately matched or assembles of similarities and differences. 66
  •  Matching: The input is the information from two different types of sources. For example, the teacher delivers a handout which consists of 4 pictures and four paragraphs describing 4 different events. Each event can correspond to one picture. What students are asked to do is matching each event with an appropriate picture  Finding similarities: The starting point for this may be two or more sets of information on a common theme that can be compared to find similarities. o Comparing two characters in a TV series or two reports on the same events written by different reporters o Finding similarities between books and newspaper.  Finding differences: The input might be two or more sets of information on a common theme (from personal experience, visual aids or text) that can be contrasted to find differences. Some effective techniques which belong to this type of task can be listed as follows: o Spotting the differences between the two pictures, two stories, and two accounts of the same incident. o Contrasting system, e.g. of education or traffic in difference countries. 5.1.1.4. Problem-solving tasks The outcome by this kind of task is solution to a problem, which can be evaluated. Therefore, the processes would be analyzing real or hypothetical situations, reasoning and decision making. The problem might be of the followings: 67
  •  Short puzzles or logic problem. For example: Cutting the cake: what is the minimum number of straight cut you must make to divide a round cake into eight equal pieces.  Real-life problems, personal experience, hypothetical issue. For example: Make up a new version of the missing section or ending of a incomplete story.  Case studies, for example social studies of young offenders: decide on the best action to take: to stop them to offend. Previous solutions and statistics for offending are given. After these activities, students can do a comparing task, presenting, justifying and discussing their solutions for the class to vote the best one.  Sharing personal experience tasks: Sharing personal experience is our usual “task” everyday. This kind of casual social talk can happen naturally in accordance with other task types and because it is so common outside the classroom, sharing personal tasks should be encouraged. The processes of this type of task are mainly: narrating, describing, explaining, and responding. The input of this kind may be: o Anecdotes: o Personal experience: o Attitudes, opinions, preferences o Personal reactions 5.1.1.5. Creative tasks The processes of this type of task are brainstorming, fact-finding, ordering, and sorting, comparing, problem-solving and others. The outcome of this kind of task is an end product, which can be appreciated by wider audience. 68
  • Creative tasks tend to demand more efforts from the students and they can involve research and are often referred to as “projects”. Creative tasks can be carried out in the forms:  Students work in groups then describe the process of painting a picture, doing a science experiment.  Students work in groups to design, produce and record a short program on audio or video  Students work in groups, drawing a picture about one topic and then making a presentation about it. 5.1.2. Suggested adaptation of speaking tasks in English 10 Textbook Task 2 (English 10 – Unit 2: p.15) (See Appendix C) The task can be adapted into a sequencing task: Adapted task: Work in groups. Rearrange the following activities in a suitable order. You are required to give specific time for each activity: A. Playing football with friend B. Having dinner with family C. Watching TV D. Go to sleep E. Bathing F. Reading books G. Washing dishes H. Doing homework  The teacher prepares pieces of paper in which the activity is written.  Ask students to work in groups of four and deliver them with the pieces of paper.  Ask them to do the task in 3 minutes and each group will have one representative to go to the board and give their opinion.  The groups may have different answers but the important thing is that they can explain it. For example, some possible order might be: F C A B G E H D or F A E B G C H D 69
  • Task 1 – Unit 3: People’s background (See Appendix D) This task can be adapted into 2 tasks: Task 1 (Listing task): Work in groups and discuss: Which are the factors that can tell you about somebody’s background?  Ask students to close the book and work in four groups, listing the items that can be used to talk about somebody’s background.  Dividing class into 4 groups and asking them to discuss in 2 minutes, close their books and then answer the question.  The board is divided into 4 sectors, each sector has name of each group, from 1 to 4.  Call each group give the answer, in turn, the latter must give a different answer from the former. Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4 - Year of - Education - Family - Habit/hobby birth - Appearanc - Relationships - Special talent - Hometown e  Ask each group clarify their answers and ask other groups to listen to their friend in order to understand their friends’ ideas.  Ask whether other groups agree or disagree or not. If not, justify their opinions. Task 2 (Ranking task): Work in pairs and discuss: What are 3 most important things that we should mention when talking about a person? What questions we can use to ask with that?  Ask students to work in pair and choose among the factors mentioned in task 1 the 3 most important things to talk about, depending on their own ideas.  Call 2 or 3 pairs to speak in front of class and justify their answer. 70
  • Task 1 - Unit 8: The story of my village (See Appendix E) This task can be adapted into a creative task: Work in groups of 6 – 7. Draw a picture describing the possible results of the plan of improving the life in Ha Xuyen Village. You are not required to draw all the result but using at least 3 points given.  Before the class, teacher must prepare A1 paper as well as color pens for students to draw.  Ask them to finish the picture within 7 minutes  The picture is not necessarily beautiful but it shows the points that given in the box.  After 7 minutes, the productions will be stick on the board and the leaders of the groups will make a small talk about it.  Evaluation: based on the number of points that the groups use to draw the pictures and their explanation, the groups will assess the others’ products and give comments. Task 2 – Unit 13: Films and Cinema This task can be adapted to Problem-solving task: Your friend and you decide to go to the cinema. Decide on the following films: - The Pink Panther 2 - Unborn - Quantum of Solace - Garfield 2  Teacher delivers students the posters of these films in advance (see Appendix 8)  Ask students to work in pair and discuss what types these films are. 71
  •  Ask students to make a conversation to decide which film they can go to see together and giving explanation for their choice, using the words in the table.  Call some pairs to perform the conversation in front of class Unit 9: Undersea World (See Appendix F) The tasks contained in speaking part in this unit are good enough but this is a suggestion for the warm-up activity. Finding 5 differences in the two pictures: (See Appendix G) - The teacher asks students to work in pairs and find out 5 differences among the two pictures of dolphins. - 3 pairs who give the answers most quickly and correctly will be the winner. 5.2. Conclusion 5.2.1. Summary Communicative tasks are an effective means to improve students’ ability of communicating. It is undeniable that in Vietnamese secondary school’s current conditions, it is by no mean an easy and simple task to utilize and maximize the effectiveness of communicative tasks due to many factors that were already discussed. However, the researcher of this study believes that using communicative tasks at secondary school is not a question of acquiring new teaching techniques. Rather, it is a matter of perceptive and sensitive management of the learning environment, which involves examining existing belief and trying to look at learning and teaching in a realistic light. Therefore, the objective of this thesis, on top of providing the techniques to implement communicative tasks at secondary school, would also help the teachers realize the need to change the conventional path of teaching speaking so as to meet the country’s demand for the competent English learners who are not only excellent in English grammar but also outstanding in communication. 72
  • Within the scope of the thesis, general theoretical background knowledge relating to communicative tasks and speaking were investigated. Also, two survey questionnaires were conducted, aiming at finding out the real situation of using communicative task at secondary school in speaking tasks. Based on what is found from the data, some applications were suggested with a view to increase the effectiveness of communicative tasks in speaking activities. 5.2.2. Limitation of the study Due to many restrictions in terms of time, scope of the study and the author’s limited knowledge and experience, the drawbacks are unavoidable. The subject matter of the thesis has not been researched as thoroughly and deeply as it should be. What is written and investigated in the thesis is partly based on the different reference materials on the issue and partly attributes to the author’s own knowledge in methodology. Hopefully, the author would receive both critical and lenient review from the readers. 5.2.3 Suggestions for further studies Because of the limitations mentioned above, it can be seen that this study only touches upon a very small usage of communicative tasks, for example improving the 10th grade speaking skill. There might be further studies that can develop this matter such as: 5.2.3.1. Using communicative tasks to improve the listening skill for students because the listening The four skills are taught primarily according to grammar – translation approach. Speaking and listening are regarded as the two most important skills as these are the direct processes taking part in communication. If there is a study about using communicative tasks to improve the listening skill for students because the listening, it will receive attention and be highly appreciated. 73
  • 5.2.3.2. Adapting textbook with communicative tasks To say frankly, the English textbooks have many drawbacks that need to improve. Among which are the authenticity of the tasks. The CT can help to repair this but requiring the teachers to take time to adapt them. A study about designing or adapting tasks in the English textbook might be considered. REFERENCES 1. Breen, M. Learner contributions to task design. In C Candlin and D Murphy. 1987. (eds) Language Learning Tasks. Englewood Clffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. 2. Brown, K. Douglas. 1994. Teaching by principle. Prentice Hall Regents 3. Brown, G. and Yule, G (1983). Teaching the Spoken Language. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press. 4. Brumfit, C.T. and Johnson, K (1983). The Communicative Approach to Language Teaching. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press. 5. Brumfit, C.T. (1981). Communicative Methodology in Language Teaching. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press. 6. Carnal, B. and Swan, M. (1980). Learner English. Cambridge. Cambridge University Express. 7. Carter, Ronald and Nunan, David. (2001)The Cambridge Guide to Teaching English to Speakers of other languages. Cambridge. Cambridge University Express. 8. Chomsky, N. 1965. Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge MA: MIT Press 74
  • 9. Do, M et al . 2006. English 10. Education Publish House 10.Dörnyei, Z. (2003). Questionnaires in second language research: Construction, administration, and processing. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum 11.Estaire, S. & J. Zanon (1994). Planning CLasswork: A Task-Based Approach. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 12. Gillian, P. L. 2000. Role-play. Oxford University Press. 13. Jane, W. 1996. Challenge and Change in Language Teachin. Macmillan in. 14. Hymes, D. 1972. On communicative competence. In Pride, J. B. and Holmes, J. (Eds.), Sociolinguistics. Harmondsworth: language training. In K Hyltensam and M Pienemann (eds) Modelling and Assessing second Language Acquisition. Cleveson, Avon: Multilingual Matters. 15. Long, M. 1985. A role for instruction in second language acquisition: Task-based 16. Newmark. L. and Reibel, D., 1968, Necessity and Sufficiency in Language Learning, International Review of Applied Linguistics, reprinted in Lester (ed.) 1970, Searle, J., 1969, Speech Act, Cambridge University Press, 6,2,145-64.. 17. Nunan, D. 1988. The Learner-Centred Curriculum. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 18. Nunan, David. 1989. Designing Tasks for Communicative Classroom.”Cambridge University Express 19. Prabhu, N.S. (1984). Procedural syllabuses. In T.E. Reed (Ed.), Trends in Language Syllabus Design. (pp. 272-80). Singapore University Press/RELC. 75
  • 20. Prabhu, N.S.. 1987. Second Language Pedagogy. New York, Toronto: Oxford University Press. 21. Richards, J, J Platt and H Weber. 1985. Longman Dictionary of Applied Linguistics. London: Longman 22. Ur, P., 1996. A Course in Language Teaching. Cambridge University Press. APPENDIX 1: PHIẾU ĐIỀU TRA Cô là Nguyễn Thị Diệu Hằng, sinh viên lớp K39A10 trường ĐHNN, ĐHQGHN. Cô đang thực hiện đề tài khóa luận “Nghiên cứu về việc sử dụng các bài tập giao tiếp trong việc nâng cao khả năng nói tiếng anh của các em học sinh lớp 10 trường THPT Xuân Đỉnh”. Bảng câu hỏi dưới đây được thiết kế để thu thập dữ liệu cho nghiên cứu đó. Đây không phải là 1 bài kiểm tra nên không có câu trả lời nào là “đúng” hoặc “sai”. Sự giúp đỡ của các em trong việc trả lời các câu hỏi có ý nghĩa đặc biệt quan trọng đối với sự thành công của nghiên cứu Phần 1: Thông tin cá nhân: - Giới tính: Nam Nữ - Em đã học tiếng Anh trong.......... năm. Phần 2: Khoanh tròn vào câu trả lời: Câu 1: Khi làm các bài tập môn nói, các em thường cảm thấy thế nào? A. Rất hứng thú B. Hứng thú C. Bình thường D. Nhàm chán E. Rất nhàm chán Câu 2: Em đánh giá thế nào về độ hiệu quả của các bài tập nói trong việc nâng cao kĩ năng nói của các em? A. Rất hiệu quả B. Hiệu quả C. Không rõ lắm 76
  • D. Không hiệu quả E. Phản tác dụng Đánh dấu vào ô thích hợp: Câu 3: Em thường gặp dạng bài tập nào sau đây trong các giờ nói ở trường? Dạng bài tập 1.Rất 2. 3. 4. 5.Không thường Thường Thỉnh Hiếm bao giờ xuyên xuyên thoảng khi 1.Bài tập yêu cầu bạn liệt kê (Vd: Liệt kê tên của các danh lam thắng cảnh, các môn thể thao…) bằng cách trao đổi ý kiến với bạn bè. 2. Bài tập yêu cầu sắp xếp theo thứ tự (Vd: sắp xếp các bức tranh rời rạc thành 1 câu chuyện hoàn chỉnh) 3. Bài tập yêu cầu xếp hạng các mục cho sẵn 4. Bài tập yêu cầu phân loại dựa trên tiêu chí có sẵn(Vd: phân loại các loại phương tiện giao thông dựa vào nơi sử dụng của chúng) 5. Bài tập yêu cầu phân loại mà người học phải tự đề ra tiêu chí phân loại (Vd: phân loại sách) 6. Bài tập có dạng tìm sự giống nhau hoặc khác nhau (Vd: Tìm 6 điểm khác nhau giữa 2 bức tranh) 7. Bài tập được tổ chức gần giống với những hoạt động có thật trong thực tế( Vd: Nhập vai vào các tình huống: đi mua sắm, tổ chức tiệc..) 8. Bài tập cho phép người học chia sẻ những kinh nghiệm cá nhân (Vd: Kể về chuyến đi dã ngoại đáng nhớ…) 9. Bài tập cho phép bạn thực hiện những công viêc sáng tạo tự do (Vd: vẽ 1 bức tranh miêu tả ngôi nhà mơ ước của bạn; viết 1 bài thơ chủ đề tự chọn …) Câu 4: Em muốn làm dạng bài tập nào sau đây trong các giờ nói ở trường? Dạng bài tập 1. Rất 2. 3. 4.Không 5. 77
  • thích Thích Không muốn Phản làm làm rõ làm đối . Bài tập yêu cầu bạn liệt kê (Vd: Liệt kê tên của các danh lam thắng cảnh, các môn thể thao…) bằng cách trao đổi ý kiến với bạn bè. 2. Bài tập yêu cầu sắp xếp theo thứ tự (Vd: sắp xếp các bức tranh rời rạc thành 1 câu chuyện hoàn chỉnh) 3. Bài tập yêu cầu xếp hạng các mục cho sẵn 4. Bài tập yêu cầu phân loại dựa trên tiêu chí có sẵn(Vd: phân loại các loại phương tiện giao thông dựa vào nơi sử dụng của chúng) 5. Bài tập yêu cầu phân loại mà người học phải tự đề ra tiêu chí phân loại (Vd: phân loại sách) 6. Bài tập có dạng tìm sự giống nhau hoặc khác nhau (Vd: Tìm 6 điểm khác nhau giữa 2 bức tranh) 7. Bài tập được tổ chức gần giống với những hoạt động có thật trong thực tế( Vd: Nhập vai vào các tình huống: đi mua sắm, tổ chức tiệc..) 8. Bài tập cho phép người học chia sẻ những kinh nghiệm cá nhân (Vd: Kể về chuyến đi dã ngoại đáng nhớ…) 9. Bài tập cho phép bạn thực hiện những công viêc sáng tạo tự do (Vd: vẽ 1 bức tranh miêu tả ngôi nhà mơ ước của bạn; viết 1 bài thơ chủ đề tự chọn …) Nếu có thắc mắc hoặc đóng góp gì, em có thể gửi ý kiến vào email zieuhang87@gmail.com. Xin chân thành cảm ơn sự giúp đỡ của các em! 78
  • APPENDIX 2: PHI ẾU ĐI ỀU TRA Em là Nguyễn Thị Diệu Hằng, sinh viên lớp K39A10 trường ĐHNN, ĐHQGHN. Em đang thực hiện đề tài khóa luận “Nghiên cứu về việc sử dụng các bài tập giao tiếp trong việc nâng cao khả năng nói tiếng anh của các em học sinh lớp 10 trường THPT Xuân Đỉnh”. Bảng câu hỏi dưới đây được thiết kế để thu thập dữ liệu cho nghiên cứu đó. Sự giúp đỡ của thày/cô trong việc trả lời các câu hỏi có ý nghĩa đặc biệt quan trọng đối với sự thành công của nghiên cứu. Phần 1: Thông tin các nhân: - Giới tính: Nam Nữ - Thầy/Cô đã dạy tiếng Anh trong............. năm - Thầy cô đã dạy tiếng Anh cho lớp 10 trong...........năm. Phần 2: Câu 1: Thầy/cô thường sử dụng loại bài tập nào sau đây trong giờ dạy kĩ năng nói của mình cho học sinh lớp 10 ở trường? Dạng bài tập 1.Rất 2.Thường 3. Thỉnh 4.Hiếm 5.Không thường xuyên thoảng khi bao giờ xuyên 1. Bài tập yêu cầu học sinh liệt kê (Vd: Liệt kê tên của các danh lam thắng cảnh, các môn thể thao…) bằng cách trao đổi ý kiến với bạn bè 2. Bài tập yêu cầu sắp xếp theo thứ tự (Vd: sắp xếp các bức tranh rời rạc thành 1 câu chuyện hoàn chỉnh) 3. Bài tập yêu cầu xếp hạng các mục cho sẵn 4. Bài tập yêu cầu phân loại dựa trên tiêu chí có sẵn(Vd: phân loại các loại 79
  • phương tiện giao thông dựa vào nơi sử dụng của chúng) 5. Bài tập yêu cầu phân loại mà người học phải tự đề ra tiêu chí phân loại (Vd: phân loại sách) 6. Bài tập có dạng tìm sự giống nhau hoặc khác nhau (Vd: Tìm 6 điểm khác nhau giữa 2 bức tranh) 7. Bài tập được tổ chức gần giống với những hoạt động có thật trong thực tế( Vd: Nhập vai vào các tình huống: đi mua sắm, tổ chức tiệc..) 8. Bài tập cho phép người học chia sẻ những kinh nghiệm cá nhân (Vd: Kể về chuyến đi dã ngoại đáng nhớ…) 9. Bài tập cho phép bạn thực hiện những công viêc sáng tạo tự do (Vd: vẽ 1 bức tranh miêu tả ngôi nhà mơ ước của bạn; viết 1 bài thơ chủ đề tự chọn …) Câu 2: Thầy/cô thường gặp khó khăn khi áp dụng những dạng bài tập nào sau đây trong giờ dạy kĩ năng nói của mình cho học sinh lớp 10 ở trường? Dạng bài tập 1.Rất 2.Thường 3. Thỉnh 4.Hiếm 5.Không thường xuyên thoảng khi bao giờ xuyên 1. Bài tập yêu cầu học sinh liệt kê (Vd: Liệt kê tên của các danh lam thắng cảnh, các môn thể thao…) bằng cách trao đổi ý kiến với bạn bè. 2. Bài tập yêu cầu sắp xếp theo thứ tự (Vd: sắp xếp các bức tranh rời rạc thành 1 câu chuyện hoàn chỉnh) 3. Bài tập yêu cầu xếp hạng các mục cho sẵn 4. Bài tập yêu cầu phân loại dựa trên tiêu chí có sẵn(Vd: phân loại các loại phương tiện giao thông dựa vào nơi sử dụng của chúng) 5. Bài tập yêu cầu phân loại mà người học phải tự đề ra tiêu chí phân loại (Vd: phân loại sách) 6. Bài tập có dạng tìm sự giống nhau hoặc khác nhau (Vd: Tìm 6 điểm khác nhau giữa 2 bức tranh) 7. Bài tập được tổ chức gần giống với những hoạt động có thật trong thực tế( Vd: Nhập vai vào các tình huống: đi mua sắm, tổ chức tiệc..) 8. Bài tập cho phép người học chia sẻ những kinh nghiệm cá nhân (Vd: Kể về 80
  • chuyến đi dã ngoại đáng nhớ…) 9. Bài tập cho phép bạn thực hiện những công viêc sáng tạo tự do (Vd: vẽ 1 bức tranh miêu tả ngôi nhà mơ ước của bạn; viết 1 bài thơ chủ đề tự chọn …) Câu 3: Xin thầy cô hãy đánh giá về mức độ thường xuyên của các khó khăn trong việc áp dụng các dạng bài tập sau trong giờ dạy kĩ năng nói của mình cho học sinh lớp 10 ở trường?: 5= Rất thường xuyên 4= Thường xuyên 3= Thỉnh thoảng 2=Hiếm khi 1=Không bao giờ Dạng bài tập 1. Mất 2. Mất 3.Rất khó để 5. Khó khăn thời gian nhiều thời quản lý học khác(xin chuẩn bị gian trên sinh trong nêu cụ thể) lớp hoạt động này 1. Bài tập yêu cầu học sinh liệt kê (Vd: Liệt kê tên của các danh lam thắng cảnh, các môn thể thao…) bằng cách trao đổi ý kiến với bạn bè. 2. Bài tập yêu cầu sắp xếp theo thứ tự (Vd: sắp xếp các bức tranh rời rạc thành 1 câu chuyện hoàn chỉnh) 3. Bài tập yêu cầu xếp hạng các mục cho sẵn 4. Bài tập yêu cầu phân loại dựa trên tiêu chí có sẵn(Vd: phân loại các loại phương tiện giao thông dựa vào nơi sử dụng của chúng) 5. Bài tập yêu cầu phân loại mà người học phải tự đề ra tiêu chí phân loại (Vd: phân loại sách) 6. Bài tập có dạng tìm sự giống nhau hoặc khác nhau (Vd: Tìm 6 điểm khác nhau giữa 2 bức tranh) 7. Bài tập được tổ chức gần giống với những hoạt động có thật trong thực tế( Vd: Nhập vai vào các tình huống: đi mua sắm, tổ chức tiệc..) 8. Bài tập cho phép người học chia sẻ những kinh nghiệm cá nhân (Vd: Kể về chuyến đi dã ngoại đáng nhớ…) 9. Bài tập cho phép bạn thực hiện những công viêc sáng tạo tự do (Vd: vẽ 1 bức tranh miêu tả ngôi nhà mơ ước của bạn; viết 1 bài thơ chủ đề tự chọn …) Mọi thắc mắc và ý kiến đóng góp xin gửi về địa chỉ email: zieuhang87@gmail.com. 81
  • Xin chân thành cảm ơn sự giúp đỡ của thầy cô! APPENDIX 3: Questionnaire for Students – English version My name is Nguyen Thi Dieu Hang from class K39E10. I am currently taking the degree of Bachelor of Arts offered by the English Department, University of Languages and International Studies, Vietnam National University, Hanoi. My graduation paper is titled “An Investigation on the Use of Communicative Tasks to Enhance the 10th-grade Students’ Speaking Competence in Xuan Dinh High School, Hanoi”. I am conducting this study in order to develop further understanding about the current situation of using peer written feedback in first-year writing classes and its effectiveness on students’ writing revision. This is not a test so there are no “right” or “wrong” answers and you do not have to write your name on it. We are interested in your personal opinion. When you take part in this study, your confidentiality is assured in any circumstances. Please give your answers sincerely as only this will guarantee the success of the investigation. Thank you very much for your help. Part 1: Personal information: Your gender: Male: Female You have been learning English for...........years Part 2: Answer the following questions: Question 1: When doing speaking tasks in your textbook, how often do you feel? A. Very excited B. Interested 82
  • C. Normal D. Bored E. Very bored Question 2: What is your evaluation of the effectiveness of speaking tasks in the textbook in helping you to develop your speaking competence? A. Very effective B. Effective C. Not sure D. Ineffective E. Counter-effective Question 3: How often do you do speaking tasks of the following types at school? Types of task 1. Very 2. Often 3. 4. 5. Never often Sometimes Rarely 1. Tasks requiring you to list some items (e.g.: listing famous landscape, sports...) by exchange ideas with your friends. 2.Tasts requiring you to order the items (E.g.: Order single pictures into a complete story) 3.Tasks requiring you to ranking the items 4.Tasks requiring you to categorizing items based on available criterion (E.g.: categorizing vehicles based on the places they are used) 5.Tasks requiring you to classifying items with your own criterion (e.g.: Classifying your books) 6.Tasks that require you to find the similarities or differences between items (e.g.: Finding 6 differences between the two given pictures) 7.Tasks that give a real-life problem for you to solve (E.g.: going shopping, organizing a party) 8..Tasks in which you can share your own experiences (e.g.: Telling about your unforgettable trip) 9.Tasks that give you creative work 83
  • (E.g.: Drawing a picture to describe your dream house, composing a poem) Question 4: How do you want to do the following types of tasks? Types of task 1. Very 2. Often 3. 4. 5. Never often Sometimes Rarely 1. Tasks requiring you to list some items (e.g.: listing famous landscape, sports...) by exchange ideas with your friends. 2.Tasts requiring you to order the items (E.g.: Order single pictures into a complete story) 3.Tasks requiring you to ranking the items 4.Tasks requiring you to categorizing items based on available criterion (E.g.: categorizing vehicles based on the places they are used) 5.Tasks requiring you to classifying items with your own criterion (e.g.: Classifying your books) 6.Tasks that require you to find the similarities or differences between items (e.g.: Finding 6 differences between the two given pictures) 7.Tasks that give a real-life problem for you to solve (E.g.: going shopping, organizing a party) 8..Tasks in which you can share your own experiences (e.g.: Telling about your unforgettable trip) 9.Tasks that give you creative work (E.g.: Drawing a picture to describe your dream house, composing a poem) If you have any question or suggestions, contact me via email address: zieuhang87@gmail.com THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION! 84
  • APPENDIX 4 QUESTIONNAIRE FOR TEACHERS – English Version My name is Nguyen Thi Dieu Hang from class K39E10. I am currently taking the degree of Bachelor of Arts offered by the English Department, University of Languages and International Studies, Vietnam National University, Hanoi. My graduation paper is titled “An Investigation on the Use of Communicative Tasks to Enhance the 10th-grade Students’ Speaking Competence in Xuan Dinh High School, Hanoi”. I am conducting this study in order to develop further understanding about the current situation of using peer written feedback in first-year writing classes and its effectiveness on students’ writing revision. This is not a test so there are no “right” or “wrong” answers and you do not have to write your name on it. We are interested in your personal opinion. When you take part in this study, your confidentiality is assured in any circumstances. Please give your answers sincerely as only this will guarantee the success of the investigation. Thank you very much for your help. Part 1: Personal information: Your gender: Male: Female You have been teaching English for...........years You have been teaching English for the 10th grade students for.........years Part 2: Answer the following questions: Question 1: How often do you use the following types of task in your speaking lesson? Types of task 1. Very 2. Often 3. 4. 5. Never often Sometimes Rarely 85
  • 1. Tasks requiring to list some items (e.g.: listing famous landscape, sports...) by exchange ideas with friends. 2.Tasts requiring your students to order the items (E.g.: Order single pictures into a complete story) 3.Tasks requiring your students to ranking the items 4.Tasks requiring your students to categorizing items based on available criterion (E.g.:categorizing vehicles based on the places they are used) 5.Tasks requiring your students to classifying items with their own criterion (e.g.: Classifying your books) 6.Tasks that require your students to find the similarities or differences between items (e.g.: Finding 6 differences between the two given pictures) 7.Tasks that give a real-life problem for your students to solve (E.g.: going shopping, organizing a party) 8..Tasks in which your students can share their own experiences (e.g.: Telling about an unforgettable trip) 9.Tasks that give your students creative work (E.g.: Drawing a picture to describe your dream house, composing a poem) Question 2: How often do you meet difficulties when use the following types of task in your speaking lesson: Types of task 1. Very 2. Often 3. 4. 5. Never often Sometimes Rarely 1. Tasks requiring to list some items (e.g.: listing famous landscape, sports...) by exchange ideas with friends. 2.Tasts requiring your students to order the items (E.g.: Order single 86
  • pictures into a complete story) 3.Tasks requiring your students to ranking the items 4.Tasks requiring your students to categorizing items based on available criterion (E.g.:categorizing vehicles based on the places they are used) 5.Tasks requiring your students to classifying items with their own criterion (e.g.: Classifying your books) 6.Tasks that require your students to find the similarities or differences between items (e.g.: Finding 6 differences between the two given pictures) 7.Tasks that give a real-life problem for your students to solve (E.g.: going shopping, organizing a party) 8..Tasks in which your students can share their own experiences (e.g.: Telling about an unforgettable trip) 9.Tasks that give your students creative work (E.g.: Drawing a picture to describe your dream house, composing a poem) Question 5: How often do you meet these following difficulties in designing and applying speaking tasks? Give mark to each difficulty: 5= Very often 4 = Often 3 = Sometimes 2 = Rarely 1 = Never Taking Take Difficult Not Other Possible difficulties time to time to manage effective (Justify Task types prepare when students your using in answer) class 1. Tasks requiring to list some items (e.g.: listing famous landscape, sports...) by exchange ideas with friends. 87
  • 2.Tasts requiring your students to order the items (E.g.: Order single pictures into a complete story) 3.Tasks requiring your students to ranking the items 4.Tasks requiring your students to categorizing items based on available criterion (E.g.:categorizing vehicles based on the places they are used) 5.Tasks requiring your students to classifying items with their own criterion (e.g.: Classifying your books) 6.Tasks that require your students to find the similarities or differences between items (e.g.: Finding 6 differences between the two given pictures) 7.Tasks that give a real-life problem for your students to solve (E.g.: going shopping, organizing a party) 8..Tasks in which your students can share their own experiences (e.g.: Telling about an unforgettable trip) 9.Tasks that give your students creative work (E.g.: Drawing a picture to describe your dream house, composing a poem) If you have any question or suggestions, contact me via email address: zieuhang87@gmail.com THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION! 88
  • APPENDIX 5 : English 10 – Unit 2: p.15: 89
  • APPENDIX 6: Task 1 – Unit 3: People’s background 90
  • APPENDIX 7: Task 1 - Unit 8: The story of my village 91
  • APPENDIX 8: Task 2 – Unit 13: Films and Cinema: 92
  • 93
  • 94
  • 95