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