This document summarizes a study on the effects of task-based language teaching (TBLT) on the reading performance of grade 5 students in Mekelle City, Ethiopia. The study used a quasi-experimental pre-test post-test design with an experimental and control group. Results showed that students in the experimental group, who received TBLT, performed significantly better on the post-test than the control group. Additionally, high-achieving students benefited more from TBLT than low-achieving students. Challenges encountered included limited English proficiency and time constraints in completing tasks. The pilot study informed revisions for a full study on the impact of TBLT on reading skills.

1. Effects of Task-Based Language Teaching on
Grade Five Students’ Reading Performance:
Two Primary Schools in Mekelle City in Focus
By:
Mesfin Eyob
Advisor:
Melaku Wakuma (PhD)

2.  The History of Language Teaching Methods.
 Task-Based Language Teaching.
 It is the use of tasks as the core unit of planning
and instruction in language teaching.

3.  Gessesse (1999); Taye (1999); Solomon (2000) ;
Andargachew (2004) ; Mesfin (2008) ; Genene (2011) ;
Megersa (2011) and Hayleyesus (2011).
 The reading performance of students at all levels of
education in our country falls below the standard.
 Sts couldn’t read their grade level text with a reasonable
level of understanding.
 In addition, the Ethiopia English EGRA (2012) study on
grade 2, 3, and 4 found that, sts couldn’t meet the
expectations of MLC(p. 37). …. Magnitude

4. Though, there are different factors for such problems “the
method English teachers employ are a primary cause for
students language learning problems”.
In our context, English classes' are dominated by traditional
methods (Girma,2005; Melkamu, 2005 and the pre-pilot
study). (Mc Guinnes, 1998; Cunningham, 2000; Genene,
2011)
Rahman ( 2007) “Reading skill will never develop without
students’ active engagement in reading process” ♥

5. Studies proved the positive effects of TBLT (Genene ,
2011 ; Megersa ,2011; Willis and Willis ,2007; Ellis ,2003;
Zhou You-hua ,2006; Murad ,2009;). Mekasha (2005)
suggested to introduce task based approach to Ethiopian
schools.
I. Although …Seedhouse (1999) argued that the interaction
that results from tasks is often poor and can lead to
fossilizations.
II.Weak construct validity
III.Is suitable for acquisition rich( high achiever) sts only.
IV.Ellis (2003) ; and Willis &Willis ( 2007) also mentioned
some pedagogical problems that occur during the
implementation of TBLT.

6. Owing to such differences, researchers suggested for
further study to prove its effect (Uraiwansae-ong, 2010;
Zhou You-hua, 2006; Tagesse, 2008; Nunan, 2004).
Because, many aspects of TBLT has not yet been
justified.
As…, There is no experimental study conducted on
TBLT in our country. Therefore, the study tries to test its
effect hoping it may have a pedagogical contribution
pertinent to enhancing grade- 5 students reading skill.

7. 1.3.1 General Objective of the Study
 To investigate the effect of task-based language teaching
on grade five students reading performance and identify
the challenges encountered while teaching reading
through TBLT.
 Specifically,
1. Examine the effect of task-based language teaching on
enhancing grade five students’ skimming skill.
2. Determine the effect of TBLT on promoting grade five
students’ scanning skill.

8. 3. Test the effect of TBLT on improving grade five
students’ skill of guessing the meaning of new
vocabulary words.
4. Assess the effect of TBLT on enhancing grade five
students’ use of pronoun references.
5. Examine the effect of TBLT on promoting grade five
students’ skill of arranging order of events.
6. Find out the effect of TBLT on high and low achiever
grade five students’ reading performance.
7. Investigate the challenges encountered while teaching
/learning reading through TBLT.

9. 2.1 Task-Based Language Teaching
2.2 The Reading Skill
2.3 Theoretical Framework of the Study
2.3.1 Experiential Learning Theory
2.3.2 Constructivism Theory
2.3.2.1 Piaget’s Cognitive Theory
2.3.2.2 Vygotsky’s Socio-Cultural Theory
2.4 Task-Based Language Teaching Framework
2.5 Studies Done on Reading and Task-Based
Language Teaching

10. PRE-TASK
The teacher
Introduces and defines the topic
Uses activities to recall useful words
Ensures students understand task instruction
The students Note down useful words from the
pre-task activities
Spend some minutes for prepare for the
task individually
TASK CYCLE
1.Task
The students do the tasks and the teacher monitors
2.Planning
The students prepare to report and rehears and the T-ensures the purpose is
clear.
3. Report
Students present their report and the T-chair and give feedback
LANGUAGE FOCUS
1.Analysis 2.Practice
S-do consciousness raising activity-reviews
each analysis

11. 3.1 Research Design
 A mixed research approach of Quantitative and
qualitative methods.
Mainly Quasi-experimental research design.
Pre test-post test comparison group design
O1 X O2
---------------
O1 O2

12. 3.2. 1 Setting Tigray Regional State Mekelle City.
Convenience sampling
“Ayder primary school /30 in 2006) .
Simple random sampling
3.2.2 Participants of the study
Grade Five Students Purposive sampling
Sections (Two) Availability sampling
To assign the EG &CG Simple random sampling
English Teacher Availability sampling

13.  Reading Test (pre &post) Spec.Obj 1-6
Classroom Observation Spec.Obj 7
Students and teacher Interview Spec.Obj 7
3.4 Methods of Data Analysis
Quantitative data ( t-test)
 Independent sample t-test.
Paired samples t-test.
 Qualitative data
 analysed qualitatively by transcribing and
translating.

14. 4.1 Significance of difference in mean scores of EG and
CG on pre- reading test.
The pre-reading test scores of EG (n = 54, M = 10.19, S.D
= 3.905) and CG (n = 54, M = 9.72, S.D = 3.678; t (106) =
0.218, P = 0.527. The sig. value is > 0.05, which confirms
the variances are equal (the groups had been drawn from
similar population).
Homogeneous sampling…In addition to the students
background

15. The mean scores of experimental group (n = 54, M = 13.78,
S.D =3.032) and control group (n = 54, M = 9.31, S.D =
3.441; t (106) = 7.150, P = 0.000. The sig. value is < 0.05
and shows There is a significant difference between the two
groups after the treatment. Therefore, it seems the EG has
performed better than the CG students. This difference
might be because of the treatment the experimental group
gained and Similar with Murad (2009); Zhou-you-hua,
2006)

16. The paired samples t-test result shows t (53) = -6.913, p =
0.000 . The sig. value is < 0.05 This may lead, the
experimental group has made a significant
improvement in the post reading test than the pre-test.
4.4 The mean scores of low achievers (n = 15, M = 12.27,
S.D = 3.327) and high achievers (n = 15, M = 16.27, S.D =
1.534; t (28) = -4.229, P = 0.000. The sig. value is < 0.05
This shows the variances are not equal and seems, high
achiever students performed significantly better than
the low achiever students of the EG.

17. At the beginning of the lesson the English teacher
and Students were using too much L1 (Lack of
English language proficiency).
Students were not able to complete the reading
tasks on time ( time constraints).
Similar with a study done in Hong-Kong
elementary schools by Carless (2009) and the
challenges of this approach stated by Ellis (2003) ;
Willis & Willis, (2007).

18. 5.1 Validity ( face and content)
The validation process was made before administering the
pilot study.
Panel of judges (3 instructors & 2 grade five teachers)
And most of the comments were reconsidered for the
pilot study.
5.2 Reliability
 The reading test reliability result shows Cronbach alpha
= 0.709 ( desirable reliability)…since it is > 0.7

19. I. Difficulty level ( 0.3 – 0.7)
II. Discrimination Index (> 0.3 has good DI)
Thus, Most of the items are found with
acceptable D.L & D. I.
But Item 3 ( D. L = 0.73) is found easy.
Items 11 (D.I= 0.2) & Item 20 ( D.I = 0.26 ) are
with poor D.I .

20. 1. The data collection tools, methods of data analysis
and the research procedures are proved to be
effective to conduct the main study by amending
some minor problems:
 Reading Test (Items 3, 11 & 20 need revisiting).
 Students Interview (Will not be used)
2. One research question will be added for the main
study so as to explore teachers and students
attitude towards TBLT , since Interventions need
to survey subjects attitude.

21. 3.In the pilot study the EG English teacher was interviewed
once at the end of the intervention. however, for the main
study teachers reflection will made after each lesson to get
immediate information.
4. Classroom English will be provided for the English
teachers and the teachers training period will be maximized
from 3 to 5 days.
5.Finally,it seems TBLT has a positive impact on the reading
performance and the researcher has got direction to conduct
the main study.