An Evaluation of the tasks of IX-X textbook "English

for Today": An Empirical Study

BRAG
UNIVERSITY

Submitted by: Supervisor:

Zahin Antara Zishnu Mr. Mohammad Mahmudul Haque

ID# 08103009 Department of English

BRAC University
 Acknowledgement

I am grateful to Almighty Allah for giving me the determination and the strength to carry out this

research. I would like to thank all the people who have helped me directly and indirectly do this

research ; especially my two friends Kazria and Nimpia.

I would also like to thank the students and teachers who unconditionally participated in my

survey.

From the bottom of my heart my sincere thanks go to my supervisor , Mr. Mohammad Mahmudul

Haque for believing in me , supporting me for two semesters , giving me his most valuable time,

energy, suggestions , and most importantly for correcting my mistakes over and over again.

Finally , I would like to mention that I am indebted to my family , my husband (Shahriar Hossain)

and my two best friends (Tonima Hossain and Sarwat Sarah Sarwar) for encouraging me,

helping me, giving me with mental support and always being there for me when I needed them

the most.

Zahin Antara Zishnu

July 2011

I
 Abstract

The objective of this study is to evaluate the tasks in the English textbook currently used in

classes IX and X of Secondary Schools in Bangladesh. It attempts to find out if the tasks are

communicative as claimed in the preface of the book. The study also seeks to evaluate the

effectiveness of the tasks by analyzing the perspectives of the teachers and the students through

questionnaire survey.

It is very unfortunate in our context that even after completing SSC (class X and IX), students

from the Bangla medium schools are still unable to demonstrate sufficient competence in all the

four skills (speaking, listening, reading and writing) in the target language. Since, English is the

second language for the learners of Bangladesh, the greatest amount of exposure they receive is

in their English classes in school which is very much text book oriented. Therefore, in the light

of the recent theoretical developments in the field, the study examines the effectiveness of the

tasks of the textbook "English for today for class IX and V. The study looks at: (a) definitions

of task, (b) task components, (c) framework, (d) task difficulty, (e) empirical basis for task-based

language teaching, and (f) focus on form in task- based language teaching.

For this empirical research, the researcher used teachers' and students' questionnaire along with

a researcher's checklist to evaluate the book. The results show that the tasks are very effective

with a few drawbacks in some areas.

11
The study has been divided into the following chapters:

Chapter 1: Introduction

Chapter 2: Literature Review

Chapter 3: Research Methodology

Chapter 4: Results

Chapter 5: Conclusion and Recommendations

III
 Contents

Page

Acknowledgement I

Abstract II

Chapter 1: Introduction

1.1 Introduction 1

1.2The role of the tasks in the text book 1

1.3The problem defined 2

1.4Significance of the study 3

1.5Objectives of the study 3

1.6Methodology 4

I.7Limitation of the study 4

1.8Conelusion 5
Chapter 2: Literature Review

2.1 Definitions of task 6

2.2 Task components 7

2.3 Framework 9

2.3.1 From topic to task 10

2.3.2 Tasks involving listing 10

2.3.3 Tasks involving ordering and sorting 11

2.4 Task difficulty 12

2.5 An empirical basis for task-based language teaching 15

2.5.1 The input hypothesis 15

2.5.2 Interaction, output and the negotiation of meaning 16

2.6 Focus on forms in task based language teaching 18

2.6.1 Focus versus unfocused tasks 18

2.6.2 The place of a focus on form in an instructional sequence 19

2.6.3 Focus on form in the communicative classroom 20

2.6.4 Conclusion 20

Chapter 3: Research Methodology

3.1 Introduction 21

3.2 Method of data collection 21

3.3 Principles followed for designing instruments 22

3.4 Description of the questionnaires' for students and teachers 24

3.5 Validity and reliability 25

3.6 Description of the checklist 25

3.7 Universe of the study 26

3.8 Sampling of the study 26

3.9 Administering the students ' questionnaire 29

3.10 Administering the teachers' questionnaire 29

3.11 Process of data analysis 30

3.12 Conclusion 30

Chapter 4: Results

4.1 Introduction 31

4.2 Results as Found from the Students ' Questionnaire Survey 31

4.3 Results as Found from the Teachers' Questionnaire Survey 34

4.4 Discussion of the Students' Questionnaire Survey Results 37

4.5 Discussion of the Teachers' Questionnaire Survey Results 41

4.6 Researcher's Own Evaluation Using the Checklist 45

4.7 Conclusion 51

Chapter 5: Conclusion and Recommendations

5.1 Introduction 52

5.2 Conclusion 52

5.3 Recommendation 54
Works Cited 57

Appendices 59
 1

Chapter 1: Introduction

1.1 Introduction

Textbooks/Coursebook provided by the school is very important to learners especially in a

context like Bangladesh where English is a second language and the only exposure most of

the learners receive is in classroom . Moreover, a major aspect of the textbook is the tasks that

the students work on . It is very important that the tasks be learner friendly as well as

communicative. In many scenarios , it is often seen that learners are exposed to the target

language forms yet they are not able to interact with others using the target language. Their

knowledge of grammar does not translate into an ability to use the target language. However,

the new "English for today" for class IX and X claims that the tasks are communicative and

will help the learners achieve communicative competence. Furthermore, in light of the

literature available in the field , this study ties to evaluate how communicative the tasks are.

1.2The role of the tasks in the textbook

The effectiveness of a textbook is measured by many ways one of which is the tasks that are

designed for the learners to carry out. One can assume that the tasks are what make a

textbook relevant and appropriate for the learners , teachers and the course itself. Therefore,

most of the time, language teaching centers around the textbook activities/tasks that is why

the tasks are very crucial and must be dependable. Nunan states (1989:p.139),
 2

The concept of `task' was selected for the initial workshop as experience has shown that

it is the one curriculum element which is most familiar and accessible to classroom

teachers. (As we have seen, this is also the conclusion reached by Shavelson and Stern

1981). In addition, as Candlin and Murphy (1987) have pointed out, tasks embody a

curriculum in miniature.

So, inclusion of effective tasks in a textbook is incredibly important and significant as having

a relevant textbook in a teaching- learning situation for both the teachers and the learners in

an ESL classroom.

1.3The Problems Defined

In Bangladesh, English is taught from the school level but yet we still encounter learners who

are unable to construct simple sentences and fail to communicate effectively in the target

language. Although, in the recent textbook, the tasks claim to be communicative, the

products of the textbook i.e. the learners are not as effective communicators as expected. One

of the major reasons maybe that the study of grammar is still encouraged than interaction in

our context. Also, a lot of the problems are associated with the teacher and how they

implement the tasks. In many cases, the teacher is not well trained to conduct an ESL class.

In addition, many teachers may only take the reading comprehension passages from the book

and create activities/questions without following the tasks of the book. The context between

the rural and urban areas is also a factor. In case of listening tasks, children in the rural areas

are not provided with speakers and tape recorders and hence cannot perform some tasks in

the textbook which differentiates them from the children from the urban areas who are well
 3

facilitated. As a result, it is very important to know to what extent the tasks really help the

learners acquire the second language.

1.4 Significance of the Study

It is a present-day reality that English has become a lingua- franca of the world and its

importance is increasing day by day. Since the textbook is produced by NCTB and used all

over the country, it is, in many contexts, the only source of the target language to many

learners. Therefore, the tasks provided in the textbook should be appropriate to the learners'

level of competence. Despite all the attempts to improve the standard of English in the nation

for many years, we often come across learners who have been learning English from their

primary school but still fail to communicate in the target language. Although, the textbooks

claim to be communicative, it is very crucial to evaluate exactly to what extent the tasks are

communicative and reliable. As a result, this study is very significant because by evaluating

how communicative the tasks are and to what degree it helps the learners; we can identify the

weaknesses and strengths of the textbook and thus we will be in a position to suggest changes

to make the book more effective.

1.5Objectives of the Study

Evaluation is an issue of judging the appropriateness of something for a specific purpose.

This study seeks to discover the communicative level of the tasks in the textbook "English
 4

for today" for class IX and X and to what measure it is effective for the students. The

literature review is broken down into the following sections:

a) Definitions of task

b) Task components

c) Framework

d) Task difficulty

e) Empirical basis for task-based language teaching

f) Focus on forms in the task-based language teaching

1.6Methodology

The methods employed for this study are:

a) Teacher's questionnaire survey

b) Student ' s questionnaire survey

c) A checklist for the researcher for his/ her own evaluation, and

d) Library and internet research to study the theoretical development in

task-based teaching and communicative teaching.

 5

1.7Limitation of the Study

During the time of the data collection, for this study, there was a hartal (During hartal, all the

economic activities are stopped and vehicles are not allowed on the roads) on almost every

alternative day in the country which resulted in many of the schools remaining closed.

Therefore, the researcher was able to cover only a few schools around Dhaka city. And also,

due to time and resource constraints, only a handful of teachers and students were able to

take part in the study. However, results received from the participants were examined as well

as analyzed as closely and objectively as possible.

1.8 Conclusion
In this chapter, we have looked at the significance, objective, methodology and limitations of

the study. However, in the following chapter, an elaborated theoretical discussion on tasks is

provided in addition to the important aspects of designing tasks for communicative

classrooms.
 6

Chapter 2: Literature Review

2.1 Definitions of Task

The term `task' generally means the fundamental building blocks in the language curriculum.

According to Long (1985, p. 89: cited in Nunan, 2004,p. 2), a task refers to all the things and

activities one performs every day at work , at play and even in between; for example, buying a

shoe, typing a letter, borrowing a library book etc. In language pedagogy, task-based language

learning or Task based instruction is conducted and centered on the task that is given to students

A more technical and an applied linguistic interpretation of task is that it is "an activity or action

which is carried out as the result of processing or understanding language" such as "listening to a

tape, listening to an instruction and performing a command"(Richards, Platt and Weber 1986, p.

289: cited in ibid, 2004, p. 2).So, a pedagogical definition of task is

"therefore assumed to refer to a range of work plans which have the overall purpose of facilitating

language learning-from simple and brief exercise type, to more complex and lengthy activities

such as group problem solving or simulations and decision making" suggested by Breen (1987, p.

23: cited in ibid, 2004, p. 3).

Similarly, Prabhu believes that a `task' "is an activity which requires learners to arrive at an

outcome from given information through some process of thought, and which allowed teachers

to control and regulate that process" (Prabhu, 1987, p. 24). Nunan (1989, p. 11) defined `task' as
 7

"a piece of meaning focused work involving learners in comprehending, producing and /or

interacting in the target language, and that tasks are analyzed or categorized according to their

goal, input data, activities, setting and roles".

All the definitions above imply that tasks are closely associated with communicative language

use and the learners' focus is rather more on the meaning than on the structure of the language.

Jane Willis, (1996: cited in Willis and Willis: cited in Nunan, 2004, p. 3) however, explains task

as "activities where the target language is used by the learner for a communicative purpose

(goal) in order to achieve an outcome". Nunan's description of task highlights more on meaning

as opposed to the definition recommended by Jane Willis which highlights more on goal and

outcome.

Nunan also stated that classroom tasks are divided into two categories; real- world tasks and

pedagogic tasks. Real- world tasks introduce and allow learners to engage in activities that are

necessary outside the classroom. The real-world tasks also engage the learners into the tasks that

enable them to be acquainted with the situations existing beyond the border of classroom. On the

other hand, Pedagogic tasks are confined to classrooms and the tasks end in themselves, which

are not similar to the outside world. So, pedagogic tasks are not practiced in the outer world and

its uses are restricted to the confines of classrooms.

2.2 Task Components

A task generally focuses on the use of authentic language and encourages students to do

meaningful activities in the target language. Task components explore the elements of task and

some of the components of tasks are recommended by various linguists. Shavelson and Stern
 8

(1989, Nunan2004 , p. 40) suggested their concept of "task-based language teaching within the

concept of education in general , rather than TESOL in particular ". They both believe that while

designing a task, task designers should consider certain aspects such as content (the topic to be

taught), materials (resources learners can use), activities (what learners and teachers will be

doing during the lesson ), goals ( the general aim of the teacher ), students (their capabilities,

interest and needs are as important), and last but not least social community ( the class as a whole

and its sense of wholeness).

Nunan's, explanation of the term "goal" is very much similar to Shavelson and Stern. Goals are

the general or vague outcomes of a task. "Tasks need outcomes to motivate learners into

participation" (Stewart, 2005, p. 257) that can often be inferred from the task itself. Goals can be

a combination of several outcomes such as communicative, affective and cognitive or it may

even describe teacher or learner behavior. There are two types of goals: (I) general purpose and

(II) specialized purpose goals. General purpose goals aim to teach general "everyday" English

whereas specialized purpose goals focus on one skill at a time to master the language.

"Input refers to the spoken, written and visual data that learners work within the course of

completing a task" (Nunan, 2004, p.47). Some examples of input are letters, invoices, note to a

friend, menu and many more which can be provided by the teachers, textbook, other resources or

at times generated by the learners. Moreover, in case of giving input to the students, the question

of authentic data arises. "Authentic here is any material which has not been specially produced

for the purpose of language teaching" (Nunan, 1989, p.54). It is important to familiarize learners

with authentic input so that they can cope with the language they read and hear outside the

classroom. The last but a very important aspect of task component is the `setting'.
 9

"Setting refers to the classroom managements specified or implied in the task". "In considering

settings for task- based learning, it is useful to distinguish between `mode' and `environment'

(Nunan , 2004, p. 71-72).

The learning mode refers to whether or not the learners are doing individual or group work, and

the environment refers to where the learning is taking place.

2.3 Framework

"Language is best taught when it is being used to transmit messages, not when it is explicitly

taught for conscious learning" (Krashen and Terrell 1983, p. 55: cited in Nunan, 2004, p. 21).

However, Nunan's view in language classroom is that learners in their early stage can benefit

from focus on forms but learners should not have to generate language that is not accessible to

them.

" In the Task Based Language Teaching framework, form focused work is presented in the form

of enabling skills, so called because they are designed to develop skills and knowledge that will

ultimately facilitate the process of authentic communication" (ibid, 2004, p. 22).

There are two types in the enabling skills: language exercise and communicative activities.

Language exercises focus on any forms such as lexical, grammatical or phonological.

Communicative activities are between language exercise and pedagogical task because like

language exercise it provides a lot of restricted set of language items and it has many meaningful

communication elements similar to any pedagogical task. As a result, it is very important to have

both pedagogical tasks and enabling tasks incorporated or included in the framework of any task

based language classroom.

 10

2.3.1 From topic to task

It is very crucial to choose an appropriate topic for a task that may be given to students. Topics

can be selected in many ways however,

"one way to raise motivation is to ask learners to suggest their own topics, or to get them to

choose topics they like best from a list of topics that have been proved popular with previous

learners" (Willis 2007, pg 64).

It is not necessary that all topics will enthuse all the learners, moreover if the topic is reasonable

and looked at from a different perspective it will foster learners involvement from the learner. By

this process, learners are more exposed to interaction which later may increase their engagement

in the classroom.

2.3.2Tasks involving listing

The term `listing' initially may appear to be an easy and simple job for learners but that too can

vary linguistically from simple to difficult according to what learners have to write on the list.

Learners can begin by listing simple words and gradually move on to listing more difficult

aspects such as phrases or sentences. Moreover, there are two types of listing: Brainstorming and

Fact-Finding. (Brainstorming proves to be one of the most successful ways of getting students to

interact with one another, even the shy ones at that matter). According to Willis, Brainstorming

can be done amongst small groups of students and/or with the teacher leading the whole class.

Fact- Finding, on the other hand, allows students to find specific information from a mentioned

source instructed by the teacher. The sources can be anything from a book to a newsletter. (Fact-

finding can also be given as homework if the topic is discussed in class so in that case students

would have to find interesting facts about the topic and later share it with the class). Moreover,
 11

"the listing process can form the basis for many simple activities like quizzes, memory games,

and guessing games" (Willis, 2007, p. 68). By doing these activities, learners become aware of

the English words they already know from before and " this illustrates one basic principal of

TBT(task-based teaching): it is far more positive to build on what your learners already know,

than to start with what they don't know" (ibid, 2007, p. 70). The two very important phrases of a

task are pre-task priming and post- task activities. In pre-task priming, the learners usually

activate their schema and share their previous knowledge of the topic with the entire class that

will be later discussed elaborately or at times the teacher may share one or two past experiences

he or she had at this stage. On the contrary, post- task activities play a role after the task is over

where focus- on- form has a very important part. At this stage, the teacher commonly pinpoints

the language forms that are useful and lets learners practice and record helpful patterns and

phrases. Therefore, " a good task not only generates interest and creates an acceptable degree of

challenge, but also generates opportunities for learners to experience and activate as much

language as possible" (ibid,2007, p. 70).

2.3.3 Tasks involving ordering and sorting

Ordering and sorting are slightly more complex than listing and involves "a little more thought

and cognitive effort" (Willis, 2007, p. 72). There are three sub- points at this stage: sequencing,

ranking and classifying. Sequencing requires learners to arrange or assemble different things

together in a task provided by the teacher such as jumbled pictures/events, parts of stories. (It can

also be a memory challenge activity where learners are shown a video just once or twice and

later they have to recollect what they saw and put them in order). Rank ordering or ranking is

ordering things according to "different criteria like cost, popularity, practicality or fun value -
 12

different topics will obviously need different criteria" (ibid, 2007, p. 73). (However, it is very

useful to have a list before ranking and thus while ranking communication and an interaction

between students is stimulated because they need to support ranking order). In case of classifying

"learners can either be asked to work out their own categories for classifying or to allot items in a

list to categories already given" (ibid, 2007, p. 75). Some of the examples for classifications can

be shapes, things that make noise and many more. Learner suggesting different ways of

classifying stimulates more interaction and discussions amongst them and if it is the teacher

providing with the various ways of classification, interaction then becomes very minimal.

2.4 Task Difficulty

Task difficulty has been a leading area of research for many years and it has been of essential

importance to researchers, syllabus designer, material writers etc. It becomes more of an intuitive

issue if there is no way of determining the difficulty of task and if there has not been any method

for determining task complexity and difficulty. Even in case of different kinds of syllabi

determining difficulty becomes problematic, thus determining functional difficulty becomes

easier than determining task difficulty. According to Brindley (1987: cited in Nunan, 2004, p.

85), the factors that are involved in making a task difficult are learner factors, task factors and

text or input factors. Moreover, A two- dimensional framework was recommended by Brown,

Shilcock, Anderson and Yule (1984 cited in ibid, 2004, p. 86), "the first dimension related to the

type of information that had to be conveyed. The second dimension concerned the scale of the

task and the interrelationship among the different elements involved" (ibid, 2004, p.86).

Moreover,
 13

"in relation to the first dimension, they found that `static' tasks such as describing a diagram" is

easier then "dynamic tasks such as telling stories or describing a road accident, where the

elements remain constant relative to one another" and the "most difficult of all were `abstract'

tasks such as expressing an opinion, in which the elements are abstract rather than concrete"

(ibid, 2004, p. 86).

The second dimension, however, focused on the interrelationship of the various elements

involved in a task as well as the scale of the task. Furthermore, cognitive complexity/demands

have attracted most researchers towards task difficulty. Skehan illustrated a three way distinction

model "between code complexity, cognitive complexity and communicative stress. Code

complexity is the linguistic difficulty and variety Cognitive complexity, on the other hand, is

divided into two parts: cognitive familiarity (the knowledge or the awareness of the topic from

beforehand) and cognitive processing (the organization and amount of the information). Lastly,

communication stress is the time limitation that is allotted in conversations. In addition, the

model Skehan proposed accompanied by Foster to measure task complexity consisted of three

incorporated dimensions commonly known as, accuracy, complexity and fluency.

"Accuracy is measured by dividing the number of correct clauses by the number of clauses

produced by each subject. Complexity is measured by dividing the total number of clauses by the

total number of C-units ("A c- unit is an utterance containing a unit of referential or pragmatic

meaning" Nunan, 2004, p. 87) produced by each unit. Fluency is measured by the total number of

seconds of silence and time saying `um' and `ah ' by subjects as they complete the tasks"

(Nunan,.2004, p.87).

As a result, they found that different kinds of tasks required and resulted from different cognitive

demands. (Robinson (2001b: cited in ibid, 2004, p. 88), another researcher, argued that cognitive

factors are of two kinds: resource-directing and resource depleting.

 14

"Resource directing factors include the number of elements involved , the amount of contextual

support available, and reasoning demands made on the user " whereas , Resource- depleting

factors "make demands on attention and working memory , include the amount of planning time

available" (ibid,2004, p.88) and many more.)

Thus, to increase or decrease task complexity, any of the factors can easily be manipulated.

Robinson also states that more negotiation takes place in complex versions of tasks. Lastly

Martyn pointed out four aspects of cognitive demand: contextual support, reasoning demand,

degree of task structure and availability of knowledge schema. Using these factors, she

conducted a research applying the tasks that maximize negotiation such as jig-saw, information

exchange, problem-solving, decision- making and opinion exchange. After carrying out the

research she argued that "when density of negotiation was the dependent variable, the result

would be reversed, that the opinion exchange task, having greater cognitive demand, would

generate negotiation of meaning sequences with significantly higher density"(Nunan 2004, p.

90). As a result,

"tasks with high cognitive demands and more complex communication , as marked by high

density negotiation of meaning sequences , generated the `pushed output ' that Swain ( 1995: cited

in ibid, 2004, p. 90) argued was a factor of acquisition" (ibid, 2004, p.90).

Therefore, acquisition will only take place for learners when the level is appropriate and in case

of the inappropriate level instead of acquisition, fossilization will occur. In conclusion,

"difficulty is an individual matter because it depends upon learners' language learning aptitude

and analytical abilities" (Scheffler, 2007, p. 7).

 15

2.5 An empirical basis for task-based language teaching

Stephan Krashen proposed several hypotheses of language acquisition which have a major

influence on task based language teaching. His hypothesis was very much based on a number of

studies called `morpheme order studies' which

"showed that the morphemes were acquired in pretty much the same order by learners regardless

of their first language . The acquisition order was also similar regardless of the age of the

learners" (Nunan 2004, p.77).

The data collected by Krashen allowed him to develop four hypotheses commonly known as:

acquisition learning hypothesis, natural order hypothesis, monitor model hypothesis and input

hypothesis.

2.5.1 The input Hypothesis

Krashen states that an individual acquires language "by exposure of comprehensible input" and

"if the input contains forms and structures just beyond the learners current level of a competence

in the language, then both comprehension and acquisition will occur" (Spada, 1999, p. 39).

According to Krashen and Terrell (1983: cited in Scheffler, 2007, p.5) "all that is necessary for

L2 acquisition to take place is that learners are provided with comprehensible input". Therefore,

in order for learners to progress from one stage to another, they always need to learn to

comprehend structures and forms beyond their existing knowledge. The tasks provided to the

learners must also be structured in such a way that the following task consists of a greater input

level than the learners' one already embedded in the learners' knowledge.
 16

2.5.2 Interaction, output and the negotiation of meaning

In 1985, a Canadian Researcher, Merrill Swine attacks the idea of input hypothesis and proposed

an alternative notion commonly known as the `output hypothesis'. He argued in his proposal that

input is not enough to attain second language acquisition rather learners need a greater number of

opportunities to use the language since one can easily avoid the syntax and aim for meaning.

"However, in order to produce a comprehensible utterance, one has to `syntacticize' the

utterance, that is, encode it grammatically" (Nunan, 2004, p. 80). Moreover, the very first

researcher to put great importance on the concept of output was Hatch (1978: cited in ibid, 2004,

p.79) who believed interaction should be given first priority and that conversing is very much

effectual when learning a second language rather than learning grammatical forms. Ellis (1984,

p. 95: cited in ibid, 2004, p. 80) too had a similar view point, he argued that "interaction

contributes to development because it is the means by which the learner is able to crack the

code". Therefore, the tasks given to learners should have enough opportunities for them to

interact with each other as well as the teacher. Swine claims that in the process of achieving

comprehensible input, foreign language production becomes more accurate because learners

strive to speak properly and accurately so that their speech is comprehended by the listener,

(Lynch, 2006, p. 319).Long (1985: Nunan, 2004, p. 80) also contributed to the idea of output by

suggesting "linguistic conversational adjustments (which are also known as the negotiation of

meaning)" which

"promote comprehensible input because such adjustments are usually triggered by an indication

of non-comprehension, requiring the speaker to reformulate his or her utterance to make it more

comprehensible".
 17

Therefore, if comprehensible input allows acquisition to take place, negotiation of meaning also

promotes acquisition. Negotiation of meaning is something that individuals do on a daily basis

without even being aware of it. The process of negotiation of meaning contains four stages:

trigger (it is what starts the sequence), signal (draws awareness to a communication breakdown),

response (where the speaker challenges to fix the error; this stage may have more than one steps)

and lastly follow-up (marks the closing of the sequence); (Pica et al. 1991: Nunan, 2004, p.80).

Martyn developed a new method for determining the density of the sequence which was called

negotiation of density that included three ratios. : "the number of signals per negotiation

sequence, the number of responses per negotiation sequences and the number of signals per

responses" (ibid, 2004, p.83). She believed that measuring the density will provide a precise

measure of the level of communicative demand and cognitive involvement rather than a simple

count regarding different kinds of tasks. Doughty and Pica (1986: Nunan, 2004, p.84) established

that when information sharing is mandatory, the amount of negotiation is greater in number than

when it is optional. Around 1993, Pica, Kanagy and Falodun, designed a framework what they

called the two key features of a task: the interactional activity and the communication goals. The

interactional activity is then divided into two parts:

"Interactant relationship (Do task participants hold mutual or mutually exclusive information) and

Interactant requirement (is the exchange of information necessary or optional for task

completion?), communicative goals are also distributed in two sections: outcome options (is a

single outcome required, or was several outcome possible) and goal orientation (are participants

expected to converge on a particular goal or to diverge?)", (ibid, 2004, p. 84).

As a result, Pica proposed four conditions ("each interactant holds different portion of

information, it is necessary for the information to be exchanged for the task to be completed,
 18

Interactant have convergent goals and only one acceptable answer is possible," (ibid, 2004, p.

84) that would maximize the amount of negotiation in various tasks such as jigsaw, information

exchange, problem-solving, Decision-making and opinion exchange. As a result, learners should

be assigned with the tasks mentioned above and also the exchange of information should be

compulsory so that the maximum amount of negotiation takes place in the classroom.

2.6 Focus on form in task- based language teaching

The issue whether or not Task-based language teaching should focus on forms has been a very

debatable concern for many years. According to the strong interpretation/approach by some

linguists, "communicative interaction in the target language is necessary and sufficient for

language acquisition, and that a focus on form is unnecessary" (Nunan, 2004, p.93). In addition,

they also believe that "an approach which imposes linguistic constraints cannot be called `task-

based' " (ibid, 2004, p.93).Krashen, who strongly supports the strong approach,

"argues that there are two processes operating in language development, subconscious acquisition

and conscious learning and that form focused is aimed at conscious learning which does not feed

into subconscious acquisition" (Nunan, 2004, p. 93).

2.6.1 Focused versus unfocused tasks

Tasks that require a particular structure so that it can be completed successfully are termed as

focused tasks. On the other hand, unfocused tasks are those in which learners have the liberty to

apply any linguistic resources within their stock of knowledge to finish a task. Moreover,

Loschky and Bley-Vroman (1993: Nunan, 2004, p. 95), points out, "while a particular form may

not be essential for the successful completion of a task, certain forms could be expected to arise
 19

quite naturally in the course of the task" (ibid, 2004, p. 94). They also state that the use of such

forms will significantly assist the completion of the task and that linguistic forms aimed by

teacher, syllabus and textbook are not required. In contrast, Willis and Willis discard the concept

of `focused task' also known as metacommunicative task "( exercise with a focus on linguistic

forms, in which learners manipulate language or formulate generalization about form)"(Willis,

2001: pg 173-4 Cited in Nunan, 2004: pg 97). As a result, Willis and Willis state, "one feature of

TBL (task-based learning), therefore is that learners carrying out a task are free to use any

language they can to achieve the outcome" (Willis and Willis, 2001, p. 173-4 Cited in ibid, 2004,

pg 97).

2.6.2 The place of a focus on form in an instructional sequence

In an instructional sequence/ cycle, focus on forms was introduced and exposed initially or at the

beginning of the task in the early forms of task-based language teaching. The logic behind it was

that it was impractical of the learners to produce language that they have not been exposed to

earlier in the lessons. However in recent instructional cycle, the focus on forms comes later in the

process commonly recognized as `focus on linguistic elements', the reason being that the

previous stages expose learners to enough communication in the target language before they are

confronted with the linguistic focus. According to White (1987 cited in Mohamed, 2003, p.228),

since certain grammatical forms cannot be acquired merely through the exposure to the language,

instruction then plays a vital role.

"Larsen- Freeman (1995: cited in Mohamed, 2003, p.228) points out that even if grammar is

acquired naturally, it does not necessarily follow that it should not be taught. Instruction can

enhance that acquisition of grammar, and help speed up the process".

 20

2.6.3 Focus on form in the communicative classroom

Focus on form is more or less integrated in communicative classrooms. Teachers can provide

either an implicit or an explicit focus on the target language structure while designing a task

suggested by Samuda (2001: cited in Nunan 2004, p.107). Moreover, for some communicative

tasks, the focus on forms is very indirect and manipulated by the task whereas for other tasks,

forms may be very direct and overt. Nonetheless, the teacher as well the task has a massive role

to play regarding the kind of form focus the task will pursue in the classroom.

2.7 Conclusion

The sections discussed in this chapter will help to work as the basis for evaluation of the tasks in

the English textbook for classes IX & X in Bangladesh. They will be used in constructing the

students and teacher questionnaire as well as the researcher's own checklist to conduct the

survey and to assess the tasks.

 21

Chapter 3: Research Methodology

3.1 Introduction
This chapter gives an insight into the research methodology that was followed to conduct the

research. Questionnaire survey for both students and teachers in addition to the researcher's own

checklist were the primary methods used in this study. Moreover, in this chapter, there is a

detailed discussion on implications, administration, sampling, data analysis and the research

tools.

3.2 Methods of Data Collection

The chief methodology used in this study include: (1) students' questionnaire survey, (2)

teachers' questionnaire survey and lastly, (3) researcher's own evaluation using a checklist.

Questionnaire method while conducting a survey is one the most useful and widely used methods

for many years. By using questionnaires, both the researcher and the participants can benefit,

there are many advantages associated with questionnaire. For the participants', to fill in

structured questionnaire requires very little time and the answers are relatively objective, easy to

analyze. Therefore, for the researcher, it is very simple to quantify and interpret the result.

According to Seliger and Shohamy (1989, p. 172) some of the advantages of using a

questionnaire for data collection are:

 22

a) They are self-administered and can be given to a large group of subjects at the same

time. They are, therefore, less expensive to administer than other procedures such as

interviews.

b) When anonymity is assured, subjects tend to share information of a sensitive nature

more easily.

c) Since the same questionnaire is given to all subjects, the data are more uniform and

standard.

d) Since they can usually be given to all subjects at exactly the same time or with the

short period of time, the data are more accurate.

Another method that is implemented in this study is the researcher's own checklist. By using the

checklist, the researcher will be able to identify and give his /her feedback of the textbook being

evaluated.

3.3 Principles followed for Designing Instrument

The methods used to collect data were students' and teachers' questionnaire survey. According

to Seliger and Shohamy (1989, p. 173), questionnaires are printed forms for data collection,

which include questions or statements to which the subject is expected to respond, often

anonymously. Moreover, according to Kothari (1985), a questionnaire consists of a number of

questions printed or typed in a definite order on a form or set of forms. Kothari (ibid, p. 127) also

stated that all questions should meet the following standard. They - (a) should be easily

understood, (b) should be simple and (c) should be concrete and should conform as much as

possible to the respondents' way of thinking.

 23

There are many ways to create a questionnaire and rating scale is one of the most common ways

(Likert, 1932) is most extensively used in case of empirical

amongst which the Likert Scale

studies. In a Likert scale, 5 different options are provided for each item on the questionnaire to

the participants. They are required to answer a series of statements indicating whether they

`Entirely agree' (EA), `Agree' (A), `Not sure' (NS), `Disagree' (D) and lastly `Entirely Disagree'

(ED).Moreover, Entirely Agree is assigned 1 and Entirely Disagree may get the score of 5.

Seliger and Shohamy (1989, p. 173), however, recommended that in an attitude questionnaire the

sequence should be reversed from the one suggested by Likert. For example, `Entirely Disagree'

should be assigned 1 and `Entirely Agree' should be scored 5.Therefore, this study follows the

latter suggestion given by Seliger and Shohamy.

Furthermore , Likert scale too has advantages such as:

(a) Likert type scale is considered more reliable because under it respondents answer

each statement included in the instrument. Likert-type scale can easily be used in

respondent-centered and stimulus-centered studies i.e. through it we can study how

responses differ between people and how responses differ between stimuli.

(b) Likert-type scale takes much less time to construct; it is frequently used by the

students of opinion research.

(Kothari 1985, p. 106,107)

Taking all there advantages in to account, the researcher decided on Likert scale as the rating

scale for her research. While designing the questions, the researcher tried to make the questions

as simple and brief as possible so that the participants do not face any difficulties. The questions
 24

basically asked the participations about their opinion towards the tasks in the English textbook

for classes- IX and X.

3.4 Description of the Questionnaires for Students and Teachers

All the questions in the questionnaire for both students and teachers emerged out of the

theoretical discussion in chapter 2(Literature Review). The questionnaire consists of 21 items

and for each item 5 options were assigned. The participants were instructed to circle the most

appropriate answer for each item. The options are sequenced from entirely disagree, disagree, not

sure, agree and entirely agree. Moreover, the areas the questionnaire covers are definitions of

task, task components, framework, task difficulty, empirical basis for task-based language

teaching and focus on form in task-based language teaching.

(See Appendices I and II)

The area `Definitions of task' consists of 4 items to investigate what types of tasks are provided

in the English Textbook for class IX and X. It also tries to find out if the levels of the tasks are

sequenced in an orderly manner from simple to difficult.

The area `Task components' in the questionnaire includes 5 items. It tries to find out if the tasks

are effective and motivate the learners. It also attempts to find out what type of tasks are

performed by the learner.

The third area `Framework' consists of only 3 questions which seek to discover if the tasks allow

the learners to practice authentic language and implement different skills such as ordering,

listing, and etc.

 25

`Task Difficulty' however, has only 2 items in the questionnaire and is very much self

explanatory. It aims to see if the tasks maintain a sequence of difficulty and which types of tasks

more complex than others.

The area `Empirical basis for task-based language teaching' includes 3 items. It tries to find out

if the inputs given are appropriate for the learners and if the tasks interactive.

Last but not least, `Focus on form in task-based language teaching' has 4 items which try to find

out while focus on form is indirect if it helps to complete the task.

3.5 Validity and Reliability

There are many different ways linguists have defined validity and reliability have been defined.

Seliger and Shohamy (1989, p. 188) state that `validity refers to the extent to which the data

collection procedure measures what it intends to measure'. Nunan (1992, p. 14), on the other

hand, defines validity as `the extent to which a piece of research actually investigates what the

researcher purports to investigate'. Reliability, however, refers to the accuracy in the data

collection procedure (Seliger and Shohamy, 1989, p .185). Moreover, some of the aspects the

researcher considered are:

a) Literature on research method

b) Objective of the present study

c) Consultation with the supervisor of this study

3.6 Description of the Checklist

 26

The checklist is constructed for the researcher's own evaluation of the textbook. The checklist

has the same number of items and areas mentioned in the teachers' and students' questionnaire.

The only major distinction is that the items on the checklist are in the form of questions rather

than in statements. Moreover, it is included in the study to help the researcher execute a

subjective evaluation of the items from the knowledge he/she has gathered from the teacher and

student questionnaire as well as the academic study.

3.7 Universe of the Study

In a practical situation, field studies require a lot of time as well as capital which lead to a

selection of respondents i.e. selection of restricted number of samples. According to Kothari

(1985:68), "the selected respondents constitute what is technically called a `sample' and the

selection process is called sampling technique".

The topic for this research requires the researcher to collect valid and reliable data from various

schools all the over the country which involves a lot of money, time and man power that is not

available in her context. Therefore, considering all the limitations, the researcher chose to use

sampling to conduct the research for the convenience of the data selection.

The schools were chosen keeping in mind of the cost, time limitations and other resources. Also,

these are some of the most well known Bangla medium schools in Dhaka, Bangladesh.

3.8 Sampling of the Study

Borg and Gall (1989) refers to sampling as "selecting a given number of subjects from a definite

population as representative of that population". Therefore, to collect the data the researcher has
 27

chosen 20 teachers along with 100 students and as many schools as possible as subjects or

sample units.

Samples selected for the survey are shown in the following table:

Type Number

Teachers' questionnaire 20

Students' questionnaire 100

Detailed Sampling Plan

Institution Teacher Students

s No. Class No.

School A 2 IX 11

X 4

School B 2 IX 3

X 3

School C 4 IX 0

X 0

School D 5 IX 0

X 0

School E 1 IX 0
 28

x 0
School F 1 IX 10

X 7

School G 1 IX 0

X 0

School H 2 IX 0

X 0

SchoolI 1 IX 0

X 0

School J 1 IX 0

X 0

School K 0 IX 9

X 0

School L 0 IX 5

X 0

School M 0 IX 14

X 3

School N 0 IX 5

X 14

SchoolO 0 IX 2

X 1

School P 0 IX 0
 29

X 3

School Q 0 IX 6

X 0

3.9 Administering the Students ' Questionnaire

The researcher administered most of the students' questionnaire survey by going to different

coaching centers in which students from various schools gathered. At first, the researcher had to

introduce herself to the owner of the coaching center and explain the purpose of the research and

requested him the permission to conduct the survey amongst the students there. The owners were

very helpful; they requested the teachers of the class to allow the researcher to do the survey.

Moreover, the researcher also had to go to some of the participants' home to carry out the

research but those were limited to the family members or relatives. However, by going to a few

coaching centers and doing questionnaire survey among students of various schools, the

researcher was able to cover a number of different schools all around Dhaka.

3.10 Administering the Teachers ' Questionnaire

The teachers' survey was administered slightly differently than that of the students' survey. The

researcher emailed most of the surveys to the teachers as it was preferred by them and for the

other teachers, the researcher had to contact the teacher and go to his/her residence to do the

survey. Although, towards the beginning of the research, it was becoming difficult to convince

the teachers to fill out questionnaire survey but once, they were convinced, their co-operation

was astounding. Lastly, some of them not only filled out the survey but, in addition, provided the

researcher with information that became very useful for the research.
 30

3.11 Process of Data Analysis

The data collected from the survey for both students and teachers were hand tabulated and

analyzed applying Frequency Counts and Mean Scores. Seliger and Shohamy (1989, p. 211)

state that there are a number of advantages of Frequency Counts for data analysis:

❖ Frequencies provide the researcher with meaningful information on the measures used in

the research even before the result is compared. .

❖ Frequencies can also be useful for obtaining insight into the data research.

❖ Frequency Counts is a useful way of condensing, organizing and summarizing the data

when the score range is high.

❖ Frequencies can provide the researcher with meaningful information on the measures

used in the research even before the results are compared. This can help the researcher

obtain insight into the data and the result.

Moreover, Seliger and Shohamy (1989:215) also stated that the mean is the sum of all scores of

all subjects in a group divided by the number of subjects , [X =YX/n].

3.12 Conclusion

The results found from both of the questionnaires' (teachers and students) have been analyzed

and discussed in details based on an interpretation key in the following chapter. The researcher's

own checklist is also used to assess the task efficacy of the textbook. .
 31

Chapter 4: Results

4.1 Introduction
The data collected from both the students' and teachers' questionnaire has been hand tabulated

and analyzed thoroughly in terms of frequency counts and means and the results are presented in

this chapter.

4.2 Results as Found from the Students' Questionnaire Survey

In the students' questionnaire, the participants had to circle the appropriate box from five options

for each item. In order to analyze, the responses had to be converted into mathematical figures as

follows:

Entirely disagree = 1

Disagree = 2

Not sure = 3

Agree = 4

Entirely agree = 5

The results are presented in the table below:

(In all the boxes, the numbers on top indicate the number of scorers and the number at the

bottom represents the score after the conversion into mathematical figures. Moreover, the mean

score is calculated by adding all the mathematical figures at the bottom.

 32

Table: I

Statements

A. Definitions of task
Tasks in the textbook are arranged from 0 3 2 83 12
simple, brief type, to complex and lengthy
4 . 04
activities such as group solving and decision
making. 0 6 6 332 60

Task is a process controlled by teachers that 0 0 6 91 3

requires you to arrive at an outcome from
3.97
given information. 0 0 18 364 15

The tasks focus on activities that promote 4 0 2 85 9 3 . 95

communication.
4 0 6 340 45

The textbook covers both real-world 0 10 5 49 36 4 . 11

(introduces and allows you to engage in
activities that are necessary outside of the
classroom) and pedagogic task (are limited to 0 20 15 196 180
classrooms and are not similar to the outside
world).
3. Task components
The tasks in the text book motivate your 0 5 4 61 30 4.16
participation.
0 10 12 244 150
The input given to you is very effective. 0 0 7 55 38 4, 31

0 0 21 220 190
The tasks are learner friendly. 1 0 0 73 26 4. 23

1 0 0 292 130
The tasks allow the teachers to be able to offer 0 2 9 88 1 3. 88
 33

help but not give the answer.

0 4 27 352 5
You are required to do pair, individual and 1 17 17 62 3 3.48
group activities.
1 34 51 248 15
Framework
The tasks are form focused which will let you 5 6 2 55 32 4.03
practice authentic communication (when you
are expected to do an activity in class similar
to an actual communicative interaction 5 12 6 220 160
outside the classroom)

The task topics are appropriate and well liked 0 1 6 78 15 4.07

by you.

0 2 18 312 75
Tasks make you practice various skills such as 1 3 10 81 5 3.86
listing, ordering and etc.
1 6 30 324 25
D. Task Difficulty
The difficulty level of the task increases 4 4 1 30 61 4.40
gradually.
4 8 3 120 305
A task that requires you to describe something 0 23 3 67 7 3.58
is easier than expressing an opinion. For
example, telling a story or describing a road
accident is easier than expressing how you 0 46 9 268 35
feel about a movie or a political party.

E. Em p irical basis for task - based lan guage tea hin g

The level of the input given to you is 1 10 4 38 47 4.20
advanced than your current level. For you to
move from one stage to another, you need to
understand structures beyond the knowledge 1 20 12 152 235
you already have.

Tasks are designed in a way that it encourages 0 1 2 84 13 4.09

interaction between you and the teachers.
0 2 6 336 65
The task requires/encourage you to exchange 0 3 0 87 10 4.04
information.
0 6 0 348 50
F. Focus on form in task-based lan gua ge teachin g
Certain language structure help the learners 0 0 5 93 2 3.97
complete a task.
0 0 15 372 10
 34

You are free to use language in your own way 0 4 4 86 6 3.94

to get the outcome.
0 8 12 344 30
At first , there is enough exposure to the target 0 51 15 34 0 2 .83
language for you, and then you are taught
language structure.
0 102 45 136 0
Language structures are not taught directly 4 48 2 44 2 2 . 92
through the tasks.
4 96 6 176 10

(The discussion for "Item by item discussion" is in the appendix)

4.3 Results as Found from the Teachers' Questionnaire Survey

Similar to the Students' questionnaire survey the teachers' questionnaire survey was conducted

and calculated in the same manner. The participant teachers had to circle an appropriate answer

for each item among five options given to them and then for analysis the responses were again

converted in mathematical figures.

Entirely disagree = 1

Disagree = 2

Not sure = 3

Agree = 4

Entirely agree = 5

The results of the teachers' questionnaire survey are shown in the table below:
 35

(In all the boxes the numbers on top indicate the number of scorers and the number in the bottom

represents the score after the conversion into mathematical figures. Moreover, the mean score is

calculated by adding all the mathematical figures in the bottom.)

Table: 2

Statements

w Q z
A. Definitions of Task
Tasks in the textbook are arranged from 1 3 0 15 1 3.6
simple, brief type activities to complex
and lengthy activities such as group
solving and decision making. 1 6 0 60 5

In the textbook, tasks require the learners 0 1 1 15 3 4.0

to arrive at a conclusion from given
information. 0 2 3 60 15
In the textbook, tasks are associated with 0 1 2 11 6 4.1
communicative language use.
0 2 6 44 30
The textbook covers both real-world tasks 0 2 1 12 5 4.0
(introduces and allows learners to engage
in activities that are necessary outside of 0 4 3 48 25
the classroom) and pedagogic task
(confined to classroom and are not similar
to the outside world).
B. Task com ponents
The tasks in the text book motivate 0 1 3 12 4 3.9 5
learner participation.
0 2 9 48 20
The input given to students is very 1 5 5 8 1 3.15
effective.
1 10 15 32 5
The tasks are learner friendly. 1 1 2 10 6 3.95

1 2 6 40 30
The tasks allow the teachers to be only 0 6 5 7 2 3.25
facilitators.
0 12 15 28 10
There is a balance between different 1 2 1 15 1 3.65
 36

modes of activities (individual, pair and

group). 1 4 3 60 5
C. Framework
1. The tasks are form-focused which allow 2 4 3 11 0 3.15
students to process authentic
communication. ( when learners are 2 8 9 44 0
expected to do an activity in class similar
to the a genuine communicative
interaction outside the classroom)

The task topics are appropriate and well 1 3 5 7 4 3.5

liked by the learners.

1 6 15 28 20
Tasks are designed to cater to various sub 0 2 3 14 1 3.7
skills such as listing, ordering and etc.
0 4 9 56 5
D. Task Difficulty
The difficulty of the task increases 1 4 3 11 1 3.35
gradually.
1 8 9 44 5
A task that requires describing something 1 0 4 10 5 3.9
is easier than expressing an opinion. For
example, telling a story or describing a
road accident is easier than expressing 1 0 12 40 25
how one feels about a movie or a political
party.
E. Em pirical basis for task-based lan u a a teac hin
The level of the input given to the learners 4 3 4 7 2 3.15
is advanced than their current level. For
learners to move from one stage to
another, they need to know structures
beyond their existing knowledge. 4 6 15 28 10

Tasks are designed in such a manner that 1 8 1 5 5 3.25

it encourages interaction between learners
and the teacher.
1 16 3 20 25

7. The task requires learners to exchange 0 3 2 10 5 3. 8 5

information.
0 6 6 40 25
F. Focus on form in task- based language teachi ng
3. Certain language forms help the learners 0 0 1 15 4 4.15
to complete the task.
0 0 3 60 20
^. Learners are free to use any language to 2 5 2 9 2 3.2
attain the outcome.
 37

2 10 6 36 10
Initially, sufficient amount of 0 4 6 7 3 3.45
communication is provided to students
and later they are exposed to linguistic 0 8 18 28 15
forms.

Focus on forms is very indirect in the 0 1 3 14 2 3. 8 5

tasks.
0 2 9 56 10

((The discussion for "Item by item discussion" is in the appendix)

4.4 Discussion of the Students' Questionnaire Survey Results

This section discusses the results presented in tablel in this chapter.

** (The interpretation key is applied for discussion of the results in: 1.00- 2.25 = negative

feedback , 2.26-3. 00 =not satisfactory , 3.01-3.75 =satisfactory and 3.76 -5 .00 = very satisfactory.)

Below the heading Definitions of Task, there are 4 items. The overall responses of all the

students to all the four items are `very satisfactory'.

In item no. 1 (Tasks in the textbook are arranged from simple, brief type, to complex and lengthy

activities such as group solving and decision making), the mean score is 4.04 which means the student

responses have a `very satisfactory' attitude towards this item.

Item no. 2 (Task is a process controlled by teachers that requires you to arrive at an outcome from given

information); the students responses are `very satisfactory' as well since the mean score is 3.97.
 38

For item no.3 (The tasks focus on activities that promote communication), the mean score is 3.95 and the

students attitude is `very satisfactory'.

Item no.4 (The textbook covers both real -world [ introduces and allows you to engage in activities that are

necessary outside of the classroom ] and pedagogic task [are limited to classrooms and are not similar to

the outside world] ), the overall attitude of the students were ` very satisfactory' because the mean score is

4.11.

Among the five items, from no.5 to no.9, under the area Task components, for numbers 5, 6, 7, 8 and

`very satisfactory' is the response of the students and numbers 9 the students' attitude is `satisfactory'.

In item no. 5(The tasks in the text book motivate your participation), the mean score is 4.16 and therefore,

the attitudes of the students are `very satisfactory'.

In item no. 6 (The input given to you is very effective ); the mean score is 4 .31 which state that the

students' attitude is similar to the previous one `very satisfactory'.

Item no. 7 (The tasks are learner friendly), the mean score is 4.23and thus the result is `very satisfactory'

In item no. 8 (The tasks allow the teachers to be able to offer help but not give the answer), the mean

score is 3.88 and the overall attitude is `very satisfactory'.

In item no. 9 (You are required to do pair, individual and group activities), the attitude towards this

question is `satisfactory' and the mean score is 3.48.

 39

Under the area Framework there are 3 items, from item 10 - 12. The students' attitudes are all `very

satisfactory'

Item no. 10 (The tasks are form focused which will let you practice authentic communication [when you

are expected to do an activity in class similar to an actual communicative interaction outside the

classroom]), the mean score is 4.03 and the attitude is `very satisfactory'.

Item no. 11 ( The task topics are appropriate and well liked by you), the students attitude are `very

satisfactory' and the mean score is 4.07.

Item no.12 ( Tasks make you practice various skills such as listing, ordering and etc), the mean score is

3.86 thus the attitude is `very satisfactory'

Under Task difficulty there are only 2 items where one is `very satisfactory ' and the other is `satisfactory'.

In item no .13 (The difficulty level of the task increases gradually ), the mean score is 4.40 and the attitude

of the students are `very satisfactory'.

Item no.14 ( A task that requires you to describe something is easier than expressing an opinion. For

example , telling a story or describing a road accident is easier than expressing how you feel about a

movie or a political party), the mean score is 3 . 58 therefore the attitude is also ` satisfactory'.

Under the area Empirical basis for task- based language teaching , there are only 3 items in this section

and three of them are `very satisfactory'.

 40

In item no.15 (The level of the input given to you is advanced than your current level. For you to move

from one stage to another, you need to understand structures beyond the knowledge you already have),

the overall attitude of the students are `very satisfactory' and the mean score is 4.20.

In item no. 16 (Tasks are designed in a way that it encourages interaction between you and the teachers),

the mean score is 4. 09 and the students view is `very satisfactory'.

Item no .17 (The task requires /encourage you to exchange information ), the students attitude is `very

satisfactory' and the mean score is 4.04.

Under the area focus on form in task- based language teaching there are 4 items from numbers 18-21

where 2 of the items are `very satisfactory' and 2 are ' not satisfactory'.

In item no. 18 (Certain language structure help the learners complete a task), the mean score is 3.97 and

the students' attitude is `very satisfactory'.

In item no.19 (You are free to use language in your own way to get the outcome) the students attitude

again 'very satisfactory' but the mean score is `3 .94 very close to the previous item.

Item no.20 (At first, there is enough exposure to the target language for you, then you are taught language

structure), the mean score is 2.83 and the view of the students are `not satisfactory'.

In item no. 21(Language structures are not taught directly through the tasks), the mean score is 2.92

therefore this too is `not satisfactory'.

 41

4.5 Discussion of the Teachers' Questionnaire Survey Results

This section discusses the results presented in table 2 in this chapter.

** (The interpretation key is applied for discussion of the results in: 1.00-2.25 = negative

feedback, 2.26-3.00 = not satisfactory, 3.01-3.75 =satisfactory and 3.76-5.00 = very satisfactory.)

Below the heading Definitions of Task, there are 4 items. For 3 of the items students' response

are `very satisfactory' and for one `satisfactory'.

In item no. 1 (Tasks in the textbook are arranged from simple , brief type activities to complex and

lengthy activities such as group solving and decision making), the mean score is 3.6 the teachers

responses has a `satisfactory' attitude.

Item no. 2 (In the textbook, tasks require the learners to arrive at a conclusion from given information),

the teachers view is `very satisfactory' and the mean score is 4.0.

For item no.3 (In the textbook, tasks are associated with communicative language use), the mean score is

4.1 and the students attitude is `very satisfactory'.

Item no.4 (The textbook covers both real-world tasks [introduces and allows learners to engage in

activities that are necessary outside of the classroom] and pedagogic task [confined to classroom and are

not similar to the outside world]), the overall attitude of the teachers is `very satisfactory' because the

mean score is 4.0.

 42

Among the five items, from no.5 to no.9, under the area Task components, for numbers 5 and 7 `very

satisfactory' was the response of the teachers and numbers 6, 8, and 9 the teachers' attitude is

`satisfactory'.

In item no. 5(The tasks in the text book motivate learner participation), the mean score is 3.95 and

therefore, the attitudes of the teachers are `very satisfactory'.

In item no. 6 (The input given to students is very effective); the mean score is 3.15 which state that the

teachers' attitude is `satisfactory'.

Item no. 7 (The tasks are learner friendly), the mean score is 3.95 and thus the result is `very satisfactory'

In item no. 8 (The tasks allow the teachers to be only facilitators), the mean score is 3.25 and the overall

attitude is `satisfactory'.

In item no. 9 (There is a balance between different modes of activities [individual, pair and group]), the

attitude towards this question is `satisfactory' and the mean score is 3.65.

Under the area Framework there are 3 items, from item 10-12. All of the items are `satisfactory'.

Item no. 10 (The tasks are form-focused which allow students to process authentic communication [when

learners are expected to do an activity in class similar to a genuine communicative interaction outside the

classroom]), the mean score is 3.15 and the attitude is `satisfactory'.

Item no . 11 (The task topics are appropriate and well liked by the learners), the teachers attitude are

`satisfactory' and the mean score is 3.5.

 43

Item no.12 (Tasks are designed to cater to various sub skills such as listing, ordering and etc), the mean

score is 3.7 thus the attitude is `satisfactory'

Under Task difficulty one item is `satisfactory ' another is ` very satisfactory'.

In item no.13 (The difficulty of the task increases gradually), the mean score is 3.35 and the attitude of the

teachers are `satisfactory'.

Item no.14 (A task that requires describing something is easier than expressing an opinion. For example,

telling a story or describing a road accident is easier than expressing how one feels about a movie or a

political party), the mean score is 3.9 therefore the attitude is also `very satisfactory' like the previous

item.

Under the area Empirical basis for task-based language teaching , there are only 3 items in this section

from which only two are `satisfactory' and one is `very satisfactory'.

In item no.15 (The level of the input given to the learners is advanced than their current level. For learners

to move from one stage to another, they need to know structures beyond their existing knowledge), the

overall attitude of the teachers are `satisfactory' and the mean score is 3.15.

In item no. 16 (Tasks are designed in such a manner that it encourages interaction between learners and

the teacher), the mean score is 3.25 and the teachers view is `satisfactory'.
 44

Item no.17 (The task requires learners to exchange information ), the teachers attitude is `very satisfactory'

and the mean score is 3.85.

Under the area focus on form in task- based language teaching there are 4 items from numbers 18-21

where 2 of the items are ' satisfactory' and other 2 items are `very satisfactory'.

In item no. 18 (Certain language forms help the learners to complete the task), the mean score is 4.15 and

the teachers' attitude is `very satisfactory'.

In item no.19 (Learners are free to use any language to attain the outcome) the teachers attitude is

`satisfactory' and the mean score is 3.2.

Item no.20 (Initially, sufficient amount of communication is provided to students and later they are

exposed to linguistic forms), the mean score is 3.45 and the view of the teachers are `satisfactory'.

In item no. 21 (Focus on forms is very indirect in the tasks), the mean score is 3.85 therefore this too is

`very satisfactory'.
 45

4.6 Researcher ' s Own Evaluation Using the Checklist

In this section , the researcher presents her own evaluation of the textbook using the checklist.

The results found and analyzed for each of the item is presented in order and discussed in details.

A. Definitions of Task

Item no.l : The researcher believes that the tasks have been arranged from simple to brief types,

to complex to lengthy activities such as group solving and decision making. For example, `unit

1: lesson 4; exercise c; p: 8' is simpler than `unit 3: lesson 3, exercise c; p: 28'. Because, the task

in Unit 1 needs only discussion regarding Baishakhi mela but the task in Unit 3 requires the

partner to fill in the spider diagram for Rafiq's school while the learner fills out another one

regarding his/her school and after they are both done; they are instructed to compare the

information about the two schools.

Item no.2: In the checklist, in item 2 the researcher does believe that the task process is

controlled by teachers that require learners to arrive with a product from given information.

Many of the tasks are provided with information or a given sample and the students are

instructed to follow that information to arrive with the product. For example, students are given a

sample dialogue or a set of words and they are then instructed to create another dialogue

following the structure of the previous one or write a number of sentences using the set of words

provided. However, the tasks are more or less controlled and the process is regulated by the

teachers. In Unit 6; Lesson 4, exercise c; p: 64, learners are provided with a set of statements

about junk food that they are instructed to read and make similar statements with the information

provided.
 46

Item no.3: In the checklist, item 3 refers to task association with communicative use. The

researcher believes that the tasks are very much communicative and involves the students to

interact to a great extinct. For example, Unit 1; lesson 1; exercise C; the learners are instructed to

work in pair and arrange the jumbled sentences in a dialogue form matching the dialogue with

the picture provided below. Also, in Unitl3; lessonl; exercise A; students are instructed to "look

at the pictures below and tell their partner which country the animals are found in".

Item no4: The textbook covers both real-world (introduces and allows learners to engage in

activities that are necessary outside of the classroom) and pedagogic task (confined to

classrooms and are not similar to the outside world). The researcher believes that the textbook

maintains a good balance between real-world task and pedagogic task. For example, Unit 1,

Lesson 1, exercise E requires the learners to interview his/her partner and then write a short

article of about 100 words based on the answer they received. Also, in Unit 15, Lesson 4,

exercise B and C, p.155; learners are instructed to fill out a bank form with his/her partner which

can be considered to be a real-world task; however, in exercise C in the same unit, learners are

told to read a text about an Access Card and match the headings with the appropriate paragraphs.

Exercise C is considered to be pedagogic task and Exercise B is a real-world task, therefore, it

can be stated that there is a good balance between the real-world task and pedagogic task.

B. Task components

Item no.5: According to the researcher, the textbook motivates learners because a great number

of tasks are communicative and has various skills integrated into one lesson. Also, the topics are

not at all intimidating rather to their liking which are very simple and encouraging such as Eid,

Christmas, A new experience in Unit 7; Lesson8; p.79, Unit 7;Lesson9; p.80-81 and Unit
 47

4;Lesson5;p.38. The topics are familiar and the tasks are learner friendly. For example, for Unit

7; Lesson8; p.79, exercise B requires the learners to read a newspaper article on the significance

of Eid and answer questions. Moreover, In Unit 7;Lesson9; p.80-81, exercise C, learners are

instructed to write down who is buying what for whom this Christmas using the clues from a

given box. Lastly, In Unit 4, Lesson5; p.38, exercise A, learners are asked to read the questions

given and work in pairs to share their personal information.

Item no6: The inputs provided to the learners are very effective because they are taught how to

interact when meeting someone new, how to read news paper advertisement for information and

many more. Moreover, the functions the learners are learning are also very effective such as

expressing request, exchanging greetings, advising, and etc. For example, Unit 1; Lesson4, pg.7-

8, exercise D expects learners to make a poster requesting volunteers to help with the various

duties. In unit 1, lesson 1, p.3, exercise E, learners are required to think about the questions they

are going to ask their partner and then interview them which will teach them how to exchange

greetings.

Item no7: The researcher feels that most of the tasks are learner friendly but the tasks that require

learners to read a comprehension and answer questions can be very conventional and thus bore

the students; for example, Unit 10; lesson 6; p . 1 1 1 - 1 12. Moreover, the topics are very simple and

straightforward which should allow the students to feel comfortable with the tasks. .

Item no.8: In some tasks, the teachers can act only as facilitators such as when the learners are

instructed to create a dialogue but in case of Q &A tasks, teachers can easily play the role of

facilitators like in Unit 14; lesson3; p.146. For exercise B and C, learners are told to read the text
 48

and later in exercise C, they are instructed to answer the following questions. In tasks like these,

teachers can easily offer help and at times even provide the learners with the answers.

In item no.9 : Overall in the textbook, there is a balance in the mode of learning but considering

each lessons individually, some consists of only individual work while others are a combination

of both individual and pair work.

C. Framework

In item no 10: The researcher believes that the tasks are form focused which allow students to

process authentic communication (when they are expected to do an activity in class similar to an

actual communicative interaction outside the classroom) because even when the function of the

task is to describe something, a form or grammar structure is followed indirectly such as present

simple tense; for example, in unit 2; lesson 4; p. 15-16 and thus this applies for almost all of the

tasks.

In item no 11: According to the researcher , the tasks are appropriate and should be well liked by

the students because in Unit 1, lesson 2 , exercise E, p. 4, learners are required to work in pairs

and complete the extract using the given words in the box which is very much suitable for their

level and enjoyable to do since it demands interaction between the partners to complete the task.

In item no 12: In the checklist item 12, refers to the tasks catering to various sub-skills such as

listing, ordering etc. The researcher thinks that the tasks are well planned/designed to cater to

various sub-skills because in Unit 5 ; lesson 1; p.48, exercise C learners are asked to list the

reasons why traffic jam happens and in Unit6 , Lessonl , p.58, learners are instructed to list the

things their partner has done.

 49

D. Task Difficulty

Item no.13: The researcher believes that the difficulty level of the tasks increases gradually

because in Unit 1, lesson 1, exercise B, p. 1, learners are told to work in pairs and guess specific

information from the picture but in Unit 1, lesson 2, exercise A, p.3, learners are supposed to

read some information about a woman named Prity, work in pairs and ask and answer questions

about the information. Here, it is clearly established that the task in lesson 1, exercise B is merely

guessing specific information about Becky from the given picture which is easier than the task in

lesson 2, exercise A which is a little more complex.

In item no 14: The researcher once again believes that the tasks that require learners to describe

something are easier than expressing an opinion. In the textbook, since the lessons are designed

from simple to complex, one can notice that in Unit 4; lesson 2; p. 33, describing the pictures is

included. However, how to express one's opinion is taught in Unit 11; lesson 3; p.121. Also, in

Unit 3, lesson 4, exercise A, p. 29, learners are asked to look at some pictures and describe what

the students are doing with his/her partner and in Unit 7, lesson 4, exercise c, p.72, learners are

required to work in groups and make changes for Thursday and Friday television programs

which require learners to express their opinions. Therefore, describing must be easier than

expressing an opinion.

E. Empirical basis for task - based language teaching

Item no .15: The level of the input given to learners is advanced than their current level according
to the learner
to the researcher. For example , Unit 5 , lesson 2 intends to teach ` present simple '

and in the same unit , lesson 3 teaches ' passive future simple ' allowing the latter input to be
 50

advanced than the learners' current level However, some inputs are repeated in several tasks

towards the following lessons. Such as in Unit 22, lesson 1, first conditional taught but it is again

repeated in lesson 3.

Item no 16 : Tasks are designed in such a manner that it encourages interaction between learners

and the teachers . However, some of the tasks encourage more interaction between teachers. For

example, True/ False or Fill in the blank activities requires interaction with the teacher more than

between the learners themselves. Such as in Unit 7 ; lesson 8 ; p.80, exercise C requires the

learners to state if the statements are true or false and if false , learners have to correct it. In these

types of exercises, there isn ' t much interaction between learners themselves, rather learners

consult and interact with teacher more by asking them for help or sharing the answer with them.

In item no.17: A lot of the tasks, "learners are very much required to exchange information" like

in Unitl; lesson 1; p.3, exercise E, where students are required to exchange personal information

while interviewing one another.

F. Focus on form in task - based language teaching

In item no.18: Although there isn't any direct mention of language forms, the researcher thinks

that certain language forms do help to complete of the task. The form can be identified by the

way the questions are structured. For example, in Unit 1, lesson2, exercise A, p.3, learners are

instructed to work in pairs and answer question about the information provided to them, an

example is already given; e.g., Q: How old is -Prity; A: She is 10 years old. By this learners can

identify that this task will be teaching them `present simple' without the book directly stating it.
 51

Item no.19: As mentioned above, from the surface, it seems learners are free to use any language

to attain outcome but this too very much depends on the question structure but as long as the

outcome is grammatically correct, they are able to use any language structure as they wish.

Item no.20: The researcher believes that learners are exposed to linguistic forms from the

beginning rather than later in the textbook; for example, Unitl, lesson 1, p.2 is indirectly

teaching the learners `present simple' and `wh-questions'.

In item no.21: Almost majority of the time, focus on form is indirect in the tasks; for instance,

Unit4, lesson 9, p.44-45 is intended to teach the learners `passive forms' without any mentioning

of it.

4.7 Conclusion

The result, as a whole, confirms that the book has many positive aspects; yet, in a number of

areas, the responses were `not satisfactory' which needs to be further modified. However, the

tasks in the book seem to be very skillfully designed around Communicative language teaching

principles. In the concluding chapter, recommendations regarding further improvements of the

tasks have been provided by the researcher in light of results of the students' and teachers'

questionnaire survey along with the researcher's own evaluation of the tasks with the checklist.
Chapter 5: Conclusions and Recommendations

5.1 Introduction

This chapter sums up, concludes and suggests recommendations based on the findings of the

empirical study done by the researcher.

5.2 Conclusion

The foremost purpose of this study was to evaluate the tasks in English textbook for classes IX &

X under a certain number of headings. The major finding of the study is briefly mentioned in the

following section.

Definitions of Task

According to the surveys as well as the researcher's checklist this section "definition of tasks" is

`very satisfactory'. Teachers overall view was `very satisfactory' similar to that of the students.

For item 1, teachers' response was `satisfactory'. The researcher also feels that the tasks in the

textbook are confined to at least one or more definitions stated in the questionnaire surveys;

therefore the attitude of researcher is `very satisfactory'.

Task Components

The teacher's survey illustrates that the tasks in the textbook cover all the components

adequately and their attitude was `satisfactory', however, the students' responses were more or

less `very satisfactory'. Item 9 for the students were `satisfactory' and the rest were `very

satisfactory' but for the teachers' items 6, 8 and9 were only `satisfactory' and only items 5 and 7
are `very satisfactory'. Moreover, the researcher's attitude towards this section is `very

satisfactory'.

Framework

Again according to the survey and the checklist, the response concerning "Framework" is

`satisfactory' from the teachers' perspective and the students' felt that it is `very satisfactory'

even though for item 11, the result was just `satisfactory'. Furthermore, the tasks are appropriate

for the learner, it caters to various sub-skills and is form- focused which allows students to

process authentic communication, and therefore the researcher's attitude is also `very

satisfactory'.

Task Difficulty

The attitude towards the levels of the difficulty in tasks was `very satisfactory' from both the

survey and the researcher's checklist. Therefore, it can be concluded that the difficulty of the

tasks increase gradually and descriptive tasks are easier than tasks that involves explaining.

Empirical basis for task-based Ianaua2e teaching

The responses of the students and the teachers in this section contradict one another. Teachers

felt that overall this section was `satisfactory' since item no.15 and 16 are both `satisfactory' and

only item 17 are `very satisfactory'. Whereas, the students' felt that overall it was `very

satisfactory'. In addition, the researcher's view is also `satisfactory'.

Focus on form in task- based language teaching

Students' attitude for "focus on form in the task-based language teaching" is in the middle

ground because for item 18 and 19, their response was `very satisfactory' and for 20 and 21 it

was `not satisfactory'. Teachers' response was also in the middle ground. For item 18 and 21,

their response is `very satisfactory' and for items 19 and 20 it was `satisfactory'. However,

referring to the checklist, only item 20 was not `satisfactory' according to the researcher.

Moreover, the researcher's attitude is `satisfactory'.

5.3 Recommendations

To improve the tasks in the text book the researcher came up with a few suggestions to overcome

the weaknesses identified in the process of evaluating the book. The points are as follows:

A. Definitions of task

1. Although, there is a good balance between the real-world task and pedagogic task, it

would be wise if there are more real- world tasks in the textbook than pedagogic tasks

because towards the end of the textbook many of the tasks instructs learners to only

answer or discuss questions after reading a passage. For example, Unit 20, lessonl,

exercise D, p.202 requires the learners to answer the question causing the tasks to be

pedagogic.
B. Tasks Components

1. There should not be too many reading comprehension passages where the following

task is simply answering questions from the passages because it minimizes the amount of

interaction between the learners. For example, Unit 18, lesson 1, exercise B, p.182

requires the learners to read the article and complete the unfinished sentences and tasks

such as this one does not involve learners minimally to interact with each other.

2. The tasks should include more group work.

C. Framework

1. The tasks should maintain a balance among all the sub-skills (listing, ordering, and

etc). Unit 8 , Lessonl , exercise C , p. 84 require learners to make a list of the work the

computer can and cannot do. Similarly , in Unit 1, Lesson 4 , exercise C requires the

learners to make a list of activities the learners want to have during the mela. Moreover,

there are very few tasks that require learners to order or sort things.

D. Task difficulty

1. Although, the difficulty level increases gradually, occasionally it is seen that level of

difficulty reduces when it is supposed to be high. Unit 11, Lesson 2, exercise D, p. 118

expects the learners to merely read the text and discusses the question with his/her

partner. Moreover, this task is very simple considering the unit it belongs to because the

pervious units consisted of more complex tasks such as Unit 9, Lesson 3, exercise D,p.98

where the learners have to write about some interesting features of his/her English course.
E. Empirical basis for task-based language teaching

1. It is wise to repeat the input to practice the learnt item but if it is repeated too many

times the students will be deprived of learning new items. Therefore, repeating the input

just once is sufficient. For example, the input `present simple' is taught in Unit 1, lesson

1,2 , 3 and then again in Unit 2 , 3 and so on. This kind of repetition of input might not be

very helpful for the learners.

2. The tasks should maintain a balance between teacher and student interaction. Many of

the tasks require the learners to work in pairs or groups causing very limited interaction

with the teacher. For example, Unit 20, lesson 2, exercise D, p. 204 expects the learners

to work in pair because the instruction states that "discuss with your partner whether

he/she agrees or disagrees".

F. Focus on form in task-based language teaching

1. Initially, there should be enough exposure of the target language because from the

surface it seems that there is an exposure of the target language but all the tasks have a

grammar focus. For example, in Unit 1, lesson 2, exercise A, p. 3 the grammar form is

already revealed by the sentence provided.

 Works Cited

Kothari, C.R. 1985. Research Methodology: Method and Techniques. India: Wishwa

Prakashan.

Lightbown, P. M. & Spada, N. (1999) How Language are Learned. NY: Oxford

University Press.

Likert, R.A. 1932. A technique for the Measurement ofAttitudes. Archives of Psychology

No. 140.

Lynch, T, (1996, June). Nudge, nudge: teacher interventions in task-based learner talk.

ELT Journal. 51(4).

Mohamed, N. (2003, February). Consciousness-raising tasks: a learner perspective. ELT

Journal .58(3).

Nunan, D. (1989) Designing Task for the Communicative Classroom. UK: Cambridge

University Press.

Nunan, D. (2004) Task-based language teaching. UK. : Macmillan Cambridge University

Press.

Prabhu, N.S (1987). Second Language Pedagogy.UK: Oxford University Press.

Scheffler, P. (2008, March 11).Rule difficulty and the usefulness of instruction". ELT

Journal. 63(1).

Seliger,H.W & Shohamy,E. 1989. Second Language Research Methods. China: Oxford

University Press.

Stewart, T. (2005, June). Teachers and learners evaluating course tasks together. ELT

Journal, 61(3).
Willis, J.R, Willis, D. (2007) Doing Task-based teaching. Oxford: Oxford University

Press.
 Appendices

Appendix: I

Questions for the Students

A Note for the students:

This questionnaire is designed for a study on an evaluation of the" English for today" Textbook
for classes IX and X for an undergrad thesis in English. The answers you will provide will not to be
disclosed and used only for the purpose of the research. Thank you for your co-operation.

Section A: Personal Information

1. Name:

2. Class:

3. Institution:

Section B : Instruction

Each of the items has 5 points scale where 1= entirely disagree, 2= Disagree, 3= Not Sure, 4=
Agree and 5= entirely Agree . Please circle the appropriate number for your desired opinion about each
statement.

Statements
NO. >,

4.4 03
. .- O bA bA

A. Definitions of task
I. Tasks in the textbook are arranged from 1 2 3 4 5
simple, brief type, to complex and lengthy
activities such as group solving and decision
making.
2. Task is a process controlled by teachers that 1 2 3 4 5
requires you to arrive at an outcome from
given information.
3. The tasks focus on activities that promote 1 2 3 4 5
communication.

4. The textbook covers both real-world 1 2 3 4 5

(introduces and allows you to engage in
activities that are necessary outside of the
classroom) and pedagogic task (are limited to
classrooms and are not similar to the outside
world).
B. Task components
5. The tasks in the text book motivate your 1 2 3 4 5
participation.

6. The input given to you is very effective. 1 2 3 4 5

7. The tasks are learner friendly. 1 2 3 4 5

8. The tasks allow the teachers to be able to offer 1 2 3 4 5

help but not give the answer.
9. You are required to do pair, individual and 1 2 3 4 5
group activities.
C. Framework
10. The tasks are form focused which will let you 1 2 3 4 5
practice authentic communication (when you
are expected to do an activity in class similar
to an actual communicative interaction
outside the classroom)

11. The task topics are appropriate and well liked 1 2 3 4 5

by you.

12. Tasks make you practice various skills such as 1 2 3 4 5

listing, ordering etc.
D. Task Difficulty
13. The difficulty level of the task increases 1 2 3 4 5
gradually.

14 A task that requires you to describe something 1 2 3 4 5

is easier than expressing an opinion. For
example, telling a story or describing a road
accident is easier than expressing how you
feel about a movie or a political party.

E. Em pirical basis for task- based language eachin g

15. The level of the input given to you is 1 2 3 4 5
advanced than your current level. For you to
move from one stage to another, you need to
understand structures beyond the knowledge
 you already have.

16. Tasks are designed in a way that it encourages 1 2 3 4 5

interaction between you and the teachers.

17. The task requires/encourage you to exchange 1 2 3 4 5

information.
F. Focus on form in task-based lan n guage teaching
18. Certain language structure help the learners 1 2 3 4 5
complete a task.

19. You are free to use language in your own way 1 2 3 4 5

to get the outcome.

20. At first, there is enough exposure to the target 1 2 3 4 5

language for you, and then you are taught
language structure.

21. Language structures are not taught directly 1 2 3 4 5

through the tasks.

Item by Item Discussion for Students ' Questionnaire

In the students' questionnaire, the participants had to circle the appropriate box from five options

for each item. In order to analyze, the responses had to be converted into mathematical figures as

follows:

Entirely disagree = 1

Disagree = 2

Not sure = 3

Agree = 4

Entirely agree = 5
The results are presented in the table below:

The details of the results of students' questionnaire survey given below:

(For each item the number of total respondents was 100 students').

For item number 1 (Tasks in the textbook are arranged from simple, brief type, to complex and lengthy

activities such as group solving and decision making) , none of the students ticked `entirely disagree', 3

students chose `disagree' , 2 picked `not sure', 83 students ticked `agree' and 12 chose `entirely agree'.

The mean score is 4.04.

For item 2, (Task is a process controlled by teachers that requires you to arrive at an outcome from given

information), no one chose `entirely disagree' and similarly no one ticked the option `disagree'. 6 students

answer `not sure' while 91 picked `agree' and only 3 ticked `entirely agree'. And the mean score is 3.97.

Item 3, (The tasks focus on activities that promote communication), 4 students chose `entirely disagree',

no one picked `disagree', only 2 picked `not sure', 85 students chose `agree' and 9 chose ' entirely agree'.

The mean score is 3.95.

For item number 4 (The textbook covers both real-world [introduces and allows you to engage in

activities that are necessary outside of the classroom] and pedagogic task [are limited to classrooms and

are not similar to the outside world]), none of the students ticked `entirely disagree', 10 students chose

`disagree', 5 picked `not sure', 49 students ticked `agree' and 36 chose `entirely agree'. The mean score is

4.11.
Item 5 (The tasks in the text book motivate your participation) , not a single student picked `entirely

disagree' , 5 chose `disagree' only 4 picked ` not sure', 61 students ticked ' agree' and 30 chose ` entirely

agree'. The mean score is 4.16.

For item 6, (The input given to you is very effective), no one chose `entirely disagree', similarly no one

picked `disagree', 7 picked `not sure', 55 students chose `agree' and 38 chose ' entirely agree'. The mean

score is 4.31.

For item 7, (The tasks are learner friendly), I chose `entirely disagree', no one picked `disagree ', similarly

no one picked `not sure', 73 students chose `agree' and 26 chose ` entirely agree'. The mean score is 4.23.

For item number 8 (The tasks allow the teachers to be able to offer help but not give the answer) , none

of the students ticked `entirely disagree', 2 students chose `disagree', 9 picked `not sure', 88 students

ticked `agree' and only 1 chose `entirely agree'. The mean score is 3.88.

Number 9 (You are required to do pair, individual and group activities), I student chose `entirely

disagree', 17 students' picked `disagree' in the same way 17 students' chose `not sure' agree' was

picked by 62 and only 3 students answered `entirely agree'. 3.48 is the mean score.

Item IO(The tasks are form focused which will let you practice authentic communication [when you are

expected to do an activity in class similar to an actual communicative interaction outside the classroom])

5 students picked `entirely disagree' , 6 picked `disagree' only 2 picked ' not sure', 55 students ticked

` agree' and 32 chose ` entirely agree'. The mean score is 4.03.

 64

For item number 11 (The task topics are appropriate and well liked by you) , none of the students

ticked `entirely disagree ', I student chose ` disagree ', 6 picked ` not sure ', 78 students ticked ` agree' and

only 15 chose ` entirely agree '. The mean score is 4.07.

Number 12 (Tasks make you practice various skills such as listing, ordering etc.) 1 student chose `entirely

disagree', 3 students' picked `disagree', 10 students' chose `not sure' agree' was picked by 81 and

only 5 students answered `entirely agree'. The mean score is 3.86.

Item 13, (The difficulty level of the task increases gradually ) , 4 student chose `entirely disagree'

similarly 4 students picked ' disagree ', but only I picked ` not sure' , 30 chose ` agree ' and 61 picked

` entirely agree '. And the mean score is 4.40.

Item 14, (A task that requires you to describe something is easier than expressing an opinion. For

example, telling a story or describing a road accident is easier than expressing how you feel about a

movie or a political party) , no one chose `entirely disagree' 23 students picked ' disagree', but only 3

picked `not sure' , 67 chose ` agree ' and 7 picked `entirely agree'. And the mean score is 3.58.

Item 15, (The level of the input given to you is advanced than your current level. For you to move from

one stage to another, you need to understand structures beyond the knowledge you already have) , only I

student chose `entirely disagree' 10 students picked ' disagree', but 4 picked `not sure' , 38 chose `agree'

and 47 picked `entirely agree'. And the mean score is 4.20.

For item 16, (Tasks are designed in a way that it encourages interaction between you and the teachers), no

one chose `entirely disagree', 1 picked `disagree', 2 chose `not sure', 84 students chose `agree' and 13

chose ` entirely agree'. The mean score is 4.09.

 65

Item 17, ( The task requires / encourage you to exchange information) , no one chose ` entirely disagree' 3

students picked ' disagree ', but again no one picked ` not sure ' , 87 chose `agree ' and 10 picked ` entirely

agree '. And the mean score is 4.04.

For item 18, (Certain language structure help the learners complete a task), 0 chose `entirely disagree',

also `disagree' was picked by no one , 5 chose `not sure', 93 students chose `agree' and 2 chose ' entirely

agree'. The mean score is 3.97.

For item 19, (You are free to use language in your own way to get the outcome), no one chose `entirely

disagree', 4 picked `disagree', also 4 chose `not sure', 86 students chose `agree' and 6 chose ' entirely

agree'. The mean score is 3.94.

For item 20, (At first, there is enough exposure to the target language for you, and then you are taught

language structure), again no one answered `entirely disagree' but 51 picked `disagree'. 15 chose `not

sure', 34 students selected `agree' as their answer but no one answered `entirely agree'. However, the

mean score is 2.83.

For item 21, (Language structures are not taught directly through the tasks) , 4 students chose `entirely

disagree', `disagree' was picked by 48 students , 2 selected `not sure', 44 students chose `agree' and 2

chose ' entirely agree'. The mean score is 2.92.

 66

Appendix: II

Questions for the teachers

A Note for the teachers:

This questionnaire is designed for a study on an evaluation of the English Textbook for classes IX
and X for an undergrad thesis in English. The answers you will provide will not to be disclosed and used
only for the purpose of the research. Thank you for your co-operation.

Section A: Personal Information

4. Name:

5. Teaching Experience:

6. Teaching Institution:

Section B : Instruction

Each of the items has 5 points scale where 1= entirely disagree , 2= Disagree , 3= Not Sure, 4=
Agree and 5= entirely Agree. Please circle the appropriate number for your desired opinion about each
statement.

Statements
NO. >1 U
, .. c^

A. Definitions of Task
1. Tasks in the textbook are arranged from 1 2 3 4 5
simple, brief type activities to complex and
lengthy activities such as group solving and
decision making.
2. In the textbook, tasks require the learners to 1 2 3 4 5
arrive at a conclusion from given information.

3. In the textbook, tasks are associated with 1 2 3 4 5

communicative language use.
 67

1 2 3 4 5
4. The textbook covers both real-world tasks
(introduces and allows learners to engage in
activities that are necessary outside of the
classroom) and pedagogic task (confined to
classroom and are not similar to the outside
world).
B. Task com p onents
1 2 3 4 5
5. The tasks in the text book motivate learner
participation.

1 2 3 4 5
6. The input given to students is very effective.

1 2 3 4 5
7. The tasks are learner friendly.

1 2 3 4 5
8. The tasks allow the teachers to be only
facilitators.
1 2 3 4 5
9. There is a balance between different modes of
activities (individual, pair and group).
C. Framework
1 2 3 4 5
10. The tasks are form-focused which allow
students to process authentic communication.
( when learners are expected to do an activity
in class similar to the a genuine
communicative interaction outside the
classroom)

The task topics are appropriate and well liked 1 2 3 4 5

11.
by the learners.

1 2 3 4 5
12. Tasks are designed to cater to various sub
skills such as listing, ordering etc.
D. Task Difficulty
1 2 3 4 5
13. The difficulty of the task increases gradually.

1 2 3 4 5
14. A task that requires describing something is
easier than expressing an opinion. For
example, telling a story or describing a road
accident is easier than expressing how one
feels about a movie or a political party.

E. Em p irical basis for task-based Ian ua a teachin

1 2 3 4 5
15. The level of the input given to the learners is
advanced than their current level. For learners
to move from one stage to another, they need
to know structures beyond their existing
knowledge.

1 2 3 4 5
16. Tasks are designed in such a manner that it
 68

encourages interaction between learners and

the teacher.

17. The task requires learners to exchange 1 2 3 4 5

information.
F. Focus on form in task-based lan n guage teachin g
18. Certain language forms help the learners to 1 2 3 4 5
complete the task.

19. Learners are free to use any language to attain 1 2 3 4 5

the outcome.

20. Initially, sufficient amount of communication 1 2 3 4 5

is provided to students and later they are
exposed to linguistic forms.

21. Focus on forms is very indirect in the tasks. 1 2 3 4 5

Item by Item Discussion for Students' Questionnaire

The participant teachers had to circle an appropriate answer for each item among five options

given to them and then for analysis the responses were again converted in mathematical figures.

Entirely disagree = I

Disagree = 2

Not sure = 3

Agree = 4

Entirely agree = 5

The results of the teachers' questionnaire survey are shown in the table below:

(In total there were 20 respondents for each item).

 69

For item 1, only I teacher's response was `entirely disagree' and 3 teachers answered `disagree',

no one chose `not sure' for this item however, 15 teachers chose `Agree' and once again only

one circled `entirely agree'. The mean score is 3.6.

In item 2, none of the teachers circled `entirely disagree', only one circled `disagree'. For `not

sure' once again just 1 teacher circled that option but 15 teachers chose `agree' as their answer

where as only 3 selected ' entirely agree'. The mean score is 4.0.

In item 3, once again no one selected `entirely disagree', only 1 chose `disagree' and 2 chose

`Not sure', however, 11 teachers circled `Agree' and 6 circled `Entirely agree'. The mean score

is 4.1.

For item 4, similar to before no one chose the option `entirely disagree', 2 selected' Disagree', 1

chose `Not sure' and 12 selected `Agree' whereas only 5 circled `Entirely agree'. The mean

score is 4.0.

In item 5, no one circled ' Entirely disagree', only 1 selected `disagree', 3 teachers selected `not

sure ' , 12 `Agree ' and 4 teachers ` Entirely agree'. The mean score is 3.95.

In item 6, 1 teacher circled `Entirely disagree', 5 teacher's `Disagree', 5 selected `Not sure', 8

chose ` Agree' and only 1 chose ' Entirely agree'. The mean score is 3.15.

For item 7, only 1 teacher's response was `entirely disagree' again 1 teacher answered `disagree',

2 chose `not sure' for this item however, 10 teachers chose `Agree' and 6 circled `entirely agree'.

The mean score is 3.95.

 70

In item 8, none of the teachers picked `Entirely disagree', 6 teachers selected `Disagree', 5

selected `Not sure', 7 chose ' Agree' and finally only 2 teachers chose ' Entirely agree'. The

mean score is 3.25.

In item 9, 1 teacher circled `Entirely disagree', `Disagree' was selected by 2 teachers , I selected

`Not sure', 15 picked `Agree' and only 1 chose ' Entirely agree'. The mean score is 3.65.

In item 10, 2 selected `Entirely disagree', 4 teacher `Disagree', 3 selected `Not sure', 11 chose

Agree' and no one chose `Entirely Agree'. The mean score is 3.15.

In item 11, 1 circled ' Entirely disagree', 3 selected `disagree', 5 teacher selected `not sure' , 7

`Agree' and 4 teachers `Entirely agree'. The mean score is 3.5.

For item 12, no one responded `entirely disagree' and 2 teachers answered `disagree', 3 chose

`not sure' for this item however, 14 teachers chose `Agree' and once again only one circled

`entirely agree'. The mean score is 3.7.

In item 13, 1 selected `Entirely disagree', 4 teacher `Disagree', 3 selected `Not sure', 11 chose

Agree' and I chose `Entirely Agree'. The mean score is 3.35.

In item 14, 1 circled ' Entirely disagree', no one selected `disagree', 4 teachers selected `not

sure' , 10 `Agree' and 5 teachers `Entirely agree'. The mean score is 3.9.

For item 15, 4 teachers response was `entirely disagree' 3 teachers answered `disagree', 4 chose

`not sure' for this item, 7 teachers chose `Agree' and only 2 circled `entirely agree'. The mean

score is 3.15.
 71

For item 16, only I respond was `entirely disagree' 8 teachers answered `disagree', 1 chose `not

sure', 5 teachers chose `Agree' and similarly 5 circled `entirely agree'. The mean score is 3.25.

In item 17, no one selected ' Entirely disagree', 3 selected `disagree', 2 teachers selected `not

sure' , 10 `Agree' and 5 teachers `Entirely agree'. The mean score is 3.85.

In item 18, no one chose `Entirely disagree and similarly no one selected `Disagree', 1 chose

`Not sure', 15 teachers chose ' Agree' and 4 chose ' Entirely Agree'. The mean score is 4.15.

In item 19, 2 selected `Entirely disagree', 5 teacher `Disagree', 2 selected `Not sure', 9 chose

Agree' and 2 chose `Entirely Agree'. The mean score is 3.2.

For item 20, no one chose `entirely disagree' 4 teachers answered `disagree', 6 chose `not sure'

for this item, 7 teachers chose `Agree' and only 3 circled `entirely agree'. The mean score is

3.45.

In item 21, none of the teachers circled `Entirely disagree', I teacher `Disagree', 3 selected `Not

sure', 14 chose' Agree' and only 2 chose ` Entirely agree'. The mean score is 3.85.
 72

Appendix III

Checklist for Researcher

A. Definitions of Task

1. Do the tasks in the textbook works to facilitate the learners with simple to brief type, to

complex and lengthy activities such as group solving and decision making?

2. Is the task process controlled by teachers that require learners to arrive with a product

from given information?

3. In the textbook, are the tasks associated with communicative language use?

4. Do the textbook cover both real-world (introduces and allows learners to engage in

activities that are necessary outside of the classroom) and pedagogic task (are confined to

classrooms and are not similar to the outside world)?

B. Task components:

5. Do the tasks in the text book motivate learner participation?

6. Are the inputs provided very effective for the learners?

7. Are the tasks are learner friendly.

8. Do the tasks allow the teachers to be only facilitators?

9. Is there a balance between the mode of learning (individual, pair and group)?
 73

C. Framework

10. Are the tasks form focused which will allow students to process authentic

communication (when they are expected to do an activity in class similar to an actual

communicative interaction outside the classroom)?

11. Are the task topics appropriate and well liked by the learners?

12. Are the tasks designed to cater to various ways of skills such as listing, ordering etc?

D. Task Difficulty

13. Do the difficulty of the task increases gradually?

14. The tasks that are required to describe something is easier than expressing an opinion,

For example telling a story or describing a road accident is easier than expressing

how they feel about a movie or a political party?

E. Empirical basis for task-based language teaching

15. Is the level of the inputs given to the learners advanced than their current level, for

learners to move from one stage to another, they need to know structures beyond their

existing knowledge?

16. Are the tasks designed in such a manner that it encourages interaction between

learners and the teachers?

17. Do the tasks require learners to exchange information?

 74

F. Focus on form in task- based language teaching

18. Do certain language forms help the completion of the task?

19. Are the learners free to use any language to attain the outcome?

20. Initially, are the sufficient amounts of communication provided to students and later

are learners exposed to linguistic forms?

21. Is the focus in forms very indirect in the tasks?