Task difficulty
From WikEd
Contents |
[edit] Descriptions, definitions, synonyms, organizer terms, types of
Tasks
Prior to considering task difficulty, it is necessary to look at the definition of tasks and consider one's own definition. Tasks can range on a continuum of real-world tasks to pedagogical tasks. Long takes the stance of tasks as any real-world activity (Nunan, 1988). However, others may be tasks that are only performed and useful for the classroom setting. In considering tasks in relation to language learning, only tasks including language input or output may be considered.
Tasks can be used in language learning, such as various gap (or jigsaw) activities in which students exchange information, their opinions, or reason together (Candlin). They can be used in science instruction in the form of inquiry activities. They can be used in the general elementary, middle school, or high school classroom. An example of this is are the motivational projects at the Interact: Learn Through Experience website[1].
Tasks in syllabus design
The process of incorporating tasks into lessons is different depending upon the type of syllabus design (Nunan, 1993). In a synthetic structural (tradition) syllabus, the teacher identifies the students level through a needs analysis and then selects and sequences the teaching material. Next, the tasks would be selected based upon the content selection. Although tasks may be used in this type of syllabus, the tasks are based upon the content, which may render them more inauthentic or less applicable to the real-world setting. Also, they may not be organized around a theme or topic because there would be many tasks in relation to that content. For example, if the language teaching is organized around the content of "passive tense", the lesson may include tasks regarding accomplishments (the artwork was painted by... the book was written by...), situations in which the performer does not wish to be mentioned (the car was hit), situations in which the subject is not necessary (the criminals were chased, the mail was delivered), etc. In other words, because the content is selected first, the lesson may not be organized around one real-world topic.
However, when the syllabus based on tasks, such as in Task Based Language Teaching (TBLT), the process is different (Nunan, 1993). First, a needs analysis may be performed, this time taking into account the learners's goals, preferences, and learning syles. However, instead of proceding to content selection, task selection would be the next step. These tasks would be selected in reference to the learners' goals. These goals are generally more specific with the older the learner (Long, 2005). The content to be learned would be in relation to the tasks (Nunan 1993).
Task difficulty
Task difficulty is one of the ways that students attribute success and failure in the classroom. To see more information regarding task difficulty in relation to the Attribution theory click on the link.
According to Bernard Weiner (1974) and his contribution to attribution theory, the four main attributes which serve to explain one's success or failure which are ability, task difficulty, effort, and luck can be categorized based on their stability and locus of control. Ability and effort are considered internal loci of control, because they are derived from the individual's psyche. Task difficulty and luck are considered external. On the other hand ability and task difficulty share the characteristic of being stable factors (factors that tend to be consistent over time), while effort and luck are considered unstable factors. A table such as the following may be used to understand these concepts:
Internal External
Stable - Ability - Task Difficulty
Unstable - Effort - Luck
Thus, task difficulty is a stable, external attribute that students will look to in order to explain their success or failure.
Grading and sequencing tasks
Because task difficulty is related to student success, it is necessary to examine how tasks should be graded and sequenced.
There have been many suggestions and attempts on how this should be carried out. Long has suggested that the tasks be classified into target tasks and task types (Nunan, 1988). From this, pedagogical tasks can be selected and sequenced.
Candlin (1987) has suggested basic criteria for organizing language learning tasks, which may be applicable to grading and sequencing tasks in other curriculum areas. They are:
(1) Cognitive load (how mentally difficult the task is)
(2) Communicative stress (a result of the instructional context, including the student's prior knowledge of the material and relationship to other students)
(3) Particularity and genreralizability (the measure of how much the tasks resemble "universal or stereotyped pattern")
(4) Code complexity and interpretive density (how difficult it is for the learner to process the language)
(5) Content continuity (the measure of how much the task relates to the student's interests and needs)
(6) Process continuity (tasks relating to each other)
Other criteria may relate to task difficulty. This includes the number of people involved in the task and the difficulty of the assessment criteria. Also, task difficulty is dependant upon whether the gap is one-way or two-way. In one-way tasks, the information is transfered from one learner/group to another. In two-way tasks, both students/groups exchange information) (Long).
Nunan's Atlas textbook series can be categorized as task-based. (See [2].) The units begin with a pre-task. Then there are tasks with increasing difficulty which require more and more language processing. These are organized into task chains. Each unit has a overriding theme. Also, the units are organized by task difficulty in relation to cognitive load, communicative stress, code complexity and interpretive density, and other criteria. This textbook series may be an example of how to grade and sequence tasks in relation to task difficulty.
Benevides and Valvona's Widgets textbook (See [3].) is an example of a 'strong' task-based approach, where the theme and a more generalized approach to sequencing tasks in an lifelike manner is emphasized over code complexity and other linguistic considerations. It does not include any explicit grammar or vocabulary instruction at all, choosing instead to implicitly present and recycle vocabulary and grammar forms by embedding them in explanations and example dialogs.
[edit] Evidence of effectiveness
Related studies on task difficulty
Frieze and Weiner (1971) conducted studies on the causal attributions in achievement-related contexts. They expected to find that internally controlled attributes would produce greater amounts of achievement-expectation. That is, people who perceived ability and effort as significant factors in determining the outcome would expect that outcome to occur again and again. However, they found that stability (due to the results that identified task difficulty as significant) was more important. In other words, subjects relied more heavily on the difficulty of the task and the ability of the achiever as greater predicters of future achievement than effort. The researchers learned that since effort is perceived as inconsistent, it was not as significant a factor as the more consistent quality of task difficulty in determining future success.
Matching task difficulty to student ability is highly beneficial for students with ADD/ADHD. (Rief 1993) Students with ADD/ADHD quickly lose interest in tasks that are either too difficult as well as tasks that are too easy.
[edit] Critics and their rationale
Numerous people have various criteria in defining tasks and task-based lessons or task-based syllabi. They would hold different opinions as to how to create tasks or the syllabus. They would also hold differing critiques on teaching materials, such as those mentioned in this page.
[edit] Diversity considerations
When using tasks for lessons, the teacher must consider if the task is culturally specific. This is because it would be complicated for the student to learn the culture in addition to the content being taught at the same time. If the task is culturally specific, teaching the culturally related items or events should be a pre-task before the planned task. If it is not, then the use of the task should be reconsidered.
[edit] Signed �?life experiences�?, testimonies and stories
I did not realize until listening to the presentation on task difficulty and then reading further, that some of my students fall under the category of a motivated underachiever. I did see the students as being lazy, when in fact many just don’t want the added responsibility of having the teacher expect more from them. I will be using the writing prompt of “Are you successful in school�? in my class. I think this will tell me much more about my students than I realize. -Jbaxter
[edit] References and other links of interest
References
Candlin, C.N. (1987). Towards task-based language learning. In C.N. Candlin & D.F. Murphy (Eds.), Language learning tasks, London: Prentice Hall. (Chapter 1: pp. 5-22).
Frieze, Irene and Bernard Weiner (1971), The Journal of Personality, 39:4. "Cue Utilization and Attributional Judgments for Success and Failure." Duke University Press.
Long, M. (2005). Current issues in Task-Based Language Teaching (presentation at UIUC) April 21.
Mayer, Richard E. The Promise of Educational Psychology Volume II: Teaching for Meaningful Learning. Pearson Education, Inc., New Jersey, 2002.
Nunan, D.H. (1988) Syllabus design. Oxford: Oxford University Press. (Chapters 3 and 4: pp. 27-60).
Nunan, D. (1993). Task-based syllabus design: Selecting grading and sequencing tasks. In S.M. Gass & G. Crookes (Eds.), Tasks in a pedagogical context. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. (Chapter 2, pp. 58-59).
Rief, S. (1993). How to Reach and Teach ADD / ADHD Children: Practical Techniques, Strategies, and Interventions for Helping Children with Attention Problems and Hyperactivity. West Nyack, NY: The Center for Applied Research in Education.
Weiner, Bernard (1974). Achievement Motivation and Attribution Theory. General Learning Press.
Links of interest
Benevides, M. and C. Valvona. (2008). Widgets: A task-based course in practical English. Pearson Longman ELT: Hong Kong. (See [4]
Interact: Learn Through Experience website[5]
Nunan, D. (1994). Atlas: Learning-centered communication. Heinle & Heinle Pub; 1st edition. (See [6]
