英语论文网

of language . A task u sually requ ires theteacher to specify w hat w ill be regarded as suc2cessfu l comp let i on of the task. The u se of a var i2ety of differen t k inds of task s in language teach2ing is said to make language teach ing mo re com2mun icat ive . . . since it p rovides a pu rpo se fo r aclassroom act ivity w h ich goes beyond the p rac2t ice of language fo r it s ow n sake . B reen ( 1987 ) : … any st ructu red languagelearn ing endeavo r w h ich has a par t icu lar ob jec2t ive, app rop r iate con ten t, a specif ied wo rk ingp rocedu re, and a range of ou tcomes fo r tho sew ho under take the task. "Task" is therefo re as2sumed to refer to a range of wo rk p lan s w h ichhave the overall pu rpo se of facilitat i on languagelearn ing- lengthy act ivit ies such as group p rob2lem - so lo ing o r si mu lat i on s and decisi on mak2ing .
N unan (1989: 10) : The commun icat ive taskis a p iece of classroom wo rk w h ich invo lveslearners in comp rehending, man i pu lat ing o r in2teract ing in the target language w h ile their at2ten t i on is p r inci pally focu sed on mean ing ratherthan fo rm. The task shou ld also have a sen se ofcomp leteness, being ab le to stand alone as acommun icat ive act in it s r igh t .JaneW illis (1996) : Task is a goal- o r ien tedact ivity in w h ich learners u se language to ach ievea real ou tcome . In o ther wo rds, learners u sew hatever target language resou rces they have ino rder to so lve a p rob lem , make a list, do a puz2zle, p lay a game, o r share and compare exper i2ences . Skehan ( 1996 ) : Task s . . . are act ivit iesw h ich have mean ing as their p r i mary focu s . Suc2cess in task is evaluated in term s of ach ievemen tof an ou tcome, and task s generally bear some re2semb lance to real- life language u se . A task -based app roach sees the learn ing p rocess as oneof learn ing th rough do ing- it is by p r i mar ily en2gaging in mean ing that the learners′system isencou raged to developed .　
　 II . W ha t A re Pedagogica lT a sk s?　　L et u s look at P rabhu′ s def in it i on of task:th is makes no Reference to real wo r ld needs . In2stead, task s are learn ing act ivit ies that engagelearners in logical th ink ing . P rabhu iden t if iesth ree k inds of cogn it ive task types: op in i on -gap , info rmat i on - t ran sfer and reason ing - gaptask s . A n examp le of a reason ing gap task- themo st i mpo r tan t task type in P rabhu′ s scheme ofth ings - is u sing railroad t i metab les o r readingmap s in o rder to get f rom A to B. P rabhu alsodist ingu ishes betw een p re- task s and task s; themain difference betw een these task s is that p re-task s are cogn it ively less demanding than maintask s . Du r ing the p re- task stage in the railroadt i metab les examp le ju st cited, the tw elve hou rclock is u sed, on ly two o r th ree changes oft rain s are called fo r in o rder to get f rom A to Band the teacher takes a leading ro le in help ingstuden t s so lve the p rob lem. Bu t du r ing the maintask stage, studen t s have to u se the tw en ty fou rhou r clock, change t rain s mo re of ten and so lvethe p rob lem w ithou t the teacher′ s help.R ichards et al . share P rabhu′ s concern w ith howa task is specif ied and also men t i on the teacher′ sro le in regu lat ing the teach ingö leam ing p rocess .Si m ilar ly, the def in it i on s by R ichards et al . andN unan emphasize the commu