AoA, CLT, & TBLT: Tasks

subheader extendedexp | Action-oriented Approach|Plurilingualism|Tech-mediated

Tasks in Communicative Language Teaching (CLT), Task-Based Language Teaching (TBLT) and the Action-Oriented Approach (AoA) 💡

Before starting this infosheet, you may want to go again through AALE infosheet AoA, CLT & TBLT: Similarities & Differences

There is a logical progression from CLT through TBLT to the AoA apart from the chronology of their development. 

Length: The tasks in TBLT are generally longer than in CLT, where the task may well be a short phase of a lesson with an overall focus on a topic and particular language. Tasks in the AoA are generally contextualized in a scenario spanning several lessons, leading up to a culminating task involving some kind of concrete product.

Authenticity: In TBLT the tasks are also more likely than in CLT to be ‘situationally authentic,’ selected in terms of a ‘needs analysis’ of what situations these learners will need to be able to handle later – often in a professional or academic context. The AoA by contrast sees the learning situation itself (inside and outside of class) as an authentic one and focuses on engaging learners by giving them more ownership of the process. The AoA can be seen as a kind of fusion between TBLT and project-based teaching (PBT).

Complexity: The tasks in TBLT are often more complex than in CLT, and they are usually embedded in a pre-task phase in which necessary language and skills are practised and a post task phase in which learners are encouraged to reflect on their performance and remedial language practice will be undertaken. AoA tasks are generally more challenging than TBLT tasks in relation to language level. They are also more open, less structured: learners have a mission and need to work out how to accomplish it – learners treat the teacher as a resource rather than the teacher telling them what to do.

Reading & reflection 💭

Many of the tasks used in CLT and TBLT are in fact quite banal and trivial compared to the task/projects of the AoA. In this respect, readSection 6.2.3 Tasks (pages 13-15) of the article The CEFR Companion volume and the action-oriented approach.

Reflection questions:

  • Which of the seven types of task that Willis and Willis (2007) list do you use in your classes?
    a) listing; b) ordering and sequencing; c) matching; d) comparing; e) sharing personal experience; f) problem-solving; and g) projects and creative tasks: class newspaper, poster, survey, fantasy, etc.
  • Which of them do you think can be action-oriented?
  • For, example, how could a classic communicative task like ‘sharing personal experience’ be developed into an action-oriented scenario?
    • by adding an imaginary context?
    • by adding a mission, a concrete product to create in small groups?
    • By making it multimodal?
    • by extending it to involve other people, e.g., family? 
  • Can you think of topics for other such ‘personal’ tasks that could be motivating for your students and developed into action-oriented scenarios? 

Implementation of CLT, TBLT and the AoA

Probably the main reason for the sustained success of CLT is that it appears more straightforward than TBLT and the AoA. It is also easier to operationalise in coursebooks. But there are also contextual factors that come into play:  

  • CLT is common in state schools and private language schools, linked to a (often topic-based) syllabus with a progression in grammar and skills, usually provided by a commercial coursebook. When not just following the progression in the book, teachers generally choose tasks, like ‘communication games,’ because they practise a certain language that they are focusing on at that moment in their teaching.  
  • TBLT is also increasingly common in commercial coursebooks, but is mostly used in professional and academic contexts and in the teaching of migrants, where learners will need to conform to specific future expectations. In such cases, since the expectations are known, it is much easier to prioritize the ‘target language situations’ of most relevance for the particular group of learners.
  • The AoA is suitable for all teaching contexts because, by recognizing the authenticity of communicative collaboration in and beyond the classroom, it can harness the world of the imagination and personal interests/obsessions as well as the ‘situational authenticity’ of future needs.

Further reflection

The list above takes a pragmatic, even technical perspective. However, there are other ways in which the AoA differs from CLT and TBLT at an educational or even political level.

The AoA treats learners as fully empowered participants in the learning process. By giving learners agency, the approach legitimises learner identities, perspectives and choices. The teacher’s role changes fundamentally from being the font of knowledge to setting a clearly defined framework within which work is to be done, and then being a coach. The learner’s role requires a willingness to engage and take responsibility, to shape the precise goal (product) and the means of achieving it.

Reflection questions

  • To what extent does the institutional context in which you work (curriculum, syllabus, regulations, timetable) make it possible to implement task/projects that span several lessons?
  • To what extent do your learners respond to action-oriented teaching as opposed to conventional coursebook exercises? Teacher testimonials suggest learners enjoy an opportunity to engage creatively – but what proportion of your work plan do you think should be action-oriented?

Conclusion 🔚

Now that you have understood the difference between tasks in CLT, TBLT and the AoA, why not round things off by watching this 25-minute presentation from a workshop on the subject: The action-oriented approach: from theory to practice. You can also access the Handout from the workshop.

AALE Toolkit Home | Action-oriented Approach | Plurilingualism | Tech-mediated | AALE Infosheets Exploration