GIÁO D C VÀ ÀO T O
TR
NG
I H C C N TH
KHOA S PH M

___________

_________________
PHAN V N CHÍ

USING COMMUNICATIVE TASKS TO ENHANCE
LEARNERS’ SPEAKING ABILITY

LU N V N TH C S
Chuyên ngành: Lý Lu n và Ph ng pháp
Gi ng D y Ti ng Anh
Mã s : 60 14 18

n Th , 10/2008


MINISTRY OF EDUCATON AND TRAINING
CAN THO UNIVERSITY
SCHOOL OF EDUCATION

_______________

_____________________________________

PHAN V N CHÍ

USING COMMUNICATIVE TASKS TO ENHANCE
LEARNERS’ SPEAKING ABILITY
M.A THESIS

Major: Principles and Methodology in
English Language Education
Course code: 60 14 18
Supervisor: M.A Nguy n Thành

Can Tho October, 2008

c


GIÁO D C VÀ ÀO T O
TR
NG
I H C C N TH
KHOA S PH M
_______________

______________________________________

PHAN V N CHÍ

USING COMMUNICATIVE TASKS TO ENHANCE
LEARNERS’ SPEAKING ABILITY
LU N V N TH C S
Chuyên ngành: Lý Lu n và Ph ng pháp

Gi ng D y Ti ng Anh
Mã s : 60 14 18
ã

Hi u tr

c b o v và

c duy t

ng: …………………………………………………..
Tr

ng Khoa

Cán b h

…………………………

ng d n

………………………

n Th , 10/2008


Lu n v n th c s v i

tài:


“USING COMMUNICATIVE TASKS TO ENHANCE LEARNERS’
SPEAKING ABILITY”

Do h c viên Phan V n Chí th c hi n và báo cáo ã

cH i

ng Ch m Lu n v n thông

qua.

Th ký

y viên

(Ký tên)

(Ký tên)

……………………………………

GV Ph n bi n 1

…………………………………

GV Ph n bi n 2

Ký tên)

(Ký tên)


……………………………………

……………………………………

C n Th , ngày ……… tháng ………… n m 2008
Ch t ch h i

ng

(Ký tên)

…………………………………


STATEMENT OF AUTHORSHIP
I hereby acknowledge that this study is mine. The data and findings discussed in the thesis are
true, used with permission from associates, and have not been published elsewhere.

Can Tho-2008
Author,

Phan V n Chí

i


ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Above all, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my supervisor, Mr. Nguyen Thanh
Duc for his excellent insights and his considerate, experienced guidance throughout the entire

development of the study. Without his valuable comments, my research would be far from being
finished.
This study owes much to Dr. Nguyen Thu Huong and Dr. Trinh Quoc Lap for their valuable
encouragement and suggestions from the beginning of the study.
I am also especially indebted to Dr. Truong Vien who has been my source of support and
constructive criticism. His invaluable advice and profound ideas have aided me in writing this
research.
I would also like to acknowledge my colleagues and students at An Giang University for their
collaboration and their willingness in working with me during experimental period, completing
the questionnaires and providing precious information for my research.
Lastly, I wish to thank my family for their love, devotion and encouragement they gave me
while I was doing the course and the thesis.

ii


TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Statement of Authorship................................................................................................ ….i
Acknowledgement......................................................................................................... …ii
Table of contents ......................................................................................................... ….iii
List of abbreviations...................................................................................................... ..vii
List of tables................................................................................................................. ..viii
List of figures ............................................................................................................ …. ix
Abstract....................................................................................................................... …..x

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1.

Background .................................................................................................... …..1


1.2.

Topic ................................................................................................................ ….2

1.3.

Rationale .......................................................................................................... ….2

1.4.

Research questions............................................................................................ ….3

1.5.

Objectives.............................................................................................................. 3

1.6.

Scope of the study............................................................................................. ….3

1.7.

Structure of the Thesis ...................................................................................... ….3

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1.

Introduction ........................................................................................................ ...4


2.2.

Definitions of key terms...................................................................................... ...4
2.2.1.

What is a task? ........................................................................................... ..4

2.2.2.

What is motivation? ..................................................................................... 7

2.2.2.1. Definitions of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation ....................................... 8

iii


2.2.2.2. Operationalization of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation ............................ 9
2.2.2.3. Conceptualization of self-determination ................................................. 10
2.2.2.4. Learner beliefs........................................................................................ 13
2.2.3.

Speaking ability ......................................................................................... 14

2.3. Principles of communicative tasks design .............................................................. .15
2.3.1. The principle of meaningful tasks............................................................... .15
2.3.2. The principle of focusing on language form ............................................. .16
2.3.3. The authenticity principle............................................................................ 17
2.3.3.1. Through genuine task purposes ........................................................... .19
2.3.3.2.Through real world targets..................................................................... 19
2.3.3.3. Through classroom interactions ............................................................ 19

2.3.3.4. Through learners’ engagement.............................................................. 20
2.3.4. The principle of reasonable task difficulty .................................................. 20
2.4. Three phases of a task- based instruction ................................................................ 20
2.4.1. The pre-task phase ...................................................................................... 22
2.4.1.1.Performing a similar task....................................................................... 22
2.4.1.2. Providing a model ................................................................................ 23
2.4.1.3. Non-task preparation activities ............................................................. 24
2.4.1.4. Strategic planning................................................................................. 24
2.4.1.5. Summary and final comment ................................................................ 26
2.4.2. The during-task phase ................................................................................. 27
2.4.2.1. Task performance options..................................................................... 27
2.4.2.2. Process options..................................................................................... 29
2.4.3. The post-task phase .................................................................................... 36
2.4.3.1. Repeat performance.............................................................................. 37

iv


2.4.3.2. Reflecting on the task ........................................................................... 37
2.4.3.3. Focusing on forms................................................................................ 38
2.4.3.4. Review of learner’s errors .................................................................... 39
2.4.3.5. Consciousness-raising tasks.................................................................. 39
2.4.3.6. Production practice activities................................................................ 40
2.4.3.7. Noticing activities ................................................................................ 40
2.4.3.8.Summarization and comment ............................................................... 41

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY
3.1

Introduction........................................................................................................... .42


3.2

Research design ..................................................................................................... .42
3.2.1. Participants ................................................................................................... .42
3.2.2. Instruments .................................................................................................... .43
3.4.1. Questionnaire ............................................................................................. 43
3.4.2. Language test ............................................................................................. 43
3.4.3. Interview checklist ..................................................................................... 44
3.2.3. Materials ....................................................................................................... .44
3.2.4. Study time-frame ........................................................................................... .45

CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION
4.1 . Introduction........................................................................................................... . 46
4.2 . Experimental study profiles ............................................................................... .….47
4.3 . Findings and discussion .......................................................................................….48

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION, IMPLICATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR
FURTHER STUDY
5.1. Conclusion ......................................................................................................... ...56
5.2. Teaching implications......................................................................................... ...57

v


5.3. Limitations of study............................................................................................ ...61
5.4. Further study ...................................................................................................... ...62

REFERENCES .......................................................................................... …….63
APPENDICES .....................................................................................................73

APPENDIX 1: Questionnaire for students ...........................................................................
APPENDIX 2: Speaking test .............................................................................................. .
APPENDIX 3: Interview check list .................................................................................... .
APPENDIX 4: Experimental Lesson 1 ............................................................................... .
APPENDIX 5: Experimental Lesson 2 ............................................................................... .
APPENDIX 6: Experimental Lesson 3 ................................................................................
APPENDIX 7: Experimental Lesson 4 ................................................................................

vi


LIST OF ABBREVIATION
CLT:

Communicative Language Teaching

AGU:

An Giang University

EFL:

English as a foreign language

IM:

Intrinsic motivation

EM


Extrinsic motivation

L2:

Second language

TBLT:

Task-based language teaching

CRT:

Consciousness-raising tasks

GMT

General linear model

PPP:

Present-practice-production

SLA:

Second language acquisition

vii


LIST OF TABLES

Table 2.1: A framework for designing task-based lessons.....................................………21
Table 2.2: Options for strategic planning (based on Foster and Skehan 1999)……………26
Table 2.3: Stereotypical classroom processes in traditional form-focused pedagogy and
task- based pedagogy ...................................................................................................... 31
Table 2.4: Implicit and explicit techniques for focusing on form during a task................. 36
Table 3.1: Procedure of the study .................................................................................... 45
Table 4.1: Experimental students’ profiles....................................................................... 47
Table 4.2: Student’s mean scores in pre-speaking test ..................................................... 49
Table 4.3: Student’s mean score in the post speaking test ................................................ 50
Table 4.4: GMT repeated measure test on student’s mean score difference between preand post-speaking test .................................................................................................... 50
Table 4.5: Student’s motivation mean score in pre-questionnaire..................................... 51
Table 4.6: Student’s motivation mean score in the post-test............................................. 52
Table 4.7: GMT test: difference between student’s motivation mean score in pre- and postquestionnaire................................................................................................................... 53

viii


LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 2.1: Orientation subtypes along the self-determination continuum (adapted
from Ryan & Deci, 2000, p.72) ................................................................................ ..... 8
Figure 4.1: A general picture of chapter four “findings and discussion” ..................

46

Figure 4.2: Student’s mean score in pre- and post-speaking test....................................... 50
Figure 4.3: Student’s motivation mean score Pre-test vs. Post-test................................... 53

ix



ABSTRACT

This study investigated the impact of communicative task on learner’s speaking ability in term of
teaching English to non-English major students at An Giang University (AGU). The focuses of
this study were (a) on how communicative tasks enhance learner’s speaking ability in term of
teaching English to non-English major, (b) how communicative tasks motivate students in
speaking English, and (c) student’s reactions to communicative task language teaching.
In this study, one experimental programme was designed for 39 non-English major students at
AGU. These subjects were chosen randomly among non-English major classes at AGU. The
materials used for experimental programme were the innovated lesson plans- lesson plans with
communicative task were employed. The programme lasted for 8 weeks in which students
covered five topics in the textbook. At the beginning of the programme, students were tested to
check for input motivation and speaking ability. At the end of the experimental period they were
tested again to check for learner’s speaking ability and motivation in speaking. Besides, an
interview was carried out to explore learner’s feedback after the treated lessons.
The results of the study reveal that learner’s speaking ability and motivation in speaking were
enhanced after students were treated with communicative task lessons. Moreover, the study
received positive feedbacks on communicative task lessons from learners. Students showed their
enjoyment when learning with communicative tasks. More importantly, the study attempted to
provide practical teaching implications as well as professional advice on how to effectively
create communicative tasks in non-English major classes in EFL teaching contexts.

x


TÓM L

C

tài nghiên c u tác


ng c a quá trình giao ti p thông qua th c hi n nhi m v h c t p lên n ng

c nói ti ng Anh c a sinh viên không chuyên ngành ng v n Anh t i tr
tài t p trung nghiên c u ba v n
hi n nhi m v h c t p c a ng

ng

i h c An Giang.

chính: m t là tìm hi u quá trình giao ti p thông qua th c

i h c có tác

ng nh th nào

i v i n ng l c nói ti ng Anh c a

sinh viên không chuyên nhành ng v n Anh, hai là tìm hi u quá trình giao ti p thông qua th c
hi n nhi m v h c t p tác

ng nh th nào

iv i

ng c nói ti ng Anh c a sinh viên, ba là

tìm hi u ý ki n ph n h i c a sinh viên v quá trình giao ti p thông qua th c hi n nhi m v c a
ng


i h c.

Qua

tài nghiên c u tác gi

xây d ng ch

viên không chuyên ngành ng v n Anh t i tr
nghi m g m 6 giáo án cho 6
ph

ng trình th c nghi m cho m t nhóm g m 39 sinh
ng

i h c An Giang. Tài li u s d ng trong th c

n v bài h c trong giáo trình Know How One

ng pháp “giao ti p thông qua th c hi n nhi m v h c t p c a ng

nghi m h c sinh ã

c g i t p trung ki m tra n ng l c nói và

c ki m tra l n hai

i h c”. Tr


c khi th c

ng c nói ti ng Anh b ng hai

công c chính “speaking test” và “questionnaire”. Sau khi k t thúc giai
8 tu n, sinh viên ã

c thi t k theo

n th c nghi m kéo dài

c ki m tra n ng l c nói ti ng Anh và

ng c

nói ti ng Anh. Ngoài ra tác gi còn t ch c bu i ph ng v n l y ý ki n ph n h i c a sinh viên v
các bu i h c theo ch

ng trình th c nghi m.

t qu phân tích s li u cho th y c hai n ng l c nói ti ng Anh và
sinh viên ã

c t ng c

ng. Ngoài ra sinh viên có ý ki n ph n h i r t tích c c qua các bài h c

th c nghi m. Sinh viên t ra r t thích thú khi
tài nghiên c u tác gi


ng c nói ti ng Anh c a

ã rút ra k t lu n sâu s c

c h c theo ph

ng pháp này.

ng th i úc k t

c bi t là qua

c bài h c kinh nghi m t

th c t d y và h c.

xi


CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background.
In the context of political renovation and open-door policy in the past decades in
Vietnam, the demand for foreign languages, especially English, has soared and the
number of learners of English has therefore increased remarkably. Various methodologies
with different ways of teaching foreign languages have also been introduced into
Vietnamese schools. Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) as an approach has been
highly appreciated and has prevailed all over the world during the decades. This
communicative approach has really given great contribution to changing the environment
of teaching foreign languages in Vietnam, especially in the higher education system and it

has helped to build communicative competence for language learners, which is very
necessary for their jobs and which may meet, to some extent, the current requirements of
the society.
However, according to the evaluation of some employers and language educators, many
school-leavers seem to be incompetent despite studying English in the direction of CLT
for three years or more at colleges and universities. Director of Saigon Tourist, Nguyen
Huu Tho, gave a really shocking comment at the Conference on “the Teaching Quality of
Higher Education in Ho Chi Minh city” in May, 2006 : “At our company, most of the
applicants graduating from universities of foreign languages get ‘dumb’ by fifty percent
and ‘deaf’ by forty percent when being interviewed.”
Similarly, according to Director of the Southeast Asian Ministers of Education
Organization Centre in Vietnam, “many BA holders could not express everyday notions,
or perform basic communicative functions; they lack productive and receptive skills and
strategies; they are unable to negotiate meaning successfully; they create text that is
cohesive but not coherent and are not successful in relating code to context; in general
they lack communicative competence”. It can be said that the current higher education
training programs fail to produce graduates with the necessary skills for modern
workplaces especially speaking ability.
Consequently, in order to successfully build communicative skills for language learners
and to successfully produce employees who are really able to meet the urgent demands of
the society in the development trend of the country, English language teachers should
take into consideration the idea of using communicative task.
It is obvious that the communicative-style teaching really requires authentic task use and

1


classroom exchanges where students actually engage in real communication with one
another.
With an attempt to follow that trend, Vietnamese teachers of English have tried their best

to create more tasks in the classroom through the use of authentic materials and textbooks
for years. Many language teaching materials used in most Vietnamese schools in general,
are “authentic” in the sense that they contain “authentic language, authentic tasks, and an
authentic focus of communication” (Candlin and Edelhoff,1982:7). However, the tasks
and the topics found in the textbook are limited and proved not to meet all of the need and
interest of students of different kinds. Therefore, students are often passive and do not
like to participate in the classroom activities. This reality may be hard to achieve the main
goals of teaching and learning programs for higher education made by the Ministry of
Education and Training that practicality and effectiveness should be assured.
As a result, this study aimed to investigate the impact of communicative task on learners’
speaking ability, to find out the degree of motivation which this teaching methodology
brings to students as well as to explore the student’s reaction after working with
communicative task.
1.2. Topic
Therefore, in this thesis, I would like to focus my research on the topic:
“Using communicative task to enhance learner’s speaking ability”
With this title, some main reasons and purposes for our research would be listed out as in
the next section “Rationale”.
1.3. Rationale
Firstly, communicative task has played a very important role in the communicative
language teaching in recent years. It really helps motivate students to use the language in
real communication and is therefore of every teacher’s concern. In the era of teaching
foreign languages with the communicative approach, language teachers are being
encouraged to make their teaching “more communicative”. However, the concept of
communicative task and its vital roles in developing learners’ ability to use the language
in real social interaction seem to cause some confusion to many EFL teachers and EFL
students as well.
Secondly, the reality of teaching and learning English in many Vietnamese classrooms,
especially in non-English major classes at An Giang University fail to match the aforesaid
perspectives and significance of task-based language teaching. The teachers might not

follow the basic steps in task-based instruction. What goes on in a classroom tends to be

2


unreal to the language learners. Classrooms cannot recreate the reality of the outside
world and the language use in EFL classes is not really authentic.
Thirdly, as a teacher of English at An Giang University, I find it quite essential to have
more insights into the teaching strategies that may help the English faculty members of
our college to make the teaching and learning process more effective and practical in this
particular context through the use of communicative task instruction. The experience
from this study is also necessary for me in evaluating, selecting and adapting teaching
plans in foreign language classrooms.
1.4. Research questions
This study is conducted based on the following research questions:
v Does the use of communicative tasks enhance learner’s speaking ability?
v Does the use of communicative tasks motivate learners to speak English?
v What are learner’s reactions to communicative tasks used in teaching non-English
major classes at An Giang University?
1.5. Objectives:
This study aims to (1) find out the impact of communicative task on learner’s speaking
skill in term of teaching English for non English major students at AGU (2) to investigate
how communicative task motivates students in speaking English and (3) to explore the
learner’s reactions when studying with communicative task.
1.6. Scope of the study
This study was conducted with 39 students from geography class which was chosen
randomly among non-English major classes. These classes use the same course-book:
Know How, book one.
1.7. Structure of the thesis
This thesis consists of five chapters. Chapter one introduces general information of the

research. Chapter two reviews the literature and chapter three discusses research
methodology. Findings and discussion are presented in chapter four. Chapter five gives
the summary of the study, implications and suggestions for further study.

3


CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1. Introduction
The first section of this chapter defines and clarifies the terminology that is crucial to a
better understanding of the issues involved. The second section focuses on the issue of
principles for communicative task design. The third section introduces the four steps of
task-base instruction.
2.2. Definitions of key terms
2.2.1. What is communicative task?
What is a task? Definitions of tasks abound in the literature cited in Trinh (2005), (Long,
(1985); Richards, Platt, & Weber (1985); Prabhu (1987); Breen (1989); Nunan (1989);
Willis (1996); Lee (2000); Bygate, Skehan & Swain (2001)). There is no complete
agreement in the field of SLA research and language pedagogy on what exactly a task is.
Various dimensions of tasks are used to describe what a task is: (1) The scope of a task,
(2) the perspective from which a task is viewed, (3) the authenticity of the task, (4) the
linguistic skills required to perform the task, (5) the psychological processes involved in
task performance and (6) the outcome of the task (Ellis 2003). The scope of a task refers
to which kind of knowledge is required from learners to perform the task, or which kind
of knowledge should be developed in learners in performing the task. The scope of a task
refers to the continuum of form-focused or meaning-focused. The knowledge required
could be non-linguistic or linguistic.
In his definition of task, Long (1985) views a task as a piece of work undertaken for
oneself or the others, freely or with some reward such as painting a fence, dressing a

child, making an airline reservation or borrowing a book from the library. From Long’s
definition, a task can require language to perform (i.e., making an airline reservation) or
require no linguistic knowledge (i.e., painting a fence). Nunan (1989) limits the scope of a
task to the requirement of language use to do the task. He defines a communicative task

4


as a piece of classroom work which involves learners in comprehending, manipulating,
producing, or interacting in the target language while their attention is principally focused
on meaning rather than form. The task should also have a sense of completeness, being
able to stand alone as a communicative act in its own right (Nunan, 1989). Focus on form
or focus on meaning is used as criteria to distinguish a language activity from task. While
Breen’s (1989) definition incorporates all kinds of language activity, including exercises
as tasks, Nunan (1989) and Skehan (1996) restrict the term “tasks” to activities where
meaning is primary. The distinction between a task and an exercise is clarified by Ellis
(2003). In his view, both tasks and exercises are language activities. Tasks are activities
that primarily call for meaning focused language use; exercises are activities that
primarily call for form-focused language use. Widdowson (1998) further narrows the
definition of task. Both tasks and exercises need to require learners to pay attention to
both meaning and form. What distinguishes a task from an exercise is the kind of
meaning involved. Whereas a task is concerned with pragmatic meaning (the use of
language in context), an exercise is concerned with semantic meaning (the systematic
meanings that specific forms can convey irrespective of context). However, Widdowson’s
(ibid.) argument is mainly based on the distinction between the terms “form-focused” and
“meaning-focused”, so the distinction is based on terminology alone (Ellis, 2003). In
doing tasks, learners work primarily as language users and in doing exercises, learners
work primarily as language learners, which means that learners not always focus on
meaning and act primarily as language users when performing a task. The perspective
from which the task is viewed refers to whether a task is seen from the task designers’ or

the task executors’ point of view. Prabhu (1987), Breen (1989), Nunan (1989), Lee
(2000) and Ellis (2003) adopt the task-designer’s perspective to view tasks. They see
them as “work plans” that intend to engage learners in meaning-focused communication.
In some definitions (i.e., Bachman & Palmer, 1996; Lee, 2000) rubrics in the plan of
doing the task (e.g., the outcome of the task and the sequences of task execution to
achieve the outcome) are specified. The authenticity of the task refers to whether the
activities correspond to real-life or at least manifest some relationship to real-world

5


activities (Skehan, 1996) so that upon completion of the task, learners can transfer the
language they have learned and/or used while executing the tasks to perform real-world
tasks. Activities that are situationally authentic and/or seek to achieve interactional
authenticity are classified as tasks (Ellis, 2003). One learns a foreign language to meet
their authentic communicative purposes. For this reason, tasks through which the target
language is learned or used, aiming to transfer its use to real-life world, should be labeled
as sub-tasks, while activities corresponding to real-life world are labeled as tasks.
Language skills involved in performing the activities are not always explicitly stated in
definitions of tasks. Long’s (1985) activities require oral and written language. Richards,
Platt and Weber (1985) explicitly state that a task “may or may not involve the production
of language”. Other authors on task-based teaching such as Bygate, Skehan and Swain
(2001) assume that tasks are directed at oral, mainly speaking skills. Ellis (2003)
explicitly states that activities involving any of the four language skills are tasks. If the
purpose of a language activity is to help learners to learn (via using) the language, this
activity must create opportunities for them to use the four language skills so that they can
learn how to communicate. Then the activity can be classified as a task. A cognitive
dimension is embodied in executing language activities. In Nunan’s (1989) definition,
tasks involving learners in comprehending, manipulating, producing or interacting in the
target language only address the linguistic dimension of tasks. In Prabhu’s (1987)

definition, tasks should ideally involve learners in reasoning- making connections
between pieces of information, deducing information and evaluating information.
Knowledge of the cognitive processing required in doing tasks will help to design proper
tasks that enhance second language acquisition. Robinson (2001) proposes the variety of
tasks in terms of their complexity of the cognitive demands that tasks require on the part
of the learners. All authors deal with the outcomes of a task. Ellis (2003) distinguishes the
outcome of the task from the aim of the task. The outcome concerns what learners arrive
at upon completing the task (i.e., a story) and the aim “refers to the pedagogic purpose of
the task, which is to elicit meaning-focused language use, receptive and/or productive”
(Ellis, 2003: 8). If the pedagogical purpose of the task were to elicit meaning-focused

6


language use, both receptively and/or productively, we would say it is not enough for an
activity to be classified as the aim of the task. The pedagogical purpose of the task is to
elicit meaning-focused language use, both receptively and productively, and to elicit
textual features of language input that learners have come across or have been presented
to.
Working definition: Various definitions of tasks focus on one or more of the six
mentioned dimensions. One component of communicative competence, metacognitive
skills (strategic competence), has not yet been included. Therefore, tasks that are used to
develop communicative competence should create opportunities for learners to get
exposed to “rich” language input (authenticity) so that learners can employ their cognitive
skills (cognitive dimension) to interact and evaluate the input and opportunities for
learners to use (negotiation of meaning) the four language skills integratively (scope,
language skills), to plan how to do the task, monitor task execution (meta-cognitive
skills), and to arrive at a real-life outcome, from which learners can evaluate task
execution to adjust later task executions. Trinh & Rijlaarsdam, (2003) defined an activity
that creates opportunities for learners (motivates learners) to use the target language

authentically (i.e., negotiating meaning, exchanging information on planning work,
problem solving, evaluating language input and the effects of their performance) to
execute real-life work (for oneself or for the other) is a task . The target language is used
for knowledge constructing and for knowledge activating. Knowledge includes
knowledge of the language and knowledge of other fields. In other words, a genuine
language task must create an opportunity (i.e., a social context) in which learners can
practice real life language use, with interaction mainly with peers working together to
fulfill that task and with self-evaluate task execution and to reflect on their language
learning.
2.2.2. What is motivation?
According to Deci and Ryan’s (1985) self-determination theory, there are two types of
motivation, namely intrinsic motivation and extrinsic motivation. Figure 2.1 shows that
intrinsic orientation, extrinsic orientation and motivation lie on a continuum from self-

7


determined to non-determined. An individual with a high level of self-determination is
likely to demonstrate autonomy in his or her learning and lead to higher achievement.
Non self-determined

A motivation

self-determined

Extrinsic
orientation

Intrinsic
motivation


Knowledge

Non-regulation

External
regulation

Stimulation

Identified
regulation

Introjected
regulation

Accomplishment

Figure 2.1: Orientation subtypes along the self-determination continuum (adapted
from Ryan & Deci, 2000, p.72)
2.2.2.1. Definitions of intrinsic and extrinsic motivations
Intrinsic motivation is defined as “motivation to engage in an activity because that
activity is enjoyable and satisfying to do” (Deci and Ryan, 1985, p. 39) whereas extrinsic
motivation refers to “actions carried out to achieve some instrumental end such as earning
a reward or avoiding a punishment”.
Deci and Ryan (1985) hypothesized that people will seek challenges if they are given
freedom to choose what activities to perform. They will then develop a sense of

8



competence in their abilities and internalize it into the self-concept. Extrinsic motivation,
in a similar vein, lies at one point on a continuum of self-determination, depending on the
type of extrinsic motivation.
2.2.2.2. Operationalization of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation
Three-part taxonomy of intrinsic motivation (IM) and three levels of extrinsic motivation
(EM) were developed by Vallerand (1997).
Intrinsic motivation is derived from humans’ innate needs for competence and selfdetermination. According to cognitive evaluation theory, a sub-theory of selfdetermination theory, intrinsic motivation is characterized by people’s need for meeting
“optimal challenges” that “stretch personal abilities by a small but significant amount
each time, and promote feelings of competence and skill development” (Deci & Ryan
1980). Furthermore, it is hypothesized that “when people are free to choose to perform an
activity, they will seek interesting situations where they can rise to the challenges that the
activity presents” (Noels et al. 2000). The first type of intrinsic motivation in the
taxonomy, IM-Knowledge, relates to the sensations stimulated by discovering new
knowledge. The second type of intrinsic motivation, IM-Accomplishment, refers to
feelings associated with task completion or goal attainment. Lastly, the third category of
intrinsic motivation, IM-Stimulation, is the motivation for doing an activity for the
feeling and sensations associated with performing pleasurable tasks. Individuals will
experience pleasurable sensations when they are performing tasks which are initiated by
the individual and challenging enough.
In contrast to intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation lies on the continuum from nonself-determination to self-determination: external regulation, introjected regulation, and
identified regulation.
External-regulated extrinsic motivation holds only when external incentive is present. The
behaviors of an externally-regulated individual are determined by sources external to the
individual such as monetary rewards. If the external incentive is taken away from
individuals, they will discontinue the engagement in the activity. This is the most extreme

9



form of extrinsic motivation which represents least self-determination and can be
comparable to Gardner’s (1985) instrumental orientation.
Introjected-regulated extrinsic motivation takes place when the external pressure has been
transferred to the self of the individual. The basis for introjected regulation is “taking in
but not accepting a regulation as one’s own” (Deci, Vallerand, Pelletier, & Ryan 1991, p.
329). Although introjected regulation is internal to an individual, task engagement only
results from threatened sanctions or promised rewards and the regulation is not part of the
integrated self (Deci & Ryan 1991). As a result of internal coercion (force) and seduction,
the behaviors exhibited resemble external control rather than self-determined forms of
regulation where true choice is not present.
The final type of extrinsic motivation, identified regulation, refers to a state where
individuals will do an activity for a good cause. Identified-regulated individuals would
engage in an activity at their own will because they identify with the values it entails. A
sense of choice or volition about behaving in the absence of external contingencies and
introjects is essential to the development of autonomy and self-determination. Though
this form of extrinsic motivated behaviors is not fully self-determined as the behaviors are
motivated by the usefulness or instrumentality for the activity itself, it is relatively selfdetermined because the individual would carry out the activity “willingly, for personal
reasons, rather than external pressure” (Deci, Vallerand et al. 1991, p. 330).
On the far left of the model (Figure 2.1), a motivation, which is independent of intrinsic
and extrinsic motivation, presents the absence of either intrinsic or extrinsic reasons for
performing an activity. It refers to the situation in which the individual sees no
correspondence between his action and the consequences of that action, and the
consequences result from factors beyond his control.
2.2.2.3. Conceptualization of self-determination
Despite the fact that less self-determined motivation is less likely to help individuals
develop autonomous learning behaviors, Noels et al. (2000) note that extrinsic motivation
“does not imply a lack of self-determination in the behavior performed… different types

10