Focused Versus Unfocused Tasks

MARÍA DEL PILAR GARCÍA MAYO

­Framing the Issue

The acquisition of a second language (L2) is a complex process that has been studied
since the mid-1960s. One of the issues to which many printed pages have been
devoted is the acquisition of grammatical competence, and several explanations have
been proposed depending on the target language and the theoretical approach from
which the data are considered. However, what teachers and teacher trainers seem to
demand are effective ways to teach learners the intricacies of the grammar of the
English language. As Larsen-Freeman (2009) pointed out, the term “grammar” is
probably one of the most elusive in the teaching field, but there is a clear agreement
among not just teachers but also researchers and learners themselves that knowing
grammar is crucial for the development of a complete mastery of the language.
Throughout history, there have been several methods to teach grammar (Nassaji
& Fotos, 2011), and the pendulum has moved from the grammar-translation
method, with a focus on learning grammar rules, to a total focus on meaning and
language use within communicative settings, which basically led to the oblivion of
formal grammar teaching. In fact, some researchers in Canadian immersion pro-
grams expressed their concern back in the 1980s when they saw empirical evidence
showing that after literally hundreds of hours of meaningful exposure to the target
language, learners still had problems with their productive skills. That empirical
information provided the first argument for a return to attention to grammar
issues in the language classroom. Other arguments were also put forward, such as
the fact that learners, especially at the beginning stages, and as a result of process-
ing limitations, tend to pay attention to lexical items as opposed to grammatical
form and that therefore there should be ways to draw their attention to those forms
which would otherwise go unnoticed. Noticing (Schmidt, 1990) was actually a con-
cept proposed to operationalize the attention to form needed for language learn-
ing to proceed. Finally, meta-analyses (studies that analyze results from several
other studies to consider whether some general pattern can be identified) on
explicit versus implicit grammar instruction showed that the former resulted in
significant gains for the learner that were maintained over time.

The TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching, First Edition.

Edited by John I. Liontas (Project Editor: Margo DelliCarpini).
© 2018 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Published 2018 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
DOI: 10.1002/9781118784235.eelt0063

eelt0063.indd 1 11/2/2017 7:28:17 PM

 2 Focused Versus Unfocused Tasks

Task-based language teaching (TBLT) is a method of teaching L2s whose main

purpose is to engage learners in the use of authentic language (Ellis, 2003). Tasks
have been defined in numerous ways, but they should all require learners to use
the language meaningfully. According to Ellis, in a task the primary focus is on
message, there should be some type of information gap, learners should be able to
use their own linguistic (and, if necessary, nonlinguistic) resources, and, above all,
tasks should have an outcome. Tasks have been claimed to be beneficial for L2
development because they trigger interaction and negotiation of meaning during
which learners notice the mismatch between their production and the target lan-
guage. TBLT aims to develop not just the learners’ fluency in the target language
but also accuracy in its production and the concept of “focus on form” (Long, 1996)
is crucial. In other words, attention to form should always be learned within a
communicative context.

­Making the Case

Within a TBLT approach to language teaching, learners’ attention can be drawn to

form by means of focus tasks (but see Sheen, 2004, for a different position). Focused
communication tasks are tasks that have been designed in such a way that learners
will need to use a specific grammar form in order to complete them. For example,
one may think of a task in which learners are playing the role of a real-estate agent.
They don’t have access to their partner’s information but they need to convince
him or her that one specific property is better than another. The most likely situa-
tion is that the learners end up using comparative structures in order to complete
the task. Focused tasks have to be designed in such a way that learners focus on
meaningful issues (such as selling a property they want to sell), but at the same
time are forced to use specific linguistic features, such as the comparative struc-
tures needed in this example.
By contrast, in unfocused communication tasks learners use the language freely
and no particular grammar form is needed to complete the task. In other words,
these tasks are not designed with the purpose of eliciting specific grammatical
features in the learners’ output. We may think, for example, of a simple storytell-
ing task where a learner narrates a story on the basis of a series of picture prompts.
Both focused and unfocused tasks provide L2 learners with opportunities to use
the target language in a meaningful context, but only the former are designed to
elicit specific linguistic features in the learners’ output. However, the key charac-
teristic of both is that they will foster communicative language use. As pointed out
by Loshky and Bley-Vroman (1993) in a key contribution to the topic, focused tasks
can be designed so that the target linguistic feature arises naturally in the learner’s
production, or is very useful to complete the task at hand, or, finally, must be used
if the learner wants to complete the task. Although Loshky and Bley-Vroman
pointed out that designing tasks that trigger a linguistic form that is essential for
task completion is not easy, several research studies published over the past two
decades have shown that it is actually possible to design tasks where learners

eelt0063.indd 2 11/2/2017 7:28:17 PM

 Focused Versus Unfocused Tasks 3

focus their attention on linguistic features such as articles, conditionals, modal

verbs, passive voice, phrasal verbs, question formation, prepositions, and mor-
phological markers such as the -s of the English third ­person singular present tense.
However, these studies have also shown that (1) learners do not always focus on
the linguistic features targeted by the teacher or the researcher, (2) some linguistic
features are easier to elicit than others, and (3) using a target form while complet-
ing a communication-focused task does not mean that the target form will be
learned. Moreover, the teacher will also find the typical individual variation that is
attested in any classroom.
Although designing focused communicative tasks is a challenge for both
researchers and teachers, numerous studies have shown that both focused and
unfocused tasks trigger the use of language-related episodes (Swain, 1998) where
learners focus on the language they are using without the teacher intervening to
call attention to linguistic issues. In that sense, focused and unfocused tasks help
to draw learners’ attention to form while completing communicative tasks.

­Pedagogical Implications

Teachers can make use of focused and unfocused communication tasks in their
daily activity. As mentioned above, unfocused tasks should center on meaningful
aspects of interest to the learner (i.e., they should be age appropriate) so that they
trigger their engagement with language. A simple narration of a story on the basis
of a series of picture prompts will lead to a varied production of different linguistic
issues. The practitioner could then choose to focus on those aspects that have
turned out to be problematic and design focused communicative tasks that will
help the learner to notice the differences between his/her interlanguage and the
target language. Knowledge of the learners’ first language to identify potential
transfer patterns would be helpful.
Regarding focused communicative tasks, and acknowledging that it is not
always the case that learners will produce and notice the target form the teacher
has in mind, there are several types of task that can be implemented in the lan-
guage classroom. A structure-based production task (Ellis, 2003) that has been
widely used in second language acquisition (SLA) research studies, both with
adult and child learners, and also in teacher-training courses, is dictogloss (Wajnryb,
1990). This task is an updated version of the traditional dictation. The standard
dictogloss procedure is as follows. Learners first listen to a short passage (adapted
to different proficiency levels) that is read out loud once at normal speed, without
writing anything down. They then listen to the passage a second time and jot
down those words that they consider key in the passage. In a third stage they
reconstruct the original text as faithfully as possible, whether individually or col-
laboratively. The passage can be seeded with the target structure the teacher is
interested in. Dictogloss has been shown to force learners to focus on the form of
the language they are learning and to promote noticing (Schmidt, 1990) of those
features. In addition, in the process of completing the dictogloss learners produce

eelt0063.indd 3 11/2/2017 7:28:18 PM

 4 Focused Versus Unfocused Tasks

numerous language-related episodes that focus on different linguistic features

which they find necessary to finish the task. These episodes draw their attention to
the formal aspects of the language with which they have problems. Research has
shown that most of these episodes are correctly solved by the learners without the
teacher’s intervention. Another type of focused task that can be implemented in
the language classroom is text reconstruction. In this task, learners do not listen
but, rather, read a text that makes frequent use of the target linguistic feature. They
are then asked to underline the parts of the text that they find most important for
further reconstruction where accuracy is emphasized.
There are other ways in which teachers can draw learners’ attention to linguistic
features that might be problematic. For example, specific sections of a text can be
highlighted using bold or italics so that learners pay attention to the specific forms
the teacher has previously chosen. For example, if learners have problems with
possessive pronouns in English because some languages establish agreement with
the gender of the following noun instead of with the possessor, as English does,
the teacher can use a written story with male and female characters and ask the
students to underline the possessive pronouns. Attention will be drawn to that
specific form within the meaningful story line. Research has shown that learners
who have been exposed to texts that have been enhanced in different ways are
more likely to notice the linguistic target in question.
Dictogloss, text reconstruction, and highlighted texts are all tasks that draw
learners’ attention to form in an implicit way: that is, when completing the tasks,
normally in collaboration with a peer or in small groups, they are carrying out a
meaningful exercise and, at the same time, focusing their attention on those lin-
guistic issues that they consider problematic. There is another type of focused task
that calls attention to language in an explicit way: consciousness-raising tasks. In this
type of task the teacher can choose a structure that she or he knows is especially
difficult for the learners. One might think of articles in English as a case in point.
By making articles the focus of the task, the teacher will ensure that learners pay
attention to that feature but, at the same time, that they share their ideas about
which article to use in which context and provide their own explanations for that.
In other words, they will be having a meaningful interaction on a language feature.
It should also be mentioned that even so-called traditional tasks, such as fill-in-
the-gap, can draw learners’ attention to form if they are carried out interactively
with a peer or with the teacher. Both peers and teachers can always provide correc-
tive feedback on learners’ output in an implicit way by making use of conversa-
tional adjustments: clarification requests (I don’t understand), wh-questions (What?
Which one?), yes/no questions, or confirmation checks (interventions by the
teacher to establish that what the learner has just produced has been properly
understood), or by recasting the utterance that contains a wrong form.
Grammatical competence is a cornerstone in the mastery of any language. The
use of focused and unfocused tasks in a context that is meaningful to learners
seems to be a step forward in the development of that mastery.

eelt0063.indd 4 11/2/2017 7:28:18 PM

 Focused Versus Unfocused Tasks 5

SEE ALSO: Communicative Language Teaching (CLT); Consciousness-Raising

Tasks; Dictogloss Technique; Direct Versus Indirect Grammar Feedback; Easy
Versus Difficult Grammar Rules; Explicit Versus Implicit Grammar Knowledge;
Grammar in Foreign and Second Language Classes; Interaction and Learning
Grammar; Tasks Versus Exercises

References

Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford, England: Oxford
University Press.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2009). Teaching and testing grammar. In M. H. Long & C. J. Doughty
(Eds.), The handbook of language teaching (pp. 518–42). Oxford, England: Blackwell.
Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition.
In W. R. Ritchie & T. J. Bathia (Eds.), The handbook of research on second language acquisition
(pp. 413–68). New York, NY: Academic Press.
Loshky, L., & Bley-Vroman, R. (1993). Grammar and task-based methodology. In G. Cooke
& S. Gass (Eds.), Tasks in language learning (pp. 123–67). Clevedon, England: Multilingual
Matters.
Nassaji, H., & Fotos, S. (2011). Teaching grammar in second language classrooms: Integrating
form-focused instruction in communicative context. London, England: Routledge.
Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics,
11(2), 129–58.
Sheen, Y. (2004). Corrective feedback and learner uptake in communicative classrooms
across instructional settings. Language Teaching Research, 8(3), 263–300.
Swain, M. (1998). Focus on form through conscious reflection. In C. J. Doughty and J.
Williams (Eds.), Focus on form in classroom second language (pp. 64–81). Cambridge,
England: Cambridge University Press.
Wajnryb, R. (1990). Grammar dictation. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press

Suggested Readings

Ellis, R., & Shintani, N. (2014). Exploring language pedagogy through second language acquisition
research. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
García Mayo, M. P. (Ed.). (2007). Investigating tasks in formal language learning. Clevedon,
England: Multilingual Matters.
Samuda, V., & Bygate, M. (2008). Tasks in second language learning. Basingstoke, England:
Palgrave Macmillan.
Van den Branden, K., Bygage, M., & Norris, J. (Eds.). (2009). Task-based language teaching: A
reader. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins.

eelt0063.indd 5 11/2/2017 7:28:18 PM