See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/334130294

Task-Based Language Teaching and Theme-Based Role-Play: Developing EFL

Learners' Communicative Competence

Article in Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching · June 2019

DOI: 10.56040/bdwa161a

CITATIONS READS

23 6,872

1 author:

Budi Waluyo
Walailak University
43 PUBLICATIONS 288 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Budi Waluyo on 01 July 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching
2019, Vol. 16, No. 1, pp. 153–168
© Centre for Language Studies
http://e-flt.nus.edu.sg/ National University of Singapore

Task-Based Language Teaching and Theme-Based

Role-Play: Developing EFL Learners’ Communicative
Competence

Budi Waluyo
([email protected])
Walailak University, Thailand

Abstract

While task-based language teaching has received considerable attention from both researchers and educational
policy makers, the effective implementation in the classroom is still a matter of question. Thus, this classroom-
based research attempts to contribute to the practice of task-based teaching in actual classrooms. It proposes
theme-based role-play as an alternative in developing EFL learners’ communicative competence in task-based
teaching. This study explores student progress (N = 782) in theme-based role-play performances throughout
one academic term – 12 weeks – and examines the impact on student achievement in the final speaking exam.
The findings confirm the hypothesis that students’ performances in theme-based role-play predict the develop-
ment of their communicative competence. However, topics and contents of role-play activities, roles of students
and teachers as an individual and a group, and teachers’ provision of support may play key roles in implemen-
tation.

1 Introduction

Task-based language teaching (TBLT) has been widely discussed in the past thirty years and a
significant body of literature has appeared around it (Comer, 2007). The growing interest in TBLT
is primarily influenced by the opportunities it can provide for promoting oral language production
and facilitating meaning-negotiation through tasks (Winnefeld, 2013). TBLT is essentially part of
communicative language teaching (CLT) and considered as the strongest version of CLT, since it
lays importance on developing learners’ communicative competence, which is the primary goal of
language teaching (Richards, 2005). The success of the application of CLT depends on the variety
of language activities provided by classroom teachers, which may involve communication, interpre-
tation, expression, and negotiation of meaning; this, therefore, leads to discussions of selecting
meaningful, appropriate tasks that can generate language activities and facilitate the development
of communicative competence, thereby bringing more interest in the exploration of task-based ap-
proach within CLT (Littlewood, 2004; Savignon, 1991). In education policies, especially in Asian
countries, where teachers are required to implement a communicative approach in teaching English,
tasks are often recommended to be used as a means of realizing meaningful classroom language
practice (Adams & Newton, 2009).
In the EFL context, TBLT is ideal, for its task feature enables teachers to create interactive group
learning with more exposure to target language utilization, which eventually facilitates the develop-
154 Budi Waluyo

ment of learner’s communicative and interactive skills (Xiongyong & Moses, 2011). Besides, learn-
ers in countries where English is taught as a foreign language (EFL) usually do not have much
contact with native speakers; therefore, frequent use of the target language in active group learning
is believed to be crucial in foreign language acquisition (Jeon & Hahn, 2006). TBLT is an ideal
medium to draw learners’ attention to the use of target language in real life situations and foster
independent learning (McDonough & Chaikitmongkol, 2007). However, despite the benefits poten-
tially obtained through the implementation of tasks, it is important to note that teachers may have
vague concepts regarding what constitutes a task and what the focal elements of task-based teaching
are (Comer, 2007; Pei, 2008), and further investigations are still needed on potential, meaningful
tasks that can enhance learners’ communicative competence in task-based teaching (Carless, 2003).
Various empirical studies have been conducted with regard to the implementation of TBLT in
different countries across the globe. In Thailand, task-based EFL courses are favored by teachers
and students for meeting the immediate academic needs of being able to communicate in and outside
classroom (McDonough & Chaikitmongkol, 2007). Task-based learning and activities facilitating
language use are adopted in the English textbooks of Korean high schools (Jeon, 2005). Teachers’
attitudes toward task-based approach are positive, but the size of the class and the evaluation of task-
based performance remain challenging in China (Xiongyong & Moses, 2011). TBLT has the poten-
tial of facilitating the integration of the four skills in EFL in Columbia (Córdoba Zúñiga, 2016).
This approach is well accepted by teachers across Canada for its benefits of practicality, effective-
ness, and learner-centeredness (Douglas & Kim, 2015). Nevertheless, the use of the mother tongue,
classroom management, and the production of the target language appears to be problematic in the
implementation of a task-based approach at primary schools in Hongkong (Carless, 2004); addition-
ally, such factors as teacher beliefs, teacher understandings, the language proficiency of students,
available resources, and textbooks also play substantial roles in the classroom application of task-
based teaching (Carless, 2003).
Besides, there are also studies that compare TBLT with other English teaching approaches, such
as the structural based approach and PPP (presentation, practice, and production), in which the find-
ings suggest the superiority of the task-based approach in advancing learner’s fluency and complex-
ity in the target language (Rahimpour, 2008), addressing the needs of different levels of students
(Carless, 2009), and enhancing students’ motivation in writing (Sabet, Tahriri, & Haghi, 2014).
However, despite these positive findings, several studies have also revealed that implementing
TBLT in classroom practices is not as easy as discussed in the literature; teachers are faced with
obstacles and challenges that might derive from curriculum designers and managers (Yen, 2016),
traditional examinations and limited understandings of practical communicative activities (Chunrao
& Carless, 2009), limited dissemination of principles and procedures of TBLT (Plews & Zhao,
2010), and the lack of familiarity with task design and restrictions from textbooks (Jasim, 2011).
Drawing on this brief review, one would assume that the interest in the application of TBLT is
growing and that this approach is favored by EFL learners; yet teachers are still struggling in their
task-based teaching. Thus, this study intends to offer insights regarding the use of theme-based role-
play in task-based teaching and the impact on developing learners’ communicative competence.
Using a quantitative research design, this study explores student progress in theme-based role-play
performances throughout one academic term – 12 weeks – and examines the impact on student
achievement in the final speaking exam. The detailed implementation of theme-based role-play is
also elaborated as follows. This study seeks to contribute to the practice of task-based approach in
actual classrooms.

2 Literature review

2.1 Task-based language teaching

The distinctive feature of task-based language teaching (TBLT) is none other than the ‘task’,
which is proposed as the main unit of language design program and individual lesson plan (Ellis,
 Task-Based Language Teaching and Theme-Based Role-Play 155

2009), based on Prabhu’s concept, published in 1987, that effective learning happens when learners
are fully engaged in a communicative language task (Oxford, 2006). Communicative tasks serve as
the basic units of the language curriculum (Lai & Li, 2011), primarily intended to engage learners
in a naturalistic learning process that enables them to use the target language frequently (Skehan,
1996). Hence, there are, at least, three essential goals that underlie this approach: 1) accuracy –
improving learner’s language production that follows the rule system of the target language, 2)
complexity – enhancing learners’ willingness and capacity in the elaboration of the produced
language, 3) fluency – advancing learners’ capacity to use language in real time without unnecessary
pausing or hesitation (Skehan, Willis, & Willis, 1996); the designed tasks should assist learners to
achieve these goals, which eventually lead them to the development of communicative competence.
Nonetheless, what constitutes a task and what are considered as core elements often confuse
teachers in the implementation of task-based teaching. Thus, this study specifically refers to Willis
(1996), who defines ‘task’ as a goal-oriented activity where learners use all resources of the target
language they have to solve a problem, play a game, do a puzzle, share and compare experiences; it
is designed to attain a real outcome in using the target language for interactive communication. In
accomplishing a task, learners are involved in the process of semantic and pragmatic meaning of
utterances, conveying information, expressing an opinion and inferring meaning, yet relying on their
own linguistic and non-linguistics resources (Ellis, 2009). At this point, the selected tasks must
facilitate learners to communicate through interaction in the target language, involve authentic texts
in the learning situation, consider the vital contribution of learner’s own personal experiences to
classroom learning, and more importantly, form a connection between inside classroom language
learning and the use of the target language outside the classroom (Nunan, 1991).
In developing learners’ communicative competence, task in language teaching can provide
students with increased opportunity and motivation for communication, which enhances
metalinguistic awareness or knowledge of the rules in the target language (Savignon, 2018). Task
can also be used for acquiring linguistic knowledge of a specific grammar point of the target
language and creating situations of negotiated interaction among learners facilitating language
acquisition (Fotos & Ellis, 1991). Divergent disagreements exist among those advocating the
characteristics of task-based teaching in developing learners’ communicative competence (e.g. Ellis,
2003; Long, 1985; Skehan, 1998), but Swan (2005) contend that agreements occur on the
assumption: tasks should emphasize natural language use, meaning rather than language, and learner
centeredness rather than teacher centeredness, as well as offer opportunities to focus on the form.
Besides, it is also vital to consider the cognitive complexity and sequence of a task, since they have
the potential to affect learners’ language production and learning of the target language (Robinson,
2005).
Previous empirical studies have explored some areas in which tasks play a key role in developing
learner’s communicative competence. Rahmani and Alavi (2017) studied the impact of TBLT and
content-based language teaching (CBLT) on the speaking improvement of Iranian intermediate
learners. It was found that students in the TBLT class had better performance than the CBLT class
in the post-test of the speaking test, implying more significant improvement. The findings confirmed
the strengths of TBLT in developing learners’ speaking abilities through meaningful and interactive
communication. Learners who were instructed according to task-based principles were also found
to perform better in the final speaking test with focus on proficiency development, but gender was
not a determining factor (Khomeyjani & Khaghaninezhad, 2009). Task-based teaching that involves
learner-centeredness and meaning-based instruction in a collaborative setting allows learners not
only to fulfill content area needs, but also improve their second language proficiency (Kelch & Yang,
2008). The effective impact of TBLT on developing learners’ communicative competence also lies
on the opportunities to use the target language contextually and experience it through situational
activities (Hasan, 2014).
Aflah, Salam, and Sada (2015) examined the extent of the application of the TBLT framework
in speaking class and the influence of TBLT on learners’ speaking performance. The findings
revealed that TBLT stimulated more active participation, which in turn, increased learners’ positive
156 Budi Waluyo

attitude towards the language learning. Further, TBLT framework helped teachers to manage
classroom interactions that put emphasis on the use of the target language. Learners enjoyed their
learning experiences in TBLT and significant progress on fluency was noticeable. Task-based
learning activities encourage learners to take responsibility and control of their learning, thereby
developing learner autonomy and improving their performance in speaking tasks (Ghodrati, Ashraf,
& Khalil, 2014). Learner autonomy and English language proficiency were found to have a positive
relationship (Sakai & Takagi, 2009). Moreover, the impact of using tasks in language teaching have
been confirmed to be encouraging in vocabulary enhancement (Marashi & Hatam, 2009), improving
writing performance involving accuracy, fluency, and complexity (Dirgeyasa, 2018; Pourdana,
Karimi Behbahani, & Safdari, 2011), teaching grammar (Yildiz & Senel, 2017), and helping learners
tackle reading problems (Astika, 2005).

2.2 Role-play as a task

Since a task in TBLT is a goal-oriented activity that facilitates learners to communicate in the
target language (Ellis, 2009; Nunan,1991; Willis, 1996), several scholars have recommended role-
play as one of the communicative tasks to be used in task-based teaching (e.g. Dorathy &
Mahalakshmi, 2011; Patel, 2017). Role-play provides learners with opportunities to use the target
language and conversational resources stimulating authentic conversational interactions in different
social contexts and social roles (Al-Senaidi, 2010; Richards, 1985). It is a type of communicative
activity, in which learners are directed to create useful language exchange fostering a wide range of
participation involving aspects of verbal communication (e.g. intonation, stress patterns, and tone
of voice) and non-verbal communication (e.g. eye contact, hand gestures, and personal space)
(Abidin & Hosseini, 2012; Qing, 2011). However, although role-play seems to fit the framework of
TBLT, the success of using role-play as a communicative task can be influenced by the relevance
of the role-play topic to learners’ learning goals, teacher’s elaboration on the appropriate language
used in the role-play, schemes of error corrections, and teacher’s role in the role-play (Liu & Ding,
2009). It is also important to realize that despite its popularity in the 1980s, interest in role-play has
drastically dropped, as critics consider role-play as an artificial activity that does not necessarily
reflect real world language needs (Shapiro & Leopold, 2012).
Nevertheless, several recent studies have disclosed some positive findings regarding the impact
of role-play in developing learners’ communicative competence. At the tertiary level, studies have
revealed that role-play enables students to express themselves by using the target language that they
have just learned, and increases self-confidence to overcome inhibitions in speaking, which can
potentially lead to the improvement of their speaking skills (Ampatuan & San Jose, 2016; Islam &
Islam, 2013). Aliakbari and Jamalvandi (2010) investigated the impact of role-play on fostering
sixty sophomores Iranian EFL learners’ speaking ability by employing the IELTS speaking test as
pre- and post-tests; the study found that learners’ improved significantly in the speaking post-test.
Moreover, in a study involving 26 second-year students majoring in English at the Songkhla
Rajabhat University Thailand, Chotirat and Sinwongsuwat (2014) discovered that, compared to
scripted role-play, non-scripted role play gives learners better opportunities to cope with
conversational issues and practice relevant features of the target language in actual interactions,
indicating better chances to improve their communicative competence. Regular practice of non-
scripted role play also helps improve speaking performance of Thai EFL learners with low and high
levels of English proficiency, especially in turn taking and sequence organizing, the use of turn-
holding, reciprocal greeting, and delay devices in conversational practices (Naksevee &
Sinwongsuwat, 2014).
For adult learners, Magos and Politi (2008) explored the contribution of the role-play technique
in assisting adult immigrants who learn Greek as a second language. The purpose of their study is to
identify the extent of role-play in facilitating the second language acquisition of immigrant
learners. The results suggest the effectiveness of role-play, but also that the success can be affected
by the content of the role-play activity, and the roles and attitudes of teachers and students as an
 Task-Based Language Teaching and Theme-Based Role-Play 157

individual and a group. Teacher’s provision of support at all points of role-play, that is, at the
preparation, beginning, development, and end of the role-play, is also a determining factor in the
success of role-play in teaching a second language. A further study on the implementation of role-
play in teaching speaking for vocational high school students by Insani (2016) found that role-play
activities increased students’ motivation in learning English and helped to create a bridge between
theoretical language features and conversational practices.

3 Methods

3.1 Research design and hypothesis

The present study is essentially a classroom-based research with quantitative research design.
Task-based language teaching was chosen as the teaching approach with theme-based role-play as
one of the tasks. The implementation lasted one term – 12 weeks in English in Cultural Diversity
course at Walailak University, Thailand, in the academic year 2017/18. The details of the course are
explained in the following sub-sections. This study examines the impact of the implementation of
theme-based role-play in task-based language teaching on the development of EFL learners’ com-
municative competence. The research hypothesis is explained below:
H1: Theme-based role-play performances predict the development of communicative compe-
tence.
Regression analysis was selected to examine this hypothesis. Besides, differences in means in
students’ scores were also observed.

3.2 Participants

This study involves first-year students (N = 782; female = 620; and male = 162) who took the
English in Cultural Diversity course at Walailak University in the 2017/18 academic year. The stu-
dents’ majors include 29 undergraduate programs, namely, Accountancy, Animal Science, ASEAN
Studies, Biotechnology, Business Administration, Chinese Language, Communication Arts, Com-
puter Engineering, Digital Information, Economics, Electrical Engineering, English, Environmental
Health, Environmental Science, Fisheries, Food Technology, Information Technology, Interior De-
sign, Marine and Coastal Resource Management, Medical Technology, Medical Technology, Mul-
timedia, Nursing Science, Occupational Health and Safety, Political Science, Polymer Engineering,
Software Engineering, Tourism and Hotel, and Industrial Design.
In terms of English proficiency, most of these students are at the beginners’ level, then followed
by the intermediate and advanced levels, based on the results of the university placement test in
2017 (see Table 1). The proficiency level of ome others remain unidentified.

Table 1. The participants’ English proficiency levels

Score Range Level Number of Students (%)

70 – 100 Advanced 27 (3.5%)
56 – 69 Intermediate 254 (32.5%)
40 – 55 Beginner 420 (53.7%)
Unidentified 81 (10.4%)

3.3 Details of course design

3.3.1 Course objectives and class schedule

158 Budi Waluyo

The English in Cultural Diversity course was designed to advance the acquisition of speaking,
listening, reading, and writing as well as to help students acquire vocabulary and grammar, empha-
sizing the use of language and the presentation of the cultural diversity worldwide, with topics such
as careers, lifestyles, arts and cultures, differences, tourist attractions, cultural exchanges. All the
teaching materials, including the syllabus and textbook, were created by a team consisting of several
English lecturers at Walailak University Language Institute (WULI). Theme-based role-play mate-
rials were integrated into the syllabus and textbook of the English in Cultural Diversity course. This
course involved 12 weeks of classes discussing four topics: Airport, Restaurant, Living Abroad, and
Festivals, Arts and Crafts; all these topics were included in the four units prepared in the student
textbook. In this course, teachers taught one unit in one meeting, then conducting role-play activities
in another meeting; the teaching and learning process followed this pattern from week 2 to 9. In
total, students had to perform four role-plays following the four units. The topic of the role-play
activities followed the unit’s theme; therefore, this course basically adopted a theme-based role-play
approach. Then, the students had the final speaking test in weeks 11 and 12. This course applied
both in- and out-of-classroom activities that involved various ICT tools to enhance the students’
learning. A simple illustration of the class schedule focusing on the materials for role-play activities
is presented in Table 2.

Table 2. Class schedule

Week Material
1 1. Introduction: Lecturer and Students
2. Course Introduction:
• Assessment Summary
• Syllabus
• Vocabulary Sets and Tests
• Weekly learning materials
• Assignments in each unit
3. Creating a Facebook Group for the class.
2 Unit 1: Airport
3 Students perform role-plays under the theme of airport
4 Unit 2: Restaurant
5 Students perform role-plays under the theme of restaurant
6 Unit 3: Living Abroad
7 Students perform role-plays under the theme of living abroad
8 Unit 4: Festivals, Arts, and Crafts
9 Students perform role-plays under the theme of festivals, arts, and crafts
10 Review of Lessons
11 Final Speaking Test (cont.)
12 Final Speaking Test

3.3.2 Role-play instructions

The phases involved in the role-play implementation followed the frameworks of TBLT sug-
gested by Ellis (2009), Littlewood (2004), Long (1985), Nunan (1991), Skehan (1996) and Willis
(1996). The first phase is called ‘pre-task’. In this phase, teachers feed the students with the target
language features commonly used under each theme in the textbook. The language features consist
of grammar and vocabulary, coupled with other supporting materials that facilitate learners’ under-
standings of the discussed theme, for instance, a conversation at airport, a text that contains the
information about airport, pronunciation practice on key words related to airport, and so forth. This
phase provides input for the students before they prepare their role play under each theme. In addi-
tion, students’ role play preparations occur in this first phase outside the classroom, where consul-
tation with their lecturers is feasible.
 Task-Based Language Teaching and Theme-Based Role-Play 159

Then, the second phase consists of students’ role-play performance. One group of students con-
sists of 4–5 students and each group must submit their scripts prior to their performance in class.
This role play performances last 2 hours, in which one group has up to 10 minutes for its perfor-
mance. During their performance, students can bring any supporting materials that can enhance their
performance, such as hat, dress, plate, spoon, and so forth. Besides, the classroom is equipped with
Internet connection, projector, computer, and speaker, so that the students may show pictures or
play music as part of their performance. After each group’s performance, teachers give feedback
regarding the target language used by the students during their role-play; the feedback can focus on
pronunciation, choice of word, grammar, and so forth. The last phase is named ‘post-task’, which
comprises discussions of the role-play activities, such as the obstacles that they students face, issues
in the student groups, and so forth. Basically, the purpose of this phase is to reflect on what the
students have been through and what the students can do to improve their performance in the next
role-play.

Table 3. Phases of role-play

Phases of Role-Play Teacher’s role Details

Pre-Task Feed the students with 1) Vocabulary and pronunciation, e.g. aisle,
the target language boarding pass, departure lounge, passport,
features commonly used luggage, etc. (theme: airport)
under each theme in the
textbook 2) Grammar: preposition, adjective,
Wh-questions, etc.

3) Listening and reading, e.g. listening to a

conversation between a customer and airport
office, reading a text about eating out in
America

Role-Play Performance Facilitate students’ role- Students can bring any supporting materials that
play performances and can enhance their performance, such as hat,
ensure the availability of dress, plate, spoon, etc.
required equipment, such
as computer, projector,
and speaker.

Post-task - Give feedback regarding the target language used by the students during
their role-play; the feedback can focus on pronunciation, choice of word,
grammar, etc.
- Feedback or corrections are given after each group’s performance

The specific instructions for each role-play activity are available in each unit of the student’s
textbook. The instructions provide students with a list of situations that they can perform; yet the
students also have the freedom to create their own situations. This theme-based role-play activity
attempts to engage students with language practice in ‘real-world’ situations that people will gener-
ally encounter under the theme. For instance, one of the suggested situations under the theme of
Airport is contacting the Lost and Found unit at the airport. After performing a role play in this
situation, it is expected that the students would be able to communicate by using the target language
when they happen to be in such situation. Also, for the students who view the role-play performance,
they would get a visualization of how the situation might occur and how to use the target language.
160 Budi Waluyo

Table 4. Example of one of the role-play instructions included in the student’s textbook

Location Airport
Situations 1. Contacting Lost and Found
2. Missing the flight
3. Booking a ticket online
4. Renting a taxi
5. Filling up an arrival card
6. Complaining about damaged luggage

Preparation 1. Select your team leader, who will lead the discussion.
2. Design the conversations that you will use in your selected situation.
3. Discuss the roles of each member.
4. Choose your script writer and your director(s).
5. Prepare some tools and customs that fit your selected situation.

Script 1. Must be submitted 2 days before the class.

2. Made using MyStoryBook.com, so students just need to share the URL link with
teacher on Facebook Group.
3. Along with the script, each group submits 10 multiple-choice questions for audi-
ence about their role play.

Presentation 1. Present your 10-minute role-play in class.

2. Perform your Role-Play using your own original script. Copied or semi-modified
script from other sections or groups shall automatically get 0 POINT if proven.
3. On the performing day, the lecturer would randomly call each group. If the group is
not ready, that group would get 0 point.
4. If a member in each group has an accident or severe illness on the performing day,
other members in the group must be able to perform without the missing person.

3.3.3 Final speaking test

All four role-play activities under the four themes in the textbook are designed as a form of
speaking practice for the students. The development of students’ communicative competence is ex-
pected to be visible during the final speaking test. The format of the final speaking test is an indi-
vidual interview, which involves three parts: 1) personal information (general questions and specific
questions on the course materials; 2) reading aloud words, phrases, sentences, and paragraphs,
which are taken from the course materials; 3) communicating and expressing ideas spontaneously
based on one selected picture, related to the course materials.

3.3.4 Research data and assessment rubrics

Students’ role-play performances and the final speaking test are assessed using scoring rubrics.
The students’ scores obtained through these scoring rubrics are the primary data used in the present
study. First, the scoring rubric for role-play consists of five criteria: vocabulary use, fluency, accu-
racy, interaction, and creativity, preparedness, and prompts. The score range includes .5, 1, 1.5, and
2, which means that in total, the lowest score is 2.5 and 10 is the highest score. In the assessment
rubric, each point has detailed descriptions. Then, for the final speaking test, the scoring rubric also
contains five criteria: content, vocal expression, presentation, fluency and accuracy, and listening
skill (in conversational situations). The score range also starts from .5, followed by 1, 1.5, and 2. So,
the lowest score is also 2.5 and 10 is the highest score. The details of the assessment rubrics are
presented in Tables 5 and 6.
 Task-Based Language Teaching and Theme-Based Role-Play 161

Table 5. The assessment rubric of student’s role-play performance

Criteria 0.5 1 1.5 2

Vocabulary Inadequate use of The students make The students make The students make
Use vocabulary use of an adequate use of a wide range use of a wide range
range of vocabulary of vocabulary and a of vocabulary and a
limited number of wide number of
language expres- language expres-
sions sions
Fluency Hesitation, repeti- Hesitation, repeti- The student only The students only
tion, and self-cor- tion, and self-cor- shows occasional show occasional
rection are frequent rection are often, hesitation, repeti- hesitation, repeti-
and hinder effective but the messages tion, and self-cor- tion, and self-cor-
communication are generally under- rection rection
standable
Accuracy The students make The students make The students make The students’
many grammatical less frequent gram- a few grammatical speech is generally
errors which make matical errors errors and show error-free
the message non- which make the control over the er-
comprehensible message generally rors
understandable
Interaction The students coop- The students coop- The students coop- The students coop-
erate deficiently erate actively with erate actively with erate actively with
with each other each other, but mis- each other, but each other
communications some miscommuni-
happen many times cations happen in
one or two parts
Creativity, The students lack The students show The students show The students show
prepared- of creativity/show one or two creative some levels creativ- high levels of crea-
ness, and predictable acts that acts in their ity/unpredictable tivity/unpredictable
prompts disengage the audi- roles/characters; acts in their acts in their
ence; no costume seem not very well- roles/characters; roles/characters;
and supporting ma- prepared; use more seem prepared; use seem well-pre-
terial than one custom/ more than two cos- pared; use more
less than two sup- tume pieces and than two costume
porting materials other supporting pieces and other
materials supporting materi-
als

Table 6. The assessment rubric of the final speaking test

Criteria Scores
0.5 1 1.5 2
(Fair) (Average) (Good) (Excellent)
Content (Able to provide relevant answers to the topic
with explanation and/or supported ideas provided)
Vocal expression (clarity and audibility) (Able to
pronounce the words, phrases, sentences and
paragraphs clearly and correctly)
Presentation (Able to show strong self-confidence and
uses proper posture, gesture and eye contact)
Fluency and accuracy (Able to express
himself/herself in English fluently and accurately)
Listening Skill (Able to comprehend the given
instructions and perform correctly the given tasks)
162 Budi Waluyo

4 Results and discussion

4.1 Results

A linear regression analysis was run to predict the development of students’ communicative
competence in the final speaking test based on their theme-based role-play performances. The re-
sults (see Table 7) revealed a significant regression equation: F (1, 780) = 31.783, p < .001, with R2
= .039. Students’ predicted final speaking test scores were equal to 4.921 + .261 in role-play scores,
when role-play is measured in the range of 2.5–10. About 39% of the variance in the final speaking
tests can be explained by role-play performances. Students’ final speaking test scores increased .26
for each score in their role-play performances. These results accepted the alternative hypothesis that
theme-based role-play performances predicted the development of communicative competence in
the final speaking test.

Table 7. Regression analysis results on the development of communicative competence

Model Summary

R R Square Adjusted R Square Std. Error of the

Estimate

.198a .039 .038 1.2023

ANOVA

Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Regression 45.939 1 45.939 31.783 .000b
Residual 1127.428 780 1.445
Total 1173.367 781

Coefficients

Predictor B SE B Β t Sig. (p)

Theme-based role play performances .261 .046 .198 5.64 .000

Differences in means were also explored to expose the development of learners’ communicative
competence across the four theme-based role-plays (see Table 8). The findings displayed that dif-
ferences in means existed in the data, but the trends fluctuated among the role-plays. The scores
increased slightly in the second role-play, then making a small decline in the third role-play, before
showing an increase again in the last role-play. The third and fourth role-plays had the lowest scores
at 2.5, while the first and second role-plays had lowest scores of 3.5 and 3.0 respectively. The highest
variance occurred in the fourth role-play (S2 = 1.503), and the lowest one was evident in the second
role-play (S2 = 1.149).

Table 8. Descriptive statistics (N = 782)

Role-Play Role-Play Role-Play Role-Play Role-Play Final

1 2 3 4 (Average) Speaking Test
Mean 6.92 7.05 6.92 7.15 7 6.75
SD 1.20 1.07 1.22 1.23 .93 1.23
Variance 1.44 1.15 1.48 1.50 .87 1.50
Minimum 3.5 3 2.5 2.5 4.3 2.5
Maximum 10 10 9.5 10 10 9
 Task-Based Language Teaching and Theme-Based Role-Play 163

To obtain more detailed information about students’ development, the results based on the scor-
ing rubrics of role-play and final speaking test were analyzed. The criteria of the rubrics were used
to help illustrate students’ development across the four theme-based role-play performances and in
the final speaking test. The analyses put the cut-off point at 7.5 and higher to distinguish students
who had made good development; below 7.5 was considered average and fair in terms of develop-
ment. From this analysis of the role-plays, it was found that the number of students who received
7.5 or higher varied across the four role-plays: 327 in the first role play, 349 in the second role play,
339 in the third role play, and 137 in the fourth role-play. The trend showed an increase from the
first to the second yet declining in the third and fourth role-plays.
As an illustration, students who obtained 7.5 or higher used a wide range of vocabulary and
language expressions, showed occasional hesitation, repetition, and self-correction, made a very few
grammatical errors, interacted each other actively, and displayed high levels of creativity in their
roles/characters. Moreover, in the final speaking test, there were 288 students who obtained 7.5 or
higher. These students were able to provide relevant answers to the topic with good explanations,
had good clarity and audibility in pronunciation, showed strong self-confidence and proper gestures
and eye-contact, displayed good fluency and accuracy in English expressions, and comprehended
the given instructions well reflected in their performances on tasks. Figure 1 provides the detailed
number of students within each score range in the various rubrics.

Fig. 1. Number of students for each score range reflected in the rubrics (N = 782)

600
500
400
300
200
100
0
Final
Role Play
Role Play 1 Role Play 2 Role Play 3 Role Play 4 Speaking
(Ave)
Test
(2.5 - 4.5) 34 16 39 21 16 39
(5 - 7) 421 417 404 363 524 455
(7.5 - 9.5) 311 346 339 393 242 278
10 16 3 0 5 0 10

In terms of proficiency levels, the differences in means showed that theme-based role-play had
more effect on students at the intermediate level. The means of students’ scores reflected an increas-
ing trend across the four role-plays and in the final speaking test. On the contrary, fluctuations were
found in the means of students’ scores at the beginners’ and the advanced levels.
164 Budi Waluyo

Table 9. The means of students’ scores based on proficiency levels

Level Role- Role- Role- Role- Role-Play Final Speaking

Play 1 Play 2 Play 3 Play 4 (Ave) Test
Unidentified Mean 6.704 6.667 6.383 6.864 6.654 4.685
N 81 81 81 81 81 81
Std. Deviation 1.2010 1.0398 1.1839 .9843 .7956 .4216
Beginner Mean 6.764 6.946 6.731 6.968 6.853 6.419
N 420 420 420 420 420 420
Std. Deviation 1.2254 1.1130 1.1933 1.2563 .8956 .6028
Intermediate Mean 7.317 7.364 7.469 7.579 7.432 8.104
N 254 254 254 254 254 254
Std. Deviation 1.0161 .9134 1.0210 1.1267 .8404 .5897
Advanced Mean 6.352 6.759 6.222 6.639 6.494 5.259
N 27 27 27 27 27 27
Std. Deviation 1.5116 1.1959 1.5021 1.2410 1.2110 .2546
Total Mean 6.923 7.047 6.917 7.145 7.008 6.747
N 782 782 782 782 782 782
Std. Deviation 1.2017 1.0720 1.2182 1.2261 .9308 1.2257

4.2 Discussion

The results of this study sustain the hypothesis that students’ performances in theme-based role-
play predict the development of their communicative competence. As the superiority of TBLT lies
in the opportunities to promote oral language production and facilitating meaning-negotiation (Win-
nefeld, 2013) and advance learner’s fluency and complexity in the target language (Rahimpour,
2008), the outcomes of the regression analysis in this study encourage the implementation of theme-
based role-play for developing EFL learners’ communicative competence. Theme-based role-play
has the potential to fulfil the expectations of using tasks in language teaching, such as facilitating
learners to communicate in the target language (Ellis, 2009; Nunan,1991; Willis, 1996) and engag-
ing learners in a naturalistic learning process that enables them to use the target language frequently
(Skehan, 1996). Role-play tasks enhance learning through frequent use of the target language in
contextual situations, so that immediate comprehension of how to express meanings in the target
language can be grasped by learners, which may help learners improve their communicative com-
petence after several role-play performances (Ampatuan & San Jose, 2016; Aliakbari & Jamalvandi
(2010); Islam & Islam, 2013). Simply, theme-based role-play can be an alternative in creating ef-
fective learning by engaging learners in a communicative language task in task-based teaching.
In the present study, fluctuations in students’ performances appeared across the four theme-
based role-plays. It is argued that role-play topics and teacher’ roles in the three phases of role-play
(pre-tas, during role-play performance, and post-task) might influence students’ performances. For
instance, regarding the role-play topics, the first and second topics are Airport and Restaurants,
while the third and fourth topics are Living Abroad and Festivals, Arts, and Crafts. The topics of
Airport and Restaurant could be familiar contexts to students, where they might have had direct or
indirect experiences for both topics. On the other hand, the first-year students who participated in
this study might not be familiar with the “experiences” of Living Abroad, since they had just com-
pleted high school. Thus, as reflected in the differences in means, students’ performances improved
from role-play 1 to role-play 2, but declining in role-play 3. The performances showed some im-
provement again in role-play 4, since the topic is about Festivals, Arts, and Crafts, which is arguably
close to Thai students’ life.
Besides, in the present study, teachers were involved in the three phases of role-play: pre-task,
during role-play performance, and post-task. Teacher’s roles in these phases might have contributed
to students’ communicative competence development. For instance, in the pre-task session, teachers
fed the students with the target language features commonly used under each theme in the textbook,
encompassing vocabulary and pronunciation, grammar points, listening, and reading. Then, during
 Task-Based Language Teaching and Theme-Based Role-Play 165

the role-play performance, teachers facilitated and ensured the availability of required equipment,
such as computer, projector, and speaker, while encouraging the students to bring any supporting
materials that can enhance their performance, such as hat, dress, plate, spoon, and so forth. In the
post-task, teachers became more crucial, as they gave direct feedback to the students right after their
performance. The schemes of corrections involved feedback on the target language used by the
students during their role-play, primarily focusing on pronunciation, choice of word, grammar, and
so forth. The relevance of the-role play topic to learners’ learning goals, teacher’s elaboration on
the appropriate language used in the role-play, schemes of error corrections, and teacher’s role in
the role-play affect the success of using role-play as a task in task-based teaching (Liu & Ding,
2009).
This study is consistent with the findings of previous studies that found the positive impact of
role-play on enhancing learners’ communicative competence at the university level (Aliakbari &
Jamalvandi, 2010; Ampatuan & San Jose, 2016; Islam & Islam, 2013). Nonetheless, although not
specifically explored, it suggests the benefit of using scripted role-play in task-based teaching, dif-
ferent from the findings of previous studies that showed the superiority of non-scripted role play
over scripted role-play (Chotirat & Sinwongsuwat, 2014; Naksevee & Sinwongsuwat, 2014). In the
use of theme-based role-play in task-based teaching, one should also consider: 1) the role-play de-
sign, including topics and contents of role-play activities; 2) the roles of students as an individual
and a group; 3) teachers’ provision of support from preparation, beginning, development, until the
end of play (Magos & Politi, 2008). Providing that role-play stimulates authentic conversational
interactions in different social contexts and social roles (Al-Senaidi, 2010; Richards, 1985), appro-
priate role-play designs and plans that fit learners’ situational needs of the target language both in
knowledge and practice can help create a bridge between theoretical language features and conver-
sational practices (Insani, 2016).
Another purpose of the present study is to contribute to the practice of task-based teaching in
actual classrooms. The findings of this study indicate the benefits of using theme-based role-play
for developing learners’ communicative competence. Some would argue that role-play does not
offer anything, and is but an artificial activity that does not really reflect real world language needs
(e.g. Shapiro & Leopold, 2012); however, this study explored students’ communicative competence
development in two parts: students’ performances across the four role-plays and students’ perfor-
mances during the final speaking test, which is an individual interview. Additionally, as explained
earlier, the assessment rubrics not only encompassed technical points, such as content, presentation,
preparedness, prompts, creativity, and vocal expression, but also included the assessment of vocab-
ulary use, fluency, and accuracy. All these points were intentionally prepared to ensure that, alt-
hough theme-based role-plays are essentially an artificial and planned activity, students still gained
useful knowledge and practical experience that were required in communicating in particular con-
texts, such as when they are at the airport, in a restaurant, or studying abroad.

5 Conclusion

Given that the primary goal of language teaching is to develop communicative competence,
theme-based role-play offers opportunities for teachers to promote oral language production and
create authentic conversational interactions in various social situations and roles in classroom. It can
serve as a means of realizing meaningful classroom language practice in task-based teaching. For
effective implementation, attention should be paid to the role-play designs and plans as well as the
roles of students and teachers. The three basic goals underlying task-based teaching can be used as
guidelines, in which accuracy, complexity, and fluency should be considered in the development of
learners’ communicative competence. Role-play tasks should enable learners to form a connection
between in-class language learning and the use of the target language outside the classroom.
Furthermore, the present study has some pedagogical implications. As pointed out by previous
studies, teachers are still struggling with the implementation of TBLT in classroom practices (Yen,
2016). Limited dissemination of principles and procedures of TBLT (Plews & Zhao, 2010), and a
166 Budi Waluyo

lack of familiarity with task design and restrictions from textbook (Jasim, 2011) are among the
obstacles and challenges faced by teachers. At this point, the present study contributes to the dis-
semination of principles and procedures of TBLT in classroom practices through theme-based role-
play. Nonetheless, the success of role-play as a task in TBLT may be influenced by the relevance of
role-play topics to learners’ backgrounds, scripted or non-scripted role-play, and the teacher’s role
in the role-play. Although role-play is an artificial activity, teachers must ensure that the language
features practiced by students are real-world language required in the performed contexts.
It is acknowledged that this study could have provided more detailed information, if it had col-
lected students’ and teachers’ perceptions of the implementation of theme-based role-play for de-
veloping communicative competence. In this instance, the findings of this study should be under-
stood in a limited context that requires interpretations of students’ scores in role-play performances
on the development of their communicative competence. This research could have adopted experi-
mental research designs, such as controlled group versus experimental group or pre- and post-tests;
nevertheless, due to the inflexibility of the course, which involved forty classes, and foreign and
Thai lecturers, it was not possible to include experimental research designs. Hence, future studies
are encouraged to further explore the potential of role-play as a communicative task in task-based
teaching through different ways of interpretations and research designs.

References
Abidin, M. J. Z., & Hosseini, M. S. (2012). Role-play: Taking the line of least resistance. International Journal
of Learning and Development, 2(2), 258–270.
Adams, R., & Newton, J. (2009). TBLT in Asia: Constraints and opportunities. Asian Journal of English Lan-
guage Teaching, 19(1), 1–17.
Aflah, M. N., Salam, U., & Sada, C. (2015). Implementing task-based language teaching in speaking class to
hospitality students at Alpha University Pontianak. Jurnal Pendidikan dan Pembelajaran, 4(12).
Aliakbari, M., & Jamalvandi, B. (2010). The impact of" role play" on fostering EFL learners' speaking ability:
A task-based approach. Journal of Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics, 14(1), 15–29.
Al-Senaidi, S. A. (2010). Using role play to promote oral fluency. Retrieved from http://citese-
erx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.613.9510&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Ampatuan, R. A., & San Jose, A. E. (2016). Role play as an approach in developing students communicative
competence. International Journal for Innovation Education and Research, 4(1), 18–24.
Astika, G. (2005). A task-based approach to reading English for specialised purposes. English Australia Jour-
nal, 22(2), 22.
Carless, D. R. (2009). Revisiting the TBLT versus PPP debate: Voices from Hong Kong. Asian Journal of
English Language Teaching, 19, 49–66.
Carless, D. (2004). Issues in teachers' reinterpretation of a task-based innovation in primary schools. Tesol
Quarterly, 38(4), 639–662.
Carless, D. R. (2003). Factors in the implementation of task-based teaching in primary schools. System, 31(4),
485-500.
Chotirat, S., & Sinwongsuwat, K. (2014). Effects of scripted and non-scripted role play activities on oral per-
formance: A case study of repair organization in conversation of Thai college students. In Proceedings of
The 3rd International Conference on Humanities and Social Sciences (pp. 1–16). Songkla: Faculty of Liberal
Arts, Prince of Songkla University.
Chunrao, D. E. N. G., & Carless, D. (2009). The communicativeness of activities in a task-based innovation in
Guangdong, China. Asian Journal of English Language Teaching, 19, 113–134.
Comer, W. (2007). Implementing task-based teaching from the ground up: Considerations for lesson planning
and classroom practice. Russian Language Journal/Русский язык, 57, 181–203.
Córdoba Zúñiga, E. (2016). Implementing task-based language teaching to integrate language skills in an EFL
program at a Colombian University. Profile Issues in Teachers Professional Development, 18(2), 13–27.
Dirgeyasa, I. W. (2018). The effect of task based language teaching (TBLT) on tertiary TESOL learners aca-
demic writing achievement. Journal of Education and Learning (Edu Learn), 12(1), 97–104.
Dorathy, A. A., & Mahalakshmi, S. N. (2011). Second language acquisition through task-based approach–role-
play in English language teaching. English for Specific Purposes World, 11(33), 1–7.
Douglas, S. R., & Kim, M. (2015). Task-based language teaching and English for academic purposes: An
investigation into instructor perceptions and practice in the Canadian context. TESL Canada Journal, 31(8),
1–22.
 Task-Based Language Teaching and Theme-Based Role-Play 167

Ellis, R. (2009). Task-based language teaching: Sorting out the misunderstandings. International Journal of
Applied Linguistics, 19(3), 221–246.
Fotos, S., & Ellis, R. (1991). Communicating about grammar: A task-based approach. TESOL quarterly, 25(4),
605–628.
Ghodrati, M., Ashraf, H., & Khalil, M. (2014). Improvement of Iranian EFL learners’ autonomy through task-
based speaking activities. International Journal of Multidisciplinary and Current Research, 2(4), 1002–1008.
Hasan, A. A. A. (2014). The effect of using task-based learning in teaching English on the oral performance of
the secondary school students. International Interdisciplinary Journal of Education, 3(2), 250–264.
Insani, H. D. (2016). The portrayal of the role-play implementation in teaching speaking to the students of
tourism study program. Journal of English and Education, 2(2), 1–13.
Islam, P., & Islam, T. (2013). Effectiveness of role play in enhancing the speaking skills of the learners in a
large classroom: An investigation of tertiary level students. Stamford Journal of English, 7, 218–233.
Jasim, I. A. (2011). Investigating teachers' attitudes toward task-based language teaching in a vocational
school in the UAE (Unpublished M.A. thesis). American University of Sharjah, Sharjah, UAE.
Jeon, I. J., & Hahn, J. W. (2006). Exploring EFL teachers' perceptions of task-based language teaching: A case
study of Korean secondary school classroom practice. Asian EFL Journal, 8(1), 123–143.
Jeon, I. J. (2005). An analysis of task-based materials and performance: Focused on Korean high school English
textbooks. 영어교육, 60(2), 87–108.
Kelch, K., & Yang, J. (2008). Integrating the task-based approach into content curriculum. CATESOL Journal,
20(1), 135–145.
Khomeyjani, F. A., & Khaghaninezhad, M. S. (2009). A study of task-based approach: The effects of task-
based techniques, gender, and different levels of language proficiency on speaking development. Pazhuhesh-
e Zabanha-ye Khareji, 49, 23–41.
Lai, C., & Li, G. (2011). Technology and task-based language teaching: A critical review. CALICO Journal,
28(2), 498.
Littlewood, W. (2004). The task-based approach: Some questions and suggestions. ELT Journal, 58(4), 319–
326.
Liu, F., & Ding, Y. (2009). Role-play in English language teaching. Asian Social Science, 5(10), 140–143.
Long, M. H. (1985). A role for instruction in second language acquisition: Task-based language teaching.
Modelling and assessing second language acquisition, 18, 77–99.
Magos, K., & Politi, F. (2008). The creative second language lesson: The contribution of the role-play tech-
nique to the teaching of a second language in immigrant classes. RELC Journal, 39(1), 96–112.
Marashi, H., & Hatam, G. (2009). Using tasks in a content-based program: Does it enhance vocabulary learn-
ing? Journal of Teaching English as a Foreign Language and Literature, 1(4), 73–91.
McDonough, K., & Chaikitmongkol, W. (2007). Teachers' and learners' reactions to a task-based EFL course
in Thailand. TESOL Quarterly, 41(1), 107–132.
Naksevee, N., & Sinwongsuwat, K. (2014). Non-scripted role-play: A better practice for Thai EFL college
students’ speaking skills. The TFLTA Journal, 5, 80–91.
Nunan, D. (1991). Communicative tasks and the language curriculum. TESOL Quarterly, 25(2), 279–295.
Oxford, R. L. (2006). Task-based language teaching and learning: An overview. Asian EFL Journal, 8(3), 94–
121.
Patel, Y. L. (2017). Task-based approach in second language teaching: Role-play in the classroom. When Chil-
dren Interact with Like-minded Adults, 8(2), 18–23.
Pei, C. (2008). Task-based language teaching in classrooms: A study of Chinese EFL teacher practice. CELEA
Journal (Bimonthly), 31(6), 102–112.
Plews, J. L., & Zhao, K. (2010). Tinkering with tasks knows no bounds: ESL teachers’ adaptations of task-
based language-teaching. TESL Canada Journal, 28(1), 41.
Pourdana, N., Karimi Behbahani, M., & Safdari, M. (2011). The impact of task types on aspects of Iranian EFL
learners' writing performance: Accuracy, fluency, and complexity. International Proceedings of Economics
Development and Research, 20, 261–265.
Qing, X. U. (2011). Role play-an effective approach to developing overall communicative competence. Cross-
Cultural Communication, 7(4), 36–39.
Rahimpour, M. (2008). Implementation of task-based approaches to language teaching. Pazhuhesh-e Zabanha-
ye Khareji, 41, 45–61.
Rahmani, A., & Alavi, M. (2017). Comparing the impact of culturally laden task-based language teaching
(TBLT) and content-based language teaching (CBLT) on Iranian intermediate learners' Speaking improve-
ment. Journal of Teaching English Language Studies, 5(3), 69–88.
168 Budi Waluyo

Richards, J. C. (2005). Communicative language teaching today. SEAMEO Regional Language Centre.
Richards, J. C. (1985). Conversational competence through role play activities. RELC Journal, 16(1), 82–91.
Robinson, P. (2005). Cognitive complexity and task sequencing: Studies in a componential framework for
second language task design. IRAL-International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 43(1),
1–32.
Sabet, M. K., Tahriri, A., & Haghi, E. B. (2014). The impact of task-based approach on Iranian EFL learners.
Motivation in writing research abstracts. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 5(4), 953.
Savignon, S. J. (2018). Communicative competence. The TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching,
1–7.
Savignon, S. J. (1991). Communicative language teaching: State of the art. TESOL Quarterly, 25(2), 261–278.
Sakai, S., & Takagi, A. (2009). Relationship between learner autonomy and English language proficiency of
Japanese learners. The Journal of Asia TEFL, 6(3), 297–325.
Shapiro, S., & Leopold, L. (2012). A critical role for role-playing pedagogy. TESL Canada Journal, 29(2),
120–130.
Skehan, P. (1998). Task-based instruction. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 18, 268–286.
Skehan, P. (1996). A framework for the implementation of task-based instruction. Applied linguistics, 17(1),
38–62.
Skehan, P., Willis, E. J., & Willis, D. (1996). Second language acquisition research and task-based instruction.
Readings in Methodology, 13–23.
Swan, M. (2005). Legislation by hypothesis: The case of task-based instruction. Applied Linguistics, 26(3),
376–401.
Willis, J. (1996). A flexible framework for task-based learning. In D. Willis & J. Willis (Eds.), Challenge and
change in language teaching (pp. 52-62). Oxford, England: Heinemann.
Winnefeld, J. (2013). Task-based language learning in bilingual Montessori elementary schools: Customizing
foreign language learning and promoting L2 speaking skills. Linguistik online, 54(4), 69–82
Xiongyong, C., & Moses, S. (2011). Perceptions and implementation of task-based language teaching among
secondary school EFL teachers in China. International Journal of Business and Social Science, 2(24), 292–
302.
Yen, P. H. (2016). Challenges of shifting to task-based language teaching: A story from a Vietnamese teacher.
Can Tho University Journal of Science, 2, 37–45.
Yildiz, M., & Senel, M. (2017). Teaching grammar through task-based language teaching to young EFL learn-
ers. The Reading Matrix: An International Online Journal, 17(2), 196–209.

View publication stats