INVESTIGATING ENGLISH TEACHERS PERCEPTIONS AND PRACTICES OF TBLT IN THREE SECONDARY SCHOOLS IN AWI ZONE

Ketema Addis¹⁺ --- Abiy Yigzaw²

¹Mizan Tepi University Department of Foreign Language and Literature, Ethiopia

²Department of English, Faculty of Humanities, Bahir Dar University, Ethiopia

Keywords:Teachers’ perception Task based language teaching (TBLT) Classroom Challenges of implementing TBLT Possibilities of implementing TBLT Practice of TBLT.

ARTICLE HISTORY: Received:6 June 2018 Revised:17 August 2018 Accepted:22 August 2018 Published:27 August 2018.

Contribution/ Originality: This study is one of very few studies which have investigated teachers’ perceptions and practice in high school level. Language instructors’ perceptions of language teaching process have a great influence on what they actually do in practice; therefore, this study proven empirically in terms of its classroom practice in school foreign language learning contexts.

1. INTRODUCTION

English is one of the languages, which is widely spoken all over the world. Many people use the English language for social, economic and political purposes, it is also used as a medium of instruction in schools of many developing countries, even in Ethiopia, and it is incorporated into the local curriculum and taught as a subject. In these days, in Ethiopian schools English is given as a language that students learn at all levels from primary to tertiary levels.

In the history of English language teaching, different methods of language teaching have been observed. These methods vary from Grammar translation method, which focuses on lesson, organized around grammar points (Richards and Rodgers, 1986 ) to communicative language teaching method, which pays systematic attention to functional as well as structural aspects of language (Little-Wood, 1981 ). The origin of communicative language teaching (CLT) is to be found in the changes in the British language teaching tradition dating from the late 1960s. Moreover, Communicative Language Teaching marked a new phase in second or foreign language teaching. This is because it is the first method that begins from what the language does, not from what it is Richards and Rodgers (1986 ). In contrast to the grammar-based methodology in which primary emphasis is on mastering grammatical rules, the main concern of the communicative methodology is how to use those grammatical rules to produce a meaningful language (Richards and Rodgers, 1986 ). In short, the target of Communicative Language Teaching is to develop the communicative competence. This method is introduced in the existing curriculum of Ethiopia. Textbooks for different grade levels have been prepared based on this approach. The underlying assumption of using this method i.e. a shift in focus from form to function has the potential of bringing many changes in the classroom.

Nunan (2004 ) indicated that the highest goal of learning English is to communicate effectively. The communicative approach recommends teaching English through enjoyable activities (Willis, 1996 ). The communicative approach allows learners to express their ideas while practicing and using language.

However, in the teaching of English as a Foreign Language in Ethiopian classes, we observe many problems in its implementation. As a result, students do not use the language effectively for communication. Various studies were conducted in our context regarding this point. Hailom (1982 ) indicated that students who join higher institutes lack the language skills that their level demands. He stated that first year students of Addis Ababa University had serious problems in understanding and in using English language. According to the study, the percentage of total failure was 55.71. This data shows how severe the problem is.

Alamirew (1992 ) also says, “--- in spite of the number of years the students are exposed to English, their proficiency in all four skills of the language is low.” The report for freshman programme in the college of social sciences, Addis Ababa University, reveals the same problem (Gebremedihin, 1993 ). According to the report, the performance for first year students of the college in English was the lowest and it is the main factor for most dismissal cases. He asserts that the students are poor in their English and lack confidence in their ability to operate.

This is because as Willis (2004 ) states, "Weak form of Communicative Language Teaching still did not seem to offer a significant improvement on the structural approach in terms of the achievement of communicative competence." Therefore, to solve these problems Task-Based Language Teaching is evolved recently (Willis, 2004 ). According to Nunan (2004 ). Task-Based Learning provides many advantages in teaching English as a Foreign Language (TEFL) because it promotes learning and creates variety for the students. However, it is still working method in our country and it is being introduced to a certain extent in different level.

Tagesse (2008 ) conducted his MA thesis on the general practicability of task-based instruction in higher institutions. This research was conducted on two colleges in Addis Ababa, namely Kotebe College of Teacher Education and Addis Ababa Commercial College. The researcher found out that Task-Based Language Teaching is practical to some extent but there are some problems in implementing the Task-Based Language Teaching based on its fundamental principles. Problems in teaching and learning English as a Foreign Language (EFL) relate to both teachers and learners. This problem is partly affected by teaching methods. Lochana and Deb (2006 ) stated that most EFL teachers teach language by lecturing and focusing on grammatical rules instead of language use. It is much more effective to teach language from context and meaning (Ellis, 2003 ).

It also suggests that TBLT as an instructional method is more than just giving tasks to learners and evaluating their performance. More importantly, the teacher, who wants to try implementing TBLT successfully, is required to have sufficient knowledge about the instructional framework related to its plan, procedure, and assessment.

In consideration of the problems and the importance of teaching and learning of English, The current study also aims to find out what teachers think of TBLT, then what actually happens in the classroom regarding the implementation of TBLT and the challenges and possibilities for teachers to explore Task-Based approach to English teaching.

1.1. Statement of the Problem

Language teaching has undergone a number of phases in using different approaches and methods because of continuous development and change of knowledge in the world. Among the many methods, one is Task-Based Language Teaching method. In Task-Based Language Teaching method, language is taught through tasks, and learners are expected to pick up the language unconsciously. Many scholars believed that, language learning depends on immersing students not only in 'comprehensible input' but also in tasks that require them to negotiate meaning and to engage in naturalistic and meaningful communication. While students are engaged in such kinds of tasks, which need their cognitive abilities, it is assumed that they will develop both accuracy and fluency of the language (Richards and Rodgers, 2001 ; Ellis, 2003 ; Willis, 2004 ). In spite of its uses, TBLT has got some challenges of implementation. Some teachers do not implement it as it was intended. They are tempted to insert a grammar presentation stage into the lesson before students do the task. The teaching method run for spoon-fed by their teachers with language at all stages (Lopes, 2004 ).

On the other hand, much of the work done in the area of TBLT, has focused on the definitions of task, the role of tasks in second language acquisition (Skehan, 1996a ; Ellis, 2000 ) different task types (e.g. Skehan and Foster (1997 )) task repetition, and task difficulty. However, there is little practical discussion of how language teachers perceive Task Based Instruction whereas language instructors’ perceptions of language teaching process has a great influence on what they actually do in practice. Jeon and Hahn (2006 ) stated TBLT has not yet been sufficiently researched or proven empirically in terms of its classroom practice in school foreign language learning contexts.

Tagesse (2008 ) however finds out that, there are many misconceptions and uncertainties about the implementation of the Task-Based Language Teaching in practice. Why and how this misconception occurred? This may be the result of the perception of teachers and students, which later influence their classroom practice, this is also another gap that this study intends to fill. As Borg (2001 ) indicates that teachers have vast and complex understanding about pedagogical issues which latter influence their classroom practice.

There are different factors affecting the practice of Task-Based Language Teaching Method in Ethiopian context. From my observation, most students did not understand and use the language correctly and most EFL teachers often provide insufficient opportunities for learners to practice the target language. This is reflected in their achievement; their scores are very low in all English language skills. Students usually hesitate to speak English because they have problems of using accurate, fluent and complex language. As stated in the background of the study some of the factors like the perceptions of teachers in high school have not been assessed yet. Thus, the researcher of this study tries to investigate particularly the perception and practice of EFL teachers in Task-Based Language Teaching.

Despite its educational benefits in language learning contexts, a task in itself does not necessarily guarantee its successful implementation unless the teacher, the facilitator and controller of the task performance, know (or perceive correctly) how tasks actually work in the classroom.

Nevertheless, none of these studies was actually intended to examine the perceptions of teachers on Task-Based Language Teaching on high school level. Therefore, based on the assumption that teacher’s perception may affect the implementation of Task-Based Language Teaching method, the researcher is initiated to conduct this research. It is also believed that the research will fill this gap. This study tries to investigate teachers' perception and practice of Task-Based Language Teaching with particular reference to three secondary high schools.

1.2. Research Questions

This study has attempted to investigate Awi Zone EFL teachers’ perceptions and their implementation of Task-Based Language Teaching. For this purpose, the following questions were formulated;

• What are the teachers’ perceptions about Task-Based Language Teaching?
• How are these perceptions reflected in their class room teaching practices?
• What are the challenges and possibilities of the implementation of TBLT in their class room teaching practices?

1.3. Objectives of the Study

1.3.1 General Objective of the Study

The main objective of this study was to investigate English teachers’ perceptions and practices of TBLT in secondary schools.

1.3.2. Specific Objectives of the Study

The specific objectives of the research were:

• To investigate teachers’ perceptions on Task-Based Language Teaching.
• To examine how teachers’ perceptions are reflected in their class room teaching practices.
• To identify the challenges and possibilities in the implementation of TBLT in their class room teaching practices.

1.4. Significance of the Study

The result of this study is believed to have potential contribution to the following groups.

• Helping teachers’ better understanding of TBLT, its theories, methods and implementation.
• Secondary schools use the results of this study as a resource for improvement in TBLT practices.
• To give valuable information for syllabus designers and material developers.
• For researchers to use it as a resource for further studies.

1.5. Delimitation of the Study

The scope of the study was delimited to 32 English teachers from 3 different secondary schools (Tilili, Injbara and Addis Kidam) in Awi Zone. This investigation was aimed to interpret and explain teachers’ perception and implementation of TBLT with special attention to the challenges and possibilities as implementing in the classrooms.

1.6. Limitation of the Study

This study would have been more comprehensive if it had considered some more factors like age, sex, experience and any other social backgrounds, and included more subjects from private and even from government schools out of Awi zone. However, due to time and financial constraints, the study was limited to investigation of thirty two secondary school English language teachers available at three selected secondary schools in Awi zone. In addition, the number of participants in the interview and class room observation also small.

2. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

The purpose of this study was to investigate teachers' perceptions and practices of TBLT in three secondary government schools in Awi Zone. This chapter describes the research methods that were used to achieve the main objectives of the study. Therefore, an attempt has been made to discuss the research design, instrument of data collection, the development of data collecting tools and data analysis of the entire study.

2.1. Research Design

This study, being aware of the nature of questions under investigation, the descriptive survey was employed as it enables the researcher to describe the status of an area of the study. Moreover, both quantitative and qualitative methods of analysis were used.

2.2. Participants of the Study

The participants of the study were 32 English teachers from three Secondary government schools in Tilili, Addis kidam and Injibara found in Awi Zone completed a questionnaire survey on their perceptions of TBLT. The three schools were selected for study because they were near to the researcher's residence so that it would be easy to go to the schools to get the required data. All the 32 English teachers from three secondary schools were selected in the study purposively. The rationale for choosing them for the questionnaires was that they must be from schools of different backgrounds. The involvement of teachers from different contexts of teaching could generate richer data on teachers’ perceptions and the implementation of TBLT in various secondary schools. For the interviews and classroom observations, convenient sampling was used and that two volunteer English teachers who believed that they implement tasks from Tilili secondary school were invited to participate in the research. In addition, they taught in the same school and in the same form. The data could be compared and contrasted more effectively. In addition, they had different academic background and teaching experience. Teacher A was a degree holder and she had five years of teaching experience. Teacher B had also a degree holder and he had 33 years of teaching experience. The differences in training and academic background could be comparable and contribute to the analysis ultimately.

2.3. Sampling Technique

In the case of sampling technique convenience sampling was utilized. Dornyei (2007 ) explain convenience sampling is a type of non-probability sampling technique. Convenience sampling is also known as opportunity sampling. It is used in second language (L2) research sample type where an important criterion of sample selection in which a member of the targeted population is selected for the purpose of the study if they meet certain practical criteria, such as geographical proximity, availability at a certain time, ease accessibility or the willingness to volunteer.

2.4. Data Gathering Instruments

Three data collection instruments were employed to obtain information from the subjects of the study. These include: questionnaire, interview and classroom observation.

2.4.1. Questionnaire

Questionnaire composed of Likert scale item is a useful and effective means of determining perceptions Getachew (2012 ) cited as Turner (1993 ). In this regard, a questionnaire item for teachers is prepared based on past relevant studies, for instance, Jeon and Hahn (2006 ) “Exploring EFL teachers' perceptions of Task-Based Language Teaching” were adapted. For the sake of decreasing ambiguity, ‘closed ended’ type questions were used based on Richards and Lockhart (1994 ) to retrieve their perceptions of TBLT and open-ended questions for the participants to express their ideas freely. The strength of open-ended questions as to allow the respondents to feel that they can contribute more individual points of view and more detailed information than is elicited in closed questions. Therefore, open-ended questions may complement the limitation of the closed questions by eliciting more information. The questionnaire for this study is composed of six sections.

• The first part was about their demographic information including: sex, age, educational background and teaching experience. Though this part did not have direct relevance to the research questions, it was believed that it would give the reader certain pieces of information about the demography of the research participants.
• The second part contains four items on Teachers’ perceptions of TBLT.
• The third part included nine items. These items were designed to know the respondents perception on implementing TBLT.
• The fourth part of the questionnaire again consisted of ten items which show possibilities of implementing TBLT.
• The fifth part included three items that illustrate limitations and challenges of TBLT practice.
• The sixth part consisted of four items that show teachers perception on practice of TBLT.

Each of these sections is composed of Likert scale items in which the participants are asked to put a tick mark that best reflects their perception and practice of TBLT. The responses’ options are:5 indicates strongly agree (SA), 4 agree (A) ,3 undecided (U) ,2 disagree (D), and 1 strongly disagree (SD). The last section included two open-ended questions that attempted to collect some descriptive feedback from teachers: How would you define Task-Based Language Learning? And what do you think are the crucial factors for the effective implementation of TBLT? All the open-ended answers were transcribed for analysis.

2.4.2. Interview

According to Koul (1984 ) and Selinger and Shohamy (1989 ) using interview is essential to obtain a greater depth of information, free and flexible responses and to get information concerning feeling, attitude or emotion to certain questions that is not possible through questionnaire and classroom observation. Moreover, conducting interview helps to substantiate the data gathered through the other instruments used in the study. The Semi-structured interview was conducted for the two teachers originated from the questionnaire mainly the challenges and possibilities of TBLT. The interview would be transcribed and analyzed mainly the challenges and possibilities of TBLT. While the interview was going on, it was written down for using it again when the analysis was done.

2.4.3. Class Room Observation

Getachew (2012 ) cited Osterman and Kottkamp (1993 ) argue that to facilitate reflective practice not only do adopted theories need to be described, but also a clear understanding of theories-in-use through observation is required. The observation was conducted in order to check whether teachers practiced the principles of TBLT or not. It also helps to cross check what they respond in the questionnaires and how the actual lesson was going on in their classes.  Prior to the observation, it was important to determine “what we want to look for or at... we should clarify the nature of the problem or issue we wish to investigate” (Nunan, 1989 ). Since the focus was mainly on teachers’ methodologies in conducting the different stages of implementing tasks in the lessons.

The observation was conducted based on the pre-designed checklist that focuses on ‘the task’, ‘teacher’s activity’ and ‘the observers comment section’ adapted from Tagesse (2008 ). Lessons were watched and transcribe later. Teachers were also asked to reflect on the strengths and weaknesses of the lessons and areas for improvement in the observers comment section.  If there were other things, which was not included in the checklist but relevant for the study were written down. In order to avoid personal bias, the observation was conducted by the researcher and co-observer. Co-operation is preferred in order to avoid bias that might result from one observer, the researcher.

The co-observer, who was expected to have a knowledge of the theories of TBLT about how to observe task implementation and how to write the needed information, and co-operated in observing the classes because the co-observer is a third year master of education at Bahir Dar university. For the details of the observations, teacher A was observed four lessons, each consisted of 40 minutes. Teacher B also observed too. The observations were carried out from 6/06/2005-8/08/2005 E.C. The classes were Grade 9 sections ‘T’ and ‘Y’ in Tilili secondary school.  The data collected from the classroom observations were compared and contrasted from the questionnaires and interviews.

2.5. Data Collection Procedure

This questionnaire was adapted and modified from Jeon and Hahn (2006 ) used in his study on exploring Korean EFL teachers’ perceptions of Task-Based Language Teaching. The drafts of the instruments were reviewed and assessed by my colleagues. Then, by my advisor, some of the items were rewritten and rearranged. In the teachers' questionnaire items, it is tried to include different types so that the respondent teachers would not feel tired. Before the final distribution of the questionnaire, a pilot study was carried out to assess the content, logical flaws, clarity of the items, and their reliability. Accordingly, teachers' questionnaire was piloted on six teachers from the three schools. The collected data were analyzed to determine the reliability of questionnaires and again insights for the main study. The internal reliabilities of the questionnaire were calculated using Cronbach’s Alpha. The reliability Coefficient of the questionnaire was found to be 0.92 Cronbach’s Alpha. The researcher believes that most of the items are tested as a result they are reliable.

Based on the inputs obtained in the pilot study from the respondents, some adjustments were made. For instance, some questions were left out from the teachers' questionnaire since they did not elicit the required data. Some types were also transformed into other types. The logical flaw of some items was changed in the teachers' questionnaire. The researcher recognizes from the pilot study that should be given orientation. This is because some teachers have earlier marked an item with two or three values.

Finally, the teachers' questionnaires were ready and distributed to the respondents. Therefore, all items were clearly filled in and returned. After that I coded the questionnaire so as to help re checked the data. As far as the classroom observation were concerned, the researcher prepared a checklist (See Appendix B) and observed eight lessons together with the co-observer. Finally, interview for teachers (See Appendix C) were conducted for the observed classes on the bases of convenience sampling.

2.6. Validity and Reliability of the Study

The validity and reliability of this research tools were checked before collecting data for the study. The validity of the questionnaires, interview questions and observation check lists were checked at two ways, i.e. through reviewers, my advisor and my colleagues, and pilot study. The reliability of the questionnaire was determined through the pilot study. The face validity of the questionnaire, interview questions and observation check list were reviewed and assessed by my advisor and my colleagues. The drafts of the instruments were given with validation forms adapted from Jeon and Hahn (2006 ) to comment. Based up on the feedback, unclear items were re-worded, irrelevant items were deleted and some items were added. Then, they were pilot tested as stated in the data collection procedures.  

In collecting data, reliability and validity are one of the main concerns. Nunan (1989 ) states that “questionnaires can provide a great deal of information in an economical form.’ Data provided are amenable to various forms of quantification” (p.62). He points out one problem with questionnaire is that, “having developed our categories and questions before collecting the data, we may predetermine, to a large extent, what we actually find” (p.62). As to lessen this problem, open-ended questions were used to supplement the close-ended questions.

Three methods of data collection were used in this study in order to fulfill the goal of triangulation. Triangulation is gathering data from a number of different sources so that the research findings or insights can be tested out against each other. This increases the reliability and validity of the research. Any methods of data collection would take the concepts of validity and reliability by various means. Therefore, three different approaches would be used to collect data for analysis.

2.7. Methods of Data Analysis

Data needs to be analyzed with caution in order to elicit plausible discussion. Both qualitative and quantitative methods were employed.  SPSS (Statistical Package for Social Sciences) version 17.0 for Windows was used to analyze the results of the questionnaire. In order to assure whether the observed and the expected mean score differences were significant; One sample t-test was used at the significant level 0.05. The statistical data analysis was descriptive and inferential. Frequency, a percentage analysis and mean scores were used to describe how frequently each item occurred and what it indicates. Then, continuous data was generated and the whole items analysis was made. Finally, the means were evaluated against the expected mean of 3.0. The reason for determining the expected mean was because the researcher did not find any standard measurement established to evaluate against the obtained means.

For the open-ended questions, the answers were transcribed for analysis. All the responses from the interviews were written down and analyzed. Teachers were asked to reflect on the strengths and weaknesses of the lessons and areas for improvement on the observers’ comment section. The lessons of the participants were analyzed. The focus was mainly on teachers’ methodologies in conducting the different stages of implementing tasks in the lessons. It also attempted to look at how teachers positioned their role in the classroom and the task itself.

The interviews were used to gain richer and more in-depth data originated from the questionnaire. The interview would be transcribed and analyzed mainly the challenges and possibilities of TBLT. The class observation would provide observable teaching practices reference to the theories and methodologies of TBLT. The analysis provided qualitative data which is exploratory, explanatory and interpretive in nature. The findings and discussions will be discussed with the data collected from the questionnaires, interviews and classroom observations.

3. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS

This chapter shows the findings with three areas of focus – the first section is related to teacher’s perceptions on the questionnaire part, the second part on how these perceptions reflected on their teaching practice on the observation part and the last section on the challenges and possibilities for implementing TBLT mainly interview. The discussion would be based on these findings. Thus, the data collected using questionnaire, observation and interview were analyzed and discussed under the following major themes in line with the research questions in the light of the review related literature.

3.1. Analysis and Discussion of Teachers’ Perceptions Questionnaire

This part is devoted to present the analyses and findings of the data gathered from 32 teachers using the survey questionnaire. In the first section, the demography of the participants is presented. In the next part, the findings of the questionnaire were reported in order of the first research question on the basis of the survey data.

3.1.1. Demography of Participating Teachers

Table-3.1. Participants’ Personal Information

Respondent	Variables	No of respondents	Percentage
	Male	21	66%
Sex	Female	11	34%
	20-29	11	34%
	30-49	18	56%
Age	>50	3	10%
	≥PhD	-	-
Educational Background	M	-	-
	BA/Bed	32	100%
	≤Diploma	-	-
	5-Jan	5	16%
Teaching experience	10-Jun	17	52%
	2-Nov		10%
	>20	7	22%

Source: survey data

The above table 3.1 shows the target population of the study composed of three secondary school EFL teachers to which the researcher prefers to generalize, so this study was conducted in Tilili, Addis Kidam and Injibara located in Awi Zone. Justification for choosing participants was that they were from schools with different backgrounds, which could generate rich data on teachers’ perceptions and TBLT implementation in various settings and they were near to the researcher's residence. A total of 32 teachers from these three high schools fulfilled the survey. Consisting of 13 Injibara high school teachers (41%), 10 Addis Kidam high school teachers (31%) and nine Tilili ones (28%). Totally, 11 teachers were female (34%) and 21 teachers (66%) were male. The majority of the participants 52% (n =17) had six to nine years’ experience of teaching EFL. The number of years they had taught EFL varied, ranging from less than five years (n = 5, 16%), six to nine years (n= 17, 52%), 11 to 20 years (n = 3, 10%), and more than 20 years (n= 7, 22%). The teachers ranged in age from their 20’s to 29’s, of whom 34% (n= 11) were in their 30’s to 49’s, of whom 56% (n=18) and above 10 %( n=3).The data also shows the educational levels of the respondents are all degree holders. Though this part did not have direct relevance to the research questions, it was believed that it would give the reader certain pieces of information about the demography of the research participants.

3.1.2. Teachers’ Perceptions of TBLT

Teachers’ perceptions can influence directly or indirectly the implementation of TBLT. The table below shows the findings of the closed items of the questionnaires. The discussion on teachers’ perceptions of TBLT is based on the data from this table and on comments made in the open ended item of the questionnaire survey.

Table-3.2. Perceptions of Teachers on TBLT

	Response
No	SD(1)		D(2)		U(3)		A(4)		SA(5)
	NO	%	No	%	No	%	No	%	No	%	M	SD
1	0	0	1	3.1	3	9.4	18	56.3	10	31.2	4.1	0.72
2	0	0	2	6.3	6	18.7	18	56.2	6	18.8	3.8	0.79
3	1	3.1	2	6.3	6	18.7	16	50	7	21.9	3.8	0.96
4	0	0	2	6.3	4	12.5	17	53.1	9	28.1	4	0.82

Key:-Q=Question item, SA= strongly agree, A= agree, U= undecided, D= disagree, SD= strongly disagree, R=respondent SD= standard deviation, M= mean

The teachers surveyed generally state to perceive that TBLT and its theories. Regarding the perception about Task-Based Language Teaching, the teachers indicated that they have positive perception towards the theories of TBLT (Q1: mean 4.1). Besides, they indicated that they are very happy with the practice and methodologies of TBLT (Q2: mean 3.8) as well as the rationale behind the implementation of TBLT in Awi zone three secondary schools (Q3: mean 3.8). Regarding interest to know about TBLT, the teachers inclined to think they are interested to know about the TBLT (Q4: mean 4.0). As shown in the table, most of the participants have a higher level of perceptions of the theories, practices and methodologies and the rationale behind the implementation of TBLT since each of the means exceeds the average score (3.0).

On the other hand, the open-ended item in the same issue showed different results. In response to question 1-“How do you define Task-Based Language Teaching” in the open ended of the questionnaire, which attempted to elicit teachers’ definitions of Task-Based Language Teaching, teachers, the findings tended to contradict the results of the closed ended items. All teachers responded to this question.

Most of the teachers surveyed focused on one aspect of TBLT. (R6) emphasized only the pre-task stage. (R9) emphasized the meaning-focused criterion. (R5) tended to emphasize communication. (R8) stressed “authenticity”. (R25, R14) were mainly concerned with the final product. (R11, R28, R26) set the goal of TBLT simply as “completion of task”.  (R29)  stated that TBLT is the learning of specific aspects of language in order to carry out a meaningful task. In TBLT, however, learners progress from one stage towards another by carefully chosen and appropriately sequenced tasks. Skehan (1996b ) points out those teachers need to be decisive of their choices in the different stages of task implementation. It is clear that there are stages in the task implementation: the pre-task, during task and post-task. Each stage has its specific purposes to achieve. But my respondents had a narrow focus in TBLT to facilitate students’ learning. Therefore, teachers need to be properly informed and trained in the methodologies in order to achieve more effective implementation.

The respondents also showed to be unclear about their role in TBLT classroom. (R31) Learning English is by directing to fulfill a task. (R2) Instruct the teaching of a specific theme, a grammar point and a writing type. In fact, the main role of teacher is not only to present or instruct. Scholars defined that “One can generalize here and say that the teacher, in a task-based approach, needs to command a significantly wider range of skills than in more structural approaches. These include:

• an ability to select and sequence tasks for supplementary activities
• the competence to organize, appropriately, pre- and post-task activities
• a willingness to adapt task difficulty during the actual task phase
• a sensitivity to individual differences and the capacity to adapt tasks to take account of differences in learner orientation.” (Skehan, 1996b ).

Misconceptions of the perception of TBLT could also be found regarding the basic assumptions and theories. (R15) responded that TBL is only suitable for secondary school students. Another seemed unclear about the objectives of TBLT lessons. (R23) said that the goal of TBLT was to achieve a product. In addition, (R20) think TBLT is simply the integration of real-life problem-solving elements into language learning. But, Skehan (1996b ) states clearly the three long-term pedagogic goals for task-based approach namely accuracy, complexity and fluency while the short-term goal is to help learners become “effective communicative problem solvers” (p.22). That is all three goals cannot always be achieved in one task. Nevertheless, a balance between the goals should be maintained effectively. As Skehan (1996b ) suggests, there should be a balance between lexical and syntactic modes of communications .In sum, pedagogical goals should have a balance of focus which ensures various goals are included.

The study part of teachers did not have a clear concept of the role of grammar or form in TBLT. Their misconception lies in the way they think students are asked to complete a task in a specific language structure. (R10) responded that the structure is not the characteristic of TBLT. (R22) concluded that students inevitably learn the language use. In addition, some of the teachers focused on specific parts of TBLT, other teachers tended to oversimplify TBLT. (R32) defined TBLT as an approach “in which students are required to do many tasks to acquire the language”.  According to Long (1997 ) proposes the teaching of language should have ‘a focus on form’ because of the problems of ‘focus on forms’ and ‘focus on meaning’. Focus on forms is criticized for being inefficient in meeting students’ needs, leading to boring lessons, having unrealistic samples of language in use, ignoring language learning processes derived from SLA research and producing failed beginners who would be de motivated. Focus on meaning is criticized for ignoring learners’ needs, leading to ungrammatical errors and being insufficient for Second Language Learning. In fact, teachers can emphasize certain structures that are useful for the task. However, students do not have to use the language form. Indeed teachers need to be balance in choosing form-focused tasks and meaning-focused tasks.

Few respondents showed a perception of TBLT. (R3) use tasks for both form and meaning. (R4)  The use of tasks based on their complexity on the level of students. (R9) using tasks to encourage the students English language accuracy and fluency.  Similarly, Richards and Rodgers (2001 ) have given a basic and simple definition of Task-Based Language Teaching (TBLT) as “an approach based on the use of tasks as the core unit of planning and instruction in language teaching” (p.223).  Since tasks are the basic unit in TBLT framework, the concepts of task should be, According to Candlin (2001 ) points out “tasks themselves are conceived as being potentially of differential levels of demand on learners, in terms of cognitive load, language difficulty, and conceptual content, and can require variable completion times and be undertaken in a variety of contexts and conditions” (p.235).

So, TBLT is not a definite method that teachers must follow systematically. Skehan (1996a ) distinguishes task-based approach into two forms–strong and weak ones, “[a] strong form sees tasks as the basic unit of teaching and drives the acquisition process. A weak form sees tasks as a vital part of language instruction but is embedded in a more complex pedagogical context” (p.36). Teachers can decide to what extent they adopt the TBLT based on their professional decisions.

To conclude, the findings of the questionnaires, on the topic of teachers’ perceptions show the respondents were positive, interesting and happy about the theories, practices and methodologies TBLT. But it contradicts with the findings of the open ended proves Problems of oversimplification, narrow focus and misconceptions of teachers concerning their perceptions of TBLT. Therefore, teachers seemed not to have a complete perception of the theories, practices and methodologies of TBLT.

3.1.3. Teachers’ Perceptions for the Implementation of TBLT

Table-3.3. Perceptions of Teachers on the Implementation of TBLT

	Response
	SD(1)		D(2)		U(3)		A(4)		SA(5)
No	NO	%	No	%	No	%	No	%	No	%	M	SD
1	0	0	1	3.1	2	6.3	21	65.3	8	25	4.1	0.65
2	1	3.1	7	21.9	8	25	12	37.5	4	12.5	3.34	1.06
3	1	3.1	2	6.3	10	31.2	15	46.8	4	12.5	3.59	0.91
4	1	3.1	3	9.4	8	25	13	40.6	7	21.9	3.68	1.02
5	3	9.4	8	25	11	34.4	9	28.1	1	3.1	2.9	1.1
6	0	0	1	3.1	3	9.4	18	56.3	10	31.2	4.1	0.72
7	0	0	1	3.1	3	9.4	22	68.8	6	18.7	4	0.64
8	1	3.1	2	6.2	3	9.4	20	62.5	6	18.8	3.8	0.9
9	2	6.2	3	9.4	6	18.8	15	46.8	6	18.8	3.6	1

Key:- Q=Question item, SA= strongly agree, A= agree, U= undecided, D= disagree, SD= strongly disagree, R=respondent SD= standard deviation, m= mean

From table 3.3.Teachers generally perceived that the implementation of TBLT in English language instruction is challenging (Q1: mean 4.1) but radical (Q3: mean 3.59). They tend to indicate that the implementation of TBLT has created some pressure (Q4: mean 3.68). Regarding the newly published textbook used in school, teachers tend to believe it has truly implemented a TBLT approach (Q2: mean 3.34). In fact, they tend to find the textbook helpful for conducting their lessons (Q 8: mean 3.8).  Teamwork is treasured by teachers as one important factor. They tended to think that team work is essential to the successful implementation of TBLT (Q6: mean 4.1). Moreover, they responded that assessment methods should be changed to promote the implementation of TBLT (Q7: mean 4.0).

Generally, as shown in the table, most of the participants have a higher level of perceptions for the implementation of TBLT. Since each of the means exceeds the average score (3.0). Negative opinions were indicated from teachers as well. The observed mean scores that were found from the teachers responds was less than the expected mean scores (3.0). They tended to think that educational bureau has not given sufficient support regarding the adoption of TBLT (Q5: mean 2.9) found in the study.

The general analysis of all the items indicates that most teachers seem to have mixed both positive and negative perception towards Task-Based Language Teaching implementation. Hence, one can deduce that the groups of teachers have perceived the implementation of Task-Based Language Teaching both positively and negatively. The teachers’ negative perception of Task-Based Language Teaching implementation is strengthened by the open ended conducted with them.

According to the open ended question response of teachers feel negative about the new approach (R26, R19,R32) replied little or no concrete support such as intensive training programmes for teachers or courses in TBLT and the assessment methods. They may also feel helpless because there could be other issues to deal with at the same time –for example, pressures related to the passing rate in examinations, the promotion rate, and club report and school evaluations. Facing with these and other many pressures, teachers may simply stick to the “traditional” teaching approach they have been using. (R12, R14, R20)  Perceptions of the implementation of TBLT are mixed with both positive and negative.

Generally, mixed feelings were developed among teachers towards the implementation of TBLT. Teachers found challenging to implement TBLT as they thought might not had sufficient support from school, colleagues, and the Education office.  In addition, teachers were very concerned with the assessment methods. They indicated that the new approach did not bring about changes in the assessment method. This mismatch seemed to be unacceptable to the teachers as the lessons would still be used for examination practices.

3.1.4. Teachers’ Perceptions on the Possibilities of Implementing TBLT

Table-3.4. Perceptions of Teachers on the Possibilities of Implementing of TBLT

	Response
	SD(1)		D(2)		U(3)		A(4)		SA(5)
No	NO	%	No	%	No	%	No	%	No	%	M	SD
1	0	0	2	6.2	4	12.5	17	53.2	9	28.1	4	0.82
2	1	3.1	2	6.2	7	21.9	15	46.9	6	21.9	3.7	0.97
3	1	3.1	2	6.2	3	9.4	20	62.5	6	18.8	3.8	0.9
4	0	0	1	3.1	3	9.4	18	56.3	10	31.2	4.1	0.72
5	0	0	1	3.1	2	6.3	21	65.3	8	25	4.1	0.65
6	0	0	1	3.1	3	9.4	22	68.8	6	18.7	4	0.64
7	1	3.1	2	6.2	3	9.4	20	62.5	6	18.8	3.8	0.9
8	0	0	2	6.3	6	18.7	18	56.2	6	18.8	3.8	0.79
9	1	3.1	2	6.3	6	18.7	16	50	7	21.9	3.8	0.96
10	2	6.2	3	9.4	6	18.8	15	46.8	6	18.8	3.6	1

Key:-Q=Question item, SA= strongly agree, A= agree, U= undecided, D= disagree, SD= strongly disagree, R=respondent SD= standard deviation, m= mean

From table 3.4, the teachers under study indicated that they could describe some benefits of TBLT. They indicated that TBLT can increase learners’ motivation to learn English (Q1: mean4.0) and can transform the learning process to be more meaningful (Q2: mean 3.7). They reported TBLT can improve learners’ communicative competency (Q4: mean 4.1) and can enhance their fluency in English (Q5: mean 4.1). TBLT is a suitable approach for students in Awi Zone (Q6: mean 4.0). They believed TBLT provides students with more opportunities to use English (Q 7: mean 3.8). In addition, they thought TBLT can enhance student-teacher (Q9:mean3.8) and student-student interactions in class (Q8: mean 3.8).

So, the results of the questionnaire showed above the observed mean scores were greater than the expected mean score (3.0). Therefore, this may mean that they view TBLT could increase teaching effectiveness (Q10: mean 3.6) or learning effectiveness.

In the open ended item, there were some crucial factors that affect the teaching practice and the implementation of TBLT. The results show that the quality of teachers (R9), available resources (R18), changes in assessment methods (R10), favorable environment for English (R22), better textbooks or materials (R21), teacher collaboration (R19), student cooperativeness (R7), teacher training and acceptance and recognition of TBLT (R16). Generally, teachers may feel more willing to try out TBLT methodologies with greater effort if they are given more sufficient training and support.

Therefore, teachers seemed to observe some of its benefits, for example, it could enhance fluency, interaction between teacher and students, interaction among students and also increase students’ motivation, learning and teaching effectiveness.

3.1.5. Teachers’ Perceptions on the Limitations and Challenges of Implementing TBLT

Table-3.5. Perceptions of Teachers on the Limitation and Challenges of Implementing TBLT

	Response
	SD(1)		D(2)		U(3)		A(4)		SA(5)
No	NO	%	No	%	No	%	No	%	No	%	M	SD
1	0	0	1	3.1	2	6.3	21	65.3	8	25	4.1	0.65
2	4	12.5	7	21.9	11	34.4	8	25	2	6.3	2.9	1.12
3	3	9.4	8	25	11	34.4	8	25	2	6.2	2.9	1.09

Key:-Q=Question item, SA= strongly agree, A= agree, U= undecided, D= disagree, SD= strongly disagree, R=respondent SD= standard deviation, m= mean

Some limitations were found in the implementation of TBLT. However, teachers showed that they favor a mixture of TBLT approach with other teaching approaches (Q1: mean4.1), more than they favored using a truly TBLT approach (Q2: mean 2.9).

This preference perhaps indicates that the mean value of the observed score was greater than the expected mean score (3.0). Teachers may not be comfortable when conducting their lessons in a truly TBLT approach to teach English. Moreover, teachers tended not to believe TBLT could improve learners’ accuracy in English (Q3: mean 2.9). Their perception was not very strong, as they did not seem to think TBLT could greatly enhance accuracy. Therefore, some of the teachers would tend to use it in conjunction with other approaches.

The critics of the Task-Based Approach to Language Teaching express their fear that this approach neglects the accuracy of language use by the learners. Nevertheless, Krashen and Terrell (1987 ) argue "We do not necessarily sacrifice accuracy for fluency ..." and the other proponent of TBLT argue that the main goal of using tasks to teach language will help to develop both communicative and linguistic competence of the learners' i.e. TBLT is important for both fluency and accuracy. As Rivers (1983) and Prabhu (1987 ) state that tasks aid fluency by enabling learners to activate their linguistic knowledge to use in natural and spontaneous communication. It also contributes to accuracy by enabling learners to discover new linguistic forms during the course of communication, and by increasing their control over already acquired forms. As it is explained above, both accuracy and fluency are the very essential goals of any task based language-teaching lesson and these goals are inseparable.  

In the open ended item (R16) reported that individual differences among students in terms of background and language competence make the implementation of TBLT difficult. They felt it was demanding to implement TBLT in every lesson because preparation time could be lengthy and it was proposed that collaboration among teachers is crucial to its successful implementation (R8, 18, 19). (R15) stated large class size make the interaction difficult.(R18) added resource and training  (R4) indicated that textbooks cannot meet the needs of all students with varied language competency. (R3) commented that the tasks in the textbooks are not well-designed and they have to design extra tasks for the lesson. So, they have to design extra tasks for the lesson. Even sometimes the textbooks are not prepared based on TBLT in these case as Leaver and Kaplan (2004 ) mentioned, "...teachers chose not to use a text-book". As a result, most of teachers and administrators who desired to add tasks to their classrooms found that they had to find appropriate authentic materials and then develop their own tasks.

Generally, Individual differences among students in terms of background and language competence make the implementation of TBLT difficult. They felt it was demanding to implement TBLT in every lesson because preparation time could be lengthy and it was proposed that collaboration among teachers is crucial to its successful implementation.

3.1.6. Teachers’ Perceptions of their own Practice in Classroom

Table-3.6.Perceptions of Teachers in Classroom Practice

	Response
	SD(1)		D(2)		U(3)		A(4)		SA(5)
No	NO	%	No	%	No	%	No	%	No	%	M	SD
1	1	3.1	7	21.9	8	25	12	37.5	4	12.5	3.3	1.06
2	1	3.1	2	6.2	7	21.9	15	46.9	6	21.9	3.7	0.97
3	1	3.1	2	6.2	3	9.4	20	62.5	6	18.8	3.8	0.9
4	2	6.2	3	9.4	6	18.8	15	46.8	6	18.8	3.6	1

Key:-Q=Question item, SA= strongly agree, A= agree, U= undecided, D= disagree, SD= strongly disagree, R=respondent SD= standard deviation, = mean

The teachers indicated that the introduction of TBLT had changed their teaching methods (Q1: mean 3.34). They claimed that they are adopting a TBL approach in teaching (Q 2: mean 3.7). They tended to agree that they follow TBLT closely (Q 3: mean 3.8). They also reported to design additional TBLT-related tasks to supplement the textbook materials (Q4: mean 3.6).

The result of the perceptions of their own practice of TBLT in the classroom observed mean scores were greater than the expected mean score (3.0).This shows that most teachers follow TBLT closely.

3.1.7. Results of the Teachers' Perceptions Questionnaire

Table-3.7. One Sample t-test result.

N	Mean	SD	Test value	t-value	Df	Sign(2-tailed)
30	3.7	0.35	3	11.255	29	0

Key:-N=number of items,SD=standard deviation,df=degree of freedom and sign.=significance level

In order to see the teachers’ perception towards TBLT, the mean scores of the 30 teacher’s responses were computed. The result revealed that the observed and expected mean scores were found to be 3.7 and 3 respectively. This leads to say that the observed mean scores that were found from the teachers’ responses are greater than the expected mean score. And it seems that the participants have a higher level of perceptions of TBLT. In order to assure weather the mean score difference is significant one sample t-test was employed calculated at the degree of freedom  29 and at significant level 0.05, and it was found that the observed mean score was found to be significantly higher than the expected mean of the test value(t=11.255,df= 29,p<0.05). The comparison of the observed mean with expected mean shows that teachers perceive positively TBLT.

A more detailed example of how teachers perceive their own practice in the classroom can be in the analysis and discussions of the comments and actual teaching practice of the two teachers who were observed and interviewed were reported in order of the second research question on the basis of the class room observation.

3.2. Analysis and Discussions of Class room Observation

In this section, the data obtained through observation would be analyzed and discussed. Two volunteer teachers who believed that they implement tasks were observed four times each by the researcher and co-observer. In total eight observations were done with the help of the co-observer. The data collected were based on the requirement of the classroom checklist. The researcher always crosschecked the observation checklist with his observation checklist and discussed after every observation. According to the overall agreements, what was observed in the classrooms was discussed as follows. (See Appendix 'B').

3.2.1. The Difference between Perceptions and Teaching Practice

As it was observed in all classes, the students were working in one to five groups. There are ten groups a total of sixty students in each class. During the implementation of the tasks, all teachers introduced the tasks and gave clear instructions.

Teacher A started her lesson like this.

“Ok open your text book on page 121 cities of the future in unit seven A7.4 the speaking section comparing the cities. Look at the picture and try to compare them by choosing two or three adjectives for each city picture and make up sentences. e.g. use an adjective ‘busy’ ‘This city is a busy modern American city.’ She explained to them, use the form S +V+Adj+er/ more+adj+than+n.  Such like this construct your own sentences in to your one to five group members.” She was walking round in the class to monitor the task progress and to provide help when students needed. She helped two groups but immediately she announced that “we didn’t have enough time, so it is better to listen the examples. Who can read it? Ok the group leader of the first group read loudly. ‘New York has taller buildings.’ Very good .she corrected New York has taller buildings than London. Another student…” the time is up. She ordered them to do such like this at home.

But teacher B started introducing the three cities (London, New York City, and Hong Kong) about their development, population, continent, capital city, area and the present situation. After that he tried to define degree of comparisons. He talked the form and examples of the three types of comparisons deeply. Next to this, he constructed his own sentences by using different adjectives depending on the picture. e.g. ‘Hong Kong has the longest outdoor escalator, but then again, London has the greatest number of underground railways’.  ‘Addis Ababa has many more beggars than Hong Kong’.  Finally he ordered them to construct similar sentences in their one to five groups by relating in to their country. When he walked round in the class to provide help while they were doing their tasks, the time was over. He advised them in order to practice at home.

The role of teachers in pre-task cycle was giving some activities to help learners recall/learn useful words/phrases that help them while they were carrying out a given task.  Regarding this, both of them talked about degree of comparison. In the last part of the pre-task cycle, teachers make sure that all students understood what to do before they went to carry out a given task. Concerning this, both of them never make sure that the students understood the task’s instruction. This showed that there were times in which the learners were enforced to precede doing the task without fully understanding what was done. Unless students know what and with whom to do, it could be difficult to process the task and to arrive at an outcome (Skehan, 1998 ; Willis, 2004 ). Moreover, students might spend more time than expected to complete the task or even they will be unable to carry out the task if they are not clear with what to do. Therefore, teachers have always to ensure whether the learners understand what to do before students engage in doing the task.

The main role of the teacher during task cycle is walking round in the class to monitor the task progress and to provide help when students need (Richards and Rodgers, 2001 ). Although teachers were always expected to do this, teacher A tried only in to two groups but not teacher B.

Both teachers seemed to realize their own weaknesses during the lessons. Their reflections in the observers comment explicitly demonstrated such awareness. The following is a summary of how teachers described their own lessons. Teacher A, she explained that she spent a lot of the class  time on explaining procedural matters. The students were asked to write but due to time constraints, they did not give enough oral presentation. Instructions focused too much on form and therefore communicative use of language lacked focus on content component. Teacher B, he thought that he had guided students with clear samples and instructions. Students were given chance to work together collaboratively in the one to five group form. He could realize his own weaknesses by noting that although the lessons were well-planned and well-designed on the lesson plan, students were not given sufficient time and chance to finish their tasks.

To sum up, on the first day of the observations, I can conclude from the above data that teachers give more emphasis to linguistic factors than cognitive ones. Cognitive factors are more useful for the development of fluency while linguistic factors are important to develop accuracy. Hence, both should be given equal emphasis to make balance between accuracy and fluency (Skehan, 1996b ; Birch, 2005 ; Shehadeh, 2005 ). The findings of teachers’ perceptions of TBLT from the questionnaires contrast with the evidence from the classroom observation. First of all, the difference between the balance of content and form was one of the prominent observations. The result of the perceptions of their own practice of TBLT in the classroom on table 4.6, the observed mean scores were greater than the expected mean score (3.0).This showed that most teachers follow TBLT closely. And on table 4.4 TBLT could enhance their fluency in English (Q5: mean 4.1).On the other hand, on table 4.5 teachers tended not to believe TBLT could improve learners’ accuracy in English (Q3: mean 2.9). But both teachers focused on form the evidence from the classroom observation in contrast with the findings of teachers’ perceptions of TBLT from the questionnaires. Thus, there is the difference between perceptions and teaching practice.

3.2.2. Limited Opportunities for Learners to use English

Teachers let them report what they did in groups. Students’ group discussion to carry out the task and reflections (reports) are some of the roles of learners during task cycle (Richards and Rodgers, 2001 ). As report motivates students to produce not only fluent but also accurate language, there should always be a report stage. Besides, if students know that their teachers do not ask them to report their work; they may not worry about doing a task at hand and might not carry out a given task properly some other time (Skehan, 1996b ; Shehadeh, 2005 ). Regarding helping the learners to plan what they are going to both teachers never help them. Planning stage, as Shehadeh (2005 ) says, makes learners to focus on form and tries to produce more complex language and helps them to think about and rehearse what to say so as to help them develop confidence in using the target language, so students have to get adequate help about how to plan before they report. After planning, students are expected to report what they did when the teacher selects who will speak (report) next. On this issue, teacher A tried to select who will report next. Concerning, giving brief comments/feedback, there is an attempt to implement it but not enough.

On this day, on page 128 B7.2 ‘livings in Addis Ababa’ they ordered them ‘check what they have written about Addis at the back of the listening section; suggest differences in between Addis and where they live.’ The students work in groups to exchange opinions and express their different perspectives.   In teacher A class, students were reluctant to speak in front of the class and she encourage them it was important to make everyone speak and share opinions.  In teacher B class, he stated that perceptions of students’ behavior helped him to plan lessons as he spent some time pre-teaching vocabulary is necessary for negotiation of meaning. He also spent some time on instructions of content components. As a result, they assigned limited time for students to discuss and report. So, students could not have ample time to use English for communication.

During their group discussion, some students use English language to discuss in groups. But most of them speak Amharic. This shows that students do not use the target language, English. According to Nunan (2006 ) TBLT emphasizes learning to communicate through interaction in the target language because it provides opportunities for learners not only on language but also on the learning process. Therefore, students who do not use the TL lose these opportunities and do not pass through the process of learning and, in turn, might not reach the intended level of proficiency in English.

In the observers’ comment section, When asked how to improve their lessons in our previous observation, both teacher A and B suggested giving more time for students to share their ideas. In addition, they proposed inviting the whole groups to report to the class. In fact, it was difficult for teachers to participate the whole groups in one class because of time. But indeed, today chances were given to all students regardless their language ability. Students should not be deprived of the chances to speak in the language. Rather, they should be encouraged to use the language. Both of them stressed they improved the previous lesson weakness but they commented themselves they never give language focus activities. They always teach language structures first.

3.2.3. Overlook of TBLT Methodologies

Overlook of TBLT methodologies was one of the prominent observations. In post cycle task-based language teaching recommends teaching grammar after students accomplished each task because this helps learners to see what they did wrong during their discussion and/presentation time so that they correct their mistakes and can learn from the mistakes they made and make it part of their knowledge (Willis, 1996 ). On the contrary, both teachers never gave them language focus activities after report stage. Therefore, using these tasks has a considerable effect in teaching/learning English. After their presentations (reports) students always need to have useful phrases and words related to their task for their future use and confidence. Post-task activities can “lead learners to switch attention repeatedly between accuracy and restructuring and fluency … provide another means of inducing effective use of intentional resources during tasks, and balancing the various goals that are desirable” (Skehan, 1996b ). As these stages alert students simultaneously to language-as-form and language-as-meaning, teachers have to plan to provide such opportunities for their students.

There is also pre-teaching of language structures first, which is not advised in TBLT. Besides, the post-task cycle is completely ignored. This implies that both teachers never give language focus activities. In the open ended responses (R6, R29) refers to the goal of language teaching and learning as only at the pre-task stage, and classroom observations show that the post-task cycle is overlooked. Theoretical confusion can lead to practical inefficiency, and this can do a lot of harm, with time and effort being wasted on unprofitable activities while important priorities are ignored. Therefore, teachers need to be properly informed and trained in the methodologies in order to achieve more effective implementation.

3.2.4. Focus on Instruction and Product

This lesson is focused on Unit eight ‘winning the lottery’ on page 148.students discussed in groups what they do if they win a million dollar. And order their ideas and reach a consensus of the best way to spend the money. Begin ‘If I won a million birr…’ the majority of Teacher B’s lessons were used to instruct students to follow improbable conditional sentence. Teacher-centered instruction was prominent. After their report, Teacher A just gave her opinion and evaluation work of the presentation. In fact, she could have asked students to have a discussion instead of giving direct instructions. By doing so, the students may have benefited from peer learning. Therefore, the restriction of Teacher B’s lessons is perhaps his limitations. Therefore, this implies that teachers spend much time teaching their students and students speak if their teacher asks them to do so. A focus on product was apparent in both teachers’ lessons. Teacher B stated that students were given clear guidelines and sample tasks.

In addition, in the observer comment section teacher A stated that she used other approaches (teacher center) in the language classrooms depending on what I expected the students to achieve in terms of product. The students also like this method even I know the effectiveness of TBLT. If not, they perceive that it is a lack of subject matter knowledge. So, in order not to be neglected by my students and other teachers, I usually used teacher center method. She tended to think TBLT as being ineffective and she claim that it is “not completely practical”. Teacher B suggested that the students are motivated to learn in the traditional method in his experience. However, it is generally assumed that more effective teaching methods or approach could lead to the development of the inter-language system. Hence, I may contribute to the effective implementation of TBLT if adequate and relevant training in TBLT is given. He described that there was a wide range of differentiation with respect to the extent and level of TBLT implementation” and he commented that implementation of TBLT is only “a lip service” and that it is one of the other  methodologies used by us.

3.2.5. Dependence of the Text book

Both teachers focused only on the text book. According to Richards and Rodgers (2001 ) “Instructional materials play an important role in TBLT because it is dependent on a sufficient supply of appropriate classroom tasks”. Since language instruction begins with providing learners with tasks, the instructional material that consists of tasks is very important to give the context of learning for students.

On the other day both teachers A and B was giving a similar quiz. When we observed, there are five multiple questions done by five minute individually. Two of them are conditional sentences in order to complete the main or if clause of the right verb. The rest three are focused on the three types of degree of comparison to select the correct adjective. In the observer comment, teacher A indicated that examinations are employing traditional methods while task-based approach to teaching is implemented. She was suggested that the development of task-based assessment is necessary. Continuous assessment of student performance is needed in TBLT implementation.

Teacher B concerned over assessment methods, he caught between the dilemma of examination preparation and the implementation of TBLT. The examination-oriented nature of the language system may have hindered the development of more effective teaching approaches because teaching and learning time may be used for examination practice. Perhaps teachers, the change of teaching approach may indicate a change in assessment methods.

“although tasks play a central role in much communicative teaching, the development of reliable task- based assessment techniques is woefully inadequate” (Bygate et al., 2001 ). The difficulty is “how tasks can be used for summative evaluation, i.e. how tasks can be used to make reliable, valid and useful decisions about the level of achievement and proficiency of learners” (Bygate et al., 2001 ).

This is a traditional assessment method. It is inappropriate because students are unable to engage in process in applying the knowledge.

The issue of assessment has been challenging in TBLT because the changes in teaching approach would inevitably imply changes in assessment methods. Otherwise, a mismatch between teaching and assessment would be problematic. Therefore, it is essential to be aware of the criteria for devising assessment tasks.

3.3. Analysis and Discussions of Teachers’ Interview

In this section, the data gathered through interview would be analyzed and discussed.

3.3.1. “How do you define Task-Based Language Teaching?”

Teacher A defined as follows:

“Task Based Language Teaching (TBLT) as an approach it can enhance the acquisition of vocabulary of a specific topic.”

Teacher B defined as follows:

“Task Based Language Teaching (TBLT) mainly shows the sequence of tasks. It focuses simply the order of the tasks.”

Teacher A, who was observed in grade 9T, defined that the TBLT approach could enhance the acquisition of vocabulary of a specific topic. However, she oversimplified the way TBLT could help language acquisition, which was not just about learning of vocabulary for more effective communication. Teacher B in 9Y interpreted the sequence of tasks as simply the order of the tasks without referring to a certain criteria. Skehan (1996a ) the aim of sequencing task is to make sure that it is at the appropriate level of demand for students. The danger of inappropriately sequenced tasks is that it can lead to unfavorable learning outcomes. Difficult tasks lead to the reliance on lexicalized interaction which would result in “fossilization and may produce only routine solutions to communication problems” (p.23). Easy tasks hinder inter language development as no further consolidation has gained in the learning process. The process of selection and sequencing of tasks plays an important role in TBLT but teachers had misconception about sequencing tasks as they may be unfamiliar with the knowledge of sequencing task.

3.3.2. Challenges and Possibilities for Adopting TBLT

Findings from the interviews

Teacher A implied:

“Teachers understanding of TBLT are insufficient and the adoption of TBLT in the classroom has not been very effective. The attempt in organizing and completing the tasks is supposed to be challenging. A lot of time and effort are spending in designing tasks which can assemble the learning needs of students. In addition, teachers find it hard to a balance between form and function.”

Teacher B explained:

“Teachers have to practice TBLT to some extent but examinations are still using traditional assessment methods. Encourage the whole class to complete the various tasks is a challenge or it is difficult for mixed abilities among students. Some tasks are too difficult for students to complete. Teachers are not well trained in TBL theories. It is challenging to prompt colleagues to work together.”

In the open ended item, there were some crucial factors that affect the teaching practice and the implementation of TBLT. The results show that the quality of teachers, available resources, changes in assessment methods, favorable environment for English, better textbooks or materials, teacher collaboration, student cooperativeness, teacher training and acceptance and recognition of TBLT. On the other hand, individual differences among students in terms of background and language competence make the implementation of TBLT difficult. They felt it was demanding to implement TBLT in every lesson because preparation time could be lengthy. In addition, large class size, resource and training make the interaction difficult. Some teachers commented that the tasks in the textbooks are not well-designed because textbooks cannot meet the needs of all students with varied language competency.

Generally, Teacher A and Teacher B indicate that the challenges and possibilities for teachers including teachers’ ability to adjust to the teaching context, the plan of appropriate assessment materials for TBLT, fostering of teamwork among teachers, effective teacher training programme of TBLT and the design of an proper situation for affecting factors of the implementation of TBLT.

3.3.2.1. The Ability of Teachers to adjust Teaching Contexts

Teacher A suggested:

“This means, changing the context of the material to make it more suitable for the learners.”

Teacher B implied:

“Prior to the task, I have designed and sequenced the tasks according to various factors including the needs of students.”

Thus, the tasks would be more familiar to students and easier for them to handle. They instruct with respect to the learners’ level of proficiency. Therefore, the challenge may be that teachers need to be able to adjust the tasks to suit students with individual differences–their language standard, diverse learning needs and preferred learning styles.

3.3.2.2. Planning of Appropriate Assessment for TBLT

Teacher A noted:

“Students should not be familiar with the criteria for assessing their performance”.

Students could not use a peer assessment practice, and should not be critical toward their own as well as others’ work by evaluating it with appropriate grading criteria, hoping that such practice could not improve learning ultimately.

Teacher B noted:

“The change of teaching approach may indicate a change in assessment methods.” 

Teachers may be tempt to think that the change in teaching approach from the traditional approaches to a more learner-centered approach to teaching English should be assisted by relevant and appropriate assessment methods that embody the underlying assumptions and criteria of TBLT.

3.3.2.3. Fostering of Team work

Teacher A pointed out:

“If textbooks are inadequate, teachers cannot adopt everything from the textbook. It was suggested that preparing different materials within department teachers may facilitate teaching”.

Teacher B added:

“Collaboration among teachers in the task design stage may help reduce workload of teachers and develop consensus among teachers concerning implementation matters. Nevertheless, new textbooks have been improving their quality in meeting student needs and there are a lot of resources with authentic materials”.

In fact, the team may work together to improve task design, syllabus planning, their pedagogies and methodologies and evaluate their TBLT course. Teamwork would be a possibility for teachers to further enhance the implementation of TBLT.

3.3.2.4. Teacher Training in TBLT

Teacher A suggests:

“Novice teachers for instance I have been trained in TBLT and they generally have a basic understanding of TBLT.”

Teacher B suggests:

“The more experienced teachers, like me, if they have taken any teacher training courses, may not have access to the knowledge of theories and practices of TBLT.”

They must read extensively on their own. The department, schools and individual teachers need to value the importance of training in upgrading the profession of teachers.

3.3.2.5. Proper Situation for Implementing TBLT

Teacher A commented:

“Lack of support from school, lack of time and lack of assessment methods are the factors affecting the implementation of Task-Based Language Teaching. In order to implement TBLT effectively this factors should be reduced"

Teacher B recommended:

"For the implementation of TBLT, large class size, lack of resources, lack of training in theoretical basis and practical implementation are the possible hindering factors. So, for the effective implementation of it, these factors could be diminished."

It may be promising that with changes in the environment, teachers may put more effort in implementing TBLT.

3.4. Discussion of the Findings

The main purpose of this study was to examine English teachers’ perceptions and practices of using TBLT. In addition, it was intended to explore the challenges and possibilities as implementing in the classrooms. Data were collected using different tools from questionnaire, interview and classroom observation.  Data were analyzed quantitatively and qualitatively in the preceding sections. The findings of the analyses are integrated and discussed in this section. The discussions of the findings were made in relation to the research questions posed. That is to say, the organizations of the discussions were made in a way to address the objectives of the research questions.

The first research question was intended to examine what are the teachers’ perceptions about task-based language teaching. The findings of the questionnaire were used to address the objectives of this question. The findings of the questionnaire indicate that the respondents were positive perception, interesting and happy about the task even if it contradicts with the findings of the open ended and interview proves problems of oversimplification, narrow focus and misconceptions of teachers concerning their perceptions of TBLT. Therefore, teachers seemed not to have a complete perception of the theories, practices and methodologies of TBLT.

This finding supports the previous findings that have shown that teachers convey a considerable amount of practical understanding about the key concepts of TBLT conducted by Jeon (2005 ); Jeon and Hahn (2006 ); Zare (2007 ). According to Jeon (2005 ). This could be the result of the shift that the Asian EFL context has made toward the use of a Task-Based type of Learning a language to improve the learners’ communicative skills.  According to Jeon and Hahn (2006 ) who examined EFL Teachers’ Perceptions of Task-Based Language Korean Secondary School Classroom Practice, this could be the fact that the current Korean national curriculum for English had a definite shift toward the application of Task-Based Learning use aimed at improving learners’ communicative competence. This finding also supports the findings of the study conducted by Zare (2007 ) who examined the attitudes of Iranian EFL learners and teachers towards TBLT after they were exposed to and applied TBLT, respectively. The results showed that the Iranian EFL learners and teachers had a positive attitude towards TBLT. This finding also supports the findings of the study in our context conducted by Tagesse (2008 ) who examined the practicability of TBI in higher institute EFL teachers. The results showed that the EFL teachers had a positive attitude towards TBLT.

The findings of the questionnaire also revealed that teachers had perceived TBLT. This could originate from the fact that when Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) approach has been introduced and become the most prevailing approach to language teaching globally, especially after the introduction of the new Education and Training Policy, the syllabi for English language teaching has also been changed from structural syllabus to communicative one. The English language textbooks were prepared with the orientations of the principles of CLT. Language tasks are tools of communicative approach in language teaching which can increase students’ use of target language.

To conclude, the findings of the open ended items and interview, for instance, the limited scopes of the definitions provided by teachers reflect that their perception of TBLT is rather inadequate. Such a limitation may be the result of insufficient training in the knowledge base of TBLT.  Many teachers may not have been exposed to the knowledge of TBLT and may not be equipped with the appropriate teaching methods. Therefore, teachers could end up attending these courses and only acquire “a little” knowledge which is inadequate to meet the needs of the implementation of TBLT in the classroom. At the same time, teachers may not be exposed to reading materials of TBLT if they are not attending teacher training courses in English education or they may not have time to spend on extra reading for the purpose of professional development. The attitude of teachers may also be a factor contributing to the limited knowledge of TBLT among teachers. Some “experienced” teachers are comfortable with the ways they have been teaching and they may be reluctant to accept new approaches in teaching English.

The second research question was inquiring on how the Teachers’ perceptions reflected on classroom practice. The finding of the questionnaire reported that teachers follow TBLT closely but in practice it contrasts with the evidence from the classroom observation. TBLT has not been implemented successfully as teachers have only limited perception and incomplete practice of its theories and methodologies. First of all, difference between perceptions and teaching practice, overlook of TBLT methodologies, limited opportunities for learners to use English, focus on instruction and product and dependence of the text book were one of the prominent observations.

These results consistent with the findings of the previous studies that have shown, despite the comparatively higher-level understanding of TBLT concepts, many teachers actually hesitated to adopt TBLT as an instructional method in classroom practice (Jeon, 2005 ). Jeon argues that teachers’ conceptual understandings of TBLT do not necessarily lead to the actual use of task in the classroom. According to him, this may result from the fact that most Korean EFL teachers still use the traditional lecture-oriented methods, which they are accustomed to, and more than that, they have the psychological pressure of facing some new disciplinary problems in using TBLT. In relation to task participants’ roles and classroom arrangements, it might be true that Korean EFL teachers have become accustomed to working in teacher-centered classrooms, thus adopting a one way instruction method rather than two-way interaction. However, a teacher has to be pliable in controlling a language learning environment because naturally, language learning necessitates the active participation of learners in language use activities.

The findings of this study related to the second research question are contradict  with the findings of Zare (2007 ) study, in which it is argued that Iranian EFL teachers participated in the study welcomed the new experience. Zare asserts that the educational environment to which people are accustomed can have some effects on their attitudes towards methods of language teaching and these attitudes can sometimes prevent or delay the acceptance of new methods of language teaching. On the other hand, he argues that these attitudes are not innate and can be changed through exposure to a new method of teaching.

This finding also supports the findings of the study in our context conducted by Tagesse (2008 ) who examined the practicability of TBI in higher institute EFL teachers. It is found out that task-based instruction is being practiced to some extent in higher institute EFL teachers, though the basic principles of the approach are not followed.

So, teachers’ perceptions regarding instructional approach have a great influence on classroom practice, it is necessary for the teacher, as a practical controller and facilitator of learners’ activities in the classroom, to have a positive perception towards TBLT in order for it to be successfully implemented.

Teachers lack practical application perception of task-based methods or techniques, teachers should be given the opportunity to acquire knowledge about TBLT related to planning, implementing, and assessing. To this end, it is suggested that education bureau, which aim at in-depth training about language teaching methodologies, should properly deal with both the strengths and weaknesses of TBLT as an instructional method ranging from basic principles to specific techniques.

The third research question was intended to identify the challenges and possibilities in the implementation of TBLT. The findings of the questionnaire and interview data analyses reveal that the challenges and possibilities towards the implementation of TBLT including; teachers’ ability to adjust to the teaching context, the plan of appropriate assessment materials for TBLT, fostering of teamwork among teachers, effective teacher training programme of TBLT and the design of an appropriate situation for affecting factors of the implementation of TBLT. These challenges of practicing TBLT were studied by Tagesse (2008 ) at higher level institute of EFL teachers that found Lack of authentic materials, shortage of time to prepare lessons, students’ background, difficult to predict how much time learners would need with each time, difficulty to test and lack of students’ interest to involve in learning process were identified to be factors that negatively influence the implementation of task based language teaching in Ethiopian colleges. Among these, students’ poor background was the most serious factor which was identified by the instructors. Difficulty in assessment is also the other challenge according to Jeon (2005 ); Zare (2007 ); Jeon and Hahn (2006 ).

So, the challenges of implementing TBLT should be given too much consideration to overcoming potential obstacles those teachers may come across in a task-based. For task-based materials, few teachers answered that materials in textbooks were not well-designed using task-based techniques in their classrooms. This partially indicates that the current EFL textbooks supposedly follow the principles of the communicative theory of language learning, properly reflect the task-based syllabus which chiefly concerns communicative skills. It also reveals that teachers are often required to redesign individual Work-oriented materials in textbooks to be in accordance with the principles of promoting interaction and collaborative learning. Traditional summative assessment is recommended to be replaced by formative assessment which highlights the diversity of forms, contents, and methods. Abiy (2013 ) also asserted that assessment was not properly practiced by high school teachers. 

Finally, for large classes, which have often been considered to be problematic with regard to disciplinary situations in task-based group work, the teacher needs to take group formation and presentation procedure into consideration. Basically task-based techniques can be used the same way in large classes as in small ones, except that large classes need more time and preparation.

4. SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION

This chapter deals, high lights on the general points of the major findings of the study are initially presented. Then possible solutions or suggestions for improvement of the existing situation are dealt with following the concluding remarks.

4.1. Summary

The main objective of this study was to investigate English teachers’ perceptions and practices of using TBLT with particular reference to Tilili, Injbara and Addis Kidam secondary schools with special attention to the challenges and possibilities as implementing in the classrooms.

In order to achieve this objective, the following questions were posed:

• To investigate teachers’ perceptions on Task-based language Teaching.
• To examine how teachers’ perceptions are reflected in their teaching approaches.
• To identify the challenges and possibilities in the implementation of TBLT. 

All English teachers of three secondary schools in Tilili, Injbara and Addis Kidam that amount a total of 32 teachers were taken as participants of the study purposively. The data required to answer those research questions were collected using questionnaire, interview and classroom observation. The questionnaire was piloted and some necessary improvements were made to the instruments before using them in the main study. The teachers’ questionnaire was designed in 5-point Likert type, and it entails 30 items with five parts and two open ended questions (See appendix A) .In addition, two volunteer teachers who believed that they implement tasks were selected for interview and observation by using convenient sampling from Tilili secondary school. A total of eight lessons were conducted based on the pre-designed Checklist (see appendix B). The observation was made to have a comprehensive image on the teachers’ actual classroom practice in relation to TBLT. The interview was conducted based on the semi structured interview mainly focused on the Challenges and possibilities for adopting TBLT (See appendix C).

The raw data obtained from these instruments were organized and summarized systematically for further analysis. In doing so, descriptive statistics were employed to analyze the responses of the questionnaire. Percentage and mean scores were used to describe the frequency of occurrence of each item. One sample t-test was computed to see if the difference between the mean scores were statistically significantly. Data obtained from the class room observation and interview was also qualitatively analyzed.

In doing so, from the analysis of the data obtained from the questionnaire, interview and class room observation, the major findings of the study included the following points;

Based on the teachers’ responses to the questionnaire, it seems that teachers’ perceptions show the respondents were positive, interesting and happy about the theories, practices and methodologies of TBLT. But it contradicts with the findings of the open ended. It proves Problems of oversimplification, narrow focus and misconceptions of teachers concerning their perceptions of TBLT. Therefore, teachers seemed not to have a complete perception of the theories, practices and methodologies of TBLT.

Mixed feelings were developed among teachers towards the implementation of TBLT. Teachers seemed to observe some of its benefits; for example, it could enhance fluency, interaction between teacher and students, interaction among students and also increase students’ motivation, learning and teaching effectiveness. Their perception was not very strong, as they did not seem to think TBLT could greatly enhance accuracy. Therefore, some of the teachers would tend to use it in conjunction with other approaches. In addition to this, teachers found challenging to implement TBLT as they thought might not had sufficient support from school, colleagues, and the Education bureau. In addition, teachers were very concerned with the assessment methods. They indicated that the new approach did not bring about changes in the assessment method. This mismatch seemed to be unacceptable to the teachers as the lessons would still be used for examination practices.

The finding of the questionnaire reported that teachers follow TBLT closely but in practice it contrasts with the evidence from the classroom observation. TBLT has not been implemented successfully as teachers have only limited perception and incomplete practice of its theories and methodologies. First of all, difference between perceptions and teaching practice, overlook of TBLT methodologies, limited opportunities for learners to use English, focus on instruction and product and dependence of the text book were one of the prominent observations.

The challenges and possibilities towards the implementation of TBLT including ;teachers’ ability to adjust to the teaching context, the plan of appropriate assessment materials for TBLT, fostering of teamwork among teachers, effective teacher training programme of TBLT and the design of an appropriate situation for affecting factors of the implementation of TBLT.

4.2. Conclusion

Based on the findings of the study, the following conclusions are drawn:

• Teachers’ perception on TBLT shows that respondents were positive, interesting and happy about the theories, practices and methodologies of TBLT. But it contradicts with the findings of the open ended and interview proves problems of oversimplification, narrow focus and misconceptions of teachers concerning their perceptions of TBLT. Therefore, teachers seemed not to have a complete perception of the theories, practices and methodologies of TBLT.
• Mixed feelings were developed among teachers towards the implementation of TBLT. Teachers found challenging to implement TBLT as they thought might not had sufficient support from school, colleagues, and the Education office.
• Teachers seemed to observe some of its benefits; it could enhance fluency, interaction between teacher and students, interaction among students and also increase students’ motivation, learning and teaching effectiveness.
• The teachers seem to be perceived the relevance of TBLT, even if they lack the proper dedication to apply it in their classroom practically. It is found out that TBLT is being practiced to some extent in secondary schools, though the basic principles of the approach are not followed.
• Concerning teachers’ roles during task implementation, both teachers play their roles well during the pre-task cycle and more or less during the first stage of task cycle. The post-task cycle is completely ignored.
• limitations were found in the implementation of TBLT teachers showed that they favor a mixture of TBLT approach with other teaching approaches, more than they favored using a truly TBLT approach.
• Challenges and possibilities towards the implementation of TBLT including; teachers’ ability to adjust to the teaching context, the plan of appropriate assessment materials for TBLT, fostering of teamwork among teachers, effective teacher training programme of TBLT and the design of an appropriate situation for affecting factors of the implementation of TBLT.

4.3. Recommendations

On the basis of the above findings of the study, the following recommendations are forwarded:

• Teachers should be prepared to enrich themselves for the successful implementation of TBLT. Having positive perception is the first step towards professional development to be participatory to learn task design, criteria for selecting and sequencing tasks, TBLT methodologies, assessment methods and criteria for evaluation.
• Lack of training hinders the effective implementation of TBLT. Therefore, it is important to conduct in-service training like refreshment courses, workshops, panel discussions, etc. so that the use of Task-Based Language Teaching / Learning method will be enhanced. In addition to this, Training among colleagues, experience sharing among schools, seminar, and courses organized by official bodies are needed. Therefore, the training should be focused on helping teachers to perceive theories, methodologies and assessment criteria.
• Teachers need to develop the habit of drawing supplementary reading texts or selecting adapting authentic materials based on the students’ level and interest. Further, devising a number of tasks and extended activities to enable them tackle different tasks strategically.
• The challenges of implementing TBLT should be given too much consideration to overcoming potential obstacles those teachers may come across in a task-based.

4.4. Suggestions for Research

This study has attempted to raise some critical discussions by comparing and contrasting the perception and implementation of TBLT in three secondary schools, with reference to the evidence from teachers’ perceptions and their teaching practices.

• Effective implementation of TBLT is still an immense challenge for teachers in this study. The underlying principles and rationales of TBLT have been widely researched in the field of SLA. The real challenge lies in the actual implementation of TBLT in teaching practices with the relevant knowledge, skills and approach that are grounded in SLA research.
• Finally, the objective of the study solely lay on exploring teachers’ perception and practice of TBLT. The sample framework was restricted to secondary schools. In the study, students did not include. Thus these gaps need further investigation.

Funding: This study received no specific financial support.

Competing Interests: The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Contributors/Acknowledgement: I would like to express my deep whole-hearted gratitude and indebtedness to my Advisor Abiy Yigzaw (Dr.) for his unreserved assistance, guidance and very constructive supervision from inception until the accomplishment of the research work. I also extend my thanks and appreciation to my colleagues and teachers for their cooperation in filling the questionnaire, interview and allowing their classrooms to observe during their lessons for my work. All my family members are also acknowledged.

REFERENCES

Abiy, Y., 2013. High school English teachers and Students perceptions, attitudes and actual practices of continuous assessment. Educational Research and Reviews, 8(16): 1489-1498. View at Google Scholar 

Alamirew, G., 1992. The applicability of group work in learning English. Unpublished M.A Thesis, Addis Ababa University.

Birch, J., 2005. Balancing fluency, accuracy and complexity trough task characteristics. In Edward, C. and Willis, J. (Eds.), Teachers exploring tasks in English language teaching. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Borg, 2001. Teacher beliefs. ELT Journal, 55(2): 186-188. View at Google Scholar 

Bygate, M., P. Skehan and M. Swain, 2001. Researching pedagogical tasks: Second language learning, teaching and testing. Harlow, UK: Longman.

Candlin, C.N., 2001. Afterword: Taking the curriculum to task. In M. Bygate, P. Skehan,  & M. Swain (Eds.), Researching pedagogic tasks: Second language learning, teaching and testing. Essex: Pearson Education Limited. pp: 229-243.

Dornyei, Z., 2007. Research methods in applied linguistics: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Ellis, R., 2000. Task-based research and language pedagogy. Language Teaching Research, 4(3): 193-220. View at Google Scholar | View at Publisher

Ellis, R., 2003. Task based language learning and teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Gebremedihin, S., 1993. Individualized reading for EAP for social science first year students in Addis Ababa University. (Unpublished PhD Dissertation).

Getachew, B.K., 2012. Teachers. roles and perceptions in the context of plasma delivered English lessons: Grade 10 in focus. Addis Ababa University (Unpublished PhD Dissertation).

Hailom, B., 1982. English conditional sentences: A comparative analysis of the structural and  communicative approaches in teaching non-native speakers. Unpublished MA Thesis, Addis Ababa University.

Jeon, I.-J., 2005. An analysis of task-based materials and performance: Focused on Korean high school English textbooks. English Teaching, 60(2): 87-109. View at Google Scholar 

Jeon, I.J. and J.W. Hahn, 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. View at Google Scholar 

Koul, L., 1984. Methodology of educational research. 2nd Edn., Delhi: Vikas Publishing Ltd.

Krashen and Terrell, 1987. The natural approach: Language acquisition in the classroom. London: Printice Hall.

Leaver, B.L. and M.A. Kaplan, 2004. Task-based instruction in U.S government slavic language programs. In Leaver, B. L and Willis, J. R. (Eds.), Task based  instruction in foreign language education: practices and programs. Washington, D. C: Georgetown University Press.

Little-Wood, W., 1981. Communicative language teaching: An introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lochana, M. and G. Deb, 2006. Task based teaching: Learning English without tears. Asian EFL Journal, 8(3): 140-154. View at Google Scholar 

Long, M.H., 1997. Focus on form in task-based language teaching. Fourth Annual McGraw-Hill Satellite Teleconference.

Lopes, J., 2004. Introducing TBI for teaching English in Brazil: Learning how to leap the hurdles. Washington, D. C: Georgetown University Press.

Nunan, D., 1989. Designing tasks for the communicative classroom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Nunan, D., 2004. Task-based language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University  Press.

Nunan, D., 2006. Task-based language teaching in Asian context: Defining task. Asian EFL Journal Quarterly, 8(3): 12-18.

Osterman, K.F. and R.B. Kottkamp, 1993. Reflective practice for educators. Newbury Park, CA: Corwin Press.

Prabhu, N.S., 1987. Second language pedagogy: A perspective. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Richards, J. and J. Rodgers, 2001. Approaches and methods in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Richards, J. and T. Rodgers, 1986. Approaches and methods in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Richards, J.C. and M. Lockhart, 1994. Reflective teaching in the language classrooms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Rivers, W.M., 1983. Speaking in many languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Selinger, H.W. and E. Shohamy, 1989. Second language research methods. Oxford University Press.

Shehadeh, A., 2005. Task-based language learning and teaching: Theories and applications. In Edward and Willis, J. (Eds.) 2005, Teachers exploring tasks in english language teaching. NewYork: Palgrave Macmillan.

Skehan, P., 1996a. A framework for the implementation of task-based instruction. Applied Linguistics, 17(1): 38-62. View at Google Scholar | View at Publisher

Skehan, P., 1996b. Second language acquisition research and task-based instruction. In Willis, J and Willis, D. (Eds.) 1996, Challenge and changes in language teaching. Oxford: Heinemann.

Skehan, P., 1998. A cognitive approach to language learning. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Skehan, P. and P. Foster, 1997. Task type and task processing conditions as influences on foreign language performance. Language Teaching Research, 1(3): 185-211. View at Google Scholar | View at Publisher

Tagesse, D., 2008. The practicability of task based language teaching in higher institutes, Among Addis Ababa university EFL students. (Unpublished Master Thesis) Addis Ababa University.

Turner, J., 1993. Another researcher comments. TESOL Quarterly, 27(4): 736-739.View at Google Scholar 

Willis, J., 1996. A framework for task-based learning. London: Longman.

Willis, J., 2004. Perspectives on task-based instruction: Understanding our practices, acknowledging different practitioners. In Leaver, B.L and Willis, J.R. (Eds.), Task-based Instruction in Foreign language Education: practices and Programs. Washington, D.C: Georgetown University Press.

Zare, G., 2007. The attitudes of the Iranian EFL learners and teachers towards task-based language teaching. (Unpublished MA Thesis). Shiraz University, Shiraz.

APPENDIX-A

Bahir Dar University Faculty of Humanities Department of English

Research Questionnaire

Teachers’ Questionnaire

First of all I would like to thank you in advance for the time you are willing to devote to fill out this questionnaire. The questionnaire is designed to examine Awi Zone EFL teachers’ perception and practice of Task-Based Language Teaching (TBLT).

The purpose of the study is to investigate teachers’ perception and practice of TBLT. Therefore, for this critical work, you are expected to provide your genuine input which is very important to get hints to go to the problems. The response could be either putting a tick mark in the box or just giving the possible responses in written form on the space provided corresponding to each questionnaire.

Thank you for your cooperation!

Code no……………

Section I: General and Demographic Information of respondents

Sex:               □ male                             □ female

Age:              □ 20-29                            □ 30-39             □ 40-49            □ 50 +

Educational background: □ ≥PhD            □ MA           □ BA/Bed           □ ≤Diploma

Total number of years teaching English:  □ less than 5 year’s    □ 5 to 9 years    □ 10 to 20 years’  

□ More than 20    

Questionnaire Items	Response
I have a positive perception towards the theories TBLT.	SD	D	U	A	SA
I am very happy with the practice and methodologies of TBLT.
I am well-known with the rationale behind the implementation of TBLT in my school
I am very interesting to know about TBLT.

Section II: Teachers’ perceptions of TBLT

Questionnaire Items	SD	D	U	A	SA
Regarding the adoption of TBLT in the English curriculum, I think it is challenging.
The textbook used in my school has truly adopted a TBLT approach.
Regarding the adoption of TBLT in the English curriculum, I think it is radical.
Regarding the adoption of TBLT in the English curriculum, I think it has created pressure.
Education Bureau has given sufficient support regarding the adoption of TBLT.
Team work is essential to the successful implementation of TBLT.
Assessment methods should be changed to promote the implementation of TBLT.
I find the textbook helps me conduct my lessons.
My school has a good thinking implemented a TBLT approach to English language teaching.

The following statements address teachers’ perceptions of TBLT. Please answer by putting a tick mark (√) in a box that matches your position most, according to the following scale: SA (strongly agree), A (agree),U (Undecided), D (disagree), SD (strongly disagree).

Section-III. Teachers’ perception on Implementing TBLT

Questionnaire Items	SD	D	U	A	SA
TBL can increase learners’ motivation to learn.
TBL can transform the learning process to be more meaningful.
I believe TBL can increase my learning effectiveness.
TBL can improve learners’ communicative competency.
TBL can enhance learners’ fluency in English.
I think TBL is a suitable approach for students in AWI ZONE.
TBL provides students with more opportunities to use English.
TBL can enhance the interactions among students in class.
TBL can enhance the interactions between teacher and students in class.
I believe TBL can increase my teaching effectiveness.

Section-IV.  Possibilities of Implementing TBLT.

Checklist	Observation
Does the teacher divide the class into pairs/groups?
Is the task adequately introduced?
Are clear instructions given?
How many phases are involved in the task?
Is the monitoring involved?
Is there a report stage?
Is there a report-back (language focus) stage?

Section-V. Limitations and challenges of TBLT

Questionnaire Items	SD	D	U	A	SA
I favor a mixture of TBLT approach with other teaching approaches.
I favor a truly TBLT approach.
TBLT can improve learners’ accuracy in English skill.

Questionnaire Items	SD	D	U	A	SA
The introduction of TBLT has changed my teaching methods.
I am adopting a TBLT approach in my teaching.
I follow the TBLT textbook closely.
I have designed additional TBLT- related tasks to supplement the textbook Materials I am using.

Section VII: Open-ended questions

Checklist	Observation
Does the teacher divide the class into pairs/groups?
Is the task adequately introduced?
Are clear instructions given?
How many phases are involved in the task?
Is the monitoring involved?
Is there a report stage?
Is there a report-back (language focus) stage?

1. How do you define Task-Based Language Teaching?

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

2. What do you think are the crucial factors for the effective implementation of TBLT in your school?

APPENDIX-B

Bahir Dar University

Faculty of Humanities Graduate Program

Department of English Language and Literature

Observation Checklist

Lessons being observed _______________________Date_____________________

Observer __________________________________Time_______________________

Grade and Section_________________________ Teacher______________________

I. Observing Tasks

II. Observing the Teacher

IV. Comments of the Observer

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

Appendix-C

Bahir Dar University

Faculty of Humanities Graduate Program

Department of English Language and Literature

Interview questions for teachers

1. How do you define Task Based Language Teaching?
2. What are the challenges and possibilities for adopting TBLT?

T-TEST

/TESTVAL=3

/MISSING=ANALYSIS

/VARIABLES=PERCEPTION

/CRITERIA=CI(.95).

T-Test

[DataSet0]

One-Sample Statistics
	N	Mean	Std. Deviation		Std. Error Mean
PERCEPTION	30	3.727	0.35381		0.0646
One-Sample Test
	Test Value = 3
	t	df	Sig. (2-tailed)	Mean Difference		95% Confidence Interval of the Difference
						Lower			Upper
PERCEPTION	11.255	29	0	0.727		0.5949			0.8591

Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's Alpha	Cronbach's Alpha Based on Standardized Items	N of Items
0.995	0.996	30