In defence of a modular curriculum for tasks.

In this article, I start by distinguishing two approaches to the design of a language curriculum: the structural approach and the task-based approach. I then present my views relating to three key question: Is one approach superior to the other? When implemented, do these approaches result in differ...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:ELT Journal: English Language Teaching Journal Vol. 74; no. 2; pp. 185 - 195
Autor principal: Ellis, Rod
Formato: Artículo
Publicado: Oxford University Press / USA Apr2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
fields @attributes:
  recordID: 1
pdfLink:
plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=hlh&AN=143420851&site=ehost-live
header:
  @attributes:
    shortDbName: hlh
    uiTerm: 143420851
    longDbName: Humanities International Complete
    uiTag: AN
  controlInfo:
    bkinfo:
    jinfo:
      jid:
        09510893
        ELT
      jtl: ELT Journal: English Language Teaching Journal
      issn: 09510893
      maglogo: N
    pubinfo:
      dt: Apr2020
      vid: 74
      iid: 2
      pid: 622
      pub: Oxford University Press / USA
    artinfo:
      ui:
        143420851
        10.1093/elt/ccaa015
      ppf: 185
      ppct: 10
      formats:
      tig:
        atl: In defence of a modular curriculum for tasks.
      aug:
        au: Ellis, Rod
      su:
        Curriculum
        Teaching methods
        Independent study
        Learning modules
        Curriculum planning
        Foreign language education
        Education
      sug:
        subj:
          Curriculum
          Teaching methods
          Independent study
          Learning modules
          Curriculum planning
          Foreign language education
          Education
      ab: In this article, I start by distinguishing two approaches to the design of a language curriculum: the structural approach and the task-based approach. I then present my views relating to three key question: Is one approach superior to the other? When implemented, do these approaches result in different classroom processes? Are there advantages in combining the two approaches? I argue that the evidence points to the superiority of a task-based approach, that prior explicit instruction can have a deleterious effect on the performance of tasks and that a curriculum that combines the two approaches is preferable. I conclude by pointing out the flexibility of a modular curriculum that makes it well suited to a variety of instructional contexts.
      pubtype: Academic Journal
      doctype: Article
      src: R
    language: English
    refInfo:
    copyright:
      @attributes:
        flag: Y
      dt:
        @attributes:
          year: 2020
    holdings:
      @attributes:
        islocal: N