The Three Phases in a Communicative Oral Task : Preparation,

Performing, Accountability
Francisco C. Fogaça

Every communicative TASK, regardless of its objectives and characteristics, is a threefold activity:

Preparation Phase:

sets the mood for the activity;

contextualizes;
helps build up students confidence
makes students perceive the goals of the TASK
makes instructions less 'explained' and more 'practical'
the teacher plays a more central role through more controlled activities like open pairs,
choral repetition, T-Ss and Ss-Ss guided dialogues, depending on the type of TASK and its
goals;

Performing phase

Students will work on their own pace and will try to accomplish the TASK; pair work;
The teacher acts more like an observer and supervisor, trying to make sure everyone is
actively involved in the activity, helping students who are stuck for ideas, for instance;
teacher doesn't interfere;

Accountability

Accountability is when the student accounts for what he has learned , when he is going to show or
report his achievements on a particular TASK. This can be done in a direct way, e.g., by asking the
student to tell which language items he used to perform the TASK, or in an indirect way, by asking
him to report on the content of the conversation he has just had with his fellow student (in case of
an oral task). What is going to determine the type of the accountability is the nature of the TASK
and its content. Anyway, the main purposes of the accountability are :
a) Assessment – to what extent the results reflect the goals of the TASK;
b) Self-assessment : by enabling the student to have a better perception of his progress;
c) Awareness – students’ perception of their learning strategies and mental processes, and the
way he uses the language;
d) Feedback
d) Motivation

The accountability process is present in all types of communicative TASKS, involving the 4 skills
and the different communicative competencies. If the goal of a Reading Comprehension Task is the
development of reading strategies, then the student will account for the strategies he used to reach
the answers (accomplish the TASK). The student has to show the strategies he used, even though
he may not know their names, so that he becomes aware of his mental processes and develops
even more. If the teacher simply corrects the exercise, then there is no accountability. In other
words, it has to bring about awareness.

A few more hints about accountability:

the teacher checks learning results and helps students realize how much they learned
through the activity;
It helps to foster in the student a perception of the way he uses the language
 the type of accountability will vary according to the goal of the TASK and has to match it;
Some typical accountability activities:
asking students to report on their findings or on their conversations;
comparing different results;
dramatizing short dialogues, when they are 'short'
asking students about the language they used, if the focus is more on functions;
asking students to tell how they got to that conclusion (ex: in the case of a reading
or listening activity)
etc.

Focus on Language (practice tasks)

Preparation Phase in Focus on Language

One of the hardest of the 3 phases is the preparation one, because it requires a careful plan and
because it will enable students to be more independent and self-assured. Unfortunately it is the
most neglected of the 3 moments involved in a TASK. And the reason I chose Focus on Language
to analyze is that this type of TASK involves a large repertoire of techniques and skills, which can
be also used in other types of TASKS. So, let’s now take a better look at it.

Contextualization: this is the moment when the teacher and students will get involved in
the TASK . It’s not enough to explain what they have to do in the TASK, but also to create
an atmosphere by relating it to reality and thus providing a linking among the various
TASKS. According to Scott (1982, Communication in the Classroom) :
“Contextualization is the means by which the meaning of a language item is made clear.
(...) From a communicative point of view an item only takes on meaning as a result of the
total context in which it is used, and an item without context in this sense cannot be said to
have meaning at all. It must therefore be made clear to the students, as a general
observation about how language works, that what you say takes on its meaning as a result
of the context, where the context is taken to mean a constellation of factors, such as who
the speakers are, their relationship to one another, what they are trying to do, what has just
been said, where they are, and so on, in addition to the ideational content of what they are
saying.”
Open pairs X instructions

It is a feature of communicative methodology that practice follows quickly upon

contextualization. It may start with choral repetition by the students of the language
presented and then move into individual responses directed by the teacher (T-Ss).

He can then ask individual students to ask the questions to each other (S-S type of
interaction), in open pairs, so that everyone can listen to the pair who is performing the
short dialogue. The importance of this moment is that the teacher can actually help
students with new vocabulary, intonation – by asking them to repeat individually or as a
group, if necessary – and even the grammar needed to perform the dialogues. In other
words, he is helping students to build confidence and preparing them to work on their own.
Moreover, as students know what is expected from them – both in relation to the language
to be used and the degree of complexity in which they have to approach the TASK – it
avoids the long and unnecessary explanations when they have to work in closed pairs. So,
instead of explaining the task, DO IT!
Teacher’s Role: Here your main job is to make sure that all the students know what they
have to practice and to see that they practice it effectively . Your role is, then, that of a
CONDUCTOR – by conducting the open pair dialogues, by asking them, whenever
necessary, to repeat sentences, chunks, phrases or words, by making sure pronunciation
and intonation poses no problem for a pair work practice, and by instigating them to use a
variety of items in their conversations.

Open-pair practice should not be confused with the traditional substitution drill used in
structural approaches, in which students simply use the given structure and substitute parts
of it with different words, but without paying attention to meaning.

Some important reminders for open-pair practice:

• Don’t let it go for too long, but make sure you call all of the students in
class:
• Choose students at random in the class, so that the students won’t know
whose turn it is going to be next;
• Allow them time to think, and don’t interrupt them while they are trying to
communicate their thoughts. You may comment on their mistakes, of
course, and even ask them to repeat a word or structure, but do it after
they tried it first.
• Use different ideas from those in the TASK proposed by the book.

Open Pairs & information gap

This is one of the most fundamental concepts of communicative teaching, and a

characteristic of all communicative TASKS. Keith Morrow, in his ‘Principles of
Communicative Methodology’ , says:

In real life, communication takes place between two (or more) people, one of whom knows
something that is unknown to the other(s). The purpose of communication is to bridge this
information gap. This may seem to some a gross over-simplification of the uses of
language. What about comments such as ‘Hello’ or ‘Nice day, isn’t it?’ Surely no transfer of
information is taking place here. In fact it depe3nds on what you mean by ‘’information’.
Communication is taking place here, but the information which is transferred is of the
‘interpersonal’ (social) type rather than ‘ideational’ (factual). In other words, the speakers
are exchanging or confirming information about their social relationship.
In classroom terms, an information gap exercise means that one student must be in a
position to tell another something that the second student does not already know. If two
students are looking at a picture of a street scene and one says to the other, ‘where is the
dog?’ when he knows that the dog is sitting outside the post-office because he can see it as
clearly as his fellow-student can, the this is not communicative. There is no information gap.
But if one student has the picture of the street scene and the other has a similar picture with
some features missing which he find out from the first student, then the same question
becomes real, meaningful – and communicative.

So, this means that the language practiced in open pairs should differ from that practiced in
pairwork, for the sake of information gap. You wouldn’t practice asking people’s ages – A:
How old are you? B: I’m ..... ‘ – in open pairs and then in closed pairs, unless some
information gap was provided, e.g. asking them to pretend they are different people in open
pairs and then answer their real ages in pairwork. Other situations are so open that no
matter how much information you exchange in open pairs, there will always be information
to be found out in pair work. However, make sure you don’t repeat the same examples from
the book.
Choral and individual repetition

A very simple repetition technique is called ‘back-to-front’, in which you ask your students --
in groups or individually – to repeat the words of a sentence or phrase beginning with the
last one and building it up till they are able to say it completely. For example, supposing you
want to ask your students to repeat ‘I haven’t made up my mind yet...’ , which can be
 frustrating if you ask them to say it just like that. But by dividing it into several smaller
chunks this can be accomplished easily ( ...yet... mind yet... made up... made up my mind
yet ... haven’t... haven’ made up my mind yet... I haven’t made up my mind yet...) . This, of
course, will depend on how successful students are in repeating it. This may be a very
simple and quick operation, or may take some time. But, it may prove to be very useful and
important in the process of building their confidence.
Dealing with the written instruction in the book

Instructions will be much easier if enough open-pair practice is provided in the preparation
phase. So, you should ask your students to read the instructions silently and try to figure
out by themselves what they are supposed to do in the TASK. As it is almost exactly the
same thing they have just done, it will be usually very clear. However, don’t take it for
granted that they will understand the instructions without any explanation at all. Make sure
they know exactly what they have to do by asking them either to explain what they have
understood – in English, if possible – or by answering to some clarifying questions. It is
important that your students foster their independence and be able to read and understand
instructions by themselves, just as you do with reading comprehension skills.

Performing phase in Focus on Language

In this phase the teacher :

Observes the pairs/groups performing the TASK ;

Makes sure everybody is actively engaged in the TASK by helping the pairs whenever they
are stuck for ideas;
Mediates the conversations whenever some explanation is needed;
Conducts the accountability process after the TASK is done;

The student takes risks by trying to accomplish the TASK and negotiates meanings with his
classmates. This is why it so important that he speaks only the target language. By resorting to
Portuguese, he won’t develop his strategic competence and all the others as well.
In this phase, the learner gets a chance to work independently, which is good for motivation and
takes on responsibility for what he does.

Pairing up & Type of interaction ==> pair work, interviews, mingles, find someone who... opinion
polls, etc.

Accountability in Focus on Language

Goals <==> accountability

The student will be accountable for what he has learned ; he is going to show or report his
achievements on a particular TASK. This can be done in a direct way, e.g., by asking the student to
tell which language items he used to perform the TASK, or in an indirect way, by asking him to
report on the content of the conversation he has just had with his fellow student (in case of an oral
task). What is going to determine the type of the accountability is the nature of the TASK and its
content.

First of all, you have to analyze the competence the TASK is aiming at (grammatical, socio-
linguistic, strategic or discourse) and its main component (lexical, structural or simply
communicative). For a strong structural component, during accountability make sure your students
have mastered the use of that particular structure. If a strong lexical component is the case, then
your accountability has to consider those items. But if the TASK has a stronger communicative
component, then accountability should focus on the use of the given functions on that particular
TASK and the teacher should ask students to tell which of the exponents they have used besides
the content of their conversation.

This is why the common practice of asking students to dramatize their dialogues for the whole class
during accountability may prove not to be a very efficient one. Will this make them more aware of
the language, structure, lexical items, exponents and functions (whatever the goal may be) ?

Focus On Communication (production tasks)

Goals ==> To integrate new language items to previously learned ones;

To develop negotiation skills and fluency;
To develop strategic competence;
To develop discourse competence;

FOL X FOC
Focus on language and Focus on Communication have different goals. While FOL aims at
developing grammatical competence and some negotiation skills through the ‘practice’ of specific
functions/exponents within limited situations, FOC has a much broader objective, enabling students
to have free conversations and to use any of the language items they have learned so far.

The preparation phase in FOC

Because of its ample objectives, the preparation phase cannot work as a ‘drill’ or guided practice in
open pairs, as in FOL. But somehow the functions to be used in the conversation have to be
reviewed or elicited from the students before they actually produce their dialogues. Of course, any
activity is preceded by a contextualization.

Reading the situation

The teacher can ask students to read silently the situation they will be involved in , and then
check if they all understand what they’ll be talking about . Students can paraphrase what
they’ve just read and the teacher will make sure they know what they have to do.
Eliciting function/exponents
The teacher can then ask students to think of questions that can be used in the
conversation – questions will require answers and the dialogue will occur naturally.
It is his job to instigate students to think of different language items (other than the ones just
learned) and exponents that can be included in the conversation. As the ideas come out,
the teacher can write them on the board so that students can resort to some of them while
they’re talking to their colleagues (in pairs or in groups). This phase is really important
because students will have an idea of what they can use in their conversations and also
how complex the task is. They will also know what is expected to be a successful
accomplishment of that specific task.
Open pairs
This is a possibility. However, it should only be done if you feel that your students have not
mastered the use of some of the functions needed for the TASK. Anyway, the relevance of
this technique here is one of the decisions you have to make. The same goes for repetition
of exponents of lexical items.

The performing phase in FOC

OK, now it’s time for performing! The same criteria for grouping and arrangements used in FOL can
be applied here. Make sure students have enough time to actively engage in their conversations,
and your role is to ensure that their conversations get started. It’s important to tell them before hand
how much time they’ll have to accomplish the task. The teacher can ask students to exchange pairs
once or twice before accountability.
The situations provided present learners with the opportunity to practice speaking under conditions
that are as close as possible to those of normal communication, involving information gap, choice
and feedback, given the language the student has at his disposal. As Roger Scott (1981) puts it
‘From a communicative point of view, using language well is not a simple question of
grammaticality, but one of overall appropriacy and acceptability’.

Teacher’s Role

The teacher will act as an observer and ‘instigator’ in case students get stuck for ideas. But by no
means should he interfere in their conversations, specially for corrections. Students have to take
risks and feel free to experiment with the language. Making mistakes is part of the learning process.
In most cases it is better to take notes of relevant mistakes you may observe and comment on them
after the task is done.

Accountability in FOC

Again, as the objectives of FOC are different from those of FOL, so are the objectives of the
accountability phase. While in FOL the teacher wants to make sure students have used the
language items properly or that the limited negotiation skills have been achieved, here the
accomplishment of the task is a consequence of an adequate use of all communicative components
( grammatical, socio-liguistic, discourse and strategic). Asking students to retell what they have
talked about is a good way to evaluate the content, language and effectiveness of the dialogues
produced in the task.

Bibliography:

• Brown, H. Douglas (1987) - Principles of language Learning and Teaching ;Prentice-Hall

• Ellis, Rod (1985) - Understanding Second Language Acquisition ; Oxford University Press
• Johnson, keith and Morrow, Keith (1982) - Communication in the Classroom; Longman Handbooks for Language
Teachers
• Nunan, David (1992)- Designing Tasks for the Communicative Classroom ; Cambridge University Press
• Omaggio, Alice C. (1986) - Teaching language in Context ;Heinle & Heinle Publishers, Inc.
• Richards,Jack C. and Rodgers, Theodore S. (1986) - Approaches And methods in Language Teaching; Cambridge
University Press
• Stern, H. H. (1984) - Fundamental Concepts of language Teaching ;Oxford university Press
• Stevick , Earl W. (1976) - Memory Meaning and Method ; Newbury House