Abstract

 

Speaking  is  considered  one  of  the  most  important  language  skills that needs to be developed and mastered by language learners. However, mastering this language skill does not go so easily with  the  EFL  learners. Many SL and EFL students think of speaking as the most  difficult  skill to attain since it requires first and foremost a great deal of practice and exposure also. To overcome this problem, teachers should seek a new approach which provides learners with opportunities to  improve  their speaking skills. One of the highly recommended approaches is task-based language teaching which provides learners with  real  life  contexts   to practice  speaking  English  with  their  classmates.  The  purpose  of  the current  study  is  to  investigate  the  effects  of  using  task-based  instruction on developing Saudi EFL students‘ speaking skil s. In the second place, it attempts to explore students‘ perceptions towards the use of task-based learning in the classroom. To this end, 60 Saudi EFL learners  in  the department  of  English  Language  and  Translation,   Qassim   University, Saudi Arabia, participated in the  study.  To  homogenize  the  participants‘  level of proficiency, the Quick Placement Test was employed, and the participants  with  the  intermediate  level  of   proficiency   were   selected. Then, the participants  were  randomly  divided  into  two  groups:  thirty students representing the experimental group studied six  units  practicing English speaking under task-based instruction, while thirty  students representing the  control  group  studied  the   same   units   following   the regular instruction. Research data were gathered through speaking tests (TOEIC), semi-structured interviews and questionnaires. The data from

 

the speaking test were statistically analyzed using mean scores, standard deviation scores, and t-test for dependent samples and paired-sample. The speaking test  findings indicated that there were statistically significant differences between  the  mean  scores  of  the  experimental  group  and  that of the control group on the post-test in favor of  the  experimental  group which was exposed to the task-based instruction in the speaking skills. Moreover, a qualitative analysis of the interviews and questionnaire data demonstrated that the majority of the experimental group  had  positive reactions to the task-based instruction. They admitted that they  liked  the TBSA and wanted  to  use  it  frequently  in  learning  speaking.  The  majority of the experimental group also added  that  their  speaking  ability  has improved after implementing TBLT. The  results  of  the  current  study  can also be  useful  for teachers  and   curriculum   planners   when   designing future curricula textbooks.

Key terms: task-based approach, traditional approach, speaking skills, task, attitudes

 

 

Introduction

Nowadays English is the  most  important  language  in  the  world because it is used as a means of communication among nations for trade, tourism, education, technology, traveling…etc. It is the  fastest  growing language in the world, with  more  people  speaking  English  than  ever before.  This  is  a  fact  that  seems  to  be  irreversible.  English  has  become the  official  language of the  business  and  scientific  world  (Tu,  2014). English is an international language, spoken in many  countries  both  as  a native and as a  second  or  foreign  language.  Linguistic  scholars  estimated that at the end of the 20 th century, 80% of English users were non-native speakers (Crystal, 2003). Nunan (2006) also  confirms that over  the  past two decades, there has been significant increase  in  the  number  of  people who speak English as a second language around the  world.  Nunan further adds that the  figure  of  non-native  speakers  of  English  is  significantly  greater  than English  native  speakers.  Realizing  the  important  role   of English nowadays as an international language urged  many  countries  all around the  world  to   literate  their  young  generation   in  English   with  the aim of making  them  able to establish and  maintain successful communication  with  the  people  of  the  world   for   various   reasons (Ravirot,  2015).Consequently,  mastering  English   has   become   a prerequisite that everyone needs to master and learn. Thus, the status  of English is more noticeable as a lingua franca over the world.

 

The distinguished status  of  English  on  the  international  level  is  a major factor  that  contributes  to  the  increase  in  the  importance  of  English  in many Asian countries in general and  in  Saudi   Arabia  particularly  (Hamzah and Ting 2010). In many Asian countries, English is taught as a foreign language in schools, colleges and universities, and the purpose of learning English is to prepare the learners for effective and efficient communication in  English  in  their  social  and  professional  situations.  In Saudi Arabia, the situation is not different where English has become a compulsory language subject from primary school until university. Saudi Arabia, being part of the  Arab  world,  is  also  doing  its  best  to  make English  an  integral  part  of  its  education  system.  Accordingly,  the  main aim of teaching English in Saudi schools and universities is to equip the students with  good  and  fluent  communication  skills  in  English   so   that they become able to enroll in the labor market and  to  attain  the  jobs chances, gaining  knowledge,  understanding  others’  cultures,  studying overseas and travelling for pleasure (www.mkgedu.sa). To achieve these objectives, the teaching of English in Saudi Arabia is directed to develop students‘ competence in four language skil s; they are listening, speaking, reading, and writing skills (Al jaref, 2007).

Of all the four macro  English  skills,  speaking  is  the  most  important one required for communication (Hassan 2014). Speaking is generally considered  the  most  important  aspect  of  learning  a  second/foreign language (Nunan,  2006).  Speaking  is  the  means  through  which  learners can   make   presentations,  offer  explanations,  transmit  information, describe  things, make polite  requests,  and  exchange  ideas  with  others  or to express their opinions (Lui, 2014). The mastery of speaking skill in

 

 

English   is   a   priority   for   many   second  or   foreign   language   learners. To Aliakbari & Jamalvandi (2010), it is  by  this  skill  that  learners are judged. Many learners think that to be able to speak in  English  means  to know the English language. Lui (2014) claims that success in language learning is measured in terms of  the  ability  to  carry  out  a  conversation  in the  target  language.   Consequently,   learners   often  evaluate   their   success in  language learning as  well  as  the  effectiveness  of  their  English   course on the basis of how well they feel they have improved in their spoken  language proficiency.

In  spite   of  the   importance   often  assigned   to  the   speaking  skills, it   is   widely   acknowledged   that    currently    learning    to   speak   English in  many  countries  is  not  successful  despite   studying   for   many   years (chen and Zhang, 2015;  Lui,  2014;  Chen,  2011).  According  to   the findings from recent researches at the Asian context, it is found that many students study English for many years but  they  cannot  apply  the  skills  in  real life communicative situations effectively (Ho and Long, 2014; Hadi, 2013; Sae-ong, 2010, Ismail and Meryem, 2009). Many  learners  of  a foreign language usually do not like or are afraid of speaking in the target language, and most  of  the  time  they  exhibit  a  passive  attitude  in  class, since  they do  not  have  the  opportunity  to  express  themselves   naturally and  spontaneously  (Sae-ong, 2010). Students cannot   communicate verbally  in  English  because  of  shyness, fear of  making  mistakes  in  front of others, inadequate vocabulary,  or  simply  lacking  the  necessary knowledge. Most of them wish that they had been  taught  speaking  skills more properly at university.

 

However, the situation in Saudi Arabia is not an exception. It  is generally similar to the current ones in many parts of the world. In Saudi Arabia, the teaching of  English  speaking  skill  has  been  deemed  by  many to be rather  ineffective. For example, Alseweed in his study‘s (2009) states that Saudi students who have spent eight years learning English in primary and secondary  schools have relatively low English  proficiency. Rahman and Alhaisoni add  that  many  learners who  study  a  foreign  language find difficulties expressing themselves fluently in the  target language. Hassan (2014) and Al jaref (2007) find that the university students cannot  express  themselves  orally.  As  a  result,  they have developed  poor  speaking  ability.  In  similar  studies,   Alsamadani   and Ibnian (2015) and  Alseweed  (2009)  attribute  the  students‘  poor  mastery of the necessary EFL  speaking skills to  several  reasons.  Firstly,  the methods of  teaching  adopted  don‘t  motivate  or  arouse  students‘  interest in speaking English. Secondly, teachers  of  English  have  been  found  to adopt traditional methods in  teaching  English.  In  such  methods,  the teachers‘ focus is on grammatical rules, memorization of vocabulary, and translation  of  reading  texts and  writing tasks  but  rarely  have  their  students involved in speaking activities.  The  same  ideas  are  also  reported by Ho and Long  (2014) who  show  that  Vietnamese  teachers  spend  most of the time on teaching grammar and guiding learners to do grammar and vocabulary exercises. The focus on teaching vocabulary and grammar has created negative impacts  on  learners‘  learning.  Thirdly,  to  make the situation worse, both teachers and  Saudi  learners in  EFL  classes frequently use Arabic language throughout English classes. Finally, Al

 

 

Jaref (2007) and Alseweed (2009) state that most EFL teachers  often  provide insufficient  opportunities  for   learners   to   practice   English.   In Saudi Arabia, as a non-English speaking  community,  opportunities  to practice English outside the classroom  are  rare.  There  is  lack  of  exposure to the native speakers of English as well as authentic materials, which is something that both students and teachers  agree  on.  This  goes  in accordance with Al Jaref (2007) who concludes that teachers do not provide classroom  instruction  that  leads  students to  have   an  opportunity to communicate as in real-life situations.

All  the  previously  mentioned  reasons  behind  the  poor  mastery  of the speaking skill indicate that Saudi EFL  students lack the extensive exposure to the English language in real situations, and there is a need  to provide similar situations in classrooms  in  order  to  make  learners  interact and experience using English. Hashim et al (2014) shows that learning a language flourishes most when learners are in a positive environment and are  given opportunities  to  communicate   in   authentic   situations. Accordingly,  many  language teachers, experts   and   researchers   are seeking to find something that can create  a  difference  in  their  classroom. They have been looking for an effective teaching approach,  which  can provide learners with a natural context for language use. Task-based approach seems to satisfy this need to the greatest extent possible (Adendorff, 2014; Ellis, 2003 and Nunan, 2006). Task-Based Language Teaching itself is one  of  the  mainly  efficient  approaches  to   teach  a language by engaging learners in real situations (Willis & Willis, 2007). Hadi, (2013) stated that using a variety of tasks increases student talks,

 

makes the classroom atmosphere relaxing, and reinforces students‘ comprehensible input. Lee (2004) suggested that TBLT has improved the learners‘ self-confidence, learning attitudes, and thinking skills. Other researchers (Bao and Du, 2015; Mohammad pour and Rashid, 2015; Lui, 2014; chen and Zhang, 2015; Chen, 2011; Chen & Yang, 2009; Chuang, 2010; and Wang, 2010 and Prabu, 1987) report that task-based learning approach can  increase and  improve  students‘ English  speaking performance. It is one of the suitable  approaches  to   create   a  natural learning context for learners to be  exposed  to  the  target  language  and  to  use it for real communication, and to motivate learners to engage in the learning  process  (Willis,  1996).  Overall,  as  indicated  by  the  above studies, task-based teaching is a promising approach to enable students to develop their own English speaking ability in order to reach their goals. Therefore, the researcher is interested in studying the effectiveness of task-based language instruction on developing Saudi students‘ English speaking ability.

Thus, this study aimed to investigate the effects of using TBLT on developing the speaking skills of the Saudi  EFL   students  in  academic settings at Qassim University, College of Arabic Language  and  Social Studies. It also investigated students‘ attitudes towards  the use of task-based   instruction.   It   was  expected  that   the   outcome   of   the study  would  directly  enhance  the  development  of  the  participants‘ speaking performance and also provide more insight for  teachers  into alternative activities to develop  speaking  skills  for EFL  learners in EFL/ESL contexts.

 

 

Statement of the problem:

The main objective of learning a foreign language is to be able to communicate in that language. Yet, it has been observed that Saudi EFL learners have difficulties in communicating in English. The reasons for learner’s inability to speak well are many and varied.

To begin with, learners cannot swallow  everything  they  need  to speak well  at  once, nor  can  they learn effectively  from traditional methods which  do  not  involve  the  students  in  intensive   interactions   and do not help them to develop communicative abilities. Accordingly, many students in the department of English language and translation at Qassim University  are  unable  to  communicate  and   express   themselves   fluently and correctly. Students attribute their  inability  to   communicate  to   their limited English speaking abilities and the lack of exposure to the  native speakers of English as well as authentic materials.

Developing learners‘ speaking ability requires mainly overcoming these obstacles and  seeking  a  new  approach  that  helps  learners  use foreign  language  effectively  and  efficiently.  One  of  the   newly recommended approaches  is  task-Based  Language  Teaching.  TBLT  can be the solution for the  lack  of  exposure  to  authentic  English;  TBLT  gives the students  a  chance  to  practice  their  English  by  using  different  activities in real world tasks and  in  a  stress   free  atmosphere  in  the  classroom setting.  Through  TBLT  procedures,  students have  more   time   to  discuss the task topic using their personal  experiences  either  with  other  mates  or with the teacher.

 

Hence,  the  researcher  is  interested   in   utilizing   this   approach which is based on the use of tasks as the  core  unit  of  planning  and instruction in language teaching called Task- Based language Teaching (TBLT). The current study  attempts to  investigate  the  effects  of  task- based instruction on the speaking skills of Saudi EFL majors at Qassim University.  This  study  also  tries  to   examine  the   students‘   attitudes towards the use of task-based instruction in the speaking classroom. To this end, a speaking test, a questionnaire and a semi-structured interview were used as the main methods.

Research questions

The present study attempts to examine the following research questions:

1. Does utilizing task-based language instruction have any effect on developing the English speaking  ability  of  Saudi   EFL   language learners at Qassim University?
2. What are the EFL students‘ perceptions  and  attitudes  towards  the  use of the task-based teaching in enhancing English speaking ability?

Research Hypotheses

With regard to the first research  question,  the  researcher proposed the null hypothesis of the study:

1. There is  no  a  statistically  significant  difference  between   the  mean scores of the experimental group exposed to the task-based language instruction,    and    the    control    group    receiving    regular     instruction on the pre-test in overall speaking proficiency in  favor  of  the experimental group.

 

 

• There is no  a  statistically  significant  difference  between   the  mean scores of the control group on the speaking pre-test and post-test  in overall speaking proficiency in favor of the post-test
• There is no  a  statistically  significant  difference  between   the  mean scores of the experimental group  on  the  speaking pre-test and  post-test in overall speaking proficiency in favor of the post-test
• There is no  a  statistically  significant  difference  between   the  mean scores of the experimental group exposed to the task-based language instruction,   and   the   control   group   receiving   regular   instruction   on the post-test in  overall  speaking  proficiency  in  favor  of  the experimental

Significance of the study

The significance of this study stems from the following factors:

 

1. The study addresses the paucity of research on the employment of task-based instruction in EFL speaking   Although  task- based instruction has  been  investigated  in  ESL   classrooms,  little research has been conducted in EFL  speaking classrooms  at  the university level. The  situation  becomes  more  exacerbating  when it comes to  the context of Saudi Arabia. Unfortunately, no study has incorporated  the  efficacy  of  task-based   instruction   in   learning speaking at the university level in Saudi Arabia. Thus  it  seems  that  a  study  utilizing  task-based  instruction  might  be  an  actual  attempt  through which  the  influence  of  task-based  activities  can  be  examined on developing the speaking skill.

 

2. Besides, it was the first attempt at Qassim  University  to  examine  the effect of  using  task-based  language teaching for developing the speaking skills of Saudi EFL
3. On account of dissatisfaction  with  conventional  instructional  methods, the researcher hopes  that the current study will be  an  attempt  to overcome the shortcomings in teaching the speaking skills  and  provide  ESL  students with  activities  and  opportunities   to  improve   their  ability in
4. It is hoped that this study will contribute to  English  teachers  to understand the effects of task-based instruction on English speaking
5. The study results can be useful for all teachers of languages at Qassim University because this Institution has a tendency to use  modern  ways and approaches towards language teaching in  order  to  make classes more student-centered.
6. Moreover, It is hoped that the result  of the  present  study  may  provide the syllabus designers an insight into more effective methods in  their materials that they
7. This study was expected   to   provide  some  pedagogical  implications and suggestions to  the  classroom  teachers  who  are  interested  in applying TBI into their curriculum design, classroom activities, and assessment

 

 

Definition of key words

The following terms are significant in this study:

Speaking:

Speaking is defined as an  interactive  process  of  constructing meaning that involves  producing,  receiving  and  processing   information. Its form and meaning are dependent on the context in which it occurs, the participants, and the purposes of speaking (Ruenyoot, 2009).

Speaking  is  defined  operationally  in  this  study  as  the   EFL students’    ability    to    express    themselves    orally,    coherently,     fluently and  appropriately  in  a  given  meaningful  context  to serve  both transactional and interactional  purposed  using correct  pronunciation, grammar  and  vocabulary  and  adopting  the  pragmatic  and  discourse  rules of the spoken language.

Task-based instruction

Task-based instruction can be defined as an approach in which communicative and  meaningful  tasks  play   central   role   in   language learning and in which the process of using  language appropriately carries more importance than the  mere  production  of  grammatically  correct language forms (Richards and Rodgers, 2001; Willis, 1996).

For the purpose of this study, task– based instruction is defined operationally as a different method to teach  languages.  It  can  help  the student by placing him in a situation like in the real world. It includes communicative tasks  designed  and   administered   to  the   experimental group students to develop their spoken ability.

 

Traditional approach

By ‗traditional approach‘ I  refer  to  both  grammar-translation  and to presentation-practice-production.

Definition of Task

There are various ways to define a task, and so far no complete agreement has been achieved among researchers. For example, Long and Crookes regard a task as a real-life activity, while Nunan (2006) considers it as a pedagogical work plan.  Nunan says, ―A task is a piece of classroom work that involves learners in comprehending, manipulating, producing or interacting in the  target  language  while  their  attention  is focused on the meaning. The  task  should  also have  a  sense  of completeness, being able to  stand  alone  as  a  communicative  act  in  its own right with a beginning, middle and an end.‖

For the purpose of  this study, the task is defined operationally as an activity which requires learners to use language with an emphasis on meaning, to attain an objective.

Language Attitudes

Attitudes refer to a person’s way of thinking or feeling about somebody or (Oxford Advance Learner’s Dictionary, 7th ed., 2005, p.85). Attitudes  towards  a  language may also reveal what  people  feel about the speakers of that  language.  Language  attitudes  also  have  an  effect  on SL or FL learning. The measurement of language attitudes provides information    that    is    useful    in    teaching    and    language   planning (Murad, 2009). In this study the EFL learners’ attitudes towards the task- based teaching will be measured through the  use  of a  questionnaire  which will be adapted from literature review.

 

 

Review of literature

The literature review covered three main aspects: significance of speaking skills, the task based learning approach and related research.

Conception of Speaking

Speaking is ability to  speak  and  to  understand  the  language  by using expression  and  oral  communication.   Speaking   is   the   most important  language skill. Brown, (1994) said that speaking is  an interactive process of  constructing  meaning that involves producing, receiving and processing information. Speaking is one of the four  basic language skills that should be well mastered by the students who learn English as foreign language. In order to equip their students  with  good speaking skill, English teacher should be good in speaking skill. It is considered being active skill because the speaker must hand  over to grasp both in thought and in utterance orally.

There  are  a   number   of   factors   relating   to   speaking   skills   to be considered for effective English speaking performance. Pronunciation, vocabulary,   and    collocations    are    singled    out    as    important    factors to be emphasized in building fluency for EFL  speakers. Providing students with a variety of situations and frequent speaking tasks plays a significant role in the improvement of students‘  fluency  when  speaking (Brown, 1994).

Components of Speaking

According to Nunan (2006), the elements of the speaking skill are summarized as it follows:

 

1. Fluency is smoothness of It is ability to negotiate meaning including the ability to use communication  strategies  with  ease  when facing difficulties.
2. Appropriateness includes degree of politeness, suitable timing  in  turn taking suitability of language used  in  requesting  clarification  and expressing
3. Accuracy focuses on both intelligibility and

 

1. Range refers to adequacy and variety of vocabulary and

In summary, the components of an oral English activity should  emphasize the nature of communication. The  three  most  important components were  fluency, appropriateness   and   accuracy.   Fluency conveys the  meaning  runs  smoothly  in  each  situation.  Appropriateness refers to proper use and choice of word, phrases or sentences suitable in conveying  meaning.  Accuracy  implies  correct  use  of  structure   and grammar as well as vocabulary and pronunciation.

Teaching Speaking

Even though acquiring oral skills is considered to be important, speaking did not have a primacy in  language learning and  teaching  in  the past. Historically, learning . structural  language,  rote  memorization  of sentence patterns and vocabulary and  using literary language were considered superior to practicing spoken language. These pedagogical activities were  supported  by  the  Grammar  Translation  Method  (Richards &  Rodgers,  2001).  However,  in  the  mid-nineteenth  century,  the importance of teaching grammar for grammar‘s  sake  decreased  as  a result of the existence of opportunities for  achieving  conversational  skills  in  learning a foreign language.

 

 

Toward the end of the  1950‘s,  the  Audio  Lingual  Method  (ALM) in the U.S. and Situational Language Teaching in the U.K. appeared as a reaction  against  the  Grammar  Translation  Method.  They  dominated  the field  of  language pedagogy.  These methods both  emphasized   speaking and  listening  skills  in  language  teaching.  Although   those   approaches favored the spoken language, the emphasis was  mostly on  the  use  of accurate  pronunciation  and  structures  while  speaking   in   the   target language (Richards & Rodgers, 2001). Little attention was  paid  to  the  natural  and  spontaneous  use  of  this new language in conversation.   This led to  the emergence of the CLT which  emphasized  oral  language proficiency. In CLT, meaningful and communicative activities are used to   provide   learners   with  the   ability  to   use   authentic   language.  ―Using language  to  learn  it‖ rather  than ―Learning language  to  use  it‖ became  the slogan of CLT. Fluency and accuracy were both given emphasis as the important  language goals  employed  in  meaningful   contexts   in   the approach as well.

The communicative approach had many methodological offspring which attempted to   shape  the  principles  of  CLT  into  more  specific teaching practices. Thus, Content-Based Instruction (CBI),  Project  Work, and Task-Based  Instruction  all  are  founded  on  the  premise  that  language is learned through using it communicatively. In these  communicative approaches, especially in Task-Based Instruction, tasks are the tools to promote interaction and real language use. The role of tasks is to promote interactive  and  authentic  language  use rather  than to serve as  a framework for practice on particular language forms or functions. Tasks promote the role of speaking in negotiating  meaning  and  collaborative problem solving (Richards & Rodgers, 2001).

 

In  this study,  Task  Based  Learning  Strategy  is  used  to  improve the students speaking ability. Chaung (2010) reports  that  TBI  aims to cultivate  students‘  communicative  skil s  with  purposeful  language activities.  From  this viewpoint, tasks   are   activities   which   see   meaning  as  the  primary  concern,  and  these  tasks  have  a  strong  similarity  to real-life language exchange.  The approach,  which  employs  student – centered approach, is viewed as more effective than the traditional way. This approach  is  slowly  gaining  its  popularity  among  learners  all  around the world.

Task-based Instruction in Language Classroom

The emergence of the task-based language teaching  as  a  rather  newly favored pedagogy has won increasing popularity in second and foreign language research in recent years and has been recommended as a way forward in ELT. It  has  attracted   the  attention  of  many  curriculum designers, language teachers and researchers worldwide. Task  Based Language Teaching (TBLT) is a teaching  approach which  is  based  on the use of communicative and interactive tasks in order to plan and deliver instruction. Task based language teaching is an  extension  of  the characteristics of communicative language teaching and an attempt by its supporters to apply principles of L2 to teaching. It has been regarded as an  innovative  approach.  Such  an  approach  is  ―a  development  of  CLT‖. This approach relies on  three  major  notions  in  terms  of  tasks.  Richards and Rogers (2002) introduce such criteria as:

 

 

1. Activities      involve     real   language    communication    are    essential for language
2. Activities in which language is used for carrying out meaningful tasks promote
3. Language that is meaningful to  the  learner  supports  the  learning ‖

The idea of getting learners to acquire English through task-based approach was first performed by Prabhu  (1987) who advanced the concept of TBA in the 1980s.  His  approach was  a  reaction  both against the traditional form of English  as  a  foreign  language (EFL) used  in  India and against the type of  communicative  language  teaching  which  was practiced there.  Prabhu‘s  project  is  mostly  cal ing  attention  to   the cognitive processes entailed by tasks. He talks about tasks involving

‗some processes of thought‘ (Prabhu, 1987). Prabhu (1987) defines a task as  ―an activity which  required  learners  to  arrive  at  an outcome  from given information through some  process  of  though,  and  which  allowed  teachers to control and regulate that process‖ (p 24).

A survey of foreign language literature has provided varied definitions   for   the   term   ―task‖.   The   following  definitions   of  the   term

―task‖ are presented by linguists  conducting  task research.

Skehan  (1996a)  views  tasks  ―as  activities  which have  meaning as  their primary  focus‖,  whose  success  ―is  evaluated  in  terms  of  achievement of  an  outcome‖,  resulting  in  the  fact  that  ―tasks  general y  bear  some resemblance to real-life language use‖ (p. 20).

Willis  (1996)  argues  that  tasks  are  ―always  activities  where  the  target language is used by the learners for a communicative purpose (goal)  in order to achieve an outcome‖ (p. 24).

 

El is  (2003)  claims  that  a  ―task  is  a  work  plan that  requires learners to process language pragmatically in order  to  achieve  an  outcome that can be evaluated in terms of content (rather than language)‖ (p. 64).

However, according to  Nunan (2006),  task-based  instruction  is  a way of designing teaching syllabuses which consists of a set of communicative tasks, and a way to  involve learners in comprehending, manipulating, producing or interacting in the target language. Task-based approach has attracted more and more attention in the foreign language teaching  field  since  the  1980s.  Being  a  learner-centered  approach,   it views language as a communicative tool. Task-based approach aims at presenting opportunities for learners to  master  language  both  in  speaking  and  writing  via  learning  activities  designed  to   engage  learners  in  the natural, practical and functional use of language for meaningful purpose (Prabhu,  1987).  This  approach  provides  learners  with  an   authentic context in which they can use language. In such an approach, they have abundant chances  to  interact  with  each  other  and  acquire  the  language  as a result of attempting to understand each other and to be understood.

Framework

Task-based approach has been used  widely  for  language  learning. The TBT  framework  consists  of  three  main stages. Willis and  Willis (2007) broke it into three sections: the pre-task (where students are introduced to the topic and told what  the  task  will  be),  the  task  cycle (where the  students  plan  the  task,  gathering  language  and  information  to do it, and then produce the piece  of writing  or  oral performance  that  the task  demands),  and  the  language  focus  (students  analyze  the   language they used for the task, making  improvements  and  practicing  any  language that needs repair or development).

 

 

Some Studies Related to the effectiveness of Task- Based Learning in developing speaking skills

A number of research  investigated  the  effect  of task-based  learning on developing the students‘ speaking skil (Bao  and  Du,  2015;  Kasap, 2005; Jeon and Hahn, 2000; Chaung, 2010; Tindall, 2015;  Van  den Branden, 2006; Richards & Rodgers, 2001; Chen and Zhang, 2015; Khoshsima and Bajool, 2015; Lui 2014; Aliakbari and Jamalvandi, 2010; Ruenyoot, 2010; Richards & Rodgers, 2001; Ismail and Meryem, 2009; Torky, 2006; Jeon & Hahn, 2006 and Fan-Jiang, 2005) The studies above prove that the experimental group students performed  better  than  those  of the control group on the final speaking post-test. The findings proved that task-based learning positively af ected students‘ speaking ability.

In a recent study,  Ho  and  Long (2014) investigated  the impacts  of  the TBSA on the students‘ oral performance; and the students‘ attitudes towards the TBSA. The results of the oral tests and post-questionnaire revealed that the students‘  oral  performance  in  the  post-test  was  higher than the one in the pre-test. The students had positive attitudes towards task-based activities used in the classroom.

Aljarf (2007) examined the effect of TBLT  on  52  female  EFL students at college of language at King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. This study showed that the students could  speak  fluently  using  correct grammar and pronunciations and could easily generate idea. The success of the improvement was due to efficient task-based instruction.

 

Ruso (2007) conducted research into TBLT and its effects upon  student motivation. The findings of the study revealed that implementing a   TBLT   approach  in  EFL   classes   created   ―variety  for  the  students‖. Moreover, it enhanced both their learning and motivation since the tasks encouraged student involvement and lead to  significant improvements regarding their language performance. The study draws upon a variety of different data collection methods and the use of each  method  has  been clearly justified and any potential weaknesses have been acknowledged.

Unlike in Ruso‘s study, Mendoza and Keranen  (2012)  found  that  when the students were performing the tasks there  was  very  little  TL  use. The teacher  suggests  this was  perhaps  due  to  the  fact  that  the  students did not have enough TL proficiency to  carry out the  task,  which  could indicate that TBLT is more suited to learners with an adequate level   of   TL   fluency.   Timing  was   also   an  issue   as   the   teacher   ―had difficulty determining how much time the tasks  were  going  to   take‖ (Mendoza  &  Keranen,  2012).Despite  the  overwhelming  number  of negative comments from the teacher which dominate the  study,  pupils appeared  to  respond  well  to  TBLT  and   interacted   more   than   usual  in the TL.

Pyun (2013) carried out research to  explore  learner‘s  attitudes towards TBLT and how motivation to learn can affect this. 91  college students of  Korean  as  a  foreign  language participated  in   this questionnaire study. The data from the study implied that students with a personal  interest   and   motivation   in   language   learning   rated    TBLT more positively.

 

 

Another study by Murad (2009) investigated the effect  of  a  task-based  language teaching program for developing  the  speaking skill of Palestinian  secondary  students and  their  attitudes toward  English.  It was  found  that the  TBLT  program  enhanced  significantly  the  speaking skill  of  the  students  of  the  experimental  group  and  positively   affected their attitudes towards English.

Fan-Jiang‘s (2005) study aimed to investigate the ef ectiveness of implementing TBLT in  a  Taiwanese  primary  school,  and  her  finding revealed that TBLT could enhance students‘ motivation and attitudes toward learning English. Chao  (2008) conducted a detailed qualitative study to  explore the implementation  of  task-based  learning  and  teaching  in an elementary English class in Taiwan. The overall results of her study evinced  that  the  implementations  of  task-based  learning  was  challenging for both the teacher and students involved; however, students did enjoy working on the tasks at different levels.

Based on the above-mentioned literature  review,  it  is  apparent  that  the current study is similar to others from the standpoint of the steps and framework of processes used to  analyze the effects  of  TBLT  on  the students’ achievements  and  performance  in  learning  a   foreign   language, but it differs from the studies cited here in several aspects:

1. Much of the research on TBLT has been in an ESL context, but little research has been conducted in EFL
2. Few studies have been conducted on the effects of task-based language teaching on language skills in general, and on the speaking skills in particular, which are considered the most important  skill  in  learning English as a foreign

 

3. While the majority of researchers asserted that engaging learners in a variety of  tasks  would  enhance  their  learning,  most  researches addressed learners in secondary and elementary school However, this study deals with university level.
4. However, Literature review crystalizes the need for such experimental research within the S.A. to support its effectiveness in the  FL classroom. Literature review indicates that little research has been conducted  in  the  K  S.A.  regarding  this  topic  in  general,  and particularly with English majors at Qassim University. Therefore, the current research is unique since it examines the effects of TBLT on the speaking skills of Saudi EFL  students and their attitudes towards TBLT. Its results and implications will no doubt be very beneficial to policy-makers, school principals, and EFL teachers.

Research Methodology

The methodology of the research procedure included three major sections: research framework, research participants  and  research  instruments, and data collection and analysis.

Design of the Study

The study is a quasi-experimental design in which there are both a control group and an experimental group and samples were selected intentionally and  there was no true -randomization. To  accomplish research objectives, a mixed-method research design (involving both quantitative and qualitative methods) was employed for data collection. According to this mixed-method approach, the research problem and objectives act as the starting point, which determine the choice  between various  quantitative  and  qualitative  methods  to  accomplish   specific research goals. Some quantitative and qualitative  research  tools  were designed  and  administered:  These  are:  were  the  Quick   Placement  Test, the speaking skills test,  a semi-structured interview and an attitudinal questionnaire.

 

 

Table 1.An experimental research design with Pretest- Posttest experimental and control groups

 

groups	Pretest	Process	Posttest
Experimental (30)	QPT test The Speaking Skills test	Task Based Instruction	-The Speaking Skills test -The Attitudes Questionnaire -A Focus Group Interview
Control (30)	QPT  test The Speaking Skills test	Regular Instruction	The Speaking Skills test

Variables of the study:

Independent variable: The independent variable refers the treatment  implemented  in  this study (the  task-based   instruction implemented with the experimental group versus the  regular  instruction received by the control group)

Dependent Variable : Dependent variables were  the  subjects’ scores on the English speaking  skill  test  and  the  scores  of their  responses to the items of the attitudinal questionnaire.

Research Participants

Sixty  students participated  in  the  present  study.   They   were English majors at the English Language and Translation Department at University of Qassim in the academic year 2015-2016  in  KSA.  Students‘ age in both groups ranged from eighteen to nineteen. They were enrolled in the ―Listening  and Speaking‖  class  and met once a week.

Before the start of the experiment, the participants  were  asked  to take Quick  Placement  Test  which  is  designed  to  determine  the homogeneity of the  groups  in  order  to   place  them  into  appropriate classes: A, or B group. According to the results obtained by the students

 

in the Quick Placement Test  administered  before  the  start   of  the experiment, the researcher  selected  sixty  students  from  the  two  classes since  their  English  proficiency  belonged  to  ‗average  level‘.  Among  the  two    classes,    the     researcher     randomly     assigned     one     class     as the experimental group (30  students)  and  the  other  as  the  control  group (30 students). The students  thus  constituted  a  homogenous  group  in  terms of their learning history and English proficiency.

Instruments  of the study

Since the study focuses on two factors, using task Based approach  and students’ attitudes toward  that approach,  four research instruments were  developed  by  the  researchers.  These  four  instruments  were  the Quick Placement  Test,  the  speaking  skills   test,   a   semi-structured interview and an attitudinal questionnaire. By using a  combination  of Placement test, speaking  tests,  questionnaires,  and  interviews  as  evidence for the current study, the researcher was  attempting to improve the trustworthiness of my findings.

Placement Test

In order to assess  the  general  English  knowledge  of  the participants, the researcher used the  Quick  Placement  Test  which  is extracted from (Richards et al., 2008). This QPT test is being designed to determine the homogeneity of the groups (Richards et al., 2008). This test included 50 multiple-choice items of English  language skills, and  its  total score was 50. The test should take  around  50  minutes  to  complete.  In  order to make sure that the two groups were homogeneous; their performances were computed on the QPT were through running descriptive statistics of means and standard deviations. A  group  of  67 students took part in the QPT test. The participants with the intermediate

 

 

level of proficiency were selected. Based  on the  mean score of 14.59 and the standard deviation of 3.38 (Table 2), 60 subjects were selected and randomly assigned into two homogeneous  groups of  control  and experimental to participate  in  the  main  study.  Table.2  indicates  the  results of the descriptive statistics for the QPT test.

Table 2 . Descriptive Statistics Preliminary Study for the QPT test

QPT	N	Mean (X)	S.D.	Mean – SD	Mean+ SD
Pre-test	67	14.59	3.387	11.21	17.97

The speaking test

The  second  data collection instrument was TOEIC speaking test in which learners‘ speaking abilities were graded and  assessed  before  and after the implementation of the experiment in  order  to  detect  the  effect  of the task-based approach on the  participants’  speaking  skills.  The  test  covers the aspects of pronunciation, grammar, vocabulary, fluency and comprehension. The test duration was 20 minutes for every student.  The English Speaking Test was given in week one  and  repeated in week  eight. The data collected  through  the  results  of  pre-  and  post-treatment  tests were used to respond the first research question investigating the effect of task-based instruction in  the  study.  The  tests  were  run  in  the  college  by the researcher and a voluntary teacher.  After  the  students  finished  the  test and left  the  classroom,  raters  scored  their  performance  individually  by using the  current oral  assessment rubric.  Raters  then  compared  their grades and if there  was  more  than  10  points  difference  between  the grades, raters negotiated a common grade  through  discussing  the performance.

 

Description of the test

The TOEIC speaking test is an academic  English  test produced  by the institution of  Educational  Testing  Service  (ETS).  Table  (3)  indicates that the test included six parts. In part 1of the test, the candidate  will read aloud the given text. He  will  have  45  seconds  to  prepare.  Then  he  will have 45 seconds to read the text aloud. In part 2 of the test (Describe a picture), the candidate will  describe  a  given  picture  in  as  much  detail  as he can. He will have 30  seconds  to  prepare  his  response.  Then  he  will have 45 seconds to speak  about  the  picture.  In the  third  part  of the  test, the candidate will answer three questions. For each question, he begins responding immediately after he hears  it.  No preparation   time   is provided. He will have 15 seconds to respond  to  Questions  3, 4and  5.  In this fourth part of the  test,  the  candidate  will  answer  three  questions based on the information provided. He will have 30 seconds to read the information before  the  questions  begin.  For  each  question,  begin responding  immediately after he  hears  it.   No  additional  preparation  time  is provided. He will have 15  seconds  to  respond  to  Questions  6  and  7, and 30 seconds to respond to Question 8. In the fifth part of the test, the candidate will be presented with a problem and  asked  to   propose  a solution. He will have 30 seconds to  prepare. Then he will have 60 seconds to speak. In the  last  part of the  test,  he  will give  his  opinion about a specific topic. The topic  was  written  on  a  card,  and  the  participant should be sure to say as much as he  can in  the  time  allowed.  He  will have 15 seconds to prepare. Then he will have 60 seconds to speak.

 

 

From  among  the  reasons  for  choosing  this  instrument  was  that  it is accepted at international scale. Leading Universities in USA, UK  and Canada have recognized it as a reliable and valid test and it observed comprehensive criteria, including fluency, accuracy,  communication, vocabulary, and pronunciation, to  assess  speaking  skill  which  suited  the very purpose of the study.

This is the TOEIC Speaking  test.  This  test  includes  10  questions that measure different aspects of the speaking ability. The test  lasts approximately 20 minutes.

Table.3 Description of the TOEIC Speaking test

 

Question	Task	Evaluation Criteria
1	Read a text aloud	•  pronunciation •  intonation and stress
2	Describe a picture	All of the above, plus •  grammar •  vocabulary •  cohesion
3-5	Respond to questions	All of the above, plus •  relevance of content •  completeness of content
6-8	Respond to questions using information provided	All of the above
9	Propose a solution	All of the above
10	Express an opinion	All of the above

 

For each type of question, the participant will be given specific directions, including the time allowed for preparation and speaking.

 

Scoring the test

The researcher and a voluntary teacher scored the pre-test and  post- test by using the checklist extracted from Mohammadipour and Rashid, (2015); Hasan, (2014); Kasap (2005) and Reunyoot,  (2010).  The researcher and  teacher  met  with  each  student  for ten  minutes,  during which they asked questions from the  speaking  skills test. Throughout the test, the rater awards a global mark out of  25  according  to  five  criteria which  are  interpreted  according  the  following  speaking   assessment  criteria: fluency, grammar, vocabulary, contents  and  pronunciation.  Assessment is based on  performance  in  the  whole  test,  and  is  not  related to performance in  particular  parts  of  the  test.  The  speaking  assessment and evaluation were checked by a panel of experts in the field of English language (See Appendix B).

Speaking Test Validity:

The speaking skills test was given to a panel of specialists in the field of applied linguistics to  be professionally reviewed. Moreover,  the jury members were asked to evaluate the test as a whole in terms of: (a) number of tasks and appropriateness to   the  functions  measured,  (b) suitability of the tasks to students’  linguistic  level  and  (c)  suitability  of  the test to measure the intended skills. Based on the reviewers’ feedback and comments, the researcher had to evaluate and fix whatever  needed  to  be fixed, and eliminate some items.  By  doing  so,  the  validity  of the  test  can  be insured.

 

 

Speaking Test Reliability

The speaking skill test was tested on a pilot group. This group consisted of 39 students randomly selected from the section  of  the  target level at the department who were  not  members  of  two  specified  groups who participated in the study. A technique of a  test-retest  was  used  to ensure the reliability of the  research  instruments.  The  period  between  the test and the re-test was two weeks. The  correlation  coefficient  of the  test was calculated using Pearson’s Correlation Coefficient and was  found (85%) for the speaking skills test,  which was considered statistically acceptable for the current study (See table 4).

Table 4: Instrument’s Reliability

 

Research Tool	No. Items	No. Students	Reliability
Speaking Skills Test	10	39	85%

The administration of the Pre- Test and Post- Test

Both groups of samples will be given a Pre-Test and Post-Test to gauge  their  speaking  performance.  The  pre-test  will  be  conducted   to both groups at the beginning of the study while the  post-test  will  be conducted after the completion of  the  task-based  listening  activities.  In order to see the difference achieved by both group, a comparison of two means of the scores gained  by  both  groups  will  be  taken  into consideration.  Similar  to   the  interpretation  for   the   questionnaire,   the paired t-test will also be used  to  see  whether  the  difference  of the  scores for both  treatment  and  control  groups  is   statistically  significant   and  can be generalized on a wider population.

 

Inter-Rater Reliability for the Speaking Test

The speaking skill test  was administered on the control and experimental  groups.  The  correlation  coefficient  of   the   test  was calculated using Pearson’s Correlation Coefficient.

Inter-Rater Reliability Pre-test

The inter-rater reliability for the  two  raters  who  rated  the  students on the pre-test of speaking is .92 (P = .000  <  .05).  Correlation  is  significant at the 0.01 level  (2-tailed).  Correlation  Coefficient  was  considered statistically acceptable for the current study.

Table 5: Inter-Rater Reliability Pre-test

 

	No. of Students	Pearson Correlation	Sig. (2-tailed)
Rater 1 Rater 2	60	.923	.000

Inter-Rater Reliability Post-test

The inter-rater reliability for  the  two  raters  who  rated  the  students on the post-test of speaking is .88 (P =  .000  <  .05).  Correlation  Coefficient was considered statistically acceptable for the current study.

Table. 6 Inter-Rater Reliability Post-test

 

Rating	No. of Students	Pearson Correlation	Sig. (2-tailed)
Rater 1 Rater 2	60	.889	.000

 

 

The attitudinal questionnaire

The second instrument adopted in this study was a 44 Likert-scale question which was adapted from the perception questionnaires used in previous studies (i.e. Pyun, 2013 and Kasap, 2005). In this study, the questionnaire was used to obtain data  to  address  the  predetermined second research question. It was used for the purpose of finding out learners‘ opinions about TBLT .The draft  questionnaire  consisted of  48 items. The students were asked to  indicate  to  what  extent  they  agreed  to the statements of the questionnaire. 2- point Likert scale was used for the questionnaire    with    number    1    indicating    ―disagree‖   and    number    2 implying  ―agree‖.  The  questionnaire  was  administered  to  the  participants in the experimental group after the implementation of the treatment.

Questionnaire Validity

The draft questionnaire  was  submitted  to  some specialists  in  the field of TESOL to check validity and convenience with the research purposes. Members of the jury  in  the  field  of  TEFL  were  directed  to judge the questionnaire statements according to the following criteria:

• The relation of the statements to the research objectives
• The clarity of the meaning  of the  statement  to  the  3- The appropriateness of the wording  to the intended respondents. 4- Add any phrase or statement that seems to be fit.

5- Delete any inappropriate phrase or statement.

The reviewers suggested that some of the scale’s items should be re-written or eliminated in order to  be  suitable  for  the  study.  Accordingly, the researchers agreed with the reviewers’ suggestions  to  modify, and eliminate some items. As a result, the scale ended up with a twenty item attitudes instrument.

 

Questionnaire Reliability:

 

To find out reliability degree of the questionnaire, the reliability coefficient (Cronbach alpha) was calculated as an indicator of homogeneity to the level of instrument as a whole.

The  attitudinal  questionnaire  was  tested  on  thirty  nine  students who were not members of two specified groups  who  participated  in  the study. A technique  of  a  test-retest  was  used  to  ensure  the  reliability  of the research instruments. The period between  the pre  and  the  post application was  two weeks. A statistical  Alpha  Cronbach  calculation  showed a higher level of reliability of 0.840, which is acceptable by the researchers, (Table 7).

Table 7: Instrument’s Reliability

 

Research Tool	No. Items	No. Students	Reliability
Questionnaire	20	39	0.840

Semi-structured interview

The fourth instrument used in the present study was semi-structured interviews which involve  inquiries in order  to  gather  information  and support the results obtained from speaking test and the questionnaires. Semi-structured interviews were conducted in the present study with ten participated students from the experimental group who  were  randomly selected  by  the  researcher.  They  were  interviewed  face  to   face individually  at  the  end  of  the  experiment.   This   interview   was  conducted in order to investigate learners‘ perceptions  about  task-based  instruction after the treatment.  The  data  from  these  interviews  were  used  to  respond to the second research question in respect to student attitudes towards task-based instruction.

 

 

As far as the structured interview is concerned, the  researcher arranged a meeting with  each  participant  separately.  This  meeting  was held on December 2015.  The  duration  of each interview  was  between 20 to 25 minutes. At the  beginning,  the  researcher  explained  the  purpose  of this structured interview, i.e.  the   use   of  authentic   task-based   materials as  a  means  to  develop   business   students‟   oral  communication   skills and so on.

Validity of the interview

In terms of the fourth study tool (interview) validity, the designed interview was submitted to some jury members specialized in TESOL (n=7) to check validity and consistency with research purposes. Based on jury’s  suggestions,  some  amendments  were  made.  Then,  the   interviews were piloted on 10 EFL students. Based on a test-retest procedure, the resulting reliability value was 0.6. After that, a sample of EFL student teachers (n=10) was randomly selected for the interview. Then, data was collected and  analyzed  with  the  assistance  of  qualitative  Word-  processing. Based on this analysis, perceptions of EFL student towards TBTA was compiled.

Materials

Both  groups  studied  ―Interaction  1:  Listening  and  Speaking  Book. All the students met once a week,  one  hundred  fifty  minutes  a  time,  and  they were  taught  the  same  topic  and  content—the  only  difference   was that the experimental group was  asked to complete six  tasks  in  the classroom as TBT. The experimental group was  exposed to some supplementary video files  extracted  from  TED  conferences  before  doing  the task. TED is a nonprofit  devoted  to  ideas  worth  spreading.  It  started out in 1984 as a  conference  to  bring  together  people  from three  domains of: technology,  entertainment  and  design.  Since  then  its   scope   has become ever broader. All the video files were selected from TED Talks according to the students’ level and according to the content or  spoken genre tackled by each task. While selecting the video  files,  the  researcher took into account the following criteria:

 

-They were relevant to students‘ background knowledge and culture.

 

-They were authentic, representing real life spoken discourse  and including natural characteristics of spoken discourse such as (fillers, hesitation markers, fixed expressions, el ipsis,  vague language…etc.).

-They could lend themselves to  analysis and  close  examination  as  a means of raising student’s awareness of different aspects of spoken discourse. The main site students were referred to was: http://www.TED.com

A framework for designing six Task-based Learning Lesson Plans

Six lesson plans were constructed based on the framework for task- based learning by Willis (1998). The three basic conditions for language learning are pre-task, task cycle and  language focus. The pre-task mode will introduce the  class  to   the  topics,  the  tasks,  together  with  topics related words  and  phrases.  The  task  cycle  will  offer  students  the  chance to use whatever language they already know, in order to carry out the exercise, and then develop their language under  the  teacher‘s  guidance. Finally,  the  language  focus  includes  two  components:  Analysis   and Practice. During the analysis stage,  the  teacher  reviews  what  happened  in the task   and  highlights  language  forms  for  the  students  to  analyze.  Then, the students practice activities to  extent their confidence. It is also an opportunity for the teacher to emphasize key language.

 

 

The role of the teacher in both classes

The  teacher‘s  role  in  the  traditional  classroom  was   the   leader, and  the  main  activities  in  the  control  classes  were  teacher-student questions and answers. To sum up, the features of traditional  English classroom in this study included 1) the teacher-centered; 2) more teacher- student interactions  than student/ student interactions;  3)  lack   of  pair/group work  in class;  and  4)  most  learning  activities  conducted  as whole class activities.

On   the   other   hand,   the   teacher‘s   role   in    TBI   classes  was the facilitator who monitored and gave advices to the students during the focused   tasks   as   needed,  and   the   in-class    tasks   mainly    conducted as   student-students   interactions.   The   procedure  of   lesson   plan followed  Wil is‘  (1996)  three-stage  framework: pre-task,   task  cycle (task, planning, and report) and  language  focus  (analysis  and  practice) (figure 2).

The  researcher  who  taught  the  experimental  classes  was  required to conduct six task-based activities in class including (1) Shopping question-and-answer   (language   focus:   question-and-answer),(2)    Planning a  party  (language  focus:  doing  requests,  much/many,  some/any),   (3) Giving  directions  (language  focus:   map   expressions),   (4)   Decorating house (language focus:),  (5)  Looking  for  a  job  (language  focus:  Simple past and  past  continuous),  (6)  and  the  school   trip  (language  focus: making requests; asking for permission). Those tasks  were  carried  out  in class (for more details, see appendices).

Research procedures

The research procedures for this study included six stages as follows:

Firstly, before the initiation of the study, the QPT test and the  Speaking Skills test were administered to both groups.

 

Secondly, the  experiment  started  and  lasted  for  eight  weeks (approximately two months) through which both the experimental and the control groups participated in their listening and speaking  classes  once  a week. Each  class lasted for 150 minutes. The researcher taught the experimental group students himself based on task- based  instruction  by Willis (1998).

Figure.1 Lesson Plan Sequences of the Experimental Group

 

On the other hand, the control group was  also taught by  the researcher using the traditional method without  doing  any  task-based activities (figure 2). According to regular instruction, the control group students were given little communicative opportunity to practice the speaking skills. Students rarely practiced any  pre-speaking  activity  that  aimed  at   teaching   them   the   characteristics   of   the   spoken   language and  they  were  never  guided  to  use planning before the  speaking activities. They were not given any supplementary material like the experimental group.

Figure .2 Lesson Plan Sequences of the Control Group

 

 

 

In other words, the instructions of  the  control  classes  started  with the presentation of a target language form by the instructor. After the new material was introduced, students focused on the target forms by doing grammar practice and language drills to ensure their mastery of using the language which was just taught.

Thirdly, Post-test. After completing the task based instruction, the same test  used as a post-test was  readministered  to  both  groups  to  evaluate their progress in speaking skills.

Fourthly, attitudinal questionnaire was administered to the experimental group only at the end of the course to find out their attitudes towards the task- based instruction.

Fifthly,  the  researcher  interviewed  the  ten  assigned   students   for the interview one by one, and there were ten questions.

Table 8: Table four shows the different methods of  data  collection used to answer each research question.

Table 8: the different methods of data collection used to answer each research question.

Research Question	Method of data collection
Q1. Does utilizing task-based language instruction have any effect on developing the English speaking ability of Saudi EFL language learners at Qassim University?	Pre and post-speaking test at the beginning and the end of the study (Both groups).
Q2. What are Saudi EFL students‘ attitudes toward using the task-based instruction to develop the English language speaking skills?	The administration of the questionnaire and interviews after the intervention (the experimental group only)

 

Duration

The study was conducted during the period of two months. The study was conducted in the first academic  semester  of  the  year  2015-  2016. Task-based  instruction  treatment  in  the  experimental  group  started on October 15, 2015 and ended on December, 16, 2015. The study was conducted for 8 weeks. There were twenty hours in total. The  Pre-test and the Post-test were included. The control class was taught by regular instruction (PPP teaching approach for the whole eight weeks) and the experimental class  was   taught  by  Task-based  Teaching  (TBT)  designed by the researcher in  their  English  classes.  In  the  8-week  teaching  period, all the students met once  a  week,  one  hundred  fifty  minutes  a  time,  and they were  taught  the  same  topic  and  content—the  only  difference   was that the experimental group was  asked to complete six tasks in the classroom as TBT while  the  control  group  was   taught  by  regular instruction without  doing  any  task-based  activities.  In  order  to  minimize the effects  of  teacher  variability,  the  researcher  taught  both  the  control  and experimental  classes,  following  the  separate  lesson  designs  for  each  of these classes.

Statistical Analysis

To answer the research questions, the speaking skills test  was administered as a pre-test and a  post-test.  Two  independent  t-tests were run for the difference between the mean scores  of  the  experimental  group and the control group on the pre-test  as  well as the  post-test. A paired  t- test was run to find the difference between the means of the scores on the following tests: the pre- and post-tests  for  the  control group as well as for the experimental group to  see if there was any difference between the performance  of  the  subjects  on  the   pre-  and   post-tests.   Moreover,  in an  attempt  to  learn what   the   students   in   the   experimental   group thought  about  the  use   of  task  based  instruction,  they  were  asked  to  do a questionnaire after the post-test.  Data  obtained  from  the  questionnaire were  calculated  by   using   frequencies   and   percentages   and   interpreted as   levels   to  indicate  how  students   perceived   the    use    of    task  based instruction.

 

 

Results and discussion

To answer the first research question, ‗Does utilizing task-based language instruction have any effect  on  developing  the  English  speaking ability of  Saudi  EFL  language learners at Qassim University?‘, the student scores from the  pre-test  and  post-test  were  systematically  uploaded  into  a  computer for quantitative  analyses.   The   Statistical Package for the Social Science (SPSS) was adopted in the statistical analysis. Consequently, a set of paired and independent T-test was administered to find out whether  there  were  statistically  significant differences between the control and the experimental groups in terms of speaking proficiency.

Results related to the first tool of the study (a TOEIC speaking pre-test)

Before implementing  the  TBLT  to  the  experimental   group,   a TOEIC speaking test  is administered to both the  control  and  the experimental groups as a pretest. Raw scores were statistically calculated. Then, an independent t-test is run to compare the mean scores of the experimental and control groups on the  pre-test  of  speaking.  An independent t-test showed no statistically  differences  in  mean  scores  of  both groups as shown in table (9) below. The  results  indicated  that  the mean score of the  experimental  group  was   18.73  with  a  standard deviation of 4.653, and the  mean  score  of  the  control  group  was 19.23with a standard  deviation  3.549.  This  result  showed  that  the difference  in  the  mean  scores  between  the  experimental  group  and  control   group   was  not   statistically   insignificant.   The   t-observed  value is

.468  (Table  9). This score of t-value is  lower  than the  critical value  of 2 at

 

58 degrees of freedom. As evident in the  table,  the  result  showed t = .468, df = 58, and Sig. =.102, indicating that there was no significant difference between the two groups  before  the  experiment  started,  and  the  two groups started with the same proficiency  level.  Based  on  these  results,  it  can  be  concluded that there is  not   any  significant   difference   between  the mean  scores  of  the  experimental  and  control  groups  on  the  pre-test of  speaking. That  is  to   say   the   two   groups   were   homogenous   in terms of their speaking ability before the administration  of  task-based language teaching to the  experimental  group.  These  findings  are presented in Table (9).

Table 9: An Independent T-test results for the Comparison of Pre- test Scores between Control Group and Experimental Group

in the Speaking Skills Test prior to Experimentation

 

Group	N.	Mean	Std. Deviation	T	DF	Sig.
Control	30	19.23	3.549	.468	58	.102
Experimental	30	18.73	4.653

The data in table (9) indicate that the results  of  the  independent  samples  T-test  is  consistent  with   the  first  hypothesis  stating  that  there  is no significant difference between the experimental  group  and  the  control group in terms of their performance  on  the  speaking  pre-tests.  It  should also be taken into account that the scores  of the students of both  groups were fairly low and this may be  due  to   the  fact  that  neither  the  experimental group nor the control group was exposed to any approach in teaching speaking skills before starting the treatment. The results of the comparison of  the  pre-test  scores  between  control  group  and experimental group in the speaking skills test prior to experimentation are also graphically shown in Figure3.

 

 

Figure 3: The Pre-test Scores of the Control Group and Experimental Group in the Speaking Skills Test

It could vividly be seen in figure (1) that  there  is  no  significant difference   between  the    control    group    and    experimental    group    in the speaking skills pre-test. It can be seen in  figure  (1)  that  the  starting  point of the  two  groups  was   low  average.  Their  performance  was identified as low due to  their lack of  exposure  to   opportunities  for practicing English speaking.

Results Related to Comparison of the Mean of the Speaking Pre-test and Post-test within the Group

In order to see how much improvement each group had from the pre-test to the post-test, paired samples t-tests were conducted. Table (10) shows descriptive statistics for the  results  of  the  pre-  and  post-tests  for both groups. After analyzing the data  through  the  SPSS  software  version  18, the results obtained  from  the  descriptive  statistics  indicated  that  the mean score of the learners on the pretest was less than that of the posttest.

 

Before the intervention, the speaking mean scores  of  students  in  control group and experimental group were 19.23 and 18.73 from 50 points,  and those scores increased to  19.63  and  34.80  respectively  after  the intervention. It is noticed that standard deviation of the two groups  also changed a little bit. From t-test analysis, there is no significant difference between means of scores obtained by the control group in terms of their performance on the pre-posttest of speaking performance. This finding obtained from table (10)  agrees  with  the  third  hypotheses  stating  that there are no significant  differences  between  means  of  scores  obtained  by the control group in terms of their performance on the pre-posttest  of speaking performance.

From t-test analysis, the post-test mean  scores  were  significantly higher   than   the    pre-test    mean    scores    in    the    experimental    group (T = –15.264–). This means  that  the  students  in  experimental  group improved their speaking performance. However,  it  is  noted  that  students who received task based  instruction  outperformed  the  control  group  who did traditional teaching. This considerable improvement  shown  by  the  subjects of the experimental group is  due  to  the  effect  of the exposure to the  test-taking  strategy  instruction,  which  included  presentation   and practice  on  test-taking  strategies.  This  indicates  that   the   participants   in the experimental group indeed benefited  from  the  task-based  instruction.  This implies that the students in the experimental  group  improved  their speaking  significantly  after  they were  taught  with  the   task-based instruction. This finding obtained from table (10) disagrees with the third hypotheses stating  that there are   no   significant   differences   between means of scores obtained by the experimental group in terms of their performance on the pre-posttest of speaking performance.

 

Table 10. Paired Samples t-test of the Comparison of the Mean of the Speaking Pre-test

and Post-test within the Group

 

Group	Pre-test Mean (SD)	Post-test Mean (SD)	df	T -Test	Sig.
Control (n=30)   Experimental (n=30)	19.23 3.549 18.73 4.653	19.63 3.243 34.80 4.342	29   29	-.495-   -15.264-	.624   . 000

Figure 4: The Pre-test and Post-test Scores within the control group

 

The results of the  comparison  of the  pre-test and  post-test within  the control group are also graphically represented in figure 4.  As  seen  in figure 2, the participants‘ speaking skil s performance was considered as inadequate in the pre-test and post test. This  is  due  to the  lack of exposure  to task based approach.

 

The results of the  comparison  of the  pre-test and  post-test within  the experimental group are also graphically represented in figure 5.

Figure 5: The Pre-test and Post-test Scores within the experimental group

As it could be seen in figure  5,  the  difference  between  the  pre-test and post-test scores of the experimental group was a significant one. The progress that occurred from pre-test to post-test can be observed in figure

3. At the beginning, the group had a low  performance  qualified  as inadequate, but after the group‘s exposure to the treatment, there was a significant increase of reaching a substantial mean score. Therefore, the difference was considerable between the pretest and posttest.

Results related to Comparison of the  Post-Test Mean Scores of the Control and Experimental Groups

1: Does utilizing task-based instruction have any  effect  on  the  speaking ability of Saudi EFL language learners?

 

 

After  the  intervention  between  those  having traditional  instruction and those doing task  based language instruction, a post-test on the participants‘ speaking performance was  readministered.  An  independent t-test is run to compare the mean scores of the experimental and control groups on the post-test of speaking to probe whether administration of task-based  instruction  has  any  significant  effect  on  the  experimental groups’ speaking ability. As is shown in table (11)  below,  using  t-test  revealed that there is  a  significant  difference  between  means  of  the  scores of  the  control  group  and  those  of  the  experimental  group  in   this   test. The result indicated that  the  post-test  mean  score  of  experimental  group (M  =  34.80,  SD  =  4.342)  was  higher  than  that  of  the  control  group (M = 19.63, SD = 3.243). This result revealed a statistically significant difference in the test scores at  the  level  of  .05  as  shown  in  Table  (11). The t-observed value is  -15.328-  (Table  11).  This  score  of  t-value  is higher than the critical value of 2 at  58  degrees  of freedom.  Mean scores and standard deviations for the  performance  of  both  groups  on  the  post test of speaking showed that the experimental group students had better performance compared with their counterparts in the  control   group. Therefore, it can be concluded that students who received the task based language instruction in the experimental group achieved a significant improvement on the speaking test scores than the students in  the  control  group who  received  regular  instruction  only.  This  finding  is  in  a disagreement with the fourth hypothesis which states that there were no statistically  significant  differences  between  mean  scores   of   the experimental group and the control group subjects on  the  post-testing  of  their oral performance in speaking test.  Table  (11)  sets  out  the  results  of the  post-testing  of  the   students’  speaking  performance  in  the  test  utilized in the study.

 

Table 11: Comparison of Post-test Scores between Control Group and Experimental Group in the Speaking

Skills Test after Intervention

 

Group	N.	Mean	Std. Deviation	T	DF	Sig.
Control	30	19.63	3.243	-15.328-	58	.156
Experimental	30	34.80	4.342

 

This finding  proved  that there was a statistically significant difference between  mean  scores  of  the  experimental  group  students  and the control group students at (05.0) regarding  their  oral  performance, favoring the experimental group  students.  Since  the  control  group  shares with  the  experimental  group  all  other  variables  in   the   study,   the significant improvement in the experimental group students’ speaking performance    in    the    test    utilized     in    the    study    can   be    attributed to the effectiveness of  the  task  based  approach.  This  is  also  shown  in figure (6) below.

 

 

Figure 6: The Mean Scores of the Experimental, and Control Groups  on the Post-test

As illustrated in figure (6),  there  is  a  considerable difference  between the two  groups favoring  the  experimental  group.   The performance of  this  group  could  be  considered  as  remarkable.  Thus,  it can be said that  there  was  a  positive  effect  with  substantial  improvement of speaking  skills  because the starting level tested as somewhat inadequate, but the post-test score was very close  to   top  score.  It  is beyond question  that  the  experimental  group  of  the  study  outperformed the control group.

As it was noticed, the study came up with some notable results deserving further  considerations  and  discussions.  This  result  also  showed that the experimental group achieved a significant improvement in  their speaking performance on the post-speaking  test   than  the  control  group. This significant result is due to the use of the task  based  instruction.  This finding  supports  the  results  in  previous  studies  which   investigated   the effect of using task based instruction and revealed their usefulness in developing learners’ speaking  skills (Bao and  Du   (2015); Mohammadipour and Rashid, (2015); Chen and Zhang (2015); Tabrizi (2011);  Ho   and   Long  (2014);  Sae-Ong  (2010);  Chen  (2009);  Chuang

(2010),   Sae-Ong  (2010)  and   Wang  (2010)  Murad,  (2009);  Al  Torky,

(2006);  Swan (2005)  Skehan  (1996;  Ruso,  2007;  Pyun, (2013); Van den

Branden,   (2006);  Tindall,   (2015);  Ellis,   (2003);  Mendoza   and  Keranen

(2012);  Chen  and  Yang  (2009);  Guo(2006),  Kasap  (2005),  Liu (2014),

Sae-Ong (2010), and Kasap (2005). These studies emphasized the role of TBLT   in   promoting   speaking   skills.    One  possible   reason   of   this fact

 

could be that the tasks  were  related  to   real-world  situations  which improved  students‘ motivation  in  English  speaking. Students   in   task- based instruction had more opportunities to work in pairs or groups  to  practice   speaking   English   with   meaningful   language  which  also motivated them to speak and learn English. Lever and Willis (2004) also pointed out  that  learners  made far more rapid progress through |TBLT and were able to  use  their  new  foreign  language  in  real  world  situations with reasonable levels  of  efficiency  after  relatively  short  courses.  In addition, Ellis (2000),  Nunan  (2006)  and  Willis  (1996)  noted  that  in  TBLT learners also use the language for a communicative purpose. Moreover, TBLT enhances students’ oral discourse in terms of utterance length or complexity, fluency and accuracy, and then communication is promoted. This explains that Wil is‘s  (1998)  principles  of  task-based learning  provide students with  the  opportunities   to  use   language creatively. And  task-based  learning  enhances  the  language  proficiency  of the learners.

The researcher who implemented the task based  instruction  also played  an  important  role  in  developing  the  students‘  speaking   skil s.  First, he had a positive  attitude  towards  TBLT,  and  was  enthusiastic  to teach  according  to  its  procedures  and  principles.  Willis   (1996) emphasized  the  role  of  the  teachers  in  promoting  students‘  learning through TBLT. Second,  during  the  implementation  of  the  TBLT,  the teacher acted as monitor or facilitator, and  encouraged  his  students  to perform the activities. The teacher who was  involved  in  the  current  study kept in mind that a task in  TBLT  is  goal-  directed  and  based on meaning and form. He also  took  into  account  that  a  task  for  oral social interaction is  a  simulation of a real  life activity; authenticity  of  tasks  is   critical quality in TBLT.

 

 

To  summarize  the  major  findings  of  this  study  in  terms   of research hypotheses set at the outset, the  null-hypothesis  predicting  no greater  speaking  proficiency  skill  through  using task-based activities  for the experimental group than  for  the  control  group  was  rejected  in  this study. Additionally, the experimental  group  indicated  more  ability  in  speaking. It was predicted that using task-based activities leads to a noticeable improvement in speaking.

Results of the second tool of the study (questionnaire) related to the second question:

The data used to  answer the second  research  question  were gathered from the  questionnaires  which  were  distributed  to  the experimental  group  students  after the  treatment.   The   results   were analyzed in terms of frequency and percentage to find out the  students‘ attitudes towards the TBSA in learning speaking.

The students’ attitudes towards the task-based teaching

This section of the  questionnaire  concerned  with  the  students‘  attitudes towards task based teaching approach. Based on the overall results shown in Table (12), it was  obvious  that  students  had  positive attitudes towards task-based classroom activities.

 

Table 12 Students’ attitudes towards Task-Based teaching (TBLA)

	Statements	Agree		Disagree
		No	%	No	%
1	I enjoy learning English using tasks.	27	90	3	10
2	The task based approach makes learning English easy.	21	70	9	30
3	TBLA helps me learn more English.	25	83.3	5	16.7
4	The task based approach makes learning English interesting.	27	90	3	10
5	I like to learn English by using task-based learning.	24	80	6	20
6	I can apply the English skills I learned from the task-based activities into real-life situations in the future.	22	73.3	8	26.7
7	The task based instruction makes me feel more relax and comfortable when using the foreign language to communicate with their classmates positively.	24	80	6	20
8	The task based instruction makes me feel more confident in using English.	27	90	3	10
9	I would like to use this approach in the other language classes.	21	70	9	30
10	I don‘t worry about making mistakes when I perform oral tasks in the classroom.	28	93.3	2	6.7
11	The task-based activities help me express my ideas in classroom.	26	86.7	4	13.3
12	The task-based activities came with clear goals that I had to accomplish.	25	83.3	5	16.7

 

 

When asked about their attitudes towards  the TBLT, a large majority of the  experimental  group  students  feel  that learning  English through tasks is enjoyable (90%) and interesting in  the  class  (85,3%), and they feel comfortable and relax when using the foreign language to communicate  with  their  classmates positively  (80%).  They  (90%)   get more confident in using English. 80% of  the  respondents  like  to  learn  English by using task-based learning. More than two  thirds  (70%)  agree that the task based  approach  makes  learning  English  easy.  Students  felt  that  English  language learning wasn‘t as  dif icult  as  they  perceived  it  to be. Many students (70%)  of  the  respondents  also  like  to   use  this approach  in  the  other  language  classes.  Another  important  finding   was that they (73.3%) could apply the oral skills they learned into real-life situations.  This  finding  is  shared  by  Chaung  (2010)  who   indicated   that the majority of the respondents concur that they could apply  the  language skills that they learn in class into their daily life and other subjects.

Regarding task-based activities used in the  English  classroom,  the results of Table 10 indicated that most of the students considered that task-based activities came with more clear learning goals  (83.3%).  In addition,  the  experimental  group  students  agreed  that  not  only   they learned  English  oral  communication  skills   through   task-based   activities but also could apply the English skills they learned from the task-based activities into real-life situations in the future (86.7%).

 

Furthermore, Task-based  learning  creates  a   non-threatening   and less stressful class environment. Table (12) indicates that the majority of students (93.3%) stated that they didn‘t worry about grammatical errors which  allowed  them to  communicate  more  freely.  The  researcher  told them not to worry about making mistakes while they were talking to their friends, presenting or asking questions to the teacher.  The  researcher  told them that it was important in communicating to try to get the meaning across of what they  wanted  to  say.  This  reflects  the  effect  of  the  TBLA on the class environment which makes students feel more relaxed  and confident. This finding is in an  agreement  with  that  reached  by  As  Sae- Ong, (2010) and Willis & Willis (2007)  who  reports  that  task-based learning creates a non-threatening and less stressful class environment.

Students’ attitudes towards the use of the Task Based approach in learning speaking skills

Regarding the students‘ attitude towards the use of the task-based approach  in  learning  speaking  after  the  treatment,  the   questionnaire findings  confirmed  positive  effects  of  incorporating  TBL  to   improve English speaking ability of the  participants  majoring  in  English  language. Table (13) summarizes the results of the students ‗attitudes towards  the  TBSA after training in learning speaking.

 

 

Table 13. Students’ attitudes towards the use of the Task Based approach in learning speaking

	Statements	Agree		Disagree
		No.	%	No	%
13	I feel motivated while participating in doing tasks and other speaking activities in English class.	22	73.3	8	26.7
14	The TBLA encourages me to speak more English.	23	76.7	7	23.3
15	I achieve more progress in speaking after the treatment.	26	86.7	4	13.3
16	Speaking tasks in class help me to develop my presentation skills.	25	83.3	5	16.7
17	Giving      an     oral     report     makes speaking English easier.	27	90	3	10
18	I think the TBLA gives me more time for speaking.	25	83.3	5	16.7
19	I feel that my English speaking skill has improved.	24	80	6	20
20	I think the TBLA improves my pronunciation.	20	66.7	10	34.3
21	I don‘t feel embarrassed to speak English in class	21	83.3	9	16.7
22	After the treatment I take part in speaking positively.	23	76.7	7	23.3
23	When performing speaking tasks, I can get so anxious that I forget things I know.	7	23.3	23	76.7
24	I think the task based approach helped me recall old vocabulary and improve my vocabulary.	20	66.7	10	23. 3
25	I can use English vocabulary and expressions in context correctly.	21	70	9	16.7
26	I think the TBLA classes helped me to understand the functions of language better.	22	73.3	8	26.7

 

Many students (73.3%) believed that the task-based learning motivated  them  to  speak  English.  This  finding  is  in  line   with  Bao  and  Du (2015) who have discovered that TBLT creates a positive learning environment by promoting learners‘ enjoyment, boosting learners‘ confidence, and increasing learners‘ motivation. In a similar study, Hadi (2013)  found  that most participants  felt   positively   about  TBLT. Learners were ready to  adapt themselves to  this new  methodology because it enhanced their motivation, made class more fun and interesting, and produced a lively classroom atmosphere.

Table also showed that the students  expressed  their  like  of  the TBSA in learning speaking because  (1) they achieve more progress in speaking after the treatment (86.7%),  and  (2)  their  English  speaking  skill has improved (80%).  These  findings  above  correspond  to  previous studies which showed that the TBLT  was   an  appropriate  method  to improve learners‘ speaking  abilities (Rocha,  2005;  Humanez  &  Arias, 2009; & Murad, 2009). The TBLT provided a relaxed atmosphere  to promote target language use (Sae-Ong, 2010).

The results visibly show that the majority  of  the  participants  agree that the speaking tasks have helped them in developing their developing presentation  skills (94%) and  delivering  oral  reports  (90%).  This   finding is similar to that concluded by Sae-Ong (2010) who stated  that task activities were valuable  in  giving  learners  a  chance  to  speak  longer  and  in a sustained way.

 

 

The results revealed that the students got an improvement in the speaking skills because the TBSA helped the students (66.7%)  recall  the old vocabulary and learn new vocabulary; (2) improving pronunciation (66.7%), (3) using the vocabulary in context correctly (70%); and (4) understanding the vocabulary functions and speaking contexts (73.3%).

Concerning the use of the foreign language and the possible embarrassment, many students (83.3%) answered that they are never embarrassed to speak English in class,  with  76.7%  asserting  that  they take part in speaking positively. The creation of  a  relaxed  atmosphere  in class is vital to avoid frustration and  inhibition  when  doing  activities  and tasks, and this will  ultimately  lead  to  the  improvement  of  the  speaking  skills. These findings were confirmed by other researchers such as Murad (2009) and Chaung (2010) who  report  that  the  reduction  of  students‘ stress and  anxiety  leads  to  the  increase  of  their  confidence  and participation  in  speaking.  The   TBSA   improved   students‘  communication in  English  by  giving  them opportunities  to  practice   the   language   in classes and  reactivated  their  knowledge  of  English  vocabulary  and structures (Adendorff, 2014).

Students’ perceptions of the variety of task-based activities

 

Table (14) showed the degree of appreciation of the variety of tasks carried out. All the activities were designed to promote interaction and to develop  the  students‘   communicative   competences.   Table   (14) summarizes the findings of the students‘ perceptions of the variety of task-based activities.

 

Table 14. Students’ perceptions of the variety of task-based activities

 

No .	Items	Agree		Disagree
		No.	%	No.	%
27	I enjoy working with listening to English radio programs.	30	100
28	I enjoy working with computers.	26	86,7	4	13.6
29	I enjoy working with watching videos.	29	96.7	1	3.3
30	I enjoy working with newspapers and magazines.	27	90	3	10
31	I enjoy working with role-plays.	30	100
32	I enjoy working with stories.	29	96.7	1	3.3

We wanted to detect the general and particular enjoyment of the activities used in class and which of them were preferred. The majority of students enjoy working with stories (96.7%), role-plays (100%), videos (96.7%), English radio programs (100%), and computers (100%). It is noteworthy that there is a substantial difference in the preference for readers, newspapers and  magazines.  Again,  there  is  a  consistent  tendency to enjoy working  with  oral  practice  rather  than  with  written  skills.  This  is a relevant  fact  because  they  are  students with  low  linguistic  proficiency  and they are likely to perform poorly in this area. The students used the authentic materials and realia to  present  their  tasks.  It  enhanced  the students‘ speaking and motivated them to speak in English. References to Kruger and Poser (2007) and Adendorff (2014) Nunan (1993); Skehan, (1998)  and  Ellis  (2003)  using  activities  as  well  as   using   authentic material are considered essential in Task-based Language Teaching

Attitudes toward Pair/Group Work

Questions 33 to 44 deal with students‘ attitudes toward  pair/group work according to their experiences  of  TBLT.  Regarding  students‘ willingness to interact with their peers and the existence of a comfortable atmosphere when  working  in  pairs/groups  or  individually,  table (15) showed the students‘ impressions of their task-based experience in the classroom during the experimental study.

 

 

Table 15.Attitudes toward Pair/Group Work

 

No .	Statements	Agree		Disagree
		No.	%	No.	%
33	I like pair work and group tasks.	28	93.3	2	6.7
34	I prefer to work individually.	5	16.7	25	83.3
35	I like to interact with peers.	24	80	6	20
36	I   like    to    do brainstorming with classmate(s) in class.	27	90	3	10
37	I     like     to     cooperate     with       my classmate(s) to complete the task assigned by teacher.	26	87.7	4	13.3
38	I like to listen to my classmates when they Speak.	23	76.7	7	23.3
39	I can learn from my classmate(s) in class when doing pair/group work.	21	70	9	30
40	I   like    to    share experiences and exchange ideas with my classmate(s).	27	90	3	10
41	I feel less anxious when speaking English with classmate(s) in class rather than with teachers or foreigners.	20	66.7	10	33.3
42	I have more chances to do oral practice in pair/group     work     rather     than     in teacher-directed classroom.	25	83.3	5	16.7
43	The dialogues I use in pair/group work are practical to use in real-life situations.	25	83.3	5	16.7
44	I feel accomplished when I complete the task by pair/group work in class.	26	86.7	4	13.3

After experiencing TBLT, a  high  percentage  of  students  (93.3%) like pair work  and group tasks rather than individually  (16.7%),  which denotes a preference for collaboration and interaction with others in the construction of meaning. More than two thirds  (70%)  of the students said that they had learned more from their friends while working together.

 

Many students (76.7%) like to listen to their classmates when they speak, which indicates that they feel engaged in the fulfillment of  the  tasks.  In addition to that, a high percentage of students (80%,  87%) like  to  interact with peers and like to  cooperate  with  their  classmate(s)  to  complete  the task assigned by teacher. The majority of students (90%) said that  they enjoyed doing brainstorming, and sharing personal  experiences and exchanging ideas with  their  classmate(s)  in  class.  Furthermore,  many students (83.3%) turned to agree  that they had  more  opportunity  to practice their English oral skills in pair or group work   rather  than  in traditional teacher-directed English classroom.

Final y,  regarding  students‘  perceptions   on   in-class   pair/group work, their feedbacks  appeared the surprisingly positive results.  Most students (83.3%) agreed that the dialogues which they used in task-based pair/group work  were practical to use in real-life situations, and they (86.7%) felt self-fulfillment when they completed the task. This is in  line with the literature review that says TBLT approach,   which  is  student centered, allows for more  meaningful  communication  and  could  provide more practical extra-linguistic skill building (Van den Branden, 2006).

According to the students‘ opinions from the questionnaires, it  was found that almost students expressed positively toward studying English through TBLA activities in an English class.  The  findings  indicated  that students valued the task  based  approach  in  developing  their  speaking ability  after implementing  TBLT.  They  no   longer   saw  ‗speaking‘   as  a dif icult skil to learn. In addition, students‘  interest  in  attending  English  classes increased a  lot  since  they  were  provided  with  more  opportunities  to engage in pair/group work through TBLT to practice English  without  anxiety,  their  self-confidence   therefore   positively   increased,   and   they  also believed that their speaking ability  could  be  improved  through continuous practice.

 

 

Results of the third tool of the study (Semi-structured Interview) Related to the Second Question:

The purpose of the interview questions, which were directed to ten students from the  experimental  group  after  the  study,  was  to  investigate the perceptions of  students  towards  the  use  of  task-based  instruction  in the speaking classes. In  EFL  class,  the  researcher  assigned  various  tasks  to the FL  students  that  matched  with  the  real  life  situations.  In  short,  all the ten participants were asked to express their  perceptions  of  the  ask- based language instruction.

1. Before you participated in  this study, what kind of teaching methods did your teacher use?

The data from semi-structured interviews revealed that students complained about language classrooms where teachers rarely use tasks. They complained  that  the  teacher  was  talking  and  they  were  only listening.  Students  were  only   following   the   book  and  perceived  nothing of interest in their classroom. Students could not find enough chances to experience   the   language.    As   Wil is   (1996)   suggests,   ―most   of   the opportunities  for  language use are taken by the teacher‖. Wil is also argues that in teacher directed lessons students cannot find the chance to experience the target language.

What are your expectations of EFL class?

When asked about their expectations of EFL class, almost all learners from the  experimental  group   expressed  having   negative   feelings at the outset of the course, as  they  all  thought  English  to  be  a  very  difficult language, especially the pronunciation:

It has so much sound; it was very difficult, because of the tones. I thought it was silly sometimes; I just need to say a tone. (EG2)

 

Students’ thoughts about TBL

When asked about Students‘ thoughts about TBL, eight out of ten learners who were interviewed expressed their enjoyment of the  TBLT method in a number of ways. For instance, some  of  these  learners mentioned that what they have learned is out of their expectation:

But I think I have learned a lot  more  English  in  this  way  than  I would have before.  Because  I  had  English  for  many  years,  and  I  don‘t feel I am good at it. (EG4)

However, learners in the experimental group reported that TBLT enhanced their participation, as task completion demanded everyone‘s contribution. Seven out  of  ten  participants  who  were  interviewed mentioned the importance  of  participation  in  learning  a  language  over merely listening to the teacher:

It is so important when it comes to learning a  language.  If  students don‘t  participate,  they  don‘t  learn the  language,  they  just sit  there, perhaps they understand the grammar, but in terms  of  speaking  the  language,  it  might  be  more  difficult  for   them   because   language   is practice. (EG3)

How do you see the class before implementing TBLA?

Before TBL was implemented, students had  negative  feelings  about their  classroom  experiences such  as  complaining about the  book. Students mentioned that  nothing  was  interesting  in  their  book,  the  book was not important for them.

The  interviewees  from the   experimental   group   also   showed different  responses while being asked to describe  their  learning experience before the study. Their responses are as follows:

 

 

‗The English class is a bit boring (EG01).‘

 

‗I feel that my English is not improved (EG03).‘

 

‗ Lots of classmates do not pay attention in class (EG08).‘

 

‗Teachers try to help us to learn, but  I do  not  like  to  study English.  It  is very difficult to learn English well (EG10).‘

How do you see the class after implementing TBLA?

The analysis of the interviews indicates that all  students  realized  a change within  their  classroom  after  TBL  was  implemented.  The  change was felt when the teacher started to use a variety of tasks. Furthermore, students realized  the  change  through  different  tasks   and   positive  classroom atmosphere. All  students  agreed  that  English  lessons  started  to be  enjoyable. Students  found  more  chance  to  speak.  Comparing  with their classes before the study, students realized that their speaking time increased in the  treatment.  Also,  they  reported  that  speaking  classes started to be enjoyable, interesting and entertaining  that they were unaware of the passage  of time. For  instance,  one  of  the  students  supported these ideas by stating that: I think we started  to  actively participate. Shyness disappeared. I mean when I use  inaccurate  language, none wil make fun of me (EG1)‖.

Another  student  adds,  ―Speaking  is  actual y more  important  for  me. This new method of teaching also  makes  the  lessons  seem interesting  and this helped the classes flow smoothly and fast.  We  didn‘t  realize  the  class was over (EG3)‖.

 

What do you think of the task based activities that have been used in this study?

The  interview  data  revealed that these   participants   differed   widely in their attitudes towards  teacher‘s  using  wide  range  of  activities  in  the class. Almost 9 of participants were positive about teacher‘s activities, considered these as beneficial for them to  develop  their  confidence  for playing their roles to  participate actively in the classroom. All these students regarded classroom activities as  the  tools  that  enable  them  to cope with  the  communicative  problems for their  future  at  their  work- world organizations. All  participants  possessed  the  same  views  regarding  use of activities. For example, one of the students said: I  like  such  task based activities because they arouse my interest. I actively participate in these   activities   (EG8).   A   second   student   adds,   ―Classroom   activities engage us and increase our knowledge in different  ways.  I  think  these activities make us active to  study  by  participating  in  presentations  or  in other tasks‖ (EG5).

In short, most students were satisfied with the tasks used in EFL classroom. They similarly found activities  beneficial  for them to  enhance their learning effectively.

The tasks  support  language learning and  encourage students to speak English.

How did the task based approach help you improve your speaking skills?

All  learners reported  that  TBLT  created  more  opportunities  for them to speak. The following are extracts of the experimental group participants‘ responses from individual interviews:

 

 

‗My English speaking is practiced in the classroom, and I am not so afraid of speaking English. (EG 03)‘

‗I have more opportunities to speak out in English in class (EG04).‘

 

‗I find English speaking not as dif icult as before (EG06).‘

 

Regarding the task-based instruction, the students agreed that they became more active in the classroom. They seemed happy to see their improvement in speaking ability.

How did the tasks implemented in the class enhance your speaking skills?

When asked about the tasks implemented in the class,  the  students made comments on tasks related to the  language  used  in  making  requests and  giving  directions.  These  tasks  enabled  students  to  practice  language   in different real-life contexts. One interviewee shares this idea by stating,

―In my opinion,  the  classes  should  be  like  this, the speaking classes. If we learn something related to   daily  use  of  language,  this  learning  becomes more permanent. Otherwise, we forget these things (EG4)‖.

Another participant says,‖ I think these giving directions tasks  were useful, because when we try to  find and go somewhere the  very  first thing that we wil ask  is  about  directions  if  we  don‘t  know  how  to  go there. It was useful to learn these forms to ask for directions (EG3)‖.

Students  al   agreed  that  tasks  helped  them  practice  ―live‖  language and  thus  improve  their  speaking  ability.  The  common  skills   they  mentioned were related to  the speaking sub-skills of fluency, accuracy, pronunciation and vocabulary growth. One of them stated:

 

We now can decide on the language we  use  in  daily  life.  For  example, I learned how to order in a restaurant in ordering tasks. When I learned these  it  affected  my  fluency,  the  vocabulary  growth,  the grammatical structures. In daily life, it is very important how we behave the person we interact with. (EG3)

Do TBLA help you reduce anxiety and shyness while speaking?

It was interesting, too, that  the  interviewees  explained  that  TBA helped them speak without being afraid or shy:

I think it is good. You speak, and then you are not shy,  especially [when] we are such a little class. (EG3)

However, more than half of  the  interviewee  expressed  that  working on tasks reduced  their anxiety to some degree. Learners expressed increased confidence during tasks completion:

In small group, you can speak without  being  afraid  of  making mistakes in front of others. (EG5)

Pair or group work tasks

Tasks were designed mostly as  pair  or  group  work   activities. These tasks were  intended  to  increase the  communication  between students. According to students‘ reflections on pair work tasks, the participants preferred working  with  partners  rather  than  individually,  and they enjoyed the  feeling  of   self-fulfillment   when   completing   the   task. One interviewee said :

I like group and pair work  tasks  because  they  created opportunities for  me to share and exchange  ideas in a more comfortable  environment. t (EG10)

 

 

Another    interviewee    expresses    his   opinion   by   saying   ―I   like classroom tasks very much and participate either in pairs or group works because through these I can develop my confidence, and speak without hesitation‖ (EG 1).

Would you like to continue the speaking classes like this, I mean with these activities and tasks?

Most of  the  interviewee  said  that they wished  to  continue  with these tasks through the end of the study. One of them suggested that the syllabus  should  include  these  tasks  for  the  other  courses: ―I  would  prefer to go on with the tasks because   they  were  like  giving  additional  information for us. I would like to go on with this method (EG3)‖.

According to the interview results, it was  found that the EG students‘ opinions about task based teaching were more positive. The students of the experimental group commented to  the  researcher  that  they feel less fear of grammar mistakes when they try to  communicate to friends and teachers. They also said  that  English  isn‘t  as  difficult  as  they used  to  believe.  They  feel  interesting  while   learning.   They  had  a  chance to exchange their knowledge with their friends, sharing opinions and making  decisions  together  while  they completed the  tasks.   They   help each other with planning and practicing together  for presentations with teacher support. They feel  more  confident  of  speaking  in  front  of  class  and motivated to learn further.

 

In addition, it is believed that  task-based  learning  should  be  used again, when appropriate, with Saudi students. Based on the research conducted at  Qassim  University,  it  has  been  found  to  be  an  invaluable and effective approach that produces tangible results, and can be used to augment and support more traditional teaching methods.

The  findings  in  this section   were  derived   from   interviews conducted  with  the  course  participants.  Building  up   confidence   in speaking to an audience was mainly reported as a factor that strengthened speaking performance. The tasks based on speaking for  special communication in a variety  of  situations  designed  into  the  course  also helped participants to prepare for speaking, and  once  each  speaking  task was well-prepared, this preparation became an effective strategy to minimize  anxiety,   and   thus   maximize   speaking   confidence.   When speaking English in an  EFL  context  was  taken  into consideration,  it  was not surprising that the study revealed that  confidence  played  an  important role. Promoting  speaking  confidence,  together  with  appropriate   task design,  was recommended for the  English  skills  development  of EFL/ESL  learners  (Murad,  2009; Nunan,  2006; Tu,  2014; Chaung, 2010).

The  responses  from the  interviews  regarding  students‘  perceptions of TBLT were  wholly  positive  and  are  compatible  with  the  findings  of both the post test and  the  questionnaire.  The  experimental  group  students felt comfortable  and  confident  in  communication  when  practicing  the  TBSA; and they  achieved  progress  in  learning  speaking.  The  findings  of  the study reveal  that  implementing  a  TBL  approach  in  EFL   classes creates variety for the students. Moreover it enhances  their  learning,  since TBL tasks encourage student involvement and  lead  to  significant improvements   regarding   their   language   performance.   The   findings   of the

 

 

study on the use of  task-based  learning  to   develop  English  speaking abilities were similar to the hypotheses statements of  Zhang  and  Hung, 2013; Chaung, 2010; Ho, 2006; Lee, 2006; Tseng, 200; Nunan (2004),

Jampamoon (2012), Murad (2009), and Ruenyoot (2010). The previous studies show that the use of task-based learning effectively  developed students‘ English  speaking  abilities.  These   studies   showed   similar   levels of  success  in  implementing  task-based  learning  due  to  the   task component arrangement.

Conclusion

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effectiveness of task-based instruction on developing the  Saudi  EFL  students‘  speaking  skills and to find out the attitudes of the students towards the use of the task-based instruction in the speaking classroom. In order to explore the possible effects of TBI in students‘ speaking  abilities,  pre-  and  post- speaking tests were conducted, whereas learners‘  perceptions  about  TBL  are  investigated  through   different   data   collection   methods:   a questionnaire  and  semi-structured   interview.   Sixty   EFL  students   from two English classrooms participated in the  study  and  assigned  into  two groups (experimental and control).

The findings indicated that  the  experimental  group  students,  who study speaking through task-based teaching, performed remarkably  better than those of the control group on the  final  speaking  post-test.  Whereas there was no significant increase in the control group‘s posttest  exam results, the mean values for  the  experimental  group‘s  post-test  results showed significant changes. The students‘ speaking performance in  the post-test was higher than the one in the pre-test.

 

Qualitative and quantative analysis of the data indicates that TBLT benefits  the  experimental  group  learners  in  terms  of   increasing participation, creating more opportunities for speaking,  easing  learners‘ anxiety, and enhancing  enjoyment.  The  experimental  group  reflected positively on  the  TBI  treatment  in  the  questionnaires  and  more  positively  in  the  interview.  There  is  evidence  in  the   qualitative   data   that experimental group students were interested in the tasks and wanted to  continue  with  task-based  instruction  after the  treatment.  The   findings   in the present research were not new because they  had  been discovered  by Bao and Du (2015); Ho and Long (2014); Murad (2009), Torky (2006);

Rocha (2005), Murad (2009), Sae-Ong (2010),  Humanez  and  Arias (2009). They admitted the positive ef ects of  the  TBLT  on  the  learners‘  oral performance. These studies have certainly shown  TBLT  to  be enjoyable and  interesting  for  the  majority  of  students.  However,  the findings were valuable for teachers at College as well as teachers in universities in teaching speaking.