MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116753181 · doi:10.18806/tesl.v31i0.1194

Task-Based Language Teaching and Expansive Learning Theory

2015· article· en· W2116753181 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Margaret Robertson

Bibliographic record

VenueTESL Canada Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLanguage educationPsychologySecond-language acquisitionLearning theoryLanguage acquisitionCLARITYPedagogyTeaching methodMathematics educationLinguisticsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Task-Based Language Teaching (TBLT) has become increasingly recognized as an effective pedagogy, but its location in generalized sociocultural theories of learning has led to misunderstandings and criticism. The purpose of this article is to explain the congruence between TBLT and Expansive Learning Theory and the benefits of doing so. The merit of locating TBLT in Expansive Learning Theory is that it provides concrete explanations for how cycles of meaning making and negotiation can be worked into task phases. It provides an elaboration of the cyclical learning processes that may be embedded in tasks, improving the intentionality and focus of language tasks. In doing this it clearly establishes task-based teaching as a robust construct for language teaching programs. Additionally, the location of TBLT within Expansive Learning Theory makes explicit the central importance of intercultural communication competence to language learning, positioning culture as a mediating artefact in learning. This may provide teachers choosing to use TBLT as their pedagogy with a theoretical underpinning of expansive learning and with tools to assist their teaching practice. Additionally, it may contribute to teacher training and professional development through clarity provided by placing TBLT pedagogy within the theoretical framework of Expansive Learning Theory.L’enseignement des langues basé sur les tâches (ELBT) est de plus en plus perçu comme une pédagogie efficace, mais sa place au sein des théories socioculturelles de l’apprentissage a donné lieu à des malentendus et des critiques. L’objectif de cet article est d’expliquer la concordance entre l’ELBT et la théorie de l’apprentissage expansif, d’une part, et les avantages de le faire, d’autre part. Le fait de situer l’ELBT dans la théorie de l’apprentissage expansif permet d’offrir des explications concrètes pour l’intégration des cycles de production de sens et de négociation dans les phases de tâches. L’élaboration des processus d’apprentissage cyclique qui peuvent être ancrés dans les tâches vient améliorer l’intentionnalité et l’objectif des tâches langagières, établissant ainsi l’enseignement basé sur les tâches comme cadre solide des programmes d’enseignement des langues, exposant l’importance centrale de la communication interculturelle dans l’apprentissage d’une langue et remettant à la culture un rôle de médiateur dans l’apprentissage. Tout ceci peut offrir aux enseignants qui choisissent de baser leur pédagogie sur l’ELBT un fondement théorique en apprentissage expansif et des outils pour appuyer leur pratique. L’intégration de la pédagogie de l’ELBT au sein du cadre théorique de l’apprentissage expansif peut également contribuer à la formation et au développement professionnel des enseignants.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.654
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.206 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTESL Canada JournalSame topicEFL/ESL Teaching and LearningFrench-language works237,207