Skip Navigation

ELT Journal 1991 45(2):98-107; doi:10.1093/elt/45.2.98
© 1991 by Oxford University Press
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kumaravadivelu, B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?


Articles

Language-learning tasks: teacher intention and learner interpretation

B. Kumaravadivelu

taught ESL/EFL for over fifteen years. At present, he teaches TESOL/Applied Linguistics, and directs the MA TESOL program at the University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, USA. He has taught at the Central Institute of English and Foreign Languages, India; the University of Michigan; and the University of Minnesota. He holds an MA in ELT from the University of Lancaster, and a PhD in Applied Linguistics from the University of Michigan. His research interests include second/foreign language teaching methodology, teacher education, and second/foreign language acquisition.

Recent explorations in task-based pedagogy have pointed out that learning outcome is the result of a fairly unpredictable interaction between the learner, the task, and the task situation. From the teacher's perspective, then, achievement of success depends largely on the degree to which teacher intention and learner interpretation of a given task converge. The narrower the gap between teacher intention and learner interpretation, the greater are the chances of achieving desired learning outcomes. It is thus important that we understand potential sources contributing to the mismatch between teacher intention and learner interpretation. The present study attempts to identify potential sources of mismatch by exploring the learner's and teacher's perceptions of the nature, the goals, and the demands of selected language-learning tasks, and comes out with a list of ten sources: cognitive, communicative, linguistic, pedagogic, strategic, cultural, evaluative, procedural, instructional, and attitudinal. It is argued that a knowledge of potential sources of mismatch between teacher intention and learner interpretation will help us sensitize ourselves to interpretive density of language-learning tasks and help us facilitate desired learning outcomes in the classroom.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Simulation GamingHome page
G. B. Halleck
Simulation in second language acquisition: Part 3
Simulation Gaming, December 1, 2007; 38(4): 533 - 535.
[PDF]


Home page
ELT JHome page
T. Stewart
Teachers and learners evaluating course tasks together
ELT J, July 1, 2007; 61(3): 256 - 266.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RELC JournalHome page
W. Lee and B. Morrison
A Role for Newspaper Articles in Developing Autonomous Language Learning Skills
RELC Journal, December 1, 1998; 29(2): 90 - 120.
[PDF]



Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.