THE IMPLEMENTATION OF TASK-BASED LANGUAGE TEACHING TO DEVELOP STUDENTS’ GRAMMAR ACCURACY

Muhammad Soali1, Ashadi2, Azwan Hepriansyah3

Universitas Negeri Yogyakarta, Indonesia1,2

Politeknik Bina Husada Kendari, Indonesia3

Email: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]

KEYWORDS

students’ grammar mastery; Task-Based Language Teaching; classroom action research

ABSTRACT

This research aims to find out; (1) whether task-based language teaching can develop students’ grammar accuracy; and (2) whether the implementation of Task-Based Language Teaching can develop class condition in grammar class of the second-grade students of English Department of Universitas Harapan Bangsa. The method used in this research is classroom action research. It was conducted in two cycles from October to December 2021 at the first-grade students of English Department of Universitas Harapan Bangsa. The research result shows that the use of Task-Based Language Teaching can develop the students’ grammar accuracy. The students succeed to make sentences in various tenses with correct form and meaning. The results of all cycles conducted as follows; the average score of post-tests in cycle I is 64, and post-test in cycle II is 73. The class condition also became better since the method was applied. They are more active joining the learning process. They applied the language rules they learned communicatively in the spoken and written forms. This condition made them aware of their ability to use the standard language in the communication. In conclusion, task-based language instruction can improve the classroom environment and the students' grammar proficiency. Both the academic performance and the learning environment of the students are benefited by this approach.

INTRODUCTION

The interpersonal communication process consists mainly of listening, speaking, reading and writing. These skills show up in language. Learning a language means acquiring language skills (Pardede, 2020). Students need to have a good command of them if they want to communicate with other people and share their ideas, feelings and opinions. Mastering the four language skills, especially English, is very important for students to be able to interact with people from all over the world.

Some components affect mastery of the four language skills, such as vocabulary and grammar. Mastery of vocabulary and grammar play an important role in the oral and written form of the language. Wilkins in Thornberry (1999) states that nothing can be communicated without vocabulary. Harmer (2007b) continues: "Grammar is an important part of learning English in order to become proficient in the English language." Furthermore, Harmer (2007b) states: "If grammar rules are too lightly broken, communication can suffer..." These statements show how important vocabulary and grammar are when learning a language, English in details.

Grammar, as one of the elements that support fluency in speech, is very important to learn as it affects the meanings and messages a person wants to convey (Ampa & Akib, 2019). Using incorrect grammar can make our posts meaningless and unclear. Everyone who communicates in a certain language knows, consciously or unconsciously, the grammar of that language.

There are many grammatical elements in the English language, as mentioned above; one of them is closed. Tense is a verb form used to indicate time, and sometimes the continuation or completion of an action related to speaking time (Listia & Febriyanti, 2020). There are several tenses that we have learned that are widely used in English, such as the present simple, present perfect and past simple. The tenses help students form grammatically correct sentences both orally and in writing.

Learning English as a foreign language can be very difficult for students, especially when it comes to learning grammar. Grammatical elements such as tenses are quite complicated for the students to learn because each element has specific rules that must be followed when using it in the language (Spahiu & Kryeziu, 2021). The same difficulties also arose in the first class. Data was obtained from an initial time test distributed to students including Present Simple, Present Continuous, Past Simple, Past, and Present Perfect and showed that many students still perform poorly. The students who scored 65 on the passing criterion are 27 out of 42 students. The students' average score on this pre-test was 55. The lowest score was 33 and the highest was 81. This means that many students still had difficulties learning grammar, especially tenses. The result showed that the students still had difficulties with the use of auxiliary verbs, regular and irregular verbs, tenses and functions. They had difficulty forming meaningful sentences and using the correct tense in a sentence. After investigating the issues, there were three reasons why these issues occur. These reasons were: (1) the students found that learning the grammar was not only very complicated but also less important to learn because they thought they could still communicate in English without knowing the grammar, (2) I rarely offered interactive classes to the students, so the students were quite passive (3) the teaching and learning process was more teacher-centred than the student, so I tended to dominate the class, (4) I often put pressure on the students out by correcting their mistakes directly. Regarding the problems and their causes, the author believes that students' knowledge of grammar and their thinking about the importance of learning grammar should increase. As a teacher, I also need to give students comfort in learning grammar and not bore them while teaching. I should also create more student-oriented classes so that they can deepen their knowledge of grammar. To remedy this, I have proposed task-based language teaching as a solution to these problems.

Task-based language teaching or task-based instruction is one of the methods generated from communicative approach which applies some interactive and meaningful activities engaging the learners to comprehend or to produce an outcome using the target language (Nasiba, 2022). The tasks applied in this method are different from the traditional tasks in which the teacher instructs the students to complete the exercise. 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 mobilizing their grammatical knowledge in order to express meaning, and in which the intention is to convey meaning rather than to manipulate form (Nunan, 2004). 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, a middle and an end. The definition is in accordance with the principal of teaching grammar in communicative approach that teaching grammar should be taught explicitly and implicitly (Hee et al., 2005).

Generally, the phases of teaching using task-based consist of three phases; Pre-task. It is the introduction to the topic and task provision of useful input (listening, reading, brainstorming, etc.) (2) Task Cycle. In this phase, the students, commonly work in small groups, are encouraged to accomplish the task and present it in written or spoken form. The teacher monitors the students’ work and provides help for them in order that they are motivated (3) Post-task. It focuses on retrospective discussion of the task-awareness-raising. It is important to emphasize that tasks in task-based language teaching should have very clear objectives and conclude with a very tangible sense of achievement for the learners (Richards, 2005).

Choosing homework-based language learning in grammar class provides students with various interactive tasks to complete in the target language they are learning, so students improve not only their language skills but also their grammar skills. By applying the three basic steps of homework-based language teaching to grammar lessons, students will directly produce the language they are learning while being aware of the rules of the language. Production possibilities may require students to pay special attention to form and the relationship between form and meaning (Harmer, 2007b). Furthermore, language structures should not be taught in isolation but should be integrated into the four language skills. In this case, the use of the task method changed the way of teaching and learning grammar from traditional to more communicative (Rojas, 1995). The main objective of this change is the development of communicative grammatical competence, understood as the ability to use and understand constructions spontaneously in different situations. Although task-based language teaching is viewed as a way of implementing a communicative approach, and as with communicative approaches in general, one feature of task-based language teaching that often worries teachers is that there appears to be no space for learning grammar. In fact, grammar is just as important in a communicative approach as it is in any other approach. This means that the grammar applies equally to task-based language teaching.

In accordance with the above explanation, I would apply the use of task-based language teaching in grammar class to cope with the problems occurring in that class. When the students are provided by various interactive and meaningful tasks, there is no doubt that the students would not only improve their grammar mastery but they would also experience the learning process in a better class condition. However, this research would be specified in one of the grammar indicators, that is tense.

As explained in the background of the study, it is concluded that the teacher needs to improve the students’ grammar mastery using an appropriate teaching strategy in which in this research, I would like to try to use Task-Based to improve the students’ grammar mastery.

To find out if task-based language lessons can improve students' grammar skills, there are a few steps that need to be followed. In the first, I test students with a test that aims to determine how students are improving their grammar skills after learning grammar with task-based language instruction. A questionnaire completed by students and distributed each cycle measures whether they have made progress in learning grammar. I also used the diary to get additional data on students' progress in learning grammar. By analyzing the test and quiz results, data is obtained on whether or not task-based language teaching can improve students' grammar skills. What is the situation in the classroom after the introduction of task-based language teaching in grammar lessons? The introduction of homework-based language lessons in grammar lessons will make a significant contribution to improving teaching conditions. I use an observation sheet and questionnaire to collect data. These tools measure whether: (1) students are motivated to learn grammar; actively learning grammar, (2) the learning process becomes more student-centred; students to dominate the learning process more, (3) I make the learning process more attractive by encouraging, supporting, helping them and also providing them with various interactive and communicative activities. The aim of this article is to describe whether activity-based language instruction can improve the grammar competence of first-year students at the English Department Universitas Harapan Bangsa. Describe the classroom environment in which task-based language learning is used in grammar lessons.

These research problems are formulated in the following questions: Can Task-Based Language Teaching improve grammar mastery of the first grade of English Department Students of Universitas Harapan Bangsa in the academic year of 2021/2022?

RESEARCH METHOD

The research was conducted in the first-grade students class A of English Department at Universitas Harapan Bangsa in the academic year of 2021/2022. To have a valid result, this research was conducted in eight months from August 2021 to March 2022. This research was started from conducting the pre observation until reporting. The implementation of the research was conducted in two cycles consisting of six meetings in the cycle one and five meetings in the commit to user cycle two.

The subject of the study was the class A at the first-grade students of English Department in the academic year of 2021/2022 of Universitas Harapan Bangsa. There were 42 students consisting of 31 females and 11 males. Their ages were between eighteen to twenty-one years old.

The design of this research is classroom action research (AR). Burns (2009) clarifies that AR is related to the ideas of ‘reflective practice’ and ‘the teacher as researcher’. It involves taking a self-reflective, critical, and systematic approach to exploring your own teaching contexts. Moreover, she says that one of the main aims of AR is to identify a ‘problematic’ situation or issue that the participants – who may include teachers, students, managers, administrators, or even parents – consider worth looking into more deeply and systematically. Further, Elizabeth in Burns (2009) states that action research is research carried out in the classroom by the teacher of the course, mainly with the purpose of solving a problem or improving the teaching/learning process. It means that action research emerges from some problems in this case the problems aroused in the classroom to find the solution that should be overcome by the teacher of the class.

The steps of action research are illustrated by Kemmis and Mc Taggart as quoted by Burns (2009), consisting of planning, action, observation, and reflection. In the planning, some steps are used such as, identifying a problem or issue and develop a plan of action in order to bring about improvements in a specific area of the research context.

In doing the research, there are two kinds of data, quantitative and qualitative data. To obtain the quantitative data, I used test to examine the students’ grammar mastery. Test may be constructed primarily as devices to reinforce learning and to motivate the students or primarily as a means of assessing the students’ performance in language (Heaton, 1988). The test was conducted as a pre-test to determine their basic understanding about tenses and post-test done in every cycle to determine their improvement after being treated using Task-Based. The qualitative data in this research were got from questionnaire, observation sheet and teacher’s diary. A questionnaire is a research instruments that contains a variety or series of questions used for collecting or recording information about a particular issue of interest (Kirklees, 2011). Here are some steps of gaining the data:

Questionnaire

The researcher gave questionnaire to the students to support the information from the observation sheet to know the students’ responses about the process of teaching learning grammar using task-Based.

Observation

The observation was aimed at receiving the data about the teaching and learning process using Task-Based language Teaching and the teacher and students’ attitude during the learning process. The data received were utilized for the researcher to know the advantages and disadvantages of teaching grammar using Task-Based Language Teaching. She used the observation sheet filled by the observer and questionnaire filled by the students.

To collect the data, the researcher used test. Both pre-test and post-test were aimed at knowing whether grammar mastery of the students get the progress or not. The data from grammar test was individual data. Ngadiso (2007) explains about how to find the mean of the data. The formula is:

Mean = nx

In which:

n: the number of students, and

x: the students’ score

Miles and Huberman in Koshy (2005) provide some steps in analyzing the qualitative data. The steps are as follows; a. Data reduction; refers to the process of selecting, focusing simplifying, abstracting and transforming the data that appear in the written-up field notes or transcription. There were some activities I did, those are selecting the important data and transforming it into a written report. After transforming into written report, the data would be displayed into a kind of graph, chart or description. The purpose is to make organized information into an immediately available, accessible, and compact form so that I can see what is happening and either draws conclusions or moves on to the next step of analysis the display suggests being useful. c. Drawing Conclusion and Verification; In this step, I concluded and verified what things means, note the regularities. I hold this conclusion until all data are more explicit and grounded, besides, the action researcher also draws conclusions as the project progresses.

RESULT AND DISCUSSION

It has been stated in the first chapter that the first grade students had some difficulties in studying tenses in grammar class, such as in using auxiliaries, regular and irregular verbs, making sentences using correct forms, meaning, and use. It was obtained from pre-test result. The pre-test result shows the average score 59 from the total number of 42 students. There were only 14 students or 33% who got score above the criteria of success. It means that 28 or 67% students still got score under the criteria. The result showed that many students made mistakes in making verbal and nominal sentences; they made mistakes in using auxiliaries or judging the verb form in accordance with the tense, in making meaningful sentence based on the tense used, and in using the appropriate form in accordance with the time.

Another problem appeared in grammar class was also found. It comes from the students, the teacher, and also the learning process. The students did not take apart actively in the learning process; they often relied their task on their friends who was more capable, they didn’t pay attention or listen when I explained the material. They sometimes felt nervous when joining the grammar class, the smarter students in the classroom tended to dominate the learning process. And the last is the grammar activities tended to be monotonous. The students usually did individual tasks more than cooperative tasks and they tended to be quiet during the learning process.

Some factors causing they met those difficulties are seen from the students themselves, I as the grammar teacher, and the classroom condition. The students had lack knowledge about tenses. They also had low motivation to learn grammar. From I myself as the teacher, I tend to emphasize the students to answer grammatically correct so the students felt nervous, when the students were given an exercise, I sometimes did not correct the students’ work. It made me and the students not know the students’ progress. The learning process was also more teacher-centred. I tend to dominate the learning process. The summary of the problems indicators is displayed in the Table 1.

Table 1. Condition Prior the Research

Problem Indicators	Description
A. Students’ Grammar Mastery
The students had difficulties to make sentences using correct form in the five tenses	The students made mistakes in making sentences based on the form of each tense. They made mistakes in applying the verb agreements in those sentences.
The students had difficulties to make meaningful sentences in the in the five tenses	The students made sentences based on the five tenses without comprehending the meaning
The students had difficulties to make appropriate structures	The students made sentences using the five tenses without comprehending when and why those tenses are used
B. Classroom Condition
The students did not take apart actively in learning process	The students tended to be quiet during the learning process. They seldom asked questions related to the lesson. They did not find any information when they were given a task
The smarter students tended to be competitive	The students who had better capability in grammar tended to dominate the learning process
The teacher provided less help, support, and encouragement	The teacher usually let the students not comprehend the material well. I often made the students feel nervous I seldom determined the students’ progress by delivering questions.
The grammar learning activities tended to be teacher- centred	The grammar learning activities were mostly teacher’s explanation about the rules of tenses. The students’ tended to be quiet during the learning process.

Considering on those problem, here i used task-based language teaching to improve the students’ grammar mastery especially in tenses. Using task-based provides the students many meaningful activities that can build their awareness of their language they are learning through task activities. This is in line with

To determine whether the study specifically in grammar class was successful or not, it concerned on two aspects: grammar teaching learning process and students’ achievement described in Table 2.

Table 2 Criteria of Success, Data Source, and Instrument

The Criteria of success	Data source	Instrument
The process
First grade students of Class A respond positively during the implementation of Task Based in grammar class	The students’ statements about their attitude toward the implementation of Task Based in grammar class	Questionnaire
All first-grade students of Class A are motivated during the action	The students’ involvement in class activities	Observation sheet
	The students’ responses during the implementation of task based in grammar class	Teacher’s diary
The students’ achievement
The average of all students is equal or above the minimum passing criterion, which is 65	The score of the students’ test	Grammar Test

The Implementation of the Research

This part covers the implementation of the research consisting of two cycles. Each cycle consists of different numbers of meeting because it is suit with the needs of the research. Cycle 1 consists of 6 meetings, and cycle 2 consists of 5 three meetings. Every cycle covers four stages: planning, implementation of the action, observing and reflecting. It is also described the result of post-test from each cycle.

Cycle 1

1) Planning the Action

There were some preparations done by me and my partner, the observer, before implementing the action, as follows: lesson plans, instruments, observation sheet, and students’ worksheet dealing with the material in grammar class. In making the lesson plans, she and her observer discussed the objective of the course, the material to convey in every meeting in this cycle 1, the implementation of task based in the teaching learning process consisting of the activities in pre task, during the task and language focus activities. This cycle consists of 4 meetings with different material in each meeting.

The instrument was also provided by us to measure the students’ comprehension of the tenses they had already got after the last meeting of this cycle. The instrument is in the form of test consisting fifty questions which is divided into three parts, as follows: twenty multiple choices, fifteen completions, and fifteen analyses. To obtain the further information and improvement about the process of grammar teaching learning process using task based, I and the observer prepared the observation sheet which would be filled by the observer every meeting.

2) Implementation of the Action

The process of teaching grammar using task based was implemented in the grammar 1 class of the class A English Department, Harapan Bangsa University in six meetings started from October until November. The findings of this study are as follows:

a) The Improvement of Students’ Grammar Accuracy

To know the improvement of the students’ grammar accuracy after being done the learning process using task based, I conducted the grammar post-test of the first cycle covering five indicators; present simple, present continuous, present perfect, past simple, and past continuous. The result of this test is compared to the result of the pre-test before the cycle. The average of grammar test result in the pre-test was 59 in which the highest score was 81 and the lowest one was 31. Meanwhile the post test result of cycle 1 showed an improvement in which the average reached 65. The highest score in this post test was 82 and the lowest one was 46. It can be seen that in this cycle the highest score did not improve higher but some students had reached higher scores than it in the pre-test. In other word, the improvement was not significant because there were many students who did not reach the criteria of success even the average score has reached it. The following paragraph draws the result of the cycle 1 post-test compared with it of the pre-test.

As it has been explained before that the indicators tested in this research consist of five tenses. The first indicator is present simple. The average score of this indicator in the pre-test was 60, while in the post-test of cycle 1, the average increased becomes 66. Although the average score has improved, there were still several students who did not reach the criteria of success. The highest score for this indicator was 9 and the lowest one was 4. Most students had recognized this tense but they still found some difficulties in it such as placing auxiliary, determining auxiliary do and auxiliary be in a sentence or making questions using WH questions.

The second indicator is present continuous. This tense reaches the highest average score of all indicators. The average score in the pre-test was 64 and in the post-test of cycle 1 was 69. Some students who got lower scores also appeared in this indicator. The highest and lowest scores reached in this indicator are similar with the first indicator that is 9 and 5. It was found that the students still made mistakes in determining the verb used in continuous and the verb not used in it. Some of them were also made mistake in determining the adverbial of time.

The next indicator of grammar is present perfect. The score of this tense is the opposite from the second indicator. This tense reaches the lowest score of all indicators. In the pre-test the average reaches 55 and in the post-test of cycle 1 the average is 63. The highest score reached in this indicator is 8 and the lowest one is 32.

Most students made mistake in this tense in determining the verb of past participle. Past simple is the next indicator tested in this research. From the students’ pre-test result, it was got the average score 59 and their post-test result reached the average 65. 8 and 4 were got as the highest and the lowest scores from this indicator. The most common difficulties found in this tense were that the students were difficult to determine the verb past and determine the nominal and verbal sentences.

And the last indicator is past continuous. The result shows that the average score of this indicator in the pre-test was 57 and in the post-test was 62. The highest score of this indicator was 8 and the lowest one was 4. The students commonly made mistakes in judging whether the sentence should be in simple past or in past continuous. To provide clarity of the result, it is drawn in the Table 3 and Table 4.

Table 3 the Average Score before the research and after Cycle 1

Students’ grammar test results

No	Indicators	Pre-test	Post-Test Cycle 1
1	Present Simple	62	66
2	Present Continuous	60	69
3	Present Perfect	55	63
4	Past Simple	55	65
5	Past Continuous	57	60
		58	65

Table 4 the Result in the pre-test and Post-Test in Cycle 1

Points	Grammar Test in Cycle 1
Points	Pre-Test	Post-Test
	Pre-Test	Post-Test
Lowest	33	46
Highest	78	82
Average	55	64

The table shows that the students’ grammar test result increases in the post-test of the first cycle compared with the pre-test. The average score for all indicators in the pre-test is 55 and it in the post-test is 64. Even though the test result shows the improvement, it has not reached the criteria of success yet. There were still many students who had not got score above 64. Some students had been able to cope their difficulties in learning tenses as described above but some other students still found those difficulties.

b) The Improvement of Classroom Condition

Besides clarifying the students’ improvement in their grammar mastery, here is described also about the classroom condition during teaching learning process using task-based language teaching. This description is based on the observation result done by the observer. There are two kinds of data that will be described. The first, the numeral data consisting of three from four major categories in which the observer gave score to each question of each category. And the second, the verbal data in which she further commented or clarified the score she gave in a clear description.

The four categories consist of development of learning objectives, presentation, instructor-students’ interaction, and general point of view. The three categories are measured from the lowest and the highest scores from 0-5. Score 0 means not applicable. It means that the steps she conducts during teaching learning process do not correlate with the steps she has made in the lesson plan or the lesson plan itself does not correlate with the aim of the grammar learning goals. Score 1 means not demonstrated. It means that there is a step existing in the lesson plan but she does not apply it in teaching learning process. Score 2 is merits further development. The observer gives this score if the steps the researcher conducts in teaching learning process need much more improvement. Score 3 means satisfactory. It means that that statement is given when the steps of teaching grammar using task-based correlates with the learning grammar goals but it still needs more improvement. Score 4 means well-demonstrated. It means that the steps the observer does have been appropriate with the goals of learning grammar. Score 5 means outstanding. It means that the steps she does during teaching learning process were very good.

In this part, there are three categories measured numerically. All categories were in the satisfactory level. It means that those were good but still need more improvement. The first category is development of learning objectives. It consists of five questions, such as giving clear objectives, relating the lesson with the previous and future lessons, preparing the students with assigned reading, and summarizing major points of the lessons. The observer gave comment and suggestions in this category, she reminded the researcher that in the first meeting she didn’t tell the objectives of the lesson, she suggested to give clear explanation about it and to state it in the lesson plan because it doesn’t content the step of explaining the objectives of learning. She further suggested the researcher to give more assigned reading for the students to enhance their understanding about the material given.

The second category, presentation, covers all activities during the grammar teaching learning process using task-based language instruction. This category is also in the satisfactory level. It means that the way the researcher conducted the grammar class using task-based still needs improvement in several ways. It can be seen from the observation sheet responded by the observer. It was started from the pre task when the researcher aroused the students’ background knowledge about the material that would be given, the task that the students should do in the task cycle until the language focus in which it focused on the explanation and reinforcement about the material in the last step of teaching. The observer responded that; the ways she gave clear instruction, maintained eye contact with the students, used the appropriate media, used humour were good enough. She suggested the researcher to give more variety questions to arouse the students’ background knowledge before they did the task, provide the materials much better because she saw that the way the researcher did was rather careless. It can be seen that there were several mistakes she did in making power points, such as, mistyping. She also suggested the researcher to ask the students to get involved and take apart more in doing the task and accomplishing the project because she saw there were many students who chatted with their friends when their partners were doing the task. Further, she added that the researcher should maintain better atmosphere during teaching learning to minimize the students’ boredom, such as using humour, changing the setting of the classroom relating to the need, listening to the students’ questions or responses, and walking around the class while they did the task to monitor their progress because most of them needed help especially in grammar.

The third category, instructor’s –students’ interaction, is all about the interaction between the researcher as a teacher and the students during teaching learning. The average score of this category is 3.6 meaning that the way the researcher interacted with the students was also satisfying, even though some weaknesses existed in the process of interaction. The observer explained that there were several improvements needed to make the learning process better. The researcher should be more aware of the students’ need, encourage the students’ response and questions by giving clearer explanation, monitor the students’ progress by delivering some questions relating to the material, and she also should provide more time for the students to discuss their problems in learning grammar. Moreover, she commented that the researcher sometimes let one of the groups or group members dominate the learning process. It made some students not motivated to learn.

The last category is general view of the observer towards the process of teaching learning grammar using task-based. This category is not measured numerically meaning that the observer clarifies her point of view only in description. In this category, the observer clarified that using task-based in grammar class had left good impressions on the students because they got new experience learning grammar in communicative way. She also stated that the researcher’s major strengths in the teaching process where she could lead the students to learn actively by choosing the various activities, and the media she used had clear purposes. Furthermore, she suggested the researcher to improve her ability in presenting the material, building chemistry with the students to make them motivated in learning grammar, encouraging the students’ boredom and confusion, and being aware of the students’ needs. To make it clear, the result of cycle I can be seen in the Table 6. It describes the result of the observation graded numerically.

Table 6

Summary of the Classroom Observation Sheet Meeting 1-6 in Cycle 1

No.	Observed Categories	Scoring	Description
1	Development of objectives	3.4	satisfactory
2	Presentation	3.8	satisfactory
3	Instructor-students’ interaction	3.6	satisfactory
		3.6

4) Reflecting

After doing the action and observation, reflection is needed to know what has been achieved, what has not, and what solution to do to make the process of learning and the students’ grammar mastery better. In other words, this stage describes three main parts; what has been achieved, has not, and recommendation. It is included the analysis of the action results of the implementation of task-based in grammar class. The data obtained from observation stage were compared to the indicators of the criteria of success.

a) What has been achieved

It is known that learning grammar is very difficult to learn. The students stated in their pre-questionnaire that they were often confused and depressed when they met this class. They regarded that grammar talks about not only rules but also meaning. That is why the researcher tried to use task-based to solve the problem.

After being applied, there were some improvements reached in the grammar class consisting of the improvement process of teaching learning obtained from the observation and questionnaire results and the improvement of their grammar mastery obtained from grammar test result.

The observation result shows that the process of teaching learning has been satisfying. It means that the researcher had provided the students with several efforts to make them comfortable with the process of learning grammar, such as, giving clear learning objectives, presenting the material well, encouraging the students by listening, responding, facilitating and monitoring their progress. Meanwhile, the questionnaire tells that the students have gone through a new grammar learning experience since task-based was implemented. It made them more active, enthusiastic, and motivated to learn grammar because they not only learned it theoretically but also applied it directly in spoken or written form. It gave a good improvement for their grammar mastery.

The grammar test result in this cycle shows that the students’ grammar mastery was improved from their pre-test, even though not all students could reach the criteria of success. The average score the students reached in pre-test was 59 with the lowest and the highest scores were 32 and 82. Meanwhile the average of post-test result in this cycle was 64 with the lowest and the highest scores were 46 and 82. The pre-test shows that there were 17 students who reach the criteria of success, and it improved become 30 students from 42 students in the post-test of this cycle.

b) What has not been achieved

It has been clarified previously that the students’ grammar mastery in this cycle has not improved significantly or even reached the criteria of success yet. It can be seen from the students’ grammar test and the observation results. The test results show that not all students got score above 65. Even though there was an improvement reached in this cycle from the pre-test, 12 students still got score under the criteria of success. The most common problems faced were in past continuous and present perfect tenses. Those tenses got the lowest score of all. The average score of past continuous was 62 and present perfect was 63. Meanwhile, the observation result describes that providing good atmosphere during teaching learning process needs improving to make the students feel comfortable and enjoyable. In other words, the researcher and the observer concluded that the action in the first cycle had to be continued to the next cycle by paying attention to some considerations discussed.

Discussion

This part draws a discussion of the research findings covering two sub-topics, the improvement of students’ grammar mastery and the improvement of class condition. It discusses the findings from the research that have been done compared with the theories.

The Improvement of the Students’ Grammar Mastery

It has been clarified that the result of pre-observation draws that the students got problems in learning grammar especially in learning tenses. There were many students who got scores under the criteria of success, whereas grammar holds a very important role in a language. Grammar can be partly seen as knowledge of what words can go where and what form these words should take. Studying grammar means knowing how different grammatical elements can be strung together to make chains of words. (Harmer, 2007a). In the previous book he (Harmer, 2001)says that if grammar rules are too carelessly violated, communication may suffer. It means that if we do not have good mastery in grammar, it will be able to cause misunderstanding. So, the information conveyed may get disturbed. Further, Thornbury (1999) states that without grammar, little can be conveyed. It appeared to the students, that they were very difficult to convey information with correct grammar and even it often caused misunderstanding.

One of the reasons why they got difficulties in learning grammar is that the way of teaching and learning. They used to have their learning grammar only focused on rules of language; they got an explanation of the language rules then

they did exercises. Most students spent their learning by remembering those rules without applying it into the real situation. However, learning grammar must not be learned in isolation but it is integrated to the language skills (Rojas, 1995).

To help the students improve their grammar mastery, the researcher used task-based language teaching. It is one of the methods of communicative approach that provides the students to learn grammar focusing not only on form but also on meaning. Even though this method has raised some critics when it is applied in learning grammar, she is quite sure that this method could help the students improve their grammar in order that they can improve their language performance. It is supported by Beglar and Hunt in (Harmer, 2007a) who states that opportunities for production may force students to pay close attention to form and to the relationship between form and meaning. Meanwhile, Richards (2014) recites that in advocating the use of task work in language teaching, the assumption is that learners will develop not only communicative skills but also an acceptable standard of performance through task work. Task work is not intended to promote development of a nonstandard form of English but is seen as part of the process by which linguistics and communicative competence is developed.

This method applies three main steps in learning process; they are pre-task, task cycle, and language focus. In the pre-task, the students are introduced to the topic. They are brainstormed by using some meaningful activities, such as, using question and answer about the topic that will be learned, or using games. The teacher may also prepare the students by highlighting useful words and think and prepare the task that will be accomplished. In the task cycle, the students are encouraged to accomplish their tasks and present it communicatively in written or in spoken form. The teacher monitors the students by helping, motivating, and encouraging the students in a supportive way. And in the language focus, the students are led to analyze the language they have made and compare with the rules of that language they will learn. After analyzing the language, they practice it by doing the exercises (Richards & Rodgers, 2014)

The steps above gave the students a chance to explore the language rules they learn into some real meaningful and interesting activities. In the first-two steps, the students were encouraged to use the target language without worrying about their mistakes. I as the researcher monitored the class by brainstorming and motivating them to take apart of doing the task by helping them correct their mistakes without declaring that they had made mistakes or teaching new rules of language. In the second-last step, they were led to analyse the target language they had used whether it was correct or incorrect and they were also given the explanation about the rules of the target language they learned. At the end of this cycle, they were asked to do the exercises to reinforce the language rules they had learned. So, the students experienced learning the language while using it. It is in line with the previous study conducted by Yousevi (2010) entitled: “Task-based Teaching of Grammar”. He states that grammar teaching should not just maintain its rule-listing routine. Instead, some new attempts should be involved. Teaching grammar through tasks in situational contexts will pursue the appropriate practical use of grammar.

By applying task-based in the grammar class, it has improved the students’ grammar mastery. It is proved by their improvement reached in every cycle. Task based provides the students to learn not only how the language is formed but also how it is used.

The Improvement of the Classroom Condition

From the research findings, it is obtained that the implementation of task- based gives some advantages to the improvement of the better class condition when learning grammar is carried out. Those advantages are classified into three main parts, the advantages reached by the students, the teacher, and the process of teaching learning. Those will be described in the following.

1) The students

The use of task-based in grammar class has given good influence on the students. Based on the data obtained from the results of the observation and the questionnaire, there are some improvements reached by the students, as follows:

a) The improvement of students’ activeness

Before task-based was implemented in grammar class, the students tended to be passive in learning grammar. They came to the class, sat and listened silently to the teacher’s explanation, and then they did exercises. After it was implemented, they were encouraged to accomplish various tasks by interacting communicatively using the language they were learning. So, it made them learn actively. This finding is also in line with the research finding done by Ruso (1999). She clarifies that before task-based was implemented, students did not like their teachers talking too much. It made them become passive and not create sufficient language practice opportunities. But when it was implemented, they stated their teacher presented them various tasks that create opportunities for practice. Further, Ellis (2006) states that one of the main characteristics of task-based is learner centred.

b) The improvement of students’ motivation and interest

The second point reached by the students after task-based was implemented is the improvement of their motivation and interest. It was shown from the questionnaire result that they felt enjoyable and comfortable to learn grammar because they were encouraged to take apart in doing and accomplishing the various tasks and also to have the same opportunities to work within group work. They further clarified that their willingness to get involved in learning process was higher and higher every meeting. Those statements were in accordance with one of the ideal conditions of classroom argued by Stanberry (2000) that the students verbally express interest in learning and doing well when defining their roles as students. The observation results also described that the students were very enthusiastic in joining the class, they were curious to experience new activity every meeting. Krahnke (1987) clarifies that task-based can provide motivation. Furthermore, Oxford (2006) states that on the part of the learner, this involves a serious commitment, motivation, confidence, clarity of purpose, and willingness to take.

c) The improvement of students’ confidence

Task-based focuses the students’ activity on how to decide what best ways to take to accomplish the tasks. In this research, applying task-based allowed them independently to decide what suitable steps they could do to complete the task. Kohonen in Nunan (2004) says that task-based encourages self-directed rather than teacher-directed learning. Its finding also proves that the implementation of task based language teaching had made the

students reduce their nervousness or anxiety when they learned grammar. It made they were more confident to express their ideas. Stanberry (2000) states that the ideal classroom condition provides a warm effective condition lowering anxiety and contributing to the creation of a true community of learners who recognize their boundaries yet are open to new ideas and change.

Another finding is that the way I presented the material, and encouraged the students by listening, responding, facilitating and monitoring their progress made them enthusiastic and motivated to learn. It means that this finding is relevant to the teacher’s roles in task-based language teaching illustrated by Van den Branden (2016) that teachers’ roles are motivating the learners to invest intensive mental energy in completing the task and intentionally supporting task performance in such a way as to trigger processes. In the action of the research, there were some steps I did to motivate the students, for instance, selecting the interesting steps of learning in the pre-task which can arouse students’ attention to get involved in the learning process, choosing the meaningful activities in the task-cycle that made the students active in completing the task, giving stimulation to the students to persist the activity, and providing them a help whether they met difficulties with the language they were learning during the task performance. The use of task-based language teaching has also affect to the improvement of the classroom condition in which teacher has improved her positive attitude by helping and supporting the students (Stanberry, 2000).

2) The teaching learning process

Another aspect which improves when task-based was applied during teaching and learning grammar is the improvement of teaching learning process. Before task-based was implemented, learning grammar only focused on how the students learned the rules of English language are formed. They did not apply it in

3) The teacher

By implementing task based, I as the teacher or researcher become more aware of the students’ needs. The reflection done in the end of every cycle shows there were still weaknesses to improve in preparing the class, such as, the lesson plan, the activities, media, and also teacher’s attitude towards teaching and learning process. So by regarding my weaknesses in teaching, it improves my ability to conduct the better lesson.

the real communication. Rojas (1995) said that language structures must not be taught in isolation but integrated to the four skills of language. In this case, using task-based has changed the way of teaching and learning grammar from the traditional way into more communicative one. The main objective of this change focuses on the development of communicative grammatical competence, which is understood as the ability to use and understand a structure in a variety of situation spontaneously.

The improvement of process of learning in this research is clarified based on the phase of task-based. In the pre-task, the students were introduced to the topic they would get in the task-cycle. They were encouraged to recall their knowledge that might be useful in completing the task. In this phase, the students were also given time to prepare the task and some instructions to complete it. Those activities were aimed at making the students aware of what they would learn.

After accomplishing the pre-task, the students were led to the task-cycle where they should accomplish the task. The students felt interested and enthusiastic in joining this phase because they could interact with their partners within their group using the target language they learned communicatively. The task-cycle provides the students to explore the rules of the target language they learn wider while they accomplish the various activities. This situation made them use grammatical knowledge directly and unconsciously. This finding is also stated by Xiao-Zhen (2007). He stated that the teaching activities designed according to the theory of task-based approach could arouse students’ interest in the work group. During the whole process, students felt very excited, and they could remember the grammar more clearly and easily. The activity above is also in accordance with the grammar teaching stated by Pennington in Xiao-Zhen (2005) who suggested “action grammar” in which grammars of language should meet real use: “it must be interactive in nature and relative to specific discourse communicates and their communicative practices.”

In the task-cycle, teacher functions to provide helps by monitoring the students’ work and motivating them to get involved in accomplishing the task. The researcher, during this phase walked around monitoring the students’ activities, asking whether they had or not difficulties in completing the task, and determining the students’ progress in comprehending the task and the target language they were learning without judging the language rules they were using. Cuesta (1995) suggests that teachers, when task-based is applied, should be aware of the difficulty some learners find in learning to communicate in L2 and should also teach communication strategies, where learners are expected to paraphrase, borrow or invent words, use gesture, ask for feedback, simplify, etc.

At the end of the task-cycle, the students were encouraged to report their task in spoken or written form. They should use the target language they were learning without feeling burden with the grammatical knowledge. The researcher monitored the process of the report and giving comment to the content of their reports without giving a lot of correction. The steps above is in line with Willis in Richards (2005)who suggested that in this phase teacher may ask some groups to report their tasks. Other students may compare their work each other and the teacher monitor to the content of the report without giving overt correction.

The last step is language focus. In this part, the learning process focuses on the students’ grammatical knowledge they had used in the task-cycle. The researcher led the students to analyse whether the language they had used in task-cycle has been in accordance with the rules of language. After analysing the grammar rules, the researcher explained its rules to reinforce their comprehension in grammar. Going through this step has made the students more aware of their grammatical knowledge. It was proved by the achievement of students’ scores. Wilkins in Oxford in EFL Journal (2006) states that one of the task-based goals is focus on forms. It means of presenting specific, preplanner forms one at a time in the hope that learners will master them before they need to use them to negotiate meaning. The learner must synthesize all of the material himself or herself; hence a focus on forms syllabus is a synthetic syllabus.

There were some types of tasks used in this research such as information gap, role plays, and jigsaw tasks. The use of those tasks has aroused positive responses from the students as the subject of learning. They stated in their questionnaire that they were usually curious to know what other interesting activities they would have in the next meeting. They further said that they were enthusiastic joining the grammar class because they experienced new atmosphere and they could work cooperatively and communicatively. This situation was also found by Ruso (1999), she clarifies that carrying out a task, students feel the need to concentrate on the topic and accordingly learn. Students realized the change through different tasks and positive classroom atmosphere. Furthermore, Stanberry (2000) state that small group dialogue resulting in planning and taking responsibility for the learning process allows all voices to be heard, all participants to be respected, and a safe learning environment to be created.

CONCLUSION

The use of task-based improves the students’ grammar mastery. Task-based is a teaching method that emphasizes the students to do the meaningful task. By using this method in grammar class, the students are led to apply the rules of language directly while accomplishing the task using various activities. The improvements of their grammar mastery can be seen from the result of post-test in each cycle. The pre-test results show that the average score of their grammar mastery is 59. Most students got problems in considering the verb agreements, such as, the use of auxiliaries and verb forms. After cycle I had been conducted, their post-test results reached 65 and in cycle II became 70. Most students have been able to use auxiliaries and verb forms in appropriate tense based on the tenses measured. Those finding describes that task-based is suitable to use to improve the students’ grammar mastery.

The second point is that task-based also improves the classroom condition. The data are obtained from the observation results done by the observer and the questionnaire filled by the students. The use of task-based can make the classroom condition better. The students are more motivated and enthusiastic to learn

grammar because it provides various meaningful activities. They learn grammar

not only theoretically but also practically. They could apply their grammar directly in spoken or written form. Using various tasks in learning grammar makes the students feel new atmosphere. The teaching learning process is not teacher’s centered anymore because the students are encouraged to learn actively by accomplishing various tasks. The teacher functions to facilitate the students by helping them realizing their grammar mastery by guessing and inferring meaning from their background knowledge and also the teacher motivates and supports them to accomplish the task and monitors their progress.

REFERENCES

Ampa, A. T., & Akib, E. (2019). The students’ learning achievement of the english productive skills. Eleventh Conference on Applied Linguistics (CONAPLIN 2018), 395–399.

Burns, A. (2009). Doing action research in English language teaching: A guide for practitioners. Routledge.

Cuesta, M. R. (1995). A task-based approach to language teaching: The case for task-based grammar activities. Revista Alicantina de Estudios Ingleses, 8, 91–100.

Ellis, R. (2006). The methodology of task-based teaching. Asian EFL Journal, 8(3).

Harmer, J. (2001). The practice of English language teaching. London/New York, 401–405.

Harmer, J. (2007a). The practice of English language teaching 4th ed. England: Pearson Education Limited.

Harmer, J. (2007b). The practice of English language teaching 4th edition. Harlow: England Pearson Education.

Heaton, J. B. (1988). Writing English Language Tests. London: Longman Group UK Limited.

Hee, S., Park, B. S., & Lee, H. G. (2005). Hypocholesterolemic action of fermented brown rice supplement in cholesterol‐fed rats: cholesterol‐lowering action of fermented brown rice. Journal of Food Science, 70(8), s527–s531.

Koshy, V. (2005). Action research for improving practice: A practical guide. Sage.

Listia, R., & Febriyanti, E. R. (2020). EFL learners’ problems in using tenses: an insight for grammar teaching. IJET (Indonesian Journal of English Teaching), 9(1), 86–95.

Nasiba, P. (2022). The Importance Of Task-Based Learning In Developing Speaking Skills. Web of Scientist: International Scientific Research Journal, 3(11), 793–797.

Ngadiso. (2006). Educational Statistics. Surakarta: Unpublished Thesis.

Nunan, D. (2004). Task-based language teaching. Cambridge university press.

Oxford, R. L. (2006). Task-based language teaching and learning: An overview. Asian EFL Journal, 8(3).

Pardede, P. (2020). Integrating the 4Cs into EFL Integrated Skills Learning. Journal of English Teaching, 6(1), 71–85.

Richards, J. C. (2005). Communicative language teaching today. SEAMEO Regional Language Centre Singapore.

Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2014). Approaches and methods in language teaching. Cambridge university press.

Rojas, C. O. (1995). Teaching communicative grammar at the discourse level. Encuentro, 8, 175–187.

Ruso, N. (1999). Influence of task based learning on EFL classrooms.

Spahiu, I., & Kryeziu, N. (2021). Grammatical mistakes of Albanian students in learning English as a foreign language. Linguistics and Culture Review, 5(S3), 814–822.

Thornbury, S. (1999). How to teach grammar. Readings in Methodology, 129.

Van den Branden, K. (2016). Task-based language teaching. In The Routledge handbook of English language teaching (pp. 238–251). Routledge.

Copyright holders:

Muhammad Soali, Ashadi, Azwan Hepriansyah (2023)

First publication right:

Devotion - Journal of Research and Community Service

This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International