"Processing," a simply-defined heuristic, can give the ESP materials designer a perspective on task variation in the interest of reducing learner cognitive load and maintaining learner freshness. Learning language is mysterious: it begins with interest; it results from processing, which is best if varied in nature.

1. “Processing”
An ESP task/syllabus
design heuristic
Lawrie Hunter
lawriehunter.com
lawriehunter@gmail.com
JACET ESP, Toyo University, December 19, 2015

2. 2
"Processing," a simply-defined heuristic,
can give the ESP materials designer
a perspective on task variation
in the interest of reducing learner cognitive load
and maintaining learner freshness.
Learning language is mysterious:
it begins with interest;
it results from processing,
which is best if varied in nature.
Hunter
"Processing"
as a Heuristic
for Task Design

3. 3
Task design: framing content
for blended learning
QUESTION:
How to shape the tasks
in a blended curriculum
so as to ensure
-coverage of lexical items
-coverage of niche functions
-suitable acquisition order
?
Hunter
"Processing"
as a Heuristic
for Task Design

4. 4
Task design: framing content
for blended learning
Task
creation
Information
structures
Functions
Acquisition
order
Hunter
"Processing"
as a Heuristic
For Task Design
Language
structures
Lexis
Learner
profiles

5. 5
Task design paradigm
(interface design):
LEARNERinfo
LEARNER
language
language info
Hunter
"Processing"
as a Heuristic
for CALL Task Design

6. 6
Creating tasks: are these tasks?
1. Read a paragraph No.
2. Read a paragraph and speak it out loud Yes, weak processing.
3. Read a paragraph and copy it longhand Yes, stronger than 2.
4. Listen to spoken English No.
5. Listen to spoken English and repeat it Yes, weak processing.
6. Listen to spoken English and write the verbs Yes, stronger than 5.
7. Read an equation and find the value of x. Yes.
8. Read a problem, make it into an equation,
and find the value of x. Yes, stronger than 7.
9. Watch a video. No.
10. Watch a video and repeat one character's speech. Yes.
11. Watch a video and write down all the locations. Yes.
12. Memorize a list of the halogens, Cl, Br... Yes, weak processing.
13. Draw a set of atomic models for the halogens Yes, stronger than 12.
Hunter
"Processing"
as a Heuristic
for CALL Task Design

7. 7
Creating tasks: are these tasks?
1. Read a paragraph No.
2. Read a paragraph and speak it out loud Yes, weak processing.
3. Read a paragraph and copy it longhand Yes, stronger than 2.
4. Listen to spoken English No.
5. Listen to spoken English and repeat it Yes, weak processing.
6. Listen to spoken English and write the verbs Yes, stronger than 5.
7. Read an equation and find the value of x. Yes.
8. Read a problem, make it into an equation,
and find the value of x. Yes, stronger than 7.
9. Watch a video. No.
10. Watch a video and repeat one character's speech. Yes.
11. Watch a video and write down all the locations. Yes.
12. Memorize a list of the halogens, Cl, Br... Yes, weak processing.
13. Draw a set of atomic models for the halogens Yes, stronger than 12.
Hunter
"Processing"
as a Heuristic
for CALL Task Design

8. 8
How to quantify “Processing”?
L2 processing
Language -> information
identify sounds/words/phrases
find L1 equivalent
find mental construct equivalent
identify anaphora/exophora
identify discourse pattern
identify discourse intent
Information -> language
mimic sounds/symbols
create sounds/symbols
encode visual impressions
encode discourse impressions
encode text impressions
build discourse from intention
Information processing
Recognize symbols
Identify a pattern
Identify a problem
Select a transformation
Select a technique
Apply a technique
Evaluate results
Hunter
"Processing"
as a Heuristic
for CALL Task Design

9. 9
“Processing”
types
INPUT TASKS
Listening
Looking
Watching
Reading a symbol
Reading text
Feeling
Smelling
Tasting
OUTPUT TASKS
Pointing
Moving
Making a noise
Speaking
Drawing
Writing
Making
PROCESSING
TASKS
Remembering
Accumulating
Transforming
Naming
Describing
Classifying
Comparing
Finding an answer to a question
Selecting an answer to a question
Applying a rule
Describing a rule
Discovering a rule
Sequencing
Applying a process
Inferring
Analyzing
Synthesizing
Evaluating
Deciding
Hunter
"Processing"
as a Heuristic
for CALL Task Design

10. 10
“Processing”
types
INPUT TASKS
Listening
Looking
Watching
Reading a symbol
Reading text
Feeling
Smelling
Tasting
OUTPUT TASKS
Pointing
Moving
Making a noise
Speaking
Drawing
Writing
Making
PROCESSING
TASKS
Remembering
Accumulating
Transforming
Naming
Describing
Classifying
Comparing
Finding an answer to a question
Selecting an answer to a question
Applying a rule
Describing a rule
Discovering a rule
Sequencing
Applying a process
Inferring
Analyzing
Synthesizing
Evaluating
Deciding
Hunter
"Processing"
as a Heuristic
for CALL Task Design
By carefully orchestrating the modes
of task input and output,
the designer can lead the learner
to a wide variety of cognitive activities
(here "processing").

11. 11
“Processing”immediacy and presence
Immediate processing
Delayable processing
Minimum
presence
Maximum
presence
Tests
for points
Classroom
paper tasks
Conversation
Classroom
questioning
Dictation
Cell phone
push
Homework
Drag n’ drop
Point n’ click
Chat
email
chat
SMS
chat

12. 12
Input tasks Processing Output tasks
Listen-remember drill
Listening Cumulative
remembering
Speaking (repeating)
Ordering exercise
Listening
Reading
Reading
Looking
Identifying key information
Ordering
Visualizing
Visualizing
Writing notes
Writing numbers
Drawing
Speaking
Dictation with graphic
and cloze
Listening
Looking
Listening
Visualizing
Remembering
Identifying cloze words
Drawing
Writing
Writing missing words
Process flowchart
Listening Identifying suitable
example
Writing
“Processing” analysis for task design

13. 13
How to quantify content?
For learning effectiveness:
Key 1: varied processing
Key 2: structured content:
-to ensure coverage of utterance range
at a given level.
-to meet the functional demands
within a content niche.
Hunter
"Processing"
as a Heuristic
for CALL Task Design

14. 14
How to quantify content?
At KUT, we have built our curriculum
around these genres (a.k.a. text types):
Description
Classification
Comparison
Sequence
Cause-effect
+ inference
Pro-con
-a composite genre
hunter’s
tools
GENRES REGISTERS MOVES
These genres come from
Mohan’s (1986) knowledge structures:
Classification Principle Evaluation
Description Process Choice
Action situation
Background knowledge
Hunter
"Processing"
as a Heuristic
for CALL Task Design

15. 15
Sequencing of content
Cycling through information structures (text types)
(maintaining the same niche theme,
e.g. self-description e.g. experiment, e.g. geography)
Description Classification
Comparison
Cause-effect
Inference
Pro and con
Sequence
Hunter
"Processing"
as a Heuristic
for CALL Task Design

16. 16
Merging content and processing
to decide task type
Description
Classification
Comparison
Sequence
Cause-effect
Inference
Pro-con
Remembering
Accumulating
Transforming
Naming
Describing
Classifying
Comparing
Findingananswertoaquestion
Selectingananswertoa
question
Applyingarule
Describingarule
Discoveringarule
Sequencing
Applyingaprocess
Inferring
Analyzing
Synthesizing
Evaluating
Deciding
Hunter
"Processing"
as a Heuristic
for CALL Task Design

17. 17
Sequencing of tasks Remembering
Accumulating
Transforming
Naming
Describing
Classifying
Comparing
Finding an answer to a question
Selecting an answer to a question
Applying a rule
Describing a rule
Discovering a rule
Sequencing
Applying a process
Inferring
Analyzing
Synthesizing
Evaluating
Deciding
Sample 1: False beginners
(using same content in each task)
Aural only
A1:listen and repeat
A2-listen and repeat cumulative
A3-listen and draw/signify graphically
A4-listen and complete pattern clozes
A5-listen and problem-solve
Read/write
W1-reverse of A3
W2-A4 with no listening
W3-Read cases and discover rules
W4-Read cases and draw scenarios
W5-Read cases and solve problems
Hunter
"Processing"
as a Heuristic
for CALL Task Design

18. Thank you
for your kind attention.
Don’t hesitate to write to me.
I share!
Lawrie Hunter
lawriehunter.com
lawriehunter@gmail.com

19. Bio
Lawrie Hunter is currently working in the Center for Professional
Communication at GRIPS in Roppongi.
He was a member of the founding team of Kochi University of
Technology, and before that he created the intercultural
communication program for Kochi University. He has worked as a
mathematics teacher and counsellor in Canadian high schools and as a
mathematics teacher trainer in Papua New Guinea.
His main research themes are document design for education;
computer assisted language learning; information structures as a
framework for EFL curricula; non-grammar approaches to academic
writing; and concept/argument mapping for low text representation of
complex ideas.
Textbook publications: Critical Thinking (Asahi); Thinking in English
(Cengage); How Academic Writing Works (Minaminokaze).
Lawrie is now active in the Tokyo poetry scene.