A Comparative Review of Task-Based Language Teaching and the Production-Oriented Approach in English as a Foreign Language (EFL): Language and Thinking Skills Development

Authors

  • Qiuyun Wang Faculty of Psychology and Education, Universiti Malaysia Sabah (UMS), Sabah, Malaysia
  • Wardatul Akmam Din Faculty of Psychology and Education, Universiti Malaysia Sabah (UMS), Sabah, Malaysia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31436/ijcs.v8i2.448

Keywords:

Production-oriented approach (POA), Task-based languange teaching (TBLT), Languange skills, Thinking skills, Instructional integration, English as a foreign language (EFL) instruction

Abstract

Background: This study presents a critical comparison between Task-based Language Teaching (TBLT) and the Production-Oriented Approach (POA) in the context of English as a Foreign Language (EFL) instruction, aiming to explore their differences and complementary strengths in fostering both language proficiency and thinking skills.

Methods: This paper systematically reviews recent key literature in both Chinese and English, and conducts a comparative analysis of the theoretical foundations and teaching practices of TBLT and POA across five dimensions: task design, instructional goals, critical thinking development, teacher-student roles, and pedagogical adaptability.

Results: The results show that TBLT helps improve language fluency and communication skills among beginner learners, while POA places greater emphasis on logical expression and the development of critical thinking, making it more suitable for intermediate to advanced learners. The two approaches demonstrate complementary strengths across multiple dimensions, suggesting that integrating them into instructional design is both theoretically sound and practically feasible.

Conclusion: This study proposes an integrated instructional approach centered on ‘task-driven learning and output optimization,’ highlighting the need to flexibly combine TBLT and POA based on learners’ proficiency levels and specific teaching contexts. Future research may further explore the development and empirical validation of such hybrid models across intercultural and diverse educational settings.

References

Thornhill-Miller B, Camarda A, Mercier M, Burkhardt JM, Morisseau T, Bourgeois-Bougrine S, et al. Creativity, Critical Thinking, Communication, and Collaboration: Assessment, Certification, and Promotion of 21st Century Skills for the Future of Work and Education. Vol. 11, Journal of Intelligence. MDPI; 2023.

Liu X. A study of tactics of cultivating senior high students’ critical thinking skills of english writing based on the production-oriented approach. Theory and Practice in Language Studies. 2021 Jul 1;11(7):816–20.

Ellis R. Task-based language teaching. The Routledge handbook of instructed second language acquisition:?; 2017. p. 108-25. Routledge. 2017;

Wen Q. Foreign Language Teaching in China. In 2024. p. 57–84.

Wen Q. A Comparison of the POA with TBLT and PBL. In 2024. p. 323–55.

Bygate M. Some directions for the possible survival of TBLT as a real world project. Language Teaching. 2020 Mar 2;53:1–14.

Wen Q. The Post-Method Pedagogy in China. In 2024. p. 27–56.

Molnar ID, Dániel MI. Implementing task-based learning approach in EFL classroom. 2024. 2024;

Wen Q. Production-Oriented Approach To Teaching Foreign Languages: Does a Post-method Era Need a New... Approach? Springer Nature. 2024;

Sun L, Ismail HH, Aziz AA. Current English Language Teaching Using Production-Oriented Approach: A Systematic Review. Vol. 14, World Journal of English Language. Sciedu Press; 2024. p. 101–13.

Xuan Q, Cheung A, Yin H, Yu X, Huang R. The Effectiveness of the Production-Oriented Approach to Enhance Adult Chinese EFL Learners’ Language Proficiency: A Comparative Study of Three Language Teaching Approaches. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher. 2024 Mar 12;33:297–306.

Ellis R. Chapter 12. Conclusion: Some thoughts on investigating individual differences in task-based language teaching. In 2024. p. 344–62.

Bryfonski L, McKay T. TBLT implementation and evaluation: A meta-analysis. Language Teaching Research. 2019 Sep 1;23:603–32.

Wen Q. Explanation of the POA. In 2024. p. 105–48.

Song R, Shen Y. Using Production-Oriented Approach (Poa) to Improve Chinese Efl Writing.

Ellis R. Task-Based Language Teaching. In 2021. p. 133–6.

Giancola M, Palmiero M, D’Amico S. Field dependent–independent cognitive style and creativity from the process and product-oriented approaches: a systematic review. Creativity Studies. 2022 Aug 18;15:542–59.

Zhang Y. Enhancing Oral Production in Integrated English Blended Teaching through a Production-Oriented Approach: An Action Research Study. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning (iJET). 2023 Oct 4;18:61–71.

Serang-Banten J, Barokah N. The Effect Of Task-Based Language Teaching (Tblt) And Critical Thinking On Students’ Writing Of Argumentative Essay (A Quasi-experimental Research in the Twelfth Grade students of SMAN 1. 2018.

Willis J., Willis D. Doing task-based teaching-Oxford handbooks for language teachers:?; 2013. Oxford University Press. 2013;

Wei R, Zhao X. Effects of task-based language teaching on functional adequacy in L2 writing. Assessing Writing. 2024 Apr 1;60:100838.

Wang W, Lyu C. The Effectiveness of Production-Oriented Approach on Students’ English Language Skills: A Meta-Analysis. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher. 2025 Mar 25;

Li R. Research trends of blended language learning: A bibliometric synthesis of SSCI-indexed journal articles during 2000-2019. ReCALL. 2021 Dec 18;34.

Bandura A. Social Foundations of Thought and Action. In 1986. Available from: https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:142519016

Vygotsky LS. The collected works of LS Vygotsky: The fundamentals of defectology:?; 1987. Springer Science & Business Media. 1987;

Downloads

Published

2025-07-31

How to Cite

Wang, Q., & Din, W. A. . (2025). A Comparative Review of Task-Based Language Teaching and the Production-Oriented Approach in English as a Foreign Language (EFL): Language and Thinking Skills Development. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CARE SCHOLARS, 8(2), 96–109. https://doi.org/10.31436/ijcs.v8i2.448