Task Based Language Learning, Task Completion and Backwash in Second Language Education

Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) has received increasing attention from language researchers and educators due to its capability to influence student language performance. Very limited previous meta-analysis studies have examined instructional factors in their analysis, while it deserves great attention. Task-based language teaching (TBLT) is a widely applied language instructional approach. Hence, this systematic review and meta-analysis study adopts TBLT to investigate how these instructional factors (e.g., task-based variables, learner variables) impact student language learning in GenAI contexts. Using the PRISMA guidelines, we collected literature and included 25 empirical studies involving 2,431 participants. The study confirmed the positive influence of GenAI on language learning and identified three moderators—student AI literacy, task planning, and task assessors—that potentially moderate its effectiveness. This finding likely relates to the GenAI tools employed; specifically, ChatGPT—not primarily designed for language learning—was used most frequently. This general-purpose GenAI may require students to understand how AI works, how to plan their tasks, and the necessity of involving teachers as assessors. We suggest teachers should get more involved in language learning with GenAI, and more language learning-specific GenAI should be developed. These suggestions help institutions and teachers to plan their instructions in the AI era.

This literature review provides an analysis of Communicative Language Teaching (CLT), tracing its historical development, theoretical underpinnings, practical applications, and the challenges and future directions it faces in language education. Originating in the 1970s as a response to the limitations of traditional grammar-translation methods, CLT emphasizes the development of communicative competence and the practical use of language. The review synthesizes research literature to highlight the significance of CLT in enhancing language teaching and learning and its implications for educational practices. It identifies gaps in current research and suggests future directions, including the integration of technology, intercultural communicative competence, task-based language teaching, assessment methods, contextualized teaching strategies, and teacher professional development. In China, CLT has adapted to the learning characteristics of Chinese students, enriching the theory and practice of English language teaching. Moving forward, CLT is poised to further integrate with technology and focus on cultivating learners' cross-cultural communicative competence.

The introduction of the revolutionary generative AI tool named ChatGPT has raised some concerns in numerous fields, including language education. Despite harsh criticism, ChatGPT is expected to remain a strong presence. Hence, it is important to involve students as well as teachers in harnessing AI tools in order to support teaching and learning. So far, various researchers have tried to utilise ChatGPT to discover its limits and potentialities. However, little is known about its application in designing classroom activities for language learners, its usefulness for language students and educators, and its effect on students’ critical thinking skills. This exploratory research investigates the utility of ChatGPT in designing Task-Based Language Learning (TBLL) activities, the extent to which ChatGPT affects student teachers’ critical thinking skills and the ways student teachers interact with the AI chatbot. To explore these research areas, a mixed-method approach was applied. After having examined the data collected from an online questionnaire, some online interviews, interactions with ChatGPT and TBLL activities, some insights emerged from the outcomes. Firstly, findings confirmed that the participants could create the same or a better quality TBLL activity and save time with the help of ChatGPT. Secondly, evidence revealed that about half of the student teachers copied the outputs given by ChatGPT to perform the TBLL activity. Thirdly, outcomes underlined some difficulties the student teachers encountered when interacting with ChatGPT. Based on the results obtained, some potential solutions and proposals for future research regarding the application of ChatGPT in language education have been provided.

Contents: Introduction. Part I: Important Social Contexts in Research on Second Language Teaching and Learning. Introduction. M.E. Brisk, Bilingual Education. M.R. Hawkins, ESL in Elementary Education. P.A. Duff, ESL in Secondary Schools: Programs, Problematics, and Possibilities. D.E. Murray, ESL in Adult Education. S. Carkin, English for Academic Purposes. P. Master, English for Specific Purposes. C. Roberts, English in the Workplace. B. Tomlinson, English as a Foreign Language: Matching Procedures to the Context of Learning. Y. Kachru, Teaching and Learning of World Englishes. Part II: Methods in Second Language Research. Introduction. L. Harklau, Ethnography and Ethnographic Research on Second Language Teaching and Learning. L. van Lier, Case Study. A. Lazaraton, Quantitative Research Methods. D. Nunan, Classroom Research. A. Burns, Action Research. Part III: Applied Linguistics and Second Language Research. Introduction. T. Pica, Second Language Acquisition Research and Applied Linguistics. S.L. McKay, Sociolinguistics and Second Language Learning. J. Zuengler, K.M. Cole, Language Socialization and Second Language Learning. G. Kasper, C. Roever, Pragmatics in Second Language Learning. J.P. Lantolf, Sociocultural and Second Language Learning Research: An Exegesis. N. Markee, Conversation Analysis for Second Language Acquisition. R.B. Kaplan, Contrastive Rhetoric. S. Conrad, Corpus Linguistics and L2 Teaching. Part IV: Second Language Processes and Development. Introduction. G. Ioup, Age in Second Language Development. R. DeKeyser, A. Juffs, Cognitive Considerations in L2 Learning. Z. Han, L. Selinker, Fossilization in L2 Learners. M. Swain, The Output Hypothesis: Theory and Research. E. Tarone, Speaking in a Second Language. M. Rost, L2 Listening. T.G. Wiley, Second Language Literacy and Biliteracy. P. Byrd, Instructed Grammar. D.E. Eskey, Reading in a Second Language. I.S.P. Nation, Teaching and Learning Vocabulary. J.S. Hedgcock, Taking Stock of Research and Pedagogy in L2 Writing. E. Hinkel, Analyses of Second Language Text and What Can Be Learned From Them. Part V: Methods and Curricula in Second Language Teaching. Introduction. S.J. Savignon, Communicative Language Teaching: Strategies and Goals. S. Fotos, Traditional and Grammar Translation Methods for Second Language Teaching. J. Williams, Form-Focused Instruction. M.A. Snow, A Model of Academic Literacy for Integrated Language and Content Instruction. R. Ellis, Instructed Language Learning and Task-Based Teaching. M. Celce-Murcia, E. Olshtain, Discourse-Based Approaches: A New Framework for Second Language Teaching and Learning. C.A. Chapelle, Computer-Assisted Language Learning. N.J. Anderson, L2 Learning Strategies. Part VI: Second Language Testing and Assessment. T. McNamara, Introduction. A.J. Kunnan, Language Assessment From a Wider Context. A. Davies, C. Elder, Validity and Validation in Language Testing. M. Chalhoub-Deville, C. Deville, A Look Back at and Forward to What Language Testers Measure. T. Lumley, A. Brown, Research Methods in Language Testing. D. Douglas, Testing Languages for Specific Purposes. C. Leung, Classroom Teacher Assessment of Second Language Development: Construct as Practice. Part VII: Identity, Culture, and Critical Pedagogy in Second Language Teaching and Learning. Introduction. T. Ricento, Considerations of Identity in L2 Learning. M. Byram, A. Feng, Teaching and Researching Intercultural Competence. S. Canagarajah, Critical Pedagogy in L2 Learning and Teaching. Part VIII: Language Planning and Policy and Language Rights. R.B. Baldauf, Jr., Introduction. R.B. Baldauf, Jr., Language Planning and Policy Research: An Overview. T. van Els, Status Planning for Learning and Teaching. A.J. Liddicoat, Corpus Planning: Syllabus and Materials Development. R.B. Baldauf, Jr., R.B. Kaplan, Language-in-Education Planning. D.E. Ager, Prestige and Image Planning. S. May, Language Planning and Minority Language Rights.

Task-based language teaching (TBLT) is a widely applied approach in second language education. The benefits and challenges of TBLT have been debated over the past thirty years. The advent of technology enhanced learning (TEL) and the use of TBLT in online and blended contexts have revealed further benefits and challenges with this approach. This study briefly summarises the historical background of TBLT, common approaches to TBLT and definitions of tasks. The paper then reviews recent literature relating to TBLT and TEL with specific reference to challenges involving student participation, negotiated meaning and focus on form. The study argues for a comprehensive reassessment of TBLT frameworks in order to address technology related challenges of the TBLT approach.

<p><b>Task-based language teaching (TBLT) has been emphasised in second/foreign language education policy in many Asia-Pacific countries, including in Vietnam where, since 2008, official policy has mandated the use of language learning tasks in foreign language education. Consequently, Vietnamese teachers are expected to adopt task-based, communicative instruction in their classes. However, research to date in Vietnam has reported mixed success in teacher adoption and understanding of TBLT. The two-fold purpose of this study was to first investigate the influence of a textbook on task-based teaching, including how textbook tasks were interpreted and implemented by EFL teachers at a Vietnamese university, and, second, to investigate the impact of professional support on improving their engagement with TBLT. The research adopted an interpretive, qualitative, case study approach combined with Participatory Action Research (PAR). It tracked the use of tasks by three teachers across two research phases: a situation analysis followed by a PAR study. Data for the study included textbook analysis, classroom observations, stimulated recall interviews, semi-structured interviews with the teachers, and focus group interviews with students. </b></p> <p>Phase 1 investigated the relationship between the affordances for task-based teaching in the textbook New Cutting Edge, Elementary and teachers’ awareness of and uptake of these affordances. The communicativeness and task-likeness of activities and lesson sequences in the textbook were analysed and compared with the implementation decisions made by the teachers. Findings reveal that while the textbook has a high proportion of activities with low communicative value, many of these activities are either tasks or task-like. Data from classroom observations showed that, in their implementation of the textbook, the teachers consistently reduced the communicativeness and task-likeness of the textbook activities and replaced them with teacher-centred, explicit grammar explanation and drill practice. Interviews revealed the teachers’ rationales for their practices, including their belief that tasks are unsuitable for low proficiency students, pressure from exams, limited instruction time, and the teachers’ limited understanding of TBLT. </p> <p>In Phase 2, the three case study teachers participated in two PAR cycles aimed at helping the teachers to adopt TBLT. The PAR involved two professional development and learning (TPDL) workshops, collaborative planning of six task-based lessons (three lessons in each cycle), and subsequent teaching of these lessons. Data for Phase 2 included a descriptive account of the workshopping process, 18 classroom observations, semi-structured teacher interviews, and student focus group interviews. Findings revealed ways in which, over the two cycles, the teachers’ practices increasingly aligned with recognised principles of TBLT, although with each teacher moving along a unique professional trajectory in how they delivered the lessons and in their evolving understanding of TBLT and particular concerns. The study contributes to three intersecting fields of research: the implementation of TBLT in authentic classrooms; the relationship between teachers’ beliefs and TBLT practices; and TPDL for TBLT, an under-researched topic.</p>

This chapter explores the integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) into Task-Based Language Learning (TBLL) to create innovative, learner-centered language education experiences. It examines the theoretical foundations of TBLL and AI's transformative potential in language instruction, highlighting technologies such as adaptive learning platforms, natural language processing, and immersive virtual environments. By leveraging AI, educators can design dynamic, personalized tasks that foster meaningful communication, real-time feedback, and cultural relevance. The chapter also addresses challenges, including ethical considerations, algorithmic biases, and the digital divide, emphasizing the need for balanced implementation to maintain TBLL's communicative focus. Future directions include advanced personalization, multimodal interaction, and the incorporation of emerging technologies like augmented reality (AR) and virtual reality (VR).

The Language and Literature Division (LLD) is the largest of the six divisions of the Faculty of Education, University of Hong Kong (HKU). It is currently home to 34 academic staff, who specialize either in the fields of Chinese Language, English Language and/or Literature Education, and to 60 full-time and 28 part-time doctoral students, who are researching a wide range of topics including subjects as diverse as corpus-aided language learning, task-based language teaching in primary schools, the English writing of Chinese undergraduates, and the impact of school-based assessment. Staff are very active in conducting their own research, much of which is rooted in classrooms and focuses on issues that directly concern the teaching and learning of languages, such as reading literacy, school-based assessment and assessment for learning in English Language, the teaching of Chinese characters, and good practices in English Language Teaching in Hong Kong secondary schools (see http://good-practices.edb.hkedcity.net/). Colleagues in the English Language area have played important roles in the HKU Strategic Research Theme ‘Language in education and assessment’. This initiative brought together staff from a range of disciplines in various forms of language-related research collaboration, culminating in two large and highly successful international conferences in June 2008: one focusing on language awareness and the other on language issues in English-medium universities (see http://www.hku.hk/clear/).

Generative AI (GenAI) is an enhanced fragment of Artificial Intelligence (AI). The emergence of GenAI has engendered numerous impacts on many sectors, including the English language learning and education industry. Motivation, one of the key aspects in language learning, has inspired many scholars as a subject of discussion within language education and second language learning and acquisition. This research sought to determine the correlation between GenAI and EFL Indonesian learners’ perceptions of using GenAI to motivate them in writing. An open-ended and close-ended questionnaire was used to collect quantitative and qualitative data from 30 Indonesian EFL undergraduate students through purposive sampling. The other group of 32 Indonesian EFL undergraduate students participated in the pilot study to test the credibility and validity of research instruments. The result suggests a moderate positive correlation between EFL undergraduate motivation in writing and GenAI’s usage. Qualitative data analysis also demonstrated students’ positive perceptions of using GenAI technology in writing. They found it resourceful for boosting motivation, delivering immediate and personalized feedback, and encouraging self-directed learning. These findings indicate that integrating GenAI into language learning classes, particularly writing, can moderately enhance students' motivation and engagement, thus improving their overall writing skills. The primary limitation stemmed from the small scale and targeted group of participants. Future scholars and researchers are encouraged to explore the influence of a specific GenAI-driven app (e.g., Google Gemini), on another language's core skills, such as speaking or listening, throughout different educational environments and student demographics.

Two very different theoretical accounts of task-based language use and learning are critiqued and their relevance for language pedagogy discussed. One account, which will be referred to as the psycholinguistic perspective, draws on a computational model of second language (L2) acquisition (Lantolf, 1996). According to this perspective, tasks are viewed as devices that provide learners with the data they need for learning; the design of a task is seen as potentially determining the kind of language use and opportunities for learning that arise.Three different psycholinguistic models are discussed: Long’s Interaction Hypothesis, Skehan’s ‘cognitive approach’ and Yule’s framework of communicative efficiency. The second theoretical account of tasks is that provided by socio-cultural theory. This is premised on the claim that participants co-construct the ‘activity’ they engage in when performing a task, in accordance with their own socio-history and locally determined goals, and that, therefore, it is difficult to make reliable predictions regarding the kinds of language use and opportunities for learning that will arise. Socio-cultural theory emphasizes the dialogic processes (such as ‘scaffolding’) that arise in a task performance and how these shape language use and learning. Both theoretical approaches afford insights that are of value to task-based language pedagogy. The psycholinguistic approach provides information that is of importance for planning task-based teaching and learning. The socio-cultural approach illuminates the kinds of improvisation that teachers and learners need to engage in during task-based activity to promote communicative efficiency and L2 acquisition.

This comprehensive gem of a book is designed as a “textbook… intended for courses for prospective and in-service KFL teachers” (p. x). The book consistently combines theory and research with elements of practical application in each of its eight well-planned, thoughtfully discussed chapters that center on the following “key issues”: SLA (Second Language Acquisition), pedagogy, language in use, culture, heritage language learners, literacy and multiliteracies, assessment, and program building. These eight chapters collectively constitute Part I of the volume. Each chapter provides a basic overview of the topic, cites selected prior literature and research central to that topic, specifies with concrete illustrations how such issues emerge in the Korean as a Second Language classroom, and concludes with between five and 12 discussion questions, designed to encourage readers to: synthesize the contents and importance of each chapter, imagine themselves in the topic-specific contexts of learning and teaching, and expand their critical understanding of the chapter beyond the specific details provided therein. Part II is a robust assemblage and review of 524 research pieces (495 peer-reviewed journal articles and 29 doctoral dissertations), organized according to the focus areas of each of the eight chapters in Part I. The full volume showcases the academic expertise and practical experience of 18 contributors, all of whom are deeply involved in and committed to Korean language pedagogy, theory, and research, from such fields as linguistics, applied linguistics, literature, culture, civilization, and intercultural communication.Chapter 1 (Kim) provides a historical overview of the field of SLA, in general terms, but more specifically in relation to theories, approaches, and factors related to the teaching and learning of Korean as a Second Language (e.g., L1 influences in developmental sequence of grammatical forms and phonological (dis)similarities, implicit vs. explicit instruction, etc.). The chapter sets the groundwork by appealing to the classic SLA literature, including Kellerman (1979) and Krashen (1982), and building toward more current theories (e.g., Ortega, 2007; Spada & Tomita, 2010; White, 2007), and offers a wide range of application to multiple areas of Korean SLA (e.g., Ahn, 2015; Jeon, 2004; Kim H-Y, 2012; Lee, 2012).Chapter 2 (Park, Choi, and Ko) provides a view into the theoretical backgrounds and implementation of various Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) methodologies, focusing the discussion on where and how each approach is currently being applied in Korean language education programs. In this review of task-based language teaching, content-based instruction, and technology-enhanced language instruction methodologies, the reader finds an overview of current approaches in the field of Korean language education (e.g., Cheon, 2007; Kim, Choi, Yun, Kim, & Choi, 2020; Kong, 2012; Lim & Lee, 2015; Noji, Yuen, & Yuen, 2012; Roh & Kim, 2019).Chapter 3 (Kim and Yoon) reviews how “linguistic, pragmatic and interactional” features of Korean are used in “managing topic and reference” for coherent communication (e.g., Kim, 1999; Kim H-Y, 2012; Oh, 2007), “organizing discourse” according to interactional goals (e.g., Hwang, 2015), and “performing social actions” in terms of both speech act and stance expression (e.g., Kim, 2020; Lee, 1999; Park, 1999; Yoon, 2019). These patterns of usage are linked to a speaker's interactive competence (Young, 2008; Hall & Pekarek Doehler, 2011), and activity ideas for Korean language classes are included.Chapter 4 (Brown and Yoon) complexifies issues of culture in relation to language teaching, by first underscoring the assumed primacy of grammar in both SLA and language pedagogy. The authors propose multiple perspectives on “culture” and the multivariate ways in which culture is defined and discussed (Byram, 2008; Herron, Cole, Corrie, & Dubreil, 1999; Walker, 2000). Supplementing the more traditional, pragmatically grounded explanations of Korean society and culture, the authors also address issues of identity (“Korean adoptee returnees,” Higgins & Stoker, 2011) and note the use of media-based materials (advertisements) and pop culture, as resources for language-culture content, while also pointing out drawbacks of how culture is introduced and taught in Korean textbooks (Choo, 1999; Ree, 2000).Chapter 5 (Kim) reviews the characteristics of Korean heritage learners in terms of error types and cognition of language processing as compared to those found in L2 learners and bilingual Korean-English speakers (e.g., Kim, 2008; Kim H, 2012). Through this discussion, heritage learners' unique learner profiles are explained by their tendencies of attending to (Zyzik, 2016) and noticing (Schmidt, 1990) language patterns, which are informed by their background knowledge (Gass, 1988, p. 201) and history of Korean language input. Implications of these findings on Korean Heritage Language education are suggested in terms of concrete teaching approaches, feedback methods, and subject matter.Chapter 6 (Suh and Jung) centers on literacy and multiliteracies as conceptualized in the Korean L2 classroom. The authors underscore the fact that literacy extends far beyond reading, writing, and orthography in all L2 education. Rather, literacy and multiliteracies are grounded in the various layers of meaning within texts (explicit, implicit, and cultural). Literacy practices are also related to critical thinking, in the sense that texts are imbued with multiple voices and perspectives that are then decoded and subsequently appropriated by language learners. Crucially, the chapter underscores the robust ways in which literacy is social action (Kim, 2018), as enacted in TV dramas (Lee-Smith & Roh, 2016), Public Service Announcements (PSAs) (Lee-Smith, 2016), peer review in composition assignments (Byon, 2005), and overall writing skill development.Chapter 7 (Shin and Lee) considers timely issues in both standardized and classroom-based assessments of Korean language. An overview of standardized assessments particularly focuses on the contexts and limitations of prominent Korean language exams. The discussion of classroom assessments points out essential considerations such as the distinct needs of heritage versus nonheritage learners (Brinton, Kagan, & Bauckus, 2008; Cho & Chun, 2015; Kondo-Brown, 2005; Lee & Kim, 2008; Sohn & Shin, 2007; 손성옥, 2005) and the alignment of assessments with classroom instruction content (Norris, 2016). The creation of criterion-referenced tests for achievement assessments is suggested, and a framework for such assessments is described in detail (Davidson & Lynch, 2002). Finally, helpful guidelines are put forth for the creation of achievement assessments that mirror actual language usage as closely as possible, and alternative forms of assessment are also described.Chapter 8 (Yu Cho, Lee, and Wang) lays out the history and development of Korean language programs in higher education and at K-12 levels, underscoring such factors as the National Standards for Korean Language Education and the invaluable support by the Korea Foundation. The authors provide an overview of the various Korean language programs in North America, while illustrating the current Korean as a foreign language (KFL) faculty profiles and discussing the various types of professional development opportunities for preservice and in-service KFL teachers and their importance to continued growth and success (Im, Suh, Jung, Shin, & Choi, 2013; Kim, 2017). At the heart of successful Korean language programs are the KFL instructors.Part II of this volume is an extensive and detailed annotated bibliography consisting of 524 research pieces, of which 495 are peer-reviewed journal articles and 29 are doctoral dissertations. The journal articles were culled from 35 major journals that specialize in foreign language pedagogy, each of which has published at least one article on Korean foreign language education in English. Of these, 21 were published in North America and 14 in South Korea. Part II opens with a quantitative summary of relevant KFL-related research topics from the past 2.5 decades, a qualitative compilation of topic-based research trends, a brief discussion on the evolution of scholarship in Korean as a Heritage Language, and a summary of more recent research trends in KFL scholarship more generally. Following this introduction, the actual annotations to relevant research articles and dissertation appear in the same order and under the same headings as the chapter headings for the eight chapters in Part I. The annotated bibliography is designed as a “useful and ready-to-use resource” (p. 206).One drawback to the annotated bibliography is that the authors have designedly excluded such academic publications as “book chapters” (and thus also full book-length publications) because they are “not easily downloadable from online databases.” This focus may skew both the overall findings as well as the summaries of research trends, since much seminal research on Korean, Korean applied linguistics, Korean pragmatics, Korean language pedagogy, socialization, and so forth (written in English) also appears as chapters in important edited volumes, including the full series of Japanese-Korean Linguistics and the full series of conference proceedings from International Circle of Korean Linguistics (ICKL).Overall, this book is a welcome addition to the growing body of publications on Korean language pedagogy and professional development that serves multiple purposes: It is an invaluable resource for classic and more recent theoretical trends in linguistics, applied linguistics, sociolinguistics, pragmatics, literacy, multiliteracies, and language socialization.It provides insights into critical topics related to KFL issues and how such issues have been investigated and analyzed.It provides practical, concrete examples for potential application in the KFL classroom.It is user-friendly and includes discussion questions for readers to develop their own understandings of the eight key issues beyond the content and limitations of each individual chapter.

The researchers delved into the practice of divergent assessment (DA) and participation in assessment while emphasizing task-based language learning (TBLT) as instruction in argumentative essay courses in an Iraqi EFL context. In doing so, they formed 3 classes, namely a traditional class, a DA exercise with a traditional class, and a TBLT exercise with a traditional class, to investigate the differences that such practices can induce in the writing quality of EFL learners. performance Post-test analysis and one-way ANOVA show that the CONV TBLT class (M = 3.97) significantly outperformed the CONV DA group (M = 2.98) in terms of better argumentative writing. This study shows how EFL learners respond to the integration of DA and TBLT with compliant writing instruction. The researchers used two parallel argumentative writing tasks before and after the DA and TBLT treatment. The results of the study rejected the researchers' null hypotheses, showing that both DA and TBLT were reliably effective in increasing Iraqi EFL students' argumentative essay excellence, with TBLT having a slightly higher neck than DA. The final result of the study clearly shows that the CONV TBLT group showed a significantly higher mean score than the CONV DA and CONV groups. The CONV DA group showed a significantly higher mean score than the CONV group.

The notion of embodied learning has gained ground in educational sciences over the last decade and has made its way to language education with researchers acknowledging language learning as an embodied process. This mixed studies review aggregates and reviews empirical research, published from 1990 to 2020, using embodied learning approaches in language education. The review focuses on embodied approaches in learning and teaching first, second, and foreign languages at various educational levels. It encompasses 41 empirical studies with a majority published between 2019 and 2020, suggesting that the research area is growing rapidly. The results show that the studies align with two strands: (1) embodied learning through orchestrating embodied language learning and teaching, and (2) embodied learning in naturally occurring language learning interactions. The review identifies various embodied learning activities and presents how they contribute to language learning and teaching in different ways. The review proposes an understanding of embodied language learning that holds potentials to engage learners holistically, while simultaneously promoting language learning skills and adding emotional and motivational benefits to language learning.

A scoping review of research on languaging in second language education

Three issues of technology integration into English language learning are present: inquiries on what and how technology is used to support language learning, ignorance of theoretical foundations and technology standards as a basis to design technology-supported language tasks and instructions, and English language teachers’ attitudes that put technology far ahead of language learning. In response to these issues, this theoretical paper aims to discuss resources where teachers can find reliable technology to support their language teaching practices. It continues to explain language learning and task engagement principles and technology standards as a basis for designing language tasks and instructions. The author supports the discussions with relevant literature and instances of some technology-supported language tasks. The paper then proposes a professional learning community meeting where the teachers can learn collaboratively with their colleagues in a supportive learning environment on how to use various tech applications. The paper concludes that teachers with principled ways of using technology should perform better in supporting students’ learning with technology than those who design a technology-based task and instruction mainly based on their personal (and biased) experiences on what worked well with technology.