Results
ANOVA tests and linear correlation coefficients (Pearson) were generated
to assess the extent of the correlations in test scores between the
control and experimental groups. Regarding the control group, the
pre-test positively correlated with the post-test (r = .423), and
the pre-test and post-test values of the experimental group werer = .213 and r = .017, respectively (see Table 1),
suggesting similarities or a relationship between conventional and
task-based methods for teaching English. This explains why we have some
students passing the test even after conventional method of teaching are
used although students pass greatly exceptional after task-based method
was employed on learners.
[Table 1 near here]
Consequently, it is noted that post-test control group scores is also
positively related to pre-test control group scores at .423 and
post-test experimental at 09 but negatively correlated with pre-test
experimental with correlation values of -.092. Pre-test scores of the
experimental group positively related to the pre-test scores of the
control group (r = .213) and post-test experimental group at
.167. The statistical significance was p < .01,
suggesting a difference in the effects of the teaching methods.
Correlations were performed on the test scores to assess
cross-correlations among the variables. Cross-correlations of the
pre-test and post-test scores of the control group that were not
statistically significant, the coefficients were negative or positive at
different lags.
The cross-correlations between the pre-test and post-test scores of the
experimental group were not statistically significant. The lag before
technology assisted shows a small negative coefficient while the lag
after the new method of language teaching shows improved positive
coefficient of about 0.4. Therefore, for every 1% increase in
technology-based learning, reading comprehension scores increased by
0.40 units. This finding is significant because it implies that task-
based learning is an important method of teaching English comprehension
(see Figs. 1 and 2).
[Figures 1 and 2 near here]
The goal of this study was to assess whether task-based teaching methods
influenced learners’ behaviors and attitudes toward learning English
compared to conventional teaching methods. As shown in the Table 2
below, the experimental group scored significantly higher after the
treatment than before it on the IELTS (t = -5.808, df =
19, p < .001). Therefore, reading comprehension under
the task–based teaching method significantly improved after the
treatment. The mean test score was about 4.5 before and 8.5 after the
treatment. Tasks had a substantially positive effect on reading
comprehension. However, the results found that the control group scored
significantly lower in the post-test compared to the pre-test (t= 3.243, df = 19, p = 0.04), indicating that conventional
teaching methods were not effective for improving English reading
comprehension as shown in Tables 2 and 3.
[Tables 2 and 3 near here]