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]