task-design
Filtering by topic task-design(2)Clear all filters
- PaperApplied Linguistics16 Jul 2026
AI and the simplification of task design
Anna Mendoza
This commentary argues that Generative AI simplifies task design in academic writing and qualitative research, potentially hindering deeper learning. The author contends that AI's standardized representations of writing tasks undermine the nuanced understanding needed in EAP instruction, and its limited role in qualitative data analysis overlooks content beyond text. The piece concludes that over-reliance on AI may detract from what students and novice researchers need to learn.
Original abstract
This commentary begins by summarizing Jeon et al.’s (2025) concerns about Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI)’s tendency to standardize language, followed by Hu’s (2026) response, on how to bring Artificial Intelligence (AI) into teaching (academic) writing in ways that allow for negotiation of forms. My own response, given the bigger picture, is whether AI needs to be used at all. First, as a former English for Academic Purposes (EAP) writing instructor, I argue that AI represents writing tasks differently from humans, and that going along with its simplified representation is a step back after human experts have rendered more complex representations of the tasks. Second, as a qualitative researcher, I argue that AI is of limited use in qualitative data analysis, since what qualitative researchers analyze goes beyond what is in the text. I conclude that in both these cases, AI simplifies tasks and detracts from what students of academic writing or novice qualitative researchers need to learn.
- PaperELT Journal27 May 2026
The trap of procedural reading in ELT
Mfanukhona Wonderboy Kunene
In English language teaching, learners often read texts primarily to find answers rather than construct meaning, a pattern termed procedural reading. This comment piece explores how repeated comprehension tasks shape this behavior and limit deeper comprehension. It offers practical ways for teachers to rebalance task design to support both exam performance and meaningful engagement.
Original abstract
In many English language teaching classrooms, learners approach reading texts primarily as sources of answers rather than as opportunities to construct meaning. This comment piece describes this pattern as procedural reading: a form of engagement shaped by repeated exposure to comprehension tasks that reward efficient answer location. While such strategies are adaptive in assessment-oriented contexts, they may narrow learners’ conception of reading and limit opportunities for deeper comprehension. Drawing on classroom observations, I explores how common task formats can influence reading behaviour and reader orientation. I then outline practical ways for teachers to rebalance task design to support both exam performance and meaningful engagement with texts. The aim is not to reject efficiency, but to restore balance between answer-focused and meaning-focused reading.