A Critical Analysis of the Advocacy of the Task‐Based Syllabus

A basic premise of this article is that the frequent paradigm shifts in the field of second and foreign language teaching have not resulted in significant progress in language learning. The fault seems to lie in the overstatement of criticisms directed at existing paradigms and the failure to challenge the validity of the advantages imputed to replacements. It is suggested that a new paradigm shift is gaining momentum in the proposals for the task‐based syllabus; if we wish to prevent another unproductive revolution, we must submit those proposals to critical scrutiny. Such scrutiny will reveal that the criticisms of the synthetic syllabus (i.e., of conventional methods) and of method comparison research are largely unjustified when seen in the light of largely ignored research findings. It is concluded that the priority for advocates of the task‐based syllabus should lie in the necessity to demonstrate the greater effectiveness of such an approach over those of a more conventional nature.