Empirical study: a mixed methodology to improve linguistic and communicative competence in Spanish as a FL/SL

/Resumen ABSTRACT This present article seeks to provide a mixed methodological model for the development and implementation of a Teaching Module for Spanish as a Foreign Language in the face to face environment. The primary objective is to portray how methodological principles from different language teaching approaches (such as task based language teaching and cooperative learning) can be combined effectively in designing activities for face to face contexts. In this regard, empirical evidence is analysed in order to determine the effectiveness of the mixed methodology in the teaching-learning of Spanish as a Foreign Language in the said settings, in a study based on a longitudinal experimental design with pre-test and post-test, but without control group. The findings will help to provide researchers, educators and language teachers with valid guidelines as it relates to the development of Teaching Modules and Units for Foreign Language Learning. The results show an increase in the acquisition of specific knowledge in Spanish as a Foreign Language, thus improving the students’ linguistic and communicative competence. It is therefore proposed that mixed methodological models be integrated and implemented when designing Teaching Modules for Language Learning, since they are the most suited for Second and Foreign Language Acquisition. Keywords: Task-Based Language Learning and Teaching, Task-Based Approach, Cooperative Approach, Cooperative Learning, Mixed Methodological Model, Mixed Methodology, Face to Face Method, Teaching Module, Linguistic and Communicative Competence. RESUMEN El presente artículo propone proveer un modelo metodológico mixto para el desarrollo e implementación de un Módulo de Enseñanza para el español como lengua extranjera metodológicos en dichos ambientes, en un estudio basado en un diseño experimental longitudinal con pre-test y post-test, sin grupo control. Los hallazgos les proporcionarán guías de orientación efectiva a investigadores, educadores y profesores de lenguas en función del desarrollo de unidades de trabajo y módulos para el aprendizaje de lenguas extranjeras. Los resultados muestran un incremento en el aprendizaje de determinados conocimientos en español como LE y por tanto, mejorando la competencia lingüística y comunicativa de los sujetos. Se propone, entonces, que en el diseño de módulos de enseñanza para el aprendizaje de lenguas se integren e implementen modelos metodológicos mixtos por cuanto son los más propicios para el aprendizaje de LE/L2. Palabras clave: Enseñanza-Aprendizaje de Lenguas Mediante Tareas, el Enfoque por Tareas, Enfoque Cooperativo, Aprendizaje Cooperativo, Modelo Metodológico Mixto, Metodología Mixta, Modalidad Presencial, Módulo de Enseñanza, Competencia Lingüística y Comunicativa.


Introduction
In the ambit of Language Teaching & Learning, today, one of the principal concerns of researchers, educators and teachers revolves around the teaching methodology that is being implemented, or that which should be used, to execute the work units in the classroom to teach Spanish as a Foreign Language (FL) or Second Language (SL). They all agree that the methodological processes implemented should equip the students to substantially improve their linguistic and communicative competence in a determined language (Ellis, 2003;Livingstone, 2009Livingstone, & 2010Willis & Willis, 2007). In relation to this, language teachers should update and improve their teaching practices -which would influence the students' learning process in one way or another -by experimenting with new teaching methods and approaches as it relates to Spanish as a FL/SL like the Communicative Method, Task-Based Language Teaching & Learning (TBLT), Cooperative Language Learning (CLL) and Computer-Assisted Language Learning (CALL), among others. These methods are favourable to language learning (Livingstone, 2010).
The interest in Task-Based Instruction and Co-operative Language Learning is due to the potential that they offer for the design and implementation of courses that respond to learners' specific communicative needs. In didactic modules, the task is seen as the vertebral and primary axis of the pedagogic "input" in teaching.
It must be signalled that the fundamental aim of these two methodological approaches is to enable the pupil to develop and to improve functional competence in a foreign language without sacrificing grammatical accuracy. These methods harmonize the way in which languages are taught with what Second Language Acquisition (SLA) Research has revealed about how they are learned (Lee, 2000;Sheen, 1994;Willis, 1996;Skehan, 1998). It is necessary to highlight that the said teaching methodologies constitute a movement of evolution within the Communicative Method and it would therefore not be so difficult to experiment with them by means of designing teaching modules incorporating the practice of the four language skills (speaking, writing, reading and listening) might be considered.
The present study deals with the effectiveness of a mixed model methodology - Task The research data were collected through a quasi-experimental longitudinal study with pre-test/post-test without control group. The purpose of the two tests is to collect valuable information about the skill levels of students before and after the intervention. Through this research it is expected that clear and accurate information be obtained in regard to the linguistic and communicative competence of the participants in this study, before and after implementing a teaching module for Spanish as a FL.
Similarly, we want to emphasize how effective TBLT and CLL are in the learning and acquisition of a certain body of knowledge pertaining to Chilean and American eating habits.

Outline of the Problem
As it relates to teaching Spanish as a FL, it is now evident that teachers are making significant efforts to ensure that their students are linguistically and communicatively competent. However, students do not always demonstrate that they have the communicative competence to perform in real life outside the classroom. In fact, their competence in the target language is sometimes more linguistic than communicative.
In terms of methodology, over time, different approaches have emerged to support second and foreign language teaching (SL/FL). One of the first to be developed was the Grammar-Translation Method. This is based on the goal of studying a language to learn it and to be able to read its literature, or benefit from the intellectual development, which results from this study.
In the traditional methodology, there have been some limitations in defining the cognitive processes involved in the development of inter-language, which include the progressive resolution of forms and functions and the restructuring of the existing SL knowledge (Ellis, 2003, Willis & Willis, 2007.
It seems clear that the traditional view that identified the teacher as an instructor of Spanish who transmitted his knowledge to the students and who took all decisions relating to the progress of the class is no longer adequate. It is no longer adequate because it does not cater for the development of the cognitive skills of the student or for the communicative competence that is pivotal to language learning.
Another approach that has emerged to support language teaching is the Communicative Approach. Since the genesis of this method, it has been asserted that the objective of teaching-learning process of a SL/FL is for students to achieve a certain level of communicative competence in that language (Skehan, 1998;Zanón, 1999;Willis, 1996). The constant evolution of the Communicative Method has led to the development of two teaching methodologies: Task-Based Language Teaching and Learning and Cooperative Language Learning. In an attempt to turn the classroom into a scenario of real-life communication processes, the realisation of tasks is proposed in a collaborative manner, as the articulating axis of the teaching-learning process.
It should be noted that there is little evidence of experimentation with Task-Based Instruction and Cooperative Language Learning in the teaching-learning Spanish as a FL/SL. It is quite evident that throughout the world these teaching methodologies are being used to teach other languages such as English and German. This obviously makes it clear that many studies have not been carried out in which these methods have been incorporated in order to determine its effectiveness in teaching Spanish. It has been found that the Communicative Approach is the method that is still being widely used for teaching Spanish as a FL/SL (Willis & Willis, 2007;Livingstone, 2008).
Given the emergence of these new methods and approaches for teaching language in the world, and the increasing use of them, the need to evaluate these methodologies to observe its effect on learning is becoming increasingly clear.
Experience has shown that what is taught in language lessons are not learned the same way and in the same order by the students. Clearly, there are different teaching methods to learn a foreign language and consequently, teachers must find ways and means of upgrading their teaching.

Face to Face Teaching
This style refers to two criteria: the temporal simultaneity of the processes of teaching communication and physical presence of instructors and students in the communication process. This means that in the "face to face" mode, most of the teaching-learning processes coincide in space and time. The teacher and students share the physical space where the teaching communication processes are carried out simultaneously in time.
No one doubts that "face to face" teaching is very lively, warm, human and personal. "We could assume that the best possible training is undoubtedly the face-toface training. Perhaps, it is because the face-to-face interaction between a trainer and trainee is considered one of the key factors in any process of formation" (Bartolomé, 1995).
Face to face teaching is accompanied by a complex context that reinforces the informal manner in the interest of the student learning activity that unfolds (peers, exchanging notes and points of view, group revision, extra-curricular activities, contact with the teacher, etc.; in short, interpersonal communication is the best stimulus for motivation). In general, it allows for the implementation of interaction between all members of the learning community. It fosters group work and increases the motivation of the student. In other words, there is a very active participation of all the students.
By using this 'face to face' teaching model, a distributed learning is created, i.e. the terms for knowledge are structured so that each linguistic skill obtains optimal development. Both the productive and receptive skills can therefore be improved by taking a form that can help reinforce each of them in a more balanced manner. It also promotes closer contact between teacher and students, which is vital in the process of teaching and learning languages.

Language Teaching Methodologies
The birth of the communicative approach in the 1980's brought a shift in the conception of language and its teaching. Before its appearance, language was conceived as a system of signs to convey ideas. Methods of teaching foreign languages (FL) such as audio oral and audio-lingual rested in the formal teaching of grammar and translation. Linguistic and language correction were essential. These had arisen as a direct result of the need to have a good command of oral and aural language. Language was conceived as a system of signs to convey ideas. The central elements of investigation were repetition exercises, drills and building habits.
Advocates of this approach saw the need to put emphasis on linguistic precision, arguing that a continuous repetition of errors would lead to the acquisition of incorrect structures and mispronunciation. The lessons were organized around a grammatical structure presented in short dialogues. Students often heard a series of recordings of conversations again and again and then tried to repeat the exact pronunciation and grammatical structures of these dialogues. These activities highlighted the use of receptive skills (listening and reading) subordinated to productive skills (speaking and writing).
Opponents of the Audio-lingual Method argued that too much emphasis on repetition and precision in language did not help students to acquire a communicative competence in the target language. They sought new ways to present and organize language teaching and they defended the Communicative Method as the most effective strategy for teaching a foreign language.
The Communicative Approach was taking new forms while it continued reflecting on language, communicative competence, learning and language acquisition, and educational aspects that facilitated this process. Language began to be conceived primarily as a tool for communication and therefore the emphasis of teaching was directed towards developing communicative competence of students. Its key feature is that it bases learning of language in real communicative needs for which the learner will execute in that language. This new approach to FL/SL teaching and learning picked up The Communicative Approach has an integrative character as it combines the use of language skills in terms of achieving real communication situations, and its objective is for the student to achieve communicative competence. Moreno (1997) makes this argument: The basic goal of teaching an L2 is to develop the ability to communicate in the foreign language, not the mastery of linguistic structures. The traditional method does not put emphasis on the student's communicative output, but on developing skills such as the reading of classic works (p. 122).
Regarding the above, Germany Germany & Ferreira Cabrera (1999) postulate that: The teaching-learning process is justified in terms of two educational perspectives: the idealistic and pragmatic. The idealistic component of language emphasises the emotional aspects of it, while the pragmatic component emphasises the functionality of language. Moreover, considering that the student must obtain the maximum benefit of the language taught, his learning experience, moreover, should be anchored in a strong cultural base (p. 1).
Over the past 100 years, the assumption that the quality of teaching a second language (SL) will improve if teachers improve their teaching has resulted in the emergence of a variety of approaches and methods and resources that can be tested, adapted or implemented depending on the contingent necessities (Richards & Rodgers, 2001).
Two of the new forms that emerge from the Communicative Approach are Task-Based Language Teaching and Co-operative Language Learning. Each one of these is discussed immediately below:

Task-Based Language Teaching
Task-Based Language Teaching (TBLT) is based on the use of tasks as the central axis of planning and instruction in language teaching. The tasks are proposed as a useful vehicle for implementing these principles. The participation of learners in the work of tasks provides a better context for the activation of the processes of learning than activities based on form. Breen (1987) defines task-based learning as: "any effort of learning the language that has a particular objective, appropriate content, a specific work, and a range of outcomes for those who are responsible for the task." According to Zanón (1999), it deals with organizing the teaching in communicative activities that promote and integrate various processes related to communication. While realizing the task in the classroom, students have to deploy a number of useful strategies to solve specific problems (fluency, meaning, etc.).
Regarding the proposed task, Ellis (2003, p. 276) argues that "the general purpose of the task-based methodology is to create opportunities for language learning and for developing skills through the collaborative construction of knowledge".
According to Estaire (2004Estaire ( -2005 3), it is an approach geared towards the construction of the communicative competence of students in all its dimensions. It focuses on action, developing the capacity of students to "do things" through language.
This approach is based on a cognitive-constructivist conception of SL/FL learning in which the student is an active player in his own learning: he finds himself in a continuous process of constructing and restructuring knowledge. It is a conception of learning in which significant learning, work focused on student learning strategies, and self learning are particularly important. This approach is also based on a social conception of FL/SL learning which considers the classroom as a social context, and offers a wealth of opportunities for the development of language.

A Framework For Task-Based Language Teaching and Learning
In task-based teaching, the lessons are focused on teaching units centred on a theme. This model uses the task as the organizing unit for planning the lesson. It is precisely the task that determines the content to be worked in the unit (Estaire & Zanón, 1990). Roca et al (1990) emphasize that "the task involves solving a problem or filling a gap of information by activating a mental process using the foreign language and it is considered that through that mental process SL is internalised and acquired. The student concentrates on solving the task and "forgets" that he is in a SL classroom and thus he learns distractedly, unconsciously, playing, thinking and/or creating. This model enhances work in groups and pairs, which is indicative of Cooperative Learning (Livingstone, 2008;2009;2010). Ellis (2003, p. 238) emphasizes that Estaire & Zanón (1994) proposed a framework for planning work units or teaching units. These have two stages: The first phase involves a general statement and is responsible for providing what is hoped to achieve through the work unit. The general statement is accomplished in three steps in this order.
The first stage: 1. The determination of the topic or area of interest for the teaching unit.
2. Planning for the final task to be carried out at the end of the unit.
3. The specification of the objectives of the work unit.
The second phase consists of the details and stipulates how the teaching unit will be carried out. There are three additional sequential steps as follows: The second stage: 1. The specification or determination of the content (thematic and linguistic) necessary for performing the final task 2. Planning and sequencing of the communication and language support tasks to enable students to perform the final task 3. Planning and evaluation procedures throughout the unit.
Task-Based Instruction, in all its variants, has been and remains the guiding light of the teaching work of many educators. It has been decided that the only way to make a balance between the ideal and the real of a theoretical framework is to develop it in the classroom. In this way, teachers and educators can be guided in the techniques for developing teaching modules for their classes.

Cooperative Language Learning
Just like TBLT, the Cooperative Approach (Cooperative Learning Language or CLL) emerges in the framework of communicative language teaching in the mid-70s (Estaire, 2004(Estaire, -2005. It is a teaching approach that maximizes the use of cooperative activities involving pairs and small groups of learners in the classroom. This approach has been defined by Olsen & Kagan (1992) in this way: A group learning activity which is organized so that learning is dependent on the socially structured exchange of information between learners in groups and in which each learner is responsible for his own learning, and is motivated to enhance the learning of others (p. 8). Fathman & Kessler (1993, p. 128) define CLL as "group work which is carefully structured to enable all students to interact, share information and can be evaluated individually for their work". Richards & Rodgers (2001) argue that the word "cooperative" in the CLL emphasizes another important dimension: the development of language classes that encourage cooperation rather than competition in learning. It is an approach designed to develop critical thinking skills and communicative competence through the activities of structured social interaction.
Trujillo Sáez (2002) states that in 2001 the California Department of Education defined the CLL in this way: Most cooperative approaches involve small, heterogeneous groups, usually 4 or 5 members working together to carry out a group task, in which each member is individually liable for part of the final result which can not be complete unless group members work together, in other words, group members are positively interdependent.
The Cooperative Method is used to develop linguistic and communicative competence, but also to improve cognitive and social skills, besides being a tool for integrating language and curriculum content, a key exercise in the SL and FL context.

Longitudinal Experimental Study
In relation to the hypothesis of this research a longitudinal experimental study was carried out with pre-test/post-test, without control group, to determine empirically whether the mixed methodology, grounded in the task-based teaching and cooperative learning, was effective for learning specific knowledge in Spanish as a FL. The results should reflect that the mixed methodology, using the face-to-face method, based on the task-based and cooperative approaches is effective for increasing their learning in Spanish and thus optimize their linguistic and communicative skills.

Hypothesis
In this present work, the assumptions that guide this research are:

A mixed methodological model, supported by Task-Based Language
Teaching and Co-operative Language Learning techniques, will be effective in learning and acquiring determined knowledge in Spanish as a FL/SL. 2. The students will be able to increase their knowledge in Spanish, as it relates to a specific subject matter, and therefore become linguistically and communicatively competent in that body of knowledge.

Objectives
The specific objectives of this research are: 1. Designing a methodological model for teaching and learning of Spanish as a FL supported by task-based and cooperative learning techniques for intermediatelevel students.
2. Verify whether the work in pairs and in groups is effective in performing tasks and learning Spanish in a defined area of knowledge.

Methodology Sample
This teaching module for Spanish was aimed at students from the University of St.Cloud, Minnesota, which, by agreement with the Spanish Department, came during the second half of 2007 to do a set of subjects, including Spanish as a FL. They were from different fields and had an intermediate level of Spanish as an LE, thus it was necessary for them to improve their linguistic and communicative skills.

Selecting the Sample.
In order to obtain empirical evidence of the learning process, and to evaluate the linguistic and communicative competence in Spanish, a sample group of 18 students from the St. Cloud State University, Minnesota, United States was selected. The average age of the participants in the sample ranged between 18 and 22. Of the total number of the sample, 38.9% (7) were males and 61.1% (11) of them female.
The American students stayed in homes of Chilean families with the objective of integrating themselves into the daily lives of Chileans. They were in Chile by means of a student exchange programme which was meant to improve their dominion of the Spanish language. Their stay considered a semester of immersion during which the teaching module was conducted. All the university students spoke English as their native language (NL) and given that the Spanish language is increasingly being spoken in the United States and the world, they felt compelled to improve it.
All the students were studying Spanish driven by two needs: they wanted to have a better degree of linguistic and communicative competence, and they had an interest in learning more about Latin American culture and custom. In this way, they could return to their country and perform much more effectively in the Spanish-speaking community. The university students had taken and passed four semesters of Spanish at St. Cloud State University before they were able to enrol in the programme.

Design of the Experiment
To design the materials and procedures for the combined learning model that was developed for this study, we conducted a review of the theoretical affirmations of the TBLT and CLL methodology as well as the components of face-to-face teaching.
The cultural context of Chile was also considered for the design of all activities that supported the practice of the four language skills to facilitate language learning. The said activities were used to activate the processes of meta-cognition, reflection, analysis and opportunities for contact with the target language, thus allowing learning to be internalized, and achieved favourably.
It has been considered that the only way to make a balance between the real and the ideal of a theoretical framework is to develop it in the classroom. To this end, a teaching module for Spanish as a FL was designed and developed based on the mixed methodology already signalled. The aim then was to test the effectiveness of this mixed methodological model which, ultimately, could help to train teachers in techniques for developing teaching modules for their classes.

Description of the Mixed Methodological Model.
The module for this experimental study was designed along the lines indicated by Zanón & Estaire (1990) for Task (4) The linguistic and thematic contents which will be carried out throughout the teaching module (5) The sequencing of tasks (micro tasks) leading to the final task (macro task) (6) The evaluation In the context of cooperative learning, techniques were identified that served to support language teaching. For purposes of this research, the techniques that were used in particular were: Learning Together: The main assumption is that it should include all the basic principles of cooperative learning so that, in this way, all group members achieve the goal of the proposed task.
Group Investigation: It proposes that students organize their own groups and be dedicated to studying one aspect of the proposed theme for the whole class.
Jigsaw Puzzle: Each member of the group or each group receives a different part of the information of the specific topic to be discussed. After discussing the information that each group or each group member has, with a group of "experts" on certain issues, they come together to produce a report. With students from other groups who have different pieces of information, they start to put together the project cooperatively.

Manuals
Two manuals were designed: a Teacher's Manual and a Student Support Manual. These are described briefly below:

Teacher's Manual.
This consists of the six steps proposed by Zanón & Estaire (1990) well-planned and specified, i.e. specification of the area of interest/theme, a final task, objectives, linguistic and thematic content, sequence of tasks that lead to the final task, and evaluation processes. It also has electronic links and additional reading. Thanks to this, the language teacher may fulfil his role as a guide and facilitator of the student.

Student Support Manual.
This consists of an open letter, an introduction to the learning module, the tasks to perform, a list of useful vocabulary relating to the topic, a Grammar summary, and the same readings and additional links found in the Teacher's Manual, through which the learner could become more familiarized about the subject. The purpose of giving a manual to the students was for them to have some autonomy and to take control of their own learning, one of the main objectives of the Task-Based Approach.

Time-period for the Intervention Module
The theme of the teaching unit was "Los Hábitos Alimenticios Chilenos & Estadounidenses". It lasted 23 hours 25, spreading over five weeks of classes, and for two days a week, two hours each day.
This mixed methodological module consists of 9 communication tasks and 7 language support tasks. In other words, they were developed based on clear grammar and communicative objectives to help to promote contacts and opportunities for interaction in the target language. All of them were executed within a maximum period of 18 hours 35 minutes. The two tests, the pre-test and post-test, which form part of the evaluation, had a duration of 4 hours 50 minutes. In Table 1 the duration of each task is illustrated:

Time Allotted For the Intervention Module
Furthermore, it is important to establish that the focus-on-form tasks are interwoven with the communication tasks, from 1 to 7, so that students can centre their attention on them at the time of completing the communication task. In other words, tasks 1 to 7 are accompanied by language support tasks. The time scheduled for the latter includes the completion of both tasks: communication and focus on form.
To have a better organization of each class, a lesson plan was designed describing what would be done and how each session would be conducted, including the methodological approach and the delivery route of knowledge (in this case, face to face classes).

Task Duration
Pre-task 1 hour The duration of the mixed methodological model was 18½ sessions of face to face contact and the activities created for the said model were done during the allotted time period. The activities were divided into micro tasks, (Ellis, 2003), and these had the objective of helping and guiding the student to carry out the macro task (final task).

Implementation of the Teaching Module.
The module was integrated into the subject plan "Los Hábitos Alimenticios Chilenos & Estadounidenses" of the Department of Spanish at the University of Concepción. This was carried out in the MECESUP room, located on the third floor of the Faculty of Humanities and Arts of the university. It had a capacity for the 18 subjects.
A decision was taken to give the students the material in part, instead of giving them the entire manual all at once, throughout the implementation period of the learning module. This was done in order to prevent the students from trying to complete all the tasks at home and not participating actively in their execution. Given this probability, which would undoubtedly jeopardize the effectiveness of the mixed methodology and the entire teaching module, we chose to give them the first two tasks, namely the pretask and task 1, then task 2, etc.
The communication tasks (pre-task, tasks 1-7) as well as the language support or focus on form tasks (these were designed and woven in such a way that students would execute them immediately after carrying out the communication tasks), were executed just as they appear in the Student Support Manual.

Analysis and discussion of the results
This experiment considered an independent and a dependent variable. The independent variable referred to the face to face mode and the teaching methodologytask-based and cooperative approaches. By exposing students to this type of methodology, the development of language skills in Spanish would be greatly enhanced in contexts of face to face teaching. The dependent variable corresponded to the increase in learning that is observed in the results obtained by the participants, when comparing the pre-test with the post-test. The Student t statistical test was used to establish significant differences in the results.
It is important to note that the structure of the pre-test and post-test, which integrates the receptive skills (listening and reading) and productive (speaking and written) have been adapted in some ways in accordance with the general objectives of assessing general communicative competence in Spanish. "If the rates of assessment are a total of 100%, 60% is allocated to the assessment of productive skills, and 40% to receptive skills" (Germany Germany Ferreira & Cabrera, 1999, p. 4).
The design of these tests were realised according to the parameters and format of the Modern Languages Examinations (MLE) of the Caribbean Examinations Council (CXC) 1 . This evaluation scale is the same one that is being used currently in the Caribbean. Furthermore, this pattern of assessment was adopted for the pre-test and post-test applied; i.e., the scores used for the two tests were as follows: Listening Comprehension 20 points, Reading Comprehension 20 points, Oral Production 30 points and Written Production 30 points, giving a total of 100 points or 100%.
The pre-test consisted of a written test to measure language proficiency and an interview to measure communicative competence in terms of objectives, content and skills related to the topic of the teaching module. The post-test consisted of a test and an interview equivalent to pre-test, with the same format, which measured the same objectives, content and skills, but with different texts to the pre-test so as not to influence the results.
The quasi-experimental longitudinal study, which was conducted to test the effectiveness of a mixed methodological model, based on task-based teaching and cooperative learning techniques, yielded very favourable results. The results of two tests (pre and post) were analyzed in terms of the mean, median, mode, variance, standard deviation, percentage of variability and correlation in order to describe the behaviour of the sample and make a comparison between them.
Regarding the hypotheses, Table 2 presents the different results observed in the pre-test of the group. These are illustrated for each subject (S) of each group, by language skill (according to the test used, CXC). To determine the median, the students were distributed according to the percentage of achievement with an amplitude of 2. The calculation by the formula for linear interpolation gives a figure of 70. This means that 9 students (50% of the sample) had a score less than or equal to the median (54-70), while the remaining (50% of shows) achieved a score greater than or equal to the median (70 -87.5). In the pre-test, it can be seen that the average yield was 70.75 points out of 100. It is noted that of a total of 18 students, 10 (56% of the sample) are below the average obtained.
As for the average performance of the sample by language skill, the following results can be observed in Graph 1: (1)

Graph 1. Average Performance by Language Skill in the Pre-test
It should be noted that the distribution of pupils in percentage ranges of achievement in the pre-test sample intervals show that 61-70% and 71-80% present the highest number of students. In other words, most of the students were between these ranges: i.e., 8 students (44% of the sample) had an average of 61-70%, while 5 students (28% of the sample) had an average of 71-80%. It can therefore be summarized that 13 students (72% of the sample) were found between 61-80%. The remainder (28% of the sample) were below this range.
Regarding the hypotheses, Table 3 illustrates both the scores obtained in the post-test by linguistic skill and the total score for each of the students in the sample (according to the test used, CXC).

Total Store Obtained in the Post-test (The 4 Language Skills)
In determining the median of the post-test, the students were distributed according to the percentage of achievement with an amplitude of 8. The calculation by the formula for linear interpolation gives a figure of 79.5. This indicates that 9 students (50% of the sample) achieved a score less than or equal to the median (57-79.5), whereas the other students (50% of shows) had a score greater than or equal to the median (79.5-93.5). The average yield in the post-test is 79.36 points out of 100. Furthermore, it appears that the 18 students, 8 (44% of the sample) were under the average: i.e., a lesser number than those presented in the pre-test.
As for the average performance of the sample by language skill, the following results are observed in Graph 2: (1)

Graph 2. Average Performance by Language Skill in the Post-test
The distribution of pupils in percentage ranges of achievement in the post-test shows that the ranges of 71-80% and 81-90% present the highest number of students. In other words, most of the students were between these ranges: i.e., 7 students (39% of the sample) had an average of 71-80%, while 7 students (39% of the sample) had an average of 81-90%. It can be therefore summarized that 14 students (78% of the sample) were found between 71-90%. The remainder (22% of the sample) were below this range.
From the results in terms of the median obtained in the pre-test (70%) and the median reached in the post-test (79.5%), one can observe an increase in it by 9.5.
As it relates to the average, if we contrast the values between the pre-test and post-test the number of students that fall short of it is 6 (33% of the sample). These students are the same ones who are below the pre-test average.
As for the average yield achieved in the pre-test and in the post-test, Graph 3 shows that the average in the pre-test is 70.75% while the average obtained in the posttest is 79.36%. As you can see the results, the mean of the post-test (79.36%) exceeds that of the pre-test (70.75%) by 8.61%.

Graph 3. Averages Achieved in the Pre-test and the Post-test
The difference established between the pre-test and post-test, according to the percentage scores also can be seen in the results obtained in each of the 4 language skills. The students performed better in the post-test than in the pre-test: (1) with respect to "Listening Comprehension", the average achieved in the post-test (15.58) is above the average obtained in the pre-test (12.83) by 2.75; (2) in regard to "Reading Comprehension", the average in the post-test (15.14) exceeds the average achieved in the pre -test (13.36) by 1.78; (3) with respect to the "Oral Production", the average obtained in the post-test (24.94) exceeds the average in the pre-test (23,44) by 1.5; (4) as it relates to "Written Production", the average achieved in the post-test (23.69) is greater than the average obtained in the pre-test (21.11) by 2.58.

Graph 4. Difference between Performance by Language Skill in Pre-test and Post-test
Regarding the distribution of students according to the percentage of achievement, it is noted that the tendency in the pre-test to concentrate the students in the range of 61-80% changes, placing the post-test range above it (71-90%). As a result, students achieved a better performance in the post-test than in the pre-test.
To calculate the average percentage improvement in relation to the knowledge acquired by the 18 students, the difference in final percentage scores was divided (ΣD) by the number of students leaving a result of 8.61%. Nine students (50% of the sample) are above this average. 4 students (22.2% of the sample) are between 6-7%, and 5 students (27.8% of the sample) fall below these averages.
In summary, in accordance with the results from pre-test and post-test, we can highlight the following: -In terms of Listening Comprehension, it was noted that 12 of the 18 students had an increase in their knowledge. This means that there was a 67% improvement in this language skill.
-Relating to Reading Comprehension, it was observed that 13 of the 18 students improved their performance. This means that there was a 72% improvement in this language skill.
-With respect to Oral Production, there was an increase in the knowledge of 12 out of 18 students. This shows that there was a 67% improvement in this language skill.
-In regard to Written Production, 16 out of 18 students performed better. This shows that there was an 89% improvement in this language skill.
With regard to the final percentage scores achieved in the two tests, it was shown that 16 of the 18 students had an increase in their performance. This indicates that there was an 89% improvement at the end of the teaching module for Spanish as a FL/SL.
To determine whether the improvement in the learning and acquisition of a certain body of knowledge by the students was statistically significant, the difference between the average results of the pre-test and post-test was calculated using the paired Student t test. The purpose of this was to quantify the difference between the average of the two tests, to verify if it was significantly different and to objectively establish the correlation between the variables. In order to establish the critical value, an error margin of 1% N-1 degrees of freedom (17) was considered, which is equal to 2.567. Any value above it would allow us to decide on the effectiveness of the mixed methodology used.
With regard to the statistical analysis, it was found that two of the critical values obtained were quite high, exceeding the critical value at 1% for a one-tailed test with N- The face to face sessions enabled and optimized even more the teaching-learning of Spanish without neglecting the elements of grammar that were considered. Also, feedback was given with the objective that the student be aware of his mistakes and internalize, in a more solid way, the knowledge learned.
Another element that was considered essential so that the results of this research could show favourable effects is the fact that in its design the face to face teaching space was structured quite clearly for the practice of the different language skills. Of a total of 18½ sessions, 100% of these were done via face to face contact in order for students to practice the different language skills using specific contexts. In addition, students had a comprehensible and a much richer input unlike what is generally done in traditional teaching styles.
Considering these figures, it can be quite clear that the learning gained by students in the experimental group was due to the design, and the way in which the materials and means of delivering them were presented (through face to face classes, using various resources of this kind) encouraged students to practice skills in an integrated and compact way, involving them in a profound way, in accordance with the objectives of the mixed methodological model.

Conclusion
This research has focused its attention on answering the question with regard to improving the linguistic and communicative competence through practicing the 4 language skills in Spanish as a Foreign Language in the context of a mixed methodological model, TBLT and CLL.
But as the treatment period was relatively brief (18½ sessions) and also the small numbers of subjects (18), there will have to be further studies to confirm the trends that have been observed in this work.
Throughout the intervention module, the performance and response of students in relation to this new teaching methodology was evidenced. In general, the results of the experiment highlighted that performance in the language skills in Spanish for students at an intermediate level was highly improved when applying a combined learning model. This suggests that the students were supported in their learning, in an effective way, by the use of the face to face mode, thus confirming the hypotheses.
The design of the mixed methodological model based on tasks and cooperative learning techniques promoted opportunities for interaction in the target language, thus achieving higher learning. The Task-Based Approach provided the essential theoretical bases for the execution of the activities with the face to face modality. Specific tasks were created with defined objectives and the students were placed in the context in which they had to work, in order to carrying out each task in a positive way. The idea of introducing real communication situations enabled them to reflect and focus more on the target language thus choosing the appropriate structures to produce texts.
Task-Based Curricula have been promoted by Second Language Acquisition (SLA) researchers as well as educators (Ellis, 2003, Willis & Willis, 2007 as an alternative to the linguistic curriculum, based on the following principles: (1) linguistic curricula are not effective in promoting acquisition, and (2) Task-Based Curricula are constructed around the acquisition processes.
The objective of language learning is not merely to stimulate students with a comprehensible input (Krashen, 1981), but also tasks that require the negotiation of meaning and involvement in natural and meaningful communication. All these principles, concepts and criteria are compatible with the design of task-based courses and curricula, and can form part of the scheme of work in FL/SL teaching and learning.
The language teacher should use these criteria with the aim of designing courses, curricula and teaching units through tasks. In addition, he must analyze the results and adjust his practice to add, edit or delete any item so that the students' learning process can be successful and productive. Tasks, for many years now, have been part of the conventional repertoire of teaching techniques for language teachers in the past decades, and what matters today is the specific manner in which a task is conceptualized. It is recommended for language teachers, in their quest to improve the quality of their teaching, to integrate into their curricula, this learning model to improve their teaching practices.
The cultural elements of the learning module focused on the eating habits especially those of the Chileans. They provided a very positive added value to the execution of the tasks and activities that students had to perform throughout the experiment. The notion to set the exercises within the Chilean culture further enhanced the field of linguistic and world knowledge of each student. Learning the socio-cultural codes is displayed as an aid for students to able to understand and manage the language every time they are caught in a communicative situation in which they have to practice or use the new language.
There is empirical evidence, which demonstrates that TBLT and CLL are focused on meaning and are effective for the development and improvement of linguistic and communicative competence (Lightbown, 2002, Ellis 2003, Willis & Willis, 2007. However, there is not much evidence of experimental research in which TBLT and CLL might have been used in the teaching-learning of Spanish as a FL/SL. This makes it clear that the existing empirical evidence is related to other languages including English and German.
Currently in Chile, one of the teaching methodologies being used mostly for teaching Spanish as a FL/SL is the Communicative Approach, so this study is an important contribution to language teaching. Indeed, this research is a pioneer research in this country because to date there is no empirical evidence of this mixed methodology being tested for teaching Spanish as a Foreign or Second Language.
Undoubtedly, this research approach will enrich the area of language teaching and learning with respect to the language specified. There is no doubt that this study has a lot of importance and scope for researchers, educators and language teachers.
Moreover, this mixed methodology could be successful the classrooms of secondary and tertiary institutions in those countries not yet using these new teaching methods for Spanish as a FL/SL. Through this study it was possible to reach conclusions which contribute to the area of language teaching and learning and more specifically to the teaching of Spanish as a foreign or second language. The effectiveness of a mixed methodological model for teaching Spanish as a FL/SL for the purpose of improving the linguistic and communicative competence of a specific body of knowledge was proven.
This research may form part of the existing empirical evidence on the effectiveness of these methodological approaches emphasising the fact that the TBLT and CLL are concentrated on meaning and the development of the student's instrumental and formal knowledge.