The republic of uzbekistan uzbek state world languages university english faculty III

Step twelve
This point is dedicated to time planning of each lesson. In the research plan, it was stated that the time duration would be only 45 minutes according to the State’s educational system. However, the researcher did not give the time detailed for each technique she was going to teach. Honestly, this point was challengeable for her: in little children’s classes, it is very difficult to plan the time, to divide into paces. For example, six different lessons were conducted, and there were four strategies in each new topic, all of them were equal in time consuming.
Nevertheless, the children were so inflexible; when one of the exercises was very interesting, they demanded again to play it or to perform once more. In addition, the learners are very young, they have short attention span and get tired very quickly. These issues interrupted the lesson duration, and even they made the teacher to add some time to finish the lesson. When the children get tired, they started to lie on their desk, did not listen to their teacher, coefficient of the activeness lowered too much, or some of them began taking a little nap. Therefore, in 10 or 15 minutes, the teacher had to make them stand up and Anyhow, the researcher tried to divide a lesson into three paces: introduction for homework revising, body part to conduct the planned topics, conclusion to generalize or summarize the two, previous and the present topics in a mixed way.
V. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
There were considerable changes in the results after some lessons based on both approaches in all groups. The researcher could get the effect of both approaches and identify which of them was the best one and which was more effective. Before doing the survey the researcher didn’t expect that she would get such results. The tasks were a bit difficult, especially listening tasks. In both approaches the researcher paid her attention to developing Speaking and Listening skills. As the researcher satisfied from the results, it can be seen that she achieved the target goal. Because during the session all learners were interested in the subject. They all made some progress and their post-speaking and post-listening became much better than it was before. It was obvious that such changes happened not only because of the lesson on TBLL, but there were some other affective factors, such as good instruction, more experience and different approaches.
Scores of Content-based approach
Group A
Table 1.4

№	Learner’s name		Score
1	Abdullayeva Xulkar		86
2	Asqarov Nodir		83
3	Aliyev Alisher		80
4	Karimov Sardor		82
5	Rasulov Abror		84
6	Sodiqova Ra’no		85
7	DehqonovEldor		79
8	Xasanov Akmal		80
9	Xakimov Dilmurod		76
10	Rasulova Dilnoza		82
11	Rustamova Zulfiya		81
12	Tursunova Robiya		85
13	Tolipova Iroda		85

Group A. Lesson 1

Mean	Mode	Median	Low High	Range	SD
82	85	79	76 86	11	7.84

The subjects got these marks according to the following criteria: the researcher put 76 for not participating at the lesson and interrupting others while they are speaking. In addition to this the learner tried to make fun. 79 scores were put for participating passively and making noise during the class. 80 was evaluated the learner who tried to work, however because of not knowing enough words. 81 scores got the subject, who made mistakes during the task. The learner got 82 for thinking long and for making grammatical mistakes. The researcher put 83 for participating actively, but for hesitation in doing them task. 84 scores got the subject, who did everything, but for making simple mistakes in speech. 85 were put for the learner, who worked hard and participated actively during the lesson. The researcher evaluated 86 scores, who was the most active and was attentive during the lesson.
Group B