2. Understanding of pair work and small group activities

CONCLUSION
In conclusion, pair work and small group activities have been shown to be effective teaching methods that promote communication, collaboration, and critical thinking. The theoretical background of these methods supports their use in education and highlights the benefits of active learning and student-centered approaches.
Information gaps and small group activities provide opportunities for students to learn from each other and engage in meaningful interactions. These activities enhance language learning by providing a communicative environment where students can practice their language skills and build confidence in their abilities.
While there may be challenges associated with implementing pair work and small group activities, such as managing group dynamics and ensuring equal participation, strategies can be put in place to overcome them. Teachers can adapt these methods to different contexts and provide guidance and support to students to facilitate successful implementation.
In summary, pair work and small group activities are valuable tools for teachers seeking to create engaging and collaborative learning environments. These methods can benefit students of all ages and backgrounds, promoting active learning and enhancing communication and collaboration skills. By incorporating pair work and small group activities into their teaching practices, educators can facilitate effective learning outcomes for their students.


REFERENCES

1. 
   “Yangi O’zbekiston“ gazetasi 2021-yil 6-may soni https://yuz.uz/en/news
   
2. 
   4th Biennial International Conference on Task-Based Language Teaching". Conferencealerts.com. Retrieved 2016-05-07.
   
3. 
   Doughty & Pica 1986.
   
4. 
   Ellis 2003.
   
5. 
   Harmer 2001, p. 86.
   
6. 
   Harmer 2001, pp. 79–80.
   
7. 
   Larsson 2001.
   
8. 
   Leaver & Willis 2004, pp. 7–8.
   
9. 
   Long, Michael, H. (1985). "A Role for Instruction in Second Language Acquisition: Task- based Language Teaching". Modelling and Assessing Second Language Acquisition.
   
10. 
    Loschky & Bley-Vroman 1993.
    
11. 
    Niemeier 2017, p. 23, 34.
    
12. 
    Nunan, David (2004). Task-based Language Teaching. New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. 1–16. ISBN 978-0-521-84017-0.
    
13. 
    Pica, Kang & Sauro 2006.
    
14. 
    Plews & Zhao 2010.
    
15. 
    Prabhu 1987.
    
16. 
    Skehan, Peter (2003). "Task-based Instruction". Language Teaching. 36: 1–14. doi:10.1017/S026144480200188X. S2CID 31449611. {{cite journal}}: Check |url= value (help)
    
17. 
    TBLT 2009: 3rd Biennial International Conference on Task-Based Language Teaching". Lancs.ac.uk. 2009-09-16. Retrieved 2016-05-07.
    
18. 
    TBLT2007 About TBLT". Hawaii.edu. 2009-09-16. Retrieved 2016-05-07.
    
19. 
    Welcome to TBLT". Tblt.org. Retrieved 2016-05-07.
    
20. 
    Willis, Jane (1996). A Framework for Task- based Learning. Longman.
    

1^ “Yangi O’zbekiston“ gazetasi 2021-yil 6-may soni https://yuz.uz/en/news

^{2 4th Biennial International Conference on Task-Based Language Teaching". Conferencealerts.com. Retrieved 2016-05-07.}

^{3 Doughty & Pica 1986.}

^{4 Ellis 2003.}

^{5 Harmer 2001, p. 86.}

^{6 Harmer 2001, pp. 79–80.}

^{7 Larsson 2001.}

^{8 Leaver & Willis 2004, pp. 7–8.}

^{9 Long, Michael, H. (1985). "A Role for Instruction in Second Language Acquisition: Task- based Language Teaching". Modelling and Assessing Second Language Acquisition.}

^{10 Loschky & Bley-Vroman 1993.}

^{11 Niemeier 2017, p. 23, 34.}