A Critical Overview of Communicative Language Teaching

9ROXPH,,,,VVXH9-XO\,661
A Critical Overview of Communicative Language Teaching
Mr. Simhachalam Thamarana

Research Scholar
Andhra University
Visakhapatnam, Andhra Pradesh
India
ABSTRACT
In this paper, an introduction to various English language teaching methods is presented atthe
outset. Some prominent definitions of Communicative Language Teaching are mentioned
along with the origin, theoretical background and major characteristic features.
Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) is one of the best and a recent approach in teaching
English as foreign / second language and it has been brought under focus by many linguistics
and researchers. This paper also explain who this approach has made language learning more
communicative with reference to many researchers conducted studies on this approach. I shall
also explain the advantage and disadvantage of CLT in implementation. Finally the conclusion
is drawn as per the review of the literature indicated.
Key Words: Communicative Language Teaching, Approach, Method, Technique, Procedure.
5HIHUHHG3HHU5HYLHZHG-RXUQDO KWWSZZZLMHOOKFRP

01. Introduction
In the history of language teaching, certain methods such as Audio-lingual, Grammar
Translation, Suggestopedia and Total Physical Response have come into view. All these
methods have been widely and extensively discussed and evaluated by researchers and
scholars. Each of them has their own focus, weak points as well as strong points and they are
based on a theory. In other words, methods are developed based on theories such as
behaviourism, structuralism, constructivism and universal grammar. Communicative
Language Teaching (CLT) is no exception with this regard (Larson Freeman, 1986; Ellis,
1994). Now a day, the CLT method, which is originated in Britain, is widely used in English
as Second Language (ESL) classrooms around the world. According to Barnaby and Sun
(1989) and Ellis (1996), CLT is recognised as powerful theoretical model in ELT by many
linguists and language teachers as a useful approach to language teaching. In this short review
of CLT, I try to define Communicative Language Teaching approach, its theoretical
background and some important characteristics. I will also explain main advantages and
disadvantages of CLT implementation.
02. Definition of Communicative Language Teaching

Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) is an approach to teaching language which is
defined many writers (Cannale, 1983; Cook, 1991; Littlewood, 1981; OMalley and Chamot,
1990; Richards and Rodgers 2001; Rivers, 1987). According to Richards, et al. in the
Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics defined CLT as an approach to
foreign or second language teaching which emphasises that the goal of language learning is
communicative competence (1992: 65). Other authors in the field have defined and
characterized CLT in various ways (Howatt, 1984; Littlewood, 1981; Savignon, 1991;
Scarcella and Oxford, 1992). Littlewood explains that one of the most characteristic features
of communicative language teaching is that it pays systematic attention to functional as well
as structural aspects of language, combining these into a more fully communicative view
(1981:1).
In general, CLT advocates go beyond teaching grammatical rules of the target language,
and propose that, by using the target language in a meaningful way, learners will develop
communicative competence. The communicative approach is concerned with the unique
individual needs of each learner. By making the language relevant to the world rather than the
classroom, learners can acquire the desired skills rapidly and agreeably.

03. The origin of Communicative Language Teaching

Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) has its roots in England, which is a primarily
English as a Second Language (ESL) environment. In the early 1960s concepts about second
language teaching were changing, and the theoretical assumptions behind them were also being
rethought. It was during this time of re-evaluation that CLT was born. Galloway says that the
communicative Approach could be said to be the product of educators and linguists who had
grown dissatisfied with the Audio-lingual and Grammar Translation methods of foreign
language instruction. Richards and Rodgers (1986), on the other hand, claim that the origins
of communicative language teaching are to be found in the changes of situational language
teaching approaches, which influenced the British language teaching tradition till the late
1960s. Meanwhile, Savignon (1991) asserts that the emergence of CLT can be traced to
concurrent developments on both sides of the Atlantic, i.e. in Europe and the United States.
Educators and linguistics such as Candlin (1981) and Widdowson (1978) saw the need to
focus in language teaching on communicative proficiency rather than on mere mastery of
structures. They felt that students were not learning enough realistic, whole language in those
methods, i.e., Situational Language Teaching, Audio-lingual or Grammar Translation method
(Richards and Rodgers 1986; Savignon 1987, 1991; Galloway 1993). Students did not know
how to communicate in the cultures of the language studies. In respect of this point
(Widdowson, 1972).
04. Some major features of Communicative Language Teaching:

The communicative approach to language teaching is, relatively, a newly adapted approach in
the area of foreign / second language teaching. Communicative Language Teaching is a
hybrid approach to language teaching, essentially progressive rather than traditional
(Wright, 2000). CLT can be seen to derive from a multidisciplinary perspective that includes,
at least, linguistics, psychology, philosophy, sociology and educational research (Savignon,
1991). It is generally accepted that proponents of CLT see it as an approach, not a method
(Richards and Rodgers 1986; Savignon 1991; Brown 1994). For Brown, for instance,
Communicative Language Teaching is a unified but broadly based theoretical position about
the nature of language and language learning and teaching (1994: 244-245).
Although we have different versions and various ways in which CLT is interpreted and
applied, educators in the area, Littlewood (1981); Finocchiaro and Brumfit (1983); Brumfit
(1984); Widdowson (1978, 1979); Johnson and Morrow (1981); Richards and Rodgers (1986);

Larsen-Freeman (1986); Celce-Murcia (1991) and Johnson (1982) put some of the major
characteristics of CLT as follows:
(a) It is felt that students need knowledge of the linguistic form, meaning and functions.
However, CLT gives primary importance to the use or function of the language and
secondary importance to its structure or form (Larsen-Freeman 1986; Johnson 1982).
This does not mean that knowledge of grammar is not essential for effective
communication, rather systematic treatment of both functions and forms is vital.
Stressing on this, Littlewood says one of the most characteristic features of
communicative language teaching is that it pays systematic attention to functional as
well as structural aspects of language (1981: 1). CLT suggests that grammatical
structure might better be subsumed under various functional categories we pay
considerably less attention to the overt presentation and discussion of grammatical rules
than we traditionally did (Brown 1994: 245). Emphasis is also given to meaning
(messages they are creating or task them are completing) rather than form (correctness
of language and language structure). For Finocchiaro and Brumfit meaning is
paramount (1983:91) since it helps the learners to manage the message they engage
with the interlocutors.
(b) "Fluency and accuracy are seen as complementary principles underlying
communicative techniques (Brown1994:245). However, at times fluency may have to
take on more importance than accuracy because "fluency and acceptable language is
the primary goal" (Finocchiaro and Brumfit1983:93) and accuracy is judged not in the
abstract butin contexts. Fluency is emphasised over accuracy in order to keep learners
meaningfully engaged in language use. It is important, however, that fluency should
never be encouraged at the expense of clear, unambiguous, direct communication. And
much more spontaneity is present in communicative classrooms (Brown, 1994).
(c) Language teaching techniques are designed to engage learners in the pragmatic,
authentic, functional use of language for meaningful purposes. Classrooms should
provide opportunities for rehearsal of real-life situations and provide opportunity for
real communication. Emphasis on creative role plays, simulations, dramas, games,
projects, etc., is the major activities which can help the learner provide spontaneity and
improvisation, not just repetition and drills. Another characteristic of the classroom
process is the use of authentic materials because it is felt desirable to give students the
opportunity to develop the strategies for understanding language as it is actually used
by native speakers. In the classroom, everything is done with a communicative intent.

Information gap, choice and feedback are thought to be truly communicative activities
(Johnson and Morrow 1981).
(d) Grammar can still be taught, but less systematically, in traditional ways alongside more
innovative approaches. Savignon (2002:7) says "... for the development of
communicative ability research findings overwhelmingly support the integration of
form-focused exercises with meaning - focused experience". Grammar is important;
and learners seem to focus best on grammar when it relates to their communicative
needs and experiences. Disregard of grammar will virtually guarantee breakdown in
communication (Savignon 1991, 2001; Thompson 1996). These writers also say there
are some misconceptions about CLT that makes difficult for many teachers to see
clearly what is happening and to identify the useful innovations that CLT has brought.
One of the persistent misconceptions is that CLT means not teaching grammar although
the exclusion of explicit attention to grammar was never necessary part of CLT"
(Thompson 1996:10). In CLT involvement in communicative event is seen as central
to language development and this involvement necessarily requires attention to form
(structure).
(e) Communicative approach is not limited to oral skills. Reading and writing skills need
to be developed to promote pupils' confidence in all four skills areas. Students work on
all four skills from the beginning, i.e. a given activity might involve reading, speaking,
listening and perhaps also writing (Celce-Murcia1991). The idea of emphasising the
oral skills creates uncertainty among teachers. They misconceived CLT as if it were
devoted to teaching only speaking. But, "CLT is not exclusively concerned with face
to face oral communication" (Savignon 2002:7). The principles of CLT apply equally
to reading and writing activities that engage readers and writers in the interpretation,
expression, and negotiation of meaning. In other words, it is important to recognise that
it is not only the speaker (or writer) who is communicating. Instead, communication
through language happens in both the written and spoken medium and involves atleast
two people. Thompson (1996) further states that, though there is a complaint that CLT
ignores written language, a glance at recent mainstream text books shows that reading
and writing materials have been given attention too.
Students regularly work in groups or pairs to transfer (and if necessary to negotiate) meaning
in situations where one person has information that others lack (Celce - Murcia 1991). More
emphasis should be given to active modes of learning such as pair or group work in problem-

solving tasks in order to maximise the time allotted to each student for learning to negotiate
meaning. Many people assume group/pair work is applicable in all contexts. However,
classroom group and/or pair work should not be considered an essential feature used all the
time, and may well be inappropriate in some contexts. Thompson (1996) and Savignon (2002)
claim that group and/or pair work are flexible and useful techniques than that suggests and they
are active modes of learning which can help the learners to negotiate meaning and engage in
problem- solving activities.
The use of pair/group work is a physical signal of some degree of control and choice
passing to the learners; but that needs to be complemented by real choice (learners need to be
given some degree of control over their learning). Therefore, the use of pair/group work needs
to be complemented by real choice for the following reasons: (1) they can provide the learners
with a relatively safe opportunity to try out ideas before launching them in public; (2) they can
lead to more developed ideas and therefore greater confidence and more effective
communication; (3) they can also provide knowledge and skills which may complement those
of their partners which in turn lead to greater success in undertaking tasks (Thompson 1996).
Errors are seen as a natural outcome of the development of the communication skills
and are therefore tolerated. Learners trying their best to use the language creatively and
spontaneously are bound to make errors. Constant correction is unnecessary and even counter-
productive. Correction noted by the teacher should be discreet. Let the students talk and express
themselves and the form of the language becomes secondary. If errors of form are tolerated and
are seen as a natural outcome of the development of communication skills, students can have
limited linguistic knowledge and still be successful communicators (Larsen-Freeman 1986).
Evaluation is carried out in terms of fluency and accuracy. Students who have the most
control of the structures and vocabulary are not necessarily the best communicators. A teacher
may use formal evaluation i.e., he/she is likely to use a communicative test, which is an
integrative and has a real communicative function (e.g., Madsen 1983; Hughes 1989).
The students native language has no role to play (LarsenFreeman1986). The target
language is used both during communicative activities and for the purpose of classroom
management. The students learn from these classroom management exchanges, too and realise
that the target language is a vehicle for communication. Whatever the case may be, "the teacher
should be able to use the target language fluently and appropriately" (Celce-Murcia1991:8).
However, for others (e.g., Finocchiaro and Brumfit 1983) judicious use of native language is
accepted where feasible. Teachers may provide directions of homework, class work and test
directions by using the native language.

The teacher is the facilitator of students' learning, manager of classroom activities, advisor
during activities and a 'co-communicator' engaged in the communicative activity along with
the students (Littlewood 1981; Breen and Candlin 1980). But he does not always himself
interact with students; rather he acts as an independent participant. Other roles assumed for the
teacher are needs analyst, counsellor, researcher and learner. Students, on the other hand, are
more responsible managers of their own learning. They are expected to interact with other
people, either in the flesh, through pair and group work, or in the writings. They are
communicators and actively engaged in negotiating meaning in trying to make themselves
understood. They learn to communicate by communicating (Larsen-Freeman, 1986). Above
all, since the teacher's role is less dominant, the teaching / learning process is student-centred
rather than teacher-centred. In other words, it is the learner who plays a great role in a large
proportion of the process of learning.
05. ADVANTAGE AND DISADVANTAGE OF CLT
(A) Advantages of CLT:

The implementation of CLT has brought alot of advantages for Teaching English as a
foreign/second language. Unlike audio lingual and grammar-translation methods,
Communicative teaching emphasis on task-oriented, student-centred language teaching
practice and it provides students with comprehensive use of English language, for
communication of opportunities (Richards, 2006). Other scholars also suggested some of
the major advantages of CLT as follow:
(a) It motivates students to improve their ability of using English by themselves since
it emphasises on fluency in the target language. Meaning that, it provides students
with assignments that allow them to improve their own ideas about what they are
going to talk and how they are going to express. This enables the learners to be more
confident when interacting with other people and they also enjoy talking more
(Brown, 2001).
(b) CLT focuses on and aims at communicative competence. Thus, enabling the
learners to use the language in a communicative situation to satisfy their needs in
real-life communication is a priority in CLT (Richards, 2006). In other words, it
brings the real life situation of the native English in to classroom activities such as
role-play and simulation (Harmer, 2007).

(c) The major portion of the learning process is not upon the teacher thus illustrating
that CLT classes have moved from teacher-centeredness to learner-centeredness. In
other words, much more time issued by the learner that the role of the teacher is just
to facilitate the learning process. Thus, the learner should exercise and communicate
enough in the CLT class to achieve communicative competence (Brown, 2001).
(B) Disadvantages of CLT:

There have been various criticisms on the principles of the communicative approach to
teaching and learning language:
(a) The approach gives priority to meanings and rules of use rather than to grammar
and rules of structure. In other words, it is felt that there is not enough emphasis on
the correction of pronunciation and grammar error. It is because too much focus on
meaning at the expense of form. It is believed that with CLT there is a danger of
focusing too much on oral skills and less emphasis is given to reading and writing
skills, (Al-Humaidi, n.d.as cited in Keithley, Kumm(2013).
(b) The CLT approach focuses on fluency but not accuracy in grammar and
pronunciation. According t o Hughes ( 1983) communicative language teaching
leads to the production of fluent but inaccurate" learners. What is predicted to
happen here is the danger of giving priority to fluency over accuracy in CLT classes.
(c) The CLT approach is great for intermediate student and advanced students, but for
beginners some controlled practice is needed Students with low levels of
proficiency in the target language may find it difficult to participate in oral
communicative activities and, if the exams used by any institution are grammar
based, communicative fluency may not be appropriate.
(d) The monitoring ability of the teacher must be very good. Despite teachers best
efforts, classroom activities are not actually real-life and it can be difficult to
reproduce truly authentic language use and to facilitate genuine interaction.
Moreover, a major principle underlying this approach is its emphasis on learners'
needs and interests. This implies that much more effort is expected that every
teacher should modify the syllabus to correspond with the needs of the learners.
(e) CLT is sometimes difficult to be implemented in an EFL classroom due to the lack
of sources and equipments like authentic materials and native speaker teachers as

well as large size of the classes. In addition, suitable classrooms are not available
that can allow for group work activities and for teaching aids and materials
(Burnaby and Sun, 1989).
CONCLUSION
Communicative language teaching is one of the latest humanistic approaches to teaching
Approaches which gives emphasis to the language use and provides more opportunity to
learner to practice the target language inspite of its limitation. Today, the main
apprehension of most learners of English as a foreign /second language is whether they are
able to use the language independently and fluently in a variety of real life communicative
situations such as when someone is on a trip, in a meeting or in a restaurant. If accuracy
and correcting grammatical errors are also taken into consideration in CLT, fluency and
accuracy are yielded simultaneously through the application this method. Since language
is a means of communication and CLT may enable the learners to effectively communicate
in real life situation, it is inferred that CLT may fulfil the actual goal of teaching a language
which is to improve learners communicative competence.
WORKS CITED:
01. Harmer, J (2007). The Practice of English Language Teaching. England: Longman.
Howatt, A. (1984).
02. Richards, J., Platt, J, and Platt, H. (1992).Dictionary of language teaching and applied
linguistics. London: Longman
03. Larsen-Freeman, D.(2000).Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. New
York: Oxford
04. Littlewood, W. (1981). Communicative Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.

05. Brumfit, C. and K. Johnson K. (1979).The Communicative Approach to

LanguageTeaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
06. Robin, C., and Oxford, R. (1992). The Tapestry of Language Learning: The
Individual in the Communicative Classroom.TESL, EJ,1(3).
07. Savignon, S. (2001).Communicative language teaching: context and concerns
in teacher education .New Haven, CT: Yale University press.;
08. Brumfit, Christopher (1984). Communicative Methodologyin Language Teaching.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
09. Nunan, D.(1991). Language Teaching Methodology: A Textbook for Teachers. New
York: Prentice-Hall.
10. Widdowson, H.(1978).Teaching language as communication. London. Oxford
University Press.
11. O Malley, J. & Chamot, A. (1990).Language strategies in second
language acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
12. Richards, J. C. & Rodgers, T.(2001). Approaches and methods in language
teachingAdescription and analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
13. Brown, H. (1994). Teaching by Principles An Interactive Approach to
LanguagePedagogy. Prentince Hall.
14. Rivers, W.(1987).Interactive Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
15. Celce-Murcia, M. (1991) Grammar pedagogy insecond and foreign language teaching.
TESOL Quarterly 25,459480.
16. Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge: MIT Press
17. Cook, V. (1991).Second language learningandlanguageteaching.(2need.).London:
Arnold.
18. Finocchiaro, M., and Brurnfit. (1983). The Functional Notional Approach: FromTheory
to Practice. New York: Oxford University Press.
19. A History of English Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
20. Johnson, K. (1982). Communicative Syllabus Design and Methodology.
Oxford: Pergamon.
21. Johnson, K. and Morrow,K.(1981).Communication in the classroom. Essex: Longman.
22. Canale, M. (1983). From communicative competence tocommunicative
languagepedagogy. In J. C. Richards & R. W. Schmidt (Eds.),Language and
Communication (pp.pp. 2-27). Harlow: Longman.

Web Reference:
http://www.ukessays.com/essays/english-language/communicative-language-teaching-
the-origins-english-language-essay.php

A Critical Overview of Communicative Language Teaching

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

A Critical Overview of Communicative Language Teaching

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

9ROXPH,,,,VVXH9-XO\,661