Communicative Language Teaching(CLT)

Introduction
The field of second or world language teaching has undergone many shifts and trends
over the last few decades. Numerous methods have come and gone. We have seen the
Audio-lingual Method, cognitive-based approaches, the Total Physical Response
(TPR), the Natural Approach, and many others (for a detailed description of these
methods and approaches, see Richards and Rodgers 2001). In addition, the
proficiency and standards-based1 movements have shaped the field with their
attempts to define proficiency goals and thus have provided a general sense of
direction. Some believe that foreign language instruction has finally come of age (see
Harper, Lively, and Williams 1998); others refer to it as the post-method area
(Richards and Rodgers 2001). It is also generally believed that there is no one single
best method that meets the goals and needs of all learners and programs. What has
emerged from this time is a variety of communicative language teaching (CLT)
methodologies. Such methodologies encompass eclectic ways of teaching that are
borrowed from myriad methods. Furthermore, they are rooted not only in one but a
range of theories and are motivated by research findings in second language
acquisition (SLA) as well as cognitive and educational psychology. The purpose of
this chapter is to provide an introduction to CLT and furthermore describe general
methodological principles that function as theoretical and practical guidelines when
implementing CLT methodologies.

Definition of CLT/CA
The Communicative Approach, also called Communicative Language Teaching or
Functional Approach, was the British version of the movement in the early 1960s in
reaction to the structuralism and behaviorism embodied in the audio-linguistics.
Communicative language teaching (CLT) is generally regarded as an approach to
language teaching (Richards and Rodgers 2001). As such, CLT reflects a certain
model or research paradigm, or a theory (Celce- Murcia 2001). Longman Dictionary
of Language Teaching & Applied Linguistics defines the Communicative Approach
or Communicative Language Teaching as “an APPROACH to foreign or second
language teaching which emphasises that the goal of language learning is
COMMUNICATIVE COMPETENCE.” CLT/CA is a set of principles about teaching
including recommendations about method and syllabus where the focus is on
meaningful communication not structure, use not usage. Its primary goal is for
learners to develop communicative competence (Hymes 1971), or simply put,
communicative ability. In other words, its goal is to make use of real-life situations
that necessitate communication. In this approach, students are given tasks to
accomplish using language instead of studying the language. The syllabus is based
primarily on functional development, not structural development. In essence, a
functional syllabus replaces a structural syllabus. There is also less emphasis on error
correction as fluency and communication become more important than accuracy.
Authentic and meaningful language input becomes more important as well. The class
becomes more student-centered as students accomplish their tasks with other students,
while the teacher plays more of an observer role.
Short origin
The origins of the Communicative Language Teaching are to be found in the changes
in the British language teaching tradition dating from the late 1960s. In the late
sixties, the current situational approach was questioned. British applied linguistics
began to emphasize the fundamental dimension of language teaching at that time—the
functional and communicative potential of language. Scholars like Christopher
Candlin and Henry Widdowson drew on the work of British functional linguistics
such as John Firth, and Halliday and American work in socio-linguistics like Dell
Hymes as well as work in philosophy. They argue for focus in language teaching on
communicative proficiency rather than on mere mastery of structures.The impact
from the European Common Market constituted another impetus for Communicative
Approach. The increasing independence of European countries appealed for greater
efforts to teach adults the major languages of the community. The council of Europe
sponsored international conferences on language teaching. It published monographs
and books about language teaching, and was active in promoting the formation of
International Association of Applied Linguistics. In 1971, a group of experts began to
investigate the possibility of developing language courses on a unit-credit system. At
that time, Wilkins, a British linguist proposed a functional or communicative syllabus
for language teaching. He attempted to demonstrate the systems of meaning that lay
behind the communicative uses of language. He described two types of meanings, the
notional categories and categories of communicative functions. He had his ideas
published in Notional Syllabus. The work of the Council of Europe; the writings of
Wilkins, Widdowson, Candlin, Chrisopher Brumfit and Keith Johnson; the rapid
application of these ideas by textbook writers; and the equally rapid acceptance of
these new principles by British language teaching specialists, curriculum development
centers, and even governments gave prominence nationally and internationally to
what came to be referred to as the Communicative Approach, or simply
Communicative Language Teaching.

Background/Origin/History
Due to the potential need for literacy by the whole community, education and
language teaching were reformed of in 20th century. The utilitarian philosophy
defeated the classics study of elite groups (Howatt, 2006, p. 1). The concept of CLT
was first introduced in 1970s with the term ‘communicative competence’ integrating
linguistic theory, research and teaching practice. When American Structuralist
linguistics and behaviorist psychology became influential in language teaching, the
widely practiced framework of Audiolingual Approach was replaced by "newer more
comprehensive theories of language and language behaviors" (Savignon 1991, p.261-
262). Mimicking and memorization in Audiolingual Approach focused excessively
the error-free performance and limited creativity in learning process as well as
creating anxiety in learners (Brandl, 2008, p. 4).
CLT emerged in the period of a transition of language teaching from microlinguistics
to a broader concern. The drill-based methodology of Audiolingual Approach was no
longer appreciated after reigning in language classrooms during the 1950s-1960s,
because it did not make learners produce meaningful language. Its predecessor, the
Grammar-Translation Method, fell out of favor because it failed to provide learners
with oral proficiency. CLT posits the collaborative nature of meaning making by
learners’ engagement in “interpretation, expression, and negotiation of meaning”
(Savignon, 1991, p. 262).
After Noam Chomsky’s ideal "grammatical competence" was proposed in 1957 in his
book Syntactic Structures, which said that language learning requires creative
processes and language was rule-governed creativity, the North American linguist and
anthropologist Dell Hymes countered his argument by developing the term
‘communicative competence’ to refer to knowledge that speakers and listeners have
when they communicate with the awareness of appropriateness in different social
contexts. It becomes “a central notion in sociolinguistics and other socially oriented
approaches to the study of language” (Tillis, 2006, p. 1). This means Hymes refused
to accept Chomsky’s claim about the innate ability of language learning.
Apart from Dell Hymes, there were other scholars whose works contributed to the
change of view in language teaching such as J. Firth, M. Halliday, and J. Austin: they
all supported the concept of communication as the purpose of language use (Brandl,
2008, p. 4). J.L. Austin’s How to Do Things with Words (1962) proposed the term
‘speech acts’ which were used to suggest, request, question, etc. in social discourse
and led to the ‘notional-functional approach’ (Howatt, 2006, p. 18). The concept
added one more dimension to language teaching practices (Wilkins, 1979. in Howatt,
2006, p. 18).
Then van Ek in 1973 and D. A. Wilkins 1976 developed a functional-notional
syllabus focusing on the organization of teaching materials, which traditionally had
been relevant to grammatical structures and vocabulary units, in order to help
teaching performance cover “what learners need to do with language and what
meanings they need to communicate.” Function are related to ‘asking,’ ‘requesting,’
‘arguing’ ‘describing,’ or ‘requesting,’ which were previously described by J.L.
Austin as “speech acts,” while notion includes ‘time’ and ‘location.’ There is a
warning that notions and functions sometimes can be mistaken for topics and
situations (Brandl, 2008, p. 4).
Later research studies brought about more insights and understanding of CLT
paradigm. In the area of Second Language Acquisition, Selinker (1972) found stages
of development of learning processes while Dulay and Burt’s study (1973) reflected
different sequences of what learners learned and what they were taught. Therefore, the
internal syllabus of language learners is not arranged in the same order as the
curriculum (Brandl, 2008, p. 4-5).
Though there are other methods developed after the emerging of CLT, not all of them
survived or were accepted by teaching practitioners. Even CLT though itself remains
a popular concept it is interpreted and implemented by scholars in the later years and
revised or even renamed. Sharing the same principles of CLT, diverse teaching
methods proposed recently are Natural Approach, Cooperative Language Learning,
Content-based Teaching, learner-centered instruction, Interactive Learning, Whole
Language Education, Task-based Teaching, and the two more candidates: Lexical
Approach and Multiple Intelligences. Among them, Task-based Language Teaching is
“one of the most prominent perspectives (Brown, 2007, p. 50-58). Though
Communicative Language Teaching was established on earlier notional/functional
proposals for the description of languages, T. Rodgers points out that currently “new
leads in discourse and genre analysis, schema theory, pragmatics, and
systemic/functional grammar are rekindling an interest in functionally based
approaches to language teaching” (Rodgers, 2001, p. 5 (online issue paper).

Context

The idea of Communicative Language Teaching arose partly in response to

deficiencies in two major teaching philosophies that preceded it: the traditional
Grammar-Translation Method and the Audiolingual Approach. Both of these earlier
approaches involved repetition and memorization of forms (model sentences to
illustrate grammar points), the former emphasizing written speech and the latter,
spoken.

In Europe in the 1970's, there was an influx of immigrant workers who needed to
quickly learn the language of their receiving countries in order to get and do their
jobs. Curricula informed by the earlier teaching philosophies did not accomplish this
very efficiently. Perhaps the Grammar Translation Method was adequate to the
purposes of the British Empire elite of a previous era, when a little familiarity with
Latin or French was an status marker connoting privilege; but it did little to serve the
immediate needs of the immigrant workers to communicate with their employers.

In the same years in the United States, Dell Hymes proposed the idea of
"communicative competence," by which he meant that competence in a language goes
beyond knowing the forms (lexical, phonological or syntactic), to embrace the
sociolinguistic aspect as well, or "what to talk about with whom, when, where and in
what manner in what circumstances and how to say it" (Hymes quoted in Canale and
Swain, 1980). Communicative competence is the ability to use the language
effectively to communicate with other human beings. Although, as Thompson [1]
points out, this definition is vague enough to make it difficult to disagree with, at the
time it represented a departure from the old way of thinking. One of the things Hymes
was trying to overcome was the overspecialization of linguistics in the 1960's, which
considered forms (phonology, syntax, etc.) to be the only subject of linguistic study,
artificially isolating language from its social context. The idea of communicative
competence and communicative language teaching brought in the social context as a
factor inseparable from language use and language learning. Grammatical form was
still important; it was just repositioned as one of several factors, the others being
sociolinguistic (as described above) and strategic competence (the ability to get
around limits of linguistic knowledge by paraphrasing or asking for help from the
interlocutor).

Sandra Savignon, another early researcher/ practitioner of CLT, emphasizes that

communication is considered both the goal of language learning and the means to get
there. Thus, a CLT-informed classroom offers many opportunities for practice, with
role playing, games, journal writing and other means of self-expression and social
interaction. Also, the curriculum is supposed to be student centered, meaning that
content should be determined by the real-life communicative needs of the students.

One of the problems with the emphasis on communication skills was that these are
difficult to evaluate in traditional tests. As CLT took hold and teachers began to apply
it in their classrooms, the exams lagged behind and continued to evaluate
decontextualized formal skills. Much work has been done to develop exams that
evaluate communication, but a gap persists, especially in outer circle, English as a
Foreign Language settings. This is a problem because many times the English exam
stands between the student and future possibilities in education and employment; in
the real life context, passing that exam matters much more to the student's life and
future than communicating in English does.

Another strand of analysis (see Peirce [2] ) looks at the effect on the learner of power
inequities and negative social interactions in the L2. One of the tenets of CLT is that
learning should be student driven. That idea gave rise to a lot of studies on motivation
and the "good language learner." The good language learner in willing to
communicate, and finds or creates her own opportunities to interact in the second
language. Peirce questions "the premise that language learners can choose under what
conditions they will interact with members of the target language community" (Peirce
12). She studies an ESL situation, immigrant women workers in Canada, in which the
English learners in the workplace have to constantly negotiate with often hostile
natives for the right to speak. She suggests incorporating these experiences into the
classroom, where students can reflect and compare these experiences with one
another, thereby supporting each other, learning, and asserting a new identity as social
researchers or ethnographers of Canadian culture, to empower themselves and combat
their own marginalization, along with asserting their right to speak in English.

There is also an argument that CLT is embedded in Western culture, and in some
ways clashes with Asian cultures (see Ellis [3] ). As mentioned, the English exam is
very important for the Asian students' future; the greatest service the English teacher
can do for those students is teach to the exam, which is likely to be form and
translation based. One of the cultural values English teachers should not take for
granted is the importance placed on spoken communication, and on meaning over
form. For the EFL student in a non-Western country, there may be little opportunity
or need to speak English, but more for reading and writing in it, and forms (such as
Chinese calligraphy) are highly valued. Another cultural gap arises from the Western
teacher's role as facilitator or friend, when Asian classrooms are more formal, and a
teacher centered style is the norm. According to Ellis, when such cultural gaps are too
big and no attempt is made to compromise or mediate between teachers' and students'
different expectations, it will cause confusion and frustration for the students.
Still, the communicative approach continues to be the dominant conceptual
framework today for the teaching of English to speakers of other languages, with its
attendant values of tailoring the curriculum to the needs of the student, teaching about
culture along with language, creating opportunities for role-play and conversation,
and trying to make content of lessons, and the way they are given, as authentic as
possible.

Features
1) Focus on meaning.
2) Communicative competence is the desired goal.
3) Learner-centered.
4) Fluency is the primary goal.
5) Students are expected to interact with other people, either in oral practice, through
pair and group work, or in their writings.
6) Dialogues, if used, center around communicative functions.
7) Intrinsic motivation will spring from an interest in what is being communicated by
the language.
8) Task-based.
David Nunan (1991) offers five features to characterise the Communicative Language
Teaching.
1. An emphasis on learning to communicate through interaction in the target language
2. The introduction of authentic texts into the learning situation
3. The provision of opportunities for learners to focus, not only on language but also
on the learning process itself.
4. An enhancement of the learner’s own personal experiences as important
contributing elements to classroom learning.
5. An attempt to link classroom language learning with language activation outside
the classroom. (cited in Brown 1994a :78)

Principles
1) The communicative principle: Activities that involve real communication promote
learning.
2) The task principle: Activities in which language is used to carry out meaningful
tasks promote learning.
3) The meaningfulness principle: Language that is meaningful to the learner supports
the learning process.

Berns (1990, 104) provides a useful summary of eight principles of CLT:

1. Language teaching is based on a view of language as communication. That is,
language is seen as a social tool that speakers use to make meaning; speakers
communicate about something to someone for some purpose, either orally or in
writing.
2. Diversity is recognized and accepted as part of language development and use in
second language learners and users, as it is with first language users.
3. A learner's competence is considered in relative, not in absolute, terms.
4. More than one variety of a language is recognized as a viable model for learning
and teaching.
5. Culture is recognized as instrumental in shaping speakers’ communicative
competence, in both their first and subsequent languages.
6. No single methodology or fixed set of techniques is prescribed.
7. Language use is recognized as serving ideational, interpersonal, and textual
functions and is related to the development of learners’ competence in each.
8. It is essential that learners be engaged in doing things with language—that is, that
they use language for a variety of purposes in all phases of learning.

Richards:

# Second language learning is facilitated when learners are engaged in interaction

and meaningful communication.
# Meaningful communication results from students processing content that is relevant,
purposeful, interesting and engaging.
# Language learning is gradual process that involves creative use of language and trial
and error. Although errors are a normal product of learning, the goal of learning is to
be able to use the new language both accurately and fluently.
# The role of teacher in the language classroom is that of a facilitator, who creates a
classroom climate conduct to language learning and provides opportunities for
students to use and practice the language and to reflect on language use and language
learning.
# The classroom is a community where learners learn through collaboration and
sharing.

Characteristics

• With overall goals, all components of communicative competence as well as

the organizational and pragmatic aspects of language are in play.

• By engaging learners in language use for meaningful purposes, pragmatic,

authentic and functional use is encouraged and therefore correct forms can be
excused though not totally ignored.

• To encourage comprehension and production with fluency in learners,

correcting for accuracy can be offered by teachers subsequently.

• Focusing on real-world contexts, learners are equipped with skills they need
for the unrehearsed contexts by communicative techniques.

• Individual learners’ learning process is considered in order to promote their

autonomy and strategic involvement. Teacher can help them develop
appropriate strategies according to their strengths, weakness and preferences
of learning styles.
 • Teacher roles in CLT classroom are like those of ‘coach,’ ‘guide’ or
‘facilitator’ and ‘friend’ who will help learners develop genuine linguistic
interactive competence. Therefore learners are active participants who involve
trial and error in order to communicate by integrating different language skills.

Characteristic features
The fundamental principle of CLT is to enable learners to understand
and use the target language for communication. Two basic
assumptions underlying this approach to language learning are that
the core of language learning is the development of communicative
competence and that the starting point for language learning is not
grammatical rules but context, function, meaning and the
appropriate use of the language.
Richards and Rogers identify the distinct characteristics of
communicative language teaching as (1986: P.71):
‘Language is a system for the expression of
meaning.
The primary function of language is for
interaction and communication function of
language.
The structure of language reflects its functional
and communicative uses.
The primary units of language are not merely its
grammatical and structural features, but
categories of functional and communicative
meaning as exemplified in discourse.’
This approach calls for radically different ideas of language
teaching. One major shift is that language learning has become
student-centred. Lessons are planned in such a way that all the
students can engage in interactive activities.
Authentic and meaningful communication should be goal of
classroom activies. Group work and pair work are employed to
promote communication and getting the meaning across. Authentic
materials, such as newspaper articles, radio programmes, video-
tapes, train-timetables etc., are used to bring the real world
elements into the classroom. Situations are simulated but
interaction and task complete within real-time are genuine. Role-
plays centre on communicative functions.
Fluency is an important dimension of communication. The objective
of language learning is to communicate; attempts to communicate
are encouraged at the very beginning. Errors are unavoidable but
accuracy is judged in context rather in structures and forms. Errors
which are concerned with structures are not corrected openly and
simultaneously because the main concern is fluency and getting
meaning through communication. Learning is a process of creative
construction and involves errors.

Objectives

Piepho (1981) discusses the following levels of objectives in a communicative

approach:

1. an integrative and content level (language as a means of expression)

2. a linguistic and instrumental level (language as a semiotic system and an object of

learning);

3. an affective level of interpersonal relationships and conduct (language as a means

of expressing values and judgments about oneself and others);

4. a level of individual learning needs (remedial learning based on error analysis);

5. a general educational level of extra-linguistic goals (language learning within the

school curriculum) (Piepho 1981: 8)

These are proposed as general objectives, applicable to any teaching situation.

Particular objectives for CLT cannot be defined beyond this level of specification,
since such an approach assumes that language teaching will reflect the particular
needs of the target learners. These needs may be in the domains of reading, writing,
listening, or speaking, each of which can be approached from a communicative
perspective. Curriculum or instructional objectives for a particular course would
reflect specific aspects of communicative competence according to the learner's
proficiency level and communicative needs.

Theory of language
The communicative approach in language teaching starts from a theory of language
as communication. The goal of language teaching is to develop what Hymes
(1972) referred to as "communicative competence." Hymes coined this term in
order to contrast a communicative view of language and Chomsky's theory of
competence. Chomsky held that linguistic theory is concerned primarily with an ideal
speaker-listener in a completely homogeneous speech community, who knows its
language perfectly and is unaffected by such grammatically irrelevant conditions as
memory limitation, distractions, shifts of attention and interest, and errors (random or
characteristic) in applying his knowledge of the language in actual performance.
(Chomsky 1965: 3)
For Chomsky, the focus of linguistic theory was to characterize the abstract abilities
speakers possess that enable them to produce grammatically correct sentences in a
language. Hymes held that such a view of linguistic theory was sterile, that linguistic
theory needed to be seen as part of a more general theory incorporating
communication and culture. Hymes's theory of communicative competence was a
definition of what a speaker needs to know in order to be communicatively com-
petent in a speech community. In Hymes's view, a person who acquires
communicative competence acquires both knowledge and ability for language use
with respect to
1. whether (and to what degree) something is formally possible;
2. whether (and to what degree) something is feasible in virtue of the means of
implementation available;
3. whether (and to what degree) something is appropriate (adequate, happy,
successful) in relation to a context in which it is used and evaluated;
4. whether (and to what degree) something is in fact done, actually performed, and
what its doing entails.
This theory of what knowing a language entails offers a much more comprehensive
view than Chomsky's view of competence, which deals primarily with abstract
grammatical knowledge.
Another linguistic theory of communication favored in CLT is Halliday's functional
account of language use. "Linguistics ... is concerned... with the description of speech
acts or texts, since only through the study of language in use are all the functions of
language, and therefore all components of meaning, brought into focus" (Halliday
1970: 145). In a number of influential books and papers, Halliday has elaborated a
powerful theory of the functions of language, which complements Hymes's view of
communicative competence for many writers on CLT (e.g., Brumfit and Johnson
1979; Savignon 1983). He described (1975: 11-17) seven basic functions that
language performs for children learning their first language:
1. the instrumental function: using language to get things;
2. the regulatory function: using language to control the behaviour of others;
3. the interactional function: using language to create interaction with others;
4. the personal function: using language to express personal feelings and meanings;
5. the heuristic function: using language to learn and to discover;
6. the imaginative function: using language to create a world of the imagination;
7. the representational function: using language to communicate information.
Learning a second language was similarly viewed by proponents of Communicative
Language Teaching as acquiring the linguistic means to perform different kinds of
functions.
At the level of language theory, Communicative Language Teaching has a rich, if
somewhat eclectic, theoretical base. Some of the characteristics of this communicative
view of language follow.
1. Language is a system for the expression of meaning.
2. The primary function of language is for interaction and communication.
3. The structure of language reflects its functional and communicative uses.
4. The primary units of language are not merely its grammatical and structural
features, but categories of functional and communicative meaning as exemplified in
discourse.

Theory of learning
In contrast to the amount that has been written in Communicative Language Teaching
literature about communicative dimensions of language, little has been written about
learning theory. Neither Brumfit and Johnson (1979) nor Littlewood (1981), for
example, offers any discussion of learning theory. Elements of an underlying learning
theory can be discerned in some CLT practices, however. One such element might be
described as the communication principle: Activities that involve real
communication promote learning. A second element is the task principle: Activities
in which language is used for carrying out meaningful tasks promote learning
(Johnson 1982). A third element is the meaningfulness principle: Language that is
meaningful to the learner supports the learning process. Learning activities are
consequently selected according to how well they engage the learner in meaningful
and authentic language use (rather than merely mechanical practice of language
patterns). These principles, we suggest, can be inferred from CLT practices (e.g.,
Little-wood 1981; Johnson 1982). They address the conditions needed to promote
second language learning, rather than the processes of language acquisition.
More recent accounts of Communicative Language Teaching, however, have
attempted to describe theories of language learning processes that are compatible with
the communicative approach. Savignon (1983) surveys second language acquisition
research as a source for learning theories and considers the role of linguistic, social,
cognitive, and individual variables in language acquisition. Other theorists (e.g.,
Stephen Krashen, who is not directly associated with Communicative Language
Teaching) have developed theories cited as compatible with the principles of CLT.
Krashen sees acquisition as the basic process involved in developing language
proficiency and distinguishes this process from learning. Acquisition refers to the
unconscious development of the target language system as a result of using the
language for real communication. Learning is the conscious representation of
grammatical knowledge that has resulted from instruction, and it cannot lead to
acquisition. It is the acquired system that we call upon to create utterances during
spontaneous language use. The learned system can serve only as a monitor of the
output of the acquired system. Krashen and other second language acquisition
theorists typically stress that language learning comes about through using language
communicatively, rather than through practicing language skills.
Johnson (1984) and Littlewood (1984) consider an alternative learning theory that
they also see as compatible with CLT-a skill-learning model of learning. According to
this theory, the acquisition of communicative competence in a language is an example
of skill development. This involves both a cognitive and a behavioral aspect:
The cognitive aspect involves the internalisation of plans for creating appropriate
behaviour. For language use, these plans derive mainly from the language system —
they include grammatical rules, procedures for selecting vocabulary, and social
conventions governing speech. The behavioural aspect involves the automation of
these plans so that they can be converted into fluent performance in real time. This
occurs mainly through practice in converting plans into performance. (Littlewood
1984: 74)
This theory thus encourages an emphasis on practice as a way of developing
communicative skills.

Teacher's role
Several roles are assumed for teachers in Communicative Language Teaching, the
importance of particular roles being determined by the view of CLT adopted. Breen
and Candlin describe teacher roles in the following terms:
The teacher has two main roles: the first role is to facilitate the communication
process between all participants in the classroom, and between these participants
and the various activities and texts. The second role is to act as an independent
participant within the learning-teaching group. The latter role is closely related to
the objectives of the first role and arises from it. These roles imply a set of secondary
roles for the teacher; first, as an organizer of resources and as a resource himself,
second as a guide within the classroom procedures and activities.... A third role for the
teacher is that of researcher and learner, with much to contribute in terms of
appropriate knowledge and abilities, actual and observed experience of the nature of
learning and organizational capacities. (1980: 99)
Other roles assumed for teachers are needs analyst, counselor, and group process
manager.
NEEDS ANALYST
The CLT teacher assumes a responsibility for determining and responding to learner
language needs. This may be done informally and personally through one-to-one
sessions with students, in which the teacher talks through such issues as the student's
perception of his or her learning style, learning assets, and learning goals. It may be
done formally through administering a needs assessment instrument, such as those
exemplified in Savignon (1983). Typically, such formal assessments contain items
that attempt to determine an individual's motivation for studying the language. For
example, students might respond on a 5-point scale (strongly agree to strongly
disagree) to statements like the following.
I want to study English because...
1. I think it will someday be useful in getting a good job.
2. it will help me better understand English-speaking people and their way of life.
3. one needs a good knowledge of English to gain other people's respect.
4. it will allow me to meet and converse with interesting people.
5. I need it for my job.
6. it will enable me to think and behave like English-speaking people.
On the basis of such needs assessments, teachers are expected to plan group and
individual instruction that responds to the learners' needs.
COUNSELOR

Another role assumed by several CLT approaches is that of counselor, similar to the
way this role is defined in Community Language Learning. In this role, the teacher-
counselor is expected to exemplify an effective communicator seeking to maximize
the meshing of speaker intention and hearer interpretation, through the use of
paraphrase, confirmation, and feedback.
GROUP PROCESS MANAGER
CLT procedures often require teachers to acquire less teacher-centered classroom
management skills. It is the teacher's responsibility to organize the classroom as a
setting for communication and communicative activities. Guidelines for classroom
practice (e.g., Littlewood 1981; Finocchiaro and Brumfit 1983) suggest that during an
activity the teacher monitors, encourages, and suppresses the inclination to supply
gaps in lexis, grammar, and strategy but notes such gaps for later commentary and
communicative practice. At the conclusion of group activities, the teacher leads in the
debriefing of the activity, pointing out alternatives and extensions and assisting
groups in self-correction discussion. Critics have pointed out, however, that non-
native teachers may feel less than comfortable about such procedures without special
training.
The focus on fluency and comprehensibility in Communicative Language Teaching
may cause anxiety among teachers accustomed to seeing error suppression and
correction as the major instructional responsibility, and who see their primary
function as preparing learners to take standardized or other kinds of tests. A
continuing teacher concern has been the possible deleterious effect in pair or group
work of imperfect modeling and student error. Although this issue is far from
resolved, it is interesting to note that recent research findings suggest that "data
contradicts the notion that other learners are not good conversational partners because
they can't provide accurate input when it is solicited" (Porter 1983).

Teacher vs. student roles

The emphasis in Communicative Approach on the process of communication rather
than mastery of language forms, leads to different roles from those found in more
traditional second language classrooms.

Teachers’ role
Instead of being the dominating authority in the classroom, the teacher in the
Communicative Approach facilitates the communicative process among all the
learners and between the students and the various tasks, giving guidance and advice
when necessary. Furthermore, teachers act as independent participants within the
learning-teaching group. However, this does not mean that once a teaching activity is
in progress, the teacher should become a passive observer. It is still the teacher’s
obligation to develop the students’ potential through external direction. Although the
teacher may
be nondirective in general, it is still the teacher’s responsibility to recognize the
distinctive qualities in the students and to help the students develop those qualities. In
contemporary English teaching, the teacher’s function should become less dominant
than before, but no less important. For example, his/her role as an independent
participant within the learning-teaching group is closely related to the objective of
his/her role as communicative activator. These roles include a set of secondary roles
for the teacher: first, as an organizer of resources and as a resource; and second, as a
guide and manager of activities. A third role for the teacher is that of a researcher and
learner, with much to contribute in terms of appropriate knowledge, abilities, and
actual experience in the nature of learning (Breen and Candlin 1980). One of the
important components of communicative competence is the ability to select a
linguistic form that is appropriate for a specific situation (Hymes 1981). Language has
been redefined as an integral part of the culture with which it is connected today.
There is plenty of evidence that a good command of English grammar, vocabulary,
and syntax does not necessarily add up to a good mastery of English. There is a set of
social conventions governing language form and behavior within a communicative
group.

Students’ role
Because in Communicative Approach the students’ performance is the goal, students
need much practice. So students should be centered. The teacher must step back and
observe, sometimes acting as a referee or monitor. A classroom during a
communicative activity is far from quiet, however. The students do most of the
speaking, and frequently the scene of a classroom during a communicative exercise is
active, with students leaving their seats to complete a task. Because of the increased
responsibility to participate, students may find they gain confidence in using the target
language in general. Students are more responsible managers of their own learning.

Advantages of CLT
Specifically, the communicative approach of teaching has the following three
advantages:
(1) the interaction between students and teachers. Communicative teaching is
becoming increasingly clear feature is the change in the way as the internship,
students develop the subject, initiative and become increasingly important. Teacher-
student relationship is an interactive, harmonious relationship, rather than the
traditional education, the kind of master-servant relationship.
(2) to impart the basic knowledge and ability to skillfully combine the development.
Traditional classroom teaching of English in the main body of the expense of home
study, only emphasized the teachers on the knowledge of the systematic and integrity,
which is a teacher-centered, knowledge-centered from the medieval "scholastic"
teaching teaching methods inherited One consequence of the neglect of student
ability. The communicative teaching emphasizes the learner's cognitive ability and
operational capabilities, which allow the students themselves to think about and
express their views, thus trained in real life the ability to use language to
communicate.
(3) greatly enhanced the student's interest. Communicative teaching students to
participate in, sometimes accompanied by scenes or simulated scenarios, so that
students more close to life, the students became the main character, naturally they
were interested in the English language, to learn English as a pleasure.

Communicative Language Teaching defects

Communicative Approach is a new teaching methods to meet the demands of the
times, its emphasis on interpersonal skills, better than the traditional method to
stimulate students interest in learning, stimulate students to communicate their
enthusiasm, it is than trying to teach the entire language is more formal system of
traditional law quick , but also save time and effort, but it also has its downside.
First of all, using communicative approach to grammar teaching, grammar, learning
systematic and progressive to a certain extent, be affected. Psycholinguistic
experiments show that, regardless of language acquisition of children, or adults in
second language acquisition, their awareness of grammar acquisition and
understanding of the project is carried out according to a certain order.
Communicative grammar teaching practice is often used features an outline of ideas
to focus on teaching how to make the students in a specific context, in order to
achieve specific communicative functions, such as: inquiry, instruction, order, refused
the request and so on, the correct who graciously to use these linguistic forms. In this
system, the syntax of the systematic and progressive to a certain degree of neglect,
and sometimes give people with disorderly feeling.
Second, the communicative approach to grammar teaching, grammar items account
for a large proportion of the output, that is a lot of time for students to communicate in
conversation to understand the consolidation of the phrase v points. Compared with
the traditional teaching of grammar, syntax knowledge, communicative input ratio of
relative reduction. The linguists Van Patter and Cadiero found that "only from the
input of those who perceive and deal with the students in understanding the
grammatical structure of sentences is superior to the output-based students." In
addition, the communicative approach, there are other Issue. As Richard and Rodgers
pointed out: "the adopting of a commu-fricative approach raises important issues for
teacher training, materials development, and tesn, ng and evaluafion."

Challenges in Communicative Language Teaching

CLT or a task-based approach is not a panacea to language teaching. There are
numerous challenges to making communicative language teaching happen. These
issues have to do with the choice of content, context, specific skill areas (e.g.,
vocabulary, grammar, etc.), and particular learning tasks that determine a curriculum.
These choices are tightly linked to questions about what it means to “know” a
language, to be proficient in a language, and what communicative abilities entail.
While the literature on language teaching has attempted to provide answers to such
questions, there are no universally accepted standards. The proficiency and standards
movements have attempted to provide some guidelines, but they often remain broad
in learner performance descriptions (see Appendix 8.3, ACTFL Proficiency
Guidelines). This ultimately makes assessment of individual learners’ communicative
ability challenging, and it essentially leaves judgment of learner progress up to the
teachers. Communicative abilities cannot be simply categorized as speaking, listening,
reading, or writing skills, as it was done in a traditional fourskills approach. For
example, when two people talk to each other, the process normally involves speaking
and listening skills as well as active communicative strategies such as asking for
clarification and adjusting language to make each other understood. The endeavor to
teach languages in a way that encompasses all skills, based on an interactive view of
language behavior, has posed many challenges on how to go about integrating the
four skills effectively in a daily and long-term curriculum. The teaching of
proficiency and communicative-based skills raises the question not only about content
but also about the choice of learning tasks or best teaching practices. CLT does not
promote one standardized method or curriculum, but is eclectic in its approach. Being
eclectic means it promotes the best or most effective techniques or methodologies. At
the same time, the choice of techniques and learning tasks is not an arbitrary decision,
but is firmly grounded in principles of learning as they are motivated by research in
second language acquisition (SLA) and educational psychology. Learning what
constitutes effective ways of learning and teaching initially requires intensive training
and in the long run staying in touch with current SLA research findings. As a last
point, the quality of CLT also often depends on the quality of teaching materials.
Unfortunately, only in the most commonly taught languages—such as English,
Spanish, French, and German—does an abundance of materials exist to support the
development of communicative language abilities over a wide range of skills.

Points of criticism
The communicative approach focuses on the use of language in everyday (1
situations, or the functional aspects of language, and less on the formal structures.
However, critics believe that there needs to be some sort of "bridge" between the two
.in order for effective language learning
The approach relies extensively on the functional-notational syllabus which places (2
.heavy demands on the learners
The various categories of language functions are overlapping and not systematically (3
.graded like the structures of the language
A major premise underlying this approach is its emphasis on learners' needs and (4
interests. This implies that every teacher should modify the syllabus to correspond with
.the needs of the learners
The approach gives priority to meanings and rules of use rather than to grammar and (5
rules of structure. The latter are taught by means of functions and notions. Such
concentration on language behavior may result in negative consequences in the sense that
.important structures and rules would be left out
The requirements are difficult: availability of a classroom that can allow for group (6
.work activities and for teaching aids and materials

Merits of CLT

There are many advantages in teaching according to the communicative approach:

1.CLT is a holistic appraoch. It doesn’t focus only on the traditional structural

syllabus. It takes into consideration communicative dimension of language.

2.CLT provides vitality and motivation within the classroom.

3.CLT is a learner centered approach. It capitalizes on the interests and needs of the
learner.

4.In a world where communication of information and information technology have

broken new considerable ground, CLT can play an important role in
education.

Critism

1.Notional syllabus was critcised as merely replacing one kind of list, namely a list of
grammatical strucures, with another list of notions and functions.
2.The various categories of language functions are overlapping and not systematically
graded like the structures of the language.

3.The communicative approach focuses on the use of language in everyday situations,

or the functional aspects of language, and less on the formal structures. There must be
a certain balance between the two.It gives priority to meanings and rules of use rather
than to grammar and rules of structure. Such concentration on language behavior may
result in negative consequences in the sense that important structures and rules would
be left out.

4.The approach relies extensively on the functional-notational syllabus which places

heavy demands on the learners.

5.A major principle underlying this approach is its emphasis on learners’ needs and
interests. This implies that every teacher should modify the syllabus to fit the needs of
the learners.

6.The requirements are difficult. Not all classrooms can allow for group work
activities and for teaching aids and materials.

In spite of its critics, CLT has gained widespread acceptance in the world of language
study. CLT can succeed, as long as teachers don’t completely reject the need for the
structure provided by grammar. Teachers must strive for moderation and don’t neglect
the merits of other methods. CLT, in the hands of a balanced teacher, can bring new
life and joy to the classroom. Its vitality makes it an important contributor to language
learning approaches.