See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/284347432

An Overview of Communicative Language Teaching

Conference Paper · June 2014

DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.1.3092.2489

CITATIONS READS
0 5,959

1 author:

Simhachalam Thamarana
GMR Institute of Technology
42 PUBLICATIONS   31 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

USE OF ICT AND MULTIMEDIA IN TEACHING WRITING SKILLS IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE: AN EXPERIMENTAL STUDY View project

Multimedia Technologies for Effective English Language Teaching View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Simhachalam Thamarana on 23 July 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 5th International Conference on English Language and Literature (ICELL –
2014) Hyderabad, India, June 28 – 29, 2014

A Critical Overview of Communicative Language Teaching

By
Mr. SIMHACHALAM THAMARANA (RESEARCH SCHOLAR),
Dept. of English
ANDHRAUNIVERSITY
VISAKHAPATNAM

ABSTRACT

In this paper, an introduction to various English language teaching methods is presented at

the 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.

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; O’Malley 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 emphasizes that the goal of
International Academic and Industrial Research Solutions (IAIRS) Page 63
 5th International Conference on English Language and Literature (ICELL –
2014) Hyderabad, India, June 28 – 29, 2014

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).

International Academic and Industrial Research Solutions (IAIRS) Page 64

 5th International Conference on English Language and Literature (ICELL –
2014) Hyderabad, India, June 28 – 29, 2014

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” (Brown 1994:245). However, at times fluency may
have to take on more importance than accuracy because "fluency and acceptable
language is the primary goal" (Finocchiaro and Brumfit 1983:93) and accuracy is
judged not in the abstract but in contexts. Fluency is emphasized 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
International Academic and Industrial Research Solutions (IAIRS) Page 65
 5th International Conference on English Language and Literature (ICELL –
2014) Hyderabad, India, June 28 – 29, 2014

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-Murcia
1991). The idea of emphasizing 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
recognize 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 at least two people. Thompson (1996) further states that,
though there is a complaint that CLT ignores written language, a glance at recent
mainstream textbooks 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 maximize 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).
International Academic and Industrial Research Solutions (IAIRS) Page 66
 5th International Conference on English Language and Literature (ICELL –
2014) Hyderabad, India, June 28 – 29, 2014

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 (Larsen Freeman 1986). 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 realize 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-Murcia 1991:8). 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 a lot 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,

International Academic and Industrial Research Solutions (IAIRS) Page 67

 5th International Conference on English Language and Literature (ICELL –
2014) Hyderabad, India, June 28 – 29, 2014

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 emphasizes 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 into 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 is used 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 an institution are grammar
based, communicative fluency may not be appropriate.

International Academic and Industrial Research Solutions (IAIRS) Page 68

 5th International Conference on English Language and Literature (ICELL –
2014) Hyderabad, India, June 28 – 29, 2014

(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 in spite 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 Language
Teaching. 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 Methodology in Language Teaching.

International Academic and Industrial Research Solutions (IAIRS) Page 69

 5th International Conference on English Language and Literature (ICELL –
2014) Hyderabad, India, June 28 – 29, 2014

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
teaching”A description and analysis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
13. Brown, H. (1994). Teaching by Principles – An Interactive Approach to Language
Pedagogy. Prentince Hall.
14. Rivers, W.(1987).Interactive Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
15. Celce-Murcia, M. (1991) Grammar pedagogy in second and foreign language
teaching. TESOL Quarterly 25, 459–480.
16. Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the Theory of Syntax. Cambridge: MIT Press
17. Cook, V. (1991).Second language learning and language teaching.(2ne
ed.).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 to communicative language
pedagogy.” In J. C. Richards & R. W. Schmidt (Eds.), Language and
Communication (pp.pp. 2-27). Harlow: Longman.

International Academic and Industrial Research Solutions (IAIRS)

View publication stats