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/CAThe 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 originThe 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

1) The communicative approach focuses on the use of language in everyday 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.

2) The approach relies extensively on the functional-notational syllabus which places heavy demands on the learners.

3) The various categories of language functions are overlapping and not systematically graded like the structures of the language.

4) A major premise underlying this approach is its emphasis on learners' needs and interests. This implies that every teacher should modify the syllabus to correspond with the needs of the learners.5) The approach gives priority to meanings and rules of use rather than to grammar and 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.

6) The requirements are difficult: availability of a classroom that can allow for group 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.