"Communicative language Teaching"

      To evaluate my assignment click here 

     

Name: Rinkal D. 

 Roll No: 22       

            

Batch: 2016-18

SEM: 3

Enrollment no: 2069108420170012

Email Id: rinkaljani1807@gmail.com

Paper No: 11 English language teaching-1

Topic: "Communicative Language Teaching"

Submitted to:  Dr Dillip Barad

Department of English,

Smt. S. B. Gardi

Maharaja Krshnkumarsinhji Bhavnagar Universit

Background :

                                    The origins of Communicative Language ,Teaching ( CLT ) are to be found in the changes in the British Language teaching tradition dating from the late 1960s until then, situational language teaching represented the major British approach to teaching English as a foreign language. In situational language teaching, language was taught by practicing basic structures in meaningful situation based activities but just as the linguistic theory underlying audio lingualism was rejected in the United States in the mid 1960s British applied linguists began to call into question the theoretical assumptions underlying Situational Language Teaching

                                  By the end of the sixties it was clear that the situational approach had run its course. There was no future in continuing to peruse the chimera of predicting language on the basis of situational events. What was required was a closer study of the language it self and a return to the traditional concept that utterance carried meaning in themselves and expressed the meanings and intentions of the speakers and writers who created them. ( Howatt – 1984 : 280 )

                               

A British linguist D.A.Wilkins (1912) proposed a functional or communicative definition of language. [p

                        Little wood ( 1981 : 1 ) states, “ one of the most characteristics features of communicative language teaching is  that it pays systematic attention to functional as well as structural aspect of language. ” 

                        The introduction to the national primary English Syllabus based on a Communicative approach comments that,

             “Communicative purposes may be of many different kinds what is essential in all of them is that at least two parties are involved in an interaction or transformed of some kind where one party has an intention and the other party expands or reacts to the intention.” 

                             Yalden ( 1983 ) in her discussion of communicative syllabus design, discusses six communicative language teaching design alternatives, ranging from a model in which Communicative exercise are grafted onto an existing structural syllabus, to a learner generated views of syllabus design .

                         In English language teaching, it is understood that with the help of CLT, teachers try to enhance the Communicative competence includes following competences.

1.  Grammatical competence

2.  Discourse competence

3.  Strategic competence

4.  Socio linguistic competence.

              

                       At present we find, learners are by and large not able to use the language that they learn in either written or oral form. In other words it is their inability to communicate with each other. It is the Communicative approach and Communicative language teaching which advocates and attaches paramount importance to the communicative aspect of language in English Language Teaching.

                            Language being a means of expression and communication is learnt to communicate through its use and therefore any language course ought to provide the learner with the skills that enable him to interact with others. Considering this viewpoint, the communicative language teaching may be defined as a teaching language for communication in simple terms it means,

                   In CLT, the whole focus is on communication proficiency rather then on more mastery of language.

                    It aims at creating the right kind of environment in the classroom which brings about in learners and urge to say something to express them to do something with words and the urge to communicate.

                    It favours group work to the maximum possible extent in order to interact the learner with each other and to raise the maximum learners involvement in the teaching as well as learning process.

                     It’s one of the aims of his to help the learners to acquire communicative competence for example, ability to use the linguistic system effectively.

                    It is the learner oriented approach and not the teacher oriented.

Communicative Language Teaching (The Communicative Approach)

As the language theories underlying the Audiolingual method and the Sitiuational Language Teaching method were questioned by prominent linguists like Chomsky (1957) during the 1960s, a new trend of language teaching paved its way into classrooms. Communicative Language Teaching (CLT), which is an approach to the teaching of second and foreign languages, emphasizes interaction as both the means and the ultimate goal of learning a language. It is also referred to as “Communicative Approach”. Historically, CLT has been seen as a response to the Audio-Lingual Method (ALM), and as an extension or development of the Notional-Functional Syllabus. Task-based language learning, a more recent refinement of CLT, has gained considerably in popularity.

Shortcomings of structuralism and behaviorism

The theories underlying the audiolingual method and the situational language teaching were widely criticized during the 1960s. Noam Chomsky, for instance, rejected the structuralist view of language and demonstrated that there is a distinction between performance and competence.  The goal of the linguist is to study the linguistic competence native speakers are endowed with. He also showed, rightly, that structuralism and behaviorism were unable to account for one fundamental  aspect of language, namely the creativity and uniqueness of individual sentences. A child is able to produce an infinite number of sentences that s/he has never encountered. This makes  the factors of  imitation, repetition and habit formation weak arguments to account for any language learning theory.

A shift towards communicative proficiency

The increasing interdependency between the European countries necessitated a need for a greater effort to teach adults the principal languages of the continent. New goals were set in language teaching profession:

• The paramount importance of communication aspects of language.
• The increasing interest in meaningful learning.
• The growing centrality of the learner in teaching processes.
• The subordinate importance of structural teaching of language.

Notional / functional dimension of language

Applied linguists  and philosophers addressed another fundamental dimension of language: the functional and communicative potential of language.  The speech act theory showed that we do something when we speak a language. We use language ( cf Halliday 1975)

• to get things,
• to control behavior,
• to create interaction with others,
• to express personal feelings,
• to learn,
• to create a world of imagination,
• to communicate information.

Besides applied linguists emphasized  a teaching of language based on communicative proficiency rather than mastery of structures. instead of describing the core of language through traditional concepts of grammar and vocabulary, they (Van Ek & Alexander, 1975; Wilkins, 1976) attempted to show the systems of meaning underlying the communicative use of language. They described two kinds of meanings.

• Notional categories: concepts such as time, sequence; quantity, location, frequency.
• Functional categories: requests offers, complaints, invitation …

In other words, a “notion” is a particular context in which people communicate. A “function” is a specific purpose for a speaker in a given context. For example, the “notion,” of shopping requires numerous language “functions,” such as asking about prices or features of a product and bargaining.

One language competence or numerous competences?

For Chomsky the focus of linguistics was to describe the linguistic competence that enables speakers to produce grammatically correct sentences. Dell Hymes held, however,  that such a view of linguistic theory was sterile and that it failed to picture all the aspects of language. He advocated the need of a theory that incorporate communication competence. It must be a definition of what a speaker needs to know in order to be communicatively competent in a speech community.

Later Canale and Swaine (1980) described four dimensions of communicative competence.

• Grammatical competence: refers to what Chomsky calls linguistic competence.
• Sociolinguistic competence: refers to an understanding of the social context in which communication takes place (role relationships, shared beliefs and information between participants …)
• Discourse competence: refers to the interpretation of individual messsage elements in terms of their interconnectedness and how meaning is represented in relationship to the entire discourse or text.
• Strategic competence: refers to the coping strategies that participants use to initiate terminate, maintain, repair and redirect communication

Learning theory

According to the the communicative approach, in order for learning to take place, emphasis must be put on the importance of these variables:

• Communication: activities that involve real communication promote learning.
• Tasks: activities in which language is used to carry out meaningful tasks supports the learning process.
• Meaning: language that is meaningful and authentic to the learner boosts learning.

Acquiring or learning?

Stephen Krashen later advocated in his language learning theory that there should be a distinction between learning and acquiring. He sees acquisition as the basic process involved in developing language proficiency and distinguishes this process from learning. Acquisition is an unconscious process that involves the naturalistic development of language proficiency while learning is the conscious internalization of the rules of language. It results in explicit knowledge about the forms of language and the ability to verbalize this knowledge. Learning according to Krashen can not lead to acquisition.

Syllabus

Communicative language teaching syllabus organizes the teaching according to the notional and functional categories of language rather than according to its structures.It concentrates on the following:

• Interactions: using  language to communicate,
• Tasks: using language to  perform meaningful tasks
• Learner: putting the learner’s interests, needs in the forefront.

Merits of CLT

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

• CLT is a holistic approach. It doesn’t focus only on the traditional structural syllabus. It takes into consideration communicative dimension of language.
• CLT provides vitality and motivation within the classroom.
• CLT is a learner centered approach. It capitalizes on the interests and needs of the learner.
• In a world where communication of information and information technology have broken new considerable ground, CLT can play an important role in education.

Criticism

• Notional syllabus was criticized as merely replacing one kind of list, namely a list of grammatical structures, with another list of notions and functions.
• The various categories of language functions are overlapping and not systematically graded like the structures of the language.
• 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.
• The approach relies extensively on the functional-notational syllabus which places heavy demands on the learners.
• 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.
• 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 shouldn’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.

THE ROLES OF THE TEACHER AND STUDENT CHANGE IN COMMUNICATIVE LANGUAGE TEACHING?

Teachers in communicative classrooms will find themselves talking less and listening more--becoming active facilitators of their students' learning (Larsen-Freeman, 1986). The teacher sets up the exercise, but because the students' performance is the goal, the teacher must step back and observe, sometimes acting as 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 (Larsen-Freeman, 1986).

    Some of the features of CLT are as under:

Ø  Focus on language as a medium of communication is the main feature of this approach recognizes that all communication has a social purpose. Learner has

something to say or find out.

Ø In communication one uses the language with an intention of conveying message and they are always in form of functions, like speaking information, apologizing, expressing, likes and dislikes and motions like apologizing for being late, asking late/asking where the nearest railway station or bus stop is, so in this approach form is not primary but functions are primary.

Ø In the classroom situation, languages are taught vacuum language for the sake of language or passing examinations, the language is hardly taught for true communications. The communicative approach enables learners to communicate.

Ø In communicative approach, learners learn the second or foreign language as one was acquired the first language. Opportunities for learners to use target language in a communicative way for meaning activities emphasis is on meaning rather than form.

Ø Use of target language as routine medium for classroom instruction and management enables learners to acquire language naturally.

Ø Communicative approach is learners centered because all the teaching activities are planed according to learners need and interest.

Ø The learners are taught to use the language and they are taught the language as native. They need to be able to cope or survive in a variety of everyday situations. They may encounter in foreign countries where target language is being used.

Ø Classroom should provide opportunities for rehearsal of real life situations and real communication emphasis on techniques like creative role plays, simulations, projects etc. produce spontaneously and improvisation not just more repetition and drills.

Ø There is more emphasis on active modes of learning including pair work and group work. In this approach, learners are active learners.

Ø The learners have to develop skills of language; speaking and listening are skill to be exploited from oral communication.

Ø Errors are a natural part of learning language. Learners trying their best to use the language creatively and spontaneously are bound to make errors. Constant correction is unnecessary and even counter-productive. Constant correction should be noted by teacher. Let them take and express themselves form of language becomes secondary.

Ø Grammar is taught but less systematically. It is taught in traditional ways with innovative approaches so emphasis on teaching grammar is not prescriptively but descriptively.

Ø The authentic material is used instead of age old texts. Materials must relate to learners own lives, fresh and real revising texts and materials regularly keeps teacher on toes and learners interested.

Ø Language need not be laboriously monotones and ‘medium’ oriented. Language can be structure but also spontaneous and incidental. The language is never static; it is dynamic. This approach leads learners to make use of language naturally and according to form and usage.

Ø Use of visual stimuli OHP/ flash cards, etc important to provoke practical Communicative language. Visual resources can be exploited at whatever level one wishes help to motivate and focus learners attention.

v  Conclusion :

                           Communicative language teaching is best considered an approach rather than a method. It refers to a diverse set of principles that reflect a Communicative view of language and language learning and that can be used to support a wide variety of classroom procedures.

Work cited:

http://www.myenglishpages.com/blog/communicative-language-teaching-communicative-approach/

https://www.ericdigests.org/1993/sample.htm