Moslemi Nezhad Saieed

8/2/2019 Moslemi Nezhad Saieed

1/26

University of

Sistan and BaluchestanChabahar InternationalCampus (C.I.C)

Faculty of management and humanismI ranian EFL Engl ish b ook 1 based on

com mun ica t i ve c r i t e r ia

A Project for the fulfillment of the Teaching

Methodology Course

Course:Teaching Methodology

Supervisor:

Khalili Sabet, PhD

Researcher:

Moslemi Nezhad. SaieedDepartment of English language teaching and translation studies University of

Sistan and Baluchestan Chabahar International Campus (C.I.C)

Autumn, 2011


2/26

TABLE OF CONTENTSPAGE NO.

I. Abstract

Chapter IIntroduction

1.1. Background.......................................................................................................... 11.2. Statement of the problem ..................................................................................... 21.3. Purpose of the study and research question ........................................................ 31.4. Justification and significance of the study ............................................................ 31.5. Limitations and delimitation of the study .............................................................. 41.6. Definition of key terms .......................................................................................... 4

Chapter IIReview of literature

2.1. Introduction ............................................................................................................... 52.2. Historical perspective. ................................................................................................ 5

I. The classical method ................................................................................ 5II Gouin and Berlitz - The Direct Method ... . 6III. The Audio-Lingual method ..................................................................... 6IV. The "designer" method of the 1980s ...................................................... 7V. Suggestopedia ........................................................................................ 7VI. The silent way method ........................................................................... 7VII. Strategies-based instruction .................................................................. 8VIII. Communicative Language Teaching .................................................... 8

2.3. CLT in definition ......................................................................................................... 92.4. Why the CLT? .......................................................................................................... 102.5. Communicative language teaching Method. ............................................................ 11

2.6. Communicative Curricalum design syllabus.......................................................... 14I. Text-based Materials .............................................................................. 14II.Task-based Materials .............................................................................. 15III. Realia ................................................................................................... 15

Chapter IIIMethodology

3.1. Introduction. ............................................................................................................. 163.2. Method and Design. ................................................................................................. 163.3. Subject ................................................................................................................... 16

3.4. Procedure ................................................................................................................ 17

Chapter IVConclusion and Implication

4.1. Introduction. ............................................................................................................. 204.2. Conclusion and implication ...................................................................................... 20Bibliography ................................................................................................................... 21Appendix . 22


3/26

Abs t rac t

This paper makes an evaluation about the level of communicative approach which is used in

Iranian high school EFL English Book 1. Since teaching and studying this book has a direct

impact on both learners cognitive and feedback about English language and learning, we are

going to see whether the so called English book has the standardized criteria ofCommunicative Language Teaching (CLT) or not. This study focuses on how Iranian high

school EFL are exposed to formal English by the book of English 1 based on communicative

criteria perspective. The gained information established upon this survey has theoretical

importance and can be considered on revising the syllabus design in relation to the regarded

topic. For the reason that the importance and popularity of this problem is or can be expanded

to all the Iranian EFLs at high school level 1, the importance of the population of this survey

is bounded to the types of used syllables in this book. The type of technique in which we used

through this research is based on the studying, surveying, classification and finally the

comparison. We have provided some key features on CLT-based syllabus and then made our

conclusion about whether the book of English language for Iranian high school class of one

applied the Communicative language teaching principles or not. By studying the so called

book we categorized the given practices which are given in each unit, and then matched them

based on CLT criteria especially on the part of CLT's related syllabus. After finishing the

method procedure we could nearly agree on the used level and the used degree of CLT in

designing the so called book.

Key w ords :

Communicative language teaching (CLT) - Syllabus - language method Approach

Classroom.


4/26

Page1

Chapter I

In t roduc t ion

1.1. Background

From the past up to now, various methods of teaching languages has been created in which

some of them have had their glory some days and faded out; some are broadly used now and

others have a small following. Considering this view, we can divide these broadly used

methods into the grammar translation method, direct method, audio-lingual method,

Communicative language teaching, Language immersion, Minimalist/Methodist and

Directed practice and so on. It would be better to go through these methods briefly in

description.

As (Brown, 2000) introduces, the grammar translation method educates students in

grammar, and provides vocabulary with direct translations to learn by rote. It was the

predominant method in Europe in the 19th century. Most teachers now admit that thismethod is unproductive by itself. It is now most frequently used in the traditional

instruction of the classical languages.

(Larsen-Freeman, 2000) States the direct method which is sometimes also called

natural method, is a method that refrains from using the learners' native language and

just uses the target language. It was established in Germany and France around 1900.

The direct method functions on the idea that second language learning must be an

imitation or simulation of first language learning, as this is the natural way humans

learn any language. This method puts a great stress on correct pronunciation and the

target language from the beginning. It is based on teaching of oral skills at theexpense of every traditional aim of language teaching.

Students in audio-lingual method have to listen to or view recordings of language

models performing in situations. Students practice with a mixture of drills, and the

teacher emphasizes the use of the target language at all times. The audio-lingual

method was used by the United States Army for "crash" instruction in foreign

languages during World War II. Due to weak points in performance, audio-lingual

methods infrequently are the primary method of instruction today, (Larsen-Freeman,

2000).

As to (Brumfit, C.J. and K. Johnson, 1979) cited in (Thanasoulas, English Education ,

2011) Communicative language teaching (CLT) is an approach to the teaching of

languages that emphasizes interaction as both the means and the ultimate goal of

learning a language. Despite a number of criticisms, it continues to be popular,


5/26

particularly in Europe, where constructivist views on language learning and education

in general dominate academic discourse,

(Larsen-Freeman, 2000) Talks Task-based language learning (TBLL), also known as

task-based language teaching (TBLT) or task-based instruction (TBI), has growngradually in popularity. TBLL is a further modification of the CLT approach,

emphasizing the successful completion of tasks as both the organizing feature and the

basis for assessment of language instruction.

Language immersion puts students in circumstances where they must use a foreign

language, whether or not they know it. This creates fluency, but not accuracy of

usage. French-language immersion programs are common in Canada in the state

school system as part of the drive towards bilingualism.

As cited in (Thanasoulas, http://www.englishclub.com, 2002) Paul Rowe's

Minimalist/Methodist approach. This new approach is underpinned with Paul Nation's

three actions of successful ESL teachers. Initially it was written specifically for

unqualified, inexperienced people teaching in EFL situations. However, experienced

language teachers are also responding positively to its simplicity. Language items are

usually provided using flashcards. There is a focus on language-in-context and multi-

functional practices.

(Larsen-Freeman, 2000) Introduces the directed practice in which it has students

repeat phrases. This method is used by U.S. diplomatic courses. It can quickly provide

phrasebook-type knowledge of the language. Within these limits, the student's usage

is accurate and precise. However the student's choice of what to say is not flexible.

1.2. Sta t ement o f the prob lem

Since in our today educational society, comprehension and its affected function is a highly

regarded factor in learning, teaching, and besides the tendency to get the communicative

methods at service has an increscent development, as a matter of fact; these are the reasons tomake the current interest and the future do-ability of this study to focus on how Iranian high

school EFL are exposed to formal English by the book of English 1 based on communicative

criteria perspective. The gained information established upon this survey has theoretical

importance and can be considered on revising the syllabus design in relation to the regarded

topic. For the reason that the importance and popularity of this problem is or can be expanded

to all the Iranian EFLs at high school level 1, the importance of the population of this survey

is bounded to the types of used syllables in this book. This survey has not intend to revise or

extend any existing knowledge, it is just the matter of surveying and proposing how and in


6/26

Page3

what extend the Iranian high school EFL English book 1 has syllabus designing based upon

communicative principles.

For this reason the surveyor is not so empowered about studying, evaluating and also creating

better and practical syllabus plans. However, based on the to-days orientations and also future

developments on communicative language teaching and learning this surveying has the

validity to expand on future studies. As Andrew Littlejohn, November 2001, "The future is acontinuation of our present, and, as such, is a development of factors that are at work now".

Accordingly, how and in what extend the Iranian high school EFL English language Book 1

is designed based on the Communicative approach Criteria?

1.3. Purpose of the s t udy & Research Quest ion

Along the so many classical approaches of English learning and teaching, Communicative

language Teaching (CLT) is an innovation in English language Teaching (ELT). It was in

1970s, that CLT emerged as a new teaching approach in Britain. Almost immediately, this

approach and its methods published and used around the different parts of the word by means

of an improved way of teaching a foreign language. Now, it is taken as granted that every

educational system provides some specific frameworks on preparing and developing its

educational syllabus. By doing so, regarding to the changing of needs and attitudes trough the

time, this system needs to follow some criteria to design its syllabus. In other words needs to

be up to dated. So, all the related expertise have to follow the contemporary, new and modern

methods of teaching and learning in order to provide a standard book on learning.

This paper makes an evaluation about the level of communicative approach which is used in

Iranian high school EFL English Book 1. Since teaching and studying this book has a direct

impact on both learners cognitive and feedback about English language and learning, we are

going to see whether the so called English book has the standardized criteria of CLT or not.

1.4. Jus t i f i ca t ion & Sign if i cance o f the s tudy

Evaluating different aspects of education, or better to say; considering those effective factors

in language teaching, especially in communicative classrooms and syllabus will help more

and more on the successful process of learning. Because of the increased responsibility to

participate, students may find out they gain confidence in using the target language in

general. Students are more responsible managers of their own learning (Larsen-Freeman,

1986). Surely, having a class in communicative mood, needs more communicative syllabus.

Since Iranian high school students basically learn English language as a foreign languagefrom this time through their educational life, this research could be helpful on determining if

we need to add communicative principles to our syllabus or if we did so how we can improve

and organize it effectively.


7/26

1.5. L imi ta t i ons and Del im i ta t i on :

The limitation of this study is time. The time limitation on this survey didnt let us to expand

our evaluation through other and further related syllabus. At the other hand this survey is just

delimited to Iranian high school EFL English language Book 1 and it's not covered all other

books in this field. In other words it can be generalized merely to the so called book.

1.6. Def in i t ion of Key term s:

Communicative language teaching (CLT):

An approach to the teaching of second and foreign languages in which emphasizescommunication as both the means and the ultimate goal of learning a language. It is alsoreferred to as (Brown, 2000) communicative approach to the teaching of foreign languagesor simply the communicative approach.

Syllabus:

An outline and summary of topics to be covered in an education or training course. It isdescriptive (unlike the prescriptive or specific curriculum). (Johnson, 1982) states a syllabusis often either set out by an exam board, or prepared by the professor who supervises orcontrols the course quality.

Language method:

As to (Thanasoulas, English Education , 2011) A set of proximate principles which are eitherthe teacher's own mental construct or are based on recommendations by experts.

Approach:

(Gattegno, 1972) refers to principles and theories which on the one hand highlight thelanguage behavior in the classroom and on the other indirectly control the teacher's classroomperformance.

Classroom:(Krashen, S.D., & Terrell, T.D., 1983) define it as a room in which teaching or learning

activities can take place.


8/26

Page5

Chapter I I

Rev iew o f l i te ra tu re2.1. In t roduc t ion

Through the decades of 1960 and 1970 foreign language education was widely extended with

the founding of comprehensive schools in which led to the teaching of a foreign language to

nearly all children. Many researchers have lent a hand to develop the theory and practice the

Communicative Language Teaching Approach. The principal theory of the CLT approach is

the communicative competence. Students do not merely learn the linguistic structures and

grammar rules. They have to learn how to use the language appropriately. (Littlewood, 1981)

described the CLT approach in the way 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" p.6. In reaction to the grammar-translation and audio-lingual

methods (structuralism view and Chomskyans), based on (Littlewood, 1981) the CLT

approach is emphasizing on the communicative activities that employ the actual use of

language in everyday life situation.

2.2. His to r i ca l perspec t i ve

The English language teaching has been proposed to radical changes, particularly during the

twentieth century. Maybe more than any other method, this institution has been experienced,

in diverse alterations, in language classrooms. As to (Thanasoulas, English Education ,

2011)"While the teaching of Math or Physics, that is, the methodology of teaching Math or

Physics, has, to a greater or lesser extent, remained the same, this is hardly the case with

English or language teaching in general. As a result of this idea the briefly introducing the

English language teaching based on historical perspective will help to have a better outlookon the way to teaching English.

I.The Classical Method(Brown, 2000), trough his book, commenced the classical method in this way that In the

Western world back in the 17th, 18th and 19th centuries, foreign language learning was

connected with the education of Latin and Greek, both invented to support their speakers'

highly developed intellect. At the time, it was of fundamental importance to focus on

grammars, syntax, and rote memorization of vocabulary and translation of bookish texts.

There was no provision for the oral use of the languages under study; after all, both Latin andGreek were not being taught for oral communication but for the sake of their speakers'

becoming educated or creating an illusion of scholarship. As to (Thanasoulas,

http://www.englishclub.com, 2002) Late in the nineteenth century, the Classical Method

came to be known as the Grammar Translation Method, which offered very little beyond an

insight into the grammatical rules attending the process of translating from the second to the

native language.


9/26

It is broadly accepted that the Grammar Translation Method is motionless one of the most

well-liked and preferred models of language teaching, which has been rather strong and

nonflexible to learning adaptations, left over a typical and crucial situation of methodology.

With surveillance, we could say that its contribution to language learning has been limited, so

that, doing nothing to perk up a student's communicative skill in the foreign language use.

II.Gouin and Berlitz - The Direct Method(Thanasoulas, http://www.englishclub.com, 2002) On The Direct Method referring to the

book of The Art of Learning and Studying Foreign Languages (1880), Francois Gouin, in

which he described his "disturbing" experiences of learning German. Living in Hamburg for

one year, he tried to become proficient in the German language by memorizing a German

grammar book and a list of the 248 irregular German verbs. After that he felt all German

grammar has offered him, he hurriedly went to the University to test his understanding. He

could not recognize a word! After his breakdown, he decided to learn by heart the German

roots, but again no success. He went so far as to memorize books, translate Goethe and

Schiller, and learns by heart 30,000 words in a dictionary, only to meet up with stoppage. Byreturning to France, Gouin discovered that his three-year-old nephew had managed to

become a fluent of French. He began observing his nephew and came to the conclusion that

language learning is a matter of transforming perceptions into conceptions and then using

language to represent these conceptions.

However, this approach to language learning was lived for a short period of time and gave its

place to the Direct Method, as to (Thanasoulas, English Education , 2011), the Direct Method

posited by Charles Berlitz. Its basic principle of Berlitz's method was that second language

learning is similar to first language learning. That is, lots of oral communication, natural use

of the language, no translation, and little if any analysis of grammatical rules and structures.

In short, as to (Asher, 1982), the principles of the Direct Method were as follows:

Classroom instruction was conducted in the target language

There was an inductive approach to grammar

Only everyday vocabulary was taught

Concrete vocabulary was taught through pictures and objects, while abstract

vocabulary was taught by association of ideas.

Up till now, after a period of decline, this method has been revived, leading to the emergence

of the Audio-lingual Method.

III.The Audio-lingual MethodIn various resources the audio-lingual creation is known as the occurrence of World War II

because in that time there was the need for Americans to become orally proficient in the

languages of their allies and enemies alike. Based on this view, fragments of the Direct

Method were appropriated in order to form and keep up this new method, the "Army

Method," which came to be known in the 1950s as the Audio-lingual Method. The Audio-

lingual Method was based on linguistic and psychosomatic theory and one of its main

properties was the technical clarifying of a wide group of languages. On the other hand,


10/26

Page7

conditioning and habit-formation models of learning put forward by behaviouristic

psychologists were coupled with the prototype practices of the Audio-Lingual Method. The

following points by (Brown, 2000) sum up the characteristics of the method:

Dependence on mimicry and memorization of set phrases

No grammatical explanation Learning vocabulary in context

Use of tapes and visual aids

Focus on pronunciation

Immediate reinforcement of correct responses

But the popularity of Audio-lingual method diminished after 1964. It was in lack of

promoting communicative ability because of its attention to memorization and doing drills. In

this case context and world knowledge in language learning was missed. After all, as to

(Krashen, S.D., & Terrell, T.D., 1983) it was revealed that language was not acquired through

a process of practice formation and errors were not necessarily bad or destructive.

IV.The "Designer" Methods of the 1970sAfter the Chomskyan revolution in linguistics the consideration of linguists and language

teachers went about the "deep structure" of language, whereas psychologists regarded the

affective and relations between persons nature of learning. As a result, new methods were

projected, which attempted to get the most out of on the significance of psychological factors

in language learning. (Nunan, 1989) referred to this method as "designer" methods, on the

grounds that they took a "one-size-fits-all" approach.

V.SuggestopediaSuggestopedia guaranteed great results by bringing the brain power and personalcompetences into use. (Lozanov, 1979) believed that we are talented in learning much more

than we suppose. He created a method for learning a language that used leisure as the

resources of acquiring new knowledge. It positioned the justification of this factor that music

played a crucial role in this method.Lozanov and all who continued his idea, tried to present

vocabulary, readings, role-plays and drama with traditional music in the setting and students

sitting in comfortable seats. In this manner, students became "suggestible." Of course, as

(Bancroft, 1999) introduces in his book suggestopedia offering precious perception into the

"super learning" supremacy of our brain but it was flatten on several aspects. Undoubtedly,

this method is insightful and productive and can be applied occasionally, with having not all

its property .However, (Bancroft, 1999) believes a comfortable mind is an open mind and it

can assist a student to experience more convinced and flexible".

VI.The Silent WayThe Silent Way created on perceptive rather than affective arguments. This method is

characterized based on the problem-solving approach to learning. (Gattegno, 1972)

apprehended that learners' best wellbeing is to develop self-government and collaboration

with each other in solving problems, As to (Gattegno, 1972) which is concerning the point

that "The teacher is supposed to be silent - hence the name of the method - and must disabuse

himself of the tendency to explain everything to them. The Silent Way came in for an


11/26

onslaught of criticism. More specifically, it was considered very harsh, as the teacher was

distant and, in general lines, the classroom environment was not conducive to learning" (p.p

75-80).

VII.Strategies-based instructionMany linguistics and methodologist learning are emphasizing on the importance of styleawareness and plan development in guarantee the mastery of a foreign language. Many

textbooks and entire syllabus offered guidelines on constructing strategy-building activities.

Below there is an example of a list of the "Ten Commandments" for good language learning

taken fromBrown, H. D. (2000) cited in (Thanasoulas, http://www.englishclub.com, 2002):

Teacher's Version Learner's Version

1 Lower inhibitions Fear not!

2 Encourage risk-taking Dive in

3 Build self-confidence Believe in yourself

4 Develop intrinsic

motivation

Seize the day

5 Engage in cooperative

learning

Love thy neighbour

6 Use right-brain processes Get the BIG picture

7 Promote ambiguity

tolerance

Cope with the chaos

8 Practice intuition Go with your hunches

9 Process error feedback Make mistakes work FOR you

10 Set personal goals Set your own goals

These suggestions and orders can make learners sensitive to the significance of achieving

self-sufficiency that is, taking charge of their own learning, and not expecting the teacher to

deliver everything to them. However this notion is still broadly in controversy by alllinguistics.

VIII.Communicative Language TeachingBased on (Littlewood, 1981) ideas, in which he says; "The need for communication has been

relentless, leading to the emergence of the Communicative Language Teaching Having

defined and redefined the construct of communicative competence; having explored the vast

array of functions of language that learners are supposed to be able to accomplish; and having

probed the nature of styles and nonverbal communication, teachers and researchers are now

better equipped to teach (about) communication through actual communication, not merely

theorizing about it" (p.p 60-66). By this point, we should say that Communicative Language

Teaching is not a method; it is an approach, which went beyond the borders of concretemethods and, concurrently, techniques. It is a theoretical idea about the nature of language

and language learning and teaching.

Let us look at the basic properties of this approach which are driven from (Brown, 2000):

Focusing on all of the components of communicative competence, not only

grammatical or linguistic competence but also engaging learners in the pragmatic,

functional use of language for meaningful purposes.


12/26

Page9

Viewing fluency and accuracy as complementary principles underpinning

communicative techniques.

Using the language in unrehearsed contexts.

From all the above we can see that the researches of just a few decades ago has given place to

an orderly depository of data. Researchers all over the world are meeting, talking, comparing

notes, and arriving at some explanations that go beyond the previous explanations. As(Brown, 2000) notes, "Our research miscarriages are fewer as we have collectively learned

how to conceive the right questions" (p.43). Since we accept everything by reasoning so it

would be true to say that nothing is taken as granted. This "test" possibly will change its

procedure, but the fact leftovers that the orientations of the studies throughout the time and

further researches will improve the needed base of language teaching and learning.

2.3. CLT in def in i t ion

The theory which is following the CLT (Communicative Language Teaching) suggests thatwe learn language by using it. However, as (Gattegno, 1972) states through his book, we

make use of language in four different customs, which we can called as competencies, That is

learners discourse, grammatical, sociolinguistic and strategic competencies in which

overlapping in areas high in communicative competence. Beside of this notion the backbone

of CLT appears itself.

As to (Brown, 2000), which is cited here, Communicative competence favor in maintaining

communicative language educators by means of materials in which focus on the language

needed to utter and comprehend different kinds of purposes. Actions such as asking for

things, describing people, expressing likes and dislikes and telling time can be regarded for

this function.

Based on (Larsen-Freeman, 2000) point of view, we can think of Discourse competence in

the way it refers to the learners ability to employ the new language in spoken and written

discourse. In other words by discourse capability (competence) we are answering to how well

a person can unite grammatical forms and meanings to find diverse ways to speak or write.

Teachers often call this ability the "students fluency". The Grammatical competence, with

the notion of (Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T.S., 2001); refers to the capability to use the

language in the approved manner. In this case we are answering to questions like how well a

person has learned characteristics and regulations of the language. Vocabulary,

pronunciation, and sentence formation are the most examples of this kind. At the other hand

it is talking about 'How well' does the learner understand the grammar of English? Teachers

regarded this accuracy within language use.

Sociolinguistic competenceof (Brown, 2000) refers to the , as Brown believed, learners

capability to use language appropriately in specific social circumstances for example, using

appropriate language forms at a job interview. Socio-linguistic competence is based on such

elements as the understandings of those are speaking to each other. That is, the purpose of the

communication, and the expectations of the players. In sociolinguistic competence we are

eager to answer the questions like, 'How socially acceptable is the persons use of English in

different settings?' This competency is about appropriateness in using language. (Larsen-

Freeman, 2000), in the description of Strategic competence refers to the strategies for


13/26

successful communication when the learners vocabulary establishes insufficient for the job,

and his or her authority of helpful scholarship strategies. Strategic competence is talking

about how well the individual uses both verbal forms and non-verbal communication to pay

compensation for lack of knowledge in the other three competencies. Measuring capability of

the learners to find ways to balance for areas of weakness, by doing so, the learner would

have communicative efficacy.

2.4. Why the CLT?

The communicative approach in language teaching (CLT) initiates from the hypothesis of

language as communication. The objective of language teaching is to expand what (Hymes,

1972)referred to as communicative competence. Hymes made up this expression in order to

make a distinction between the communicative view of language and Chomsky's theory of

competence. Chomsky proposed that linguistic hypothesis is concerned primarily with an

ideal speaker-listener in an entirely homogeneous speech in group of people, who knows its

language fully and is unchanged by such grammatically dissimilar circumstances, and asChomsky believed this is about the memory inadequacy, disruptions, changing attention and

curiosity, and errors in applying the individual knowledge of the language in real routine.

This difference between Hymes and Chomsky paved the road for language teaching toward

the creation of new approach by the title of Communicative language Teaching, CLT.

Meanwhile, Halliday added another linguistic theory of communication in CLT which is

about the functional version of language use. As to (Halliday, 1970); "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" (p. 145). Halliday always is emphasizing on the powerful hypothesis of

the functions of language, we can review seven basic functions that language performs for

children learning their first language which is cited based on ideas stated by Brumfit, Johnsonand Savignon:

1. The instrumental function:language by means of getting wanted things.

2. The regulatory function:language by means of controlling the behavior of individuals.

3. The interactional function:language by means of creating interaction with individuals.

4. The personal function:language by means of expressing personal feelings and meanings.

5. The heuristic function:language by means of learning and realizing.

6. The imaginative function:language by means of creating a world of the imagination.

7. The representational function: language by means of communication.

As to (Littlewood, 1981)"one of the most characteristic features of communicative languageteaching is that it pays systematic attention to functional as well as structural aspects of

language, combining these into a more fully communicative view" (sec.1). Whenever we talk

about the structure of language, we are referring to the some specific rules which tell us how

linguistics items can be combined to produce the correct expression. However, based on

(Littlewood, 1981) idea, it would be not adequate on its own to account for how language is

used as a means of communication. What we could get from these definitions of function is


14/26

Page11

that any types of sentences which we produce firstly have their structure and secondly cover a

linguistic function, such as suggestion, complain, question, declarative and so on.

At the other hand by considering the (Savignon, Summer, 1991)statement of CLT, in which

believed in "Communicative language teaching (CLT) refers to both processes and goals in

classroom learning". (Sandra.J, 2002), "We reach this idea of Communicative language

teaching derives from a multidisciplinary perspective that includes, at the least, linguistics,psychology, philosophy, sociology, and educational research" (p.17). This notion of CLT

puts our mind in a way that teaching and learning a language is not just one specific method,

but a process; which focuses on the competence. Competence, in which (Savignon, Summer,

1991) is defined in "terms of the expression, interpretation, and negotiation of meaning and

looks to both psycholinguistic and socio-cultural perspectives in second language acquisition

(SLA) (sec. 2). This conception is in favor of what we discussed earlier about competences.

2.5. Comm unicat ive language Teaching Method

In this part, by considering these ideas about CLT it would be better to look at the basic partsof the Communicative language teaching as a Method briefly in order to make up a list in

CLT characteristics. Famous linguists such as (Johnson, 1982) and (Larsen-Freeman, 2000)elaborate on Communicative language teaching method, especially in CLT based design; by theseproperties:

Focus on language as a medium of communication. Recognizes that all

communication has a social purpose - learner has something to say or find out.

Communication embraces a whole spectrum of functions (e.g. seeking information/apologizing/ expressing likes and dislikes, etc) and notions (e.g. apologizing for being

late / asking where the nearest post office is).

New syllabuses based on communicative method offered some communicative ability

from early stage.

Hitherto languages were taught in a vacuum - language for the sake of language /

passing exams - rather than language for true communication.

Classroom activities maximize opportunities for learners to use target language in a

communicative way for meaningful activities. Emphasis on meaning (messages they

are creating or task they are completing) rather than form (correctness of language

and language structure) - as in first language acquisition.


15/26

Use of target language as normal medium for classroom management and instruction -

reflects naturalistic language acquisition.

Communicative approach is much more pupil-orientated, because dictated by pupils'

needs and interests.

Accent is on functional/ usable language. Learners should be able to go to foreign

country, prepared for reality they encounter there. Need to be able to cope / survive in

a variety of everyday situations.

Classroom should provide opportunities for rehearsal of real-life situations and

provide opportunity for real communication. Emphasis on creative role-plays/simulations/ surveys/ projects/ playlets - all produce spontaneity and improvisation -

not just repetition and drills.

More emphasis on active modes of learning, including pair work and group-work -

often not exploited enough by teachers fearful of noisy class.

Primacy of oral work. Emphasis on oral and listening skills in the classroom. Contact

time with language is all-important - paves way for more fluid command of thelanguage / facility and ease of expression. Not just hearing teacher, but having

personal contact them with language, practicing sounds themselves, permutation

sentence patterns and getting chance to make mistakes and learn from doing so.

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. Correction should be discreet / noted by

teacher - let them talk and express themselves - form of language becomes secondary.

Communicative approach is not just limited to oral skills. Reading and writing skills

need to be developed to promote pupils' confidence in all four skill areas. By using

elements encountered in variety of ways (reading/ summarizing/ translating/

discussion/ debates) - makes language more fluid and pupils' manipulation of

language more fluent.


16/26

Page13

Grammar can still be taught, but less systematically, in traditional ways alongside

more innovative approaches. Recognized that communication depends on grammar.

Disregard of grammatical form will virtually guarantee breakdown in communication.

Language analysis and grammar explanation may help some learners, but extensive

experience of target language helps everyone. Pupils need to hear plenty said about

the topic in the foreign language at regular and recurrent intervals, so they are

exposed to the topic and can assimilate it. (Not mere passive acquisition of certain

lexical items).

Communicative approach seeks to personalize and localize language and adapt it to

interests of pupils. Meaningful language is always more easily retained by learners.

Use of idiomatic/ everyday language (even slang words 'bof bof' / 'i'sais pas'). This is

kind of language used in communication between people - not a 'medium'/

grammatical/ exam-orientated/ formal language!

Makes use of topical items with which pupils are already familiar in their own

language - motivates pupils arouses their interest and leads to more active

participation.

Avoid age-old texts - materials must relate to pupils' own lives / must be fresh and

real (cf. Whit marsh texts developing language but not communicative language!)

Changing texts and materials regularly keeps teacher on toes and pupils interested.

Language need not be laboriously monotonous and 'medium' orientated. Can be

structured but also spontaneous and incidental. Language is never static. Life isn't like

that - we are caught unawares, unprepared, 'pounced upon!' Pupils need to practiceimprovising/ ad-libbing/ talking off the cuff, in an unrehearsed but natural manner.

Spontaneous and improvised practice helps to make minds more flexible and inspire

confidence in coping with unforeseen, unanticipated situations. Need to 'go off at

tangents' / use different registers / develop alternative ways of saying things.


17/26

Communicative approach seeks to use authentic resources. More interesting and

motivating. In Foreign language classroom authentic texts serve as partial substitute

for community of native speaker. Newspaper and magazine articles, poems, manuals,

recipes, telephone directories, videos, news bulletins, discussion programmes - all can

be exploited in variety of ways.

Important not to be restricted to textbook, never feel that text-book must be used from

cover to cover. Only a tool / starting-point. With a little inspiration and imagination,

text-book can be manipulated and rendered more communicative.

Teacher must free himself from it, rely more on his own command of language and

his professional expertise as to what linguistic items, idioms, phrases, words, need to

be drilled / exploited/ extended.

Use of visual stimuli - OHP/ flashcards, etc - important to provoke practical

communicative language. (3 stages presentation / assimilation/ reproducing language

in creative and spontaneous way).

2.6. Comm unicat ive cur r icu lum des ign- sy l labus

Broad diversity of materials has been used to prop up communicative approaches in language

teaching. Dissimilar to a number of modern-day methodologies, e.g. Community Language

Learning, the consumer of Communicative Language Teaching regarded the materials as

means of influencing the superiority of classroom interaction and language use. Materials

thus have the principal role of encouraging communicative language use. As taken and cited

from (Johnson, 1982), (Thanasoulas, English Education , 2011) and (Larsen-Freeman, 2000);

There are three kinds of materials currently used in CLT which are labeled as Text-based,

Task-based, andRealia.

I.TEXT-BASED MATERIALSThere are various course books designed to express and support Communicative Language

Teaching. Their tables of contents sometimes suggest a kind of classifying and ordering of

language perform not unlike those found in structurally organized texts, that is those

prescribed grammarian texts. Some of these are in fact written around a largely structural

syllabus, with little changing layout to justify their plea to be based on a communicative

approach. Others, however, look very dissimilar from previous language teaching texts.


18/26

Page15

As cited in (Thanasoulas, http://www.englishclub.com, 2002) "Morrow and Johnson's

Communicate , as they are emphasizing, for instance, has none of the usual dialogues, drills,

or sentence patterns and uses visual cues, taped cues, pictures, and sentence fragments to

initiate conversation". Pair Work activities based on text-based materials composed of the

two different texts, each built-in about the different information needed to carry out role plays

and put into practice the other pair activities. Consequently from its initial stages, is center of

attention in CLT is based on language use. For example, understanding the message, askingquestions to attain clarification, inquiring for more knowledge, note-taking, feedback and

applying circumstances explanation. Regarding this notion, based on what (Larsen-Freeman,

2000) introduces we cite an order of this by this example in which 'A caller asks to see your

manager. He does not have an appointment. Gather the necessary information from him and

relay the message to your manager'. At the end, a stimulus awarding and the final

comprehension questions and rephrase exercises make our evaluation about the text-based

input that we proposed to learners.

II.TASK-BASED MATERIALS(Larsen-Freeman, 2000) by proposing a variety of games, role plays, simulations, and task-

based communication activities supports Communicative Language Teaching in classes. As

(Littlewood, 1981)says and cited here; these activities are in the form of exercise handbooks,

cue cards, action cards, pair-communication practice materials, and student-interaction

perform booklets. In pair-communication resources, there are two types of materials for a pair

of learners, in which they are containing different kinds of information. The point in Task-

based materials is that the diversity in pairing works is emphasized. As (Littlewood, 1981)

believes; from time to time the information is complementary, and buddies must fit their

individual parts of the "jigsaw" into a combined whole. However, based on whatever we

aware of them to-days, some instructors defined this as different role relationships for the

partners (e.g., an interviewer and an interviewee) and some others provide drills and practice

material in interactional formats.

III.REALIANearly all supporters of Communicative Language Teaching have supported the use of

"authentic" (of undisputed origin), and "from-life" materials in the classroom cited from

(Nunan, 1989). These might include, as (Brumfit, C.J. and K. Johnson, 1979) introduce,

language-basedRealia, such as signs, magazines, advertisements, and newspapers, or graphic

and visual sources in which communicative activities can be built, like, maps, pictures,

symbols, graphs, and charts. Different kinds of stuffs can be used to support communicativedrills, such as a plastic model to assemble from directions. (Larsen-Freeman, 2000) notion of

Communicative language teaching material always fixed in using a functional-notional

syllabus.


19/26

Chapter I I I

Methodology

3.1. In t roduc t ion

As mentioned earlier through the introductory part, The main goal of this research is to

provide some key features and decide whether the book of English language for Iranian high

school class of one applied the Communicative language teaching principles or not. By

studying the so called book we categorized the given practices which are given in each unit,

and then matched them based on CLT criteria especially on the part of CLT's related

syllabus. By reviewing the given practices for each unit and considering those parts of

exercises which shared trough all lessons, we can make a septets division named under the

labels on which the book itself introduces as A (New words), B (Reading), D (Speak Out), E

(Write it Down), F (Language Functions), G (Pronunciation) and I (vocabulary). In procedure

section we will go through each category one by one.

3.2. Method and des ign

The type of technique in which we used through this research is based on the studying,

surveying, classification and finally the comparison. At first we studied different pages of the

so called book. Then we tried to make some classifications in which we could have different

parts of the given exercises through different distinctive groups. The point about theseclassifications is that we just categorized those practices which are shared between all

lessons. When our classifications showed up we investigated them, based on the given or

wanted task from learners; to understand in what extend these exercises are matched with

communicative language teaching criteria. Our procedure is stated in more details trough the

procedure section.

3.3. Subject

The real subject of this study is the English language book that Iranian Students are proposedthrough their first year of high school. The point that must be in mind is that this research is

only delimited to the so called book and cannot be generalized to any other books at this

field. At the other hand, the final result was presented through an interview to some teachers

who are teaching this book in high schools in order to have their ideas about the gained result.

Consequently, the type of given syllabus through this book is the subject matter.


20/26

Page17

3.4. Procedure

The first category, that is part A, is includedNew words section. As it shows, the goal of this

section is to make the student familiar with new vocabularies proposed at the first part of the

each lesson. In this part new words through each lines and sentences are emphasized by

showing them bold and underlined. Each sentence, which is showed numerically, isintroducing at least one or two new vocabulary. And furthermore there are given one or some

pictures for each of these sentences in order to help learners' better understanding and

guessing the meaning of the new vocabularies. The role of learners' mother-tongue (Persian)

is highly de-emphasized and if needed some, it is the teacher who brings the learners native-

language to use. It seems that the goal of this section is to make students familiar with new

words by using different materials, showing the verbs actions, using pictures, giving

description, synonym, antonym and etc. so, hopefully we can state the communicative

language teaching text-based criteria are ruling here, but not highly and completely. Because,

it is the role of teacher in which they complete the real end of any type of syllabus.

In part B, Reading; as it shows from its name, the goal here is comprehension, or better to say

Reading and comprehension. Based on what we expect and CLT criteria introduces us, the

main feature of reading comprehension is not translating the text into the learners mother

tongue, but the goal also must be in reading the given text and guessing the meaning of the

new words and phrases without any rely on the learners or students mother tongue. However,

our observations through some different classes of this level show us something really

controversy. By observing three classes continuously, at different high schools, teachers just

were in favor of giving phrase by phrase definition and describing structure, in the way that

they were hindering ongoing Reading and totality comprehension. And in this case,sometimes; whenever the students were missing the point, teachers tried to take the students'

attention back to the main idea by giving the Persian translation of the text.

As it shows one may think that this not those CLT features. Maybe the goal of the syllabus

designer for providing this part of activity had been based on Communicative approach, and

it might be the problem with the teachers method of teaching in the class, or especially

regarding this exercise that we say it is more like to GTM. However at the other hand, if we

ignore the teacher attitude and eliminate the observed method of teaching at this level in

Iranian English classes at first year of high school, the type of given Reading Comprehensioncan be based on CLT text-based criteria if, teachers try to leave this part on the side of the

learners themselves, and never wanted them in translating Reading part and also put more

emphasis on totality comprehension and evaluate this degree of comprehension by proposing

discussion in English language in their classes.


21/26

Through the two other sections which are called D and E, the book itself introduces these two

parts under the names of Speak Out (D) and Write It Down (E). It seems that most of the new

grammars and structure rules in which the learners should learn in each new lesson are fitted

in these two parts. The proposed steps on the book, such as Production, Transformation,

substitution and Repetition regarding these parts, at the first glance somehow recall CLT

features to us. In which CLT task-based activities tell us the real goal in teaching grammar isnot teaching the structure itself but as a tool in order to learn how to write, read and speak

correctly. So, we can say that, without any attention to the rule of teachers and their methods

toward acting on this part, it can be regarded as some sorts of Communicative language

teaching task-based syllabus, though in weak version.

Continuing our classification, we reach the section F by the title of Language Functions. The

book itself is proposing some different conversation - based episodes. As it shows, teaching

and evaluating the structure of the sentences are not important in this part. Since some of the

sentences and their structures may lay beyond the recent knowledge of the student, so the realfocus on grammar is de-emphasized at this part. If the teachers really want their students to

read the section first and after that try to act and speak based on that episode, instead of

memorizing the exact sentences and restating them (parrot learning), one might say that it is

more like to use the language naturally. This case is when we talk about the nature of CLT

task-based characteristics. For example, the real need here based on CLT criteria is that the

learners should try to do some different role playing in group activities or with their partner.

As a result, again just by considering the type of syllabus which is proposed by the book

itself, regardless of teachers' attitudes on their teaching, we can say that this section of

practices can be highly regarded as one of those CLT task-based activities, i.e. learn how to

use language naturally.

Pronunciation Practice, the given name for part G. in this part the students are getting

familiarity with the correct pronunciation of the sound, how to pronounce the English sounds

letter correctly. Trough this part the book is proposing some new sounds of English and

wanted the students to read the given list of words at the same part and try to match each

word by each sound, i.e. whenever those sounds are repeating within the given words. The

thing which is wanted will bring Audio Lingual method activities to our minds. Maybe if the

book could presents some real activities and exercises like those playing activities for

teaching sound pronunciation, it could me more helpful and more memorable sound and

words, in which the learner never forget them. Frankly speaking, no CLT criteria whatever

the degree it can be, is not seen here.

At the last part of our classification we have part I by the label of Vocabulary. In this part, all

of the new words which are introduced through the lesson are given to the students

alphabetically. All of the words are given just in English language. The main purpose on this


22/26

Page19

part is to replace an exact Persian equivalent for the English one. Unfortunately; as the

experience of the surveyor himself as a student and also as a teacher in this level shows, the

teacher inside the class just give the Persian correspondences at the same time or wants the

student to look the meaning up through the bilingual dictionaries.

It shows that this kind of exercise is in lack of even least features of Communicative

Language Teaching, where the teacher tries to make students familiar with new words by

using different materials, showing the verbs actions, using pictures, giving description,

synonym, antonym and etc. This is more like to GTM (Grammar Translation Method) rather

than CLT approach. By studying this part, students will be aware of how much and in what

extend they are familiar with the new words. The main point here is that, unfortunately, the

book itself, never proposing how and in which way learners could practice these new words.

However there are some very small parts in which the learner practices some of those new

words in the case ofFill In The Blankexercises, but this part is not shared through all of the

given lessons in this book. Again, no need to say; students are just trying to memorize allthese words in passive form. Like those of GTM and ALM. No application of CLT is seen

here.


23/26

Chapter IV

Conclus ion and impl icat ion

4.1 In t roduct ion

On the part of conclusion we should decide about the main goal of this study, in which we

want to determine the level of communicative approach which is used in Iranian high school

EFL English Book 1. We want to answer the early stated question; how and in what extend

the Iranian high school EFL English language Book 1 is designed based on the

Communicative approach Criteria. After finishing the method procedure we could nearly

agree upon the used level and the used degree of CLT in designing the so called book. As

mentioned earlier the surveyor has been in favor of make some senses of practicality to the

result of this study. In doing so, we decided to propose our study to some of Iranian English

teachers who were in charge of teaching the same book through interviews in order to have

their opinions. The reason why the researcher has done this by interviews is that the time

limitation didn't allow us to do this step based on questionnaires or any other of this kind. Atthe other hand in this way, the surveyor easily could introduce the goal of getting

interviewees' ideas and having their opinions directly. The result of these interviews is stated

at result section.

4.2 Conclus ion and Impl icat ion

This is not too difficult to say that the kind of used tasks and contexts through this book are

supporting communicative language teaching criteria in a very weak form, especially those

features in which we introduced through CLT syllabus .If we want to make a degree of the

used level of CLT-based from 1 to 20, where 1 is least and the 20 means the most; we will in

favor of the level of 5. The reason is that the type of used syllabus are passive, nearly all of

the mentioned type of practices in which was shown through different groups needs at least to

an instructor. By ignoring the type of attitudes and also the kind of strategies in which

teachers bring to their classrooms, still we can say these classifications of reported exercises

are in lack of considering communicative language teaching criteria especially at the field of

CLT-based syllabus features. Proposing this view point to some teachers who were in charge

of teaching this book, they were also confirming our gained result rather in different ways.

Even between the 10 teachers as our interviewees, 8 of them stated that nearly most of the

introduced aspects are truly doable about the used syllabus trough the so called book.


24/26

Page21

BibliographyAsher,J.J.(1982).Learninganotherlanguagethroughactions.LosGatos,CA:SkyOaksProductions.

Bancroft,W.(1999).SuggestopediaandLanguageAcquisition.NewYork:GordonandBreach.

Brown,H.D.(2000).Principlesoflanguagelearningandteaching.NewYork:Longman.

Brumfit,C.J.andK.Johnson.(1979).Thecommunicativeapproachtolanguageteaching.Oxford:

OxfordUniversityPress.

Gattegno.(1972).TeachingForeignLanguagesinSchools;TheSilentWay.NewYork:Educational

Solutions.

Halliday,M.(1970).Languagestructureandlanguagefunction.Harmondsworth:PenguinBooks.

Hymes,D.(1972).OnCommunicativeCompetence.Harmondsworth:Penguin.

Johnson,K.(1982).CommunicativeSyllabusDesignandMethodology.Oxford:PergamonInstituteof

English.

Krashen,S.D.,&Terrell,T.D.(1983).TheNaturalApproach:LanguageAcquisitionintheClassroom.

EnglewoodCliffs,NJ:PrenticeHall.

LarsenFreeman,D.(2000).CommunicativeSyllabusDesignandMethodology.Oxford:Pergamon.

Littlewood,W.(1981).Communicativelanguageteaching:anintroduction.CambridgeUniversity

Press.

Lozanov.(1979).SuggestologyandtheOutlinesofSuggestopedia.NewYork:GordonandBreach.

McKenzieBrown,P.(November17th,2010).TheUnwaveringInventor.LanguageInstinct,23.

Nunan,D.(1989).DesigningTasksfortheCommunicativeClassroom.Cambridge:Cambridge

UniversityPress.

Richards,J.C.,&Rodgers,T.S.(2001).ApproachesandMethodsinLanguageTeaching(2nded.).

Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Sandra.J.(2002).SettingUpandFacilitatingStudentCentered.Classrooms.Lanham:Scarecrow

Press.

Savignon,S.J.(Summer,1991).CommunicativeLanguageTeaching:StateoftheArt.TESOLQuarterly

,Vol.25,No.2.

Thanasoulas,D.(2011,930).EnglishEducation.Retrieved1129,2011,fromwww.english

mom.com/:http://englishmom.com/

Thanasoulas,D.(2002,615).http://www.englishclub.com.Retrieved1120,2011,fromenglishclub:

http://www.englishclub.com/teflarticles.htm


25/26

AppendixInterviewquestionlistI

1. How and what do you know about Communicative language approach?

2. Based on the book that you teach to your students are you agree with this

notion that all the given materials can be regarded as communicative

based syllabus?

3. Based on the reasons which are the real results of this research and also

were proposing to you, which type of approach or method would you like

to name about this book?

4. By considering what you know about communicative based syllabus, can

we say that all used materials are related to CLT syllabus or can be taught

as communicative materials?

5. The result of this study introducing the degree level of 5; from 1 the least

to the 20 the most for the used level of CLT in this book, so, are you agree

with this result?


26/26

Page23

AppendixIIOne lesson from the Iranian high school EFL English language Book 1 based is attached as a

sample.

Moslemi Nezhad Saieed

Documents