ChAPTeR 12

CommunICATIve lAnGuAGe TeAChInG

Servet Çelik, Karadeniz Technical University

▶ A historical Perspective on the Communicative

Approach
▶ Principles of Communicative language Teaching
▶ Instructional Practices in Communicative language
Teaching
▶ Learner Outcomes in CLT – What the Research Says
▶ Considerations in Implementing ClT in an efl
Context
▶ Suggestions for Practice and Further Study
▶ sample lesson Plans
▶ References & Image Credits
▶ Author Bio

CommuniCative Language teaChing 183

 Learning Goals
in this chapter, we will discuss the theoretical principles behind communicative
language teaching (Clt), as well as the practical aspects of teaching according
to a communicative approach. Ater covering all of the material in this chapter,
students should be able to:
1. Explain what is meant by communicative competence;
2. describe, in general terms, the linguistic theory behind communicative
language teaching;
3. Articulate the main objectives of communicative language teaching;
4. discuss the practical considerations in teaching languages according to
a communicative approach;
5. discuss the issues involved in adapting Clt to meet the needs of students
in an English as a foreign language (EFl) context.
6. design an EFl lesson plan according to a communicative approach.

A historical Perspective on the Communicative Approach

Until the latter part of the
As you begin reading the material in this
20th century, the theoretical
chapter, think about the purpose of language
foundations of language education
learning. Which of the following objectives
were irmly anchored in behavioral
do you think are most important in studying
psychology and structuralism,
a foreign language, and why?
which held that learning mainly
took place through a process ▶ Understanding grammatical
of repetition and habit forming. structures and reproducing them
language teaching was typically correctly.
divided into four skill categories, ▶ Negotiating meaning with other
including the active skills of speakers of the target language.
speaking and writing, as well ▶ Choosing the appropriate forms of
as the passive skills of listening the language according to a given
and reading (Savignon, 1991); situation.
and foreign language lessons
▶ developing “native-like”
oten centered on rehearsing a pronunciation.
ixed repertoire of grammatical
patterns and vocabulary items
▶ learning to use various strategies to
uphold communication, even when
until they could be reproduced
one’s knowledge of a language is
easily and precisely, with a low
limited.
tolerance for error. However,
richards (2006) points out that
because the focus of learning was primarily conined to accuracy of production,
rather than meaningful interaction, individuals taught according to this approach
frequently experienced considerable diiculty in real-life communicative encounters.

CommuniCative Language teaChing 185

Noted linguist and social theorist Noam Chomsky (1965) criticized this aspect of and early 1970s, along with the expansion of global English, this changing viewpoint
language instruction, arguing that: brought recognition of the need to reframe our conception of language education
Linguistic theory is concerned primarily from that of teaching a language to teaching students how to use the language
think about the textbooks you studied (Nunan, 1989).
with an ideal speaker-listener, in a
when you irst began learning a foreign
completely homogeneous speech
language. What types of activities were Principles of Communicative language Teaching
community, who knows its language
presented more frequently in those Unlike many of the other instructional techniques covered
perfectly and is unafected by such
texts – grammar exercises in this book, communicative language teaching does
grammatically irrelevant conditions
or communicative practice? not constitute a method in itself. rather, Clt is a set of
as memory limitations, distractions,
How did those activities principles framing an overarching approach to language
shits of attention and interest, and
afect your views of teaching which may be carried out according to a variety of
errors (random or characteristic)
language learning? diferent methods (some of these, including Content-based
in applying his knowledge of the
instruction (Cbi) and task-based instruction (tbi) will be
language in actual performance (p. 3).
dealt with in separate chapters later on). these principles
this criticism of the traditional view of language learning as a sterile, intellectual
have been summarized by berns (1990) as follows:
exercise, rather than as a practical undertaking resulting in skills that may be applied
in real-life situations, was echoed by scholars such as Habermas (1970), Hymes 1. language teaching is based on a view of language as communication.
(1971), and Savignon (1972), who based their understanding of language on the that is, language is seen as a social tool that speakers use to make mean-
psycholinguisticand socio-cultural perspectives that meaning is generated through ing; speakers communicate about something to someone for some pur-
a collaborative process of “expression, negotiation and interpretation” (Savignon, pose, either orally or in writing.
1991, p. 262) between interlocutors. Hymes (1971), in particular, stressed the need 2. diversity is recognized
and accepted as part Check Your understanding
for language learners to develop communicative competence, which suggests that
successful communication requires “knowing when and how to say what to whom” of language develop- Which of the following activities are
(larsen-Freeman & Anderson, 2011, p. 115); in his view, knowledge of grammatical ment and use in second representative of a communicative approach
structures and vocabulary were not suicient to enable communication on a language learners and to English language teaching?
functional level.
users, as it is with irst
• reading a news article about a recent,
language users. significant event and discussing its
Hymes’ (1971) ideas were supported by an evolving understanding of how
3. A learner’s competence implications in English.
communication occurs. research on language and communication revealed that
is considered in relative,
the so-called “passive” language learning skills – reading and listening – in fact
not in absolute, terms.
• Asking students to memorize lines of a
require active engagement on the part of the learner; as a result, these skills Shakespeare play.
4. More than one variety
Relective Activity:
were re-conceptualized as receptive
of a language is recog-
• Playing a card game, using English to
activities, while the skills of speaking explain the rules and discuss the play.
research Hymes’ writings on the notion nized as a viable model
and writing were reclassiied
of communicative competence. Write for learning and teach- • Having students recite the days of the
as productive (Savignon, 1991).
ing. week in English until they can repeat
a short paper on how this concept has Furthermore, it was recognized that
5. Culture is recognized as them correctly.
afected the traditional approaches communication consists not only
to foreign language education, and of production (message-sending) instrumental in shaping • directing students to label a map of
discuss how the need to encourage speakers’ communi- Australia, using English names for the
and reception (message-receiving),
the development of communicative cative competence, in cities and other geographical features.
but negotiation of meaning, or
competence in language learners collaboration between senders and
both their irst and sub- • Pairing of students and asking them
may impact your future teaching sequent languages. to create a role play (in English) of a
receivers. Added to the dramatic
practice. Support your arguments with shit in the international social and 6. No single methodology familiar activity, such as buying tickets
references to scholarly sources. or ixed set of tech- to a sporting match or buying a snack.
political climate of the late 1960s
niques is prescribed.

186 CommuniCative Language teaChing CommuniCative Language teaChing 187

 7. language use is recognized as serving ideational, interpersonal and tex-
tual 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 (p. 104).
because the communicative approach does not comprise a standardized framework
for teaching, curriculum design is largely up to individual institutions and the
language instructors who teach according to these principles. However, regardless
of the speciic techniques employed, any teaching methods that can be classiied as
truly communicative share these assumptions.
Instructional Practices in Communicative language Teaching
As richards and rodgers (2001) stress, communicative learning activities are
those which promote learning through communication itself; therefore, the range
of instructional practices that may be employed in Clt is bounded only by the
creativity of curriculum designers and classroom instructors in developing authentic
communicative tasks. breen (1987) described these as structured activities which
“have the overall purpose of facilitating language learning – from the simple and
brief exercise type, to more complex and lengthy activities such as group problem-
solving or simulations and decision making” (p. 23).
Designing Communicative Tasks
Nunan (1989) enumerates six basic elements that should be taken into account in
designing communicative tasks, including: (1) learning goals; (2) linguistic input; (3)
classroom activities; (4) the teacher’s role; (5) the role of the students; and (6) the
setting in which the activity is situated (p. 49), as illustrated in Figure 1.
Teacher
Goals
Role
learner
Input
Role
Task
Activites setting
Figure 1: A framework for analyzing communicative tasks (adapted from Nunan, 1989)
188 CommuniCative Language teaChing
Learning Goals
According to Nunan’s (1989) understanding, the learning goals of a communicative
exercise denote the range of outcomes that are expected as a result of carrying out
a speciied learning task. in terms of communicative language learning, these goals
entail “establishing and maintaining relationships” (p. 50); exchanging information;
carrying out daily tasks; and obtaining and utilizing information from a variety
of sources (such as the internet, television, newspapers, public announcements,
research materials and so on).
Linguistic Input
the input of a communicative task refers to any type of information source on
which the exercise is centered. For instance, depending on the learning objective
and the needs of the students, a teacher might design an activity framed around
a newspaper article, a class schedule, a recipe, a feature ilm, a schematic of a
computer circuit, or a map.
Activities
learning activities in a communicative context are drawn from the relevant input in
order to develop competencies such interactional ability in real-life settings, skills
building, or luency and accuracy in communication (Nunan, 1989, p. 59). these
should be designed to mirror authentic communicative scenarios as closely as
possible, and “methods and materials should concentrate on the message, not the
medium” (Clarke & Silberstein, 1977, p. 51). Özsevik (2010) and richards (2006)
suggest the use of information-gap and problem-solving exercises, dialogs, role
play, debates on familiar issues, oral presentations, and other activities which
prompt learners to make communicative use of the target language; in doing so,
they develop the skills that they will need to use the language in unrehearsed, real-
life situations.
in addition to the elements of communicative activities outlined by Nunan (1989), it
is useful to consider several further issues, including the role of the target language;
the function of the students’ native language; the extent to which the skills-based
competencies of grammar, accuracy and luency should be addressed; and how
feedback and evaluation may be carried out in a communicative classroom.
Role of the Teacher
the teacher’s role in implementing a communicative learning exercise is somewhat
malleable in comparison with other, more instructor-oriented approaches to
language learning. in traditional language classrooms, the instructor is generally
the dominant igure; the focus of the class is on the teacher, and students may
assume a passive role as they receive direct instruction. in the communicative
classroom, on the other hand, the focus is on interaction between students. richards
and rodgers (2001) emphasize the teacher’s role in this setting as that of a “needs
analyst” who is responsible for “determining and responding to learner language
CommuniCative Language teaChing 189
needs” (p. 167) within a speciic learning context. in this case, the teacher serves
mainly as a facilitator, designing activities that are geared toward communication
and monitoring students’ progress, as well as stepping in as necessary to resolve
breakdowns in communication. beyond this, the instructor may take on the role of
a participant in a given exercise, or even act as a co-learner herself, as students
express themselves during the course of a communicative task (Nunan, 1989, p.
89). When errors occur, the instructor may note them without comment so as not to
disrupt the low of the activity, instead addressing the issues that appear to cause
diiculties at a later time (larsen-Freeman & Anderson, 2011). As richards and
rodgers (2001) suggest, teachers who lack specialized training may ind classroom
development to be challenging in such a learning environment, as they strive to ind
a balance between providing structure to the learning process while still maintaining
a natural low of communication.
Role of the Students
Within the framework of a communicative approach, students are the focal point
of classroom activity, assuming primary responsibility for their own learning. As
it is assumed that using a language is the most efective way to learn it (richards,
2006), students are encouraged to work together to negotiate meaning in order to
accomplish a given communicative task; thus, learning activities are highly interactive
and may take place in smaller groups or with an entire class. in this context, learners
are responsible for choosing which forms of the language they use to convey their
messages, rather than following a prescribed lexis (belchamber, 2007).
Setting
Finally, Nunan (1989) notes the signiicance of the setting
in which communicative learning takes place. While the
classroom is the most typical venue for language learning,
communicative tasks may also be carried out in venues as
diverse as occupational settings, online instruction or in the
community at large; therefore, activities designers should
consider the speciic requirements of the learning context in
developing learning tasks.
Role of the Target Language
because the goal of language learning in a communicative context is, by deinition,
developing the ability to communicate in the target language, nearly everything is
done with this in mind, as it is essential to make it clear to students that the language
is not only a subject to be mastered, but a means for real interaction. Accordingly,
not only learning tasks, but classroom management and direct instruction are
carried out in the target language whenever practicable, with teachers turning to the
students’ native language only when required to ensure comprehension. Activities
are focused on authentic use of the target language, utilizing “games, role-plays and
problem-solving tasks” (larsen-Freeman & Anderson, 2011, p. 123), to approximate
190 CommuniCative Language teaChing
real-life situations in which the language may be used. in addition, the use of
teaching materials – restaurant menus, greeting cards, music videos, comic strips,
tv episodes, concert tickets, newspaper articles and travel guides – that showcase
authentic functions of the language underscores its communicative nature and helps
students to develop the skills they need to interact in real-life situations.
Role of the Native Language
Unlike some modern approaches to language
instruction, such as the direct Method, the use of
the students’ mother tongue is not prohibited in Clt
(larsen-Freeman & Anderson, 2011). However, in
order to emphasize the communicative aspect of the
target language, use of the mother tongue should be
kept to a minimum and used only as needed for issues
such as classroom management or giving complex
instructions that are beyond the students’ level of
proiciency in the target language.
Where do Grammar, Fluency and Accuracy Fit In?
As Nunan (1989) relates, in the earlier days of communicative language teaching,
there was a tendency among certain linguists to de-emphasize the teaching of
grammar and other aspects of form; this idea was based on the belief that learners
would acquire this knowledge naturally through the process of learning how to
use the language. However, the current thinking on this issue is that efective
communication cannot take place without attention to the rules of grammar,
punctuation, sentence structure, pronunciation, and other more formalized aspects
of the language; and therefore, teaching these elements is seen as a necessary
component of communicative language teaching (larsen-Freeman & Anderson,
2011), as discussed later on in the section concerning learner outcomes in Clt.
Feedback, Evaluation and Assessment
a inal consideration in designing and carrying out communicative
activities concerns the need to provide meaningful feedback for
students, as well as to evaluate their progress. in terms of feedback,
as mentioned earlier in the chapter, ofering verbal corrections during
the course of a communicative activity may constitute a disruption, as well as creating
anxiety among learners; therefore, error correction should be administered with
discretion. However, in this respect, larson-Freeman and Anderson (2011) point out
that feedback may occur as a natural result of a communicative activity, since learners
are able to determine whether or not their communication attempts have been
successful based on the responses they receive from their instructor and classmates.
Concerning the evaluation and assessment of learners in a communicative context,
richards (2006) and Savignon (2002) point to current trends in language education
CommuniCative Language teaChing 191
which favor holistic evaluation of learner progress based on the results of in-class
presentations, writing portfolios, recorded interactions, and other types of projects.
On the other hand, Savignon (2002) cautions that in many educational contexts,
teachers have little leeway in choosing a more qualitative approach to assessment,
as testing and evaluation are carried out according to nationalized standards.
Considerations in Implementing ClT in an efl Context
in spite of ongoing debate concerning the most efective means of implementing
Clt, the communicative approach to language teaching has become increasingly
popular in the ield of English language education, not only in areas where it as taught
as a second language, but in countries where English is not the primary means of
communication and opportunities to use the language in real-life interactions are
limited (Özsevik, 2010). As Wenjie (2009) explains, Clt is oten regarded in such
contexts as a progressive, and therefore preferred, approach to foreign language
teaching; however, Widdowson (1998) reasons that the notion of creating authentic
communicative scenarios in a foreign language setting is, in essence, a contradiction.
As he argues, the target language as it is used in the EFl classroom “cannot be
authentic because the classroom cannot provide the contextual conditions for it to
be authenticated by learners” (p. 711). in his view, Clt constitutes, at most, a sort
of dress rehearsal, where learners have the opportunity to try out the language,
engaging with and internalizing its semantic forms before putting it to use in real-life
interactions.
in this respect, Özsevik (2010) also
points out that in an EFl context such
as turkey, where learning English is
an academic requirement rather
than a means for survival, students
are frequently under-motivated.
their interest in learning the
language may only extend to passing
standardized tests such as university entrance exams; therefore, they are more
likely to resist attempts to encourage them to interact in English and to develop
their communicative skills. Furthermore, the mismatch between the principles of
the communicative approach and the current national assessment methods, not
to mention the content of standardized teaching materials, oten lead to problems
with implementation on a practical level.
in addition to these issues, richards and rodgers (2001) maintain that students
who are accustomed to a more traditional, teacher-fronted approach to language
instruction may resist the need to become active partners in the learning process.
Under these circumstances, inceçay and inceçay (2009) contend that, as demonstrated
by researchers such as Harley and Swain (1984) and Spada (1997), combining
communicative exercises with conventional, form-focused learning tasks may be the
most efective means for building communicative competence in the English language.
192 CommuniCative Language teaChing
Learner Outcomes in CLT – What the Research Says
it seems logical that if the ultimate goal of studying a
language is communication, then teaching according
to a communicative approach should produce
the desired results. However, in determining the
efectiveness of a particular instructional method,
real-life evidence concerning learner outcomes must
be considered in addition to theoretical arguments.
Accordingly, multiple studies have been carried out
to evaluate the efects of communicative language
teaching on learner success. researchers around
the world have viewed the issue from a variety of
perspectives, considering the impact of Clt on skills such as oral luency, accuracy,
comprehension and overall proiciency. Some of the major indings concerning each
of these aspects of communicative competence are summarized below.
▶ Chang (2011): in a comparative study of Chinese EFl students, it was found
that learners taught according to the standard grammar-translation method
performed better in an assessment of grammar skills than an experimental
group taught via Clt.
▶ Genesee (1987): Observation of students in a French language immersion
program revealed that communicative language teaching allowed learners
to develop near-native proiciency in comprehension.
▶ Guo and Chang (2005): in an experimental study carried out with ith-
grade EFl students, learners in a Clt course outperformed those taught via
a form-based approach in an evaluation of their communicative competence.
▶ Harley and Swain (1984): Students in a French language immersion
program who were taught via a communicative approach that emphasized
meaning over form did not develop accuracy in skills-based tasks to the same
extent as peers who received instruction in form and function in addition to
communicative skills.
▶ Ma (2009): An experimental study conducted with non-English major
Chinese EFl students demonstrated that learners taught through Clt scored
signiicantly higher on listening comprehension tests than peers who were
taught via a traditional, grammar-based method.
▶ Savignon (1972): learners who participated in a communicative component
of a French as a foreign language course performed better in both
communicative assessments and linguistic tasks than peers who received
instruction through the audio-lingual method.
▶ Spada (1987): An observational study on learner outcomes in three separate
Clt classrooms revealed that overall learner success depended in large part
on the approach of the individual instructor in implementing Clt.
CommuniCative Language teaChing 193
 ▶ Spada (1997): in a review of classroom and laboratory research on Clt
instruction, it was concluded that integrating form-focused instruction and
communicative exercises, rather than relying on Clt alone, tends to have a
positive efect on learner outcomes.
▶ Spada and Lightbown (1989): Francophone students in an intensive,
content-based EFl course focused on communication showed signiicantly
greater oral luency than their peers who were taught via traditional methods
emphasizing the rules of grammar and structure; however, they tended to
make frequent grammatical errors when speaking.
▶ Spangler (2009): in a comparative study with students of Spanish as a
foreign language, it was demonstrated that learners taught according to a
Clt approach underperformed with respect to oral luency in relation to their
peers who received instruction through a tPrS (teaching Proiciency through
reading and Storytelling) approach.
▶ Thuy (2009): A comparative study of vietnamese EFl students revealed
that Clt-based instruction resulted in signiicantly greater oral luency than
conventional, grammar-oriented language teaching.
An examination of the research outlined above makes it clear that, on the whole,
communicative language teaching has had positive results in terms of comprehension,
oral luency and overall communicative competence. However, in terms of grammar
and other structural aspects of language, results have been mixed, with some
learners showing no signiicant diference, or even underperforming, with respect
to their peers who were taught using other approaches; while in other cases, the
students taught according to Clt performed signiicantly better than their peers in
terms of form-based as well as communicative tasks.
Suggestions for Practice and Further Study
i. Using the internet, research the notional/functional
dimension of language. Write a short paper (5-6
pages) which includes the following information, using
references to reliable sources to support your discussion:
a. the theoretical perspective on the notional/func-
tional view of language learning;
b. the scholars who are primarily associated with this concept;
c. A description of the key points of the notional/functional view of language;
d. A discussion of how you believe that this understanding of language
relates to communicative language teaching.
ii. design a single lesson plan that incorporates both receptive and productive
aspects of communication. your lesson plan should include the following:
a. the learner proiciency level targeted by the exercise;
b. the objective of the exercise;
194 CommuniCative Language teaChing
c. the materials needed to prepare/carry out the exercise;
d. Any preparation required of the teacher;
e. instructions for students;
f. Suggestions for evaluation and feedback.
iii. Considering your educational and cultural context and the framework in
which you expect to teach English as a foreign language, discuss the following
with your peers:
a. the relevance of teaching English for communicative purposes speciic to
your case;
b. the potential diiculties that might arise in implementing a communicative
approach, from the point of view of the instructor as well as of learners;
c. ideas that might be useful in overcoming these diiculties – give concrete
examples.
sample lesson Plans
because communicative language teaching does not adhere to a prescribed
instructional method or format, teaching materials and lesson plans are highly
diverse, depending directly on the needs of the students and on the context in
which the language is being taught. However, for the purpose of illustration,
some sample lesson plans have been included here.
lesson 1
Diiculty Level: beginner
Age of Students: 6-7 years
Lesson Topic: Home and Family
duration of Class Period: 40 Minutes
Language Skills: Speaking and listening; following simple
instructions.
Materials: drawing paper; crayons or pencils; lash cards
with pictures of familiar items related to home and family
(house, family members, pet animals, car, trees, sun, etc.).
Learning Objectives:
• Students will be able to recognize and say the names of familiar objects and
people related to home and family.
• Students will be able to give and respond to simple instructions.
introduction (10 minutes): teacher introduces new vocabulary related to home and
family life, using lashcards to familiarize students with the terms.
Practice Activity (15 minutes): “draw a…”
Students are divided into pairs. Student #1 from each pair receives 4-5 random
lashcards containing some of the vocabulary items; student #2 receives drawing
CommuniCative Language teaChing 195
materials. Without showing the cards, student #1 gives simple instructions: “draw
a house;” “draw a family;” “draw a bird;” and so on. Student #2 draws the items on
the paper. Halfway through the exercise, the students exchange materials so each
gets a turn to draw.
Presentation (10 minutes):
Students present their drawings to the class and explain their pictures: “this is
a house;” “this is a family;” “this is a bird.”
Wrap-up (5 minutes):
Students and teacher inish the lesson by singing a song about “my family.”
lesson 2
Diiculty Level: intermediate
Age of Students: 11-12 years
Lesson Topic: treasure Hunt
duration of Class Period: 40 Minutes
Language Skills: reading; following directions
about where to go.
Materials: Written “clues,” small rewards (stickers,
pencils, etc. as appropriate to the age of the learners); pencils and drawing paper.
Preparation: teacher writes a numerical series of instructions, or “clues,” on small
pieces of paper: e.g., “look under the plant,” “check behind the door,” etc. All but
the irst clue should then be hidden accordingly. in addition, the rewards should be
hidden in the location speciied by the inal clue.
Learning Objectives:
• Students will be able to read simple directions (such as up, down, let, right,
in, out, and so on).
• Students will be able to follow simple instructions about where to go or look
(e.g., “look on the shelf;” “turn let;” “walk through the door”).
Introduction (10 minutes): teacher introduces new vocabulary related to directions
and objects in the classroom, demonstrating “turn let (right);” “look under the desk
(bookshelf/chair);” “look behind the door (board/clock),” etc.
Practice Activity (15 minutes): Students work alone or in pairs. Each student or
pair of students is given the irst “clue” from a set of clues and is asked to follow the
instructions. if they follow them correctly, they will discover
their “treasure” at the end of the exercise.
Practice Activity (15 minutes): Students are given drawing
materials, and the teacher gives directions such as “draw a
school on the let side of the paper;” “draw a street in the
center of the paper;” “draw a house on the right side of the
street;” and so on.
196 CommuniCative Language teaChing
RefeRenCes
belchamber, r. (2007). the advantages of communicative language teaching. The Internet TESL
Journal, 13(2). retrieved from http://iteslj.org/Articles/belchamber-Clt.html
berns, M. S. (1990). Contexts of competence: Social and cultural considerations in communicative
language teaching. New york, Ny: Plenum.
breen, M. (1987). learner contributions to task design. in C. Candlin & d. Murphy (Eds.), Language
learning tasks (pp. 23-46). Englewood Clifs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
buttjes, d. (1991). Mediating languages and cultures: the social and intercultural dimension restored.
in d. buttjes & M. byram (Eds.), Mediating languages and cultures: Towards an intercultural theoryof
foreign language education (pp. 3-16). Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.
Guo, y.-H., & Chang, t.-S. (2005). the efect of communicative language teaching on English oral
communicative competence of the ith-grade students. Contemporary Education Research
Quarterly, 13(1), 135-164.
Chang, S.-C. (2011). A contrastive study of grammar translation method and communicative
approach in teaching English grammar. English Language Teaching, 4(2), 13-24. doi: 0.5539/
elt.v4n2p13
Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge, MA: Mit.
Clarke, M., & Silberstein, S. (1977). toward a realization of psycholinguistic principles in the ESl
reading class. Language Learning, 27(1), 48-65.
Genesee, F. (1987). Learning through two languages. rowley, MA: Newbury House.
Habermas, J. (1970). Zur logik der socialwissenschaten. Frankfurt am Main, Germany: Suhrkamp.
Harley, b., & Swain, M. (1984). the interlanguage of immersion students and its implications for
second language teaching. in A. davies, C. Criper, & A. Howatt (Eds.), Interlanguage (pp. 291-
311). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Hymes, d. (1971). Competence and performance in linguistic theory. in r. Huxley & E. ingram (Eds.).
Language acquisition: Models and methods (pp. 3-28). New york, Ny: Academic Press.
Hymes, d. H. (1972). On communicative competence. in J. b. Pride & J. Holmes (Eds.), Sociolinguistics.
Selected Readings (Part 2, pp. 269-293). Harmondsworth, England: Penguin.
inceçay, G., & inceçay, v. (2009). turkish university students’ perceptions of communicative and non-
communicative activities in EFl classroom. Proceedings of the World Conference on Educational
Sciences, Nicosia, North Cyprus, 618-622.
kramsch, C. (1993). Language and culture. H. G. Widdowson, (Ed.). Oxford, England: Oxford University
Press.
larsen-Freeman, d., & Anderson, M. (2011). Techniques and principles in language teaching (3rd ed.).
london, England: Oxford University Press.
Ma, t. (2009). An empirical study on teaching listening in Elt. International Education Studies, 2(2),
126-134.
Nunan, d. (1989). Designing tasks for the communicative classroom. Cambridge, England: Cambridge
University Press.
Özsevik, Z. (2010). The use of communicative language teaching (CLT): Turkish EFL teachers’ perceived
diiculties in implementing CLT in Turkey (Unpublished master’s thesis). University of illinois,
Urbana-Champaign, il.
richards, J. C. (2006). Communicative language teaching today. New york, Ny: Cambridge University
Press.
richards, J. C., & rodgers, t. S. (2001). Approaches and methods in language teaching (2nd ed.). New
york, Ny: Cambridge University Press.
Savignon, S. J. (1972). Communicative competence: An experiment in foreign language teaching.
Philadelphia, PA: Center for Curriculum development.
Savignon, S. J. (1991). Communicative language teaching: State of the art. TESOL Quarterly, 25(2),
261-277.
Savignon, S. J. (2002). Communicative language teaching: linguistic theory and classroom practice.
in S. J. Savignon (Ed.), Interpreting communicative language teaching (pp. 1-28). New Haven, Ct:
yale University Press.
CommuniCative Language teaChing 197
Spada, N. M. (1987). relationships between instructional diferences and learning outcomes: A Author Bio
process–product study of communicative language teaching. Applied Linguistics, 8(2), 137-161.
doi: 10.1093/applin/8.2.137 Servet ÇELİK is an assistant professor in the department of Foreign language
Spada, N. M. (1997). Form-focused instruction and second language acquisition: A review of Education at karadeniz technical University, turkey. He also serves as a senior
classroom and laboratory research. Language Teaching, 30, 73-87. researcher for the Scientiic and technological research Council of turkey
Spada, N. M., & lightbown, P. M. (1989). intensive ESl programs in Quebec primary schools. TESL
(tÜbitAk). dr. Çelik holds a bachelor’s degree in Elt from Gazi University, turkey;
Canada Journal, 7, 11-32.
Spangler, d. E. (2009). Efects of two foreign language methodologies, communicative language a master’s of education degree in tESOl from the University of Pennsylvania, USA,
teaching and teaching proiciency through reading and storytelling, on beginning-level students’ and a doctoral degree in literacy, Culture, and language Education from indiana
achievement, luency, and anxiety (doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest theses and University-bloomington, USA. Some of dr. Çelik’s professional interests include
dissertations database (UMi No. 854554814)
thuy, t. t. (2009). Efects of communicative language teaching approach in the speaking skills of second
language teacher education, teaching of culture and intercultural competence,
year students of Vietnam Germany industrial college school year 2008- 2009 (Unpublished master’s narrative inquiry and qualitative research.
thesis). laguna State Polytechnic University, thai Nguyen City, viet Nam.
Wenjie, C. (2009). Using communicative language teaching (CLT) to improve speaking ability of Chinese
non-English major students (Unpublished master’s thesis). University of Wisconsin, Platteville,,
wi.
Widdowson, H. G. (1998). Context, community and authentic language. TESOL Quarterly, 32(4), 705-
715.

Image Credits
1. Telling a secret. image No. MP900448485. Courtesy of Fotolia. retrieved from http://oice.
microsot.com/en-us/images/results.aspx?qu=telling%20secrets&ex=2#ai:MP900448485|
2. female teacher in classroom. image No. MP900439542. Courtesy of iStockphoto.
retrieved from http://oice.microsot.com/en-us/images/results.aspx?qu=teacher&ex=1
#ai:MP900439542|
3. Photograph of globes for geography studies. image No. MP900305797. Courtesy of
oice.microsot.com. retrieved from http://oice.microsot.com/en-us/images/results.asp
x?qu=globe&ex=1#ai:MP900305797|
4. Globe with cutouts of igures. image No. MP900433193. Courtesy of iStockphoto.
retrieved from http://oice.microsot.com/en-us/images/results.aspx?qu=globe&ex=1#a
i:MP900433193|
5. Diverse young adults on a bench. image No. MP900439453. Courtesy of iStockphoto.
retrieved from http://oice.microsot.com/en-us/images/results.aspx?qu=diversity&ex=1
#ai:MP900439453|
6. Teacher. image No. MC900438963. Courtesy of oice.microsot.com. retrieved from
http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/images/results.aspx?qu=teachers#ai:MC900199006
|mt:1|
7. Three students writing homework and studying in a library. image No. MP900427825.
Courtesy of oice.microsot.com. retrieved from http://oice.microsot.com/en-us/
images/results.aspx?qu=study&ex=1#ai:MP900427825|
8. Young boy in classroom. image No. MP900439406. Courtesy of iStockphoto. retrieved
from http://oice.microsot.com/en-us/images/results.aspx?qu=child+in+classroom&ex=
1#ai:MP900439406|
9. Color crayon drawing a wavy line. image No. MC900013073. Courtesy of oice.micro-
sot.com. retrieved from http://oice.microsot.com/en-us/images/results.aspx?qu=crayo
n&ex=1#ai:MC900013073|
10. A child’s illustration of a two-story house on top of a hill. image No. MC900391412.
Courtesy of oice.microsot.com. retrieved from http://oice.microsot.com/en-us/
images/results.aspx?qu=child%27s+drawing&ex=1#ai:MC900391412|
11. A pirate treasure map. image No. MC900055651. Courtesy of oice.microsot.com.
retrieved from http://oice.microsot.com/en-us/images/results.aspx?qu=treasure+map
&ex=1#ai:MC900055651|

198 CommuniCative Language teaChing CommuniCative Language teaChing 199