You are here

Home » Content

Secondary EFL school teachers’ perceptions of CLT principles and practices: An exploratory survey

Journal Name:

  • Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research

Publication Year:

  • 2016

Key Words:

Author NameUniversity of Author
Abstract (2. Language): 
Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) is advocated by many applied linguists as a common vehicle to curriculum innovation in many ELT contexts. It represents a change of focus in language teaching from linguistic structures to learners’ need for developing communication skills. In recent years, the Iranian Ministry of Education has introduced the development of a new English curriculum for secondary schools with the aim of establishing the use of communicative activities in language classes. The present study was an attempt to investigate Iranian teachers’ perception of CLT principles and practices through a survey of 75 secondary school teachers in the context of the newly introduced English language curriculum developed based on CLT principles. Based on a combination of quantitative and qualitative data using a semi-structured questionnaire supplemented with interviews with a smaller group of teachers, the results of the survey revealed that a change in classroom arrangements is required before CLT can be practiced in secondary school English classes in Iran. The results also showed that the employment of CLT procedures at the local level is at its beginning stages and might take time to take root. The conclusion is that for the suggested changes in the curriculum to be implemented and realized in English education in Iran, the findings of more comprehensive surveys complemented with observation of teachers’ instructional practices is required to inform the change implementation.
Bookmark/Search this post with
FULL TEXT (PDF): 
PDF icon arastirmax-secondary-efl-school-teachers-perceptions-clt-principles-and-practices-exploratory-survey.pdf
  • 3
109
130
  • English

REFERENCES

References: 

Anani Sarab, M. R. (2010). Secondary education curriculum framework for teaching foreign languages: Opportunities and challenges. Iranian Journal of Curriculum Innovation, 35(3), 172-199.
Birjandi, P. & Soheili, A. (1985). Right path to English. Tehran: Sherkat Chap va Nashr Iran.
Borg, S. (2007). Research engagement in English language teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(5), 731-747.
Borg, S. (2003). Teacher cognition in language teaching: A review of research on what language teachers think, know, believe, and do. Language Teaching, 36, 81-109.
Borg, S. (2009). English language teachers' conceptions of research. Applied Linguistics, 30(3), 355- 388.
Brandi, K. (2008). Communicative language teaching in action: Putting principles to work. London: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Brown, H.D. (2014). Principles of language learning and teaching. New York: Pearson Education, Inc.
Burns, A. (2010). Doing action research in English language teaching: A guide for practitioners. New York: Routledge.
Canale, M. & Swain, M., (1980), Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1, 1-47.
Carless, D. (2004). Issues in teachers' reinterpretation of a task-based innovation in primary schools. TESOL Quarterly, 38(4), 639-662.
Carless, D. R. (2003). Factors in the implementation of task-based teaching in primary schools. System, 31, 485-500.
Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research 4(3), (Oct., 2016) 109-130 125
Chang, M. (2009). Taiwanese college English teachers’ attitudes toward Communicative Language Teaching. Unpublished M.A. Thesis, Queen’s University Kingston, Ontario, Canada. Texas University-Kingsville
Dahmardeh, M. (2009). Communicative textbooks: English language textbooks in Iranian secondary school. Linguistik Online, 40(4). Retrieved from: http://www.linguistik-online.com/40_09/dahmardeh.html
Doughty, C. J. & Long, M. H. (2003). Optimal psycholinguistic environments for distance foreign language learning. Language Learning & Technology, 7(3), 50–80.
Fullan, M.G. (1991). The new meaning of educational change. London: Cassell.
Ghanbari, B, & Ketabi, S. (2011). Practicing a Change in an Iranian EFL Curriculum: from Ivory Tower to Reality. Iranian EFL Journal, 7 (6), 9-13.
Gorsuch, G. (2000). EFL educational policies and education cultures: influences on teachers’ approval of communicative activities. TESOL Quarterly, 34 (4), 675–710.
Gorsuch, G. (2001). Japanese EFL teachers’ perceptions of communicative, audiolingual and yakudoku activities: The plan versus the reality. Education Policy Analysis Archives 9(10), 11-15.
Harmer, J. (2007). The practice of English language teaching (4th ed). London: Longman.
Hiep, P. H. (2007). Communicative language teaching: Unity within diversity. ELT Journal, 61(3), 193–201.
Howatt, A. P. R. (1984). A history of English language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Hu, G. W. (2005). ‘CLT is best for China’ – An untenable absolutist claim. ELT Journal, 59(1), 65–68.
Humphries, B. & Burns, A. (2015). ‘In reality it’s almost impossible’: CLT-oriented curriculum change. ELT journal, 69(3), 239-248.
Iran Ministry of Education. (1984). Graded English. 7 vols. Tehran: Sherkat Chap va Nashr Iran.
Jenkins, J. (2009). English as a lingua franca: Interpretations and attitudes. World Englishes, 28(2), 200–207.
Jeon, J. (2009). Key issues in applying the communicative approach in Korea: Follow up after 12 years of implementation. English Teaching, 64(1), 123–150.
Karavas-Doukas, K. (1995). Teacher identified factors affecting the implementation of an EFL innovation in Greek public secondary schools. Language, Culture, and Curriculum, 8 (1), 53-68.
Khadir Sharabyan, S.; Kheirabadi, R.; Alavimoghadam, B.; Anani Sarab, M. R.; Forozandeh Shahraki, E. & Ghorbani, N. (2013). English for Schools: Prospect. Tehran: Shekat Chap va Nashr.
126 M. Anani Sarab, A. Monfared & M. Safarzadeh/Secondary EFL school …
Kim, A.A. (2014). Examining How Teachers’ Beliefs about Communicative Language Teaching Affect Their Instructional and Assessment Practices: A Qualitative Study of EFL University Instructors in Colombia. RELC journal, 45, 337-354, doi: 10.1177/0033688214555396.
Kumaravadivelu, B. (1994). The postmethod Condition: Emerging strategies for second/foreign language teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 28(1), 27-48.
Larsen-Freeman, D. & Anderson, M. (2011). Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching (3rd ed). New York: Oxford University Press.
Li, D. (1998). ‘It’s always more difficult than you plan and imagine’: Teachers’ perceived difficulties in introducing the communicative approach in South Korea. TESOL Quarterly, 32(4), 677-703.
Liao, X. (2004). The need for communicative language teaching in China. ELT Journal, 58(3), 270-273.
Littlewood, W. (2011). Communicative language teaching: An expanding concept for a changing world. In E. Hinkel (ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning, (pp. 541–557). Volume II. New York: Routledge,
Littlewood, W. (2014). Communication-oriented language teaching: Where are we now? Where do we go from here? Language Teaching, 47(3), 349-362.
Maftoon, P. (2002). Universal relevance of communicative language teaching: Some reservations. The International Journal of Humanities, 9(2), 49-54.
Mangubhai, F., Marland, P., Dashwood, A., & Son, J. (2005). Similarities and differences in teachers' and researchers' conceptions of communicative language teaching: Does the use of an educational model cast a better light? Language Teaching Research, 9(1), 31–66.
McKay, S.L. (2012). Principles of teaching English as an international language. In Alsagoff, L., Hu, Guangwei, Mckay, S. L., & Renandya, W.A. (Eds.). Principles and practices for teaching English as an International language (pp. 28-46). New York: Routledge.
Mehrani, M. B. (2015). English teachers’ research engagement: Engagement and motivation. Iranian Journal of Teaching Research, 3(1), 83-97.
Nishino, T. (2008). Japanese secondary school teachers’ beliefs and practices regarding communicative language teaching: an exploratory survey. JALT Journal, 30(1), 27–51.
Nunan, D. (2003). The impact of English as a global language on educational policies and practices in the Asia-Pacific region. TESOL Quarterly, 37(4), 589–613.
Orafi, S. & Borg, S. (2009). Intentions and realities in implementing communicative curriculum reform. System, 37 (2), 243–253.
Phipps, S. & Borg, S. (2009). Exploring tensions between teachers’ grammar teaching beliefs and practices. System, 37 (3), 380–90.
Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research 4(3), (Oct., 2016) 109-130 127
Pinar, K. (1999). Introducing new course materials. In C. Kennedy, P. Dayle, and C. Goh (Eds.), Exploring change in English language teaching (pp. 47-54). Oxford: Macmillan Heinemann English Language Teaching.
Rao, Z. (1996). Reconciling communicative approaches to the teaching of English with traditional Chinese methods. Research in the Teaching of English, 30(4), 458–471.
Razmjoo, S. A. & Barabadi, E. (2015). An activity theory analysis of ELT reform in Iranian public schools. Iranian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 18(1), 127-166.
Riazi, A. M., & Razmjoo, A.S. (2006). “Do high schools or private institute practice Communication Language Teaching? A case study of Shiraz teachers in high schools and institutes.” The Reading Matrix, 6 (3), 340-363.
Richards, J. C. (1993). Beyond the textbook: The role of commercial materials in language teaching. RELC Journal, 24(1), 1-14.
Richards, J. C. (2015). Creativity in language teaching. Iranian Journal of Language Teaching Research, 1(3), 19-43.
Richards, J. C. & Rodgers, T. S. (2001). The nature of approaches and methods in language teaching. In J. C. Richards & T. S. Rodgers (Eds.), Approaches and methods in language teaching (2nd ed., pp. 18-35). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Richardson, V., Anders, P., Tidwell, D. & Lloyd, C. (2012). The Relationship between Teachers' Beliefs and Practices in Reading Comprehension. American Educational Research Journal, 28. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org
Rodger, C.R. (1984). Gloria- A historical note. In R.F. Levent & J. Shlien. (Eds.), Client-centered therapy the person-centered approach: New direction in theory, research, and practice (pp. 423-425). New York: Praeger.
Sakui, K. (2004). Wearing two pairs of shoes: Language teaching in Japan. ELT Journal, 58 (2), 155-163.
Sato, K. & Kleinsasser, R.C. (1999). Communicative language teaching (CLT): practical understandings. The Modern Language Journal, 83, 494-517.
Savignon, S. J. (2007). Beyond communicative language teaching: What’s ahead? Journal of Pragmatics, January, 39(1), 207-220.
Taguchi, N. (2005). The communicative approach in Japanese secondary schools: Teachers’ perceptions and practice. The Language Teacher, 29(3), 3-9.
Thompson, G. (1996). Some misconceptions about communicative language teaching. ELT Journal, 50(1), 9-15.
128 M. Anani Sarab, A. Monfared & M. Safarzadeh/Secondary EFL school …
Wang, Q. (2007). The National Curriculum changes and their effects on English language teaching in the People’s Republic of China. In J. Cummins & C. Davison (eds.), International handbook of English language teaching. Boston, MA: Springer Science & Business Media, (pp. 87–105). Online access via Springer Link.
Wang, R (1990) Focusing on oral communication competence. English teaching Forum, 28, 36-38.
Waters, A. & Vilches, M. L. C. (2008). Factors affecting ELT reforms: the case of the Philippines basic education curriculum’. RELC Journal, 39(1), 5–24.
Wong, R. Y. L. and Ho, W.K (2004). The future of English language teaching in East Asia. In W. K. Ho & R. Y. L. Wong (Eds.), English language teaching in East Asia today (pp. 455–465). Singapore: Eastern Universities Press.
Yook, C. M. (2010). Korean Teachers' Beliefs about English Language Education and their Impacts upon the Ministry of Education-Initiated Reforms. Applied Linguistics and English as a Second Language Dissertations. Paper 14. Retrieved from: http://scholarworks.gsu.edu/alesl_diss/14/

Thank you for copying data from http://www.arastirmax.com