English for Specific Purposes World, ISSN 1682-3257, http://www.esp-world.info, Issue 40, vol.

14, 2013

Communicative Language Teaching in 21st Century ESL Classroom

B. Bala Nagendra Prasad
Assistant Professor of English
Annamacharya Institute of Technology and Sciences (Autonomous)
RAJAMPET Kadapa District, AP
prasadbbn@gmail.com
ABSTRACT
Communicative language teaching (CLT) refers to both processes and goals in classroom
learning. The central theoretical concept in communicative language teaching is
communicative competence a term introduced into discussions of language use and second
or foreign language learning in the early 1970s. This paper looks at the phenomenon of
communicative language teaching (CLT) in the current scenario. The goal of the paper is to
show how CLT has been interpreted and implemented in various contexts. Also, the paper
discusses ways for teachers to shape a more communicative approach to ELT in the context
of their own situation keeping in mind the needs and goals of learners and the traditions of
classroom teaching, which is the first step in the development of a teaching program that
involves learners as active participants in the interpretation, expression, and negotiation of
meaning.
***
Teachers have found many ways or methods for teaching languages. All have been admired
models in some time or place, often to be ridiculed, perhaps, or dismissed as inappropriate in
yet another. Times change, fashions change. What may once appear new and promising can
subsequently seem strange and outdated. Within the last quarter century, communicative
language teaching (CLT) has been put forth around the world as the new, or innovative,
way to teach English as a second or foreign language. Teaching materials, course descriptions, and curriculum guidelines proclaim a goal of communicative competence.
Not long ago, when American structural linguistics and behaviorist psychology were the
prevailing influences in language teaching methods and materials, second/foreign language
teachers talked about communication in terms of four language skills: listening, speaking,
reading, and writing. These skill categories were widely accepted and provided a ready-made
framework for methods manuals, learner course materials, and teacher education programs.
Speaking and writing were collectively described as active skills, reading and listening as
passive skills.
Today, listeners and readers no longer are regarded as passive. They are seen as active
participants in the negotiation of meaning. Schemata, expectancies, and top-down/bottom-up
processing are among the terms now used to capture the necessarily complex, interactive
nature of this negotiation. Yet full and widespread understanding of communication as
negotiation has been hindered by the terms that came to replace the earlier active/passive
dichotomy. The skills needed to engage in speaking and writing activities were described
subsequently as productive, whereas listening and reading skills were said to be receptive.

Communicative Language Teaching in 21st Century ESL Classroom

B. Bala Nagendra Prasad

English for Specific Purposes World, ISSN 1682-3257, http://www.esp-world.info, Issue 40, vol. 14, 2013

While certainly an improvement over the earlier active/passive representation, the terms
productive and receptive fall short of capturing the interactive nature of communication.
Lost in this productive/receptive, message sending/message receiving representation is the
collaborative nature of making meaning. Meaning appears fixed; to be sent and received, not
unlike a football in the hands of a team quarterback. The interest of a football game lies of
course not in the football, but in the moves and strategies of the players as they punt, pass,
and fake their way along the field. The interest of communication lies similarly in the moves
and strategies of the participants. The terms that best represent the collaborative nature of
what goes on are interpretation, expression, and negotiation of meaning. The
communicative competence needed for participation includes not only grammatical
competence, but pragmatic competence.
Interpretations of CLT
Adapted from the familiar inverted pyramid classroom model proposed by Savignon
(1983) (Figure 1), it shows how, through practice and experience in an increasingly wide
range of communicative contexts and events, learners gradually expand their communicative
competence, consisting of grammatical competence, discourse competence, socio-cultural
competence, and strategic competence. Although the relative importance of the various
components depends on the overall level of communicative competence, each one is
essential. Moreover, all components are interrelated. They cannot be developed or measured
in isolation and one cannot go from one component to the other as one strings beads to make
a necklace. Rather, an increase in one component interacts with other components to produce
a corresponding increase in overall communicative competence.

Figure 1
Grammatical competence refers to sentence-level grammatical forms, the ability to recognize
the lexical, morphological, syntactic, and phonological feature of a language and to make use
of these features to interpret and form words and sentences. Grammatical competence is not
linked to any single theory of grammar and does not include the ability to state rules of usage.
One demonstrates grammatical competence not by stating a rule but by using a rule in the
interpretation, expression, or negotiation of meaning.

Communicative Language Teaching in 21st Century ESL Classroom

B. Bala Nagendra Prasad

English for Specific Purposes World, ISSN 1682-3257, http://www.esp-world.info, Issue 40, vol. 14, 2013

Discourse competence is concerned not with isolated words or phrases but with the
interconnectedness of a series of utterances, written words, and/or phrases to form a text, a
meaningful whole. The text might be a poem, an e-mail message, a sportscast, a telephone
conversation, or a novel. Identification of isolated sounds or words contribute to
interpretation of the overall meaning of the text. This is known as bottom-up processing. On
the other hand, understanding of the theme or purpose of the text helps in the interpretation of
isolated sounds or words. This is known as top-down processing. Both are important in
communicative competence.
Socio-cultural competence extends well beyond linguistic forms and is an interdisciplinary
field of inquiry having to do with the social rules of language use. Socio-cultural competence
requires an understanding of the social context in which language is used: the roles of the
participants, the information they share, and the function of the interaction. Although we have
yet to provide a satisfactory description of grammar, we are even further from an adequate
description of socio-cultural rules of appropriateness. And yet we use them to communicate
successfully in many different contexts of situation.
It is of course not feasible for learners to anticipate the socio-cultural aspects for every
context Moreover, English often serves as a language of communication between speakers of
different primary languages. Participants in multicultural communication are sensitive not
only to the cultural meanings attached to the language itself, but also to social conventions
concerning language use, such as turn-taking, appropriacy of content, nonverbal language,
and tone of voice. These conventions influence how messages are interpreted. Cultural
awareness rather than cultural knowledge thus becomes increasingly important.
The ideal native speaker, someone who knows a language perfectly and uses it appropriately in all social interactions, exists in theory only. None of us knows all there is to know of
English in its many manifestations, both around the world and in our own backyards.
Communicative competence is always relative. The coping strategies that we use in
unfamiliar contexts, with constraints due to imperfect knowledge of rules or limiting factors
in their application such as fatigue or distraction, are represented as strategic competence.
With practice and experience, we gain in grammatical, discourse, and socio-cultural
competence. The relative importance of strategic competence thus decreases. However, the
effective use of coping strategies is important for communicative competence in all contexts
and distinguishes highly competent communicators from those who are less so.
Language teaching has seen many changes in ideas about syllabus design and methodology in
the last 50 years. We may conveniently group trends in language teaching in the last 50 years
into three phases:
Phase 1: traditional approaches (up to the late 1960s)
Phase 2: classic communicative language teaching (1970s to 1990s)
Phase 3: current communicative language teaching (late 1990s to the present)
Current communicative language teaching
Since the 1990s the communicative approach has been widely implemented. Because it
describes a set of very general principles grounded in the notion of communicative
competence as the goal of second and foreign language teaching, and a communicative

Communicative Language Teaching in 21st Century ESL Classroom

B. Bala Nagendra Prasad

English for Specific Purposes World, ISSN 1682-3257, http://www.esp-world.info, Issue 40, vol. 14, 2013

syllabus and methodology as the way of achieving this goal, communicative language
teaching has continued to evolve as our understanding of the processes of second language
learning has developed. Current communicative language teaching theory and practice thus
draws on a number of different educational paradigms and traditions. These include second
language acquisition research, collaborative learning, competency based learning, and content
based instruction. And since it draws on a number of diverse sources, there is no single or
agreed upon set of practices that characterize current communicative language teaching.
Rather, communicative language teaching today refers to a set of generally agreed upon
principles that can be applied in different ways, depending on the teaching context, the age of
the learners, their level, and their learning goals and so on. The following core assumptions or
variants of them underlie current practices in communicative language teaching.
Core assumptions of current communicative language teaching
Second language learning is facilitated when learners are engaged in interaction and
meaningful communication
Effective classroom learning tasks and exercises provide opportunities for students to
negotiate meaning, expand their language resources, notice how language is used, and
take part in meaningful intrapersonal exchange
Meaningful communication results from students processing content that is relevant,
purposeful, interesting and engaging
Communication is a holistic process that often calls upon the use of several language
skills or modalities
Language learning is facilitated both by activities that involve inductive or discovery
learning of underlying rules of language use and organization, as well as by those
involving language analysis and reflection
Language learning is a gradual process that involves creative use of
language and trial and error. Although errors are a normal produce of
learning the ultimate goal of learning is to be able to use the new language
both accurately and fluently
Learners develop their own routes to language learning, progress at different rates,
and have different needs and motivations for language learning
Successful language learning involves the use of effective learning and
communication strategies
The role of the teacher in the language classroom is that of a facilitator, who creates a
classroom climate conducive to language learning and provides opportunities for
students to use and practice the language and to reflect on language use and language
learning
The classroom is a community where learners learn through collaboration and sharing
Shaping a Communicative Curriculum
Syllabi for language courses today seek to capture the rich view of language and language
learning assumed by a communicative view of language. While there is no single syllabus
model that has been universally accepted, a language syllabus today needs to include

Communicative Language Teaching in 21st Century ESL Classroom

B. Bala Nagendra Prasad

English for Specific Purposes World, ISSN 1682-3257, http://www.esp-world.info, Issue 40, vol. 14, 2013

systematic coverage of the many different components of communicative competence,

including language skills, content, grammar, vocabulary, and functions. Different syllabus
types within a communicative orientation to language teaching employ different routes to
developing communicative competence.
In planning for CLT, teachers should remember that not everyone is comfortable in the same
role. Within classroom communities, as within society at large, there are leaders and there are
those who prefer to be followers. Both are essential to the success of group activities. In
group discussions, there are always some who seem to do the most talking. Those who often
remain silent in larger groups typically participate more easily in pair work. Or they may
prefer to work on an individual project. The wider the variety of communicative, or meaningbased, activities; the greater the chance for involving all learners. My Language Is Me
implies, above all, respect for learners as they use English for self-expression. Although
Language Arts activities provide an appropriate context for attention to formal accuracy,
Personal English Language Use does not Most teachers know this and intuitively focus on
meaning rather than on form as learners express their personal feelings or experiences.
Respect for learners as they use English for self-expression requires more than simply
restraint in attention to formal errors that do not interfere with meaning. It includes recognition that so-called native-like performance may not, in fact, even be a goal for learners.
Moreover, as the English language is increasingly used as a language of global
communication, so called non-native users of its many varieties overwhelmingly
outnumber so-called native speakers. The decision of what is or is not ones native
language is arbitrary and irrelevant for ELT and is perhaps best left to the individual
concerned.
Regardless of the variety of communicative activities in the ESL/EFL classroom, their
purpose remains to prepare learners to use English in the world beyond. This is the world
upon which learners will depend for the maintenance and development of their
communicative competence once classes are over. The classroom is but a rehearsal.
Development of the Beyond the Classroom component in a communicative curriculum
begins with discovery of learner interests and needs and of opportunities to not only respond
to but, more importantly, to develop those interests and needs through English language use
beyond the classroom itself.
In an ESL setting, opportunities to use English outside the classroom abound. Systematic
field experiences may successfully become the core of the course, which then could
become a workshop in which learners can compare notes, seek clarification, and expand the
range of domains in which they learn to function in English. Classroom visits to a courtroom
trial, a public auction, or a church bazaar provide introductions to aspects of the local culture
that learners might not experience on their own.
Implications for methodology
Current approaches to methodology draw on earlier traditions in communicative language
teaching and continue to make reference to some extent to traditional approaches. Thus
classroom activities typically have some of the following characteristics:

Communicative Language Teaching in 21st Century ESL Classroom

B. Bala Nagendra Prasad

English for Specific Purposes World, ISSN 1682-3257, http://www.esp-world.info, Issue 40, vol. 14, 2013

They seek to develop students' communicative competence through linking

grammatical development to the ability to communicate. Hence grammar is not taught
in isolation but often arises out of a communicative task, thus creating a need for
specific items of grammar. Students might carry out a task and then reflect on some of
the linguistic characteristics of their performance.
They create the need for communication, interaction, and negotiation of meaning
through the use of activities such as problem solving, information sharing, and role
play.
They provide opportunities for both inductive as well as deductive learning of
grammar.
They make use of content that connects to students' lives and interests
They allow students to personalize learning by applying what they have learned to
their own lives.
Classroom materials typically make use of authentic texts to create interest and to provide
valid models of language
Conclusion
Depending upon their own preparation and experience, teachers themselves differ in their
reactions to CLT. Some feel understandable frustration at the seeming ambiguity in discussions of communicative ability. Negotiation of meaning may be a lofty goal, but this view
of language behavior lacks precision and does not provide a universal scale for assessment of
individual learners. Ability is viewed as variable and highly dependent upon context and
purpose as well as on the roles and attitudes of all involved. Other teachers who welcome the
opportunity to select and/or develop their own materials, providing learners with a range of
communicative tasks, are comfortable relying on more global, integrative judgments of
learner progress.
Communicative competence obviously does not mean the wholesale rejection of familiar
materials. There is nothing to prevent communicatively-based materials from being subjected
to grammar-translation treatment, just as there may be nothing to prevent a teacher with only
an old grammar-translation book at his or her disposal from teaching communicatively. What
matters is the teachers conception of what learning a language is and how it happens. The
basic principle involved is an orientation towards collective participation in a process of use
and discovery achieved by cooperation between individual learners as well as between
learners and teachers.
Since its inception in the 1970s, communicative language teaching has passed through a
number of different phases. In its first phase, a primary concern was the need to develop a
syllabus and teaching approach that was compatible with early conceptions of communicative
competence. This led to proposal for the organization of syllabuses in terms of functions and
notions rather than grammatical structures. Later the focus shifted to procedures for
identifying learners' communicative needs and this resulted in proposals to make needs
analysis an essential component of communicative methodology. At the same time
methodologists focused on the kinds of classroom activities that could be used to implement a
communicative approach, such as group work, task work, and information-gap activities.
Communicative Language Teaching in 21st Century ESL Classroom
B. Bala Nagendra Prasad

English for Specific Purposes World, ISSN 1682-3257, http://www.esp-world.info, Issue 40, vol. 14, 2013

Today CLT can be seen as describing a set of core principles about language learning and
teaching, as summarized above, assumptions which can be applied in different ways and
which address different aspects of the processes of teaching and learning. Some focus
centrally on the input to the learning process. Thus content-based teaching stresses that the
content or subject matter of teaching drives the whole language learning process. Some
teaching proposals focus more directly on instructional processes. Task-based instruction for
example, advocates the use of specially designed instructional tasks as the basis of learning.
Others such as competency-based instruction and text-based teaching focus on the outcomes
of learning and use outcomes or products as the starting point in planning teaching. Today
CLT continues in its classic form as seen in the huge range of course books and other
teaching resources that cite CLT as the source of their methodology. In addition, it has
influenced many other language teaching approaches that subscribe to a similar philosophy of
language teaching.

1.

2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.

References
Sandra J. Savignon. 2001. Communicative Language Teaching for the Twenty-first
Century, Teaching English as a Second and Foreign Language, ed. Marianne CelceMurcia, Heinel & Heinel,.
Savignon, S.J.1997. Communicative Competence: Theory and Classroom Practice. New
York: McGraw Hill.
Breen, M., and C. Candlin. 1980. The essentials of a communicative curriculum in
language teaching, Applied Linguistics.
Byram, M. 1997. Teaching and Assessing Inter-cultural Communicative Competence,
Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters.
Holliday, A. 1994. Appropriate Methodology and Social Context, Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Nun an, D. 1989. Designing Tasks for the Communicative Classroom, Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Littlejohn, A. and D. Hicks. 1996. Cambridge English for Schools. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Littlewood, W. 1981. Communicative Language Teaching. New York: Cambridge
University Press.

Communicative Language Teaching in 21st Century ESL Classroom

B. Bala Nagendra Prasad

English for Specific Purposes World, ISSN 1682-3257, http://www.esp-world.info, Issue 40, vol. 14, 2013

Declaration:
I, Bala Nagendra Prasad, hereby declare that this article is a genuine work done by me and I
state that any discrepancies in this regard shall make me responsible. I am willing to transfer
Copyrights to the Publisher if this article is accepted for publication.
Sd/B. Bala Nagendra Prasad
A Brief Bio-Note about the Author:
Mr. B. Bala Nagendra Prasad has wide teaching experience of 11 years at engineering level.
A Post graduate from Sri Venkateswara University, Tirupati, he completed Master of
Philosophy from Madurai Kamraj University. His passion to enhance his pedagogic skills
drove him to complete PGCTE and PGDTE from English and Foreign Languages University,
Hyderabad. Currently, he is working as an Associate Professor of English at Annamacharya
Institute of Technology and Sciences (Autonomous) Rajampet. He is the Chairman of the
Board of Studies, English, and is instrumental in setting up English Language
Communication Skills Laboratory on the campus. Also, he is the Editor of PORTRAITS, the
newsletter of the college besides being the Editor of the Bulleting, the newsletter of the
Educational Trust. An avid researcher and a regular contributor of articles, he presented
several papers on language teaching, literature in various national and international
conferences.

Communicative Language Teaching in 21st Century ESL Classroom

B. Bala Nagendra Prasad