It
has been argued that teaching English
as a foreign language in Indonesia has been implemented as a compulsory subject
in national curriculum from primary school to high school level. Like other countries,
CLT has created a long debate among educational practitioner particularly
English language teacher. Central to this debate is the problem of implementing
CLT in national curriculum. In teaching and learning process, English teachers
are expected to help students to use language communicatively. However, many
students are not able to use English as a way for communication. As a result,
many English teachers are frustrated when teaching English. In addition,
despite its importance and significance, CLT is not always administered
appropriately. This causes major problem in language teaching.
In
terms of CLT approach, language teachers should realize what kind of activities
that suit with their classroom condition. Because in many countries where English
is taught as a foreign language, implementing CLT creates dilemma. It has been
argued that when teaching language, it should be include all four skills such
as speaking, writing, reading, and listening. Non-speaking English students are
in the risk of having this situation. However, in practical, CLT approach only
discusses in curriculum and syllabus and only little attention to adapt it.
National
curriculum is expected to give a clear guidance to the student to improve their
communicative skills through communicative approach. What happen nowadays in
language teaching is curriculum mostly applies the sequential skills that
decrease the goal of CLT approach. As a result, lots of teachers turn again
following the curriculum guidance. For this reason, teachers may teach their
students how to mastery grammar or structure language rather than teach them
how to speak. Unfortunately, the government seems uncared to this condition. What they want to see is an
instant result from examination.
Lie
(2007) comments that communicative approach has failed in Indonesia.
Furthermore Lie points out that English teacher are very confused regarding the
implementation of communicative approach in teaching and learning since there
is no clear connection between the curriculum goals and syllabus (2005:5). This
is reasonable because teacher cannot maintain his teaching goals for example
assessing speaking, writing, listening and reading in one occasion.
Accordingly, teachers may only teach them based on the syllabus. Again, it
seems unfair that the students should be assessed all four skills while the
national curriculum recommend to apply CLT or communicative approach. Teachers
are disappointed because the text books are structurally oriented and CLT
approach is simply not a realistic expectation (Purwo, 1990, in Lie, 2007).
This mean that what the teachers expect in this approach is only slogan and it
does not differ significantly from previous curriculum.
Conclusion
To sum up, there is no single method and
approach that suit with all contexts. However CLT is still play important role
to increase students’ communicative competence. In implementing CLT approach, a
language teacher should be careful because not all curriculum is designed in
communicative approach therefore the principles and approach of CLT should be
understood. Expecting students to
develop their communicative competence is not an easy way. However, there are
still some fruitful solutions to the foreign language teachers on these
problems. The fact that learning language should be integrated, a teacher may
apply integrated approach where listening, speaking, reading, and writing are
learnt in the same time. Restricting teachers’ creativity in creating
communicative activities may hinder students to develop their communicative
ability. If teachers have more authorities to implement CLT, they can improve
the achievement of students.
In
language teaching, all skills may integrate in teaching and learning. Teachers
play a central part in determining the success of the students in using
language communicatively. Furthermore, government, educational practitioner,
and other stake holders should be involved in supporting learners to use
English language communicatively by implementing CTL approach.
References
Beale, J. (2002). Is
Communicative Activities a Thing of the Past?. Journal of Babel 37 (1),
12-16
Brown, H.D (1994). Teaching by
Principle: An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. Prentice Hall.
Butler, Y.G. (2005). Comparative
Perspective toward Communicative Activities among Elementray Teacher in South
Korea, Japan and Taiwan. Language Teaching Research.9 (4):423-446.
Hadfield, J. (1990). Intermediate
Communication Games. In Beale, 2002. Is coomunicative language teaching a
thing of the past?. Journal of Babel, 32 (1), 16-21
Hiep, P.H. (2007). Communicative
Language Teaching: Unity within Diversity. ELT Journal 61 (3):193-201.
Ho, W.K & R.Y.L. Wong. (2004). English
Language Teaching in East Asia Today. Singapore: Eastern Universities
Press.
Kamiya, M. (2008). The Role of
Communicative Competence in L2 Learning, ELT journal, 12 (3), 63-88
Lie, A. (2007). Educational
Policy and EFL Curriculum in Indonesia: between the Commitment to competence and
the Quest for Higher Test Score. TEFLIN Journal. 17(1):1-15
Littlewood, W. (2007). Communicative
Task-Based Language Teaching in East Asian Classroom. Language Teaching
Journal. 40: 243-249
Nunan, D. (2003). The Impact of
English as A Global Language on Educational Policies and Practices in the
Asia-Pacific region. TESOL Quearterly 37 (4): 589-613
Richards, J.C., and T.S. Rodgers. (2001). Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching (2nd ).
Cambridge.Cambridge University Press.
Scholefield, W. (1997). An
Overview of Teaching and Learning of English in Japan Since 1945. Journal
of Babel, 32 (1), 16-21
Yoon, K.O. (2004). CLT theories
and Practices in EFL Curricula: A case Study of Korea. Asian EFL Journal. 6
(3): 1-8
Xin, Z. (2007). From communicative
Competence to Communicative Language Teaching. Sino-US English Teaching. 4
(9): 39-45
Comments
Post a Comment