LEARNER-CENTERED METHOD Who Learns?

A.    Definition of CLT

Talking about learner-centered method it means we talk about CLT because learner-centered method refers to CLT. CLT itself originally called as communicative syllabus/approach. CLT means an approach focused with the needs of the students to communicate outside classroom. Teaching techniques reflect this in the choice of language content and materials with emphasis the role play, pair and group work, among others. It means the approach focus in learners’ need which its goal is to help learners to develop communicative competence. For example, the ability to use the language accurately, appropriately, and effectively in real communication. Here, teachers use techniques which give impression when teachers choice the language content and materials by emphasising role play. So, role play and simulation is very popular in CLT.

B.     Background of CLT

Before CLT is popular, there are some assumption that teachers are authority, an expert who the only transmits the language, their task is lecturing the learners and being the atlas complex. While learners are passive audience, just listen what the teacher said. So, they only take notes. Not only that, the frustrating result of audio-lingual method which no opportunity to use the language in meaningful because learners have to memorize dialogue and practice the pattern of sentence. One other reason is its emergence had been stimulated by Chomsky’s point of view of the creativity and the uniqueness of individual sentence as fundamental characteristic of language. Hymes (1972) gives his response to Chomsky’s model of grammatical competence that motivates the increasing of CLT.

C.    Communicative Competence Models

Proponents of CLT assume that CLT is the goal of language teaching and the developing procedure in teaching of four language skill must be acknowledged that there is connection between language and communication. It means language is to communicate.

Hymes’ Models (1972)

Firstly, communicative competence was used by Hymes’ to response Chomsky’s point of view that there was a difference between linguistic competence and linguistic performance. Chomsky focused his linguistic theory on the knowledge and ability to produce grammatically correct sentences. In other hand, Hymes argues that Chomsky's linguistic theory needs to be included in a broader view of communication and culture. Further, Hymes (1972: 281) stated there are four aspects of communicative competence:

1.      Whether something is formally possible,

2.      Whether something is feasible,

3.      Whether something is appropriate,

4.      Whether something is in fact done.

Canale and Swain’s Model (1980)

Canale and Swain (1980) proposed in their article that in theory of communicative competence, at least there are three importance competencies that is grammatical competence (mastery of L2 phonological and lexico-grammatical rules and rules of sentence formation). Occording to Chomsky’s view, grammatical is linguistic competence but in hymes’ view is ‘formally possible’. Sociolinguistic competence, it is divided into two rules. First, knowledge of the socio-cultural rules of use. It is about understanding of social cultural context. Second, the rules of discourse. It is about understanding of how to interconnect the individual message elements and how meaning is represented to the entire text. Strategic competence, it consists of verbal and non verbal strategies which are used by person who speaks.

Bachman’s Model (1990/1996)

According to Bachman’s there are three components of communicative language ability that is language competence / knowledge, strategic competence and psychophysiological mechanism. Basically, the idea of Bachman’s and Canale and swain are the same. But Bachman adds psychophysiological mechanism. It refers to the channel (auditory, visual) and model (receptive, productive) of language use in the implementation of competence. The three competence is more than knowing of system of gramatical rules (phonology, syntax, vocabulary, and semantics), it is about an ability to use this language appropriately in communication.

Knowledge structure                                            Language competence

               Knowledge of the world                                       Knowledge of language

       Strategic

    Competence

Psychophysiological mechanisms

Context of situation

Celce Murcia, Dornyei, and Thurrell’s Model (1995)

According to  Celce Murcia, Dornyei, and Thurrell’s model, the target of competence is discourse competence. Socio-cultural competence, linguistic competence, and actional competence support discourse competence. Social linguistic is included in socio-cultural competence because language can not be separated from culture. Competence in pronounciatin, grammar and vocabulary are included in linguistic competence. Actional competence is convey and understand communicative intent. They put strategic competence out of the circle because it refers to negotiate messages and resolve problems.

D.    CLT Syllabuses

As the earlier explanation, proponent of CLT assume that the goal of language teaching is communicative competence. To achieve the goal of CLT, we can make CLT syllabus design. There are various type of CLT syllabus design. These show that CLT is not a unified teaching method / approach. Brown (2001: 143) describes the characteristics of CLT:

1.      Classroom goals focus on all of the components of communicative competence.

2.   Language techniques are designed for learners in order they use the language for meaningful puposes.

3.      Fluency and accuracy are underlied of communicative competence.

4.      Students in a communicative class can use tha language productively and receptively outside the class.

5.      Learners are given opportunities to focus their own learning process by their own styles.

6.      Teachers become facilitator and guide but not all is given to learners. They can find other knowledge by their own sources.

According to Krahnke (1987), Richards and Rodgers (2001: 163-165) and Yalden (1983: 108-118), those are types of communicative syllabus of CLT with each model:

1.      Structures plus function (Wilkins, 1976)

2.      Functional spiral around a structural core (Brumfit, 1980)

3.      Structural, functional, instrumental (Allen, 1980)

4.      Functional (Jupp and Hodlin, 1975)

5.      Notional (Wilkins, 1976)

6.      Interactional (Widdowson, 1979)

7.      Task-based (Prabhu, 1984)

8.      Learner-generated (Candling 1976; Henner Stanchina and Riley, 1978)

9.      Content-based (Chamot, 1983; Mohan, 1979)

From those types of syllabus, the most interest types are the interactional, task-based, and learner-generated because they are commonly characterized as learner-centered models.

E.     Phases of CLT

According to Rodger (1990, 6-7), there are three phases of CLT that is the Wilkins period (1976) with the notional and functional syllabuses which refer to synthetic syllabus, the Munby period (1978) with the need analysis, it appears to have develop into ESP, and the Prabhu period (1984), he introduced one type of task-based, that is the  procedural syllabus. In 1992, Long and Crookes showed two types of task-based, that is process syllabus, and task syllabus. The there syllabuses refer to analytic syllabuses which refuse linguistic elements as the unit of syllabus design even adopt a conception of task as an alternative.

The task syllabus / task-based language teaching (TBLT) are the third type of task-based CLT. The tasks in TBLT are target tasks, tasks type, pedagogic tasks, and tasks syllabus. Nevertheless, as proposed by Nunan (1991: 279), feature of the three types of task based CLT:

1.      An emphasis on learning to communicate through interaction in the target language.

2.     The introduction of authentic texts into the learning situation.

3.      The provision of opportunities for learners to focus, not only on language, but also on the learning process itself.

4.      An enhancement of the learners’ own personal experiences as important contributing elements to classroom learning.

5.      An attempt to link classroom language learning with language activation outside the classroom.

F.     Criticism on CLT

The period of CLT was the last quarter of the 20^th century but in the last decade there are a number of criticisms of the implementation of CLT, they are:

1.   Sano, Takashi, and Yoneyama (1984) in Japan.

2.   Krikpatrik’s (1984) in Singapore.

3.   Gonzales (1985) in Philippine.

4.   Chau and Chung (1987) in Hong Kong.

5.   Burnaby and Sun (1989) in China.

6.   Anderson’s (1993) in China.

7.   Ellis (1994) in Vietnam

8.   Chick (1996) in KwaZulu, South Africa.

9.   Shamin (1996) in Pakistan

10.  Li (1998) in South Korea. He found the sources of difficulties of the implementation of CLT, that is the teacher, the learners, the educational system, and CLT itself.

A major criticism of CLT is that of a clash of theory and practice or the implementation. Theoretically all learners should learn to say and do what they personally want to do, but practically the syllabus mostly prescribes the lexical and grammatical items which they have to learn at a given stage of the course. In Indonesia, CLT used to be taught: (a) teaching speaking only, (b) not teaching grammar, (c) small group teaching, (d) requiring competent teachers. Those criticisms above were considered as teachers’ misunderstanding and misperception towards CLT.

G.    Advantages and Disadvantages of CLT

Focus of CLT is not only a language in the form, grammatical accuracy, more emphasis on the appropriateness of language use, feasibility, communication skills, as well as training students in communicative activities in the strain and problem-solving ability. There are three advantages of CLT that is the interaction between students and teachers, to impart the basic knowledge and ability to skillfully combine the development, and greatly enhanced the student’s interest. Its disadvantages are it is possible that the activities undertaken in the classroom may be perceived by learners as being too abstract, It may also be a difficult method to use in very large classes, students with low levels of proficiency in the target language may find it difficult to participate in oral communicative activities, it is also worth considering that CLT may not be appropriate in EFL classrooms where English is rarely heard or used outside of the classroom, some people believe that with CLT there is a danger of focusing too much on oral skills at the expense of reading and writing skills and there is not enough emphasis on the correction of pronunciation and grammar errors, and Li (2001) also cites the difficulties faced by teachers and EFL students in Korea when attempting to introduce a communicative approach.

H.    Post Method Era

TEFL has various methods and those have come and gone. In the 1950s the Audio-lingual Method, in 1990s Neuro-linguistic Programming, in the early 20^th Direct Method and now the current method is CLT (in 1976 using Wilkins’ notional / functional syllabus). CLT is also called a natural process because it was first proposed, accepted, applied, and eventually criticized. Experts in TEFL have begun to think of a post method era. Post method era is. According to Kumaravadivelu (1994: 29-30) this era is characterized by:

1.  A search for an alternative to method rather than an alternative method.

2.  Recognition of teacher autonomy.

3.  The use of principled pragmatism.

According to Richards and Rodgers (2001: 247) some methods are unlikely to be widely adopted because they are difficult to understand and use, lack clear practical application, require special training, and necessitate major changes in teachers’ practices and beliefs. It means no method could be implemented in its pure concept, so there were always modifications in classroom practices. The teachers have an important part of the success of their learners. They know them and they determine the most suitable techniques by considering the use of facilities. Classroom Action Research (CAR) has been familiar for teachers to develop their own English classes and lesson study. In Indonesia in 2006, there is KTSP which trend has led to the needs of teachers’ certification. Another trend is TEYL / EYL in the early 1990.

Group                          : 3 (three)

Name of members       :  1. Deni Tri Prasetyo                         (107434)

                                       2. Siswati Fitriani Ningsih               (107440)

3.  Ayu Soraya                                  (107442)

                                       4. Reny Anggriawan Dien Novita   (107469)

5. Ernis Sholis Setiawati                  (107662)

6. Nadya Saphira                             (107729)         

7. Tri Wahyudi                                  (107739)

Reference:

Fachrurrazy. 2011. Teaching English as a Foreign Language for Teachers in Indonesia. Malang.  State University of Malang.

Free Paper Download Center. 2009. Advantages and Disadvantages of Communicative Language Teaching and the Improvement Methods. Retrieved 9^th of October 2010 from http://www.hi138.com/e/?i96198

Harmer, Jeremy. 2007. The Practice of English Language Teaching. England. Pearson Education Limited.

http://teachingenglish4all.wordpress.com/2011/04/22/communicative-language-teaching-clt-and-the-post-method-era/ (30 October 2011)

http://www.google.co.id/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=ppt%20ccommunicative%20language%20teaching&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCIQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fclcreek.wikispaces.com%2Ffile%2Fview%2FWhat%2Bis%2BCommunicative%2BLanguage%2BTeaching.ppt&ei=f0etTp3kONGsrAefvZTUDA&usg=AFQjCNGQC7ON1bx419bKA4fUXFBM6jUS0A&cad=rja (30 October 2011)

Studying on Line. 2009. Some Disadvantages of Communicative Language Teaching. Retrieved 10^th October 2010. From http://studying online.bttradespace.com/news-and-post/news/77C7AC2EB574E26E0401BAC710164E3