Vol. 4 Issue 2. – Research Paper: ‘Teaching English for developing communicative competence in the Sultanate of Oman- an empirical approach’ by S. Christopher Gnana Seelan

ELTWeekly Vol. 4 Issue#2 | January 9, 2012 | ISSN 0975-3036

S. Christopher Gnana Seelan has got experience in teaching English Language both at the secondary and tertiary levels for 19 years. Currently, he is an ESL lecturer at Higher College of Technology, Muscat, Sultanate of Oman, and is also a part-time PhD scholar, in the Manonmaniam Sundaranar University, India.

Abstract

This article will review various ESL/EFL theories/ approaches/methods which are being practiced in the ESL/EFL classrooms today in the Middle East, precisely in the Sultanate of Oman, by language teachers, with the sole purpose of developing communicative competence. It will further highlight both the appropriateness and the inappropriateness of some theories and approaches which are being used for teaching development of communicative competence.

Key words/phrases: socio-linguistic competence, discourse competence, strategic competence, grammatical competence, the theory- then-research approach, and the research-then- theory approach.

Introduction:

The concept of communicative competence is both comprehensive and complex. Serious attempts have been undertaken recently by many teachers around the globe to develop the level of communicative competence in their learners, by adopting various language acquisition theories /approaches/methods. New theories and approaches keep emerging and are being practised by ESL/EFL teachers, for developing different aspects of communicative competence such as grammatical, or linguistic, sociolinguistic, strategic and discourse. In order to transform the language classroom into a classroom for the development of communicative competence, the teachers need to adopt specific ESL/EFL methods or approaches which normally support a holistic development of communicative competence in the learners.

Empirical Background of the study:

Sultanate ofOmanis one of the most beautiful Islamic countries in theMiddle East. Arabic is the native language (L1) there. Apart from being the mother tongue of these peace-loving people, Arabic also enjoys wide spread freedom and love and is always treated with religious fervour, as it is considered the original language of the sacred book of Islam, the Holy Quran. The people of Oman, not to mention the learners there, are so proud of this language and feel quite comfortable to use it both as a medium of instruction as well as to learn any new information, and even to learn a foreign language. However, there has been an ‘urge’ recently for learning English and a proficient speaker of English has started enjoying a special privilege of being acknowledged as a ‘learned’ person. Besides, the tertiary level learners, at least, have seemed to have realized the importance of learning English, as a person with a good communicative competence in English has a great chance to get the best job others vying for, either in the public or in the private sector. This so-called enviable status enjoyed by English presently, is often looked up in awe and is frequently referred in superlatives and the tertiary level learners in the Middle East in general and the learners in the Sultanate inOmanin particular, show a good amount of enthusiasm in developing their communicative competence level. Learners at the Post Foundation level (advanced level) in the Sultanate though are fairly competent enough in using their oral and written skills, often find themselves in embarrassing situations in specific communication competence settings.

Though considerable development has been made over the years to develop the oral communication skills and the writing skill of the learners in the Sultanate, not much effort has been invested for the development of their communicative competence. As a result, their level of communicative competence, specifically at the advanced level, is, unfortunately, far below the required level at that stage. In classrooms, for example, the teachers of ESL often watch helplessly , almost on daily basis, their learners encountering problems in discourse, communication break downs (strategic competence), and also in showing ignorance in comprehending the language settings (sociolinguistic competence) etc. The existing ESL curriculum followed at tertiary levels in the Sultanate does not, in any way, encourage the teachers to teach their advanced level learners, for example, to increase their knowledge in varying the kind of language they use ‘according to levels of  formality and familiarity’. As a result, their have been frequent communication break downs during group works, pair works and in discussions and consequently, the learners become sceptic about their own communicative abilities, and in a mood of resignation, often with draw from  the communication process.

Theory-building:

Hakuta (1981), states that “the game of language acquisition research can be described as the search for an appropriate level of description for the learner’s system of rules”.Rutherfordsays that “we wish to know what it is that is acquired, how it is acquired and when it is acquired. But, were we to have the answers even to these questions, we would still want to know why . . . . . . (Hakuta, 1981)” Thus, theory building comprises of explanation and description. According to Long (1983), there are two approaches to theory building:

  1. The theory- then-research approach, and
  2. The research-then- theory approach

According to Long, the theory-then-research approach includes five stages. They are:

  1. Develop an explicity theory;
  2. Derive a testable prediction from theory;
  3. Conduct research to test the prediction
  4. Modify the theory if the prediction is disconfirmed, and
  5. Test a new prediction if the first prediction is confirmed.

Similarly, Long also speaks about the four stages of the research-then-theory approach. They are:

  1. Select a phenomenon for investigation;
  2. Measure its characteristics;
  3. Collect data and look for systematic patterns, and
  4. Formalize significant patterns as rules describing natural event (Long, 1983).

Though both these approaches are commonly in practice today in ESL/EFL researches, in the present context (teaching for the development of communicative competence), the theory-then-research approach seems to be more feasible. Hence, a few ESL/EFL theories, on the basis of theory-then-research approach, are reviewed here in detail.

The Natural Approach:

This is one of the most recent and a popular approach found in the ESL/EFL arena. It, in fact, is a term for a number of language teaching methods which were developed in the 19th century as a reaction to the Grammar-Translation method. Stephen Krashen who formulated this approach says that “Language acquisition does not require extensive use of conscious grammatical rules, and does not require tedious drill” (Stephen Krashen, ). He says that real language acquisition develops slowly, and speaking skills emerge significantly later than listening skill, even when conditions are perfect” (Stephen Krashen, 19 ). Hence, the teachers who adopt this method in language classrooms need to realize that the learners, in order to develop their communication competence should be given chances to listen first the target language before asking them to use that language in their interactions. So, it is the responsibility of the teachers to adopt for their communicative competence lessons, only feasible approaches which support supplying the all important ‘comprehensible-input’ to the learners in ‘low anxiety situations, containing messages that the learners really want to hear. Krashen implies that these approaches normally do not want to insist upon early production in the target language (L2), but are flexible to learners and encourage them to produce the products only when they are ready.

Another very interesting feature of this Natural Approach is that unlike many other approaches, it is strongly in support of the view that adults can still acquire second language and the ability to learn languages does not disappear at puberty. The Natural Approach stresses that an adult learner can acquire all except the phonological aspect by using his/her Language Acquisition Device (LAD). According to Krashen an adult leaner goes through two processes-acquisition and learning but a child has only one process- acquisition. While talking about L2 acquisition, Stephen Krashen has brought forth five key hypotheses. They are:

  1. The Acquisition- Learning Distinction
  2. The Natural Order Hypothesis
  3. The Monitor Hypothesis
  4. The Input Hypothesis, and
  5. The Affective Hypothesis

A brief evaluation of these hypotheses will unfold many interesting facts about adult learners. So, let’s see one by one.

a. The Acquisition- Learning Distinction:

The Acquisition –Learning Distinction Hypothesis shows two ways to the adult learner to develop competence in L2. They are language acquisition and language learning. Language acquisition takes place unconsciously and the acquirer (the adult learner) is normally not aware of the grammatical rules of the language. But, they ‘feel’ the error and go for correction. However, language learning is a conscious process and the adult learner is aware of the rules and so, is able to talk about them.

b. The Natural Order Hypothesis:

This hypothesis stresses that “the acquisition of grammatical structure proceeds in a predictable order”. Accordingly, some grammatical structures of a given language are learnt early but some others late. But, that doesn’t mean that grammar should be taught in this order of acquisition.

c. The Monitor Hypothesis:

The Monitor Hypothesis states that the language a learner has subconsciously acquired “initiates our utterances in a second language and is responsible for our fluency” (Stephen Krashen,   ). However, the language that has been consciously learnt, takes the role of an editor. This editor has enough time to edit, has the focus on form and is aware of the rules to correct, for example, the grammar test or a written product. This editor is called the Monitor. But, this monitor is often wrongly used by the individuals. Monitor over-users, try to use their monitors every now and then and they end of with a serious concern on their frequency. The monitor under-users, however, choose not to use their conscious knowledge of the language. They correct errors based on a ‘feel’ for correctness.

The teachers should instruct the learners to “use the Monitor only when it is appropriate and also only when it does not interfere with communication”. For example, the learners should be asked to use their grammatical knowledge not in conversation, but in writing and in planned speech. Thus, this kind of “optimal monitor users” can therefore use their learned competence as a supplement to their acquired competence” (Stephen Krashen,   ).

d. The Input Hypothesis:

This hypothesis explains how a language acquirer develops competency over time. It also says that the comprehensible input a learner receives should be at just beyond the level of the learner. The learner, instead of waiting for the teacher to teach, for instance, the grammatical structure at just beyond his/her current level, could easily focus on communication and this, in turn, will enable the learner to produce the language. In fact, the production ability in a learner naturally emerges and not taught directly. The example of the effectiveness of the Input Hypothesis could be found in the care taker speech (from an adult to a child) and in teacher-talk (a teacher to a language learner).

Krashen suggests that teachers, in order to help learners produce language, should provide them a ‘silent period’ initially. During this time, the learners usually build up acquired competence before they begin to produce it. If they don’t get this ‘silent period’, they will try to produce the language with the help of the rules they have already acquired from their first language. This will lead to communication break downs.

e. The Affective Filter Hypothesis:

This hypothesis explains how anxiety, self confidence and motivation affect language acquisition. Depending upon the degree of their intensity, it raises or lowers the ‘stickiness’ or ‘penetration’ of any comprehensible input that is received.

Evaluation of the Natural Approach:

A question is commonly asked in the ESL EFL arena: ‘Does classroom teaching help to develop a learner’s communicative competence level?’ The answer is ‘yes, it does’. Stephen Krashen, with the help of these five hypotheses, emphatically states that, for language learning to take place in a learner, ‘comprehensible input’ is very much essential and as the learners do not have access to ‘real world’ language speakers to obtain this ‘comprehensible input’, alternatively the language classrooms will supply that. The ‘comprehensible input’ that the learners get from language classrooms, ranges from the rules on grammatical structures (grammatical competence), societal expectations, speech acts and speech events (sociolinguistic competence), error correction- self, peer or the teacher, repairing communicative break downs (strategic competence) and also how to organise words, phrases and sentences into long conversations and also into well organised speeches (discourse competence). In the Omani context also, these hypotheses will work effectively in the communicative competence classrooms and hence, could adopt them in classrooms.

Task-based Language Learning (TBLL):

This approach was the brain child of N. Prabhu. Task-based Language Learning or Task-based Instruction (TBI) centres on meaningful tasks. It focuses on the use of authentic language and on asking the learners to do useful tasks using the target language. For example, the tasks in Task-based Language Learning include tasks such as “using telephone to obtain information, drawing maps based on oral instructions, performing actions based on commands given in the target language, giving orders and instructions to others etc” (The Longman  Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics, 1993). Task-based Language Learning stresses that it is a more effective way to develop communicative competence, as “it provides a purpose for the use and learning of a language other than simply learning language items for their own sake” (The Longman  Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics, 1993).

Jane Willis states that the Task-based Language Learning comprises of the ‘pre-tasks, the task cycle and the language focus’.

According to her, the components of a ‘task’ are:

  1. Goals and objectives,
  2. Input,
  3. Activities,
  4. Teacher Role
  5. Learner role, and
  6. Settings.

During the ‘pre-task phase, the teacher will explain what the learners are expected to do and some times, the teacher will also provide the learners with key vocabulary or grammatical constructs to complete the tasks successfully. The teacher also present a model of the task either by doing it himself/herself or by presenting pictures, audio tracks or video clips demonstrating the task.

During the ‘task phase’, the learners perform the task. They usually do it in small groups. The teacher’s role is limited to one of a facilitator or counsellor and so the Task-based Language Learning comes strictly within the purview of student-centred methodology.

Once the task is completed, the learners prepare an oral or written report and present it to the class. The teacher gives feedback. He also reviews the language forms that the learners were using during the ‘task phase’, the problems they encountered and also also the ‘forms’ that need to be covered.

The final stage of learning is the practice stage. The learners are provided with a lot of opportunities to practise the task for fluency. The teacher also ensures at this stage that the teaching material is covered in full and required key-language features are emphasized.

Evaluation of Task-based Language Learning:

This is a very effective method for the development of communicative competence. It is a student-centred approach and it often ‘provides for practical extra-linguistic skill building’. The pre-task phase, for example, allows the learners a free hand to use the grammatical structures and the vocabulary that they want. In Task-based Language Learning, the learners get the opportunity use all the language they know and or learning, rather than just the ‘target language features’ of the lesson. This is a good way to develop the learners’ grammatical competence level, and the tasks like ‘visiting the doctor’ and giving commands and instructions, will help the learners to develop their sociolinguistic and strategic competence. The learners’ oral or written presentation during the ‘task phase’ will help them develop their discourse competence. In the Omani context too, as this approach doesn’t interfere in the cultural practices of the Omani learners, it may thus be concluded that Task-based Language learning will work effectively in developing the level of communicative competence in the advanced level learners of Higher College of Technology in the Sultanate of Oman.

The Lexical Approach:

The Lexical Approach was introduced to the ESL/EFL classrooms in the 1990s by Michael Lewis. The basic concept, on which the Lexical Approach rests, is the idea that an important part of learning a language consists of “being able to understand and produce lexical phrases as chunks” (The Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics, 1993). In Lexical Approach, the instruction focuses mainly on fixed expressions that occur usually in dialogues which Lewis claims, forms a larger part of discourse than unique phrases and sentences. Lexical Approach treats vocabulary more than grammar and this is one of the underlying principles, why teaching of chunks and set phrases has become common in ESL/EFL classrooms.

Presently, a vast majority of researchers and teachers have unanimously accepted the inclusion of vocabulary teaching in the syllabus. They say that vocabulary should be taught systematically and on a regular basis in the ESL/EFL classrooms so as to help the learner learn the language easily. Lewis (1986), states very clearly that vocabulary should be at the centre of language teaching because “language consists of grammaticalized lexis, not lexicalizes grammar” (M.Lewis, 1986).

Gairns and Redman (1983) suggest that when teaching vocabulary, the language teachers need to take into account several aspects of lexis, which are as follows:

  1. Boundaries between conceptual meaning: to know not only what lexis refer to, but also where the boundaries are, that separate it from words of related meaning. (e.g. cup, bowl)
  1. Polysemy: recognize and to differentiate various meanings of a single word form with other closely related meanings (head: of a person, of a company, of a nail etc).

c.   Homonymy: to know and distinguish between various meaning of a single word form which has different meanings but are not closely related (e.g. a file: used to put papers in or a tool).

d. Homophyny: to understand words that have the same pronunciation but different spellings and meanings (flour, flower).

  1. Synonymy: to understand the different shades of meaning that synonymous words have (e.g. extend, increase, expand etc).
  1. Affective meaning: to know the difference between the attitudinal and emotional factors (denotation and connotation) which generally depend upon the speakers’ attitude or the situation. Socio-cultural associations of lexical items, is another important factor.

g. Style, register, dialect: to know the difference between different levels of formality, the effects of different contexts and topics as well as the difference in geographical variation.

h. Translation: to understand certain differences and similarities between the native and the foreign language (e.g. false cognates).

i. Chunks of languages: multi-word verb items, idioms, strong and weak collocations, lexical phrases etc.

j. Grammar of vocabulary: to understand the rules that enable learners to build up different forms of the word or even different words from that word (e.g. sleep, slept, sleeping).

k. pronunciation: ability to recognize and reproduce items in speech.

One of the important aspects of vocabulary teaching, especially at the advanced level, is to consistently maintain learner-autonomy in the language classrooms. This will encourage the learners to deal with new lexis and expand their vocabulary. This can be further encouraged by means of guided discovery, contextual guess work and also by the use of dictionary.

Lewis views vocabulary as the basis for communication. He also states that “language consists not of traditional grammar and vocabulary, but often of multi-word prefabricated chunks” (Lewis, 1997). Chunks like collocations, fixed and semi-fixed expressions and idioms play a very important role in facilitating language production because Lewis sees this as a key to fluency. So, the language teachers should make the learners aware of chunks, provide them opportunities to identify, to organise and to record these in their memory.

The Lexical Approach insists upon teaching the learners to know the word and to know to use the word efficiently. Lewis (1993) states that “being able to use a word involves, mastering its collocational range and restrictions on that range” (Lewis, 1993). So, the language teachers, instead of giving importance to teaching isolated words, should involve in recognizing and teaching multi-word chunks.

The Lexical Approach recommends clear ways for organising and recording vocabulary. Lewis says that “language should be recorded together which characteristically occurs together” (Lewis, 1993). He suggests recording language in collocation tables, mind maps, word trees etc. He also suggests recording of whole sentences to help contextualization, but the items stored in a learner’s memory depends upon his/her needs.

It is interesting to learn that both the Lexical Approach and the Task-based Language Learning Approach share a common platform on certain aspects. They both believe that ‘comprehensible input’ is essential for language acquisition. They both also boast that ‘successful communication’ is more important than production of a few grammatically correct sentences. So, the language teachers too who adopt these methods in their classrooms, must make these aspects as their primary teaching goals.

Evaluation of the Lexical Approach:

In the Omani context, the Lexical Approach can perform better in communicative competence classrooms. The advanced level learners there usually run short of vocabulary during discussions, and teaching of the lexicalized grammar that this method advocates, will enable them to develop their communicative competence considerably. Further this method also recommends recording of language in the memory of the learners which will be helpful to use it in discourse later. Learning vocabulary in chunks also, will help learners to repair their communication breakdowns. Hence, it may thus be concluded that, the Lexical Approach is feasible for teaching the advanced level learners at Higher College of Technology for the development of Communicative competence.

The Communicative Approach:

Communicative Approach, also called ‘Communicative Approach to the Teaching of Foreign Language, is an approach which emphasizes that the goal of language learning is communicative competence. This approach, developed by the British Applied Linguists, was a result of an angry reaction against the then existing grammar-based approaches. Interaction in the target language is the key objective of this approach and, the teaching materials are generally used to teach,

a. the language needed to express and understand different kinds of functions, such as requesting, describing, expressing likes and dislikes, etc;

b. a notional syllabus or some other communicatively organised syllabus;

c. the processes of communication, such as using language appropriately in different types of situations, to perform different kinds of tasks, e.g. to solve puzzles, to get information etc, also to use language for social interaction with other people.

The Communicative Approach emerged in the 1970s as a result of an inadequate language teaching method called The Audio-lingual method. In the Audio-lingual method, lessons were organised by grammatical structure and presented through short dialogues. The learners listened to the dialogues and mimicked pronunciation and the grammatical structures in these dialogues. Critics of the Audio-lingual method noticed that this over-emphasis on repetition and accuracy did not help the learners achieve communicative competence in the target language. Noam Chomsky also opposed this approach and argued that ‘Language is not a habit of structure”. He also stated that “ordinary linguistic behaviours characteristically involve innovation, formation of new sentences and patterns in accordance with rules of great abstractness and intricacy” (Noam Chomsky, 1993). So, the critics who were opposing the Audio-lingual method, formulated a notional-functional syllabus as an alternative method and eventually, it gave way to the present Communicative Approach.

A notional-functional syllabus is a way of organising a language curriculum. Accordingly, instructions are organised in terms of notions (context) and functions (purpose). For example, the notion ‘shopping’ requires a lot of language functions such as asking for prices, features of a product, bargains etc. So, in this approach, the learners get opportunities to learn the language features as per their requirements.

The Communicative Approach is often defined as a list of general principles or features. David Nunan has suggested the following best five features:

  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 both on language as well as

on the learning management process,

  1. an enhancement of the learner’s own personal experiences as important, contributing elements to classroom learning, and
  2. an attempt to link classroom language learning with language activities outside

the classroom (David Nunan, 1991).

As a result of these above principles, in the Communicative Approach classrooms, role plays, pair and group works, interviews, information gaps, games language exchanges and surveys, play a major role in helping learners develop their level of communicative competence.

Over the years, many interesting observations have been made by researchers and teachers. The following list of these observations on Communicative Approach will, help to measure its effectiveness.

* Communicative Approach focuses on (target) language as a medium of communication and it also recognises that all communication has a social purpose.

*   Communicative Approach implies that communication embraces a whole   spectrum of functions such as , seeking information, apologising, expressing likes and dislikes etc, and notions like apologising for being late, asking where the nearest railway station is and so on.

*   In Communicative Approach, classroom activities maximise opportunities for learners to use the target language in a communicative way for meaningful  activities. It is much more pupil-oriented because it is dictated by pupil’s needs and interests.

* Communicative Approach gives more emphasis on active modes of learning including pair works and group works.

* Communicative Approach encourages the learners to learn and use idiomatic and everyday language, even slangs, to understand the social context.

* Grammar is taught but less systematically.

* Communicative Approach uses authentic texts to teach communicative competence. In ESL/EFL classrooms, these authentic texts serve as partial substitute for community of native speakers. Newspaper and magazine articles, poems, manuals, recipes, telephone directories, videos, news bulletins etc, are used in the classrooms effectively.

The above observations, mostly observed by the language teachers, provide a clear- cut view on the effectiveness of the Communicative Approach. Thus, it remains the most effective method, available for teaching communicative competence, today.

Evaluation of the Communicative Approach:

The Communicative Approach provides enormous amount of scope to the learners to develop their communicative competence. The authentic texts used in Communicative Approach classrooms will help the learners to understand the socio-cultural functions of the language. As this approach doesn’t give much importance to frequent corrections in the classrooms, there is absolutely no chance of communication-breakdowns. Grammar is taught inductively, and this is good for developing their grammatical competence, too. In Communicative Approach, the learners also get opportunities to use their acquired language in the production of oral speech or a written text, and this will further pave way for the development of their discourse competence. In short, as Communicative Approach was formulated just to develop the learners’ level of communicative competence all around the globe, it could also be adopted in the classrooms in the Sultanate of Oman to develop the communicative competence level of the advanced level learners of Higher College of Technology.

Direct Method:

Direct Method was the brain child of Charles Berlitz and was developed in the late 19th century as a reaction against the Grammar-Translation Method. The Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching & Applied Linguistics (1993) has given the following list of general features which are inherent in the Direct Method.

a. only the target language (English) should be used in class.

b. meanings should be communicated ‘directly’ by associating speech forms with actions, objects, mime, gestures and situations;

c. reading and writing should be taught only after speaking, and

d. grammar should only be taught inductively.

The Direct Method helps to learn the target language in an appropriate setting. One basic rule of this method is that translation is not at all allowed in the classrooms in the process of learning a language. Another very interesting feature of the Direct Method is that abstract vocabulary is taught by association of ideas. This method also stresses that printed word (reading texts) should be kept away from the learner till they achieve mastery in their oral skills.

With the Direct Method, the following strategies are commonly followed in language classrooms:

a. The teacher asks questions of any nature and the learners answer in the target language. In preparation for this activity, the teacher models extensively the use of complete answers to questions. Then the teacher expects answers in sentences.

b. The teacher reads aloud a passage from the book three times. When it is read for the first time, the learners listen. When the teacher reads the passage the second time, it is read phrase by phrase with a long pause between phrases and the learners write down the words and phrases. The teacher reads the passage the third time in a normal speed and the learners check their work.

c. The learners self-correct their errors with the teacher offering them a choice between what they said and the proper pronunciation.

d. Teacher gives a blank map of a country and gives specific instructions and the learners label the map as per the teacher’s instructions. Once it is completely labelled, the teacher takes the same map on an overhead and the learners give instructions.

The Direct Method was popular in the beginning of the 20th century. But, gradually it ebbed away as it was not supported by any great linguistic theories. Another drawback of this approach was that it depended too much on the teachers’ ability to teach.

Evaluation of the Direct Method:

The Direct Method can only be used with other Communicative competence- supporting approaches. The Direct Method doesn’t encourage the learners to involve in reading and writing at the early stage of their learning days. This will reduce the speed of development of their communicative competence. However, the Direct Method, at some point, encourages the learners to listen to a range of texts from variety of cultural traditions which will surely help them to increase their sociolinguistic competence level. The dictation activity will improve the learners’ vocabulary and so, will gradually develop their discourse competence. The self- correction strategy of this method will improve the learners’ strategic as well as the grammatical competence. As it could be seen here, the Direct Method has in itself both pros and cons, and in the Omani context, to teach communicative competence, it should be used with other relevant approaches to yield the maximum results from the classrooms.

The Zone of Proximal Development:

The concept of the Zone of Proximal Development was developed by a Soviet Psychologist, Lev Vygotsky. This approach primarily brings out the difference between what a learner can do without any help, and what he/she can do with help. According to Vygotsky, the Zone of Proximal Development is ‘the distance between the actual development level as determined by independent problem-solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem-solving under adult guidance, or in collaboration with more capable peers”(Lev Vygotsky,    ).

Vygotsky firmly believes that interaction with peers is an effective way to develop skills and strategies. When a language teacher adopts the Zone of Proximal Development concept in a language classroom and uses the cooperative learning strategy, even the less competent learners develop his/her language skills with the help from more skilful peers-within the zone of proximal development. To help a learner complete his/her language activity, all that the learner needs is a small amount of scaffolding and once the activity is completed, then the scaffolding can be removed. And the learner will, then, be able to do similar activity again without any scaffolding. Vygotsky explains that the scaffolding is nothing but the assistance that a learner gets from a more skilful peer.

‘Reciprocal teaching’ is another feature of the Zone of Proximal Development and as per this feature, the teacher and the learners collaborate in learning and practice four skills of language learning. They are; summarising, questioning, clarifying and predicting. These skills in turn, will help the learners to learn the target language by using these four skills. Besides, Vygotsky’s instructional concepts such as ‘scaffolding’ and ‘apprenticeship’ help a low level learner, to learn the language easily. His collaborative learning is yet another effective language learning strategy. Vygotsky explains that the concept of collaborative learning will be very effective if the members of the group possess different levels of ability to provide scaffolding to the deserving learners.

Thus, the Zone of Proximal Development is the name given by Lev Vygotsky for the wide range of tasks a learner can learn independently, and those completed with the guidance and assistance of a teacher or with the scaffolding of more-skilled learners in the class. ‘Scaffolding’ is changing the level of support. During teaching, a skilful person (either a teacher or a skilful learner) adjusts the amount of guidance to fit the learner’s zone of proximal development. Dialogue is used as an important tool to do this because in a dialogue, a learner’s spontaneous concepts which are basically disorganised and unsystematic, are met with the more organised, systematic, logical and rational concept of the skilful helper.

Evaluation of the Zone of Proximal Development:

In fact, Lev Vygotsky’s concept of the Zone of Proximal Development is an effective concept for teaching communicative competence in the Sultanate of Oman. Concepts like scaffolding and apprenticeship, which are the by-products of Zone of Proximal Development, will help the learners to develop the level of their communicative competence. For example, the use of dialogues in classrooms will develop their discourse competence level. They can have student-student interactions as well as teacher- student interactions to do that. Another concept associated with the Zone of Proximal Development is collaborative learning and the learners can get opportunities to know more about the sociolinguistic features of the target language, and with collaborative learning they also learn to repair communication breakdowns. More over, with Zone of Proximal Development, as the learners are expected to follow either the teacher or another skilful learner, it is possible that the learners will become as competent either as the teacher or at least like the other skilful learner in the class. Though the concept of the Zone of Proximal Development doesn’t deal with the development of independent areas of communicative competence, the teacher being a communicative competent person could instil in his/her learners all the competencies to help them become communicatively competent.

Computer-Assisted Language Learning:

According to Levy, (the person who introduced this language teaching method), “Computer Assisted Language Learning is, the search for and study of applications of the computer in language teaching and learning” (Levy, 1997:p1). The Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching& Applied Linguistics, says that “Computer Assisted Language Learning may take the form of

a. activities with parallel learning through other media but which use the facilities of the computer ; (e.g. using the computer to present a reading text;

b. activities which are extensions or adaptations of print-based or classroom-based activities; (e.g. computer programmes that teach writing skills by helping the learner develop a topic and thesis statement and by checking a composition for vocabulary, grammar and topic development, and

  1. activities which are unique to CALL” (The Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching& Applied Linguistics, 1993).

In Computer Assisted Language Learning, a wide range of applications and approaches to learning languages are found taken from the “traditional” drill and practice programmes and also from the recent manifestations of Computer Assisted Language Learning, such as web-based distance learning and virtual learning environment. CALL also endorses the use of corpora and concordancers, interactive white-boards, computer-mediated communication, language learning in virtual worlds and mobile-assisted language learning (MALL).

The recommended CALL materials have been designed on the basis of the principles of language pedagogy and methodology which are derived from different learning theories such as behaviourist, cognitive, constructivists and Krashen’s second language theory- Krashen’s hypotheses etc. These materials generally have two essential features: interactive learning and individualized learning. With CALL, the teachers in the classroom can reinforce what has already been learned. CALL can also provide support to those learners who need additional support.

Vocabulary acquisition using flash cards, is the basic use of Computer Assisted Language Learning. It is a very simple programme which makes use of spaced- repetitions, a technique in which the learner is presented with the vocabulary items which are expected to be in the memory of the learners for an increasingly longer intervals until a process called ‘long-term retention is achieved. This programme has paved the way for a number of applications called Spaced-repetition systems (SRS). Similar programmes such as BYKI and phase 6 have been designed typically meant for foreign language learners.

Preparation of CALL software deserves a careful consideration of pedagogy. Deccoo says that “the designers of this software should keep in mind the appropriateness of all the relevant language teaching theories dating back to Grammar-Translation through the Direct Method, Audio-Lingualism and a variety of other approaches to the more recent Communicative Approach and Constructivism” (Deccoo, 2001). It is always easy to design a CALL software and produce a set of multiple-choice and gap-filling exercises. But, there is so much more. For example, Stepp-Greany says that it would be fruitful to create and manage an environment “incorporating a constructivist and whole language philosophy” (Stepp-Greany, 2002). In the constructivist theory, learners are active participants in tasks in which they ‘construct’ new knowledge derived from their prior experience. Constructivism also stresses that language learning moves from the whole to the part, rather than building sub-skills to lead towards higher abilities of comprehension, speaking and writing. So also, the CALL software needs to inter-relate comprehension, speaking, reading and writing skills and should reinforce each other in ways that the learners will find them comfortable to learn.

With the advent of internet in the 1990s, a significant change occurred in the use communication technology in language teaching. Teachers in classrooms could display the full text in a full page and could make comparisons with other texts in a different web site. With internet and the establishment of many new web sites, the learners could involve themselves directly in the language learning processes individually or with online support. The teacher’s role remains to be a role of a felicitator.

Davies presents a list of over 500 websites where links to online exercises can be found, along with “links to online dictionaries and encyclopaedias, concordancers, translation aids and other miscellaneous resources of interest to the language teacher and learner” (Davies, 2010). As a result, today, language teachers are using a lot of web applications to teach the target language effectively. Walker and Davies give the following list of such applications:

* Image storage and sharing,

* Social book-marking,

* Discussion lists, blogs, wikis, social networking,

* Chat rooms

* Pod casting

* Audio tools

* Video sharing applications and screen capture tools, and

* Animation tools-comic strips, movies, etc.

Besides, today, CALL, with the inclusion of corpora and concordancers, virtual worlds (computer games like colossal cave adventure), human language technologies (speech recognition and parsing (to analyse sentences), makes it into an appropriate language teaching/ learning method. However, though computers claim to have taken the place of language teachers, the exponents of language teaching methods are still sceptic about it. Can computers ever successfully take the role of teachers and perform fully like them in language classrooms? Only time will tell.

Evaluation of the Computer Assisted Language Learning:

Omani learners mostly love to work with computers. They always find working with computers comfortable and useful. So, the introduction of CALL to the communicative competence classrooms there will undoubtedly be effective. To teach different aspects of communicative competence such as grammatical, sociolinguistic, strategic and discourse, CALL needs to have a special software specifically to teach communicative competence to the advanced level learners of the Higher College Technology, who are well-versed in using computers. It would be very effective if CALL could teach various sub-skills related to communicative competence such as grammar, lexis, societal expectations, speech acts, speech events , repairing communication breakdowns etc, initially and then could concentrate on the whole communicative competence mastery stage. It should also be noted that in the Sultanate of Oman, communicative competence cannot be taught merely by computer alone, but the presence of a teacher who is good at CALL, could help the advanced level learners of the Higher College of Technology, to develop their level of communicative competence.

Summing Up:

All in all, there have been numerous researches conducted around the world on the basis of teachers’ beliefs on various language learning theories and approaches. However, very few researches have been undertaken so far on the theoretical perspectives of teaching communicative competence, and the meagre achievement achieved so far in the communicative competence area, remains a cause of concern to many teachers who have been working hard to develop their learners’ level of Communicative competence.

Though, most of the theories/approaches reviewed here, fall under the category of language acquisition, it is commonly acknowledged that language acquisition theories/methods cannot be isolated from the theories/approaches of communicative competence. After all, development of communicative competence is the ultimate goal of language teaching everywhere. So, conscious efforts have been made here, to highlight the appropriateness of the language acquisition theories while adopting them in communicative competence classrooms. A language enthusiast will never deny to accept the fact that not a single language acquisition theory, even if it is the so-called outdated Grammar-Translation Method, can’t cease to survive before making a considerable degree of contribution to the learners for the development of their communicative competence. The critical review of these theories /approaches has proved just that.

References:

Alptekin, C. (2002) Towards intercultural communicative competence in ELT. ELT Journal, 56 (1), 57 64

Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1 (1), 1-47.

Canale, M. (1983). From communicative competence to communicative language pedagogy. In J. C. Richards & R. Schmidt (Eds.), Language and Communication. (pp. 2-27).London: Longman.

Ellis, R. (1990). “Communicative Competence and the Japanese Learner”. JALT Journal, 13 (2), 103-128.

Ernst Von Glasersfeld “Cognition, Construction of Knowledge, and Teaching.”  Syntheses 80.1 (1989): 121-140.

Hymes, D. (1972). On communicative competence. In J. B. Pride & J. Holmes (Eds.), Sociolinguistics.Harmondsworth,England: Penguin Books.

Jack C. Richards, John Platt & Heidi Platt (1993) Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching & Applied Linguistics. Longman Group UK Limited 1993 (Third Impression)

Noam Chomsky (1993) Language and Thought, Wakefield, RI: Moyer Bell.

Oxford, R. (1990). Language learning strategies: What every teacher should know. New York: Newbury House Publishers.

Savignon, S. (1983). Communicative Competence: Theory and Classroom Practice. Reading,MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.

Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. Gass & C. Madden (Eds.), Input in Second Language Acquisition. Rowley: Mass, Newbury House.

Spolsky, B. (1989). “Communicative Competence, Language Proficiency and Beyond”. Applied Linguistics 10/2:138-156

Upton T. A. & Lee-Thompson, L. (2001). The Role of the First Language in Second Language Reading. SSLA, 23, 469-495.

1 comment

  1. Pingback: ELTWeekly Vol. 4 Issue 2. : ELTWeekly

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *