How Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) Is Being Used In Kurdistan?

Noora Mohammed Ahmed

doi:10.33193/JALHSS.75.2022.632

Noora Mohammed Ahmed Dept. of Special Education, Collage of Basic Education, University of Duhok, Kurdistan Region – Iraq

DOI: https://doi.org/10.33193/JALHSS.75.2022.632

الكلمات المفتاحية: Communicative Language Learning (CLT), approach, method, Kurdistan, sunrise

الملخص

Learning a language throughout a communicative approach is believed to be more effective as a procedure of teaching a foreign language such as English language. It is believed that the communicative approach assists learners to learn a language successfully by having them to communicate the real meaning. In Kurdistan, schools relay a lot on CLT (Communicative Language Teaching) method as a new and effective way of teaching languages. Through this research, it has been advised to see CLT as an approach for teaching English as a Foreign language (EFL) in Kurdistan rather than as a method. In the current sunrise textbook that is being taught in Kurdistan schools are not merely CLT method based textbook but are a mixture of different communicative approaches which are seen in the examined activities in section Three. Overall, the textbook introduces English as a communicative mechanism to be used inside and outside the classroom with confidence in many aspects of life and give teachers an opportunity to try different teaching approaches that suits their students’ understanding, motivation, and communication with the target language.

المراجع

1. Canale, M. and Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical Bases of Communicative Approaches to Second Language Teaching and Testing. Applied Linguistics 1:1: 1-47.
2. Deckert, G. (2004). The Communicative Approach: addressing frequent failure. English teaching Forum 42:1: 12-17.
3. Hu, G. (2002). Potential Cultural Resistance to Pedagogical Imports: the case of communicative language teaching in China. Language, Culture and Curriculum 15:2: 93-104.
4. Hymes, D. (1971). Competence and Performance in Linguistic Theory. In Huxley, R. and Ingram, E. (eds.) 1971. Language Acquisition: Models and Methods. London: Academic Press. 3-28.
5. Howatt, A. (1984). A History of English Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
6. Littlewood, W. (1981). Communicative Language Teaching: An introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
7. Larsen-freeman, D. (1986). Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching. Oxford: oxford university press.
8. McGroarty, M. (1984). Some Meanings of Communicative Competence for Second Language Students. TESOL Quarterly 18:2: 257–272.
9. Melrose, R. (1991). The Communicative Syllabus. England: British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data.
10. Mclver, N., Prowse, Ph., and Garton-Sprenger, J. (1999). Sunrise Student’s book. Oxford: Macmillan Publishers Limited.
11. Mitchell, R. (1988). Communicative Language Teaching in Practice. Warwick: Centre for Information on Language Teaching and Researching.
12. Ministry of Education, (2011). Xola Sheyandina Mamostayan. Kurdistan: materials for teacher training.
13. Richard, J. and Rogers T. (2001). Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge university press.
14. Richards, J. (2006). Communicative Language Teaching Today. New York: Cambridge University Press.
15. Savignon, S. (1987). Communicative Language Teaching. Theory into Practice 26:4: 235-242.
16. Skehan, P. (1996). Second Language Acquisition Research and Task-Based Instruction. In Willis, J. and Willis, D. (eds.) 1996. Challenge and change in language teaching. Oxford: Heinemann. 17-30.
17. Ministry of Education. (n.d). Class resources. n. p. :Macmillan. [online]. Available from [10 Dec 2011].
18. Van Ek, J. (1975). Systems Development in Adult Language Learning: the threshold level in a European unit credit system for modern language learning by adults. Strasbourg: Council of Europe.