Upload
dodan
View
219
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Difficulties Encountered in Implementing a Communicative Curriculum:
EFL Teachers’ Perspectives
Nannapat Wanchai
English Program
Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences
Pranakorn Sri Ayutthaya Rajabhat Univerity
E-mail address: [email protected]
Abstract
This paper reviews research that explored and documented the difficulties
that English as a foreign language (EFL) teachers encountered while implementing
the communicative curriculum in their classrooms. The review aims to reiterate the
difficulties other countries have had in implementing the communicative curriculum
and similarities in Thailand. In essence, the review identified several difficulties
confronted by the EFL teachers in EFL context (particularly in Asian countries).
These included, for example, a disconnection between curriculum policies and
classroom practice, teacher qualifications, students’ low English proficiency, and the
authenticity in language classrooms among many others. More importantly, the
review called for more research to further investigate and debate the issues of these
difficulties in the Thai context where the policies of the communicative curriculum
has long been implemented, but has largely been excluded from the actual practice
from EFL instruction.
Introduction
The education reform in Thailand under the National Education Act of 1999
brings about changes in English language teaching at both secondary and tertiary
levels through decentralizing syllabus design, adding local cultural components,
encouraging thinking skills, focusing on individual needs, providing language
education, and more importantly encouraging the communicative language teaching
approaches (CLT) (Darasawang, 2007). However, Thai teachers who are required to
implement the learner-centered policy find themselves encounter with a number of
challenges in both the context in which they work and associated with the new goals
they are required to attain (Nonkukhetkhong, Baldauf, & Moni, 2006). Traditionally,
a typical English classroom in Thailand is either teachers’ use of grammar-
translation or audio-lingual methods (Saengboon, 2006). This results in students
being trained to be passive, obedient, and respectful to teachers. Inevitably, teachers
who are the products of the old educational system may find it difficult to manage
the role reversal required in the curriculum reform where learners play a more
crucial role in the learning process (Nonkukhetkhong, Baldauf, & Moni, 2006).
Interestingly, some studies concerning the implementation of CLT in the Thai
context revealed that despite the new curriculum reform stipulated by the
Education Educational Act, most Thai EFL teachers still use the traditional teaching
methods they are familiar with, namely, a textbook-based, grammar-translation and
audio-lingual methods, and little or no evidence of communicative language use has
been found from several observations of English classes (Nonkukhetkhong, Baldauf,
& Moni, 2006; Prapaisit de Segovia & Hardison, 2008; Seangboon, 2002).
1. Major Concerns of Communicative Curriculum
Although the 1999 English curriculum reform is aimed at improving students’
linguistic and communicative competences, the majority of Thai teachers fail to
achieve the requirements (Foley, 2005). There are a number of factors which
probably affect the implementation of the English curriculum reform. Among those
that could be listed are: a disconnection between curriculum policies and classroom
practice, teacher qualifications, difficulties caused by students, and authenticity in
language classrooms. These factors are concerns pertaining to the communicative
curriculum and the implementation of CLT in EFL context.
1.1 Disconnection between Curriculum Policies and Classroom Practice
The literature on educational innovation has identified a disconnection
between curriculum policies and classroom practice in terms of teaching principles.
In Japan, for example, Gorsuch (2000) found that while the educational policy
emphasized the development of students’ communicative ability and attention to all
four macro skills, Japanese teachers’ current orientation toward foreign language
learning seems to be that teacher control is desirable and that students need to
memorize grammatical rules and be very accurate. In Libya, Orafi and Borg (2009)
similarly reported that the evidence from their study points to limited uptake by the
teachers of a new communicative English curriculum. The analysis of actual lessons
over a two week period for each teacher showed that key curricular principles
relating to pair work and the use of English were not reflected in the teachers’
practices. In contrast, their practices were characterized by teacher-fronted whole
class work and the wide spread use of Arabic. Similar findings have been reported in
Thailand in relation to the introduction of communicative curricular (Prapaisit de
Segovia & Hardison, 2008). To investigate the coherence of the English language
curriculum reform in Thailand following a recent education reform, some evidence
of CLT was anticipated during the classroom observations. Over the total of nine
observations, teacher-learner or learner-learner communicative interactions in
English were, however, not evident. Likewise, Nonkukhetkhong, Baldauf, and Moni’s
(2006) study revealed that despite the mandated reform to develop Thai students’
communicative competence, most Thai EFL teachers’ instructional practices were
still traditional. That is, they usually employed whole class grammar and vocabulary
explanation, and whole class drills. These findings pertaining to the uptake of the
communicative curriculum suggests the necessity to address Thai EFL teachers’
conceptualizations of CLT approaches.
In the Thai context, the new policy has always been mandated top-down
which simply means the absence of teachers’ participations in designing the
curriculum (Nonkukhetkhong, Baldauf, & Moni, 2006). As a result, a number of
difficulties have been confronted by teachers at the classroom-level implementation
of a new policy. In the same way, the Philippines Basic Education Curriculum (BEC)
implementation strategy is of a largely top-down process, in which information was
transmitted and teaching behavior modeled through a series of hierarchical levels
(Waters & Vilches, 2008). According to Hayes (2000), the cascade model adopted, in
other words, was transmissive rather than re-interpretative. Water and Vilches’
(2008) findings suggest the top-down process of the curriculum reform obviously
reveals the inadequate level of understanding by teachers of the BEC principles.
Further, the classroom-level implementation of the BEC has been difficult to achieve
principally because the curriculum design is insufficiently compatible with teaching
situation constraints. These findings are consistent with the situation of the
curriculum reform in the Thai context as Nonkukhetkhong, Baldauf, and Moni
(2006) suggest that the NEA mandated reform is unlikely to be successfully
undertaken unless those involved in the top-down process listen to teachers’ voices
and respond to these concerns. In short, though teachers play a major role in the
reform, they are an untapped resource in the decision making process (Fullan,
1993).
1.2 Teacher Qualifications
One of the factors that seem to be hindering the implementation of CLT is the
teachers themselves. Several studies interestingly reveal a number of difficulties
that EFL teachers have encountered when implementing the communicative
curriculum in the classroom (See Chou, 2003; Hiep, 2005; Karavas-Doukas, 1996; Li,
1998; Nonkukhetkhong, Baldauf, & Moni, 2006; Orafi & Borg, 2009; Prapaisit de
Segovia & Hardison, 2008; Saengboon, 2002; Sakui, 2004; Waters & Vilches, 2008
for more details). Those difficulties are, for example, (1) insufficient English
language proficiency; (2) inadequate sociolinguistic knowledge; (3) overload of
responsibility; (4) diversity in interpretation of CLT; (5) teachers’ over-reliance on
their beliefs; and (6) lack of training in CLT.
1.2.1 Insufficient English Proficiency
Teachers’ insufficient English proficiency is considered as a constraint in
implementing CLT approaches in Thailand. Most Thai EFL teachers perceived their
own low English proficiency as a constraint impeding them from using
communicative approaches (Prapaisit de Segovia & Hardison, 2008; Saengboon,
2002; Wongnoppharatlert, 2001). According to evidence from the previous studies,
myriads of Thai EFL teachers admitted they lacked confidence in using CLT
approaches in their classrooms. Similar findings have been reported outside
Thailand. South Korean teachers, according to Li (1998), realized that their own
deficiency in spoken English impeded them from implementing CLT in their
classrooms. They all reported that their abilities in English speaking and listening
were not adequate to manage communicative classes. In Japan, teachers’ lack of
confidence in conducting CLT also resulted from their insufficient spoken English
ability (Sakui, 2004). In the same vein, teachers in Libya expressed their concerns
regarding their ability to implement CLT (Orafi & Borg, 2009). The new
communicative curriculum in Libya made demands not only on teachers’
pedagogical expertise, but it also challenged their communicative ability in English.
Orafi and Borg (2009), therefore, suggest that teachers’ own limitations in this
respect are problematic.
1.2.2 Inadequate Sociolinguistic Knowledge
Apart from English proficiency, teachers’ sociolinguistic competence must be
greater in a communicative classroom than in a traditional grammar-focused
classroom (Li, 1998). Most EFL teachers in several studies, thus, generally felt
incompetent to conduct a communicative class (Li, 1998; Wongnoppharatlert,
2001). In the Thai context, most teachers revealed that their low sociolinguistic
competence limited their use of CLT (Wongnoppharatlert, 2001). They admitted
that sometimes they could not answer their students’ questions pertaining to
English culture, and that embarrassed them. More or less the same problem has
been found in South Korea. Li’s (1998) findings revealed that teachers felt
discouraged from using CLT since they were afraid of not being able to answer
students’ questions about English cultures.
1.2.3 Teaching workload
Teaching loads seem to be the most troublesome problem for Thai EFL
teachers (Prapaisit, 2003). For instance, some teachers in Prapaisit’s (2003) study
reported that they were assigned to teach eight subjects to a class; therefore, they
had to spend considerable time in preparing for subjects they were not familiar with
such as mathematics and science. With the 25 hours a week of teaching and other
extra responsibilities such as homeroom duties, lunch project for students and lab
care taker, those teachers revealed having been overburdened for years. Due to the
heavy teaching load and extra responsibilities, these teachers did not have time for
communicative activity materials preparation. As a result, they tended to rely
heavily on such traditional teaching methods as grammar-translation and audio-
lingual. The same constraint has also been reported in Japan where teachers were in
constant demand in dealing with many administrative and non-academic
responsibilities (Sakui, 2004). These teachers claimed that CLT required
considerable time for material preparation and implementation, thus they decided
to use pencil-and-paper exercises (or sear-work exercises) in which they believed
required less time preparation time.
1.2.4 Teachers’ over-reliance on their beliefs
Signs of crisis in the curriculum development have been proposed by Schwab
(1969) as cited in Lange (1990). Apparently, ‘downward’, one of the signs of crisis
according to Schwab, has been widely evident when the educational innovation has
been introduced. That is, teachers tend to rely on their personal beliefs and
experiences rather than theories. Previous studies on educational innovation have
identified mismatches between curricular principles and teachers’ beliefs as a major
obstacle to the implementation of educational change. The literature also shows that
teachers’ feelings, values, needs, and beliefs, combined with their experiences and
theoretical knowledge, usually guide their language instructional practices. Penning
and Richards (1997) studied five English teachers in Hong Kong who failed to
implement CLT approaches in their classroom. They suggested that one reason for
this failure was the teachers’ preexisting schema for teaching based on their learning
experiences as students in Hong Kong school system. Karavas-Doukas (1996)
reported similar findings in the responses of 14 Greek teachers of English to an
attitude survey and in the observation she made of their instructional practices. She
found that the survey results leaned toward agreement with CLT principles. Yet,
when she observed the classrooms, the teachers’ classroom practices deviated
considerably from the principles of communicative approaches. Mangubhai, Marland,
Dashwood, and Son (2005) similarly examined the CLT practices of languages other
than English (LOTE) teachers in Australia. Based on their statistical data, they
concluded that the theoretical understanding of the LOTE teachers participating in
their study at times corresponded to those of theorists. However, these teachers
further admitted in their interviews that their practices of CLT were grounded on
their experiences rather than their theoretical knowledge. A similar finding has also
been found in an Australian context in which most teachers’ pedagogic principles
were based on their background knowledge and classroom experience (Breen, Hird,
Milton, Oliver, & Thwaite, 2001). Such constraint of teachers’ over-reliance on their
beliefs and experiences is a crucial factor that may impede the development of the
communicative curriculum.
1.2.5 Lack of training in CLT
Numerous studies have documented lack of training is one of the main
obstacles that EFL teachers faced in applying CLT. In the Thai context,
Wongnoppharatlert (2001) and Nonkukhetkhong, Baldauf, and Moni (2006)
consistently reported that though Thai EFL teachers had positive attitudes toward
CLT approaches as part of the mandated communicative curriculum, it was difficult
for them to adapt to the new policy requirements as they had not been properly
trained. Admittedly, some Thai teachers in Prapaisit’s (2003) study felt that they
were not sufficiently trained in terms of English language proficiency and teaching
methodology from their teacher education institutes. Worse still, some Thai EFL
teachers also expressed dissatisfaction of their lack of learning opportunities within
the workplace (Hongboontri, 2008). They pointed out that the learning
opportunities to attend workshops, seminars or conferences were scarce and
limited. Findings from these studies suggest that Thai EFL teachers need more
assistance for learning opportunities to understand the basic concepts of CLT and to
obtain more practical input in order to augment their confidence in developing
communicative activities. Similar findings have been reported in South Korea where
the teachers admitted that they did not quite understand how CLT worked, and thus
did not practice it much (Li, 1998). Likewise, some EFL teachers in Libya felt that
they did not obviously understand the concepts of the communicative curriculum
(Orafi & Borg, 2009). They attributed this lack of understanding to the absence of
training, and inquired how teachers could work in these circumstances in which
there was no training or workshop to help teachers improve the skills of teachers
and to help them understand the principles of this new communicative curriculum.
1.3 Students’ Low English Proficiency
Students, according to Fullan (2001), need to play a meaningful role in the
educational change; or else the attempts to implement the educational innovation
will fail. Hence, it is necessary to address problems derived from students in order
to better understand their situations. A number of teachers in EFL contexts
reported several problems from students inhibiting them from implementing the
CLT approaches within their teaching. Among such difficulties dealing with the
students include students’ low English proficiency.
Students’ low English proficiency is perceived as a constraint in implementing
CLT approaches in EFL contexts (Bock, 2000; Hiep, 2007; Li, 1998 Nonkukhetkhong,
Baldauf, & Moni, 2006; Orafi & Borg, 2009; Wongnoppharatlert, 2001). In South
Korea, one crucial difficulty preventing teachers from using CLT was students’ low
English proficiency (Li, 1998). The South Korean teachers reported having
difficulties in conducting oral communicative activities with students since students
did not have sufficient proficiency in English (Li, 1998). The similar problem
occurred in Vietnam in which EFL teachers also experienced a difficulty in getting
students to participate in group activities (Hiep, 2007). This is because the students
did not have enough English to communicate with each other. Hence, they switched
to Vietnamese to conduct the group work. Likewise, Bock (2000) revealed that even
Western teachers teaching in Vietnam also found students’ low English proficiency a
difficulty in using communicative activities. In Libya, the teachers similarly referred
to the students’ low level of English as an obstacle for their participation in
classroom activities (Orafi & Borg, 2009). Besides, these teachers believed that what
a curriculum required students to do was beyond students’ actual abilities. This
belief inevitably had a strong influence on their instructional practices. As for the
Thai EFL context, a similar problem has been found in Thai students. Thai students,
in general, have, as Nonkukhetkhong, Baldauf, and Moni (2006) and
Wongnoppharatlert (2001) argued, limited English knowledge, thus teachers found
it hard to do any communicative activities with them
1.4 Authenticity in language classrooms
Another problem that seems to impede the development of the
communicative curriculum deals with the issue of authenticity in English language
classrooms. According to Brooks (1993) and Yang and Cheung (2003),
communicative language teaching requires authentic communication, which
includes a believable setting, a normal speed in speaking, a range of lexical items
suitable for the students’ ages, and an overall promotion of learning. The kind of
language actually taking place in the classrooms is, however, considerably different
from the language used outside the classrooms (Brooks, 1993; Lange, 1990). The
schooled response in the classrooms reflects the teachers’ overriding authority to
decide the acceptance of student’s produced language, and to decide who speaks to
whom, about what, in what ways, and for what purpose. Because of the
unauthenticated language used in the classroom, students are usually blocked from
engaging in any sort of real communication (Brooks, 1993). Unsurprisingly, the lack
of authenticity in English language classrooms is evident especially in the Thai EFL
context. Prapaisit’s (2003) study, for instance, interestingly showed that during the
classroom observations of the Thai participating teachers there was an absence of
communicative activities that allowed students to speak and practice giving
directions authentically, although students appeared willing to use them
communicatively. Instead, teachers focused only on drills such as total physical
response and games. Worse yet, these activities were not relevant to students’
developmental stage (Prapaisit, 2003).
2. Conclusion and Recommendations
Obviously, a number of difficulties hindering the educational reform in
Thailand are noticeable as previously documented. To find feasible solutions to
these concerns, particular attentions should be given to the following areas.
2.1 Educational Reform Values
The educational change, according to Fullan (2001), is multidimensional. At
least three dimensions are needed in implementing any new policy: (1) the
possible use of new or revised materials; (2) the possible use of new teaching
approaches; and (3) the possible alteration of beliefs. All three aspects of change
need to be coherent to represent the means of achieving a particular educational
goal (Fullan, 2001). For instance, the educational reform aims at introducing a new
teaching approach (CLT) whereas both the instructional materials and teachers’
beliefs remain unchanged. It is hardly likely that such reform will be successful.
This example obviously corresponds to what Fullan (2001) asserted that
educational innovations that do not include changes on all three dimensions are
probably not significant change at all.
Indeed, the curriculum innovation involves fundamental shifts in values and
beliefs of the individuals concerned (Burns, 1996). According to Price (1988),
reform of education is not simply the reform of the school system, but the reform
of behaviors and thinking process of teaching and learning. Even though changes in
beliefs are difficult in that they challenge the values held by individuals regarding
the purposes of education, they are the foundation of achieving lasting reform
[McLaughlin & Mitra (2000) cited in Fullan (2001)]. However, such fundamental
change takes time (Li, 1998). All stakeholders, who are in charge of the educational
change such as curriculum developers, government, and teachers, should thus
realize that changes in beliefs and understandings are an ongoing process, and
there is a need to address them on a continuous basis through discussions after
teachers have had at least some behavioral experiences in attempting new
practices. Simply put, in order to change teachers’ beliefs, the stakeholders need to
make them realize the benefits or usefulness of the educational innovation. Lastly,
for the curriculum innovation to be implemented successfully, Carless (1999)
highlighted that ‘if teachers are to implement an innovation, it is essential that they
have a thorough understanding of the principles and practices of the proposed
change’ (p. 355).
2.2 Students
In using CLT with students who have previously studied foreign language in
traditional ways, in which they take passive role, and sit motionless listening to
teacher lectures, teachers are likely to confront some initial problems (Li, 1998;
Wongnoppharatlert, 2001). To deal with these problems, teachers should make
their students fully understand the features and benefits of CLT before they use
this approach in the classrooms (Rao, 2002). Similarly, Yang and Cheung (2003)
highlighted that the classroom activity must be purposeful and meaningful to
students. Imperatively, students should be given convincing reasons for
participating in classroom activities. Also, they should know what they will have
achieved upon completion of such activities (Yang & Cheung, 2003). Apart from
that, Burke (2007) suggested that teachers should help students overcome their
fear of speaking the target language and allow students to take control of their own
learning. To do this, teachers should invite students to involvement in the teaching
and learning process by listening to their ideas and suggestions (Burke, 2007). For
students with low motivation, the need for variety must be taken into
consideration (Savignon, 2002). That is, teachers should apply a diversity of
activities, instructional materials and media to draw learners’ interests and to
promote them in having positive attitude toward English learning in a
communicative way (Wongnoppharatlert, 2001; Yang & Cheung, 2003).
2.3 Teacher Professional Development
Some teachers may feel reluctant to use CLT as it requires them to do
something differently from what they are familiar with (Li, 1998). Teachers,
therefore, should receive assistance and encouragement in trying out CLT
approaches. This can be accomplished by providing opportunities for teachers to
attend in-service teacher training programs (Li, 1998; Nonkukhetkhong, Baldauf,
& Moni, 2006; Wongnoppharatlert, 2001). Such opportunities for in-service
training are imperative for the long-term development of teachers as well as for
the long-term success of the schools or institutions they work (Richards & Farrell,
2006). Workshop, according to Richards and Farrell (2006), can be a vital
strategy in the implementation of a curriculum or other kind of change. For
instance, if a new educational policy mandates an unfamiliar teaching or
curriculum approach such as CLT, workshops can be an ideal format for
preparing teachers for the change. A workshop is additionally aimed to enhance
teachers’ practical skills and help resolve problems. Teachers attending a
workshop should, therefore, receive hand-on experiences, ideas, strategies,
techniques, and materials that can be applied in their classrooms (Richards &
Farrell, 2006). Indeed, without the support from administrators, teachers would
not be able to attend the in-service teacher trainings or workshops as well as to
sustain their professional development. This issue obviously deserves a close
attention from all stakeholders so that teachers who are constantly in the
educational change process are able to adopt the change effectively and
smoothly.
2.4 Teacher collaboration
Teacher collaboration such as peer coaching should be fostered to enhance
the implementation of a new communicative curriculum. Peer coaching, according
to Richards and Farrell (2006), is a procedure in which two teachers collaborate to
help one or both teachers improve some aspect of teaching. In this kind of
collaboration, teachers who have successfully implemented CLT may demonstrate
their teachings so that those who have never tried using CLT or who are newcomers
to the approach will have enough opportunity to emulate such teaching approach.
Peer coaching is considered as a developmental process and is an effective way to
promote professional development (Richards & Farrell, 2006). That is, it provides
opportunities for two teachers to look at teaching problems as well as to develop
possible solutions. Peer coaching, for instance, can be used to help novice teachers
learn from more experienced colleagues as it provides a supportive context in which
novice teachers can try out new teaching approaches. Moreover, peer coaching
reduces the sense of isolation that most teachers tend to feel (Benedetti, 1997).
More importantly, peer coaching helps reduce the school budget problems for in-
service training as the school would benefit by strengthening the collegiality
between teachers in that they collaboratively help each other.
2.5 Administrative Support
A curriculum in which the administrators perceive their job as supporting
teachers will be a curriculum in which teachers are in a better position to teach
effectively (Brown, 1995). In doing this, the administrators can help make every
effort to reduce teachers’ paperwork load to the absolute minimum necessary for
teachers to meet the requirements made by the mandated curriculum reform.
Another type of administrative support involves ensuring that all necessary
instructional resources are provided to teachers in order to carry out instructions
in accordance with the new communicative curriculum and to continue developing
themselves professionally (Brown, 1995; Nonkukhetkhong, Baldauf, & Moni, 2006;
Prapaisit, 2003).
2.6 Making Use of Available Materials
Due to the lack of time and expertise in creating authentic materials for CLT
activities, teachers can solve this problem by making use of any available materials
(Rao, 2002). For instance, teachers and students can cut out news or articles from
magazines and use them as authentic reading materials. Burke (2007) similarly
suggested that authentic materials such as magazines, newspapers, bus schedules,
travel guides are important to promoting students’ communicative competence.
Further, he argued that teachers should neither follow a textbook sequentially nor
do they need to cover everything. Burke’s (2007) suggestion corresponds with
what Savignon (1997) pointed out “there is no such thing as an ideal textbook” (p.
131) Teachers should, therefore, learn how to make use of any available materials
or textbooks to conduct a communicative classroom.
As previously discussed, it is evident that despite the aim of the Thai
educational reform to enhance students’ communicative ability, Thai EFL teachers
apparently differ in their reactions to CLT. Some teachers willingly welcome the
new teaching approach by providing learners with a range of communicative tasks
(Saengboon, 2002). On the contrary, some feel frustrated and confused at the
ambiguity of the approach, and thus decide to stick to more familiar teachings
methods like grammar-translation and audio-lingual (Nonkukhetkhong, Baldauf, &
Moni, 2006). This problem implies a discrepancy between the purposes of the new
communicative curriculum and the classroom-level practices of Thai EFL teachers.
To deal with this particular concern, it is necessary to redefine the concept of the
communicative curriculum so as to construct its new framework for all
stakeholders to make use as a fundamental basis when attempting to mandate the
communicative curriculum. In other words, the concept of the communicative
curriculum needs to be redefined in order that it is clearly understood by both
curriculum planners themselves and Thai EFL teachers. Taking all these difficulties
and feasible solutions into account, all stakeholders and curriculum developers
would gain a better picture of the current situations of implementing
communicative language curriculum in Asia. Last but not least, this review is
calling for more studies on this particular issue so as to further investigate and
debate the issues of these difficulties in incorporating the communicative
curriculum particularly in the Thai context.
The Author
Nannapat Wanchai is currently a lecturer in the English Program at the Faculty of
Humanities and Social Sciences, Pranakorn Sri Ayutthaya Rajabhat University. She
graduated with a Master’s Degree of Arts in the area of Applied Linguistics
(Teaching English for Specific Purposes) from Mahidol University. She recently
received a grant from the Faculty of Graduate Studies, Mahidol University to
deliver an oral presentation under the title ‘Communicative Language Teaching
Approaches: A Clash between Theories and Teachers Conceptualizations’ at the
31st Annual Thailand TESOL International Conference in Chiang Mai, Thailand. Her
research areas of interest include teachers’ beliefs and classroom practices as well
as teacher training and professional development.
REFERENCES
Bock, G. (2000). Difficulties in implementing communicative theory in Vietnam.
Teacher's Edition, 24-30.
Breen, M. P., & Candlin, C. N. (1980). The essentials of a communicative curriculum
in language teaching. Applied Linguistics, 1(2), 89-111.
Brooks, F. B. (1993). Some problems and caveats in 'Communicative' Discourse:
Toward a conceptualization of the foreign language classroom. Foreign
Language Annals, 26(2), 233-242.
Burke, B. M. (2007). Creating communicative classrooms with experiential design.
Foreign Language Annals, 40(3), 441-462.
Burn, A. (1996). Collaborative research and curriculum change in the Australian
migrant English program. TESOL Quarterly, 30, 591-598.
Carless, D. (1999). Exploring change in English language teaching. Oxford:
Macmillan.
Chou, J. C. (2003). Exploring English teachers' beliefs and practical knowledge about
communicative language teaching in EFL contexts. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, Indiana University, 2003.
Darasawang, P. (2007). English in Southeast Asia. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars
Publishing.
Foley, J. A. (2005). English in...Thailand. RELC Journal, 36(2), 223-235.
Fullan, M. (2001). The new meaning of educational change. Columbia: Teacher
college press.
Gorsuch, G. J. (2000). EFL educational policies and education cultures: Influence on
teachers' approval of communicative activities. TESOL Quarterly, 34(4), 675-709.
Hayes, D. (2000). Cascade training and teachers' professional development. ELT
Journal, 54(2), 135-145.
Hiep, P. H. (2007). Communicative language teaching: Unity within diversity. ELT
Journal, 61(3), 193-201.
Hongboontri, C. (2008). Workplace organizational factors and professional
development of university English as a foreign language (EFL) teachers:
Lessons from Thailand. In M.K. Kabilan & M.E. Vethamani (Eds), Qualitative
studies on English language teacher development (pp. 191-222). Malaysia:
Sasbadi Sdn. Bhd.
Karavas-Doukas, E. (1996). Using attitude scales to investigate teachers’ attitudes to
the communicative approach. ELT Journal, 50(3), 187-198.
Lange, D. L. (1990). Sketching the crisis and exploring different perspectives in
foreign language curriculum. In D.W. Birckbichler (ed.), New perspectives and
new directions in foreign language education (pp. 78-109). IL: National
Textbook Co.
Li, D. (1998). "It's always more difficult than you plan and imagine": Teachers'
perceived difficulties in introducing the communicative approach in South
Korea, TESOL Quarterly, 32(4), 677-703.
Mangubhai, F., Marland, P., Dashwood, A., & Son, J.-B. (2005). Similarities and
differences in teachers' and researchers' conceptions of communicative
language teaching: Does the use of an educational model cast a better light?
Language Teaching Research, 9(1), 31-66.
Nonkukhetkhong K., Baldauf, B. R. Jr., and Moni, K. (2006). Learner Centeredness in
Teaching English as a Foreign Language, Paper presented at 26 Thai TESOL
International Conference, Chiang Mai, Thailand, 19-21 January 2006, 1-9.
Orafi, S. M. S., & Borg, S. (2009). Intentions and realities in implementing
communicative curriculum reform. System, 37, 243-253.
Pennington, M., & Richards, J. (1997). Reorienting the teaching universe: The
experience of five first-year teachers of English in Hong Kong. Language
Teaching Research, 1, 149-178.
Prapaisit de Segovia, L., & Hardison, D. M. (2008). Implementing education reform:
EFL teachers' perspectives. ELT Journal, 10, 1-9.
Prapaisit, L. (2003). Changes in teaching English after educational reform in
Thailand. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, 2003.
Price, R. F. (1988). The politics of contemporary educational reform in China. Atlanta:
Georgia State University.
Rao, Z. (2002). Chinese students’ perceptions of communicative and non-
communicative activities in EFL classroom. System, 30, 85-105.
Richards, J. C., & Farrell, T. S. C. (2006). Professional development for language
teachers: Strategies for teacher learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Saengboon, S. (2002). Beliefs of Thai teachers about communicative language teaching.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, 2002.
Saengboon, S. (2006). CLT revisited. NIDA Language and Communication Journal,
11(11), 136-148.
Sakui, K. (2004). Wearing two pairs of shoes: Language teaching in Japan. EF, 58(2),
155.
Savignon, J. S. (1991). Communicative language teaching: State of the art. TESOL
Quarterly, 25(2), 261-277.
Waters, A., & Vilches, M. L. C. (2008). Factors affecting ELT reforms: The case of the
Philippines basic education curriculum. RELC Journal, 39(1), 5-24.
Wongnoppharatlert, S. (2001). A study of the implementation of communicative
language teaching at the lower secondary school level in Bangkok public
schools. Unpublished thesis (MA), Mahidol University, 2001.
Yang, A., & Cheung, C.-p. (2003). Adapting textbook activities for communicative
teaching and cooperating learning. English Teaching Forum, 41(3), 16-24.