CTL

Task based instruction

Skehan argues that interaction is key when it comes to task based instruction and that imput alone is not enough for our students. I could not agree more because the immediate feedback students get from interacting with either a native speaker, L2 speaker, or even a fellow peer is valuable. When students can take the input they learn, have it register in their minds and communicate affectively is essential to the learning process. Skehan argues that task based approaches enhance a student’s knowledge and measure performance differently. There are many different approaches in task based instruction but one that caught my eye was by Willis who broke down the tasks into a sequence. The pre task introduces the topic and texts all while exposing real language, task cycle where the task is presented, students practice and rehearse language while the teacher assists, and finally the language focus where students analyze and practice. Skehan believes in task based instruction saying researchers have made methodological progress within the last fifteen years and all signs of success point to task based instruction. 

The End of CLT

“A country without CLT is somehow backward.” This is the CLT attitude and while it has worked well in the past Bax says it is time to replace this approach because it is causing negative effects on the learners. Bax gives four diverse examples about how CLT is no longer needed today. Even though many think it is a complete solution to language learning CLT has served its purpose and even though it was beneficial to language learning at a certain degree it is time to look at other approaches. I could see why people gravitate towards CLT; it has worked in the past, its main focus is communication, and promotes student interaction. It is time to move on from this approach because it ignores an instrumental part of language learning, the context where it takes place. It tells teachers that CLT is written in stone; no matter what it is the best approach. I disagree with this because language learning is so personal and it depends on the individual. A teacher’s job should be finding out what works best for the student and start from there. There is no one approach that works the best for every language learner out there but CLT presents itself as the end all be all language learning approach. As future teachers we must look at the whole context of the classroom and understand that methodology is just one factor in language learning. There are many more important factors that should not be ignored and other approaches that should be looked at.

There are other approaches to look at besides methodologically driven ones such as language driven approaches. Language driven approaches typically give priority to one or more facet of language. But both types of approaches treat context the same way, secondary. It would be valuable for teachers to look at an approach that places importance on context.

Communicative Language Teaching in China

At the very core CLT and the culture of the PRC are radically different. It is a culture clash when you put the two fundamentals side by side. The principals of education in China verses CTL key components are so different I kept asking why the PRC would even try to teach this way. Hu talks about several important features of Chinese education; education is extremely significant and is put on a pedestal, accumulating knowledge for a practical purpose rather than learning for an immediate purpose (learning equals reading books), everyone is capable of being educated and capable of perfection, and that students are expected to respect their teachers, not challenge them. These key factors in Chinese education are what CLT is trying to avoid. CLT is opposed to teacher dominance in the classroom and think of teachers and students on the same level. Collaborative learning and it is important for student’s to have discussions with the teacher and bounce ideas off of each other.  In China the students are seen as empty vessels and the teacher’s role is to fill them with knowledge as well as being the director of knowledge. This is quite the daunting task and the pressure on the teachers is intimidating. As future teachers we know that children have off days, sometimes they do not want to do their work even if they can sometimes they just do not want to depending on the day. If the student was assessed on that day the teacher could lose credibility based on an off day. This is just one example of how CLT and ELT in China are different.

 The student’s job is also pressure filled, they sacrifice their social lives for perfection in school. This would also put a dent in learning CLT because it is focused on communication. ELT would be extremely hard to teach and learn in PRC and the pressure would be extremely hard to deal with especially since Chinese education demands perfection. The two cultures are so different it would be exceptionally difficult to become proficient in ELT learning through CLT. It is almost like setting the English learners up for failure which would be discouraging in a culture that expects precision in education.