21st Century EFL: Enhancing the Communicative Approach
Maria R. Coady, USA and Maryna Tsehelska, Ukraine
Maria Coady is an Associate Professor of ESOL and Bilingual Education. She is a Specialist Scholar with the Fulbright Commission, and her research is teacher education for English learners. E-mail: mcoady@coe.ufl.edu
Maryna Tsehelska is a Chair of the English Language and Methodology Department at KryvyiRih National University. She also runs language schools where the newest ideas of teaching are applied. E-mail: mtsehelska4@yahoo.com
English language use has become increasingly dynamic with the creation and expansion of new international communication networks and the ubiquity of technologies in and beyond the English-speaking world. In this paper, we problematize the traditional and pervasive communicative approach (CA) to the teaching of English in foreign language contexts. We argue that CA has not kept pace with 21st century language teaching and learning needs, including the demand in international contexts for "academic language" development. We propose an "Enhanced" CA that emphasizes uses of new technologies, academic language development, and global nature of English.
Menu
Introduction
Communicative competence in EFL
21st Century English language development
Blurring the EFL/ESL divide?
Preparing EFL teachers: The case of Ukraine
Conclusion
References
English language use has become increasingly dynamic with the creation and expansion of new international communication networks and the ubiquity of technologies in and beyond the English-speaking world. While there is a persistent gap between low v. middle, minority v. majority families and access to technology (Lopez, Gonzalez-Barrera & Patten, 2013), the demand for English in new and varied contexts such as the Internet continues to illuminate challenges and raise questions for English language development (ELD).In this paper we argue that English as a Foreign Language (EFL) teaching methods have failed to keep pace with the nature and use of global English. Moreover, we argue that the contexts in which English is currently used are influencing the very nature of ELD such that there is blurring of the traditional EFL/ESL (English as a Second Language) divide.
In this paper we overview the context of EFL teaching, emphasizing where EFL changes are occurring in the field. We reflect on the changing nature of English, particularly its use as a global language and lingua franca. Next, we describe the need to reposition traditional EFL teaching and learning away from the current Communicative Approach (CA)to a new way of teaching, which we refer here to as an “Enhanced Communicative Approach” (ECA). We argue that the latter more accurately reflects the needs, demands, and varied contexts in which learners acquire and use English as an international language. We use the case of English language development in Ukraine to illustrate our points. Our goal in this paper is to begin to raise questions and voice some concerns regarding the preparation of students learning English around the globe to participate in multiple and varied English language contexts and its corollary concern: training teachers to navigate and to prepare students for those contexts.
Once upon a time, teaching English as a foreign language followed a largely predictable plan: wherever possible, English was taught by native speakers (NSs), who prepared students to achieve communicative competence. Essentially, EFL is taught in the countries where it is not spoken as a native language of the majority of people, and English as a Second Language (ESL) is taught where it is the native language. The goal of communicative competence in EFL, a term coined by Dell Hymes in 1966, was to prepare users (speakers) to make utterances appropriately in order to achieve a particular goal (or language function), such as to praise, to ask permission, and so on. The linguistic knowledge base of communicative competence included grammar, syntax, morphology, and phonology with an emphasis on the social context in which the language was to be used.
Using the communicative approach to teaching (a methodological derivative of the aim of communicative competence), EFL teachers prepared students to communicate with imaginary native English speakers, in imaginary contexts, and for imaginary purposes. Language learning tasks included building vocabulary for greetings, asking directions, using transportation, ordering food in restaurants, and so on. Students requiring more detailed language training could follow an English for Specific Purposes (ESP) sequence, in which specialized language and vocabularies were taught to students to prepare them to perform specific functions, such as French speakers taught “business English” in order to trade stock on the French stock market or bourse. These were not the only uses, but the concept of preparing speakers for these imaginary spaces or, “imagined communities,” as Anderson (1991) described with respect to the construct of nation, pervaded the methods and materials used by EFL teachers. Training materials were developed based on the communicative approach and typically included topics such as greetings, the seasons, clothing, health, travel, and transportation; students practiced the language via role plays, attempting to attain NS-like fluency and ability levels. Examples of these curricula and textbooks include the “Headway” series and “Total English”, both popular in EFL contexts and still in use today.
During the latter 20th century, when the use of English grew exponentially (Graddol, 2006) and people became more mobile internationally, English was increasingly used as a common language or lingua franca, for communication among users who did not share first languages. Despite this demographic shift in learners of English, the communicative approach continued to be valued as “the” approach to teaching English.
In spite of the pervasive nature of EFL and its imaginary contexts, it takes little imagination to recognize the reality of English language use in the 21st century. Native English speakers no longer dominate the landscape in international contexts, at least not in terms of numbers. Countries in which English is spoken as a native language, referred to as the “core,” are far outnumbered by English speakers in non-core, or “periphery,” countries. And there is a growing “semi-periphery” as well. Graddol (2006) estimates that about 350 million speakers currently exist in the core, yet there are an additional 350 million English second language learners (ESL) and 750 million or more who are learning English as a foreign language worldwide. Yet the non-core is not a homogenous group. Former English speaking colonies, such as Nigeria and Hong Kong, differ from contexts in which English holds a more recent place in the country’s language planning policy (Phillipson, 2003). Increasingly, language policies in those countries mandate the teaching of English as a foreign language because English is viewed as critical to the overall economic development and participation in the global economy, no matter how remote those possibilities may be. McKay (2012) notes that for some, English can result in economic and social benefits; however, for others, learning English provides “[un]realistic accounts of what a knowledge of English may bring to their lives” (p. 39). Ukraine is one such country, where English has been taught as a foreign language as a mandatory subject in all state schools, yet questions are being raised as to the purpose for which Ukrainian might use English and the overall benefit of English for the development of the country (Coady, in preparation).
The differences in histories and policies highlight the myriad varieties of English currently being used worldwide. One cannot argue that Indians are not NS of English any more than one cannot argue that New Zealanders are not NS of the language. Further, speakers of Singlish (Singaporean English) speak a variety of English that differs from that spoken in Belize. So while there remains an imagined NS variety of English that is still used to guide instruction, materials, and methods in EFL contexts and that follows CA, the reality is that today’s students of English are more likely to encounter English used by non-native speakers (NNS) in non face-to-face interactions.
EFL students are increasingly likely to communicate with speakers of English or to access information in English via the Internet than they are in realized imagined-spaces. However, as noted earlier, those English speakers are not probably from the core. As English continues to dominate the industries of business and technology, its status as a lingua franca is not about to change in the foreseeable future. This reality is exacerbated by the ubiquity of technology in the form of handheld computers and tablets, Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs), such as Coursera, Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Games (MMORPGs), and the ability to obtain information, data, and to access research in English on a extensive scale. Hence, the nature of global communication in the 21st century requires us to envision and tap into new contexts (places, situations, and speakers) of English. It is for these spaces that we must prepare students.
In addition to changes in context in which English is used, in the field of English language teaching and learning, scholars have raised the question of whether or not there has been a merging of the English as a Foreign/ English as a Second Language divide. Some (Bell, 2013) argue that the nature of teaching EFL, which includes an emphasis on culture (typically the culture of the core) and, noted earlier, imaginary contexts of language use, is distinct from the nature of ESL. Yet other scholars see the debate differently (McKay, 2012), and articles describing assessment practices and curriculum for both ESL and EFL contexts are not unusual ( |
