"It's Always More Difficult Than You Plan and Imagine": Teachers' Perceived Difficulties in Introducing the Communicative Approach in South Korea

Abstract

Despite the widespread adoption of communicative language teaching (CLT) in ESL countries, research suggests that curricular innovations prompted by the adoption of CLT in EFL countries have generally been difficult. The literature on curriculum innovation suggests that teachers' understanding of an innovation is central to its success. A study of a group of South Korean secondary school English teachers' perceived difficulties in adopting CLT reveals that the difficulties have their source in the differences between the underlying educational theories of South Korea and those of Western countries. The results suggest that, to adopt CLT, EFL countries like South Korea will need to change their fundamental approach to education and that implementation should be gradual and grounded in the countries' own EFL situations. In the long run, EFL countries should establish their own contingent of language researchers in order to develop English teaching theories more suitable for their EFL contexts. Change agents must study teachers' perceptions of an innovation to ensure its success.

Factors Affecting the Implementation of Communicative Language Teaching in Taiwanese College English Classes

“…Various research studies reported that instruction in EFL classrooms was still based on the traditional approach (Littlewood, 2007;Nunan, 2003;Savignon and Wang, 2003). The ideas of CLT are different from the educational values and traditions of many EFL settings (Burnaby & Sun, 1989;Li, 1998). In addition, situational factors such as large class sizes, test-oriented instruction, and students' low proficiency also influenced CLT practices.…”

“…The implementation of CLT has encountered problems and resistance in EFL classrooms (Ellis, 1996;Li, 1998;Liao, 2000;Yu, 2001). Various research studies reported that instruction in EFL classrooms was still based on the traditional approach (Littlewood, 2007;Nunan, 2003;Savignon and Wang, 2003).…”

“…In some studies, Chinese teachers expressed difficulties in including cultural aspects into their classes because of lack of experience in an English speaking country (Liao, 2003;Yu, 2001). Students' resistance and low-English proficiency also deter teachers from using CLT (Chang, 1999;Li, 1998;Liao, 2003;Liao, 2006;Tsai, 2007;Yu, 2001). These situational factors may weaken the teachers' efforts to use CLT.…”

“…Various research studies showed that teachers usually used form-based instruction because they felt pressure to help students pass the exams (Karim, 2004;Li, 1998;Liao, 2003;Liao, 2006;Menking, 2001;Pacek, 1996;Tsai, 2007;Yu, 2001). In addition, the research findings suggest that teachers find it difficult to manage group work for large classes (Tsai, 2007;Li, 1998;Liao, 2003;Liao, 2006;Yu, 2001;Karim, 2004). There are also factors that arise from the teachers and the students.…”

“…CLT advocates teaching practices that develop communicative competence in authentic contexts (Larsen-Freeman, 2000). However, the theories and practices of CLT have faced various challenges in EFL contexts (Anderson, 1993;Ellis, 1996;Li, 1998;Liao, 2000;Takanashi, 2004;Yu, 2001). …”