1.0 INTRODUCTION
Communication is one of the important skills in teaching language. It
needed when students and a teacher want to exchange opinion, explanation and
share information.
According to Massila Hamzah and
Arfah yusof (2013, August), “
communication is a process of interaction and sharing of meaning, exchanging
ideas and opinions or sharing of information either in the form of writing,
symbols, sounds or speech, transmitted face-to-face or via the mass media”.
British Council stated (n.d.) “An
approach is a way of looking at teaching and learning. Underlying any language
teaching approach is a theoretical view of what language is, and of how it can
be learnt. An approach gives rise to
methods, the way of teaching something, which use classroom activities or
techniques to help learners learn”.
According to Linguistik Id (2017, February 24), “The communicative
approach is a learner-centred approach.
This approach gives the learner not only grammatical competence but also a
social skill as to what to say. How to say, when to say and where, in order to
satisfy his daily needs as larger aim”.
The Communicative Approach is a famous in the last four decades which
began in the 1960s in Great Britain and was proposed by Hymes (1972). This
approach is used in the teaching of second and foreign language. This approach
is seen to be potential in developing communicative skills among students in
Malaysia.
This approach emphasizes on the communicative capabilities among the
students while, a teacher act as a
facilitator to them. The students need to communicate and use the effective
techniques. They should express or convey ideas verbally or non-verbally.
There are many approaches used by teachers in teaching language. Some of
them are Structuralist Approach, Non-structuralist approach, Learner-Centred
Approaches and Communicative Approach.
I disagree that the communicative approach to language teaching is the
only feasible approach for the Malaysian classrooms. Even though, the
communicative approach is one of the best approaches to teach English but, I
disagree if we only use the approach for the Malaysian classroom. One of my
reasons is there is no approach is 100% perfect. Every approach has pros and
cons. So, that is why we have to use variable approaches because, in a certain
situation, the Communicative Approach is not suitable. For me, only learners
know their strengths and weakness. So, the teacher has to ask them which method
or approach is suitable for them to increase the level of understanding among
them. Besides, we can analyse from
students’ performance too. So, I prefer if we combine several of approaches. It
is supported by a research who conducted
by Anny Joukoulian (n.d.) which stated that to improve the quality of teaching
and to get the best results, teachers ought to combine the advantages of all
approaches and apply in their classrooms. She also advised not to ignore any
approach no matter what. It is as supported by a research conducted by Viera
Boumová (2008) which is stated from his research it seems that both traditional
and modern methodologies bring results with respect to levels of encyclopaedic
knowledge, but that modern methodology is also more effective in encouraging children to communicate and in
creating a positive attitude to the subject. However, the teacher needs to be
knowledgeable too. He or she has to learn and search new knowledge and also
improve his skills to teach this subject. He has to explore and practise a new approach to make sure his can deliver different method for a
different topic. It is important to fulfil
students’ needs and requirement.
The learners are important in teaching and learning process. We have to
make the processes become meaningful for them to attract and tackle their
attention. Learning is quite boring for them because they have to face and
learn every day. It made them fed up. So, that is why we have to use a great
technique. We cannot only use the communicative approach in teaching language.
The teacher needs to choose a teaching method and approach that can engage
teacher and students to learn together. It is supported by Ministry of
Education Malaysia (2002) which stated that teachers should try to provide a
meaningful learning experience to the students so that they do not only have
fun but also show and display an interest in searching further from their own
information. Students should also be given an opportunity to be independent,
explore and experience learning themselves.
In Malaysia, examinations and
assessments are important in our education system. People measure the students
based on the examinations and assessments. If they get the highest result in
the examinations and assessments, they will have a high perception among
students, teachers, parents and public.
So, that is why they emphasize on their examinations and assessments. They
prefer to learn sentence structures, vocabulary,
and grammar than communicative, interactions and language skills because their
examination based on them. Most of the students are less interest in this
approach. So, that is why I disagree with the statement. It supported by
Nikian, S., Mohamad Nor, F., Rejab, A., Hassan, H., and Zainal, Z. (2016) which
stated that although communicative approach rapidly gained extensive acceptance
in western countries, adopting communicative approach as a curriculum
innovation has generally been difficult in Asian countries. The factors that
contribute to this lack of success in the implementation of the communicative approach in Asian regions include
the exam-oriented education system that is practiced in some countries.
According to research conducted by
Reza Raissi and Fazirah Mohd Nor (2013) among ESL teachers in secondary
schools, Pasir Gudang, Johor who stated that 76.7% of their respondents
mentioned favourable attitudes regarding
the implementation of this approach in Malaysian secondary schools. The
respondents who had unfavourable
attitudes regarding CLT principles mention it is too difficult to apply a
communicative approach in a class with the students with different first
language background. So, that is one of my reasons I disagree with the
statement. The level of mastery of English among Malay, Chinese and India is
different. So, it is too hard for us to use the approach among different level
of mastery English because some of them cannot follow the lesson.
My stand is supported by Reza Raissi
and Fazirah Mohd Nor (2013) too, which the respondents expressed regarding the
CLT principles related to teaching grammar, they believed that when you are
teaching grammar implicitly students cannot understand grammar principles and
they believed that teaching grammar by old methods and introducing sentence
patterns and structures, students can learn better and teaching grammar by
implicit instruction cannot help the learners to be proficient in grammar
enough. I agree with their opinion. Even though the students can improve their
communicative by CLT but they still have grammar problems. They not too
understanding and confuse in any aspects
of grammar. CLT only focus on fluency rather than accuracy. So, that is why
they always made mistakes when talked. The teachers have to comment on the
rules of sentences and words order to make sure that the students are aware and
pinpoint about the grammatical mistake.
In my opinion, the statement of “The
Communicative Approach to language teaching is the only feasible approach for
the Malaysian classrooms” is a false statement. There is no circular from
Ministry of Education asks teachers to use only this approach in the classroom.
They can use any approaches as long as they give positive impacts to the
students. We have to create a win-win situation. We hope the students can
improve their education and career in future while,
the government who invest in education hope several benefits from the young
workforce to compete for jobs in the international market.
The teachers have to use various
methods of teaching to give positive effects to both parties. There are many of
language teachers in Malaysia misunderstood about Communicative Approach. They
think that linguistic knowledge is not important and all they have to do is
talk to people. So, they rarely emphasize about grammar and pronunciation to
their students. So, this situation will give negative effects to the students.
It is supported by Zuraidah Mohd Noor (2016 July 10) which stated that they have to combine the
traditional content knowledge associated with language teaching with an
understanding of how linguistic knowledge is used in communication.
Communicative teaching is sometimes misunderstood, and taken to mean that
linguistic knowledge is unimportant, and that to learn a language, all you have
to do is talk to people. This misunderstanding has led to a decline in the
teaching of grammar and pronunciation all over the world, including Malaysia.
That
is a false statement which Reza Raissi and Fazirah Mohd Nor (2013) stated in
their research which the respondents expressed that all of the secondary schools of
the Johor state should use the same textbook which seems to be adapted to this
district, but they have mentioned that they are not only focusing on the
assigned textbooks by Ministry of Education of Malaysia but they are using some
supplementary materials like grammar and workbooks. This situation means that, the teachers should use several types of
materials which they think the materials can give the best for the students.
They cannot focus 100% only for the Ministry of Education syllabus and
techniques but they should modify their techniques according to the students’
development.
Besides, Reza Raissi and Fazirah
Mohd Nor (2013) also stated in their research which the secondary school teachers’
belief, as they had weak students in different skills and components of
English, they had to use translation in the ESL classes, and they mentioned
that they have to apply translation in their classes as students cannot
understand different words, idioms or paragraphs fully in English which seems
to be another challenge for teachers to apply CLT fully in Malaysian secondary
schools. So, the CLT is not the only feasible approach for the Malaysian
classroom. That is a false statement. The teachers are more understood about
their students. The students with lower achievement,
especially in English, always think that learning English is difficult,
feel anxious and embarrassed with their friends and teachers. They learnt in fear. So, the government cannot give
a strict order about teaching approaches or methods whereas, the teachers have
to identify a suitable method or approach for their students.
Besides, we cannot only use CLT
fully for primary and secondary school at the rural area because students at rural
area are less exposed to English. They have been using their mother tongue in
daily conversation. So, it is too difficult to encourage them to speak in
English. They have no confident to use
English in communication. They might be a passive student in English class.
They only can speak and answer in simple sentences. It is supported by Kozue
(2013) asserted that many children in rural areas begin school in a language
that they are not familiar with and/or do not fully understand. This is indeed
true in the Malaysian context, whereby those children in the rural area have
difficulties in learning English. This might
be due to the surrounding that does not support the exposure of English
language. It is as supported by Ting et al. (2011) that for some quarters of
the Malaysian population, learning English may be like learning a foreign
language and they have limited need for the language in daily life. Therefore,
they face difficulties in learning English
language in schools.
Even though the communicative
approach is a modern approach but it has its disadvantages too. It is not
suitable to implement in too many students in the class because of it so hard
for us to focus on their communication one by one. Even though we have to
encourage them to communicate but at the same time we have to check their
language and it is too hard for us to check alone. So, that is why I say that
is a false statement. It is supported by Qiang and Ning (2011) which stated
that teaching large classes is difficult for teachers to discipline the class,
especially for students who lack self-managing in studying, to satisfy all the
needs of students who have different interests (personalities and
capabilities), to organise efficient class activities due to the constraints of
time and space, to provide equal chances for the students to participate and
practise; to give timely and effective feedback and evaluation. Actually, it is
so many problems arise when we have to conduct a large number of students in a
class. Some of them are hard for us to control their discipline and activities;
difficult to contact with the students sitting at the back and for students to
get individual attention, and to evaluate the effectiveness of learning
process.
We have used a traditional approach
like deductive approach in a long time. So, it is too hard for the students to
accept the new approach because of some of them
more biased to traditional teaching styles which are dominated by the book-centred approach, teacher-centered
approach, emphasize on memorise, focus on
reading writing, vocabulary and
translation. So, that is why I argue with the statement. It is supported by
Incecay and Incecay (2009) which commented that it is not easy for EFL students
to forget their traditional learning styles and habits which are full of
teachers and book-centred approaches.
Because of it, they do not enjoy with communicative activities. No matter what
we have done, they still fear and afraid in making mistake. They are shy when
other students pay attention to them. Besides, they have nothing to say because
the teacher has selected unsuitable topic for them and they do not have
information about it.
4.0 CONCLUSION
The communicative teaching language
has been recognized as a good approach to implement in the world includes
Malaysia. However, it is still difficult to apply in Malaysia because of
several factors even though the teacher has tried their best to implement this
approach but still have some problems.
Even though we want our students to
be able to talk fluency and confidently but, at the same time they have to use
grammar and pronunciation correctly. So, that is why the teachers need to use
other methods together to overcome this problem. The students need to learn
grammar in an implicit manner. They need to learn how to pronounce words
correctly to make sure native speakers can understand what they say.
CLT is a suitable and favourable method in Malaysia but, it should be
modified to a context of Malaysia. It should be combining with other techniques.
Grammar Translation Method has to use until now because it gives clear
explanations about grammar and it helps the students to learn better.
Whatever approaches have we applied,
we have to analyze the effectiveness to our students. If we saw the approach
gave positive impacts to our students, we have to continue the approach.
However, they are human. They have feelings and they might bore if we use the
same approach. So, we have to use several methods to avoid them from sleepy in
our lesson. Make sure that we can create a fun environment.
As a teacher, our task is not only teaching but we are responsible to
overcome problem students’ like laziness, truancy, not interested, less
motivation and not fully focused too. So, we have to find out causes of the
problems and be their friends to motivate them. As long as their problems are
not settling, they will give many negative impacts to us, their parents,
school, society and country. Remember we
are the person who shapes our society and country.
No comments:
Post a Comment