Педагогічні науки

Довженко О.А.

Сергієнко Т.М.

Сумський Національний Аграрний Університет

Maximizing learning potential in the communicative classroom

Communicative language teaching (CLT) which started in the early 1970s has become the driving force that shapes the planning, implementation, and evaluation of English language teaching (ELT) programmes in most parts of the world. Curriculum planners are preoccupied with communicative syllabus design. Materials producers have flooded the textbook market with books carrying the label 'communicative'. Testing experts have come out with batteries of communicative performance tests. Teachers invariably describe themselves as communicative teachers. Thus, theorists and practitioners alike almost unanimously emphasize communication of one kind or another.

The emphasis on communication seems to slacken, however, where it matters most: in the classroom. In theory, a communicative classroom seeks to promote interpretation, expression, and negotiation of meaning. This means learners ought to be active, not just reactive, in class. They should be encouraged to ask for information, seek clarification, express an opinion, agree and/or disagree with peers and teachers. More importantly, they should be guided to go beyond memorized patterns and monitored repetitions in order to initiate and participate in meaningful interaction. In reality, however, such a communicative classroom seems to be a rarity. Research studies show that even teachers who are committed to CLT can fail to create opportunities for genuine interaction in their classrooms.

This article is based on one such inquiry which resulted in a framework of macrostrategies for teacher development .I present here a follow-up study that seeks to assess how far the framework will help the CLT teacher become genuinely communicative.

Macrostrategies

The idea of macrostrategies is based on a rather self-evident hypothesis: L2 learning/teaching needs, wants, and situations are unpredictably numerous. We can therefore only help teachers to develop a capacity to generate varied and situation-specific ideas within a framework that makes theoretical and pedagogic sense. Such a framework is here conceptualized in terms of macrostrategies which are general plans derived from theoretical, empirical, and pedagogical knowledge related to L2 learning and teaching. Each macrostrategy can generate several situation-specific classroom techniques or microstrategies. There are five macrostrategies, which are briefly described below:

Macrostrategy 1: Create learning opportunities in class

The first strategy—creates learning opportunities in class—is based on the popular belief that we cannot really teach a language: we can only create conditions under which it will develop in its own way. The creation of learning opportunities is not entirely constrained by a predetermined syllabus or a prescribed textbook because it is the result of a joint production by participants engaged in the classroom event. Thus, learning opportunities can be created by the teacher as well as the learner.

Macrostrategy 2: Utilize learning opportunities created by learners

The second strategy—utilize learning opportunities created by learners—is closely linked to the first, and is based on the premise that teachers and learners are co-participants in the generation of classroom discourse. The teacher is one of the participants—one with greater competence and authority, of course, but only a participant—and as such cannot afford to ignore any contributory discourse from other partners engaged in a joint venture to accomplish classroom lessons. It is therefore imperative for the teacher to show a willingness to utilize learning opportunities created by the learner.

Macrostrategy 3: Facilitate negotiated interaction between participants

The third strategy—facilitates negotiated interaction between participants—refers to meaningful learner-learner and learner-teacher interaction in class. Negotiated interaction entails the learner's active involvement in such discourse features as clarification, confirmation, comprehension, requesting, repairing, and reacting. Above all, the term 'negotiated' means that the learner should have the freedom to initiate interaction, not just react and respond to what the teacher says. This macrostrategy is the most important of all and is premised on theoretical insights and empirical results which overwhelmingly stress the significance of meaningful interaction in the learner's comprehension of classroom input and in L2 development.

Macrostrategy 4: Activate the intuitive heuristics of the learner

The fourth strategy—activate the intuitive heuristics of the leaner—is based on the premise that all normal human beings automatically possess intuitive heuristics, that is, conscious and unconscious cognitive processes of inquiry that help them discover and assimilate patterns and rules of linguistic behaviour. One way to activate the intuitive heuristics is to provide enough data so that the learners can infer and internalize underlying rules from their use in varied communicative contexts.

Macrostrategy 5: Contextualize linguistic input

The fifth strategy—contextualize linguistic input—is based on the psycholinguistic insight that comprehension and production involve rapid and simultaneous integration of syntactic, semantic, and discourse phenomena. Pedagogically, it means that linguistic input should be presented to learners in units of discourse so that they can benefit from the interactive effects of various linguistic components. Introducing isolated sentences will deprive learners of necessary pragmatic cues, thereby rendering the process of meaning-making harder.