Article+Reflection+by+Emine+Düzövüt

**The Author:** Geoff Thompson
 * Name of the Article:** Some Misconceptions About Communicative Language Teaching

Geoff Thompson, in his article “Some Misconceptions About Communicative Language Teaching”, sets out four of the main misconceptions related to CLT and discusses why they have arisen in order to define some important characteristics of it. According to Thompson, some misconceptions arise because some of the teachers remain confused about what exactly CLT means. At the more abstract end, there is general agreement that CLT involves an emphasis on communicating by means of the foreign language; at the practical classroom end, CLT is strongly associated with a number of particular activity types, such as problem-solving and pair work. However, rather than theory, when it comes to practice part things become less certain. That’s why certain misconceptions about CLT continue to survive, making it difficult for many teachers to see clearly what is happening and to identify the useful innovations that CLT has brought.  Thompson states that the most deep-rooting misconception is that CLT means not teaching grammar. One reason behind this idea is that grammar teaching is impossible because the knowledge that a speaker needs in order to use a language is simply too complex (Prabhu 1987). Another is that grammar teaching is unnecessary because that knowledge is of a kind which cannot be passed on in the form of statable rules, but can only be acquired unconsciously through exposure to the language (Krashen 1988). At that point I am agree with the writer who quotes from Krashen, and I am also the supporter of that idea because I strongly believe that some features of language can be acquired unconsciously by exposure.  The second misconception is that CLT means teaching only speaking. For many learners, the main uses that they are likely to make of the language are oral: getting around in the foreign country if they visit it, talking to visitors from that country, etc. Therefore, the emphasis is likely to be on speaking and listening skills.  The third misconception is that, according to Thompson, CLT means pair work, which means role play. One of the constant themes of CLT is that learners need to be given some degree of control over their learning (since language is a system of choices, the learners must be given the opportunity to learn how to make choices). I am agree with Thompson, because choice is an important part of language learning and it completes the autonomy cycle which is very significant for learners. However, when pair work is used, the learners never choose what to say, they simply work out how to say what they are told to say. The use of pair work is a physical signal of some degree of control and choice passing to the learners; but that needs to be complemented by real choice-which role play, particularly at simpler levels, may not encourage as much as other uses of pair work.  The forth and the last misconception related to CLT is that CLT means expecting too much from the teacher. CLT places greater demands on the teacher than certain other widely-used approaches. Many textbooks now provide very practical, straightforward CLT guidelines and activities which place few demands on the teacher beyond a willingness to try them out with enough conviction. The majority of nonnative teachers of English that I have worked with have a high enough level of proficiency to cope fairly easily with the required shift towards more fluent and less pre-planned use of the language. And it seems very odd for language teachers to argue that listening responsively to what other people say is not part of their job - perhaps teachers who do argue that should be thinking of going into politics instead? To conclude, given the fairly dramatic change in attitudes not only to language but also to learners and teachers that came with the development of CLT, it is not surprising that it has taken some time to work out the implications for all aspects of the teaching/learning process. To apply these ideas to our educational system, we should take the forth one into consideration as teachers, because it places greater demands on the teacher than certain other widely-used approaches. ** Comments: **  ** BY BÜŞRA ELMAS **  I find your article profoundly beneficial, because in your article you stated both the misconceptions about the communicative language teaching and the your supportive ideas on the same subject. One of the misconceptions is " CLT means not teaching grammar" actually it is totally different from this opinion because even in CLT, learners may need to be taught some grammar information, but this is a misconception because of the reasons you underlined: "grammar teaching is impossible because the knowledge that a speaker needs in order to use a language is simply too complex" and "grammar teaching is unnecessary because that knowledge is of a kind which cannot be passed on in the form of statable rules, but can only be acquired unconsciously through exposure to the language". However the real CLT method does not mean the same. Another misconception is that CLT is not based on just speaking as you mentioned. Actually I think that this statement is the most misunderstood part of CLT because most of the teachers assume that CLT approach is based on speaking. This thinking style is kind of fossilize. The other one is  "CLT means expecting too much from the teacher." On the contrary to this view, now, many textbooks provide very practical, direct CLT guidelines and activities which requires few demands on the teacher. In a nutshell, CLT is a teaching method which keeps various techniques in it and takes the versatility as its basis.