The Communicational Approach: Its Key Features and Potential
Keywords:
Communicational Approach (CA), Communicative Language Teaching (CLT)Abstract
The article begins by tracing the origin of the Communicational Approach (CA), highlighting its indebtedness to both the Structural Approach and Communicative Language Teaching (CLT). It is followed by a note on the context and the circumstances of CA’s development. The term ‘Communicational’, as explained by N.S. Prabhu, the chief architect of the project, was deliberately chosen to emphasise that in CA, communication serves as the means rather than the end of language teaching, unlike in CLT. To demonstrate the paradigm shift introduced by CA, the central section of this article presents its ten key features. This is followed by examples of critical acclaim for the methodology. The penultimate section evaluates CA’s relevance to Indian classrooms through the lenses of sociological analysis and the concept of the ‘intact class’. The article concludes by proposing the adoption of CA through a ‘Small is Beautiful’ approach.
References
Beretta, A., & Davies, A. (1985). Evaluation of the Bangalore project. ELT Journal, 39(2), 121-7.
Carter, R., & Nunan, D. (2001). The Cambridge guide to teaching English to speakers of other languages. Cambridge University Press.
Ellis, R. (2003). Task-based language learning and teaching. Oxford University Press.
Howatt, A. (1984). A history of English language teaching. Oxford University Press.
Morgan, D.Y. (1966-67). Structurally graded syllabuses. Bulletin of the Central Institute of English. Hyderabad.
Narayanaswamy, K.R. (1970-71). The Structural Approach to the Teaching of English in India: Its Supreme Irrelevance. Bulletin of the Central Institute of English. Hyderabad.
Nunan, D. (1989). Designing tasks for the communicative classroom. Cambridge University Press.
Nunan, D. (2004). Task-based language teaching. Cambridge University Press.
Peter, F. (1992). English for the disadvantaged: The cognitive and affective variables impinging on their language learning capacities [Doctoral dissertation, Bharathidasan University, Tiruchirappalli]. Shodhganga. http://hdl.handle.net/10603/117442
Prabhu, N.S. (1987). Second language pedagogy. Oxford University Press.
Regional Institute of English Newsletter: Special Series. Volume 1: No.2. September 1979. p.22. Bangalore: Regional Institute of English South India.
Regional Institute of English South India Bulletin. 1981.p.38. Bangalore: Regional Institute of English South India.
Regional Institute of English South India Bulletin: New Approaches to Teaching English. Report of Seminar. No:4 (1). P.164. 1980. Bangalore: Regional Institute of English South India.
Tarinayya. M. (Ed.) (1992). English language teaching: Theory and practice. T.R. Publications.
Tickoo, M. L. (1972). The essential structural approach. Central Institute of English & Foreign Languages Newsletter. 9(10). 14-16.
Tickoo, M. L. (1992). State level syllabuses in English: Outlining an alternative. In M. Tarinayya (Ed.), English language teaching: theory and practice. T.R. Publications.
Willis, D., & Willis, J. (2001). Task-based language learning. In Ronald Carter and David Nunan (Ed.), The Cambridge guide to teaching English to speakers of other languages. Cambridge University Press.
