Polytechnic English Language Lecturers’ Attitudes Towards The Teaching Of Communicative English

Authors

  • S. Thivviyah Sanmugam Faculty of Education, University Teknologi Malaysia, 81310 UTM Johor Bahru, Johor, Malaysia
  • Sarimah Shamsudin Language Academy, University Teknologi Malaysia, KL Campus, 54100 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
  • Gunadevi Jeevi Subramaniam General Studies Department, Politeknik Sultan Azlan Shah, 35950 Behrang, Perak, Malaysia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.11113/sh.v9n4-2.1357

Keywords:

Communicative English teaching at Malaysian polytechnics, attitude towards communicatice English teaching, problems in teaching communicatice English

Abstract

The aim of this study is to explore the polytechnic English Language lecturers’ attitudes towards the teaching of Communicative English, which has been introduced in 2010 in the current English syllabus. It also sets out to investigate the challenges the lecturers face in teaching Communicative English syllabus. Participants of this study were 15 English language lecturers teaching at Malaysian Polytechnics and the main mode of data collection was informal interview. Interview data were qualitatively analysed with initial descriptive codes being assigned to lecturers’ responses. Results from the study indicate that the English language lecturers felt that the current Communicative English syllabus could help to prepare students for the workplace needs. However, issues related to students, institutional policy, non-academic tasks and professionalism were reported as challenges in teaching Communicative English courses. This study allows relevant authorities to identify the attitudes and challenges faced by English language lecturers and to facilitate these lecturers who are teaching the new Communicative English syllabus at Malaysian polytechnics.

References

Abdullah, S., & Majid, F. A. (2013). Reflection on Language Teaching Practice In Polytechnic: Identifying Sources Of Teachers’ Beliefs. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 90, 813-822.

Ansarey, D. (2012). Communicative Language Teaching In EFL Contexts: Teachers Attitude And Perception in Bangladesh. ASA University Review, 6(1), 61-78.

Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by Principles an Interactive Approach to Language Teaching. White Plains, New York: Pearson Education.

Chang, M. (2011). EFL Teachers’ Attitudes Toward Communicative Language Teaching In Taiwanese College. Asian EFL Journal, 53(1), 17-34.

Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches. Sage Publications. United States of America.

Harmer, J. (2005). The Practice of English Language Teaching. 3rd Edition. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Hymes, D. H., & Competence, O. C. (1972). The Communicative Approach to Language Teaching. 2nd Edition. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Koosha, M., &Yakhabi, M. (2013). Problems Associated With The Use Of Communicative Language Teaching In EFL Contexts And Possible Solutions. International Journal of Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 1(2), 63-76.

Larsen-Freeman, D., & Anderson, M. (2013). Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching 3rd Edition. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Lashgari, M., Jamali, F., &Yousofi, N. (2014). Investigating EFL Teachers’ Attitudes Toward CLT. International Journal of Basic Sciences & Applied Research, 3(3), 160-164.

Littlewood, W. (2007). Communicative and Task-Based Language Teaching In East Asian Classrooms. Language Teaching, 40(03), 243-249.

Nunan, D. (1991). Communicative Tasks And The Language Curriculum. TESOL Quarterly, 25(2), 279-295.

Orafi, S. M. S., & Borg, S. (2009). Intentions and Realities In Implementing Communicative Curriculum Reform. System, 37(2), 243-253.

Puteh-Behak, F. (2013). Using a Multiliteracies Approach In A Malaysian Polytechnic Classroom: A Participatory Action Research Project. (Doctoral dissertation), University of Southern Queensland.

Rahimi, M., &Naderi, F. (2014). The Relationship Between EFL Teachers’ Attitudes Towards CLT And Perceived Difficulties Of Implementing CLT In Language Classes. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature, 3(3), 237-245.

Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Communicative Language Teaching. Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching, 2. (2nd Edition). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Sanmugam, S. T.(2013). Target Situation Needs Analysis: Exploring The Linguistic Needs Of Polytechnic Engineering Students Across Three Majors. English for Specific Purposes World, 14(39), 1-9.

Sreehari, P. (2012). Communicative Language Teaching: Possibilities And Problems. English Language Teaching, 5(12), 87-93.

Yalew, M. Y. (2016). Investigating Grade-Nine EFL Teachers’ and Learners’ Beliefs towards CLT and Perceived Difficulties in Implementing Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) in EFL: The Case of Three Debre Markos Secondary Schools, in Ethiopia. Senior Editors,96, 118-141.

Yusof, Y., Mohamad, M. M., &Zainorabidin, A. (2013). Teachers’ Desires And Challenges To Perform Active Teaching Practices.Proceeding of the International Conference on Social Science Research, ICSSR, (e-ISBN 978-967-11768-1-8), 1091-1095.

Downloads

Published

2017-11-30

How to Cite

Sanmugam, S. T., Shamsudin, S., & Subramaniam, G. J. (2017). Polytechnic English Language Lecturers’ Attitudes Towards The Teaching Of Communicative English. Sains Humanika, 9(4-2). https://doi.org/10.11113/sh.v9n4-2.1357