Chapter 10 The Goal of Communicative Curriculum Learning Objectives After learning this chapter, the students will be able to: 1. conceive the essential parts ofa communicative curriculum properly in language teaching. describe the conceptual and functional meaning well. 3. develop the goal of communicative curriculum proportionally. Defining Communicative Curriculum Communicative Curriculum defines language learning as learning how to communicate as a member of a particular socio- cultural group. It draws from three major areas: a view of the nature of language as seen by the field of sociolinguistic, a cognitively based view of language learning, and a humanistic approach in education. These theoretical view which influence the goals of a communicative curriculum as shown in diagram 10. Diagram 10.1 : An idealised communicative curriculum, consists of sociocultural view, cognitive view, and humanistic approach. CCaricuum and Material Development - Practicl Learning Material | 871. Sociocultural View The Sociocultural View is an approach to understand why humans behave the way they do. The sociocultural perspective seeks to understand human behaviour and personality development by examining the rules of the social groups and sub- groups in which the individual is a member. A sociocultural perspective are: a. Focusing on the social context as central to learning. b. Stresses the importance of social interaction, communication and instruction in learning. ©. The social environment is not just a place where learning happens, itis integral to it. Nowadays, Sociolinguistics has viewed any language as inseparable from its sociocultural context, therefore most of theoretical work in sociolinguisties has been directed towards constructing hypotheses concerning with the nature of this connection between language and society or culture. The experts from the area of this sociocultural view are Sapir and Whorf (1920- 19303) more concerned with the relationship of meaning in culture and language. Firth and Halliday (before World War II) built theoretical models which encompassed elements in language with factors in the social and cultural matrix in which language is grounded. As one sociolinguist has stated ‘ there are no single- style speakers, every speaker adopts a style of speaking which is appropriate to the particular social context (Labov 1970). A key concept in sociolinguisties is focus on the speech community rather than on an individual or idealised speaker as the focus of language. Of consequence to the language teaching profession is the fact that sociolinguisties deals explicitly with languages in ways that have far- reaching significance for their teaching and learning, particularly the question: What language do we teach? In terms of our discussion, sociolinguistics plays a vital role in influencing the specification of language content in a communicative syllabus. Of the various thrust of sociolinguistics during the past twenty years, probably the concept of communicative competence has had the greatest impact on the field of language pedagogy. Since Hymes (1972) 88 | curricutum and Material Development - Practical Learning Materialspaper on the topic, the concept of communicative competence has continued to develop. Though not all would define it in exaetly the same way, an accepted definition begins with the idea that communicative competence requires knowing not only the language code or the form of language, but also what to say to whom and how to say it appropriately in any given situation, It deals with the social and cultural knowledge that speakers are presumed to have which enables them to use and interpret linguistic forms. Communicative Competence also includes Knowledge of who may speak or may not speak in certain settings, when to speak and when to remain silent, how to talk to persons of different statuses and roles. 2. Cognitive-Based View of Language Learning Course planning which centres around learners and their needs, must concern itself with individual differences in learning styles. Recently second language research has looked at individual traits much more seriously. Moreover, the growing emphasis on cognitive psychology and information processing models in education has given special impetus to the area of research related to language learning in general (River and Melvin, 1981). For curriculum planning and material development, the emphasis is to design tasks that will allow learners to experience a variety of cognitive activities. Second language learning is not a set of easy steps that can be programmed in a quick way. The learning of a second language is a complex process, involving a seemingly infinite number of variables. In cognitive- based view of language learning, the variables can be specified as follows: a) Strategies and tacties Second language researchers have long been disrupted by the fact that language learners show both high levels of systematical and considerable varience in their acquisition processes. Thus we have to comprehend the difference between universal learning process and idiosyncratic feature in order to achieve acquisitional processes well. McLaughlin (1981) distinguishes between ‘ acquisition heuristics’ which are the universal processes, consisting of language- specific as well as general cognitive mechanisms that are used by all learners when sent - Practica Learning Materials | 89= learning language, in the meantime individual ‘operating procedures’ which are idiosyncratic features. Furthermore, Seliger (1983) defined strategies and tactics in more operational distinetion for the proper purposes. According to him, strategies are superordinato, abstract, constant, and long- term cognitive processes. These are general cognitive mechanisms used by all learners ignoring language background, age, or acquisitional context. While Tactics are short- term processes used to overcome temporary and immediate obstacles to the achievement of the long- range goal of language acquisition. Tactics take the form of rule using memorisation, mnemonic devices, input utilisation techniques and the like, Learners may not have any control over strategies which are innate in nature, but they could be made aware of their own tactics which work better for them, Thus we can conclude that strategy is adopted for collective groups while tactic mostly applied for individuals. b) Context- Embedded and Context- Reduced Language Use One of the confusing characteristies of second language acquisition is the difference that seems to exist between the strategies or processes needed for acquiring the language in its natural environment (outside school) and learning it as a school subject (in the classroom). Educators cannot fail to observe that immigrant children from literate, middle- class backgrounds who have been exposed to more abstract vocabulary, or have been sensitised to both context- reduced and decontextualised use of language in their first language can cope with the task of second language learning in the school environment more readily than children from lower- class backgrounds who have little experience with decontextualised language even in their first language. One explanation for this difference is offered by Cummins (1978, 1979, 1980) in his interdependence hypothesis, According to Cummins, the cognitive- academic aspects of a first and second language are thought to be interdependent and proficiency ina second language in a school setting is predicted to depend largely on previous learning of literacy- related functions of language. Cummins calls these functions Cognitive, Academic, Language Proficiency (CALP) and they require a context reduced use of language. CALP can be empirically distinguish from Basic Interpersonal Communicative 90 | Curriculum and Material Development -Practisal Learning Materialsdures’ ics in ng to term ed by ‘ional come long- using d the anate work d for Use uage egies tural a the dren d to text age hool unds heir | by esis. and ina ins ney can tive Skills (BICS) which are more relevant to the natural settings where interpersonal communication takes place. Cummins (1981) argues for a continuum of contextual support available for expressing and receiving meaning. At one end of the continuum we find context- embedded communication where meaning is actively negotiated by the participants, while at the other end, there is context- reduced communication. In context- embedded communication the participants can rely on various non- linguistics elements which help support meaning when the linguistic features are not sufficient. In context- embedded communication the participants can rely on various non- linguistic elements which help support meaning when the linguistic features are not sufficient. In a context- reduced situation, the participants need to rely much more extensively on linguistic clues. Cummins’ context continuum is intersected by another continuum based on the amount of information processing that is involved in the task; tasks which are well- learned and automated require little cognitive effort, while those that are not well- learned require more cognitive involvement. Thus the most difficult situation is one which is context-reduced with a cognitively demanding task. The relevance of Cummins’ explanation to language learning is that we need to distinguish between Tanguage used in everyday, face- to- face interaction where fluency or communication strategies may be of greatest importance and school settings where the learning tasks are much more cognitively demanding. ) The Holistic Approach to Language Learning A holistic approach to learning process will improve creativity and self: expression, nourish cognitive processes, and concern with personality traits of the specific learners if it turns back due to crities of the behavioural approach to learning. As a result to criticism of Dehaviourism, learning theorists have tended to return to the earlier Gestalt psychology, transforming it into cognitive- field theory and discovery learning. In these approaches, perception, motivation, and theoretical deductivity become strongly emphasised. Particularly Curriculum and Material Development - Practical Learning Materials | 1.important in this work has been influenced by Maslow’s (1954) humanistic psychology, also known as holistic- dynamic which suggests a much more comprehensive perspective motivation than the behaviourist- response- reinforcement theory. Nowadays language learning theory has been reshaped to incorporate a mentalistic- cognitivist view which is compatible with a holistic approach to learning in general. In the meantime, language Tearning theory has also changed over its emphasis from linguistic competence to sociocultural appropriateness and communicative competence, influenced by developments in sociolinguistics. On the other hand, a communicative orientation to learning and teaching places high value on overall interaction and on message transmission, so by definition it is not compatible with a discrete point view of language learning. It is the integrative holistic view empasising the totality of language learning which works best with a communicative approach. It becomes obvious that the development led towards a shift from accuracy and form to appropriateness and meaning has also led from a discrete view to a holistic perspective. The Fundamentals of a Humanistic Curriculum In many instances, communicative language programmes have incorporated to educational philosophies based on humanistic psychology or a view which in the context of goals for other subject areas has been called ‘the humanistic curriculum’ (MeNeil, 1977). While the major focus of a humanistic approach is the development of the whole learners with an emphasis on emotional aspect of the leaner. Within the humanistic approach is about creating a need within the learner and cooperate with motivation. Education needs a humanistic approach. Humanism teaching theory considers the research on cognition, emotion, interests, motivation and potential of the learners during the process of learning. In operational terms, a language programme which draws on humanistic curriculum goals tries to acvieve these objectives: a) Great emphasis is placed on meaningful communication from the learner's point of view; texts should be authentic, tasks should be 92 | curriculum and Material Development- Pract Learning Moteriascommunicative, outcomes should be negotiated and not predetermined. b) The learner is the focal point of this approach and respect for the individual is highly valued. ©) Learning is viewed as a self- realisation experience in which the Jearner has considerable say in the decision- making process. 4) Other learners are viewed as a support group within which they interact, help, and evaluate themselves and each other, as well as the whole process. e) The teacher is a facilitator who is more concerned with class atmosphere than the adherence to the syllabus or the materials in use. £) The first language of the learner is viewed as a useful aid when itis necessary for understanding and formulating hypotheses about the target language, particularly in the early stages. ‘The Goals of Communicative Curriculum Communicative curriculum will place language teaching within the framework of the curriculum itself from a communicative point of view. Communicative curriculum defines language learning as learning how to communicate as a member of a particular sociocultural group. The social conventions governing language form and behaviour within the groups are, therefore centralizing to the process of language learning. Communicative goals have brought about a more comprehensive view of the language component. Consequently, content in the curriculum has been expanded to include not only structures, situations, themes or topics, but also concepts (notions) and functions. The content of an utterance can be considered in terms of two major types of meaning: a) The propositional or conceptual meaning of an utterance ‘b) Its illocutionary force ‘The conceptual meaning expresses our perception of events, entities, states, causes, location, time, etc, including grammatical elements such as agents and instruments. Ina syllabus, these elements are realized as notions or semantico- grammatical categories. On the other hand, the illocutionary force of an Curriculum and Material Development - Practical Learning Materials | 93spouoioyy Ounusve7 ooponag -rwaundopaac pouspoye pu umraysinD | 6 0} safor Jo suoISsnosIp YBnomp A|BupjLYs your peyorpul uoq sey seo San eoTUNUTWZOD YATM sasInod UF SoNTeA DYSTUBUANY JO WOISHAUL ay “uorsuawip -papuvdxe Jo vase onpord pu “vare ssav0xd ‘eoxe yusyHO0 puedxs 0} 1909 s[eoS aaeoTUMUNUOD : Zor wreISeIC. Eouauiey Pave Fania Coan Peace “It weaderp uy UMoYs se AtOMO IME XULeA| PUL ‘spaoU IoUIRD] ‘sIseydUD SqIp[s 3noge st onpoad ayy ey ‘sInoyIOm Teqo[s pue ‘eanvard ‘aartUBoo JO sysisuoo vase ssavord ayy, ‘uoReoIunUUos ayerIdordde pue fnySurTeaU 40} soursyy ‘souoaq~wo [euoRSUNY ‘saLoSaye eONRMMUIAS onUEUIES se ons wore ]W9}U09 auOS TEM [Lap 0} aaky am quazuod aBensuy] ayy puedxs 0) ‘raxamoyy ‘o1d0} Jo souayy ‘uomeoruUTUIOD sof papeot sTINIs [BUORIUN, ‘souloeqeo [eorreuTuresS -ooUEUTDS :salJOJUAALY PauoMUaUI JaLLIE Say, aqp Sururquios ‘Jepour aayowsoyUL ue UTEAIM yuOIUOD Surddeut Aq st snquILAs Teuonou v ur Ayoneuraysis axaryoe ues srodojasap Aem auQ ‘wopezperoues ©} peo] AAuoroYUT jou op pur 1eUTeU oAEUIAISAs UT pazTUEBIO KpISeO Jou are suonou ox “Bujueay Jo uonEZTURsIO oy} 0} VOLDeATp [nySuTWEOUE 9a18 ysnut suoRsolgo yey} ‘exoyarOY, “sauos BuIddays se suonezTer8UE Suisn fq uopsinboe ey, ur ssasBord Apueysuoo uvo siouzeel WIP os [eHOJUE ay} oztuLSI0 pihoys 3 {Supour ore [fe yoy spresor [eo8 poypods [Jam & axey plnoys snquy[ss agenFue] pos y ‘279 ‘uonE AUT ue ‘A8ojode ue qsonbox & sv 1xo]UO9 UfeZe9 v UT suoKoUNy oouRIONN. qemnopred oy reyoym sSueauI jeuonaMNy sy sassaidxe aouereNNteachers and learners (Fansclow 1977, Allwright 1972). In fact, the metaphor of the cooperative enterprise which is advocated for communicative language teaching has been characterised as one of teach/learn. In this role- relationship between teachers and learners, their endeavours take place in a cooperative, open, and caring manner. The teacher is there to guide learners, not to tell them. The teacher's role is recognised as a facilitating one, with leaners proceeding according to their own inner eapacities, not in a lock- step plan only of the teacher's creation. ‘An attitude of cooperation and sharing is stressed, as well as an emphasis on group activities. Summary Communicative curriculum defines language learning as Jearning how to communicate as a member of a particular sociocultural group, and exploits to expanded content area, expanded process, and expanded product area. In communicative goals the contents of utterance are the propositional meaning and illocutionary force, while types meaning of utterance vary notional and functional meaning. Communicative goals expand the three areas of principles i.e. content area, process area, and product area. Review Questions /Tasks 4. Does Active Learning have the same meaning with communicative curriculum? Explain well and give some simple samples! 2. What is the difference between notional and functional meaning? Explain in brief and give your best samples! 3. What is cognitive perspective? Explain it well and give some examples! 4. Skills emphasis, learner needs,and learner autonomy are the goals expanded in product area. Explain in brief! curves and Material Development -Proctial Learning Materials | 95What I hear, I forget. What I see, Iremember. What I talk, I understand. What I do, I comprehend. Learn today, Reach the Future References Dubin, Fraida & Olshtain, Elite. 1990. Course Design. New York : Cambridge University Press. Richards, Jack C. 2005. Curriculum Development In Language Teaching. New York : Cambridge University Press. www. Florencedesignacademy.com/ Product Design. www. Capital. Edu > Academics > CELT Nunan, David. 1991. Language Teaching Methodology. Great Britain : Prentice Hall International. Fanselow, Michael & Allwright. 1977. The Infusion Of Humanistic Value. Ucla : The University Of Washington. http://fanselowlab. Psych.ucla.edu/index. Html. 96 | corsa ond Matra Development - Prati eoming Materials