1. Ehsan Ataei MP101459 Feb, 2011
Using attitude scales to investigate teachers' attitudes to the communicative approach
Evdokia Karavas-Doukas
INTRODUCTION
This research paper looks at teachers’ attitudes toward communication language teaching
approach.
Teachers’ attitudeand behavior has the main role to implement any approach.
Article introduction discussed over teachers that they are following traditional approach in
practice but they admitted communicative approach. Based on so many studies communicative
classroomsarerarely found.
Then, research comes to communicative approach and teachers' attitudes discrepancies
In order to apply a new approach as (Kennedy 1988:329) it is not enough for people to act
differently, which is a surfacephenomenon, they may also be required to change the way they
thinkabout certain issues, which is a deeper and more complex change.
It is very hard for teachers to be innovative without any misunderstanding about any approach so
according to Breen (1991) in-service teacher development is very important and can solve this
problem. Sometimes it might happen unconsciously due to teachers’ education or
misinterpretations.
BACKGROUND OF STUDY
The background to the study based on studies as Karavas (1993) commented focused on the
degree of
implementation of a communicative learner-centered approach in Greekpublic secondary school
EFL classrooms. The investigation of Greek English language teachers' attitudes towards the
communicative approach would help identify the teachers’readiness to accept and implement this
new approach in their classrooms. Observing classes would reveal classrooms practices, nature
of activities and teachers roles

2. The researcher decided to choose Likert -type scale because it is easy, relevant and there is no
need for judgment.
The statements in this method covered the main aspects of the communicative learner centered
Approach such as group work, error correction, grammar students’ needs, and the teachers`and
learners ‘role
FINDINGS
Teachers hold favorable attitudes toward the communication approach based on scores But in
their observations they diverged from the principles of communicative approach and followed an
eclectic approach. According to in-depth analysis those teachers were weak in CLT
understanding and got average score.
It became clear in interviews that they did not understand and they could not apply any practical
implications of CLT principles.
Smart selection in questions minimize the problems occur in likert type scale evaluation and
scores.
In general, misinterpreting and misunderstanding about CLT approach made teachers to act
different or opposite of the approach principles.
Regarding to Lamp (1995:79) the focus of teacher training courses should be the teacher beliefs:
'These need first to be articulated, and then analyzed for potential contradictions with each other,
the teaching circumstances, and the beliefs of the learners.' Attitude scales can play a significant
role in revealing teacher beliefs Teachers should perfectly train at the time of facing new
approach.
And attitude evaluation can be a good guide to uncover teachers’ideas.

3. ARTICLE’S POSITION
There are some many papers about learning and teaching strategies, so many critics or
articles about different approaches all of them forget to zoom on the main target which is teachers
and learners and their ideas. This article looks at teachers and learners at the center ofresearch. In
recent years the importance of teacher cognitions has been increasingly recognized(Borg, 2003;
Freeman, 2002).
There are some studies about teachers’ beliefs and implementation of CLT
inVietnam,Australia, Oman,Armenia, South Korea, china and Iran.As Pham Hoa Hiep (2005) found,
although the theory of communicative competence on which CLT is based is uniform, it is broad. As
a result, what CLT looks like inclassroom practices may not be uniform.
On one hand, it is a good point in CLT to have a wide range of activities and teachers have
limited restrictions but on the other hand it made teachers go beyond CLT or made them confuse.
This broad theory has generated many different ways of understandings, descriptions, and uses of
CLT, challenging what it actually means to classroom teachers (Pham Hoa Hiep, 2005)
Freeman and Richards (1993) mentioned ‘tensions’ between stated intentions and Actions because of
‘divergences’ between different elements in a teacher’s understanding.
Several surveys have revealed that teachers’ claims to be using communicative
approacheshad not any support by their practices (Kumaravadivelu, 1993; Nunan, 1987). Mangubhai
et al. (2005) recommend that teachers might have two conceptualizations: a theoretical one based on
study, and a practical one based on classroom experience. In contrast of these studies there are some
other surveysas Savignon (2005) says Communicative syllabus in curricular reform in Japan shows
that CLT is successful or there is no other alternative.
As Nunan (1987) says whilea great deal has been written on the theory and practice of
CLT, there have been comparatively few studies of actual Communicative language
practice.Some studies in EFL countries prove this fact so we need more investigations on CLT
practicality (especially in EFL countries) also on teachers’ attitude toward CLT.

4. Jack C Richard (2006) categorized CLT in traditional CLT(before 1970s) Classic
CLT(1970s-1990s) and CLT today so it might happen for teachers due to the history of changes
in CLT to apply it based on past principles. After 1990s (classic CLT ) so many changes
happened in CLT and it needs to make some changes in implementation as jack C Richard
(2006)says In applyingCLT principles in the classroom, new classroom techniques and activities
were needed, new roles for teachers and learners in the classroom were required. Teachers
should be up dated to find the real CLT.
Almarza (1996) found that institutional pressures can cause teachers to use practices that
differ from cognitions. Institutional pressures include matters as diverse as examinations, the
socialization of students, and accountability demands (Crookes, 1997).
Breen et al. (2001) noticed that different teachers make different associationsbetween
principles and practices. Differences may be developmental as well: newknowledge can offer
new terminology and new understandings of cognitions and practices(Freeman, 1991).
These are related to teaching situations, andit has been recognized that Western methods
(such as CLT) may not readily transfer tonon-Western state school settings (Holliday, 1994b).
Shamim (1996) And Canagarajah (1999) discuss how differing student expectations can impact
teacher andClassroom practices.so we have a wide range of factors based on these studies that
affect teachers CLT implementation and I could not find any comprehensive research for my
critical review.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
– critically discuss the methodological framework adopted. Are they appropriate? What are the
strengths and limitations? What other available options?
in all researches, Teachers attitudes evaluation can be done by interviews, Kelly`s grid
technique, recall method and questionnaires (open and closed ended) and also in-depth
interviews. Using in-depth interview in this article is very good because there are some problems
and limitations in teachers attitudes evaluations that resolved by it. Also observations are the best
ways but the number of observation should be more that one time to have a better and an
accurate results. In general, two major useful methods in teachers attitudes evaluation aresemi-
structured, in-depth interviews; and stimulated recall interviews involving the use ofvideotapes
of lessons taught by the teacher toprompt teacher recall of aspects of her
practicaltheories.(Connelly & Clandinin, 1988; Elbaz, 1983).

5. About factors which affect teachers attitudes researches could use a wide range of
elements but just teachers role teachers error correction and class activities and learners role and
grammar were questioned. According to Pham Hoa Hiep (2005) factorsrange from systemic
constraints such as traditional examinations, largeclass sizes, to cultural constraints characterized
by beliefsStudents’ responsibility, teaching Time is also important. About teacher andstudent
role, and classroom relationships, to personal constraints such asstudents’ low motivation and
unequal ability to take part in independentactive learning practices, and even to teachers’ limited
expertise in creatingcommunicative activities like group work. So I think the range of questions
was limited and not comprehensive.
The difficulties reported by the Korean teachers fall into four categories: those caused (a)
by the teacher, (b) by the students, (c) by the educational system, and (d) by CLT itself. Among
them, difficulties falling into the first category were mentioned most often, almost twice or three
times as much as those in the other three categories DEFENG LI (1998)It would be better for
researcher to give a framework and mentioned important CLT factors and based on that start the
evaluation because CLT concepts are divers.
According to Ellis (1 994), teaching in a foreign language setting gives rise to
conflicts. Clashes of expectations and clashes of assumptions about the acceptable
behavior of individuals from two different cultures are examples of the difficulties in the
way of integrating one teaching methodology into another.
Ellis (1 994) investigated the appropriateness of the communicative approach in
Vietnam. It was found that one of the basic problems in implementing a communicative
approach in Vietnam was the teachers' holding on to the deep-rooted tradition. This
problem, according to Ellis, was compounded by two traditional practices: the cultural
reluctance of the Vietnamese to challenge written words, and the focus on grammar translation
in the examination system.

6. FINDINGS AND IMPLICATIONS
– an evaluative critique of the findings and implications in terms of its contributions, whether it
is worth publishing and aspects it fails to address.
It seems that this article is one of the rare articles discussed over teachers attitude and
after that the number of articles with similar subject decrease so it proves using attitude scales in
approach practicality is necessary. But finding teachers attitude with different backgrounds is
very hard so although there are some discrepancies between teacher’s attitude and teacher’s
implementation
But this article did not mentioned about the reasons.
Evaluating attitudes is very hard and it needs some verification to have the reliability In
Evdokia`s article split half method used to do so which is a positive point. About teachers
attitude toward CLT there are so many factors as in Kumaravadivelu’s work (2001) attempts a
shift in viewpoint by identifying limitations associated with CLT methodology and arguing for a
focus on particularity, practicality and possibility within a post method paradigm. However, the
proposed post method condition, despite its significant contribution to the study of methodology,
has also been seen as adapting but ultimately maintaining the dominant paradigm.
I suppose in CLT implementation there are some other factors like CLT practicality
We come to this question that is CLT suitable for all countries and is it a kind of practical theory
for all learners (native and ESL and EFL learners) this is another subject can be probe later.
Likert scale type can find the discrepancy and it is not suitable to find the reasons and real
feelings of teachers. Also I think it is better to evaluate teachers’ learners’ attitude toward CLT
and CLT practicality to have a general conclusion and find the solutions.

7. Brown(1994) notes that CLT is based on a broad theoretical position about thenature of
language and of language learning and teaching.Teachers deal with this position in theory and try
to apply it in practice on the other side students and their participation in applying CLT is very
important so low participation among students , misunderstanding in CLT theories among
teachers cause So-called communication language teaching .
COMPARATIVE STUDY
- replicate the study and compare your findings with Doukas’s. Indicate the details of your
respondents in the reference section.
Get at least FIVE respondents for your survey
Observe one class
The score for 5 respondents are: T1=78 T2= 86 T3=92 T=70 T5=69
It seems that most of the teachers know about CLT but they cannot put it in practice
They used to teach elective or they prefer to adapt their methods with their students’ needs so
expecting them to do the real CLT is not based on reality.
Based on my own experience in my classes students are not used to do group or pair works due
to following factors
1. They do not know what should they do ( it is better to show them a movie with similar
group work or role play )
2. They know what should they do but they use first language some of them write their
conversations and memorize it
3. They do not want to communicate in English even they want to do the job or task or role
play maybe because they are not in a real situation and they cannot imagine themselves
to be in an imaginary position

8. 4. Role-plays should be relevant to the point in harmony with students level and background
and attractive enough to be used by learners
5. I have created English workshop in and English institute I changed the position of role
paly and group work from the class to another place (we had built some places like
restaurant hotel travel agency shop etc. similar to real places with authentic materials. so
students feel relaxed and talk better faster with self-confidence they were not in the class
and they were not learning English so that was very successful. Also about evaluation it
had 10 extra marks so students were not worried about losing any mark.
Also base on my observation in MCI (English institute in Iran which use CLT method in
teaching English) teachers are forced to match themselves with CLT methods
Most of the teachers have studied English in GTM and ALM so they cannot reject or deny their
history so unconsciously they use other methods rather than CLT they are not updated or they do
not observe any real authentic CLT class so they make their own ideal class by their ideas and
experiences.Borg (1998) believes thatteachers’ pedagogic system is shaped by their educational
and professional experience in their life.
When we discussed over learners and their cultures and first language it is difficult to
apply a specific method in different places so giving a comprehensive definition for CLT
approach and applying it in different regions is difficult. Based on history of CLT this approach
was in progress and not limited or restricted. Local teachers that has no contact with the real
English world or CLT teachers that they are just imitators or had studied in GTM or ALM
environment can not apply it very well
FUTURE DIRECTIONS
– discuss the ways in which this particular line of study or analysis should be developed in future.
As I mentioned before there should be more researches on CLT practicality in EFL countries
EFL countries should establish their own contingent of language researchers in order to develop
English teaching theories more suitable for their EFL contexts. Change agents must study
teachers' perceptions of an innovation to ensure its success DEFENG LI (1998)

9. Despite the widespread adoption of communicative language teaching (CLT) in ESL countries,
research suggests that curricular innovations prompted by the adoption of CLT in EFL countries
have generally been difficult According to Larsen-Freeman (1986) Communicative activities and
authentic materials are two important basis of CLT so working on CLT is very important to fill
the gap between theory and practice
The other subject can be learners and teachers attitudes and also some practical methods and
techniques .Also the role of TTC classes ( teacher training courses ) In changing or applying a
new approach can be another subject.
Ellis (1996) questioned the universal relevance of communicative approach to
language teaching in view of the cultural conflicts of different educational theories
he asserted that tomake communicative approach suitable for Asian situation "it needs to be both
culturallyattuned and culturally accepted so cultural aspects of any approach implication are also
important. In order to have a universal approach we need to think universally and get feed backs
from different parts of the world.
Having a probe on categorized attitudes can be useful as Sato & Kleinsasser (1999) says
teachers’ understandings and beliefs about some key characteristics of CLT differed from those
appearing in the literature on CLT. teachers’ conceptions of CLT were of four types: (a) CLT is
about learning to communicate in the second language; (b) CLT uses mainly speaking and
listening; (c) CLT involves little grammar instruction; and (d) CLT uses activities that are time
consuming. Most of studies seem to be small-scale and have been scattered across a number of
different contexts.so it is not possible to have a general conclusion and further studies is
necessary.
According to savingnon(2002) there are five components of a communicative curriculum
1. Language arts (related to teachers)
2. Language for a purpose (related to materials)
3. Personal English language use
4. Theatre arts 5 Beyond the classroom ( related to learners)
So in applying CLT teachers are as important as students both sides should have a good
understanding about CLT and teaching skills and study skills should work together. In some

10. cases pair and group work are difficult to use because ofstudents Pham Hoa Hiep(2005) so
students are also involved in this subject.
I have studied so many articles in accordance with the article from science direct and ELT
journal to EFL journal so I prefer to discuss about this subject rather than writing a critical
review This is my first experience in writing a critical review so maybe so many points did not
mention in this paper.
Dealing with misconceptions about CLT is also important and needs more analysis
the four misconceptions about CLT reported byThompson (1 996): CLT means not teaching
grammar; CLT means teaching onlyspeaking; CLT means pair work which means role play; and
CLT means expecting toomuch from the teacher. More over CLT is not an EFL methodology
CLT requires a proficient teacher and it is time consuming are also more misconceptions which
should be clear for teachers and learners.

11. REFERENCES
Brown, H. D.(1994). Principles of Language Learningand Teaching: Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice HallRegents.
Pham Hoa Hiep (2005) Communicative language teaching:unity within diversity: eltj.oxford
Journals
Bahram Mowlaie, Ali Rahimi (2010). The effect of teachers’ attitude about communicative
Language teaching on their practice: Do they practice what they preach? : Procedia
Social and Behavioral Sciences 9 (2010) 1524–1528
Savignon, S. J.(2002). Communicative curriculumdesign for the 21st century’. English
Teaching Forum40: 2–7.
Kramsch C. and P. Sullivan.(1996). Appropriatepedagogy: ELT Journal 50/3: 199–212.
LiDefeng(1998).It's Always More Difficult Than You Plan and Imagine:
Teachers’ Perceived Difficulties in Introducing the Communicative Approach in South
Korea: TESOL Quarterly, Vol. 32, No. 4, pp. 677-703
Anderson, J. (1993). Is a communicative approach practical for teaching English in China?Pros
and cons.
Bax, S. (2003). The end of CLT: a context approach to language teaching: English
Language Teaching Journal, 57(3), 278-287.
Kazuyoshi Sato, Robert C and Kleinsasser (1999).Communicative Language Teaching

12. (CLT): Practical Understandings: The Modern Language Journal, 83, iv, (1999)
Evdokia karavas-doukas (1995). Understanding the gap between teachers` theories and their
Classroom practices: an investigation of teachers` attitudes towards error correction and
their classroom error correcting behavior
Mark Wyatt(2009).Practical Knowledge Growth in Communicative Language Teaching: The
Electronic Journal for English as a Second Language
Sandra J. Savignon(2005). Beyond communicative language teaching: What’s ahead?
Anne Feryok (2007).An Armenian English language teacher’spractical theory of
Communicative language teaching
Francis Mangubhai, Perce Marland, Ann Dashwood and Jeong-Bae Son (2004). Teaching a
foreign language: one teacher’s practical theory
Chris Kennedy and Judith Kennedy (1996).Teacher attitudes and change implementation
Lingjie Jin,Michael Singh and Liqun Li(2005).Communicative Language Teaching in China:
Misconceptions, Applications and Perceptions