ED7502: Second Language Teaching and Learning

Formative Unit

A critical evaluation of Ellis, G. (1996)

How culturally appropriate is the communicative
approach? ELT Journal, 50/3: 213-218

April 2013

Introduction

Over the last 30 years increasing emphasis has been

placed on the importance of communicative competence in
regards to language teaching and learning. In his article How
Culturally Appropriate is the Communicative Approach, Greg
Ellis (1996) explores the question of how relevant the
communicative approach is within cultural contexts that differ
widely from the Western context in which it has found success.
He focuses on Far Eastern cultures, finding that in order to be
at least accepted by the students, the communicative
approach requires modification, and suggests that the role of
cultural mediator, someone who seeks to find common
ground between the 2 cultures, is essential for teachers to
adopt in order that resistance to communicative language
teaching (CLT) strategies is reduced. This analysis seeks to
examine the validity of these claims based on personal
teaching experience with East Asian students.
The first section of the report will give some background
information on the communicative approach. The second will
summarise the claims made in Ellis article and the final
section will evaluate the claims in light of my own experience.

The
CLT is best considered an approach, principles that are
Communicati concerned with a communicative view of language learning,
ve Approach rather than a method. In CLT, language is seen as a system for
the expression of meaning where the main purpose of
language is to interact with and communicate with others. This
underlying principle becomes a lens through which teaching
practices are evaluated; activities, exercises and tasks are
selected based on the extent to which they engage the learner
in authentic, meaningful language use, and guidance on the
roles and demands of the teacher and learners is provided.
Nunan (2004) notes that Learners and the cognitive
processes they engage in as they learn are seen as
fundamentally important to the learning process. (p.7). As
such, the roles of learners are seen as key to defining what
constitutes a communicative class. Learners are expected to
be interdependent, interacting with one another more so than
with the teacher. The teacher, then no longer acts as the sole
arbiter of knowledge but takes on, among other roles, those of
needs analyst, manager, guide and facilitator.
It is necessary to discuss what is meant by the narrow
definition of communicative competence with regard to the
communicative approach. This is where CLT differentiates itself
2

from earlier approaches, most notable of which being

Chomskys generative grammar, which emphasised
grammatical accuracy, structures and passive knowledge of
ideal speakers. The term communicative competence was
coined by Hymes as a response to generative grammar, and in
particular to the restriction of competence to the notions of a
homogeneous community, perfect knowledge and
independence of sociocultural factors.(Hymes, 1972:55) It is
this disregard for the social aspect of language, the fact that a
normal child acquires knowledge of sentences not only as
grammatical, but also as appropriate. He or she acquires
competence as to when to speak, when not, and as to what to
talk about with whom, when, where, in what manner. (p.60)
that prompted the inclusion of sociocultural features in Hymes
description of language.
The definition of communicative competence is further
refined by Canale and Swain (1980) who proposed that This
notion is intended to include not only grammatical
competence (or implicit and explicit knowledge of the rules of
grammar) but also contextual or sociolinguistic competence
(knowledge of the rules of language use)(p.4) - Sociolinguistic
competence being an understanding for the social context in
which communication takes place including knowledge of rolerelationships, the shared information of the participants and
the communicative purpose of the interaction. (Richards and
Rogers 2001:160)
It is these two aspects of CLT which are important for the
evaluation of Ellis claims in section 3, that, as an approach,
CLT is pluralistic and flexible and, by its own definition, places
great value on socio-cultural factors and role-relationships.
Summary of
Ellis begins by pointing out that the roles the teacher are
the main expected to play in the classroom (facilitator/friend etc.) are
points themselves culturally-relative concepts operating at a
subconscious level in the minds of the learners. He suggests
that it would be simpler to modify the approach rather than
expect the students to fundamentally shift their beliefs about
these roles in order to adapt to those demanded by
communicative principles.
Ellis questions the validity of substituting the teachers
own value system for the learners, as the Western concept of
the teacher-as-facilitator(Ellis 1996:216) may, in fact, be far
from ideal as examined from other cultural perspectives when:
3

touching upon an essential part of the learning process,

that learning involves the incorporating of new
information into old sets of beliefs and knowledge for
the purpose of maintaining a consistent world
view(p.214), Ellis looks at research that shows that
unfamiliar activities having a communicative or process
orientation were not highly valued by students from
traditional backgrounds.(p.214), and that a gap in
expectations results in a breakdown of language
production, and frustration for the language learner;
the breakdown in production being in direct contrast to
the goals of the communicative approach.

He points to the fact that the communicative approach

with its emphasis on the learning process and fluency
rather than content and accuracy, may be all that is
required to form an unbridgeable gap in societies which
value mastery of content.(p.214)

While highlighting the fact that ESL learners operate in

an environment where there is pressure to integrate,
Ellis suggests that the communicative approach is
appropriate in such an environment where there is a real
need to communicate. Contrastively however, he goes
on to draw attention to the fact that in an EFL context
with which he is concerned, where English is usually part
of a school curriculum, passing an examination may be a
priority to the learner rather than communicative
competence. (p.215)

These observations; the focus on process rather than

content; the focus on communication with its flawed or
degenerate quality (Hymes citing Chomsky, 1972:55) and the
mismatch of aims between the goals of the approach and the
students needs are enough to generate resistance to the
approach in the learners, yet when combined with the gap in
expectations of what teachers and learners should be doing, a
complete rejection of the approach, or the teacher could be
engendered.
By way of a solution, Ellis draws upon research to offer
an alternative role for the teacher as that of cultural
mediator, someone who finds common ground between the
two cultures and is sympathetic to different cultural identities.
This, he posits, is the key role for the Western teacher to adopt

in order to bridge the gap.

He concludes by saying that if the teacher hopes to
succeed in transmission of knowledge in a cross-cultural
context, then finding points of congruence between the two
cultures is an essential tool in the teaching box.
Analysis

My own experience has shown that many of the points

raised in this article are valid.
Ellis makes the distinction between the integrative
pressure and demand to communicate of an ESL environment
as compared to an EFL environment, where pressure to
communicate in the target language is minimal. As I work in
the Netherlands, my Asian students are effectively EFL
students. The university itself strives to be international, and
while international students constitute only 10% of the student
body, English is spoken widely by the staff, creating somewhat
of an ESL micro-climate within the institution. Despite having
many opportunities to mix with locals and other international
students, the East Asian students largely isolate themselves
and make few attempts to integrate and thus lack the pressure
to communicate. Consequently, learners overlook the
importance of communicative activities.
Ellis point about examination pressure being a more
fundamental concern is also borne out here. While tasked with
providing a preparatory course for students to access higher
education in a Western teaching environment, the requirement
for acceptance is an IELTS score. The students come with the
belief that what is provided is an extended IELTS preparation
course. This expectation, coupled with their own beliefs about
the value of examinations, and examination and study
techniques have led to strong resistance from a large section
of the student body to anything which deviates from rote exam
practice. Students will regularly substitute IELTS practice
writing tests, consisting of near identical sentence stems and
phrases they believe to have academic value for set work and
generally fail to see the value of communicative activities. This
is evidenced by the students attempts to get through
communicative tasks as quickly as possible, then sit in silence
or chat in their native language while waiting for others to
finish. Resolving the issues stemming from these expectations
is of great concern; the subsequent drop-out rate when
students access their university course is high, as the learners
stock of disconnected, memorized phrases render them
5

unprepared for the demands of functioning in a higher

education environment.
That expectations are culturally relative concepts; that
expectations of authorities, parents and peers vary quite
widely between cultures, is not in question; the expected roles
and functions of the teacher as well as the course content are
subject to the same shifting definition. It is quickly evident in
classes that students have their own expectations of classroom
culture, learning and teaching which largely fit a passive
learning model. Any attempts to modify these expectations are
frustrated by disinterest, distrust, and a general sense of
inertia. In transformative learning theory, the idea that adults
often reject ideas that do not match their own values is verified
in the classroom. Rewriting cultural programming seems a near
impossible task, and with that in mind, Elliss point of adapting
the approach to the students rather than the reverse seems
well made. Given the pluralistic nature of CLT, modification
would not seem to violate any tenets, and given the concern of
CLT with knowledge of culturally acceptable ways of
interaction, it would be a critical to understand the idea that
the concept of roles vary culturally.
While the term cultural mediator is new to me, I have
tried to integrate aspects of cross-cultural communication into
my teaching. It is hard to definitively attribute success in the
classroom solely to this element, given the unscientific
application of its inclusion, yet for my current crop of students,
the addition of this element seems to be bearing fruit.
Comments such as I just realised that not all Western culture
is the same, and I wish to be an East-West person are
encouraging, but it was during a week in which students
researched and compared Socrates and Confucius looking for
commonalities, culminating in a Socratic seminar, a whole
group discussion, analysing a text which described how
Western students acted in an Asian classroom from an Asian
perspective (see appendix) that saw the communicative
approach being truly embraced by the learners.
The idea of grounding new knowledge in existing
knowledge is a cornerstone of constructivist models of
learning. I have discovered that integrating reflective practices,
disguised as in-class free-writing assignments have further
revealed doubts from the students themselves about their own
approach to study and the effectiveness thereof. Through their
writing, admissions of an initial sense that the process was a
waste of time were almost universally replaced by reports of a
6

deeper understanding of the text from open discussion with

peers and positive feedback about the method itself.
Conclusion
There is much to reflect on in Ellis article, chief among
and which is the idea that as the very definition of CLT hinges upon
recommenda the inclusion of socio-linguisitic competence, it must
tions consequently have to take into account the differences in rolerelationships for any given culture. In my own experience,
struggling with washback effects of the exam, combined with
passive approaches to learning, I have found results worthy of
further investigation. I would further agree with Ellis
recommendations that further research should be done in
these areas with a view to perhaps producing guides to areas
of cultural overlap for in-house training purposes.
As mentioned above, it is hard to testify to the points of
cultural congruence being the only factor involved in the open
attitude my most recent students have taken to my
communicative overtures. Reflective practices; attempts at
promoting learner-autonomy; a focus on overtly teaching study
skills; and elements of critical thinking are all recent additions
to my syllabus. As such, my own evidence in support of Ellis
core claim is anecdotal at best, and there is always the
possibility of these students being coincidentally receptive to
communicative teaching practices. However, the unusually
receptive response of the students to the communicative
demands of a Socratic seminar led me to conclude that this
activity is at least worthy of future exploration.

References:

Canale, M. & Swain, M. (1980) Theoretical bases of

communicative approaches to second language teaching and
testing, Applied Linguistics 1(1), 1-47.
Ellis, G. (1996) How culturally appropriate is the communicative
approach? ELT Journal, 50/3: 213-218.
Hymes, D.H. (1972) On communicative competence. In J. B Pride
and J. Holmes (eds.) Sociolinguistics, Harmondsworth,
England: Penguin Books. pp. 269-293.
Nunan, D. (2004) Task-Based Language Teaching. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Richards, J. & Rogers, T. (2001) Approaches and Methods in
Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Appendix A:
Text used for
Socratic
Seminar

An Interrupted Lesson
Last year, I took a course Ecological
environment of China at the Chinese University of
Hong Kong. I expected that all my classmates would
be local students. After I entered the lecture theatre,
I saw a few exchange students chatting with each
other in the first rows of the seats until Professor Lo
began to talk.
I remember the topic of the lecture was the
impact of the Three Gorges Dam. I really felt that the
topic was boring because it was rather factual and
theoretical to me. The impact of the project was
obvious and not difficult to understand. Thus, I
thought I would fall asleep throughout the lessons.
However, my expectation seemed to be wrong due to
the exchange students.
The lesson started smoothly and all students
were silent. No one made a sound. After Professor Ho
lectured for half an hour, an exchange student called
Natalie suddenly raised her hand. As Professor Lo
was concentrating on his lesson, he was not aware of
her, or maybe he did not expect any questions from
students. However, local students sitting behind
those exchange students saw her clearly. Their first
reaction was to open their eyes widely. We felt a bit
8

surprised because there were rarely any students

asking questions during lessons. After a while,
Professor Lo saw Natalie and she spoke. She said, Id
like to ask where exactly the Three Gorges Dam is?
And how seriously does it affect the soil? Professor Lo
smiled and nodded his head, and then he answered
Natalies queries. After she got her answers, she
continued her attention on Professor Los lesson.
We, local students, thought that the remaining
one and a half hours would be passed in silence. We
tried to pay attention to professors lecture. However,
as his tone is too flat it seemed to be a lullaby to us;
our eyelids began to fall. At this moment, not only
Natalie, but also other exchange students took turns
to raise their hands and ask questions. I looked at my
classmate who sat beside me, and saw her looking at
me, too. Other local students also looked and smiled
at each other, feeling half surprised and half
doubtful. The exchange students were so eager to
ask questions that, along with the students, Professor
Lo also showed his uneasiness. He rarely
encountered so many questions in a lesson and he
was certainly worried that he could not finish his
syllabus.
Following the question and answer session, the
exchange students amazed us again as they pushed
the lessons to the climax when they could not agree
with Professor Los point of view. Near the end of the
lesson, he mentioned the impact of the project, that
the pros exceeded the cons for its contribution to the
future economic development of China. There was
nothing wrong with his standpoint. Of course, we
know that it was hard to say which factors
outweighed others, but Professor Los view reflected
his own idea and one of the facts only.
Therefore, we got his view and tried to think of
our own perspectives. I thought to myself that I could
not totally agree with Professor Lo because I
regarded the damage caused by the Three Gorges
9

Dam on the environment as irreversible. However, I

had no intention of speaking my mind, as it was
unnecessary and also embarrassing to talk in front of
the whole class.
Yet, an exchange student called Alison held the
same view as me. She did not know anyone in the
class, including other exchange students. However,
she started to debate with Professor Lo. I felt the
atmosphere become strange and intense. Other local
students were also startled by Alisons behaviour and
they murmured to each other. Some of them even
seemed embarrassed. They seemed to be thinking:
How come a student challenges a professor and
doesnt give him face?
Luckily, time was up and the lesson ended. The
exchange students may have needed to hurry for the
next lessons so they left on time. At that moment,
Professor Lo sighed and looked relieved - just like the
rest of us.

Feedback
Presentation

Format: I suggest you don't have a wide left-hand margin. Most markers will not expect or like it and
it is not necessary.
Style: you write clearly. The text is coherent and very readable.
References:
I suggest you change the following:
Nunan (2004) notes that Learners and the cognitive processes they engage in as they learn are seen as
fundamentally important to the learning process. (p.7). to the more standard:
Nunan notes that Learners and the cognitive processes they engage in as they learn are seen as
fundamentally important to the learning process. (Nunan, 2004 p.7).
Digits below ten are usually spelt out.

10

page 4: long quotes are usually indented and in italics.

page 7: good to provide evidence from your own experience.
You might be interested in http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/11028894-researching-chinese-learners
General
I think this submission is OK. When reviewing CLT it would be good to include a broader range of authors
and ideas. E.g. what about other attempts to counter Chomsky (as covered by Stevick in 'A way and ways')
You write clearly and you ground your assumptions in references from the literature. Your voice is clear and
you are critically analytical.

11