Article Sidebar

Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 982 Download : 958

Main Article Content

Abstract

Teaching English as a foreign language (EFL) differs greatly from teaching English as a first language (L1). To ensure that teaching and learning are successful and efficient, teachers must possess a broad range of pedagogical expertise. Each method needs to be adjusted to the particular educational and environmental setting. The primary objective of this article is to provide comprehensive insights into two prominent language teaching methods, namely the Grammar Translation Method (GTM) and Communicative Language Teaching (CLT). While GTM has been historically prevalent, CLT has recently gained widespread popularity. This paper focuses on the understanding of educational practitioners, particularly in the domain of English Language Teaching (ELT) setting, by conducting a comprehensive comparison of GTM and CLT thoroughly, focusing on teaching techniques, characteristics of both teaching methods, and the way the instructor addresses students’ mistakes. Although CLT is recognized as the more realistic and advantageous method in contemporary contexts, it is still acknowledged that GTM possesses certain positive attributes. Additionally, since every country has its own unique set of circumstances, social norms, and background, the teacher must be aware of the most suitable teaching-learning method.

Keywords

Communicative Language Teaching EFL Context Grammar Translation Method

Article Details

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

In submitting the manuscript to the FOSTER: Journal of English Language Teaching, the authors certify that:

  • They are authorized by their co-authors to enter into these arrangements.
  • The work described has not been formally published before, except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture, review, thesis, or overlay journal.
  • That it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere,
  • The publication has been approved by the author(s) and by responsible authorities – tacitly or explicitly – of the institutes where the work has been carried out.
  • They secure the right to reproduce any material that has already been published or copyrighted elsewhere.
  • They agree to the following license and copyright agreement.

License and Copyright Agreement

Authors who publish with FOSTER: Journal of English Language Teaching agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the FOSTER: Journal of English Language Teaching right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  2. Authors can enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the FOSTER: Journal of English Language Teaching published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or edit it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) before and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
How to Cite
Nisha, P. R. (2024). Comparing Grammar Translation Method and Communicative Language Teaching in EFL Context: A Qualitative Literature Review. FOSTER: Journal of English Language Teaching, 5(1), 40-48. https://doi.org/10.24256/foster-jelt.v5i1.159
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

References

  1. Breen, M. Candlin, C. N. (1980). The essentials of a communicative curriculum in language teaching. Applied Linguistics.
  2. Brown, H. D. (1994). Principles of Language Learning and Teaching. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall Regents.
  3. Brown, H. D. (2007). Teaching by Principle; An Interactive Approach to Language Pedagogy. Third Edition. New York: Pearson Longman.
  4. Finocchiaro, M., and C. Brumfit. (1983). The Functional-Notional Approach: From Theory to Practice. New York: Oxford University Press.
  5. K. Johnson and H. Johnson. (1998). Encyclopedic Dictionary of Applied Linguistics. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
  6. Kelly, L. (1969). 25 Centuries of Language Teaching. Rowley, Mass: Newbury House.
  7. Harmer, J. (2007). The Practice of English Language Teaching. Fourth Edition. Cambridge: Pearson Longman.
  8. Hedge, T. (2000). Teaching and Learning in the Language Classroom. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  9. Larsen-Freeman, D. and Anderson, M. (2011). Techniques & Principles in Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  10. Littlewood, W. (1981). Communicative Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  11. Lortie, D. (1975). Schoolteacher: A Sociological Study. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  12. Prabhu, N.S. (1987). Second Language Pedagogy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  13. Richards, J., and Rodgers, T. (1986). Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  14. Richards, J. C., and Schmidt, R. (2002). Longman Dictionary of Language Teaching and Applied Linguistics. Pearson Education Limited.
  15. Scharle, Agota & Anita Szabo (2000), A Guide to Developing Learner Responsibility, Cambridge University Press.
  16. Sweet, H. (1899). The Practical Study of Languages. Reprinted London: Oxford University Press.
  17. Thornbury, S. (2003). How to Teach Grammar. Beijing: World Affairs Press.
  18. Wardhaugh, R. (1972). Introduction to Linguistics. McGraw-Hill Book Company.
  19. Wilkins, D. A. (1976). Notional Syllabuses. Oxford: Oxford University Press.