CHAPTER I

PRELIMINARY
A. Background of The Problem
Any teaching curriculum is designed in answer to three interrelated
questions: What is to be learned? How is the learning to be undertaken and
achieved? To what extent is the former appropriate and the latter effective? A
communicative curriculum will place language teaching within the framework
of this relationship between some specified purposes, the methodology which
will be the means towards the achievement of those purposes, and the
evaluation procedures which will assess the appropriateness of the initial
purposes and the effectiveness of the methodology.
This paper presents the potential characteristics of communicative
language teaching in terms of such a curriculum framework. It also proposes
a set of principles on which particular curriculum designs can be based for
implementation in particular situations and circumstances. The diagram
summarises the main areas with which this paper will deal. In discussing the
purposes of language teaching, we will consider (1) communication as a
general purpose, (2) the underlying demands on the learner that such a
purpose may imply, and (3) the initial contributions which learners may bring
to the curriculum. In discussing the potential

methodology of a

communicative curriculum, we will consider (4) the process of teaching and

learning, (5) the roles of teacher and learners, and (6) the role of content
within the teaching and learning. Finally (7) we will discuss the place of
evaluation of learner progress and evaluation of the curriculum itself from a
communicative point of view.
Inevitably, any statement about the components of the curriculum runs
the risk of presenting in linear form a framework which is, in fact,
characterised by interdependence and overlap among the components. In
taking purposes, methodology, and evaluation in turn, therefore, we ask
readers to bear in mind the actual interdependence between them.

What follows is a consideration of those minimal requirements on

communicative language learning and teaching, which, in our view, must now
be taken into account in curriculum design and implementation.
B. Problem Identification
1. What is the purpose of the curriculum?
2. What underlies the ultimate demands on the learner?
3. What are the learner's initial contributions?
4. How are the curriculum purposes to be achieved?
5. What are the roles of the teacher and the learners within a communicative
methodology?
6. What is the role of content within a communicative methodology?
7. How is the curriculum process to be evaluated?
8. What is the Achieving Communicative Language Teaching
C. Purpose
1. To know What is the purpose of the curriculum
2. To know What underlies the ultimate demands on the learner
3. To know What are the learner's initial contributions
4. To know How are the curriculum purposes to be achieved
5. To know What are the roles of the teacher and the learners within a
communicative methodology
6. To know What is the role of content within a communicative methodology
7. To know How is the curriculum process to be evaluated
8. To know What is the Achieving Communicative Language Teaching

CHAPER II
DISCUSSION
A. What is the purpose of the curriculum?
The communicative curriculum defines language learning as learning
how to communicate as a member of a particular socio-cultural group. The

social conventions governing language form and behaviour within the group
are, therefore, central to the process of language learning. In any
communicative event, individual participants bring with them prior
knowledge of meaning and prior knowledge of how such meaning can be
realised through the conventions of language form and behaviour. 2 Since
communication is primarily interpersonal, these conventions are subject to
variation while they are being used.

In exploring shared knowledge,

participants will be modifying that knowledge. They typically exploit a

tension between the conventions that are established and the opportunity to
modify these conventions for their particular communicative purposes.
Communicating is not merely a matter of following conventions but also of
negotiating through and about the conventions themselves. It

is a

convention-creating as well as a conventionfollowingactivity. So, in learning

how to communicate the learner is confronted by a variable process.
In communication, speakers and hearers (and writers and readers) are
most often engaged in the work of sharing meanings which are both
dependent on the conventions of interpersonal behaviour and created by such
behaviour. Similarly, the ideas or concepts which are communicated about
contain different potential meanings, and such potential meanings are
expressed through and derived from the formal system of text during the
process of communication. To understand the conventions which underlie
communication, therefore, we not only have to understand a system of ideas
or concepts and a system of interpersonal behaviour, we have to understand
how these ideas and this interpersonal behaviour can be realised in languagein connected texts. Mastering this unity of ideational, interpersonal and
textual knowledge allows us to participate in a creative meaning-making
process and to express or interpret the potential meanings within spoken or
written text
B. What underlies the ultimate demands on the learner?

A language teaching curriculum, from a communicative point of

view, will specify its purposes

in terms

of a particular

target

repertoire. Different curricula will hopefully select their own particular

repertoires from a pool of communicative performance on the basis of
a sociolinguistic analysis of the target situation. This does not imply
that any one curriculum will be neces sarily entirely distinctive in the
target repertoire

to which it is devoted. At the surface there will be

inevitable overlap among different repertoires. However, underlying any

selected target repertoire there will- be an implicit target competence. It
is this target competence which we may define as the capacity for actual
use of the language in the target situation. So, in specifying the purposes
of the curriculum, a requirement for the communicative approach would
be to make an initial distinction between the target repertoire ultimately
demanded of the learner and the target competence which will underlie
and generate such a repertoire.
How can we characterise this target competence? We have already
proposed that

learning

knowledge of

the

performance.

to

communicate

conventions

In addition,

which

involves
govern

acquiring

communicative

we have proposed that such communicative

knowledge can be seen as a unified system.

We have also suggested that communication and learning how to
communicate involve the participants in the sharing and negotiating of
meanings and conventions. Such sharing and negotiating

implies the

existence of particular communicative abilities as an essential part of

competence. Therefore, we may identify within competence both

the

knowledge systems and the abilities which call upon and act upon that
knowledge. These abilities can be distinguished within competence more
precisely. In order to share meaning, the individual participant needs to be
able to interpret the meanings of others and to express his own meanings.
However, such interpretation and expression.
will most often take place in the context of interpersonal and
personal negotiation. The ability to negotiate operates between participants

in communication and within the mind of the individual participant-the

latter negotiation is perhaps more conscious during new learning. More
obviously, participants in communication negotiate with one another. But,
in endeavouring to interpret and express with a new language, the learner
will himself negotiate between the communicative competence he already
possesses and that which underliesthe new learning.
C. What are the learner's initial contributions?
A communicative curriculum will focus on the learner from the
very beginning by relating the initial contributions of the learner to the
ultimate purposes of the curriculum. More precisely, the communicative
curriculum seeks relationships between any specific target competence and
relevant aspects of the learner's own initial competence. We need to ask:
What communicative knowledge-and its affective aspects-does the learner
already possess and exploit? What communicative abilities-and the skills
which manifest them-does the learner already activate and depend upon in
using and selecting from his presently established repertoire? Also, can
the curriculum build upon features of that performance repertoire which
we describe rather narrowly, perhaps, as the learner's first language or
mother tongue? Similarly, can the curriculum build upon what the learner may
already know of and about the target repertoire-however fragmentary or
'latent' such an awareness may be?
A communicative specification of purposes supports the principle
that the roots of our objectives can already be discovered in our learnershowever beneath the surface of the actual target repertoire these roots may be.
We need to try to recognise what the learner knows and can do in
communicative performance with the first.language and not assume that the
learner's ignorance of the target repertoire implies that the learner is a naive
communicator or someone who evaluates communication in only a superficial
way.
This principle, which seems to require us to credit the learner with a
highly relevant initial competence of communicative knowledge and

abilities, has often been overlooked or only partially applied in language

teaching. In the past, it has seemedeasier to somehow separate the learner
from the knowledge to be learned-to 'objectify' the target language as
something completely unfamiliar to the learner. This objectification of the
language in relation to the learner has perhaps been encouraged by a narrow
definition of what the object of learning actually is, and by an incomplete
view of what the learner has to offer. We have tended to see the target only in
terms of 'linguistic competence' or textual knowledge, and we have limited
such knowledge to the level of syntax without reference to structure above
the sentence. Thus, ideational and interpersonal knowledge, which continually
interact with textual knowledge and from which textual knowledge evolves,
have tended to be overlooked or neutralised. We have often seen the learner
primarily in terms of the first language, and we have often assigned to it
'interference' value alone-again taking a narrow textual knowledge as our
criterion. More recently, due to developments within sociolinguistics, we
have recognised the significance of 'sociolinguistic competence' and also of
the 'functional' aspect of language
D. How are the curriculum purposes to be achieved?
1. Methodology as a Communicative Process
Language learning within a communicative
most

curriculum

is

appropriately seen as communicative interaction involving all

the participants

in the learning and including the various material

resources on which the learning is exercised. Therefore,

language

learning may be seen as a process which grows out of the interaction

between learners, teachers, texts and activities.
2. Methodology as a differentiated process
The emphasis given in the previous section to the interactive
nature of the communicative curriculum suggests, in turn, the need for a
communicative curriculum to be differentiated. A communicative
curriculum begins with the principle that we should differentiate within
purposes between the target repertoire and the communicative knowledge

and abilities which underlie it. A second principle is that the learner's
process competence needs to

be dif ferentiated from the target

competence, and that different learners may exploit different process

competences as the means towards some particular target. These kinds
of distinctions involve differentiation at the curriculum level between
purposes and the methodology adopted to achievesuch purposes. Within
methodology, differentiation is a principle which can be applied to the
participants in the learning, the activities they attempt, the text-types with
which they choose to work, and the ways they use their abilities. It is
worth considering differentiation within these areas in more detail:
a. Learners' Contributions
b. Routes
c. Media
d. Abilities
Whatever the route chosen or the media and text-types selected
for communicative learning, different learners will have differentiated
ways of making use of the abilities
competence, and will therefore adopt
Such heterogeneity
but a communicative
differentiation

is often

within their communicative

different

learning

seen as problematic

methodology

strategies.

for the teacher,

would take advantage

of this

among learning strategies, rather than in sisting that

all learners exploit the same kinds of strategy.

3. Methodology exploits the communicative potential of

the learning

Teachingcontext
The communicative curriculum seeks to exploit the classroom in
terms of what it can realistically offer as a resource for learning. This
would not necessarily mean changing or disguising the classroom in the
hope that it will momentarily serve as some kind of 'communicative
situation' resembling situations in the outside world. The classroom itself
is a unique social environ ment with its own human activities and its own
conventidns governing these activities. It is an environment where a
particular social-psychological and cultural reality is constructed. This
7

uniqueness and this reality implies a communicative potential to be

exploited, rather than constraints which have to be overcome or
compensated for. Experimentation within the prior constraints of any
communicative situation is, as we have seen, typical of the nature of
communication

itself,

and

the

prior

constraints

of

classroom

communication need be no exception.

We can make a distinction between the different contributions
offered to learning by, on the one hand, the 'formal' language learning
contexts of the classroom and, on the other, the 'informal' learning which
takes place at any time, anywhere. The classroom can be characterised by
the kinds of learning which are best generated in a group context, while
'informal'

learning under taken beyond the classroom is often an

individual commitment, especially in the context of foreign language

learning. Thus the 'formal'
relationships of

context is one where the interpersonal

the classroom group

have their own potential

contribution to make to the overall task. Within the communicative

curriculum, the classroom-and the procedures and activities it allowscan serve as the focal point of the learning-teaching process. In
adopting

a methodology characterised by learning and teaching as a

communicative and differentiated process, the classroom no longer needs

to be seen as a pale representation of some outside communicative
reality.
E. What are the roles of the teacher and the learners within a
communicative methodology?
1. The Teacher
Within a communicative methodology the teacher has two main
roles. The first role is to facilitate the communicative process between all
participants in the classroom, and between these participants and the
various activities and texts. The second role is to act as
interdependent

an

participant within the learning-teaching group. This

latter role is closely related to the objective of the first role and it arises

from it. These roles imply a set of secondary roles for the teacher: first,
as an organiser of resources and as a resource himself.
Second, as a guide within the classroom procedures and activities.
In this role the teacher endeavours to make clear to the learners what they
need to do in order to achieve some specific activity or task, if they
indicate that such guidance is necessary. This guidance role is ongoing
and largely unpredictable, so the teacher needs to share it with other
learners. Related to this, the teacher-and other learners-can offer
and seek feedback at appropriate moments in learning-teaching activities.
In guiding and monitoring the teacher needs to be a 'seer of potential'
with the aim of facilitating and shaping in dividual and group
knowledgeand exploitation of abilities during learning. In this way the
teacher will be concentrating on the process competences of the learners.
2. The Learner
Regardless of the curriculum in which they work and regardless of
whether nor not they are being taught, all learners of a language are
confronted by the task of discovering how to learn the language. All
learners will start with differing expectations about the actual learning,
but each individual learner will be required to adapt and continually
readapt in the process of relating himself to what is being learned. The
knowledge will be redefined as the learner uncovers it, and,

in

constructing and reconstructing his own curriculum, the learner may

discover that earlier strategies in the use of his abilities need to be
replaced by other strategies. Thus, all learners-in their own ways-have
to adopt the role of negotiation between themselves, their learning
process, and the gradually revealed object of learning.
A communicative methodology is characterised by making this
negotiative role-this learning how to learn-a public as well as a private
undertaking. Within the context of the classroom group, this role is
shared and, thereby, made interpersonal.
F. What is the role of content within a communicative methodology?

Language teaching curricula have often been traditionally defined by their

content. Such content has itself been derived from a target repertoire in terms
of some selected inventories of items analysed prior to the commencementof
the teaching-learning process and often acting as predeterminants of it.
Similarly, sets of formal items taken from an analytic grammar of the
language, or sets of 'functions' taken from some list of semantic categories,
have been linked to themes and topics deemed in advance to be appropriate to
the expectations of the particular learners. We will now consider the possible
criteria for the selectionand organisation of content within the communicative
curriculum with reference to each of these five aspects in turn:
1. Focus
2. Sequence
3. Subdivision
4. Continuity
The need to provide continuity for the learner has, in the past, been based
upon content. Within a communicative methodology, continuity can be
identified within at least four areas
G. How is the curriculum process to be evaluated?
The communicative curriculum insists that evaluation is a highly
significant

part

'grammaticality',

of

communicative

'appropriateness',

interaction

'intelligibility',

itself.
and

We

judge

'coherence'

in

communicative performance on the basis of shared, negotiated, and

changing conventions. Evaluation within the curriculum can exploit this
'judging' element of everyday communicative behaviour in the assessment of
learners' communication and metacommunication. The highly evaluative
aspect of communication can be adopted as the evaluation procedure of the
curriculum. If so, the essentially intersubjective nature of evaluation can be
seen as a strong point rather than, possibly, a weakness.
How might we evaluate learner progress? Evaluation of oneself,
evalua tion of others, and evaluation of self by others is intersubjective. In
this way, evaluation need not be regarded as external to the purposes of the
curriculum or external to the actual process of learning and teaching. In

10

recognising that relative success or failure in the sharing of meaning, or in the

achievement of some particular task, is most often an intersubjective
matter,

the com municative curriculum would rely on shared and

negotiated evaluation. Criteria for eventual success-in some particular

task-could be initially negotiated, achievement of the task could be related
to these agreed criteria, and degrees of successor failure could be
themselvesfurther negotiated on the basis
Evaluative criteria, therefore,

of

the

original

criteria.

would be established and applied in a

three-stage process: (i) What might 'success' mean? (ii) Is the learner's
performance of the task successful? (iii) If so, how successful is it? Each
stage would be a matter for communication. Instead of the teacher being
obliged to teach towards some externally imposed criteria manifested most
often by some external examination or standardised test-he can exploit the
interpretation of these external or standardised criteria as part of the joint
negotiation within the classroom. The group's

discovery of the criteria

inherent in such end-of-course or summative assessment would be one means

for the establishment of the group's own negotiated criteria and, crucially,
for the sharing of responsibilities during the learning-teaching process.
H. Achieving Communicative Language Teaching
We emphasised at the outset of this paper that any curriculum
framework for language teaching and

learning necessarily involves

designers, materials writers, teachers and learners in a process of relating the

three components of purpose, methodology and evaluation. Even so, we need
to acknowledge that any curriculum-including

communicative

curriculum-cannot strictly be designed as a whole from the start. We can

only deduce and propose the principles on which a variety of communicative
curricula may be based. Any curriculum is a personal and social arena. A
communicative curriculum in particular, with its emphasis on the learning
and teaching of communication, highlights a

11

communicative process

whereby the interrelating curriculum components are themselvesopen to

negotiation and change.

CHAPTER III
CLOSING
A. Conclusion
The communicative curriculum defines language learning as learning
how to communicate as a member of a particular socio-cultural group. The
social conventions governing language form and behaviour within the group
are, therefore, central to the process of language learning. In any
communicative event, individual participants bring with them prior
knowledge of meaning and prior knowledge of how such meaning can be
realised through the conventions of language form and behaviour. 2 Since

12

communication is primarily interpersonal, these conventions are subject to

variation while they are being used.
A language teaching curriculum, from a communicative point of
view, will specify its purposes

in terms

of a particular

target

repertoire. Different curricula will hopefully select their own particular

repertoires from a pool of communicative performance on the basis of
a sociolinguistic analysis of the target situation. This does not imply
that any one curriculum will be neces sarily entirely distinctive in the
target repertoire

to which it is devoted. At the surface there will be

inevitable overlap among different repertoires.

B. Suggestion
We realize that in this paper are still many shortcomings and oversight
therefore, readers and experts writers main suggestions and criticisms or
scolds courtesies that are build will be accepted gladly for the perfection of the
next paper.

FOREWORD
Assalamualaikum warahmatullahi wabarakatuh
Praise and thanksgiving authors say over the presence of God Almighty,
for His grace, His taufiq and guidance was, I can finish this paper. This paper is
intended to fulfill the first task of the author in this course, which can thank God
the author completed on time. Authors say thank you to those who have helped in
the completion of this paper.
Hopefully this paper can be useful not only for authors, but also for those
who deign to take the time to read this paper. Given the limitations of the writer as
13

an ordinary man who did not escape the errors and sins, the authors realized that
this paper is very far from perfect. Therefore, criticism and constructive
suggestions very authors expect. So that the future can be better writers. Wrong
and make mistakes authors apologize. to God, the author of forgiveness.
Wassalammu'alaikum warahmatullahi wabarakatuh.

Bengkulu, 2016

Author

LIST OF CONTENTS
i
TITLE PAGE
FOREWORD..................................................................................................i
LIST OF CONTENTS....................................................................................ii
CHAPTER I PRELIMINARY
A. Background...........................................................................................1
B. Problem Identification..........................................................................2
C. Purpose.................................................................................................2

14

CHAPTER II DISCUSION
A.
B.
C.
D.

What is the purpose of the curriculum?.............................................3

What underlies the ultimate demands on the learner?...........................4
What are the learner's initial contributions?...........................................5
How are the curriculum purposes to be achieved?................................6
E. What are the roles of the teacher and the learners within a
communicative
methodology?
..........................................................................................................

9
F. What is the role of content within a communicative methodology?......10
G. How is the curriculum process to be evaluated?....................................10
H. Achieving Communicative Language Teaching....................................12

CHAPTER III CLOSING

A. Conclusion............................................................................................13
B. Suggestion ...........................................................................................13
REFERENCES

ii
REFERENCES
Allwright, R. L. 1978. 'Abdication and responsibility in teaching'. Paper
presented at the Berne Colloquium on Applied Linguistics to be
published in a special issue of Studies in Second Language Acquisition.
Indiana: Indiana University Press.
Bernstein, B., 1971. Class, Codes and Control, Volume I: Theoretical Studies towards
a Sociology of Language. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Breen, M. P. and Candlin, C. N., forthcoming. The Communicative
Curriculum in Language Teaching. London: Longman.
Bruner, J. S., Olver, R. and Greenfield, P., 1966. Studies in Cognitive Growth.
New York: John Wiley & Sons.
Bruner, J. S., 1973.Beyond the Information Given. London: George Allen &
Unwin. Clark, R., Hutcheson, S., Van Buren, P., 1974. 'Comprehension
and production in language acquisition' Journal of Linguistics, 10, 1974.

15

Corder, S. P.,
1978. 'Error analysis, interlanguage and second language
acquisition' in Kinsella, V. (ed.) Language Teaching and Linguistics:
Surveys. Cambridge University Press.
Dulay, H. and Burt, M., 1975. 'A new approach to discovering universal
strategies of child second language acquisition' in Dato, D. (ed.)
Developmental Psycho linguistics. Georgetown University Press.
Gatbouton, E., 1978. 'Patterned phonetic variability in second language
speech'Canadian Modern Language Review, 34, 3: 1978.
Giles, H. and Powesland, P., 1975. Speech Style and Social Valuation.
London: Academic Press.
Golby, M., Greenwald, J. and West, R., (eds.) 1975. Curriculum Design. London:
Croom Helm in association with the Open University Press.
Gumperz, J. J., 1964. 'Linguistic and social interaction in two communities'
in Gumperz, J. J. and Hymes, D. (eds.) American Anthropologist 66 (6 ii):
1964
Johnson-Laird, P., 1974. 'Experimental psycholinguistics' Annual Review
of Psychology 25, 1974.

iii

16