The concept of a paradigm shift gives a means of making connections between changes that are linked to communicative language teaching. There are eight changes, which fit with the communicative language teaching paradigm shift. These are the social nature of learning, the autonomy of the learner, curricular integration, diversity, focus on meaning, individual thinking skills, teachers as co-learners and alternative assessment.
Paradigm shift in education is used to represent change. A paradigm shift takes place when we see things from a different perspective. Paradigm shifts in the twentieth Century can be due to a large shift from positivism to post-positivism (Jacobs & Farell, 2003). An example of positivism is attempting to standardize while post-positivism is when individuals show appreciation of diversity.
The communicative language teaching paradigm shift in second language edition is similar to the flow from positivism to post positivism. The components of this shift have some concerns. One concern is that attention is focused on the learners’ role than external stimuli, which the learners receive from the environment. A second concern is attention focused on the learning process than on the learning products produced by learners. Another component is focusing on the social nature of learning. Focus on individual differences, Individual views, promoting holistic learning, helping children develop their individual learning purposes, and emphasizing on the necessity of meaning instead of drilling learners are a few components of this shift.
The eight changes that fit the communicative language teaching paradigm shift are interdependent on each other. Successful implementation of one change is dependent on the successful implementation of the other change. For instance, cooperative learning connects with autonomy of learners as group activities encourage second language students not to be very dependent on teachers.
Cooperative learning facilitates curriculum integration as students can pool their knowledge and energies to take on different projects. Focus on meaning can also be seen as group members engage in meaningful communication in cooperative learning (Jacobs & Farell, 2003). Thinking skills are also essential in groups as student’s debate on concept and ideas in the groups. Cooperative learning also fosters peer assessment. Teachers can be co-learners in cooperative learning. This is because they can do research alongside students and discuss with students where they get difficulty in the group work.
The communicative language-teaching paradigm is a slow process. This is because changing behavior and beliefs is a slow process generally. Another problem could be the practical application of the theory by practicing teachers.
The reading is true according to experience. The eight changes that fit with communicative language teaching are all essential components of learning. All the changes in the paradigm shift enable learners to have a better understanding in teaching. This is because it mostly encourages post positivism hence, no limits in the learning process.
Understanding the communicative language-teaching paradigm is beneficial to learners and teachers. According to the paradigm, teaching should encourage learners to do their own research so that they can understand better. Teaching should not be about drilling ideas to students (Jacobs & Farell, 2003). Teaching should focus on the eight changes, which fit communicative language teaching paradigm shift.
In conclusion, second language educators should have a big-picture in changes in communicative teaching. These changes are brought about by the changes in a paradigm shift, which could greatly increase the chances of success in communicative language teaching. The second language education encourages learning for individuals and teachers, which could be beneficial in developing the field of communicative language teaching.
Reference
Jacobs, G.M., & Farrel, S.C. (2003). Understanding and implementing the CLT (Communicative Language Teaching) Paradigm. RELC Journal 34 (1). Pp 5 – 30
