FOSTERING COMMUNICATIVE COMPETENCE IN UNIVERSITY STUDENTS THROUGH COMMUNICATIVE LANGUAGE TEACHING ENVIRONMENT
Keywords:
Key words: Communicative Language Teaching, Communicative Competence, university students, innovative education, language proficiency, student engagement, mixed methods research, role-playing, evaluation, group discussions, language games and activities.Abstract
Abstract: This study explores the development and implementation of a Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) environment aimed at enhancing the communicative competence of university students. Given the increasing importance of effective communication skills in a globalized world, the research outlines a framework that integrates interactive pedagogical approaches, real-life communication scenarios, and collaborative learning experiences. Through a mixed-methods approach, data were collected from student assessments, surveys, and classroom observations to evaluate the impact of the CLT environment on students’ language proficiency and confidence in using English in various contexts. The findings indicate a significant improvement in students’ ability to engage in meaningful interactions, with enhanced fluency, accuracy, and pragmatic skills. The study underscores the necessity of creating a supportive and immersive linguistic atmosphere that prioritizes student engagement and encourages active participation.
References
1. Akram, M., & Mehmood, A. (2011). The need of communicative approach (in ELT) in teacher training program in Pakistan. Language in India, 11(5), 172-178.
2. Hopkins, David, B. (2017). An Outline of Nativist and Behaviorist Theories of Language Acquisition; International Conference on Literature, History, Humanities, and Interdisciplinary Studies (LHHISS-17). International College, Siam Technology College, Bangkok, Thailand: 46-48.
3. Hymes D (1972b). ‘Models of the interaction of language and social life’ In Gumperz J & Hymes D (eds.) Directions in sociolinguistics: the ethnography of communication. Oxford: Basil Blackwell. 35–71.
4. Hymes D (1972c). ‘Introduction.’ In Cazden C, John V & Hymes D (eds.) Functions of language in the classroom. New York: Teachers College Press.
5. Hymes D (1974a). ‘Ways of speaking.’ In Bauman R & Sherzer J (eds.) Explorations in the ethnography of speaking. Cambridge: CUP. Hymes D (1974b). Foundations in sociolinguistics: an ethnographic approach. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
6. Jabeen, Shazi, S. (2014). Implementation of Communicative Approach. Canadian Center of Science and Education, Vol. 7, No. 8, 68-74.
7. Jones, M. Gail & Araje, Laura, B. (2002). The Impact of Constructivism of Education; Language, Discourse, and Meaning. American Communication Journal, Vo. 5, No. 3: 1- 10.
8. Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (1987). The nature of approaches and methods in language teaching. Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching (pp. 14-30). ReinoUnido: Cambridge University Press.
9. Richards, J., & Sandy, C. (2008). Passages (2nd ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
10. Richards, J., Platt, J., & Platt, H. (1992). Dictionary of language teaching & applied linguistics. London:
11. https://www.scirp.org/reference/referencespapers?referenceid=1190078
