English Language Teaching through Communicative Approach: A Qualitative Study of Public Sector Colleges of Hyderabad, Sindh

Barira Abrejo, Shabana Sartaj, Sadia Memon


Language is a complex phenomenon whether it counts in speaking or writing. Teaching and learning English language is much demanded in today’s globalization era. The increasing need of English language learning has demanded English language teaching around the globe. Therefore, the demand for language learning needs a tremendous quality in language teaching materials and resources. In current years, language learning has been perceived from a special perspective; it can be viewed as the communication between users and the learner of the language. The aim of the study is to determine the factors that deter teachers to implement communicative approach in their teaching. Researchers and practitioners have considered communicative competence as an ideal teaching approach (Berns, 1990). However, public sector colleges in Pakistan rely on Grammar Translation Method (GTM). Though students have good understanding of the language skills such as vocabulary, grammar and reading but research still have shown low proficiency when their speaking skills are tested. Therefore, in order to overcome this default in language proficiency, many teachers are supposed to adopt communicative language teaching methodology in their teaching. The study findings shed light on the factors which always deter teachers in the implementation of CLT and it is believed by the teachers that CLT should be followed at public sector colleges since it is one of the most effective methods of language teaching and learning. English language teaching and learning can be learnt meaningfully, if the aspects like phonetics, phonology, morphology, syntax and semantics will be instilled or implemented properly.


Communicative Approach, Competence, GTM, English Language, Teaching, CLT

Full Text:



Ahmad, N., Ahmad, S., Bukhar, M. A., & Bukhari, T. A. (2011). The Nature of Difficulties in Learning English by the students at Secondary School level in Pakistan. Journal of Education and Practice, 2(10), 18-24.

Anderson, J. (1993). Is a communicative approach practical for teaching English in China?

Pros and cons. System, 21(4), 471-480.

Chang, M. & Goswani, J. S. (2011). Factors affecting the implementation of communicative language teaching in Taiwanese college English classes. English Language Teaching, 4(2), 3-12.

Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge: MA. MIT Press.

Chang, S. C. (2011). A contrastive study of grammar translation method and communicative approach in teaching English grammar. Canadian Centre of Science and Education, (4)2, 13-24.

Ellis, G. (1996). How culturally appropriate is the communicative approach? ELT Journal, 50(3), 213-218.

Ellis, G. (1994). The appropriateness of the communicative approach in Vietnam: an interview study in intercultural communication. ELT Journal, (50)3, 11-78.

Hymes, D. H. (1972). On communicative competence. In C. J. Brumfit, & K. Johnson (Eds.). The communicative approach to language teaching (2nd ed., pp. 5-27). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Hymes, D. (1971). Competence and performance in linguistic theory. In R. Huxley & E.

Ingram (Eds.) Language acquisition: Models and methods. (pp.2-28). NY: Academic


J, G. (2008). Application of communicative approach in college English teaching. Asian Social Sciences, 4(4), 81-85.

Littlewood, W. (2007). Communicative and task-based language teaching in East Asian classrooms. Language Teaching, 40(3), 243-249. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444807004363

Littlewood, W. (1981). Communicative language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Li, Xiaoju. 1984. In defense of the communicative approach.ELT Journal38/1:2-6. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Mansoor, S. (2004). Language Planning in Higher Education: Issues of Access and Equity. Lahore School of Economics Journals, 8(2), 17-42. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/123456789/5580

Nunan, D. (1991). Language teaching methodology: a textbook for teachers. Hertfordshire: Prentice Hall.

Ngoc, K. M. (2012). A comparison of learners’ and teachers’ attitudes toward communicative language teaching at two universities in Vietnam. University of Sydney Papers in TESOL, 7, 25-49.

Panhwar, A. H., Baloch, S., & Khan, S. (2017). Making communicative language teaching work in Pakistan. International Journal of English Linguistics, (7)3, 226-234.

Rorberts J. L. (1982). Recent Development in ELT, Cambridge. Cambridge:University Press

Richards, J.C. & Rodgers, T.S. (2001). Approaches and methods in language teaching (2nd Ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Rao, Z. (1996). Reconciling communicative approaches to the teaching of English with traditional Chinese methods. Research in the Teaching of English, (30)4, 458-471.

Shamim, F. (2011). English as the language for development in Pakistan: Issues, challenges and possible solutions. In H. Coleman (Ed., 2001), Dreams and Realities: Developing Countries and the English Language (pp. 291-311). London: British Council. Retrieved from http://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/sites/teacheng/files/Z413%20EDB

Swan, M. (1985a). A critical look at the communicative approach (1). ELT Journal, 39, 2-12.

Tan, C. (2005). How culturally appropriate is the communicative approach for primary school children in Singapore? The Reading Matrix, 5(1), 21-35.

Thompson, G. (1996). Some misconceptions about communicative language teaching. ELT Journal, 50, 9-15.

Yu, L. (2001). Communicative Language Teaching in China: Progress and Resistance.

TESOL Quarterly, 35(1), 194-198.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.alls.v.10n.5p.43


  • There are currently no refbacks.

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

2010-2022 (CC-BY) Australian International Academic Centre PTY.LTD.

Advances in Language and Literary Studies

You may require to add the 'aiac.org.au' domain to your e-mail 'safe list’ If you do not receive e-mail in your 'inbox'. Otherwise, you may check your 'Spam mail' or 'junk mail' folders.