Background on Communicative Language Teaching (CLT)

CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
Background on Communicative Language Teaching (CLT)
Language teaching methods have significantly changed to provide high-quality teaching that positively impacts students, especially by improving their communicative
abilities in a target language. These changes have produced various methods that overcome shortcomings of previous methods. In the field of foreign language teaching,
CLT was developed by a group of European Council experts in the seventies (Galloway, 1993). The basic principle behind CLT was enunciated by Nunan (1988) who claimed
that “learners must learn not only to make grammatically correct, propositional statements about the experiential world, but must also develop the ability to use
language to get things done” (p. 25). This method came to be known as CLT.
The development and use of CLT within teaching are traceable to the seventies when the British embraced CLT as a method of teaching English. The development of CLT and
its eventual use in England created a paradigm shift in language teaching. It was fundamentally different from other teaching methods because it emphasised aspects of
communication in language learning. It was primarily used as an English as a second language (ESL) method but rapidly extended across the world, especially in Western
countries. From England, the method was first embraced by other English-speaking countries and then adopted in other countries.
Increases in globalisation, which are made possible by modern scientific and technological devices, contributed to CLT’s wide spread proliferation across the globe.
Globalisation positioned English as the lingua franca; it transitioned from a national language to a global language, especially in the areas of politics, science,
education, technology and international commerce. This prompted non-English speakers to implement CLT within their countries. For example, Asian nationals shifted
their language teaching towards CLT. However, the application of CLT in EFL contexts has faced numerous obstacles—especially from scholars who feel that its usage
raises serious questions (Burnaby and Sun, 1989; Ellis, 1996, Li, 1998 and Rao, 2002)
The concept of CLT is premised on the primary function of language: communication. It additionally promotes the development of communicative competence among learners
and teachers (Hymes, 1972; Rodgers, 2001; Ying, 2010).The method relies on teaching language in a practical way. Hymes (1972) elaborated on the nature of CLT and
coined the term “communicative competence”. Hymes considered CLT as “that aspect of our competence that enables us to convey and interpret messages and to negotiate
meanings interpersonally within specific contexts” (as cited in Brown, 2007, p. 246). Most scholars have come to agree with Hymes’ definition. Tsai (2007) notes that
the primary role of CLT is to develop the communicative competence of learners. Therefore, language learning should not concentrate on mastering sentence structure,
which is common in traditional teaching methods. Rather, language learning should concentrate on increasing learners’ communication proficiency.
Despite the positive development of CLT globally, its implementation remains a significant problem, especially in non-English speaking nations. According to
researchers, the full implementation of CLT remains a mystery in most of these nations. Several obstacles prevent the successful application of CLT in Asian countries.
Instead of critically investigating the effects of these hindrances on students’ abilities to develop communicative competence, much of the focus has been on
hindrances to CLT in different contexts (Burnaby and Sun, 1989, Ellis, 1996, Li, 1998 and Rao, 2002). However, CLT has also been difficult to implement in English as
a first language (Ellis, 1996, Li, 1998, Liao, 2000 and Rao, 2002). Like ESL, the method seeks to develop communicative competence among English as a foreign
language (EFL) learners.
CLT in Saudi Arabia
Global politics and economics have influenced English language usage in Saudi Arabia. The government has been emphasising English language teaching in Saudi schools to
cope with rapidly changing world politics and commerce. Given this goal, the Ministry of Education (MOE) developed a number of policy objectives concerning teaching
English. They introduced English learning in grades four, five and six in primary schools. Furthermore, they developed a new curriculum that concentrates on
communicative teaching rather than traditional approaches.
The new curriculum is centred on developing competence in spoken language among Saudi learners by encouraging communicative activities, like games, group work and
working in pairs. The English teaching materials designed by the MEO contain elements that encourage listening, role playing, group work and communication. The
assessment style established by the MOE is also different from traditional assessment approaches. The MOE introduced a continuous assessment tool in primary schools
that measures students’ communicative competence during lessons in a manner that does not scare or create anxiety in students. The instrument is essentially a rubric
that helps to ascertain the fluency of spoken language instead of focusing on accuracy. Despite these great steps, listening and speaking skills are still not assessed
during examinations. Furthermore, traditional instruction methods that are teacher centred remain popular among Saudi English teachers. Most teachers prefer grammar-
based teaching because it does not require teachers high levels of proficiency (Abu-Ras, 2002).
Implementation of CLT remains difficult because traditional methods are more compatible with the existing training and competence of teachers. Most students who
graduate from secondary schools in Saudi Arabia have low levels of spoken English, despite nine years of language learning (Abu-Ras, 2002). The problem is not related
to the students’ abilities—it is rooted in teachers’ ignorance concerning proper CLT application. Among female Saudi English teachers, significant evidence indicates
that most had limited knowledge of pertinent CLT principles (Bakarman 2004). Given that proper pre-service training remains underemphasised, this situation continues
to worsen.
Most teachers are not properly trained: they lack the necessary qualifications to meet the demanding nature of CLT (Al-Qurashi, 1990 and Al-Hajailan, 1996 as cited by
Abu-Ras, 2002, p.15). The development of CLT has encountered setbacks in Saudi Arabia despite the positive steps taken by the government. Currently, CLT applications
remain relatively poor in Saudi Arabia. Most teachers have not fully embraced the method and are still bound to traditional methods of teaching.

Research Questions
The aim of this paper is to examine the extent to which CLT can be applied in secondary English language classrooms in Saudi Arabia. It also aims to examine teachers’
perceptions towards CLT and the difficulties in applying CLT in Saudi Arabian EFL contexts. This study relies on quantitative and qualitative approaches to provide
answers to the research questions. Data collection was achieved through questionnaires and interviews.

Saudi Arabian Secondary School Classrooms
A Saudi Arabian secondary school classroom contains approximately30–40 students. Their English proficiency levels are usually moderately low. Most students find it
difficult to develop communicative skills, despite being exposed to English at an early age and for a long period of time. The root of the problem is twofold: most
students only speak English during lessons, and teachers favour individual work over group discussions. Teachers’ main obstacles include having to cover the entire
textbook within a specific timeframe, and the lack of assessments for speaking and listening skills during examinations.

Theoretical Significance of the Study
Various studies have examined CLT applications in EFL contexts, but few studies have dealt with CLT implementation in Saudi Arabia. The goal of this paper is to
provide an elaborate overview of the current status of CLT practices in Saudi Arabia. The findings will provide new insight into the application of CLT in Saudi
contexts. The challenges and difficulties that are particular to Saudi teachers will be identified. Using the relevant literature, recommendations will be provided on
how to best implement CLT in a Saudi context.

Hypothesis
It is assumed that Saudi Arabian teachers feel that they are not applying CLT accurately during lessons and that they are not fully aware of the demands of CLT
implementation in Saudi Arabia.

Practical Significance of the Study
In practical terms, this study will provide recommendations on how teachers can limit or overcome difficulties in CLT application. The findings will provide the MOE
with insight on the importance of enhancing teachers’ training at pre-service and in-service levels. These recommendations will help Saudi teachers to overcome the
difficulties of CLT application and to practically embrace CLT by encouraging English communication inside and outside the classroom.

Overview of the Chapters
Chapter one examined the historical background of CLT in a more general way and provided insight into the Saudi context. It explained the government’s efforts to help
the country transition to CLT and limit traditional language teaching. Specifically, the government created a CLT-oriented curriculum and provided teaching materials
that promote CLT application and implementation. Research questions and objectives were also presented.
Chapter two reviewed the relevant literature concerning CLT application and implementation. An elaborate discussion explained the main objectives of CLT: establishing
CLT principles and communicative competence. The differences between ESL and EFL contexts were discussed. An overview described the implications of CLT applications in
each teaching environment, as the implications fundamentally differ form each environment. Lastly, the difficulties and problems faced by Saudi Arabia when
implementing and applying CLT were discussed.
Chapter three provided an elaborate overview of the study’s methodology. It described the methods used to address the research questions. In addition to questionnaires
and interviews, qualitative and quantitative approaches were used in data collection. An introduction addressed the study participants, piloting the study’s tools and
the techniques used to analyse interview and questionnaire data.
Chapter four provided the study findings using the data collected. Chapter five provided analyses and interpretations of the findings as well as highlighted the
study’s limitations. Recommendations were provided on how CLT may be best applied in a Saudi Arabian context. Finally, chapter six provided a holistic summary of the
study and recommendations for further research.
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction
The problem of communication in English is particularly high among Asian communities. According to Rababah (2003p. 89), most learners from Arabic regions often
encounter difficulties in expressing themselves in English. Rababah (2003) believes the difficulty stems from the fact that most Arabic students cannot effectively
apply the grammatical structures that are taught in the classroom to communicative situations outside of the classroom. The problem of communication in English is not
limited to Arabic regions alone: a high number of Chinese students also face difficulties in expressing themselves in English.
Many scholars consider the development of communicative language teaching (CLT) to be the best way of learning a language over other teaching methods, such as the
audio-lingual, grammar translation, and silent methods. According to Savignon (2002p.127), teachers have invented many ways of teaching language (especially English),
but due to changes brought by time and context, such methods are often dismissed. These traditional approaches are not effective in helping students enhance their
communication skills.
Although CLT was developed to allow students to communicate effectively and easily in real-life situations, the method does have some disadvantages. Critics of CLT
have cited several disadvantages that they claim make CLT a difficult approach in teaching language in the English as a Foreign Language (EFL) context. (The
differences between EFL and English as a Second Language [ESL] are discussed below.) Supporters of CLT have denied such claims; they hold that CLT is more beneficial
to students than opponents claim. Considerable literature has been written on these differing viewpoints. This literature review examines several views about the
difficulty of applying CLT in the contemporary world.
The purpose of the study is to examine the extent to which CLT can be applied in a secondary English language classroom in Saudi Arabia. In answering this
broad question the study seeks to provide answers to the following sub questions: What are the difficulties faced by teachers in applying the CLT method? What are
teachers’ perceptions of CLT? And what impact does the lack of administrative support have on CLT application? It is assumed that English teachers in Saudi Arabia feel
that they have perceived that they do not implement CLT accurately in the classroom
In addition to teachers being less conversant with the CLT principles, other factors may impede CLT’s implementation, such as class size, grammar-based examinations,
students’ lack of motivation, and the level of proficiency among students.
Principles of CLT
Language teaching methodology can be described in various ways. One widely accepted formulation views the methodology as a link between theory and practice in teaching
language. In their book Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching, Richards and Rodgers (2001) point out certain characteristics of the communicative view of
language. First, they find that language is a system used to express meaning; second, that the core function of language is to enable interaction and communication;
third, that functional and communicative uses of language are reflected in the structure of language; and finally, they believe that the key components of language are
not limited to grammatical and structural features but extend to groups of functional and communicative meaning, as shown in dialogue (Richard and Rodgers 2001).
A core characteristic of the CLT method is the shift towards a learner-centred communicative and interactive classroom. The process allows both students and the
teacher to share and facilitate the learning process. A learner-centred communicative and interactive classroom allows students to express themselves without fear of
the teacher as the ultimate authority and possessor of all knowledge. Nunan (1988) confirms that the CLT approach was devised to address the need to create a learner-
centred approach. The approach requires that students’ participation is assured during lessons as much as possible. According to Nunan, familiarising teachers with the
approach is imperative, as it allows teachers to state students’ roles clearly before embarking on the lessons.
Communicative activities should reflect real-life situations as closely as possible (Ellis, 1996).This facet allows the partial transfer of the real world into
classroom situations, thus allowing students and teachers to express themselves freely. Classroom activities must be considered closely before being applied, since
these can either motivate or demotivate students. Classroom climates that allow students to express themselves are more likely to improve motivation.
Larsen-Freeman (2001) states that most teachers are liable to fall back on traditional teaching methods, thus inhibiting the role they should play in advancing their
students’ communicative competence. In addition, she argues that teachers should provide an enabling environment to allow students to move towards a learner-centred
approach rather than the teacher-centred approach, which has failed to achieve success in developing communicative competence. The role of teachers is to encourage
students to communicate better with each other. In order to achieve this goal, teachers should encourage several communicative activities—such as games, role playing,
and problem solving—as a way of enhancing interaction. The role of the teacher should, in essence, take a moderating form, only providing control of the discussions
and making corrections when the need arises.
Larsen-Freeman (1986) argues that small groups allow students a chance to interact with one another. Such discussions can assure meaningful and authentic language use.
Pair and group work is important to students’ competency development for several reasons:
1.It allows students to learn from fellow students, as they can pick up how language is used by others.
2.It assures that the new language will be used more, as pairs and group shave a greater chance of increasing enthusiasm towards the English language.
3.It allows students to develop language fluency (Richard 2006, p. 20).
Communicative Competence
Researchers have defined communicative competence differently over the years, but the meaning of each definition is essentially the same. Savignon (1997 p. 272)
defines communicative competence as ‘functional language proficiency; the expression, interpretation, and negotiation of meaning involving interaction between two or
more persons belonging to the same (or different) speech community’.
Various models of communicative competence have been established for instructional and assessment purposes. One model, presented by Canale and Swain (1980), proposes
four components of communicative competence: (1) grammatical competence, which denotes the proper understanding of the language code, such as rules of grammar,
vocabulary use, pronunciation, and spelling; (2) sociolinguistic competence, which denotes mastery of the sociocultural code of the language used by the application of
appropriate vocabulary, politeness, and the style of communication in a given scenario; (3) discourse competence, which is a person’s ability to effectively combine
language structures into various types of cohesive text, such as political speech or poetry; and (4) strategic competence, which denotes the comprehension of verbal
and nonverbal communication strategies in order to enhance efficient communication. Strategic competence is important, since it allows learners to overcome
communication difficulties when communication breakdowns occur.
According to Rababah (2003), the major difficulty in Saudi Arabia is the inability to transfer the grammatical structures that are taught in class to real-life
communication contexts. He summarises the problem as a deficiency in communicative competence and self-expression (p. 17). Deficiency in communicative competence is
the main factor that has contributed to low-level English proficiency among students. However, low-level English proficiency is not self-inflicted by students;
teaching methods and learning environments are culpable (Rababah, 2003). Al-Hazmi, while writing on the Saudi Arabian context, notes that most teachers are not
qualified to handle the demands of EFL students (p. 342).
Differences between ESL and EFL
Both ESL and EFL involve the learning of English by nonnative speakers. While the two processes aim to develop an effective means of communicating in English, they
vary considerably in terms of the learning environment that each provides. ESL refers to situations in which English is the target language taught in settings where
English is the main language spoken. For instance, when a Frenchman takes English lessons in the United Kingdom. EFL, on the other hand, means learning English in
one’s native country or where English is not the primary language spoken. An example of this is when a native of a non-English-speaking country (a Saudi woman, for
instance) decides to take English lessons in her own country.
Understanding the two concepts is crucial, especially when one needs to know the implications of the application of the CLT method in each of the different learning
and teaching environments. One difference is that learning in an ESL setting does not necessarily require classroom instructions, as learners are surrounded by and can
interact with speakers of the target language in and out of the classroom. Learning the language in an ESL environment is a matter of necessity for students, since it
is the only sure way to thrive in their new environment (Ellis, 1996). EFL, on the other hand, will most likely be conducted in a classroom. Learning English in an EFL
context is not a matter of necessity; rather, it is only part of a school curriculum. Exposure to English in this context occurs only during class time.
According to Ellis (1996), students in ESL settings are more likely to interact with others, and to make new friends in the process, because such settings usually
include people who speak a variety of languages. Ellis notes that classrooms with culturally mixed languages are more likely to create learning motivation and thus
enhance learners’ fast adaptation of learning strategies. EFL learners, in contrast, usually share the same native language. The degree to which students are motivated
to learn new things is thus limited. Furthermore, their motivation is hampered in EFL, since students will use their native language, rather than English, outside the
classroom (Ellis 1996).
Adoption of CLT in the EFL Context
Researchers have consistently posited that the transfer of teaching methods developed in one country to another usually creates trouble (Kramsch and Sullivan 1996;
Pennycook 1989). These researchers believe that the tenets of education are embedded in a particular cultural environment; thus, proper teaching practice aligns to the
social construction of particular societies. CLT was developed as a Western-style English Learning and Teaching (ELT) methodology in the 1970s. It has been widely used
across the world since then in both ESL and EFL contexts (Kramsch and Sullivan 1996).
It should be noted that the implementation of the CLT method in EFL contexts is usually problematic. It would be unwise, however, to disregard the importance of CLT in
teaching English in such environments simply because of such difficulties. This is because, as Larsen-Freeman writes (2001, p. 67), ‘we may fail to understand the
cause of the problem and run the risk of overacting and losing something valuable in the process’.
Ellis (1996) points out that, in the Vietnamese context, the adoption of CLT in language teaching has not been successful, partly because most teachers rely heavily on
traditional teaching practices, with too much focus on the translation of grammar. The adoption of CLT in Vietnam thus has not been easy for education stakeholders.
Accordingly, Ellis believes that CLT is not appropriate for language teaching in Vietnam. Karavas-Doukas (1996) finds that a similar outcome occurred in the adoption
of CLT in EFL contexts in Greece. Teachers there did not understand the CLT principles, and as a consequence continued to rely on traditional language teaching
methodologies.
Difficulties in Applying CLT in EFL Contexts
The application of CLT in EFL contexts has faced several difficulties related to teachers, students, the educational system, and the CLT method itself. These
difficulties are discussed in the following sections.
Teacher-Related Difficulties
The application of CLT requires that teachers have the ability to meet CLT’s demanding characteristics. The use of CLT is thus hindered by many difficulties when
teachers try to teach a foreign language to students with a similar background, including teachers’ lack of training, cultural knowledge, and language proficiency, as
well as their misconceptions about CLT and the fact that CLT is time consuming.
1.Lack of training
Most of the world’s governments fail to offer proper training for teachers. Such training would give teachers the best platform for embracing new teaching methods in
accordance with their ability. In a study conducted by Abu-Ras (2002) in the Saudi Arabian context about the communicative ability of teachers, it was found that 89%
of the teachers had no adequate pre service training in CLT. Teachers in Saudi Arabia are not properly trained to effectively apply CLT (Al-Qurashi 1990; Al-Hajailan
1996 as cited by Abu-Ras 2002 p. 15). Teachers have stuck to the use of traditional teaching methods, hence failing to motivate students to embrace CLT. Methods such
as grammar translation still remain dominantly applicable in the Saudi context (Altwaijri 1982 p 143). The adoption of these traditional methods is viewed as
compatible to the training and competence of teachers, as they are not confident about their English language ability and can hardly hold a conversation with a native
speaker(Abu-Ras 2002). Additionally, Liao (2004) notes that the CLT approach was unsuccessfully introduced to China due to government officials’ hesitance to embrace
teacher training there.
Liao(2000) argues that proper training and an enhanced understanding of CLT principles would enable teachers to understand that (1) lessons should begin with listening
and speaking; (2) drills on language form should be done in moderation; (3)the new language should be used during and after class, translation should be limited, and
audio visual aids should be utilised to greater effect; (4) teachers should embrace the role of facilitator and helper to provide guidance to students, which will
enable them to develop effective learning skills, and teachers should appreciate individual differences among students; and (5) students should be encouraged to pursue
their own initiatives to further their learning.
2. Lack of cultural knowledge
Teachers lack cultural knowledge of the target language in most EFL environments, thus creating another difficulty in applying the CLT method. One of the greatest
hindrances is the set of traditions that demands young people should always listen to and respect the opinions of adults. These traditional behaviours are the main
reason that students remain passive in class. Littlewood (2000) recounts that cultures that have long traditions of unconditional obedience and recognition of
authority are the same ones where CLT has been difficult to implement. Hui’s study (1997) finds that China’s Confucian culture, which encourages harmony and compromise
between people and stresses the importance of honoring one’s elders, has affected students’ participation during class. Students fear losing face or offending others.
It is therefore important that English-language cultural practices be understood if CLT is to succeed in EFL environments.
3.Spoken English proficiency
The problem of proficiency among teachers is another hindrance that has been noted by many scholars. Abu-Ras (2002)and other studies find that most Saudi EFL teachers
are not confident about speaking English and can hardly hold a conversation with native speakers. Ellis (1996) believes that the successful implementation of CLT in
EFL settings cannot be achieved unless English proficiency among teachers improves. One study (Li 1998) on CLT progress in China found that most teachers had low
levels of English proficiency. Li (1998) argues that the problem of CLT implementation persists in China because teachers cannot modify textbooks and facilitate
students due to their low-level English proficiency. Li further emphasises that while CLT implementation requires that teachers be fluent in spoken English, the
teachers were only found to be proficient in English grammar.
4.Misconceptions about CLT
Another problem that researchers find causes teachers’ disregard of the CLT method is their misconceptions about the method (Lewis and McCook 2002). Bakarman (2004)
finds that the majority of Saudi EFL teachers lack awareness of the CA principles. Such misconceptions, however, have not been regarded as a major problem in the
implementation of the method (ibid). The misconceptions are partly driven by teachers’ beliefs (Sato and Kleinsasser 1999). According to Sato and Kleinsasser these
beliefs are responsible for the fear that teachers have developed towards CLT more than the knowledge they possess (1999). These misconceptions play a role in
influencing teachers to reject and criticise CLT (Thompson 1996). Thompson (1996) identifies the misconceptions as follows: CLT means not teaching grammar; CLT is only
about speaking; CLT is about paired work, and thus is about role playing; and CLT demands much more from teachers.
In order to document teachers’ views and practices of CLT in teaching Japanese as a second language in Australia, Sato and Kleinsasser (1999) found several instances
of Thompson’s identified misconceptions (1996) among these teachers. They noted that most teachers were more comfortable relying on traditional methods rather than CLT
due to their belief that CLT relied too much on listening and speaking skills while allowing little room for students to learn grammar.
5.CLT is Time Consuming
Another difficulty that CLT faces is that, unlike traditional teaching methods (which require limited time and resources), CLT is time consuming. Traditional methods
are deemed to be less time consuming, as they are centred on the teacher in all aspects of learning (Brown1994). CLT introduces a new method of teaching that makes
students the centre of attention, thus creating a more social relationship between teachers and students. Teachers find it difficult in these circumstances to create
teaching formulas or activities that can attract students’ interest in the lessons. Studies show that teachers are reluctant to apply CLT, as they view the
preparations as time consuming. In Sato and Kleinsasser’s study on the application of CLT (1999), most teachers viewed the methods used in applying CLT as time
consuming, which made it difficult for them to embrace the method in their programmes. Another study, in the context of Bangladesh, showed that teachers viewed CLT as
requiring a great deal of time to prepare teaching materials and classroom activities (Sato and Kleinsasser 1999).
Difficulties with Students
Since teachers and students are both supposed to adopt an active role during the learning process (unlike traditional methods, where the students play a more passive
role), the difficulties in applying CLT are not limited to teachers alone. Students have also found it cumbersome to apply the method during their learning process.
Student-related difficulties have been found in the following areas: (1)their low levels of proficiency; (2) their passive style of learning; (3) their resistance to
participating in communicative activities; and (4)their general lack of motivation to develop communicative competence.
1.Low proficiency levels
Altwaijri (1982) observes that ‘Saudi students spend at least ten years learning English, but their English proficiency is generally unsatisfactory when compared to
the amount of time spent in learning it’ (p. 6). Li (1998) finds that low-level English proficiency amongst students hinders the adoption of CLT in class. Most
students prefer teacher-centred approaches to communicative teaching approaches. Incecay and Incecay (2009) describe this situation as students wanting the teacher to
provide a brief explanation for everything discussed in the classroom. Additionally, Jin, Singh, and Lin (2005) find that students with low-level average English
proficiency could not communicate effectively.

2.Passivity
Another challenge that students face is the means of CLT’s application and implementation during lessons. Most students have the mindset that the teacher is the
authority and has all the knowledge, while the student’s job is to sit passively and listen to whatever the teacher says. Cummins (1998), Li (1998), and Nunan (1988)
demonstrate that CLT tends to invert this thinking by creating a learning environment where the focus is on the student. CLT does not impose exercises on the students
but allows them to develop their personal interests and aspirations in a manner they deem fit. Accordingly, CLT has made students active participants during the
learning process.
3. Reluctance to participate
According to Littlewood (2000), CLT was developed to compensate for the inadequacies of traditional teaching methods and to improve students’ abilities to communicate
adequately in English. In his study, Rao (2002) established that, when learning languages, students prefer traditional teaching styles that focus on book-centred and
teacher-centred approaches as well as on rote memory. Students prefer strategies that stress vocabulary, grammar, reading, and word-level translation as well as
writing (Rao, 2002). Larsen-Freeman (2001) notes that CLT promotes teaching practices that aim to enhance communicative competence in a realistic context. In order to
successfully use the CLT method, the role of students during classes cannot be underestimated. The main role that learners play in these circumstances is as
negotiators. CLT allows students to discuss among themselves and to negotiate, thus letting them give as much as they get out of the process. Despite these clear-cut
roles for students, difficulties usually arise when applying CLT. Littlewood (2000) contends that the obedient nature of Asian students, in particular, does not
reflect their real behaviour in classrooms.
Abu-Ras (2002) notes that most students feel the communicative activities employed to teach them are boring. In addition, the importance of language has not been
given proper recognition in the Saudi Arabian curriculum. Furthermore, the grammar-based system of evaluating the competence of students serves as an impeding factor
(Abu-Ras, 2002, p. 140).
4.Lack of motivation
Students’ lack of motivation usually results from the limited social interactions that they encounter outside the classroom. This problem is mainly found in the Saudi
context, since students usually use their native language when outside the classroom. Ellis (1996) points out that compared to environments where students share the
same native language, culturally heterogeneous classrooms usually breed greater motivation among students to consistently speak using the target language. Accordingly,
lack of motivation is a bigger problem in Saudi environments than it is in ESL environments.
Difficulties in the Educational System
In addition to the difficulties introduced by teachers and students, the educational system has also proved to be a major challenge in implementing the CLT method.
Various studies have consistently shown certain educational system-related features that are shared across all countries. Three key constraints were found to hamper
the effective implementation of the method during classes: overly large classes, grammar-based examinations, and shortage of administrative support.
1.Class size
In a study in Saudi Arabia by (Bakerman, 2004), the number of students in a class, usually between thirty and forty, this high number prevents students from
participating in effective communicative activities, such as pair or group work and role play. Li (1998) highlights this problem as a major limitation in the proper
implementation of CLT in EFL countries. Li points out that applying the method during classes is difficult for teachers. CLT requires that teachers adopt a close
monitoring method when dealing with students to ensure their full participation during lessons. Li argues large classes are a recipe for noise instead of well-
organised class work. Gahin and Myhill (2001) agree with these findings, contending that large classes are bad for CLT, since they disrupt group activities. In
addition to affecting smooth group work during lessons, large classes contribute to difficulties in error-correcting strategies. Gahin and Myhill (2001) argue that
because moving around the class is often difficult for teachers, managing their classes becomes difficult in large classes
2.Grammar-based examinations
According to the findings of Gahin and Myhill (2001), Li (1998), and Sato and Kleinsasser (1999), the implementation of CLT in EFL countries is greatly hampered by the
fact that teachers persist in using traditional testing methods when examining students’ abilities. In particular, Sato and Kleinsasser (1999) voice concern that the
assessment tests used focus mainly on testing four skills of language and as such are an obstacle to learning. Li (1998),on the other hand, demonstrates that the large
amount of time that teachers take teaching and testing grammar during examinations, has proved to be a major driver in pushing teachers to concentrate on teaching
grammar while neglecting the development of communicative skills.
3.Shortage of administrative support
Additional problems also relate to learning institutions’ lack of financial resources for providing facilities for CLT implementation (Rao 2002). The adoption of the
CLT method demands that learning institutions must provide facilities to establish teaching materials and aids in order to motivate students. The availability of such
resources will enhance the concentration on communicative activities, yet lack of finances has prevented EFL from providing them.
Difficulties in CLT Itself
Li (1998) argues that certain problems and difficulties that CLT faces during implementation arise from the method itself. Li believes that CLT does not provide
sufficient accounting of EFL teaching. The problem in this context, according to Li, is that CLT fails to distinguish between ESL and EFL contexts. In this sense, CLT
fails to consider the relevant characteristics of teaching and learning in view of the availability of authentic teaching materials.
Li’s findings are supported by those of Hiep (2005), who adds that the transfer of CLT to EFL contexts has always been problematic, since the tutoring methods of a
foreign country often go against the social, cultural, and physical conditions of the particular countries that are adopting them. He argues that the problem is
usually not related to methodology; rather, it is related to the manner of its implementation and adaptation to adequately meet students’ needs.
Hiep (2005) and Li (1998) provide recommendations for improving CLT application in EFL countries. They believe that success can only be attained when education stake
holders adopt comprehensive reforms, which must be able to align the method with the needs of locals. Achieving this objective requires that teachers be trained to
elevate their teaching and learning skills in the foreign language. Li (1998) argues that achieving these comprehensive reforms would mean that teachers could learn to
adapt CLT in their CLT application rather than adopting the process without regard to particulars.
Conclusion
This literature review provides a general understanding of the application of CLT in various countries while highlighting the specific problems these countries face
when implementing the method. The literature demonstrates the specific strengths of CLT in increasing students’ language proficiency and its weaknesses in enhancing
grammatical knowledge. Accordingly, this literature review shows that there is no one method of teaching that can effectively offer students the ‘whole package’
required for learning. In addition, this literature review explains the difficulties and challenges faced during the application and implementation of the CLT method.

CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
Introduction
The preceding chapter highlighted the adaptation of CLT in EFL contexts and the problems that caused by that adaptation. These problems are divided into four
categories; teacher related, student related, educational system related, and the difficulties that caused by the communicative method itself . This chapter provides
an overview of the study’s methodology. It describes research design, reasons for using questionnaire and interviews, participants description , pilot study and data
analysis.

Research Design
This study aims to examine the extent to which communicative language teaching (CLT) can be applied in secondary English language classrooms in Saudi Arabia. This
study also aims to examine the teachers’ perceptions towards CLT and the difficulties in applying CLT in an Saudi Arabian English as a foreign language (EFL) context.
A qualitative method was applied in conducting the interviews, while a quantitative method was applied in creating the questionnaires. Adopting a questionnaire was
necessary because the study revolves around beliefs. Horwitz (1985) he agreed that adopting questionnaires is common practice in research studies concerning human
belief.
This study applied techniques for collecting information and used various methods for analysing the collected data. A mixed method approach was used, which meant
gathering and examining quantitative and qualitative data while concurrently collecting information. After collecting the data, data were prioritised by integrating
them in various stages of the research process (Creswell et al, 2003, p.212).
Using a mixed method in a research study enables the researcher to reach a number of possible research outcomes (Tashakkori and Teddlie, 1998). In addition, a mixed
method approach provides researchers with a broader perspective, as the researcher can use qualitative data to describe aspects that cannot be effectively described
through quantitative data (Creswell, 2003). A mixed method approach also gives researchers the opportunity to provide generalised results by transitioning from a
sample to an entire population. Furthermore, a mixed method approach enables researchers to acquire deeper understandings of their topics.
By applying a mixed research approach in this research, explanations were provided about the perceived difficulties that are commonly experienced by students and
teachers in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) countries when CLT is implemented. In conducting follow-up semi-structured interviews, other challenges and
difficulties were uncovered that the questionnaires failed to note, specifically concerning the implementation of CLT in EFL environments.
It is fundamentally important for researchers to adopt research designs that best address their research questions (Connelly, 2009). In this respect, mixed research
methods offer the best approach. Connelly (2009, p.31) described the objective of a mixed method: “the goal of mixed methods research is to draw on the strengths and
minimize the weaknesses of both types of research.”
Triangulation, which is used for validating information, is the main component of a mixed method research approach. Employing triangulation assures credibility after
research findings have been reported. Amores (1997, p.521) defined triangulation as “the collection and comparison of data from two or more separate observations or
illustrations of the behaviours being studied.” Triangulation is important because it facilitates data validation through cross verification, which is especially
useful if there are more than two sources involved. Through triangulation, researchers are better able to control or assess limitations that could influence their
results. In addition to data validation, triangulation enhances and supports our understanding of the research. Mathison (1988) contends that a researcher can overcome
any relevant weaknesses, problems, or biases inherent in single-method, single-observer, or single-theory studies by using a mixed method approach. Furthermore, he
supposes that triangulation enables researchers to confirm the accuracy of their findings by merging various perspectives. When various perspectives are merged, the
results tend to accurately represent reality (Mathison,1988). Yeasmin and Rahman (2012) confirm that the trend of using qualitative and quantitative research methods
has made triangulation techniques more acceptable in social research.
In conducting this research, triangulation was the main tool used to gather data. Data were collected through written survey questionnaires and organised semi-
structured interviews with respondents. These two data gathering tools were important in this study because they ensured the validity of the questionnaire answers and
interview responses.

Questionnaires as Data Collection Tools
Questionnaires are the most frequently used tools in collecting data when conducting second language research. When using questionnaires, most researchers suggest
administering them to groups of participants so that huge amounts of data and information may be collected in a limited time (Krathwohl, 1998). Dörnyei (2003, p.9)
suggested that, “questionnaires reduce the personal investment required in conducting the research to a fraction of what would be applicable for questioning the equal
number of persons one by one”. A well-constructed questionnaire is also important because the collected data and information can be handled more fairly, proficiently,
and straight forwardly, especially when researchers apply contemporary technology, such as computers and sophisticated word processing software. Marshall and Rossman
(1999) recommend using questionnaires because they are convenient, generalisable, and able to provide accurate data. The reliability of questionnaires enables them to
provide consistent data in different implementations, thereby ensuring that the collected data are consistent and dependable (Marshall and Rossman, 1999).
Questionnaires are also secretive in nature and therefore protect the identities of respondents. This is important, as it gives respondents an opportunity to provide
more honest answers than they might have provided in one-on-one interviews.
There are certain limitations when using questionnaires for conducting research of this nature. Despite the extremely useful characteristics of questionnaires, they
usually fail to properly examine complex social relationship or sophisticated pattern interactions (Marshall and Rossman, 1999). Questionnaires also seem easy to
construct, and that may lead researchers to underestimate the difficulty involved in design them. Such underestimations may lead to insufficient data being collected
and may even threaten the reliability and validity of the data. In addition, questionnaires may also be unsuitable tools when they are used to probe into profound or
complex matters, since most questionnaires have simple and straight forward wording to facilitate ease of comprehension (Dörnyei, 2003). Due to these limitations, this
study presented an open-ended question to participants so that they could freely express their thoughts and ideas without the constraints of fixed options. In this
sense, questionnaires can “provide a far greater ‘richness’ than fully quantitative data” claims Dörnyei (2003, p.47).
In this study, a written questionnaire was designed for secondary school EFL teachers in Saudi Arabia. These questionnaires were distributed to EFL teachers to explore
the difficulties that they potentially encounter in their attempts to implement CLT and to investigate their understandings of the principles of CLT. The questionnaire
included both closed-ended and open-ended questions.
The questionnaire composed of three main parts. The first part of the questionnaire consists of questions that deal with participants’ personal information. This
includes participants’ academic backgrounds and their years of experience in teaching English.
The second part of the questionnaire consists of nine items that are used to explore teachers’ perceptions towards CLT principles. The last three items concern common
misconceptions about CLT. The respondents’ choices are meant to indicate the degree to which they strongly agree, agree, are neutral, disagree or strongly disagree
with the questionnaire statements.
The third part of the questionnaire concerns any difficulties encountered by the teachers. This section was divided into three categories: teacher-related
difficulties, student-related difficulties and difficulties related to the educational system. For each of these items, participants were asked to choose from a five-
point scale, where participants could strongly agree, agree, be neutral, disagree or strongly agree with each statement.

Interviews as Data Collection Tools
In addition to using questionnaires, interviews were used as another way of gathering information and supplementing the data already gathered. Three categories of
interviews exist. The first type is the standard interview, which is often called the formal interview. The second type is the unstandardised interview, which is
primarily called the informal interview. Finally, the third type is the semi-standardised interview, which is often called the semi-structured interview (Berg, 1989).
Semi-structured interviews were used in this study. According to Berg (1989, p.17), a semi-structured interview is normally conducted in “a systematic and consistent
order, but it allows the interviewers sufficient freedom to digress; that is, the interviewers are permitted (in fact expected) to probe far beyond the answers to
their prepared and standardized questions”. Usually, interviews take a personal turn when gathering data and information. Because interviews are personal in nature,
questions may be adapted when questioning respondents. This in turn allows the researcher to gain deeper insight into the topic of interest; this would be difficult to
do through questionnaires alone.
Mathison (1988) asserts that semi-structured interviews can provide large amounts of useful data, especially when the sample size is small, and can allow for a
thematic analysis of the qualitative data that have been collected. A semi-structured interview fits the open framework required by this research. Accordingly, more
useful information may be obtained from these conversations through intensive two-way communication with the respondent. Semi-structured interviews are also
advantageous because they do not require researchers to formulate questions beforehand, which is normally the case in interviews. On the contrary, the semi-structured
interview approach usually takes a more broad and general questioning approach (Arksey and Knight, 1999, p.5).
According to Ratner (2002), semi-structured interviews provide both the interviewer and the interviewee with the freedom to explore and control the discourse. Usually,
when preparing to conduct a semi-structured interview, only topics and subtopics should be identified rather than identifying specific questions. The hope is that
specific questions will arise during the interview process concerning these pre-identified topics and subtopics. Accordingly, interviewers can explore several matters
and avoid situations that lead diverge from the key issues.
The nature of semi-structured interviews also allows the interviewers to use thought provoking interjections. Since the format is not strictly journalistic,
interviewers can learn more about a particular issue of interest. However, in using this technique, there is an assumption that the interviewer and interviewee share
the same expert level of knowledge about the subject matter.
Semi-structured interviews also help the interviewers and the interviewees to create strong relationships by sharing a common ground and common experiences before
officially commencing with the interview. Establishing this rapport is crucial, as it gives the interviewer an opportunity to gain perspectives on the matters being
discussed. Furthermore, the semi-structured interview format encourages interviewees to describe any critical events and to converse about them freely. This is
important because it helps to elaborate and exemplify the topics and subtopics being discussed.
However, semi-structured interviews are not without drawbacks. It is important to also recognise the weaknesses of this method. According to Denscombe (2007, p.194),
people tend to respond differently to semi-structured interviews depending on their perceptions of the interviewer. In particular, the age, sex, or ethnic background
of the interviewer could impact the kinds and amounts of information that people are willing to share.
In this study, four of the questionnaire participants—all EFL teachers at Saudi Arabian secondary schools—were chosen to participate in interviews in July of 2015. The
semi-structured interviews each lasted for approximately ten minutes. The interviews followed an individual, face-to-face interview format, and each interview was
recorded.
The selected participants differed in a few ways. They varied in their years of teaching experience and also in their academic qualifications. Teachers’ experience
varied from 3 to 18 years of teaching English. Additionally, two teachers held master’s degrees and another two teachers held bachelor degrees. Before conducting the
interview, participants were given a chance to review the interview questions and also received an explanation of the purpose of the study. The interviews occurred in
different places. The first teacher agreed to meet at a café, while the other three teachers were visited at their homes. The interviews were conducted in English for
all teachers. The following questions were posed:
Do you apply CLT in your classroom? Why or why not?
Do you think it is possible to apply CLT in Saudi Arabian classrooms? Why or why not?
Do you think that teachers in Saudi Arabia are encouraged to use CLT in their classrooms? Why or why not?
What are the difficulties that you have personally faced when attempting to implement CLT in your classroom?
Do you think that those difficulties can be overcome? How can they be overcome?
Have you ever participated in a training course on how to implement CLT in your classroom?
Do you think that teachers can successfully implement CLT without being formally trained?

Participants
All 63 participants were male Saudi Arabian English teachers who taught English textbooks in public secondary schools in Saudi Arabia. All teachers answered
written questionnaires, and four teachers were also interviewed. The participants came from three different cities in Saudi Arabia: Makkah, Jeddah, and Almadinah. To
distribute the questionnaires to as many teachers as possible, a snowball sampling technique was used. Copies of the questionnaire were delivered to the participants
using two techniques: in-person or via email.
In the spirit of full disclosure, it is necessary to note that some participants were friends and previous colleagues of the researcher. However, the majority of the
participants were unknown. Additionally, friends and colleagues of the researcher were asked to distribute questionnaires to English teachers working in secondary
schools. Many copies of the questionnaire were distributed to the teachers through English teacher supervisors. The completed questionnaires were received via email,
physically collected from participants, or physically collected from colleagues who had retrieved them on behalf of the researcher.
The first part of the questionnaire consists of two personal questions about the teachers’ teaching experiences and qualifications. Part two consists of nine questions
about the teachers’ perceptions toward CLT. Part three consists of 13 questions about the difficulties of applying CLT in an EFL context. Finally, part four consists
of one open-ended question about any other difficulties that had not been specifically mentioned in the other questions. The questionnaire took approximately ten
minutes to complete.
Regarding the participants’ teaching experience, their experience ranged from1year to more than 11 years of experience. The participants’ teaching experience can be
divided into four groups: 19 teachers had 1–3 years of teaching experience, 22 teachers had 4–7 years of teaching experience, 13 teachers had 8–10 years of teaching
experience, and 9 teachers had 11 or more years of teaching experience.

Concerning the participants’ qualifications, the majority of teachers had BA degrees (45 teachers), while the remainder had MA degrees (18 teachers) and no teachers
had PhD degrees.

Piloting the study data collection instruments
According to Collis and Hussey (2009), it is useful to conduct a pilot study to test the questionnaire or interview questions before distributing them to participants.
It provides an opportunity to verify each aspect of the questionnaire, including grammatical or wording errors. Therefore, the researcher consulted the study’s
supervisor and three English teachers (two of the English teachers held master’s degrees and the other teacher held a bachelor degree) to provide feedback and comments
related to the structure and content of the study. This ensured that the questionnaire and the interview questions completely addressed the study areas. After
conducting the pilot study and receiving feedback, a number of ambiguous questions were rearranged and any unnecessary questions were removed. For example, the point
scales in the second part of the questionnaire were originally “no problem”, “a manageable problem” and “a great problem”. These options were changed to “strongly
agree”, “agree”, “neutral”, “disagree” and “strongly disagree”. It was determined that the three-point scale was limited and that teachers could have different
understandings of the meanings of “a manageable problem” and “a great problem”. In another instance of feedback, one teacher suggested that the items be organised
rather than randomly presented. As a result of this feedback, the items were organised.

Data Analysis
The purpose of data analysis, claims Burns (2000, p.430), is to “find meanings from the data and a process by which the investigator can interpret the data”.
Similarly, Marshall and Rossman (1999) stated that the purpose of data analysis is to bring meaning, structure, and order to data.
In analysing the written questionnaire data, the closed-ended questions and the questionnaire data were analysed using Microsoft Excel. The open-ended question results
were analysed using relevant themes; however; only two participants answered the open-ended question.
The semi-structured interviews analyzed through content analysis. According to Krippendorff (1980, p21) content analysis is “a research technique for making
replicable and valid inferences from data to their context”. By using content analysis, it is perfectly possible to have a deep understandings of teachers thought. In
order to analysis data, the researcher read through lines, encode, and decodes what was being said during the interviews and later relates the findings to the results
derived from questionnaire data.
Conclusion
This chapter discussed the research methodology in terms of research design, reasons for using questionnaire and interviews, participants description , pilot study
and data analysis.

CHAPTER 4
RESULTS
Introduction
This chapter presents the results of the key data collected for the purpose of answering the research questions. This study aims to examine the extent to which CLT can
be applied in secondary English language classrooms in Saudi Arabia, as well as to examine teachers’ perceptions towards CLT and the difficulties in applying CLT in
Saudi Arabian EFL contexts. To answers these research questions, questionnaire and semi-structured interviews were utilized.

Questionnaire Findings
A written questionnaire was used to explore English teachers’ perceptions towards communicative language teaching (CLT) and the difficulties in applying CLT in an
English as a foreign language (EFL) context in secondary schools. The questionnaire consisted of three sections. Section one dealt with participants’ personal
information. Section two examined teachers’ perceptions about CLT principles and was comprised of nine questions, it consisted of descriptively characterised of CLT
principles and some of which concerned common misconceptions about CLT. Section three related to some difficulties in applying CLT in EFL context. Teachers were asked
to state whether they strongly agreed, agreed, were neutral, disagreed or strongly disagreed with various statements The key results are presented below.

Teachers’ Perceptions Toward CLT Principles
The following six pie charts illustrate the perceptions of participant Saudi EFL teachers.
Figure 4: Results for the statement that CLT involve only group work or pair work.
In total, 37% of teachers agreed that CLT involves group work and pair work, which is more than third of all teachers surveyed. An additional 19% of teachers surveyed
strongly agreed with this statement. Therefore, the majority of teachers perceive that CLT involve only group work or pair work.
Figure 5: Results for the statement that CLT ignores teaching grammar.
The statement that CLT ignores teaching grammar resulted in mixed perceptions among the teachers surveyed. While a considerable percentage of the teachers agreed with
this statement—41% agreed and 18% strongly agreed—an additional 22% of teachers remained neutral, which is a relatively high percentage. Furthermore, 16% of teachers
surveyed disagreed. However, there is notable division between the two perspectives where the majority believes that CLT ignores teaching grammar.

Figure 6: Results for the statement that CLT only involves teaching oral communication.
Concerning the statement that CLT only involves teaching oral communication, the teachers surveyed seemed to disagree. Altogether, 43% of teachers disagreed and
another 17% of teachers were neutral. Only 27% of teachers agreed and 11% strongly agreed, which presents a much lower figure than those who disagreed, even when
combined.

Difficulties in applying CLT
This section evaluates the difficulties related to teachers, students and the educational system during the implementation of CLT. The results are presented below.
Figure 7: Results for the statement that teachers’ levels of proficiency in spoken English are important.
At 63%, the majority of teachers surveyed overwhelmingly agreed that their proficiency in spoken English is important. They were supported by another 13% who strongly
agreed with the statement. In comparison, only 13% of teachers surveyed disagreed and a mere 3% strongly disagreed. Teachers’ proficiency is therefore important in the
implementation of CLT.
Figure 8: Results for the statement that teachers’ training on how to implement CLT is important.
The results indicate that it is important for teachers to receive training on CLT implementation. Altogether, 54% of the teachers surveyed agreed and another 35%
strongly agreed that it was important for teachers to be trained in the implementation of CLT. Only 5% of teachers surveyed disagreed with that proposition and another
5% strongly disagreed.

Figure 10. Results for the statement that students’ levels of proficiency in spoken English present a challenge in implementing CLT.
Concerning the statement that students’ levels of spoken English present a challenge in implementing CLT, 41% of teachers agreed with the statement and 24% of teachers
strongly agreed. An additional 14% of teachers remained unsure and were therefore neutral. A considerable number of teachers felt that the levels of spoken English
among students did not present a challenge: 13% of teachers disagreed, while 8% strongly disagreed. However, the majority of teachers agreed that it does present a
challenge.

Figure2: Results for the statement that CLT requires supporting by authentic materials from administration.
It is interesting to note that teachers overwhelmingly agree with the statement that CLT requires to be supported by authentic materials from ministry of education.
Overall, 27% of teachers surveyed agreed with the statement, while another 54% strongly agreed with the statement. These numbers are quite high, as only 13% of
teachers disagreed and another 6% strongly disagreed. According to the results, it appears that CLT requires to be supported by authentic materials from ministry of
education.

Figure 12: Results for the statement that large numbers of students in a classroom is challenging.
Concerning the statement that having large numbers of students in a classroom is challenging, 52% of teachers surveyed strongly agreed and while 29% agreed. The number
of contrary views remained quite low: 6% of teachers were neutral, 5% disagreed and 8% strongly disagreed. These results indicate that the majority of teachers
perceive that having a large number of students in a classroom is challenging.
Figure 13: Results for the statement that grammar-based exams impact students’ participation in CLT.
The statement that grammar-based exams impact students’ participation in CLT attracted mixed views, and there were notable differences in surveyed teachers’
perspectives. Altogether, 44% of the teachers surveyed agreed that grammar-based examinations impact students’ participation in CLT, and another 25% of teachers
strongly agreed with this. Furthermore 13% of teachers remained neutral, which is still a considerable number. In total, 10% of teachers surveyed strongly disagreed.
It is clear that the majority of teachers believe that grammar-based examinations impact students’ participation in CLT.
As regarding to the open ending question, which asked teachers to list any other problems or difficulties in applying CLT in Saudi Arabia. This question was answered
by two teachers; teacher A said that: “1- dedicated time for learning English in a week. 2- lack of well-equipped classroom in term of technology and other learning
facilities”. teacher B said that ” the length of the curriculum and the class time are effecting the CLT”.
Interview Findings
As another data collection tool in this study, four English teachers who had responded to the questionnaires also participated in semi-structured interviews. Each
interview lasted for approximately ten minutes, and each teacher was asked several questions related to the current implementation of CLT in Saudi English classes as
well as the possibility of CLT practice in Saudi classroom in future. The teachers’ responses are presented below. Please note that the words between converted commas
are uttered by the Saudi teachers.

When it comes to asking teachers about their CLT practice, the majority of them announce that they do not actually implement the communicative approach in their
classes. 75% of the participant interviewed teachers relates certain factors and obstacles they faced during teaching to their inability to adopt CLT. Some of these
obstacles, as mentioned by the Saudi teachers, are related to the time constraint, class size, student English level of proficiency. At this point, it is important to
reiterate that the Saudi English textbooks have recently changed to adopt the communicative method, therefore, the curriculum contains a reasonable number of
communicative activities which take time to be performed. Teachers are forced to cover the whole curriculum in a specific period of time but simultaneously they are
urged to apply some of the principle of CLT, communicative activities, due to changes in textbooks. As the previous two aims (covering the book and implementing CLT)
are seems impossible for teachers to achieve, they tend to ”skip some of the communicative activities in order to finish the book” which is what is expected from
them as a teachers. Another reason that urged teachers to avoid communicative approach in classroom is students low level of proficiency. As commented by one of the
teachers ”when I give students communicative activities, most of them either do not speak or speak in Arabic. So, I feel that they are not benefiting from such
activities, as they are not using English”. Class size is an important reason that affect teachers willingness to implement CLT. ”There are too many students in the
classroom which make it impossible to watch every single student and give them the feedback they need”, as mentioned by an English teacher.

Conversely, 25% of the interviewed teachers believe that they actually implement CLT in classroom while teaching. This is due to the implication of the communicative
activities in the given textbook which require students to work either in pairs or groups, as quoted from one of the teachers “Yes I think I practice the communicative
method in my classes because I make students work in pairs or groups because some activities in the textbook should be done like that”.
In term of future implementation, all the in the interviewed teachers a positive attitude toward CLT implementation in Saudi classroom in future due to the positive
changing in the curriculum. However, each one of the participants shed the light on specific problems that need to be overcome to facilitate communicative practice.
As proposed by one teacher, the change should be started from the ministry of education, as he stated ” the ministry of education should support classroom with all
facilitates such as recorder and authentic materials”. Another teacher further argues that ” speaking should be marked to force students to participate in speaking
activities”. Two teachers further more highlight the need for taking time constrain into consideration. Teachers therefore, ” should not be forced to finish the
whole book… because the communicative activities take long time”. 75% of the participants teachers highlight the need for training for teachers as it is virtually
impossible to successfully implement CLT without training. One teacher comments that ”teachers must be provided with the skills to motivate students and get them
participate in discussion… and keep the conversation goes on”, and two more teachers hold the same attitude toward training.

Conclusion
This chapter presented the key quantitative and qualitative findings collected through questionnaires and semi-structured interviews among secondary school EFL
teachers in Saudi Arabia

CHAPTER 5
DISCUSSION
Introduction
The preceding chapter presented an overview of the findings of teachers perceptions and the difficulty they faced when applying CLT in Saudi English classroom. It is
important to reiterate that this study aims to investigate the CLT in an EFL context, in Saudi Arabia, as well as Saudi teachers perception toward CLT practice. Saudi
teachers presume that they are not applying CLT accurately in their classes. This chapter entails a discussion of the (in) consistency between the study results and
the literature review. Therefore, this chapter is organised into four Sections: the first three Sections (5.2, 5.3, 5.4) highlight the difficulty in implementing CLT
in Saudi secondary schools in relation to the previous research. These difficulties are divided into three categories: teacher related, student related, and
educational system related, which will be discussed respectively in the first three sections. In Section 5.5, the discussion will highlight the difficulty that caused
by the communicative method itself. The conclusion in Section 5.6 will summarise this chapter and relate it to the next.

Major findings
The findings find that the majority of Saudi EFL teachers do not apply CLT in classroom for several reasons such as; teachers’ lack of training, students’ low level,
class size, grammar-based examination and teachers’ misconception of CLT.

Teacher-related difficulties
Teachers’ lack of training:
One of the prime reasons that leads to misapplication of CLT in Saudi English classes is lack of training. As the majority of Saudi teachers who held a bachelor
degree are not trained. It is likely that they would not implement the communicative approach properly as reported by Gamal and Debra (2001). Teachers also have
similar believe that training is critically essential in implementing CLT and can creates many difficulties regarding to implementation in classroom. This can be
supported by most significant studies that identify lack of CLT training is a main difficulty in implementing CLT in EFL context (Li, 1998; Burnaby and Sun,1989 and
Gamal and Debra, 2001). However, as shown in the data there are other factors along with training that play important roles in the implementation process in
classroom. During the interviews, two masters teachers who had a training course in implementing CLT, indicates that they still can not implement CLT properly due to
time constraint regardless of their training. Teachers are suppose to cover textbook which is designed to be taught through communicative teaching in a short period
of time. Such communicative curriculum is full of communicative activities which need a considerable amount of time if they are applied properly (aaaa, 0000). It is
virtually impossible to do every single communicative activity in the book in a given period of time. To cover the curriculum, teacher can either perform some of the
communicative activities or remain teaching the target language through the method they used to, which is grammar translating method. Almost all Saudi teachers are
urged to choose the second choice, following grammar translation method, due to lack of training and time constraint.

Misconception
In this study the majority of teachers was found have misconception in related in implementing CLT in classrooms. These findings can be supported by (Bakerman. 2004)
who finds that the majority of Saudi EFL teachers lack awareness of the CLT principles. This misconception includes; “CLT means only group work and pair work” , “CLT
means not teaching grammar ”, “CLT means teaching speaking only”
CLT means only group work and pair work:
Almost all of the teachers misconception of CLT in related to pair and group work. 94% of them related CLT to pair and group work only. As shown from the
questionnaire 56 % have misconception, 38% have no clear knowledge. That is, only 6% of teachers have good understanding of CLT in related to pair and group work. To
have further investigation, of teachers beliefs regarding to CLT and pair and group work they were asked on applying CLT in their classrooms, one teacher responded he
applies CLT through pair work.
CLT means not teaching grammar
as shown in data, the majority of teachers have misconception regarding to teaching grammar. 82% of the participants teachers do not have a clear knowledge about CLT
in related to teaching grammar . 60% of teachers believe that CLT ignore teaching grammar, and 22% of them hold neutral position to CLT and grammar. However, this is
not the true. CLT required teaching grammar inductively and dose not highly focus on presenting sentence structure explicitly ( Savignoni, 2002). Students can figure
out of the target language involved in dynamic and interactive process interactive.
CLT means teaching speaking only
More than half of participants 55% have misunderstanding of CLT regarding to teaching skills. They believe that CLT activities should involve speaking only. That
means, reading and writing are ignored in CLT. This finding is related to Gamal and Deabra, 2001) they conduct a study in EFL context, more specifically in Egypt. This
study finds that Egyptian EFL teachers thought that communicative activities should based on speaking only.
In addition, Jin, Singh and Li’s (2005) study found that most teachers and students in an English-major college in China reported that CLT means teaching only speaking
and listening that without grammatical competence. As a result, both teachers and students in their research put the stress on speaking and listening skills.
However, this is not the case in CLT as it focus on developing all skills and competences, not only speaking. Menking (2001) argues that mastering a second or
foreign language is not the result of listening to a teacher who tells the students what to do and how to do, but rather, a communicative approach, it is the result of
students actively trying to listen, speak, read and write with meaningful message.

Teachers Spoken English Proficiency
The finding of the current study derives that the majority of the Saudi teachers 76% consider their English level of proficiency, more specifically their oral
proficiency is a barrier. That prevent them from adopting CLT in their classes. They reported that they are relatively poor establishing in managing a
commu8nication I English language. This result concedes with Abu Ras (2002) findings, which is conducted in the same context, in which he states that most Saudi
English teachers are not confident enough about their speaking and communicative ability and they have difficulty in holding a whole conversation in English due to
their inadequate language skills, listening and speaking.
A prime reason that urges Saudi English teachers prevent CLT implementation could continue teaching using traditional methods such as grammar translation approach.
Abu Ras states that teachers level of proficiency such finding is proved by many other research studies (Li, 1998) conducted in EFL contexts. Some of Saudi teachers
have noted during the interview, that they believe in their linguistic competence more than in communicative competence, so that they rely heavily on grammar
translation method. Saudi teachers reliance on grammar translation method is predictable due to their reasonable vocabulary size, adequate grammatical knowledge and
lack of communicative competence. Conversely, not all teachers argue on the importance of teachers high level of proficiency on CLT implementation, 16% of them
highlight that teachers proficiency is not a major issue result in preventing CLT practice. This is related to Li’s finding that not all high proficient teachers, who
can easily communicate in English, implement the communicative approach in their teaching. This is no doubt that teachers level of proficiency play an important role
in the chosen methodology teaching practice. The more teachers are confident in their communicative ability, the greater opportunity they have in implementing CLT.
According to Walsh (0000) teachers role in classroom is critically essential as they are the ones who establish, maintain and manage classroom interaction. Without
teachers’ ability to facilitate and create students engagement in classroom discussion, it is hardly possible that students would do so. Therefore, in order to help
teachers, more specifically Saudi teachers , to create a successful communicative teaching environment, an improvement in teachers language proficiency need to be
taken into consideration (Ellis,1996).

Student-related difficulty
Students’ Low Proficiency not finished yet

Educational system-related difficulties
Shortage from administration not finished yet
Class Size
After analyzing questionnaire and interview data, it is found that the majority of EFL participants teachers 81% believe that large classroom size is a major dilemma
that hinder communicative activities in Saudi English classroom. In a study conducted in Saudi Arabia by (Bakerman, 2004), the number of students classroom, usually
between 30 and 40 which prevented them from participating in effective communicative activities, such as pair or group work and role-play. This finding coincides with
previous studies conducted in EFL contexts such as (Gamal and Debra, 2001 and Hui, 1997). The majority of Saudi teachers stated that CLT implemented is quite difficult
in crowded classroom as teachers will not be able to fulfil their role properly. In communicative activities, teachers are supposed to move around the class to
facilitate monitor and sometimes give feedback if needed. In large size classroom, as mentioned by teachers and supported by Hui (1997), teachers do not have
opportunity to freely move around and give individual attention to every student due to their large number. Another problem that hinder teachers from fulfilling
communicative activities such as pairs and groups works games information-gap or problem-solving, is classroom layout. These activities require students to move
around or passing messages to another. In Saudi classroom students sit in row, rather than in circles, as it is more convenient for the size of the class and number
of
students

Grammar-Based Examination
After analyzing the data, it is found that grammar based examination is consider as a major barrier in implementing the communicative approach. More than two
thirds of the participants teachers, more specifically 69% agree that they tend to prevented making most if not all of the communicative activities, which involve
students in an interactional environment as most of the students are not motivated to be a part of prime reason for teachers behaviour and students reaction is due
to the examination. In Saudi Arabian context, as in most EFL context see for example Li (1998) the communicative competence is not included in the examination format
which therefore has a direct impact developing communicative skills in classrooms, In secondary schools in Saudi Arabia, almost all the evaluation marks go for testing
sentence structure, 80% of the overall marks go for testing grammar and the remaining 20% of the mark are for attendance and homework which relay heavily on practicing
the various correct forms of the target language. In other words, examination and evaluation relay heavily on structure level rather than developing students’ ability
to communicate and practice what they have learnt.
As mentioned earlier, such examination dose not only have a negative impact on teachers, on neglecting communicative competence, but also on students. As
students are not worked on their ability of communication, but rather on their ability to produce accurate and correct sentences in a written form, this is likely to
demotivate students to take a part in classroom dissection. As a result, students attention is directly shifted from developing communicative competence to improving
linguistic competence to pass the exam and obtain high marks. This finding coincides with a previous study (Rao,2002) in which grammar based examination has a negative
impact on students involvement in classroom discussion.

Difficulty from the CLT
In analysis of the interview data, noted that some of the Saudi EFL teachers are aware of the difference between EFL and ESL teaching and learning contexts, in regards
to CLT implementation a Saudi teachers ,for instance, commented that CLT might not be an effective in Saudi context due to lack of social interaction environment. A
prime reason that demotivate Saudi students from developing communicative skills through participating in classroom discussion is because English is taught EFL
context. In other words, unlike ESL context, Saudi students are not encouraged to improve their communication skills for sake of communication as there is a complete
ignorance of English language outside classroom. There are not urged to practice in social community what they learned in classroom as they rely on their first
language. This is also reported in Roa’s study (2002) in which his sample chosen students reported that their lack of motivation in coping what communicative teaching
result from which is essential in CLT principle. The result of the current study and Roa ‘s study is supported by Hiep (2005) study that students motivation is learn
and practice the target language if it is learned for the purpose of communication. Taken the findings of previous these study, it could be found that CLT
implementation in EFL contexts is different from ESL contexts, as students in EFL countries likely pay less attention on communicative activities in classroom, and
however, to communicative skills, as the surrounded outside environment is not supported and encouraging to make use of English language in everyday communication.

TO GET YOUR ASSIGNMENTS DONE AT A CHEAPER PRICE,PLACE YOUR ORDER WITH US NOW