![Reconsideration on CLT in College English: Theory and Practice/ Reconsideration Sur L'approche Communicative Dans L'anglais Universitaire: Theorie Et Pratique (Report)](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
![Reconsideration on CLT in College English: Theory and Practice/ Reconsideration Sur L'approche Communicative Dans L'anglais Universitaire: Theorie Et Pratique (Report)](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
![](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
![](/assets/artwork/1x1-42817eea7ade52607a760cbee00d1495.gif)
Reconsideration on CLT in College English: Theory and Practice/ Reconsideration Sur L'approche Communicative Dans L'anglais Universitaire: Theorie Et Pratique (Report)
Canadian Social Science 2007, Feb, 3, 1
-
- 2,99 €
-
- 2,99 €
Publisher Description
1. INTRODUCTION Communicative Language Teaching (CLT), which is believed to be an effective methods to train communicative competence, has been widely talked about and practiced in college English teaching ever since its being first introduced and applied in China in 1980s. It seems as if CLT, which has proved more successful than traditional methods overseas would have brought on a new look to our college English teaching. However, over 20 years' practice of CLT to college English has not been so satisfactory as expected since many teachers and scholars have realized that the goal of developing communicative competence had far from reached. CLT is even labeled as an impossibility and failure to college English teaching in current China (Zhu Yijia, 2000). Why such a popular and convincing teaching method has confronted such confusion? Should we have no choice but stick to the former tradition (most possibly, the Grammar-Translation Method)? Or is there a reasonable way out of the dilemma?