magazinelogo

The Educational Review, USA

ISSN Online: 2575-7946 ISSN Print: 2575-7938 CODEN: TERUBB
Frequency: monthly Email: edu@hillpublisher.com
Total View: 6842023 Downloads: 1430874 Citations: 1026 (From Dimensions)
OpenAlex-based citation data
  • citations

    1417
  • h-index

    13
  • i10-index

    14
ArticleOpen Access http://dx.doi.org/10.26855/er.2023.02.021

Analysis and Comparison of Two Innovations

Jixiu Xing

Heilongjiang Polytechnic, Harbin, Heilongjiang, China.

*Corresponding author: Jixiu Xing

Published: April 03, 2023

Abstract

Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) is different from the traditional language syllabus, which is on the basis of the rationale that the goal of language teaching is to “use” the target language rather than to learn the “usage” of discrete grammatical structures. This paper expounds on the innovation from traditional teaching to CLT as well as the personalized technology of large-class teaching from the seven aspects of Who, Adopts, What, Where, When, Why, and How. The author compares and analyzes the two and concludes that the first case illustrates the importance of the CLT, but it is difficult to carry out due to a series of obstacles such as large-class teaching. Although the researcher in the second case accepted the poor situation and found a series of appropriate CLT skills that could be implemented in large-class teaching and achieved good results, the skills are not true of all large-class teaching. Therefore, curriculum innovation is an inevitable result of educational development, a reform to solve a specific problem involved, and needs to be adjusted according to different backgrounds.

Keyword

Curriculum innovation, traditional teaching, CLT, teacher and learner roles

References

Allen, J. P. B. (1984). General-purpose language teaching: a viable focus approach. In C. J. Brumfit (Ed.), General English syllabus design: Curriculum and syllabus design for the general English classroom, ELT Documents 118. Oxford: British Coun-cil/Pergamon Press.

Bao, T. R. (2004). Record of interviewing Professor Gui Shichun. Study of foreign languages teaching, 2004(1).

Bao, T. R. (2004). Record of interviewing Professor Zhang Zhengdong. Study of foreign languages teaching, 2004(2).

Barnes, D. (1976). From communication to curriculum. Harmondsworth: Penguin.

Hall, D., & Hewings, A. (Eds.). (2001). Innovation in English language teaching. London: Routledge.

Li, Y. J. (2001). The study of CLT in China: Problems and thoughts. Foreign Languages, 2001(2).

Markee, N. (2001). The diffusion of innovation in language teaching. In D. R. Hall & A. Hewings (Eds.), Innovation in English language teaching: A reader (pp. 118-126). London: Routledge.

Savignon, S. J. (1983). Communicative competence: theory and classroom practice. America: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc.

Sergeant, S. (2001). CALL innovation in the ELT curriculum. In D. R. Hall & A. Hewings (Eds.), Innovation in English language teaching: A reader (pp. 240-249). London: Routledge.

Summaira, S., et al. (2015). Teachers’ and students’ perceptions of the communicative language teaching methodology in the CALL environment: A case study. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 199, 730-736.

Zhu, Y., & Shu, D. (2017). Implementing foreign language curriculum innovation in a Chinese secondary school: An ethnographic study on teacher cognition and classroom practices. System, 66, 100-112.

Copyright

© 2023 by the author(s).
This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives (CC BY-NC-ND) license, which permits non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not modified or adapted.
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

How to cite this paper

Analysis and Comparison of Two Innovations

How to cite this paper: Jixiu Xing. (2023). Analysis and Comparison of Two Innovations. The Educational Review, USA7(2), 246-250.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.26855/er.2023.02.021