Difficulties Encountered in Implementing a Communicative Curriculum:

EFL Teachers’ Perspectives

Nannapat Wanchai

English Program

Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences

Pranakorn Sri Ayutthaya Rajabhat Univerity

E-mail address: wnannaphat@gmail.com

Abstract

This paper reviews research that explored and documented the difficulties

that English as a foreign language (EFL) teachers encountered while implementing

the communicative curriculum in their classrooms. The review aims to reiterate the

difficulties other countries have had in implementing the communicative curriculum

and similarities in Thailand. In essence, the review identified several difficulties

confronted by the EFL teachers in EFL context (particularly in Asian countries).

These included, for example, a disconnection between curriculum policies and

classroom practice, teacher qualifications, students’ low English proficiency, and the

authenticity in language classrooms among many others. More importantly, the

review called for more research to further investigate and debate the issues of these

difficulties in the Thai context where the policies of the communicative curriculum

has long been implemented, but has largely been excluded from the actual practice

from EFL instruction.

Introduction

The education reform in Thailand under the National Education Act of 1999

brings about changes in English language teaching at both secondary and tertiary

levels through decentralizing syllabus design, adding local cultural components,

encouraging thinking skills, focusing on individual needs, providing language

education, and more importantly encouraging the communicative language teaching

approaches (CLT) (Darasawang, 2007). However, Thai teachers who are required to

implement the learner-centered policy find themselves encounter with a number of

challenges in both the context in which they work and associated with the new goals

they are required to attain (Nonkukhetkhong, Baldauf, & Moni, 2006). Traditionally,

a typical English classroom in Thailand is either teachers’ use of grammar-

translation or audio-lingual methods (Saengboon, 2006). This results in students

being trained to be passive, obedient, and respectful to teachers. Inevitably, teachers

who are the products of the old educational system may find it difficult to manage

the role reversal required in the curriculum reform where learners play a more

crucial role in the learning process (Nonkukhetkhong, Baldauf, & Moni, 2006).

Interestingly, some studies concerning the implementation of CLT in the Thai

context revealed that despite the new curriculum reform stipulated by the

Education Educational Act, most Thai EFL teachers still use the traditional teaching

methods they are familiar with, namely, a textbook-based, grammar-translation and

audio-lingual methods, and little or no evidence of communicative language use has

been found from several observations of English classes (Nonkukhetkhong, Baldauf,

& Moni, 2006; Prapaisit de Segovia & Hardison, 2008; Seangboon, 2002).

1. Major Concerns of Communicative Curriculum

Although the 1999 English curriculum reform is aimed at improving students’

linguistic and communicative competences, the majority of Thai teachers fail to

achieve the requirements (Foley, 2005). There are a number of factors which

probably affect the implementation of the English curriculum reform. Among those

that could be listed are: a disconnection between curriculum policies and classroom

practice, teacher qualifications, difficulties caused by students, and authenticity in

language classrooms. These factors are concerns pertaining to the communicative

curriculum and the implementation of CLT in EFL context.

1.1 Disconnection between Curriculum Policies and Classroom Practice

The literature on educational innovation has identified a disconnection

between curriculum policies and classroom practice in terms of teaching principles.

In Japan, for example, Gorsuch (2000) found that while the educational policy

emphasized the development of students’ communicative ability and attention to all

four macro skills, Japanese teachers’ current orientation toward foreign language

learning seems to be that teacher control is desirable and that students need to

memorize grammatical rules and be very accurate. In Libya, Orafi and Borg (2009)

similarly reported that the evidence from their study points to limited uptake by the

teachers of a new communicative English curriculum. The analysis of actual lessons

over a two week period for each teacher showed that key curricular principles

relating to pair work and the use of English were not reflected in the teachers’

practices. In contrast, their practices were characterized by teacher-fronted whole

class work and the wide spread use of Arabic. Similar findings have been reported in

Thailand in relation to the introduction of communicative curricular (Prapaisit de

Segovia & Hardison, 2008). To investigate the coherence of the English language

curriculum reform in Thailand following a recent education reform, some evidence

of CLT was anticipated during the classroom observations. Over the total of nine

observations, teacher-learner or learner-learner communicative interactions in

English were, however, not evident. Likewise, Nonkukhetkhong, Baldauf, and Moni’s

(2006) study revealed that despite the mandated reform to develop Thai students’

communicative competence, most Thai EFL teachers’ instructional practices were

still traditional. That is, they usually employed whole class grammar and vocabulary

explanation, and whole class drills. These findings pertaining to the uptake of the

communicative curriculum suggests the necessity to address Thai EFL teachers’

conceptualizations of CLT approaches.

In the Thai context, the new policy has always been mandated top-down

which simply means the absence of teachers’ participations in designing the

curriculum (Nonkukhetkhong, Baldauf, & Moni, 2006). As a result, a number of

difficulties have been confronted by teachers at the classroom-level implementation

of a new policy. In the same way, the Philippines Basic Education Curriculum (BEC)

implementation strategy is of a largely top-down process, in which information was

transmitted and teaching behavior modeled through a series of hierarchical levels

(Waters & Vilches, 2008). According to Hayes (2000), the cascade model adopted, in

other words, was transmissive rather than re-interpretative. Water and Vilches’

(2008) findings suggest the top-down process of the curriculum reform obviously

reveals the inadequate level of understanding by teachers of the BEC principles.

Further, the classroom-level implementation of the BEC has been difficult to achieve

principally because the curriculum design is insufficiently compatible with teaching

situation constraints. These findings are consistent with the situation of the

curriculum reform in the Thai context as Nonkukhetkhong, Baldauf, and Moni

(2006) suggest that the NEA mandated reform is unlikely to be successfully

undertaken unless those involved in the top-down process listen to teachers’ voices

and respond to these concerns. In short, though teachers play a major role in the

reform, they are an untapped resource in the decision making process (Fullan,

1993).

1.2 Teacher Qualifications

One of the factors that seem to be hindering the implementation of CLT is the

teachers themselves. Several studies interestingly reveal a number of difficulties

that EFL teachers have encountered when implementing the communicative

curriculum in the classroom (See Chou, 2003; Hiep, 2005; Karavas-Doukas, 1996; Li,

1998; Nonkukhetkhong, Baldauf, & Moni, 2006; Orafi & Borg, 2009; Prapaisit de

Segovia & Hardison, 2008; Saengboon, 2002; Sakui, 2004; Waters & Vilches, 2008

for more details). Those difficulties are, for example, (1) insufficient English

language proficiency; (2) inadequate sociolinguistic knowledge; (3) overload of

responsibility; (4) diversity in interpretation of CLT; (5) teachers’ over-reliance on

their beliefs; and (6) lack of training in CLT.

1.2.1 Insufficient English Proficiency

Teachers’ insufficient English proficiency is considered as a constraint in

implementing CLT approaches in Thailand. Most Thai EFL teachers perceived their

own low English proficiency as a constraint impeding them from using

communicative approaches (Prapaisit de Segovia & Hardison, 2008; Saengboon,

2002; Wongnoppharatlert, 2001). According to evidence from the previous studies,

myriads of Thai EFL teachers admitted they lacked confidence in using CLT

approaches in their classrooms. Similar findings have been reported outside

Thailand. South Korean teachers, according to Li (1998), realized that their own

deficiency in spoken English impeded them from implementing CLT in their

classrooms. They all reported that their abilities in English speaking and listening

were not adequate to manage communicative classes. In Japan, teachers’ lack of

confidence in conducting CLT also resulted from their insufficient spoken English

ability (Sakui, 2004). In the same vein, teachers in Libya expressed their concerns

regarding their ability to implement CLT (Orafi & Borg, 2009). The new

communicative curriculum in Libya made demands not only on teachers’

pedagogical expertise, but it also challenged their communicative ability in English.

Orafi and Borg (2009), therefore, suggest that teachers’ own limitations in this

respect are problematic.

1.2.2 Inadequate Sociolinguistic Knowledge

Apart from English proficiency, teachers’ sociolinguistic competence must be

greater in a communicative classroom than in a traditional grammar-focused

classroom (Li, 1998). Most EFL teachers in several studies, thus, generally felt

incompetent to conduct a communicative class (Li, 1998; Wongnoppharatlert,

2001). In the Thai context, most teachers revealed that their low sociolinguistic

competence limited their use of CLT (Wongnoppharatlert, 2001). They admitted

that sometimes they could not answer their students’ questions pertaining to

English culture, and that embarrassed them. More or less the same problem has

been found in South Korea. Li’s (1998) findings revealed that teachers felt

discouraged from using CLT since they were afraid of not being able to answer

students’ questions about English cultures.

1.2.3 Teaching workload

Teaching loads seem to be the most troublesome problem for Thai EFL

teachers (Prapaisit, 2003). For instance, some teachers in Prapaisit’s (2003) study

reported that they were assigned to teach eight subjects to a class; therefore, they

had to spend considerable time in preparing for subjects they were not familiar with

such as mathematics and science. With the 25 hours a week of teaching and other

extra responsibilities such as homeroom duties, lunch project for students and lab

care taker, those teachers revealed having been overburdened for years. Due to the

heavy teaching load and extra responsibilities, these teachers did not have time for

communicative activity materials preparation. As a result, they tended to rely

heavily on such traditional teaching methods as grammar-translation and audio-

lingual. The same constraint has also been reported in Japan where teachers were in

constant demand in dealing with many administrative and non-academic

responsibilities (Sakui, 2004). These teachers claimed that CLT required

considerable time for material preparation and implementation, thus they decided

to use pencil-and-paper exercises (or sear-work exercises) in which they believed

required less time preparation time.

1.2.4 Teachers’ over-reliance on their beliefs

Signs of crisis in the curriculum development have been proposed by Schwab

(1969) as cited in Lange (1990). Apparently, ‘downward’, one of the signs of crisis

according to Schwab, has been widely evident when the educational innovation has

been introduced. That is, teachers tend to rely on their personal beliefs and

experiences rather than theories. Previous studies on educational innovation have

identified mismatches between curricular principles and teachers’ beliefs as a major

obstacle to the implementation of educational change. The literature also shows that

teachers’ feelings, values, needs, and beliefs, combined with their experiences and

theoretical knowledge, usually guide their language instructional practices. Penning

and Richards (1997) studied five English teachers in Hong Kong who failed to

implement CLT approaches in their classroom. They suggested that one reason for

this failure was the teachers’ preexisting schema for teaching based on their learning

experiences as students in Hong Kong school system. Karavas-Doukas (1996)

reported similar findings in the responses of 14 Greek teachers of English to an

attitude survey and in the observation she made of their instructional practices. She

found that the survey results leaned toward agreement with CLT principles. Yet,

when she observed the classrooms, the teachers’ classroom practices deviated

considerably from the principles of communicative approaches. Mangubhai, Marland,

Dashwood, and Son (2005) similarly examined the CLT practices of languages other

than English (LOTE) teachers in Australia. Based on their statistical data, they

concluded that the theoretical understanding of the LOTE teachers participating in

their study at times corresponded to those of theorists. However, these teachers

further admitted in their interviews that their practices of CLT were grounded on

their experiences rather than their theoretical knowledge. A similar finding has also

been found in an Australian context in which most teachers’ pedagogic principles

were based on their background knowledge and classroom experience (Breen, Hird,

Milton, Oliver, & Thwaite, 2001). Such constraint of teachers’ over-reliance on their

beliefs and experiences is a crucial factor that may impede the development of the

communicative curriculum.

1.2.5 Lack of training in CLT

Numerous studies have documented lack of training is one of the main

obstacles that EFL teachers faced in applying CLT. In the Thai context,

Wongnoppharatlert (2001) and Nonkukhetkhong, Baldauf, and Moni (2006)

consistently reported that though Thai EFL teachers had positive attitudes toward

CLT approaches as part of the mandated communicative curriculum, it was difficult

for them to adapt to the new policy requirements as they had not been properly

trained. Admittedly, some Thai teachers in Prapaisit’s (2003) study felt that they

were not sufficiently trained in terms of English language proficiency and teaching

methodology from their teacher education institutes. Worse still, some Thai EFL

teachers also expressed dissatisfaction of their lack of learning opportunities within

the workplace (Hongboontri, 2008). They pointed out that the learning

opportunities to attend workshops, seminars or conferences were scarce and

limited. Findings from these studies suggest that Thai EFL teachers need more

assistance for learning opportunities to understand the basic concepts of CLT and to

obtain more practical input in order to augment their confidence in developing

communicative activities. Similar findings have been reported in South Korea where

the teachers admitted that they did not quite understand how CLT worked, and thus

did not practice it much (Li, 1998). Likewise, some EFL teachers in Libya felt that

they did not obviously understand the concepts of the communicative curriculum

(Orafi & Borg, 2009). They attributed this lack of understanding to the absence of

training, and inquired how teachers could work in these circumstances in which

there was no training or workshop to help teachers improve the skills of teachers

and to help them understand the principles of this new communicative curriculum.

1.3 Students’ Low English Proficiency

Students, according to Fullan (2001), need to play a meaningful role in the

educational change; or else the attempts to implement the educational innovation

will fail. Hence, it is necessary to address problems derived from students in order

to better understand their situations. A number of teachers in EFL contexts

reported several problems from students inhibiting them from implementing the

CLT approaches within their teaching. Among such difficulties dealing with the

students include students’ low English proficiency.

Students’ low English proficiency is perceived as a constraint in implementing

CLT approaches in EFL contexts (Bock, 2000; Hiep, 2007; Li, 1998 Nonkukhetkhong,

Baldauf, & Moni, 2006; Orafi & Borg, 2009; Wongnoppharatlert, 2001). In South

Korea, one crucial difficulty preventing teachers from using CLT was students’ low

English proficiency (Li, 1998). The South Korean teachers reported having

difficulties in conducting oral communicative activities with students since students

did not have sufficient proficiency in English (Li, 1998). The similar problem

occurred in Vietnam in which EFL teachers also experienced a difficulty in getting

students to participate in group activities (Hiep, 2007). This is because the students

did not have enough English to communicate with each other. Hence, they switched

to Vietnamese to conduct the group work. Likewise, Bock (2000) revealed that even

Western teachers teaching in Vietnam also found students’ low English proficiency a

difficulty in using communicative activities. In Libya, the teachers similarly referred

to the students’ low level of English as an obstacle for their participation in

classroom activities (Orafi & Borg, 2009). Besides, these teachers believed that what

a curriculum required students to do was beyond students’ actual abilities. This

belief inevitably had a strong influence on their instructional practices. As for the

Thai EFL context, a similar problem has been found in Thai students. Thai students,

in general, have, as Nonkukhetkhong, Baldauf, and Moni (2006) and

Wongnoppharatlert (2001) argued, limited English knowledge, thus teachers found

it hard to do any communicative activities with them

1.4 Authenticity in language classrooms

Another problem that seems to impede the development of the

communicative curriculum deals with the issue of authenticity in English language

classrooms. According to Brooks (1993) and Yang and Cheung (2003),

communicative language teaching requires authentic communication, which

includes a believable setting, a normal speed in speaking, a range of lexical items

suitable for the students’ ages, and an overall promotion of learning. The kind of

language actually taking place in the classrooms is, however, considerably different

from the language used outside the classrooms (Brooks, 1993; Lange, 1990). The

schooled response in the classrooms reflects the teachers’ overriding authority to

decide the acceptance of student’s produced language, and to decide who speaks to

whom, about what, in what ways, and for what purpose. Because of the

unauthenticated language used in the classroom, students are usually blocked from

engaging in any sort of real communication (Brooks, 1993). Unsurprisingly, the lack

of authenticity in English language classrooms is evident especially in the Thai EFL

context. Prapaisit’s (2003) study, for instance, interestingly showed that during the

classroom observations of the Thai participating teachers there was an absence of

communicative activities that allowed students to speak and practice giving

directions authentically, although students appeared willing to use them

communicatively. Instead, teachers focused only on drills such as total physical

response and games. Worse yet, these activities were not relevant to students’

developmental stage (Prapaisit, 2003).

2. Conclusion and Recommendations

Obviously, a number of difficulties hindering the educational reform in

Thailand are noticeable as previously documented. To find feasible solutions to

these concerns, particular attentions should be given to the following areas.

2.1 Educational Reform Values

The educational change, according to Fullan (2001), is multidimensional. At

least three dimensions are needed in implementing any new policy: (1) the

possible use of new or revised materials; (2) the possible use of new teaching

approaches; and (3) the possible alteration of beliefs. All three aspects of change

need to be coherent to represent the means of achieving a particular educational

goal (Fullan, 2001). For instance, the educational reform aims at introducing a new

teaching approach (CLT) whereas both the instructional materials and teachers’

beliefs remain unchanged. It is hardly likely that such reform will be successful.

This example obviously corresponds to what Fullan (2001) asserted that

educational innovations that do not include changes on all three dimensions are

probably not significant change at all.

Indeed, the curriculum innovation involves fundamental shifts in values and

beliefs of the individuals concerned (Burns, 1996). According to Price (1988),

reform of education is not simply the reform of the school system, but the reform

of behaviors and thinking process of teaching and learning. Even though changes in

beliefs are difficult in that they challenge the values held by individuals regarding

the purposes of education, they are the foundation of achieving lasting reform

[McLaughlin & Mitra (2000) cited in Fullan (2001)]. However, such fundamental

change takes time (Li, 1998). All stakeholders, who are in charge of the educational

change such as curriculum developers, government, and teachers, should thus

realize that changes in beliefs and understandings are an ongoing process, and

there is a need to address them on a continuous basis through discussions after

teachers have had at least some behavioral experiences in attempting new

practices. Simply put, in order to change teachers’ beliefs, the stakeholders need to

make them realize the benefits or usefulness of the educational innovation. Lastly,

for the curriculum innovation to be implemented successfully, Carless (1999)

highlighted that ‘if teachers are to implement an innovation, it is essential that they

have a thorough understanding of the principles and practices of the proposed

change’ (p. 355).

2.2 Students

In using CLT with students who have previously studied foreign language in

traditional ways, in which they take passive role, and sit motionless listening to

teacher lectures, teachers are likely to confront some initial problems (Li, 1998;

Wongnoppharatlert, 2001). To deal with these problems, teachers should make

their students fully understand the features and benefits of CLT before they use

this approach in the classrooms (Rao, 2002). Similarly, Yang and Cheung (2003)

highlighted that the classroom activity must be purposeful and meaningful to

students. Imperatively, students should be given convincing reasons for

participating in classroom activities. Also, they should know what they will have

achieved upon completion of such activities (Yang & Cheung, 2003). Apart from

that, Burke (2007) suggested that teachers should help students overcome their

fear of speaking the target language and allow students to take control of their own

learning. To do this, teachers should invite students to involvement in the teaching

and learning process by listening to their ideas and suggestions (Burke, 2007). For

students with low motivation, the need for variety must be taken into

consideration (Savignon, 2002). That is, teachers should apply a diversity of

activities, instructional materials and media to draw learners’ interests and to

promote them in having positive attitude toward English learning in a

communicative way (Wongnoppharatlert, 2001; Yang & Cheung, 2003).

2.3 Teacher Professional Development

Some teachers may feel reluctant to use CLT as it requires them to do

something differently from what they are familiar with (Li, 1998). Teachers,

therefore, should receive assistance and encouragement in trying out CLT

approaches. This can be accomplished by providing opportunities for teachers to

attend in-service teacher training programs (Li, 1998; Nonkukhetkhong, Baldauf,

& Moni, 2006; Wongnoppharatlert, 2001). Such opportunities for in-service

training are imperative for the long-term development of teachers as well as for

the long-term success of the schools or institutions they work (Richards & Farrell,

2006). Workshop, according to Richards and Farrell (2006), can be a vital

strategy in the implementation of a curriculum or other kind of change. For

instance, if a new educational policy mandates an unfamiliar teaching or

curriculum approach such as CLT, workshops can be an ideal format for

preparing teachers for the change. A workshop is additionally aimed to enhance

teachers’ practical skills and help resolve problems. Teachers attending a

workshop should, therefore, receive hand-on experiences, ideas, strategies,

techniques, and materials that can be applied in their classrooms (Richards &

Farrell, 2006). Indeed, without the support from administrators, teachers would

not be able to attend the in-service teacher trainings or workshops as well as to

sustain their professional development. This issue obviously deserves a close

attention from all stakeholders so that teachers who are constantly in the

educational change process are able to adopt the change effectively and

smoothly.

2.4 Teacher collaboration

Teacher collaboration such as peer coaching should be fostered to enhance

the implementation of a new communicative curriculum. Peer coaching, according

to Richards and Farrell (2006), is a procedure in which two teachers collaborate to

help one or both teachers improve some aspect of teaching. In this kind of

collaboration, teachers who have successfully implemented CLT may demonstrate

their teachings so that those who have never tried using CLT or who are newcomers

to the approach will have enough opportunity to emulate such teaching approach.

Peer coaching is considered as a developmental process and is an effective way to

promote professional development (Richards & Farrell, 2006). That is, it provides

opportunities for two teachers to look at teaching problems as well as to develop

possible solutions. Peer coaching, for instance, can be used to help novice teachers

learn from more experienced colleagues as it provides a supportive context in which

novice teachers can try out new teaching approaches. Moreover, peer coaching

reduces the sense of isolation that most teachers tend to feel (Benedetti, 1997).

More importantly, peer coaching helps reduce the school budget problems for in-

service training as the school would benefit by strengthening the collegiality

between teachers in that they collaboratively help each other.

2.5 Administrative Support

A curriculum in which the administrators perceive their job as supporting

teachers will be a curriculum in which teachers are in a better position to teach

effectively (Brown, 1995). In doing this, the administrators can help make every

effort to reduce teachers’ paperwork load to the absolute minimum necessary for

teachers to meet the requirements made by the mandated curriculum reform.

Another type of administrative support involves ensuring that all necessary

instructional resources are provided to teachers in order to carry out instructions

in accordance with the new communicative curriculum and to continue developing

themselves professionally (Brown, 1995; Nonkukhetkhong, Baldauf, & Moni, 2006;

Prapaisit, 2003).

2.6 Making Use of Available Materials

Due to the lack of time and expertise in creating authentic materials for CLT

activities, teachers can solve this problem by making use of any available materials

(Rao, 2002). For instance, teachers and students can cut out news or articles from

magazines and use them as authentic reading materials. Burke (2007) similarly

suggested that authentic materials such as magazines, newspapers, bus schedules,

travel guides are important to promoting students’ communicative competence.

Further, he argued that teachers should neither follow a textbook sequentially nor

do they need to cover everything. Burke’s (2007) suggestion corresponds with

what Savignon (1997) pointed out “there is no such thing as an ideal textbook” (p.

131) Teachers should, therefore, learn how to make use of any available materials

or textbooks to conduct a communicative classroom.

As previously discussed, it is evident that despite the aim of the Thai

educational reform to enhance students’ communicative ability, Thai EFL teachers

apparently differ in their reactions to CLT. Some teachers willingly welcome the

new teaching approach by providing learners with a range of communicative tasks

(Saengboon, 2002). On the contrary, some feel frustrated and confused at the

ambiguity of the approach, and thus decide to stick to more familiar teachings

methods like grammar-translation and audio-lingual (Nonkukhetkhong, Baldauf, &

Moni, 2006). This problem implies a discrepancy between the purposes of the new

communicative curriculum and the classroom-level practices of Thai EFL teachers.

To deal with this particular concern, it is necessary to redefine the concept of the

communicative curriculum so as to construct its new framework for all

stakeholders to make use as a fundamental basis when attempting to mandate the

communicative curriculum. In other words, the concept of the communicative

curriculum needs to be redefined in order that it is clearly understood by both

curriculum planners themselves and Thai EFL teachers. Taking all these difficulties

and feasible solutions into account, all stakeholders and curriculum developers

would gain a better picture of the current situations of implementing

communicative language curriculum in Asia. Last but not least, this review is

calling for more studies on this particular issue so as to further investigate and

debate the issues of these difficulties in incorporating the communicative

curriculum particularly in the Thai context.

The Author

Nannapat Wanchai is currently a lecturer in the English Program at the Faculty of

Humanities and Social Sciences, Pranakorn Sri Ayutthaya Rajabhat University. She

graduated with a Master’s Degree of Arts in the area of Applied Linguistics

(Teaching English for Specific Purposes) from Mahidol University. She recently

received a grant from the Faculty of Graduate Studies, Mahidol University to

deliver an oral presentation under the title ‘Communicative Language Teaching

Approaches: A Clash between Theories and Teachers Conceptualizations’ at the

31st Annual Thailand TESOL International Conference in Chiang Mai, Thailand. Her

research areas of interest include teachers’ beliefs and classroom practices as well

as teacher training and professional development.

REFERENCES

Bock, G. (2000). Difficulties in implementing communicative theory in Vietnam.

Teacher's Edition, 24-30.

Breen, M. P., & Candlin, C. N. (1980). The essentials of a communicative curriculum

in language teaching. Applied Linguistics, 1(2), 89-111.

Brooks, F. B. (1993). Some problems and caveats in 'Communicative' Discourse:

Toward a conceptualization of the foreign language classroom. Foreign

Language Annals, 26(2), 233-242.

Burke, B. M. (2007). Creating communicative classrooms with experiential design.

Foreign Language Annals, 40(3), 441-462.

Burn, A. (1996). Collaborative research and curriculum change in the Australian

migrant English program. TESOL Quarterly, 30, 591-598.

Carless, D. (1999). Exploring change in English language teaching. Oxford:

Macmillan.

Chou, J. C. (2003). Exploring English teachers' beliefs and practical knowledge about

communicative language teaching in EFL contexts. Unpublished doctoral

dissertation, Indiana University, 2003.

Darasawang, P. (2007). English in Southeast Asia. Cambridge: Cambridge Scholars

Publishing.

Foley, J. A. (2005). English in...Thailand. RELC Journal, 36(2), 223-235.

Fullan, M. (2001). The new meaning of educational change. Columbia: Teacher

college press.

Gorsuch, G. J. (2000). EFL educational policies and education cultures: Influence on

teachers' approval of communicative activities. TESOL Quarterly, 34(4), 675-709.

Hayes, D. (2000). Cascade training and teachers' professional development. ELT

Journal, 54(2), 135-145.

Hiep, P. H. (2007). Communicative language teaching: Unity within diversity. ELT

Journal, 61(3), 193-201.

Hongboontri, C. (2008). Workplace organizational factors and professional

development of university English as a foreign language (EFL) teachers:

Lessons from Thailand. In M.K. Kabilan & M.E. Vethamani (Eds), Qualitative

studies on English language teacher development (pp. 191-222). Malaysia:

Sasbadi Sdn. Bhd.

Karavas-Doukas, E. (1996). Using attitude scales to investigate teachers’ attitudes to

the communicative approach. ELT Journal, 50(3), 187-198.

Lange, D. L. (1990). Sketching the crisis and exploring different perspectives in

foreign language curriculum. In D.W. Birckbichler (ed.), New perspectives and

new directions in foreign language education (pp. 78-109). IL: National

Textbook Co.

Li, D. (1998). "It's always more difficult than you plan and imagine": Teachers'

perceived difficulties in introducing the communicative approach in South

Korea, TESOL Quarterly, 32(4), 677-703.

Mangubhai, F., Marland, P., Dashwood, A., & Son, J.-B. (2005). Similarities and

differences in teachers' and researchers' conceptions of communicative

language teaching: Does the use of an educational model cast a better light?

Language Teaching Research, 9(1), 31-66.

Nonkukhetkhong K., Baldauf, B. R. Jr., and Moni, K. (2006). Learner Centeredness in

Teaching English as a Foreign Language, Paper presented at 26 Thai TESOL

International Conference, Chiang Mai, Thailand, 19-21 January 2006, 1-9.

Orafi, S. M. S., & Borg, S. (2009). Intentions and realities in implementing

communicative curriculum reform. System, 37, 243-253.

Pennington, M., & Richards, J. (1997). Reorienting the teaching universe: The

experience of five first-year teachers of English in Hong Kong. Language

Teaching Research, 1, 149-178.

Prapaisit de Segovia, L., & Hardison, D. M. (2008). Implementing education reform:

EFL teachers' perspectives. ELT Journal, 10, 1-9.

Prapaisit, L. (2003). Changes in teaching English after educational reform in

Thailand. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University, 2003.

Price, R. F. (1988). The politics of contemporary educational reform in China. Atlanta:

Georgia State University.

Rao, Z. (2002). Chinese students’ perceptions of communicative and non-

communicative activities in EFL classroom. System, 30, 85-105.

Richards, J. C., & Farrell, T. S. C. (2006). Professional development for language

teachers: Strategies for teacher learning. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.

Saengboon, S. (2002). Beliefs of Thai teachers about communicative language teaching.

Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Indiana University, 2002.

Saengboon, S. (2006). CLT revisited. NIDA Language and Communication Journal,

11(11), 136-148.

Sakui, K. (2004). Wearing two pairs of shoes: Language teaching in Japan. EF, 58(2),

155.

Savignon, J. S. (1991). Communicative language teaching: State of the art. TESOL

Quarterly, 25(2), 261-277.

Waters, A., & Vilches, M. L. C. (2008). Factors affecting ELT reforms: The case of the

Philippines basic education curriculum. RELC Journal, 39(1), 5-24.

Wongnoppharatlert, S. (2001). A study of the implementation of communicative

language teaching at the lower secondary school level in Bangkok public

schools. Unpublished thesis (MA), Mahidol University, 2001.

Yang, A., & Cheung, C.-p. (2003). Adapting textbook activities for communicative

teaching and cooperating learning. English Teaching Forum, 41(3), 16-24.