Challenges in Teaching and Learning English by Using Teaching Methodology - Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) under the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) at Phranakhon Rajabhat University
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Thailand has reformed several English language curricula over the last twenty years, all of which have failed to lift the standard of Thai students’ English proficiency at all levels. In 2014, the Ministry of Education adopted the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR) to improve the standard of English learning and teaching at schools in Thailand. This education policy change affects the communication and perception of English teachers in public high schools. This also affected English teaching and learning at the university level. An interesting issue in reforming the English curriculum this time is the extent of understanding the CEFR levels by English language teachers in higher education about what the CEFR is and how they view its effect on them and their teaching. The factors that influence teachers’ attitudes and levels of support for the introduction of CEFR levels and the effectiveness of the channels and mechanisms used to communicate English language teaching policy are investigated.
This article focused on the present use of CEFR levels for language proficiency in education and English competency of Phranakhon Rajabhat University. The author of the article aims to explore important issues regarding the meaning and scope of CEFR levels, the necessity of the CEFR, the English competency of undergraduate students of Phranakhon Rajabhat University, and the challenges of providing English teaching and learning through the use of Communicative Language Teaching (CLT).
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
All published articles are evaluated by three qualified peer reviewers from various institutions through a double-blind process, where reviewers do not know the authors’ identities and authors do not know the reviewers’ identities. The content and articles in the Hatyai Academic Journal reflect the authors’ views only and are neither the opinions of the editorial board nor the responsibility of Hatyai University. The Editorial Board of the Hatyai Academic Journal allows articles to be reproduced for academic purposes, on the condition that the original source is clearly cited.
References
Alderson, J. C. (2007). The CEFR and the need for more research. The Modern Language Journal, 91(4), 659-663.
Bunching, B., Kraithong, P., Singhasuwan, P., & Buddharat, C. (2021). Students’ perspectives towards NSTRU policy on English proficiency development project aligned with CEFR. Suranaree Journal of Social Science, 15(2), 75-92. [in Thai]
Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. Applied Linguistics, 1, 1-47.
Charttrakul, K., & Damnet, A. (2021). Role of the CEFR and English teaching in Thailand: A case study of Rajabhat Universities. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 11(2), 82-89.
Choi, H. (2010). A study for the improvement of foreign language education in Korea based on language education policy of the European Union. Foreign Languages Education, 17(2), 359-381.
Commission on Higher Education. (2016). Policy on raising English language standards in higher education institutions. Retrieved from http://www.dqe.mhesi.go.th/front_home/Data%20Bhes_2559/04052559.pdf [in Thai]
Commission on Higher Education. (2024). Policy on raising English language standards in higher education institutions. Retrieved from https://www.ops.go.th/th/ches-downloads/edu-standard/item/9625-2567 [in Thai]
Council of Europe. (2001). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching, assessment (CEFR). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Council of Europe. (2018). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching, assessment (CEFR). Retrieved from https://rm.coe.int/cefr-companion-volume-with-new-descriptors-2018/1680787989
Dhanasobhon, S. (2006). English language teaching dilemma in Thailand. Bangkok: Association Curriculum and Instruction Thailand (ACIT). [in Thai]
Fennelly, M. G. (2016). The influence of CEFR on English language education in Japan. Bulletin of Shikoku University, 46, 109-122.
Foley, J. A. (2019). Issues on the initial impact of CEFR in Thailand and the region. Indonesian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 9(2), 359-370.
Gultom, E. (2016, May 11-12). Assessment and evaluation in EFL teaching and learning. In The Fourth International Seminar on English Language and Teaching (ISELT-4) (pp. 190-198). Universitas Negeri Padang, Indonesia.
Hawes, C. J., & Atthaphonphiphat, S. Ch. (2020). CEFR & English language teaching standardization at Suratthani Rajabhat University. Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences Suratthani Rajabhat University, 12(2), 59-77. [in Thai]
Hwang, P. (2016). A study on the adequacy of the achievement standards of primary English reading in the 2015 revised national curriculum. Journal of the Korea English Education Society, 15(4), 147-165.
Jeon, J., & Kim, J. (2018). An analysis on the standard of language competence between 2015 revised English curriculum and CEFR basic user level. Journal of Learner-Centered Curriculum and Instruction, 18(7), 65-87.
Jeong, H. (2014). A comparative study of the Japanese achievement standard on the 2009 revised curriculum and CEFR JF standard. Journal of Japanese Language and Literature, 61, 281-289.
Junwanna, P. (2023). A report of grade result of English for 21st century learners in general education section in the year of 2023. Bangkok: Phranakhon Rajabhat University. [in Thai]
Ketamon, Th., Pomduang, P., Phayap, N., & Hanchayanon, A. (2018). The implementation of CEFR in the Thai education system. Hatyai Academic Journal, 16(1), 77-88. [in Thai]
Kulsiri, S. (2006). A critical analysis of the 2001 national foreign language standards-based curriculum in the Thai school system (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Canberra, Canberra.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2002). Techniques and principles in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Lee, B. C. (2020). Applicability of CEFR to national curriculum and assessment of English. Korea Journal of English Language and Linguistics, 20(1), 496-516.
Lee, Y. S., & Kim, H. Y. (2009). A comparative study of the achievement standards between the revised Korean National Curriculum of English and Common European Framework of References (CEFR). Modern English Education, 10(2), 108-132.
Ministry of Education. (2008). Learning content organization learning areas (foreign languages), Basic education core curriculum (A.D. 2008). Bangkok: Teachers Council Printing House. [in Thai]
Moser, J. (2015). From a knowledge-based language curriculum to a competency-based one: The CEFR in action in Asia. Asian EFL Journal, 88, 1-29.
Nawong, W., Moore, K. S., & Wichitputcharporn, W. (2019). Approaches to enhance English teaching methodology in line with The Common European Framework of Reference for Language (CEFR) under Pathumtani Primary Educational Service Area Office 1 and 2. Journal of Educational Administration, 16(30), 176-187. [in Thai]
North, B. (2007). The CEFR: development, theoretical and practical issues. Babylonia, 1(07), 22-29.
North, B. (2008). The relevance of the CEFR to teacher training. Babylonia, 2(08), 55-57.
Office of the Basic Education Commission. (2014). Manual for organizing new English teaching methods. Bangkok: The War Veterans Organization of Thailand. [in Thai]
Pattaradechakul, N., Daungkaew, R., Chongchaoen, K., & Ritcharoon, P. (2023). The development of English teacher competency for student learning in the 21st century for private basic education schools under the Office of the Private Education Commission. Hatyai Academic Journal, 21(2), 261-292.
Pomin, T., & Srinonyang, P. (2020). Applying web-based instruction EFL for undergraduate students to improve the English language ability based on the reference levels of the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages. Journal of Modern Learning Development, 5(5), 212-223. [in Thai]
Poszytek, P. (2012). Policy perspectives from Poland. In M. Byram & L. Parmenter (Eds.), The Common European Framework of Reference: The globalization of language education policy (pp. 97-103). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Putri, N. S. E., Pratolo, B. W., & Setiani, F. (2019). The alternative assessment of EFL students’ oral competence: Practices and constraints. Ethical Lingua Journal of Language Teaching and Literature, 6(2), 72-85.
Richards, J. C. (2006). Communicative language teaching today. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Sae-Lao, R. (2013). The logic of the Thai higher education sector on quality assessment policy (Doctoral dissertation). Columbia University, New York.
Steiner-Khamsi, G. (2006). The economics of policy borrowing and lending: A study of late adopters. Oxford Review of Education, 32(5), 665-678.
Uri, N. F. M., & Abd Aziz, M. S. (2018). Implementation of CEFR in Malaysia: Teachers’ awareness and the challenges. 3L: Language, Linguistics and Literature – The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 24(3), 168-183.
Widdowson, H. G. (1978). Teaching language as communication. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Zaki, A. W., & Darmi, R. (2021). The implementation of CEFR in ESL learning: Why does it matter to the Malaysian education system?. Asian Journal of Assessment in Teaching and Learning, 11(2), 1-13.
