CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 470EFL/ESL Teaching and LearningSecond Language Learning and TeachingEnglish Language Learning and Teaching

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 113 of the 114 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Implementation of Communicative and Task-Based Language Teaching in the Asia-Pacific Region

Butler, Yuko Goto·2011·Annual Review of Applied Linguistics
DOI 10.1017/s0267190511000122
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Communicative language teaching (CLT) and task-based language teaching (TBLT) have been widely adopted in the Asia-Pacific region, with a number of Asian countries strongly promoting CLT and TBLT in their curricula and English language education policies. Despite their popularity, a number of challenges have arisen in connection with implementing CLT and TBLT in Asian classrooms. The challenges that have emerged include (a) conceptual constraints (e.g., conflicts with local values and misconceptions regarding CLT/TBLT); (b) classroom-level constraints (e.g., various student and teacher-related factors, classroom management practices, and resource availability); and (c) societal-institutional level constraints (e.g., curricula and examination systems). These constraints have led some to argue that successfully implementing CLT and TBLT in Asia requires adaptation to local environments, such that CLT and TBLT become embedded in local practices. Although there have been a growing number of reports of various CLT/TBLT implementation efforts in different Asia-Pacific regions, we still have only a limited understanding of how best to achieve contextually embedded adaptations and how they affect students’ English learning. After reviewing relevant studies, this article suggests potential options for moving forward, including (a) employing more contextually feasible and flexible interpretations of CLT and TBLT, (b) implementing decentralized or innovative language-in-education polici…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0267190511000122

Cites

113 of 113 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 114 references

Research works printed but not linked: 19

  1. Nunn, 2006, Designing holistic units for task-based instruction, Asian EFL Journal, 8, 69
  2. Muller, 2006, Researching the influence of target language on learner task performance, Asian EFL Journal, 8, 165
  3. Long, 1985, Modeling and assessing second language acquisition, 77
  4. Kirkpatrick, 1984, Communicative language teaching, 171
  5. Jeon, 2006, EFL teachers’ perceptions of task-based language teaching: With a focus on Korean secondary classroom practice, Asian EFL Journal, 8, 192
  6. Fotos, 2005, Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning, 653
  7. Eguchi, 2006, The limited effect of PBL on EFL learners, Asian EFL Journal, 8, 207
  8. Davison, 2010, English language assessment and the Chinese learner, 248
  9. Bruton, 2007, Description or prescription for task-based instruction?: A reply to Littlewood, Asian EFL Journal Quarterly, 9, 227
  10. Alwi, 2009, TBLT and SCMC: How do students use communication strategies, Asian Journal of English Language Teaching, 19, 135
  11. 10.1017/S0261444807004363 · DOI · Paper page
  12. Yukawa, 2002, Inside the classroom: Interaction in elementary school English lessons in Japan, Japan Journal of Multilingualism and Multiculturalism, 8, 1
  13. Cheng, 2004, Washback in language testing: Research contexts and methods, 147, 10.4324/9781410609731 · DOI
  14. Wilkins, 1976, National syllabuses
  15. Adams, 2009, TBLT in Asia: Constraints and opportunities, Asia Journal of English Language Teaching, 19
  16. Lee, 2002, Investigation into teacher proficiency for communicative English teaching in elementary schools, Primary English Education, 8, 235
  17. Lingley, 2006, A task-based approach to teaching a content-based Canadian studies course in an EFL context, Asian EFL Journal, 8, 122
  18. Tinker Sachs, 2007, Task-based language education from a classroom-based perspective, 235
  19. Robertson, 2006, Special conference proceedings volume: Task-based learning in the Asian context, Asian EFL Journal Quarterly, 8

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Butler, Y. G.
Corresponding author
Butler, Yuko Goto
ORCID
Butler, Yuko Goto
Venue
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Published
2011-03
Volume
31
Pages
36-57
ISSN
  • 0267-1905 (ISSN-L)
  • 1471-6356
DOI
10.1017/s0267190511000122
OpenAlex
W2170764416
Cited by
456
References
114
Citations by year
2026: 42 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 30 · 2022: 67 · 2021: 72 · 2020: 28 · 2019: 45 · 2018: 25 · 2017: 28 · 2016: 22 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 3
FWCI
95.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.cambridge.org/core/terms (unspecified, 185 d)
Locations
Annual Review of Applied Linguistics (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
  • Social Sciences › Linguistics and Language › Second Language Learning and Teaching
  • Social Sciences › Education › English Language Learning and Teaching
Keywords
communicative language teaching, task-based language teaching, language teaching policy, English language teaching, curriculum implementation, Asia-Pacific region, language education policy, examination system, classroom management, learning communities, teacher misconceptions

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review