COMMUNICATIVE COMPETENCE INTEACHING SPEAKING

By

Jasno

UIN SUSKA RIAU

Abstract: The existence of Communicative Competence inteaching speaking is importantly viewed as the basis as wellas the goal that must be achieved. Understanding the aspectsand characteristics of Communicative Competence can helpthe speaking teachers to guide their learners into speakingatmosphere that make them speak naturally. Negotiation ofmeaning and management of interaction in communicativecompetence reflect to the focus on the use of language, not onthe usage. Oral communicative tasks given to students are thespeaking teachers’ consideration to create students’ orallynatural communication.

Key Words: communicative competence, teaching speaking

Introduction

Speaking is known as a productive skill used ascommunication tool through oral form. As the firstmanifestation of language, speaking places the first rankin communication compared with the other skills. It canbe proven that most of communication interaction doneby human through speaking. Moreover, the learning-purposes of language are firstly focused on the ability tocommunicate in speaking. Yet, what is expected inteaching the speaking is often far away of the target,because much of the language teaching speaking refersto grammatical or structure functions (usage) more thancommunicative way (use). This condition should beunderstood by the English teachers in order that theyreally understand what to do in teaching speaking. Theywould be able to make change and improvement of theirteaching, so that their students really feel the advantageof their learning of language. The students will regardspeaking as the most important skill they can acquire,and they assess their progress in terms of theiraccomplishments in spoken communication. Difficultiesexperienced by them in expressing their ideas inspeaking motivate them to do more.

In the communicative model of language teaching,teachers should actually help their students develop thisbody of knowledge by providing authentic practice thatprepares students for real-life communication situations.They help their students develop the ability to producegrammatically correct, logically connected sentences that

are appropriate to specific contexts, and to do so usingacceptable (that is, comprehensible) pronunciation.According to NCLC (2004: 1) Language learners need torecognize that speaking involves three areas ofknowledge:

Mechanics (pronunciation, grammar, andvocabulary): Using the right words in the rightorder with the correct pronunciation

Functions (transaction and interaction): Knowingwhen clarity of message is essential(transaction/information exchange) and whenprecise understanding is not required(interaction/relationship building)

Social and cultural rules and norms (turn-taking,rate of speech, length of pauses betweenspeakers, relative roles of participants):Understanding how to take into account who isspeaking to whom, in what circumstances, aboutwhat, and for what reason.

However, the success of teaching speaking isabsolutely emphasized to the use, not the usage. It can beseparated with CLT (communicative LanguageTeaching). As known that the target of CLT achievescommunicative competence as the final result of learninglanguage, especially in speaking which the students willspeak naturally based on the context.

Based on the writer’s observation and teachingexperience, the failure of achieving the targetexperienced by the students in speaking is because most

of the speaking teachers focus on the usage more thanthe use as suggested in CLT. Understanding CLTmethod will emerge awareness of the speaking teacher toconnect their teaching method, strategy and technique tocommunicative competence.

This paper tries to inform the readers the concept ofcommunicative competence, the importance ofdeveloping communicative competence in teachingspeaking, and the connection between CLT andcommunicative competence.

DISCUSSION

THE CONCEPTS OF COMMUNICATIVECOMPETENCE

Communicative competence is a term in linguistics,not only refers to a language user's grammaticalknowledge but also social knowledge about how andwhen to use utterances appropriately. The ability to usethe language correctly and appropriately according tocommunicative competence is to accomplishcommunication goals. The desired outcome of the use ofthe language is the ability to communicate competently,not the ability to use it exactly as a native speaker does.It means that the communicators of the language wouldcommunicate naturally without the strict tie of nativespeaker’s influence. This condition really mirrors theexistence of communicative competence as the achieved

target of learning language. The teachers of language, ofcourse, lead their students based on what is suggested bythe communicative competence that involve some areas:linguistics competence, Sociolinguistics competence,Discourse competence, and Strategic competence.

According to Canale and Swain (1980: 47)Communicative competence is made up of fourcompetence areas: linguistic, sociolinguistic, discourse,and strategic.

Linguistic competence is knowing how to use thegrammar, syntax, and vocabulary of a language.Linguistic competence asks: What words do Iuse? How do I put them into phrases andsentences?

Sociolinguistic competence is knowing how touse and respond to language appropriately, giventhe setting, the topic, and the relationships amongthe people communicating. Sociolinguisticcompetence asks: Which words and phrases fitthis setting and this topic? How can I express aspecific attitude (courtesy, authority, friendliness,respect) when I need to? How do I know whatattitude another person is expressing?

Discourse competence is knowing how tointerpret the larger context and how to constructlonger stretches of language so that the partsmake up a coherent whole. Discoursecompetence asks: How are words, phrases andsentences put together to create conversations,speeches, email messages, newspaper articles?

Strategic competence is knowing how torecognize and repair communication breakdowns,how to work around gaps in one’s knowledge ofthe language, and how to learn more about thelanguage and in the context. Strategiccompetence asks: How do I know when I’vemisunderstood or when someone hasmisunderstood me? What do I say then? How canI express my ideas if I don’t know the name ofsomething or the right verb form to use?

Meanwhile, Savignon (1983: 49) cites through theinfluence of communicative language teaching, it hasbecome widely accepted that communicativecompetence should be the goal of language educationcentral to good classroom practice. This is in contrast toprevious views in which grammatical competence wascommonly given top priority. The understanding ofcommunicative competence has been influenced by thefield of pragmatics and the philosophy of languageconcerning speech act. In addition, Savignon describesthe importance of characteristics of communicativecompetence and states that communicative competenceis dynamic, relative, context specific, and applies to bothwritten and spoken language, as well as to many othersymbolic systems. This idea is also supported by Zainil(2003: 35) that itemizes the characteristics ofcommunicative competence as follows:

1. The dynamic, interpersonal nature of communicativecompetence and its dependence on the negotiation of

meaning between two or more persons who share tosome degree the same symbolic system

2. Its application to both spoken and written language aswell as to many other symbolic systems

3. The role of context in determining a specificcommunicative competence, the infinite variety ofsituations in which communication takes place, and thedependence of success in a particular role on one'sunderstanding of the context and on prior experience of asimilar kind

4. Communicative competence as a relative, notabsolute, concept, one dependent on the cooperation ofall participants, a situation which makes it reasonable tospeak of degrees of communicative competence.

Mean while, Hymes ( 1972: 114) clarifiescommunicative competence is a concept introduced anddiscussed and redefined by many authors. Original ideais that speakers of a language have to have more thangrammatical competence in order to be able tocommunicate effectively in a language; they also need toknow how language is used by members of a speechcommunity to accomplish their purposes. Furthermore,Hymes classifies communicative competence into twogroups that each has four aspects:

Linguistic aspects

Phonology and orthography Grammar Vocabulary Discourse (textual)

Pragmatic aspects

Functions Variations Interactional skills Cultural framework

Communicative competence is measured bydetermining if, and to what degree, the goals ofinteraction are achieved. Communicative competence isdependent on the context in which the interaction takesplace. Communication is successful with one group inone situation that may not be perceived as competentwith a different group in another situation. Brown, D(2000: 250) states the domain of communicativecompetence includes learning what are the availablemeans (available strategies), how they have beenemployed in various situations in the past, and being ableto determine which ones have the highest probability ofsuccess in a given situation.

Bachman (1990: 26) divides communicative competenceinto the broad headings of "organizational competence,"which includes both grammatical and discourse (ortextual) competence, and "pragmatic competence,"

which includes both sociolinguistic and "illocutionary"competence. Strategic Competence is associated with theinterlocutors' ability in using communication strategies.

In conclusion, communicative competence isadmitted as the ability to use the language systemappropriately in any circumstances with regard thefunction and varieties of language as well as sharedsocial cultural supposition.

DEVELOPING COMMUNICATIVECOMPETENCE IN TEACHING SPEAKING

As a frequently suggested matter, the goal ofteaching speaking should be related to thecommunicative competence. Developing communicativecompetence in teaching speaking is viewed verynecessary because it will be highly valued in the processof communication. In developing the communicativecompetence, the primary point will be focused on themeaning and the understanding of information.Widdowson (1978: 67) strengthens, the ultimate aim inlanguge learning is to acquire communicativecompetence in talking and corresponding andpsychological activity underlying the ability to say, listen

to, write and read. In this case, the students feel free tocommunicate their ideas naturally in their speakingwithout hardly burdened with the grammar aspect. Reallife communication and social- culture interaction willhighlight the existence of communicative competence inteaching speaking.

Zainil (2008: 37) claims that in natural communication,developing communicative competence must bepracticed that the senders should develop theircommunicative competence by focusing on the use, notthe usage.

High motivation and prepared communicativetasks to the students are importantly considered indeveloping communicative competence in teachingspeaking. They will be brought into situations ofspeaking atmosphere that really enable them to speaknaturally. Interactional dialogue or face to faceinteraction, spontaneous improvised drama, and othercommunicative applied strategy and techniques becomeimportant parts for them in developing communicativecompetence. Absolutely, all can improve their speakingability through the implementation of communicativecompetence in teaching speaking on them. Hymes (inBrown 2000: 246) explains communicative competenceas the aspect of our competence enables the students toconvey meaning and interpret messages and to negotiatemeanings interpersonally within specific context.

When the students’ speaking of English isnatural, their communicative competence for that theirperformance is already developed. Developingcommunicative competence in teaching speaking isfaster and better if they are exposed to maximum naturalcommunication. Consequently, the speaking teachersmust speak, teach, and communicate English naturallyand fluently. As informed at previous statement, duringnatural communication process, the meaning orunderstanding is primary. It means that the use is priorityto develop the students’ comprehension on messages orinformation communicated by their interlocutors. Theuse is natural verbal that must be understood by theteacher in guiding the students in teaching speaking.Absolutely, understanding this way will be helpful todevelop the students’ acquisition. The acquisition meanthere is the students’ mastery of the language.

More interesting, challenging materials, andprepared oral communicative tasks offer the success ofdeveloping communicative competence in teachingspeaking. According to Savignon (in Murcia 2001: 24)communicative competence obviously does not preventcommunicatively- based materials from being subjectedto grammar- translation treatment, just there may benothing to prevent a teacher with only an old grammar-translation book at his or her disposal from teachingcommunicatively. However, the development of

communicative ability supports the integration of theform- focused exercise with meaning- focusedexperience. It means the grammar relates to theircommunicative needs and experiences.

Meanwhile, Harmer, J (1983: 15) supports, inteaching speaking communicatively, conversation shouldconstantly interpret what is being said as theconversation continues that interacting with theinterlocutor will focus on the analysis of the contextbeing conversed.

In this case, the students in speaking, of course,use the language in context, in real- life situation, and itis one of the jobs considered by the speaking teacher inapplying materials and oral communicative task indeveloping communicative competence.

In conclusion, whatever is given by the speakingteacher to the students should be related tocommunicative ones as expected in developingcommunicative competence.

THE IMPORTANCE OF ORALCOMMUNICATIVE TASKS IN DEVELOPINGCOMMUNICATIVE COMPETENCE

The success of developing communicativecompetence in teaching speaking is inseparable with thematerials or tasks given to the students. The speakingteachers should really pay attention to tasks given thatare more focused on oral communicative ones. Thetendency of relying on student- centered communicativetask is strongly expected to achieve the target ofcommunicative competence development. Absolutely,the oral communicative tasks will activate the students’interest to communicate their ideas in oral formnaturally. They will enjoy their communication processcreated without much interference of teacher.Negotiation of meaning and management of interactionin their speaking activities will automatically occur well.

Brandl (2008:289) suggests that student-centeredcommunicative task results are far more opportunities fornegotiated meaning than teacher-centered activities.

improved grammatical accuracy.

greater sociolinguistic awareness.

increased self-correction.

improved pronunciation.

As a teacher, you should find most challengingabout communicative oral activities in accordance withthe students’ need. If the teacher is currently teaching, itis better to ask the students about what they find mostchallenging about these kinds of activities and share theresults with classmates. Then the teacher has consideredthe defining features of real communication and hasdiscussed the difficulties of keeping students on task,finally the teachers and students are ready to analyzewhat makes some communicative tasks succeed andothers fail.

It is better to begin by thinking about the demands that acommunicative task places on the student: cognitive,linguistic and communicative. It is important to strike abalance when designing a task (not too hard, not tooeasy). Next, the teacher will look at the features thatmost well-designed communicative tasks have incommon.

The way a communicative task is structured (or not) hasa great deal to do with its ultimate success in theclassroom. When considering how to structure a task,Lee (2000: 35-36) suggests that designers askthemselves these four questions:

1. What information is supposed to be extractedfrom the interaction by the learners?

2. What are the relevant subcomponents of thetopic?

3. What tasks can the learners carry out to explorethe subcomponents? (e.g., create lists, fill incharts, etc.)

4. What linguistic support do the learners need?

In other side, Haycraff (1978: 82) supports that theeffective way of stimulating the students’ talking is toissue materials with natural situations that consist of theexchanges such as questions and answer, suggestions,and reactions, opinions and arguments, etc. furthermore,various changes and challenges in materials encouragethe students to explore their ideas that whole class isinvolved each with everyone.

Selecting materials according to students’ need willbear the natural oral communication effectively andefficiently. The students need opportunities to developtheir skills by being exposed to situations where theemphasis is on using their available resources.Littlewood (1981: 62) cites the personal interpretation ofthe situations is encouraging general confidence andfluency in speaking, allowing the learners to explore andexploit their communicative repertoire in any ways theywish. Moreover, Littlewood also gives considerations ofsome kinds of activities, situations and roles that canhelp the speaking teacher in developing oralcommunicative tasks as follows:

1. The idea of capability covers not only the level ofcomplexity of the language forms that learnerscan handle, but also the degree of independencewith which they can handle them. Thus, as

learners increase their linguistics competence,there will be scope for both greater complexityand greater independence.

2. The teacher should remember the point made inconnection with classroom interaction, thatstructures and functions are not bound no specificsituations. Therefore, the situations that he selectsdo not have to be restricted to those in which thelearners expect to perform outside the classroom.Communication skills can be developed in thecontext of, say, a classroom discussion or astimulated detective enquiry, and later betransferred to other contexts of language use.

3. On the hand, teacher has to aim for maximumefficiency and economy in his students’ learning.It therefore makes sense to engage them in alarge proportion of situations which bears a directa resemblance as possible to the situations wherethey will later need to use their communicativeskills. In this way, he can be confident that mostaspect of tha language practiced (function,structures, vocabulary, and interpersonal skills)are relevant to learners’ needs. This is particularimportant with older learners, whose need arecomparatively well- defined.

4. The situations must be capable of stimulatinglearners to a high degree of communicativeinvolvement. In part, this is another aspect of thepoint just made: learners are more likely to feelinvolved in situation where they can see therelevance of what they are doing and learning. Inpart, however it is a separate point. Many

learners (notably younger learners) have no clearconception of their future needs with the foreignlanguage. They may therefore find the greaterstimulation in situation that are of immediaterather than future relevance. These may besituations which arise in the course of classroominteraction. If simulation is used, they may berole- playing activities based on their familiarrealms of experience (e.g., family, friends orschool), rather than those which project into aless familiar future. (e.g,.booking hotels).

5. Similar considerations apply to the roles thatlearners are asked to perform in these situations.They may often be asked to stimulate a role thatthey are never likely to adopt in real life, such asthat of a detective or waiter. This does not meanthat the language they practice in that role is ofno value. Each learner should be allocated a fairproportion of roles which are more directlyrelevant in one or both of two senses. (a) hemight reasonably expect to have to perform thatrole in foreign language situations outside theclassroom; (b) he is already familiar with the rolein their native language. It is these roles thatlearner are likely to identify most deeply.Through them, therefore, they have the greatestchance of relating to the foreign language withtheir whole personality, rather than merelymanipulating it as an instrument which isexternal to them.

COMMUNICATIVE COMPETENCE AND CLT

The Communicative Language Teaching (CLT)is a method of second language teaching which isderived from the belief that language proficiency equalsto communication ability. Thus, communicativecompetence becomes the main inspiration of CLT. Thestrong form of CLT attempts to avoid explicit grammarinstruction in language teaching. Learners are expectedto generalize rules from input-rich situation created bythe teachers. Other than the strong form of CLT, manyvariations can be mentioned related to the application ofCLT. This makes CLT is an ideal pedagogical teachingmechanism philosophically but not easy to be convertedinto real classroom situations. The further application ofCLT around the world has been under investigation foryears, yet CLT has not yielded the result that it isexpected to have. I think, CLT needs more time to proveits effectiveness (not simply because it has failed).Savignon (in Murcia 2001: 13) explains that inCommunicative Language Teaching, the identification oflearners’ communicative needs and goals is the first stepin the development of a teaching program that involveslearner as active participant in interpretation, expression,and negotiation of meaning.

Negotiation of meaning describes the abilityviewed as variable and highly dependent upon contextand purpose as well as on the roles and attitudes of all

involved. On the other hand, it will develop the learner’sability to actually use the language for communication.As known that negotiation of meaning as suggested inCLT in teaching speaking becomes a lofty goalsupported with materials, providing learners with a rangeof communicative tasks that are comfortable for them. Itis also suggested to EFL teacher to encourage more thestudents with the language instruction that stimulate thestudents to use their language naturally. According toMurcia (2001: 20) making an effort to get the gist andusing strategies to interpret, express, and negotiatemeaning are important to development ofcommunicative competence.

The development of communicative competenceinvolves whole learners. The most successful teachingprograms are those who take account the affective aswell as the cognitive learners psychologically as well asintellectually. Of course, the communicative practice isimportant for the learners. Furthermore, Murcia (2001:22) cites learners should not only be given theopportunity to say what they want to say in English, theyalso should be encouraged to develop an Englishpersonality with which they are comfortable.

In this model of learning, the interaction willhappen in which the language made by the learners isformed of stimuli resulting a feedback. This also treatsthe acquisition of language as the result of an interaction

between the learner’s mental abilities and the linguisticenvironment. According to Ellis (1986 : 129) claims, theinteraction is a manifest in the actual verbal interactionin which the learner and interlocutor participate thatresults language acquisition derived from thecollaborative efforts.

With reference to the statement above, it is clearthat natural communication is strongly stressed in CLT.As mentioned in previous statement that CLT of Englishis the teaching that is focused on developing thestudents’ communicative competence, namely,developing their ability to communicate effectively inculturally significant setting. Furthermore, Zainil (2008:42) supports that Communicative competence in CLT isdynamic, interpersonal, context specific, and relative thatit depends on the negotiation of meaning betweencommunicators.

CONCLUSION

The process of natural communication willdevelop the learners’ communicative competence. The

teacher in teaching speaking should maximize thelearners ‘exposure to natural communication byproviding them with appropriate materials to stimulatethem to speak that focus on the use of language, not onthe usage. The students’ tasks and materials applied referto problem solving oriented that develop more theirlanguage activities to be their language creativity. InCLT, communicative competence must be the basis ofteaching activities in which teacher not only paysattention to verbal communication but also non- verbalcommunication that is practiced well. Finally, thespeaking teachers should create other innovative andcreative techniques for developing communicativecompetence in teaching speaking.

REFERENCES

Bachman, L. (1990). Fundamental considerations inlanguage testing. Oxford:

Oxford University Press.

Brandl. K. 2009. Chapter 8 Developing oralcommunication skills. In Communicative Language

Teaching in Action. Upper Saddle River, NJ:Pearson/Prentice Hall.

Brown, D. 2000. Principle of Language Learning andTeaching. New York:

Addison Wesley Longman. Inc

Canale, M. and Swain, M. 1980. Theoretical bases ofcommunicative approaches to second

language teaching and testing. AppliedLinguistics 1 (1), 1-47.

Haycraff, J. 1978. An Introduction to English LanguageTeaching. Singapore:

Longman Group, Ltd

Hymes, et al. 1972. Directions in Sociolinguistics: TheEthogisthy of communication.

New York: Halt, Rinertheart and Wiston.

Lee, J. 2000. Tasks and Communicating in LanguageClassrooms. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Littlewood, W. 1981. Communicative LanguageTeaching. Canbridge:

Canbridge University Press.

Murcia, C. C. 2001. Teaching English as a Second orForeign Language 3rd. New York:

Heile & Heinle. Thomson Learning Inc.

NCLRC. 2004. Goal and Technique of TeachingSpeaking.

http://www.nclrc.org/essential/speaking/goalsspeak.htm#topotpage. Retrieved: 12 Feb 2012

Savignon, Sandra J. 1983. Communicative Competence:Theory and Classroom Practice.

Menlo Park, California: Addison-WesleyPublishing Company

Widdowson, H. G. 1978. Teaching Language asCommunication. Oxford:

Oxford University Press.

Zainil. 2008. Actional and Functional Model (AFM).Padang: Sukabina Offset.