ESL Teachers’ Perception towards the Use of Communicative Language Teaching Approach in Senior High Schools’ in Ghana: The Case of Wa Municipality

Zinteng James *

Department of Languages, Mccoy College of Education, Nadowli, Ghana.

Wasila Mahamud

Department of Languages, Tumu College of Education, Ghana.

Paul Gbolo Ni-Ana

Department of Languages, St Vincent College of Education, Yendi, Ghana.

*Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.


This study examines Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) use among SHS teachers in Wa Municipality. To accomplish the set objectives, a mixed method approach was applied. Questionnaire, interview and observation were used to collect data from the participants. Constructive teaching model was used as a theoretical framework and the data analyzed using descriptive statistics (SPSS) and thematic analysis. The results showed that the majority of SHS teachers were aware of Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) as an approach to teaching English and also recognized the importance of Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) for students' communication skills. However, teachers did not adhere to the principles and teaching  of CLT in their classrooms. This was due to a lack of understanding of the basic principles of Communicative Language Teaching (CLT). For this reason, teachers still rely on traditional approaches to teaching the English language. The majority of teachers used teacher-centered practices instead of learner-centered practices in their classrooms. The study showed that teachers attributed their inability to use CLT in their classrooms to factors related to the teacher, the student, and the CLT approach. Teachers' differing ideas about CLT influenced their attitudes towards the approach. Based on the results, it is recommended that teachers of English try as much as possible to adopt appropriate strategies for teaching the English language and also to motivate their students in language learning to become proficient users of language. In-service teacher training should also be strengthened to keep teachers informed of evolving trends in English as a Second Language (ESL) methodology.

Keywords: Communicative language teaching (CLT), english as second language, teachers, strategies, traditional

How to Cite

James, Z., Mahamud , W., & Ni-Ana , P. G. (2024). ESL Teachers’ Perception towards the Use of Communicative Language Teaching Approach in Senior High Schools’ in Ghana: The Case of Wa Municipality. Asian Journal of Language, Literature and Culture Studies, 7(1), 24–45. Retrieved from


Download data is not yet available.


Elizabeth, Obando. Communicative language teaching strategies to develop senior high school students ’english language speaking skill; 2023.

Calle A, Calle S, Argudo J, Moscoso E, Smith A, Cabrera P. Los profesores de inglés y supráctica docente: Un estudio de caso de los colegios fiscales de la ciudad de cuenca, ecuador. Maskana. 2012;3(2):1-17.

Toro V, Camacho-minuche G, Pinza-tapia E, Paredes F. The Use of the Communicative Language Teaching Approach to Improve Students ’ Oral Skills. 2019;12(1). DOI:

Brown HD. principles of language learning and teaching. (4th ed.) New York: Longman; 2000.

Savignon S. Interpreting communicative language teaching. context and concerns in teacher education. New Haven: Yale University Press; 2002.

Savignon SJ. Communicative language teaching. Theory Into Practice. 1987;26(4):235-242.

Dos Santos LM. The discussion of communicative language teaching approach in language classrooms. Journal of Education and e-Learning Research. 2020;7(2):104-109.

Ahmed S. English language teaching at secondary school level in bangladesh: an overview of the implementation of communicative language teaching method. Journal on English Language Teaching. 2012;2(3):16-27.

Larsen-Freeman D. Techniques and principles in language teaching. Oxford University; 2000.

Brown HD. Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy. New Jersey. Prentice Hall; 1994.

Savignon SJ, Wang C. Communicative language teaching in efl contexts: learner attitudes and perceptions. International Review of Applied Linguistics. 2003;41(3):223-250.

Ministry of education Teaching syllabus for English Language (SHS). Accra: CDD press; 2010.

Kennedy P. Learning cultures and learning styles: myth-understandings about adult (Hong kong) chinese learners. International Journal of Lifelong Education. 2002;21(5):430-445.

Available: 10156745.

Baugh A. A history of the English language. Englewood Cliffs, N.J: Prentice-Hall; 1993.

Emerson O, Ann Arbor MI. The history of the english language: Plutarch Press; 1971.

Howatt AR, Widdowson H. A history of english language teaching (2nd ed). oxford: Oxford University Press; 2004.

Richards JC. Communicative language teaching today. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2006.

Richards JC, Rodgers TS. I major language trends in twentieth-century language teaching. Approaches and methods in language teaching; 2001.

Moss D, Ross-Feldman L. Second language acquisition in adults: From Research to Practice; 2003.


Jeyasala VR. A prelude to practice: Interactive activities for effective communication in english. Alternative Pedagogies in the English Language & Communication Classroom. 2014; 164-170.

Hymes D. Competence and performance in linguistic theory. In R. Huxley & E; 1971.

Richards JC, Rodgers TS. Approaches and methods in language teaching (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2014.

Brown HD. Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy. New York: Addison Wesley Longman, Inc; 2001.

Rutherford W. Second language grammar: Learning and teaching. London: Longman; 1987.

Hymes DH. On communicative competence. in c. j. brumfit, & k. johnson (eds.). The communicative approach to language teaching (2nd ed). Oxford: Oxford University press. 1972;5-27.

Van Ek J, Alexander LG. Threshold level english. Oxford: Pergamon; 1980.

Bachman L. Fundamental considerations in language testing. New York: Oxford University Press; 1990.

Chang M. Factors affecting the implementation of communicative language teaching in Taiwanese college English classes. English Language Teaching. 2014;4(2):3-12.

Wajid MA, Saleem M. Learner conformity to communicative language teaching approach in efl contexts: a case study in Saudi Arabia. International Journal of Language and Linguistics. 2017;4:240-249.

Incecay G, Incecay V. Turkish university students’ perceptions of communicative and non-communicative activities in efl classroom. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2009;1: 618-622.

Berns M. Contexts of competence: social and cultural considerations in communicative language teaching. New York: Plenum Press; 1990.

Thompson AG. Teachers' beliefs and conceptions: A Synthesis of the Research; 1992.

Colker LJ. Hand-on learning. washington, dc: National Association for the Education of Young Children; 2007.

Abe E. Communicative language teaching in japan: current practices and future prospects: investigating students' experiences of current communicative approaches to english language teaching in schools in Japan. English Today. 2013;29(2):46-53.


Coskun A, Izzet A. Investigation of the application of communicative language teaching in the english language classroom – A Case Study on Teachers ’ Attitudes in Turkey. 2011;2(1).

Nitish KM. School teachers’ attitudes toward communicative language teaching in Bangladesh. English Discipline, Khulna University, Khulna-9208, Bangladesh; 2012. Available:http://www., 4(5), 20-28

Sato K, Kleinsasser RC. Communicative language teaching (clt): practical understandings. The Modern Language Journal. 1999;83(4):494-517.

Gamal G, Debra M. The communicative approach in Egypt: Exploring the secrets of Pyramids. TEFL Web Journal, 1 (2). Unpublished MA Thesis; 2001 Available: http:/Iwww.teflweb-i. or& 1 n2lGahin MvhilL html (Access date: July 10,2003).

Burnaby B, Sun Y. Chinese teachers’ views of western language teaching: context in forms paradigms. TESOL Quarterly. 1989;23(2):219-238.

Defeng L. Reflective journals in translation teaching. Perspectives: Studies in Translatology. 1998;6(2):225-234.

Li D. It's always more difficult than you plan and imagine: teachers' perceived difficulties in introducing the communicative approach in south korea. TESOL Quarterly. 1998;32(4):677-703.

Chen W. A case study of action research on communicative language teaching. Journal of Interdisciplinary Mathematics.2015;18(6):705-717. DOI:

Bruner DA, Sinwongsuwat K, Radic-Bojanic B. EFL Oral communication teaching practices: A close look at university teachers and a2 students' perspectives in thailand and a critical eye from serbia. English Language Teaching. 2015;8(1):11-20.

Ellis G. The appropriateness of the communicative approach in Vietnam: an interview study in intercultural communication. ELT Journal. 1994;50(3);11-78.

Karim KMR. Teachers’ perceptions, attitudes, and expectations about communicative language teaching (clt) in post-secondary education in bangladesh. Unpublished Master Thesis, University of Victoria; 2004.

Aleixo LM. Voltametria: conceitos e técnicas. Revista Chemkeys. 2003;(3):1-21.

Borg S. Teacher cognition in language teaching: A review of research into what language teachers think, know, believe and do. Language Teaching. 2009;36(2):81–109.

Fullan M. The new meaning of educational change (4th ed.). London, UK: Routledge; 2007.

Alwan FH. An analysis of english language teachers’ perceptions of curriculum changes in the united arab emirates. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Exeter, United Kingdom; 2006.

Takanashi Y. TEFL and communication styles in japanese culture. Language, Culture and Curriculum. 2004;17(1):1-14.

Karavas-Doukas E. Using attitude scale to investigate teachers’ attitudes to the communicative approach. Journal. 1996;50(3):187-199.

Chowdhury R, Le Ha P. Reflecting on western tesol training and communicative language teaching: bangladeshi teachers' voices. Asia Pacific Journal of Education. 2008;28(3):305-316.

Shiba S. An investigation of libyan efl teachers’ conceptions of the communicative learner-centered approach in relation to their implementation of an english language curriculum innovation in secondary schools. PhD Thesis (Unpublished), Durham University; 2011.

Lee N. Childhood and society: growing up in an age of uncertainty. McGraw-Hill Education (UK); 2001.

Hamid MO. Globalization english for everyone and english teacher capacity: language policy discourse and realities in Bangladesh. Current Issues in Language Planning. 2010; 11(4):289-310.

Islam SMA. Language policy and practice in secondary school context in Bangladesh: Challenges to the implementation of language-in-education policy (Doctoral dissertation). Aalborg University, Denmark; 2015 Available: S.M._Ariful_Islam_EPUB.pdf

Brutt-Griffler J, Samimy KK. Revisiting the colonial in the postcolonial: critical praxis for nonnative-english-speaking teachers in a TESOL program. TESOL Quarterly. 1999;33(3):413-431.

Ur P. A course in language teaching: theory and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 2005.

Shamim F, Negash N, Chuku C, Demewoz N. Maximising learning in large classes: issues and options. Addis Abbaba: The British Council; 2007 Retrieved: eng/files/ELT-16-screen.pdf.

Charleston MM. The large class and effective instruction. Educational Review. 1976;22(1):38-44.

Benbow J, Mizrachi A, Oliver D, Said-Moshiro L. Large class sizes in the developing world: what do we know and what can we do? American Institutes for Research under the EQUIP1 LWA / US Agency for International Development; 2007. Availabe:

Sharndama EC. Application of icts in teaching and learning english (elt) in large classes. Journal of Arts and Humanities. 2013;2(6):34-39.

Abioye T. Managing language testing in nigerian large classes: Processes and prospects. English Language Teaching. 2010;3(2):82-87.

Watson Todd R. Why investigate large classes? [Special Issue: Large Classes] KMUTT Journal of Language Education. 2006;9:1-12.

Guba EG, Lincoln YS. Competing paradigms in qualitative research. Newbury Park, CA: Sage; 1994.

Vygotsky L. Mind in society. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 1978.

Lee J, VanPatten B. Making communicative language teaching happen. New York: McGraw-Hill, Inc; 2003.

Hiep P, Communicative language teaching: Unity and diversity. ELTJ. 2007;61(3):193- 201.

Liao J, Zhao D. Grounded theory approach to beginning teachers’ perspectives of communicative language teaching practice. Electronic Journal of Foreign Language Teaching. 2012;9(1):79-90.

Lincoln YS, Lynham SA, Guba EG. Paradigmatic controversies, contradictions, and emerging confluences, revisited. The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research. 2011;4(2):97-128.

Hatch AJ. Doing qualitative research in education sittings. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press; 2002.

Creswell JW, Clark PWR. Designing and conducting mixed methods research. (2nd ed.). London: Sage Publications; 2011.

Kaufman D. Constructivist issues in language learning and teaching. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics. 2004; 24:303B319.

Brooks J, Brooks M. In search of understanding: the case for constructivist classrooms. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development; 1999.

Jonassen DH. Evaluating constructivist learning. Educational Technology. 1992;31(9):28- 33.

Marsh GE, Ketterer JJ. Situating the zone of proximal development. Online Journal of Distance-Learning Administration Retrieved on 2nd January, 2016;8(2) Available: 82.htm.

Mirel B. Applied constructivism for user documentation. Journal of Business & Technical communication. 1998;12(1):7-50.

Jonassen D, Peck K, Wilson B. Learning with technology: a constructivist perspective. Upper Saddle Rive, NJ: Merrill; 1999.

Creswell JW. Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Sage Publications, London, UK; 2007.

Saunders M. an investigation into the effects of revision strategy instruction on l2 secondary school learners. system, vol. 2009;28(l):97 - 113.

Zheng H. The dynamic interactive relationship between chinese secondary school efl teachers' beliefs and practice. The Language Learning Journal. 2014;41(2):192-204.

Green A. Washback in language assessment. International Journal of English Studies. 2013;13(2):39- 51.

Littlewood W. Communicative language teaching: an expanding concept for a changing world. in e. hinkle (ed.), handbook of research in second language teaching and learning, volume ii. New York: Routledge. 2011; 541-547.

Can T. Learning and teaching languages online: A constructivist approach. Novitas-Royal. 2009;3(1):60-74. Retrieved: http://

Paul D. Institutional Dialogue; 2009 Available: https: www.researchgate .net/publication /31 30.

Morgan H. Relying on high-stakes standardized tests to evaluate schools and teachers: A bad idea; 2016 Retrieved: http://www.tandfonline. com/doi/full/ 10.1080/ 00098655.2016.1156628.

Lightbrown PM, Spada N. How languages are learned (4th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2013.

Crooks TJ. The impact of classroom evaluation practices on students. Review of Educational Research. 1998;58(4):43-481.

Airasian PW, Madaus GF. Linking testing and instruction: policy issues. Journal of Educational Measurement. 1983; 20(2):103-118.

Khaniya TR. Examinations as instruments for educational change: investigating the washback effect of the nepalese english exams. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis. University of Edinburgh; 2005.

Airasian PW, Madaus GF. Linking testing and instruction: policy issues. Journal of Educational Measurement. 1983;103-118.