Grammar and Communicative English Language Teaching in the Thai Educational Context

Main Article Content

Pornpan Boonpattanaporn


Communicating in English is truly important for graduates when the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC) takes full effect by the end of 2015. With limited exposure to English, most Thai students who will soon be a part of the community are at risk of being disadvantaged language users, compared to those from other member countries. The communicative input for practicing speaking and grammar, the backbone of writing, should be balanced appropriately to enable students to have language fluency and accuracy at an acceptable level. The integration of grammar and communicative activities is a challenge within the limitation of the Thai educational context.


Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Boonpattanaporn, P. (2019). Grammar and Communicative English Language Teaching in the Thai Educational Context. niversity of the hai hamber of ommerce ournal umanities and ocial ciences, 37(2), 152-169. etrieved from
Academic Article


Bax, S. (2003). The end of CLT: A context approach to language teaching. ELT Journal, 57(3), 278-287.

Belchamber, R. (2007). The advantage of Communicative Language Teaching. The Internet TESL Journal, 13(2). Retrieved from

Bosuwan, T. (2013). Common syntactic errors in interlanguage writing output: A case study of EFL undergraduates. University of the Thai Chamber of Commerce Journal, 33(special issue), 229-246.

Brown, H. Douglas. (2007). Principles of language learning and teaching. New York: Pearson Education.

Burke, B. (2007). Creating communicative classrooms with experiential design. Foreign Language Annals, 40(3), 441-462.

Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge: M.I.T. Press.

Cowan, R. (2008). The teacher’s grammar of English. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Educational Testing Service. (2014). Test and score data summary for the TOEFL ITP Test.

Retrieved February 2, 2016, from

EF English proficiency index 2015. (2015).Retrieved February 5, 2016, from

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

Ghazali, S. N., Setia, R., Muthusamy, C., & Jusoff, K. (2009). ESL students’ attitude towards texts and teaching methods used in literature classes. English Language Teaching, 2(4), 51-56.

Hymes, D. (1972). On communicative competence. In J. Pride & J. Holmes (Eds.), Sociolinguistics (pp. 269-293). London: Penguin.

Jindathai, S. (2015). Factors affecting English speaking problems among engineering students at Thai-Nichi Institute of Technology. In The 3rd National
Interdisciplinary Academic Conference (TNIA 2015). Retrieved March 10, 2016, from

Kachru, B. (1992). World English: Approaches, Issues and Resources. Language Teaching,25(1),1-14.

Knight, G., & O’Neil, M. (2007). Business explorer 2. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Krashen, S. (1988). The input hypothesis: Issues and implications. London: Longman.

Long, M. (n.d.). Focus on form in task-based language teaching. Retrieved June 12,2015, from http.// socscience/foreignlang/conf/option1.htm

Methitham, P., & Chamcharatsri, P. (2011). Critiquing ELT in Thailand: A Reflection from history to practice. Journal of Humanities, Naresuen University, 8,(2),

Nassaji, H., & Fotos, S. (2011). Teaching grammar in second language classrooms: Integrating form-focused instruction in communicative context. New York: Routledge.

Nazari, N. (2013). The effect of implicit and explicit grammar instruction on learners’ achievements in receptive and productive modes. Procedia: Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 70, 156-162.

Richards, J. (2002). Accuracy and fluency revisited. In E. Hinkel & S. Fotos (Eds.), New perspectives on grammar teaching in second language classrooms (pp. 35-49).

Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Richrads, J., & Ranandya, W. (2011). Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of current practice. New York:Cambridge University Press.

Richards, J., & Reppen, R. (2014). Towards A pedagogy of grammar instruction. RELC Journal, 45(1), 5-25

Savignon, S. (1997). Communicative competence: Theory and classroom practice (2nded.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Savignon, S. (2005). Communicative Language Teaching: Strategies and goals. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning
(pp. 635-651). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Swan, M. (2006). Teaching grammar – Does teaching grammar work?. Retrieved November 7, 2015, from www.mikeswan.

Swan, M. (2011). Seven bad reasons for teaching grammar – and two good ones. In J. Richards & W. Ranandya (Eds.), Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of current practice (pp. 148-152). New York: Cambridge University Press.

Thailand. Ministry of Education. (2006).Developing language and communication skills. Retrieved June 12, 2015, from

Thailand. Office of Higher Education Commission. (2015). Educational Development Plan (2012-2016). Retrieved June 12, 2015, from

Thailand ranks near bottom in English proficiency: Survey. (n.d.). Retrieved November 7, 2013, from ranks-near-bottom-in-English-proficiency-30218838.html

Thompson, G. (1996). Some misconceptions about Communicative Language Teaching. ELT Journal, 51(1), 9-15.

Wanchai, N. (n.d.). Difficulties encountered in implementing a communicative curriculum: EFL teachers’ perspectives. Retrieved July 2, 2015, from
research/Journal/2012/Final%20RA%20 Difficulties%20 Encountered%20 in%20 Implementing%20a%20Communicative% 20 Curriculum.pdf

Watanasin, P. (n.d.). Teachers’ perception and imprementations of Communicative Language Teaching (CLT): A Case study. Retrieved June 2, 2015, from www.human. file/Journal/2013 _02_26_13_01_01-07%20อ.พัฒน์.pdf

Widdowson, H. (1990). Aspect of language teaching. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Wiriyachitra, A. (n.d.). English language teaching and learning in Thailand in this decade. Retrieved July 13, 2015, from www.
download/english%20language%20 teaching%20and%20learning%20in%20 thailand.pdf