HOW COMPETENCE BASED ELT FOR S1 GRADUATE CANDIDATES SHOULD BE IMPLEMENTED

HOW COMPETENCE BASED ELT FOR S1 GRADUATE CANDIDATES SHOULD BE IMPLEMENTED: SOME ALTERNATIVES*

Competence Based Curriculum (CBC) in ELT refers to the curriculum that is aimed at achieving knowledge, skills, and basic values reflected in ways of thinking and performing actions, so that the learners are expected to have a set of ability or ‘competence’ which are reflected in their behavior through their formal learning process at school that they can use in their life within their society (see Ansyar, 2002; Hasan, 2002; Noer, 2003). The followers of this curriculum believe that thinking habit and consistent, continuous actions may make people competent to do something. However, the term ‘competence’ in this CBC is taken to mean differently from the same term introduced by Chomsky in that it just refers to the knowledge, to what people know about the language. What refers to what people do with the language is called ‘performance’ (Fromkin and Rodman, 1998: 12). In other words, CBC covers the ideas of competence and performance in that the learners—the S1 (undergraduate) graduate candidates of the English Education Study Program at the Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, Sriwijaya University—are expected to have good if not excellent proficiency in English by the time they are graduated. “The development of communicative competence has increasingly been cited as the goal of foreign language instruction” (Horwitz: 1987: 146)

*Paper presented in the NUESP National Conference organized by The Universtiy of Jember in cooperation with the British Council and Network of University ELT Service Providers (NUESP) in Jember, August 4—6, 2003.

** Prof. Diemroh Ihsan, MA., PhD, is a lecturer at the English Education Study Program, Faculty of Teacher Training and Education, and Graduate School of Sriwijaya University, and at present the Head of Sriwijaya University Language Institute, Palembang.

Teaching a language with no exception of a foreign language is commonly aimed at achieving its proficiency by the learners which means that the language learned can be used for communication, orally as well as in writing. This objective of learning has become the ultimate goal of the 1996 and 2001 curricula of the English Education Study Program, Sriwijaya University. If we are supposed to revise the recent curriculum to the what is called Competence Based Curriculum (henceforce CBC), the final objective of the ELT remains the same. Therefore, in other words, the CBC is not really something new in the area of EFL as well as in ELT. Although our 2001 curriculum was not specifically and directly designed based on the idea of “CBC”, the subjects offered are mostly intended to make the graduates of S1 program have the linguistic as well as the communicative competence.

To achieve that goal, the target language can be taught through a variety of modes or methods. Contextual learning and teaching, seminar procedures strategy, group discussion, communicative approach, real life problem solving activity, and summarizing strategies can be used in teaching language skills as well as content area subjects.

Before discussing those mentioned methods of ELT, allow me to present some questions with brief answers in relation to the matter of CBC that I learned from the some sources especially from educational interview on CBC with a staff of South Sumatera Provincial Department of Education broadcasted by Educational Radio in Palembang (Dinas Diknas: 2003). The questions are (a) How is the development of curriculum in Indonesia?, (b) What is the rationale of curriculum change?, (c) What is the foundation of the curriculum change?, (d) What are the features of CBC?, and (e) What is the difference between the previous curriculum and the present CBC? The paragraphs below are the answers of those questions, respectively.

The curriculum of education in developed country can be changed anytime depending on the need of the school and society. However, the curriculum alteration in a developing country like Indonesia is considered something extraordinary that makes people feel uneasy and frustrated. For example, high school curriculum in Indonesia has been changed several times, that is, curriculum of 1964, 1968, 1977, 1984, and 1994. The same thing is true in the level of higher education. The change of curriculum, nevertheless, should be regarded as a need that should be done due to the fact that any change is intended to make a better way of education for better life in the future generation. It is said that a good curriculum is the one that makes graduates competent in their majors and consequently easily hired by institutions or industrial companies. There might be no change of curriculum that is intentionally made to worsen the national education.

The rationale of curriculum change is that everything in the word including education changes through time due to the influence of the development of technology, information, electronic multi-media, and the people’s way of thinking and their need for better life. In other words, curriculum should be changed through time following the need of education and society as language changes through time. Curriculum change is needed to improve the material quality of education.

The foundations of curriculum change in Indonesia are (a) the UU RI No. 22/1999 that deals with regional government, and (b) the central government regulation No. 25/2000 about the authority of government and provincial authority as the autonomic authority. Based on the decree of National Education Minister No 232/2000 and No. 045/2002, the CBC should be soon implemented in all higher educational institutions all over Indonesia. This brings implication on the autonomy and democracy implementation in running education. It is the duty of the government through the minister of national education to arrange national curriculum in addition to local contents that become the duty of local government to arrange by considering the need of the respective local society.

There are some features of CBC. They are, among others, (a) focusing on competence by the students, classically as well as individually, (b) learning outcome centered, (c) using various method in delivering material, (d) learning resources are not only teachers but also other educational facilities like a library, and (e) evaluation is based on process and learning achievement with intended and relevant competence.

CBC is different from the previous curricula in that the CBC focuses on what the learners should do as the result of their learning process. In other words, CBC tells the teacher about what is meant by ‘competence’. Moreover, the difference between the present and previous curriculum is that the CBC focuses the learning program on the students and what they will achieve as their learning achievement rather than on the teachers and what they have to teach to their students.

Following changes in curriculum there tends to be changes in methods of teaching. For example, following junior and senior high school curriculum of 1977, the method used in teaching EFL was audio-lingual method and in the 1984 curriculum the method offered was communicative Approach (see Sadtono, 1992: 71-92), and now the CBC is being socialized and should have been implemented in high schools and universities by the year of 2004. The final goal of CBC in EFL area is that the higher education graduates should possess the ability or competence in communication, orally as well as in writing.

In ELT business, teachers or lecturers cannot and may not use only one method in order to achieve the instructional objectives; otherwise, it is quite impossible for them to achieve the natural and ultimate goal of language learning, i.e., the language learners have the communicative competence which should be supported by their linguistic competence. No single method is the best or appropriate for all instructional objectives. Therefore, to implement CBC teachers should select certain strategies that might appropriately facilitate the learners. Some factors like the level of the learners, the level of the difficulty of the materials, the learners’ age, the learning facilities, and the teachers’ qualification may determine the choice of the learning and teaching strategies.

At the English Education Study Program, its curriculum can be divided into two categories in terms of the nature of the subjects offered, not to include the general subjects of non-English. The two categories are (a) skill subjects like listening, speaking, reading, writing, pronunciation, and (b) content area subjects or non-skill subjects like general, applied, socio-, and psycholinguistics, phonology, morphology, syntax, language seminar, cross-culture understanding, method of research in linguistics, semantics, and literature.

In the following pages, I will discuss some possible methods of ELT that can be applied for skill and content-area subject classes. The presentation of these methods is intended at least partially for enriching my own perception and qualification in teaching EFL because for one reason I have never practiced the Contextual Teaching and Learning (CTL) method precisely following Johnson (2202). However, I believe I have applied the CTL concepts in one way or another in my undergraduate as well as graduate classes through other methods that I present in this paper.

CTL introduced by Johnson (2002) is a system of instruction with one of the goal to reach high academic standard. CTL is designed for teaching either unlucky learners who are accustomed to failure or fortunate learners who are always successful in their learning. Any learners of CTL classes are expected and helped to realize their full potentials and eventualy change their lives.

The philosophy of CTL is that learners learn when they see meaning in their academic materials, in their school as well as their daily life environment by connecting their new information with their prior knowledge and experiences. Despite the fact that it is too early to say that CTL will bring a great success in implementing CBC, there is nothing wrong of being optimistic that CTL will work in Indonesian education. There are some reasons for that: (a) CTL is compatible with innate longing for meaning characteristic of all human beings, (b) it satisfies the brain’s need to connect new life with prior knowledge, (c) it corresponds to the way the universe works, and (d) CTL offers eight components which are believed to give a special color to this new method.

Seminar Procedures is quite if not very effective to create students' autonomy in learning and maximize their participation in classroom activities. The main reason for this is that the students get involved in teaching and learning process inside as well as outside the classroom. By so doing they feel glad as they are paid attention to and counted in the group. Eighty eight percent out of 81 students as the respondents of my study state that they enjoy learning in classroom using the Seminar Procedures (Ihsan, 2001).

Seminar as it is widely known is an instant education form which is relatively considered better than lecturing‑the traditional and time-consuming mode of ELT teaching (Murry, 1983:ix). At present, what is called seminar industry has been developed and widely spread out in various areas of living perspectives, not only in education, technology, economy and business, but also in politics, with the purpose of sharing information and developing the knowledge of participants (Murry, 1983:ix).

The seminar procedures that I applied in teaching content area subjects are as follows. First, a group of two to three students presents the materials assigned to them a week before in front of' the class using Overhead Projector (OHP). The presentation is done by one of the group members lead by another member as the moderator. In every meeting two groups have the turn to present their assigned materials in the same way done by the previous group.

Second, after the group presents the materials in form of summary within twenty minutes, the other students as the class participants are given opportunity to ask five questions at the most within the following twenty minutes.

Third, the questions are answered by the other members of the group. Everybody in the group has his/her own main task during their presentation. This is important to show that they work together and have a good cooperation in doing their job presenting the material and in trying to comprehend their reading part.

During the presentation and discussion between the group and the class, I as the lecturer just keep silent and watch them presenting the material using the OHP.

Fourth, after all questions from the floor have been answered by the presenting group and the time allotted for them is over, they are asked to close the seminar session. This is done by the one who is acting as the moderator, by saying at least, for example, "That's all our presentation. Thank you!" Usually without being requested, the class gives the group a big applause as their appreciation.

Fifth, as the remaining time is about ten to fifteen minutes as scheduled, it is time for me as the lecturer to clarify the answers of' the questions asked, give comment on their presentation, and show them my appreciation for their effort and performance.

Sixth, if there is no question from the class, I declare the first session is completed, and the second session following the same procedures by another group begins immediately.

The Students’ Perception on the Use of the Seminar Procedures in Teaching and Learning Process

There are four main academic activities done in my classroom using the Seminar Procedures: Students' oral presentation, questions from the floor, answering the questions by the presenting group, and clarification of the answers to questions. Based on the result of the questionnaire asking the students whether or not they like this mode as another alternative in teaching and learning process, 88% out of 81 respondents, answers YES. To the question whether or not they liked being assigned to present the materials in front of their peers, 71% of the respondents answers YES. In relation to their understanding of tile materials using this mode of ELT, 75% indicates YES (Ihsan. 1997). The respondents were the 8th semester .students of the English Education Study Program, Sriwijaya University.

Group Discussion or simply Discussion is a mode in teaching, including ELT, that highly contains students centered principle (see Moedjiono and Dimyati, 1991/1992). To say it in another way, this strategy requires different preparation in the part of the teacher as well as in the part of the students: In lecturing mode, for example, the learning process depends on the teacher's preparation and activities because the students are merely required to listen to what the teacher talks about, whereas in the group discussion the learning process depends on both sides with more emphasis on the students. The students are expected to be more prepared and active. The two‑third of the classroom time should be devoted to the students.

As the students are given certain topics before hand for the group discussion, they are asked and forced to read and understand the topic as well as possible before coming to the class. During this period of time, the students are given opportunity to create their own strategies and autonomy in learning since there is no interference from the teacher. If they really do think about their own responsibility as good students, they will try hard to master the topic given so that they can participate actively in the group discussion.

Even though it is not easy to define what is meant by group discussion, it is known as a very open strategy of learning (see Gage and Berliner, 1984:486). It can be said here that it refers to a group of' students both as members of the class as a whole and members of smaller groups, working together to achieve a certain goal, like getting answers to questions or problems based on various possible facts by sharing ideas or opinions among the group members (see Gilstrap and Martin, 1975:15, Moedjiono and Dimyati, 1991/1992).

Group Discussion is generally understood as a strategy to grasp the main ideas as well as the details of the subject matter of the discussion. Based on the knowledge and experience the members of the group possess the students try to solve the problem raised through the sharing ideas or opinions.

In other words, to run the discussion in teaching and learning process teachers as well as students are required to have some knowledge and experience dealing with the topic discussed. Otherwise, the discussion will not work. Therefore, the students are lead and motivated to read articles or textbooks relevant to the assigned topics so that they can fully participate in the discussion. Teachers are suggested to have a number of interesting topics for the discussion.

The main purpose of this mode in teaching is to develop students’ critical thinking, democratic attitude, higher cognitive domain, and social and emotional quotient (Gistrap and Martin, 1975; Moedjiono and Dimyati, 1991/1992). This implies that if these aspects have been developed in the part of the students, the creativity and autonomy in learning and maximum participation of the students have more or less been achieved.

As this mode is student centered strategy, the teacher's job is just to give general information or background about the topic to be discussed, encourage the students to take part in the discussion actively.

Communicative Approach (CA) in this paper refers to the method of ELT especially EFL which expects the learners to be able to put the language they learn to actual use outside the language teaching context (Widdowson, 1979:252). This expectation seems in line with what the CBC intends to achieve in the learning and teaching process. To say it in another way, CA is very relevant to be used in CBC classes in that it represents what is to be learnt not simply in terms of formal linguistic units but also in terms of the communicative functions they fulfill.

In CBC classes using CA as the strategy used by the teacher, the content of language teaching courses should be defined in terms not of the formal elements of syntax and lexis, as is customary in structural syllabuses, but of the concepts and functions these elements are used to realize. These concepts and functions are called ‘notions’ (Wilkins, 1976:42) which are taken to mean that what people want to do through language is more important than mastery of the language as an unapplied system. Further, Wilkins claims that notional syllabus will produce a communicative competence as it take the communicative facts of language into account from the beginning without losing sight of grammatical and situational factors. Moreover, it is believed that CA applying the notional syllabus can sustain the motivation of the learners. I am as a EFL teacher myself in the opinion of Widdowson’s and Wilkin’s in that the success of CA as an ELT strategy depends to a certain extend on the teacher’s creativity in presenting the ‘notions’ or functions of the language. The teachers should introduce, practice, and apply various ways of expressing functions of language contextually and situationally. For example, to greet people various expressions can be used like “How are you?”, “How is life?”, “How are you doing?”, “What’s up?”, etc., depending on whether or not the context or situation is formal or informal—sociolinguistic context. The same thing can be true to notions of expressing gratitude, apology, request, refusal, love, hate, etc.. Savignon (1983) and Tarone & Tarone (1996) cited in Purnomo (2002) assert that there are four aspects of communicative competence, which I believe are also owned by CA, that is, grammatical competence, sociolinguistic competence, discourse competence, and strategy competence.

In addition, Widdowson (1979) suggests that if we are to adopt a CA to teaching which takes as its primary purpose the development of the ability to do things with language, then it is discourse which must be at the center of our attention as understanding a discourse is not as easy as understanding a sentence. It means that when a sentence is used, for example, in a normal communicative context, it activates a range of different relationships. To put it in an alternative way, when a sentence is used in context, then, the reader or listener has work to do to make sense of it.

The following are some examples of expressions based on notional-functional syllabus (for no. 1--5, see Sadtono, 1992: 76-77).

This kind of activity in EFL classroom introduced by Englander (2002) emphasizes interaction among the learners that can enhance them to use the language. This relatively new way of developing learners’ speaking skill seems quite relevant to be practiced in CBS classes. I have tried this activity in my senior class in tertiary level and I found out that most learners seemed to like and enjoy the activity as there was a lot of interaction among them. Some other reasons why my class liked this way of learning EFL can be described as follows: (a) interaction involves not just expressing one’s own ideas, but comprehending those of others, (b) the learners prefer to use communicative tasks in classroom because they get involved in comprehending, manipulating, producing, or interacting in the target language, (c) attention is very much focused on meaning rather than form (Nunan, 1989 as cited in Englander, 2002), (d) There are a collaboration and interaction among learners that complement the affective factors in EFL learning. However, some of the learners in my class did not have enough self esteem, emphaty, and motivation that caused more time needed to run the activity, and (e) real life communication in the classroom is interesting and useful to the learners.

In applying this real life problem solving activity in my class, I followed the stages used by Englander except for the time in that I set twice as much as the time set by her at least for two reasons: First, it seemed to me it was too short for my students to give the response, and second, 50 minutes equals one teaching hour at tertiary level classes. The stages offered by Englander (2002) and my modification shown by the arrows are presented below.

To develop and improve learners’ reading, writing, and speaking skills, summarizing and paraphrasing activities inside as well as outside classroom can be recommended to be done regularly by the lecturers in EFL classes. By being assigned periodically to summarize and paraphrase paragraphs the learners can gradually improve their reading comprehension and writing skill. If the learners are asked to report orally their summaries and paraphrases, they can also develop their speaking skill.

There are some tips for the learners to follow in doing these activities (see Oshima and Hogue, 1983).

To make these activities fruitful to the learners, the teachers and lecturers must be willing to devote much of their time to give feedback orally and in writing and discuss them with them in classroom.

CBC is not something new in ELT as a foreign language as well as a second language. Nevertheless, it brings new warnings to EFL teachers and lecturers in that whatever label attached to the curriculum, the success of achieving the instructional objective of language teaching and learning, i.e., to help learners acquire communicative competence, is delayed if they do their teaching jobs as a must, not based on their awareness and willingness coming from their heart.

To help successfully implement the CBC the EFL teachers as well as lecturers should if not must know as many methods or techniques of EFL teaching as possible. By doing so, they can pick up good points of certain methods and apply them to their relevant classes. No method is complete in itself and appropriate for achieving all instructional objectives including communicative competence.

In addition to some suggested methods of ELT above, EFL teachers and lecturers should be familiar with old and new methods like GTM (Grammar-Translation Method), DM (Direct Method), OA (Oral Approach), CLT (Communicative Language Teaching), ALM (Audio-Lingual Method), CLL (Communicative Language Learning), TPR (the Total Physical Response), CA ( Communicative Approach) and NA (Natural Approach)—see Richards and Rodgers (1986). The Silent Way and Suggestopedia seems to me not applicable strategies in EFL teaching in Indonesian formal schools.

Above all, CBC requires high commitment from both the part of the lecturers and the learners to do their best in teaching and learning, respectively. One of the crucial causes of the unsatisfactory result of EFL teaching in Indonesia is that most EFL teachers and lecturers are not fully committed to their profession and the learners do not have high motivation to acquire English as a means of international communication and a tool for their future life.

Ansyar, M. 2002. “Pendekatan kurikulum berbasis kompetensi.” Makalah disampaikan

Dinas Pendidikan Nasional Propinsi Sumatera Selatan. 2003. Siaran radio pendidikan

Englander, Karen. 2002. “Real life problem solving: A collaborative learning activity.”

Fromkin, Victoria and Robert Rodman. 1998. An Introduction to Language, 6^th edition.

Gage, N. L. and David C. Berliner. 1984. Educational Psychology. Chicago, IL.: Rand

Gilstrap, Robert L. and William Martin. 1975. Current Strategies for Teachers. Pasific

Ihsan, Diemroh. 2000. “Two modes in ELT to create student autonomy in learning.”

Hasan, S.H. 2002. “Hakekat kurikulum berbasis kompetensi.” Makalah disampaikan

Horwitz, Elaine K. 1987. “Linguistic and communicative competence: Reassessing

Mairu, Tarmizi. 2002. “Kurikulum berbasis kompetensi mata pelajaran bahasa dan

Murry, Sheila L. 1983. How to Organize and Manage a Seminar: What to do and When

Purnomo, Mulyadi Eko. 2002. “Kompetensi komunikatif: Arah bagi kurikulum berbasis

Sadtono, E. 1992. “Kompetensi komunikatif: Mau ke mana?.” Dalam Muljanto Sumardi

Prof. Diemroh Ihsan, M.A., Ph.D. (56) is a lecturer at the Undergraduate and Graduate Schools of Sriwijaya University. At present, he is the Head of the Sriwijaya University Language Institute (SULI), Palembang. He got his Sarjana Lengkap degree from ELTTP-FKSS, IKIP Malang in 1974 majoring in English education. He earned his M.A. in Linguistics and TEFL, and his Ph.D in Applied English Linguistics from Ball State University, Muncie, Indiana, USA, in 1984 and 1988, respectively.

NO	Notions/Functions	Examples of Expressions
1	Informational	“You won’t forget to write to Adam, will you?”
		(Function: to remind)
2	Attitudinal	“I can’t make up my mind whether to see him this evening or not”. (Function: to express uncertainty)
3	Active	“I’d do it this evening if I were you, otherwise you’ll never do it.” (Function: to advice)
4	Social formula	“Hallo!.”, “How are you?” (Function: to greet)
5	Communication polishing	“I see…”, “Really?....”, “Aha!” (Function: to show attention, understanding)
6	Request	“Could you help me?”, “Please, turn on the light.” (Function: to ask someone to do something)
7	Apology	“I’m sorry for being late.”, “Forgive me for the mistake.” (Function: to ask for apology)
8	Refusal	“I wish I could.”, “I would love to, but…” (Function: to refuse politely)
9	Direction	“Excuse me, how can I get to the post office?” (Function: to ask for a direction)
10	Hotel reservation	“Hallo, can I reserve one single-bed room, please?” (Function: to reserve a hotel room)