Ratna Juwitasari (0853042030) final assignment of SLA

THE IMPLEMENTATION OF COMMUNICATIVE COMPETENCE IN KTSP CURRICULUM

(Second Language Acquisition Assignment)

By:

Ratna Juwitasari

0853042030

ENGLISH EDUCATION STUDY PROGRAM

ARTS AND LANGUAGE EDUCATION DEPARTMENT

SCHOOL OF EDUCATION AND PEDAGOGY

UNIVERSITY OF LAMPUNG

2012

I.                   INTRODUCTION

Nowadays, we know that language has an important role in evolving the intellectual, social and emotional system, then the key to success in this life. We do believe that without language we can not do anything in this world. It has been recognized that at present English is the most important foreign language in the world since the implementation of the reform and opening-up policy. Accordingly, developing the communicative competence of the learners is one of the major goals for English teaching. There are even views that “the essence of English teaching is communication” (Wang, 1996), and that “communicative competence is the initial and ultimate goal of English teaching” (Wang, 1996).

Language is not only as consideration, but it can explain about us, the other people, the meaning and study. By looking the function of language, a language curriculum has to prepare the learner to reach the competence. Then by reaching the competence which can make the learner to express their ideas and feelings, and understanding about the nuance meaning. The language is hoped to be able to make learners know them selves, their culture and the other culture. Then by language, the learners can participate in their society, communicating with the other people. To get the language competence above, we have to start from theoretical rational and practiced based on all of the decisions to make standard competency formulation, basic competency, and the indicators.

In KTSP curriculum, there is theoretical based supporting it. Then, it is adopted as thinking planning in taking a decision in some formulation. Based on the thinking planning, it consists of the model language competence, model language, grade of level is hoped which is gotten and the difference between oral language essence and written language.

In this paper, we only focused on the competency model in KTSP Curriculum. As we know that there are some model competences which relate with part of language by looking at language competence from some perspectives. In English curriculum, model language competence used the model which is motivated by considerations of language pedagogy which have developed since Canal and Swain model and for now it uses the model competence by Celce Murcia, et al (1995).

Model competence by Celce Murcia emphasizes that language is communication. In English curriculum, Celce Murcia’s competence prepares the learners to communicate by using language in their society as user language. They learn a language not only for getting knowledge, but the importance thing that they can use the language to communicate with the other people or in their environment. This model can be called the communicative competence.

To prepare a competence based curriculum, one needs to refer to a model of competence that defines what kind of competence learners have to be developed so that every step taken in planning a language education program can be geared around certain axes leading to desire targets. Some authors have made efforts to define the kind of competence one needs to acquire in order to be able to communicate in a language and Hymes (1972), coined the term communicative competence to represent the competences needed for communication. He defined it as the knowledge of both rules of grammar and rules of language use appropriate to a given context. By considering this background, the researcher will find out how is communicative competence applied in KTSP curriculum.

II.                THEORETICAL FRAMEWORKS

The term “competence” is derived from the concept of “performance” firstly proposed by Chomsky in the 1960s. He used it to indicate that underlying the concrete behavior, or performance, of the language user, there is an abstract rule system of knowledge, and the user just uses the rules that govern his language without having any detailed awareness of the underlying system. The underlying knowledge of the grammar of the language by the native speaker is his “linguistic competence” (1965). But Campbell and Wales (1970) pointed out that Chomsky’s competence omitted the most important linguistic ability: “to produce or understand utterances which are not so much grammatical but, more important, appropriate to the context in which they are made”, and by “context” they mean both the situational and verbal context of utterance.

 Habermas (1970) also criticized Chomsky for his view and gave his own understanding

that “in order to participate in normal discourse, the speaker must have – in addition to his linguistic competence – basic aspects of speech and of symbolic interaction (role-behavior) at his disposal, which we may call communicative competence. Thus communicative competence means the mastery of an ideal speech situation”. Hymes (1972) was generally in consensus with the view of Campbell and Wales by arguing that, in addition to linguistic competence, the native speaker has another rule system without which the rules of grammar would be useless. That is, he knows intuitively what is socially appropriate or inappropriate and can adjust his language use to such factors as the topic, situation, and human relations involved: in short, he possesses “communicative competence”.

After Hymes, the concept of communicative competence continued to develop. Though not all would define it in exactly the same way, a generally accepted definition began with the idea that communicative competence entails knowing not only the language code or the form of language, but also what to say to whom and how to say it appropriately in any given situation. It deals with the social and cultural knowledge that speakers are presumed to have which enables them to use and interpret linguistic forms (Dubin & Olshtain, 1986). The latest and most comprehensive theory of communicative competence comes from Bachman (1990) who argued that:

1. Language competence includes the acquisition of both the knowledge of grammar rules and that of how to achieve communication;

2. The use of language is a dynamic process that is enhanced by the components of language competence.

Bachman held that language competence is composed of two parts:

organizational competence, which includes grammatical competence; textual competence and pragmatic competence, which include both illocutionary competence and sociolinguistic competence.

Initially,  Spitzberg (1988) defined communication competence as "the ability to interact well with others”.  He explains, "the term 'well' refers to accuracy, clarity, comprehensibility, coherence, expertise, effectiveness and appropriateness".  A much more complete operationalization is provided by Friedrich (1994) when he suggests that communication competence is best understood as "a situational ability to set realistic and appropriate goals and to maximize their achievement by using knowledge of self, other, context, and communication theory to generate adaptive communication performances." 

Communicative competence is measured by determining if, and to what degree, the goals of interaction are achieved.  As stated earlier,  the function of communication is to maximize the achievement of “shared meaning.” Parks (1985) emphasizes three interdependent themes:  control, responsibility, and foresight; and argues that to be competent, we must "not only 'know' and 'know how,' we must also 'do' and 'know that we did'”. He defines communicative competence as "the degree to which individuals perceive they have satisfied their goals in a given social situation without jeopardizing their ability or opportunity to pursue their other subjectively more important goals". 

The ability of an interactant to choose among available communicative behaviors in order that he may successfully accomplish his own interpersonal goals during an encounter while maintaining the face and line of his fellow interactants within the constraints of the situation.  A useful framework for understanding communication competence was designed by Spitzberg & Cupach (1984) and is known as the component model of competence because it is comprised of three specific dimensions: motivation (an individual’s approach or avoidance orientation in various social situations), knowledge (plans of action; knowledge of how to act; procedural knowledge), and skill (behaviors actually performed).

The component model asserts that communication competence is mutually defined by the interdependency of the cognitive component (concerned with knowledge and understanding), the behavioral component (concerned with behavioral skills), and the affective component (concerned with attitudes and feelings about the knowledge and behaviors) by interactants in an interpersonal encounter within a specific context.  Rubin (1985) explains that communication competence is “an impression formed about the appropriateness of another's communicative behavior” and that “one goal of the communication scholar is to understand how impressions about communication competence are formed, and to determine how knowledge, skill and motivation lead to perceptions of competence within various contexts”.

When applying the component model to organizational communication contexts, Shockley-Zalabak (1988) divides motivation into two separate (though related) elements: sensitivity (the ability to show concern and respect for others) and commitment (the desire to avoid previous mistakes and find better ways of communicating through the process of self-monitoring).  This revised model consisting of four dimensions (knowledge, skill, sensitivity, and commitment) is used by Rothwell (1998) to study communication competence in small group interaction. 

Note that communicative competence is dependent on the context in which the interaction takes place (Cody and McLaughlin, 1985; Applegate and Leichty, 1984; Rubin, 1985). Communication which is successful with one group in one situation, may not be perceived as competent with a different group in another situation. McCroskey (1982) attempts to clarify the importance of competence when he writes, “The domain of communicative competence includes learning what are the available means (available strategies), how they have been employed in various situations in the past, and being able to determine which ones have the highest probability of success in a given situation.

Canary and Cody (2000) provide six criteria for assessing competence which include, but are not limited to, perceived appropriateness and effectiveness. The criteria include adaptability, conversational involvement, conversational management, empathy, effectiveness, and appropriateness.  They are explained in more detail below:

SIX CRITERIA FOR ASSESSING COMMUNICATION COMPETENCE

1. Adaptability (flexibility)
     a. The ability to change behaviors and goals to meet the needs 
          of interaction
      b. Comprised of six factors
          1.  Social experience - participation in various social interactions
          2.  Social composure - refers to keeping calm through accurate perception
          3.  Social confirmation - refers to acknowledgment of partner’s  goals
          4.  Appropriate disclosure - being sensitive to amount and type of  info
          5.  Articulation - ability to express ideas through language
          6.  Wit - ability to use humor in adapting to social situations;
               ease tensions

 2. Conversational Involvement
      a. Behavioral and cognitive activity
      b. Cognitive involvement demonstrated through interaction behaviors
      c. Assessed according to three factors
          1.  Responsiveness -  knowing what to say, know roles, interact
          2.  Perceptiveness -  be aware of how others perceive you
          3.  Attentiveness -  listen, don’t be pre-occupied

 3. Conversational Management
      a. How communicators regulate their interactions
      b. Adaptation and control of social situations
      c. Who controls the interaction ebb and flow and how smoothly the interaction proceeds
      d. How topics proceed and change

 4. Empathy
      a. The ability to demonstrate understanding and share emotional 
          reactions to the situation
      b. Need not lead to “helping” the other person
      c. Cognitive understanding
      d. Parallel emotions

 5. Effectiveness
      a. Achieving the objectives of the conversation
      b. Achieving personal goals
      c. A fundamental criteria for determining competence

 6. Appropriateness
      a. Upholding the expectations for a given situation
      b. A fundamental criteria for determining competence

Whereas, Curriculum is a set of plan and arrangement anbout purposes, content, and materials and ways of which is used as a guidance of learning activity to achieve certain education goals (BSNP, 2006:3). In short, curriculum is needed by the teacher as the master plan in teaching-learning process. KTSP is an English operational curriculum which is arranged and applied by each educational unit (Mulyasa, 2006). KTSP is improved based on the content standard (SI) and graduation competence standard (Depdiknas, 2006:3) based on the content standard (SI) and graduation competence standard (Depdiknas, 2006:3). The 2006 curriculum is designed to improve the 2004 curriculum.

III.             METHOD

Questionnaire

In order to get the data, the researcher sends questionnaires to teachers who are teaching

English at MAN 1 (MODEL) Bandar Lampung about KTSP curriculum which will be applied communicative competence in it.

Face-to-face Interviews

Besides questionnaires, the researcher interviewed six randomly selected teachers to

get a more detailed understanding of the opinions from the teachers about the implementation of communicative competence in KTSP curriculum.

To gain the data needed, the researcher used observation and interview. These instruments are hopefully in line or in accordance with the objective of the research in analyzing the implementation of communicative competence in KTSP curriculum:

a.         Observation

The observation was done to get a clear image of certain activities in implementing communicative competence in KTSP curriculum. The researcher entered the classroom directly and then researcher observed and made a note of all activities that occured during the teaching learning process.

b.      Interview

Interview is a verbal communication done to get certain information needed. In this research, the researcher employed interview to the teachers. In this research the researcher used unstructured interview in which the researcher has already prepared several questions as guideline. Since the form of guideline is open-ended interview, the interviewee will answer the questions by his own words.

This process was employed to get the authentic responses and the respondent was free to give the comments based on his experiences, motives, and opinions. This interview was intended to support all data, which was gathered during the observation, and also to find out clearer and complete information about the implementation of communicative competence in KTSP curriculum.

During the interview, the researcher also asked the teachers about the communicative competence of their students. From the answers it can be seen that in general, the teachers believed that great gaps exist among different students. For example, one teacher said, “We have excellent students who can even compete with English majors, but there are also some students who cannot say anything.” This is a common view shared by teachers. Therefore generally speaking, problems are prevalent regarding the communicative competetence of the students. Below is part of the interview that was transcribed. Q stands for “question” while A stands for “answer”.

Q: On average, what do you think of the communicative competence of your students?

A: There are differences among students. But in general, I do not think they are doing well.

Q: Yes, in which part?

A: At least in communication. Sometimes they want to talk, but are not able to.

Q: What do you think are the reasons?

A: I think we had better attach more importance to culture, and to let the students know more about it. The basic language skills of the students need improving too.

Q: You mean the linguistic competence?

A: Yes. They also need to spend time on practice.

One teacher also mentioned that the students in her class have no big problems in basic communication, but have great difficulties in communication at higher levels, especially in expressing their feelings and ideas.

IV.             RESULT AND ANALYSIS

Discussion

In the area of language learning, there exist several models of communicative competence, but so far Celce-Murcia at al.’s model (1995) is the one developed for the purpose of language pedagogy informed. The previous models especially the ones by Canale and Swain (1980). Celce-Murcia et al.’s pedagogically motivated model includes five components: (1) discourse competence, (2) linguistic competence, (3) actional competence, (4) sociocultural competence, and (5) strategic competence.

In analyzing, these competences start with the core, that is to say discourse competence, which concerns the selection and sequencing of sentences to achieve a unified spoken or written text. In model discourse competence is placed at the heart of the communicative competence construct where “the lexico-grammatical building blocks, the actional and shape the discourse” (Celce-Murcia a al. 1995:9).  Then, the linguistic competence entails the basic elements of communication, such as sentence pattern, morphological inflections, phonological and orthographic systems as well as lexical resources. The Sociocultural Competence refers to the speaker’s knowledge of how to express appropriate messages within the social and the cultural context of communication in which they are produced. In this competence the learners are hoped to be able to use the language in different context and culture. They can differ when the language in different situation. Whereas, the actional competence involves the understanding of the speaker’s communicative intent by performing and interpreting speech act sets. Finally these four components are influenced by the last one that is the strategic competence which is concerned with the knowledge of communication strategies and how to use them. Strategic competence is a competence that allows a speaker compensates deficiencies in the process of communication.

Based on the explanation above, the model communicative competence has main competence which will be gotten by language education that is discourse competence. In this case the model communicative competence defined as the discourse competence because they are same by focusing on the communication. It means that when the people communicate by oral or written language, they involve in discourse. It is caused the meaning which they get and create always concern with culture context, situation covered. By participating in conversation, reading, and writing automatically activate the discourse competence which use a set of strategic to realize the valued contained language elements, grammar, pragmatic cues in interpreting and expressing meaning. (McCarthy dan Carter 2001:88).

The discourse competence is like a communication between two people or more in certain situation. Although everyday and every time the people communicate with the other, but rarely the people know about how communicate effectively in daily life. Before explaining more about it, we have to know that the discourse competence consists of two words those are discourse and competence. Firstly, discourse is a communication situation which is influenced by topic communication, the interpersonal relation between the people who communicate each other, and the last the line communication used one context or model language though that is oral, written, formal, or non formal. While competence is a concept of curriculum which emphasizes in developing the ability to competent in assignments by certain formation standard. Then, the competences are laid in the curriculum especially for KTSP curriculum. As we know that the curriculum is interpreted to mean all of the organized activities, and experience which pupils have under direction of the school, where in the classroom or not (Romine 1954). Based on the definition we can say that competences are the ability which has standard, whereas communicative competence has a definition that is the abilities consisting of skill, knowledge, and attitude which are appropriate in manage the massage verbal or non verbal based on certain standards.

Those five competences have a relation each other. In discourse competence, it is an ability to use English language to communicate with the other. The learners are able to communicate by using this language. However, the discourse competence is only getting by the learners, if the learners get the supporting competence such as linguistic competence, actional competence, sociocultural competence and strategic competence like what the Celce Murcia et.al have explained above. It can be used as guidance in language learning. As we know that the language is thought with the integrative for getting the discourse competence. As the result all of the model competences relate each other to get the communicative competence.

From the interview that was done by the researcher, it can be seen that every students have different ability in communicative competence. They felt difficult to express their ideas or feeling orally, actually it has been thought in their mind before. Therefore, communicative competence is very useful if it can be implemented in KTSP curriculum, because it will support the teaching learning process. By implementing the communicative competence in KTSP curriculum, it can make the learners more active in communication or interaction with others either inside or outside of the school. And it can also increase the learners’ speaking ability when they interacted with others.

V.                CONCLUSION

Communicative competence have been defined and discussed in many different ways by language scholars of different fields. There is, however, one thing in common that is seen in the writings of all these scholars: linguistic, or grammatical competence, should be considered just one aspect of overall competence an individual has with language. With the change of focus from grammar to communication within linguistic theories (as the field of sociolinguistics developed), L2 language teachers and researchers, too, have shifted the object of their linguistic analysis accordingly. Although teachers and researchers are aware of the need to improve students’ communicative competence and try out new ideas to contribute to meeting that need, there seems to be still a long way to go.

Communicative competence entails knowing not only the language code or the form of language, but also what to say to whom and how to say it appropriately in any given situation. It deals with the social and cultural knowledge that speakers are presumed to have which enables them to use and interpret linguistic forms. Communicative competence is very useful if it can be implemented in KTSP curriculum, because it will support the teaching learning process. By implementing the communicative competence in KTSP curriculum, it can make the learners more active in communication or interaction with others either inside or outside of the school