Compatibility Between Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) and Pesantren Learning Values in English Language Learning

Authors

  • Mujammilatul Halimah UIN Syarif Hidayatullah, Indonesia
  • Bassam Abul A'la UIN Sunan Ampel Surabaya

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15642/ijet2.2025.14.2.1-11

Keywords:

Communicative Language Teaching (CLT), Pesantren, English Language Learning

Abstract

This study investigates the compatibility between Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) and the traditional learning values embedded within Indonesian pesantren, particularly in the context of English language instruction. While CLT emphasizes communicative competence, learner autonomy, authentic interaction, and meaningful use of language, pesantren education is grounded in values such as discipline, obedience, communal learning, and character formation. These contrasting orientations raise questions about whether CLT can be effectively integrated into pesantren classrooms or whether fundamental pedagogical tensions may arise. Drawing on existing literature on CLT implementation in EFL contexts and studies on pesantren learning culture, this conceptual inquiry examines points of convergence and divergence between the two educational paradigms. Findings indicate several areas of compatibility: both CLT and pesantren prioritize collaborative learning, contextualized meaning-making, and the development of communicative ethics. pesantren traditions such as musya>warah (deliberation) and halaqah (discussion circles) naturally support interactive and cooperative learning, which align with core CLT principles. However, challenges emerge in relation to learner autonomy, teacher, student power relations, and the shift from teacher-centered instruction to student-centered practices. The study argues that with culturally responsive adaptation, such as integrating pesantren-based group practices into communicative activities and reframing autonomy within Islamic educational values, CLT can be harmonized with pesantren learning traditions. Ultimately, the study proposes a hybrid pedagogical model that maintains pesantren identity while enabling communicative English learning, offering implications for curriculum developers, English teachers, and Islamic educational institutions seeking to enhance communicative competence without compromising religious and cultural foundations.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Alakrash, H. (2020). The effectiveness of employing Telegram application in teaching vocabulary: A quasi experimental study. Alakrash, HM, Razak, NA, & Bustan, ES (2020). The Effectiveness Of Employing Telegram Application In Teaching Vocabulary: A Quasai Experimental Study. Multicultural Education, 6(1).

Alakrash, H. M., & Abdul Razak, N. (2021). Technology-based language learning: Investigation of digital technology and digital literacy. Sustainability, 13(21), 12304.

Azra, A. (1999). Pendidikan Islam: tradisi dan modernisasi menuju milenium baru. Logos Wacana Ilmu.

Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of commuicative approaches to second language teaching and testing.

Dhofier, Z. (2011). Tradisi pesantren: studi pandangan hidup kyai dan visinya mengenai masa depan Indonesia. (No Title).

Dos Santos, L. M. (2020). The discussion of communicative language teaching approach in language classrooms. Journal of Education and E-Learning Research, 7(2), 104–109.

Gay, G. (2018). Culturally responsive teaching: Theory, research, and practice. teachers college press.

Hamied, F. A. (2012). English in multicultural and multilingual Indonesian education. In English as an international language in Asia: Implications for language education (pp. 63–78). Springer.

Holliday, A. (1994). Appropriate methodology and social context. Cambridge University Press.

Hymes, D. (1972). On communicative competence. Sociolinguistics, ed. by J. Pride and J. Holmes, 293–296.

Hymes, D. (2013). Foundations in sociolinguistics: An ethnographic approach. Routledge.

Jacobs, G. M., & Farrell, T. S. C. (2003). Understanding and implementtng the CLT (Communicative Language Teaching) paradigm. RELC Journal, 34(1), 5–30.

Kumaravadivelu, B. (2006). Understanding language teaching: From method to postmethod. Routledge.

Lie, A. (2007). Education policy and EFL curriculum in Indonesia: Between the commitment to competence and the quest for higher test scores. Teflin, 18(1), 1–14.

Littlewood, W. (2014). Communication-oriented language teaching: Where are we now? Where do we go from here? Language Teaching, 47(3), 349–362.

Madjid, N. (1997). Bilik-Bilik Pesantren Sebuah Potret Perjalanan. paramadina.

Nilan, P. (2009). The ‘spirit of education’in Indonesian Pesantren. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 30(2), 219–232.

Qomar, M. (2015). Pesantren dan Transformasi Sosial. Erlangga.

Rahmwati, Y. (2018). English learning innovation in pesantren. Journal of ELT Research, 3(2), 123–135.

Richards, J. C. (2006). Communicative language teaching today (Vol. 25, Issue 2). Cambridge university press Cambridge.

Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2014). Approaches and methods in language teaching. Cambridge university press.

Savignon, S. J. (2001). Communicative language teaching for the twenty-first century. Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.

Tiwari, S. (2021). Interaction in CLT Classrooms. International Journal of English Learning, 9(2), 45–56.

Wahid, A. (2011). Islamku, Islam Anda, Islam Kita. Demokrasi Project.

Downloads

Published

2025-12-31

How to Cite

Halimah, M. and A’la, B. A. (2025) “Compatibility Between Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) and Pesantren Learning Values in English Language Learning”, IJET (Indonesian Journal of English Teaching), 14(2), pp. 1–11. doi: 10.15642/ijet2.2025.14.2.1-11.

Issue

Section

Articles

Similar Articles

<< < 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.