Journal of English Education and Teaching (JEET)

e-ISSN: 2622-5867
p-ISSN: 2685-743x
Volume 8 number 2, June 2024
Page 451-467

Communicative Language Teaching in CEFR-Based English Learning

Eliza Trimadona
UIN Sulthan Thaha Saifuddin Jambi
elizatrimadona@[Link]
Shynta Amalia
UIN Raden Fatah Palembang
shynta_amalia_uin@[Link]
Mayang Sastra Sumardi
UIN Sulthan Thaha Saifuddin Jambi
mayangsastra@[Link]
Aryawira Pratama
UIN Sulthan Thaha Saifuddin Jambi
Aryawirapratama@[Link]
Vioni Saputri
UIN Sulthan Thaha Saifuddin Jambi
Vionisaputri@[Link]
Corresponding email: shynta_amalia_uin@[Link]

Abstract

The objective of this study is to evaluate and enhance the effectiveness of

Communicative Language Teaching in the context of CEFR-based English language
learning. The population consisted of students from State Junior High School (SMPN)
8 in Jambi. The samples were collected using convenience sampling. A total of 32
students participated in this study. This investigation utilized a quantitative research
approach with a pre-experimental design. The CEFR Test was utilized as an
assessment tool for data collection. Three primary methodologies were employed in
this investigation. The study consisted of pre-test, treatment procedures, and post-
test assessments. The pretest was administered to assess the students' proficiency in
spoken English according to the CEFR standard. Subsequently, the researchers
administered eight rounds of treatments utilizing Communicative Language
Teaching. The concluding round involved administering a post-test to determine if
there was any improvement in students’ speaking performance. The researchers
analyzed the results of the pre-test and post-test following the implementation of the
Communicative Language Teaching treatment in CEFR-based English learning. The
two-tailed significance value obtained from the calculation of the paired samples t-
test was 0.017, which is less than the significance level of 0.05. The value of this
computation can be interpreted as the progressive improvement in student
performance resulting from the implementation of Communicative Language
Teaching in CEFR-based English education.

Keywords: CEFR; Communicative Language Teaching; Speaking Skills

Introduction,
The era of globalization is without a doubt the greatest challenge to social existence
in the twenty-first century. Readiness to face the globalization period, in which

451
 Journal of English Education and Teaching (JEET)
e-ISSN: 2622-5867
p-ISSN: 2685-743x
Volume 8 number 2, June 2024
Page 451-467

people must live in non-negotiable competition is imperative. In this global era, the
world of education should also compete to generate outstanding students who can
survive and compete continually in the labor market. Students must equip
themselves with two basic things: knowledge and abilities. In fact, in order to
compete in today's globalized job market, numerous talents are required.
"Soft skill" is the most important skill to have. According to Rider and Klaeysen
(2014), in a summary report on findings on job recipients' perspectives on "soft skills,"
90% of companies target the fact that the main skills that their workers must possess
are "soft skills," in addition to "hard skills," which are skills directly related to one
specific type of work. "Soft skills" are intimately tied to personal characteristics.
Communication skills are among the "soft skills" that include honesty,
communication, courtesy, accountability, social skills, a positive attitude,
professionalism, adaptability, teamwork, and work ethics (Robies, 2012). Young
(2016) stated that, according to a Microsoft survey, educators ranked
communication abilities second only to problem solving skills. Thus, English, being the
most commonly spoken language on the planet, is a necessary communication tool
that must be acquired in order to face the world of work in the global society period.
Being able to speak and communicate fluently is the dream of foreign
language learners, including English learners. In fact, effective communication relies
heavily on the act of speaking (Wulandari et al, 2022). Proficiency in the English
language holds significant value in today's context of digitalization and
globalization. English is widely acknowledged as a global language and finds
application in diverse spheres of life, including Indonesia (Ananda, 2022; Kurniawan
& Radia, 2017; Shintasiwi, 2021). Acquiring this skill is regarded as essential for
individuals desiring to succeed in the global marketplace and professional field
(Afriana et al, 2022; Prasetyaningrum et al, 2023). English proficiency is essential for
both students and teachers to effectively teach and practice during the learning
process and to seek for jobs after graduation. The Internet and technological
progress have further emphasized the importance of the English language, as a
substantial portion of the content available in cyberspace is written in English.
Likewise, for educators, making students skilled in speaking is the goal of
most English teachers. This is also in line with the objectives of learning English based
on the curriculum. The four skills included in language skills; Listening, Speaking,
452
 Journal of English Education and Teaching (JEET)
e-ISSN: 2622-5867
p-ISSN: 2685-743x
Volume 8 number 2, June 2024
Page 451-467

Reading, Writing, along with the linguistic aspects in it; Vocabulary, grammar,
pronunciation are expected to be integrated as well as possible so that in the end
the teaching objectives are achieved, namely, to create students who are skilled in
English both orally and in writing.
However, it cannot be denied that teaching English at school is hampered
because students' knowledge of the language is uneven. At school, students cannot
refuse to be placed in classes where their English proficiency varies. With this
tendency, teachers often find it difficult to teach English to students.
The most common problems of teaching English in Indonesia include
difficulty understanding English topics, lack of training in English teaching and
learning, limited resources and materials, low student motivation, and inadequate
English exposure outside of school (Fidinillah, 2022; Wahyuningsih et al, 2023; Fadilah
et al, 2023). Additionally, the formal instruction in secondary schools is often
ineffective in improving English proficiency. Students also perceive English as difficult,
not substantive for their future, and only a formality subject, leading to low
confidence, motivation, and lack of practice in speaking English (Nasihin &
Oktariani, 2022). These challenges highlight the need for improved teaching
methods, training for English teachers, better resources and materials, increased
student motivation, and opportunities for English exposure outside of the classroom.
Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) is considered as the most
influential approach to arrive at the second/foreign language teaching scene since
the so-called scientific method (i.e. audio-language method) in the 1960s (Spada,
2007). CLT is an effective approach to teaching English to secondary school
students. It focuses on developing students' practical and communicative skills in
English, particularly in speaking and writing. CLT encourages students to engage in
real-life interactions and meaningful communication, which helps improve their
communicative competence. Studies have shown that implementing CLT strategies,
such as collaborative learning and meaningful interaction, can enhance students'
grammar knowledge and fluency in writing (Long, 2023). CLT also helps students
become confident communicators in various real-life situations, as it emphasizes the
importance of conveying actual meaning (Losi & Nasution, 2022). Teachers who
implement CLT in teaching spoken language have been found to facilitate learners'
development of communicative competence skills through their choice of materials,
453
 Journal of English Education and Teaching (JEET)
e-ISSN: 2622-5867
p-ISSN: 2685-743x
Volume 8 number 2, June 2024
Page 451-467

facilitation of the teaching-learning process, and application of teaching-learning

strategies (Rokaiya et al, 2022). Overall, applying CLT in teaching English to
secondary school students can lead to improved language skills and better
socialization among students from diverse backgrounds (Azizah et al, 2022).
Experimental studies on the use of Communicative Language Teaching
(CLT) method have shown positive results. A study conducted in Indonesia
discovered that the application of CLT in translation classes led to enhanced
cognitive engagement and writing motivation (Siregar et al, 2023). A separate study
conducted in China revealed that both high school students and teachers exhibited
a preference for the grammar-translation method over the communicative
language teaching (CLT) approach. However, it was suggested that CLT should be
given greater opportunities for practical application within the context of the
recently implemented curriculum reform (Su & Yan, 2023). According to a study
conducted in Indonesia, students had positive attitudes towards the communicative
method, as evidenced by their favorable view of a friendly classroom environment
and strong teacher-student connections (Nurhayati & Ganna, 2023). Similarly, a
study conducted in Indonesia discovered that the implementation of
Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) had a positive impact on students'
reading comprehension and served as a source of motivation for them to engage in
reading (Rahmati, 2022). A research conducted in Mexico examined the
understanding and perspectives of instructors on the implementation of
Communicative Language Teaching (CLT). The study discovered that certain
elements related to each language can impact the application of CLT principles
(Morales & Alvarado , 2023).
Most of the study focused only on the implementation of CLT. This study
however would like to suggest the learning environment on the basis on Common
European Framework of Reference (CEFR). The Common European Framework of
Reference for Languages (CEFR) is a globally recognized benchmark for assessing
and classifying language competency. This research aims to provide students with
valuable language learning experiences by aligning them with standardized criteria.
Students are also encouraged to acquire proficiency in international standardized
assessments. The study aims to promote novel practices, with SMPN 8 Jambi City
serving as the site for putting the researchers' ideas into action. The impulse for this
454
 Journal of English Education and Teaching (JEET)
e-ISSN: 2622-5867
p-ISSN: 2685-743x
Volume 8 number 2, June 2024
Page 451-467

research stems from the commitment of policymakers at SMPN 8 Jambi City, who
recognize the importance of improving their students' foreign language
competencies. Furthermore, a considerable portion of 7th-grade students lack
foundational English skills, whereas 8th-grade students display a competency stall
similar to their previous grade. The existing difference in linguistic proficiency
complicates teaching and learning process. As a result, the researchers were
motivated to conduct the study to find out: 1) What the students’ CEFR Level were,
2) Whether or not there was significant improvement on students’ speaking
performance after being taught by implementing Communicative language
Teaching in CEFR Based English learning.

Research Methodology,
For the purpose of this investigation, a quantitative approach was utilized,
and a pre-experimental design was utilized as the research method. Specifically,
experimental research is defined as study that actively regulates and manipulates
the settings that affect occurrences in which the researchers is interested, introduces
interventions, and creates a difference (Cohen et al, 2018). For the sake of this study,
only one class functions as the class that will receive a special treatment. Both a pre-
test and a post-test were administered in order to collect data on students’ speaking
achievement before and after implementing Communicative Language Teaching
The existence of special treatment in this study ensures that the treatment is more
accurate since it can be compared to the circumstance before the treatment was
applied (Sugiyono, 2013). This is because the treatment can be compared to the
previous scenario.
All of the students that participated in this study were currently enrolled at
SMPN 8 Jambi City. Class VII, class VIII, and class IX were the three groups that made
up the participants in this study's population. There are eight classes available at
each grade level at the SMPN 8 Jambi City. Nevertheless, this study utilized a
method known as convenient sampling because the samples were taken from
individuals who were available for the investigation. This study included the
participation of thirty-two different students.

455
 Journal of English Education and Teaching (JEET)
e-ISSN: 2622-5867
p-ISSN: 2685-743x
Volume 8 number 2, June 2024
Page 451-467

The conducting of the study was carried out with the speaking test as the
instrument of the study. The CEFR standard served as the foundation for the
development of the speaking test. The CEFR assessment, on the other hand, was
restricted in this study by the researchers so that it could only focus on the CEFR for
young learners known as YLE. YLE is designed for pre A1 (Starters), A1 (Movers), and
A2 (Flyers) (Cambridge Assessment English, 2021). Therefore, in order to find out the
students’ real speaking level, the three different form of YLE Speaking assessment
were designed and distributed to the students. During the test, the candidate is
evaluated by a single examiner using certain criteria. The assessment for all levels is
based on three criteria including Vocabulary, pronunciation, and interaction, each
with a six-point scale (0 to 5), specified by candidate behavior. Scale descriptors are
provided for Pre A1 Starters, A1 Movers, and A2 Flyers. The scale descriptions for
vocabulary includes range, control, extent, and cohesion. For pronunciation the
scale includes individual sounds, stress and intonation. In addition, for interaction the
scale descriptions include reception/ responding, support required, and fluency/
promptness.
During the research study, the researchers provided eight rounds of
interventions. The interventions sessions include various Communicative Language
Teaching Based activities such as role-plays, group discussion, pair work, story-telling
and picture narration, and information sharing. Emphasis is placed on fostering
vocabulary expansion, fluency, accuracy and pragmatic competence in real life
context. Throughout the intervention periods, participants' progress is closely
monitored and recorded. Feedback sessions are conducted to provide constructive
guidance and address individual learning needs.
The researches then conduct two analyses after gathering the data from
pre-test and post-test. The first analyses utilized was descriptive analyses. This analysis
was used to classify the students’ speaking level, the mean scores, and the
distribution of the scores for each of the level the students obtained. Then, in order to
find out Whether or not there was significant improvement on students’ speaking
performance after being taught by implementing Communicative language
Teaching in CEFR Based English learning the researchers computed pair sample t-test
analyses by utilizing SPSS 26. Considering that it is paired, the information that is

456
 Journal of English Education and Teaching (JEET)
e-ISSN: 2622-5867
p-ISSN: 2685-743x
Volume 8 number 2, June 2024
Page 451-467

obtained from the two samples must either be of the same quantity or originate from
the same source.

Findings and Discussion,

Findings
Table 1. The result of pretest-and posttest
Nilai / Hasil
Students Tes Awal (Pre Test) Tes Akhir (Post Test)
Nilai CEFR Level CEFR Nilai CEFR Level CEFR
1 5,5 A0 (Starter) 5,5 A0 (Starter)
2 0,5 A0 (Starter) 8,5 A0 (Starter)
3 0,8 A0 (Starter) 0,8 A0 (Starter)
4 8,5 A0 (Starter) 8,5 A0 (Starter)
5 11,6 A1 (Mover) 11,6 A1 (Mover)
6 1,0 A0 (Starter) 3,4 A0 (Starter)
7 9,7 A0 (Starter) 12,2 A1 (Mover)
8 8,8 A0 (Starter) 8,8 A0 (Starter)
9 8,8 A0 (Starter) 8,4 A0 (Starter)
10 1,0 A0 (Starter) 3,6 A0 (Starter)
11 8,5 A0 (Starter) 8,5 A0 (Starter)
12 8,3 A0 (Starter) 8,3 A0 (Starter)
13 0,9 A0 (Starter) 0,9 A0 (Starter)
14 8,8 A0 (Starter) 8,8 A0 (Starter)
15 2,5 A0 (Starter) 2,5 A0 (Starter)
16 6,6 A0 (Starter) 14,4 A1 (Mover)
17 1,2 A0 (Starter) 1,2 A0 (Starter)
18 0,5 A0 (Starter) 0,5 A0 (Starter)
19 1,0 A0 (Starter) 1,0 A0 (Starter)
20 1,4 A0 (Starter) 2,2 A0 (Starter)
21 0,0 A0 (Starter) 0,9 A0 (Starter)
22 0,5 A0 (Starter) 0,5 A0 (Starter)
23 0,0 A0 (Starter) 9,3 A0 (Starter)
24 9,1 A0 (Starter) 9,1 A0 (Starter)
25 0,0 A0 (Starter) 0,5 A0 (Starter)
26 12,6 A1 (Mover) 12,6 A1 (Mover)
27 0,0 A0 (Starter) 0,5 A0 (Starter)
28 11,5 A1 (Mover) 11,5 A1 (Mover)
29 6,9 A0 (Starter) 6,9 A0 (Starter)
30 9,1 A0 (Starter) 9,2 A0 (Starter)
31 0,0 A0 (Starter) 0,5 A0 (Starter)
32 9,1 A0 (Starter) 9,1 A0 (Starter)

457
 Journal of English Education and Teaching (JEET)
e-ISSN: 2622-5867
p-ISSN: 2685-743x
Volume 8 number 2, June 2024
Page 451-467

Figure 1. The results of Descriptive Analyses -Before and after the treatment

The findings of the pretest showed that 29 out of 32 students were in the level
of A0 or pre- A1. It means 90.625% of students (M=4.8344) were categorized starter.
figure 1, the minimum score obtained during the pre-test is 0.0, which means that
students are only at level A0 (Starter). The value of 0.0 is a description of the student's
lack of ability to speak English, as evidenced by this CEFR test. Meanwhile, the
highest score obtained from the pre-test results was 12.6, with an average of 4.8. This
value is classified as A1 (movers).
The results of the posttest indicate the improvement on the students’
achievement. Firstly, there was improvement on the number of the students who
were categorized mover. Previously, there were only 3 students who could reach the
mover level scores. In the post test there were 4 students who could reach the mover
lever score. Although there were only four students who could be categorized as
mover, 11 out of 32 students indicated significant improvement in the scores
obtained (M= 5.9438). Besides, there was an increased in the students’ lowest and
highest score. Even though the level of the lowest score was categorized as starter,
but the score (0.5) was higher than that in the pretest. Then, the highest score
obtained by students was14.4, which is classified as an A1 CEFR Level Score while the
average of the acquisition of the CEFR test carried out for these 32 students was 5.9
Indeed, when the lowest scores, highest scores, and averages produced by students
when carrying out the pre-test and post-test are compared, it can be concluded
that there is a clear increase in grades, even though they are still at the same level.

Figure 2. The results of Paired Sample t-test

458
 Journal of English Education and Teaching (JEET)
e-ISSN: 2622-5867
p-ISSN: 2685-743x
Volume 8 number 2, June 2024
Page 451-467

The results of descriptive analyses also aligned with the results of statistical
analyses on paired sample t-test. Figure 2 is the result of calculations obtained from
SPSS 26. The growth value obtained from the results of student acquisition during the
initial and final tests is 0.017. Based on the comparison value determined by
Sugiyono (2017), if the significance result is less than 0.05 (0.05), then it is certain that
there is an increase between the initial and post-test scores. In fact, the value of the
SPSS 26 calculation is 0.017, which is a smaller value when compared to 0.05. It was
concluded that there was a significant improvement on the students’ speaking
achievement after being taught by using Communicative Language Teaching in
CEFR based learning.

Discussion
The study focused on the students' speaking performance. Despite the fact
that the pupils are in secondary school, their English language skills exceed
expectations. Implementing a Communicative Language Teaching strategy linked
with the CEFR-based learning evaluation was shown to have a favorable effect. The
study's findings revealed that the score improved on the final test after receiving
specific treatment through Communicative Language Teaching.
The results of the pretest and posttest analyses shed light on the
effectiveness of Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) in improving students'
speaking skills within a CEFR-based learning setting. The pretest results revealed that
the majority of pupils were rated as A0 or pre-A1, indicating that they had a solid
foundation in English. This initial assessment emphasizes the necessity of particular
instructional interventions in addressing children' language weaknesses and
facilitating meaningful language acquisition.
Students' speaking abilities improved significantly after the treatment.
Notably, there was an increase in the number of children classified as A1 (Mover)
following intervention, indicating tangible progress in language proficiency. While
only a few students achieved this milestone on the pretest, the posttest results
showed a significant increase in the proportion of students obtaining A1 proficiency,
demonstrating CLT's effectiveness in promoting language development.
According to Spada (2007), the application of communicative language
learning has a significant impact. CLT is the most influential approach to learning a
459
 Journal of English Education and Teaching (JEET)
e-ISSN: 2622-5867
p-ISSN: 2685-743x
Volume 8 number 2, June 2024
Page 451-467

second or foreign language. The results of the studies also in line with the study from
Aliazas & Velasco (2023) and Ghafar, et al (2023). The studies prove that CLT has
positive impact on students' communicative competence, particularly in terms of
fluency, vocabulary, grammatical accuracy, pronunciation, and comprehension.
Students who were exposed to communicative language teaching demonstrated
improvements in their speaking skills, including sub-skills like vocabulary, grammar,
and fluency (Maming et al, 2022). Additionally, the communicative approach
creates a friendly class atmosphere and fosters good relationships between students
and teachers, which further enhances the learning experience (Solissa & Wariunsora,
2022).
Besides, applying various Communicative Language Teaching based
activities brings a lot of advantages. Communicative language-based activities in
the classroom focus on the belief that language is naturally functional for
communication. These activities aim to develop communicative competence by
focusing on the conveyance and reception of meanings in real-life social
interactions. They stimulate students to be active and participative, allowing them to
acquire communicative competence regardless of grammatical rules knowledge.
The implementation of role play activity for example, brings significant
influence. The activities itself provides fun learning atmosphere where the students
involve in real practice of language as means of communication. Miqawati &
Wijayanti (2018) supported the idea. Their study proved that the training using role
play method effectively improved students' speaking skill. The assessment showed a
significant average increase in speaking ability. As a part of communicative
language teaching activities, group discussion and small group discussion also help
improve students’ achievement. Group discussions provide students with
opportunities to actively engage in the learning process and practice speaking
(Sukmawati, et al, 2023). Through discussions, students are exposed to different
perspectives and ideas, which helps expand their vocabulary knowledge (Jameel &
Ui Haq, 2023). Additionally, group discussions allow students to receive constructive
feedback from their peers and teachers, which further enhances their speaking
proficiency (Purnamasari et al, 2023). Moreover, the interactive nature of group
discussions promotes motivation and enthusiasm among students, leading to
increased participation and learning outcomes (Anwar, et al, 2023). In fact, In the
460
 Journal of English Education and Teaching (JEET)
e-ISSN: 2622-5867
p-ISSN: 2685-743x
Volume 8 number 2, June 2024
Page 451-467

context of English instruction in Indonesia, communicative activities such as

information-gap activities, task completion activities, and information gathering
activities are proposed to enhance students' speaking skills and their overall
communicative competence (Affandi, 2017).
The implementation of Communicative language achievement is
appropriate in the context of CEFR based learning in which CEFR becomes the
standard for assessment. This study in fact, focus on The YLE tests which are aligned
with the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR),
providing a standardized framework for assessing language proficiency levels. The
YLE tests aim to evaluate the key language skills of young learners, including
listening, speaking, reading, and writing. By assessing these skills, the tests provide a
comprehensive overview of a child's language proficiency and areas for
improvement. These tests introduce children to everyday written and spoken English
and are an excellent way for them to gain confidence and improve their English
(Cambridge University Press & Assessment, 2024).
The goal of testing speaking through the Young Learners English (YLE)
standardized test is to assess young learners' ability to communicate effectively in
English. Specifically, the speaking component of the YLE test aims to evaluate a
child's proficiency in spoken English within a variety of familiar and age-appropriate
contexts. The speaking test assesses a child's ability to communicate verbally in
English. It evaluates their pronunciation, intonation, and clarity of speech, as well as
their ability to express themselves coherently and fluently. The speaking test often
includes interactive tasks where the child listens to prompts or questions from the
examiner and responds accordingly. The speaking tasks in the YLE test are designed
to simulate real-life communication situations that children might encounter in
everyday life. This encourages authentic communication and helps children
develop practical language skills that they can use outside the classroom
(Cambridge Assessment English, 2021).
Since Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) emphasizes real-life
communication and the use of authentic content, it aligns, overall, with the nature
of the purpose of standardized tests in the context of YLE. It fits together in a way
that makes sense for the improvement of students' speaking achievement when
using the Communicative Language Teaching technique. It might be argued that in
461
 Journal of English Education and Teaching (JEET)
e-ISSN: 2622-5867
p-ISSN: 2685-743x
Volume 8 number 2, June 2024
Page 451-467

addition to improving students' speaking abilities, Communicative Language

Teaching equips them with the skills necessary to utilize English effectively in
standardized and everyday contexts.

Conclusion and Suggestion

Overall, the pre-test and post-test outcomes, together with the use of
customized instruction in the context of Communicative Language Teaching
Approach rooted in CEFR based learning assessment have clearly exhibited a
significant improvement in students' oral proficiency. The preliminary examination
indicated a variety of skill levels, primarily at A0 (Starter) and A1 (Mover). After
undergoing eight sessions of communicative language learning based on the
Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR), a noticeable
enhancement was noted in the performance of most students.
The statistical study, utilizing the paired sample t-test in SPSS 26, confirms the
significance of the observed increase. The findings suggest a significant
improvement in student scores from the pre-test to the post-test, as evidenced by a
computed value of 0.017, which is below the minimum value of 0.05. This confirms
the effectiveness of the CEFR-based strategy.
Although A0 levels were initially dominant in the initial test, the final test results
show significant improvement across the board, with certain students advancing
from A0 to A1. Nevertheless, it is worth mentioning that not all students experienced
a change in their level. This implies that although there was a general rise in scores,
several students maintained their initial level of skill.
In order to meet the individual needs of students who did not show any
change in their level, it is advisable to consider exploring more strategies or
adjustments to the CEFR-based approach. Consistently monitoring and adjusting the
language learning program could enhance outcomes to a greater extent.
Furthermore, broadening the range of evaluations beyond the CEFR test could yield
a more thorough comprehension of pupils' language proficiencies.
This study highlights the achievement and efficiency of the CEFR-based
communicative language learning technique in improving English speaking abilities.
The favorable results justify the need for continual improvement in language

462
 Journal of English Education and Teaching (JEET)
e-ISSN: 2622-5867
p-ISSN: 2685-743x
Volume 8 number 2, June 2024
Page 451-467

competency among students through ongoing enhancing and application of such

teaching approaches.
With the achievement gained from the study, there is still limitation of the
study. The study indeed implemented communicative language teaching
approach by designing the activities rooted in YLE as a part of CEFR standardized
assessment. The researchers implemented various Communicative Language
Teaching based activities. However, the analyses of the study did not focus on
finding out each of the effect of activities in detail. Therefore, it is suggested for the
future researcher to seek into how each of the CLT based activities influence the
students’ performance.

References

Affandi, Y. (2017). Communicative activities based on competence standard of

2013 curriculum. International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning,
6(1), 81-88.
Aliazas, K.J.C., & Velasco, C.Q. (2023). Communicative language teaching for an
enhanced speaking competence of grade 11 students in Sta. Lucia National
High School. International Journal of Social Science Humanity & Management
Research, 2 (6), 380-388.
Azizah, S. N. Projecting Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) implementation
in teaching spoken language at secondary school. Journal of English
Teaching, Applied Linguistics and Literatures (JETALL), 5(2), 179-198.
Afriana, A., Arianto, T., & Jamba, P. (2022). Pembinaan kemahiran berbahasa inggris
profesi dan literasi hukum komunikasi bagi guru dan siswa di MTS Manbaa’ul
Nurul Hidayah Batam. Puan Indonesia, 4(1), 29–36.
[Link]
Ananda, A. T. (2022). EFL students’ readiness on the implementation of English
Course in elementary school: A study at elementary school 119 Jambi
city. Langue (Journal of Language and Education), 1(1), 122-130.
Anwar, Y., Setyaji, A., & ambarini, R. (2023). The Small Group Discussion Method’s
effectivity for improving the students of tenth-grade vocational high school 7
Semarang’s speaking ability. Journal of English Teaching, 8(1). 15-27

463
 Journal of English Education and Teaching (JEET)
e-ISSN: 2622-5867
p-ISSN: 2685-743x
Volume 8 number 2, June 2024
Page 451-467

Cambridge Assessment English. (2021). Cambridge English qualifications pre A1

starters, A1 movers, A2 flyers handbook for teachers. [Link]

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research Methods in Education (8th
ed.). London: Routledge. [Link]
Fadilah, R., Ayudhia, H. Y., Pratama, V. M., & Harmawan, V. (2023). Teachers’
teaching reflection: English teachers’ challenges in rural areas of Indonesia.
LET: Linguistics, Literature and English Teaching Journal, 13(1), 85-104.
Fidinillah, M. A. (2022). Google Translate Application for Simple Writing. Scope:
Journal of English Language Teaching, 7(1), 72-76.
Ghafar, Z.N., Sawalmeh, M.H., & Mohamedamin, A.A. (2023). Impcat of
Communicative Language Teaching Method on students’ speaking and
listening skills: A review article. International Journal of Linguistics, Literature,
and Translation, 6(1), 53-40.
Jameel, M., Zahid, F., & Haq, S. U. (2023). Group discussions practices in improving
English vocabulary learning among ESL learners. Global Language Review,
VIII(II), 236-246. [Link]
Morales, L. S. B., & Alvarado, M. G. H. (2023). Language teachers’ knowledge and
perceptions of the implementation of CLT in a Mexican language
centre. Revista Lengua y Cultura, 4(8), 90-98.
Nasihin, A., & Oktarini, O. (2022). Analysis Problems of Low Skill English Speaking for
Senior High School Students in Indonesia. International Journal of English
Literature and Social Sciences (IJELS), 7(6).
Kurniawan, M., & Radia, E. H. (2017, May). A Situational Analysis of English Language
Learning among Eastern Indonesian Students. In 1st Yogyakarta International
Conference on Educational Management/Administration and Pedagogy
(YICEMAP 2017) (pp. 1-6). Atlantis Press.
Long, Y. (2023). Research on oral English teaching strategies in junior high school
based on Communicative Language Teaching. The Educational Review, USA,
7(5), 620-624.
Losi, R. V., & Nasution, M. M. (2022). Students' attitudes toward Communicative
Language Teaching (CLT) in English Speaking Intensive Program. International
Journal of English and Applied Linguistics (IJEAL), 2(1), 95-102.

464
 Journal of English Education and Teaching (JEET)
e-ISSN: 2622-5867
p-ISSN: 2685-743x
Volume 8 number 2, June 2024
Page 451-467

Maming, J.B., Maravilla, W.H.G., & Annalyn, C.L. (2022). Communicative Language
Teaching in selected students: Basis for pro-posed use of Task Based Learning
Approach in developing speaking skills. International Journal of
Multidisciplinay: Applied Business and Educational Research, 3(11), 285-2190.
[Link]
Miqawati, A.H., & Wijayanti, F. (2018). Communicative activities based learning untuk
meningkatkan kemampuan survival English anggota English Club Politeknik
Negeri Jember. In Seminar Nasional Hasil Penelitian dan Pengabdian
Masyarakat (pp.24-29).
Nurhayati, N., & Ganna, N. V. J. (2023). Students’ perception of Communicative
Language Teaching (CLT) approach. Jurnal Kata: Bahasa, Sastra, dan
Pembelajarannya, 11(1 Apr), 121-132.
Prasetyaningrum, D. I., Ruminar, H., Kustanti, A., & Irwandi, P. (2023). Analysis of
motivation and non-cognitive personalities in English achievement and global
competences: The case of agriculture students. English Review: Journal of
English Education, 11(1), 9-16.
Purnamasari, E., Rahmawati, S., & Akidah, I. (2023). Peningkatan keterampilan
berbicara melalui metode diskusi kelompok pada siswa kelas XI SMAN 2
Bantaeng. Journal on Education, 6(1), 2654-5497
Rahmati, R. (2021). Improving students’ reading comprehension through
Communicative Language Teaching (CLT). International Journal of English
and Applied Linguistics (IJEAL), 1(3), 298-306.
Rider, L., & Klaeysen, C. (2015). Employer perspectives on soft skills. 2014 survey
report. Washington State Human Resources Council.
Robies, M.M., (2012). Executive perception of the top 10 soft skills needed in
today’s workplace. [Link]
10.1177/1080569912460400
Rokaiya, U., & Saharuddin, N. (2022). Exploring Communicative Language Teaching
to enhance grammatical knowledge among secondary school students in
Bangladesh. Learning, 12(4S).
Siregar, R., Hasibuan, A. L., Barus, E., & Sembiring, M. (2023). Communicative
language teaching impact on students’ cognition and writing motivation in

465
 Journal of English Education and Teaching (JEET)
e-ISSN: 2622-5867
p-ISSN: 2685-743x
Volume 8 number 2, June 2024
Page 451-467

translation practice. Journal of English Language Teaching and Applied

Linguistics, 5(2), 48-56.
Solissa, E.M., & Wariunsora, M. (2022). The Comunicative Approach implementation
to improve speaking ability students of class VIII-2 SMP Negeri 7 Ambon
Indonesia. International Journal of Social Science and Human Research, 5(11),
4893-4900.
Spada, N. (2007). Communicative Language Teaching. In: Cummins, J., Davison, C.
(eds) International Handbook of English Language Teaching. Springer
International Handbooks of Education, vol 15. Springer, Boston, MA.
[Link]
Sugiyono. (2013). Metode penelitian kuantittatif, kualitatif, dan R&D. Bandung:
Alfabeta
Sukmawati, Yasim, S., Imansari, N. (2023). Speaking skill development for vocational
high school students using group discussion. TEKSTUAL, 2(1).
[Link]
Shintasiwi, F. A., & Anwar, K. (2021, September). Analysis of English-Speaking
Performance for the Effective Language Learning in Digital Era. In 6th
International Conference on Education & Social Sciences (ICESS 2021) (pp.
113-117). Atlantis Press.
Wahyuningsih, S., Afandi, M., Kasriyati, D., & Khoeroni, F. (2023). Barriers to teaching
English to non-native English-Speaking teachers in Indonesian secondary
schools: Policy recommendations. European Journal of Educational Research,
12(4).
Wu, H., Su, H., Yan, M., & Zhuang, Q. (2023). Perceptions of Grammar-Translation
Method and Communicative Language Teaching Method used in English
classrooms. Journal of English Language Teaching and Applied
Linguistics, 5(2), 96-104.
Wulandari, N. A., Amalia, S., & Ramdhani, M. I. (2022). Investigating speaking
difficulties of senior high school students: linguistics and psychological
problems. ENGLISH FRANCA: Academic Journal of English Language and
Education, 6(1), 151-166.

466
 Journal of English Education and Teaching (JEET)
e-ISSN: 2622-5867
p-ISSN: 2685-743x
Volume 8 number 2, June 2024
Page 451-467

Young, A. (2016). Microsoft survey: The top skills students need for the future
workplace. [Link] survey-top-skills-
students-need-future-workplace/

467