The introduction of the construct communicative competence in discussions of 
second/foreign language proficiency dates from the early 1970s.Without reference to methodology, the 
term "communicative" was used to describe programs that used a functional-notional 
syllabus based on needs assessment, and the language for specific/purposes (LSP) 
movement was launched. Concurrent development in Europe focused not only on the goals but also on 
the process of communicative classroom language learning. In Germany, for exam?ple, against a backdrop of social democratic concerns for individual empower?ment articulated in the writings of sociologist and philosopher Jurgen Habermas 
(1970), language teaching methodologists took the lead in the development of 
classroom materials that encouraged learner choice and increasing autonomy 
(Candlin, 1978). Their systematic collection of exercise types for communicatively 
oriented English teaching were used in teacher in-service courses and workshops 
to guide curriculum change. Pedagogical Implications
In time, the inadequacy of the four-skills model of language use would come to 
be recognized and the shortcomings of audio-lingual methodology widely 
acknowledged. Along with a general acceptance of the complexity and interrelat?edness of skills in both written and oral communication and of the need for learn?ers to have the experience of communication, to participate in the interpretation, 
expression, and negotiation of meaning, newer, more comprehensive theories of 
language and language behavior came to replace those that had looked to 
American structuralism and behaviorist psychology for support. Aided by the 
development of audio and visual recording technology, the 1970s marked the 
beginning of an explosion of research in both first and second language develop?ment based on observable data as opposed to extrapolation from general theories 
of language and learning. The expanded, interactive view of language behavior these studies provide pre?sents a number of challenges for classroom language teachers. Among them, how 
should form and function be integrated in an instructional sequence? What is an 
appropriate norm for learners? How is language proficiency to be measured? Acceptance of communicative criteria entails a commitment to address these 
admittedly complex issues. Equally important, it requires a new focus on teacher 
education to ensure that teachers themselves have the communicative competence 
to provide learners with the kinds of spontaneous interaction they need. The nature of the contribution to language development of both form-focused 
and meaning-focused classroom activity remains a question in ongoing research. The optimum combination of these activities in any given instructional setting 
depends no doubt on learner age, the nature and length of instructional sequence, 
the opportunities for language contact outside the classroom, teacher preparation, 
and other factors. However, for the development of communicative competence, 
findings overwhelmingly support the integration of form-focused exercises with 
meaning-focused experience. Grammar is important; and learne
best on grammar when it relates to their communicative needs and experiences. Nor should explicit attention to form be perceived as limited to sentence-level 
morphosyntactic features. Broader features of discourse, sociolinguistic rules of 
appropriacy, and communication strategies themselves should be included. Berns (1990), a sociolinguist, who has focused on norms in the teaching of 
English as an international language, stresses that the definition of a communica?tive competence appropriate for learners requires an understanding of the socio?cultural contexts of language use. In addition, the selection of a methodology 
appropriate to the attainment of communicative competence requires an under?standing of sociocultural differences in styles of learning. Curricular innovation is 
best advanced by the development of local materials which, in turn, rests on the 
involvement of classroom teachers. The highly contextualized nature of communicative language teaching (CLT) is 
underscored again and again. It would be inappropriate to speak of CLT as a 
teaching method in any sense of that term as it was used in the 20th century. Rather, 
CLT is an approach that understands language to be inseparable from individual 
identity and social behavior. Not only does language define a community but a 
community, in turn, defines the forms and uses of language. The norms and goals 
appropriate for learners in a given setting, and the means of attaining these goals, 
are the concern of those directly involved. Related both to the understanding of 
language as culture in motion and to the multilingual reality in which most of the 
world population finds itself is the futility of any definition of a "native speaker," 
a term that came to prominence in descriptive structural linguistics and was 
adopted by teaching methodologists to define an ideal for learners.At the end of the 18-week 
course of study, learners in the experimental group who had engaged in unscripted 
classroom communication in place of laboratory drills to "reinforce patterns" far 
excelled learners in the control group in their ability to use French in a variety of 
unscripted communicative tasks. Equally important, they demonstrated a gram?matical accuracy (linguistic competence) equal to those who had spent time 
repeating patterns in a language lab (Savignon, 1972). The findings were the first to challenge audio-lingual theory by providing 
empirical evidence that, for beginner adult learners, classroom practice in sponta?neous communication could contribute to the development of communicative 
competence with no loss of grammatical accuracy. A collection of role plays, games, 
and other communicative classroom activities were developed subsequently for 
inclusion in the adaptation of the French CREDIF (Centre de Recherche et d'Etude 
pour la Diffusion du Francais) materials, Voix et visages de la France. The accompa?nying guide (Savignon, 1974) described their purpose as that of involving learners 
in the experience of communication, along with providing them with the strate?gies to do so. Teachers were encouraged to provide learners with the French 
equivalent of expressions like "What's the word for ...?," "Please repeat," "I don't 
understand," expressions that would help them to participate in the negotiation of 
meaning.Commercialization of the "army method" and materials for wider use in US 
schools took place during the Cold War period that followed World War II. Impetus 
came in 1957 with the successful launching by the Soviet Union of Sputnik 1, the 
first artificial satellite. Alarmed US officials embarked on a race to compete with 
Soviet technological advances. The National Defense Education Act (NDEA) of 
1959 provided funding to improve education at all levels in the fields of science, 
math, and foreign languages. Intensive summer institutes for foreign language 
teachers were designed to develop what was for many a non-existent ability to 
actually understand and speak the language they were teaching while at the same 
time training them in what would become known as the audio-lingual method, 
the "New Key" in language teaching.Commercialization of the "army method" and materials for wider use in US 
schools took place during the Cold War period that followed World War II. Impetus 
came in 1957 with the successful launching by the Soviet Union of Sputnik 1, the 
first artificial satellite. Alarmed US officials embarked on a race to compete with 
Soviet technological advances. The National Defense Education Act (NDEA) of 
1959 provided funding to improve education at all levels in the fields of science, 
math, and foreign languages. Intensive summer institutes for foreign language 
teachers were designed to develop what was for many a non-existent ability to 
actually understand and speak the language they were teaching while at the same 
time training them in what would become known as the audio-lingual method, 
the "New Key" in language teaching.Teaching of "the four skills" (listening, speaking, reading, and 
writing, in that order) through memorization of sample "dialogs" and drilling of 
grammatical patterns to avoid "errors" and attain "mastery" became the new 
pedagogical model that would influence teacher practice not only in the United 
States but in classrooms worldwide. With the introduction of the tape recorder to 
provide native-speaker models of pronunciation and grammar, language "labora?tories" sprung up in schools across the land to enhance the use of audio-lingual 
materials.Teaching of "the four skills" (listening, speaking, reading, and 
writing, in that order) through memorization of sample "dialogs" and drilling of 
grammatical patterns to avoid "errors" and attain "mastery" became the new 
pedagogical model that would influence teacher practice not only in the United 
States but in classrooms worldwide. With the introduction of the tape recorder to 
provide native-speaker models of pronunciation and grammar, language "labora?tories" sprung up in schools across the land to enhance the use of audio-lingual 
materials.In her subsequent comparative study of three groups of 
beginner college French learners at the University of Illinois, she found that time 
devoted to practice in spontaneous communication, with all the grammatical and 
pronunciation errors that such communication inevitably implies, was essential to 
developing what she termed communicative competence.This brief summary considers the underlying support, both theoretical and empir?ical, for communicative competence as a goal of 21st-century second/foreign lan?guage pedagogy and evaluation along with the implications of the construct for 
shaping classroom practice in the many different contexts in which English is 
taught.An initial challenge to the underlying theories of audio-lingualism came with 
assertions by a young US structural linguist and cognitive scientist, Noam 
Chomsky (1959) that human language development, or linguistic competence, was 
much more creative than that represented by Skinnerian behaviorism.An initial challenge to the underlying theories of audio-lingualism came with 
assertions by a young US structural linguist and cognitive scientist, Noam 
Chomsky (1959) that human language development, or linguistic competence, was 
much more creative than that represented by Skinnerian behaviorism.At about this same time, a young teacher in the language teaching profession 
itself, adept at drilling dialogs and patterns in both NDEA summer institutes and 
college courses of the 1960s, was discouraged by the repeated failure of learners to 
use structures and vocabulary they had rehearsed when offered opportunities for 
spontaneous interaction.Given the 1960s academic theories in linguistics and learning psychology upon 
which the prevailing recommendations for classroom language teaching methods 
and materials were based, however, the introduction of communicative compe?tence as a guide for the teaching and evaluation of learners proved nothing short 
of revolutionary.These and other coping strategies became the basis for subsequent iden?tification by Canale and Swain (1980) of strategic competence in their proposal of a 
three-component framework for communicative competence, along with gram?matical competence and sociolinguistic competence.Savignon (1983) subsequently 
used this framework to elaborate an approach to classroom practice consistent 
with the underlying construct of communicative competence.(C) 2018 John Wiley & Sons, Inc.