From Theory to Practice: Learners’ Perspective on CLT, TBLT, and CP In a State University in Camarines Sur, Philippines

This study examined learners’ perceptions of Communicative Language Teaching (CLT), Task-Based Language Teaching (TBLT), and Critical Pedagogy (CP) in a tertiary English language classroom at a state university in Camarines Sur, Philippines. The study used a mixed-methods approach involving 55 non-English-major learners and interviews with three English language teachers. Learners responded to 15 indicators measuring TBLT, CLT, and CP practices. Results showed that all three approaches were Strongly Practiced, with CLT receiving the highest mean (M = 4.51), followed by CP (M = 4.37) and TBLT (M = 4.28). Teacher accounts supported these findings, describing authentic tasks, interactive activities, professional simulations, collaborative projects, and discussions of social issues. The findings also showed that the three approaches overlap in classroom practice rather than being implemented as separate methodologies. However, some dimensions were less pronounced, particularly moving beyond grammar-focused instruction, prioritizing fluency, and addressing language, power, and social transformation. The study concludes that TBLT, CLT, and CP are present and selectively integrated in the participating classroom, and recommends deeper integration through authentic, communicative, and critically responsive learning activities.

Communicative Language Teaching (CLT), Task-based Language Teaching (TBLT), Critical Pedagogy (CP), ELT, tertiary classrooms

1. Abad-Celleri, M., Fajardo-Dack, T., & Argudo-Serrano, J. (2025). Critical pedagogy for humanizing EFL education: A qualitative case study. International Journal of Learning, Teaching and Educational Research, 24(11), 745–765. https://doi.org/10.26803/ijlter.24.11.35 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Baillo, M., Pradia, M., Encarnacion, F. A., & Fernandez, E. (2025). Using task-based language teaching to enhance the oral communication skills of Grade 11 students. European Journal of Literature, Language and Linguistics Studies, 9(2), 36–52. https://doi.org/10.46827/ejill.v9i2.618 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Bada, S. O. (2015). Constructivism learning theory: A paradigm for teaching and learning. Journal of Research & Method in Education, 5(6), 66–70. https://doi.org/10.9790/7388-05616670 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Bargo, D., & Go, M. B. (2021). Communicative language teaching (CLT) strategies in daily lesson plans of oral communication teachers and their alignment to standards in curriculum guide. International Journal of Linguistics Literature & Translation, 4(6), 89–104. https://doi.org/10.32996/ijllt.2021.4.6.11 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Barrot, J. (2017). Exploring the implementation of communicative language teaching in the Philippines: A tertiary teachers’ perspective. Advanced Science Letters. Retrieved from https://ssrn.com/abstract=3015228 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Bozkurt, D., & Topkaya, E. Z. (2023). Critical pedagogy in English language teaching. Innovational Research in ELT, 4(2), 53–58. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Brumfit, C. (1986). The practice of communicative teaching. Oxford: Pergamon [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Chand, S. P. (2022). Constructivism in education: Exploring the contributions of Piaget, Vygotsky, and Bruner. International Journal of Science and Research, 12(7), 274–278. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Faridi, M., & Izadpanah, S. (2024). The study of EFL learners’ perception of using e-learning, self-regulation and constructivism in English classrooms: Teachers, intermediate and advanced learners’ attitude. Journal of Language and Education, 10(2). https://doi.org/10.17323/jle.2024.12492 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Gu, P., Yang, Y., & Gu, H. (2019). Creating technology-enhanced constructivist learning environment for research ability development in a BA thesis writing course. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 33(5–6), 538–566. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2019.1576735 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Guo, X. (2024). Exploring the application of constructivist theory in English language teaching. Journal of Education, Humanities and Social Sciences, 42, 807–814. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Huong, P. T., & Diem, D. T. N. (2024). An investigation of teachers’ questions as a tool to feature social constructivism in sociolinguistics lessons: A case study in a Vietnamese university. Cogent Education, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2025.2504234 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Moharami, M. (2024). Enhancing international students’ learning experience: The role of constructivist teaching practice in Australian higher education. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Leadership Studies, 5(4), 114–120. https://doi.org/10.61186/johepal.5.4.114 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Mousavi, S., & Ketabi, S. (2021). Impact of participatory critical pedagogy interventions on EFL learners’ class participation and engagement: The case study of female EFL learners in Iran. Teaching English Language, 15(1), 29–49. https://doi.org/20.1001.1.25385488.2021.15.1.2.6 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Mudinillah, A., Rahmi, S. N., & Taro, N. (2024). Task-based language teaching: A systematic review of research and applications. Lingeduca Journal of Language and Education Studies, 3(2), 102–115. https://doi.org/10.70177/lingeduca.v3i2.1352 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Norton, B., & Toohey, K. (2004). Critical pedagogies and language learning. Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Nunan, D. (2004). Task-based language teaching. Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Obenza, B. N., & Mendoza, R. C. (2021). Effectiveness of communicative language learning activities on students’ communicative competence. Asia Pacific Journal of Social and Behavioral Sciences, 19. https://doi.org/10.57200/apjsbs.v19i0.273 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Oparinde, Y., Emmanuel, O., & Olarewaju, O. M. (2020). Pedagogical approach for effective teaching of English language in Nigerian secondary schools. Journal of Asian Multicultural Research for Educational Study, 1(2), 12–17. https://doi.org/10.47616/jamres.v1i2.47 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Qasserras, L. (2023). Systematic review of communicative language teaching (CLT) in language education: A balanced perspective. European Journal of Education and Pedagogy, 4(6). https://doi.org/10.24018/ejedu.2023.4.6.763 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Saldivar, J. M. N. (2025). Crafting minds: A constructivist blueprint for Philippine education reform. Cognizance Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies, 5(1), 247–259. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Senen, I. (2024). The effect of method pedagogy and English teaching learning. Journal of Society Innovation and Development, 5(2). https://doi.org/10.63924/jsid.v5i2.48 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Sonsona, R. P. J. V., & Sitoy, J. S. (2024). Investigating the use of communicative language teaching (CLT) strategies to promote innovative teaching and learning approach. Jurnal Pendidikan Indonesia, 13(2). https://doi.org/10.23887/jpiundiksha.v13i2.79184 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Assessment of the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Repositioning TVET for Economic Development in Nigeria
• Teachers’ Use of Assure Model Instructional Design on Learners’ Problem Solving Efficacy in Secondary Schools in Bungoma County, Kenya
• “E-Booksan Ang Kaalaman”: Development, Validation, and Utilization of Electronic Book in Academic Performance of Grade 9 Students in Social Studies
• Analyzing EFL University Students’ Academic Speaking Skills Through Self-Recorded Video Presentation
• Major Findings of The Study on Total Quality Management in Teachers’ Education Institutions (TEIs) In Assam – An Evaluative Study