Further proof that CLT never had what it takes?

Macmillan have just sent me a PR announcement of their latest CLT title, but CLT doesn’t mean Communicative Language Teaching to Macmillan (any more?), it means Chinese Language Teaching. You can’t imagine the same doubling up happening to acronyms like CLIL and PPP, or even TBL*. As both were influenced by CLT, that could be seen as a positive sign of its success, but I believe it’s more a sign that CLT has never had what it really needs to take off.

This entry was posted in Alternative teaching techniques. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply