Document Type : Research Paper


1 University of Bojnord

2 Pprofessor in TEFL, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran.


Recent research has indicated that the adoption of CLT in an EFL contexts will create certain challenges. Using Engeström’s (1999) human activity system model, the present study investigated the implementation of CLT-based curriculum which was initiated in 2013 in Iranian public schools. Four groups of participants including 23 language teachers, 17 teacher directors, 23 students, and 20 parents took part in the study. Semi-structured interviews, observation of participating teachers’ classes, and analysis of relevant documents were used as data collection tools. Grounded theory analysis of the data revealed three main categories explaining the difficulty of CLT implementation in an EFL context like Iran. From an activity theory perspective, these categories indicated that the four layers of contradictions emerged in Iranian English Education as the activity system. The results suggest that not only language teachers as the subjects of the current activity system, but also other components of the activity system, and even other activity systems like teachers’ colleges and in-service programs need to work in tandem in order to overcome the challenges of implementation.


Ahn, k. (2009). Learning to teach within the curricular reform context: A sociocultural perspective on english student teachers’practicum experience in south korea. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA.
Ahn, K. (2009). Learning to teach within the curricular reform context: A sociocultural perspective on English student teachers’practicum experience in South Korea (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA.
Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., Razavieh, A., Sorensen, C. (2010). Introduction to research in education (8th Ed.). Orlando, FL: Hacourt Brace College Publishers.
Bartels, N. (2005). Applied linguistics and language teacher education: What we know. In N. Bartels (Ed.), applied linguistics and language teacher education (pp. 405-425). London: Springer.
Berns, M. (1990). Contexts of competence: Social and cultural considerations in communicative language teaching. New York: Plenum Press.
Borg, S. (2011). Language teacher education. In J. Simpson (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of applied linguistics (pp. 215-228). London: Routledge.
Burns, A. (2009). Action research in second language teacher education. In A. Burns & J. C. Richards (Eds.), The Cambridge guide to second language teacher education (pp. 289-297). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Carless, D. R. (2001). A case study of curriculum implementation in Hong Kong. In D.R. Hall & A. Hewings (Eds.), Innovation in English Language Teaching (pp.263-274). NY: Routledge.
Carless, D. R. (2003). Factors in the implementation of task-based teaching in primary schools. System, 31(4), 485-500.
Charmaz, K. (2005). Grounded theory in the 21st century: Applications for advancing social justice studies. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (pp. 507-535).Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Dahmardeh, M. (2009). English language teaching in Iran and communicative language teaching. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), The University of Warwick, Institute of Education.
Engeström, Y. (1999). Activity theory and individual and social transformation. In Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen, & R. Punamaki. (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory (pp. 19-38). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit. Retrieved September, 2002 from
Fullan, M. (1998). Education reform: are we on the right track? Education Canada, 38(3), 1- 7.
Hiramatsu, S. (2005). Contexts and policy reform: A case study of EFL teaching in a high school in Japan. In D. J. Tedick (Ed.), Second language teacher education: International perspectives (pp. 113-134). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hu, G. (2002). Potential cultural resistance to pedagogical imports: The case of communicative language teaching in China. Language Culture and Curriculum, 15(2), 93-105.
Incecay, G., & Incecay, V. (2009). Turkish university students’ perceptions of communicative and non-communicative activities in EFL classroom. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1(1), 618-622.
Kim, H., R. (2004). Exploring the role of a teacher in a literature-based EFL classroom through communicative language teaching. English Teaching, 59(3), 29-52.
Kim, E.-J. (2008). In the midst of curricular reform: An activity theory analysis of teachers’ and students’ experiences in South Korea (Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation). The Pennsylvania State University, University Park, PA.
Kramsch, C., & Sullivan, P. (1996). Appropriate pedagogy. ELT Journal, 50(3), 199–212.
Lantolf, J. P., & Thorne, S. L. (2006). Sociocultural theory and the genesis of L2 development. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lee, S. (2007). Preservice EFL teachers’ perceptions of their student teaching experiences. English Teaching, 62(4), 355-371.
Lincoln, Y., & Guba, E.G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills: Sage.
Littlewood, W. (2013). Developing a context-sensitive pedagogy for communication-oriented language teaching. English Teaching, 68(3), 3-25.
Markee, N. (1994). Curricular innovation: issues and problems. Applied Language Learning, 5(2), 1-30.
Maxwell, A. J. (1996). Qualitative research design; an interactive approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publication, Inc.
Sakui, K. (2004). Wearing two pairs of shoes: language teaching in Japan. ELT Journal, 58(2), 155-163.
Secretariat of the Higher Council of Education. (2006). Collection of regulations by the Higher Council of Education. Tehran, Iran: Madrese.
Wang, H. (2006). An implementation study of the English as a foreign language curriculum policies in the Chinese tertiary context (Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation). Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
Warford, M. K. (2011). The zone of proximal teacher development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(2), 252-258.