This study revisits communicative competence of foreign language student teachers from a dynamic perspective. More specifically, this research attempts to redefine the notion of communicative language teaching competence of student teachers through a review of existing theoretical frameworks of communicative competence in literature as well as european and swiss foreign language competence reference frameworks. What are the components of this communicative competence ? How are language and teaching competence of student teachers interrelated in their communicative interaction with pupils ?. Drawing inspiration from the self-assessment methodology of the European language portfolio as well as the swiss framework on profession-related language competence of primary teachers, a scaled-self-assessment combined with semi-direct interviews were used to access the perceptions of communicative language teaching competence of student teachers. 

This paper is part of my ongoing doctoral dissertation on communicative language teaching competence of student teachers of German at the primary level in French speaking Switzerland. My goal is to conceptualize a theoretical model of communicative language teaching competence in order to cater to the training needs of these teachers. From a cognitive standpoint, competence is associated with declarative (Bulea & Bronckart, 2005; Canale, 1983; Canale & Swain, 1980; Hymes, 1972) as well as procedural knowledge of speakers in existing literature. However, communicative competence is also related to socio-discursive capacities of speakers to use the language appropriately (Celce-Murcia, 2007; Celce-Murcia, Dörnyei, & Thurrell, 1995; Dolz & Bronckart, 2002; Dolz, Pasquier, & Bronckart, 1993; Hymes,1972). Withing a language testing paradigm, communicative competence is defined as communicative language ability (Bachman, 1990) which integrates language competence, strategic competence and psychophysiological mechanisms of speakers.

The theoretical underpinnings of communicative competence in the above-mentioned cognitive and socio-discursive perspectives have shaped the task-based conceptual framework of the common european framework of reference and the european teacher portfolio. However, the task-based paradigm of these frameworks do not provide specific information into the task-based communicative competence of language teachers. Indeed, the role of teachers as speakers in the classroom is to provoke acquisition through the creation of learning opportunities (Cameron 2001). Even more puzzling is the absence of affective factors or self-perceptions influencing the communicative language teaching competence of these teachers. For example, teacher language awareness (Andrews, 2001, 2003) including subject-matter knowledge as well as pedagogical content knowledge of language teachers play a significant role in shaping their perceptions of communicative language teaching competence. Nevertheless, such implicit knowledge of teachers is not integrated into the existing cognitive perspective of communicative competence. Moreover, fluency, a key indicator of communicative language ability, used in benchmark tests for proficient speakers, surprisingly only measures oral fluency in such tests. Studies in fluency (Muller et al.2014) show however that listening, reading and written fluency of learners also affect their communicative competence in the classroom.  The definition of communicative competence in profession-related language competence profile (Cuenat et al.2014) or the european teacher language portfolio (Neby et al. 2007) does not appear anymore satisfactory. The limits of the former lies in the almost exclusive focus on tasks or social situations favouring speaker interaction. The latter, does not account for the developmental aspects of their communicative competence. Research on competing ideal, ought-to and feared selves of language teachers (Kubaniyiova, 2009) demonstrates how affective factors related to identity goals and aspirations of these language teachers influence their perceptions of communicative language teaching competence. Assuming that communicative competence of teachers is a competential process (Bulea & Bronckart 2005) linking  their cognitive ressources with affective factors (Allal 2002) arising from their past learning and teaching experiences, a dynamic perspective would bridge the gap between effective and perceived communicative language teaching competence of student teachers.

Andrews, S. (2001). "The Language Awareness of the L2 Teacher: Its Impact Upon Pedagogical Practice". Language Awareness, 10, 75-90. Andrews, S. (2003). "Teacher Language Awareness and the Professional Knowledge Base of the L2 Teacher". Language Awareness, 12(2), 81-95. Bachman, L. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language testing: Oxford University Press. Bulea, E., & Bronckart, J.-P. (2005). Pour une approche dynamique des compétences langagières Repenser l'enseignement des langues: comment identifier et exploiter les compétences ? (pp. 193-227). Lille: Presses du Septentrion. Cameron, L. (2001). Teaching languages to young learners. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). "Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to second language teaching and testing". Applied Linguistics, 1(1). Celce-Murcia, M. (2007). Rethinking the Role of Communicative Competence in Language Teaching. In E. A. Soler & M. P. Jordà (Eds.), Intercultural Language Use and Language Learning (pp. 41-57): Springer Netherlands. Celce-Murcia, M., Dörnyei, Z., & Thurrell, S. (1995). "Communicative competence: A pedagogically motivated model with content specifications". Issues in Applied linguistics, 6(2), 5-35. Cicurel, F. (2014). "Pensée en action/ pensée sur l’action : une fenêtre sur l’agir professoral?". Canadian Modern Language Review, 70(3), 381-402. Council of Europe (2001). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages : learning, teaching, assessment Strasbourd: Language policy unit Dolz, J., & Bronckart, J.-P. (2002). La notion de compétence: quelle pertinence pour l'étude de l'apprentissage des actions langagières ? In J. Dolz & E. Olagnier (Eds.), L'énigme de la compétence en éducation (Raisons éducatives ed., pp. 27-44). Bruxelles: De Boeck Université. Cuenat, M. E., Klee, P., Roderer, T., Zappatore, D., Vosicki, B. F., Stoks, G., . . . Lenz, P. (2014). Exigences quant aux compétences langagières spécifiques des personnes enseignantes en langues étrangères au degré primaire. Dolz, J., Pasquier, A., & Bronckart, J.-P. (1993). "L'acquisition des discours: Émergence d'une compétence ou apprentissage de capacités langagières diverses?". Etudes de Linguistique Appliquée, 23-37. Hymes, D. H. (1972). On Communicative Competence. In P. J. B & J.Holmes (Eds.), Sociolinguistics (pp. 269-293). Harmondsworth: Penguin. Kubaniyiova, M. (2009). Possible selves in Language Teacher Development. In Z. Dörnyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, Language, Identity and the L2 Self (pp. 314-332). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Newby, D., Allan, R., Fenner, A.-B., Barry, J., Hanna, K., & Soghikyan, K. (2007). European Portfolio for Student Teachers of Languages : A reflection tool for language teacher education. Graz: Council of Europe. Muller, T., Adamson, J., Brown, P. S., & Herder, S. (2014). Exploring EFL Fluency in Asia: Palgrave Macmillan.