Education of the republic of uzbekistan termiz state university the faculty of foreign philology

CONCLUSION
Finally, some conclusions and considerations are discussed here. These can be summarized as follows. I strongly believe that CBI can be both challenging and rewarding. If students, the administration, and professors are positively involved in the process, this approach could be successful. Personally, I would join CBI with other CLT approach like task-based teaching (in order to provide more meaning) as part of the curriculum in order to help learners to acquire the target language.
Then CBI has become a popular approach in ESL and EFL classrooms basically because learners’ motivation seems to increase when students learn about something that interests them, rather than just studying the language (Peachy, n.d.). Language classrooms need to go a step beyond simple grammatical competence in order to promote a real acquisition of the language so students can really function in the target language with all its cultural, linguistic, and social elements. Canale and Swain describe four basic components of communicative competence: 1. Grammatical, 2. Discourse, 3. Sociolinguistic, and 4. Strategic competencies. Traditional methods and approaches focus on the first two components, which is the knowledge of structure and linking of sentences. CBI becomes a useful approach when developing communicative competence in learners, basically because it focuses on using the language on specific culturally determined situations and paraphrasing as well. It also works on the development of the language skills within a real context and meaningful purpose.
Then Stryker and Leaver point out that CBI is part of what is considered a new paradigm in the learning-teaching process. It is precisely this idea of having students develop communicative competence that allows them to participate in the target culture. Brown provides four significant characteristics (shared by some communicative approaches) that serve as a foundation for this new paradigm: 1. All the previous components are taken into account when establishing the goals. 2. Language techniques in the classroom are used to promote language with meaningful purposes. 3. Fluency and accuracy are complementary elements. 4. Language is used in unrehearsed situations, just like in the real world.
Next, one can certainly say that language teachers are to include more content into their lessons in order to achieve the learning goals. Some grammatical structures, strategic, and socio-linguistic components are easier to teach through the use of specific content. Basically, content provides meaning to everything. Moreover, the learners’ needs must be taken into account when selecting the material to be studied in class, so the professor can successfully promote the learning proposal.
Next, Peachy (n.d.) provides some thought-provoking considerations of CBI. This approach can make the learning of the target language a more motivating and interesting process because learners use the language with a real-life purpose. This can make learners more confident and autonomous. Another advantage is the fact that CBI is quite popular among English for Academic Purposes (EAP) teachers since it helps students to develop and to acquire learning strategies like note taking, summarizing, listening for the gist, and others. Finally, the acquisition of a much wider knowledge of the world through CBI helps learners to develop valuable thinking skills that may be transferred to different subjects in their general education needs. Additionally, a significant advantage of this approach is the following: CBI enhances motivation, self-confidence, foreign language proficiency, and cultural literacy. Finally, Stryker and Leaver point out that:
When all the pros and cons are considered, content-based instruction offers a challenging but highly rewarding alternative to traditional foreign language approaches. We and all our contributors agree with Corin that, in the long run, CBI is worth the pay off. We see that the payoff coming when our students leave our classrooms empowered to become autonomous learners, or in other words, when our nestlings can fly from the nest and soar off across the horizon on their own wings.
It is a fact that CBI constitutes one of the most relevant and significant approaches of language teaching, basically because it offers important opportunities to match the learners’ needs with meaningful content in order to promote language acquisition.
REFERENCES

1. 
   O‘zbekiston Respublikasi Prezidentining 2017 yil 7 fevraldagi "O‘zbekiston Respublikasini yanada rivojlantirish bo‘yicha harakatlar strategiyasi to‘g‘risida”gi PF-4947-sonli Farmoni
   
2. 
   Mirziyoev Sh.M. Tanqidiy tahlil, qat'iy tartib-intizom va shaxsiy javobgarlik – har bir rahbar faoliyatining kundalik qoidasi bo‘lishi kerak. -T.: “O‘zbekiston” 2017.
   
3. 
   Jalolov J., Mahkamova G., Mamadayupova V., Ismatova L.Ingliz tili o'rgatish texnologiyasi: 0 ‘quv metodik qoMlanma. -Toshkent: TDPU. 2020.-96 b.
   
4. 
   Ahmedova, L. T., Normuratova, V. I., 2021. Teaching English Practicum.
   
5. 
   Jalolov, J.J, G.T., Ashurov Sh. S., 2015. English Language Teaching Methodology.
   
6. 
   Jalolov J. “Chet tili o’qitish metodikasi” Toshkent.1996 yil. Yo’ldoshev J. T. “Yangi pedagogik texnologiyalar yo’nalishidagi muammoni yechimlari.Toshkent.1999 yil.
   8.Матмуротова, З. Chet tillarni o`rgatish samaradorligini oshirish usullari / З — 2017. — № 24.2 (158.2). — С. 37-38.
   
7. 
   Ishmuhamedov R. «Innovatsion texnologiyalar yordamida ta’lim samaradorligini oshirish yo’llari. Toshkent “Nizomiy nashriyoti”. TDPU 2005 yil.
   
8. 
   Coxhead, A. & Nation, P. (2001). The specialised vocabulary of English for academic purposes. (252-267). In J. Flowerdew & M. Peacock, Research perspectives in English for academic purposes. (315-329). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
   
9. 
   Coxhead, A. (2000) A new Academic Word List. TESOL Quarterly, 34 (2): 213-238.
   
10. 
    Enhancing Possible Sentences through cooperative learning. Sharon J. Jensen and Frederick A. Duffelmeyer. Open to Suggestion. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy (39: 8, May 1996), pp.658-659.
    
11. 
    Haynes, M. (1983). Patterns and perils of guessing in second language reading. In T. Huckin, M. Haynes, & M. Coady, Second language reading and vocabulary learning. (24-45). Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
    
12. 
    Horst M., Cobb, T. & Meara, P. (1998). Beyond A Clockwork Orange: Acquiring second language vocabulary through reading. [Electronic version] Reading in a Foreign Language, 11 (2).
    
13. 
    Hulstijn, J. and B. Laufer. (2002a). Incidental vocabulary acquisition in a second language: The construct of task-induced involvement. Applied Linguistics 22 (1), 1-26.
    
14. 
    Hulstijn, J. and B. Laufer. (2002b). Some empirical evidence for the Involvement Load Hypothesis in vocabulary acquisition. Language Learning 51, 539-558.
    
15. 
    Jiang, N. (2004). Semantic transfer and its implications for vocabulary teaching in a second language. Modern Language Journal, 88, 416-432.