This could be one Answer...

Communicative Language Teaching would be one of the answers to the current perceived concern about the poor communicative language competency among the Bhutanese children. Though the approach is in place with emphasis enforced by the New English curriculum, I am afraid if we ourselves have ever deviated from the traditional audio-lingual and grammar translation approach. NAPE did bring a bit of shift from total grammar translation but, as I reflect on my primary education in one of the NAPE piloting schools, learner-centred teaching wasn't adequately practised. And, it is skeptical whether it is practised by all the teachers even today. 

Confusion also lies in purpose of English language teaching in our schools. Often our teachers are too much into delivering the text in the textbooks and measure their teaching by how much the students understand the content of the text, not by the skills the students acquired in usage of language. Grammar testing and content base exam is one reason our teachers adhere to delivering the content more than skill. While teaching grammar and forms of the literary works could be important, to develop communicative language skill in children should be the main purpose of English language teaching. I too harbour a belief that, language is acquired at greater pace at younger age, so if primary English teaching can be emphasized fully on developing communicative competence, students would better learn the literature and literary works in higher classes. Today, as our students get into class IV they start learning literature in all the genres. though it provides materials for the students to get expose to English language, the emphasis put on learning forms and character of this works deviates students' from learning language. Rather they concentrate on learning the features and forms more than enjoy reading and picking up language.

 Language teaching through literature is a good idea Bhutan has adopted but the way we use the texts must be for teaching language rather than putting all importance on forms and feature from the very early age, after all what they learn in class four remains as just some words and does not turn into concept usable. I taught both in primary school and in high school, when teaching high school what I have realized is that, what has been taught about the literary forms and features in lower classes are hardly remembered by the students. Even when they remember they actually do not know what they are all about. So, teaching the content of the text with proper emphasis on forms and features would do good if we start from the secondary level and devote in developing communicative competence at the primary level. This could be one but very effective way to do a bit of good to the existing deriding murmur against the quality of communicative language proficiency of our children. There could be many more what could be done from parents 'and societies' end...