You are on page 1of 29

Chapter 2: Literature review

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 TEXTBOOK COUR!E BOOK A"# $ATERIAL!

2.1.1 #e%i&iti'&( The subject of this study is the textbook Oxford English for Electronics (OEE) by Eric H.Glendinning & John McEwan, therefore, it would be sensible to co ence the literature with the clarification of three related ter inologies! "textbook,# "course book# and " aterials.# "Textbook# is generally defined by Microsoft Encarta $%&&'( as a book that treats a subject co )rehensi*ely and is used by students as a basis for study. This ter , also called text, is the ost )re*alent ter to refer to a book ex)loited in teaching+learning situations. ,n any circu stances, the ex)ectation is that teaching will be based on a single textbook, although other aterials ay be used at the teacher#s discretion. The ter "course book# is used to refer to a textbook on which a course is based. ,n E-T, it is defined ore s)ecifically by To linson $.//0( as!
a textbook which )ro*ides the core aterials for a course. ,t ai s to )ro*ide as uch as )ossible in one book and is designed so that it could ser*e as the only book which the learners necessarily use during a course. 1uch a book usually includes work on gra ar, *ocabulary, )ronunciation, functions and the skills of reading, writing, listening and s)eaking. $To linson, .//0! ix(

The ter "course book# is so eti es associated with text materials as it has been s)ecifically selected and ex)loited for teaching )ur)oses by the classroo teacher )articularly in the local setting. 2re3uently, a course book is considered core aterials of a certain course. ,t ay be acco )anied with a *ariety of su))le entary aterials. ,n the broad sense of the conce)t, " aterials# as defined by To linson $.//0( is 4anything which is used to hel) to teach language learners.5 ,t can be in the for of a textbook, a workbook, a cassette, a 67+8o , a *ideo, a )hotoco)ied handout, a news)a)er, a )aragra)h written on a white board! anything that )resents or infor s about the language being learned. Materials of these kinds can ob*iously be ex)loited effecti*ely for language learning. Howe*er, in the local setting, textbooks see to be the ost widely used aterials in language teaching. Therefore, within this aster thesis the ter s "textbook,# "text,# "course book,# and " aterials# are used interchangeably. -ater, in the suggestions for new aterials design, the ter " aterials# is used to refer to the teacher+written aterials to re)lace OEE in the fifth se ester.
$A. The(i(
5

Chapter 2: Literature review

2.1.2 The r')e( '% te*t+'',( i& a )a&-ua-e pr'-ra. English language instruction has any i )ortant co )onents but the essential constituents to any E1-9E2- classroo s and )rogra s are the textbooks and instruction aterials that are often used by language instructors. :s Hutchinson and Torres $.//;! <.'( suggest, 4=>o teaching+learning situation, it see s, is co )lete until it has its rele*ant textbook.5 ?ther theorists such as 1heldon $./00! %<@( agree with this obser*ation and suggest that textbooks 4re)resent the *isible heart of any E-T )rogra .5 Many authors belie*e textbooks are a starting )oint fro which teachers are sti ulated and )ro*oked to create lessons for their classes. :llwright $.//&( *iews texts as 4resource books for ideas and acti*ities rather than as instructional aterial5 $fro Aitao website .///(. This )ers)ecti*e is su))orted by 6unningsworth $B'! ./0;( as he belie*es that )ublished aterials )ro*ide the initial fra ework, which ust be ada)ted by each indi*idual teacher to atch the needs of their students. -ater on $.//'( he argues that they are an effecti*e resource for self+ directed learning, an effecti*e resource for )resentation aterial, a source of ideas and acti*ities, a reference source for students, a syllabus where they reflect )re+ deter ined learning objecti*es, and su))ort for less ex)erienced teachers who ha*e yet to gain in confidence. 2inally, Hutchinson and Torres $.//;( ha*e )ointed out that textbooks ay )lay a )i*otal role in inno*ation. They suggest that textbooks can su))ort teachers through )otentially disturbing and threatening change )rocesses, de onstrate new and9or untried ethodologies, introduce change gradually, and create scaffolding u)on which teachers can build a ore creati*e ethodology of their own. Chile any of the afore entioned theorists are 3uick to )oint out the extensi*e benefits of using E1-9E2- textbooks, any other researchers, and )ractitioners do not necessarily acce)t this *iew and retain so e well+founded reser*ations on the subject. :llwright $./0%(, for instance, has written a scathing co entary on the use of textbooks in the E-T classroo . He suggests that textbooks are too inflexible and generally reflect the )edagogic, )sychological, and linguistic )references and biases of their authors. 7es)ite that fact, textbooks are widely considered a key co )onent in ost language )rogra s in Dietna ese uni*ersities. ,n the 6?-TE6H, D>EH, E2- textbooks ser*e as the basis for uch of the language in)ut learners recei*e and the language )ractice that takes )lace in the classroo . 2or ost teachers, these instructional aterials )ro*ide the foundation for the content of lessons, the balance of the skills
$A. The(i(
6

:s 6unningsworth $. his definition is well aligned with the learner+centered a))roach.)ublishing arket. besides studying the objecti*es stated by the author$s( of the book. To linson i )licitly )oints out that the *alue of a aterial should be deter ined by considering whether the learning )oints are )otentially useful to the learners. He considers syste aticity an ut ost i )ortant characteristic of this )rocedure in defining aterials e*aluation as! the syste atic a))raisal of the *alue of aterials in relation to their objecti*es and to the objecti*es of the learners using the .//0! xi( Dia this definition. $To linson ! . or condition.ea&t +/ . it would be reasonable to de*ote the literature ainly on clarifying the key ter that will be fre3uently encountered in this thesis. :s being defined in Microsoft Encarta 8eference -ibrary %&&'.2. i )ortance. the ter evaluation ste ing fro the *erb 4to evaluate5 which eans 4an assess ent of *alue! the act of considering or exa ining so ething in order to judge its *alue.Chapter 2: Literature review taught.1 What i( . $A. as well as the kinds of language )ractice the students engage in during class acti*ities. ?b*iously. its nature re ains unchanged. due to the growth of the E1. 4course aterials for English should be seen as the teacher#s ser*ant and not his aster5 which leads to the issue of how texts are or should be used in a classroo .ateria)( eva)uati'&0 This thesis concerns ainly with the )rocess of e*aluationG therefore. 8ather than chastising instructors for using texts.5 Heing e )loyed as a )edagogical ter . extent. ex)erts need to be offering the ad*ice on how to best select course books. The(i( 7 . : ong *arious definitions of aterials e*aluation.!.//0( see s to be the ost widely acce)ted. 3uality. whether the learning )rocedures can axi iIe the likelihood of the learners actually learning what they want and need to learn. the e*aluator is ad*ised to consider the learners# o)inions.'( asserts./0.2 $ATERIAL! EVALUATIO" 2. teachers need to be increasingly knowledgeable and so)histicated in sorting through the asses of books a*ailable. Fet. 2. it has been inter)reted in any different ways by researchersG howe*er. that offered by To linson $. Therefore.

& Caters. the e*aluation of the textbook OEE is to be conducted with an atte )t to realiIe its features discussed abo*e! + syste aticity + context+relatedness + taking into account students# o)inions + judging the fitness of the book against the learning goals The following )arts enclosing a))roaches.Chapter 2: Literature review . They also ake it clear that whether the book is )raiseworthy de)ends largely on its suitability to the local setting. The essence of this definition is its attention to the students# needs in e*aluating aterials and therefore is ado)ted in this thesis. in*ol*es the making of judgments=./0@!/B(. :t its ost basic le*el. Hutchinson& Caters regard what distinguishes e*aluation fro analysis is that 4e*aluation is.///( suggest that it should be distinguished fro the related ter .n -ittlejohn#s *iew)oint. %&&%!%%( . to )ut a *alue on it. a close analysis of aterials the sel*es should be seen as a )reli inary ste) to aterials e*aluation./0@!.. E*aluation. $6ited in McGrath.5 .n conclusion. . : .n an e )irical )oint of *iew. ty)es and the roles of aterials e*aluation will be )ursued in the light of these characteristics. . concerned with relati*e erit5 $Hutchinson. whereas e*aluation is ore concerned to disco*er whether what one is looking for is there J and if it is. T. $A. as 4there is no absolute good or bad J only degrees of fitness for the re3uired )ur)oses. *erifiable description. as the word suggests..5 They share with To linson that 4the e*aluation )rocess should be syste atic5 and add that it 4is best seen as a atching exercise! atching your analyIed needs to a*ailable solutions5 $. T.//0( and To linson $. analysis seeks to disco*er what is there $-ittlejohn . analysis.n the sa e *ein. . . analysis is a )rocess that leads to an objecti*e. %&&%!%%(. $. Hutchinson.&'(.n order to ha*e a dee)er understanding of the e*aluation )rocedure. The(i( 8 . Thus.//0(.n the si )lest for . -ittlejohn $. :. KthenL.t can be conse3uently inferred that e*aluation differentiates itself fro analysis in the sense of context+relatedness. & Caters. 4when co )aring a descri)tion of a textbook with a descri)tion of a context in order to establish whether that textbook ight be suitable for that context we are e*aluating5 $cited in McGrath./0@!/B( see e*aluation )lainly as 4a atter of judging the fitness of so ething for a )articular )ur)ose.

it )roceeds by eans of intensi*e studies of indi*iduals and )articular cases(.e..E.2. it e )loys 3uantitati*e data to ake statistical generaliIations with a *iew to establishing general "laws#(.2. H.ateria)( eva)uati'& Materials e*aluation or ore s)ecifically textbook e*aluation has been studied fro different research )ers)ecti*es.. McGrath. the achie*e ent of which can be deter ined by tests that easure learner beha*ior and learning outco es.Chapter 2: Literature review 2.//0(. res)onsi*e e*aluation belongs ore to the sociological tradition of educational research and is idiogra)hic in a))roach $i. teaching and learning )rocesses at issue..5 which narrows down the eaning of the ter . .'3e) :s being ex)lained by Ellis. $%&&%( synchroniIes 4a syste atic a))roach5 with 4a cyclical a))roach5 with three stages eanwhile :nsary..2. & Habaii.2 Appr'a1he( t' . who states that the literature on educational e*aluation identifies two broad a))roaches! the "objecti*es odel# and the "res)onsi*e e*aluation# based on 3uantitati*e and 3ualitati*e stand)oints res)ecti*ely. 8.2 Re(p'&(ive eva)uati'& . this ty)e of e*aluation tends to base its judg ents of textbook *alue on the res)onses of a *ast a ount of stakeholders of the learning )rocess including the teachers.e.Textbooks! : 1te) Towards 1yste atic Textbook E*aluation5 include a heading 4 checklist approach to textbook e*aluation.1 O+2e1tive( . To )ut it in a si )le way. This a))roach re3uires that curricula be ex)ressed in ter s of )recise objecti*es. .n brief. . Therefore. this a))roach see s to be ina))licable. the $A.2.. : )o)ular classification is that of Ellis. 2. 2.n contrast to the abo*e+ entioned a))roach. the latter a))roach is to be taken into consideration. : close study of the literature shows that there is no consensus a ong researchers# uses of the ter "a))roach# in aterials e*aluation.2.$%&&%( in their article 4Eni*ersal 6haracteristics of E2-9E1. The "res)onsi*e e*aluation# a))roach ai s to illu inate the co )lex nature of the organiIational.n the case of the study where the learning objecti*es of the course were not well established. The(i( 9 . this odel belongs to the )sychological tradition of educational research and is no othetic in a))roach $i. the objecti*es odel a))roach is concerned with deter ining whether the )rogra 9)roject has achie*ed its goals through 3uantitati*e ethods. $. 8.

1uffice it to say that this a))roach has a close relationshi) with 3ualitati*e research ethod. -earners $6ited in To linson.2. Howe*er. in turn can be broken down into a consideration of! 6urriculu a.ateria)( eva)uati'& 8esearchers offer different ways of categoriIing e*aluation in general and aterial e*aluation in )articular.4 T/pe( '% .0( eeting its goalsM :s the word suggests. acro+e*aluation. %. can be seen as an u brella ter e*aluations. therefore. .//0( in the article 4The e*aluation of co unicati*e tasks5 distinguishes between acro+e*aluation and icro+e*aluation as follows! Marco+e*aluation can be defined as e*aluation that seeks to answer one or both of the following 3uestions! . Teachers c.deally.//0( )resents an ex)ansi*e scenario of the for er whereas McGrath $%&&%( di*ides the latter into three stages in a circular )ath. . .//0! %.4. is an e*aluation carried out for accountability and9or de*elo) ental )ur)oses by collecting infor ation relating to *arious ad inistrati*e and curricular as)ects of the )rogra .0( .n what way can the )rogra 9)roject be i )ro*edM $6ited in To linson.Chapter 2: Literature review learners. H. due to the ti e and ex)erience constraints. we decide to follow the res)onsi*e e*aluation a))roach only. :d inistrati*e atters $i.. .1 $ar1'5 ver(u( .. 2. which.//0! %.t. He clai s that the i )le entation of a acro+e*aluation of a )rogra 9 )roject in*ol*es collecting *arious kinds of infor ation relating to one or both of the following! .i1r'5eva)uati'& Ellis $. To what extent was the )rogra 9)roject effecti*e and efficient in %. Materials b. The classification reco ended by Ellis $.. and the ad inistrators. the logistical and financial under)innings of the )rogra ( atters. The(i( that encloses series of icro+ 10 . $A. 2.2.e. e*aluators are recogniIing the need for broad+based a))roach to e*aluation that incor)orates both the objecti*es odel and the res)onsi*e e*aluation. These two ways of categoriIation co )le ent each other to for a co )lete *iew of aterials e*aluation. : 3uestion to be raised here is where the )osition of aterial is in a large )icture of a whole )rogra 9 )roject e*aluation. then.

McGrath. etc. and )ost+use e*aluation.4.. $A.//0(./(. and task e*aluation in a larger scene.i&i(trative . etc. in+use. evaluation of levels of participation. 2. $%&&%( argues for a cyclical a))roach to aterials e*aluation that enco )asses three stages! )re+use. are exa )les of icro+e*aluation. according to Ellis $. aterials e*aluation co )oses an as)ect of acro+ e*aluation of the whole )rogra 9)roject. etc.6pr'2e1t eva)uati'& A3. 2..2 Pre5u(e i&5u(e p'(t5u(e eva)uati'& 2ro another *iew)oint.2.1: Marco. etc. it constitutes an integral )art of curricular atters. .and micro-evaluation in language teaching (cited in Tomlinson. Fig. 4is characteriIed by a narrow focus on so e s)ecific as)ect of the curriculu or the ad inistration of the )rogra 5 $cited in To linson. . 1998: 219) :s illustrated in the diagra . task evaluation. evaluation of questioning practices. This figure also shows the relationshi) of aterials e*aluation with other areas of e*aluation such as )rogra e*aluation. The next )art will a))roach aterial e*aluation fro a closer angle. e*aluation of le*els of students# )artici)ation etc. Together with teacher and learner e*aluation. Task e*aluation.Chapter 2: Literature review Micro+e*aluation.atter( $a1r'5 eva)uati'& $ateria)( eva)uati'& Curri1u)ar .atter( Teacher evaluation Learner evaluation $i1r'5 eva)uati' & timeta le evaluatio n. This *iew of e*aluation is reflected diagra atically in the figure below! Pr'-ra.//0! %. The(i( 11 . learner e*aluation.

( sees syste atic )ost+use as a stage in which the )re+ use selection criteria that are )roduced )rior to the course can be *alidated. and records of the course book ada)tation or su))le entary aterials. The $A. 4The use of the textbook is onitored to )er it e*aluation of its use and effecti*eness.e&tati'& a&3 re(p'&(e7 ..! '+B( de and.//0( who clai that the ost co on for is )robably the ")redicti*e# or ")re+use# e*aluation designed to exa ine the future or )otential )erfor ance of a textbook.u)ate pre)i.( )oints out in reference to the )re+use e*aluation of aterials. Chile we can exercise )rofessional judg ent in answering 3uestions such as. )ractice. This stage is carried out when decisions concerning the selection of a))ro)riate textbook need to be ade. and recycling of new linguistic ite s see to be shallow9stee) enough for your studentsM5.//. !. McGrath $%&&%!.p)e.5 To be ore s)ecific.a/ (ti. The final stage in the circle is "retros)ecti*e# or ")ost+use# $reflecti*e( e*aluation of a textbook that has been used in any res)ecti*e institution. Masuhara $. This second stage can be conducted )eriodically in co bination with careful obser*ation in order to satisfy :llwright#s $. as >unan $. classroo obser*ation data. 2""2:18") '% (e)e1ti'& 1riteria This argu ent is su))orted by 6unningsworth $. This stage enables a ore co )rehensi*e way to assess the effect of using aterials. :lthough so e teachers ight think that )ost+e*aluation is a "daunting# task for which not only ti e ex)ertise is needed. 2.5 This goal can be achie*ed with analysis of the teachers# diaries9 journals.'( acknowledges that this ty)e 4is ost reliable when it draws on the ex)eriences of se*eral teachers and se*eral grou)s of learners./0.2: Closing the circle (Mc rath. The(i( 1! .//. ulti ately. 4does the introduction.//'( and Ellis $. such 3uestions can only be settled with reference to their actual use5 The "in+use# e*aluation designed to exa ine aterial that is currently being used ay ser*e better )edagogical )ur)oses.!%.Pre5u(e eva)uati'& e(ta+)i(he( p'te&tia) (uita+i)it/ P'(t 勃 (e eva)uati'& u(e( 3ata '& i&1'ur(e u(e a&3 3ata '& e%%e1t( t' a((e(( (uita+i)it/ '% (e)e1ti'& a&3 (e)e1ti'& pr'1e3ure( Chapter 2: Literature review I&5u(e eva)uati'& -ather 3ata '& p)a&&i&3e1i(i'&( i.. which would be a co )licated )rocess.i&ar/ re1'&(i3erati'&( Fig. Howe*er.

students# self+studies. Fig.i1 path 1. Ex)loration of need 3. )''p( of need for aterials 2. . . 6ontextual realiIation of aterials 4. Nedagogical realiIation of aterials 5. there a))ear two o)tions. etc. 2.8 The r')e( '% eva)uati'& i& . 2.valuation materials ()oll* and +olitho 1998:98) E*aluation is not at all new in the context of education. this )hase ay ser*e as future reference for ho egrown Chen it co es to the 3uestion of co bining the a))roaches with the after+use e*aluation. teaching ethodologies.ectives $A. This issue has been a to)ic of great interest a ong foreign researchers. The ain )ur)ose of this e*aluation is to *alidate the erit of OEE based on its users# o)inions. it see s unreliable to judge the effecti*eness of a certain textbook by 3uantitati*ely co )aring the results in )re+tests and )ost+tests or t+tests between different grou)s since so any *ariables are in*ol*ed such as learning styles. howe*er. .#: $ teacher%s &ath through the &roduction o' ne( or ada&ted materialso' .ateria)( 3eve)'p. Howe*er.n Dietna ese context. Hardly any language )rogra can be co )leted without an e*aluati*e ste). it )art in al ost e*ery educational )rogra . Therefore. Nroduction of aterials 1tudent use of aterials 6.dentification 5 5 5 5 5 5 Opti'&a) (tep( a&3 %ee3+a1.2. The(i( 1" .Chapter 2: Literature review feedback collected fro aterial writers. only recently has against isagreed an integral o-. the kind of e*aluation being de)loyed in this thesis is 4)ost+use e*aluation5 in align ent with 3ualitati*e a))roach.n contrast.e&t 9999999 #/&a.

based on learning objecti*es. These two researchers also state that 4trialing and e*aluation are *ital to the success of any aterials5 adding that 4e*aluation. 2. :s being illustrated in the abo*e figure. 2or con*enience. can cut down on wasted ti e and effort and result in clear )in)ointing of ste)s which re3uire attention in the subse3uent )rocess of re*ision. This thesis. E*aluation is regarded by Jolly and Holitho $.pre((i'&i(ti1 . Howe*er.//0( as an essential co )onent of aterials writing )rocess. three basic ethods can be discerned in the literature on textbook e*aluation.t is e*aluation that akes the )rocess )otentially cyclical. to)ics. $ETHO#! O: TEXTBOOK EVALUATIO" .e.5 This kind of o*er*iew is undoubtedly inade3uate if it constitutes the sole basis for textbook e*aluation and selection. Hence.1 The i. in what ways should a textbook be e*aluatedM 2.//'!. Hased on his or her e*aluation or learner feedback. therefore. $A.( ter 4i )ressionistic o*er*iew5 suggests. i )ressionistic analysis is concerned to obtain a general i )ression of the aterial.ts significance still holds true within the sco)e of aterials e*aluation. this ethod )robably )ro*ides the re*iewer with the *ery first i )ression as well as the objecti*es of the author$s( in designing the book.4. 2or that reason.n general. by both learners and teachers. and at the content )age $for an indication of the syllabus ty)e and co*erage(. and *isuals. the teacher considers any one of the )re*ious ste)s and akes adjust ents to the aterials as they are being used or after the e*ent. this ethod is so eti es called 4first+glance e*aluation. the brief descri)tion of the book on the back co*er(. e )loys it to attain a general i )ression in co bination with the i )le entation of a ore exhausti*e ethod.4. the trigger ste) in the downward se3uence that is res)onsible for kee)ing the whole syste in otion is the e*aluation of aterials against agreed objecti*es. . and the in+de)th ethod. . the checklist. McGrath $%&&%!%'( refers the to the i )ressionistic. such an o*er*iew ty)ically in*ol*es glancing at the )ublisher#s blurb $i. layout.5 The e*aluation also )ro*ides teacher + aterial writers with a )le lessons in order to diagnose the weakness and sustain the strength in their self+ ade aterials.Chapter 2: Literature review e*aluation confir ed its *ital role in guaranteeing educational 3uality. :s 6unningsworth#s $.eth'3 :s indicated in its na e. and then ski ing through the book looking at organiIation. The(i( 1# .

/@0! %./@/(G 7aoud & 6elce+Murcia $. ensuring that all ele ents that are dee ed to be i )ortant are considered.//B(G Arashen $.4. The(i( 15 . identification.Chapter 2: Literature review 2.t can be su ariIed that the syste aticity referred to abo*e is only a strength if the criteria or categories of which a checklist is co )osed $. or *erification5 $6ollins English 7ictionary . offers a co on fra ework for decision+ aking. and in+de)th e*aluation based on close analysis of features or sections. $McGrath.eth'3 The li itations of the i )ressionistic ethod lead to the e ergence of an alternati*e tool of assess ent in which a checklist beco es the )oint of de)arture.//%(. i )ressionistic e*aluation in*ol*ing di))ing into a book. . <. it consists of a list of ite s that is 4referred to for co )arison. )sychological./( ./0<(G Hutchinson and Caters $. citing Tucker . This ethod.//'(G Er $. )ro*ided the categories are well understood by all in*ol*ed in the e*aluation.t is explicit.( are based on a sound )edagogical groundG $%( enco )ass all features of the textbookG $<( differentiate between features and $.. Chich factors ake this ethod )re*ail o*er the othersM 6o )ared to the ost ob*ious alternati*es.t is cost effective.//@(G Garinger $%&&. and )edagogical )rinci)les underlying odern ethods of language learning. $A.&. . These criteria should be exhausti*e enough to insure assess ent of all characteristics of the textbook. )er itting a good deal of infor ation to be recorded in a relati*ely short s)ace of ti e. %&&%!%@( The syste aticity of the checklist ethod ranks the first a ong all the ad*antages.//. the use of checklists for s)ecific e*aluation )ur)oses has at least four ad*antages! .t is systematic.n its ost literal sense.2 The 1he1.t is well brought out by 1kierso $./@'(G 6andlin & Hreen $. .)i(t ..!./@/(G Cillia s $. is ad*ocated by nu erous researchers of the field such as Tucker $./00(G 1kierso $.. . :nd they should be discrete enough to focus attention on one characteristic at a ti e or on a single grou) of related characteristics $Tucker .//. The infor ation is recorded in a convenient for at./@0(! : textbook e*aluation checklist should consist of a co )rehensi*e set of criteria based on the basic linguistic. .//B(G -ittlejohn $. allowing for easy co )arison between co )eting sets of aterial. which akes good use of a checklist to e*aluate aterials. .(G Arug $%&&%(G :nsary $%&&%(G to na e but a few.( are rele*ant to the s)ecific context in which it is to be used. %./0@(G 1heldon $.(G 6unningsworth $. and.

there ay be ore econo ical ways of arri*ing at this decision. as ex)lained by McGrath $%&&%! %@+%0(. underlying assu )tions about learning or *alues on which the on. 1)ecific )rocedures reco ended include a focus on s)ecific features $6unningsworth. they ay also ha*e certain disad*antages! .4. of language descri)tion( that is not a*ailable. this ethod seeks to find out whether the aterials are likely to li*e u) to the clai s being ade for the . The categories in all aterials e*aluation instru ent or obser*ation schedule are a uch reflection of the ti e at which they were concei*ed and of the belief of their designers as are )ublished aterials the sel*es. 2ro the abo*e discussion about the $A. . Partiality! because in+de)th analysis is nor ally narrowly focused $being based either on a )articular section of the aterial or one or ore threads running through it(.g. the kind of language descri)tion. a close analysis of one or ore extracts $Hutchinson.//'(. This section has argued that as used in isolation each of these ethods has its li itations as well as its s)ecific uses.Chapter 2: Literature review The last )oint was not entioned by 1kierso $.t gi*es only a )artial insight into what the aterial offers./0B(. Representativeness of samples! the sa )les $e.. <. 2. . Cillia s $. for instance.//./0@(.5 aterials are based . or a thorough exa ination of se*eral units using )redeter ined 3uestions $Johnson. 4go beneath the )ublisher#s and author#s clai s to look at. %./0<( has noted a checklist cannot be a static )heno enon.( but ust be included because it reflects the )re*ailing learner+centered a))roach in second language teaching.n a broader sense. and this ay therefore distort any judg ent.n+de)th techni3ues. Though it can be argued that the ti e s)ent on e*aluation is well s)ent if a )otentially unsuitable textbook is rejected. .4 The i&53epth .g. exercises. Thus. The(i( 16 . McGrath argues that while such techni3ues ha*e the *irtue of ensuring that the selection )rocess is a ore considered affair. an 4off+the+shelf5 checklist is likely to need tailoring to suit a )articular context. lessons.eth'3 . units( selected for analysis ay not be re)resentati*e of the book as a whole. ime and expertise re!uired! so e )ro)osals for in+de)th e*aluation would in*ol*e a good deal of ti eG others re3uire ex)ert knowledge $e. e*idenced by a wide range of checklists o*er the years. .

J. is chosen as the ajor ethod to gauge the textbook OEE. it is clear that the checklist ethod triu )hs o*er the others. an E2-9 E1. The following )art will be de*oted to selecting criteria to be )ut in the checklist and ethods of rating and weighting the . Their tools of e*aluation are concise reflections of their *iews on the nature of language & language ac3uisition. The(i( 17 . The following will discuss the for ation of an e*aluation checklist with the focus on the what $fro $to assess( with the ai general categories to detailed criteria( and the how to the s)ecific context of an E1N of adjusting the course in the 6ollege of Technology.textbook e*aluation checklists has anaged to draw the so+called co on+core )ro inent characteristics of a standard E2-9E1.textbook re*iews )lus ten E2-9E1./@'(G 6andlin & Hreen $.textbook.//. $%&&'( has also released a co )osite s)ecification constructed fro ele ents of twenty+two )re*iously )ublished checklists. research shows that in addition to teaching the content. :nsary $%&&%( after conducting a scrutiniIed cor)us of ten E2-9E1.//'(G Er $. :nsary $%&&%( ad*ocates such facets as 4)ractical considerations5 or $A.//B(G -ittlejohn $. 2.(G 6unningsworth $./@/(G Cillia s $. >otably. Most recently. 2or exa )le.1 What (h'u)3 +e i&1)u3e3 i& the 1riteria 1he1./0@(G 1heldon $. the works )ro)osed by those researchers hel) lay a reliable foundation for this study. Therefore. and a))roaches to language teaching.(G Arug.)i(t0 Nrior studies on checklist e*aluation ha*e been carried out broadly with *arious focuses./0<(G Hutchinson and Caters $. 2.8. and therefore.teacher should cater for sufficient co unication skills and challenge learners to think critically about what strategies they should use in their learning.//B(G Garinger $%&&. : ethod $Tucker $. These works contain the results of recent research in second language instruction.Chapter 2: Literature review )ros and cons of all three )re*alent ethods./@/(G 7aoud & 6elce+Murcia $. Miekley.8 CRITERIA :OR TEXTBOOK EVALUATIO" Darious scholars ha*e suggested different ways to hel) teachers beco e syste atic and objecti*e in their significant body of literature exists on this ore ethod of e*aluation by using a checklist./00(G 1kierso $. $%&&%(G :nsary $%&&%(G Miekley $%&&'((.

and )edagogical )rinci)les5 $. Er $. $%( a))ro)riate se3uencing referring to the organiIation of )resentation. skill. : 3uestion to be raised here is what if the )ur)ose is not "good gra ar# and "good *ocabulary# )ractice.textbook e*aluation. si )le sentence )atterns should co e first. Ender gra ar category. which has led to the )roduction of extensi*e e*aluation checklists./@'! <''( consisting of four ain grou)s of criteria! )ronunciation. introduces a syste which has a set of criteria clai ed to be 4consistent with the basic linguistic. $%( a))ro)riateness of )resentation concerning whether or not students are fro a single language background.5 4)ricing5=Howe*er. The(i( 18 .//B!. introduction of new structures ust rest on already+ astered si )ler )atterns. to)ics being interesting to different learners. that is to say.( ade3uacy of )attern in*entory dealing with how uch of the structure should be )resented and how well it is )resented.//B!. the )resentation of )ronunciation re3uires attention to $. cultural and )edagogical concerns in )resentation. Twenty+one years later. Many ex)erts ad*ocate a *ery detailed exa ination of a course book#s language content. one of the )ioneer in situational a))roach. criteria focus on $. grading and se3uencing. Therefore. and $<( ade3uacy of )ractices dealing with both the 3uality and 3uantity of )ractice. and all this affecting the ty)e of )resentation. content.0. etc. )sychological. The following will discuss the )ros and cons of a nu ber of the . good gra ar )resentation. in this study.( co )leteness of )resentation referring to the co*erage of sounds and su)raseg entals. aterials is regarded as a )edagogic de*ice.. *ocabulary )ractice. : cursory look at its contents indicates that still good )ronunciation )ractice. Tucker.(. and general criteria. and ethodology ex)ressed in the course book. that is. Ender the )ronunciation criterion.Chapter 2: Literature review 4a*ailability. are e )hasiIed as 4grounds on which one ight criticiIe or reject a textbook5 $. content. gra ar. whether or not students are kids or adults. etc. $A. as an aid to teaching and learning a foreign language.0B( offers another checklist with ore or less a si ilar focus and a))roach to E2-9E1. this will li it the focus to as)ects of the organiIation. and $<( ade3uacy of drills and of )ractice referring to judg ents about how readily students can discern a for and about how uch )ractice is re3uired to guarantee this ade3uacy.

n his checklist. which are also worthy to be taken into consideration.//. gra ar. skill.G $<( whether the to)ics hel) ex)and students# awareness and enrich their ex)erienceG $.n fact. ?b*iously. These a))roaches are the ost co on and likely straightforward. . these criteria did not sur*i*e the attack ade on the by other ethodologists. howe*er. 6riteria )resented by hi a))roach closer to current trend toward language teaching with a shift of focus fro teaching ere language content to incor)orating it with the skills to use it. with such illustrations as! $. He lists out se*enteen s)ecifications including such di*erse factors as gra)hics and )hysical characteristics to a))ro)riateness. Hoth 1kierso $. the content transferred by it.//B(. flexibility. . The learner+centered a))roach is e bedded in all the four ain grou)s of criteria! language content.( whether students are ex)ected to take a degree of res)onsibility for their own learning.( and 6hall and 6onard $. 2or exa )le. and )ronunciation are only substituents of language content. 6unningsworth looks at aterials being e*aluated fro a broader angle than Tucker $. taking learners# needs into accountG $%( whether reading )assages and associated acti*ities suitable for the students# le*els. etc. *ocabulary. These concerns highlight the increasing significance that )rofessionals )lace on the )rocess of learning and the recognition that focusing solely on outco es often does not address all the second language learner#s needs./00( checklist is *ery ex)ansi*e and atte )ts to assess all as)ects of content.//'( see s to be ore radical in touching u)on the i )ortance of relating aterials to course objecti*es and the learner#s needs and )rocesses.n addition to that of 6unningsworth.5 These authors stress the necessity of )lacing language learning within the broader context of all learning and $A. 1heldon#s $. a book that uses synthesis and analysis would rate higher than one that de ands only co )rehension.( who seek to 4look beyond the goals of language learning itself.@. other writers )ro ote e*aluating language teaching aterial beyond si )ly their contents and instead focusing on cogniti*e and affecti*e factors.( whether the course book co*ers the ain gra ar ite s a))ro)riate to each le*el.Chapter 2: Literature review . 6unningsworth $. authenticity. and the ethodology to get things done. to)ic.( utiliIe Hloo #s Taxono y of the 6ogniti*e 7o ain to assess the )rocesses and skills textbooks re3uire learners to )erfor . The rating of a text ay directly reflect the le*el of skill it de ands. interests./@'( and Er $. This a))roach is further extended by -ittlejohn and Cindeatt $./0/! . educational *alidity. and ethodology. The(i( 19 .//.

following McGrath $%&&%(. The(i( !0 . These categories include )ro*iding a sense of )ur)oseG taking account of student ideasG engaging students with rele*ant )heno enaG de*elo)ing and using scientific ideasG )ro oting students# thinking about )heno ena. Therefore.//B(.at the eva)uati'& :lthough differences exist a ong different checklists. Each indi*idual e*aluation lists ay or ay not include the issues or ele ents that reflect the concerns of the teachers choosing textbooks.Chapter 2: Literature review e )hasiIe how knowledge and cogniti*e ability should be addressed in the creation and e*aluation of aterials.8. ?ne of the key )roble s facing the designer of an e*aluation instru ent is the s)ecification of criteria. Howe*er. the e*aluation of the instructional effecti*eness of the indi*idual iddle grades science )rogra s has a))lied a set of research+based criteria de*elo)ed by Nroject %&B. the a))ro)riateness of criteria to the e*aluati*e )ur)ose )robably ranks the first. )ro*ide co )rehensi*e infor ation of the sort that will facilitate e*aluation %. Much of the discussion on aterials e*aluation is )osited on the assu )tion that the e*aluator has in ind fairly well defined end+users $learners and teachers( and context. a aterials e*aluation checklist. an awareness of these issues is significant for enhancing his or her ability to e*aluate and choose the best textbooks. and knowledgeG assessing )rogressG and enhancing the science learning en*iron ent 6ollecti*ely. : ong the ost i )ortant as)ects of that )roble . ex)erts de and a great deal fro textbooks.2 H'w t' %'r. :s a result. and co )arison $A.#s "enchmarks for #cience $iteracy $. 8ecently in : erica. 2.//<( and the >ational 8esearch 6ouncilOs %ational #cience Education #tandards $. is ex)ected to fulfill a nu ber of )otentially conflicting functions! .. ex)eriences. as re*ealed by this re*iew. although their beliefs ay not always reflect the *iew or the situation of one#s own classroo s. each of which focuses on a s)ecific as)ect of instructional su))ort. The )rocedure#s instructional criteria are based on existing research on student learning and are organiIed in se*en categories. selecting )articular ite s to create a )ersonal e*aluation index is the best ethod for ensuring that the realities of each indi*idual learning situation are addressed. discussions of e*aluation criteria tend to be context+related.

The additional infor ation generated in this way can be of *alue in looking into the book fro different angles. /ating $A.5 $McGrath. weighting and scoring.g. $McGrath.wei-hti&. etc. lead to the selection of aterials which are a))ro)riate for the context $in the fullest sense. 2..e. a res)onse to the 3uestions &ow much' &ow well'(. %&&%! .2. The way the infor ation is judged de)ends re arkably on how it is organiIed and the rating syste s allocated for it. its for at )lays a certain role in actualiIing the abo*e functions.n closed for at. . That of Ha er $. state ents or )hrases.2 Rati&. 4This checklist in which state ents are co bined with nu erical res)onses can )robably be co )leted ore 3uickly and the res)onses of different e*aluators can be co )ared ore easily.2.//. be easily understandableG easy93uick to co )lete( ./@'(.g. ite s ainly belong to any of the three ty)es! yes9no 3uestions.a&3 (1'ri&- i..//. researchers are ore in fa*or of the hybrid between the two for ats. the ite can be in for of a state ent or )hrase. Er $.8..//B(.(. Fes9 no 3uestions corres)ond to yes9no answers which ay be a))ro)riate for certain ty)es of 3uestions $e. This for at in accordance with a three+)oint rating scale of Fes9 Nartly9 >o also )er its 3uantitati*e judg ents to be ade $i. The(i( !1 . nowadays. ./0<(. Cillia s $./0@(. Exa )les of checklists in this for at include those of Ha er $. . Grant $.0( Hesides.( sets a good exa )le of o)enness in )ro*iding s)aces for co ent.1 Ite. but also contribute to the advancement of learning and teaching in that context.Chapter 2: Literature review <. those concerning the )resence or absence of a )articular feature(. which eans that closed for at also incor)orates s)ace for co ents./(. including suitability for the teachers who will use the ( '. This section will focus on two ost i )ortant factors! the for at of ite s and res)onses and the rating.//'( in which boxes are ade a*ailable for ticking to the yes answer. Howe*er. and 6unningsworth $. :d*ocates of this ty)e include Tucker $.. while aking as few de ands on the e*aluator as )ossible $e. the content of the checklist. the res)onse to which is a tick in the suitable box and then being con*erted into corres)onding score.at a&3 re(p'&(e There are two ain for ats! closed9 o)en. 2. %'r.. %&&%! . :lternati*ely.8.

/@0( uses a three+)oint assess ent scale for student#s and teacher#s book in which the )lus sign $P( indicates a good atch between aterials and learner9 teacher needsG the inus sign $+( a is atch./@'. the 3uality is desirable. and >?. 4which akes it i )ossible for the e*aluator to choose the non+co ittal central )oint. there is a strong argu ent for a four+)oint scale $rather than three or fi*e(. 1heldon .f. Chen de onstrated in a chart9gra)h. The for er )robably assu es that all criteria in the list should be seen as of e3ual i )ortance./@/. this odel )er its a checklist that has been de*elo)ed elsewhere to be fine+tuned to the re3uire ents of a )articular context. iii. 7aoud and 6elce+Murcia . This for at is so ewhat the sa e as that used by Grant $.( include a rating scale. 7aoud & 6elce+Murcia $. one )oint for e*ery N:8T-F answer and Iero for >? answer.Chapter 2: Literature review 1o e checklists $e. Cillia s . 0eighting Chen it co es to the atter of weighting. researchers di*ide the sel*es into two ain grou)s each basing the sel*es on different assu )tions. recently. there is no need for )utting in a weighting scale. and Iero $&( that the text can be ada)ted. it )ro*ides a *isual co )arison between the )artici)ants# o)inions of the book and hence facilitating a 3uick and easy dis)lay of the e*aluator#s judg ent. then )erha)s a single tick Kindicating "fairly i )ortant#L ay be enough. and 1kierso ./0@!./@/( and Cillia s $.%%+B( with three answer choices! FE1. would . N:8T-F.//B ! . ?b*iously. : rating sche e )ro*ides a easured or 3uantitati*e ethod for judging the co )arati*e weightings of a textbook#s erits.n deciding on the weighting for each ite . therefore. 1coring $A. 8ating scales ty)ically contain three to fi*e )oints.0'( has this suggestion to ake about deciding weightings! . . but its absence would not necessarily sto) you using the book if all the other criteria were fulfilled./00./@/./0<./0<( are ore so)histicated in ex)loiting a fi*e+ )oint nu erical rating scale fro Iero to four. The inclusion of fi*e )oints a))ears to allow for finer judg ents. %&&%! '&( ii. The latter seeks an alternati*e a))roach to gi*e )ro inence to s)ecific features by allocating the a higher weighting on a designated scale $7aoud and 6elce+Murcia . The(i( !! . those of Tucker . Hruder $. howe*er.g. but.//.f so. it ight hel) to ask yourself! if this 3uality were issing. therefore not use this bookM .5 $McGrath./0<(. Cillia s . Er $. These o)tions are then con*erted into scores! two )oints for e*ery FE1 answer. then you ob*iously think the 3uality essential or *ery i )ortant.

He belie*es that there is now a sufficient consensus for 1-: research to be used as an infor ati*e base for the for ulation of criteria for the aterials to be de*elo)ed and e*aluated. it only handles with the weightings and ratings of two different grou)s of res)ondents+the teachers and the students without dealing with scores. • Materials should achieve im&act through no*elty. this study restricts itself in analyIing only one set of aterialsG therefore. :s it is belie*ed that the aterials will be taken in for )rocessing when the learners# curiosity. the atter to ake co )arisons between different sets of textbooks beco es si )le.5 $7ulay./0%( $A. attracti*e )resentation. not as uch attention has been gi*en to exa ine what akes good aterials. Howe*er.4 T'. 2. the better language ac3uisition )roceeds.8. and techni3ues to hel) the to learn rather than testing the all the ti e.(.( i3e')'-ie( '% -''3 . Chen the newly designed aterials are to be )ut into )iloting stage.Chapter 2: Literature review The great ad*antage of 3uantifying res)onses in this way is that the "score# for each criterion is to be calculated by ulti)lying rating and weighting scales J 8$ating( x C$eighting( Q 1 $core(.. H. Hefore settling down on our own checklist we need to brief about the basic )rinci)les of second language ac3uisitions rele*ant to the de*elo) ent of aterials for the teaching of languages as su ariIed by To linson. scoring will be a))lied in order to weigh its effecti*eness against OEE. 1i ilarly. *ariety. This 3uantifying easure ent is ex)ected to indicate in a ore s)ecific way than an i )ressionistic judg ent and in a clearer way than a *erbal res)onse to an o)en 3uestion. culture+ friendly texts and illustrations. Cith the scores subtotaled and totaled. The(i( !" .//0! @+%. interest and attention are attracted. and a))ealing content. The reason for that is 48esearch has shown = the effects of *arious for s of anxiety on ac3uisition! the less anxious the learner. Hurt and Arashen . • Materials should hel& learners to 'eel at ease with s)acious. trying to establish a detailed list of criteria.ateria)( Chile *arious studies ha*e been done. when *isualiIed in a chart it ay illustrate which features of the aterials are weak and would need odification or re ediation in the substitute set of aterials. Es)ecially.)i&('&. $. relaxed and co fortable students a))arently can learn ore in shorter )eriods of ti e.

and Cenden $. which coincides with 7lay./0@(. )roble atic. and )ur)ose. • Materials should &rovide the learners (ith o&&ortunities to use the target language to achieve communicative &ur&oses *ia infor ation or o)inion ga) acti*ities.Chapter 2: Literature review • Materials should hel& learners to develo& con'idence. ode. :d*ocates to this )oint of *iew include 1te*ick $. 2or exa )le. • Materials should re2uire and 'acilitate learner sel'-investment by engaging the in learner+centered disco*ery acti*ities or in*ol*ing the in finding su))le entary aterials for )articular units in a book and gi*ing the res)onsibility for aking decisions about which texts to use and how to use the . )ost+listening and )ost+reading acti*ities. ediu . creati*ity. Arashen $. $A. aterials should )ro*ide the learners with a choice of to)ics and tasks. The(i( !# ./0%( findings that 4relaxed and self+ confident learners learn faster. but still achie*able or tasks in*ol*ing in i aginati*ity. for al instruction gi*en in the target language either on the language itself or on the subject atter. this cannot be achie*ed by the )rocess of si )lification but through acti*ities that try to ")ush# learners slightly beyond their existing )roficiency by engaging the in tasks that are sti ulating./@B(. Hurt and Arashen#s $. ?therwise. the s)oken and written texts they include )ro*ided that the in)ut ust be co )rehensible and *ary in style. • Materials should e3&ose the learners to language in authentic use through the ad*ice they gi*e. • The learners% attention should -e dra(n to linguistic 'eatures o' the in&ut either consciousl* or su-consciousl*.5 Howe*er. creati*e writing and s)eaking acti*ities. the learners ight be )aying conscious attention to working out the attitude of one of the characters in a story but ight be )aying subconscious attention to the second conditionals that the character uses. the instructions for their acti*ities. • 0hat is -eing taught should -e &erceived -* learners as relevant and use'ul by relating the to known learner interest and to 4real+life5 tasks that the learner need or ight need to )erfor in the target language. and analytical skills./0%(.

8 The i&3ivi3ua)i<e3 1he1. $. the colleagues. ty)es of acti*ities.)i(t The scrutiniIed exa ination of a *ariety of the )re*iously )ublished checklists )resented in the )re*ious section. • Materials should ta4e into account that learners di''er in a''ective attitudes by )ro*iding choices of different ty)es of texts.Chapter 2: Literature review • Materials should ta4e into account that the &ositive e''ects o' instruction are usuall* dela*ed. o)tional extras.8. . . etc. • Materials should &rovide o&&ortunities 'or outcome 'eed-ac4 e*aluated in relation to the )ur)ose for which the language is used. • Materials should ma3imi5e learning &otential -* encouraging intellectual. and emotional involvement that sti ulates both right and left+ brain acti*ities. the basic )rinci)les of second language ac3uisitions rele*ant to the de*elo) ent of aterials as su ariIed by To linson. and the discussion with the su)er*isor.t is. • Materials should not rel* too much on controlled &ractice. . aesthetic. the language )roduction acti*ities should ha*e intended outco es other than just )racticing the languages. • Materials should &ermit a silent &eriod at the -eginning o' instruction that can facilitate the de*elo) ent of an effecti*e internaliIed gra ar before they start to s)eak. The(i( !5 . 2.org foru hel) lay a sound foundation for an indi*idualiIed $A.fotech. which eans that instructions should be recycled.//0! @+%.n other words./0@(. therefore. ad*isable to arrange acti*ities fro co )rehension to )roduction. which eans that acti*ities should be *ariable and should cater for all learning styles. • Materials should ta4e into account that learners di''er in learning st*les . :s ost researchers see to agree with Ellis who says that 4controlled )ractice a))ears to ha*e little long+ter effect on the accuracy with which new structures are )erfor ed5 $Ellis. ./%( and 4has little effect on fluency5 $Ellis and 8athbone.(.//&!. and the students *ia the htt)!99www.

*ocabulary. degree of accuracy. dealing with the structuring and con*entions of language use abo*e sentence le*el are also included in this grou). glossary. each of which focuses on a s)ecific as)ect! organiIation and for at. Micro+skills ought to ser*e acade ic and occu)ational $A. which is characteristic of an E1N course book. and suggestions for further reading. The acti*ities ust ha*e clearly defined objecti*es. suitable for students# le*els.8. 2. Helow are se*eral factors to structure a s)ecific design to acco )lish the e*aluati*e objecti*es. se3uentiality.Chapter 2: Literature review checklist. The for at should create i )act and attract to the eyes.8.t can be seen that any of other indexes highlight the i )ortance of clear organiIation. logicality. built on students# existing knowledge. and thus this should beco e a feature in the new list. -istening aterials should be well recorded. and unifor ity. )ronunciation. and ethodology. 1uch criteria as *arious text+ty)es. The(i( !6 . The knowledge data in each unit are )referred to be balanced with a))roxi ately the sa e length and linked to other subject areas. u)+to+date. The what The indi*idualiIed checklist results fro a thorough exa ination of se*eral )re*iously )ublished lists and the ost salient features a))licable to the s)ecific teaching context are selected. The content area is di*ided into two )arts! the electronics and the language content.1. when it co es to skill area. it is assu ed that the integration of the four skills would ser*e best. and an alternation fro to)ic category to Electronics content. and as authentic as )ossible. language content. and index is a criterion in this section. :s being ex)loited in career+related settings. and logically follow the objecti*es stated.//'( with a su))le ent of organiIation and for at. Eseful table of content. They are desired to be accurate. The criteria are organiIed in fi*e categories. the electronics content first and fore ost ust eet the re3uire ents for the occu)ational outco es. Materials for s)oken English are ex)ected to be well designed to e3ui) learners for real+life interaction. This choice of categories bases itself largely on the checklist of 6unningsworth $. and style. se3uencing fro co )rehension to )roduction. 2ourthly. . skill. The language content category consists of criteria for deter ining whether the aterial atte )ts to co*er ade3uately gra ar. The organiIation is su))osed to focus on con*enience. suitable le*el of difficulty. Electronics content. The content is also ex)ected to include discussion 3uestions. interestsG a))ro)riate in ter s of guidance9control.

syste atic. and a gra)hic re)resentation to )ro*ide a *isual co )arison between the e*aluatorOs )referred choices as an archety)e and their actual realiIations in a )articular textbook under scrutiny.textbooks suggested by :nsary $%&&%( ay well hel) ake textbook e*aluation a coherent. -astly.8. and healthy 3uestioning.Chapter 2: Literature review )ur)oses.textbook.t is noteworthy that the criteria in this category )ro*ide analysts with the o))ortunity to co ent on not only the four language skills but also high+order thinking skills such as inter)retation and reasoning. Howe*er. discrete and )recise enough to hel) define oneOs )referred situation+ s)ecific criteria. by which the uni*ersal sche e ay be ada)ted and9or weighted to suit the a si )le )rocedure for recording and re)orting the e*aluatorOs o)inion. a rating trajectory that akes )ossible a 3uick and easy dis)lay of the judg ents on each and e*ery criterion. )lication of the latter a))roach is that students are seen as the asters of their learning )rocess. the ethodological criteria are designed to get aligned with the two )re*ailing a))roaches! co unicati*e and learner+centered ones ai ing at )ro*iding students with what they need in their acade ic and occu)ational fields.( that a syste for textbook e*aluation should include! • a )redeter ined data+dri*en theory+neutral collection of uni*ersal characteristics of E2-9E1. 2. • • • • • • a syste a rating a within which one ay ensure objecti*e. echanis )articular re3uire ents of any teaching situation. no neat for ula or syste ay e*er )ro*ide a definite way to judge any textbook.2 The h'w Nerha)s.8. . and thoughtful acti*ity. which eans they ha*e to take res)onsibility in their own learning and self+i )ro*e ent and the aterials should encourage curiosity. ethod that can )ro*ide the )ossibility for a co )arati*e analysis. The(i( !7 . The checklist design essentially in*ol*es at least the three ste)s below. 3uantified assess ent. creati*ity./@'! <'/+<B. The )referred situation+s)ecific criteria were already )resented in " the what( section abo*e. The aterials are )resu ed to )ro ote students# co unicati*e abilities through )air+work and grou)+ work. )robably the a))lication of a set of uni*ersal characteristics of E2-9E1. . 1he cites Tucker $. at the *ery least. $A. Chat follows is a de onstration of how the rating sche e acco )anying the criteria checklist works.

ade3uate e*idence a score of two. !.5 4fully e*ident5 ratings are s)ecified. The criteria a))ear in the central colu n on the for .Chapter 2: Literature review 2irstly. and a total lack a score of Iero. ranging fro one to three $%( the rating $8( ranging fro Iero to three which a))ears in the third colu n on the for indicating the degree of atching between the ideal defined criterion and its actual realiIation in the textbook.( the weighting $C( which a))ears in the first colu n indicating the significance of each defined criterion to the *alue of the textbook. 1econdly. the collation of two se)arate sets of scores e*aluating! • ay ser*e as the basis for $.T0'1 01 T$% 2&'3%4T ') 5%(061016 1%7 %(2 8. The $A. the teachers of E1N 7e)art ent regard the iddle ground between these two as the ost )ractical and useful a))roach. a )artial atch a score of one. The colu n to the right called the rating colu n is subdi*ided into four sub+colu ns corres)onding to the four+)oint ratings. D>EH since the foundation of E1N 7e)art ent in %&&. The colu n to the left is s)ared for the e*aluator to insert his9her weightings fro one to three based on the i )ortance of the criterion to the textbook#s erits.5 4)artially e*ident. The res)ondents# jobs are si )ly to fill in the weighting colu n with a nu ber fro one to three and )ut a tick in the a))ro)riate boxes that indicate their answers.=. the two sets of weightings and ratings after each criterion are re)resented on a gra)h by drawing dotted line corres)onding to the nu erical ean *alues so that it is con*enient to co )are the erit of this textbook as gauged by the teachers and the learners. OEE has been used as a core aterial in co bination with a *ariety of internet aterials in the E1N courses for the Electronics and Teleco unications students.1 H'w OEE wa( e*p)'ite3 i& the E!P 1'ur(e( :lthough the beliefs on textbook use ay be as dichoto ous as ne*er bringing the into the classroo to using e*ery )age each day. 6?-TE6H. Ty)ically. The(i( !8 .5 T$% &'L%( ') T%*T+''.L( )'& %T (T/5%1T( 2. : co )arati*e weight is assigned to the relati*e realiIation in the textbook! full e*idence of the defined criterion in the textbook recei*ing three. an e*aluation for with three ain colu ns is designed. %-. • 2inally.T%&0. the scale of 4no9 little e*idence.5 4 ostly e*ident.L/..

) he main focus is placed on reading skills. ) #ome of the lessons are too long while some others are too short. this textbook turned out to be a is atch. ) he *ook does not support pair work or group work ade!uately. ) he *ook is insensitive to students( needs. a considerable a ount of E1N knowledge in OEE was o*erla))ed. and by the will of )rogra ad inistrators to assure that co )arable instruction is being )resented across courses. a reconsideration of the book usage is su))osed to be i )le ented in order to ensure the 3uality of the E1N )rogra . >e*ertheless. :s a result. Chen the new curriculu for the whole E1N course was established in the beginning of the acade ic year %&&B.fotech. the first half was taught in the fourth se ester. was war ly welco ed by the students. + here are too many new words. Grou) )resentation on the learnt to)ics. they were not co )letely satisfied with the NNN )rocedure )resented. The(i( !9 . ) he content does not closely relate to the students( majors. ethodology. Cith the a))earance of the teacher+generated textbook -English for Electronics and elecommunications . ) here is hardly any room for developing analytical skills+ critical skills.. the rest in the fifth. ) he content is o*solete.Chapter 2: Literature review thirty units excluding those that focus on listening skills were hal*ed. ) here is an inade!uacy of real)life tasks. for exa )le. /olume 0( for the third se ester. )acing and *ocabulary. 6lose class obser*ations and reflections of the instructors as well as their students through the foru htt)!99www. to )ro*ide stability for students. ) here are few chances for students to enlarge their knowledge of the field. they thought of any other ways to lead in the lessons by )ro*iding the extra infor ation fro the internet or self+ ade handouts. 6onse3uently. $A.org showed that there e erged a nu ber of co )laints about the textbook. Most teachers tended to consistently follow the text#s se3uence. This situation occurred for a *ariety of reasons! ease of organiIation of lessons. 1e*eral extra acti*ities were also designed to co )ensate for the inade3uacy of co unication tasks. Each unit was taught in four )eriods. ) #peaking and listening skills were not paid enough attention to.

/00(. The Taba#s $. 7es)ite the fact that de*elo)ing their own classroo aterials is an extre ely difficult. .n that circu stance.ati 'rgani.&ew E!P . the E1N 7e)art ent has set u) an ex)ansi*e )roject of designing new E1N aterials for all the four faculties! law. /olume 0+ 1+ 2 #. The(i( "0 .n this *ein. which is against the characteristics of an E1N course.=. two e bers of the di*ision were fortunate enough to ha*e been sent to the Nhili))ines for a one+ onth )rogra on 1yllabus 7esign and 6urriculu Manage ent.2 A& i&tr'3u1ti'& t' the pr'2e1t '% 3e(i-&i&. :ll the e bers of the di*ision ha*e eagerly )artici)ated in this significant work beginning with the establish ent of new curriculu . The teachers who are in charge of teaching E1N ha*e to confront with the se*ere lack of suitable textbooks to be ex)loited in their highly s)ecialiIed teaching en*iron ent. arduous )rocess $1heldon! . infor ation technology. 5iagnosis 5iagnosis of of nee9s nee9s )ormulation )ormulation of of o o :ectives :ectives (election (election of of content content 'rgani.6: Flo(chart o' Ta-a%s (1972) 1even 1tages o' Curriculum 8evelo&ment.atio n n of of learning learning e<periences e<periences (election (election of of learning learning e<periences e<periences CURRICULU$ Fig 2. the o)ti al choice is to create 4in+house5 aterials. This course in accordance with another one on Tertiary Education held by 2aculty of Education. econo ics. D>EH has e3ui))ed the staff with sound under)innings for constructing the new syllabus $A. the 7i*ision of ET is res)onsible for writing a set of three course books "English for Electronics and elecommunications .Chapter 2: Literature review 2.atio 'rgani.ateria)( There a))ears a fact that E1N global course books a*ailable in the arket are not well tailored to the s)ecific students# needs. and electronics & teleco unications.ati on on of of content content 5eterminatio 5eterminatio n n of of =hat =hat an9 an9 ho= ho= to to evaluate evaluate 'rgani./B%( flowchart of se*en stages of curriculu de*elo) ent was ado)ted as a con*entional )rocedure. Hefore any sketch for the )roject was jotted down. .

and *iews regarding teaching ethodology would assist in the o*erall syllabus design as well as textbook e*aluation by creating a clearer )icture of the co )atibility between actual students# needs and the )ercei*ed goals9 objecti*es of the E1N )rogra . H. ex)ectations.. -a student needs analysis( $1ee :))endix! . 1. .Chapter 2: Literature review syste . • raise a=areness of the role of %(2 in their future :o s !e. time management.t was felt that an accurate re)resentation the students# ai s. and the syllabi for the first+ and second+year students at 7e la 1alle Eni*ersity.( that was conducted before the syllabus design. • 9efine a num er of common electronic terminologies • pronounce the terminologies accuratel? • master grammatical features of %nglish for (cience an9 Technolog? • =rite grammaticall? correct sentences • listen to a short paragraph for main i9eas an9 ke? =or9s • e<change information through information@gap an9 opinion@ gap activities • acquire learning strategies for %(2. Manila. reasoning ? analog?.t the en9 of the term. concerns. interests. ra9ar.//<(. The(i( laser. anal?. :fter a thorough assess ent of learner needs.e sentence structures. This inclu9es the a ilit? to 9eal =ith ne= =or9s.t the en9 of the term. "1 . semicon9uctor. each stu9ent shoul9 e a le to> • grasp ne= technologies such as ro ot. $. resistor. each stu9ent shoul9 e a le to> • comprehen9 the constructions an9 operation principles of asic electronic 9evices such as capacitor.e(ter 4: . transistor. 9eveloping goo9 stu9? ha its. !e. formulating goo9 questions. the di*ision has co e u) with a workable set of clearly defined objecti*es for each se ester. nanotechnologies $A. The learning goals were established with a cross reference to the Hench ark for >atural 1cience and Technology by : erican :ssociation for the :d*ance ent of 1cience $. The co unicati*e a))roach acco )anied with the learner+centered one has *italiIed the old dull syllabus and hel) oti*ate a )ositi*e learning en*iron ent. :n i )ortant co )onent of the )roject. rea9 an9 solve pro lems./'B(. the Taxono y of Educational ?bjecti*es in the 6ogniti*e 7o ain by Hloo .e(ter 8: .

The criteria checklist was designed with the backu) of these sets of )ur)oses. the :ournals.t the en9 of the term.e(ter =: . 9e ates. before this de anding ission is to be i )le ented. $A. • evaluate the influences of ne= technologies on peopleAs life • master note@taking skills of short lectures • :oin in seminars confi9entl?. intro9ucing the topic. critical thinking skills via 9iscussions. seminars • raise a=areness of life@long learning These sets of objecti*es ser*e as a leading factor in order to select and organiIe the contents and learning ex)eriences as well as the e*aluation of the textbook OEE. an9 other mass me9ia acquire self@stu9? skills !e. using visual ai9s an9 non@ver al language make an informative an9 persuasive presentation a out a topic of the fiel9 9evelop anal?tical thinking skills an9 organi. constructivel? • han9le =ith several t?pical occupational situations • improve interpersonal skills • construct informative an9 =ell@organi. -English for Electronics and elecommunications ) /olume 0( was ostly co )leted and has been )ut into )iloting stage.Chapter 2: Literature review • • • • • • • • • 9iscuss the applications of these technologies in improving qualit? of life anal?.e9 paragraphs listen an9 take notes of specific information make goo9 use of 9ifferent information resources such as the li raries. The(i( "! . each stu9ent shoul9 e a le to> • improve their rea9ing@ et=een@the@lines skills in or9er to comprehen9 state@of@the@art technical 9ocuments a out the =ireless =orl9. retros)ection about the )re*iously used book is an essence. Howe*er.e9 essa?s • improve anal?tical. panels. :t )resent. the 0nternet.e the organi. That the book has recei*ed re arkably )ositi*e feedback fro both the students and the ad inistrators )ro)els the di*ision e bers to continue with the )roject of designing *olu e two and three for the fourth and fifth se ester.ational skills construct coherent an9 =ell@organi.ation of 9ifferent kin9s of rea9ing te<ts master presentation skills such as greeting.

. subject content. The 3uestionnaires will be extre ely beneficial in s)ecifying ai s and analyIing the teaching and learning situation ore clearly. The results of the teacher and student textbook e*aluation 3uestionnaire sur*ey can be found in the next cha)ter.=. eva)uati'& a( a& i&te-ra) part '% the pr'2e1t There a))ears a sad fact that no textbook e*aluation or consultation with the instructors had been conducted by the uni*ersity ad inistration )rior to the introduction of the textbook OEE to the language )rogra . a series of textbook e*aluation 3uestionnaires would be created and )ro*ided to both the instructors and the students. $A. They contain 3uestions that )ertain to the layout and design. D>EH.Chapter 2: Literature review 2. . The(i( "" . :fter se*eral se esters of trialing.nstead of choosing a course book that fulfills the learning goals set in the curriculu . gathering additional ideas. range and balance of acti*ities. and ac3uiring a *ariety of o)inions and concerns that ay ha*e otherwise been o*erlooked.t was unfortunate because the learners# needs are subjugated in fa*or of the li ited )ossibilities of the text. The e*aluation 3uestionnaires are based on the s)ecific concerns and )riorities of 6?-TE6H. skills a))ro)riateness and integration.4 The te*t+''. the teaching staff decided that in order to deter ine the relati*e strengths and weaknesses of the book and ulti ately decide how well it suited the desired and attainable goals of the newly structured E1N curriculu . language ty)es and ethodologies re)resented in the textbook. the teaching staff re*ersely resorted to build u) the curriculu based on the textbook OEE.