Materials for Language Teaching (Evaluation)

An In-depth Evaluation of American Headway 2 (2nd Edition)

1

An In-depth Evaluation of American Headway 2 (2nd Edition) Introduction Background to the Study If there should ever be a brief appraisal that can essentially lay bare the nature of the use of ELT textbooks, it would be the one put forward by Graves (2000, p. 174): “This text is written for everyone and this text is written for no one”. In its essence, Grave’s statement has identified a continuum that ELT textbook use can possibly take on. At one extreme, textbooks can be brought to its full capacity, being able to cater for the “isolationist nature of TEFL” (Sheldon, 1988, p. 240). Yet at the other, they can simply fail to “meet the needs of any individual teaching-learning situation nor the needs of the individual within it” (Hutchinson, 1994, p. 325). Much of the discussion associated with the use of ELT textbooks, it appears, has been polarized across these two extremes, consequently evoking a range of attitudes from textbook users, at best favor and at worst hostility (Hutchinson, 1994, p. 316). At its score, this paper is premised on the writer’s belief that ELT textbook, as a teaching and learning tool, should be rooted for. Therefore, the target of maximizing the use of textbook in a specific teaching-learning situation should be primarily aimed at. An effective way to achieve this, among others, is to carry out a systematic evaluation of the suitability and pedagogical value of the textbook in question. The process of such an evaluation offers substantial benefits to teachers. At the decision-making stage, it enables teachers to reach well-informed decisions through an “analytical matching process: matching needs to available solutions” (Hutchinson & Waters, as cited in Sheldon, 1988, p. 237). At the design stage, a textbook evaluation presents teachers with ample alternatives based on which innovation and reformation in their teaching practice can be brought about (Littlejohn, 1992, p. 5). Furthermore, as “the type of evaluation a textbook receives will also reflect the concern of the evaluator” (Richard, 2001, p. 259), teachers, upon trying to interpret the textbooks views and goals, are necessarily invited to make explicit their own beliefs and purposes presumably embedded in their teaching

An In-depth Evaluation of American Headway 2 (2nd Edition)

2

repertoires. Textbook evaluation, thus, is at its heart a process of discovery by which the teachers, through the lens of their teaching practice and classroom circumstances, can uncover and examine for themselves the maximum possible effects that a textbook has to offer to a specific language learning program. Purpose of the Study Taking it on trust that a textbook evaluation is, in its own right, a useful activitity and a substantial contribution to any language teaching procedures, this paper sets forth to evaluate the future potential performance of one particular textbook, namely American Headway 2 (AH2), in the context of a non-English major class in the Ho Chi Minh City Open University. Resting on the position that “materials only take value in context” (Nunan, 1991, p. 211), the evaluation focuses to appraise AH2 in terms of its potential correspondence with and contribution to the particular situation in which it will be used. Ultimately, the paper seeks to: a) Identify the degree to which AH2 can match up with the aims and objectives of the course. b) Identify the implications that the use of AH2 may have for the given teachinglearning situation. Organization of the Study To this end, the discussion in the paper is organized in four main sections. The first section briefly presents the study’s background and purposes. The second section grounds the textbook evaluation process with a critical review of existing evaluative instruments. The third section presents the evaluation results. The final section draws a brief conclusion and put forward some suggestions on how AH2 can be best used in the teaching situation it is intended to serve.

Literature and Framework for Analysis This section draws on some well-established evaluative frameworks for ELT textbooks and attempts to examine them in light of (a) their objectives, (b) their ideas on

An In-depth Evaluation of American Headway 2 (2nd Edition)

3

what constitutes an ideal textbook – the criteria, and (c) their proposed methods and procedures to evaluate textbooks. The common ground between the frameworks is first established, then each framework is further investigated in reference to their own contribution and what difference they can bring to the discussion of textbook evaluation literature. As production of new ELT textbooks has been on the increase, discussion on the design of an evaluative means to look inside them is equally vigorously developed. Whilst this plentiful supply of evaluative schemes supposedly suggests a growing concern for the individuality of different teaching-learning situations, a close examination on these frameworks reveals that a majority of them contain a number of similar general criteria, implying in some way that there inherently exists on the back of our minds a universal model of what constitute a good material, or what Chambers (1997, p. 29) referred to as the “Platonic ideal”. What most differentiates the frameworks, then, appears to be the degree of emphasis placed on the criteria and the methods by which these criteria are constructed. Cunningsworth’s (1995), for example, is a manageable, thoroughly developed forty-fiveitem checklist encompassing eight main criteria, aiming to provide a “basic quickreference” framework for evaluation. While emphasizing criteria such as content areas, methodology and practical consideration, Cunningsworth’s checklist is less attentive to issues that address learners’ interests, motivation and autonomy – apparently considered as desirable criteria in many other checklists of the same time (Breen and Candlin, 1987; McDonough and Shaw, 1993; Rubdy, 2003). In regard to the method of evaluation, Cunningsworth’s model, though simple and straightforward, seems not to be structured to facilitate the dissection of what underlying values the textbook itself can possibly offer. Tomlinson (2003, p. 17) perceives this limitation of Cunningsworth’s checklist as caused by the mixing of analysis questions with evaluation questions, echoing the view of Littlejohn (1998) and Sheldon (1988) that such a “discursive format” can hinder the process of an in-depth analysis necessary for textbooks to “speak for themselves”. Cunningworth’s framework, thus, might operate effectively if the primary concern is to

An In-depth Evaluation of American Headway 2 (2nd Edition)

4

analyze the textbook at a “straightforward surface level” (Rubdy, 2003, p. 46); for the purpose of searching for what essentially lay behind it, however, the checklists may fall short of being an appropriate choice. Bringing to the fore the need to separate “description, guidance and criticism” (p. 241), Sheldon’s framework aims to serve as an evaluative tool not only for published coursebooks, but also for teacher-produced materials. Covering a total of 17 criteria with 53 questions, Sheldon’s checklist, upon the first encounter, appears to be quite cumbersome compared to Cunningsworth’s. The method of evaluation, however, is welldirected to inviting for more evaluative stance from the part of evaluators, extending details of the questions enough to the point that such questions can only be settled through a deep critical probe into the embedded philosophy and principles of the textbook in question. Another merit the checklist offers is its discernable emphasis on the pedagogical implications a textbook can have for specific learning program, a consideration upon which Cunningsworth’s checklist appears to inadedquately draw. Though it can substantially benefit from a clearer, less abstract explanation for some criteria listed (“is it pitched at the right level of maturity and language”, “does the introduction of new linguistic items seem to shallow/ steep enough for your students”), Sheldon’s checklist as a whole is extensive in its coverage of what features analysts should examine in a textbook and elaborate in its technique for eliciting their position towards such features. Particulary aiming to look for the underlying thinking of materials, Littlejohn’s framework proposed certain further aspects to be taken into account, most notably “the nature of teachers-learners roles” suggested by the materials (1998, p. 184). Compared to Sheldon’s checklist in terms of the consideration given to the textbook underspinnings, Littlejohn’s offers more various guidance on how to uncover the relationship between the means and the ends realized in the textbook itself, making this inference process completely explicit to evaluators’ consciousness with the use of a three-level investigation (“What is there”, “What is required of users” and “What is implied”). Essentially, what makes Littlejohn’s checklist different from, if not superior to, other

An In-depth Evaluation of American Headway 2 (2nd Edition)

5

established frameworks is its emphasis on drawing the line where objective judgement, “reporting”, stops and where subjective judgement, “interpreting”, begins. By highlighting this line, Littlejohn particularly asks teacher-analysts to become more concious of, presumably also to be more responsible in, making their evaluation: for the “explicit nature” of the materials, little is asked of teachers in terms of the inference involvement; yet, for the account of the “implicit nature”, teachers are expected to operate the analysis at a necessarily higher level of deduction. In this way, Littlejohn’s proposed framework outshines the others, offering not simply a tool that helps teachers to evaluate, but also a tool that helps teachers to learn how to evaluate. Having examined three common checklists proposed to aid teacher-analysts in evaluating materials, the current study decides to use Littlejohn’s as the conceptual framework within which the analysis on AH2 can be carried out. Certain modifcation with reference to the given situation’s requirements will be made, the detailed discussion of which can be found in the next section. Analysis of the Coursebook This section first provides a brief analysis of the information most pertinent to the teaching-learning situation in which AH2 will be used. The analysis is carried out using a modification of the model suggested by Richard (2001, p. 256). The analysis of the coursebook will then pursue, using the modified framework by Littlejohn mentioned above.

Analysis of the teaching-learning situation Before the evaluation can be made, a description of the basic information (see Figure 2) regarding the teaching situation will be given, aiming to account for the following issues: the objectives of the program, the role of the textbook in the program, the teachers in the program, and the learners in the program. This description of information will play a central role in the analysis of the textbook at hand. Information will be drawn on two types of source: (a) the specification of the syllabus given to the

An In-depth Evaluation of American Headway 2 (2nd Edition)

6

teacher before the course begins and (b) the teacher’s experience in working in a somewhat similar teaching situation.1 

General English 1 is designed to provide basic users (A2) with a general capacity

program

  

that prepares them for the demands of the real-world interaction. Emphasis is placed primarily on developing students’ communicative competence All the four skills need to be integratedly developed. Grammar and vocabulary are the secondary concern.

The role of the



The coursebook basically serves as the realization of a pre-determined program

the program



syllabus The coursebook is the core and the only book used in the program.

The teacher in the program

  

The teacher has gained certain understanding of the learners The teacher tends to use the coursebook in a flexible, creative fashion The teacher has all the freedom needed to adapt and supplement the coursebook

The learners



All the learners are provided (by the program) with the photocopies of the student

 

book and the workbook A majority of the learners tend to heavily depend on the coursebook The coursebook exerts a kind of washback effect on a majority of the learners

The objectives of the

coursebook in

in the program

Table 1. Analysis of the teaching-learning situation Analysis of the coursebook Level 1: What is there? The first level of the analysis, primarily concerned with the “explicit nature” of the material, includes two parts: part A perceives the book as a whole and part B takes a “snapshot” impression by giving an overview of a certain extract, in this case Unit 11. Part A American Headway 2 is a general English textbook intended for learners at preintermediate (A2) level. The AH2 package includes student’s book, workbook, audio CDs, teacher’s guide and supplementary book. The student’s book is made up of 12 chapters; each of which revolves around a particular theme and is structured into two 1 The teacher had worked with this same group of student for one semester. A different textbook  was used for the previous semester while for this semester, AH2 is the choice. 

An In-depth Evaluation of American Headway 2 (2nd Edition)

7

main sections: 1/ Language Input (Grammar, Vocabulary and Everyday English) and 2/ Skills Development (Reading, Listening, Speaking and Writing). A set of learning objectives (related to the three subsections Grammar, Vocabulary and Everyday English) accompanies each chapter and the 12 chapters are complemented by 4 instructional resources (Writing, Audio Scripts, Grammar Reference, Pairwork Activities, Extra Materials and Word List). Part B Grammar

1. Discussion; 2. Reading; 3. Grammar spot (1); 4. Grammar discussion and practice (1); 5. Listening; 6. Grammar spot (2); 7. Grammar discussion and practice (2); 8. Listening and Speaking; 9. Writing (refer to the Writing section at the end of the book); 10. Reading and Speaking

Vocabulary

1. Vocabulary and Speaking; 2. Exercise; 3. Talking about you

Everyday

1. Exercise; 2. Speaking

English

Table 2. Sequence of activity of Unit 11

Level 2 & Level 3: What is required of users and What is implied? These levels of anlysis focus on the description and evaluation of the demands which the materials, particulary the tasks, place on the teachers and learners. The analysis consists of three aspects of process: (1) What is the learner expected to do?; (2) With whom and (3) With what content? 1. WHAT IS THE LEARNER EXPECTED TO DO? a. Turn-take Frequency

Percentage

Initiate

5

54%

Respond

6

45%

Not quired

0

0%

Total

11

100%

An In-depth Evaluation of American Headway 2 (2nd Edition)

8

b. FTable 3. Frequency and percentage of turn take The description shows a rather equal distribution of tasks that require the learners to initiate (54%) and tasks that require the learners to respond (45%). While this might signify a good chance, particularly for learners who are not always willing to participate in class, to be required to actively engage, a closer look at the Initiate tasks indicates that some of them are not interesting and stimulating enough to encourage students to ask questions about or make comments on the subject matters (world population, volcanoes). Thus, different questions or requirements on the same topic yet structured with more cues for critical reflection can be helpful to maintain the intended purpose of the textbook to balance the need for students to initiate and to respond.

b. Focus Frequency

Percentage

Language system

6

54%

Meaning

3

27%

Meaning-system relationship

2

18%

Total

11

100%

c. Mental Table 4. Frequency and percentage of Focus Result of the task analysis in this part shows that activities which focus on the form account for about half of the total proportion. This, while apparently aligns with the fact that Grammar is given a prominent role in AH2 as it can be identified in a separate section in the first column following the topic column in the syllabus, also indicates an

An In-depth Evaluation of American Headway 2 (2nd Edition)

9

emphasis on the instruction of grammar as form-oriented. While English major students might arguably benefit from this approach, non-English major students might not see the direct relationship between what the textbook offers and what they know, supposedly, they need; in this case, the competence to communicative effectively in the real world. c. Operation Frequency

Percentage

Repeat selectively

4

9%

Repeat with expansion

1

2%

Retrieve from STM

0

0%

Retrieve from ITM

5

11%

Select information

5

11%

Hypotheses

1

2%

Analyse language form

1

2%

Formulate language rule

1

2%

Apply stated language rule

5

11%

Negotiate

0

0%

Review own FL output

3

6%

Total

26

100%

An In-depth Evaluation of American Headway 2 (2nd Edition)

10

Table 5. Frequency and percentage of Operation Result in the analysis of this part shows that tasks which involve general academic study skills (analyzing, hypothesizing, negotiating, evaluating) account for only a small percentage of the total proportion. For the fact that AH2 claims to be “the world most trusted adult English course”, this inadequacy to cater for high level skills necessary for language development (Tomlinson 2008, p. 6) seems to be problematic. Part of this, as Tomlinson also explains, is due to the position held by most textbook writers that low level of language ability is necessarily associated with low level of critical thinking. My teaching experience would tell that this is not always the case. Thus, students in this particular class, who apparently are keen on tasks that require high critical awareness, can benefit more from some changes related to the mental operation aspect in the textbook.

2. WHO WITH?

Teacher and learners, whole class observing Learners to the whole class Learners with whole class simultaneously Learners invididually simultaneously Learners in pairs/ groups/ class observing Learners in pairs/ groups, simultanously

Frequency

Percentage

4

25%

1

6%

0

0%

6

37%

3

18%

16

100%

An In-depth Evaluation of American Headway 2 (2nd Edition)

11

Table 6. Frequency and percentage of Who with As Table 6 shows, about 40% of the tasks in Unit 11 requires students to work individually. This, as compared to the only 18% of the tasks that invole group or pair working, is worth concerning, given that (a) the lack of opportunities to interact can obviously hinder the process of communication development and (b) some students might work best on their own whilst some can only learn by working, either mentally or actively, in a group/ pair. A closer examination at the tasks that require individual work also indicates that most of these tasks are structured for the purpose of instructing and practing grammar, which in turn implies a passive and rather tepid way by which the textbook has chosen to deal with grammar. Tasks for the purpose of skills development, on the other hand, appear to require a lot pair/ group work, which is appropriate for the practice of communication competence. These tasks, however, can benefit more if they are to be designed with different assignments for different students in the group. WITH WHAT CONTENT? a. Source Frequency

Percentage

Materials

10

50%

Teacher

0

25%

Learners

2

25%

Total

45

100%

An In-depth Evaluation of American Headway 2 (2nd Edition)

12

D

Table 7. Frequency and percentage of Source The result demonstrates little proportion of tasks which ask the learners to draw on their own experience and knowledge, either cultural or linguistic, to contribute to the construction of the content. While it can be argued, though it would not be a persuasive argument, that at this level, asking the students to share their own experience and to present themselves as a kind of language source necessary in the learning process would be too challenging to them, more source of cultural content can actually be drawn on the students. The same treatment can be applied to teachers. If the teacher is to believe that the personalization process would be necessary to facilitate language development, he/ she, upon using this textbook, should try to make full use of his/her own experience as well as the students’ experience from outside the class. b. Nature Frequency

Percentage

Metalinguistic comment

4

57%

Linguistic item

0

0%

Non-fiction

2

28%

Fiction

0

0%

Personal information/ opinion

1

14%

Total

7

100%

Table 8. Frequency and percentage of Nature

An In-depth Evaluation of American Headway 2 (2nd Edition)

13

The result shows that about half of the types of content of the tasks in Unit 11 are metalinguistic comment. This again indicates the prominent role of grammar in the textbook and also the prefered approach of dealing with grammar in a same manner (both the two grammar focuses in this Unit are dealt with in the same way). Though the integration of skills into the instruction and practice of grammar admittedly helps learners to get a chance to perceive the language learning process as a whole, this integration can be more balanced, as intended by the textbook, should the instruction of Grammar is made more varied and skills delopment should be made to more revolve around Vocabulary or Everyday Use. Conclusion and Recommendations The degree to which AH2 can match up with the aims and objectives of the course. As a whole, AH2 can fit into this program to a certain extent. At its best, AH2 is able to help learners to perceive and experience language as a whole, which is quite necessary for the development of general language learning. However, meaning – the essenssial concern of communicative language teaching – apparently is not dealt with effectively in AH2. The pedagogical values that AH2 can offer concerning the development of communicative competence, thus, can not be as expected. The implications that the use of AH2 may have for the given teaching-learning situation. The use of AH2 in this particular teaching-learning situation needs to compensate for the abovementioned void. At the decision-making stage, this means that the teacher can choose to reassign the focus when using the textbook so as to be consistent the course overall objectives. At the design stage, the teacher can adapt or develop new tasks so as to have more skills and vocabulary integration. Tasks and activities that involve more critical awareness and personalization are also needed.

An In-depth Evaluation of American Headway 2 (2nd Edition)

14