COURSEBOOK EVALUATION A White syll mat

1 1 EVALUATION of a ELT COURSEBOOK Based on Criteria Designed by McDonough and Shaw A Module Three Assignment Lexis and Syllabus and Materials ANDREW White INTRODUCTION The selection of a COURSEBOOK is one of the most important decisions a teacher will make in shaping the content and nature of teaching and learning. It involves matching the material against the context in which it is going to be used, following the aims of the teaching program, as well as fitting the personal methodology of the teacher. In this paper, I will first look at the purposes of coursebooks, including their limitations. Following this, I will examine several EVALUATION methods, as provided by leading experts in the field. I will then apply the model of one of these methods, designed by McDonough and Shaw, to a COURSEBOOK used to my own working context.

2 In doing so, I hope to appraise the strengths and weaknesses of my materials. THE ROLE OF COURSEBOOKS In the ESL classroom, materials (and for the purposes of this paper, I am referring to coursebooks) are an important aspect of the curriculum. They are the most observable feature of a teacher s methodology, and can contribute greatly to a course s syllabus. O Neill (1982) provides 4 justifications for the use of coursebooks. Firstly, a large portion of a COURSEBOOK s material can be suitable for students needs, even if not specifically designed for them. Secondly, coursebooks allow for students to look ahead, or refresh themselves with past lessons. They remove the element of surprise in student s expectations. Thirdly, coursebooks have the practical aspect of providing material which is well-presented in inexpensive form.

3 Finally, and I believe most importantly, well-designed coursebooks allow for improvisation and adaptation by the teacher, as well as empowering students to create spontaneous interaction in the class. According to O Neill, Since language is an instrument for generating what people need and want to say spontaneously, a great deal must depend on spontaneous, creative interaction in the classroom. (O Neill 1982: 111). Coursebooks should be accessible to a 3variety of students, regardless of their learning goals, as well as being adaptable to the diversity of teachers and teaching styles. THE LIMITS OF COURSEBOOKS Most experts agree, however, that heavy dependence on a single COURSEBOOK is detrimental to students needs, and that adaptability and supplemental materials are supportive additions. (Swales 1980, Nunan 1991, Medgyes 1994, Allwright 1981, Stern 1992, Cunningsworth 1995)(See also Section and ).

4 The general view among current researchers supports the opportunity for choice, in accordance with student s learning needs and interest. Informal, teacher-made materials with a specific group of students in mind will always assist professional, published materials. (Stern 1992: 353). Additionally, in discussing what is available to be learned in the classroom, as well as to what is taught , Allwright (1981) emphasizes that content (potential intake) is not predictable. It is, rather, something that emerges because of the interactive nature of classroom events. (Allwright 1981: 8). Although a COURSEBOOK may assist in some way, it cannot determine the over-all content of a language program. Allwright, thus, believes that coursebooks hold a limited role, restricting students to merely captive learners. Instead he advocates a whole-person involvement, in which students, through learner-training, actively participate in the management of their learning, in such a way that COURSEBOOK -led teaching would find impossible.

5 A strong alliance placed on the COURSEBOOK by the teacher can reveal his considerations, or lack of, toward the over-all learning/teaching process. Additionally, to those teachers who have no input toward the materials used in their teaching context, there may be no distinction between syllabus, methodology and the COURSEBOOK used. All may be intertwined into an officially approved publication from which personal creativity is void. Cunningsworth (1995) provides four interrelated disadvantages to an approach which is heavily dependent on a single COURSEBOOK . Firstly, there can be a lack of variety in teaching procedures. Secondly, innovations toward individual student s needs are reduced. Thirdly, spontaneity and flexibility are diminished. Fourthly, there can be a lack of creativity in teaching techniques and language use.

6 Cunningsworth states, Heavy 4dependence on coursebooks is far from ideal as it reduces the importance of the individual contributions that good teachers make at all levels in the learning process. (Cunningsworth 1995: 10). A well-designed COURSEBOOK which allows for adaptation and a certain degree of learner spontaneity is generally regarded as the most visible tool in the balanced teacher/learner relationship. At best they should provide only a framework for which this interaction and improvisation occurs. (O Neill 1982, Cunningsworth 1995). As the aims of the COURSEBOOK should correspond as closely as possible to the teacher s own methodology, it is of great importance that teachers evaluate coursebooks in terms of their ability to realize these aims. Due to the recent growth of materials in the ESL publishing industry, guidelines are necessary to raise teachers awareness to various COURSEBOOK designs.

7 Rather than criticizing instructors who are handcuffed to a certain text, relevant EVALUATION criteria should instruct teachers how to best select coursebooks that fit their certain needs. (Garinger 2001). COURSEBOOK EVALUATION METHODS As a trip to any current bookstore will reveal, there is a vast choice of ESL coursebooks available, all with competing claims to be communicative , focusing on real English through stimulating activities , and so on. With such an embarrass de richesses (Stern 1992: 352), it is important that teachers make informed and appropriate choices when selecting coursebooks for their students, especially in today s computer age where sophisticated learners demand high standards in materials and presentation. In regard to these important choices teachers need to make, Nunan states, The selection process can be greatly facilitated by the use of systematic materials EVALUATION procedures which help ensure that materials are consistent with the needs and interests of the learners they are intended to serve, as well as being in harmony with institutional ideologies on the nature of language and learning.

8 (Nunan 1991: 209) 5 Effective EVALUATION relies on asking appropriate questions and interpreting the answers to them. (Cunningsworth 1995). The creation of extensive EVALUATION checklists by leading experts provides criteria for detailed COURSEBOOK analysis. Cunningsworth s checklist for EVALUATION and selection contains 45 questions, covering criteria such as aims, design, language content, skills, and methodology, as well as practical considerations such as cost and obtainability. Sheldon (1988) provides an expansive checklist of 53 questions classified under 17 major criteria, which appraises content factors such as accessibility, content, layout and authenticity. Because of the wide variety of ELT coursebooks available, he advocates the use of evaluative measures, yet admits dissatisfaction with the uneven quality of these evaluative tools, (Sheldon 1988: 240) stating the lack of any standardized global checklist or approach to materials analysis.

9 Extensive checklists such as these, as well as others (Breen and Candlin 1987, Robinett, adapted by Brown 1994, McDonough and Shaw 1993, Skierso, 1991) imply that designers are striving for comprehensiveness in EVALUATION procedures. Swales (1980, cited in Wharton, web site) has criticized this inclination, claiming that the more questions one asks of a set of teaching materials, striving for some kind of intricate discovery, the more likely one is to be disappointed. Rather, teachers should look at the EVALUATION process from a more subjective view (Sheldon 1988, Cunningsworth 1995) realizing that any checklist requires adaptation before being submitted to the personal requirements of individual teachers. As Cunningsworth (1995: 5) states, the selection procedure is intended as a framework, not a straitjacket, and any procedure should be modified to suit personal circumstances.

10 Similarly, Sheldon explains that, COURSEBOOK assessment is fundamentally a subjective, rule-of-thumb activity, and that no neat formula, grid or system will ever provide a definite yardstick. (Sheldon 1988: 245). McDonough and Shaw (1993) provide a flexible two-stage model for the comprehensive EVALUATION of coursebooks. A brief external EVALUATION includes criteria which gives an overview of the organizational foundation of the COURSEBOOK , as stated explicitly by the author/publisher through the cover, introduction and table of contents statements. Following this is an in-depth internal investigation of the COURSEBOOK , to see how far the materials in question match up to what the author claims as well as to the 6aims and objectives of a given teaching program. (McDonough and Shaw 1993: 64). Unique in their coverage of criteria, their 22-point framework is designed both for teachers looking to select a COURSEBOOK , a predictive EVALUATION , as well as for those teachers looking to identify strengths and weaknesses in coursebooks already used in their working context, a retrospective EVALUATION .