The present study aims to investigate the recycling of structures in junior high school English textbooks and to provide pedagogical suggestions for textbook writers and language teachers. To achieve this aim, the study first conducted a survey on in-service junior high school teachers’ perceptions of the troublesome structures for their students. Five structures then were targeted for their recycling presentation in five widely-used textbook series: recycling distribution, recycling frequency, recycling rate, spiral presentation, and context distribution. The major findings derived from the study are summarized as follows.
The troublesome structures for junior high school students identified by teachers were: present perfect, relative clause, passive voice, past perfect, wh-clause, and present/past participle as adjective. As past perfect is not presented in grammar activities in target textbooks, it was excluded in the study; the rest of the five structures were the target structures in this study. The grammar activities of these structures are distributed among Volumes Four, Five, or Six, and some of the activities of the same structure are distributed in different lessons for spiral learning, showing that textbooks differ in their arrangement of grammar activities. Owing to the difficulty of these structures, it is supposed that adequate recycling should be provided in the textbooks. The recycling of the five structures was then examined
after they are first taught in grammar activities.
The distribution of recycled structures falls mostly in three kinds of lessons: (1) lessons that provide spiral learning for the target structure, (2) review or recycle lessons that aim to review the structures in the former two or three lessons, and (3) lessons that practice the structure as a review structure in addition to the new one.
As for the recycling frequencies of structures in textbooks, they represent the degree of emphasis textbook publishers put on the structures, that is, their perceived importance of the structures. The more the structure is recycled, the greater it is emphasized. Overall, according to Table 15, the perceived importance of structures among textbooks is as follows: Present perfect > Relative clause > Passive voice >
Wh-clause > Present/Past participle as adjective. Although wh-clause and present/past participle as adjective are less emphasized, the order of this matches with teachers’ perceptions of the level of difficulty these structures are. This, therefore, indicates that textbooks do emphasize more on the structures that are regarded by teachers to be troublesome.
Regarding recycling rates, greater recycling rate means that the textbook tries to provide as much exposure to the structure as possible in each subsequent lesson for learners after the structure is taught. On average, Textbook K and Textbook J provide less recycling for present perfect. Textbook J and H provide less recycling for relative clause. Moreover, Textbook L, Textbook J, and Textbook H are weaker in providing recycling for passive. For wh-clause, most textbooks provide two to three times of recycling per lesson while Textbook K provides extremely high numbers of recycling, averagely 12 times per lesson. For present/past participle as adjective, only Textbook K provides more recycling of it. Overall, the extent target structures are recycled in textbooks is as follows: Textbook K > Textbook N >
normally provides more recycling of target structures for learners in its textbook contents, and Textbook H is the least. Although it is believed that more recycling can help students acquire the structure and undergo “secondary rehearsal” to enhance their retention of the structure (Martin, 1978), no exact number of exposures to the structure has been said to be needed for acquisition to take place.
Therefore, the numbers of recycling provided in the textbooks might be considered by textbook writers to be suitable for learners.
To strictly examine the quality of recycling in the textbooks, two main results were obtained. First, when at least a threshold of five encounters of a structure in a lesson is set to be possible for facilitating acquisition, a picture of the quality of recycling in the textbook is shown. Textbook N performs the best in providing better quality of recycling in its textbook, for the greatest numbers of lessons in it achieve the recycling threshold. Textbook L and Textbook J are the second, and then followed by Textbook K and Textbook H. Comparing this with the results of recycling rate, we see that even though Textbook K has the highest recycling rate - providing the most recycling for learners in the textbooks, it does not provide quality recycling like the first three sets. This result shows the deficiency of Textbook K in providing intensive exposures to the structure for learners. In future compilation, Textbook H and Textbook K might need to pay more attention on the quality of recycling for its learners. Second, for the recycling in the subsequent three lessons, among the five textbooks, Textbook K tends to recycle its structures in the subsequent few lessons, which is in accord with Tomlinson’s statement for achieving durable learning.
The spiral presentation of target structures differs among textbooks. Present perfect, relative clause and wh-clause tend to be presented spirally in the textbooks with different grammar activities provided in different lessons. In addition,
Textbook L, Textbook K, and Textbook N tend to provide spiral learning for the structures, facilitating the recycling of the structures for students. Overall, with the spiral lesson, more recycling of the structures is provided.
Regarding context distribution of recycled structures, greater proportions of structures recycled in passages/dialogues mean that the textbook presents the structure in more meaningful context instead of in single or decontextualized sentences. The proportions for recycling structures in passages/dialogues are as follow: Textbook N (53.75%) > Textbook J (51.8%) > Textbook H (45.33%) >
Textbook L (43.84%) > Textbook K (33.72%). The range is between 30% and 55%.
This shows that Textbook N and Textbook J tend to present the recycled structures in passages or dialogues, though not high, while the other three textbook sets, Textbook H, Textbook L, and Textbook K, are deficient in providing contextualized examples of the target structures for learners to notice the form, meaning, and use of them. Overall, context meaningfulness in the textbooks needs to be enhanced in order for learners to learn the real use of the structures in communication.
By comparing the results of recycling rates and context distribution of structures in textbooks, it can be seen that although Textbook K provides more recycling for the structures in its textbook, it, however, recycles the structures mostly in decontextualized sentences. This might show that although Textbook K is aware the importance of recycling in the textbook, it cannot ideally present the structures in a larger context. Therefore, for Textbook K, recycling structures in sentences and drills is probably an easy way out for more recycling in its textbook contents due to the possible limitations, such as topics and discourse fluency. For Textbook N, although it overall provides less recycling than Textbook K, it seems to perform better not only in its recycling of structures, but also in providing the
To sum up, textbooks writers might need to strike a balance between recycling frequency and the context provided. Besides, more meaningful and different contexts should be provided for students in the textbooks while recycling is provided so as to help students learn the real use of the structure in communication.