國中英語教科書之用後評估

全文

(1)國立臺灣師範大學英語學系碩士論. 文. Master Thesis Graduate Institute of English National Taiwan Normal University. 國中英語教科書之用後評估. Post-Use Evaluation of Junior High School English Textbooks in Taiwan. 指導教授：葉錫南博士 Advisor: Dr. Hsi-nan Yeh 研究生：黃孟婷 Meng-ting Huang 中華民國一百零一年七月 July, 2012.

(2)

(3) 摘要. 自從國內國中教科書編輯全面開放以來，市場上出現各版本英語教科書供教師選擇、採用。為了將來教科書的編寫、評選及使用，針對多種版本教科書的評估變得重要。雖然目前已有多筆研究探討教師對教科書的看法，卻極少研究傾聽學生的心聲。因此，本研究旨在探討教師及學生對現行國中英語教科書的用後評估，研究素材為目前市面上最常選用之兩套教科書（H、K）。另一重要目的為檢驗受試者的看法是否因城鄉差距而有所不同。教科書使用者的喜好、困難及需求也是討論重點。城區及鄉區合計 153 位教師及 399 位學生填寫問卷。受試者之中有 6 位教師和 11 位學生參與訪談。資料顯示儘管師生觀點及學校所在地區有所不同，受試者對現行教科書的份量、難易度和滿意程度極為相似，少有顯著差異。師生皆認為「說」的練習份量不足，而各部份的難易度皆為適中。大多數受試者認為「學習方法及資源」向度需要改善，其次為「語言技巧」、「字彙、片語及發音」等兩向度。至於城區和鄉區教師使用教科書所遭遇的困難，兩區之間並無顯著差異。兩區皆有超過 85%的教師認為最主要的問題是「教科書無法因應學生參差不齊的程度」，其次為「內容無法培養學生的英語溝通能力、不能引起他們的興趣」。而學生最普遍的問題為「文法的說明不夠、說與寫的技巧不足」。此外，儘管版本不同，以下三項顯示城區和鄉區學生的困難具有顯著差異：「閱讀的技巧不足」、「文法太多、太難」、「索引不便，難查閱單字及文法」。這些和目前英語考試的重點有關，而城鄉差距可能與這些顯著差異相關。關於學生的喜好，他們最喜愛的主題是「運動、旅行與休閒娛樂」、「文化、習俗、民俗技藝、節慶」及「情感」；最喜歡的體裁為「笑話」、「故事」和「漫畫」。教師在這兩方面的預測與學生的回應大致相符。最後也是最重要的一點，. i.

(4) 學生的學習需求，教師的預期及學生的回應顯示兩者觀點的差異。學生認為學習英語最主要的目的是「用英語溝通」，然而教師將「在考試及基測中拿高分」視為優先考量。此外，學生在「學習策略」與「情意學習」等兩方面的需求透露雙方觀點的顯著差異。期待本研究的結果可以幫助英語教師察覺到學生的個別喜好與需求，老師也需要彈性並多元運用教科書來因應學生多樣的需求及英語程度。此外，教科書應該根據教師及學生不同的困難、喜好及需求來編輯。. 關鍵字：國中英語教科書、教科書評鑑、用後評估、教師觀點、學生觀點、城鄉差距、教科書使用者的困難、教科書使用者的喜好、教科書使用者的需求. ii.

(5) ABSTRACT. Due to the reform on textbook policies in Taiwan, multiple versions of junior high school English textbooks have appeared on the market for teachers to select and adopt. The evaluation of various textbooks thus becomes important for future textbook compilation, selection and use. Although a number of studies investigated teachers’ perceptions of textbooks, yet little attention so far seems to have been paid to student users’ voice. Therefore, the present study aims to investigate the post-use evaluation of the most popular two junior high school English textbooks (i.e., H and K) from both teachers’ and students’ perspectives. Another significant purpose is to examine whether users’ perceptions vary with urban-rural disparity. Textbook users’ difficulties, preferences, and needs are also discussed. One hundred and fifty-three teachers as well as three hundred and ninety-nine students in urban and rural areas filled in the questionnaires. Among these participants, six teachers and eleven students were interviewed. The results indicated that regardless of different perspectives and school locations, participants’ perceptions of quantity and difficulty level of different parts in the textbook as well as their satisfaction were similar and showed few significant differences. “Speaking practice” in both textbooks was thought insufficient by teachers and students, whereas the difficulty level in each part of both textbooks was evaluated as suitable. Most participants suggested that the dimension of “learning methods and resources” be improved. Another two dimensions which needed improvement were the presentation of “four language skills” as well as that of “words, phrases and pronunciation.” Concerning urban and rural teachers’ difficulties in using the textbook, there was no significant differences. In both areas, “the textbook’s failure to cope with students’ diverse proficiency levels” was the major problem for over eighty-five percent of the iii.

(6) teacher participants. Another two common problems were “the textbook’s failure to develop students’ communicative abilities and to interest them.” On the other hand, students’ most common difficulties are “insufficient explanation of grammar”, “insufficient speaking and writing skills.” Furthermore, the following three difficulties showed significant differences in the results from rural students: “too much and too difficult grammar,” “insufficient reading skills,” and “inconvenient appendixes to look up words and grammar.” These involve the focuses of the current English exams. Urban-rural disparity may be related to these significant differences. With regard to students’ preferences, their favorite topics are “sports, traveling and recreation,” “cultures, customs, folk art and festivals,” as well as “affections.” For their favorite genres, “jokes,” “stories” and “comics” were preferred. Teachers’ predictions approximately corresponded to students’ responses. Last but not least, for students’ needs, a gap between teachers’ and students’ expectation emerged. “To communicate in English” was the top purpose of learning English in students’ mind, but teachers ranked “to get high grades in exams and the BCT” as the top priority. Furthermore, needs about “learning strategies” and “affective learning” show significant differences in the students’ perceptions. It is expected that the results help to sensitize teachers to students’ preferences as well as their needs, and teachers are suggested to flexibly and diversely utilize the textbook to suit students’ varying needs and proficiency levels. Also, it is suggested that textbook compilation be based on teachers’ and students’ major difficulties, preferences as well as needs.. Keywords: junior high school English textbooks, textbook evaluation, post-use evaluation, teachers’ perspectives, students’ perspectives, urban-rural disparity, textbook users’ difficulties, textbook users’ preferences, textbook users’ needs iv.

(7) ACKNOWLEDGEMENT “Finally, I complete the thesis!” Although it is the very beginning of the acknowledgement, the first word, “finally,” implies the investment to achieve the goal: reading piles of literature, writing about ten editions of drafts, crazily sending questionnaires to schools from Taoyuan County to Kaohsiung City until the post office closed at 7:00 p.m., train/THSR tickets to conduct interviews, dozens of pens, lollipops and white tapes to thank participants in the study, a tight neck and shoulders, white flower embrocation to reduce dizziness, analgesic balm to relieve muscular pain, burning midnight oil, a cup of coffee a day keeping sleepiness away (sometimes it did not work at all), nights of sleeplessness, as well as struggles to strike a balance between my work and writing the thesis (the most difficult part in the process). In addition to the above investment, it would not have been possible to complete this thesis without the great support and help of a number of people whom I would like to recognize and thank. First of all, I would like to express my deepest appreciation to my advisor, Dr. Hsi-nan Yeh, who has devoted himself to English teaching and learning in Taiwan for decades and always shows concerns to his students. Despite his tight schedules filled with long meetings, he still carefully read my drafts and helped me correct many flaws. I am enormously grateful for his unfailing guidance and valuable suggestions to my thesis. I would like to dedicate myself to education, following him as a role model. I also want to extend my special thanks to the other members of my thesis committee, Dr. Yuh-show Cheng and Dr. Ya-ming Tai, for their thoughtful insights and comments to help develop this research. In addition, I want to thank my classmates in this graduate school for their v.

(8) sharing and encouragement, especially Alicia, Rachel, Michelle, Yvonne, Nina, Nancy, Cindy and Sandra. I feel so lucky to enter such an inspiring four-year summer program which offers opportunities to English teachers to upgrade teaching and renew passion for education. Teachers of the program also inspired my thesis and educational philosophy. Also, I want to express my sincere gratitude to my friends, particularly Jessie, Patricia, Ann, David, Clare, Cherry, Drew, and Lori, who always cheered me up and boosted my confidence. My heartfelt appreciation also goes out to all of the participants in this thesis. Without their contribution, this thesis would not have been completed. I also want to thank the thesis, for it steeled me, enriched my poor vocabulary bank, and developed critical thinking as well as passion for studying. Finally, I want to show my deepest gratitude to my parents for their care, company, and education. They give me good fortune to meet so many good and inspiring people.. vi.

(9) TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT (CHINESE) ...............................................................................................i ABSTRACT (ENGLISH) ............................................................................................ iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENT .............................................................................................v TABLE OF CONTENTS .............................................................................................vii LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................ix LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................x CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION..........................................................................1 Background and Motivation ..................................................................................1 Purposes of the Study.............................................................................................7 Significance of the Study .......................................................................................8 CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW ..............................................................9 Issues in English Textbook Evaluation..................................................................9 English textbook evaluation schemes.............................................................9 Textbook functions in English language teaching and learning..................17 Needs of English textbook users ..................................................................19 Related Studies in English Textbook Studies ......................................................23 Textbook evaluation stages ..........................................................................23 Textbook evaluation criteria ........................................................................25 Textbook users’ needs, preferences and difficulties ....................................26 Summary ......................................................................................................29 Urban-Rural Disparity .........................................................................................32 Classifications of an area ............................................................................32 Distribution of learning resources...............................................................33 Summary of Chapter Two ....................................................................................35 CHAPTER THREE METHOD ................................................................................36 Participants...........................................................................................................36 Instruments...........................................................................................................40 Questionnaires .............................................................................................40 Interviews.....................................................................................................44 Procedures............................................................................................................45 Pilot study ....................................................................................................45 Data collection.............................................................................................46 Data analysis ...............................................................................................47 vii.

(10) CHAPTER FOUR RESULTS...................................................................................49 Questionnaires......................................................................................................49 Teachers’ post-use evaluation of the textbook..............................................49 Students’ post-use evaluation of the current textbooks ................................56 Interviews.............................................................................................................74 Interviews with teachers ..............................................................................74 Interviews with students...............................................................................97 Summary of Chapter Four .................................................................................109 CHAPTER FIVE DISCUSSION............................................................................110 Urban-rural Disparity in Textbook Evaluation ..................................................110 Teachers’ perceptions.................................................................................110 Students’ Perceptions .................................................................................113 Differences between Teachers’ and Students’ Textbook Evaluation..................120 Sufficiency in quantity and difficulty level .................................................120 Satisfaction with the textbook ....................................................................120 Students’ need and preferences ..................................................................122 Summary of Chapter Five..................................................................................124 CHAPTER SIX CONCLUSION ............................................................................125 Summary of the Study .......................................................................................125 Pedagogical Implications ...................................................................................127 Limitations of the Present Study and Suggestions for Future Research ............133 REFERENCES ..........................................................................................................135 Appendix A. Cunningsworth’s Quick-Reference Checklist for Evaluation and Selection (1995: 3-4)............................................................................141 Appendix B. Grades 1-9English Curriculum Guidelines (Adapted from the MOE, 2008: 7&30) .........................................................................................144 Appendix C. Detailed Information of Junior High Schools in the Formal Study......146 Appendix D. The Questionnaire for Teacher Participants .........................................149 Appendix E. The Questionnaire for Student Participants ..........................................153 Appendix F. Interview Questions for Teacher Participants .......................................157 Appendix G. Interview Questions for Student Participants .......................................158 Appendix H. Teachers’ Suggestions for Future Textbook Compilation ....................159 Appendix I. Students’ Suggestions for Future Textbook Compilation ......................162. viii.

(11) LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Distribution of Related Studies in National Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations in Taiwan 1986-2010: Classified by the Level of English Textbooks..........................................................................................................3 Table 2. Types of Textbook Evaluation Stages ............................................................. 11 Table 3. Textbook Evaluation Criteria ......................................................................... 11 Table 4. Textbook Functions in Language Teaching and Learning .............................17 Table 5. Needs Identified in Needs Analysis Literature (Masuhara, 1998: 240-1) .....20 Table 6. The Summary of Related Studies on Textbook Evaluation from 2003 to 2010 ..........................................................................................................................30 Table 7. The Distribution of the Teacher and Student Participants Filling in Questionnaires in the Present Study ................................................................37 Table 8. The Distribution of Interviewees in the Present Study ...................................39 Table 9. An Outline of Teacher Participants’ Questionnaire .......................................40 Table 10. An Outline of Student Participants’ Questionnaire......................................43 Table 11. An Outline of Interviews with Teachers and Students ..................................44 Table 12. Participants in the Pilot Study .....................................................................45 Table 13. Ts’ Evaluation: Quantity of Language Content, Texts, and Four Skills .......50 Table 14. Ts’ Evaluation: Difficulty Levels of Language Content, Texts & Four Skills ........................................................................................................................51 Table 15. Ts’ Satisfaction with Textbook H: Urban vs. Rural ......................................52 Table 16. Ts’ Satisfaction with Textbook K: Urban vs. Rural.......................................53 Table 17. Ts’ Difficulties in Using the Textbook ...........................................................54 Table 18. Ss’ Evaluation: Quantity of Language Content, Texts, and Four Skills.......57 Table 19. Ss’ Evaluation: Difficulty Levels of Language Content, Texts, & Four Skills ........................................................................................................................58 Table 20. Ss’ Satisfaction with Textbook H: Urban vs. Rural ......................................59 Table 21. Ss’ Satisfaction with Textbook K: Urban vs. Rural ......................................60 Table 22. Satisfaction with Textbook H: Urban Ts vs. Urban Ss .................................61 Table 23. Satisfaction with Textbook H: Rural Ts vs. Rural Ss ....................................61 Table 24. Satisfaction with Textbook K: Urban Ts vs. Urban Ss..................................62 Table 25. Satisfaction with Textbook K: Rural Ts vs. Rural Ss ....................................63 Table 26. Ss’ Favorite Topics from Ts’ and Ss’ Perspectives ........................................64 Table 27. Ss’ Favorite Genres from Ts’ and Ss’ Perspectives.......................................65 Table 28. Learning Needs: Ts’ Perspective vs. Ss’ Perspective....................................66 Table 29. Learning Needs from Ts’ Perspective: Urban vs. Rural...............................67 Table 30. Learning Needs from Ss’ Perspective: Urban vs. Rural...............................68 ix.

(12) Table 31. Ss’ Difficulties in Using the Textbook...........................................................70 Table 32. Ss’ Difficulties in Using Textbook H.............................................................71 Table 33. Ss’ Difficulties in Using Textbook K .............................................................72 Table 34. Code Names of the Interviewees ..................................................................74. LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. A Teacher’s Path through the Production of New or Adapted Materials .....20 Figure 2. A Flowchart of the Present Research Design...............................................48. x.

(13) CHAPTER ONE. INTRODUCTION. The study aims to examine school teachers’ and students’ post-use evaluation of junior high school (JHS) English textbooks and to provide pedagogical suggestions for teachers, students and textbook writers. This introductory chapter presents the background and motivation, purposes, research questions, as well as the significance of this study. Background and Motivation In Taiwan, a dramatic reform has been implemented on textbook policies. Lan (2003a, 2003b, 2006) stated that in the year 1991, the production of textbooks of arts subjects in elementary school were open to qualified publishers. In the year 1995, Ministry of Education (MOE) declared that in the school year 1996, with the implementation of the new Curricular Standards, elementary school textbooks of all subjects would gradually become authorized versions. Three years later, in the school year 1999, senior high school textbooks of all subjects were open to qualified publishers as well. As for JHS textbooks of academic subjects, they remained to be compiled and published by National Institute for Compilation and Translation (NICT) until MOE declared Grades 1-9 Curriculum Guidelines in 1998. From then on, the production of elementary and JHS textbooks of all subjects have been switched from single version by NICT to multiple versions compiled by qualified publishers. English textbooks are with no exception. The reform also empowered JHS English teachers to select their own English textbooks from a variety of authorized textbooks. However, as Cunningsworth (1995) described in the very beginning of his book: “The wealth of published materials for English language teaching (ELT) available on the market makes selecting the right. 1.

(14) coursebook (i.e., textbook) a challenging task” (p.1). Thus, it is hoped that studies on English textbooks are able to examine the merits and drawbacks of the various materials on the market and then offer suggestions for teachers’ textbook selection. Lan (2004) analyzed related studies on textbooks in Taiwan. He discovered that with the hope to improve the quality of textbooks, studies on textbooks have mushroomed to examine the advantages and disadvantages of textbooks. Many of the studies focused on textbook users’ perceptions of textbooks. In addition, it is after use of the textbook that its merits and weaknesses can be perceived by textbook evaluators (Chou, 2003a, 2003b; Deng, 2002; Lan, 2003a, 2003b, 2006). Also, Cunningsworth (1995), Ellis (1998), and Masuhara (1998) supported the significance of post-use evaluation. Cunningsworth (1995) defines “post-use evaluation” as “the retrospective assessment of a textbook’s performance and can be useful for identifying strengths and weaknesses which emerge over a period of continuous use” (p.14). Lan (2003a) further suggested that it is necessary to conduct systematic textbook evaluation every year and the findings can thus provide suggestions for teachers, textbook writers, and curriculum designers. Another reason for the significance of English textbook evaluation is that English textbooks play a dominant role in English teaching and learning. This is because the English learning environment in Taiwan is English as a foreign language (EFL), rather than English as a second language (ESL). In addition to English classes at school, students are not given adequate opportunities to practice English outside schools. Furthermore, English textbooks are teachers’ main teaching resources and students’ major learning materials (Chan, 2004; Huang, 2003; Li, 2003; Liao, 1999), particularly for less experienced teachers (Chang & Wu, 2004). Moreover, JHS English links elementary school English and senior high school English. Thus, the evaluation of JHS English textbooks appears more significant. 2.

(15) For these reasons, the researcher searched related studies of English textbooks in Taiwan in the online database, National Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations in Taiwan. The results showed 104 master theses conducted from the years 1986 to 2010, as shown in Table 1. Table 1. Distribution of Related Studies in National Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations in Taiwan 1986-2010: Classified by the Level of English Textbooks Level of English Textbooks. Kindergarten. Elementary School. Junior High School. Senior High School. College/ University. Number. 1. 33. 46. 24. 2. Percentage (%). .9. 31.13. 43.40. 22.64. 1.89. Note. Among the studies of elementary school English textbooks, two of them also dealt with junior high school English textbooks.. Table 1 indicates that there are 46 studies of JHS English textbooks. Eleven of them aimed to investigate the textbook evaluation. These studies analyzed JHS textbooks from 1999 to 2010. Nevertheless, with the constant revision of Grades 1-9 English Curriculum Guidelines, new editions of textbooks are constantly compiled and produced by qualified publishers, so the textbooks in these studies are not necessarily the same edition. Only three of them adopted the JHS English textbooks which were compiled by Grades 1-9 English Curriculum Guidelines declared in 2004 (i.e.,, the latest edition until the school year 2010) as their targets. One was to set criteria for the English textbook evaluation (Wang, 2010), another was to investigate the factors in teachers’ textbook selection as well as their satisfaction with English textbooks in Hsin-chu County (Lu, 2010), and the other was to discover teachers’ attitudes toward textbook selection and their satisfaction with the current English textbooks in Taichung City (Wu, 2010). Wang’s (2010) study established a set of evaluation criteria for teachers to 3.

(16) select and evaluate textbooks, which consisted of six dimensions: the learning content, the organization, implementations of pedagogies, teachers’ manuals, the use, and the publication. Nevertheless, this study failed to collect textbook users’ perceptions after they used textbooks. As for Lu’s (2010), a questionnaire was adopted to elicit English teachers’ perceptions of textbook selection and evaluation as well as their suggestions for future textbook revision. The questionnaire included five parts: the participant’s background information, the process of textbook selection, perceptions of the textbook, difficulties with textbook selection and use, as well as suggestions for future textbook compilation and selection. However, the questionnaire did not specify some unique issues of language learning materials, such as learners’ autonomy, learning strategies, topics of texts, recycling of vocabulary and grammar. Wu’s (2010) study had the same purposes and instruments as Lu’s. Nevertheless, Wu’s questionnaire was constituted of three parts: the participant’s background information, perceptions of the textbook selection, and the satisfaction with the textbook. Likewise, some specific features of English textbooks were not listed in the questionnaire, for example, learners’ autonomy, learning strategies, and topics of texts. In addition, no open-ended question was provided for participants to express their suggestions for textbook compilation and their expected needs of English textbooks. In spite of previous researchers’ contribution to JHS textbook evaluation, many of them failed to gather students’ perceptions of the English textbook, particularly they are also its target audience. Their needs and perceptions have to be collected and discussed because students in Taiwan have limited time to learn English effectively, as Nunan (1988) argues:. 4.

(17) “[I]n most learning contexts, it is impossible to teach learners everything they need to know in class. With little class time there is must therefore be used as effectively as possible to teach those aspects of the language which the learners themselves deem to be most urgently required, thus increasing student motivation. (p.3)” This citation highlights the necessity of investigating students’ evaluation in the present study to discover what they require in their current English learning. Yalden (1983) also claims that “language-learning systems must be learner-centered” (p.69). Moreover, some experts (Bolitho & Jolly, 1998; Cunningsworth, 1995; McDonough & Shaw, 1993; Nunan, 1988.) believe that language textbooks should suit learners’ learning process because learners are the center of the language curriculum. These insightful perceptions strengthen the significance of students’ evaluation of English textbooks. Due to the emphasis on the significance of learners’ evaluation, a few studies were conducted to elicit students’ opinions on textbooks. Of those whose targets were JHS English textbooks of Grades 1-9 English Curriculum, however, only two of them focused on students, who are also major textbook users. One is Lin’s study in 2004 and the other is Huang’s in 2006. Lin (2004) aimed to investigate both teachers’ and students’ perceptions of the provisionary edition of JHS English textbooks in Kaohsiung City through questionnaires. The questionnaires focused on the layout and the overall content of the textbooks. Yet, little attention was paid to specific features of English textbooks, such as recycling of vocabulary and grammar, topics and genres of texts, learning strategies, etc. Similarly, Huang’s (2006) also collected both teacher’s and students’ opinions on five JHS English textbooks from 2004 to 2006. Nevertheless, Huang focused on the design of the four skills in textbooks. Teachers’ opinions were gathered through 5.

(18) interviews; students’ were collected through a survey whose focuses were their interests and preferences of the features in textbooks. Huang then examined the quality of the textbooks based on the design of four skills and students’ needs. Yet, only 28 students and six teachers in an urban school participated in the study. The number of participants seemed very small and the study needed more studies to support its pedagogical implications. In addition to students’ voices, urban-rural disparity is a noteworthy issue of the current JHS English education. The results of the Basic Competence Test (BCT) every year reveal that urban students are more proficient in English while rural ones are less proficient (Chang, 2006, 2007; Huang, 2008; Pan, 2010; Wu, 2009; Yang, 2008). These researchers indicate that urban students have abundant and beneficial learning resources, including schools’ policies, teachers’ diverse pedagogies, and parental involvement. Thus they probably develop more advanced reading strategies. These factors may contribute to their higher grades in English on the BCT. Although previous studies have proved the influence of urban-rural disparity on students’ grades in English of the BCT, yet no attempts have been made to examine whether users’ perceptions of the textbook are influenced by urban-rural disparity. Furthermore, even though Lin’s and Huang’s studies gathered students’ voices, none of their participants were from a rural school. Therefore, the present study intends to enlarge the area, not only the urban one but also the rural one in order to explore teachers’ and students’ difficulties in using the textbook. It is expected that users’ perceptions of the textbook in both areas will be adopted in future textbook compilation so that urban-rural disparity may be reduced. In sum, the present study intends to explore both teachers’ and students’ post-use evaluation of JHS English textbooks in urban and rural areas. The. 6.

(19) researcher collected the whole sets of the two most popular textbooks 1, H and K, including Books One to Six, as the targets in the present study in order to induce both teachers’ and students’ perceptions. Both of the two textbooks are compiled based on Grades 1-9 English Curriculum Guidelines declared in 2004, that is, the latest edition until the school year 2010. In the spring semester of the school year 2010, the whole sets of both textbooks have been entirely adopted. Thus, it is the time for the present study to investigate the textbook users’ evaluation more completely than previous related studies.. Purposes of the Study The present study aims to investigate the post-use evaluation of the current JHS English textbooks from teachers’ and students’ perspectives and compare their perceptions of the current textbooks. Also, the differences between the evaluation of users in urban and rural areas are expected to be found. It is hoped that suggestions from textbook users can be adopted in the future English language teaching and learning as well as textbook compilation. The research questions of the present study are listed as follows: 1. Do textbook users in urban and rural areas perceive the textbook differently? To what extent are they satisfied with each part of the textbook? 2. Do teachers and students have different views of the textbook, especially regarding?. 1. According to the researchers’ personal communication with the salesman of the textbook publisher, in the school years 2009 and 2010, Textbooks H and K were the most popular English textbooks. In order to obtain the data from the majority of textbook users, the researcher intends to choose these two versions as the targets. 7.

(20) Significance of the Study The present study is significant for teachers, students as well as textbook writers. First of all, the results of the study can guide teachers to have a better understanding of what functions English textbooks have. It is hoped that pedagogical suggestions can be provided for teachers in the future textbook selection, use, and evaluation. Second, for students, it is important that they can express their expected needs of the textbook and more attention will be paid on these needs in the future English teaching and learning. Eventually, pedagogical suggestions can be offered to textbook writers to design better materials based on teachers’ and students’ real needs. It is believed that whether textbooks can interest students and how textbooks help students learn English well are major concerns of most teachers and students.. 8.

(21) CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW. This chapter aims to present issues in the English textbook evaluation, related studies, as well as urban-rural disparity. The first part states English textbook evaluation schemes, and it is followed by textbook functions in English language teaching and learning as well as the needs of English textbook users. The second part reviews previous studies of JHS English textbooks of Grades 1-9 English Curriculum. All of them are related to textbook evaluation. The final part presents studies of urban-rural disparity.. Issues in English Textbook Evaluation Experts have various perceptions of textbook evaluation. This section discusses three major issues that have impacts on the process and results of English textbook evaluation: English textbook evaluation schemes, textbook functions in English language teaching and learning, as well as needs of English textbook users.. English textbook evaluation schemes Owing to the liberalization of textbooks and teachers’ empowerment of selecting the textbook, the abundance of available textbooks on the market troubled teachers in textbook selection and evaluation (Lan, 2003a, 2003b, 2006). Skierso (1991) also claims, “Although no teacher is entirely satisfied with the textbook, yet very few manage to teach without one. …… The importance of the textbook in an EFL class makes the textbook selection crucial” (p. 432). To reduce teachers’ puzzlement, a number of evaluation schemes have been discussed and developed. This section describes two common focuses of the textbook evaluation: one is the. 9.

(22) stages of evaluation, and the other is the evaluation criteria. Many researchers develop textbook evaluation schemes by the stages when evaluation is conducted. For example, Grant (1987) presented three categories: initial evaluation, detailed evaluation, and in-use evaluation. Cunningsworth (1995) classified evaluation into three stages: pre-use evaluation, in-use evaluation, and post-use evaluation. McDonough and Shaw (1993) also presented three stages: the external evaluation (macro-evaluation), the internal evaluation (micro-evaluation), and the overall evaluation. Masuhara (1998) listed three types: pre-use evaluation (i.e.,, material selection), whilst-use evaluation, and after-use evaluation. In addition to three-stage evaluation schemes, Ellis (1998) presented two stages of textbook evaluation: one is “predictive evaluation,” which takes place before a textbook is adopted to decide which textbook to use; the other is “retrospective” evaluation,” which is conducted after teachers use the textbook to examine whether the textbook actually function as they expected and whether it is worthy of adopting the same textbook in the new school year. In line with Cunningsworth (1995), Ellis’s “retrospective” is similar with Cunningsworth’s “post-use evaluation,” both of which are implemented after the textbook is used. The present study intends to adopt post-use evaluation because based on Lan’s (2006) insight, the quality of textbooks cannot actually be examined until it has been used. Cunningsworth (1995) also specified post-use evaluation: “[it] provides retrospective assessment of a textbook’s performance and can be useful for identifying strengths and weaknesses…[this] can be helpful to decide whether to use the same textbook in the future” (p.14). From these perspectives, post-use evaluation tends to be more applicable to solve the research questions of the present study. To present a clear outline, terms of evaluation stages is summarized in Table 2.. 10.

(23) Table 2. Types of Textbook Evaluation Stages Researchers Types of Textbook Evaluation 1. Grant (1987) initial evaluation, detailed evaluation, in-use evaluation 2. McDonough & Shaw external evaluation (macro-evaluation), internal (1993) evaluation (micro-evaluation), overall evaluation 3. Cunningsworth (1995) pre-use evaluation, in-use evaluation, post-use evaluation 4. Ellis (1997) predictive evaluation, retrospective evaluation 5. Masuhara (1998) pre-use evaluation, whilst-use evaluation, post-use evaluation With regard to another popular focus of textbook evaluation, evaluation criteria, researchers’ opinions vary, as listed in Table 3: Table 3. Textbook Evaluation Criteria Researchers Criteria 1. Robinett (1978) 12 items: (cited from goals of the course, background of the students, Brown, 2007: approach, language skills, general content, quality of 192) practice material, sequencing, vocabulary, general sociolinguistic factors, format, accompanying materials, teacher’s guide 2. Grant (1987: CATALYST test for initial evaluation: 119) C—Communicative, A—Aims, T—Teachability, A—Available Add-ons, L—Level, Y—Your impression, S—Student interest, T—Tried and tested 3. Skierso (1991: 2 aspects: 440) A. The textbook (6 dimensions): bibliographical data, aims and goals, subject matter, vocabulary and structures, exercises and activities, layout and physical makeup B. Teachers’ manual (4 dimensions): general features, supplementary exercises for each language skill, methodological and pedagogical guidance, and linguistic background information 4. McDonough & 3 stages: Shaw (1993: A. external evaluation (macro-evaluation): 66-77) (1) the ‘blurb’, or the claims made on the cover of the teachers’/students’ book (2) the introduction and table of contents: these two should yield information on the following: a. the intended audience b. the proficiency level c. the context of use (i.e.,, general English v.s. ESP) d. the organization of the units/lessons (continued) 11.

(24) 5. Cunningsworth (1995: 3-4). 6. Huang (2001) (cited from Chen, 2004: 253). e. the author’s views on language and methodology and the relationship between the language, the learning process and the learner B. the internal evaluation (micro-evaluation): (1) the presentation of the skills (2) the grading and sequencing (3) the appropriacy beyond the text (4) authenticity of listening and speaking materials (5) the relationship of tests and exercises to a) learner needs and b) what is taught by the course material (6) suitability for different learning styles (7) whether materials motivate both students and teachers C. the overall evaluation: 4 factors usability, generalizability, adaptability, flexibility 8 dimensions of the quick reference checklist for textbook evaluation and selection: aims and approaches, design and organization, language content, skills, topic, methodology, teachers’ books, practical considerations 4 dimensions: (originally written in Chinese) A. physical features: e.g., layout, visual aids, etc. B. content: e.g., the overall design and organization, aims and approaches, sequencing, etc. C. teaching and learning: e.g., readability, skills, exercises and assessment, etc. D. service: e.g., publishers, authors, after-sale service, etc.. Note. The boldfaced items represent that they are the ones in the questionnaires of the present study.. As shown in Table 3, most of the researchers emphasized their concerns for learners. Robinett (1978) indicated that the textbook should fit students’ background, such as their age, motivation or purpose for learning English. Grant (1987) used an acronym “CATALYST” to explain that the textbook has to be designed to interest students and facilitate their learning. As for Skierso’s (1991) checklist of the textbook evaluation, students’ needs were taken into account in five of the six dimensions. For example, in the dimension of aims and goals, attention was suggested to be paid on how the specifications of the text’s grade level, age and. 12.

(25) background knowledge match those of the students, and to what extent the aims and objectives of the text correspond to students’ needs and goals. With regard to the other dimensions, the subject matter should suit students’ interests; the text has to make the structures and vocabulary presented easily accessible to learners; the activities should meet students’ behavioral objectives; the layout should appeal to and be suitable for students; as well as the illustrations had better be clear and simple without unnecessary details which confuse learners. In addition, McDonough & Shaw (1993) as well as Cunningsworth (1995) all specified the significance of learners in textbook evaluation. McDonough and Shaw pointed out that textbooks should motivate not only teachers but also students. Similarly, Cunningsworth claims that students’ views on the usefulness of textbooks are significant because they usually know what they like and dislike even though they may not be as articulate as their teachers. He further suggested that textbooks should follow four guidelines which emphasize learner-centeredness: (1) correspond to learners’ needs and match the aims and objectives of the language-learning program; (2) reflect the uses (present or future) which learners will make use of the language and help students to equip them to use language effectively for their own purposes; (3) take account of learners’ needs and facilitate their learning process, without dogmatically imposing a rigid ‘method’; (4) have a clear role as a support for learning, like teachers to mediate between the target language and the learner. (Cunningsworth, 1995: 14-7) In line with the emphasis on the significance of learners, JHS English textbooks of Grades 1-9 English Curriculum claim that they are designed to achieve the following objectives: to cultivate students’ basic English communicative competences, interests in and methods of learning English, as well as increase their 13.

(26) understanding of local and foreign cultures (Joy Enterprises Organization, 2010; Kan Hsuan Educational Publisher, 2010). Even so, it is necessary to investigate whether the design of the textbooks follows the principles of learner-centered language teaching and learning. The following paragraphs present major arguments of Cunningsworth’s guidelines of learner-centeredness. Due to the significance of learners’ role in textbooks, some features of textbooks have to be evaluated to examine whether they facilitate students’ progress in English language learning. Cunningsworth claims that the most obvious dimensions to reveal this function are language items (i.e.,, vocabulary and grammar), skills, and communicative strategies. Moreover, learner-centered language teaching and learning aim to guide students to cultivate learning autonomy, and they gradually become capable of using the language themselves outside the classroom, namely, in the real world. Furthermore, language skills are unique to language teaching and learning. Particularly in an EFL context like Taiwan, the significance of learning English lies in the learning of the ability to communicate with the rest of the world (MOE, 2008; Dubin & Olshtain, 1986). Because of the necessity, Cunningsworth suggested that textbooks should be able to aid learners to achieve goals by presenting authentic materials, creating tasks to encourage students to participate in activities which help them develop effective communicative skills and strategies. This can be done through topic selection, that is, choosing interesting and stimulating topics to suit students’ interests and encourage them to think as well as to discuss with each other. McDonough and Shaw (1993) followed the same line of thought and pointed out that “topic is the most obvious way in which learners’ needs and interests can be taken into account” (p.53). After all, “motivation is the most powerful forces for effective learning” (Cunningsworth, 1995: 17). 14.

(27) Another important element to facilitate learning is the assessment, which is a follow-up activity in teaching, aiming to understand students’ learning progress and offer feedback for future teaching (Yeh, 2000). It is also important for students to check their own progress and encourage themselves to realize their achievement. These will increase students’ motivation and thus enhance learning. These purposes can be done through formative assessments, such as quizzes and self-check lists to check what they have learned at a certain stage through the use of the textbook. Therefore, the assessment is one of the items in the questionnaires of the study. As for other common items shown in Table 3, the overall organization is a significant element in these evaluation criteria. Based on Cunningsworth’s (1995) insights, grammar and vocabulary need to be met in context and actively practiced. There must be sufficient recycling, at least three times before they become a part of a learner’s long-term memory. One guideline of recycling is that items are presented in an organized way in different contexts. Consequently, learners learn these language contents through progressive exposure and by constant meeting them in multiple different contexts so that learners increase their understanding of the use and meaning of language contents. Furthermore, the evaluation of English textbooks of Grades 1-9 English Curriculum by Association for Curriculum and Instruction (Chang, Yeh, et al, 2007) also present that even though all versions design a review section after three lessons, yet textbooks should recycle learned materials for students to integrate the language content (i.e.,, vocabulary and grammar) and the language skills. Cunningsworth further indicated that students’ and teachers’ sense of security would increase if there is a straightforward way through the whole curriculum for them to follow. Yet, each of the teachers or students has their individual needs and teaching/learning style. Flexibility of the textbook thus is hoped to be given. To 15.

(28) achieve this goal, it was suggested that there must be a “learning-training” section in the textbook, such as an introduction to guide students how to utilize the textbook, reference sections for students’ to look up learned vocabulary and grammar. Such an alternative is especially necessary for heterogeneous classes in junior high schools in Taiwan which are composed of students with varying needs and proficiency levels. Due to the significance of flexibility, it is important to examine whether the learning-training section is well-designed in order to grant learners more responsibility and autonomy on their own learning. Thus, the organization of the textbook is a significant dimension in the questionnaires of the present study. To sum up, of the varying evaluative frameworks, Cunningsworth’s quick-reference checklist (1995:3-4, see Appendix A) is the most feasible one regarding the flexibility of its organization. It was proposed by Cunningsworth that the most important items be chosen in the checklist as an outline to develop another unique framework which suits the real teaching and learning context with its own priorities. It is also more comprehensive than the other checklists because his was composed of a dimension which the others did not have, that is, learning resources. He further conducted case studies to demonstrate how each dimension could be applied for the textbook evaluation. These demonstrations make this checklist more comprehensible than the other evaluative frameworks. Therefore, the questionnaires in the present study were constructed based on the adaptation of this checklist. In addition to the evaluation criteria listed above, the current JHS English textbooks are compiled based on Grades 1-9 English Curriculum Guidelines (MOE, 2008, see Appendix B). Therefore, the suggested basic competences, topics, and genres were considered in the construction of questionnaires to elicit textbook users’ individual needs and preferences of learning English. In sum, in order to examine the gap between the textbook functions and the 16.

(29) actual use, the questionnaires incorporated the most common evaluation criteria: the overall design, the language content (including vocabulary, phrases, pronunciation, grammar, and sentence structure), texts (inclusive of topics, genres, and cultures), four language skills, learning strategies and resources, teachers’ manuals, and practical considerations. The detailed information is stated in Chapter Three.. Textbook functions in English language teaching and learning Apart from the discussion of textbook evaluation, textbook functions in English teaching and learning are no doubt an important issue because it is significant to observe whether the current textbooks can function effectively in classrooms so that the feedback can be offered for the future textbook compilation. In addition, as Allwright’s question addressed in 1981, “what do we want teaching materials for?” this leads to the investigation of textbook functions. Researchers have multiple insights of this issue, as shown in Table 4: Table 4. Textbook Functions in Language Teaching and Learning Researchers Textbook Functions 1. Skierso (1991: -provide a base or core of materials as jumping-off points for 432) the teacher and class (cited from O’Neil, 1982) -students’ and teachers’ main source of guidance (cited from Ariew, 1982 & Macian, 1986) -as a means of motivating students to pursue language study by offering glimpses of exotic situations in its illustrations and readings (cited from Ariew, 1982: 17) 2. Cunningsworth a resource in achieving aims and objectives that have already (1995: 7) been set in terms of learner needs; textbooks can serve as: -a resource for presentation material (spoken and written) -a source of activities for learner practice and communicative interaction -a reference source for learners on grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation, etc -a source of stimulation and ideas for classroom language activities -a syllabus (where they reflect learning objectives which have already been determined) (continued) 17.

(30) 3. Tomlinson (1998: ix). 4. Graves (2000: 174). 5. Richards (2001: 252). 6. Brown (2007). -a resource for self-directed learning or self-access work -a support for less experienced teachers who have yet to gain in confidence -the core materials for a course -aiming to provide as much as possible in one book -usually including work on grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation, functions and the skills of reading, writing, listening and speaking -provide a syllabus for the course -as a road map of the course, offering security for the students -provide a set of visuals, activities, reading, etc. to save teachers’ time in finding or developing such materials -provide teachers with a basis for assessing students’ learning -include supporting materials -provide consistency within a program across a given level; if textbooks follow a sequence, as within a series, it provides consistency between levels For teachers: -as their primary teaching resource, providing the basis for the content of lessons, the balance of skills taught, and the kinds of language practice students take part in -as the supplementary materials in the teachers’ instruction For learners: -provide the major source of contact they have with the language apart from the teacher -the most obvious and most common form of material support for language instruction. Table 4 shows that one of the most common textbook functions is to provide major resources in English learning and teaching which guides the way to realize the goals of the curriculum. However, it is worthy of noting that the textbook should play a role as teachers’ and students’ servant rather than their master (Ou, 2002, 2003). It is significant to explore how teachers and students utilize textbooks to teach and learn English in classrooms. Therefore, interview questions include questions such as when to adapt the textbook, when and what to supplement it to present what textbooks lack as a servant of teachers and students. Moreover, according to these researchers’ insights into the functions of language textbooks, the JHS English textbooks in Taiwan correspond with these 18.

(31) perceptions. Generally speaking, they are composed of dialogue texts, reading texts, grammar/sentence patterns, pronunciation, practices, activities, and exercises. Their purposes are to develop students’ four language skills, cultivate their correct learning attitudes, and to help them acquire effective learning strategies. Nevertheless, it is necessary to examine whether there is a gap between the expected functions of textbooks and the realization of materials in textbooks to discover whether the textbook’s target audience’s expected needs are ignored. Therefore, the next section discusses needs of English textbook users.. Needs of English textbook users It cannot be denied that the textbook production starts from the textbook users’ needs. As Figure 1 indicates, the identification of need for materials is the first stage of the production of new or adapted materials. After the needs of textbook users are explored, the publishers begin to compile new materials or revise them. Then, after the materials are used, the evaluation starts its way and offers feedback to the other stages of the material production. The purpose of the present study is to elicit textbook users’ post-use evaluation of the current English textbooks and thus the evaluation will offer feedback to the adaptation or production of textbooks.. 19.

(32) Figure 1. A Teacher’s Path through the Production of New or Adapted Materials (Adapted from Bolitho & Jolly, 1998: 98) In addition to Figure 1, Nunan (1988) cited Richards’ suggestion in 1984: “[N]eeds analysis serves three main purposes: to provide a means of obtaining wider input into the content, design, and implementation of a language program; to be used in developing goals, objectives, and content; and to provide data for reviewing and evaluating an existing program” (p.43). For these reasons, Masuhara (1998: 240-1) further classified needs into three main categories by the ownership: learners’ needs, teachers’ needs, and administrators’ needs. Among these three groups, learners’ and teachers’ needs are the focuses of the present study. Thus, the following list excludes the administrators’ needs, as shown in Table 5: Table 5. Needs Identified in Needs Analysis Literature (Masuhara, 1998: 240-1) Ownership Kind Source Learners’ Personal Age; sex; cultural background; interests; educational needs needs background Learning Learning styles; previous language learning experiences; needs gap between the target level and the present level in terms of knowledge (e.g., target language and its culture); (continued) 20.

(33) Learners’ needs. Teachers’ needs. Learning needs. gap between the target level and the present level in terms of proficiency in various competence areas (e.g., skills, strategies); learning goals and expectations for a course Future Requirements for the future undertakings in terms of professional knowledge of language, knowledge of language use, needs L2 competence Personal Age; sex; cultural background; interests; educational needs background; teachers’ language proficiency Professional Preferred teaching styles; teacher training experience; needs teaching experiences. Dubin and Olshtain (1985) further proposed that it is necessary to specify objectives for expected achievement at each stage. For example, after students graduate from junior high school, most of them may continue to study in academic senior high schools, while there are still others who have different purposes of learning English. Therefore, the expected needs of JHS English textbook users become a significant issue for the present study to examine through questionnaires and interviews with teachers and 9th graders. In particular, 9th graders are going to graduate from junior high school, and it is possible that they have different learning needs and goals in junior high school. Moreover, Masuhara (1998: 242) differentiated three kinds of teachers’ needs based on how they are identified: self-perceived needs, needs perceived by others, and objectively measured needs. These perceptions were suggested to be collected through questionnaires and interviews. The details are as follows: (1). (2). Self-perceived needs: the needs which are reported by the teacher. These are what teachers themselves can articulate. Needs perceived by others: the needs of the teachers which they are not aware of and thus cannot articulate themselves and which are perceived by others (e.g., colleagues, teacher-trainers, researchers) in response to qualitative data (e.g., observation of the teacher’s training, analyzing the 21.

(34) (3). tendency in interview and questionnaire responses of the teacher). Objectively measured needs: the needs which are identified in objective studies in which quantified data is collected, analyzed, and interpreted by a third party who tried to be detached, unbiased, and accurate. (Masuhara, 1998: 242). In addition, Graves (2000) as well as Richards (2001) both proposed some instruments to assess textbook users’ needs. Both of their proposals include questionnaires and interviews. These suggestions help the present study to establish a rationale in the construction of questionnaires and interviews to analyze textbook users’ needs. Davies (2006) also agreed that questionnaires designed for learners could obtain helpful information to contribute to better course provision. Based on these insights, in order to elicit textbook users’ self-perceived needs of textbooks, the questionnaires in the present study offered open-ended questions for participants to describe their suggestions for future textbook compilation. As for the collection of the other two types of needs, closed-formed questionnaires and semi-structural interviews were conducted to gather participants’ perceptions which were further quantitatively and qualitatively analyzed. The details of questionnaires and interviews are described in Chapter Three. With regard to learners’ needs, its significance lies in the textbook writers’ minds, as the introduction of JHS English textbooks claims: “this set of English textbook is designed to develop students’ language skills and cultivate their learning interests” (Joy Enterprises Organization, 2010; Kan Hsuan Educational Publisher, 2010). From their claims, we can perceive that students’ interests and needs are textbook writers’ priorities. To understand students’ needs more, they must be involved in the textbook evaluation. For this reason, questionnaires and interviews were conducted to stimulate students to articulate their needs. 22.

(35) To sum up, in the process of textbook evaluation, needs of textbook users cannot be excluded. To offer more comprehensive information for future textbook compilation, it is necessary to gather both teachers’ and students’ perceptions through the use of questionnaires and interviews.. Related Studies in English Textbook Studies This section reviews related studies of JHS English textbook evaluation in three aspects. The first part reviews studies of textbook evaluation stages, the second analyzes researches of textbook evaluation criteria, and the final one generalizes the previous findings of users’ needs, preferences and difficulties.. Textbook evaluation stages As literature of textbook evaluation stages in the previous section shows, textbook evaluation can be classified into three categories: pre-use (predictive), in-use (whilst-use), and post-use (retrospective) evaluation. Li (2003) aimed to investigate teachers’ predictive evaluation, use, and retrospective evaluation of the first volume of the new English textbook through classroom observation and interviews. Lin’s study (2004) explored teachers’ textbook selection (i.e.,, pre-use evaluation) and their evaluation (i.e.,, post-use evaluation) through questionnaires. Students participated in the study and articulated their perceptions through questionnaires. Wang (2005) discussed teachers’ experiences of textbook selection as well as evaluation. Huang (2006) collected teachers’ and students’ perceptions and examined whether the presentation of four language skills in textbooks corresponded to their needs and expectations. Finally, Wu’s study (2010) aimed to discover factors of teachers’ textbook selection and. 23.

(36) evaluation through questionnaires. The results of Li’s (2003), Lin’s (2004), Wang’s (2005) and Wu’s (2010) implied that teachers’ pre-use evaluation (i.e.,, selection) seemed to fail to clearly present an overall picture of the textbook. They explored possible factors or offered suggestions of the limitation. Li indicated that the inconsistency of teachers’ predictive and retrospective evaluation resulted from their wrong estimation of the difficulty levels of the textbook as well as students’ proficiency levels. In Lin’s, it was suggested that MOE set a detailed checklist for teachers’ textbook selection in order to select the most suitable textbook for students. Wang proposed that the combination of predictive and retrospective evaluation be utilized to select the most suitable textbook. Wu suggested that teachers of varying background discuss with each other more often to objectively select the suitable textbook. Furthermore, due to the reform on students’ entrance to senior high school, she suggested that textbooks be learner-centered and multiple assessment be adopted to develop students’ multiple competence. To sum up, it is found that each evaluation stage has its unique contribution and limitation to the investigation of the textbook. This may contribute to users’ varying perceptions of textbooks. But as experts’ insightful proposal which highly prizes the significance and strengths of post-use evaluation, it seems to be more applicable to answer research questions of the present study. Therefore, the present study aims to investigate users’ perceptions of textbooks through questionnaires and interviews. Nevertheless, another issue, textbook evaluation criteria, may also cause multiple results of textbook evaluation. The next part will focus on textbook evaluation criteria.. 24.

(37) Textbook evaluation criteria Experts’ opinions of textbook evaluation criteria vary. Previous studies also put emphasis on different aspects of the textbook. Since the questionnaires of the present study is adapted according to Cunningsworth’s checklist (1995: 3-4), the following review of related studies is based on the structure of the checklist, inclusive of eight dimensions: aims and approaches, design and organization, language content (i.e.,, words, phrases, pronunciation, grammar and sentence patterns), four skills, topics, methodology, teachers’ books, as well as practical considerations. Lin’s questionnaire (2004) was composed of three dimensions: 1) physical features, 2) the content, as well as 3) teachers’ manuals, students’ workbooks, and supplementary materials. The first dimension was similar to Cunningsworth’s emphasis on practical consideration, such as the attractiveness of the layout. The second focused on sequencing, the amount of words and grammar of a lesson, the effectiveness of practice of four skills, cultures, the diversity of texts, and whether the content interest students. These were the integration of several dimensions in Cunningsworth’s checklist, including design, language content, skills and topics. As for the third one, it corresponded to Cunnongsworth’s criteria of aims and approaches as well as teachers’ manuals. However, Lin’s questionnaire did not include specific features of language textbooks, such as pronunciation, recycling of language content, learning methods and strategies. Huang’s survey questions (2006) were designed to elicit students’ interests and mirror their learning needs. The survey focused on the presentation of four skills and was composed of seven open-ended questions: the overall design, physical appearance, learning methods or strategies, culture, activity design, topic choices, as well as whether the activities were meaningful and could be used in real-world 25.

(38) conversation. These questions integrated Cunningsworth’s evaluation criteria of four skills, topics and methodology. Nevertheless, the survey failed to collect users’ perceptions of the other parts: aims and approaches, language content, teachers’ books, and practical consideration. Wu’s questionnaire (2010) was constructed to discover teachers’ satisfaction with different dimensions of the textbook through a questionnaire. The questionnaire was composed of 26 items, and these items were classified into four dimensions: publication, physical features, content, as well as teaching and learning. They were overlapped with all of the dimensions in Cunningsworth’s checklist. Yet, some specific issues of a language textbook were excluded: recycling of language content, presentation of each language skill, and learning strategies. In conclusion, all of the related studies above focused on several criteria of textbook evaluation, such as the physical appearance, language skills, as well as topics. Even so, certain specific issues of language textbook should be further explored, particularly recycling of language content, presentation of each language skill, as well as learning strategies and resources. Therefore, the present study includes these important issues in teachers’ and students’ questionnaires. Furthermore, it intends to discover users’ satisfaction with different parts of the textbooks, and aims to offer suggestions to teachers and textbook writers.. Textbook users’ needs, preferences and difficulties Researchers have varying opinions of English textbook evaluation. Even so, most of them emphasize their concerns for learners. They support the idea of learner-centeredness and propose that materials in textbooks should suit students’ interests, needs as well as goals and then motivate them. Cunningsworth (1995) claims, “Motivation is the most powerful forces for effective learning.” His claim 26.

(39) pointed out the significance of motivating students. Furthermore, students’ motivation may be aroused by taking their needs and preferences into account in the process of textbook compilation. To examine realization of learner-centeredness in textbooks, a few studies explored teachers’ and/or students’ needs, preferences and difficulties through questionnaires or interviews. Lin (2004) designed a questionnaire to elicit teachers’ and students’ difficulties as well as students’ interests in using the provisionary editions of JHS English textbooks in Kaohsiung City. The findings showed that nearly 90% of the teachers had problems with using the textbook while over half of the students had no difficulties. Teachers’ commonest three problems were the lack of systematic instruction, failure to improve students’ writing ability, as well as too much content. Concerning students’ interests, teachers and students had different views. Most teachers (62.5%) thought that their students were interested in the textbook, while only nearly one-third of the students (30.9%) were actually interested. Therefore, it was expected that teachers adopted appealing pedagogies to interest their students, and make them feel that learning English was not only for exams. Regarding users’ preferences, topics and types of activities were asked. The results showed that students preferred “popular entertainment,” “science and technology,” as well as “arts” (e.g., music, movies). Their favorite activities were “songs,” “chants,” “raps,” “role play,” and “riddles.” Huang’s study (2006) also collected students’ perceptions of the four skills in five textbooks through surveys and then induced their needs. On the other hand, teachers’ opinions were collected through interviews. The results revealed that practice of integrated skills were important for students because it helped them cope with real-world communication. Nevertheless, the exercises of integrated skills were limited to “listen and write, “read and say,” “read and write,” and “listen and 27.

(40) repeat,” which could not meet students’ needs in the real world. Learning methods and interests were also discussed because Grades 1-9 English Curriculum Guidelines by MOE requested that these two features should be presented in textbooks to aid students’ learning. Although they were indeed offered in textbooks, yet they were insufficient for students. Also, information of cultures and customs were examined because it was also one of the ideals in Grades 1-9 English Curriculum Guidelines. The findings showed that students were interested in such information, but due to limited time, teachers might skip this part. Eventually, interviews with teachers showed specific needs of Taiwanese students, that is, equipping students with basic language competence to get high grades in the BCT as well as the basic level of General English Proficiency Test (GEPT). The textbooks could achieve the former goal because practice of grammar was sufficient. However, they failed to achieve the latter one because of insufficient vocabularies. From the studies above, it was expected that textbooks should be compiled based on students’ needs and interests. Furthermore, teachers’ and students’ difficulties should be taken into consideration. However, the aforementioned studies did not actually explore students’ needs from their perspectives. Although Lin constructed a questionnaire to elicit students’ difficulties as well as their favorite topics and activities, their learning needs were not explicitly presented. On the other hand, Huang’s interviews with teachers revealed that students in Taiwan had the specific need of passing exams (i.e.,, the BCT and the basic level of GEPT). Nevertheless, suggested competence in Grades 1-9 English Curriculum Guidelines should be considered in textbook evaluation because the current textbooks are compiled based on the guidelines. Therefore, teachers’ and students’ questionnaires of the present study include a part which aims to elicit their learning needs (see Appendixes D&E), and the findings will indicate whether teachers and students have 28.

(41) different opinions on this issue.. Summary The previous studies all tackled with JHS English textbook evaluation, some of which included the selection and use. Nevertheless, they adopted different editions of textbooks and methods to examine perceptions from different perspectives. Also, their focuses of the textbooks were not necessarily the same. Li (2003) conducted classroom observation and interviews with six teachers in Taipei County to compare their perceptions of predictive evaluation with retrospective evaluation. Lin (2004) investigated both students’ and teachers’ textbook evaluation through questionnaires. Wang (2005) interviewed with six teachers to discover their perception of the textbook liberalization as well as their experiences of textbook selection and evaluation. Huang (2006) focused on the design of the four language skills and designed a survey and an interview to respectively examine students’ and teachers’ perceptions. A content analysis was followed to conduct a more careful examination. In Wu’s (2010) study, factors of teachers’ selection and satisfaction degrees of current textbooks were discussed. Table 6 shows the summary of the related studies from 2003 to 2010.. 29.