ChapterⅡ. Literature Review
The present study attempts to investigate what topics/text types of English textbook lessons are likely to be selected for students to study on their own or skipped in class by English teachers, and to learn the reasons behind the selection. In this study, the self-learning lessons are those lessons skipped in class by English teachers or assigned for students to study on their own. If the skipped lessons reveal any pattern, the information can benefit the English teachers, the textbook material writers and the teacher educators. The majority of the previous research focuses on the selection of textbooks, but the present study aims at the selection of English textbooks lessons. The lessons which are skipped in class are the researcher’s interest. The principles and guidelines used to evaluate textbooks reviewed in the previous study can also be consulted by English teachers to select appropriate textbook lessons. The researcher would explore if the lessons filtered out by English teachers less correspond to the selection principles.
Firstly, considerations in textbook evaluation will be reviewed. Types of evaluation and the factors involved will be classified. Secondly, research on textbook adaptation will be reviewed and the need for it justified. The dimensions and the forms of adaptation will be classified. Finally, research on the variables correlating with teachers’ use of textbooks will be reviewed, including teacher factors, situational factors, and student factors.
2.1 Evaluation of Textbooks
The three phases involved in the use of textbooks – the selection, evaluation, and adaptation – are interrelated. This study involves textbook evaluation and adaptation.
In this part, the forms of textbook evaluations will be classified. The adaptation of
textbooks will be discussed in the next part.
Textbook evaluation can provide essential information for textbook use and selection. Ellis (1997) proposes two types of material evaluation: a predictive evaluation and retrospective evaluation. A predictive evaluation is held before a textbook is used. It aims to decide what materials to use. It may lack of empirical evidence and more likely to be subjective. However, for teachers who do not have the experience of using the textbook, or who are evaluating textbooks in advance to make a selection, a predictive evaluation is unavoidable. In a retrospective evaluation, by contrast, material users determine whether the selected material is worth using again, which sections or activities achieve their teaching objectives, and whether and how they should be modified. Based on the information obtained through a retrospective evaluation, teachers can not only select teaching materials more sensibly but also make materials more effective for future use. This study is more related to predictive evaluation because English teachers have to decide what lessons to teach or skip before a textbook is used in class.
Chen C. T. (2002) reviewed the literature on textbook evaluation and designed a list of criteria for her senior high school students and English teachers to evaluate the textbooks they are using. The defects of the textbooks reported by her teacher subjects included:
1. Lack of good link with junior high school English teaching materials;
2. A difficulty level beyond their students’ proficiency;
3. Too much content to be covered within the instructional time;
4. Lack of useful accompanying materials, for test-taking training, and practice in particular; and
5. Insufficient background information in teachers’ manuals for teachers to consult.
In addition to the first and the second defects above, the negative comments from
students on the textbook they were using included:
1. Insufficient amount of materials on Chinese culture; and 2. Insufficient exercises on speaking.
Chen also found that her student subjects seemed to pay more attention to the physical layout than the content of the textbooks compared with her teacher subjects.
Richards (1993) states that evaluation takes the form of small group activities in which teachers brainstorm and try to identify criteria they would use in evaluating a textbook, a unit of material, or an exercise. The focus is initially at a macro level (i.e., criteria that could be used with any kind of textbook), and then at a micro level (e.g.
criteria for a specific kind of textbook, such as a conversation text). For the macro level evaluation, criteria are identified under three categories:
1. teacher factors 2. learner factors 3. task factors
Under 1, teachers on a recent workshop identified the following factors:
1. the book matches the course objectives 2. it is relatively easy to use
3. it can be easily adapted to fit my class needs 4. it is culturally appropriate for my learners 5. the teaching points are easy to identify 6. it is not dependent on the use of equipment 7. it can be used with classes of mixed ability
Under 2, these factors were identified:
1. the content interests the students 2. the level is appropriate
3. the cost is acceptable
4. it is motivating and challenging 5. the format is attractive and colorful
Under 3, the following factors were included:
1. the task achieves their objectives 2. the tasks are self-explanatory
3. the tasks progress in difficulty throughout the course
Theses criteria are then used in examining textbook materials and determining priorities for adaptation. Richards (1993) concludes that it is essential to give teachers the knowledge and skills needed to evaluate and adapt textbooks and to prepare them to use textbooks as sources for creative adaptation.
2.2 The selection of reading passages
In Lu’s study (2004), eighty percent of the teachers focused on the reading passages when selecting a textbook. In evaluating the reading passages, most of the teachers were concerned with the practicality of the reading passages in real life. The other three top considerations were the interest level, educational function, and the informativeness of the passages. Most of the teachers reported that their students preferred passages rich in everyday English. The other top three most preferred types were touching stories, humorous tales, and passages introducing foreign cultures. In student participants’ opinions, everyday English, humorous tales, introduction on communication skills, and touching stories were to their taste.
Several factors now influence the selection of reading texts for the EFL classroom. Romero (1957) suggests that the lessons should be short and well-organized, designed for one or two class periods. This helps the teacher plan his lesson and makes for variety in class. The material should be interesting for the type of student who is to use it. Puzzles and songs give variety and are valuable if they
help teach the structures and vocabulary of the lesson. And humor is the last thing we learn in a second language.
Gary (1992) stresses the importance of need analysis and states that teachers would like to see textbooks materials that are
1. flexible for use with children with a variety of needs, 2. user-friendly, both for the teacher and students, 3. clearly written and attractive to students,
4. interactive: directing incisive questions to the students and providing raw data for the students to organize into their own data retrieval charts,
5. models of good writing practice (e.g. use of topic sentences), and 6. consistent and integrated across all curricula. (p. 139)
2.3 Adaptation of Textbooks
Although researchers tend to support the need of textbooks, they also point out the limitations of textbooks. (Allwright 1981; Chen 2002; Grant 1987; Richards 1998, 2001) In this section, reasons for adaptation and the role of teachers in adaptation will be reviewed. Then the forms of textbook adaptation and the dimensions in research on textbook use will be defined.
2.3.1 Need for adaptation
Teaching is a multi-dimensional process. Each teaching context is unique, influenced by such factors as the constraints of the curriculum and syllabus, the availability of resources, classroom dynamics, the learner factors, etc.
(Cunningsworth, 1995) Hence, commercial materials have to be adapted by individual teachers according to their unique teaching context. Since users and contexts vary, there can be no perfect textbook. Grant (1987) cautions that “…one needn’t be a slave to a textbook; it is in fact easier to use a textbook selectively than it is to use it
slavishly” (p. 10). Materials are but a starting point. Similarly, despite his support for the need of commercial materials, Allwright (1981) points out the limitations of any teaching materials: “Materials can contribute in some way, but they cannot determine [learning] goals…no matter how comprehensively the materials cover learning goal”
(p. 7).
It is teachers who make the materials work for their students in the contexts where they teach. It is teachers, not textbooks, who should undertake the management process of teaching and learning. If teachers allow textbooks to make most of the decisions and see their roles as managing students through the materials, they are marginalizing themselves to the role of little more than a technician. (Richards 1998) Indeed, teachers should see teaching as a process that is highly interactive in nature rather than something that can be preplanned by others.
In fact, it is from an expertise-tracking viewpoint that Allwright (1981) justifies teachers’ use of ready-made materials:
…not because the classroom teacher is deficient, … but because the expertise required of materials writers is importantly different from that required of classroom teachers – the people who have to have the interpersonal skills to make classrooms good places to learn in – it [a commercial materials] “free” the teacher to develop the expertise needed for dealing with practical and fundamental issues in the fostering of language learning in the classroom setting. (p. 6)
Hence Allwright not only supported the use of commercial materials but also recognizes the expertise of teachers in putting the materials into practice. He particularly emphasizes the role of teachers in the process of facilitating language learning through the adaptation of materials. Hutchinson and Torres (1994) hold the same opinion:
The textbook should be seen as a means of “re-skilling”, not “de-skilling”
since teachers adapt textbooks by adding new tasks or deleting some, changing the management of tasks, changing task inputs or expected
outputs, and so on. (p. 324)
As an experienced material writer and a researcher on teachers’ training, Richards (1998) points out the compromise and homogenization in textbook production. He warns teachers of the negative consequence of using textbooks without adaptation. Richards proposes that “teachers should therefore approach textbook with the expectation that deletion, adaptation, and extension will normally be needed for the materials to work effectively with their class” (Richards 1998, p.
135). Grant (1987) observes how much teachers rely on textbooks. He points out the fact that not all teachers rely exclusively on a textbook. Rather, those who think they stick closely to the textbook often depart from it in practice. In order to accommodate the needs of their students and the limitations of the contexts, teachers have the capacity for “self-reliance” and “self-judgment” (Grant 1987, p. 8). Dudley-Evans and St. John (1998) suggest that most teachers are not creators of teaching materials but providers of good materials instead. Thus they should not only evaluate and select from what is available, but also remain creative, by modifying activities and supplementing extra language inputs to suit learners’ needs.
In Lu’s study (2004), almost no textbook was finished in one semester. There were always one or two lessons left untaught. Also, not all the lessons were included in the two midterms and one final exam. Around one or two lessons were excluded from school exams. When asked why they did not teach all the lessons in one semester, all of the interviewed teachers complained about instructional time constraints. When asked how they deal with the untaught or excluded lessons, most of the interviewees reported that they left them for students to study on their own. A few of them would finish teaching the lessons during summer school.
Examination is an indicator for teachers’ adaptation of the textbook. In Lu’s study (2004), the teachers often skipped the sections excluded from exams. Another
indicator was the difficulty level of the section. If a section was too difficult to teach in class, or easy enough for students to study on their own, teachers just skipped it.
From the literature review above, we know that teachers’ task is to adapt textbooks according to the students’ aims, learning styles, their interests, and their needs. And “teachers are in the best position” to make effective decision concerning the specific nature of student-teacher interaction, the timing and pacing of instruction, and the detailed nature of student activities because they can “require more content-specific information than anyone outside the classroom is likely to have”
(Leithwood et al, 1982).
2.3.2 Forms of textbook adaptation
What strategies can teachers apply to make the textbook more suitable for their students? Grant (1987) points out five options that teachers can choose:
1. use the textbook’s methods and materials as they stand;
2. adapt either the content, or the method, or both;
3. replace the content, or method used in the exercise with something teachers consider more suitable;
4. omit the exercise if it is irrelevant or unsuitable;
5. add more material, whether from supplementary textbooks, or from teachers’ own resources if the textbook is lacking in some respects.
Richards (2001) also states that the adaptation may take a variety of forms, (1) modifying content; (2) adding or deleting content; (3) reorganizing content; (4) addressing omissions; (5) modifying tasks; and (6) extending tasks.
The five forms of textbook adaptation in Grant (1987) and the six in Richards (2001) can be integrated and classified into the following three points:
(1) Adding: Exercises may contain insufficient practice. Extra practice or supplementary materials may need adding. Or, the text may omit items that
teachers feel are important. For instance, they may add vocabulary items or grammar items to a unit. Teachers may add an activity designed on their own to achieve their teaching goals.
(2) Deleting: The book may contain too much for the program. An activity, a section, or even a whole lesson may be deleted, based on practical consideration:
learner’s proficiency and interest, instructional time constraints, etc.
(3) Modifying: Either the content or the teaching method of a textbook may need changing. Teachers may reorganize the lesson order in a volume. They may rearrange the sequences of the sections in a lesson. Or, they may modify the instructions of an activity or the teaching methods suggested in teachers’
manuals. The form of modifying is a more complicated process than the other two forms.
The deleting form of textbook adaptation will be the focus of investigation in the present study. Data are obtained from questionnaires.
2.3.3 Adaptation of lesson sections
Not every section of lessons is regarded as equally important by most of the teachers. In Lu’s study (2004), over half of the teachers believed that vocabulary and phrases, sentence patterns and grammar, and reading were the most important sections.
The section on language activities was ranked the fourth. It seemed that most of the teacher participants put more emphasis on language knowledge (e.g. vocabulary and grammar) than language use (i.e. activities).
In addition to enhancing some sections, teachers might skip some others. In Lu’s study (2004), less than one fourth of the teachers never skipped any section. In other words, most of the teachers often skipped some lesson sections in the textbook. The four sections skipped most often are: pronunciation, listening, post-reading questions, and pre-reading activities. The dominant reason why teachers skipped these sections
was insufficient instructional time. Some teachers skipped some sections because they were easy for students to study on their own. Another reason for skipping sections was that it was not included in school exams. The listening section was skipped for the same backwash effect of exams. Post-reading questions were skipped because teachers regarded them easy for self-study. Pre-reading activities were skipped because they were difficult to apply in class.
However, teacher’s adaptation of textbooks did not always correspond to students’ expectation. (Lu, 2004) For example, students expected teachers to enhance the conversation and listening sections, but these two sections were often skipped by teachers. The number one reason why teachers skipped specific lesson sections was the instructional time constraints.
2.4 Variables Correlated with Textbook Use
Research has shown that there are user factors and situational factors in adapting textbooks. Firstly, teachers play a dominant role in textbook evaluation, selection, and adaptation. In their decision-making process, they are often influenced by personal factors such as beliefs, teaching experiences, preferences, teaching styles, etc. (Li 2003; Richards, Tung, and Ng 1992; Savignon 1997; Ulichny 1996; Woodward 1993) Also, interaction with students can be one of the factors affecting teachers’ decision.
(Calderhead 1987; Chen 1986; Clark and Peterson 1986; Johnson 1992; Richards 2001; Su 1997; Wang 2002) Secondly, although students seldom participate in the selection or production of their learning materials in most EFL teaching contexts, their use and perception are definitely important for teachers. In fact, students’ proficiency level strongly correlates with their teachers’ and their own use of textbooks. (Chen 1986; Cheng 2002; Li, 2003; Liao 1999; Su 1997; Wang 2002) Finally, the teaching context in which the instruction takes place strongly affects all aspects of teaching.
The question of teaching context includes education policy, the curriculum, public examinations, instructional time, etc. (Li 2003, Liao 1999; Lin 1995, Su 1997; Wang 2002)
In this section, research on teacher factors will be reviewed, particularly on teaching experience. Then research on available instructional time as one of the most influential situational factors will be reviewed. Finally, student factor -- students’
self-reported English proficiency on how they use their learning materials -- will be discussed.
2.4.1 Teachers’ teaching experience
Teachers’ beliefs affect their adaptation of textbook. Research on teachers’
beliefs has investigated the influential variables in teachers’ decision-making. Ulichny concludes that:
The particular construction or sense making of the moment is a product of an individual teacher’s past teaching and teaching experiences, beliefs about teaching and learning and her particular personality. (Ulichny 1996, p. 178) Among the variables affecting teachers’ beliefs, teaching experience has been the focus of a vast body of research. (Calderhead 1987; Fogerty, Wang, and Creek 1983;
Johnson 1992; Li, 2003; Livingston and Borke 1989; Richards, Tung, and Ng 1992;
Savignon 1997; Woodward 1993) Differences between experienced teachers and novice ones in lesson presentation have been investigated. In the questionnaire survey on the beliefs of English teachers in Hong Kong secondary schools, Richards, Tung, and Ng (1992) found that the amount of teaching experience results in different beliefs and practice. Experienced teachers tended to set their teaching goals as preparing their students for future public examination. Also, they were more ready to go beyond the written medium, in the use of audio and videotapes, or oral exercises and pronunciation drills. By contrast, inexperienced teachers were more likely to believe strongly in the value of memorizing dialogues. Also, grammar-based approach
was cited as one of the most useful teaching methods by novice teachers. In Savignon’s study (1997), novice teachers relied greatly on the textbook. Experienced teachers, on the contrary, treated materials as a resource. For them, everything meaningful at hand could be integrated into their teaching. In some instances, experienced teachers even instructed their students to collect or create their own learning materials. In a review of textbook use, Woodward (1993) observes that inexperienced teachers tend to use textbook more extensively than experienced teachers. Li (2003) divided her six participants into two groups according to their opinions for or against the new textbook. The proponents were averagely ten years younger and less experienced than the opponents. The less experienced were clearer about the current state of the English education in primary schools than the experienced. More importantly, their judgment of their students’ proficiency was closer to the actual proficiency level. By contrast, the more experienced teachers tended to overestimate their students’ proficiency.
2.4.2 Amount of instructional time
The teaching contexts such as the curriculum, the pressure of public examinations, and the amount of instructional time certainly affect teachers’
decision-making. Among the situational factors, the amount of instructional time seems to be the most influential. Freeman and Porter (cited in Studolsky 1989) found that teachers were selective in the topics and exercises in their textbooks. Even though the topics and sequences to be taught were determined by textbooks, teachers still had to make significant decisions according to time allocation. Lin (1995) compared the English teaching contexts of nineteen general senior high schools (GSHSs) and twenty-two vocational high schools (VHSs). He found that the available instructional time was the critical factor affecting teachers’ use of teaching materials. In his study, 87 percent of the VHS English teachers reported that instructional time was
insufficient whereas only 38 percent GSHS teachers has the same response. Lin (1996) found that VHS teachers with two hours of English per week could only finish four to five lessons in a semester. Su’s study (1997) on vocational high school students’ need analysis reveals that over half of her student subjects complained that the instructional time for English was not sufficient. Su suggests that teachers should select a textbook of appropriate difficulty level based on students’ proficiency level and the available instructional time.
2.4.3 Students’ English proficiency
In Wang’s (2002) study, one of the common phenomena about ELT in Taiwan observed by teacher educators was that students lacked learning motivation due to the difficulties experienced in learning. Up to two-thirds of learners experienced pain and frustration. (p.136) Many junior high school students lost their interest in English or even gave up learning English. Once students lost their interest in English at junior high school level, further learning often became frustrating and fruitless. (p. 138) Not surprisingly, such a frustrating phenomenon could grow more serious in high schools.
One of the motivation strategies suggested by Dornyei (2001) is to build students’ confidence. According to the teacher educators (Wang 2002), one of the approaches to build students’ confidence is accessible material. Teaching materials and activities should be adjusted according to students’ proficiency. (p. 140) Teaching materials that are beyond students’ proficiency level only perpetuate students’
frustration rather than help develop their proficiency.
A few researchers on textbook use have taken students’ proficiency into account.
Li (2003) interviewed six secondary school English teachers. She found that all of them were mainly concerned about two factors in their decision-making: students’
English proficiency and the difficulty level of the textbook. She also found that teachers’ uncertainty of students’ proficiency level and substantial differences in
students’ individual proficiency levels were two of the contextual constraints that affected teachers’ use of the textbook. Teachers who perceived the mismatch between the difficulty level of the textbook and their students’ proficiency were more likely to employ adaptation when using textbook. Liao (1999) also interviewed six English teachers and observed their teaching. She found that her teacher participants were influenced by the students’ ability level when selecting teaching materials, adopting instruction activities, and deciding teaching methods. Similar findings are reported in Cheng’s (2002) study on the backwash effect of examination. She found no effect of the new public examinations on teachers’ teaching methodology. Cheng suggests that this might be related to practical considerations of teaching when dealing with students. Her teacher participants said that students did not have adequate English proficiency to cope with the new examination formats. Concerned with students’
insufficient proficiency, teachers did not adopt any new teaching methodology.
2.4.4 Teachers’ interaction with students
In making decisions, students’ responses often center on their teacher. Teaching is a type of improvisational performance. (Clark and Peterson 1986) While the teacher’s planning decisions provide a framework for approaching a lesson, that framework may be substantially revised as the teachers respond to students’
understanding and participation. In discussing teachers’ interaction with students, both teachers’ assumption about their students’ learning and student-centered consideration
should be included.
Johnson (1992) studied six pre-service ESL teachers, and found that teachers recalled making interactive decisions most frequently in order to promote students’
understanding (37 percent of all interactive decisions made) or to promote students’
motivation and involvement (17 percent). Calderhead found that experienced teachers
“knew what students might process in the way of previous experience, skills and
knowledge” (Calderhead 1987, p. 10). Such pedagogical knowledge is learned from experience of instruction and interaction with students as well. Still, the textbooks selected by teachers may not reflect students’ needs or interests. (Chen 1986; Richards 2001; Su 1997)
2.5 Summary
In reality, there are only few studies exploring the adaptation of local school English textbooks. Even fewer surveyed the lessons skipped in class by English teachers. Most studies focus on the selection or evaluation of textbooks. Besides, the topics/text types of the skipped lessons and the reasons to skip them have not been investigated.
The present study intends to investigate what topics/text types of high school English textbook lessons tend to be skipped by English teachers. The subjects are the teachers in charge of the English subject in every high school nationwide. The teaching materials investigated are English textbooks of different series. A comparison of the skipped lessons in different series will be explored as well. Finally, the correlation between the skipped topics/text types and the reasons to skip them will be analyzed.
