an evaluation of grammatical structure sequencing in
TRANSCRIPT
People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria
Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific research
Larbi Ben M’hidi University-Om El Bouaghi
Faculty of Letters and Languages
Department of English
A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of Letters and Languages
Department of English, in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the
Degree of
Master of Arts in Didactics of English as a Foreign Language
By: NASRI Wahiba and DIAR Soror
➢ Supervisor: Dr. BOULEMAIZ Djallel
➢ President: Mrs. GUERFI Soraya
➢ Examiner: Mrs. SENOUSSI Nadjet
2020-2021
An Evaluation of Grammatical Structure Sequencing in Second
and Third Year Middle School EFL Textbooks « My Book of
English (2AM and 3AM) »
(The cognitive Domain)
I
Dedication
To my beloved parents who gave me endless love and encouragement throughout my study.
To my dear sisters and brothers for their valuable support and help.
To my little angels nephews and nieces.
To my friends and all those who lent a helping hand, I dedicate this humble work.
Wahiba.
In the name of Allah, the most Graceful, the most Merciful
I would like to start my humble words by thanking Allah first for making me become who I’m
now, and for all the gifts he gave me and still where no words ever can express my gratefulness.
To my beloved parents Mrs. Kadri Nadia (R.I.P), and Mr. Diar Mostafa, my brother Hamza, and
my sisters Wissam and Ikram; thank you for being my family and for supporting me all the time
to be healthy and successful. I am grateful to have such friends too either the ladies or the
gentlemen who some of them are still by my side since the primary school. Yet my special ones
will always be Hadjab Khawla Romaissa, Cherifi Romaissa, Benadjel Chayma, and of course my
other half who is also my partner in this dissertation Nasri Wahiba (Wipa) my forever best
classmate and now to the list of my best friends and to thank our both hearts for loving the far
east Asian culture and mainly South Korea.
A special dedication is sent to me; I want to thank me for always believing in me, and for never
losing hope even after having those rough times during the previous years. I want to thank the
old me for building the present me, and for opening gates to the future me if God will. Thank you
so much Miss. Diar Soror!
Soror.
II
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
First of all, we would like to thank Allah for helping us to reach such point in our lives,
and to be able to be called "graduates". For all the strength and faith he gifted us to finish this
work.
We would like to express our appreciation to our special teachers of our English
department at the University of L’Arbi Ben Mhidi for the previous five years starting with our
supervisor Dr. Boulmaiz whom we thank the most for his guidance, help, and pieces of advice.
Moving to our examiners, thank you for being a part of our special day.
We would also like to thank the middle school teachers who answered every question in
our questionnaire patiently, and mainly those two who helped us through sharing with us their
years of experiences in teaching the Algeriran middle school English textbooks to guide us and
to support our aims of this research paper : Miss. Bekhouch Fatiha, and Miss. Hadjris Wafa.
Thanks to everyone.
III
Abstract
Textbooks are valuable in each language classroom. They are considered as an essential
component which has several roles in English Language Teaching (ELT) curriculum. Therefore,
their evaluation is utmost importance so that their pedagogical contribution can be assured to the
teaching-learning process. Although there are so many studies about textbook evaluation, yet the
newly published textbooks are not given the much attention needed to be examined. The present
study attempts to evaluate the new generation of the Algerian middle school English textbooks
“My Book of English” of the 2nd and the 3rd years where the focus is on the evaluation of the
grammatical sequencing and the grammar presentation. The research strives to discover if there is
appropriate grammatical sequencing in each and between both textbooks ; it seeks also to know
how grammar is presented and assess its appropriateness to the leaners’ level. Therefore, to achieve
these goals, quantitative and qualitative data were obtained throughout an adapted checklist and a
teacher’s questionnaire. A checklist was adapted from different proposed checklists to suit the
aims of the research, whereas the questionnaire was addressed to the middle school EFL teachers
to assess their perspectives towards the textbooks’ grammar content and the grammatical
sequencing. The results of the mixed method revealed that the 3rd year textbook grammatical items
are somehow appropriate to the target learners, whereas the 2nd year grammar structures are
complex and beyond the learners’ levels. Also, the grammar structures in each textbook are
sequenced on the basis of the learner’s communicative needs. Finally, there is a grammatical
sequencing between both coursebooks, but it is inappropriate and illogical because the learners are
still facing some challenges in using the language correctly which affects the achievement of the
stated objectives.
IV
Keywords : textbook, textbook evaluation, English language teaching ELT, grammar
presentation, the grammatical sequencing.
V
List of Abbreviations
A: Agree
ALM: Audio-Lingual Method
CBA: Competency Based Approach
CLT: Communicative Language Teaching
DM: Direct Method
D: Disagree
EFL: English as Foreign Language
ELT: English Language Teaching
FL: Foreign Language
GTM: Grammar Translation Method
MEB: My Book of English
MGT: My Grammar Tools
MPT: My Pronunciation Tools
MS: Middle School
N: Number
Q: Question
SA: Strongly Agree
SD: Strongly Disagree
SPSS: Statistical Package for Social Sciences
TEFL: Teaching English as Foreign Language
%: Percentage
VI
List of Tables
Table 1: Teachers' Gender ....................................................................................................... - 46 -
Table 2: Teachers' Age ............................................................................................................. - 47 -
Table 3: Teaching Experience.................................................................................................. - 48 -
Table 4: Teaching Experience using MBE .............................................................................. - 48 -
Table 5: The Use of MBE in the Teaching Learning Process ................................................. - 49 -
Table 6: Textbook Suitibility to the Learners' Level ............................................................... - 50 -
Table 7:The Organization of Content According to the Learners’ Language Needs .............. - 51 -
Table 8:Complementarity of the Textbooks ............................................................................ - 52 -
Table 9:The Objectives Achievements .................................................................................... - 53 -
Table 10:Textbooks Limit Teachers' Creativity ...................................................................... - 54 -
Table 11:The Textbook General Assessment .......................................................................... - 55 -
Table 12:The Clear Presentation of Grammar Points .............................................................. - 56 -
Table 13:Grammar Complexity ............................................................................................... - 57 -
Table 14:The Amount of Grammar Rules in Comparison with Learners’ Level .................... - 58 -
Table 15:The Gradual Movement of Grammar Points ............................................................ - 58 -
Table 16:The Presentation of Grammar Structures.................................................................. - 59 -
Table 17:The Integration of Grammar Structures .................................................................... - 60 -
Table 18:The Appropriateness of Grammar Structures Sequence ........................................... - 61 -
Table 19:The Grammatical Sequencing in Relation to Textbook Communicative Objectives- 62
-
Table 20:The Grammatical Sequencing on the basis of the Learners’ Communicative Needs- 63
-
VII
Table 21:The Relation between the Grammatical Sequencing and the Linguistic Competence
Development ............................................................................................................................. - 64 -
Table 22:The Grammatical Sequencing between both Textbooks .......................................... - 65 -
Table 23:The Appropriateness and the Logical Sequence between both Textbooks .............. - 66 -
VIII
Table of Contents
Dedication ........................................................................................................................................ I
Acknowlegements ........................................................................................................................... II
Abstract ......................................................................................................................................... III
List of Abbreviations ..................................................................................................................... V
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................ VI
Table of Contents ....................................................................................................................... VIII
General Introduction
1. Statement of the Problem .................................................................................................... - 2 -
2. Aims and Significance of the Study.................................................................................... - 3 -
3. Research Questions ............................................................................................................. - 4 -
4. Research Methodology ....................................................................................................... - 4 -
5. Structure of the Research .................................................................................................... - 4 -
Chapter One: Teaching Grammar and Textbook Evaluation
Section One: Teaching Grammar and Grammatical Sequencing
Introduction ................................................................................................................................. - 8 -
1.1. Definition of Grammar .................................................................................................... - 8 -
1.2. Types of Grammar ........................................................................................................... - 9 -
1.2.1. Prescriptive Grammar ............................................................................................... - 9 -
IX
1.2.2. Descriptive Grammar ............................................................................................... - 9 -
1.2.3. Difference between the Prescriptive and Descriptive Grammar ............................ - 10 -
1.2.4. Pedagogical Grammar ............................................................................................ - 10 -
1.3. Teaching Grammar of EFL ............................................................................................ - 11 -
1.3.1. Approaches and Methods of Teaching Grammar ................................................... - 11 -
1.3.1.1. Deductive Approach Vs Inductive Approach ................................................. - 12 -
1.3.1.2. Grammar Translation Method Vs Direct Method ........................................... - 13 -
1.3.1.3. Audiolingual Method ...................................................................................... - 14 -
1.3.1.4. Communicative language teaching (CLT) ...................................................... - 14 -
1.3.1.5. Competency based approach ........................................................................... - 15 -
1.4. Grammatical Sequencing ............................................................................................... - 16 -
1.4.1. The Importance of the Context ............................................................................... - 17 -
Section Two: Textbook Evaluation
Introduction ............................................................................................................................... - 21 -
2.1. The Role of Textbook in English Language Teaching (ELT) ....................................... - 21 -
2.1.1 Advantages ............................................................................................................. - 22 -
2.1.2. Disadvantages ......................................................................................................... - 22 -
2.2. Textbook Evaluation ...................................................................................................... - 23 -
2.2.1. The Need for Textbook Evaluation ........................................................................ - 23 -
2.2.2. Types and Approaches of Textbook Evaluation ..................................................... - 24 -
X
2.2.2.1. Predictive Evaluation vs. Retrospective Evaluation ....................................... - 24 -
2.2.2.2. Pre-Use, In-Use, and Post-Use Evaluations .................................................... - 25 -
2.2.2.3. Macro-evaluation vs. Micro-evaluation .......................................................... - 26 -
2.2.3. Methods for Evaluating a Textbook ....................................................................... - 26 -
2.3. Checklist as a Tool of Evaluation .................................................................................. - 27 -
2.4. Evaluating the Presentation of Grammar in ELT Textbooks......................................... - 30 -
Conclusion ................................................................................................................................ - 31 -
Chapter Two: Evaluative Checklist
Introduction ............................................................................................................................... - 33 -
3.1. Research Methodology .................................................................................................. - 33 -
3.2. Textbooks Description ................................................................................................... - 33 -
3.3. Analysis of MBE............................................................................................................ - 34 -
3.3.1. Practical Consideration ........................................................................................... - 35 -
3.3.2. Language Related Consideration ............................................................................ - 35 -
A. Grammar ................................................................................................................. - 35 -
B. Exercises and Activities .......................................................................................... - 41 -
C. Layout and Physical Makeup ................................................................................. - 41 -
3.4. Summary of the Main Findings ..................................................................................... - 42 -
Conclusion ................................................................................................................................ - 43 -
Chapter Three: Teachers’ Questionnaire
XI
Introduction ............................................................................................................................... - 45 -
4.1. The Method .................................................................................................................... - 45 -
4.2. Questionnaire Description ............................................................................................. - 45 -
4.3. Sample of the Study ....................................................................................................... - 46 -
4.4. Analysis of the Questionnaire ........................................................................................ - 46 -
4.4.1. Bibliographical Information ................................................................................... - 46 -
4.4.2. Textbook and Syllabus ........................................................................................... - 49 -
4.4.3. Grammar Structures ................................................................................................ - 56 -
4.4.4. Grammatical Sequencing ........................................................................................ - 61 -
4.5. Discussion of The Results .............................................................................................. - 67 -
Conclusion ................................................................................................................................ - 69 -
General Conclusion ................................................................................................................. - 69 -
Research Limitations ................................................................................................................ - 71 -
Suggestions for Future Research .............................................................................................. - 71 -
References ................................................................................................................................. - 73 -
Appendices
Résumé
الملخص
- 1 -
General Introduction
1. Statement of the Problem
2. Aims and Significance of the Study
3. Research Questions
4. Research Methodology
5. Structure of the Research
- 2 -
General Introduction
1. Statement of the Problem
It is beyond doubt that English is gaining ground and is viewed more as the most important
language to learn. The last few centuries have seen the rise of English as a global language as a
result of several factors like politics, economy, technology, and culture (Crystal, 1997). The whole
phenomenon of globalization has contributed substantially to making English the most widely
studied foreign language in the world (Richards & Rodgers, 2001).According to Chang (2006)
English has been the prevailing foreign language in the curricula of educational institutions and in
foreign language learning.
In the Algerian educational system, English is taught as a second foreign language after the
French language, and the medium that is used to provide the learners with the knowledge of this
second foreign language is the textbook. English school textbooks are considered the most relevant
sources of learning English worldwide, which function as a guide for learners and instructors to
making them engaged in practices and make both the teaching and the learning activities to thrive
(Margana & Widyantoro, 2017). As it is known, textbook remain a major source of contact with
the English language; however, the “Perfect book does not exist” (Grant, 1987, p.8) that is why
their evaluation merits serious consideration because an inappropriate choice may waste efforts
and time, and also to find out the best possible one that will fit and be appropriate to a particular
learner group.
In 2016, the Algerian education minister launched a reform movement as a result of the
dissatisfaction with the existing syllabi and textbooks at the middle school (MS) levels, hence the
birth of the second generation concerning the English language textbooks.
- 3 -
Because the publication of My Book of English collection is recent, some studies were
conducted on the evaluation of that new generation where the focus is put on particular aspects
like vocabulary development (Nabi & Oualmi, 2018), pronunciation, or maybe on the evaluation
of the textbook as whole. After further researches, it is noticed that almost all the conducted
researches have focused on the first-year middle school textbook whereas the other levels are still
waiting their turn to come. Therefore, this target study will be about the evaluation of the 2nd and
the 3rd year MS English textbooks. For more clarification, instead of focusing on all the aspects of
the textbooks, the research focuses only on the grammar aspect, and more specifically, the
grammatical sequencing and the grammar presentation and their suitability to the learners’ level.
Learning grammar is an important step in learning the foreign language, it should be taught in
appropriate sequence in and between levels to match the learners needs an advances in learning
that language. Also, its difficulty levels have to suit the target leaners’ level, all these will help the
learner to deliver the message correctly and communicate in the target situation effectively.
2. Aims and Significance of the Study
Since the textbook is the most important material used by teachers to guide the teaching-
learning process for the sake of achieving specific objectives, the research aims to see whether
there is a kind of continuity and sequencing in and between the 2nd and the 3rd grades concerning
the grammar structures. Moreover, it seeks to know how these structures are presented and evaluate
their suitability to the learners’ level.
The current study has two main objectives:
▪ To shed the light on the textbooks strengths and weaknesses concerning the grammar
presentation and how the gramatical sequencing has an effect on the achievement of the
stated objectives.
- 4 -
▪ To make the designers and the inspectors aware about the necessity to make some
adjustments in the current using textbooks concerning the difficulty level of the presented
grammar in comparison with the learners’ level.
3. Research Questions
The present study tends to answer the following questions:
a. Is there a grammatical sequencing in and between the 2nd and the 3rd grade textbooks to
achieve the stated objectives (the linguistic competence) ?
b. To what extent do the grammatical structures that are presented in 2nd and 3rd year MS
English textbooks suit the learners’ level ? And how are they presented ?
4. Research Methodology
In this study, a mixed method is applied (both quantitative and qualitative procedures). An
adapted checklist is used to collect a qualitative data through evaluating generally both textbooks
and put the emphasize on the presentation of grammar structures. Moreover, the quantitative data
are obtained through the questionnaire which was distributed to the MS English teachers in the
district of Oum El Bouaghi (OEB) (a random sample of 22 teachers was taken from: 4 MSs in
OEB, 2 MSs in Ain El Baida, and 2 MSs in Berrich) in order to assess their attitudes towards both
textbooks, the grammatical sequencing, and the grammar presentation. The questionnaire results
were treated by the SPSS 20.0 and presented in tables.
5. Structure of the Research
In an ideal setting, the current study is presented in 3 chapters in addition to the general
introduction and conclusion. The first chapter is related to the literature review, it is consisted of
two sections: the first section is about teaching grammar and the grammatical sequencing whereas
the second section talks about the textbook evaluation. In addition, the other two chapters are
- 5 -
related to the field of investigation, with the application of two different tools that are discussed in
two sparable chapters. The 2nd chapter discusses the qualitative results that are obtained from the
evaluation of the 2nd and the 3rd year textbooks through relying on the checklist method.
Furthermore, the third chapter is devoted to analyze the quantitative results after treating the
collected data and presenting them in tables via the SPSS 20.0. Finally, a conclusion, research
limitations and suggestions for future research are made to sum up the whole study.
- 6 -
Chapter One: Teaching Grammar and Textbook Evaluation
Section one: Teaching Grammar and Grammatical Sequencing
Introduction
1.1.Definition of Grammar
1.2.Types of grammar
1.2.1. Prescriptive Grammar
1.2.2. Descriptive Grammar
1.2.2.1.Difference Between the Prescriptive and Descriptive Grammar
1.2.3. Pedagogical Grammar
1.3.Teaching Grammar of EFL
1.3.1. Approaches and Methods to Teaching Grammar
1.3.1.1.Deductive Approach Vs Inductive Approach
1.3.1.2.Grammar Translation Method Vs Direct Method
1.3.1.3.Audiolingual Method
1.3.1.4.Communicative Language Teaching
1.3.1.5.Competency Based Approach
1.4.Grammatical Sequencing
1.4.1. The Importance of the Context
Section two: Textbook Evaluation
Introduction
2.1. The Role of Textbook in English language teaching (ELT)
2.1.1. Advantages
2.1.2. Disadvantages
- 7 -
2.2. Textbook Evaluation
2.2.1. The Need for Textbook Evaluation
2.2.2. Types and Approaches to Textbook Evaluation
2.2.2.1. Predictive Evaluation Vs Retrospective Evaluation
2.2.2.2. Pe-use, In-use and Post-use Evaluations
2.2.2.3. Macro-evaluation Vs Micro-evaluation
2.2.3. Methods for Evaluating a Textbook
2.3. Checklist as a Tool of Evaluation
2.4. Evaluating the Presentation of Grammar in ELT Textbooks
Conclusion
- 8 -
Section One: Teaching Grammar and Grammatical Sequencing
Introduction
English is the first language of many countries, or else it is absolutely taught as the second
or the third language in many other countries like in the Middle East with its history, literature,
grammar, and its four language skills using textbooks starting from primary schools or middle
schools so that children will be able to practice, speak, and use English from an early age. This
will help them to develop their communicative and linguistic competences through time. In fact,
the main focus to teach and learn English is given to its grammar structure and complexity rather
than any other aspect of the English language.
1.1. Definition of Grammar
Grammar is an important aspect of a language, and it has more than one definition since
scholars and linguists have different points of view, perspectives, and arguments that ended up
with several conclusions to define grammar. One common definition, which is found in Oxford
Dictionary of English Grammar, says that grammar is “the entire system of a language, including
its syntax, morphology, semantics and phonology” (Chalker & Weiner, 1994, p. 177). According
to Patrick Hartwell (1989) grammar could be categorized into five definitions that can be
summarized as follows: set of formal patterns in which the words of a language are arranged in
order to convey a larger meaning; the branch of linguistic science which is concerned with the
description, analysis, and formulation of the formal language patterns; linguistic etiquette; school
grammar; and, lastly, grammatical terms used in the interest of teaching prose. All of these
previous definitions were questioned in the 1950’s for the fact that they were too compelled.
Therefore, The Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English defines grammar as "The study and
practice of the rules by which words change their forms and are combined into sentences” (Harmer,
- 9 -
1991. p. 1). There are two basic elements in this definition: the rules of grammar; and the study
and practice of the rules. Finally, Grammar shows the ability of a person to express him/ herself,
their ideas, and emotions well. This ability is reflected in the way they use a language effectively,
and without grammar people cannot understand each other. As Crystal (2004) stresses: “Grammar
is the structural ability to express ourselves.”
1.2. Types of Grammar
Thornbury (2006) divides grammar into three types: prescriptive, descriptive and
pedagogical grammar.
1.2.1. Prescriptive Grammar
According to linguists Depraetere and Langford (2012), A prescriptive grammar is one that
gives hard and fast rules about what is grammatical and what is ungrammatical, often with advice
about what to not say but with little explanation. In other words, prescriptive grammar is based on
a set of rules that people who share the same language can judge wether these rules are right or
wrong, and how they should be used and considered as right and correct in their own language
because they define its structure and complexity which make the difference from other languages
that may have another language system.
1.2.2. Descriptive Grammar
Unlike the prescriptive grammar that deals and cares about the “right and wrong” of a
language to be considered grammatically correct, the descriptive grammar is more about the “why
and how” of a language in order to study how the language should actually be used by adult native
speakers, not only in writing and standard language but also in speech and the spoken language.
In fact, many linguists defined the descriptive grammar in different ways taking Richard Nordquist
(2015), a professor at Armstrong Atlantic State University and author of grammar and composition
- 10 -
textbooks, who sees that descriptive grammar refers to the structure of language that is used by
speakers and writers in common communication. In Addition, Battistella (2005) said that
descriptive grammar is the basis for dictionaries, which record changes in vocabulary and usage,
and for the field of linguistics, which aims at describing languages and investigating the nature of
language. These perspectives clarify that a descriptive grammar is a set of rules about language
based on how it is actually used. In a descriptive grammar, there is no right or wrong language. It
can be compared with a prescriptive grammar, which is a set of rules based on how people think
language should be used.
1.2.3. Difference between the Prescriptive and Descriptive Grammar
The difference between descriptive grammar and prescriptive grammar is comparable to
the difference between constitutive rules, which determine how something works (such as the rules
for the game of chess), and regulatory rules, which control behavior (such as the rules of etiquette).
If the former are violated, the thing cannot work, but if the latter are violated, the thing works, but
crudely, awkwardly, or rudely (Brinton & Brinton, 2010). So prescriptive grammar is the one
taught in school and mandated by language academies which requires conscious efforts from
learners to remember and to apply. For example, the I vs Me: John and me are going to have lunch.
In prescriptive grammar, the example is wrong because “me” is used as subject, and the correct
sentence should be: “John and I are going to have lunch.” Because “me” should be used as object.
However, in descriptive grammar, “me” is becoming increasingly widespread in subject position.
1.2.4. Pedagogical Grammar
Pedagogical grammar is a modern approach in linguistics intended for teaching an
additional language. This method of teaching is divided into the descriptive grammatical analysis
and the prescriptive articulation of a set of rules following an analysis of the context and
- 11 -
instructions designed for second-language students to manifest and describe how to use grammar
for the purpose of communication for them to learn the target language. The main aim of
pedagogical grammar, also called ped grammar or teaching grammar, is to focus on how
grammatical items are made more learnable and teachable. Davies (2007) in his edited book
“Introduction to Applied Linguistics” mentioned that a pedagogical grammar may be based on the
following: a grammatical analysis and description of the language, a particular grammatical theory,
and the study of the grammatical problems of learners or on a combination of approaches.
1.3. Teaching Grammar of EFL
Every foreign language has its own rules and characteristics that make it a learned
language. In addition, every approved language to be taught academically and internationally, like
English, has its own grammar rules that should incorporate all the four language skills: listening,
speaking, reading, and writing. These skills can be taught separately, in pairs, or all together at the
same time. It actually depends on the needs of the learners, the chosen activities, and the aims the
teacher wants his/her students to achieve. The students can also learn and practice the grammar
rules by using and being familiar with different modalities. In fact, in the past, people were
depending on only one method to study the grammar of a foreign language through; it is important
to mention that some of those methods are still in use till nowadays even though the linguists
developed more useful methods and approaches which provide better understanding and practice
rather the very first teaching methods like the grammar translation method and direct method.
1.3.1. Approaches and Methods of Teaching Grammar
Grammar is an important aspect for effective language learning. It can be taught through
different approaches and methods. Although the principles of these approaches and methods are
- 12 -
different from one another, there is always a focus on grammar whether it is presented explicitly
or implicitly.
1.3.1.1.Deductive Approach Vs Inductive Approach
Inductive grammar teaching allows the students to discover the grammar rules by
themselves. For example, the teacher will give them a reading passage then ask them to pay
attention to certain words to discover or to reach something at the end; these words can be verbs
that are in present tense then changed to past tense of any other tense just in order to discover such
new grammar rules. The new grammar rule like knowing new tense, adjectives, adverbs, or any
other grammar structure will be led to by answering the given questions by the teacher. The main
goal in inductive grammar is to let the students be their own guide and notice the difference or the
new change in that grammar rules by themselves as in the comparative and the superlative
adjectives, the students will automatically notice the word formation of the given adjective and so
on.
However, in the deductive grammar teaching, it is more about the standard grammar
teaching which is a more familiar method to teach English grammar where the grammar rules are
presented and studied explicitly, and the common practice is translation exercises. In fact, the
teacher is more to be the controller of teaching the new grammar lecture, s/he will go over the rules
then gives the examples, and at the end the students role comes after the full explanation of the
lecture by the teacher, they will apply the rules of the lecture by doing exercises, activities, or
worksheets to apply these new learned rules. This method has advantages because some
grammatical structures do not lend themselves very well to inductive teaching on one hand, but
when it is teacher-centered the student may not learn very well because s/he will need to ask
questions and have some ambiguity especially concerning the complicated grammar rules as it can
- 13 -
take much longer for them to realize how to apply those rules taking into consideration the fact
that not all the students have the same cognitive ability to learn something new, and there are
different levels in one classroom.
1.3.1.2.Grammar Translation Method Vs Direct Method
The Grammar Translation Method (GTM) and the Direct Method (DM) appeared in the
pre-method era (18th and 19th century) basically where the methods in this era are not scientific
and were not based on any approach. First, the main purpose behind the emergence of GTM is that
it was suggested to teach classical languages like Latin, Greek, Roman…etc. It is also called
Traditional method, Classical method, Academic method, German method, and Prussian method.
Its main aim is to help students to read and translate written texts where students are given set of
texts and asked to translate them from the foreign language to the native or the mother tongue
language, and it focuses on two things which are Grammar and Translation to further student’s
general intellectual development. The GTM immersed in analyzing the grammatical structure,
understanding and manipulating morphology and syntax of the studied foreign language and more
specifically its grammatical forms and structure for by virtue of the fact that grammar was
considered as important as the Bible language, and no other language aspect is above the grammar
because mastery of the grammar of the foreign language is essential to understand the written
target language. The grammar is taught deductively which is a method that teachers still use in
order to teach English Grammar rules, and to enable students’ primary skills to develop in reading
and writing.
Nevertheless, the DM appeared in the 19th century as a reaction to the GTM, and to aim
for teaching grammar inductively and to emblematize how to teach the second language to learners
- 14 -
in order to use language for communication purposes, and because of the demand for developing
oral communication because in GTM the focus is on accuracy rather than fluency.
1.3.1.3.Audiolingual Method
The Audio-lingual Method (ALM) has emerged during the second World War as the Army
Method, then in 1960, it was renamed the Audio-lingual method. The audio-lingual approach was
influenced by both structural linguistics and behavioral psychology (Gascoigne, 2002).
Consequently, the goal of this method is to use the target language communicatively that is focused
on developing listening and speaking skills. It uses the assumption that language learning is the
gaining of a set of correct language habits (Freemen, 1986). The ALM is based on drill exercises
– pupils repeat grammatical patterns until they are able to produce them spontaneously.
Additionally, grammar is learned from models which means it is taught implicitly by drill to
support speaking and listening although no specific grammar rules are given (Simenson, 1998).
1.3.1.4.Communicative language teaching (CLT)
“Communicative language teaching arose in the 1970s from dissatisfaction with grammar-
translation and audiolingual approaches, which began to be seen as too limited for enabling
learners to learn how to actually use the language” (Burnsp, 2011, p. 78). The focus has shifted
from form to meaning (Freemen, 2000). Thus, the main goal of this approach is to prepare students
for various types of communicative situations in a given social context, in other terms enabling
learners to use language appropriately in real contexts. Furthermore, CLT emphasizes the use of
authentic language; the teacher is not an authority but a facilitator creating a relaxed class
atmosphere and an adviser during the activities. He teaches grammar inductively because the goal
of the method is not providing knowledge about grammar rules directly. Therefore, teachers do
not correct every mistake that the learner made in performing tasks like role-play and problem-
- 15 -
solving tasks. All the grammar and vocabulary that pupils learn follow from the function and the
situational context.
1.3.1.5.Competency based approach
Competency-based approach (CBA) first emerged in the United States in the 1970s and it
was initially adopted to help immigrants and refugees learn English and life skills and for the
designation of vocational training programs. Later, it started to get employed in a range of
Australian professional spheres to discuss problems and ways of the modernization of education
(Bowden, 2004). CBA is a popular approach and well-known to educators and scientists all over
the world. Richards and Rodgers (2001) hold that CBA focuses on the outcomes of learning. It
addresses what the learners are expected to do rather than what they are expected to learn about.
The CBA advocates defining educational goals in terms of precise measurable descriptions of
knowledge, skills and behaviors that students should possess at the end of a course of study.
Similarly, Schneck (1978) views CBA as an outcome-based instruction that is adaptive to the needs
of students, teachers and the community. Therefore, learner's needs dominate the approach where
language skills, grammar and vocabulary are sequenced according to the learner's needs.
Additionally, translation is used only if necessary for communication; context is used as much as
possible to help the learner deduce meaning. Authentic materials are also used where the learner
is encouraged to practice the language by performing real tasks outside of the classroom, thus
helping in his linguistic and communicative development.
Briefly, CBA is concerned with the development of processes of learning as well as
competencies whose components are: know-how, know-how to do and know-how to be. It aims at
focusing on meaning rather than form and at equipping the learner not only with knowledge, but
- 16 -
more importantly with proper primary, social and intellectual skills to use that knowledge in real
life situations by providing the learner with a natural context for language use (Freeman, 2000).
1.4. Grammatical Sequencing
Learning a language means learning its grammar for the fact that there will be no meaningful
sentences built of random words or expressions without the use of grammar to make coherence
between these words. Actually, teaching the foreign language (FL) grammar to the FL learners is
an important issue for the reason that the teaching items in the FL coursebooks must be arranged
in a suitable way for the teaching situations and the target learner needs and levels. In order to
follow the appropriate sequencing of the teaching items, “it is almost essential to have practical
teaching experience with pupils for whom a given course is intended, because the teaching
program must be sensitive to the precise needs of the pupils” (Halliday, 1964, cited in Freeman,
1974). Consequently, the teachers have to be experienced and aware about their learner’ needs to
provide them with the appropriate sequence of the grammar teaching structures.
The grammatical sequencing of the FL is based on different factors and criteria like the order
according to the difficulty or simply the complexity factor, the sequencing according to the
frequency, and last but not least the sequencing according to the utility or the communicative
needs.
A rule difficulty can depend on learners’ language learning aptitude. Therefore, the
sequence of the grammar structures is related to the learners’ perceptions of how difficult the given
rules are in order to decide which types of rules are a priority to teach. Many may think that the
order of the grammar structures has to be presented from the simplest to the most complex
especially in the early stage of learning a language. According to Krashen (2003), the order is not
based on a grammar item being simple or complex. He claimed that some rules that seem simple
- 17 -
(e.g., the third person singular) are acquired late; others that appear complex are acquired early.
Nickel (1971) saw that the producer of language material must know something about the problem
of difficulty from the learner's point of view. His staging and sequencing of the material will
depend upon his idea of what linguistic difficulty is. Simply, the issue of difficulty and structures’
complexity have to be assessed according to learners’ perspectives and needs in order to decide
the appropriate sequencing of the grammar content and items that are to be taught and delivered
to learners to reach a specific goal.
Moreover, the grammatical sequencing according to the frequency of structural occurrence
means that the items that are in frequent use need to be taught before those that are rarely used.
The learners will also be familiar with the frequent used items, and this help them in the
recognition, learning and recall processes (Higa, 1965, cited in Freeman, 1974), in other words the
learners will master the language and use it appropriately. Finally, the criteria of utility or making
the sequence that is based on the learners’ communicative needs. By utility it is meant “the
usefulness of a particular structure to the students as viewed by its presence in relevant situations
of the students' lives and in fulfilling their need to communicate” (Freeman, 1974). In other words,
teaching the learners the structures that they need to communicate in the target situation. In
addition to the previous idea, Oller (1972) stated that it is not enough for the language student to
learn to produce well-structured sentences grammatically. The learner must also learn when it is
appropriate to produce them and must acquire the ability to produce well-formed verbal sequences
on the appropriate occasions. Apparently, the learners have to learn the grammar structures in a
particular sequence which has to be suitable to their communicative needs.
1.4.1. The Importance of the Context
- 18 -
There has always been a debate about how should grammar be taught ? Or what is the best
method that should be followed to teach grammar ? However, from the recent developments of
grammar teaching, it is approved that teaching grammar in context is one of the important grammar
teaching tips through providing a context. It was also defined as "Grammar is a system of
meaningful structures and patterns that are governed by particular pragmatic constraints.”
(Freeman, 2001, p.251). Moreover,In an anthropological work of Malinawski (1923), he illustrates
a more dynamic approach to the study of language which is still influential today, particularly in
functional approaches to grammar "The Problem of Meaning in Primitive Languages" is an essay
as a supplement in Ogden and Richards, Malinowski sets out his arguments for the role of context
(of situation and of culture) in the construction of meaning .Therefore, Many linguists are
exploring ways of grounding their description of language in the cultural, geographical, social and
economic conditions stressed by Malinowski. These factors are seen as influencing how language
is used in context. Consequently which points at when teaching grammar rules in isolation, they
do not give much meaning as in teaching grammar in context where it will be more affective with
outcomes.
Learners can use the foreign language affectively when they study its grammar, but
knowing about the grammar can help them to be more successful in developing their speaking
skills and writing performances, according to Emery, Kierzek and Lindblom (1978) :
Just as there are careful and effective drivers who do not know what makes a car run, so
there are those who, through practice and skillful observation, have become satisfactory,
even effective, writers with very little understanding of the mechanics of the language. But
it follows that the more you know about the form and function of the parts that make up
- 19 -
the larger unit, the sentence, the better equipped you are to recognize and to construct well-
formed sentences… (p. 1)
For this reason, teaching grammar in contexts involves making connections between
grammatical patterns and the meaning of texts, and wider contextual aspects such as genre,
audience, subject and purpose, a reader’s feelings, and responses to a text potential authorial
motivations for making decisions about language choices. For more clarifications, the context can
be a song, a movie, a game, a video, short stories, or even recommended cartoons by the teacher,
and the teacher will see if they can dissect the grammatical structure within those activities or
resources if the learners are beginners, or children who are also new and beginners to English as a
new foreign language. Furthermore, Many grammar lessons can be taught and learned in one
lesson. Sometimes, students may not relate to a given passage that they should read for instance,
and Ellis (2006) highlights at this important point by saying : "Grammar teaching involves any
instructional technique that draws learners‘ attention to some specific grammatical form in such a
way that it helps them either to understand it metalinguistically and/or process it in comprehension
and/or production so that they can internalize it" (p.84)
Therefore, the teacher can point at the grammar structures that are in that passage; if the
passage is about scientific facts, the teacher can ease the passage for them by covering some
grammatical structures through activities they can do like: simple past, simple present, modal
verbs, prefixes and suffixes, articles, phrasal verbs, and many more. These activities will develop
the four language skills of the student. It is also important to mention that Weaver (2001) points at
teaching grammar in isolation will not be useful for learners and concluded that "teaching
traditional grammar in isolation is not a very practical act" (p. 18). Whereas Thornbury (1999)
adds "if learners are going to be able to make sense of grammar, they will need to be exposed to it
- 20 -
in its contexts of use, and at the very least this means in texts" (p. 72) which proves that texts play
huge role in keeping the grammatical items clearer for learners to know how to use them through
different contexts not only for the sake of learning the foreign language, but also for using and
applying these rules in real life situations.
- 21 -
Section Two: Textbook Evaluation
Introduction
Any person who comes across the process of teaching and learning has come across the
term ‘evaluation’. In many cases evaluation differs according to its target aims whether it is
curriculum evaluation, teacher evaluation, student evaluation or more recently textbook
evaluation. Andon (2018) claims that “Materials are at the very center of language teaching and
understanding what goes into creating them is an essential part of a language teacher's professional
development”. ELT textbooks are the essential elements in TEFL and are currently the most widely
used teaching materials in schools; consequently, materials evaluation has been a new trend in the
process of language teaching and learning in order to fit a particular teaching situation and to meet
learners’ needs. Tomlinson (2001) believes that the study of materials development did not receive
enough attention until the 1990s when books on this subject started to be published.
2.1. The Role of Textbook in English Language Teaching (ELT)
Among various materials used for language learning and teaching, textbooks serve as a key
component in most language programs (Richards, 2001). A Textbook is a pedagogical tool used
in the teaching-learning process, and it is beneficial to both teachers and students (Harmer, 2007);
in addition, Ahour and Ahmadi (2012) state, “textbooks are the main sources that convey the
knowledge and information to the learners in an easy and organized way” (p. 176). It continues to
play an important and positive role in ELT classrooms all over the world (Dendrinos,1992; Lee,
1997; William, 1983). According to Hutchinson and Torres (1994), it has a great and essential part
to play in teaching and learning English. However, they state that textbooks provide the necessary
input into classroom lessons through different activities, readings and explanations. Thus, they will
always survive on the grounds that they meet certain needs. Allwright (1981) adds a further
- 22 -
dimension to its role by characterizing the lesson as a dynamic interaction between learners,
teachers and materials that enhance the opportunities to learn. All in all, the importance of
textbooks in ELT classroom is so extensive and cannot be ignored because they make the lives of
teachers and learners easier, more secure, and fruitful (Hutchinson & Torres, 1994) and it is crucial
to any ELT program (Litz, 2005; Sheldon, 1988).
2.1.1 Advantages
Textbooks represent the visible heart of any ELT program, and they offer considerable
advantages for both the student and the teacher particularly when they are being used in the
ESL/EFL classroom. (Sheldon, 1988).
Cunningsworth (1995) claims that textbooks have several additional roles in the ELT
curriculum. He argues that they are an effective resource for self-directed learning, an effective
resource for presentation material, a source of ideas and activities, a reference source for students,
a syllabus where they reflect pre-determined learning objectives, and support for less experienced
teachers who have yet to gain in confidence.
Additionally, Ur (1996) states the advantages of the coursebook as follows: it provides a
clear framework for both teacher and students, it provides a set of materials which mostly suit
learners’ levels and save time for the teachers, it is economical and convenience, and, finally, it
helps students to develop their autonomy towards learning.
Overall, it can be concluded that textbooks can be specified as teaching aids which help
teaching and learning process especially in EFL context.
2.1.2. Disadvantages
Although textbooks seem to offer many advantages, there has been an ongoing debate as
to the usefulness of coursebook-based teaching (McGrath, 2002). One central argument against
- 23 -
the use of textbooks is that no single textbook can meet the unique needs of individual learners
and classrooms (Gak, 2011; Richards, 2001; Tomlinson, 2001; Ur, 2012), i.e., for different groups
of learners with differing learning needs and learning styles, no single textbook can be perfect.
Likewise, topics in a textbook may not be relevant for and interesting to all learners; out-of-date
and inauthentic materials besides to the irrelevance of the content and activities which leads to a
lack of interest on the part of students (Block, 1991; Graves, 2000; Ur, 2012). Excessive
dependence on textbooks may result in teachers teaching the textbook not the language, that is, it
inhibits and kills teachers' creativity; Cortazi and Jin (1999) view that textbooks act as a deskiller,
they reduce the teacher’s role and limit the teacher’s creativity. Also, they might offer a content
that is culturally inappropriate (Harmer, 2001). More specifically, textbooks may include
stereotypical representations of genders, nations and cultures, as well as being biased against or in
favor of certain groups in the society (Arıkan, 2005; Gray, 2000; Richards, 2001; Singh, 1998).
Lastly, the textbooks may distort reality by depicting an idealized view of the world that is free of
problems (McGrath, 2013; Richards, 2001).
Even though textbooks might be afflicted with some or at least one of the shortcomings
motioned above, they continue to be utilized as the most popular sources of transferring knowledge
by all language teachers in their classrooms.
2.2. Textbook Evaluation
Textbooks influence what teachers teach and to some extent how students learn (McGrath
2002) that is why Ellis (1997) contends that every single textbook used to teach should be
evaluated.
2.2.1. The Need for Textbook Evaluation
- 24 -
No textbook is perfect and/or can fit each teaching situation or a language program.
Therefore, the evaluation of textbooks is needed to find out the most possible one which can be
used to achieve the goals and objectives of teaching-learning process. Sheldon (1988) states that
textbook evaluation process is supporting teachers to have appropriate knowledge of the content
of textbooks and recognize pros and cons of the textbooks used. In other terms, textbook evaluation
would provide a sense of familiarity with a book's content thus helping educators in identifying
the strengths and weaknesses in textbooks already in use. Furthermore, textbooks must be
evaluated in order to check and ensure their appropriateness. In this regard, Tomlinson (2001)
contends that textbook evaluation is an applied linguistic activity through which teachers, material
developers, administrators and supervisors can make sound judgments on the efficiency of the
materials for the people using them in a particular context. In addition, the evaluation helps mostly
in making some adaptations to fit the teaching-learning situation, choosing and selecting the
appropriate materials that suit the learners needs. Hutchinson (1987) claims that evaluation aids
the teachers in selection of the teaching materials and the development of their awareness of
language and learning. One extra reason for textbook evaluation is the fact that it can be very useful
in teacher development and professional growth.
Generally, textbook evaluation helps curriculum designers and material developers to
consider key issues while designing language courses.
2.2.2. Types and Approaches of Textbook Evaluation
Different types and approaches of textbook evaluation have been proposed by different
scholars, the most important ones are discussed below.
2.2.2.1.Predictive Evaluation vs. Retrospective Evaluation
- 25 -
Ellis (1997) differentiates between two types of evaluation: predictive evaluation and
retrospective evaluation. A predictive evaluation is designed to take decisions related to which
materials to select and which ones to effectively use. He indicates that there are two principal ways
in which teachers can carry out predictive evaluation. One is to rely on evaluations carried out by
expert reviewers who identify specific criteria for evaluating materials. The other way is that
teachers can do their own predictive evaluations systematically by making use of various checklists
and guidelines available in the literature. Once the materials have been used, a retrospective
evaluation may be conducted. Ellis (1997) states that “a retrospective evaluation serves as a means
of testing the validity of a predictive evaluation and what is more, it may point to ways in which
the predictive instruments can be improved for future use” (p.37). Basically, it is done when the
material is used while teaching to investigate their overall success to achieve the course objectives.
Also, retrospective evaluation can be useful to understand which activity works and which does
not, so it can help to improve and modify the materials for future use. As can be understood from
the above definitions, both predictive and retrospective evaluations aim at making the teaching
and learning environment more effective. They both help teachers to make an appropriate
judgement concerning the effectiveness of their teaching including the materials they used.
2.2.2.2.Pre-Use, In-Use, and Post-Use Evaluations
Cunningsworth (1995) also talks about three types of evaluation. He claims that evaluation
can take place before a coursebook is used, during its use and after use depending on the purposes
for which the evaluation is being undertaken. A pre-use evaluation is aimed to look for future or
potential performance of the coursebook, i.e., it is useful for future prediction about the possible
pedagogical value of the materials and related decision about textbook selection for a specific
program. In-use evaluation, on the other hand, refers to a kind of evaluation which is carried out
- 26 -
while the material is in-use to see whether the set objectives of the course are met or not and how
much of the material is successful in fulfilling those objectives. However, post- use evaluation
provides retrospective assessment of a coursebook’s performance as Ellis (1997) has already
mentioned. Post–use evaluation is useful for identifying strengths and weaknesses of the
coursebook after a period of continuous use. As Cunningsworth (1995) states, post evaluation is
useful in helping to decide whether to use the same coursebook on future occasions.
2.2.2.3.Macro-evaluation vs. Micro-evaluation
There are two main approaches that have an important role for the purpose of selecting,
improving and modifying materials to suit the needs of learners and teachers in a particular
teaching-learning context. These are called macro approach and micro approach to evaluation of
materials. A macro evaluation focuses on an overall assessment of whether a set of materials has
worked in relation to the needs identified. In a micro evaluation, however, the focus is on the
evaluation of effectiveness of the tasks. A micro evaluation of a task can both show to what extent
a task is appropriate for the particular group of learners and reveal certain weaknesses in its design
(Ellis, 1997).
2.2.3. Methods for Evaluating a Textbook
There are three basic methods for textbooks evaluation: impressionistic, checklist, and in-
depth methods. Montasser (2013) reports that the impressionistic method deals with analyzing a
textbook based on a general impression obtained by means of checking the textbook contents in
view of organization, layout, the presented topics as well as the visuals, and so forth.
Cunningsworth (1995) states that applying the impressionistic method means taking its literal
meaning by quickly having a look through the textbook to get an overview that can provide general
information about its design and structure. Nonetheless, such a method is claimed to be inadequate
- 27 -
in itself but could be integrated with another method to help gain more precise information about
the textbooks being evaluated. The second method is named the checklist method. It is a systematic
method of evaluation which includes a set of criteria ordered in a certain way within a list; it helps
in making the comparison among diverse materials easier and less time consuming (More
information will be covered later). A third distinguished method is the in-depth method which
provides a vigilant assessment and detailed evaluation of the representative aspects of the textbook;
for instance, the ability to assess the design of a specific unit and/or an exercise as selecting one
or two chapters and look at the balance of skills and activities contained in each unit
(Cunningsworth, 1995; McDonough & Shown, 1993; Montasser, 2013). Cunningsworth (1995),
“The in-depth approach is characterized by its active nature: we actively seek out information
about the material in line with an agenda that we have already decided on” (p. 2). Widodo (2015)
reports that this method elaborates on students’ needs, their attitudes towards learning, besides the
practical teaching-learning approach.
2.3. Checklist as a Tool of Evaluation
Choosing appropriate language teaching textbooks and materials becomes a challenging
task because of the great variety of published ELT materials available on the market
(Cunningsworth, 1995). Consequently, particular attention is given to materials evaluation in order
to select an effective and appropriate textbook. One of the common methods that play a crucial
role in evaluating ELT materials is the checklist. An evaluation checklist is an instrument that
helps teachers or program developers to evaluate and rate the quality of teaching materials before
or after their usage by providing the evaluators with a set of statement that correspond to specific
criteria (Mukundan, Nimehchisalem & Hajimohammadi, 2011).
- 28 -
The checklist method is advocated by most experts. For instance, Tomlinson (1998)
supports the use of this method and claims that one of the most obvious sources for guiding the
textbook evaluation process is the use of checklists. He adds that the checklist typically contains
implicit assumptions about what desirable materials should look like, and each of these areas might
be debatable while also limit their applicability. Therefore, the checklist has at least four
advantages: it is systematic which ensures the consideration of all the important elements, it is
effective which permits recording a good deal of information in a short space of time; the
information is recorded in a convenient format which allows for easy comparison between
competing sets of material, also it is explicit and flexible which offers a common framework for
decision making (McGrath, 2002).
There are many checklists proposed by various scholars at different times from different
perspectives. Some scholars offer several criteria to consider whenever analyzing textbooks for
EFL/ESL classes, whereas the evaluative criteria should be chosen according to the learning-
teaching context and the specific needs of learners and teachers (Byrd, 2001; Cunningsworth,
1995; Sheldon, 1988). Here some criteria that are proposed by different authors in the literature.
Skierso's (1991) checklist includes the features related to bibliographical data, purposes,
subject matter, vocabulary and structures, exercises and activities, and layout and physical
makeup. These fields are aligned with those in Cunningsworth's (1995) checklist which comprises
aims and approaches, design and organization, language content, skills, topic, methodology and
practical consideration. Some criteria in the above checklists are the same and useful for the
evaluation of the textbooks. Therefore, the current study adapted an evaluative checklist from the
above criteria where the majority of the selected questions are taken from Skierso's (1991)
checklist.
- 29 -
One of the most expansive checklists is Sheldon's (1988). It attempts to assess all aspects
of content including such diverse factors as graphics and physical characteristics to authenticity
and flexibility. Also, Murcia (2001) has other criteria. The criteria are divided into two kinds:
analysis of content for implementation in teaching which includes both linguistic content and
thematic content, and the analysis of teaching activities for implementation in teaching (includes
8 questions).
Williams (1983) presented a scheme for evaluating ESL/EFL textbooks which includes
these features: up-to-date methodology of L2 teaching, guidance for non-native speakers of
English, needs of learners, and relevance to the socio-cultural environment. “Each of these features
can be evaluated in terms of linguistic/pedagogical aspects: general, speech, grammar, vocabulary,
reading, writing, and technical. For each of these aspects, then, four evaluative items are
considered to provide a checklist. The weighting system of this checklist is based on a 5-point
scale: 0-4” (Karamoozian & Riazi, 2008. p.5).
Byrd (2001, as cited in Celce-Murcia, 2001) developed a checklist that includes 4 main
evaluative criteria: the fit between the textbook and the curriculum, the fit between the textbook
and the students, the fit between the textbook and the teachers, and overall evaluation of the fit of
the book for the course in the program.
Yet, it is hardly surprising that a single set of criteria cannot be used for evaluating all
different kinds of materials (Johnson & Johnson, 1999). Sheldon (1988) points out: “no one is
really certain what criteria and constraints are actually operatives in ELT context, worldwide, and
textbook criteria are emphatically local” (p. 241). Since the nature of the teaching/learning
environment may vary from context to context as Sheldon (1998) emphasizes that a “global list of
criteria can never apply in most local environments, without considerable evaluation” (p. 242).
- 30 -
To sum up, the checklist is considered as the best tool to carry out a systematic and reliable
evaluation of ELT textbooks. Though, one checklist cannot be applicable in various situations and
contexts, so it needs some adaptations to fit the learning-teaching situation and the learners needs.
2.4. Evaluating the Presentation of Grammar in ELT Textbooks
Grammar is the fundamental system organizing a language (Stathis & Gotsch, 2011).
However, Grammar presentation has been an issue in evaluating ELT textbooks. There are
different approaches to present grammar structures in ELT materials, the most common ones are
the deductive and inductive approaches presented by Ellis (2006). The deductive approach
introduces grammatical rules explicitly and then they are applied by students (Mohammed & Jaber,
2008). On the other hand, the inductive approach presents new grammatical structures implicitly
to students in a real language context, so that the students learn the rules from the context (Ming-
jun, 2008). The evaluator should focus on whether grammar is represented deductively or
inductively in the textbook and how the approache/s, that has/have been used, is/are appropriate
to learners’ level and age in a way that enables learners to apply grammar subconsciously in their
foreign language production.
The selection of grammar items is based on learner’s language needs, the evaluator should
question whether the priority is given to language form or use (meaning) in order to investigate
the balance between the structural and meaningful presentation. Additionally, the grammar
structures should be presented in short units and modules to facilitate the language learning
process. Also, the presentation of language items should be in relation to the previously acquired
aspects, that is compare and contrast them with the new ones (Aytug, 2007).
The textbook would provide a relevant explanation to considering the different meanings
of structural issues (Cunningsworth, 1995), which means that a set of grammatical structures have
- 31 -
multiple meanings like the usage of present perfect and present continuous, so the textbook should
provide a clear info about such kind of different meanings.
Similarly, in Gönen’ study (2004) the grammar is presented in contexts that advocated the
presentation of structural details as well as their usages in contextual settings. They also suggested
to present grammar through visual aids. Although the students found the activities useful in the
intended grammar textbook, the incomprehensible instructions prevent them from understanding
the main purpose of the activities. The textbook was following an integrated skill approach and
the grammar is presented via the use of four language skills (Aytug, 2007).
Conclusion
To sum up, textbooks play a vital role in the ELT context. They are considered as the
essential resources for both teachers and learners, though they may have some shortcomings too.
Consequently, evaluation should be conducted in order to choose the most appropriate one for the
teaching-learning process. There are various types, approaches and method suggested by different
scholars for textbook evaluation such as: predictive and retrospective evaluations, pre-use, in-use
and post-use evaluations, macro and micro evaluations and lastly impressionistic, checklist and in-
depth methods. Apparently, the checklist is the most suitable tool for a systematic reliable
evaluation because it is flexible and includes so many criteria which can be adapted and modified
to meet the particular needs and objectives. Finally, textbooks include many aspects to be
evaluated as the presentation of grammar that, generally, has been an issue in evaluating ELT
textbooks.
- 32 -
Chapter Two: Evaluative Checklist
Introduction
3.1.Research Methodology
3.2.Textbooks Description
3.3.Analysis of MBE
3.3.1. Practical Consideration
3.3.2. Language Related Consideration
A. Grammar
B. Exercises and Activities
C. Layout and Physical Makeup
3.4.Summary of the Main Findings
Conclusion
- 33 -
Introduction
The previous chapter dealt with the literature review related to teaching grammar, grammar
sequencing and textbook evaluation. According to what has been stated before, the textbook plays
a crucial role in the teaching- learning process, it is considered to be the core material of ELT
program. Therefore, the evaluation of textbooks is needed to find out the best one which can be
used to achieve the goals and the objectives of the teaching-learning process. Therefore, this
chapter aims to make an evaluation of the 2nd and the 3rd year middle school (MS) English
textbooks My Book of English (MBE) in order to examine how the grammar content is structured
in their syllabi and in which way both textbooks meet the learners’ needs and interests.
3.1. Research Methodology
This research evaluates MBE of both 2nd and 3rd years through two different tools. This
chapter is going to deal with the qualitative research method, namely the evaluative checklist to
assess, generally, the textbooks and, particularly, the grammar content with its presentation.
Hence, a checklist is adapted in order to suit the needs of the research questions.
3.2. Textbooks Description
● Name of the coursebooks: My Book of English – Middle School – Year
Two/Three
● Intended learners’ level: the2nd year and the 3rd year, middle school level
● Authors: Head of project: TamrabetLounis (inspector of national education
Authors: ChanniAbdelfetah (material writer)
Boukri Nabila (middle school teacher trainer)
SmaraAbdelhakim (middle school teacher trainer)
Biskri Nadia (middle school inspector) (2nd year textbook)
- 34 -
Bouazid Tayeb (university teacher trainer) (3rd year textbook)
● Publisher: CASBAH editions
● Year/Place of publication:2016/Algeria
● Number of pages:159 for each
At the beginning of the academic year 2016-2017, the English textbooks of the so called
‘Second generation’ are introduced at the MS levels under the title of My Book of English. Their
aim is to increase the learner’s opportunities to develop competencies in the subject taught. MBE
of the 2nd and the 3rd year are designed on the same basis, and they have a similar layout. They are
made up of four sequences where their titles are thematic in their nature; each one is divided into
eleven stages, most of which have headings pointing to learners’ strategies or performances.
3.3. Analysis of MBE
According to Sheldon (1988), we need to evaluate textbooks for two reasons. First, the
evaluation will help the teacher or program developer in making decisions on selecting the
appropriate textbook. Furthermore, evaluation of the merits and demerits of a textbook will
familiarize the teacher with its probable weaknesses and strengths. On this regard, the research
aims to evaluate the textbooks to see whether they fit the teaching-learning process and in which
way the presentation of grammar meets the learners’ level and needs. Consequently, an evaluative
checklist is adopted in order to fit this aim. The questions are taken from Skierso’s (1991),
Cunningsworth’s (1995), Mukundan’s et al (2011) checklists, where the majority of the selected
questions are taken from Skierso's (1991) checklist. It is divided into two parts, first, the practical
consideration which includes three general questions about the textbooks. Second, language
related consideration that is divided into three sections: grammar, exercises and activities, and
layout and physical makeup.
- 35 -
3.3.1. Practical Consideration
A. Are the textbooks easily accessible?
Both textbooks are available locally, anyone could find them easily in the MSs, private
libraries and even on web sites as PDF files.
B. Is the price of textbooks reasonable?
The price generally seems reasonable, each textbook costs 245,76 DA which is not that
much expensive. Actually, the MSs offer the textbooks for free for a specific category of pupils.
C. Are the textbooks a recent publication?
Both textbooks belong to the second generation ‘My Book of English’ which is published
recently in 2016.
3.3.2. Language Related Consideration
A. Grammar
1.To what extent is the number of grammatical points appropriate and how appropriate is
their sequence?
The number of the grammatical items presented in the 2nd and the 3rd year English
textbooks are not appropriate to the learners’ cognitive levels and abilities because they are still
beginners and are not familiar yet with this new foreign language. In fact, there are so many
lectures to be learned concerning the whole language itself with its different aspects, but the
extensive presentation of the grammar structures is the first thing that can be noticed while
reviewing both textbooks’ contents. The number of the grammatical items that are presented in
each sequence differs according to the stated communicative objectives. About 5 to 10 items in
each sequence concerning the 2nd year textbook. Whereas in the 3rd year textbook, each sequence
includes about 7 to 9 grammar points. Consequently, the objectives that have been stated cannot
- 36 -
be achieved at the end. First, for the reason that the time allotted for teaching the material is not
sufficient to do so and second, the learners cannot absorb all that amount of information.
The sequence of the grammatical points in relation to the communicative objectives is
appropriate. Generally, both textbooks are designed on the basis of CBA principles which aim to
help the learners to develop their competences. In a way, the grammatical sequencing matches the
communicative or more specifically the linguistic objectives, taking as an example the third
sequence in the 2nd year textbook (me and my health). It started with the presentation of “have to”
and “must” to express obligation and prohibition, then moved to “should/not” to ask for and give
advice, and finally the use of the imperative to also give advice and make recommendations.
Similarly, the same sequencing presented in the fourth sequence in the 3rd year coursebook with
similar grammar aspects and objectives; thus, this shows that there is a kind of sequencing
regarding the grammar lectures between both textbooks.
2.To what extent are the presentations clear and complete enough for the learners to have
available a concise review outside the classroom?
The presentation of grammar rules in both textbooks is clear and the input is enough for
the learners to have a review outside the classroom. The table of contents My Book Map (example
1 in appendices1&2) provides them with the grammar headings that they are going to tackle in
each sequence. Additionally, each sequence offers a section heading of My Grammar Tools (MGT)
which helps the learner to find the grammar lessons easily. The grammatical points are presented
in a clear and concise way. In addition to the explanation of the teacher and his guidance, any
learner could concentrate and understand the content simply outside the classroom.
3.To what extent are the linguistic items (mainly grammar) introduced in meaningful
contexts?
- 37 -
It is highly important to introduce the grammar structures in different meaningful contexts
in order to help the learner fully understand them and make them able to apply and practice the
learnt knowledge easily and effectively while using the language in different situations. Actually,
the grammar structures in both textbooks are integrated with the other skills. For instance, the first
sequence in both textbooks is presenting the lecture of in/abilities. Can and can’t are used in
different occasions. First, they appear in My Pronunciation Tools (MPT) to show the learners how
these items must be pronounced in different settings, then they are applied through deferent tasks.
Second, they are included in different tasks related to grammar section and texts related to reading
and writing. Despite all these, the grammatical items in both textbooks are not introduced in
meaningful contexts. They are introduced through sentences in the presented rules. Into the
bargain, the various tasks allow the learners only to apply the rules as they are without giving them
the opportunity to practice the learned structures in various meaningful contexts.
4.To what extent does the presentation of grammar structures move gradually from the
simple to the more complex?
According to the 2nd year textbook content, there is no specific order that shows the
grammar structures are moving gradually from the simple to the more complex. For instance, in
the first sequence (me, my friends and my family) the lectures are presented as following: from
tenses to adjectives to possessive pronouns then to location markers then ability and inability, and
so on. This grammar order of the first sequence in a way is related to the stated objectives though
it cannot show any kind of gradual movement between the presented items.
In the 3rd year textbook, the presentation of grammar structures has apparently moved
gradually from the simplest to the more complex. Their sequence is related to the theme of the
sequence and its objectives. Each sequence starts from the simplest grammatical item until it
- 38 -
reaches the most complex one as in sequence two (me and lifestyles). It starts by reviewing the
simple past tense, and how to ask questions using the time marker “ago” in order to narrate past
events and memories. Then, it moves to talk about the past actions through the use of the semi-
modal “used to”. Finally, it ends up with the presentation of the adverbs of frequency to express
the frequent action, event, or state in addition to the use of “made of” and “made with” to talk
about material and place.
5.To what extent are the grammar points presented with brief, interesting and easy
examples, and explanations?
In the 3rd year textbook, the grammar rules are explained in a concise direct way and are
supported with brief, interesting and easy examples. Each rule is presented within a framework
with a clear easy language. the most important words or letters about the rule are written in bold
and in red color to make them easily comprehensible (example 3 in appendix 2). Also, examples
are simple, concrete, and familiar to the learners because they have already met them in the
listening section. Like the use of past tense continuous to talk about longer past events: we were
working on the miniaturization of cameras. Also, a concrete illustration about the learner’s daily
life like the use of can and may to formulate requests: can you help me do my work? May I have
some more sugar, please?
The same thing concerning the 2nd year textbook, the grammar points are presented in a
direct way starting with the new rule then followed by clear and simple examples through using
darker shade of a color to point at where the new grammar rule is placed (example 3 in appendix
1). The examples that are presented under the new grammatical lectures for the pupils are made
with the use of the previous new linguistic terms they have learned earlier in order to help them
- 39 -
realize how to actually use the new rule in sentences from the previous contexts with the right
tenses, in the appropriate time, and with its appropriate use.
6.To what extent are new structures controlled to be presented and explained before they
appear in drills, dialogues or reading materials?
Apparently, in both textbooks the new structures appear in drills and dialogues related to
the listening tasks before they are presented and explained in MGT section, then they are extended
to be used into different texts and tasks. As an example, the frequency adverbs in the first sequence
of the 3rd year textbook, they appear in the listening tasks (example 4 in appendix 2), then they are
discussed and explained in the grammar section. From one extreme, it could be something good
because it makes students familiar with these new items, on the other extreme, it can leave more
ambiguity about the rule and more focus on how to understand the given activity if they are not
even familiar with the structures of the sentences they are supposed to answer in tasks. This is
applied to most of the grammatical rules in both coursebooks. It is also noticed that both textbooks
in general are based on practice more than theory even before introducing the new items to pupils
first but starting to use them directly in tasks and activities instead.
7.To what extent do practice and recycling (production) of new grammatical items seem to
be appropriate for the level of language mastery of the learners?
After the presentation of the new grammatical items, learners must go through the practice
and the recycle processes in order to have a complete understanding about what they have already
learnt. The textbooks have in each sequence a specific section titled I practise which includes tasks
and practices related to grammar. The number of tasks differs from one sequence to another
according to the number of the grammatical structures that are introduced in each, the number is
between 16 to 28 tasks under MGT section in the 2nd year textbook whereas the grammar tasks in
- 40 -
the 3rd year textbook are between 14 to 24. As what has been noticed, the different exercises are
with direct instructions and with clear simple language that encourage the learner to practice the
already learnt grammar, like asking them to fill the gaps with the appropriate pronoun or write the
correct form of the verb in both clauses then combine them using the connector “while”. It should
also be mentioned that some of grammar points appeared in the next sequences in tasks and texts,
so that it helps pupils to practice the old ones and learn how to use them with the new structures,
and the new contexts they are learning. Likewise, tasks encourage the learner to make a recycling
to the learnt grammatical items by providing them with pictures and examples to follow the form
to formulate the right answer. As a result of what has been said, the practicing and recycling of
new grammatical items in both textbooks seem very appropriate for the level of language mastery
of the learners.
8.To what extent is there an even distribution of grammatical material among the chapters?
Each textbook includes four sequences, each sequence includes a specific number of
grammatical items that are presented in a relation to the objectives and the theme of the sequence.
In the 2nd year textbook, the number of the grammar points presented in each sequence differs. The
first sequence includes 7 items, 10 items in the 2nd, 5 items in the 3rd, while the 4th contains about
6 items. It can be said that there is not an even distribution among the textbook sequences. Unlike
in the 3rd year textbook, there is a balance in the number of structures that are presented in, between
7 to 9 items in each sequence. Consequently, the grammatical material is fairly distributed among
its sequences.
9. To what extent does the text make the structures presented easily accessible to the learner?
According to what has been said before, the grammar structures along both textbooks are
presented in a clear simple way to help the learner easily access the grammar content. The
- 41 -
sequences outline (example2 in appendices1& 2) includes MGT subheading which makes the
accessibility to grammar lectures easy; the structures are introduced in a clear and organized way
with the use of different colors and illustrations. The textbook provides also different tasks and
activities to practice the rules that have already been dealt with in both implicit and explicit ways.
Additionally, an irregular verb list appears at the end of the textbooks as a supporting tool to the
learners whenever they face problems in dealing with conjugation of the irregular verbs (example4
in appendix1 & example5 in appendix 2). As a result, it is clear that the grammar items in both
textbooks are easily accessible to the learner.
B. Exercises and Activities
1.To what extent do the exercises involve the grammar structures which build up the
learner’s repertoire and develop his/her ability to communicate increasingly independently
of text or teacher’s direction?
Both textbooks provide the learners with so many exercises to practice the grammatical
structures that have been already dealt with in order to fully understand and retain them and to
apply them while using the language to communicate easily. The instructions and the assignments
are simple and clear, they always include the pronoun “I” at the beginning, which means that the
learners have to rely on themselves to answer the task depending on their own repertoire about the
grammar rules and communicate independently from the text and the teacher’s direction.
C. Layout and Physical Makeup
1.To what extent are simple graphic devices effectively used to clarify the presentation of
grammatical structures?
The textbooks are intended for beginners; therefore, designers absolutely use the graphic
devices in different contexts in order to attract the learner’s attention. Though, their use for the
- 42 -
presentation of grammar is limited only to exercises through the use of some tables, they use the
red color and words in bold when presenting the rules to draw the learner's attention to the
important grammatical items.
2.To what extent are the illustrations clear, simple, and free of unnecessary details that may
confuse the learner?
A Chinese proverb says, “one sighted is worth a hundred words”.
The textbooks are full of illustrations because as what has been already stated, they are
intended for beginners. The illustrations are used in MPT, in MGT, and in different tasks and
activities. The presentation of grammatical structures is often supported with clear and simple
illustrations that are free of unnecessary details which in a way helps the learners to have a clear
understanding of the rules (example5 in appendix1 & example6 in appendix2).
3.4. Summary of the Main Findings
After the analysis and the assessment of the 2ndyear and the 3rd year MS English textbooks,
it has been noticed that the textbooks are designed on similar basis. Consequently, they met in
some points and differed in others. The checklist’ results show that the number of the grammatical
items presented in both textbooks is not appropriate and too much in comparison with the target
learners’ level who are still beginners. Furthermore, there is a sequencing in each and between
both textbooks concerning the grammar lectures. The 3rd year textbook provides consolidation of
previously learned knowledge in the 2nd year through reviewing and representing the preceding
level lectures. Additionally, the presented items in the 3rd year textbook have moved gradually
from the simplest to the more complex unlike in the 2nd year textbook where there is no specific
order that shows the grammar structures are moving gradually. Moreover, the grammar rules are
presented clearly with simple and concrete examples which makes the review outside the
- 43 -
classroom possible. Also, they are applied in different tasks which helps the learner to practice and
recycle the new items for a better understanding, though they are not introduced in meaningful
contexts. Most of the time grammar is presented implicitly which may provide some challenges
for the learners to understand the unfamiliar new structures. Generally, the presentation of
grammar is clear and clarified with the use of some graphic devices and simple appropriate
illustrations that help the learners in their comprehension.
To sum up, it can be said that the number of the 3rd year gramatical items are too much
though their complexity can be considered suitable to the target learners’ level. Whilst the 2nd year
grammar content is somehow complex and beyond the learner’s level and cognitive capacities.
Conclusion
Textbooks play a prominent role in the teaching-learning process as they are the primary
agents of conveying knowledge to learners. Consequently, the need of the evaluation process is
important since it helps teachers to determine and select the most suitable materials to their
teaching situations. Different methods have been suggested to be used in the evaluation process.
In this chapter the checklist method was adopted in order to collect a qualitative data concerning
the suitability of the 2nd and the 3rd year MS English textbooks to the learners’ level, more
specifically, it investigated the appropriateness of the grammar presentation to the target learners.
Finally, a summary of the main findings has been provided.
- 44 -
Chapter Three: Teachers’ Questionnaire
Introduction
4.1. The Method
4.2. Questionnaire Description
4.3. Sample of the Study
4.4. Analysis of the Questionnaire
4.4.1. Bibliographical Information
4.4.2. Textbook and Syllabus
4.4.3. Teaching Grammar
4.4.4. Grammatical Sequencing
4.5. Discussion of the Results
Conclusion
- 45 -
Introduction
The previous chapter was the first part of the field of investigation in this research. It dealt
with the evaluation of MBE of both the 2nd and the 3rd years in order to assess how grammar is
presented and sequenced and in which way they meet the learners’ needs and interests. This chapter
is supporting the previous one with the application of a quantitative method. There will be an
analysis of the questionnaire that is distributed to middle school EFL teachers in order to assess
their perspective towards both textbooks, the presentation of grammar and more specifically the
grammatical sequencing in each and between both of them.
4.1. The Method
The second tool of investigation is the questionnaire which aims to collect quantitative data
about teachers’ perspectives towards the textbooks focusing on grammar presentation and
sequencing within and between both textbooks. The answers will be treated through the Statistical
Package for Social Sciences (SPSS 20.0) where the results will be presented in tables which
include the proposed options, the participants’ number, and their answers’ percentages.
4.2. Questionnaire Description
Questionnaires as defined by Brown (2001) are “any written instruments that present
respondents with a series of questions or statements to which they have to react either by writing
out their answers or selecting from among existing answers” (p. 6). Questionnaires can enclose a
series of questions or statements, and the respondents’ task is to give answers to the asked
questions or to select from the available alternatives the one that reflects their attitudes and views.
In this study, a questionnaire was submitted to middle school English teachers in order to obtain
quantitative data in a short period of time. It is used as a supplementary tool to the checklist, it
comprises twenty-four questions which have divided between Likert scale questions, and open-
- 46 -
ended questions. A four- point Likert scale was used in which responses ranged from ‘strongly
agree’ to ‘strongly disagree’. These types of questions are divided into four sections. First, section
one deals with the bibliographical information of the teacher that includes gender, age, teaching
experience and teaching experience using MBE of the 2nd and the 3rd years. Section two is about
teacher’s perspectives towards the textbooks and the syllabus, it includes seven questions. Since
the research focuses on the evaluation of the grammar the third and the fourth sections devoted to
the grammar structures (6 questions) and the grammatical sequencing within and between both
textbooks (6 questions). Finally, the element number 24 is meant to give teachers the floor to
express themselves freely and to suggest any further comments, recommendations, and feedback
regarding the coursebooks, the presentation and the sequencing of grammar structures.
4.3. Sample of the Study
The participants in this study are EFL middle school teachers who taught the 2nd and the 3rd
years using the new generation textbooks MBE. Since the number of English teachers in each
middle school do not often exceed 3 teachers, the study took a random sample of 22 EFL teachers
collected from 8 middle schools in the district of Oum El Boughi (OEB).
4.4. Analysis of the Questionnaire
4.4.1. Bibliographical Information
Q1: Gender
Table 1
Teachers' Gendre
Options Number (N) Percentage (%)
Male 2 9.1
Female 20 90.9
- 47 -
Total 22 100.0
The first question in the bibliographical information is about teachers’ gender. Two choices
were introduced which are male and female. According to the table1 above, the participants that
took part in this research are predominantly female teachers, 20 out of 22 are females with the
percentage of 90.9% and only 2 males with the percentage of 9.1%.
Q2: Age
Table 2
Teachers' Age
Options N %
20-30 3 13.6
31-40 6 27.3
41-50 10 45.5
>50 3 13.6
Total 22 100.0
The second question aims to gather information about the teachers' ages. As it is shown in
the second table, the majority of teachers are aged between 41-50 which represents 45.5% of the
whole sample on the one hand. On the other hand, 13.6%of teachers are aged between 20-30 and
also over 50 which represents 13.6% of the respondents. Now, the left category of them are aged
between 31-40, and this takes 27.3% of the whole percentage. This reveals that the majority of the
sample are adult teachers who can give insightful answers and can determine the strengths and
weaknesses of the syllabi and textbooks used.
Q3: Teaching Experience
- 48 -
Table 3
Teaching Experience
Options N %
1-4 years 3 13.6
5-10 3 13.6
>10 16 72.7
Total 22 100
The table3 above presentsthe answers of the third question which is related to the
teachers’ teaching experience. The first two options (between 1-4 years and between 5-10 years)
were chosen by 13.6% per each, whereas the option of more than 10 years has been selected by
most of the teachers by the percentage of 72.7%. According to the presented data, it can be said
that the majority of the sample are experienced teachers and their experience in teaching will help
them to give insightful answers.
Q4: Teaching experience using My Book of English
Table 4
Teaching Experience using MBE
The 2nd year textbook The 3rd year textbook
Options N % N %
1 year 1 4.5 1 4.5
2years 5 22.7 4 18.2
3years 3 13.6 6 27.3
4years 4 18.2 1 4.5
- 49 -
5years 9 40.9 10 45.5
Total 22 100 22 100
The fourth question asks teachers about their teaching experience using MBE of the 2nd and
the 3rd years. Only two gaps are offered to be filled by the participants. Since the textbooks are
used for only past 5 years, the answers were between 1-5 years. Starting by the 2nd year textbook
users’ answers, 40.9% are using the textbook for 5 years, 18.5% said 4 years, 13.6% answered 3
years, 22.5% said for 2 years, and last 4.5% said for 1 year. Moving to the 3rd year textbook
respondents, 45.5% of them said that they are using it for 5 years, 4.5% said for 4 years, 27.3%
said for 3 years, 18.2% said for 2 years and one year was chosen by 4.5% of the sample. A closer
look at the results presented in table4 reveals that a large portion of the teachers are familiar with
the coursebooks; consequently, their answers will be more valid and reliable.
4.4.2. Textbook and Syllabus
Q5: The use of MBE in the teaching-learning process
Table 5
The Use of MBE in the Teaching Learning Process
The 2nd year textbook The 3rd year textbook
Options N % N %
always 2 9.1 2 9.1
often 15 68.2 15 68.2
rarely 4 18.2 4 18.2
never 1 4.5 1 4.5
Total 22 100 22 100
- 50 -
The textbook is an important tool which helps the teacher in designing and presenting the
lessons; however, each teacher has his own way of teaching his students, some may rely on the
textbook only, while others tend to use other materials selected by their own. Table5 shows how
often teachers use the textbook in presenting the lessons in the classroom. The participants have
similarly responded to the question concerning both textbooks. The majority are often using the
textbook in the teaching-learning process (68.2%), 18.2% are using it rarely, 9.1% are always and
4.5% of the sample never use the textbooks. Based on the results, the teachers are often using the
textbooks, but they do not completely rely on them in their lessons’ presentation, they use other
supporting selected materials.
Q6: The difficulty level of the textbook is appropriate to the learners’ level
Table 6
Textbook Suitability to the Learners' Level
The 2nd year textbook The 3rd year textbook
Options N % N %
Agree (A) 10 45.5 11 50.0
Disagree (D) 7 31.8 9 40.9
Strongly
Disagree (SD)
5 22.7 2 9.1
Total 22 100 22 100
Any textbook is designed on the basis of fitting the teaching learning situation and meeting
the learners needs and levels in order to make the objective that already stated attainable. Question
6 tends to assess teachers’ points of view about the textbooks’ difficulty level in relation to the
- 51 -
learners’ level. Four options are provided according to Likert scale which are: strongly agree (SA),
agree (A), disagree (D),and strongly disagree (SD). Table6 demonstrates teachers’ answers to the
question concerning both textbooks; according to the second-year data, teachers who responded
that the textbook is appropriate to the learners’ level are about 45.5% of the sample.
However,31.8% of the contributors have disagreed and also 22.5% have strongly disagreed with
the statement. Whereas the 3rd year data shows that the number of the respondents to the A option
(50%) are equal to those who choose the D (40.9%) and SD (9.1%) options. Something should be
pointed at is that the responses related to both textbooks are slightly different, they are oscillated
between the agreement and disagreement. Those who responded with the agreement, they see that
the textbooks suit the learners’ level because they contain a lot of illustrations and colors which
match the learners’ ages and interests, and the content is often presented in clear way based on
simple language and interesting examples from one hand. On the other hand however, the others
responded with the disagreement maybe due to the amount of the grammatical points that are
included in both textbooks which is too much for the fact that the learners are still beginners, or
maybe the reading texts and the listening scripts are not authentic and difficult where the learners
face some challenges in the comprehension. As a conclusion, it can be said that both textbooks
difficulty level is appropriate to the learners’ level in some points, and not suitable according to
some other points.
Q7: the content is organized according to the learners’ language needs
Table 7
The Organization of Content According to the Learners’ Language Needs
The 2nd year textbook The 3rd year textbook
Options N % N %
- 52 -
A 11 50.0 13 59.1
D 7 31.8 7 31.8
SD 4 18.2 2 9.1
Total 22 100 22 100
It is highly important for the textbook content to be organized according to the learners’
language needs in order to facilitate the learning process and to help them in the achievement of
the particular objectives. In this regard, 50% of the sample who have responded to the 2nd year
textbook have agreed with the sentence whereas the other 50%have disagreed. For the 3rd year, the
table shows that more than the half have responded with the agreement (59.1%), 31.8% have
selected D, and 9.1% have chosen SD. The final observation shows that the 3rd year textbook
content is organized according to the learners’ language need. However, there is controversy in
the part of the 2nd year teachers’ answers maybe some see that the organization of the content was
helping the learners in developing their competences and using the language in the target situation
appropriately, whereas the others see the opposite.
Q8: The syllabuses you are using or have used provide consolidation of previously learnt
knowledge
Table 8
Complementarity of the Textbooks
The 2nd year textbook The 3rd year textbook
Options N % N %
Strongly Agree
(SA)
2 9.1 2 9.1
- 53 -
A 12 54.5 14 63.6
D 6 27.3 5 22.7
SD 2 9.1 1 4.5
Total 22 100 22 100
From one level to another, the textbook must match the current syllabus with the already
learnt knowledge in the previous level in order to show that there is a relationship between all the
language elements, and they learn them according to the provided sequence for particular purposes.
Table8 demonstrates teachers’ answers concerning the statement which claims that there is a
consolidation between the textbooks’ syllabus and the previously learned knowledge. According
to those who responded to the 2nd year textbook questions, 54.5% have chosen A, 9.1% have
selected SA, 27.3% have picked D and 9.1% have opted SD. While 63.6% have agreed that the 3rd
year textbook syllabus is unified with the previously learned knowledge, 9.1% have strongly
agreed, 22.7% have disagreed and finally 4.5% have strongly disagreed. To sum up, the majority
of the respondents see that both textbooks’ syllabi provide a consolidation of previously learned
knowledge because some lectures presented in the previous level are represented again and
reviewed in the next level in order to refresh the learners’ repertoire and construct the new
information.
Q9: The objectives that have been stated are achievable
Table 9
The Objectives Achievements
The 2nd year textbook The 3rd year textbook
Options N % N %
- 54 -
SA 6 27.3 6 27.3
A 10 45.5 12 54.5
D 5 22.7 4 18.2
SD 1 4.5 / /
Total 22 100 22 100
The textbooks are designed to fulfil the requirements of the teaching syllabus.
Consequently, the statement number 9 seeks to see whether the stated objectives are achievable or
not. Concerning the 2nd year textbook, the majority of teachers’ answers, about 72.8% of the
sample, are between SA (27.3%) and A (45.5%); however, 27.2% their answers are D and SD.
Similarly, the majority of the respondents to the 3rd year textbook, about 81.8%, are in agreement
with the statement and the rest about 18.2% have disagreed. To conclude, it can be said that both
textbooks are meeting the stated objectives.
Q10: The textbook limits teacher’s creativity
Table 10
Textbooks Limit Teachers' Creativity
The 2nd year textbook The 3rd year textbook
Options N % N %
SA 7 31.8 6 27.3
A 4 18.2 4 18.2
D 11 50.0 12 54.5
Total 22 100 22 100
- 55 -
A textbook is a guiding tool for the teachers in their teaching situations; therefore, they must
not totally depend on it because it will kill their creativity and they may lose their important role
as teachers and become only as a medium between the textbook and their learners. According to
table10, the 2nd year results show that 50% of the sample have agreed that the textbook limits
teachers’ creativity whereas the other 50% have totally disagreed. Whilst the 3rd year results show
that 54.5% have disagreed and 45.5% of the sample are between A and SA. On the one hand, the
2nd year textbook does not limit teachers’ creativity because the presented content is maybe beyond
the learners’ level as what has been stated before, so the teachers must be creative to make some
adaptation and use other supporting materials that meet their learners’ needs and level. On the
other hand, it can be a deskiller especially for novice teachers who still do not have the experience
yet to use their own selected materials. Moreover, the 3rd year textbook kills teachers’ creativity
maybe for the reason that the content is clear and appropriate to the learners, so the teacher relies
on it as it is in the teaching process.
Q11: Your general assessment of the textbook after use
Table 11
The Textbook General Assessment
The 2nd year textbook The 3rd year textbook
Options N % N %
Good 2 9.1 3 13.6
Medium 18 81.8 18 81.8
Terrible 2 9.1 1 4.5
Total 22 100 22 100
- 56 -
Table11 presents the teachers’ general assessment about both textbooks after their use.
81.8% said that both textbooks are medium. Good and terrible have been chosen by 9.1% of the
sample concerning the use of the 2nd year textbook. While the 3rd year textbook has been assessed
by 13.6% as a good textbook and 4.5% as terrible. All in all, both textbooks are in the average
according to teachers’ responses.
4.4.3. Grammar Structures
Q12: The presentation of grammar points is clear and understandable
Table 12
The Clear Presentation of Grammar Points
The 2nd year textbook The 3rd year textbook
Options N % N %
SA 4 18.2 5 22.7
A 9 40.9 10 45.5
D 7 31.8 7 31.8
SD 2 9.1 / /
Total 22 100 22 100
Grammar is one of the most important elements to be taught in the foreign language, so it
is highly important to be presented clearly and simply especially for beginners to help them make
a better understanding. In this regard, the above statement aims to assess whether the grammar
points are presented in a clear and understandable way in both textbooks or not. Table12 presents
both the 2nd and the 3rd year teachers’ answers. According to the 2nd year answers, the selection is
as follows: 18.2% have chosen SA, 40.9% have selected A, 31.6% have selected D and last but
not least 9.1% have picked SD. Whilst the 3rd year results show that 22.7% have selected SA,
- 57 -
45.5% have chosen A and 31.8% have picked D. As a conclusion, both textbooks are presenting
the grammar points in a clear and understandable way.
Q13: Grammar points presented in the textbook are beyond the learner’s level
Table 13
Grammar Complexity
The 2nd year textbook The 3rd year textbook
Options N % N %
SA 3 13.6 / /
A 9 40.9 9 40.9
D 7 31.8 10 45.5
SD 3 13.6 3 13.6
Total 22 100 22 100
The table13 shows the results and the responses of the teachers concerning the statement
which claims that the grammar rules presented in both textbooks are beyond the learners’ level.
40.9% have agreed that the grammar presented in the 2nd year textbook is complex, 13.6% have
strongly agreed, whereas 31.8% have selected D and 13.6% have chosen SD. Concerning the 3rd
year grammar content, 40.9% said that it is complex and 59.1% of the sample see that the grammar
is not beyond the learners’ level. There is a slight difference in the teachers’ answers, those who
see that the presented grammar points in both textbooks are beyond the learners’ level maybe they
think that there are some grammar points which should be dealt with in advanced levels because
of their complexity and because the learners are still beginners and should learn the language
gradually. Though there are those who disagreed with the statement maybe they consider the
- 58 -
presented grammar points as the basics that should be taught in earlier stages of the language
learning.
Q14: The amount of grammar rules presented in the textbook is too much in comparison
with the learners’ level
Table 14
The Amount of Grammar Rules in Comparison with Learners’ Level
The 2nd year textbook The 3rd year textbook
Options N % N %
SA 10 45.5 6 27.3
A 7 31.8 9 40.9
D 5 22.7 7 31.8
Total 22 100 22 100
Since both textbooks are intended for beginners in English, the number of grammar rules
must be appropriate to their level. 77.3% said that the amount of grammar rules in the 2nd year
textbook are too much, whilst 22.7% have disagreed. Similarly,68.2% of the teachers who
responded to the 3rd year textbook said that the number of the grammatical points is not
appropriate, while 31.8% said the opposite. In simple words, the number of the grammatical items
in both textbooks is not suitable to the learners’ level.
Q15: Grammar points are presented basically from the simplest to the more complex
Table 15
The Gradual Movement of Grammar Points
The 2nd year textbook The 3rd year textbook
- 59 -
Options N % N %
SA 1 4.5 2 9.1
A 10 45.5 10 45.5
D 10 45.5 9 40.9
SD 1 4.5 1 4.5
Total 22 100 22 100
In order to teach grammar for beginners, it should be arranged according to different
principles and criteria like the communicative needs, the gradation or the difficulty level like from
the simplest to the complex …etc. Question15 tends to know in what manner the grammar points
are presented. According to teachers’ answers above, 50% have agreed that grammar moved
gradually from the simplest to the more complex in the 2nd year textbook, yet the other 50% have
disagreed. Moreover, 54.6% said that the grammar points presented in the 3rd year textbook are in
the appropriate sequence, whereas 45.4% have disagreed. The answers are slightly different while
there are some teachers who see that there is a gradual movement concerning the presentation of
grammar maybe because their pupils did not face any difficulties in grasping the new information
and mastering them, simply because the presentation matches the learners’ language level and
needs. Even though, it is not the same case concerning those who have disagreed. Generally,
grammar should be presented in relation to the learners’ communicative needs at the first place
even the grammatical points do not follow the gradual movement.
Q16: How are grammar structures presented?
Table 16
The Presentation of Grammar Structures
- 60 -
The 2nd year textbook The 3rd year textbook
Options N % N %
Deductively 8 36.4 8 36.4
Inductively 4 18.2 4 18.2
A mixture 10 45.5 10 45.5
Total 22 100 22 100
There are two major approaches in teaching grammar of the foreign language, namely the
deductive and the inductive approaches. Accordingly, this question aims to know how grammar
structures are presented in the intended textbooks. As can be observed, the results are similar
concerning both textbooks. 18.2% said that grammar is presented inductively, 36.4% have seen
that the structures are presented deductively and 45.5% claimed that there is a mixture in the use
of both methods in presenting grammar content.
Q17: Grammar structures are integrated with the other skills
Table 17
The Integration of Grammar Structures
The 2nd year textbook The 3rd year textbook
Options N % N %
SA 3 13.6 3 13.6
A 15 68.2 16 72.7
D 4 18.2 3 13.6
Total 22 100 22 100
- 61 -
For better understanding of the grammatical items that have been already learned,
structures should be contextualized and integrated with the other skills. Table17 shows clearly that
the teachers’ responses are quite positive to the statement, 68.2% have agreed, 13.6% have strongly
agreed and 18.2% have disagreed that there is an integration between grammar and the other skills
in the 2nd year textbooks. Similarly, the results concerning the 3rd year textbook are as follows:
72.7% have chosen A, SA and D were put on equal footing with 13.6%. The responses reveal that
the grammar structures in both textbooks are integrated with the other skills in order to show their
applicability in different contexts.
4.4.4. Grammatical Sequencing
Q18: The sequencing of grammar structures presented in the textbook is appropriate
Table 18
The Appropriateness of Grammar Structures Sequence
The 2nd year textbook The 3rd year textbook
Options N % N %
SA 1 4.5 1 4.5
A 11 50.0 11 50.0
D 6 27.3 6 27.3
SD 4 18.2 4 18.2
Total 22 100 22 100
It is very important to the grammatical structures to be sequenced appropriately in order to
achieve the stated objectives properly. Question18 tends to assess teachers’ points of view
regarding the sequence of the grammar structures that are presented in both textbooks to see
whether it is appropriate or not. As can be noticed, the results for both textbooks are similar, 11
- 62 -
teachers have chosen the A option besides to one who selected the SA, so the total is 54.5% who
are in agreement with the statement. However, 45.5% of the sample their answers are between D
and SD. According to the results, more than the half see that grammar has an appropriate
sequencing in both textbooks maybe because it has a relation with the communicative needs and
objectives, yet the other answers that claim the opposite cannot be ignored. They think that there
are some points that should be presented before or after some other structures maybe because of
their complexity or maybe the learner has to learn them in a particular sequencing that matches his
communicative needs.
Q19: The sequence of grammar matches the textbook’s communicative objectives
Table 19
The Grammatical Sequencing in Relation to Textbook Communicative Objectives
The 2nd year textbook The 3rd year textbook
Options N % N %
A 16 72.7 17 77.3
D 5 22.7 5 22.7
SD 1 4.5 / /
Total 22 100 22 100
The second-generation MBE is supporting the principles of the CBA; thus, the textbook
content must be designed according to the stated objectives in order to help the learners to develop
their competences. Question19 aims to investigate to what extent the sequence of grammar
matches both textbooks’ communicative objectives. Table19 demonstrates that there is a slight
diversity in the teachers’ responses to both textbooks. The majority have agreed that there is
relation between the grammar sequence and the communicative objectives in both textbooks.
- 63 -
concerning the 2nd year textbooks, 72.7% have chosen A, 22.7% have selected D, and 4.5% have
picked SD. Likewise, the 3rd year textbook answers are as follows: 77.3% have agreed and 22.7%
have disagreed.
Q20: The grammar structures sequenced on the basis of learners’ communicative needs
Table 20
The Grammatical Sequencing on the basis of the Learners’ Communicative Needs
The 2nd year textbook The 3rd year textbook
Options N % N %
A 11 50.0 13 59.1
D 9 40.9 7 31.8
SD 2 9.1 2 9.1
Total 22 100 22 100
The question20 seeks to know whether the grammar structures are sequenced based on the
learners’ communicative needs or not. On the one hand, the participants answers are divided into
50%who have agreed and 50% who have disagreed, this is concerning the 2nd year textbook. On
the other hand, 59.1% of the respondents to the 3rd year textbook see that grammar is sequenced
based on the learners’ communicative needs unlike the 40.9% who have disagreed with that claim.
Apparently, the grammatical sequencing in the third-year textbook is somehow based on the
learners’ communicative needs. The 2nd year textbook respondents are divided into two groups:
those who are in agreement with the claim and those who have disagreed. The first group see that
the learners communicate effectively in the target situation which means that the sequence of the
grammatical points is related to the communicative needs of the learners. Though, the other group
- 64 -
maybe they see that some grammar points should be taught before or after some other points
according to their difficulty level and the learners’ communicative needs.
Q21: The grammatical sequencing helps learners to develop their competences, specifically
their linguistic competence
Table 21
The Relation between the Grammatical Sequencing and the Linguistic Competence Development
The 2nd year textbook The 3rd year textbook
Options N % N %
SA 2 9.1 2 9.1
A 9 40.9 10 45.5
D 9 40.9 9 40.9
SD 2 9.1 1 4.5
Total 22 100 22 100
The development of the competences, more specifically the linguistic competence, is
highly related to the appropriate sequencing of the grammatical items and the clear presentation of
the vocabulary content. The aim of question21 is to investigate to what extent the grammatical
sequencing in both textbooks helps the learners to develop their linguistic competence from
teachers’ perspective. According to those who responded to the 2nd year textbook, 50% have
chosen the SA and A options whereas the other 50% have chosen SD and D. Concerning the 3rd
year textbook, more than the half of the sample about 54.6% see that the grammatical sequencing
is appropriate to help the learner in the development of their linguistic competence, while 45.4%
have disagreed. Actually, the answers are approximately close. On the one hand, teachers who
disagree ةthink that sequence is not appropriate where some grammar structures should be taught
- 65 -
earlier before some others, maybe because the learners face difficulties to master and use them
appropriately and correctly which affects the development of their linguistic competence. On the
other hand however, those who have agreed they think that grammar sequenced appropriately
because they have noticed that their pupils use the previously learned grammar structures correctly
whenever they use the language. All of these depends on the learners’ abilities, levels, and their
communicative needs.
Q22: There is a grammatical sequencing between the grammar lectures of the 2nd year
English textbook and the 3rd year English textbook
Table 22
The Grammatical Sequencing between both Textbooks
Options N %
SA 3 13.6
A 9 40.9
D 5 22.7
SD 5 22.7
Total 22 100
It is highly important to the grammar content to be sequenced from one level to another in
order to make the communicative objectives attainable which makes the learner able to
communicate not only inside the classroom but also in the real-life situations. Table22
demonstrates teachers’ answers regarding the grammatical sequence between both textbooks.
13.6% were answered with SA, 40.9% have chosen A, D and SD were put on equal footing with
22.7%. It is noticed, there is a slight difference in the answers. More than the half of the sample
sees that there is a grammatical sequencing between both textbooks maybe because there is a
- 66 -
consolidation of previously learned knowledge where some grammar lectures of the 2nd year
represented and reviewed again in the 3rd year textbook. Despite the fact that there are repeated
lectures from the preceding level, some teachers see that the grammar lectures in both textbooks
are separated, and they have no relation with each other.
Q23: The grammatical sequencing between both textbooks is appropriate and logical
Table 23
The Appropriateness and the Logical Sequence between both Textbooks
Options N %
A 10 45.5
D 11 50.0
SD 1 4.5
Total 22 100
This question tends to see whether the grammar sequence between both textbooks is logical
and appropriate. 45.5% have agreed while the rest 54.5% have disagreed and see that the
grammatical sequence is not suitable and illogical. Apparently, there is other similarities in the
answers to this question too. According to what has been said in the previous questions, those who
have agreed see that the 3rd year textbook grammar content is related to the 2nd year grammar
content because some lectures are represented and reviewed, also the sequence of the grammatical
points helps the learners to develop their linguistic competence where they use the previously
learned knowledge appropriately while communicating. Whereas the highest percentage of the
respondents who have disagreed with the statement they see the opposite, because the learners still
face problems in developing their competences for instance, or for another possible reason, the
- 67 -
grammar lectures that are presented in the 3rd year textbook have no relation with those in the 2nd
year program.
Q24: Further comments, recommendations, or feedback concerning the coursebooks, the
presentation and the sequence of grammar structures
The respondents provided some comments and suggestions. First, they said that pupils lose
interest in learning English in both 2nd and 3rd years because of the syllabus difficulty and the
program length concerning the grammar content which is too loaded and beyond the learners’
capacities, thus teachers are obliged to make some adaptations and bring other materials that suit
their learners’ level and interest which need extra efforts and more time. Second, the 2nd year
textbook has no relation with the 1st and the 3rd year programs especially the grammar presentation
and sequence. Third, grammar must be taught explicitly not implicitly with a clear and brief
explanation. Finally, they suggest that the learners’ ages, background, and levels have to be
investigated in order to design the coursebooks on that basis. Also, teachers must be consulted in
the designing process because they are the ones who implementing the textbooks and know about
their learners’ interests, level, and language needs.
4.5. Discussion of The Results
The aim of the questionnaire is to investigate teachers’ attitudes towards the 2nd and the 3rd
year textbooks in general, and the sequencing and the presentation of grammar in particular. The
majority of the sample are experienced teachers (17out of 22), so their answers and the results
could be considered reliable.
According to the teachers’ answers, both textbooks have matched in some points and
differed in some other points. Both textbooks are neither good nor bad after their use. They are
meeting the stated objectives and they provide consolidation of previously learned knowledge.
- 68 -
Though, concerning their suitability to the learners’ level, the 3rd year textbook is considered
somehow appropriate to the target learners’ level because its content is organized due to the
learners’ language needs. Whilst the 2nd year textbook can be considered suitable because it
matches the learners’ age and interests concerning the way of presenting the content. Though, they
can be beyond the learners’ level because of the complexity of the content.
Grammar points in both textbooks are presented in a clear and understandable way through
the use of deductive and inductive methods of teaching grammar, yet most of the time they are
presented implicitly which could be somehow difficult to the learners to get them immediately.
The number of the grammatical points presented in each textbook is too much in comparison to
the learners’ level especially for the 2nd year learners where the grammatical items are complex to
them as beginners, but for those which are included in the 3rd year syllabus are considered to be
appropriate to the learners’ language needs.
Concerning the grammatical sequencing within each textbook and between both of them,
the gradual movement of the grammatical points in both textbooks is related to the communicative
needs. Sometimes, they are moving from the simplest item to the more complex, and sometimes
they are presented randomly. Moreover, the sequence within both textbooks, on the one hand, is
considered appropriate because it matches the communicative objectives that have been stated in
both textbooks, also the grammar structures sequenced on the basis of the learners’ communicative
needs which in a way helps them to work on the development of their linguistic competence. On
the other hand, the grammatical sequencing could be inappropriate maybe because some of the
grammar structures are presented without making a reference to the learners’ communicative needs
especially in the 2nd year textbook, and that can be confirmed when the learners try to use a correct
language to communicate but they fail. There is a grammatical sequencing between both textbook
- 69 -
concerning the continuity of the grammar lectures, but it is considered somehow inappropriate and
illogical which affects the achievement of the linguistic competence at the long term.
To sum up, it can be inferred from these results that the 3rd year textbook even though it
has some shortcomings but still somehow appropriate to the target learners concerning the
sequencing and the presentation of the grammar content and its complexity. Concerning the 2nd
year textbook, even though the way of presenting the content has matched the learners’ interest,
but still the grammar content is complex and beyond the learners’ level. The sequence in both
textbooks is related to the learners’ communicative needs. In addition to that, there is a sequence
between both textbooks but still inappropriate and logical which could be considered as a standing
stone in the pupils’ way to develop their competences and their use of the foreign language
communicatively.
Conclusion
This chapter has mainly focused on the evaluation of the grammatical sequencing and the
structure presentation in the 2nd and the 3rd grades English textbooks according to the teachers’
perspectives. A questionnaire was submitted to 22 middle school English teachers in the district
of OEB. Their answers had provided an insightful evaluation which reveal their positive attitudes
towards the presentation of grammar and the grammatical sequence in the 3rd year textbook. Also,
they were not satisfied with the 2nd year textbook as whole and particularly the complexity of the
grammar content. additionally, there is a sequence between both textbooks but still not appropriate
and illogical which may affect the achievement of the linguistic competence.
General Conclusion
Among the various materials that are used for language learning and language teaching,
textbooks serve as a key component in most language programs (Richards, 2001). The textbook
- 70 -
provides the learner with the appropriate input to learn and master the FL and serves as a guiding
tool in designing the lectures’ content. Along similar lines, Sheldon (1988) claims that coursebooks
represent the “visible heart of any ELT program” (p. 237) and remain the main resources for
teaching English in many settings (Richards, 2014). Actually, the selection of the suitable
textbooks to the teaching learning situations and to the target learners’ level is so important. For
that reason, the evaluation process is needed.
In the Algerian classroom, textbooks are the most important frequent used materials.
Hence, this research study attempts to provide an evaluation of an EFL textbooks, and more
specifically, an evaluation of the grammatical sequencing through the evaluation of the presenting
grammar in the textbooks. This study is focusing on the evaluation of the textbook MBE which is
used in the Algerian MS education system for the second year and the third-year students.
Apparently, mastering any language requires from the learner to master its grammatical structures,
to enable him use the language easily and effectively. The research aims to investigate and to
examine whether there is a kind of continuity and sequencing in and between the 2nd and the 3rdMS
textbooks concerning the grammar structures. Additionally, it seeks to know how these structures
are presented and evaluate their suitability to the learners’ level.
For an effective achievement of the evaluation, two different tools were followed. An
evaluative checklist was adapted in order to fit the aims of the study as well as a teacher’s
questionnaire which was designed and distributed at the MSs’ level. The results of both procedures
have revealed that the 3rd year textbook is somehow appropriate as well as the presented grammar
to the target learners. Whereas the 2nd year textbook is considered inappropriate to the target
learners because the grammar content is somehow complex and beyond the learners’ level.
Additionally, the grammatical sequence in both textbooks is related to the learners’ communicative
- 71 -
needs. Finally, there is a grammatical sequencing between both textbooks eventhough it was
proved that it is not appropriate and illogical after the investigation and the analysis of the study
which may affect negatively on the achievement of the stated objectives.
Research Limitations
It is important to mention that this study has some limitations that should be stated. First, the
difficulty to access to some MSs and submit the teacher’s questionnaire. As it is mentioned above,
the questionnaire is the best tool to gather a large amount of data in a short period of time with less
efforts, but not the case concerning this research or in general, the majority of the studies that have
been conducted in Algeria and using the same tool have faced the same problem. Honestly, through
the use of the questionnaire, a number of data was collected but in extended period of time with
many efforts. Second, due to the spread of Covid-19 which put some constraints in many fields,
the sample that was selected is considered somehow small where the results cannot be generalized
which may affect the reliability and the validity of the work.
Suggestions for Future Research
Based on the findings and limitations of the study, suggestions for future research can be
made. As in what has been said before, the sample of the study is small where the teachers’
responses to the Likert scale questions most of the time have some controversy, whether they were
responding similarly to the agreement and the disagreement, or their answers were slightly
different which affect the final results that could not take any side. For further research, another
study could be carried out in the same topic but with a large sample in order to make the work
more valid, also an experiment could be carried out with the students maybe through a
questionnaire to assess their attitudes towards the presented grammar.
- 72 -
Another research could be conducted whichhas a relation to the authenticity and the
appropriateness of the audio tracks and texts to the target learners. Something has been noticed
during the analysis of the comments of Q24 in the questionnaire, the teachers as well as the learners
are facing problems with the listening scripts and texts which are not authentic. They do not help
them to obtain the lesson’s objectives and they are most of the time not appropriate to the learners’
level.
As a last suggestion, other researches can be carried in the evaluation of another aspect
from the textbook like the vocabulary development, or maybe conducting a macro-evaluation to
assess the suitability of MBE to the target learners.
- 73 -
References
Ahour, T., & Ahmadi, E. (2012). Retrospective evaluation of textbook “Summit 2B” for its
suitability for EFL undergraduate students. Journal of Educational and Social Research,
2(5), 195-202.
Allwright, R. L. (1981). What do we want teaching materials for? ELT Journal, 36(1), 5-13.
Andon, N. (2018). Materials development for TESOL. ELT Journal, 72(1), 112–113. Retrieved
from https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccx062
Arıkan, A. (2005). Age, gender and social class in ELT coursebooks: A critical study. Hacettepe
Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 28(28), 29–38. Retrieved from
https://dergipark.org.tr/hunefd
Aytug, R. (2007). An EFL textbook evaluation study in Anatolian high schools: “New bridge to
success for 9th grade new beginners”. Ankara: Bilkent University.
Battistella, E. L. (2005). Bad language: Are some words better than others? USA: Oxford
University Press.
Block, D. (1991). Some thoughts on DIY materials design. ELT Journal, 45(3), 211–217.
doi:10.1093/elt/45.3.211
Bowden, J. A. (2004). Competency-based learning. In S. Stein & S. Farmer (Eds.), Connotative
Learning: The Trainer’s Guide to Learning Theories and Their Practical Application to
Training Design (pp. 91-100). Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt Publishing.
Brinton, L. J., & Brinton, D. (2010). The linguistic structures of modern English. Philadelphia:
John Benjamins Publishing Company.
Brown, J.D. (2001). Teaching by principals: An interactive approach to language pedagogy. New
- 74 -
York: Longman.
Burns, A. (2011). Grammar and communicative language teaching: Why, when, and how to teach
it? In S. Richmond & K. Kelly (Eds), English Language Teaching Practice in Asia (p. 78).
Cambodia: Phnom Penh.
Byrd, P. (2001). Textbooks: Evaluation for selection and analysis for implementation. In M.
Celce-Murcia (Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (3rd ed., pp.
415–427). Boston, MA : Heinle & Heinle.
Celce-Murcia, M. (2001). Teaching English as a second or foreign language. (3rd ed.). Boston,
MA: Heinle & Heinle.
Chalker, S., & Weiner, E. (1994). Oxford Dictionary of English Grammar. New York: Oxford
University Press.
Chang, J. (2006). Globalization and English in chinese higher education. World Englishes, 25(3),
513-525. doi:10.1111/j.1467-971X.2006.00484.x
Cortazi, M., & Jin, L. (1999). Cultural mirrors materials and methods in the EFL classroom. In E.
Hinkel. (Eds), Culture in second language teaching and learning. (pp. 196-219).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Crystal, D. (1997). English as a global language. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University
Press.
Crystal, D. (2004). Word and deed’ TESTeacher. Retrived from:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/grammar
Cunningsworth, A. 1995. Choosing your coursebook. Oxford, England: Heinemann.
Davis, A. (2007). Introduction to applied linguistics: From practice to theory (2nd ed). Edinburgh:
Edinburgh University Press.
- 75 -
Dendrinos, B. (1992). The EFL Textbook and Ideology. Greece: N.C. Grivas Publication.
Depraetere, L., & Langford, C. (2012). Advanced English grammar: A linguistic approach.
London and New York: Bloomsbury.
Ellis, R. (1997). The empirical evaluation of language teaching materials. ELT Journal,
51(1), 36-42.
Emery, D., Kierzek, J., & Lindblom. (1978). English fundamentals (6th ed). New York :
Macmillan.
Ellis, R. (2006). Current issues in the teaching of grammar : An SLA perspective. TESOL
Quarterly, 40(1), 83-107.
Freemen, L. D. (1986). Techniques and Principles of Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Freemen, L. D. (2000). Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching (2nd ed). Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Freeman, L. D. (2001). Teaching grammar. In M. Celce-Murcia (Ed.), Teaching English as a
second or foreign language (3rd ed., pp. 251-66). Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.
Gak, D. M. (2011). Textbook: An important element in the teaching process. Hatchaba Journal,
19(2), 78-82.
Gascoigne, C. (2002). The debate on grammar in second language acquisition: Past, present, and
future. Lewiston, NJ: Edwin Mellen Press.
Graves, K. (2000). Designing language courses: A guide for teachers. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Gray, J. (2000). The ELT coursebook as cultural artefact: How teachers censor and adapt. ELT
Journal, 54(3), 274–283. doi: 10.1093/elt/54.3.274
Halliday, M. A. K., McIntosh, A., & Strevens, P. (1964). The linguistic sciences and language
- 76 -
teaching. In L. D. Freeman. (Eds), A re-evaluation of grammatical structure sequencing.
(pp. 123-33). Michigan: Michigan University.
Harmer, J. (1991). Teaching and Learning Grammar (6th ed). London: Longman.
Harmer, J. (2001). The practice of English language teaching (3rd ed.). Essex, UK: Longman.
Harmer, J. (2007). The Practice of English language teaching. Edinburgh: Pearson Education Ltd.
Hartwell, P. (Eds.). (1987). Grammar, grammars and the teaching of grammar. New York:
Random House
Higa, M. (1965). The psycholinguistic concept of "difficulty" and the teaching of foreign
language vocabulary. In Freeman, L.D. (Eds), A re-evaluation of grammatical structure
sequencing. (pp. 123-33). Michigan: Michigan University.
Hutchinson, T., & Waters, A. (1987). English for specific purpose: A learning-centered approach.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hutchinson, T., & Torres, E. (1994). The textbook as agent of change. ELT Journal, 48(4), 315-
328. doi:10.1093/elt/48.4.315
Johnson, K., & Johnson, H. (Eds.). (1999). The encyclopedic dictionary of applied linguistics: A
handbook for language teaching. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Karamoozian, F.M., & Riazi, A. (2008). Development of a new checklist for evaluating
reading comprehension textbooks. ESP world, 3(19), 5. Retrieved from
http://www.esp-world.info
Krashen, S. (2003). Explorations in language acquisition and language use: The taipei lectures.
Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Lee, W. (1997). The Role of materials in classroom language use. In V. Berry., B. Adamson., &
W. Littlewood. (Eds), Applying linguistics: Insights into language in education (pp.69-82).
- 77 -
Hong Kong: The University of Hong Kong.
Litz, D. R. A. (2005). Textbook evaluation and ELT management: A South Korean case study.
Asian EFL Journal, 48, 1-53. Retrieved from
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228383638
Margana, M., & Widyantoro, A. (2017). Developing English textbooks oriented to higher order
thinking skills for students of Vocational high schools in Yogyakarta. Journal of Language
Teaching and Research, 8(1), 26-38. doi:10.17507/jltr.0801.04
McGrath, I. (2002). Materials evaluation and design for language teaching. Edinburgh, UK:
Edinburgh University Press.
McGrath, I. (2013). Teaching materials and the roles of EFL/ESL teachers: Practice and theory.
London, UK: Bloomsbury.
Ming-jun, W. (2008). Principal approaches of grammar instruction.US-China Foreign Language,
6(11), 29-35.
Mohammed, A., & Jaber, H. (2008). The effects of deductive and inductive approaches of teaching
on Jordanian university students use of active and passive voice in English. College Student
Journal, 42(2), 545-553.
Montasser, M. A. (2013). Developing an English language textbook evaluative checklist. IOSR
Journal of Research & Method in Education, 1(3), 55-70.
Mukundan, J., Hajimohammadi, R., & Nimehchisalem, V. (2011). Developing an English
textbook evaluation checklist. Contemporary Issues in Education Research, 4(6), 21-28.
Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.19030/cier.v4i6.4383
Nabi, S., & Oualmi, S. (2018). Textbook evaluation: Vocabulary development in my book of
English. (Master’s thesis). DCU, Tizi-Ouzou.
- 78 -
Nordquist, R. (2015). What Is Grammar? Retrieved from
http://grammar.about.com/od/basicsentencegrammar/a/grammarintro.htm
Nickel, G. (1971). Problems of learners' difficulties in foreign language. In Freeman, L.D. (Eds),
A re-evaluation of grammatical structure sequencing. (pp. 123-33). Michigan: Michigan
University.
Oller, J. W. (1972). Contrastive analysis, difficulty, and predictability. Foreign Language
Annals, 6 (1), 95-106.
Richards, J. C. (2001). Curriculum development in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Richards, J.C. & Rodgers, T. (2001). Approaches and methods in language teaching. A
Description and Analysis (2nd ed). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Schneck, E.A. (1978). “A Guide to Identifying High School Graduation Competencies.” In
Richards, J. and Rodgers, T. (2001). Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching. New
York: Cambridge University Press.
Sheldon, L. (1988). Evaluating ELT textbooks and materials. ELT Journal, 42(2). 237–246. doi
:10.1093/elt/42.4.237
Simenson, A.M. (1988). Teaching a foreign language: Principles and procedures. Bergen
Fagbookforlaget Vigmostad and Bjorke A/S.
Singh, M. (1998). Gender issues in children’s literature. ERIC Digest. Retrieved from
https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED424591
Skierso, A. (1991). Textbook selection and evaluation. In M. Celce-Murcia (ed). Teaching English
as a second or foreign language (2nd ed). Boston: Heinle and Heinle.
Tamrabet, L., Chenni, A., Biskri, N., Boukri, N., & Smara, A. (2016). My book of English. Middle
- 79 -
school. Year two. Algeria: CASBAH editions.
Tamrabet, L., Chenni, A., Bouazid, T., Boukri, N., & Smara, A. (2016). My book of English.
Middle school. Year three. Algeria: CASBAH editions.
Thornbury, S. (2006). How to teach grammar. Edinburg: Pearson Education
Tomlinson, B. (1998). Materials development in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Tomlinson, B. (2001). Materials development. In R. Carter, & D. Nunan (Ed.), The
Cambridge guide to teaching English to speakers of other languages (pp. 66-71).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Williams, D. (1983). Developing criteria for textbook evaluation. ELT Journal 37(3), 251-255
Ur, P. 1996. A course in language teaching: Practice & Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press
Ur, P. (2012). A course in language teaching: Practice and theory (2nd ed.). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Weaver, C., Nally, C., & Moerman, S. (2001). To grammar or not to grammar : That is not the
question. Retrieved from
www.learner.org/workshops/middlewriting/images/.../W8ReadGrammar.pdf
Widodo, H. P. (2015). Textbook analysis on college academic writing. TEFLIN Journal,
18(2), 109-122.
Appendices
Appendix 1: Examples of Grammatical Structures Presented in the 2nd Year MS English
Textbook.
Example 01:
Example 02:
Example 03:
Example 04:
Example 05:
Appendix 2: Examples of Grammatical Structures Presented in the 3rd Year MS English
Textbook.
Example 01:
Example 02:
Example 03:
Example 04:
Example 05:
Example 06:
Appendix 3: Evaluative checklist (adapted)
A. Practical Considerations
1. Are the textbooks easily accessible?
2. Is the price of textbooks reasonable?
3. Are the textbooks a recent publication?
B. Language Related Considerations
i. Grammar
1. To what extent is the number of grammatical points appropriate and how appropriate is
their sequence?
2. To what extent are the presentations clear and complete enough for the learners to have
available a concise review outside the classroom?
3. To what extent are the linguistic items (mainly grammar) introduced in meaningful
contexts?
4. To what extent does the presentation of grammar structures move gradually from the
simple to the more complex?
5. To what extent are the grammar points presented with brief, interesting and easy examples,
and explanations?
6. To what extent are new structures controlled to be presented and explained before they
appear in drills, dialogues or reading materials?
7. To what extent does the practice and recycling (production) of new grammatical items
seem to be appropriate for the level of language mastery of the learners?
8. To what extent is there an even distribution of grammatical material among the chapters
(do some chapters present too much material and others too little)?
9. To what extent does the text make the structures presented easily accessible to the learner?
ii. Exercises and Activities
1. To what extent do the exercises involve the grammar structures which build up the learner’s
repertoire and develop his/her ability to communicate increasingly independent of text or
teacher direction?
iii. Layout and Physical Makeup
1. To what extent are simple graphic devices effectively used to clarify the presentation of
grammatical structures?
2. To what extent are the illustrations clear, simple and free of unnecessary details that may
confuse the learner?
Appendix 4 : Teacher’s Questionnaire
Teachers’ Questionnaire
Dear teacher,
We are inviting you to respond to our questionnaire which takes a part in our research for
the fulfillment of master’s degree requirement. The questionnaire aims to gather information about
teachers’ perspectives towards the presentation of grammar and to examine the grammar sequence
in both 2nd and 3rd years middle school English textbooks. Please, put a tick to the appropriate
answer according to your opinion.
We will be so thankful for your contribution.
Nasri wahiba
Diar soror
Faculty of Letters and Languages
Larbi Ben L’Mhidi University
2020/2021
I. Bibliographical Information
1. Gender: Male ( ) Female ( )
2. Age: 20-30 ( ) 31-40 ( )
41-50 ( ) > 50 ( )
3. Teaching experience: 1-4 years ( ) 5-10 ( ) > 10 ( )
4. Teaching experience using “MY BOOK OF ENGLISH” of
2nd year: ………year/s
3rd year: ………year/s
II. Textbook and Syllabus
5. The use of “MY BOOK OF ENGLISH” in teaching-learning process is
2nd year textbook 3rd year textbook
Always ( ) ( )
Often ( ) ( )
Rarely ( ) ( )
Never ( ) ( )
6. The difficulty level of the textbook is appropriate to the students’ level.
2nd year textbook 3rd year textbook
Strongly agree (SA) ( ) ( )
Agree (A) ( ) ( )
Disagree (D) ( ) ( )
Undecided (U) ( ) ( )
Strongly disagree (SD) ( ) ( )
7. The content is organized according to the students’ language needs.
SA ( ) ( )
A ( ) ( )
U ( ) ( )
D ( ) ( )
SD ( ) ( )
8. The syllabuses you are using or have used provide consolidation of previously
learnt knowledge.
SA ( ) ( )
A ( ) ( )
U ( ) ( )
D ( ) ( )
SD ( ) ( )
9. The objectives that have been stated are achievable.
SA ( ) ( )
A ( ) ( )
U ( ) ( )
D ( ) ( )
SD ( ) ( )
10. The textbook limits teachers’ creativity.
SA ( ) ( )
A ( ) ( )
U ( ) ( )
D ( ) ( )
SD ( ) ( )
11. Your general assessment of the textbook after use.
Good ( ) ( )
Medium ( ) ( )
Terrible ( ) ( )
III. Grammar Structures
12. The presentation of grammar points is clear and understandable.
SA ( ) ( )
A ( ) ( )
U ( ) ( )
D ( ) ( )
SD ( ) ( )
13. Grammar points presented in the textbook are beyond the learner’s level (grammar
complexity).
SA ( ) ( )
A ( ) ( )
U ( ) ( )
D ( ) ( )
SD ( ) ( )
14. The amount of grammar rules presented in the textbook is too much in comparison with
the learners’ level.
SD ( ) ( )
A ( ) ( )
U ( ) ( )
D ( ) ( )
SD ( ) ( )
15. Grammar points are presented basically from the simplest to the more complex.
SA ( ) ( )
A ( ) ( )
U ( ) ( )
D ( ) ( )
SD ( ) ( )
16. Grammar structures are presented
Deductively ( ) ( )
Inductively ( ) ( )
A mixture ( ) ( )
17. Grammar structures are integrated with the other skills (like reading and writing).
SA ( ) ( )
A ( ) ( )
U ( ) ( )
D ( ) ( )
SD ( ) ( )
IV. Grammatical Sequencing
18. The sequencing of grammar structures presented in the textbook is appropriate
SA ( ) ( )
A ( ) ( )
U ( ) ( )
D ( ) ( )
SD ( ) ( )
19. The sequence of grammar matches the textbook’s communicative objectives
SA ( ) ( )
A ( ) ( )
U ( ) ( )
D ( ) ( )
SD ( ) ( )
20. The grammar structures sequenced on the basis of learners’ communicative needs
SA ( ) ( )
A ( ) ( )
U ( ) ( )
D ( ) ( )
SD ( ) ( )
21. The grammatical sequencing helps learners to develop their competences, specifically their
linguistic competence
SA ( ) ( )
A ( ) ( )
U ( ) ( )
D ( ) ( )
SD ( ) ( )
22. There is a grammatical sequencing between the grammar lectures of the 2nd year English
textbook and the 3rd year English textbook
SA ( ) A ( ) D ( ) U ( ) SD ( )
23. The grammatical sequencing between both textbooks is appropriate and logical
SA ( ) A ( ) D ( ) U ( ) SD ( )
24. If you have any further comments, recommendations, or feedback concerning the
coursebooks, the presentation and the sequence of grammar structures, please specify
below.
………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………
………………………………………………………………………………………………
Thank you.
Résumé
Les manuels sont précieux dans chaque classe de langue ; ils sont considérés comme une
composante essentielle qui joue plusieurs rôles dans le programme d'enseignement de l'anglais
(ELT). Par conséquent, leur évaluation est de la plus haute importance afin que leur contribution
pédagogique puisse être assurée au processus d'enseignement-apprentissage. Bien qu'il existe de
nombreuses études sur l'évaluation des manuels, les manuels nouvellement publiés ne reçoivent
pas l'attention nécessaire pour être examinés. L'étude suivante tente d'évaluer la nouvelle
génération des manuels d'anglais du collège algérien « My Book of English » des 2e et 3e années
où l'accent sera mis sur l'évaluation de l'enchaînement grammatical et la présentation de la
grammaire. La recherche s'efforce de découvrir s'il existe un séquençage grammatical dans
chacun et entre les deux manuels ; il cherche aussi à savoir comment la grammaire est présentée,
et à évaluer son adéquation au niveau des apprenants. Par conséquent, pour atteindre ces
objectifs, des données quantitatives et qualitatives ont été obtenues à travers une liste de contrôle
adaptée et un questionnaire de l'enseignant. De plus, une liste de contrôle a été adaptée à partir
de différentes listes de contrôle proposées pour répondre aux objectifs de la recherche, tandis que
le questionnaire a été adressé aux enseignants d'EFL du collège pour évaluer leurs points de vue
sur le contenu grammatical des manuels et le séquençage grammatical. Les résultats des
méthodes mixtes ont révélé que le contenu grammatical des manuels de 3e année est en quelque
sorte approprié aux apprenants cibles alors que les structures grammaticales de 2e année sont
complexes et au-delà des niveaux des apprenants. De plus, les structures grammaticales de
chaque manuel sont séquencées en fonction des besoins de communication de l'apprenant.
Enfin, il existe un séquençage grammatical entre les deux manuels, mais il est inapproprié et
illogique car les apprenants sont encore confrontés à des difficultés dans l'utilisation correcte de
la langue qui affectent la réalisation des objectifs énoncés.
الملخص
الإنجليزية.عدة أدوار في مناهج تدريس اللغة يلعبأساسي مكون ، فهيللغةتعتبر الكتب المدرسية ذات قيمة في كل فصل دراسي
فإن تقييمهم له أهمية قصوى بحيث يمكن ضمان مساهمتهم التربوية في عملية التعليم والتعلم. على الرغم من وجود العديد وعليه،
الكتب المدرسية المدرسية،من الدراسات حول تقييم الكتب النشر إلا أن تعمل هذهم لفحصها. لا تحظى بالاهتمام اللازحديثة
الإنجليزية" على محاولة الدراسة للغة الجزائرية "كتابي الإعدادية المدارس في الإنجليزية اللغة الجديد من كتب الجيل تقييم
تقييم التسلسل النحوي وعرض القواعد. يسعى البحث لاكتشاف ما إذا كان كل من التركيز على سيتمحيث بللسنتين الثانية والثالثة
وتقييم مدى ملاءمتها القواعد،إلى معرفة كيفية تقديم وما إذا كان مناسبا، إضافة اك تسلسل نحوي في كل وبين كلا الكتابينهن
المتعلمين. الكمية والنوعية من خلال قائمة مراجعة معدلة واستبيان ،لبلوغ هذه الاهدافلمستويات تم الحصول على البيانات
الالمعلمصمم في حين تم توجيه الاستبيان إلى مراجعة تم تعديلها وفقا لقوائم أخرى لتتماشى واهداف البحث،، حيث ان قائمة
وكذلك التسلسل النحوي اللغة معلمي اللغة الإنجليزية كلغة أجنبية في المدرسة الإعدادية لتقييم وجهات نظرهم تجاه محتوى قواعد
للمتعلمين المستهدفين في حين أن ة مناسبحد ما الىالثالث للمستوىلنحوية أن القواعد االدراسة في الكتب المدرسية. كشفت نتائج
الكتابين يتم ترتيبها الهياكل النحوية في كلاوقد تبين أيضا ان الهياكل النحوية للسنة الثانية معقدة وتتجاوز مستويات المتعلمين.
للمتعلم. التواصلية الاحتياجات أساس تسلسل نحوي أخيرًا،على الكتابين هناك ولكنه غير مناسب وغير الدراسيين،بين كلا
.منطقي مما قد يؤثر على تنمية الكفاءة اللغوية للمتعلمين