An evaluation of the textbook tiếng anh 6 (10 year program a case study at quynh mai secondary school

VIETNAM ACADEMY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES
GRADUATE ACADEMY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES

Nguyễn Thị Viên

AN EVALUATION OF THE TEXTBOOK
TIẾNG ANH 6 (10-YEAR PROGRAM):

COVER PAGE 2

A CASE STUDY AT QUYNH MAI
SECONDARY SCHOOL

MA THESIS IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE

HANOI, 2018


VIETNAM ACADEMY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES
GRADUATE ACADEMY OF SOCIAL SCIENCES

Nguyễn Thị Viên

AN EVALUATION OF THE TEXTBOOK
TIẾNG ANH 6 (10-YEAR PROGRAM):
A CASE STUDY AT QUYNH MAI
SECONDARY SCHOOL

Field: English Language
Code: 8220201
Supervisor: Phạm Lan Anh, Ph.D.

HANOI, 2018


DECLARATION BY AUTHOR
I declare that this thesis entitled “An Evaluation of the Textbook
“Tiếng Anh 6 (10-year Program)”: A Case Study at Quynh Mai Secondary
School” is created by my own findings and I am the sole author of this thesis.
To the best of my knowledge, with the exception of the indication of
reference, this thesis is carried out without using any other author’s work and
is submitted after a carefully checking progress in order to fulfill the
requirements of the M.A degree.
Author’s signature

Nguyễn Thị Viên

Approved by
SUPERVISOR

Phạm Lan Anh, Ph.D.
Date: __________________

iii


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This thesis is completed with lots of working hours and is contributed
by a large amount of enthusiasm, effort and assistance from many people.
First and foremost, I would like to express my gratitude to my
supervisor, Dr. Phạm Lan Anh for her support. Without her guidance, advice

and comments, I would not complete this research paper.
Moreover, I would like to send my special thanks to all of the teachers
at Quynh Mai Secondary School for their help and suggestions which are very
necessary and useful to me during the progress of this thesis.
Additionally, I am so grateful for the assistance from the students at
Quynh Mai Secondary School with their answers for the interview and
questionnaires.
Last but not least, I would like to send my special thanks to my beloved
family, who are always supportive and enthusiastic to me during the progress
of making this thesis.

iv


ABSTRACT
This thesis is created and completed on the purpose of evaluating the
textbook of “Tiếng Anh 6 (10-year Program)”, especially in the context of
teaching English at Quynh Mai Secondary School. The aim of this thesis is to
evaluate the English textbook officially used by the teachers and the students
at Quynh Mai Secondary School. Based on the theoretical framework of
textbooks evaluation, figures, data and information was collected and
analyzed mainly through surveys, questionnaires and interviews. The benefits,
positive effects, as well as challenges of using the textbooks are analyzed in
this thesis. Furthermore, some suggestions for overcoming these difficulties
are also mentioned.

v


Table of Contents

DECLARATION BY AUTHOR ......................................................................................... iii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................... iv
ABSTRACT....................................................................................................................... v
LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................ ix
LIST OF FIGURES .......................................................................................................... ix
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION........................................................................................ 1
1.1. Rationale.................................................................................................................. 1
1.2. Aims of the study. ..................................................................................................... 2
1.3. Research questions ................................................................................................... 3
1.4. Scope of the study ..................................................................................................... 3
1.5. Significance of the study ........................................................................................... 4
1.6. Research methods .................................................................................................... 4
1.7. Structure of the study: .............................................................................................. 4
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................. 6
2.1. ELT Materials in Learning and Teaching Language .................................................. 6
2.1.1. Position and Purpose of Materials in Teaching Language .................................... 6
2.1.2. Types of materials .............................................................................................. 8
2.2. Models used for Materials Evaluation ..................................................................... 10
2.2.1. Cunningsworth’s model (1984) ......................................................................... 11
2.2.2. Model of Hutchinson and Water ....................................................................... 11
2.2.3. Ellis’s model..................................................................................................... 14
2.2.4. Summary ......................................................................................................... 15
2.3. Criteria for Materials Evaluation ............................................................................ 16
2.3.1.

Criteria proposed by Hutchinson and Waters (1993) .................................... 17

2.3.2.

Criteria suggested by Brown (1995) ............................................................. 18

2.3.3.

Criteria suggested by Tomlinson (1998) ....................................................... 18

2.4.

Previous Studies on Textbook Evaluation ........................................................... 19

2.4.1.

Previous studies carried out in foreign countries .......................................... 19

2.4.2.

Previous studies carried out in Vietnam ....................................................... 22

2.5.

Chapter Summary ............................................................................................. 25

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY..................................................................................... 26
3.1. Research Design ..................................................................................................... 26

vi


3.1.1. Rationale ......................................................................................................... 26
3.1.2.

Research Instruments ................................................................................. 27

3.1.2.1.

Document analysis .................................................................................... 28

3.1.2.2.

Questionnaires .......................................................................................... 28

3.1.2.3.

Interviews ................................................................................................ 29

3.1.2.4.

Classroom Observation .............................................................................. 29

3.2. Research Procedure................................................................................................ 30
3.3. Data Collection Instrument ..................................................................................... 31
3.4. Summary ............................................................................................................... 37
CHAPTER 4: FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS ................................................................ 38
4.1. Evaluation of Aims ................................................................................................. 38
4.1.1. Aims stated in the Curriculum .......................................................................... 38
4.1.2. Aims stated in the textbook ............................................................................... 39
4.2. Evaluation on Methodology .................................................................................... 45
4.2.1. Methodology stated in the curriculum ............................................................... 45
4.2.2. Methodology perceived by teachers and students ............................................... 49
4.2.3. Methodology enacted by teachers...................................................................... 50
4.2.4. Comparison and contrast ................................................................................. 57

4.3. Evaluation on Audience .......................................................................................... 58
4.3.1. Audience stated in the curriculum..................................................................... 58
4.3.2. Audience stated in the textbook ........................................................................ 59
4.4. Evaluation on Contents........................................................................................... 66
4.4.1. Contents perceived in the curriculum ................................................................ 66
4.4.2. Contents perceived in the Textbook .................................................................. 68
4.4.3. Contents perceived by teachers and students ..................................................... 69
4.5. Findings of the Study .............................................................................................. 77
4.5.1. Findings related to Research Questions 1 and 2 ................................................. 78
4.6. Discussions ............................................................................................................. 79
4.7. Summary ............................................................................................................... 80
CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION .......................................................................................... 83
5.1 Recapitulation ......................................................................................................... 83
5.2. Concluding Remarks .............................................................................................. 84
5.3. Implications ........................................................................................................... 86

vii


5.4. Limitations and suggestions for the further study .................................................... 88
5.4.1 Limitations ........................................................................................................... 88
5.4.2. Suggestions ...................................................................................................... 89
REFERENCES ................................................................................................................ 90
APPENDIX 1: LESSON PLAN ........................................................................................ 93
APPENDIX 2: CITATION OF AIMS OF THE TEXTBOOK TIẾNG ANH 6 ........................... 98
APPENDIX 3: QUESTIONNAIRE ................................................................................... 101
APPENDIX 4: CLASSROOM OBSERVATION ............................................................. 105
APPENDIX 5: INTERVIEW QUESTIONS .................................................................... 107

viii

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Judgment on Objectives .................................................................... 41
Table 2: Evaluation on Skills Development ................................................... 44
Table 3: Evaluation on Methodology.............................................................. 50
Table 4: Evaluation on General Appearance ................................................. 60
Table 5: Judgment on Design and Illustration ................................................ 63
Table 6: Judgment on topic appropriateness ................................................... 65
Table 7: Number of tasks in the book ............................................................. 68
Table 9: Judgment on Content Appropriateness ............................................. 70
Table 10: Evaluation on Social and Cultural Context .................................... 72
Table 11: Evaluation on Methodology............................................................ 74
Table 12. A Summary of Appropriate and Inappropriate Features of the
Targeted Textbook Under Evaluation ............................................................. 80

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: The materials evaluation model by Hutchinson and Water ............ 12
Figure 2: Judgment on Objectives .................................................................. 41
Figure 3: Evaluation on Skills Development .................................................. 43
Figure 4: Evaluation on Methodology ............................................................ 49
Figure 5: Evaluation on General Appearance ................................................. 60
Figure 6: Details of evaluation on Design and Illustration ............................. 62
Figure 7: Judgment on topic appropriateness ................................................. 64
Figure 8: Judgment on Content Appropriateness............................................ 70
Figure 9: Evaluation on Social and Cultural Context ..................................... 72
Figure 10: Evaluation on Methodology .......................................................... 73

ix

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
1.1. Rationale
Textbooks are basic materials, compulsory to use in the school, so it is
very important to use suitable textbooks in teaching and learning. Students are
the primary target audience for textbooks. From textbooks, students can get
access to basic, modern and systematic knowledge. Students can acquire
knowledge through various sources of information, but knowledge in
textbooks is considered as the most standard knowledge. In addition to new
knowledge, textbooks are also materials that help students consolidate,
synthesize, and systematize knowledge through review and study guides.
Given the importance mentioned above, the textbook Tiếng Anh 6 (10year program) was written for innovative purposes to replace the textbook
that has been in used since 2001. English 6 for grade-6-students in Vietnam
was developed by the Vietnamese Education Publishing House in accordance
with the English Secondary Education Program issued by the Ministry of
Education and Training under Decision No. 01/QĐ-BGDĐT dated 03 January
2012, followed by English 3, English 4 and English 5. The book is designed
in a way that enables students to use language (phonetics, vocabulary,
grammar) to develop communication skills in English through four skills in
listening, speaking, reading and writing, with a focus on developing two
listening and speaking skills. In light of learning-centered approach, pupils are
the subject of the teaching process, in which the psychological age of junior
high school students, the cultural characteristics of Vietnam as well as of
other countries in the world, especially of the English speaking countries, are
given special importance.

1


Indeed, the textbook Tiếng Anh 6 for grade-6-students in Vietnam has

been taught experimentally in some classes in secondary schools nationwide
for several years. However, this material has never been evaluated by teachers
who directly teach students in secondary schools to examine if it really meets
the defined aims of the compulsory English program for grade-6-students and
if it is suitable to the students’ level of English and their background
knowledge. Since it was taught experimentally, it has been a subject of much
controversy among teaching staff. It is said to be well-written but not quite
suitable for students who are not equipped with basic knowledge from the
elementary level. Some teachers argue that each lesson in each unit of the
textbook contains a large amount of vocabulary. This makes it difficult for
students to remember the vocabulary of the lesson. In contrast, there are
teachers who are enthusiastic about it and say that it is thoughtfully planned
and relevant to current ELT trends in Vietnam. For those reasons, “An
evaluation of the textbook Tiếng Anh 6 (10-year program): A case study at
Quynh Mai Secondary School”” is chosen as the title of my thesis.
Hence, I hope that the findings of the study can help the researcher and
other teachers find out the appropriate points as well as the inappropriate
points in order to improve or modify the material for future use. Especially, I
believe that this study can enhance English teaching and learning in schools in
Vietnam.
1.2. Aims of the study.
The study aims at evaluating the textbook Tiếng Anh 6 (10-year
program) to explore if it really meets the defined aims of the course and if it is
appropriate to the students’ level of English and their background knowledge.
I also hope that the findings of the thesis will partly help to decide whether to

2


modify any contents or the structure of the book to improve the quality and

the effectiveness of the material.
1.3. Research questions
The study will be conducted to answer the following research questions:
1. To what extent does the textbook meet the aims of the course?
2. To what extent is the textbook appropriate to the students’ level of
English in terms of language and their background knowledge?
1.4. Scope of the study
According to Tom Hutchinson (1993), in textbook evaluation, a
number of criteria such as audience, aims, content, methodology, and other
criteria should be taken into account. However, in this study, due to time
constraints and scope of the minor thesis, the main focus of the evaluation is
on the following criteria as audience, aims of the material, content of the
material and teaching methodology
The subjects of the study are 80 students chosen randomly from 8
classes: class 6D, 6E, 7D, 7E, 8D, 8E, 9D, 9E (10 students per each class)
who studied experimentally the textbook in the school years 2014-2015,
2015-2016, 2016-2017 and 6 teachers of English at Quynh Mai Secondary
School, Hai Ba Trung District, Hanoi, Vietnam.
The study was implemented from early September 2017 to late May
2018 at Quynh Mai Secondary School as soon as students stabilize their
learning at the beginning of the new school year.

3


1.5. Significance of the study
The findings of the thesis are hoped to be useful for the teachers who are
teaching English at Secondary Schools. The findings of the thesis may
provide some suggestions for the authorities and the group of authors of the
textbook at the Vietnamese Ministry of Education and Training with scientific

evidence to improve the quality of the current material being used for grade6-students in Vietnam. The results also reflect the strengths and weaknesses
of the textbook in use, so that teachers themselves can find appropriate
teaching methods for students with different levels, and authorities and
authors might also modify the textbook if possible.
1.6. Research methods
In order to achieve the purpose of the study and due to the practical
situation that the textbook Tiếng Anh 6 has just been taught experimentally in
schools nationwide for some years, the study was only conducted at Quynh
Mai Secondary School in Hai Ba Trung District, Hanoi, Vietnam.
In order to answer the two research questions above, the qualitative
case study was employed. The data were collected through document
analysis, questionnaires, interviews and observations with students and
teachers at Quynh Mai School.
1.7. Structure of the study:
The study is organized into five chapters as follows:
Chapter 1: Introduction
This chapter introduces the background to the study and statement of
the problem, the aims of the study, the research questions, the scope of the
study, and the significance of the study.

4


Chapter 2: Literature Review
This chapter presents an overview of theoretical issues of textbook
evaluation, concentrating on the issues related to ELT textbook evaluation.
Chapter 3: Methodology
This chapter describes the data collection instruments and data
collection process to conduct the case study.
Chapter 4: Findings and Discussions

The results of the data are reported, described, analyzed and discussed.
Therefore, answers of the two questions are clarified in the chapter.
Chapter 5: Conclusion
This chapter provides implications for further studies, and makes
conclusion for the thesis.

5


CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
This chapter provides an overview of the background features in the
theoretical knowledge for the assessment of a particular Tiếng Anh 6 course’s
material. Particularly, a general view of the method of using and adapting
Tiếng Anh 6 materials allocated to the students at Quynh Mai Secondary
School is given and taken as a typical example. Overall, there are three
sections in this chapter. The first section mentions the roles of ELT materials
in teaching and learning the language of English while the second section is a
brief review of different approaches to materials evaluation, and the third
section consists of some previous researches from predecessors done
previously on the evaluation of the text book in different contexts.
2.1. ELT Materials in Learning and Teaching Language
2.1.1. Position and Purpose of Materials in Teaching Language
It is widely known that teaching materials are of great importance in
teaching and learning any kind of language because it is the most effective
communicative teaching method in class; without materials, the teaching
procedure in class cannot be conducted. According to Cunningsworth (1995),
teaching materials are sources of stimulation and ideas which are helpful for
activities done in class to provide students sharp practices in communicative
interaction. Additionally, teaching materials are being functioned as a source
of reference for students on the aspects of vocabulary, grammar and

pronunciation as well. Furthermore, according to the viewpoint of Dudley
Evan and St. John (1998), teaching materials can also motivate and encourage
students to study by themselves in a more effective way. Besides the
significant roles to learners, teaching materials are considered a teachers’
support for both inexperienced and experienced teachers; because, generally,

6


teachers need materials to conduct their lesson. Giving an appropriate
explanation for this fact, Richards (2001) claimed that teaching materials are
considered good ones are able to serve “a form of teacher training” and
teachers can use the ideas provided in the materials to plan their own lessons.
Particularly, according to Dudley Evan and St. John (1998), there are
four main functions of materials, including language source provision,
learning support, motivation source provision and reference source provision.
First, regarding to language source provision, especially in the situation
of applying a new kind of textbook like Tiếng Anh 6, it can be affirmed that
materials are the only method available to get access to the language content
that students and teachers have. Because of this reason, materials are required
to introduce and explain a real language used in real contexts to be
appropriate to a great deal of number of learners and fulfill their needs and
request in learning.
Second, in terms of learning support, Dudley Evan and St. John (1998)
once again presented that materials had better involve learners in using their
intellectual ideas to apply the language. That is the reason why the in-class
activities should be “stimulate cognitive not mechanical process” (p.171).
Third, with regard to the motivation source provision, it is continued to
be affirmed by Dudley Evan and St. John (1998) that materials need to be
“challenging yet achievable to offer new ideas and information whilst being

grounded in the learners’ experience and knowledge” (page 172).
Finally, for the aspects that materials are reference source provision;
Tomlinson (1998) indicated an opinion that materials are useful when they
can help students in class to make “efficient use of the resources in order to

7


facilitate self-discovery”. In other word, the language uses go along with
examples, explanation, practice exercises and in-and-out class activities
should be provided in the materials. It is also necessary to include the detailed
explanation and answers for the exercises so that students can use the
materials for their self-study at home and teachers can base on these keys and
answers to gain some more useful knowledge. In the situation of ELT
material like Tiếng Anh 6, models of precise and suitable use of language are
included and it enables the active teaching process for particular purposes in
class.
2.1.2. Types of materials
Due to the fact that materials are of great importance to the progress of
learning, teachers and scholars, in general, use numerous types of materials;
however, there are two most popular types of materials with a large number of
smaller types included in, including printed materials such as class textbooks,
workbooks, pictures, photos, handout and worksheets and non-printed
materials like recorded files and computer-based files (PowerPoint materials
for instance). No matter what type of materials they are designed, each kind
of teaching and learning materials has its own function and they are being
used differently for numerous learning purposes, which will be discussed
further below.
2.1.2.1. Textbooks
Textbooks are considered the most important teaching components due

to the fact that they are inevitable learning aids in almost all language
teaching programs, and they are often defined basing on the fact that they are
materials released and published mainly to be reliable, attractive and userfriendly so that the use of them can bring effectiveness. In order to reach this

8


effectiveness in teaching language, a useful textbook in general, and a course
book in particular, has to contain certain factors such as forming a strong
course teaching and learning framework which in essence, to build and
develop a learning syllabus which is systematically planned and used. When
allocating textbooks to use, learners study the content presented in it and by
following the book map as well as the table of content, students can
generalize the main features that they have to study in the book.
Nevertheless, according to Harmer (1998), the content of the textbook is
not perfect for all of its parts. Particularly, despite of the fact that textbooks
are well-designed and well-arranged in the content, they still can be difficult
and inappropriate to some certain aspects of the action of learning of learners.
Because the students’ competence may not be suitable to the target language
presented in the book. Additionally, Swales (2000) also claimed that
textbooks which are published with purposes are “less self-sufficient if
practice materials and in coverage of skill area” (p.57). Based on this opinion,
it is necessary to supplement the textbook with other appropriate materials to
support them and make the learning progress more effectively.
2.1.2.2. In-house materials
According to Robinson (1991), in comparison with published materials,
in-house materials are more probably to be suitable and specific regarding to
the target language and the validity presented in the materials. Furthermore,
the flexibility of in-house materials, compare to published materials, is also
another factor to be considered. It is claimed that in-house materials have

greater flexibility than published materials owing to their typical
characteristics. Finally, having improved the drawbacks of the imbalance
between textbooks and students’ competence, the author of the in-house

9


materials is able to make certain that the quality of the teaching method used
in this type of materials is controlled and the knowledge aspects will be
appropriate to students. Nonetheless, there are some drawbacks of the inhouse materials that make them less outweighed than others, and timeconsuming can be considered one of those. It was observed by Swales (1991)
that “the locally produced materials show a striking resemblance to the
published materials that have been rejected” (Swales (453, p.6)). In addition
to time-consuming, there is the high expense also be considered, because the
progress of in-house materials production requires a large amount of money.
Furthermore, because of the lack of systematic features, the form of in-house
materials is commonly “showers of singe-page handouts” (Swales (453,
p.18)); as a result, teaching order can be lost.
In spite of the weaknesses they bring, the in-house materials are
indicated by Robinson (1991) to have no polar division, in comparison with
published materials, which can be very regular to turn into the in-house
materials themselves. Nonetheless, as mentioned above, creating in-house
materials could be high in expense and time-consuming, so it is a tendency in
choosing and using existing published materials by teachers to use in class.
2.2. Models used for Materials Evaluation
To a great extent, there are some models which can be used for materials
evaluation which are proposed by several scholars in the literature. However,
the popular models which are useful until now are suggested by
Cunningsworth (1984), Hutchinson and Waters (1993) and Ellis (1997).

10

2.2.1. Cunningsworth’s model (1984)
According to Cunningsworth (1984), there are aspects for materials
evaluation, including linguistic elements of the materials regarding topics,
content of language, methodology, skills and so forth.
It is noted by Cunningsworth (1984) that language content used for the
assessment is better if it is concentrated on the suitability of the vocabulary,
grammars, functions and structures illustrated in the materials. Another
viewpoint is also presented by the author is that it is necessary to be
interesting in terms of the materials’ topics, and sophisticated and various
content are significant as well. Additionally, the students should be taken
advantages by expanding the knowledge of the language level of these topics.
In terms of the skills which are introduced in the materials, the issues about
whether the skills of listening, speaking, reading and writing are covered
enough as well as the question about whether the skills are appropriate to the
target of the course and the syllabus requirements should be solved. Furthermore,
the methodology of the materials is also being concerned; in particular, the
suitability of the materials to the situation of teaching and learning and the name
of the techniques used to introduce novel language items.
2.2.2. Model of Hutchinson and Water
It is noted by Hutchinson and Water (1993) that evaluation process of
materials is a matter in which the fitness of a particular issue for a specific
purpose is judged. In essence, materials evaluation is a matching process:
matching should come with solutions. From this perspective, an evaluation
could be divided into four main steps, including defining criteria, subjective
analysis, and objective analysis and matching.

11

The relationship among these steps is illustrated in this graph:
Defining Criteria
The bases in which the materials will be
judged
The more significant criteria

Subjective analysis

Objective analysis

The realizations of the
criteria that are wanted
in the course

The way the materials
are being evaluated
and how they realize
the criteria

Matching
The level of consistency between the
need and the materials

Figure 1: The materials evaluation model by Hutchinson and Water
It can be seen from the model that a logical procedure of the evaluation
progress for the materials is provided, which has a purpose of examining the
appropriateness of the materials for a particular students group. In the first
place, the criteria for the evaluation were set out by the evaluator, who could
also mention his or her favorite criteria. In the second step of the process, the

subjective analysis was determined, and it is time for the course’s
requirements relating to the criteria to be analyzed. It is also noted by
Hutchinson and Water (1993) that the subjective analysis should not be
regarded as an irreplaceable requirement, and the evaluator should use the
process of materials evaluation as a method of examining and developing his
or her ideas single-handedly to the requirement. Subsequently, the evaluator

12


needs to conduct the next step – Objective analysis, which has the function of
analyzing the materials basing on selected criteria. Eventually, the findings of
all the previous steps were taken on the purpose of comparing to materials
requirements at the step four with a view to deciding and evaluating the
consistency between the requirements and the materials. As can be seen from
this model, three options may take place after the process of evaluation, the
materials may not fulfill any requirement at all, or just match the requirements
partly. In these situations, especially when some criteria of the requirements
are partially mismatch with the materials, according to Hutchinson and
Waters, the evaluator can think about the possibility of considering the more
prominent criteria to the learning object concerned such as teachers, students
or sponsors and take the criteria which are easier to adapt.
It is also noted by Hutchinson and Waters (1993) that a checklist of
criteria was proposed single-handedly for objective and subjective analysis,
which had a function of assessing English teaching materials by concentrating
on typical issues namely the aims, the methodology, the audience and the
content:
 The aims: the evaluator is in charge of checking whether the
materials’ aims match with the whole objective of the course or not.
 The methodology: This criterion is about some important aspects

such as the learning theories, the attitude of the students to learning a
foreign language like English, types of possible exercises or tasks,
techniques of teaching and learning effectively, learning facilities,
suitable guidance or support for a better teaching and the materials’
flexibility.

13


 The audience: Different information are analyzed by the evaluator,
including the age, gender interests, English competence and
educational background of the students.
 The Content: A certain amount of sub-criteria should be examined;
including language aspects and description, micro and macro-skills
and their percentage, text types, organization of the content, topics
and sequence in order to assess whether the materials are appropriate
to the needs of the students or not.
2.2.3. Ellis’s model
Ellis (1997) claims that language evaluation in teaching and learning, in
nature, has been primarily predictive and has concentrated on all of the
materials concerned in the set of the materials which are retrospectively
applied on a regular basis. As a result, a model was suggested which could be
conducted as a sequence of micro-evaluations. In other words, a microevaluation is the evaluation of a teaching mission in a very particular
information which was interested in by the evaluator. Particularly, in this
model, it was suggested by Ellis that a detailed empirical assessment was
practiced and also an equivalent task level of evaluation which has a relation
to its actual context of teaching and learning was concentrated. Broadly
speaking, this model has an aim to recognize the consistency between planned
and used tasks, and it was also suggested by Ellis (1997) that some factors
concentrated macro-evaluation are able to be applicable to micro-evaluation;

including approach, types of information, timing, focus, purposes and scope
evaluators; and to clarify it, Ellis (1997) suggested seven steps for the
evaluation, including:
 Selecting an appropriate task to follow;

14


 Illustrating the task which requests the content’s specification based
on these factors: input, language activities, procedures and outcomes;
 Setting up the evaluation based on the above-mentioned dimensions;
 Collecting data and necessary information about the way of
performing the task and the results of this performance and the
opinions of teachers and students about the tasks.
 Qualitative and quantitative analysis of the collected data, figure and
information.
 Giving a conclusion basing on the discovery from the task evaluation
and recommendations for future learning and teaching process.
 Writing a report.
From Ellis (1997)’s perspective, a micro-evaluation could be considered
to be more manageable than, when compared to, a macro-evaluation.
Nevertheless, it may have some weaknesses such as time-consuming as well
as labor-consuming, when it requires much effort to provide a basis for
macro-evaluation subsequent process; furthermore, this kind of evaluation are
only carried out in the scope of the classroom, when the target materials are
applied.
2.2.4. Summary
From the analysis of the three researched model, it can be concluded that
the three above-presented approaches suggest three alternatives to conduct
materials evaluation. Particularly, Hutchinson and Water’s model (1993)

consists of the subjective analysis, which identifies the requirements of the
learning materials of the course, and objective analysis, which meanwhile
investigates the realization of the requirement of the learning course.

15


Besides, Ellis (1997) suggested the model of micro-evaluation and
macro-evaluation, which has their own advantages and drawbacks but are
interdependent because the existence of a sequence of micro-evaluations is
the provision of the bases for subsequent macro-evaluation, and this process
often are time-consuming and labor-consuming.
Finally, Cunningsworth (1984) offered a model which is relatively
detailed with features of macro complemented, and its aims is support the
teacher to make the most appropriate decisions when choosing materials to
use in class. Among the models which are discussed above, the one which
was suggested by Hutchinson and Waters (1993) shows the materials
evaluation procedure in the most logical and clearest way of presentation.
Owing to this reason, Hutchinson and Water’s model was selected to evaluate
the materials: English 6 at Quynh Mai Secondary School.
2.3. Criteria for Materials Evaluation
In order to conduct any evaluation, it is crucial for evaluator to take
definition of criteria for evaluation into account, because they have a function
of being the bases for the evaluators to depend on when making assessment.
According to Tomlinson (1998), criteria are things that evaluators use in order
to “reach a decision regarding what needs to be evaluated”. Additionally, it
was suggested by Ellis (1997) that checklists are traditionally used to evaluate
materials in a predicative way and determine the appropriateness of the
materials in certain contexts of teaching. It was also noted by Dudley-Evans
and John (1998) that criteria for the evaluation regularly depend on what and

why this kind of materials should be assessed. Because of the variety of
materials, there are also numerous of criteria sets proposed by different

16