An evaluation of EBP material english in economics and business for economics and business management students in hanoi university of mining and geology

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES

NGUYỄN THI ̣ MAI HƢƠNG

AN EVALUATION OF EBP MATERIAL “ENGLISH IN ECONOMICS AND
BUSINESS” FOR ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS MANAGEMENT
STUDENTS IN HANOI UNIVERSITY OF MINING AND GEOLOGY
(ĐÁNH GIÁ GIÁO TRÌNH TIẾNG ANH THƢƠNG MẠI “ENGLISH IN
ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS” DÀNH CHO SINH VIÊN KHOA KINH TẾ VÀ
QUẢN TRỊ DOANH NGHIỆP TRƢỜNG ĐẠI HỌC MỎ - ĐỊA CHẤT HÀ NỘI)

M.A. MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS
Field: English Language Teaching Methodology
Code: 6014.0111

Hanoi, 2013


VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY, HANOI
UNIVERSITY OF LANGUAGES AND INTERNATIONAL STUDIES
FACULTY OF POST-GRADUATE STUDIES

NGUYỄN THI ̣ MAI HƢƠNG

AN EVALUATION OF EBP MATERIAL “ENGLISH IN ECONOMICS AND
BUSINESS” FOR ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS MANAGEMENT
STUDENTS IN HANOI UNIVERSITY OF MINING AND GEOLOGY
(ĐÁNH GIÁ GIÁO TRÌNH TIẾNG ANH THƢƠNG MẠI “ENGLISH IN
ECONOMICS AND BUSINESS” DÀNH CHO SINH VIÊN KHOA KINH TẾ

VÀ QUẢN TRỊ DOANH NGHIỆP TRƢỜNG ĐẠI HỌC MỎ - ĐỊA CHẤT HÀ NỘI)

M.A. MINOR PROGRAMME THESIS

Field: English Language Teaching Methodology
Code: 6014.0111
Supervisor: Assoc Prof. Dr. Nguyen Phuong Nga

Hanoi, 2013


CERTIFICATE OF ORIGINALITY OF THE THESIS
I certify my authorship of the thesis submitted today entitled:
“An Evaluation of EBP Material “English in Economics and Business” for the
Economics and Business Management Students in Hanoi University of Mining
and Geology”
in terms of Statement for thesis and Field Study Reports in Master‟s Programs
Issued by the Higher Degree Committee.
Nguyễn Thị Mai Hương

November, 2013

i


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I owe a great many thanks to so many people who have supported me all the way
throughout my study to this final achievement.
It is with deep gratitude that I wish to thank Ms. Nguyen Phuong Nga, Associate
Professor, Doctor of Philosophy for her wholehearted guidance, valuable

suggestions and academic advice during the course of writing this thesis, without
which this work would hardly have been accomplished.
I also wish to acknowledge all the staff of the Department of Post-Graduate Studies
for giving me assistance and the lecturers who conducted the Master course for me
with valuable knowledge.
I would like to extend my deep appreciation to my colleagues and students at
English Division – Faculty of General Science, Faculty of Economics and Business
Management, Hanoi University of Mining and Geology.
Last, to my family, words are not enough to express my gratitude. I am grateful to
my parents, my dear husband, and my two little sons. Without their help and
encouragement, I could not have completed this study.

ii


LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
Communicative Language Teaching:

CLT

English for Academic Purposes:

EAP

English for Business Purposes:

EBP

English as A Foreign Language:

ELT

English for General Business Purposes:

EGBP

English for Occupational Purposes:

EOP

English for Specific Purposes:

ESP

English for Specific Business Purposes:

ESBP

English for Vocational Purposes:

EVP

Faculty of Economics and Business Management:

FEBM

Hanoi University of Mining and Geology:

HUMG

Vocational English as a Second Language:

VESL

iii


LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES
Figure 1. Diagram of business communication (Pickett, 1986: 16)
Figure 2. Closing the circle (McGrath, 2005: 180)
Table 1. Comparison of Topics Required in the Material and the Course
Table 2. Teachers and Students‟ Perception of the Appropriateness of the Material
to the Course objectives
Table 3. Teachers and Students‟ Perception of the Appropriateness of the Material‟s
Contents
Table 4. Teachers and Students‟ Perception of the Appropriateness of the Material‟s
Methodology
Table 5. Teachers and Students‟ Suggestions

iv


TABLE OF CONTENTS
CERTIFICATE OF ORIGINALITY OF THE THESIS ....................................... i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ......................................................................................ii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS................................................................................. iii
LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES ....................................................................... iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS .......................................................................................... v
PART I: INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................... 1
1.

Rationale of the Study ...................................................................................1

2.

Scope of the Study .........................................................................................2

3.

Methodology ..................................................................................................2

4.

Design of the Study........................................................................................2

PART II: DEVELOPMENTS .................................................................................. 4
CHAPTER I: LITERATURE REVIEW .................................................................4
1.1. English for Specific Purposes ....................................................................4
1.1.1. Definition of ESP .................................................................................4
1.1.2. A Brief Classification of ESP .............................................................5
1.2. English for Business Purposes ..................................................................6
1.2.1. Definition and Characteristics ...........................................................6
1.2.2. English for General Business Purposes and English for Specific
Business Purposes..........................................................................................8
1.3. Materials Evaluation ..................................................................................9
1.3.1. Definition of Materials ........................................................................9
1.3.2. Materials Evaluation ...........................................................................9

v

1.3.3. Types of Materials Evaluation .........................................................10
1.3.3.1. Pre – use Evaluation ..................................................................11
1.3.3.2. In – use Evaluation .....................................................................12
1.3.3.3. Post – use Evaluation .................................................................13
1.3.4. Criteria for Materials Evaluation ....................................................14
1.3.4.1. Sheldon’s Criteria ......................................................................15
1.3.4.2. Hutchinson and Waters’ Criteria .............................................15
1.4. Previous Researches on Materials Evaluation ......................................16
CHAPTER II: THE METHODOLOGY ...............................................................19
2.1. The Current Teaching and Learning Situation at HUMG ..................19
2.2. Research Methodology ............................................................................20
2.2.1. Research Questions ...........................................................................20
2.2.2. Survey Questionnaire .......................................................................21
2.2.3. Interviews ...........................................................................................22
2.3. Participants of the Survey .......................................................................22
2.3.1. The Teachers......................................................................................22
2.3.2. The Students ......................................................................................23
2.4. Data Collection Instruments ...................................................................24
2.4.1. Survey Questionnaires For Teachers ..............................................24
2.4.2. Survey Questionnaires for Students ................................................24
2.4.3. Informal Interviews with Teachers and Students ..........................25
2.5. Data Collection Procedures .....................................................................25
CHAPTER III: RESEARCH RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS ..........................27
3.1. The Course Objectives .............................................................................27
vi


3.2. The Material Analysis ..............................................................................28
3.2.1. The Description of the Material “English in Economics and

Business” ......................................................................................................28
3.2.2. The Appropriateness of the Material to the Course objectives ....28
3.2.3. The Appropriateness of the Material to the Content Requirements ..30
3.2.4. The Appropriateness of the Material to the Teaching Methodology
Requirements ................................................................................................32
3.3. The Survey Results ...................................................................................33
3.3.1. Teachers and Students’ Perception of Course objectives .............33
3.3.2. Teachers and Students’ Perception of the Material’s Contents and
Methodology ................................................................................................34
3.3.2.1. The Appropriateness of the Contents.......................................35
3.3.2.2. The Appropriateness of Methodology ......................................39
3.3.2.3. Teachers and Students’ Suggestions ........................................42
PART III: CONCLUSION ..................................................................................... 45
1.

Conclusion ....................................................................................................45

2.

Recommendations .......................................................................................46

3.

Limitations of the Study .............................................................................47

4.

Suggestions for Further Research .............................................................47

REFERENCES ........................................................................................................ 49

APPENDICES ........................................................................................................... I
APPENDIX 1 ......................................................................................................... II
APPENDIX 2 ......................................................................................................... V
APPENDIX 3 ..................................................................................................... VIII

vii


APPENDIX 4 ....................................................................................................... XI
APPENDIX 5 .................................................................................................... XIV
APPENDIX 6 ................................................................................................... XVII
APPENDIX 7 ...................................................................................................... XX

viii


PART I: INTRODUCTION
1. Rationale of the Study
English for Specific Purposes (ESP), along with the development of English as the
most powerful language in the world, has been a popular field for such a great of
scholars such as Hutchinson and Waters (1987), Ian McGrath (2005), Dudley –
Evans, and John (2007), and so on. Specifically, English for Business Purposes
(EBP) has been increasingly growing in the field of ESP parallel with the expansion
of the global commerce. As a result, any Vietnamese Business Administration
graduates who long to be recruited by a foreign enterprise need to train themselves
really good skills and knowledge of Business English. The teaching of EBP has
been apparently developing rapidly as well as the increase of various textbooks and
material employed. However, it is really hard to say which material is more
appropriate or which is less.
From the current situation, the issue here is to choose a right material for learners to

study EBP effectively. A great deal of institutions and universities are teaching EBP
with different kinds of material. The most essential goal here is to satisfy the needs
of students and employers in their future career. The Faculty of Economics and
Business Management, Hanoi University of Mining and Geology has started to
facilitate the course book English in Economics and Business for ESP courses since
2010. However, it is said that this material does not meet the demands of both
students and employers. Therefore, this study is conducted with the hope of
evaluating this material and explaining why it is suitable with the needs of the
students and employers. In other words, this study aims at seeking strong points as
well as weak points of this material and suggesting some recommendation to
enhance the strength and reduce the weakness to gain the EBP training‟s objectives
for students.

1


2. Scope of the Study
The study limits itself to evaluate the EBP material “English in Economics and
Business” – an EBP text material that has been used at Faculty of Economics and
Business Management for 5 years. It is accomplished in the view of the third year
students who have just finished studying it and teachers who have been using it.
3. Methodology
This study employs the qualitative approach to evaluate the material English in
Economics and Business using survey questionnaires and interviews. It specifically
aims to address the following research questions:
 To what degree is this material suitable with the training objectives of the
Hanoi University of Mining and Geology?
 What do teachers and students think of the appropriateness of the material?
4. Design of the Study
The thesis is composed of three main parts: introduction, developments and

conclusion.
The Introduction aims at the rationale, the aims, the scope, the methodology and
also the design of the study.
The Developments consists of three chapters. Chapter I is Literature Review. This
chapter reviews some theories of basic concept (ESP, EBP, material evaluation)
based on the publications in the field. She also analyses some previous researches in
the same field. Chapter II is the methodology. In this chapter, the author presents
the research methodology and the instruments used to collect data mainly from the

2


questionnaires. The interviews are used to make clear some misunderstandings in
the questionnaires. The procedure of collecting data and the analysis of the survey
data will be described carefully.
In the Conclusion, the author briefly summarizes the issues that have been
investigated and suggests some implications.

3


PART II: DEVELOPMENTS
CHAPTER I: LITERATURE REVIEW

This chapter deals with English for Specific Purposes (ESP), English for Business
Purposes (EBP), English for General Business Purposes (EGBP), English for
Specific Business Purposes (ESBP) as well as the material‟s concepts, types and
criteria. Then, the chapter discusses relevant findings of researches in the field.
1.1. English for Specific Purposes
1.1.1. Definition of ESP

The definition of ESP has been studied by various scholars around the world. The
conductor would like to quote several of them after reviewing materials.
“English for Specific Purposes is a term that refers to teaching or studying English
for a particular career (like law, medicine) or for business in general”
(International Teacher Training Organization, 2005). There is a specific reason for
which English is learned.
Robinson (1991) affirms that ESP is “normally goal – directed”, and that ESP
courses develop from a need analysis, which „aims to specify as closely as possible
what exactly it is that students have to do through the medium of English‟
(Robinson, 1991: 3). (Cited from Dudley – Evans, and John, 2007: 3)
Dudley – Evans, and John (2007); whereas, give their own definition which have
absolute and variable characteristics. In absolute characteristics, they both agree
that ESP is designed to meet the specific needs of the learner; ESP makes use of the
underlying methodology and activities of the disciplines it serves; and ESP is
centred on the language (grammar, lexis, register), skills, discourse and genres

4


appropriate to these activities. Whereas, in variable characteristics, they state that
ESP may be related to or designed for specific disciplines; ESP may be, in specific
teaching situation, a different methodology from that of general English; ESP is
likely to be designed for adult learners, either at a tertiary level institution or in a
professional work situation. It could, however, be used for learners at secondary
school level; and ESP is generally designed for intermediate or advanced students.
Most ESP courses assume basic knowledge of the language system, but it can be
used with beginners.
Hutchinson and Waters (1987:19) states that “ESP must be seen as an approach not
as a product”. ESP is not a kind of language or methodology, nor does it consist of
a particular type of teaching material. Understood properly, it is an approach to

language learning, which is based on learner needs.
In brief, the author would like to follow the definition of Hutchinson and Waters
because the two writers reach a modern ideology here – “learner – centered”.
Although these scholars have their own ideas on ESP, they all share the same
opinion that ESP has certain characteristics as follows: ESP is designed to meet
specific needs of learners; ESP makes use of the underlying methodology and
activities of the disciplines it serves; ESP is centered in the language (grammar,
lexis, and register), skills, discourse and genres appropriate to these activities.
1.1.2. A Brief Classification of ESP
Hutchinson and Waters (1987:16) states that ESP has two main types according to
whether the learner requires English for academic study (EAP: English for
Academic Purposes) or for work/ training (EOP/ EVP/ VESL: English for
Occupational Purposes/ English for Vocational Purposes/ Vocational English as a

5


Second Language). The target learners of EAP are generally at schools and they
need English in their study. Meanwhile, EOP is used as part of learners‟ work or
occupation, for instance, to communicate with tourists (a tour guide), to persuade
the customer (a salesman). The crucial point here is that ESP course which will take
place depends mainly on whether the learners are studying English before, during or
after the time they are taught in their job.
With reference to Dudley – Evans & John (2007: 7) classifies EBP as a category
within EOP. EBP is sometimes seen as separate from EOP as it involves a lot of
General English as well as Specific Purposes English, and also because it is such a
large and important category. A business purpose is, however, an occupational
purpose, so it is logical to see it is part of EOP.
These classifications are, of course, not a clear – cut distinction: people can work
and study simultaneously; it is also likely that in many cases the language learnt for

immediate use in a study environment will be used later when the student takes up,
or returns to, a job.
1.2. English for Business Purposes
1.2.1. Definition and Characteristics
With reference to Dudley & Jo (2007:54), Business English is difficult to define
and limit in linguistic term. Pickett (1986:16) emphasizes the fact that there is more
than one face to business communication with some of it being „a lot nearer the
everyday language spoken by the general public than many other segments of ESP‟.
Additionally, Pickett introduces the diagrammatic representation in which he
suggests two particular aspects to business communication: communication with the
public and communication within (intra) a company or between (inter) companies
as follow:

6


general English

communication with public

Business English

communication among businesses

specialized language of particular businesses
Figure 1. Diagram of Business Communication (Pickett, 1986: 16)
Pickett‟s distinction is useful; however, it is probably not fine enough for today‟s
wide – ranging business activities. Even within a particular business, the language
requirements of the team negotiating, for instance recruiting and board meeting may
be comparatively different. This is because the purposes of the interactions, the

topics covered and the professional relationship will all affect the choice of
language. (Dudley & Jo, 2007:55)
Moreover, according to Ellis and Johnson (2003: 3), Business English must be seen
in the overall context of ESP, as it shares the important elements of needs analysis,
syllabus design, course design, and material selection and development which are
common to all fields of work is ESP. as with other varieties of ESP, Business
English implies the definition of a specific language corpus and emphasis on
particular kinds of communication in a specific context. However, Business English
differs from other varieties of ESP in that it is often a mix of specific content
(relating to general ability to communicate more effectively, albeit in business
situations).

7


1.2.2. English for General Business Purposes and English for
Specific Business Purposes
The distinction between EGBP and ESBP is extremely essential for the course
designers, researchers, teachers and learners to plan objectives or choose suitable
materials for the certain contexts. Ellis and Johnson (2003) affirm the crucial factor
which influences most to the course – learners. They assign learners into two kinds
– pre – experience (or low – experience) and job – experienced learners. „Pre –
experienced language learners are those studying, for example, Business Studies or
Trade Commerce at schools, colleges, or universities and job – experienced
language learners are those coming from companies or other business institutions:
managers, office staff and other professionals.‟
According to Dudley & Jo (2007:55), EGBP courses are usually for pre –
experience learners or those at the very early stages of their career. They are similar
to general EFL courses with the material set in business contexts. Many learners
attend these courses at a language school and groups will usually be formed on the

basis of language level rather than job. The vocabulary range of EGBP books
clearly differs substantially from that of EGP but the language activities are core
EFL ones and the answers are often predictable with more close, right/ wrong
responses than unpredictable, open responses. As a result, the language which
learners acquire is less practical and theoretical. Whereas, ESBP courses are run for
job – experienced learners who bring business knowledge and skills to the language
– learning situation. These courses are carefully tailored and likely to focus on one
or two language skills and specific business communicative events. The material
often include selections from a range of published books, framework material and
specially written activities, probably stemming from the learner‟s own business
context.

8


1.3. Materials Evaluation
1.3.1. Definition of Materials
The answer to the question “What is materials?” is solved thoroughly by the
famous writers such as Hutchinson and Waters (1987), Brian Tomlinson (1998), Ian
McGrath (2005). Apparently, they all share the same opinions that materials is
anything related to learning and teaching languages. In a broad sense, materials
could include „relia‟ (real objects such as a pencil, a chair or a bag) and
representations (such as a drawing or photograph of a person, house or scene).
Materials of these kind can, of course, be exploited effectively for language learning
and advice on their use can be found in books that deal specifically with the use of
visual aids. (Ian McGrath, 2005: 7).
In this study, the conductor would like to mention text materials (textbook) only for
her analysis and evaluation latter on.
1.3.2. Materials Evaluation
Hutchinson and Waters (1987: 96) state that evaluation is a matter of judging the

fitness of something for a particular purpose. Given a certain need, and in the light
of the resources available, which out of possibilities can represent the best solution?
Evaluation is, then, concerned with relative merit. There is no absolute good or bad
– only degrees of fitness for the required purpose.
Cunningsworth (1995) and Ellis (1997) suggest that textbook evaluation helps
teachers move beyond impressionistic assessments and it helps them to acquire
useful, accurate, systematic, and contextual insights into the overall nature of
textbook materials. Textbook evaluation, therefore, can potentially be a particularly
worthwhile means of conducting action research as well as a form of professional
empowerment and improvement. Similarly, textbook evaluation can also be a

9


valuable component of teacher training programs for it serves the dual purpose of
making student teachers aware of important features to look for in textbooks while
familiarizing them with a wide range of published language instruction materials.
Tomlinson (2005: 15) affirms that materials evaluation is a procedure that involves
measuring the value (or potential value) of a set of learning material. It involves
making judgments about the effect of the materials on the people using them. He
also states that an evaluation is not the same as an analysis. It can include an
analysis or follow from one, but the objectives and procedures are different. An
evaluation focuses on the users of the materials and makes judgments about their
effects. No matter how structured, criterion referenced and rigorous an evaluation
is, it will be essential subjective. On the other hand, an analysis focuses on the
materials and it aims to provide an objective analysis on them. It „asks questions
about what the materials contain, what they aim to achieve and what they ask
learners to do‟ (Tomlinson, 1999: 10).
Materials evaluation, according to Dudley & Jo (2007:128), is a whole process that
begins with determining what information to gather and ends with bringing about

change in current activities or influencing future ones.
Obviously, Hutchinson and Walters‟s definition is most universally accepted
because of its focus on learners‟ purposes – learner – centered approach.
1.3.3. Types of Materials Evaluation
Regarding types of materials evaluation, Ellis (1997) divides materials evaluation
into three types: Preliminary, Formative and Summative evaluation.
Similarly, Tomlinson (2005) and Ian McGrath (2005) also categorize materials
evaluation into three stages which seems to be the most widely accepted. He states

10


that materials evaluation is composed of 3 stages: pre – use, in – use, and post – use
evaluation. In this study, the researcher would like to follow Ian McGrath‟s
categorization because of its clear distinction and explanation.

Pre – use evaluation

In – use evaluation gathers data on

established potential

planning decision, implementation and

suitability

response; may stimulate preliminary
reconsiderations of selection criteria
Post – use evaluation used data on in –
course use and data on effects to assess

suitability of selection and selection
procedures

Figure 1. Closing the circle (McGrath, 2005: 180)
1.3.3.1. Pre – use Evaluation
According to Tomlinson (2005: 23), pre – use evaluation involves making
predictions about the potential value of materials for their users. It can be context –
free, as in a review of materials for a journal, context – influenced as in a review of
draft material for a publisher with target users in mind or context – dependent, as
when a teacher selects a course book for use with her particular class. Often pre –
used evaluation is impressionistic and consists of a teacher flicking through a book
to gain a quick impression of its potential value (publishers are well aware of this
procedure and sometimes place attractive illustrations in the top right – hand corner
of the right – hand page in order to influence the flicker in a positive way). Even a
review for a publisher or journal, and an evaluation for a ministry of education is

11


often „fundamentally a subjective, rule of thumb activity‟ (Sheldon, 1988: 245) and
often mistakes are made. Making an evaluation criterion – referenced can reduce
(but not remove) subjectivity and can certainly help to make an evaluation more
principled, rigorous, systematic and reliable. This is especially true if more than two
evaluators conduct the evaluation independently and then average their conclusions.
1.3.3.2. In – use Evaluation
With reference to Tomlinson (2005: 24), this involves measuring the value of
materials whilst using them or whilst observing them being used. It can be more
objective and reliable than pre – use evaluation as it makes use of measurement
rather than prediction. However, it is limited to measuring what is observable (e.g.,
„Are the instruction clear to the learners?‟) and cannot claim to measure what is

happening in the learners‟ brains. It can measure short – term memory through
observing learner performance on exercises but it cannot measure durable and
effective learning because of the delayed effect of instruction. It is therefore very
useful but dangerous too, as teachers and observers can be misled by whether the
activities seem to work or not.
Exactly what can be measured in an in – use evaluation is controversial; however,
he includes the following criteria: clarity of instructions, clarity of layout,
comprehensibility of texts, credibility of tasks, achievability of tasks, achievement
of performance objectives, potential for localization, practicality of the materials,
teachability of the materials, flexibility of the materials, appeal of the materials,
motivating power of the materials, impact of the materials, effectiveness in
facilitating short – term learning. Most of these can be estimated during an open –
ended, impressionistic observation of materials in use but greater reliability can be
achieved by focusing on one criterion at a time and by using pre – prepared
instruments of measurement.

12


1.3.3.3. Post – use Evaluation
Post – use evaluation is probably the most valuable (but least administered) type of
evaluation as it can measure the actual effects of the materials on the users. It can
measure the short – term effect as regards motivation, impact, achievability, instant
learning, etc., and it can measure the long – term effect as regards durable learning
and application. (Tomlinson, 2005: 25)
Post – use evaluation can answer such important questions as:
 What do the learners know which they did not know before starting to use the
materials?
 What do the learners still not know despite using the materials?
 What can the learners do which they could not do before starting to use the

materials?
 What can the learners still not do despite using the materials?
In other words, it can measure the actual outcomes of the use of the materials and
thus provide the data on which reliable decisions about the use, adaptation or
replacement of the materials can be made.
Ways of measuring the post – use effects of materials include:
 tests of what has been „taught‟ by the materials;
 tests of what the students can do;
 examinations;
 interview;
 questionnaires;
 criterion – referenced evaluations by the users;
 post – course diaries;
 post – course „shadowing‟ of the learners;
 post – course reports on the learners by employers, subject tutors, etc.

13


The main problem, of course, is that it takes time and expertise to measure post –
use effects reliably (especially as, to be really revealing, there should be
measurement of pre – use attitudes and abilities in order to provide data for post –
use comparison).
In this study, the researcher would employ post – use evaluation method to evaluate
the assigned material because of its reliability and usefulness to provide important
information about the appropriateness of the material.
1.3.4. Criteria for Materials Evaluation
The aim to use criteria for materials evaluation is to “reach a decision regarding
what needs to be evaluated” (Tomlinson, 1998:220). This means they are the
foundation upon which evaluators depend when making judgments. Therefore, one

of the most important steps that evaluator should spend time on is defining
evaluation criteria.
According to Dudley – Evans & John (2007), criteria for materials evaluation
depend on what is being evaluated and why they need to be evaluated. Regarding
criteria for materials evaluation, in the literature many experts (Hutchinson and
Waters, 1987; Sheldon, 1988; Ellis and Johnson, 1994; Wallace, 1998; Tomlinson,
2005) have suggested certain sets of criteria in the forms of checklists or guidelines.
These scholars go to two main schools of evaluation: the one focuses mainly in the
content of the material with Hutchinson and Waters as representatives; the other
focuses on both the appearance and content of the materials with Sheldon as
representative. In this study, the author reviews these two schools which seem to be
the most relevant and popular to materials evaluation.

14


1.3.4.1. Sheldon’s Criteria
Sheldon (1988) suggests such a wide range of criteria that can be applied for almost
aspects of materials. She offers a checklist containing a great s of “key questions”
for the evaluators to find the answer when evaluating materials. They include
rationale, availability, user definition, layout/ graphic, accessibility, linkage,
selection/ grading, physical characteristics, appropriacy, authenticity, sufficiency,
cultural bias, educational validity, stimulus/ practice/ revision, flexibility, guidance,
and overall value for money.
As it can be seen, Sheldon states to some extent many criteria to evaluate the
materials. Most dimensions of the materials are under investigated, which leads to
some major issues. For example, layout/ graphic or physical characteristics required
to be evaluated by graphic designers or appearance designers of the materials. As a
result, evaluator needs a great deal of time and effort to accomplish this kind of work.
1.3.4.2. Hutchinson and Waters’ Criteria

As mentioned before, evaluation involves making judgments which means the
evaluator needs criteria for comparative analysis. Hutchinson and Waters (1987)
have their own system of criteria. They concentrate mainly on evaluating the
content of the book itself. Generally, their opinions focus on the following points:
First, according to Hutchinson and Waters (1987), audience of the book is a leaner
– centered approach, the biggest aim of the ESP course is to meet the needs of
learners. The book therefore should be designed with its focus on learners‟
demands. As a result, the first and foremost criterion in materials evaluation is the
audience such as personal information (age, sex, study or professional area), work
experience, language level, cultural and educational background, and so on.

15