An evaluation of the material “basic english iii” for the second year non- english major students at bac giang teachers’ training college

VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY- HANOI
COLLEGE OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES
POST- GRADUATE DEPARTMENT
GIAP THI YEN
AN EVALUATION OF THE MATERIAL
“BASIC ENGLISH III”
FOR THE SECOND YEAR NON- ENGLISH MAJOR
STUDENTS AT BAC GIANG TEACHERS’
TRAINING COLLEGE
(Đánh giá giáo trình “Tiếng Anh Cơ Bản III” dành cho sinh viên không chuyên năm thứ hai
Trường Cao Đẳng Sư Phạm Bắc Giang)
MINOR PROGRAM THESIS
FIELD : MOTHODOLOGY
CODE : 601410

HA NOI- 2008
i
VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY- HANOI
COLLEGE OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES
POST- GRADUATE DEPARTMENT
GIÁP THỊ YẾN
AN EVALUATION OF THE MATERIAL
“BASIC ENGLISH III”
FOR THE SECOND YEAR NON- ENGLISH MAJOR
STUDENTS AT BAC GIANG TEACHERS’
TRAINING COLLEGE
(Đánh giá giáo trình “Tiếng Anh Cơ Bản III” dành cho sinh viên không chuyên năm thứ hai
Trường Cao Đẳng Sư Phạm Bắc Giang)
MINOR PROGRAM THESIS
FIELD : METHODOLOGY
CODE : 601410

SUPERVISOR: ĐINH HẢI YẾN, M.A


ha noi - 2008
ii

i

CERTIFICATE OF ORIGINALITY
I certify my authorship of the minor thesis submitted today entitled
“An evaluation of the material Basic English III for the second year non-English major
students at Bac Giang Teachers’ Training College”
in terms of the statement of requirements for the thesdis and the field study reports in
Masters’ programs is the result of my own work, except where otherwise acknowledged and
that this minor thesis or any part of the same had not been submitted for a higher degree to
any other universities or institution.
Signature
Date: August 29
th
, 2008
i
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
On the completion of the thesis, I would like to thank the following people:
I would like to express my deepest gratitude to my supervisor, Ms. Dinh Hai Yen, for her
patient guidance, helpful suggestions, encouragement and constructive supervision in the
course of writing this research. Without her help, this work would have been impossible.
I would like to acknowledge my gratitude to Mr. Le Hung Tien, Head of the Department of
Post- Graduate Studies, and all the professors and lecturers at College of Foreign Language
(CFL), Vietnam National University (VNU) for their insightful lectures, invaluable
assistance and useful guidance. I am also grateful for the valuable materials provided by Ms.

Le Thu Ha- the librarian at the post- graduate studies library of CFL, VNU.
I would like to take this opportunity to express my thankfulness to all of my English staff at
Bac Giang Teachers’ Training College for their great help and kind cooperation in
completing the questionnaires for the thesis.
I wish to extend my thanks to all of my friends who have been most helpful and supportive
to me during the completion of my research.
Last but not least, my sincere thanks go to my parents whose love and encouragement have
been equally important to my educational endeavors, especially my little son who has given
me so much inspiration, energy, and support in accomplishing this challenging work.
ii
ABSTRACT
It is obvious that materials evaluation is one of the essential aspects of language teaching and
learning. Within this regard, the thesis was carried out to evaluate the material “Basic
English III” which is currently in use for the second year non- English major students at Bac
Giang Teachers’ Training College (BGTTC) since 2006 with the hope that practical
suggestions would be given for further improvements of the material in the near future to
meet the target of ensuring the effectiveness of the teaching and the learning English at
BGTTC.
The data collection instruments used in this study were questionnaires and document
analysis. In this sequence, the material in use is analyzed basing on the criteria suggested by
Hutchinson and Waters’ (1987) with an aim to determine how the material realizes the
course requirements. A survey on the teachers' opinions about the extent to which the
material meets the requirements of the course in terms of the aims, content and methodology
is conducted.
Research results have revealed some strengths and weaknesses of the material which allows
the author to conclude that the material is not very relevant to the course aims, content and
methodology.
Based on the findings, the thesis suggests some recommendations on materials adaptation
such as addition, deletion, and replacement that should be made to remedy the weaknesses of
the material so that the students can benefit more from it in future courses.

iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Trang
PART I: INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................1
POST- GRADUATE DEPARTMENT ....................................................................................... i
GIAP THI YEN ........................................................................................................................... i
MINOR PROGRAM THESIS ..................................................................................................... i
POST- GRADUATE DEPARTMENT ...................................................................................... ii
GIÁP THỊ YẾN .......................................................................................................................... ii
MINOR PROGRAM THESIS ................................................................................................... ii
FIELD : METHODOLOGY ........................................................................................... ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ....................................................................................................... ii
ABSTRACT .............................................................................................................................. iii
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ..................................................................................................... v
PART I: INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................... 1
Chapter 1: Literature Review ...................................................................................................... 4
Chapter 2: Research Methodology ..................................................................................... 16
Chapter 3: Data Analysis and Discussion ............................................................................... 21
* Sequence of content.......................................................................................................28
The content of the material did not go from easier to more difficult level. As can be
seen from the organization of content, the material was divided into three parts:
grammar, reading and exercises. These parts were repeated throughout the book.
Therefore, recycling the learned knowledge was available. Accordingly, it is reasonable
to state that the sequence of content completely fits the course specification...............28
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................ I
Appendix 2 .................................................. VII
III. Time allocation .................................................................................................................. VII
III. Instructional material ........................................................................................................ VII
Appendix 3 ........................................................ VIII
UNIT 4: WORK ...................................................................................................................... XV

References ...........................................................................................................................I.
Appendixes .......................................................................................................................III
Appendix 1..........................................................................................................................III
Appendix 2........................................................................................................................VII
Appendix 3.......................................................................................................................VIII
Appendix 4...........................................................................................................................X
Appendix 5........................................................................................................................XV
iv
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
CFL : College of Foreign Language
VNU : Vietnam National University
BGTTC : Bac Giang Teachers’ Training College
BEIII : Basic English III
v
LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES
Figures
Figure 1: Materials Evaluation Model of McDonough and Shaw
Figure 2: The materials evaluation model of Hutchinson & Waters
Tables
Table 2.1: Types of information in the teacher questionnaire
Table 3.1: The vocabulary list of unit 1 (Basic English III, p. 87)
Table 3.2: The content requirements for the third term
Table 3.3: The methodology requirements of the course
Table 3.4: Teachers’ opinions about the suitability of the material (Q 1- 6)
Table 3.5: Teachers’ opinions about language points and languages skills covered in this
material (Q7-8)
Table 3.6: Teachers’ opinions about effectiveness of sub-skills (Q 9)
Table 3.7: Teachers’ opinions about the topics in the material (Q10- 11)
Table 3.8: Teachers’ opinions about the text- types in the material (Q14)
Table 3.9: Teachers’ opinions about the organization and sequence of content (Q12- 13)

Table 3.10: Teachers’ opinions about time allocation in the material (Q15)
Table 3.11a: Students’ learning strategies and preference (Q16)
Table 3.11b: Students’ learning strategies and preference (Q17)
Table 3.11c: Students’ learning strategies and preference (Q18)
Table 3.12: Teachers’ opinions about tasks and activities of language points and language
skills (Q19- 22)
Table 3.13: Teachers’ opinions about teaching/ learning techniques in the material (Q23-24)
Table 3.14: Teachers’ opinions about the methodology guidance in the material (Q25)
vi
PART I: INTRODUCTION
1. Rationale of the thesis
Materials play an important role in the process of language teaching and learning as
appropriate materials can stimulate effective teaching and learning. Thus, to have a
successful language- teaching program, it is necessary to have good materials, especially in
Vietnamese setting.
English has been taught in Bac Giang Teachers Training College (BGTTC) since 1980s, and
English course books for non- English major students have been changed from time to time
to suit the training objectives as well as the students’ needs. Although many textbooks are
available on the market, it is really difficult to choose the materials that meet the needs of
non- English major students whose English proficiency is comparatively varied. Due to these
reasons, the teachers of English at BGTTC decided to produce the materials suitable for their
own students.
Undeniably, since these in- house materials were put to use, they have had certain positive
impacts on language teaching and learning at BGTTC. But there remain some complaints
and dissatisfaction. Until now, no research on the course book evaluation has been carried
out to examine how well the materials being in use match the course requirements in terms
of aims, content and methodology.
Therefore, the author decided to choose one of those in- house materials named “Basic
English III” (BEIII) for evaluation with the intention that it will not only help improve the
material’s quality but also enhance the learning efficiency as well as stimulate students’

interest in language learning.
2. Aims of the thesis
This study is intended to investigate:
- How well the material has satisfied the requirements of the course in relation to aims,
content and methodology?
- What improvements should be made to the material to make it more effective in
responding to the course requirements and students’ needs?
Hopefully, the findings of the thesis will provide reliable basis for further suggestions,
which helps the teachers - material designers at BGTTC improve this in- house material.
1
3. Significance of the thesis
The findings of the thesis will be useful not only to the researcher, and the course book
designers but also to the teaching staff and the second year non- English major students at
BGTTC. Besides, the given findings will help form a foundation toward improving the
quality of the in-house material “Basic English III” which is currently used for the students
at BGTTC. Further more, it is hoped that those research results will make some contributions
to the field of materials evaluation
4. Scope of the thesis
In materials evaluation, there have been a great number of criteria that should be taken into
consideration such as: the audience, the content, the methodology, the cultural bias, the
layout, the authenticity, and so on. In this study, the researcher bases on Hutchinson and
Waters’s (1987) criteria for evaluation with focus on the three following criteria: aims of the
material, content of the material, and methodology. Due to the limited scope of a minor
thesis, research subjects are primarily confined to English teachers who have been teaching
the material for 2 years rather than to students who have learnt this material. However, to
ensure the validity and reliability of the given information, students’ feedback, which is
collected in an informal way through teachers’ observation and experience in
working/talking with students, is also taken into account.
5. Design of the thesis
There are three main parts in this thesis: introduction, development, and conclusion.

The introduction provides the rationale, the aims, the significance, the scope, and design of
the thesis.
The development consists of three chapters:
Chapter one presents a review of literature concentrating on the issues related to materials
evaluation. It discusses the roles and types of materials in language teaching and learning.
and presents major issues in materials evaluation including definitions of materials
evaluation, purposes for materials evaluation, types of materials evaluation, materials
evaluators, models for materials evaluation, criteria for materials evaluation, as well as
material adaptation.
Chapter two focuses on the methodology employed in this thesis including an overview of
current English teaching and learning at BGTTC, research methods, and the data collection
procedures.
2
Chapter three discusses the findings of the study; points out the strengths, weaknesses, and
suggests the recommendations for the material improvement.
The conclusion provides a brief summary of all the major parts being present in the study,
the conclusions drawn out and suggests directions for further research.
3
PART 2: DEVELOPMENT
Chapter 1: Literature Review
1.1. Materials in Language Teaching and Learning
1.1.1. Roles of Teaching Materials in General English Courses
There are five important components involved in English language instruction namely
students, teachers, materials, teaching methods, and evaluation among which the most
essential constituents are the textbooks and instruction materials because these instructional
materials provide the foundation for the content of the lesson, the balance of the skills
taught, as well as the kinds of language practice the students engage in during class
activities.
Stressing the role of materials, Richard (2001: 251) states that
The teaching materials can serve as basis for much of language input that the learners

receive and as the source for much of the language practice that occurs in the
classroom.
Richard further explains that materials provide “basis for the content of the lesson, balance
of skills taught, and the kind of language practice students take part in” (p. 251). In other
situations, textbooks may be used to supplement the teacher's instructions. For learners,
textbooks may provide a major source of contact they have with the target language,
excluding the input provided by the teacher. In the case of novice teachers, textbooks may
also be utilized as a form of teacher training; that is, they provide the teachers with ideas on
how to plan and teach lessons as well as with formats that teachers can use. Much of the
language teaching that occurs throughout the world today could not take place without the
extensive use of commercial textbooks. Hence, learning how to use and adapt textbooks is an
important part of a teacher's professional knowledge.
Allwright (1990) supports Richard’s point of view by emphasizing that
Materials should teach students to learn, that they should be resource books for ideas
and activities for instruction, and that they should give teachers rationales for what
they do.
It is true that in many cases, teachers and students rely heavily on textbooks, and textbooks
determine the components and methods of learning, that is, they control the content,
methods, and procedures of learning. Students learn what is presented in the textbook, and
the way the textbook presents material is the way students learn it. The educational
4
philosophy of the textbook will influence the class and the learning process. Therefore, in
most situations, materials are the center of instruction and one of the most important
influences on what goes on in the classroom.
According to Nunan (1991), good teaching materials help inexperienced and poorly trained
teachers a lot, but they also help experienced teachers. Theoretically, experienced teachers
can teach English without a textbook. However, it is not easy to do it all the time, though
they may do it sometimes. Many teachers do not have enough time to design supplementary
materials, so they just follow the textbook. Textbooks, therefore, take on a very important
role in language classes. That is also the reason why the writer chooses one of the in- house

materials in use in her college for evaluation to see if it is appropriate or not to the current
teaching circumstance.
1.1. 2. Types of Materials
Teaching materials are a key and crucial component in any language teaching contexts.
There are different types of teaching materials. According to Robinson (1991), choosing
published textbooks or in- house materials is what specialists in the field of English language
teaching weigh up for arguments.
There are some arguments for and against using a published textbook. According to Ur
(1996), published textbooks have many advantages as follows:
- Framework: a textbook provides a clear framework for teachers and learners to
know where they are going and what is coming next, and build up a sense of structure
and progress.
- Syllabus: in many places, the course book serves as a syllabus. If the syllabus is
followed systematically, a carefully planned and balanced selection of language
content will be made.
- Ready- made texts and tasks: the course book provides texts and learning tasks,
which are likely to be of an appropriate level for most of the class. This of course saves
time for the teacher who would otherwise have to prepare his or her own.
- Economy: a book is the cheapest way of providing learning material for each
learner; alternatives, such as kits, set of photocopied papers or computer software, are
likely to be more expensive relative to the amount of material provided.
Convenience: A book is a convenient package. It is bound, so its components stick
together and stay in order. Moreover, it is light and small enough to carry around
5
easily. It is also of a certain shape/ size that is easily packed and stacked. In addition, it
does not depend for its use on hardware or a supply of electricity.
Guidance: For teachers who are inexperienced or occasionally unsure of their
knowledge of the language, the course book can provide useful guidance and support.
Autonomy: The learners can use the course book to learn new material, review and
monitor progress with some degree of autonomy. A learner without a course book is

more teacher- dependent.
However, not everything in the textbook is wonderful (Hammer, 1991). Though the
textbooks are well planned, they can be inappropriate for teachers and students. The counter-
arguments for using textbooks are also listed by Ur (1996) as follows:
- Inadequacy: In every class, every learner has his/ her own learning needs: no one
textbook can possibly supply these satisfactorily.
- Irrelevance, lack of interest: the topics dealt with in the textbook may not
necessarily be relevant or interesting for any individual class.
- Limitation: a textbook is confining that is, its set structure and sequence may inhibit
a teacher’s initiative and creativity, which leads to boredom and lack of motivation
on the part of the learners.
- Homogeneity: Textbooks have their own rationale, chosen teaching, and learning
approach. They do not usually cater for the variety of levels of ability and
knowledge, or learning styles and strategies that exist in most classes.
- Over-easiness: Teachers find it too easy to follow the textbook uncritically instead
of using their initiatives; they may find themselves functioning merely as mediators
of its content instead of as teachers in their own right.
In practice, the teacher should take into consideration the given advantages and
disadvantages when choosing a published textbook so as to enhance the strengths and
minimize the weaknesses which might incur in the course of teaching and learning.
Unlike published textbooks, in-house materials are always designed for a particular group of
learners so they correspond to learners’ need and match with the aims and objectives of the
language-learning program. According to Robinson (1991:58),
- In-house materials are likely to be more specific and appropriate than published
materials and have greater face validity in terms of the language dealt with and the
contexts it is presented in.
6
- In-house materials may be more flexible than published textbooks.
-The writers of in-house materials can make sure of the suitability of methodology
for the intended learners. However, it is noted that making in-house materials is time

consuming and expensive.
As stated above, published textbooks and in-house materials offer both good points and bad
points, so choosing which one as a teaching and learning material depends largely on the
purposes of the course as well as the available facilities and constraints of a particular
situation.
1.2. Materials Evaluation
1.2.1. Definitions of Materials Evaluation
There are many ways of defining evaluation. According to Hutchinson and Waters (1987, p.
96) materials evaluation is defined as “a matter of judging the fitness of something for a
particular purpose.” Evaluation is, then, concerned with relative merit. It is neither absolutely
good nor bad - only the degree of fitness for the required purpose is taken into account.
Trochim (?) at Cornel University supports Hutchinson and Waters by stating, “evaluation is
the systematic acquisition and assessment of information to provide useful feedback about
some object”. This definition emphasizes “acquiring and assessing information” rather than
assessing worth or merit because all evaluation work involves collecting and sifting through
data, making judgments about the validity of the information and of inferences we derive
from it, whether or not an assessment of worth or merit results.
From the above definitions of evaluation, it can be inferred that material involves the
determination of what needs to be evaluated, the objectives and requirements of the
materials, and the judgments of the value of the materials being evaluated in relation to the
objectives and the requirements determined.
1.2.2. Purposes of Materials Evaluation
An evaluation of teaching materials helps to identify particular strengths and weaknesses of
the materials in use. After being used in the classroom for a certain period of time, teaching
materials need to be evaluated to see if they have worked well for the intended situation and
students.
According to Ellis (1997), there are two main reasons for carrying out materials evaluation.
Firstly, there may be a need to choose among the materials available the most suitable ones
to use for a particular situation. Secondly, there can be a need for materials evaluation to
7

determine whether the material, which has been chosen, works for that situation after it has
been used for a period of time. This may help in deciding whether to use the material again
or replace it with a better one.
At BGTTC, ‘Basic English III’, which was compiled by two English teachers at English
Department in 2005, has revealed certain advantages as well as disadvantages. All these
things call for the need to evaluate the material, which ultimately becomes the author’s
purpose in carrying out this research.
1.2.3. Types of Materials Evaluation
In materials evaluation literature different authors offer different ways of categorizing it.
Robinson (1991:59) classifies materials evaluation into three types: preliminary, summative
and formative while McGrath (2002: p.14-15) divides materials evaluation into three stages:
pre-use, in -use and post-use evaluation. Although different terms are used to indicate types
of materials evaluation, these terms are basically similar.
Preliminary or pre- use evaluation often takes place before the course starts with the aim to
select the appropriate materials most appropriate for the particular group of learners and for
the aims of the course.
Formative or in- use evaluation occurs during the learning process, the result obtained can
be used to modify what is being done or in other words, such results may suggest the
development of the material in the future.
Summative or post- use evaluation is normally carried out when the course is finished with
the aim to determine whether the program was successful and effective and the findings of
this evaluation will lead to the decision whether to repeat or use the materials again or not.
In short, there are different types of materials evaluation so when making an evaluation; the
evaluators have to determine what type of materials evaluation will be suitable with their
work. As for BGTTC situation, since the material has been in use for two years, the
researcher decided to use summative/post-use evaluation with an aim to determine whether
this material is effective or not and offer some recommendations for further improvements of
the material.
1.2.4. Materials Evaluators
Robinson (1991), Tomlinson (1998), Richards (2001), and Dudley-Evan & St. John (1998)

state that materials evaluators can be either outsiders or insiders.
8
Outsiders are those who have not been involved in the program such as consultants,
inspectors and administrators. Accordingly, they may not fully understand the teaching and
learning situation in which the evaluation is being carried out. In addition, it may take them
more time to be aware of the local situation such as learners’ needs, facilities and time
constraints so it may be difficult for them to make truly judgments and recommendations of
the program.
In contrast to the outsiders, the insiders are those who have been directly involved in the
language-teaching program such as teachers, students, course and materials designers.
Therefore, they can provide the most valid information in the evaluation process. Also, their
understanding of cultural and political factors of the institution in which the evaluation takes
place would enhance the reliability of judgments and recommendations. To stress the role of
the insiders as evaluators, Richard (2001) states that the involvement of the insiders plays an
important part in the success of evaluation because “as a consequence, they will have greater
degree of commitment to acting on its result” (p. 296). He also adds that the teachers can
watch out for when the materials are being used. Consequently, they can know exactly the
extent that the materials work for their purposes and they can make modifications to improve
the effectiveness of the materials. However, there are also disadvantages to insiders when
they are “too close and involved” (Dudley- Evan and St. John, 1998, p.131) so the evaluation
may be influenced by their subjective points of view and their teaching experience.
In short, who will carry out the evaluation, outsiders or insiders, should be determined
according to the purposes of the evaluation. In this research, due to the limited scope of a
minor thesis, the insiders, especially, the teachers have been chosen as material evaluators
because the teachers are not only designers but also those who have been teaching this
material so they understand clearly about the material, the teaching context and the learners.
Their opinion and their evaluation, therefore, are critical to the improvement of the material
in particular and of teaching and learning in general. Also, the data have been collected from
various sources to minimize the subjectivity of the study.
1.2.5. Models for Materials Evaluation

There are many different models for materials evaluation. However, the most commonly
adopted models are suggested by Ellis (1997), McDonough & Shaw (1993), and Hutchinson
& Waters (1987).
9
1.2.5.1. Evaluation by Ellis (1997)
This is a micro- evaluation. In this model, Ellis suggests the practice of a detailed empirical
evaluation and focuses on evaluation at the task level with reference to its actual teaching
and learning context. Following are its steps:
1. Choosing a task to follow;
2. Describing the task with specification of input, procedures, language activities,
and outcomes;
3. Planning the evaluation with reference to the dimensions above;
4. Collecting information before, while and after the task was used, and what and
how the task was performed;
5. Analyzing the information collected;
6. Reaching conclusions relating to what has been discovered, and making
recommendations for the future teaching;
7. Writing the report.
The aim of this model is to identify the match between task planned and task in use. It can be
conducted when the materials are being used in the classroom.
1.2.5.2. Evaluation by McDonough and Shaw (1993)
This is a combination of macro- and micro- evaluation. In this model, the authors suggest a
three-stage evaluation model called: external evaluation, internal evaluation, and overall
evaluation (see figure 1).
The external stage (macro- evaluation) is used to identify whether the material is potentially
appropriate, then the internal stage starts and if the findings show that the material is
inappropriate, the evaluation will be finished at the external stage.
The internal stage (micro- evaluation) requires an in-depth investigation into the materials so
we need to examine at least two or more units of the book to examine the extent to which the
factor in the external evaluation stage actually match the internal consistency and

organization of the materials staged by the author/ publisher.
The final step is the overall evaluation. It helps to determine the suitability of the materials
for specified groups or individuals by considering a number of the factors such as the
usability, the generalizability, the adaptability, and the flexibility. This model is shown in
figure 1:
10
Macro- evaluation inappropriate/ potentially appropriate
(External)
EXIT
Micro- evaluation inappropriate/ appropriate adopt/ select
(Internal)

EXIT
Figure 1: Materials Evaluation Model of McDonough and Shaw (1993, p.75)
The model suggested by McDonough and Shaw (1993) presents a logical procedure for
materials evaluation. To examine if the materials are suitable for a certain group of learners
or not, there must be certain criteria against which our judgments or evaluation are based. It
is also necessary to determine the objectives or the requirements for the materials because
we cannot measure the success of a particular activity or a whole set of materials if there is
not clear objective for it.
1.2.5.3. Evaluation by Hutchinson and Waters (1987)
Evaluation by Hutchinson and Waters (1987) is a perfect macro- evaluation. According to
them, the materials evaluation process can be divided into four major steps (see figure 2).
OBJECTIVE ANALYSIS
How does the material being
evaluated realize the criteria?
MATCHING
How far does the material
match your needs?
DEFINE CRITERIA

On what bases will you
judge materials?
Which criteria will be
more important?
SUBJECTIVE ANALYSIS
What realization of the criteria do
you want in your course?
11
Figure 2: Materials Evaluation Process (Hutchinson and Waters 1987, p. 98)
As can be seen above, the first step is to define the criteria on which the evaluation is based.
In this step, the evaluator has to define what bases the materials will be judged and which
criteria the evaluator wants to include in the course. The second step is to determine the
subjective analysis, that is, to identify the requirements for materials so the evaluator should
describe in detail on what criteria the course is based. The third step is to determine the
objective analysis, that is, to evaluate whether the existing materials realize the criteria set in
the subjective analysis. The last one is the matching process, which finds out how far the
material matches the course requirements.
In summary, Hutchinson and Waters (1987) suggest a logical model for materials evaluation.
It can help the evaluators know exactly what must be done to analyze the materials in
comparison with the course requirements. Therefore, in this study, the author has chosen the
evaluation framework by Hutchinson and Waters (1987) to check whether the existing
material is suitable for the students at BGTTC. Also, it is very useful for the author to set out
both subjective analysis (i.e. analysis of BGTTC curriculum) and objective analysis (i.e.
12
analysis of the materials being evaluated). Then the findings of the two analyses are
compared to find out whether they match to each other and if not, to what extents they do not
match up. Based on the research results, good aspects as well as problematic parts of the
material can be identified, which may serve as a reliable ground for further suggestions on
material improvements.
1.2.6. Criteria for Materials Evaluation

According to Dudley- Evans and St. John (1998), in the evaluation process, evaluators must
take evaluation criteria into account before any evaluation takes place. Criteria for materials
evaluation depend on what is being evaluated and why they need to be evaluated.
William (1983) suggests seven criteria, each of which has the following aspects:
- General criteria: give introductory guidance on the presentation of language items
and skills.
- Speech criteria: suggest aids for the teaching of pronunciation: e.g. phonetic system
- Grammar criteria: offer meaningful situations and a variety of techniques for
teaching structural units.
- Vocabulary criteria: distinguish the different purposes and skills involved in the
teaching of vocabulary.
- Reading criteria: provide guidance on the initial presentation of passages for
reading comprehension.
- Writing criteria: demonstrate the various devices for controlling and guiding
content and expression in composition exercises.
- Technical criteria: contain appropriate pictures, diagrams, tables, etc…
The criteria suggested by William (1983) seem to be very useful and appropriate for
evaluating a course book. However, such frameworks are more suitable for the selection of
course books available in the market than for the examination of an in- house material to see
whether they meet the intended objectives. With its more comprehensive content, the
evaluating criteria defined by Hutchinson and Waters, therefore, seems to be a more helpful
tool to language materials evaluators.
According to Hutchinson and Waters (1987) there are four main criteria for materials
evaluation any evaluator should concern: the audience, the aims, the content, and the
methodology.
13
- The audience of the materials: the evaluator should obtain information about and
from learners to find out whether the materials are suitable to the students’ age,
knowledge of English, interest and so on.
- Aims of the materials: the evaluator has to check if the materials match the aims

and objectives of the course.
- Content of the materials: the evaluator has to check whether the materials’
language points, macro-skills/ micro-skills, and topics suit the learners’ needs.
- Methodology of the materials: the evaluator has to find out if techniques, aids,
guidance provided in the materials satisfy the learners and the teachers of the course.
Comparing the two sets of criteria presented above by William (1983) and by Hutchinson
and Waters (1987), it is obvious that the work of developing and choosing evaluative criteria
is rather subjective and depends on what the evaluators consider to be important. In this
evaluation research, the four criteria including audience, aims, content and methodology
suggested by Hutchinson and Waters (1987) were adopted. to see how much ‘English Basic
III’ match with the aims and the requirements of the course.
1.3 Materials Adaptation
Materials adaptation is a process of matching the teaching material with the needs, interests
of learners, and the teachers’ own capabilities. Its purpose is to maximize the
appropriateness of teaching materials in context, by changing some of the internal
characteristics of a course book to better suit the particular circumstances. McDonough and
Shaw (1993: 86) state that reasons for adaptation rely on four main aspects namely
“language use; skills; classroom organization; supplementary material.” and there are also
six important ways of modifying materials.
- Adding: the materials are supplemented simply by putting more into them. In the
quantitative way, we can add the technique of extending but the model remains
unchanged. The qualitative way, which can be termed as expanding refers to the
development of the methodology in new directions by putting in different language
skills or a new component. This can be thought of as “a change in the overall
systems.” (McDonough and Shaw, 1993: 90). Therefore, addition can be made
before, during or after the intended area.
- Deleting or omitting: deletion means cutting one or more stages within an activity
or omitting a whole activity or even a whole lesson. Therefore, addition and deletion
14
often work together. The tasks in the material may be deleted and compensated by a

more suitable one to meet the objectives of the whole unit. However, when the
techniques for adaptation are applied, it is necessary to take into account the balance
of the lesson as well as the time allocation.
- Modifying: Modification can be divided into two specific ways: re-writing and re-
structuring. Re-writing refers to the modification of the linguistic contents whereas
the re-structuring applies to the classroom management, especially the structuring of
the class. In short, teachers may occasionally decide to rewrite material, especially
exercise material, to make it more appropriate, more ‘communicative’, more
demanding and more motivating to their students.
- Simplifying: simplification is a type of modification namely re-writing activity.
Many elements of the material can be simplified such as the instructions,
explanations or even the visual layout of materials but the texts or most often reading
passages are applied to this technique. Teachers can simplify the texts with sentence
structures, the grammar structures, and the lexical content
- Re-ordering: teachers may decide that the order in which the material is presented
is not suitable for their students. They can use the technique of re-ordering to put
parts of a course book in a different order, adjusting the sequence of presentation
within a unit, or to arrange of different units in a course book.
- Re-placing: after being evaluated, text or exercise material which is considered
ineffective or inappropriate fro whatever reasons may be replaced by a more suitable
one.
In short, materials adaptation plays an important part in the process of language teaching and
learning. It makes the teaching materials more relevant to the needs of students and to the
objectives of the course, and therefore, would stimulate the effectiveness of teaching and
learning.
1.4. Summary
This chapter has provided a brief review of literature on materials evaluation. It includes
three sections. The first section addressed major issues reflecting the roles of the materials in
language learning - teaching; and types of materials. The second sections presented major
issues in materials evaluation: definitions of materials evaluation, purposes of materials

evaluation, types of materials evaluation, materials evaluators, models for materials
15