DEOLINDA LUCRÉCIA MEDINA NASCIMENTO
THE USE OF ENGLISH TEXTBOOKS IN CAPEVERDEAN SECONDARY SCHOOLS:
The Relationship between Use, Evaluation and Adaptation of Textbooks
_________________________________
Licenciatura em Estudos Ingleses
ISE/2007
DEOLINDA LUCRÉCIA MEDINA NASCIMENTO
The Use of English Textbooks in Capeverdean Secondary Schools: The Relationship between Use, Evaluation and Adaptation of
Textbooks
Trabalho científico apresentado no ISE para obtenção do grau de Licenciado em Estudos Ingleses sob orientação da Dr. Deanna Fernandes
O júri,
_____________________________________________
_____________________________________________
_____________________________________________
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Taking into consideration that the process of making this paper would not be possible without the collaboration of many colleagues, friends and members of my family, I would like to express my deepest gratitude to all of the people who helped me to make it possible.
I would like to thank my thesis advisor, Dr. Deanna Fernandes, whose guidance, support, encouragement and organization, throughout my entire work, were essential in making this study possible.
My special thanks to all the teachers who responded my questionnaire and whose availability and teaching experience gave a crucial contribution to my study, especially those teachers from my teaching practice group, Caetano, Elísio, Eunice, Ester and Lanísia, with whom I did a pilot testing of my questionnaire.
I would like to thank my family, specially my dear parents, Joao and Tomásia, who gave me significant financial and emotional support when I most needed them.
Finally, I would also like to thank the most beautiful and important person in my life, to whom I dedicate this work, my dear daughter, Tamiris.
List of Figures
Page
Figure 1.1: Teachers’ responses………... 31
Figure 1.2:Academic qualifications……… 32
Figure 1.3: Teaching experience………. 33
Figure 1.4: Pedagogical training………... 33
Figure 1.5: The use of textbooks………. 34
Figure 1.6: The use of textbooks………. 35
Figure 1.7: The use of textbooks………. 35
Figure 1.8: Textbook evaluation………. 36
Figure 1.9: Evaluation criteria……….... 37
Figure 1.10: Textbook evaluation………... 37
Figure 1.11: Textbook adaptation………... 38
Figure 1.12: Level of comfort with textbooks in use……….. 39
List of tables Table 4.1: Use of textbooks……… 41
Table 4.2: Philosophies about the use of textbooks……… 43
Table 4.3: Relationship use/evaluation………... 44
Table 4.4: Relationship use/evaluation criteria……….. 45
ABSTRACT
This study examines the relationship between teacher’s use of English textbooks and the way teachers evaluate and adapt them, looking at a particular context, the Capeverdean secondary schools, specifically in Praia.
The referred relationship was analyzed through teachers’ responses about how they use, evaluate and adapt their textbooks.
The results of the study revealed that, on the one hand, the way teachers use their textbooks influences the way they evaluate the same textbooks; on the other hand, the use of textbooks doesn’t necessarily influence the way teachers adapt them. Moreover, the findings revealed that, in general, due to some particular constraints the Capeverdean English teachers are using their textbooks as resources, in which several textbooks are used in combination with one another. Additionally, although teachers assume that they are doing their best, they still need more confidence concerning the way they use, evaluate and adapt available textbooks.
Teachers’ confidence in the way they are using their textbooks can be reinforced by establishing an intensive teacher training module on materials evaluation and adaptation, taking into account that a textbook is one of the most important tools in the process of teaching and learning. I hope that the elements presented may lead to further studies on this matter, specifically regarding textbook evaluation and adaptation.
INTRODUCTION
In recent years, the discussions over the importance of textbooks in ELT contexts have been reaching significant proportions. In fact, in general, textbooks evoke a range of responses that fluctuate between two extremes. One position is that they are“the visible heart of any ELT programme” (Sheldon, 1988) and they are valid, useful, and labor-saving tools. The other position holds that textbooks are “masses of rubbish skilfully marketed” (Brumfit, 1980) and they can be harmful, mainly concerning learner’s performance. Hence, researchers have attempted to understand how teachers use, evaluate and adapt their textbooks. This study adds to the growing body of research on materials use, evaluation and adaptation, in which it attempts to analyze the relationship between teachers’ use, evaluation and adaptation of textbooks.
The purpose in this paper is not to engage in a theoretical discussion of textbooks use, evaluation and adaptation- a task which has already been carried out by distinguished specialists such as Sheldon, Harmer, Cunningsworth, Madsen, Grant and others, but is to integrate these theories in a practical way in a specific context.
As a matter of fact, my concern has stemmed from the complaints of many Capeverdean teachers of English of the secondary schools about the inadequacy of the coursebooks in use. My intention is to show to my colleagues, among other things, that a textbook should be considered as a menu or a plat du jour. That is, a textbook is a reference document that should be used judiciously and usually needs supplementing and adapting. In addition, a textbook depends actually on what you do with it rather than what it is. In other words, a textbook which have been regarded as inappropriate by one teacher have been used to good effect by another.
Other reasons underlying the choice of this topic are the cost of English textbooks and the fact that they are not usually available in many countries, especially in Cape Verde. Therefore, this paper attempts to answer the following question:
What is the relationship between teacher’s textbook use and textbook evaluation and adaptation? My hypothesis is that how teachers use textbooks influences the way they evaluate them and their belief in the need of making adaptations
In order to answer the above question, this study includes four chapters:
Chapter I deals with the reviewing of the related literature, in which the focus is on the theories about the Role, Use, Evaluation and Adaptation of Textbooks in use.
Chapter II is concerning the Field Research, in which the Context of English Instruction in Cape Verde and the Method used to carry out the study are presented. As regards the Context, this study focuses particularly on the Provision of English Instruction in Capeverdean Secondary Schools, its Goals and Materials in use. In relation to the Method section, the Research Question and Objectives, the Target Population, the Variables and Procedures to Collect Data are presented.
Chapter III presents the results of a questionnaire that was distributed to English teachers of secondary schools in Praia, concerning the use, evaluation and adaptation of the available textbooks. In addition, the findings are quantitatively presented and illustrated by graphs.
Chapter IV deals with an analysis of the results, which shows the relationship between teachers’ use, evaluation and adaptation of textbooks, as well as the conclusions, limitations and recommendations of the study.
CHAPTER I
I. LITERATURE REVIEW
1.1. The Role of Textbooks in ELT Context
In order to understand how and why teachers use textbooks, it is necessary to understand the different perceptions that the same teachers have about textbooks and their role in ELT programmes.
The discussion over the role that EFL textbooks play on teaching and learning is very controversial. In fact, the discussion amongst the professionals in the field is based on whether textbooks are or not useful and flexible tools for whatever procedures used in specific classrooms. Some authors advocate the crucial role of textbooks in ELT programmes, textbooks essentiality as tools and guides in the process of teaching and learning, their importance as tools of multiple functions and as flexible tools that appeal to teachers’ creativity, while others advocate that textbooks can be harmful to student’s performance, textbooks may not meet students’ and teachers’ needs and interests and they are inflexible tools that controls the process of teaching and learning.
Textbooks play a crucial role in English Language Teaching contexts. According to Sheldon (1988:237), “textbooks are the visible heart of any ELT programme”, in which he illustrates the vital importance of textbooks in teaching English. However, through an analysis of the theoretical and practical problems of textbooks, Sheldon (1988) reveals that “textbooks merely grow from and imitate other textbooks and do not admit winds of change from research, methodological experimentation, or classroom feedback” (239). Thus, in spite of the fact that textbooks have an essential function in ELT contexts, it is noticeable that they carry some problems that should be taken into account.
Similarly, textbooks are considered essential tools in the process of teaching and learning. As Alan Matthews (1985) says “the textbook plays a crucial role because it is the main teaching and learning aid” (202). Matthews (1985) argues that this holds true mainly in primary and secondary schools, “where the textbooks represent the core of the syllabus”, since the majority of the tasks and activities set to be done at home and at school are taken
from them. Hence, bearing in mind that teachers and students often rely on the textbooks in the development of their process of teaching and learning, textbooks are regarded as imperative teaching and learning supports.
Likewise, textbooks have often been characterized as teaching and learning guides. O’Neill (1990, cited by Kitao, 1997) argues that even though textbooks are not designed to suit a particular group of students, they may be appropriate for student’s needs. In fact, O’Neill (1990) maintains that textbooks facilitate student’s revision and preparation of lessons, that they are ‘labour-saving tools’ in terms of time and money and that “they can and should allow for adaptation and improvisation”. In this way, textbooks are seen as flexible guides of the process of teaching and learning that save time and money.
In the same way, the importance of textbooks is highlighted based on the fact that they have multiple functions in ELT programmes. According to Cunningsworth (1995, cited by David Litz, 2000), textbooks have a great role on serving several purposes in ELT curriculum. Cunningsworth (1995) says that textbooks are very useful resources for self-directed learning, a reference source for students, a source of ideas and activities, a syllabus that helps to reflect pre-established objectives and a support for less experienced teachers who need more confidence in exerting their profession. Therefore, due to the fact that textbooks have several functions in ELT contexts, they play a crucial role that cannot be ignored.
Moreover, textbooks are considered flexible tools that appeal to teachers’ creativity. Indeed, a textbook is seen as “a helpful tool that teachers can use flexibly, and combine with other resources” (Gabrielatos, 2004). As a matter of fact, since coursebooks cannot be suitable to all teaching and learning contexts, there is a necessity for adapting published materials depending on the needs of specific classes (Gabrielatos, 2004). Thus, taking into consideration that textbooks are regarded as helpful tools that provide to teachers the opportunity to give a personal “touch” to the process of teaching by allowing adaptations, it is noticeable the great importance of textbooks in the process of teachers’ professional growth.
On the other hand, textbooks sometimes may be considered harmful tools, mainly concerning students’ performance. In Swales’ (1980, cited by Sheldon, 1988) point of view, textbooks “represent a problem and in extreme cases are examples of educational failure”. In fact, regarding the contradictions and conflicts of interest underlying textbooks creation and all the issues that go from commercialism to their ultimate use in classroom,
they are “seen as poor compromises between what is educationally desirable on the one hand and financially viable on the other” (Sheldon, 1988:237). Therefore, taking into consideration the fact that there are different interests underlying the stages of textbook designing, commercialism and usage, textbooks may exert a negative impact on student’s performance, and because of this they may be characterized as harmful tools.
Equally, due to the conflicts of interests underlying textbooks creation, they may not meet teachers’ and students’ needs and interests. As said by Christopher Brumfit (1980, cited by Sheldon, 1988), “to put a book on the open market implies a moral contract that the book has been cleared of basic faults”. In fact, the ongoing complaints about textbooks suggest that this ‘implicit agreement’ is being violated and that there is a gap between what is produced and what teachers would like to have (239). Therefore, taking into consideration that sometimes textbooks don’t meet teachers’ and students’ interests, they may not be useful in some particular situations.
In addition, textbooks are seen as inflexible tools that controls the process of teaching and learning. Indeed, Allwright (1990, cited by Kitao, 1997) concludes from an analysis of teaching materials that they can contribute to, but are restricted concerning the establishment of learning goals, content and the whole process of language learning management. In fact, Allwright (1990, cited by Sheldon, 1988) adds that “the whole business of the management of language learning is far too complex to be satisfactorily catered by a pre-packaged set of decisions embodied in teaching materials”. In other words, Allwright (1990, cited by Sheldon, 1988) advocates the inflexibility of textbooks, regarding them as tools to control teaching and learning. Hence, taking into consideration that there are complaints about the inflexibility of textbooks, it is noticeable that sometimes their role as direct instructional materials may be threatened.
To conclude, on the one hand, the professionals in the field who advocate that textbooks are too inflexible and that there are conflicts of interests underlying their creation, tend to focus on the independent use of textbooks, i.e., using textbooks as the only resource for procedures in the classroom. On the other hand, other researchers, who claim that textbooks are useful guides and resources that help teaching and learning, tend to focus on the using of textbooks as one of several resources available to teachers. Regardless, it is noticeable that textbooks can play a crucial role in the ELT curriculum and they should be regarded as helpful tools, which can be used in combination with other resources or even adapted for the effectiveness of the process of teaching and learning. In
the following section the use of textbooks will be discussed, focusing on how teachers use them in the classrooms.
1.2. The Use of Textbooks Materials
Despite the controversy over the role of textbooks in classroom procedures, in which even some teachers have a very poor opinion of them, it should be pinpointed that what really matters is what teachers do with such textbooks (Harmer, 1998). In fact, based on their opinion of the textbook in use they will take decisions on what to do and how to use it.
Concerning textbooks use, both teachers and students sometimes follow the book strictly and use it as the only material which is taken into the classroom. According to Harmer (1998), teachers and students “get locked into the book” and in such circumstances the textbooks becomes like a “millstone around the necks of all concerned, removing, as it does, the very possibility of engagement which its writer(s) hoped to provoke in the first place” (117). Hence, when teachers and students rely too much on what the book says it should be done and use it as the only material, there is less probability of students’ engagement in the lesson.
On the contrary, there are some teachers who prefer to rely on their own ideas and on a variety of other sources. Harmer (1998) says taking into consideration that sometimes textbooks can be inappropriate for teachers and students, they should be “approached with a degree of healthy scepticism “which allows teachers and students to carefully evaluate their content and to use them “judiciously for their own ends”, rather than have textbooks control
the process of teaching/learning (117). He adds that the fact that not everything in the textbook is suitable gives teachers the opportunity to use their own creativity, in which there is a dialogue between the teacher and the textbook that works for the benefit of the students (117). Thus, when teachers use their own ideas and other sources, rather than rely only on the textbook, there is an effective engagement of teachers on the process of teaching, which might provoke, on its turn, student’s involvement in the lesson.
Based on a study conducted in Vietnamese secondary school classrooms, whose focus was on an analysis of the use of materials in classrooms, Be and Crabbe (2000) concluded that there are two dimensions of textbooks use. Textbooks can be used as either scripts or as resources.
On the one hand, materials can be used as a script. In this case, “materials dictate the order and content of what is to be covered” (Be and Crabbe, 2000). Be and Crabbe (2000) add that when teachers use a textbook as a script they tend to cover all the agenda set by it, following the content strictly in the way the book says it should be done. In this way, it is noticeable that using textbooks as scripts has a limitation because of the fact that the activities may not match the process of learning, concerning specific groups of students, who have different interests and needs. However, Harmer (1998) maintains that since textbooks have a consistent syllabus, a range of vocabulary that has been carefully chosen and a set of additional materials (workbooks, cassettes, etc) to back them up, they have the advantage of “offering teachers something to fall back on when they run out of ideas of their own”. Thus, using textbooks as scripts has its advantages and drawbacks, what doesn’t reduce the importance of their role in classroom events.
On the other hand, Be and Crabbe (2000) maintain that materials can also be used as
resources. Contrarily to the first case, teachers use materials as resources when they
“follow a different agenda, perhaps working towards the goals of a syllabus, or goals deriving from difficulties experienced by learners, drawing on whatever parts of the materials that are likely to help achieve the goals in hand” (Be and Crabbe, 2000). In this case, teachers make use of their own creativity, giving a personal “touch” (e.g. using textbooks adaptations) to the teaching for the benefit of the students. Nevertheless, to follow a different agenda, teachers should have the necessary experience and time to do it in a different way from the one pre-established. Therefore, using textbooks as resources also carries some benefits and risks, but keeps their importance as helpful instructional materials.
In summary, two types of textbook use can be highlighted. On the one hand, there is the use of textbooks as scripts, in which they control the teaching and learning, most of the time not allowing any modifications. On the other hand, there is the use of textbooks as resources, in which teacher’s creativity is requested, as far as necessary modifications are concerned. In fact, depending on how teachers use textbooks (as scripts or resources) they are likely to evaluate the same textbooks in a different way, what influences on their belief
whether any modifications are required or not. The next section deals with the process of evaluating textbooks, focusing on why and how teachers evaluate textbooks.
1.3. Evaluating ELT Textbooks
Despite all the controversy over the role of textbooks and their different uses in the classroom, it is irrefutable that the ELT coursebooks market is increasing and expanding due to the increase of demands on instructional materials and to the popularity within the educational community (Sheldon, 1988). Thus, educators feel the necessity to apply a wide variety of suitable and effective criteria for the evaluation of textbooks used in classrooms.
1.3.1. Justification for textbook evaluation
Taking into account that textbooks play an important role in the process of teaching and learning, they should be evaluated before being selected for the benefit of teachers and students. As Sheldon (1988) maintains coursebooks are seen as the “route map of any ELT programme”. In fact, he argues that taking into consideration that textbooks reflect the programme’s shape, structure and destination, with progress and systematization, and they are used as helpful tools to evaluate teachers’ methodology, concerning their ability or not to follow the coursebooks sequentially, it is evident that “a wrong selection can be a particularly keen reason to regret.” (238). Thus, since textbooks are the core of any ELT syllabus and an important tool to assess teachers’ methodology, we can see that it is imperative to evaluate them in order to measure up their suitability to the process of teaching and learning.
In addition, the textbook evaluation process helps educators in getting familiar with the chosen textbook. Sheldon (1988) indicates that the process of evaluating coursebooks is a helpful tool for educators. In fact, it helps them to be familiar with their content, enabling them to identify textbooks’ strengths and weaknesses and to make effective use of their strong and weak points (Sheldon, 1988). In this way, the evaluation process is very important since it provides educators the opportunity to know better the chosen textbook and to take advantages of its strong and weak points.
Also, textbook evaluation is a way of determining the appropriateness of the textbook for the specific group of learners. Hutchinson (1987, cited by David Litz, 2000) defines evaluation as “a matter of judging the fitness of something for a particular purpose” and suggests an interactive process of textbooks evaluation by saying that,
‘…materials evaluation plays such an important role in language teaching that its potential for influencing the way teachers operate is considerable. Materials evaluation can and should be a two-way process which enables teachers not just to select a textbook, but also to develop their awareness of their own teaching/learning situation.’(p. 15)
Therefore, evaluating textbooks is essential because it facilitates the process of selecting a textbook and helps teachers and learners reflect on their own teaching and learning situation.
Likewise, the textbook evaluation process is very helpful in teacher development and professional growth. Cunningsworth (1984) puts forward the idea that the evaluation process is not mechanical, but it deals with professional judgements based on practical experience. He says that the evaluation process is a potential way of “conducting action research as well as a form of professional empowerment and improvement” (cited by David Litz, 2000). Hence, evaluating textbooks provide opportunities for a practical experience as teachers and helps us in the achievement of professional goals.
Therefore, we evaluate textbooks because it is a process that gives validity and credibility to the process of textbooks selection by helping us make decisions and reflect on our own teaching and learning experience. As a matter of fact, the evaluation process helps teachers reflect on the way they use the textbooks and make decisions if they really want to use them as ultimate tools that don’t need any adaptations or as flexible resources. In the next section, the process of textbook evaluation will be highlighted, focusing on the evaluative stages.
In order to give validity to the evaluation process, there are some evaluative stages to be followed.
Cunningsworth (1984) suggests that there are three types of evaluation: the ‘predictive’ or ‘pre-use’ evaluation that examines the potential performance of a textbook; the ‘in-use’ evaluation that examines the currently used textbook; and the ‘retrospective’ or ‘post-use’ evaluation designed to measure the effectiveness of the use of a textbook in an educational institution.
Hutchinson and Waters (1987, cited by Kitao, 1995) divide the evaluation process into four stages: 1-defining criteria, 2-subjective analysis; 3-objective analysis, 4-matching, in which the suggested checklist contains both subjective and objective analysis for each item to be assessed.
Matthews (1985) suggests the following procedures that help in the decision-making process concerning textbook evaluation: 1-Defining your own teaching situation, taking into account the syllabus, time available (teaching hours in the school year), student’s age, student’s interests, student’s background, class size and student’s level; 2- Assessing the
merits of available textbooks, consisting on the analysis of a general impression of the
book, its methodology, physical characteristics (Lay-out, illustrations, story-line, extras, series), logistical characteristics ( price, availability), content (grammar; four skills, presentation and practice of new language, sexism, culture bias), organizational characteristics (ease of use) and others such as grading, pre-testing, variety.
Garinger (2002) says that “a practical, thorough and straightforward method for choosing ESL textbooks is to analyse the options according to program issues, going from broad (e.g., goals and curriculum) to specific (e.g., exercises and activities). He adds that behind this technique the strategy to be used is the elimination of the unsatisfactory textbooks while analysing them, in which are left only the most appropriate. In addition, he proposes four steps for the textbook evaluation: 1-Matching the textbook to the program
and the course, dealing with the examination of the curriculum, whether using individual
textbooks or series and the identification of the textbook appropriateness for the intended learners; 2- Reviewing the skills presented in the textbook, consisting of measuring the effectiveness of textbooks in helping learners acquire the necessary skills, whether they provide adequate guidance and include cognitive skills that are challenging to learners;
contribution of the exercises to learners’ language acquisition; 4-Weighing practical
concerns, which include issues such as availability, cost and accessibility.
It is clear that there is more than one approach to textbook evaluation. Regardless, establishing a set of procedures to evaluate textbooks before doing it facilitates and standardizes the decision-making process for the selection of the best available textbook to be used in classroom. The following section deals with the criteria used to evaluate textbooks.
1.3.3. Textbook Evaluation Criteria
Bearing in mind the importance of the use and evaluation of textbooks, we can say that the evaluation and selection of textbooks to be used in a certain programme is regarded as a complex process that should be taken into consideration. Meanwhile, we may ask ourselves: How do we evaluate textbooks?
Taking into consideration that the evaluation of textbooks helps their effective selection, Sheldon (1988) proposes evaluative solutions for the decision-making process concerning the selection of textbooks. As he says,
‘The selection of a particular core volume signals an executive educational decision in which there is considerable professional, financial and even political investment. This high profile means that the definition and application of systematic criteria for assessing coursebooks are vital.’ (1988:237)
Sheldon (1988) pointed out that since the literature on this matter is not very extensive, researchers suggest ‘checklists’ based on supposedly generalized criteria” (240). Sheldon adds that since one set of criteria cannot be suitable to all teaching and learning contexts “we can be committed only to checklists or scoring systems” (242). He suggests the use of evaluation sheets that consists of a list of physical and organizational characteristics such as rationale, availability, layout, appropriateness, authenticity, cultural bias, flexibility and others. Also, he proposes the rating (*Poor, **Fair, ***Good,
****Excellent) and comments on each factor, about which there are several key questions to ask (see appendix#1).
Sheldon (1988) pinpoints that “it is clear that coursebook assessment is fundamentally a subjective, rule-of-thumb activity, and that no neat formula, grid or system will ever provide a definitive yardstick” (245). He argues that given the fact that different kinds of users have different interests and concerns, they might give more relevance to some criteria than to others and that depending on the context, a coursebook, when judged by the same criteria, may be effective or not.
Harmer (1998) claims that teachers should consider relevant aspects that underlie the decision about which book is more appropriate to the context in which they are teaching. In this way, he suggests an evaluation checklist, in which he presents a set of criteria and questions related to them (see appendix#2).
Hutchinson and Waters (1987, cited by Kitao, 1997) claim that the role of objectivity in textbook evaluation is very important. They say that “evaluation is basically a matching process: matching needs to available solutions. If this matching is to be done as objectively as possible, it is best to look at the needs and solutions separately”. Hence, they suggest that when evaluating a textbook, the evaluators should do a separate analysis of the needs of the particular group of learners and the materials available to satisfy the same needs, in order to make the evaluation process more objective.
Others (Cunningsworth, 1984, Breen and Candlin, 1987 and Dougill, 1987, cited by David Litz, 2000) propose checklists of questions and frameworks for textbooks evaluation, which consist of asking questions and making relevant considerations that are important to keep in mind in the process of evaluation.
Thus, there are several proposals for textbook evaluation criteria. Some authors suggest the use of checklists, others frameworks or evaluation sheets, in which a set of criteria regarding physical, organizational and logistical characteristics of textbooks are considered. Regardless, whatever form the criteria take, be in checklists, frameworks or evaluation sheets, it is noticeable that all of them ask fundamental questions that should be taken into account concerning the issue of assessing textbooks.
However, such criteria have a fundamental flaw that deals with the fact that the amount of relevancy given to each criteria depends on the “swings of linguistic fashion” (Sheldon, 1988). That means, nowadays the importance given to a criterion may be different from the one given to the same criterion twenty years ago. Hence, over the years,
the relative importance of different criteria would change, what makes the process of assessing textbooks a subjective process. Regardless, a vital question should be present in all of the checklists: Is the textbook suitable to the particular group of learners and context in which it is used?
Therefore, taking into account that Sheldon (1988) claims that the process of textbooks evaluation is subjective; teachers’ answers to the above question may differ depending on how they use the same textbooks. In other words, on the one hand, there are teachers, who use a textbook as a “script” and may answer that the textbook is suitable and will strictly follow it till the end of the school year without making any modifications. On the other hand, there are teachers, who use the same textbook as a resource and may answer that it is not as suitable as that, since it has some sections that are not appropriate to the particular group of learners, and who will be eager to make some adaptations. In this way, it is noticeable the influence of teachers’ use of textbooks on the way they evaluate the same textbooks and on their belief if adaptations are necessary or not. The next section deals with the process of adapting textbooks, focusing on why, how and what to adapt.
1.4. Adapting ELT Textbooks
1.4.1. Justification for Textbook Adaptation
Gabrielatos (2004) states that there are at least two reasons why teachers need to adapt published materials. First, “coursebooks are not always clear regarding the methodology they use in terms of ‘what’ and ‘how’ to teach. Second, coursebooks cannot be suitable to all teaching and learning contexts. Hence, due to the unclear methodology and appropriateness to the context of some textbooks, it is effective to use textbooks in a flexible way, making adaptations if necessary.
Harmer (1998) claims that there are different options for textbook use and that depending on the appropriateness of the topics, content and activities proposed in the book for the particular learners, teachers may have to take essential decisions on how to use the book. He says,
‘When teachers open a page in their textbook, they have to
decide whether they should use the lesson on that page with their class. Is the language at the right level? Is the
topic/content suitable for the students? Are there the right kind of activities in the book? Is the sequencing of the lesson logical? If the language content and sequencing of the textbook are appropriate, the teacher will want to go ahead and use it. If, however, there is something wrong with the textbook, the teacher has to decide what to do next.’ (111)
Cunningsworth (1984) remarks that there is no ‘perfect coursebook’ that totally suits a specific teaching context, but it is necessary to match what the coursebook offers with teachers and students’ needs. He claims that “teachers should not be looking for the perfect coursebook, but rather for the best possible fit between what the coursebook offers and what we, as teachers and students need” (105).
Likewise, Madsen (1978) claims that adapting textbooks motivates learners for learning and facilitates the acquisition of the language. He says,
‘Adaptation is often required in order to increase motivation
for learning by making the language more real, the situation more relevant, the illustrations (visual or printed) more vivid and interesting. It is sometimes required to ensure greater ease of acquisition-by providing sufficient practice, logical explanations, plus examples or exercises that are on the level of the learner’.
In addition, Madsen (1978) says that every teacher is an adapter of the textbooks and materials he/she uses. Madsen (1978) maintains that no matter how “perfect” is the textbook, the teachers will have their own ideas about it and the way they should present it in the classroom. Madsen (1978) adds that “it would be a trivial exercise to write a special book to tell teachers that it is necessary to particularize teaching materials in a classroom” since it “is the heart of teaching and should be a prominent concern in any teacher-training course”. Hence, teachers are always adapting their teaching materials, mainly textbooks, even if they are using the “ideal text”, for the sake of their students’ needs and interests and for their own teaching methodology.
In short, we should adapt textbooks because there is not an ultimate and perfect textbook, due to the existence of different teaching contexts, in which students have particular needs and interests. In other words, textbooks are not suitable for all teaching contexts. For this reason, teachers should be able to modify their materials for students benefit and for their own, i. e., teachers should regard a textbook as a reference document that should be used selectively and usually needs supplementing and adapting. Moreover, the effectiveness of a textbook depends actually on what you do with it rather than what it is. Thus, textbook adaptations reflect teachers’ way of using and evaluating textbooks. The following section refers to textbook adaptation techniques.
1.4.2. Textbooks Adaptation Techniques
Teachers are always adapting their teaching materials when they use them in the classroom. According to Madsen (1978), “the good teacher is constantly adapting.” Madsen (1978) maintains that the teacher adapts even when he refers to an exercise covered earlier, or when he introduces a supplementary picture, song, realia, or report. In addition, Madsen (1978) says that even when a textbook is well written, it may not be totally compatible with the instructional aims, student level or teaching style in a given school or classroom. Thus, once again, there is the idea that even the “ideal textbook” requires some adaptations for the effectiveness of the process of teaching and learning. Therefore, Madsen (1978) claims that the process of adaptation takes place on three levels. First, the individualizing of material. Second, modifying a text for purposes not
intended or anticipated by the author. Third, compensating for textbook defects. Madsen
(1978) maintains that in order to reach the above mentioned levels the teacher has to employ a variety of techniques: supplementing, editing, expanding, personalizing, simplifying, modernizing, localizing or modifying cultural/situational content. Hence, there are several techniques used to overcome the problem of textbooks inappropriateness. Grant (1987, cited by Harmer, 1998) proposes four techniques in order to overcome the problem of textbooks inappropriateness:
“There’s nothing wrong with omitting lessons from textbooks. Teachers do it all the time, developing a kind of ‘pick and choose’ approach to what’s in front of them” (Harmer, 1998). However, teachers should be careful and try not to omit too many pages; otherwise, students may begin to wonder why they are using the book if they are not following it (111).
There are some reasons why we may want to omit. Gabrielatos (2004) presents the following: learners are clear about a language point, learners are competent in a skill, there are too many tasks on a particular area/point, the item/task is not well designed, the item/task is not well-suited to its aim(s), the topic is not appropriate for learners. Thus, omission is required whenever teachers feel that the input presented in the textbook doesn’t meet the aims and learners’ needs and interests.
b) Replacement
This alternative deals with the fact that teachers can replace the textbook lesson with one of their own. Harmer (1998) says that it has the advantage of appealing to teachers’ creativity since they use their own material, what makes it more interesting to the teacher and more appropriate for the students. Nevertheless, similar to omission, “too much replacement can lead teachers and students to wonder if it is worth to use the book at all” (Harmer, 1998:111).
Gabrielatos (2004) presents several reasons why we should replace lessons: texts are of inappropriate length, materials are inappropriate to the aim, materials are inappropriate to the learner’s age/experience, materials are unclear/confusing/misleading, and tasks are badly designed. Thus, whenever teachers feel that a text/task is not suitable for the learners they can substitute it for one of their own or from a supplementary material.
c) Addition
Teachers may want to add activities and exercises to a lesson whenever they decide it is necessary to engage the students with the content. Harmer (1998) says that “if the lesson is boring, too controlled, or if it gives no chance for students to use what they are learning in a personal kind of way, the teacher may want to add activities and exercises which extend the student’s engagement with the language or topic” (111). He adds that addition is
a good choice since the textbook’s strengths are combined with teacher’s own skills and knowledge of his/her own class. Hence, the addition technique engages both learner and teacher in the lesson, what makes the process of teaching and learning easier.
There are some reasons why teachers may want to add what is in the book. Gabrielatos (2000-2004) puts forward the following: areas are not covered, texts/pictures/tasks are not provided, texts/pictures/tasks are fewer than needed, and tasks are limited in scope. Therefore, in order to motivate learners for the learning and engage them in the lesson, teachers may need to add an extra item/task.
d) Adaptation
Adaptation is a good alternative to overcome the problem of textbooks being boring and uncreative. Harmer (1998) says that teachers can use the same material in the book, but doing it in their own way. In this way, teachers can particularize their lessons and make them more interesting and appealing for the learners.
Regarding textbook adaptation, Gabrielatos (2000-2004) states that the following content can be adapted: aims, topics, texts, visuals, guidelines and explanations, exercises/activities/tasks, games, quizzes and questionnaires.
Gabrielatos (2000-2004) says that all the above alternatives, omission, replacement, addition and change, deal with making adaptations to the existing materials. Thus, using the above described alternatives is a matter of taking advantage of what textbooks offer and use them creatively, as well as an easy way of improving a less-than-perfect textbook. In this way, using textbooks adaptation techniques reflects the idea of using textbooks as flexible tools that can be used in combination with other materials and that can be improved whenever teachers feel they have flaws. In other words, adapting reveals teachers’ use of textbooks as flexible resources rather than as scripts.
CONCLUSIONS
To conclude, the fact that there are different perceptions of textbooks, regarded by some as an effective tool for teaching and learning, and by others as a “necessary evil”, means that whenever we think of “adopting” a particular coursebook, we should first
engage ourselves in an evaluation process, followed by an adaptation if necessary, so that the coursebook can meet the objectives pre-established and teachers’ and students’ needs and interests.
In this way, bearing in mind the different perceptions of textbooks, there are two ways of using textbooks in the classroom. On the one hand, there is the use of textbooks as flexible resources that can be used in combination with other materials, in which teachers can take advantage of their creativity to overcome problems of textbooks inappropriateness. On the other hand, there is the use of textbooks as scripts, in which teachers tend to let them dictate the pace and nature of the lessons, as well as controlling all the process of teaching and learning.
Hence, the different uses of textbooks reflect the way teachers evaluate them. In other words, the way teachers use textbooks in the classroom influences the way teachers evaluate them. As a matter of fact, the teachers who use textbooks as resources may have different ways of evaluating them from the teachers who use textbooks as scripts. However, despite the fact that is quite impossible to have a totally objective process of evaluation, we should set some criteria that gives validity to the same process.
Therefore, it is noticeable that depending on how teachers use textbooks in the classroom, we can draw conclusions about their opinion of the textbooks in use and how they would evaluate them, as well as what they think about the necessity of using textbooks adaptations techniques or not.
CHAPTER II
II. FIELD RESEARCH
2.1. The Context
In order to understand how Capeverdean English teachers are using their textbooks, first it is necessary to understand the context in which the process of English language instruction at Capeverdean secondary schools takes place, regarding its provision, goals and materials used. In fact, this contextualization will help to understand the reasons underlying the choice of this specific topic, concerning teachers’ use of English textbooks.
2.1.1. The provision of English language instruction at secondary level in Cape Verde
Capeverdean general education consists of 12 grades: primary school, which is divided in three phases (from grade 1 to 6: for children ages 6 to10/11) and secondary school, which is divided in three cycles (from grade 7 to 12: for children ages 11/12 to 18 (see appendix#3). Foreign languages (English and French) are taught to children from grade 7. As far as English is concerned, there is considerable provision for English language teaching and learning at secondary level. In addition, students learn English for three 50- minute periods a week, except in grade 7, when they learn for four periods a week.
2.1.2. The goals
Although there is no official written government policy on English language teaching for the formal education system in Cape Verde, there is a document, the English language curriculum, issued by the Ministry of Education, which reflects the government language policy stated on the basic laws for the Capeverdean educational system. According to this document, the main aims and objectives of the Capeverdean secondary school ELT
1
curriculum, which is assumed to be the same of the textbooks, are as follows: to enable students to the reception and production of important information for their needs and interests; to foster students’ self-confidence and critical thinking as crucial elements to the acquisition of other knowledgements; to develop student’s autonomy so that they can be able to have creative attitudes, which are open to the new and the unknown; to facilitate communication between the Capeverdean people and the English native speakers, in order to enable students to be aware of the cross-cultural differences, accepting them as they are; to enable students to become aware of the particular characteristics of the English language in relation to their L1; to develop the knowledge of the English language necessary to the acquisition and use of information from aural and written sources.
In this way, for the effectiveness of the process of teaching and learning, the textbooks should be selected taking into account the objectives pre-established in the English Curriculum.
2.1.3. The materials
According to the current English Curriculum, the official coursebook for Capeverdean secondary schools, since the beginning of English instruction in Cape Verde is Frontrunner 3, which consists of a teacher’s book, a student’s book, a workbook and a set of class cassettes. However, due to the problem of lack of resources, the difficulties to find the textbooks and the fact that Frontrunner is out of date, there are several textbooks that are used based on the contents and topics suggested by the English curriculum.
Although Frontrunner is still the official textbook, there are two up to date textbooks, which were designed for Portuguese students and that were suggested by the Ministry of Education to be used currently: Eyes and Spies for the first cycle and Teen for the second and third cycle. The first textbook consists of a set of a teacher’s guide, a student’s book (including an audio CD) and an activity book (including a picture dictionary and self-evaluation tests). The latter consists of a teacher’s guide, a student’s book (including a booklet and a small story “the Red Omega” as an offer), and a workbook (including an audio CD).
2.2.1. The research question and objectives
Taking into account the issues referred to in the literature review, the present study deals with the analysis of how English teachers of Capeverdean secondary schools use their textbooks taking into account that they have different points of view about textbooks. The major question of interest is: What is the relationship between teacher’s textbook use and textbook evaluation and adaptation? My hypothesis is that how teachers use textbooks influences the way they evaluate them and their belief in the need of using adaptations. The objectives of the study are to:
a) Analyze the way teachers are using their textbooks
b) Find out the relationship among the use, evaluation and adaptation of textbooks
In addition, bearing in mind that our teachers have been facing the problem of lack of suitable resources, in this case English books, and that the official textbook (Frontrunner) is out of date, we are also interested in knowing what teachers are doing to overcome this problem and how they feel about their current use of textbooks.
Although we take the risk of being accused of making generalizations from a small sample to Capeverdean secondary schools in general, we decide to limit the study to the secondary schools in the urban area of Praia, which consists of 8 secondary schools. Of course making generalizations is not the intention, though a wider follow-up study by questionnaire to teachers from all of the Capeverdean islands would be an interesting a
posteriori stage. Moreover, the present outcome is intended to provide useful information
about the practices of Capeverdean English teachers concerning the use of textbooks.
2.2.2. The target population
In the study, the target population is the English teachers of secondary schools in Praia. In fact, 53 English teachers of the eight secondary schools were chosen based on the fact that of the 56 English teachers of secondary schools in Praia, 53 is a reasonable and
representative group to which the study is applied and that allows valid generalizations about the findings. The rest of the teachers were not contacted for a matter of availability. In addition, in order to choose the sample, some aspects that are considered relevant when choosing samples for a study were taken into account, as time available for the study and the level of accuracy desired, in which it is considered that the larger the sample, the more accurate the results can be.
2.2.3. The variables
The major variables are teachers’ teaching experience and pedagogical training. In this way, the analysis of the results can be done by comparing the data based on the chosen variables, bearing in mind that the teaching experience and pedagogical training may influence the way teachers are using their textbooks as well as evaluating and adapting them. Meanwhile, there was another variable considered at the beginning, level currently teaching, that revealed unuseful for the study since it didn’t make any difference on the results.
2.2.4. Procedures to collect data
In order to collect field information I established the following steps and procedures in order to give validity to the study:
a) Questionnaire design
The questionnaire design involved two major steps: reviewing relevant literature for the structure of the questionnaire and for the items included, and pilot-testing the questionnaire. Concerning the first step, the major topics addressed in the questionnaire were: the use of textbooks, evaluation of textbooks, adaptation of textbooks and teachers’ feeling about the way they are using their textbooks. In relation to the last step, the pilot testing was done to try out with respondents who are similar to those who will respond in the study and to detect possible problems concerning the items, so that they can be revised.
2
According to Donna M. Johnson in Approaches to Research In Second Language Learning, 1991, concerning the choosing of representative samples
In fact, the pilot-testing group consisted of 5 English teachers in training of one of the secondary schools in Praia (the author’s internship group), in which they took the questionnaire and returned it in a maximum of 15 minutes. It is important to state that explanations about the items were given whenever they were required.
b) The questionnaire content
The content included topics regarding the use, evaluation and adaptation of textbooks, as well as how teachers feel about the way they have been using their textbooks. Additionally, the questionnaire included items that would allow us to construct teachers’ profile concerning their academic qualifications, teaching experience, level currently teaching and pedagogical training. In this way, we could meet the following pre-established objectives for each item:
1. The use of textbooks: to find out which textbooks are teachers using and how they are using them;
2. The evaluation of textbooks: to analyze the way teachers are evaluating their
textbooks;
3. Adaptation of textbooks: to find out the amount of adaptations teachers are doing
and how they do it in order to state their belief in the necessity of using textbook adaptation techniques;
4. Teachers’ feeling about the use of textbooks: to examine teachers’ opinion about
the way they have been using their textbooks in order to find out if they are comfortable with it or if they are eager to change it for the effectiveness of the process of teaching and learning.
In addition, the questions used in the questionnaire were in majority closed questions, in the format of multiple-choice answers, and one open-ended question at the end, regarding teachers’ feeling about their use of textbooks.
c) The questionnaire revision
After the pilot-testing, based on the difficulties found by the teachers on giving responses in some sections, I decided to make some modifications, not concerning the content but rather the structure of the items, by organizing them in an easier way for the readers. Such modifications were made in section one (the use of textbooks), section two (textbook evaluation) and section 3 (textbook adaptation).
d) The questionnaire distribution and collection
First, the author contacted by phone the English coordinators of each secondary school in order to find out how many English teachers exist in Praia and to request permission to attend their coordination meetings for the distribution of the questionnaire. In this way, the probability of reaching a large number of teachers was large. Second, based on the information given by the coordinators concerning the date and time of the coordination meetings, a plan was made in order to enable the author to distribute and collect the questionnaire in each school on the same day, based on the amount of time spent by the pilot-testing group on responding the questionnaire.
However, there were some constraints that prevented the plan to be executed as it was expected. On the one hand, since not all teachers were attending the coordination meetings for several reasons, we had to involve ourselves in a process of “running after teachers”, in order to reach as many teachers as possible. On the other hand, for reasons concerning teachers’ availability at the moment, the time spent to respond and collect the questionnaire was much longer than the expected. In fact, some teachers took three days to respond and return the questionnaire.
In addition, based on the fact that some teachers didn’t return the questionnaire on the same day they took it, I had to code the questionnaires with numbers and by school, in order to facilitate future contacts to clarify misunderstandings with the responses.
CHAPTER III
III. THE RESULTS
The questionnaire itself has 5 sections and each section, as stated in chapter II, has its specific objective:
1. The first section consists of 5 items, concerning professional details, such as academic qualifications, level currently teaching, length of time teaching and pedagogical training. This section has the objective of identifying possible variables that influence teachers’ responses.
2. The second section deals with the use of textbooks and consists of two sub-sections: listing the books in use and how they are used (as primary source, secondary source, occasionally, reference, for grammatical rules and activities and for exercises/ images/vocabulary); selecting statements regarding textbook use philosophies that basically define Be and Crabbe’s (2000) theory about the two dimensions of textbook use, as resource or script, referred to in the literature review. In addition, this section has as objective to find out which types of English textbooks are being used and how they are being used.
3. The third section deals with textbook evaluation and consists of two sub-sections: a question if teachers evaluate their textbook or not, giving details about why they do not and if they do, when they do it; asking teachers to rank evaluation criteria (rationale, methodology, skills covered, syllabus, flexibility, appropriateness and teachers’ guide) in order of importance, in case of being assigned to evaluate a textbook. The criteria used in the questionnaire were chosen from the criteria suggested by experts (Sheldon, 1988, Cunningsworth, 1984, Harmer, 1998 and others) referred to in the literature review. In fact, these specific criteria were chosen based on our intention of comparing teachers’ choices and seeing if the way they use textbooks influences the way they evaluate them, which is one of the sides of our research question and hypothesis, in which they might give more importance to some criteria than others. Thus, this section has as objective to analyse the way teachers are evaluating their textbooks.
4. The fourth section deals with textbook adaptation and consists of two sub-sections: a question about how often teachers modify their textbooks (every time I teach, weekly, once in a while, monthly and never); asking teachers to rank adaptation techniques from the most to the least often used. The adaptation techniques used in the questionnaire were the techniques proposed by Grant (1987), omission, replacement, addition and adaptation/change, as referred in the literature review. This section has as objective to find out the amount of adaptations teachers are doing and how they do it, so that we can see if their use of textbooks influences on their belief of the necessity of doing adaptations, which is another side of our research question and hypothesis.
5. Finally, the fifth section, untitled “The textbooks in use”, consists of an open-ended
question about teachers’ feeling about their use of textbooks, in which we’re asking them if they are comfortable with the way they are using textbooks and why. This section has as objective to examine teachers’ opinion about the way they have been using their textbooks in order to find out if they are comfortable with it or if they would be willing to change it for the effectiveness of the process of teaching and learning.
As we had stated before in chapter II, the questionnaire was distributed to 53 teachers from all the eight secondary schools in Praia, about 94.6% of the total number of English teachers in the referred city. Of the 53 teachers, 40 respond the questionnaire, or 75.5%, and there were 13 nonresponses, or 24.5%.
Figure 1.1:Teachers' responses
24.5%
75.5%
Responses Nonresponses
From the information gathered in the questionnaires we could find the following results that are organised by categories:
PROFESSIONAL DETAILS
1. Concerning academic qualifications, of the 40 teachers who responded the questionnaire, 15, or 37.5%, have a Bachelor’s degree in English Studies; 21, or 52.5%, are still doing a Bachelor’s degree; 1, or 2.5%, has a Master of Arts in Pedagogical Sciences of Foreign Languages; 1, or 2.5%, has a Bachelor’s degree on Humanities; 1, or 2.5%, has the twelve grade and 1, or 2.5%, didn’t respond.
Figure 1.2:Academic qualifications
2. As regards to length of time teaching, 12 teachers, or 30%, have 8 months to 3 years of experience, considered to be the less experienced teachers; 9, or 22.5%, have 4 to 8 years, the relatively experienced teachers; and 15, or 37.5%, have more than 8 years, the most experienced teachers; and 4, or 10%, didn’t respond.
5% 2.5% 2.5% 52.5% 37.5% Bachelor's Doing BA BA in others High school nonresponse
Figure 1.3: Teaching experience
Related to pedagogical training, 39, or 97.5%, have pedagogical training (of which, 95.1% from ISE) and 1, or 2.5%, doesn’t have any kind of pedagogical training.
Figure 1.4:Pedagogical training
2.5% 97.5% Yes No 30% 37.5% Less Relatively Most 22.5 %
THE USE OF TEXTBOOKS
1. In the first section, in which teachers are asked to list the books they use and how they use them, teachers pointed out the following textbooks as the most used: Eyes and Spies, Teen, English Grammar in Use, Frontrunner, Extreme, Breakaway and Aerial. In addition, of the 40 teachers, 8, or 20%, use Eyes and Spies as a primary source. 6, or 15%, use Frontrunner as a primary source. 3, or 7.5%, use Extreme as a primary source. 2, or 5%, use Teen as a primary source. 2, or 5%, use Aerial as a primary source. 1, or 2.5%, use Grammar in Use as a primary source and 18, or 45%, use several other textbooks as primary sources.
Figure 1.5:Use of textbooks
2. Besides, of the 40 teachers, 18, or 45%, use most of their textbooks as primary or secondary sources and as references; 22, or 55%, use their textbooks occasionally, for grammatical rules and for exercises+ images+ vocabulary.
0 10 20 30 40 50 % Textbooks in use
Eyes and Spies Frontrunner Teen Extreme Grammar in use Aerial Others
Figure 1.6:The use of textbooks
3. In the second section, in which teachers are asked to select the statement that most
corresponds to their philosophy about textbook use, 23 teachers, or 57.5%, selected the option “textbooks should be used as flexible sources…”; 8, or 20%, selected the option “I prefer to rely much on the textbooks…”; 7, or 17.5%, selected both the above mentioned options and 2, or 5%, selected the option “textbooks should be used carefully and judiciously…”.
Figure 1.7:The use of textbooks
45% 55% Primary/secondary/r eferences Occasionally/gramm atical/vocabulary 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 % Flexible sources Rely on textbooks Both Carefully
TEXTBOOK EVALUATION
1. Related to the first section, in which teachers are asked if they evaluate their textbooks, 19 teachers, or 47.5%, selected the option “yes, normally before use…”; 3, or 7.5%, the option “yes, normally during use…”. 1, or 2.5%, the option “yes, normally after use…”; 8, or 20%, selected the three options above mentioned; 7, or 17.5%, the option “no, I trust the authors…” and 2, or 5%, the option “no, I’m not confident enough…”. The mentioned results are illustrated in the following diagram, in which I refer to the teachers who selected the three options as BDA (before, during, after).
Figure 1.8:Textbook evaluation
2. Concerning the second section, in which teachers are asked to rank some evaluation criteria, of the 40 teachers, 13, or 32.5%, ranked syllabus as the most important criteria; 7, or 17.5%, methodology; 5, or 12.5%, appropriateness. 3, or 7.5%, rationale; 6, or 15%, flexibility; 6, or 15%, skills covered and nobody ranked teacher’s guide as the most important.
0 10 20 30 40 50 % Before During After BDA Authors Confidence
Figure 1.9:Evaluation criteria
TEXTBOOK ADAPTATION
1. In the first section, concerning how often teachers modify their textbooks, 21 teachers, or 52.5%, selected the option “every time I teach”; 16, or 40%, selected “once in a while”; 2, or 5%, “monthly”; 1, or 2.5%, weekly and nobody selected the option never.
Figure 1.10:Textbook evaluation
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Criteria syllabus Methodology Appropriateness Rationale Flexibility Skills covered Teacher's guide 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 % Every time Once Montlhy Weekly Never
2. Regarding the second section, in which teachers are asked to rank textbook adaptation techniques from the most to the least used, 21 teachers, or 52.5%, selected “adaptation/change” as the option most used; 9, or 22.5%, selected “replacement” as the most used; 8, or 20%, the option “addition” and 2, or 5%, the option “omission”.
Figure 1.11:Textbook adaptation
THE TEXTBOOKS IN USE
Concerning this section, in which teachers are asked if they feel comfortable with the way they have been using their textbooks, of the 40 teachers, 28, or 70%, responded that they feel comfortable with the way they have been using their textbooks. Teachers say that they have been doing their best by using textbooks in combination with others, though they have been facing some problems of finding suitable textbooks. They added that what really matters is that they follow the content established by the Ministry of Education in its yearlong plan. The rest of the teachers, 12, or 30%, responded that they are not comfortable. They also stated that they have been doing their best. However, they think that if there was an official textbook, whose content could meet the content of the English syllabus, it would be easier for the
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 % Adaptation techniques Change Replacement Addition Omission
