Custom Writing Service http://StudyHub.vip/Analysis-And-Evaluation-Of-English-6Th-

1. 1
Analysis and Evaluation of English 6th Grade
textbook used in Greek public Schools
Keywords: textbook evaluation, textbook analysis, pre-use evaluation, first-glance evaluation, close
evaluation, impressionistic method, checklist method
1. Introduction
The use of EFL published materials is more widespread than ever before since textbooks provide
EFL teachers with guidelines concerning syllabi, teaching methodologies and the materials to be taught.
They are considered an essential component of any EFL course and thus the selection of the best suitable
book for a particular context demands careful investigation. This paper focuses on the analysis and
evaluation of a recently developed textbook addressed to native speakers of Greek learning English as a
Foreign Language at the 6th grade of primary school. It is important to note that the book was published
by the Greek Ministry of Education and its use was compulsory to all state primary schools.
The textbook was written by three co-authors Eleni Efremidou, Eleni Zoe-Reppa and Filitsa
Frouzaki and it was published in 2009. It consisted of a student‟s book, a workbook, teacher‟s book and
an audio CD. According to the authors, it addressed 6th Class pupils of the Greek Primary School (11-12
Abstract
Although textbooks maintain an important role in the EFL context, their sovereignty on
teaching has been challenged and the belief that teachers can blindly rely on them has
been questioned. Textbook evaluation has become a necessary practice in the field of
teaching, seeking to assist in the choice of the best suitable book for a specific context,
promote teachers’ awareness on the actual contents of a book and facilitate them to
make necessary adaptations. The present study investigated the suitability of the
textbook used for 6th Grade primary EFL learners of Greek state schools. The results of
the study suggested that the strengths of the book could be identified in areas of
organisation, thematic content and inclusion of all the language skills. However, the
problematic areas related to authentic language, integration of skills, nature of tasks
and materials for assessment. The findings accentuate the need for adaptation by
teachers and revisit of the material by the authors

2. 2
years old), it was intended for learners at Pre-Intermediate level, corresponding to Level A2 of the
Common European Framework. The authors claimed that the pupils‟ age, needs, interests and prior
knowledge had been taken into consideration in the design and planning of the course. The authors also
stated that the activities inside the textbook were of communicative nature and encouraged learners‟
autonomy and critical thinking.
The necessity to analyse and evaluate the textbook was imposed by the fact that it was used on a
large national scale, it was recently developed and its strengths or weaknesses would have a high impact
on Greek students‟ learning of English. The analysis of the textbook would yield insights as to its
suitability; whether it actually did what it claimed to be doing and whether it accomplished its set goals. It
was therefore important to examine whether it corresponded to the learners‟ needs of the particular
situation, whether it promoted communicative language, learner autonomy, made use of problem solving
approaches and whether it allowed for differentiated instructions.
2. Literature Review
2.1. Textbook based teaching
According to McGrath (2002: 9) there has been vigorous debate concerning the desirability of
basing teaching on coursebooks. Opponents of textbook based teaching claim that even the best textbooks
take away initiative from teachers. As Hutchinson and Torres (1994:315) state «the danger with ready-
made texts is that they can seem to absolve teachers of responsibility… they make it easy to sit back and
operate the system, secure in the belief that the wise and virtuous people who produced the textbook knew
what was good for us. Unfortunately this is rarely the case». Some of the dangers of textbook use listed
by Graves (2000) include the irrelevance or inappropriacy of content with the students, exclusion of
important items, imbalanced variety of task-types, unmotivating or outdated activities and unrealistic
proposed timetables.

3. 3
As Tomlinson (2001:67) states proponents of the coursebook argue that it is the most convenient
form of presenting materials, it helps to achieve consistency and continuation, it gives learners a sense of
system, cohesion and progress and it helps teachers prepare and learners revise. Garinger (2001)
commenting on the usefulness of textbooks emphasises that using a textbook is one of the most effective
and readily available ways to relieve some of the pressures put on teachers, lessens preparation time,
provides ready-made activities and finally provides concrete samples of classroom progress through
which external stakeholders can be satisfied. McGrath (2002) asserts that textbooks can set the direction,
content and they can propose ways in which the lesson is to be taught.
2.2. Reasons for Textbook Evaluation
The list of advantages and disadvantages displayed above serves as an indicator why evaluation of
textbooks should be made. It would seek to identify any weaknesses and strengths of textbooks and help
in the selection process of a textbook with the scope to minimise the negative effects and maximise the
positive ones. Textbook evaluation, according to Cunningsworth (1995), would involve the careful
selection of materials examining whether they reflect the needs of the learners, the aims, methods and
values of a specific teaching program. Textbook evaluation helps the teachers move beyond
impressionistic assessments and it further facilitates them to acquire useful, accurate, systematic and
contextual insights into the overall nature of textbook materials (Cunningsworth, 1995; Ellis, 1997).
Through the evaluation of a textbook, teachers know the content of the book, its strengths and weaknesses
which will facilitate them to adapt it to suit the course aims, learners‟ needs and teachers‟ beliefs. As
Littlejohn (1998) observes, textbook evaluation serves the purpose of examining whether the
methodology and content of the materials are appropriate for a particular language teaching context. The
evaluation would test out the claims materials make for themselves: whether they truly develop
autonomy, whether they truly involve problem solving and if they indeed are learner centred.

4. 4
2.3. Types of Textbook Analysis
Prior to the analysis of textbooks, it is necessary to conduct a preliminary analysis of the context
in which the material is going to be used and a survey of the learners‟ needs. This need originates from
the realisation that there is a distinctive line between the analysis of the textbook and its evaluation.
According to McGrath (2002:22) analysis is a process which leads to an objective, verifiable description
whereas evaluation involves the making of judgements. Evaluation is feasible when a comparison is made
between the description of a context with the description of the textbook. Therefore, the analysis of
textbooks should be made by looking at specific required elements or set of criteria.
Evaluation of teaching materials can be divided in three types according to the literature in the
field of English Language Teaching. These are pre-use or predictive evaluation (Ellis, 1997; McGrath,
2002; Tomlinson, 2003), in-use or whilst-use evaluation (McGrath, 2002; Tomlinson, 2003) and post use
evaluation (McGrath, 2002; Tomlinson, 2003). Retrospective evaluation proposed by Ellis (1997) can
serve either as in-use or post-use evaluation. Ellis (1997) distinguishes two types of analysis. Predictive
evaluation of materials helps in defining which materials are best suited to the teaching purposes and
learners‟ needs prior to implementation whereas retrospective evaluation occurs once materials have been
used in order to determine which activities worked and which did not and find ways to make them more
effective for future use. Retrospective evaluation can be performed either impressionistically or
empirically by systematic collection of information. Pre-use evaluation proposed by McGrath (2002) and
Tomlinson (2003) involves making decisions about the potential value of materials for their users. In-use
(McGrath, 2002) or Whilst-use evaluation (Tomlinson, 2003) involves measuring the value of materials
while using them or observing them as being used. Finally post-use evaluation (McGrath, 2002;
Tomlinson, 2003) measures the actual effect of the materials on the users. As Tomlinson (2003:25) states
post use evaluation can measure the actual outcome of the use of the materials and thus provide the data
on which reliable decisions about the use, adaptation or replacement of materials can be made.

5. 5
2.4. Levels of Textbook Analysis
There are various approaches in the literature concerning the levels that ELT textbooks can be
analysed. Littlejohn (1998) proposes a three level analysis. At the first level of analysis the focus is on the
physical aspects of materials and how they appear as a complete set or book, at the second level the focus
of analysis is on the actual role of learners in the classroom activities, whether language form or meaning
is focused, forms of activities and classroom participation and finally the contents of the tasks. The third
level examines the implications derived by evaluating the overall aims of the materials, content, task
selection and sequencing, teachers‟ and learners‟ roles, demands of learner knowledge, effects, skills and
abilities and the role of materials as a whole.
McDonough and Shaw (2003) and McGrath (2002) provide a two-level model for the
comprehensive evaluation of textbooks. The first level proposed by McDonough and Shaw involves a
brief external evaluation which includes criteria concerning the organizational foundation of the textbook,
„as stated explicitly by the author/publisher‟ through the cover, introduction and table of contents
statements. The same procedure is also proposed by McGrath and it is labeled First Glance Evaluation
which involves a consideration of relevant contextual factors and the gathering of information analysis of
the material.
The second level proposed by McDonough and Shaw (2003) involves an in-depth internal
investigation of the textbook, „to see how far the materials in question match up to what the author claims
as well as to the aims and objectives of a given teaching program.” McDonough and Shaw propose a close
investigation of at least two units of a textbook in order for effective internal inspection to take place. The
second level of analysis by McGrath is close evaluation which involves a more detailed examination of the
materials either using the checklist or in-depth analysis or a combination of the two which should require
careful tailoring to the needs of the learners and the teaching context and the need for periodic updating
recognized. The checklist method would look closely to the whole book by looking at general categories
and investigating specific criteria. McGrath (2002) suggests that in-depth analysis proposed by

6. 6
Cunningsworth (1995) could complement the checklist method and vice-versa. In depth analysis,
similarly to internal evaluation by McDonough and Shaw (2003) involves a detailed analysis of one or
two units and close analysis of the treatment of specific features.
2.5. Previous Research on textbook evaluation
It is crucial to note that although there is extended amount of literature on the evaluation of ELT
materials, there is not a substantial body of published action research in analysing EFL textbooks. One
study conducted by Azizifar, Koosha and Lotfi (2009) attempted to make an analytical evaluation of
locally produced Iranian high school ELT Textbooks from 1970 to the present. The study sought to
investigate how pronunciation points, content, and grammar were dealt with the second books in “Graded
English” (GE) series published by the Iranian Ministry of Education in 1984 and in “Right Path to
English” (RPE) by Birjandi, Nowrozi, and Mahmodi in 2002. The researchers followed Tucker‟s (1975)
evaluating model and used the ideas and suggestions of different experienced persons in the field of
textbook evaluation both in Iran and abroad, including Brian Tomlinson (1998), and provided a modified
version of Tucker‟s (1975) evaluating model for the study. The results of this study revealed that the new
textbook (RPE) did not correct most of the inadequacies and deficiencies of the previous one (GE). It
failed to incorporate the recent findings in syllabus design and text construction. The two textbook series
were found to have overemphasized the practice of the linguistic forms, and not many of their language
learning activities actually included activities which stimulated or led to authentic communication and
language use. They concluded that these textbooks could not meet the learners‟ and the teachers‟ needs
within the Iranian educational system and they still emphasized structural methods and ignored the
communicative role of the language.
Another study conducted in the Saudi Arabian context by Alamri (2008) attempted to evaluate the
quality of the sixth grade English language textbook for Saudi boys' schools which was introduced at the
elementary stage by the Ministry of Education in 2004. A survey questionnaire was used in this study to
elicit the perspectives of 93 English language teachers and 11 supervisors in Riyadh Educational Zone

7. 7
about the textbook in question. The questionnaire consisted of 64 grouped under 12 main categories: the
general appearance, design and illustration, accompanying materials, objectives, topic appropriateness,
learning components, socio-cultural contexts, skills development, teachability, flexibility, teaching
methods, and practice and testing. The data was subjected to analysis through descriptive statistics.
The results of the study showed that there was a general satisfaction of teachers and supervisors
concerning the book‟s general appearance, design and illustrations, accompanying materials, set
objectives, topic appropriateness, language components, teachability, practice and testing. The results also
suggested that there was lack of varied and attractive illustrations that would stimulate creativity, lack of
topics which would stimulate critical thinking. The textbook seemed to fail to express positive views of
differing sociocultural contexts. Furthermore, it did not seem to cater for different learning styles and did
not satisfy teachers‟ and supervisors‟ expectation regarding its teaching methods which were reported as
not up-to-date, not student-centered and lacking variety in classroom activities.
A third study conducted in the Turkish primary educational context by Kirkgoz (2009) aimed to
evaluate the three English textbooks which have been prescribed for use in grade 4 classes by the Turkish
Ministry of National Education in state primary schools. The method of the study included using
questionnaires and oral interviews. A textbook evaluation scheme comprising 37 items was developed in
light of the curriculum objectives, and taking into account guidelines suggested by Cunningsworth
(1984). A parallel questionnaire was developed for the teachers comprising the same set of 37 statements.
The Questionnaire was based on five major components: layout and design, language, subject and
content, language skills, methodology and overall view of the textbooks. The findings of the study
suggested that the three books were carefully designed to meet the curriculum goals and objectives, to
serve as potential agents for curriculum change and to meet young learners‟ needs and interests.

8. 8
3. Analysis
3.1. Design of textbook evaluation
Although the textbook under scope in the present study was being used by Greek state schools, pre-
use analysis was used due to limitations of the researcher to obtain information of the actual use of the
book and the way it was received by teachers and students. The pre-use analysis would serve to examine
the textbook as it is, with the content and ways of working which they propose and not with what may
actually happen in classrooms. Apart from being a limitation, this could also be seen as a positive aspect
since as Littlejohn (1998:191) notes what happens in classrooms and what outcomes occur when
materials are brought into use will depend upon numerous further factors, thus exclusion of other
variables can be achieved through pre-use evaluation. The levels of analysis used in the evaluation of the
textbook include two levels:
Level 1: First-Glance evaluation which involves an overall presentation and analysis of the
textbook related to its design, table of contents, distribution of units, lessons and sections in the
book
Level 2: Close-evaluation which examines separately and more analytically the treatment of the
different skills, reading, listening, writing and speaking and the ways of assessment practices
provided through the book.
The analysis of the textbooks was based on impressionistic reflections on the material and the use of
checklists developed according to criteria based on the context being used and learners‟ needs and
following the guidelines suggested by McGrath (2002). The criteria taken into account when designing
the checklists for the analysis and evaluation of the textbook included authenticity, levels of difficulty,
lexical and grammatical complexity, variety of task types, variety of topics, relevance of topics to
learners‟ interests, relevance of the materials to learners‟ language needs.

9. 9
Checklists were selected as the main instrument of the study because it offered the most economical
and reliable means of reaching a decision concerning the relative suitability of the textbook under scope.
Furthermore as McGrath (2002) states checklists are considered to be the most effective way of gathering
comparable data systematically. Although checklists are convenient, they can encourage rather superficial
judgements since not everything can be contained and examined in the checklists. Hence, checklists need
to be carefully constructed according to the needs of learners and the teaching context. Ready-made
checklists would fail to be used in different contexts and it is necessary to be modified and adapted for the
purposes of their use. They should be able to utilize rating and weighting scales which would provide an
adequate indicator as to the relative suitability of the materials and serve to highlight any particular
defects or deficiencies.
3.2. Findings from Analysis Level 1
3.2.1. General organisation of the book
After a first glance on the contents of the book it could be noticed that the book was divided into
10 twelve page units, each consisting of 3 lessons followed by a self-evaluation test and can do
statements. There was a workbook and audio CD accompanying the student‟s book and a teacher‟s book
which provided guidance to the teacher. The teacher‟s book contained three revision tests which the
teachers could use to assess their students. The authors of the book seemed to have attempted to separate
the units of the book thematically since each unit focused on a specific topic which was exhausted in all
three lessons of the units. It also seemed to be following a pattern in its organization of the lessons. The
first page of every unit presented the aims of the unit to the students, the first lesson started with a reading
section and then moved on to a grammar section, the final section of lesson 1 presented practice materials.
The second lesson began with a listening section followed by grammar and practice sections. The third
lesson was spread over one page and it referred to a project related to the topic and language taught in the
unit. The above features showed the effort of the authors to present a well-organised textbook in which
the students would easily become accustomed to since they would know what to expect from each unit. A

10. 10
preliminary assumption based on the division of the units would suggest that more emphasis was given on
reading, listening and grammar.
3.2.2. Distribution of skills’ section
After examining the overall weighting of the sections devoted to skills in the textbook it was
evident that there was an imbalance between writing and the other skills (graph 1). Writing seemed to be
given more importance throughout the book with 20 sections of the book focusing on writing.
Furthermore, by comparing the number of speaking sections to the number of listening sections and the
number of writing sections to reading sections, it could be inferred that productive skills received greater
attention than receptive skills.
Graph 1: Sections of skills throughout the textbook
3.2.3. Other sections in the textbook
Apart from sections dedicated to skills, the textbook also contained sections for grammar,
vocabulary, projects and portfolios. It also included appendices at the end of the book which provided
extra material for the units. Table 1 illustrates the number of sections throughout the book. As it can be
seen from table 1 there was unequal distribution of language focus in the sections contained in the units

11. 11
of the book. More particularly, grammar seemed to be given more attention than vocabulary.
Vocabulary/Lexis which was not found to be a section on its own most of the times was nevertheless
included in the description of the contents.
Table 1: Sections throughout the textbook
Sections
No in all
units
Grammar – Language
Structures
19
Vocabulary/Lexis 2
Language functions 0
Learning Strategies 0
Portfolio 18
Appendices 11
This first glance evaluation though, might be misleading since vocabulary was perhaps embedded
in activities of other sections dedicated to skills which would be more thoroughly investigated in the
second level of analysis. Another issue worth commenting on is the fact that strategies and language
functions were listed in the table of contents as part of the units and were also described whilst they were
not labeled inside the units/lessons. Strategies were randomly found in the units as small boxes providing
tips to learners but not as a separate section in which they could be further developed by students. What
could be inferred from this first level analysis was the inconsistency between the table of contents of the
book and what was actually contained as sections in the book. This posed the question of whether what it
was claimed to exist by the authors could actually be found in the textbook, challenging the reliability of
the book.
3.2.4. Crosscurricular learning
Another issue of investigation from the first level of analysis was whether the textbook provided
opportunities for crosscurricular learning. Table 2 exemplifies the number of sections throughout the
textbook which utilized crosscurricular topics and crosscurricular learning and sections devoted to
crosscurricular projects. As the table suggests, the book provided opportunities for crosscurricular

12. 12
utilization. More specifically, the topics of each unit or lesson borrowed ideas either from other subjects
taught in school such as Geography, Science, History, Music, Art etc, or from other crosscurricular
themes such as other cultures, the internet, traditions, personal development etc.
Table 2: Crosscurricular Learning in the textbook
Crosscurricular Themes Crosscurricular Learning:
Other related subjects
Crosscurricular projects
11 23 8
3.3. Findings from Analysis Level 2
3.3.1. Overall presentation of stages in skills’ tasks
Prior to the analysis for each skill individually it was considered useful to examine and compare
the findings regarding the stages of tasks for each of the skills presented in the textbook. As it can be
noticed from table 3, the two receptive skills, reading and listening contained the biggest amount of
preparation stages which gave opportunities for students to warm-up for the while tasks.
Table 3: Stages of skills’ tasks in all units
Number of
sections
Pre While Post
Reading 12 12 12 8
Listening 10 10 10 3
Speaking 14 2 14
Writing 20 14 20
According to the authors of the textbook, warm-up activities before reading served the purpose of
smoothly introducing a topic, present new vocabulary and structures or functions of the lesson.
Furthermore, the warm up activities intended to motivate learners and give them a purpose to read, thus
trying to promote meaningful tasks. As it can be observed in table 3, all reading sections contained pre-
reading stages. Pre-Listening stages were also contained in all listening sections. These involved mostly

13. 13
visual and verbal clues in order to stimulate the pupils‟ background knowledge and prepare them for what
they were about to hear or the tasks they had to do.
There was a substantial amount of pre-writing stages in the writing sections which mostly
involved providing a model of the text to be produced or information about what was expected of the
learners to write. Pre-speaking stages were very rarely encountered in the speaking sections; a possible
reason for this is the fact that each unit was thematic and speaking was encountered in the practice
sections most of the time, after reading, grammar and listening. Thus, the students were already given
enough background in terms of textual, structural, visual and audio input since these were provided in the
sections presented previously. Post stage tasks were present only for the receptive skills and according to
the writers these tasks served either as consolidation of more vocabulary or extension of the tasks to more
productive skills such as writing or speaking on the topic they either listened to or read about.
3.3.2. Analysis of reading sections
3.3.2.1. Characteristics of Reading texts
As mentioned previously, reading sections appeared at the first lesson of each unit. Usually, there
was only one section of reading per unit. The reading texts were rather lengthy in their majority with an
average of 217 words per text. The texts chosen were mostly pedagogic although the authors claimed that
the majority of their texts were authentic or adapted/simplified. A close analysis on the texts revealed that
the texts were tailor-made for the purpose of the language under investigation in the following grammar
sections. Furthermore, they also contained the targeted vocabulary.
Another aspect which was interesting was that the reading sections followed the thematic
approach of the whole book and texts focused on the topic of the unit and the reading texts were
contextualized to the topic of the unit. It could be argued here that the textbook followed to some extend
the first principle of language acquisition proposed by Tomlinson (2010) according to which the learners
should be exposed to a rich meaningful and comprehensible input of language use. Although most

14. 14
material in reading was not so authentic, there were plentiful written texts and the language use was
contextualized, making it meaningful to students. Features of the reading texts are summarized in table 4.
Table 4: Reading texts Characteristics
Discourse Type
Descriptive Narrative Expository Instructive Argumentative
11% 78 % 11% 0% 0 %
Text Source
Newspaper
reports Leaflets Reference books
Computer screen
texts
22 % 16 % 22 % 11%
Domain
Personal Public Occupational Educational
11% 44% 6% 40 %
Topic Content
Places Free time Education Shopping Daily life,
16% 16% 50% 11% 7 %
As it can be observed in table 4, there was limited variety on the types of discourse in the reading
texts. Most of the texts were narrative and a small percentage of texts was either descriptive or expository.
Learners were not exposed to instructive or argumentative texts and thus they could not become
acquainted with all types of discourse in the target language and the language they would probably
encounter in real-life situations.
The main sources of reading texts included newspaper reports, reference books, leaflets and
computer screen texts. Other sources used by the authors included journal articles, diaries and a theatrical
play. It could be suggested that there was variety of sources used in the development of reading materials
exposing learners to different types of genres. It is questionable though whether the majority of these
sources would appeal to the learners of this age. Reference books and newspapers reports comprised the
majority of sources. Although these sources were content related with other disciplines the learners‟ were
acquainted with, they could be boring for children aged 11-12 containing mostly facts which would

15. 15
probably fail to intrigue their personal interests. This was further supported from the findings concerning
the topic and domain of the texts. Again the majority of the texts focused on the educational (40%) or
public domain (44%) and the majority of topics dealt with education issues(50%). The personal domain
was neglected and there was very little topic relevance to students‟ personal interests. It could be implied
here that the textbook failed to provide motivation to students and the topics chosen did not cater for the
learners‟ interests.
The nature of content of reading texts was mainly concrete which could imply that the texts would
be more easily comprehended by learners. Vocabulary and grammar did not seem to pose great demands
on the learners since most vocabulary used in the text was frequent containing only the few newly
introduced words to be learnt and grammatical structures were mostly simple and again contained certain
features under investigation in the following sections and served as examples.
3.3.2.2. Types of Reading tasks
Reading tasks were overall at a suitable level for the learners with the average of the tasks at level
A2 of the Common European Framework which is the corresponding level for EFL learners of the 6th
grade of Greek primary schools. The native language of the learners was not used in any occasion
throughout the tasks; English was used as the language of instruction of tasks and comprehension
questions. This was probably due to the effort of the authors to maximise the exposure to the target
language and minimise the presence of L1. It is worth noting that the teacher‟s book did not make any
explicit suggestion to teachers to use L1 in order to explain the reading tasks. Graph 2 demonstrates the
types of tasks used in reading sections throughout the book. As it can be observed most tasks used in the
reading section required students to provide a selected response and did not involve them in producing
long answers. Authors justified their choice of these types of tasks as a way of enabling learners to
understand, build up and retrieve vocabulary. Hence, once more it was evident that building of
vocabulary was embedded in the reading sections. This is further reinforced by the presence of tasks
(19%) in which students are asked to provide synonyms.

16. 16
Graph 2: Types of reading tasks
The absence of longer productive tasks such as answering comprehension questions on the reading
texts might on the one hand focus solely on the development of reading abilities without placing further
demands on learners and the teachers would be more easily able to assess the learners‟ reading abilities
without any other skills intervening. On the other hand though, this absence deprived students from
developing autonomy since their choices were very limited and also failed to integrate other more
productive skills such as writing or speaking.
Reading sections were also present in the appendices for 6 units of the textbook. Some of the
reading sections functioned as complementary reading texts on the topics of the units and others offered
extra practice. There was also one text which was a simplified version of the text in a unit probably
addressing students with difficulties allowing opportunity for differentiated instruction. The readings
were mostly presented in English; however, there were also texts in Greek which were used in order to
provide information to students and use them to exchange information in English orally, or present the
information in written form. The tasks included in the appendices were multiple choice activities and
writing reports to summarise key points of the texts. The activities included in the appendices show an
effort of the writers to integrate skills. Nevertheless, these activities were very limited and not present in

17. 17
the main body of the textbook posing the question as to whether teachers would actually use them in their
teaching context.
3.3.3. Analysis of Listening Sections
3.3.3.1. Characteristics of Listening texts
Listening sections appeared in every unit of the textbooks and seemed to serve as starting points
of the following sections which were either speaking or grammar and the targeted items in vocabulary
and grammar made up the contents of the listening texts. Most of the recordings were short, with an
average duration of two minutes. There were only two occasions with longer texts lasting approximately
5 minutes. Although the authors of the textbook claimed to be using authentic listening material a close
investigation indicated that these recordings were artificially constructed for the pedagogic purposes of
the units. The pace of the text was mostly slow – allowing the students to easily follow the speakers on
the one hand but on the other hand not giving them the opportunity of exposure to language they would
encounter in real-life situations.
Another important feature of the recordings is the fact that the participants in the recordings were
mostly native speakers of Greek and it was evident by their accent on the audio CD. There was only one
occasion in which the speech resembled the accent of an English native speaker. The recordings did not
seem to be carefully conducted; it rather resembled a rough and hasty work by the developers of the book.
This is exemplified by the fact that they did not look to obtain real authentic texts or attempt to produce
near-authentic texts. It is further reinforced by the fact that one recording containing a very famous
English song did not match the song contained in the textbooks and thus the activity in the book could not
be performed. It could be inferred that the authors did not trial the CD before its actual use.
As it can be observed in table 5 the listening texts were mostly derived from dialogues and the
entertainment sector with topics relating mostly to leisure activities deriving from the personal domain in
their majority. It could be suggested that the domains, topics and sources of the texts related to the

18. 18
learners‟ interests. The learners were also exposed to a variety of discourse types provided with language
used to establish communication, provide information, narrate stories and present documentaries. The
selected discourse types showed the intension of the authors to provide students with language the
students would most probably encounter in out-of the school settings, in their social and cultural
environment.
Table 5: Listening texts Characteristics 1
Text Source
Dialogues and
Conversations
Presentation
Talks
Entertainment
(drama, shows,
songs)
Recorded tourist
information
38% 23% 31% 8%
Discourse Type
Phatic Narrative Expository Instructive
31% 23 % 31% 15 %
Domain
Personal Public Occupational Educational
46% 31% 8% 15%
Topic Content
Places Free time Education Daily life
15% 46 % 15 % 23 %
The language level used in the listening texts corresponded to A1/A2 level of CEFR which was in
accordance with the level of the learners. Students could understand phrases and expressions related to
areas of most immediate priority such as basic personal information, shopping, local geography,
employment and the speech provided was clearly and slowly articulated. The nature of content of
listening tasks was mostly concrete, with frequent vocabulary and mainly simple grammatical structures.
Thus, listening texts did not place great demands on the learners as regards comprehension.
3.3.3.2. Types of Listening tasks
Listening tasks were also at a suitable level for the learners with the average of the tasks at level
A2 of the Common European Framework. Again, the native language of the learners was not present in
any of the tasks; the target language was used in the questions and instructions of the task, showing the

19. 19
consistency of the authors to avoid L1 interference. The listening texts could be heard more than once
giving students the opportunity to familiarise themselves with the texts. It is important to note that the
success of learners in listening tasks involves awareness raising and strategy training tasks as suggested
by Goh (2010). The authors did make an effort to raise students‟ awareness by including pre-listening
tasks in all listening sections providing visual and verbal clues to stimulate their background knowledge,
thus assisting the learners‟ cognitive processes. However, there were not any pre-listening activities in
which building up of strategies take place. There was variety of tasks involved in the listening sections as
can be seen from graph 3 below.
Graph 3: Types of listening tasks
Similarly to reading tasks, listening tasks included mostly selected response items and the tasks
involving production by the students were only of limited response. According to the authors of the
textbook, learners would need to justify any of their answers orally, thus giving opportunity for a more
productive and extended response. This could also help learners develop their strategies through
justification of their choices and the teachers in understanding the cognitive processes involved in their
students‟ responses.

20. 20
3.3.4. Analysis of Writing Sections
3.3.4.1. Types of produced text in Writing
Writing sections were mostly found towards the end of each unit which could suggest that the
writers intended to provide oral and written input to students with tasks on reading and listening which
opened the first two lessons of the units prior to the undertaking of writing texts. The most frequent texts
students were asked to produce were personal letters or emails as it can be seen in Graph 4.
Graph 4: Produced text types in writing
It was also evident that the texts students were asked to produce included variety of genres such as
poems, articles, posters and leaflets, note taking, reference book entries and even a biography. According
to Tribble (2010:162), students need to gain experience of genres that are relevant to their needs and to
ensure that they are able to draw on the linguistic resources that are relevant to complete a task. Thus, it
was necessary to examine whether these variety of genres asked by students to use in writing actually
accorded to topics of their interest and their needs as learners.
Personal
letters/emails
32%
articles
9%
notes
9%
reference books
9%
regulations
4%
posters
9%
descriptions
9%
biography
5%
leaflets
5% poem
9%

21. 21
3.3.4.2. Characteristics of produced written texts
Table 6 exemplifies the domains, topics, types and purposes of the produced written texts. As is
can be observed, texts were related mostly to the personal domain including topics such as their free time,
personal identification and home environment and the educational domain with topics derived from other
disciplinary subjects.
Table 6 : Produced written texts characteristics
Domain of produced text
Personal Public Occupational Educational
53% 6% 6% 35 %
Topic /Theme of produced text
Places Free time Education
Personal
identification
House / Home
12% 29% 35 % 12 % 12 %
Register of produced text
Formal Informal Neutral
0% 60% 40%
Purpose of produced text
Referential Emotive Conative Phatic Poetic
64 % 12% 12 % 6% 6%
Input provided for the production of texts
Textual Iconic Pictorial
59% 27% 14 %
Furthermore, the writing texts the students were required to produce were related to the topic of
the lesson and the language needed to accomplish the task was the vocabulary and grammar they had
been exposed in the previous sections of the units conforming in this way to learners‟ needs indicated by
Tribble (2010:162) to have knowledge of the concepts involved in the subject area and knowledge of
those aspects of the language system that are necessary to complete the task. It could be suggested that
these topics reflected the reality of the learners; they were not asked to write about issues they had no
previous knowledge and the topics corresponded to their age.
The register of the produced texts was either neutral (40%) or informal (60%); students were not
asked to write in formal language and were not exposed to this type of writing which again corresponded

22. 22
to their age, interests and needs. They would rarely be required to write in formal writing at this age and
level, most of their encounters either at school or in the real world would involve informal situations or
neutral ones. The purpose of the texts was mostly referential where learners had to give objective
descriptions, narrations or instructions. There were occasions in which learners had to express their
feelings or persuade their readers but these were infrequent depriving students the opportunity to
experience writing in an emotional or persuasive way, which would not be unrealistic for their age and
interests.
3.3.4.3. Characteristics of tasks in writing
Tribble (2010:163) emphasises the importance of the materials used as input for writing. These
materials need to stimulate writing and enabled learners to develop contextually their language system
and writing process knowledge and this input could be textual, iconic or pictorial. They should present a
stimulus for new thought, discussion and writing, opportunities for information processing, opportunities
to use and build on prior knowledge, useful language items, context and purpose for writing, models and
exemplar texts, reasons to start using writing process skills such as prewriting, drafting, editing. The close
analysis of the writing sections revealed that input was provided to every writing section of the book and
these included textual input (59%) in its majority supplemented with iconic and pictorial input as it can be
seen in table 7.
Table 7: Task characteristics for writing
Task control over students‟ writing
Very controlled Partially controlled No control
18 % 53% 29%
Task participants
Individual work Pair work Group work
65 % 12% 23%
Produced output language type
Simple words Simple Phrases Isolated sentences Longer text
6% 6% 18 % 70%

23. 23
Textual input provided learners with models or exemplar texts, useful language for the completion
of the task, explanations for the purpose and context of writing and in some occasions the writing sections
were divided in activities in which the students created a plan, or took notes and then they had to write the
final text. Therefore it could be suggested that the textbook provided sufficient input to the students to
develop their writing skills. The input provided for the writing tasks suggests that writing sections were
mostly integrated with the students‟ reading skills.
The level in which the students were required to write their texts was higher than the learners‟
level. According to CEFR specifications learners at the A2 level should be required to write short, simple
formulaic notes and a series of simple phrases and sentences linked with simple connectors like „and‟,
„but‟ and „because‟ and write very simple personal letters. However, students were expected to write
longer texts as it can be seen in table 7, conveying information of immediate relevance, getting across the
point they felt to be important, connecting texts on a range of familiar subjects within their field of
interest, linking a series of shorter discrete elements into a linear sequence and describing experiences and
impressions. All these conformed to B1 level and placed higher demands on the learners than their level
would indicate.
The instructions provided to students were in the target language and they guided students‟
production of the text leaving them a degree of freedom on the content. As it can be seen from Table 7 the
tasks did not completely control the learners‟ writing and there were occasions in which the task did not
have control over the students‟ writing. This aspect could promote learners‟ autonomy and assist them in
developing their own writing style. As it can be observed in table 7, writing tasks were mostly performed
on individual basis (65%) not giving learners the opportunity to collaborate with their peers in building up
the content, negotiating it, justifying it, making alterations, corrections. This would be beneficial to
learners of mixed ability classes where stronger students would help the weak ones develop their writing.

24. 24
It is important to note that writing sections comprised the majority of the contents in the appendix.
There was extra writing for each lesson of the book which suggested that the appendix gave more
emphasis on writing than the other skills. These extra writing sections provided simplified versions of the
writing tasks, different genres of the topics used in the writing and more challenging options in writing.
These tasks aimed to allow differentiation in instruction, catering for the needs of weaker students for
extra guidance or of the strong students providing them extra challenge with more open tasks and
exposing them to different genres such as reports, reviews, riddles and stories.
3.3.5. Analysis of Speaking Sections
3.3.5.1. Characteristics of produced spoken text
After a careful examination of speaking sections it was evident that the productive skills, writing
and speaking, were left towards the end of the lessons after the students had been exposed tasks of
receptive skills. The topics of the conversations were related to the topics of the previous sections
providing input to learners when talking about a topic. Table 8 illustrates the domains, topics, discourse
modes, rhetorical functions register and provided input of speaking tasks. According to Hughes (2010),
materials developed for speaking should take under consideration the individual speakers‟ affective needs
in private and unpredictable discourse contexts, personal encounters or public uses of spoken discourse.
Table 8 : Characteristics of produced spoken text
Domain of produced text
Personal Public Occupational Educational
39 % 36 % 6 % 22 %
Topic of produced text
Places
Free time –
entertainment Education
Personal
identification
Work
environment
7% 50 % 29 % 7% 7 %
Register of produced text
Formal Informal Neutral
0% 83% 17%
Rhetorical function of produced text
Description Narration Argumentation Instruction Requesting
34% 20% 20% 13% 13%

25. 25
According to the analysis on the characteristics of speaking tasks, the topics and domains of the
produced spoken texts were relevant to the students‟ language needs, involving language they would have
to use in day to day encounters, from the personal (39%), public (36%) or educational domain (22%), and
the majority of topics extracted from learners‟ free time and entertainment activities. The learners used
informal register most of the time which would be the most expected register when using the target
language in real life according to their age and interests. Variety of discourse types produced was also
observable; students were expected to produce texts with different rhetorical functions such as describing
places or objects (34%), supporting their opinion through argumentation (20%), narrating(20%), giving
instructions (13%) or making requests(13%).
3.3.5.2. Characteristics of speaking tasks
In most cases speaking was very structured and controlled by the task without leaving space for
original thought (33%) while in some others there was no input given and learners were left completely
alone to accomplish the task (22%) as it can be seen in table 9. When input was provided, this was mostly
textual in the form of instructions or with written dialogues as models in which learners substituted words
to perform the dialogues. Other forms of textual input included tables appended at the end of the book in
which students had to fill in information while talking with each other. Input was provided through
pictures as well and students usually had to describe a picture, compare and contrast pictures or give their
opinions about famous people whose photograph was the input for the speaking task. The absence of oral
input could be partly because listening activities preceded speaking sections and the topics and language
involved in speaking were previously encountered in the listening sections.
The nature of content of speaking tasks was mostly concrete allowing students to express
themselves in content they would more easily relate to and comprehend. The vocabulary and structures
students would use to perform the tasks derived from the lexical items and grammatical structures they
had encountered in the previous sections. Thus, students were not asked to use unfamiliar vocabulary or
grammar in order to perform the tasks. The language of instructions was again in the target language at

26. 26
the same level as the tasks. Most of the time students were given some minutes to organise their thoughts
as to what they would have to talk about.
Table 9 : Characteristics of Speaking tasks
Task control over students‟ speech
Very controlled Partially controlled No control
33 % 45% 22%
Input provided for the production of texts
Oral Textual Iconic Pictorial
0% 69% 4% 27%
Produced output language type
Simple words Simple Phrases Isolated sentences Longer text
0% 55 % 17 % 28 %
Task participants
Pair work Group work Role-play Dialogue with teacher
61% 17% 11 % 11%
The level of the task corresponded to the level of the students, A2 of CEFR, where students had to
communicate in simple and routine tasks requiring a simple and direct exchange of information on
familiar topics and activities. They mostly produced simple phrases (55%) or isolated sentences (17%)
and in some occasions longer texts (28%). There was a limited variety of task types, consisting of
discussions, dialogues, role-plays and mostly pair work. Through pair work and group work effective
speaking skills could be promoted based on collaboration among language users as Hughes (2010)
suggests. Overall, the speaking tasks did not seem artificial, learners were engaged in discussion and
dialogues with their peers on topics they would find interesting.
3.3.6. Analysis of Self-Assessment Sections
Self-assessment sections were included at the end of this unit. Although these sections were
labeled as self-assessment there were no guidelines as to how the learners would be able to assess
themselves and the teacher‟s book did not provide any answer keys. Thus, it was left entirely on the
teacher to decide how self-assessment would work in the classroom. As it can be seen from Graph 5
these sections included tasks on reading, writing, vocabulary and grammar. There were no activities on

27. 27
listening or speaking and the majority of tasks related to vocabulary items (35%) the students encountered
in the lessons of the units.
Graph 5: Skills representation through tasks in self-assessment sections
As mentioned previously, vocabulary was rarely a section in the units but embedded in the context
of other sections such as reading. This was reflected also in some activities in which vocabulary could not
be assessed alone but in combination to reading and vice versa. Grammar obtained a lot of attention
throughout the textbook and this was again reflected in the self-assessment tasks as can be seen in graph
5. What could be inferred concerning the distribution of skills in the self-assessment sections was that
listening and speaking were marginalised and the claim for communicative instruction made by the
authors of the textbook was questioned since the two most basic communicative skills were absent. The
content of the sections was derived from the topics of the units and ensured content validity for the
assessment of the students, since unknown language items were not present.
After the analysis of the types of tasks that were included in the self-assessment sections it was
observed that there was some variety of task types. Graph 6 exemplifies the types of activities included in
reading. Matching activities comprised the majority (50%) of tasks and other types of tasks included
information transfer, sequencing and one word answer. The types of tasks chosen for reading
Reading
19%
Writing
19%
Listening
0%
Speaking
0%
Grammar
27%
Vocabulary
35%

28. 28
corresponded with the activities learners were asked to perform in the while-reading sections. In both
cases the majority of tasks included selected response activities, showing the consistency of the authors to
test the skill in the same way they attempted to develop it.
Graph 6 Graph 7
Writing activities in the self-assessment section did not resemble the writing learners had to
perform in the units. As it can be seen in graph 7, learners were usually asked to write isolated sentences
and this usually involved using a specified grammatical structure and in effect writing was assessed
mostly for the correct application of a grammatical rule. The input that was given to learners was either
textual or a picture as stimuli to write the sentences.
Vocabulary tasks as suggested by graph 8 included mostly sentence completion activities with the words
given (39%) and matching activities (33%). They also included crosswords and one word answers. Again
vocabulary activities were intertwined with the reading skills of the learners since the words did not
appear isolated from context. Similarly to reading activities, tasks on vocabulary were mostly selected
item response types.

29. 29
Graph 8 Graph 9
As it can be observed from graph 9, grammar tasks were of limited variety and in contrast with
other activities discussed previously, the majority of the tasks were productive activities with only 29 per
cent of activities with selected response format. These activities involved the production of the correct
form of either verbs when examining tenses or adjectives and adverbs when examining the comparatives.
Overall, what could be noticed in the self-assessment sections was the exam-like format of language
involving learners to perform tasks which did not have a real like purpose but rather used language to test
particular language features. The assessment sections failed to embed the language features into a
communicative context.
3.3.7. Analysis of Revision tests
The textbook contained three revision tests which could be found in the teacher‟s book and online
on the downloadable form of the teacher‟s book. The number of the tests suggested that formal
assessment by teachers would be done three times through the school year. There was no extra
information in the teacher‟s book regarding the tests except for the answer key provided after each test.
The tests were summative in nature and aimed primarily to assess the students‟ performance on
vocabulary and grammar. Graph 10 shows the overall distribution of activities in the three tests and the
task types for grammar, vocabulary and writing.

30. 30
The tests were divided into two sections, grammar and vocabulary whereas writing appeared once
as a section and once as part of grammar in which students had to write a summary of a film using the
passive voice. The contents of the writing sections were derived from the topics in the book and related to
similar tasks the students had performed in class: writing an email and a film review. Vocabulary sections
included mostly selected response answers (matching and cross the odd one out) and giving one word
answers. Tasks on grammar included mostly providing the correct form of a word to show their
knowledge on tenses or comparatives and selected response items such as matching, multiple-choice and
filling the gaps with the words provided.
Graph 10: distribution of activities and task types in tests
The lack of skills was apparent in these three tests which did not include any activities on reading,
listening or speaking. Although the format of the whole textbook attempted to take in new methodologies
and focused on the four language skills the learners needed to develop and claimed to be following the
guidelines of CEFR, the design of the tests resembled a very traditional and out-dated approach. The
authors could have based their tests on formats of contemporary validated tests for A2 levels in which
grammar and vocabulary did not appear as sections but were rather assessed through the use of the four
2
7
1
2
7
3
4
2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
vocabulary grammar writing
short writing - response to
reading
fill in the gaps (words given)
multiple choice
correct form
one word answer
matching
odd one out

31. 31
language skills in a communicative context. Finally, an issue of content validity of the tests could arise
here, since learners were not given the opportunity to be assessed on the skills the textbook claimed to
develop and the tests would fail to examine whether the learners had developed their language skills.
3.4. Findings from Analysis of Grammar Sections
Grammar sections appeared in two lessons of every unit and it was considered important to
examine how grammar was treated in the textbook in terms of contents, presentation and task types
included in the grammar sections.
3.4.1. Content of Grammatical areas
Since the textbook addressed learners at A2 level of CEFR it was necessary to examine whether
the grammatical areas to be covered really corresponded to that level. Through a first glance evaluation,
the material to be covered seemed extensive for the learners at this level; however, closer analysis of this
aspect would substantiate the reality of this impression. The description of the CEFR levels did not make
any explicit reference to grammar and the areas to be covered; therefore, it was necessary to compare the
grammatical areas to be covered in the textbook to a validated test at this level which illustrated the
grammatical areas that EFL learners of A2 levels were required to know. For the purposes of this study,
the language specifications contained in the handbook for KET, an examination for English speakers of
other languages of Cambridge University, were used. Table 10 illustrates the grammar areas in which A2
learners should have acquired suggested by KET handbook in comparison with the areas presented in the
book. After the close comparison of the textbook grammatical contents and the suggested grammatical
areas for A2 level in the handbook for KET it was apparent that the authors tried to cover an extensive
amount of grammatical items. This would probably overload learners with input they would not be able to
process cognitively yet.

32. 32
Table 10: Comparison of grammatical areas in KET and the textbook grammatical areas
KET HANDBOOK
Grammar areas in A2 Level
Textbook for 6th
grade for Greek learners of
English at A2 level
Tenses:
Present simple and Present continuous
Present perfect simple(yet, already, never, ever)
unfinished past with for and since
Past simple and Past continuous
Future with going to , will and shall
Tenses:
Present simple and Present continuous
Past Simple and Past continuous, used to
Future with will and going to
Present perfect simple (ever in questions)
Present perfect continuous (for and since)
Past perfect simple
Structures:
Main clause and subordinate clauses with
temporal words
First conditional
Structures:
First conditional
Second conditional
Clauses of reason and clauses of result
Simple present passive voice
The present perfect continuous and past perfect simple tense require the appropriate previous
knowledge of past simple and present perfect so that learners would be able to compare and contrast
among those tenses without creating confusion. The tenses however, were provided to students in an
immediate sequence without allowing time for students to sufficiently consolidate the newly presented
grammatical item before moving to the next one. Passive voice could also create problems and confusion
since learners would have to use the past participle of the verbs which is also used for the present perfect
and past perfect. Finally, it was questionable whether the teachers and learners would be able to cover this
extensive list of grammatical items in the proposed 75-80 classroom hours.
3.4.2. Presentations of Grammar
The analysis of the presentations of grammar in the textbooks would allow the researcher to
investigate whether the claims the authors made regarding grammatical awareness raising from both
inductive and deductive approaches were valid. The grammar presentations were based on sentences
extracted from the reading or listening texts which preceded grammar sections. Thus, learners were first
provided with a holistic experience in which they could learn implicitly without focusing conscious
attention on any particular feature of the experience, conforming to the principled approaches for EFL
learning materials proposed by Tomlinson (2010). The learners would revisit and reflect paying conscious

33. 33
attention to the grammatical features after the grammar presentation. In many occasions the learners were
asked to derive the rules on their own by noticing features provided in examples, thus including inductive
methods for grammar learning. The graph below illustrates the activities learners were engaged to during
the presentation of a new grammatical feature.
Graph 11 Meta-language activities in grammar awareness activities
As it was observed, learners were engaged in meta-language activities such as completion of a
grammatical rule, choosing the correct explanation for the use of a grammatical feature or providing a
short answer to a meta-language questions demonstrating their understanding of the use of the
grammatical feature based on the examples provided in the book. The input of these activities included
tables or timelines which were presented to the learners prior to the activities and contained sentences
derived from the reading or listening texts. They had to read the sentences carefully and then try to derive
the rule and complete the meta-language activities.
3.4.3. Task types in grammar sections
What was also observable was that the model Presentation-Practice-Production which was a
traditional approach to teaching grammar was not followed in the book; the rules were not presented to
59%
20%
21%
Metalanguage activities
complete the rule
tick the correct
explanation
short answer

34. 34
the students but rather discovered by the learners and there were very few activities following this
consciousness raising awareness.
Most of the times, learners were involved in the productive skills in order to use the new
grammatical phenomenon. These tasks though, were not communicative in nature, they did not have a
real purpose and as suggested by Ellis (2010) the data for concsiousness raising tasks should be authentic,
mostly oral and should involve learners in meaningful communication using grammar as the medium and
not the goal. The tasks included in the textbook did not focus on meaning but on form and failed to lead
to real-world processes of language use. Finally, these tasks were very short and limited in the textbook
and did not provide the time learners needed to internalise the new grammar, it was rather a mere
exposure to these structures.
4. Conclusion
This study focused on the evaluation of the textbook used in 6th
grade Greek primary state schools
for EFL learners. It was motivated by the fact that the textbook was used on a large national scale, it was
recently developed and its strengths or weaknesses would have a high impact on Greek students‟ learning
of English. After the close evaluation of the components of the book, the findings suggested that the
overall organisation of the textbook and the themes included were satisfactory; the authors‟ intention to

35. 35
use real-like situations and explore all four language skills in an integrated way was apparent and
elements of differentiation of instruction were also found in the textbook. However, many problematic
areas were detected as to the practicality of the book, its contents, use of authentic language, integration
of the four skills, the nature of the tasks, autonomy of learning and assessment practices. The findings
also suggested that the textbook had not been piloted prior to its implementation which was essential in
order to ensure that the textbook would actually work for its addressed market.
The textbook followed a thematic approach for the organisation of its units and the four skills
were promoted through a context based approach which could help students in developing their language
skills. The topics and themes selected were overall appropriate to the students‟ interests and age
resembling topics they would encounter in real life either in the social, personal or educational domain.
Furthermore, the colourful illustrations contained in the textbook made the book more appealing to young
learners. The overall organisation and layout of the students‟ book showed a well-structured work that
could work with young learners of this age.
Another aspect concerning practicality is the layout of the teacher‟s book; although there were
useful guidelines for the teacher, it was difficult to use two books while teaching. Instead, a student‟s
book edition with the pages for the teacher interleaved would have been a more practical and useful
format for the teacher‟s book.
The appendix of the book contained extra material for the students in order to allow for
differentiated instruction. These materials included extra activities for reading and writing or simplified
versions of writing and listening. There were also more challenging options for stronger students. Thus,
the textbook catered for the individual learners‟ needs. However, the use of appended sections was not
provided for each lesson and this differentiation in instruction did not occur systematically. Moreover, the
fact that this differentiation of instruction was kept outside the main textbook showed that it was optional
to be used.

36. 36
There was an effort to develop the four language skills in an integrated way in the units, trying to
include every skill in each unit and the activities for receptive skills were usually used as input for the
activities of the productive skills. Nevertheless, the tasks which were involved for each skill section did
not integrate all four skills. Furthermore, throughout the book, grammar sections were overemphasised
with every unit containing two sections on grammatical features. The findings of the close analysis on the
textbook sections indicated that instruction of grammar was form focused and language in the tasks was
rarely used for real communicative purposes involving problem solving approaches. The claim of the
authors for authenticity in the reading and listening texts was rejected since it was evident that both
reading and listening texts were mostly adapted or developed specifically for pedagogic purposes, with
careful attention to the grammatical structures and lexical items in order to correspond to vocabulary and
grammar goals of each unit. Furthermore, the majority of the tasks in the productive skills seemed to be
controlling the students as to what they were going to produce and there was not much opportunity given
for learners‟ autonomy or negotiation on the tasks themselves.
The analysis on the level of different tasks revealed that speaking, listening and writing activities
were at same level as the students (A2) whereas writing tasks were above the level of the students at level
B1 of CEFR. Therefore, writing tasks which comprised the majority of overall tasks in the book were
difficult and demanding for students at this level. Furthermore, the content to be covered in grammar
sections was excessive again for learners of this level and it was questionable whether the teachers would
be able to cover all the material in the course.
The assessment practices in the book included the self-assessment sections in every unit and 3
revision tests. These practices revolved mainly around grammar and vocabulary and completely excluded
listening and speaking assessments. The teacher‟s book was not particularly helpful since there were no
guidelines as to how the self-assessment would be done and there was no answer key for students to be
able to assess themselves. On the other hand though, it could be left on the teachers‟ judgement as to how
self-assessment could be done, thus allowing freedom of choice to teachers. Nevertheless, it would have

37. 37
been useful for inexperienced teachers to have guidelines concerning this section. The number of tests
was not sufficient for a whole year and suggested a summative evaluation of the students in every 3 units.
The teachers would need to design and implement their own tests for formative and summative purposes
and many alterations concerning the tests contents would have to be made to include the four skills which
were not present most of the time.
After having identified the strengths and weaknesses of the textbook, it is important to consider
the way forward. This book has already been implemented and used by teachers in primary education.
Teachers need to perform a similar task of evaluation of the book before using it in the classroom and find
ways to combat with its defects. Teachers are the ones who will finally decide how to use the book and in
these cases, teachers do not have the option to choose any other coursebook. Therefore, they should use
the textbook as their core material, make adaptations and supplement it with other materials according to
their learners‟ needs and their teaching situation. Furthermore, the developers of the textbook should
make a retrospective evaluation of their book and make the necessary changes to improve its contents.
Finally, regular revised editions of the book should be made in order to constantly update the contents
according to the learners‟ needs and teaching context.

38. 38
References
Alamri, A. A. M. (2008). An evaluation of the sixth grade English language textbook for Saudi boys'
schools. MAthesis, Department of English Language, College of Arts at King Saud University
Azizifar, A., Koosha, M., & Lotfi, A. R. (2010). An analytical evaluation of Iranian high school ELT
textbooks from 1970 to the present. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 3, 36-44.
Cunningsworth, A. (1995). Choosing Your Coursebook, Oxford: Heinemann.
Ellis, R. (1997). The empirical evaluation of language teaching materials. ELT Journal, 51(1), 36-42.
Ellis, R. (2010). Second language acquisition research and language-teaching materials, in Harwood, N.
(Ed.). (2010). English language teaching materials: Theory and practice. New York: Cambridge
University Press, 33-57.
Garinger, D. (2002). Textbook Selection for the ESLClassroom, Eric Digest, Retrieved 11/2010:
http://www.cal.org/resources/Digest/0210garinger.html
Goh, C. (2010). Listening as process: Learning activities for self-appraisal and self-regulation, in
Harwood, N. (Ed.). (2010). English language teaching materials: Theory and practice. New York:
Cambridge University Press, 179-206.
Graves, K. (2000). Designing Language Courses. Canada: Newbury House
Hughes, R. (2010). Materials to develop the speaking skill. , in Harwood, N. (Ed.). (2010). English
language teaching materials: Theory and practice. New York: Cambridge University Press, 207-224.
Hutchinson, T. and E. Torres (1994). The textbook as agent of change. ELT Journal 48(4):
315-328.

39. 39
KIrkgöz, Y. (2009). Evaluating the English textbooks for young learners of English at Turkish primary
education. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1(1), 79-83.
Littlejohn, A. (1998).' The analysis of language teaching materials: Inside the Trojan horse', in Tomlinson
B. (ed.) (1998) Materials Development in Language Teaching , Cambridge : Cambridge University
Press, 190-216.
McDonough, J., & Shaw, C. (2003). Materials and methods in ELT: Ateacher's guide. Wiley-Blackwell.
McGrath, I. (2002). Materials evaluation and design for language teaching. Edinburgh University Press.
Tomlinson, B. (2003). Developing materials for language teaching. Continuum Intl Pub Group.
Tomlinson, B. (2001).Materials development, in R. Carter & D. Nunan (eds.), Teaching English to
speakers of other languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 66–71.
Tomlinson, B. (2010). Principles of effective materials development, in Harwood, N. (Ed.). (2010).
English language teaching materials: Theory and practice. New York: Cambridge University Press,
81-108.
Tribble, C. (2010). A genre-based approach to developing materials for writing, in Harwood, N. (Ed.).
(2010). English language teaching materials: Theory and practice. New York: Cambridge
University Press, 157-176.
University of Cambridge ESOL Examinations (2009). Key English Test: Handbook for teachers. UCLES