Lesson 2: Materials Evaluation
Objectives:
At the end of the lesson, the pre- service teacher (PST) should be able to:
a. evaluate language learning materials used in a basic education classroom using the
principles in materials evaluation;
b. examine the K to 12 English curriculum and cite materials used to facilitate
mastery of a specific competency; and
c. list down specific competencies from the K to 12 English curriculum and identify
possible language learning materials to be used for these competencies.
Materials Evaluation
Tomlinson and Masuhara (2004) use the term “materials evaluation” as the activity which
measures the value of a set of learning materials by making judgments about the effect of the
materials on the people using them. It tries to measure, for example: appeals of the materials to
the learners; materials validity/flexibility; materials ability to interest the learners; materials
potential learning value; delivery & assessment.
Evaluating Textbooks/Coursebooks:
When teachers open a page in their textbook, they have to decide whether they should use the
lesson on that page with their class. If the language, content and sequencing of the textbook
are appropriate, the teacher might 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. Therefore, when
evaluating the quality of a textbook’s exercises or activities, four key questions should be
answered (Garnier, 2002):
a. Do the exercises and activities in textbook contribute to student’s language acquisition?
b. Are the exercises balanced in their format, containing both controlled and free practice?
c. Are the exercises progressive as the students move through the textbook?
d. Are the exercises varied and challenging?
Why do we need to evaluate materials?
Mukundan (2004, 2009) argues that there are two purposes for evaluation; the first purpose is
to select the coursebook and the other purpose is to determine the effectiveness of the
coursebooks while they are used. However, Tomlinson and Masuhara (2004) indicate that
the ultimate purpose of the evaluation is for the re- development of material. Identifying
the potential strengths and weaknesses of the materials for selection and/or development
purposes is useful.
Types of Materials Evaluation
There are possibly three categories of evaluation that applied linguists subscribe to them: pre-
use evaluation, whilst (in)-use evaluation and post-use evaluation (Cunningsworth 1995; Ellis
1995, 1997; Tomlinson 1998, 1999, 2003;
McGrath 2002; Mukundan 2004, 2009; and Tomlinson and Masuhara 2004):
1. Pre-Use Evaluation: It involves making predictions about the potential value of
materials on people who use them (Tomlinson 1998, 2003). He indicates that this type of
evaluation is often impressionistic, subjective and unreliable since a teacher scans a book
quickly to gain an impression about its value. This type of evaluation is very important,
particularly, in the process of materials selection. For instance, McGrath (2002, p. 14)
has emphasized the relationship between pre-use evaluation and materials selection
including “the emphasis in much that has been written on materials evaluation is
therefore rightly on what we might call pre-use evaluation in relation to coursebook
selection” and the aim of this process is to establish potential suitability . In a similar
vein, Ellis (1997) and Mukundan (2009) indicate that predictive evaluation is carried out
to determine if the materials are adequate for use (i.e. for selection purposes). In other
words, this type of evaluation may be impressionistic if it is conducted on the existing
materials but it may be effective and useful predictive evaluation if it is conducted for
selection purposes. The related literature reveals that the attention more or less
exclusively focuses on this category (Ellis 1997).
2. Whilst (In)-Use Evaluation: It measures the value of the materials whilst observing
or using them. It is more reliable than pre-use evaluation since it makes use of
measurement rather than prediction (Tomlinson 1998, 2003). Tomlinson maintains that
it observes the performance of learners on exercises, however; it cannot measure
durable and effective learning because of the delayed effect of instruction. Whilst use
evaluation and retrospective evaluation are likely to have similar purposes (i.e.
measuring the effect of the materials or determining the effectiveness of the existing
materials whilst using them). Mukundan (2009), for example, indicates that retrospective
evaluation is the re-evaluation of materials while they are in-use to decide if the
materials work. This category has special significance since it provides applied
linguists/teachers with information that help them to “determine whether it is worthwhile
using the materials again, which activities work and which do not, and how to modify the
materials to make them more effective for future use (Ellis 1997, p. 37).
3. Post-Use Evaluation: It is the most important and valuable type of evaluation because
it can measure the actual effects of the materials on the users and provide reliable
information (Tomlinson 1998, 2003). Tomlinson maintains that it can measure short
term effects such as motivation, impact achievability and instant learning. It can also
measure long term effects such as durable learning and application. This category may
be the most useful evaluation since it is conducted after the participants have had
reasonable time using the materials. The users of the materials can then give clear and
useful opinions and suggestions about the evaluated materials. This type of evaluation
provides applied linguists with valid and reliable information that help them to develop
the target materials. Moreover, this type of evaluation is helpful and useful for identifying
the points of strength and weakness that emerge over a period of using the
coursebooks (Cunningsworth, 1995).
Assignment:
Choose one English Curriculum (Grade 1 to 12) and list down five learning competencies.
Recalling the types of materials discussed in Lesson 1 and applying the concepts discussed
above, identify possible language learning materials to be used for these competencies and
explain why they are so. You may consult DepEd Learning Module/s of your chosen curriculum
available on the internet. This will make you evaluate the materials used therein and help you
decide the most suitable materials for your chosen learning competencies. Place your work in a
short bond paper.
Lesson 3: Adapting Materials
Objectives:
At the end of the lesson, the pre- service teacher (PST) should be able to:
a. outline the process of materials adaptation from different points of view;
b. examine range of technology-based materials and tools available to classroom
language teachers; and
c. apply the criteria in selecting and evaluating language learning materials.
Adapting Materials
Edge (1993) stated that materials exist in order to support learning/teaching, so they should be
designed to suit the people & the processes involved. Most teachers are not creators of teaching
materials but providers of good materials. For that purpose, teachers may conduct materials
adaptation in order that they can provide good materials for their students. Materials adaptation
involves changing existing materials so that they become more suitable for specific learners,
teachers or situations.
Tomlinson and Masuhara (2004) suggest that the most effective way of conducting a material
adaptation is to:
a. Have a large bank of categorized materials that you can readily retrieve for adaptation.
b. Have colleagues with whom you can share resources and who are willing to go through
the adaptation process together; have colleagues who are happy to give you feedback
on your adapted materials.
c. Be in an environment in which materials evaluation, adaptation & development are
encouraged & teacher’s
time & efforts are acknowledged.
d. Revisit adapted materials and improve them.
Why do we need to adapt materials?
Despite the great effort that textbook writers make to meet the needs of the intended users,
textbooks are subject to adaptation when they are actually used in the classroom. After all,
most commercial textbooks are not written for any particular class. What makes the matter
worse is that sometimes the teachers are compelled to use certain materials, that is, materials
imposed by authorities. In a word, in most ELT cases, teachers have to adapt the materials they
are using if they want their teaching to be more effective and more interesting.
Materials adaptation should be based on the results of materials evaluation. Of course different
materials have different potential areas for adaptation. The following are some common
deficiencies of existing ELT materials:
a. fail (unable) to fulfil the goals and objectives specified by national or local syllabuses or
curricula
b. fail to fulfil the goals and objectives of schools where the materials are used
c. cannot be finished in the time available
d. require facilities or equipment or other supporting materials that are not available
e. not engaging the learners’ personality
f. detrimental to the learners’ culture
g. not cater for the learners’ interests
McDonough and Shaw (1993:86) have listed more reasons for materials adaptation. The most
important reason is that there is mismatch between what is needed and what is provided by
materials.
Principles of materials adaptation
Grant (1987) has listed the following principles for materials adaptation:
a. Making dialogues communicative
b. Making learning activities relevant and purposeful
c. Meet your learners’ needs, both external and psychological
d. Use models of real, authentic language
Very often, adaptation involves supplementation, that is, teachers add materials from other
resources to the textbook they are using. It is believed that authentic materials are better than
non-authentic materials for supplementation. So teachers who make a point of collecting
authentic materials find it much easier to adapt textbooks. This is especially true in ELT
contexts where authentic English materials are not always readily available.
DON’TS in materials adaptation:
a. Teachers should not adapt materials too casually, e.g. based on his or her own
preferences or tastes;
b. Materials adaptation should not be done at the expense of completeness and overall
framework of the materials.
c. Materials deleted or added should not go beyond a reasonable proportion, otherwise
consider alternative materials.
d. Teachers should not adapt materials only to cater to the needs of exams or tests.
Level of materials adaptation
Textbook adaptation can be done at three levels:
1) Macro adaptation
This is ideally done before the language program begins. After comparing what is covered in a
textbook and what is required by the syllabus or examination, the teacher may find that certain
areas or even whole units of the book can be omitted, and certain contents need to be
supplemented. Macro adaptation is very important because it helps to avoid waste of time and
energy of the teacher and the students as well. It also helps the teacher to see in advance what
he or she needs to supplement so that he or she can keep an eye on materials that could be
used.
2) Adapting a unit
This could be reordering the activities, combining activities, omitting activities, rewriting or
supplementing exercise material, etc. Unit adaptation helps to make the classroom teaching
smoother and more cohesive. It also helps the teacher to better fulfil the aims of a unit.
3) Adaptation of specific activities
Occasionally an activity is regarded as valuable, but it is not well-designed or it is not feasible in
a particular class. If the teacher does not want to give up the activity, he or she needs to adapt
it.
4. Specific adaptation
Maley (1998:281, in Tomlinson, 1998) suggested the following options for materials adaptation:
a. Omission: the teacher leaves out things deemed inappropriate, offensive, unproductive,
etc., for the particular group.
b. Addition: where there seems to be inadequate coverage, teachers may decide to add to
textbooks, either in the form of texts or exercise material.
c. Reduction: where the teacher shortens an activity to give it less weight or emphasis.
d. Extension: where an activity is lengthened in order to give it an additional
dimension. (for example, a vocabulary activity is extended to draw attention to some
syntactic patterning.)
e. Rewriting/modification: teacher may occasionally decide to rewrite material, especially
exercise material, to
make it more appropriate, more “communicative”, more demanding, more accessible to
their students, etc.
f. Replacement: text or exercise material which is considered inadequate, for whatever
reason, may be replaced by more suitable material. This is often culled from other
resource materials.
g. Re-ordering: teachers may decide that the order in which the textbooks are presented is
not suitable for their students. They can then decide to plot a different course through
the textbooks from the one the writer has laid down.
h. Branching: teachers may decide to add options to the existing activity or to suggest
alternative pathways through the activities. (for example, an experiential route or an
analytical route.)
