People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria

Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific research

Larbi Ben M’hidi University-Om El Bouaghi

Faculty of Letters and Languages

Department of English

A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of Letters and Languages

Department of English, in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the

Degree of

Master of Arts in Didactics of English as a Foreign Language

By: NASRI Wahiba and DIAR Soror

➢ Supervisor: Dr. BOULEMAIZ Djallel

➢ President: Mrs. GUERFI Soraya

➢ Examiner: Mrs. SENOUSSI Nadjet

2020-2021

An Evaluation of Grammatical Structure Sequencing in Second

and Third Year Middle School EFL Textbooks « My Book of

English (2AM and 3AM) »

(The cognitive Domain)

I

Dedication

To my beloved parents who gave me endless love and encouragement throughout my study.

To my dear sisters and brothers for their valuable support and help.

To my little angels nephews and nieces.

To my friends and all those who lent a helping hand, I dedicate this humble work.

Wahiba.

In the name of Allah, the most Graceful, the most Merciful

I would like to start my humble words by thanking Allah first for making me become who I’m

now, and for all the gifts he gave me and still where no words ever can express my gratefulness.

To my beloved parents Mrs. Kadri Nadia (R.I.P), and Mr. Diar Mostafa, my brother Hamza, and

my sisters Wissam and Ikram; thank you for being my family and for supporting me all the time

to be healthy and successful. I am grateful to have such friends too either the ladies or the

gentlemen who some of them are still by my side since the primary school. Yet my special ones

will always be Hadjab Khawla Romaissa, Cherifi Romaissa, Benadjel Chayma, and of course my

other half who is also my partner in this dissertation Nasri Wahiba (Wipa) my forever best

classmate and now to the list of my best friends and to thank our both hearts for loving the far

east Asian culture and mainly South Korea.

A special dedication is sent to me; I want to thank me for always believing in me, and for never

losing hope even after having those rough times during the previous years. I want to thank the

old me for building the present me, and for opening gates to the future me if God will. Thank you

so much Miss. Diar Soror!

Soror.

II

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

First of all, we would like to thank Allah for helping us to reach such point in our lives,

and to be able to be called "graduates". For all the strength and faith he gifted us to finish this

work.

We would like to express our appreciation to our special teachers of our English

department at the University of L’Arbi Ben Mhidi for the previous five years starting with our

supervisor Dr. Boulmaiz whom we thank the most for his guidance, help, and pieces of advice.

Moving to our examiners, thank you for being a part of our special day.

We would also like to thank the middle school teachers who answered every question in

our questionnaire patiently, and mainly those two who helped us through sharing with us their

years of experiences in teaching the Algeriran middle school English textbooks to guide us and

to support our aims of this research paper : Miss. Bekhouch Fatiha, and Miss. Hadjris Wafa.

Thanks to everyone.

III

Abstract

Textbooks are valuable in each language classroom. They are considered as an essential

component which has several roles in English Language Teaching (ELT) curriculum. Therefore,

their evaluation is utmost importance so that their pedagogical contribution can be assured to the

teaching-learning process. Although there are so many studies about textbook evaluation, yet the

newly published textbooks are not given the much attention needed to be examined. The present

study attempts to evaluate the new generation of the Algerian middle school English textbooks

“My Book of English” of the 2nd and the 3rd years where the focus is on the evaluation of the

grammatical sequencing and the grammar presentation. The research strives to discover if there is

appropriate grammatical sequencing in each and between both textbooks ; it seeks also to know

how grammar is presented and assess its appropriateness to the leaners’ level. Therefore, to achieve

these goals, quantitative and qualitative data were obtained throughout an adapted checklist and a

teacher’s questionnaire. A checklist was adapted from different proposed checklists to suit the

aims of the research, whereas the questionnaire was addressed to the middle school EFL teachers

to assess their perspectives towards the textbooks’ grammar content and the grammatical

sequencing. The results of the mixed method revealed that the 3rd year textbook grammatical items

are somehow appropriate to the target learners, whereas the 2nd year grammar structures are

complex and beyond the learners’ levels. Also, the grammar structures in each textbook are

sequenced on the basis of the learner’s communicative needs. Finally, there is a grammatical

sequencing between both coursebooks, but it is inappropriate and illogical because the learners are

still facing some challenges in using the language correctly which affects the achievement of the

stated objectives.

IV

Keywords : textbook, textbook evaluation, English language teaching ELT, grammar

presentation, the grammatical sequencing.

V

List of Abbreviations

A: Agree

ALM: Audio-Lingual Method

CBA: Competency Based Approach

CLT: Communicative Language Teaching

DM: Direct Method

D: Disagree

EFL: English as Foreign Language

ELT: English Language Teaching

FL: Foreign Language

GTM: Grammar Translation Method

MEB: My Book of English

MGT: My Grammar Tools

MPT: My Pronunciation Tools

MS: Middle School

N: Number

Q: Question

SA: Strongly Agree

SD: Strongly Disagree

SPSS: Statistical Package for Social Sciences

TEFL: Teaching English as Foreign Language

%: Percentage

VI

List of Tables

Table 1: Teachers' Gender ....................................................................................................... - 46 -

Table 2: Teachers' Age ............................................................................................................. - 47 -

Table 3: Teaching Experience.................................................................................................. - 48 -

Table 4: Teaching Experience using MBE .............................................................................. - 48 -

Table 5: The Use of MBE in the Teaching Learning Process ................................................. - 49 -

Table 6: Textbook Suitibility to the Learners' Level ............................................................... - 50 -

Table 7:The Organization of Content According to the Learners’ Language Needs .............. - 51 -

Table 8:Complementarity of the Textbooks ............................................................................ - 52 -

Table 9:The Objectives Achievements .................................................................................... - 53 -

Table 10:Textbooks Limit Teachers' Creativity ...................................................................... - 54 -

Table 11:The Textbook General Assessment .......................................................................... - 55 -

Table 12:The Clear Presentation of Grammar Points .............................................................. - 56 -

Table 13:Grammar Complexity ............................................................................................... - 57 -

Table 14:The Amount of Grammar Rules in Comparison with Learners’ Level .................... - 58 -

Table 15:The Gradual Movement of Grammar Points ............................................................ - 58 -

Table 16:The Presentation of Grammar Structures.................................................................. - 59 -

Table 17:The Integration of Grammar Structures .................................................................... - 60 -

Table 18:The Appropriateness of Grammar Structures Sequence ........................................... - 61 -

Table 19:The Grammatical Sequencing in Relation to Textbook Communicative Objectives- 62

-

Table 20:The Grammatical Sequencing on the basis of the Learners’ Communicative Needs- 63

-

VII

Table 21:The Relation between the Grammatical Sequencing and the Linguistic Competence

Development ............................................................................................................................. - 64 -

Table 22:The Grammatical Sequencing between both Textbooks .......................................... - 65 -

Table 23:The Appropriateness and the Logical Sequence between both Textbooks .............. - 66 -

VIII

Table of Contents

Dedication ........................................................................................................................................ I

Acknowlegements ........................................................................................................................... II

Abstract ......................................................................................................................................... III

List of Abbreviations ..................................................................................................................... V

List of Tables ................................................................................................................................ VI

Table of Contents ....................................................................................................................... VIII

General Introduction

1. Statement of the Problem .................................................................................................... - 2 -

2. Aims and Significance of the Study.................................................................................... - 3 -

3. Research Questions ............................................................................................................. - 4 -

4. Research Methodology ....................................................................................................... - 4 -

5. Structure of the Research .................................................................................................... - 4 -

Chapter One: Teaching Grammar and Textbook Evaluation

Section One: Teaching Grammar and Grammatical Sequencing

Introduction ................................................................................................................................. - 8 -

1.1. Definition of Grammar .................................................................................................... - 8 -

1.2. Types of Grammar ........................................................................................................... - 9 -

1.2.1. Prescriptive Grammar ............................................................................................... - 9 -

IX

1.2.2. Descriptive Grammar ............................................................................................... - 9 -

1.2.3. Difference between the Prescriptive and Descriptive Grammar ............................ - 10 -

1.2.4. Pedagogical Grammar ............................................................................................ - 10 -

1.3. Teaching Grammar of EFL ............................................................................................ - 11 -

1.3.1. Approaches and Methods of Teaching Grammar ................................................... - 11 -

1.3.1.1. Deductive Approach Vs Inductive Approach ................................................. - 12 -

1.3.1.2. Grammar Translation Method Vs Direct Method ........................................... - 13 -

1.3.1.3. Audiolingual Method ...................................................................................... - 14 -

1.3.1.4. Communicative language teaching (CLT) ...................................................... - 14 -

1.3.1.5. Competency based approach ........................................................................... - 15 -

1.4. Grammatical Sequencing ............................................................................................... - 16 -

1.4.1. The Importance of the Context ............................................................................... - 17 -

Section Two: Textbook Evaluation

Introduction ............................................................................................................................... - 21 -

2.1. The Role of Textbook in English Language Teaching (ELT) ....................................... - 21 -

2.1.1 Advantages ............................................................................................................. - 22 -

2.1.2. Disadvantages ......................................................................................................... - 22 -

2.2. Textbook Evaluation ...................................................................................................... - 23 -

2.2.1. The Need for Textbook Evaluation ........................................................................ - 23 -

2.2.2. Types and Approaches of Textbook Evaluation ..................................................... - 24 -

X

2.2.2.1. Predictive Evaluation vs. Retrospective Evaluation ....................................... - 24 -

2.2.2.2. Pre-Use, In-Use, and Post-Use Evaluations .................................................... - 25 -

2.2.2.3. Macro-evaluation vs. Micro-evaluation .......................................................... - 26 -

2.2.3. Methods for Evaluating a Textbook ....................................................................... - 26 -

2.3. Checklist as a Tool of Evaluation .................................................................................. - 27 -

2.4. Evaluating the Presentation of Grammar in ELT Textbooks......................................... - 30 -

Conclusion ................................................................................................................................ - 31 -

Chapter Two: Evaluative Checklist

Introduction ............................................................................................................................... - 33 -

3.1. Research Methodology .................................................................................................. - 33 -

3.2. Textbooks Description ................................................................................................... - 33 -

3.3. Analysis of MBE............................................................................................................ - 34 -

3.3.1. Practical Consideration ........................................................................................... - 35 -

3.3.2. Language Related Consideration ............................................................................ - 35 -

A. Grammar ................................................................................................................. - 35 -

B. Exercises and Activities .......................................................................................... - 41 -

C. Layout and Physical Makeup ................................................................................. - 41 -

3.4. Summary of the Main Findings ..................................................................................... - 42 -

Conclusion ................................................................................................................................ - 43 -

Chapter Three: Teachers’ Questionnaire

XI

Introduction ............................................................................................................................... - 45 -

4.1. The Method .................................................................................................................... - 45 -

4.2. Questionnaire Description ............................................................................................. - 45 -

4.3. Sample of the Study ....................................................................................................... - 46 -

4.4. Analysis of the Questionnaire ........................................................................................ - 46 -

4.4.1. Bibliographical Information ................................................................................... - 46 -

4.4.2. Textbook and Syllabus ........................................................................................... - 49 -

4.4.3. Grammar Structures ................................................................................................ - 56 -

4.4.4. Grammatical Sequencing ........................................................................................ - 61 -

4.5. Discussion of The Results .............................................................................................. - 67 -

Conclusion ................................................................................................................................ - 69 -

General Conclusion ................................................................................................................. - 69 -

Research Limitations ................................................................................................................ - 71 -

Suggestions for Future Research .............................................................................................. - 71 -

References ................................................................................................................................. - 73 -

Appendices

Résumé

الملخص

- 1 -

General Introduction

1. Statement of the Problem

2. Aims and Significance of the Study

3. Research Questions

4. Research Methodology

5. Structure of the Research

- 2 -

General Introduction

1. Statement of the Problem

It is beyond doubt that English is gaining ground and is viewed more as the most important

language to learn. The last few centuries have seen the rise of English as a global language as a

result of several factors like politics, economy, technology, and culture (Crystal, 1997). The whole

phenomenon of globalization has contributed substantially to making English the most widely

studied foreign language in the world (Richards & Rodgers, 2001).According to Chang (2006)

English has been the prevailing foreign language in the curricula of educational institutions and in

foreign language learning.

In the Algerian educational system, English is taught as a second foreign language after the

French language, and the medium that is used to provide the learners with the knowledge of this

second foreign language is the textbook. English school textbooks are considered the most relevant

sources of learning English worldwide, which function as a guide for learners and instructors to

making them engaged in practices and make both the teaching and the learning activities to thrive

(Margana & Widyantoro, 2017). As it is known, textbook remain a major source of contact with

the English language; however, the “Perfect book does not exist” (Grant, 1987, p.8) that is why

their evaluation merits serious consideration because an inappropriate choice may waste efforts

and time, and also to find out the best possible one that will fit and be appropriate to a particular

learner group.

In 2016, the Algerian education minister launched a reform movement as a result of the

dissatisfaction with the existing syllabi and textbooks at the middle school (MS) levels, hence the

birth of the second generation concerning the English language textbooks.

- 3 -

Because the publication of My Book of English collection is recent, some studies were

conducted on the evaluation of that new generation where the focus is put on particular aspects

like vocabulary development (Nabi & Oualmi, 2018), pronunciation, or maybe on the evaluation

of the textbook as whole. After further researches, it is noticed that almost all the conducted

researches have focused on the first-year middle school textbook whereas the other levels are still

waiting their turn to come. Therefore, this target study will be about the evaluation of the 2nd and

the 3rd year MS English textbooks. For more clarification, instead of focusing on all the aspects of

the textbooks, the research focuses only on the grammar aspect, and more specifically, the

grammatical sequencing and the grammar presentation and their suitability to the learners’ level.

Learning grammar is an important step in learning the foreign language, it should be taught in

appropriate sequence in and between levels to match the learners needs an advances in learning

that language. Also, its difficulty levels have to suit the target leaners’ level, all these will help the

learner to deliver the message correctly and communicate in the target situation effectively.

2. Aims and Significance of the Study

Since the textbook is the most important material used by teachers to guide the teaching-

learning process for the sake of achieving specific objectives, the research aims to see whether

there is a kind of continuity and sequencing in and between the 2nd and the 3rd grades concerning

the grammar structures. Moreover, it seeks to know how these structures are presented and evaluate

their suitability to the learners’ level.

The current study has two main objectives:

▪ To shed the light on the textbooks strengths and weaknesses concerning the grammar

presentation and how the gramatical sequencing has an effect on the achievement of the

stated objectives.

- 4 -

▪ To make the designers and the inspectors aware about the necessity to make some

adjustments in the current using textbooks concerning the difficulty level of the presented

grammar in comparison with the learners’ level.

3. Research Questions

The present study tends to answer the following questions:

a. Is there a grammatical sequencing in and between the 2nd and the 3rd grade textbooks to

achieve the stated objectives (the linguistic competence) ?

b. To what extent do the grammatical structures that are presented in 2nd and 3rd year MS

English textbooks suit the learners’ level ? And how are they presented ?

4. Research Methodology

In this study, a mixed method is applied (both quantitative and qualitative procedures). An

adapted checklist is used to collect a qualitative data through evaluating generally both textbooks

and put the emphasize on the presentation of grammar structures. Moreover, the quantitative data

are obtained through the questionnaire which was distributed to the MS English teachers in the

district of Oum El Bouaghi (OEB) (a random sample of 22 teachers was taken from: 4 MSs in

OEB, 2 MSs in Ain El Baida, and 2 MSs in Berrich) in order to assess their attitudes towards both

textbooks, the grammatical sequencing, and the grammar presentation. The questionnaire results

were treated by the SPSS 20.0 and presented in tables.

5. Structure of the Research

In an ideal setting, the current study is presented in 3 chapters in addition to the general

introduction and conclusion. The first chapter is related to the literature review, it is consisted of

two sections: the first section is about teaching grammar and the grammatical sequencing whereas

the second section talks about the textbook evaluation. In addition, the other two chapters are

- 5 -

related to the field of investigation, with the application of two different tools that are discussed in

two sparable chapters. The 2nd chapter discusses the qualitative results that are obtained from the

evaluation of the 2nd and the 3rd year textbooks through relying on the checklist method.

Furthermore, the third chapter is devoted to analyze the quantitative results after treating the

collected data and presenting them in tables via the SPSS 20.0. Finally, a conclusion, research

limitations and suggestions for future research are made to sum up the whole study.

- 6 -

Chapter One: Teaching Grammar and Textbook Evaluation

Section one: Teaching Grammar and Grammatical Sequencing

Introduction

1.1.Definition of Grammar

1.2.Types of grammar

1.2.1. Prescriptive Grammar

1.2.2. Descriptive Grammar

1.2.2.1.Difference Between the Prescriptive and Descriptive Grammar

1.2.3. Pedagogical Grammar

1.3.Teaching Grammar of EFL

1.3.1. Approaches and Methods to Teaching Grammar

1.3.1.1.Deductive Approach Vs Inductive Approach

1.3.1.2.Grammar Translation Method Vs Direct Method

1.3.1.3.Audiolingual Method

1.3.1.4.Communicative Language Teaching

1.3.1.5.Competency Based Approach

1.4.Grammatical Sequencing

1.4.1. The Importance of the Context

Section two: Textbook Evaluation

Introduction

2.1. The Role of Textbook in English language teaching (ELT)

2.1.1. Advantages

2.1.2. Disadvantages

- 7 -

2.2. Textbook Evaluation

2.2.1. The Need for Textbook Evaluation

2.2.2. Types and Approaches to Textbook Evaluation

2.2.2.1. Predictive Evaluation Vs Retrospective Evaluation

2.2.2.2. Pe-use, In-use and Post-use Evaluations

2.2.2.3. Macro-evaluation Vs Micro-evaluation

2.2.3. Methods for Evaluating a Textbook

2.3. Checklist as a Tool of Evaluation

2.4. Evaluating the Presentation of Grammar in ELT Textbooks

Conclusion

- 8 -

Section One: Teaching Grammar and Grammatical Sequencing

Introduction

English is the first language of many countries, or else it is absolutely taught as the second

or the third language in many other countries like in the Middle East with its history, literature,

grammar, and its four language skills using textbooks starting from primary schools or middle

schools so that children will be able to practice, speak, and use English from an early age. This

will help them to develop their communicative and linguistic competences through time. In fact,

the main focus to teach and learn English is given to its grammar structure and complexity rather

than any other aspect of the English language.

1.1. Definition of Grammar

Grammar is an important aspect of a language, and it has more than one definition since

scholars and linguists have different points of view, perspectives, and arguments that ended up

with several conclusions to define grammar. One common definition, which is found in Oxford

Dictionary of English Grammar, says that grammar is “the entire system of a language, including

its syntax, morphology, semantics and phonology” (Chalker & Weiner, 1994, p. 177). According

to Patrick Hartwell (1989) grammar could be categorized into five definitions that can be

summarized as follows: set of formal patterns in which the words of a language are arranged in

order to convey a larger meaning; the branch of linguistic science which is concerned with the

description, analysis, and formulation of the formal language patterns; linguistic etiquette; school

grammar; and, lastly, grammatical terms used in the interest of teaching prose. All of these

previous definitions were questioned in the 1950’s for the fact that they were too compelled.

Therefore, The Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English defines grammar as "The study and

practice of the rules by which words change their forms and are combined into sentences” (Harmer,

- 9 -

1991. p. 1). There are two basic elements in this definition: the rules of grammar; and the study

and practice of the rules. Finally, Grammar shows the ability of a person to express him/ herself,

their ideas, and emotions well. This ability is reflected in the way they use a language effectively,

and without grammar people cannot understand each other. As Crystal (2004) stresses: “Grammar

is the structural ability to express ourselves.”

1.2. Types of Grammar

Thornbury (2006) divides grammar into three types: prescriptive, descriptive and

pedagogical grammar.

1.2.1. Prescriptive Grammar

According to linguists Depraetere and Langford (2012), A prescriptive grammar is one that

gives hard and fast rules about what is grammatical and what is ungrammatical, often with advice

about what to not say but with little explanation. In other words, prescriptive grammar is based on

a set of rules that people who share the same language can judge wether these rules are right or

wrong, and how they should be used and considered as right and correct in their own language

because they define its structure and complexity which make the difference from other languages

that may have another language system.

1.2.2. Descriptive Grammar

Unlike the prescriptive grammar that deals and cares about the “right and wrong” of a

language to be considered grammatically correct, the descriptive grammar is more about the “why

and how” of a language in order to study how the language should actually be used by adult native

speakers, not only in writing and standard language but also in speech and the spoken language.

In fact, many linguists defined the descriptive grammar in different ways taking Richard Nordquist

(2015), a professor at Armstrong Atlantic State University and author of grammar and composition

- 10 -

textbooks, who sees that descriptive grammar refers to the structure of language that is used by

speakers and writers in common communication. In Addition, Battistella (2005) said that

descriptive grammar is the basis for dictionaries, which record changes in vocabulary and usage,

and for the field of linguistics, which aims at describing languages and investigating the nature of

language. These perspectives clarify that a descriptive grammar is a set of rules about language

based on how it is actually used. In a descriptive grammar, there is no right or wrong language. It

can be compared with a prescriptive grammar, which is a set of rules based on how people think

language should be used.

1.2.3. Difference between the Prescriptive and Descriptive Grammar

The difference between descriptive grammar and prescriptive grammar is comparable to

the difference between constitutive rules, which determine how something works (such as the rules

for the game of chess), and regulatory rules, which control behavior (such as the rules of etiquette).

If the former are violated, the thing cannot work, but if the latter are violated, the thing works, but

crudely, awkwardly, or rudely (Brinton & Brinton, 2010). So prescriptive grammar is the one

taught in school and mandated by language academies which requires conscious efforts from

learners to remember and to apply. For example, the I vs Me: John and me are going to have lunch.

In prescriptive grammar, the example is wrong because “me” is used as subject, and the correct

sentence should be: “John and I are going to have lunch.” Because “me” should be used as object.

However, in descriptive grammar, “me” is becoming increasingly widespread in subject position.

1.2.4. Pedagogical Grammar

Pedagogical grammar is a modern approach in linguistics intended for teaching an

additional language. This method of teaching is divided into the descriptive grammatical analysis

and the prescriptive articulation of a set of rules following an analysis of the context and

- 11 -

instructions designed for second-language students to manifest and describe how to use grammar

for the purpose of communication for them to learn the target language. The main aim of

pedagogical grammar, also called ped grammar or teaching grammar, is to focus on how

grammatical items are made more learnable and teachable. Davies (2007) in his edited book

“Introduction to Applied Linguistics” mentioned that a pedagogical grammar may be based on the

following: a grammatical analysis and description of the language, a particular grammatical theory,

and the study of the grammatical problems of learners or on a combination of approaches.

1.3. Teaching Grammar of EFL

Every foreign language has its own rules and characteristics that make it a learned

language. In addition, every approved language to be taught academically and internationally, like

English, has its own grammar rules that should incorporate all the four language skills: listening,

speaking, reading, and writing. These skills can be taught separately, in pairs, or all together at the

same time. It actually depends on the needs of the learners, the chosen activities, and the aims the

teacher wants his/her students to achieve. The students can also learn and practice the grammar

rules by using and being familiar with different modalities. In fact, in the past, people were

depending on only one method to study the grammar of a foreign language through; it is important

to mention that some of those methods are still in use till nowadays even though the linguists

developed more useful methods and approaches which provide better understanding and practice

rather the very first teaching methods like the grammar translation method and direct method.

1.3.1. Approaches and Methods of Teaching Grammar

Grammar is an important aspect for effective language learning. It can be taught through

different approaches and methods. Although the principles of these approaches and methods are

- 12 -

different from one another, there is always a focus on grammar whether it is presented explicitly

or implicitly.

1.3.1.1.Deductive Approach Vs Inductive Approach

Inductive grammar teaching allows the students to discover the grammar rules by

themselves. For example, the teacher will give them a reading passage then ask them to pay

attention to certain words to discover or to reach something at the end; these words can be verbs

that are in present tense then changed to past tense of any other tense just in order to discover such

new grammar rules. The new grammar rule like knowing new tense, adjectives, adverbs, or any

other grammar structure will be led to by answering the given questions by the teacher. The main

goal in inductive grammar is to let the students be their own guide and notice the difference or the

new change in that grammar rules by themselves as in the comparative and the superlative

adjectives, the students will automatically notice the word formation of the given adjective and so

on.

However, in the deductive grammar teaching, it is more about the standard grammar

teaching which is a more familiar method to teach English grammar where the grammar rules are

presented and studied explicitly, and the common practice is translation exercises. In fact, the

teacher is more to be the controller of teaching the new grammar lecture, s/he will go over the rules

then gives the examples, and at the end the students role comes after the full explanation of the

lecture by the teacher, they will apply the rules of the lecture by doing exercises, activities, or

worksheets to apply these new learned rules. This method has advantages because some

grammatical structures do not lend themselves very well to inductive teaching on one hand, but

when it is teacher-centered the student may not learn very well because s/he will need to ask

questions and have some ambiguity especially concerning the complicated grammar rules as it can

- 13 -

take much longer for them to realize how to apply those rules taking into consideration the fact

that not all the students have the same cognitive ability to learn something new, and there are

different levels in one classroom.

1.3.1.2.Grammar Translation Method Vs Direct Method

The Grammar Translation Method (GTM) and the Direct Method (DM) appeared in the

pre-method era (18th and 19th century) basically where the methods in this era are not scientific

and were not based on any approach. First, the main purpose behind the emergence of GTM is that

it was suggested to teach classical languages like Latin, Greek, Roman…etc. It is also called

Traditional method, Classical method, Academic method, German method, and Prussian method.

Its main aim is to help students to read and translate written texts where students are given set of

texts and asked to translate them from the foreign language to the native or the mother tongue

language, and it focuses on two things which are Grammar and Translation to further student’s

general intellectual development. The GTM immersed in analyzing the grammatical structure,

understanding and manipulating morphology and syntax of the studied foreign language and more

specifically its grammatical forms and structure for by virtue of the fact that grammar was

considered as important as the Bible language, and no other language aspect is above the grammar

because mastery of the grammar of the foreign language is essential to understand the written

target language. The grammar is taught deductively which is a method that teachers still use in

order to teach English Grammar rules, and to enable students’ primary skills to develop in reading

and writing.

Nevertheless, the DM appeared in the 19th century as a reaction to the GTM, and to aim

for teaching grammar inductively and to emblematize how to teach the second language to learners

- 14 -

in order to use language for communication purposes, and because of the demand for developing

oral communication because in GTM the focus is on accuracy rather than fluency.

1.3.1.3.Audiolingual Method

The Audio-lingual Method (ALM) has emerged during the second World War as the Army

Method, then in 1960, it was renamed the Audio-lingual method. The audio-lingual approach was

influenced by both structural linguistics and behavioral psychology (Gascoigne, 2002).

Consequently, the goal of this method is to use the target language communicatively that is focused

on developing listening and speaking skills. It uses the assumption that language learning is the

gaining of a set of correct language habits (Freemen, 1986). The ALM is based on drill exercises

– pupils repeat grammatical patterns until they are able to produce them spontaneously.

Additionally, grammar is learned from models which means it is taught implicitly by drill to

support speaking and listening although no specific grammar rules are given (Simenson, 1998).

1.3.1.4.Communicative language teaching (CLT)

“Communicative language teaching arose in the 1970s from dissatisfaction with grammar-

translation and audiolingual approaches, which began to be seen as too limited for enabling

learners to learn how to actually use the language” (Burnsp, 2011, p. 78). The focus has shifted

from form to meaning (Freemen, 2000). Thus, the main goal of this approach is to prepare students

for various types of communicative situations in a given social context, in other terms enabling

learners to use language appropriately in real contexts. Furthermore, CLT emphasizes the use of

authentic language; the teacher is not an authority but a facilitator creating a relaxed class

atmosphere and an adviser during the activities. He teaches grammar inductively because the goal

of the method is not providing knowledge about grammar rules directly. Therefore, teachers do

not correct every mistake that the learner made in performing tasks like role-play and problem-

- 15 -

solving tasks. All the grammar and vocabulary that pupils learn follow from the function and the

situational context.

1.3.1.5.Competency based approach

Competency-based approach (CBA) first emerged in the United States in the 1970s and it

was initially adopted to help immigrants and refugees learn English and life skills and for the

designation of vocational training programs. Later, it started to get employed in a range of

Australian professional spheres to discuss problems and ways of the modernization of education

(Bowden, 2004). CBA is a popular approach and well-known to educators and scientists all over

the world. Richards and Rodgers (2001) hold that CBA focuses on the outcomes of learning. It

addresses what the learners are expected to do rather than what they are expected to learn about.

The CBA advocates defining educational goals in terms of precise measurable descriptions of

knowledge, skills and behaviors that students should possess at the end of a course of study.

Similarly, Schneck (1978) views CBA as an outcome-based instruction that is adaptive to the needs

of students, teachers and the community. Therefore, learner's needs dominate the approach where

language skills, grammar and vocabulary are sequenced according to the learner's needs.

Additionally, translation is used only if necessary for communication; context is used as much as

possible to help the learner deduce meaning. Authentic materials are also used where the learner

is encouraged to practice the language by performing real tasks outside of the classroom, thus

helping in his linguistic and communicative development.

Briefly, CBA is concerned with the development of processes of learning as well as

competencies whose components are: know-how, know-how to do and know-how to be. It aims at

focusing on meaning rather than form and at equipping the learner not only with knowledge, but

- 16 -

more importantly with proper primary, social and intellectual skills to use that knowledge in real

life situations by providing the learner with a natural context for language use (Freeman, 2000).

1.4. Grammatical Sequencing

Learning a language means learning its grammar for the fact that there will be no meaningful

sentences built of random words or expressions without the use of grammar to make coherence

between these words. Actually, teaching the foreign language (FL) grammar to the FL learners is

an important issue for the reason that the teaching items in the FL coursebooks must be arranged

in a suitable way for the teaching situations and the target learner needs and levels. In order to

follow the appropriate sequencing of the teaching items, “it is almost essential to have practical

teaching experience with pupils for whom a given course is intended, because the teaching

program must be sensitive to the precise needs of the pupils” (Halliday, 1964, cited in Freeman,

1974). Consequently, the teachers have to be experienced and aware about their learner’ needs to

provide them with the appropriate sequence of the grammar teaching structures.

The grammatical sequencing of the FL is based on different factors and criteria like the order

according to the difficulty or simply the complexity factor, the sequencing according to the

frequency, and last but not least the sequencing according to the utility or the communicative

needs.

A rule difficulty can depend on learners’ language learning aptitude. Therefore, the

sequence of the grammar structures is related to the learners’ perceptions of how difficult the given

rules are in order to decide which types of rules are a priority to teach. Many may think that the

order of the grammar structures has to be presented from the simplest to the most complex

especially in the early stage of learning a language. According to Krashen (2003), the order is not

based on a grammar item being simple or complex. He claimed that some rules that seem simple

- 17 -

(e.g., the third person singular) are acquired late; others that appear complex are acquired early.

Nickel (1971) saw that the producer of language material must know something about the problem

of difficulty from the learner's point of view. His staging and sequencing of the material will

depend upon his idea of what linguistic difficulty is. Simply, the issue of difficulty and structures’

complexity have to be assessed according to learners’ perspectives and needs in order to decide

the appropriate sequencing of the grammar content and items that are to be taught and delivered

to learners to reach a specific goal.

Moreover, the grammatical sequencing according to the frequency of structural occurrence

means that the items that are in frequent use need to be taught before those that are rarely used.

The learners will also be familiar with the frequent used items, and this help them in the

recognition, learning and recall processes (Higa, 1965, cited in Freeman, 1974), in other words the

learners will master the language and use it appropriately. Finally, the criteria of utility or making

the sequence that is based on the learners’ communicative needs. By utility it is meant “the

usefulness of a particular structure to the students as viewed by its presence in relevant situations

of the students' lives and in fulfilling their need to communicate” (Freeman, 1974). In other words,

teaching the learners the structures that they need to communicate in the target situation. In

addition to the previous idea, Oller (1972) stated that it is not enough for the language student to

learn to produce well-structured sentences grammatically. The learner must also learn when it is

appropriate to produce them and must acquire the ability to produce well-formed verbal sequences

on the appropriate occasions. Apparently, the learners have to learn the grammar structures in a

particular sequence which has to be suitable to their communicative needs.

1.4.1. The Importance of the Context

- 18 -

There has always been a debate about how should grammar be taught ? Or what is the best

method that should be followed to teach grammar ? However, from the recent developments of

grammar teaching, it is approved that teaching grammar in context is one of the important grammar

teaching tips through providing a context. It was also defined as "Grammar is a system of

meaningful structures and patterns that are governed by particular pragmatic constraints.”

(Freeman, 2001, p.251). Moreover,In an anthropological work of Malinawski (1923), he illustrates

a more dynamic approach to the study of language which is still influential today, particularly in

functional approaches to grammar "The Problem of Meaning in Primitive Languages" is an essay

as a supplement in Ogden and Richards, Malinowski sets out his arguments for the role of context

(of situation and of culture) in the construction of meaning .Therefore, Many linguists are

exploring ways of grounding their description of language in the cultural, geographical, social and

economic conditions stressed by Malinowski. These factors are seen as influencing how language

is used in context. Consequently which points at when teaching grammar rules in isolation, they

do not give much meaning as in teaching grammar in context where it will be more affective with

outcomes.

Learners can use the foreign language affectively when they study its grammar, but

knowing about the grammar can help them to be more successful in developing their speaking

skills and writing performances, according to Emery, Kierzek and Lindblom (1978) :

Just as there are careful and effective drivers who do not know what makes a car run, so

there are those who, through practice and skillful observation, have become satisfactory,

even effective, writers with very little understanding of the mechanics of the language. But

it follows that the more you know about the form and function of the parts that make up

- 19 -

the larger unit, the sentence, the better equipped you are to recognize and to construct well-

formed sentences… (p. 1)

For this reason, teaching grammar in contexts involves making connections between

grammatical patterns and the meaning of texts, and wider contextual aspects such as genre,

audience, subject and purpose, a reader’s feelings, and responses to a text potential authorial

motivations for making decisions about language choices. For more clarifications, the context can

be a song, a movie, a game, a video, short stories, or even recommended cartoons by the teacher,

and the teacher will see if they can dissect the grammatical structure within those activities or

resources if the learners are beginners, or children who are also new and beginners to English as a

new foreign language. Furthermore, Many grammar lessons can be taught and learned in one

lesson. Sometimes, students may not relate to a given passage that they should read for instance,

and Ellis (2006) highlights at this important point by saying : "Grammar teaching involves any

instructional technique that draws learners‘ attention to some specific grammatical form in such a

way that it helps them either to understand it metalinguistically and/or process it in comprehension

and/or production so that they can internalize it" (p.84)

Therefore, the teacher can point at the grammar structures that are in that passage; if the

passage is about scientific facts, the teacher can ease the passage for them by covering some

grammatical structures through activities they can do like: simple past, simple present, modal

verbs, prefixes and suffixes, articles, phrasal verbs, and many more. These activities will develop

the four language skills of the student. It is also important to mention that Weaver (2001) points at

teaching grammar in isolation will not be useful for learners and concluded that "teaching

traditional grammar in isolation is not a very practical act" (p. 18). Whereas Thornbury (1999)

adds "if learners are going to be able to make sense of grammar, they will need to be exposed to it

- 20 -

in its contexts of use, and at the very least this means in texts" (p. 72) which proves that texts play

huge role in keeping the grammatical items clearer for learners to know how to use them through

different contexts not only for the sake of learning the foreign language, but also for using and

applying these rules in real life situations.

- 21 -

Section Two: Textbook Evaluation

Introduction

Any person who comes across the process of teaching and learning has come across the

term ‘evaluation’. In many cases evaluation differs according to its target aims whether it is

curriculum evaluation, teacher evaluation, student evaluation or more recently textbook

evaluation. Andon (2018) claims that “Materials are at the very center of language teaching and

understanding what goes into creating them is an essential part of a language teacher's professional

development”. ELT textbooks are the essential elements in TEFL and are currently the most widely

used teaching materials in schools; consequently, materials evaluation has been a new trend in the

process of language teaching and learning in order to fit a particular teaching situation and to meet

learners’ needs. Tomlinson (2001) believes that the study of materials development did not receive

enough attention until the 1990s when books on this subject started to be published.

2.1. The Role of Textbook in English Language Teaching (ELT)

Among various materials used for language learning and teaching, textbooks serve as a key

component in most language programs (Richards, 2001). A Textbook is a pedagogical tool used

in the teaching-learning process, and it is beneficial to both teachers and students (Harmer, 2007);

in addition, Ahour and Ahmadi (2012) state, “textbooks are the main sources that convey the

knowledge and information to the learners in an easy and organized way” (p. 176). It continues to

play an important and positive role in ELT classrooms all over the world (Dendrinos,1992; Lee,

1997; William, 1983). According to Hutchinson and Torres (1994), it has a great and essential part

to play in teaching and learning English. However, they state that textbooks provide the necessary

input into classroom lessons through different activities, readings and explanations. Thus, they will

always survive on the grounds that they meet certain needs. Allwright (1981) adds a further

- 22 -

dimension to its role by characterizing the lesson as a dynamic interaction between learners,

teachers and materials that enhance the opportunities to learn. All in all, the importance of

textbooks in ELT classroom is so extensive and cannot be ignored because they make the lives of

teachers and learners easier, more secure, and fruitful (Hutchinson & Torres, 1994) and it is crucial

to any ELT program (Litz, 2005; Sheldon, 1988).

2.1.1 Advantages

Textbooks represent the visible heart of any ELT program, and they offer considerable

advantages for both the student and the teacher particularly when they are being used in the

ESL/EFL classroom. (Sheldon, 1988).

Cunningsworth (1995) claims that textbooks have several additional roles in the ELT

curriculum. He argues that they are an effective resource for self-directed learning, an effective

resource for presentation material, a source of ideas and activities, a reference source for students,

a syllabus where they reflect pre-determined learning objectives, and support for less experienced

teachers who have yet to gain in confidence.

Additionally, Ur (1996) states the advantages of the coursebook as follows: it provides a

clear framework for both teacher and students, it provides a set of materials which mostly suit

learners’ levels and save time for the teachers, it is economical and convenience, and, finally, it

helps students to develop their autonomy towards learning.

Overall, it can be concluded that textbooks can be specified as teaching aids which help

teaching and learning process especially in EFL context.

2.1.2. Disadvantages

Although textbooks seem to offer many advantages, there has been an ongoing debate as

to the usefulness of coursebook-based teaching (McGrath, 2002). One central argument against

- 23 -

the use of textbooks is that no single textbook can meet the unique needs of individual learners

and classrooms (Gak, 2011; Richards, 2001; Tomlinson, 2001; Ur, 2012), i.e., for different groups

of learners with differing learning needs and learning styles, no single textbook can be perfect.

Likewise, topics in a textbook may not be relevant for and interesting to all learners; out-of-date

and inauthentic materials besides to the irrelevance of the content and activities which leads to a

lack of interest on the part of students (Block, 1991; Graves, 2000; Ur, 2012). Excessive

dependence on textbooks may result in teachers teaching the textbook not the language, that is, it

inhibits and kills teachers' creativity; Cortazi and Jin (1999) view that textbooks act as a deskiller,

they reduce the teacher’s role and limit the teacher’s creativity. Also, they might offer a content

that is culturally inappropriate (Harmer, 2001). More specifically, textbooks may include

stereotypical representations of genders, nations and cultures, as well as being biased against or in

favor of certain groups in the society (Arıkan, 2005; Gray, 2000; Richards, 2001; Singh, 1998).

Lastly, the textbooks may distort reality by depicting an idealized view of the world that is free of

problems (McGrath, 2013; Richards, 2001).

Even though textbooks might be afflicted with some or at least one of the shortcomings

motioned above, they continue to be utilized as the most popular sources of transferring knowledge

by all language teachers in their classrooms.

2.2. Textbook Evaluation

Textbooks influence what teachers teach and to some extent how students learn (McGrath

2002) that is why Ellis (1997) contends that every single textbook used to teach should be

evaluated.

2.2.1. The Need for Textbook Evaluation

- 24 -

No textbook is perfect and/or can fit each teaching situation or a language program.

Therefore, the evaluation of textbooks is needed to find out the most possible one which can be

used to achieve the goals and objectives of teaching-learning process. Sheldon (1988) states that

textbook evaluation process is supporting teachers to have appropriate knowledge of the content

of textbooks and recognize pros and cons of the textbooks used. In other terms, textbook evaluation

would provide a sense of familiarity with a book's content thus helping educators in identifying

the strengths and weaknesses in textbooks already in use. Furthermore, textbooks must be

evaluated in order to check and ensure their appropriateness. In this regard, Tomlinson (2001)

contends that textbook evaluation is an applied linguistic activity through which teachers, material

developers, administrators and supervisors can make sound judgments on the efficiency of the

materials for the people using them in a particular context. In addition, the evaluation helps mostly

in making some adaptations to fit the teaching-learning situation, choosing and selecting the

appropriate materials that suit the learners needs. Hutchinson (1987) claims that evaluation aids

the teachers in selection of the teaching materials and the development of their awareness of

language and learning. One extra reason for textbook evaluation is the fact that it can be very useful

in teacher development and professional growth.

Generally, textbook evaluation helps curriculum designers and material developers to

consider key issues while designing language courses.

2.2.2. Types and Approaches of Textbook Evaluation

Different types and approaches of textbook evaluation have been proposed by different

scholars, the most important ones are discussed below.

2.2.2.1.Predictive Evaluation vs. Retrospective Evaluation

- 25 -

Ellis (1997) differentiates between two types of evaluation: predictive evaluation and

retrospective evaluation. A predictive evaluation is designed to take decisions related to which

materials to select and which ones to effectively use. He indicates that there are two principal ways

in which teachers can carry out predictive evaluation. One is to rely on evaluations carried out by

expert reviewers who identify specific criteria for evaluating materials. The other way is that

teachers can do their own predictive evaluations systematically by making use of various checklists

and guidelines available in the literature. Once the materials have been used, a retrospective

evaluation may be conducted. Ellis (1997) states that “a retrospective evaluation serves as a means

of testing the validity of a predictive evaluation and what is more, it may point to ways in which

the predictive instruments can be improved for future use” (p.37). Basically, it is done when the

material is used while teaching to investigate their overall success to achieve the course objectives.

Also, retrospective evaluation can be useful to understand which activity works and which does

not, so it can help to improve and modify the materials for future use. As can be understood from

the above definitions, both predictive and retrospective evaluations aim at making the teaching

and learning environment more effective. They both help teachers to make an appropriate

judgement concerning the effectiveness of their teaching including the materials they used.

2.2.2.2.Pre-Use, In-Use, and Post-Use Evaluations

Cunningsworth (1995) also talks about three types of evaluation. He claims that evaluation

can take place before a coursebook is used, during its use and after use depending on the purposes

for which the evaluation is being undertaken. A pre-use evaluation is aimed to look for future or

potential performance of the coursebook, i.e., it is useful for future prediction about the possible

pedagogical value of the materials and related decision about textbook selection for a specific

program. In-use evaluation, on the other hand, refers to a kind of evaluation which is carried out

- 26 -

while the material is in-use to see whether the set objectives of the course are met or not and how

much of the material is successful in fulfilling those objectives. However, post- use evaluation

provides retrospective assessment of a coursebook’s performance as Ellis (1997) has already

mentioned. Post–use evaluation is useful for identifying strengths and weaknesses of the

coursebook after a period of continuous use. As Cunningsworth (1995) states, post evaluation is

useful in helping to decide whether to use the same coursebook on future occasions.

2.2.2.3.Macro-evaluation vs. Micro-evaluation

There are two main approaches that have an important role for the purpose of selecting,

improving and modifying materials to suit the needs of learners and teachers in a particular

teaching-learning context. These are called macro approach and micro approach to evaluation of

materials. A macro evaluation focuses on an overall assessment of whether a set of materials has

worked in relation to the needs identified. In a micro evaluation, however, the focus is on the

evaluation of effectiveness of the tasks. A micro evaluation of a task can both show to what extent

a task is appropriate for the particular group of learners and reveal certain weaknesses in its design

(Ellis, 1997).

2.2.3. Methods for Evaluating a Textbook

There are three basic methods for textbooks evaluation: impressionistic, checklist, and in-

depth methods. Montasser (2013) reports that the impressionistic method deals with analyzing a

textbook based on a general impression obtained by means of checking the textbook contents in

view of organization, layout, the presented topics as well as the visuals, and so forth.

Cunningsworth (1995) states that applying the impressionistic method means taking its literal

meaning by quickly having a look through the textbook to get an overview that can provide general

information about its design and structure. Nonetheless, such a method is claimed to be inadequate

- 27 -

in itself but could be integrated with another method to help gain more precise information about

the textbooks being evaluated. The second method is named the checklist method. It is a systematic

method of evaluation which includes a set of criteria ordered in a certain way within a list; it helps

in making the comparison among diverse materials easier and less time consuming (More

information will be covered later). A third distinguished method is the in-depth method which

provides a vigilant assessment and detailed evaluation of the representative aspects of the textbook;

for instance, the ability to assess the design of a specific unit and/or an exercise as selecting one

or two chapters and look at the balance of skills and activities contained in each unit

(Cunningsworth, 1995; McDonough & Shown, 1993; Montasser, 2013). Cunningsworth (1995),

“The in-depth approach is characterized by its active nature: we actively seek out information

about the material in line with an agenda that we have already decided on” (p. 2). Widodo (2015)

reports that this method elaborates on students’ needs, their attitudes towards learning, besides the

practical teaching-learning approach.

2.3. Checklist as a Tool of Evaluation

Choosing appropriate language teaching textbooks and materials becomes a challenging

task because of the great variety of published ELT materials available on the market

(Cunningsworth, 1995). Consequently, particular attention is given to materials evaluation in order

to select an effective and appropriate textbook. One of the common methods that play a crucial

role in evaluating ELT materials is the checklist. An evaluation checklist is an instrument that

helps teachers or program developers to evaluate and rate the quality of teaching materials before

or after their usage by providing the evaluators with a set of statement that correspond to specific

criteria (Mukundan, Nimehchisalem & Hajimohammadi, 2011).

- 28 -

The checklist method is advocated by most experts. For instance, Tomlinson (1998)

supports the use of this method and claims that one of the most obvious sources for guiding the

textbook evaluation process is the use of checklists. He adds that the checklist typically contains

implicit assumptions about what desirable materials should look like, and each of these areas might

be debatable while also limit their applicability. Therefore, the checklist has at least four

advantages: it is systematic which ensures the consideration of all the important elements, it is

effective which permits recording a good deal of information in a short space of time; the

information is recorded in a convenient format which allows for easy comparison between

competing sets of material, also it is explicit and flexible which offers a common framework for

decision making (McGrath, 2002).

There are many checklists proposed by various scholars at different times from different

perspectives. Some scholars offer several criteria to consider whenever analyzing textbooks for

EFL/ESL classes, whereas the evaluative criteria should be chosen according to the learning-

teaching context and the specific needs of learners and teachers (Byrd, 2001; Cunningsworth,

1995; Sheldon, 1988). Here some criteria that are proposed by different authors in the literature.

Skierso's (1991) checklist includes the features related to bibliographical data, purposes,

subject matter, vocabulary and structures, exercises and activities, and layout and physical

makeup. These fields are aligned with those in Cunningsworth's (1995) checklist which comprises

aims and approaches, design and organization, language content, skills, topic, methodology and

practical consideration. Some criteria in the above checklists are the same and useful for the

evaluation of the textbooks. Therefore, the current study adapted an evaluative checklist from the

above criteria where the majority of the selected questions are taken from Skierso's (1991)

checklist.

- 29 -

One of the most expansive checklists is Sheldon's (1988). It attempts to assess all aspects

of content including such diverse factors as graphics and physical characteristics to authenticity

and flexibility. Also, Murcia (2001) has other criteria. The criteria are divided into two kinds:

analysis of content for implementation in teaching which includes both linguistic content and

thematic content, and the analysis of teaching activities for implementation in teaching (includes

8 questions).

Williams (1983) presented a scheme for evaluating ESL/EFL textbooks which includes

these features: up-to-date methodology of L2 teaching, guidance for non-native speakers of

English, needs of learners, and relevance to the socio-cultural environment. “Each of these features

can be evaluated in terms of linguistic/pedagogical aspects: general, speech, grammar, vocabulary,

reading, writing, and technical. For each of these aspects, then, four evaluative items are

considered to provide a checklist. The weighting system of this checklist is based on a 5-point

scale: 0-4” (Karamoozian & Riazi, 2008. p.5).

Byrd (2001, as cited in Celce-Murcia, 2001) developed a checklist that includes 4 main

evaluative criteria: the fit between the textbook and the curriculum, the fit between the textbook

and the students, the fit between the textbook and the teachers, and overall evaluation of the fit of

the book for the course in the program.

Yet, it is hardly surprising that a single set of criteria cannot be used for evaluating all

different kinds of materials (Johnson & Johnson, 1999). Sheldon (1988) points out: “no one is

really certain what criteria and constraints are actually operatives in ELT context, worldwide, and

textbook criteria are emphatically local” (p. 241). Since the nature of the teaching/learning

environment may vary from context to context as Sheldon (1998) emphasizes that a “global list of

criteria can never apply in most local environments, without considerable evaluation” (p. 242).

- 30 -

To sum up, the checklist is considered as the best tool to carry out a systematic and reliable

evaluation of ELT textbooks. Though, one checklist cannot be applicable in various situations and

contexts, so it needs some adaptations to fit the learning-teaching situation and the learners needs.

2.4. Evaluating the Presentation of Grammar in ELT Textbooks

Grammar is the fundamental system organizing a language (Stathis & Gotsch, 2011).

However, Grammar presentation has been an issue in evaluating ELT textbooks. There are

different approaches to present grammar structures in ELT materials, the most common ones are

the deductive and inductive approaches presented by Ellis (2006). The deductive approach

introduces grammatical rules explicitly and then they are applied by students (Mohammed & Jaber,

2008). On the other hand, the inductive approach presents new grammatical structures implicitly

to students in a real language context, so that the students learn the rules from the context (Ming-

jun, 2008). The evaluator should focus on whether grammar is represented deductively or

inductively in the textbook and how the approache/s, that has/have been used, is/are appropriate

to learners’ level and age in a way that enables learners to apply grammar subconsciously in their

foreign language production.

The selection of grammar items is based on learner’s language needs, the evaluator should

question whether the priority is given to language form or use (meaning) in order to investigate

the balance between the structural and meaningful presentation. Additionally, the grammar

structures should be presented in short units and modules to facilitate the language learning

process. Also, the presentation of language items should be in relation to the previously acquired

aspects, that is compare and contrast them with the new ones (Aytug, 2007).

The textbook would provide a relevant explanation to considering the different meanings

of structural issues (Cunningsworth, 1995), which means that a set of grammatical structures have

- 31 -

multiple meanings like the usage of present perfect and present continuous, so the textbook should

provide a clear info about such kind of different meanings.

Similarly, in Gönen’ study (2004) the grammar is presented in contexts that advocated the

presentation of structural details as well as their usages in contextual settings. They also suggested

to present grammar through visual aids. Although the students found the activities useful in the

intended grammar textbook, the incomprehensible instructions prevent them from understanding

the main purpose of the activities. The textbook was following an integrated skill approach and

the grammar is presented via the use of four language skills (Aytug, 2007).

Conclusion

To sum up, textbooks play a vital role in the ELT context. They are considered as the

essential resources for both teachers and learners, though they may have some shortcomings too.

Consequently, evaluation should be conducted in order to choose the most appropriate one for the

teaching-learning process. There are various types, approaches and method suggested by different

scholars for textbook evaluation such as: predictive and retrospective evaluations, pre-use, in-use

and post-use evaluations, macro and micro evaluations and lastly impressionistic, checklist and in-

depth methods. Apparently, the checklist is the most suitable tool for a systematic reliable

evaluation because it is flexible and includes so many criteria which can be adapted and modified

to meet the particular needs and objectives. Finally, textbooks include many aspects to be

evaluated as the presentation of grammar that, generally, has been an issue in evaluating ELT

textbooks.

- 32 -

Chapter Two: Evaluative Checklist

Introduction

3.1.Research Methodology

3.2.Textbooks Description

3.3.Analysis of MBE

3.3.1. Practical Consideration

3.3.2. Language Related Consideration

A. Grammar

B. Exercises and Activities

C. Layout and Physical Makeup

3.4.Summary of the Main Findings

Conclusion

- 33 -

Introduction

The previous chapter dealt with the literature review related to teaching grammar, grammar

sequencing and textbook evaluation. According to what has been stated before, the textbook plays

a crucial role in the teaching- learning process, it is considered to be the core material of ELT

program. Therefore, the evaluation of textbooks is needed to find out the best one which can be

used to achieve the goals and the objectives of the teaching-learning process. Therefore, this

chapter aims to make an evaluation of the 2nd and the 3rd year middle school (MS) English

textbooks My Book of English (MBE) in order to examine how the grammar content is structured

in their syllabi and in which way both textbooks meet the learners’ needs and interests.

3.1. Research Methodology

This research evaluates MBE of both 2nd and 3rd years through two different tools. This

chapter is going to deal with the qualitative research method, namely the evaluative checklist to

assess, generally, the textbooks and, particularly, the grammar content with its presentation.

Hence, a checklist is adapted in order to suit the needs of the research questions.

3.2. Textbooks Description

● Name of the coursebooks: My Book of English – Middle School – Year

Two/Three

● Intended learners’ level: the2nd year and the 3rd year, middle school level

● Authors: Head of project: TamrabetLounis (inspector of national education

Authors: ChanniAbdelfetah (material writer)

Boukri Nabila (middle school teacher trainer)

SmaraAbdelhakim (middle school teacher trainer)

Biskri Nadia (middle school inspector) (2nd year textbook)

- 34 -

Bouazid Tayeb (university teacher trainer) (3rd year textbook)

● Publisher: CASBAH editions

● Year/Place of publication:2016/Algeria

● Number of pages:159 for each

At the beginning of the academic year 2016-2017, the English textbooks of the so called

‘Second generation’ are introduced at the MS levels under the title of My Book of English. Their

aim is to increase the learner’s opportunities to develop competencies in the subject taught. MBE

of the 2nd and the 3rd year are designed on the same basis, and they have a similar layout. They are

made up of four sequences where their titles are thematic in their nature; each one is divided into

eleven stages, most of which have headings pointing to learners’ strategies or performances.

3.3. Analysis of MBE

According to Sheldon (1988), we need to evaluate textbooks for two reasons. First, the

evaluation will help the teacher or program developer in making decisions on selecting the

appropriate textbook. Furthermore, evaluation of the merits and demerits of a textbook will

familiarize the teacher with its probable weaknesses and strengths. On this regard, the research

aims to evaluate the textbooks to see whether they fit the teaching-learning process and in which

way the presentation of grammar meets the learners’ level and needs. Consequently, an evaluative

checklist is adopted in order to fit this aim. The questions are taken from Skierso’s (1991),

Cunningsworth’s (1995), Mukundan’s et al (2011) checklists, where the majority of the selected

questions are taken from Skierso's (1991) checklist. It is divided into two parts, first, the practical

consideration which includes three general questions about the textbooks. Second, language

related consideration that is divided into three sections: grammar, exercises and activities, and

layout and physical makeup.

- 35 -

3.3.1. Practical Consideration

A. Are the textbooks easily accessible?

Both textbooks are available locally, anyone could find them easily in the MSs, private

libraries and even on web sites as PDF files.

B. Is the price of textbooks reasonable?

The price generally seems reasonable, each textbook costs 245,76 DA which is not that

much expensive. Actually, the MSs offer the textbooks for free for a specific category of pupils.

C. Are the textbooks a recent publication?

Both textbooks belong to the second generation ‘My Book of English’ which is published

recently in 2016.

3.3.2. Language Related Consideration

A. Grammar

1.To what extent is the number of grammatical points appropriate and how appropriate is

their sequence?

The number of the grammatical items presented in the 2nd and the 3rd year English

textbooks are not appropriate to the learners’ cognitive levels and abilities because they are still

beginners and are not familiar yet with this new foreign language. In fact, there are so many

lectures to be learned concerning the whole language itself with its different aspects, but the

extensive presentation of the grammar structures is the first thing that can be noticed while

reviewing both textbooks’ contents. The number of the grammatical items that are presented in

each sequence differs according to the stated communicative objectives. About 5 to 10 items in

each sequence concerning the 2nd year textbook. Whereas in the 3rd year textbook, each sequence

includes about 7 to 9 grammar points. Consequently, the objectives that have been stated cannot

- 36 -

be achieved at the end. First, for the reason that the time allotted for teaching the material is not

sufficient to do so and second, the learners cannot absorb all that amount of information.

The sequence of the grammatical points in relation to the communicative objectives is

appropriate. Generally, both textbooks are designed on the basis of CBA principles which aim to

help the learners to develop their competences. In a way, the grammatical sequencing matches the

communicative or more specifically the linguistic objectives, taking as an example the third

sequence in the 2nd year textbook (me and my health). It started with the presentation of “have to”

and “must” to express obligation and prohibition, then moved to “should/not” to ask for and give

advice, and finally the use of the imperative to also give advice and make recommendations.

Similarly, the same sequencing presented in the fourth sequence in the 3rd year coursebook with

similar grammar aspects and objectives; thus, this shows that there is a kind of sequencing

regarding the grammar lectures between both textbooks.

2.To what extent are the presentations clear and complete enough for the learners to have

available a concise review outside the classroom?

The presentation of grammar rules in both textbooks is clear and the input is enough for

the learners to have a review outside the classroom. The table of contents My Book Map (example

1 in appendices1&2) provides them with the grammar headings that they are going to tackle in

each sequence. Additionally, each sequence offers a section heading of My Grammar Tools (MGT)

which helps the learner to find the grammar lessons easily. The grammatical points are presented

in a clear and concise way. In addition to the explanation of the teacher and his guidance, any

learner could concentrate and understand the content simply outside the classroom.

3.To what extent are the linguistic items (mainly grammar) introduced in meaningful

contexts?

- 37 -

It is highly important to introduce the grammar structures in different meaningful contexts

in order to help the learner fully understand them and make them able to apply and practice the

learnt knowledge easily and effectively while using the language in different situations. Actually,

the grammar structures in both textbooks are integrated with the other skills. For instance, the first

sequence in both textbooks is presenting the lecture of in/abilities. Can and can’t are used in

different occasions. First, they appear in My Pronunciation Tools (MPT) to show the learners how

these items must be pronounced in different settings, then they are applied through deferent tasks.

Second, they are included in different tasks related to grammar section and texts related to reading

and writing. Despite all these, the grammatical items in both textbooks are not introduced in

meaningful contexts. They are introduced through sentences in the presented rules. Into the

bargain, the various tasks allow the learners only to apply the rules as they are without giving them

the opportunity to practice the learned structures in various meaningful contexts.

4.To what extent does the presentation of grammar structures move gradually from the

simple to the more complex?

According to the 2nd year textbook content, there is no specific order that shows the

grammar structures are moving gradually from the simple to the more complex. For instance, in

the first sequence (me, my friends and my family) the lectures are presented as following: from

tenses to adjectives to possessive pronouns then to location markers then ability and inability, and

so on. This grammar order of the first sequence in a way is related to the stated objectives though

it cannot show any kind of gradual movement between the presented items.

In the 3rd year textbook, the presentation of grammar structures has apparently moved

gradually from the simplest to the more complex. Their sequence is related to the theme of the

sequence and its objectives. Each sequence starts from the simplest grammatical item until it

- 38 -

reaches the most complex one as in sequence two (me and lifestyles). It starts by reviewing the

simple past tense, and how to ask questions using the time marker “ago” in order to narrate past

events and memories. Then, it moves to talk about the past actions through the use of the semi-

modal “used to”. Finally, it ends up with the presentation of the adverbs of frequency to express

the frequent action, event, or state in addition to the use of “made of” and “made with” to talk

about material and place.

5.To what extent are the grammar points presented with brief, interesting and easy

examples, and explanations?

In the 3rd year textbook, the grammar rules are explained in a concise direct way and are

supported with brief, interesting and easy examples. Each rule is presented within a framework

with a clear easy language. the most important words or letters about the rule are written in bold

and in red color to make them easily comprehensible (example 3 in appendix 2). Also, examples

are simple, concrete, and familiar to the learners because they have already met them in the

listening section. Like the use of past tense continuous to talk about longer past events: we were

working on the miniaturization of cameras. Also, a concrete illustration about the learner’s daily

life like the use of can and may to formulate requests: can you help me do my work? May I have

some more sugar, please?

The same thing concerning the 2nd year textbook, the grammar points are presented in a

direct way starting with the new rule then followed by clear and simple examples through using

darker shade of a color to point at where the new grammar rule is placed (example 3 in appendix

1). The examples that are presented under the new grammatical lectures for the pupils are made

with the use of the previous new linguistic terms they have learned earlier in order to help them

- 39 -

realize how to actually use the new rule in sentences from the previous contexts with the right

tenses, in the appropriate time, and with its appropriate use.

6.To what extent are new structures controlled to be presented and explained before they

appear in drills, dialogues or reading materials?

Apparently, in both textbooks the new structures appear in drills and dialogues related to

the listening tasks before they are presented and explained in MGT section, then they are extended

to be used into different texts and tasks. As an example, the frequency adverbs in the first sequence

of the 3rd year textbook, they appear in the listening tasks (example 4 in appendix 2), then they are

discussed and explained in the grammar section. From one extreme, it could be something good

because it makes students familiar with these new items, on the other extreme, it can leave more

ambiguity about the rule and more focus on how to understand the given activity if they are not

even familiar with the structures of the sentences they are supposed to answer in tasks. This is

applied to most of the grammatical rules in both coursebooks. It is also noticed that both textbooks

in general are based on practice more than theory even before introducing the new items to pupils

first but starting to use them directly in tasks and activities instead.

7.To what extent do practice and recycling (production) of new grammatical items seem to

be appropriate for the level of language mastery of the learners?

After the presentation of the new grammatical items, learners must go through the practice

and the recycle processes in order to have a complete understanding about what they have already

learnt. The textbooks have in each sequence a specific section titled I practise which includes tasks

and practices related to grammar. The number of tasks differs from one sequence to another

according to the number of the grammatical structures that are introduced in each, the number is

between 16 to 28 tasks under MGT section in the 2nd year textbook whereas the grammar tasks in

- 40 -

the 3rd year textbook are between 14 to 24. As what has been noticed, the different exercises are

with direct instructions and with clear simple language that encourage the learner to practice the

already learnt grammar, like asking them to fill the gaps with the appropriate pronoun or write the

correct form of the verb in both clauses then combine them using the connector “while”. It should

also be mentioned that some of grammar points appeared in the next sequences in tasks and texts,

so that it helps pupils to practice the old ones and learn how to use them with the new structures,

and the new contexts they are learning. Likewise, tasks encourage the learner to make a recycling

to the learnt grammatical items by providing them with pictures and examples to follow the form

to formulate the right answer. As a result of what has been said, the practicing and recycling of

new grammatical items in both textbooks seem very appropriate for the level of language mastery

of the learners.

8.To what extent is there an even distribution of grammatical material among the chapters?

Each textbook includes four sequences, each sequence includes a specific number of

grammatical items that are presented in a relation to the objectives and the theme of the sequence.

In the 2nd year textbook, the number of the grammar points presented in each sequence differs. The

first sequence includes 7 items, 10 items in the 2nd, 5 items in the 3rd, while the 4th contains about

6 items. It can be said that there is not an even distribution among the textbook sequences. Unlike

in the 3rd year textbook, there is a balance in the number of structures that are presented in, between

7 to 9 items in each sequence. Consequently, the grammatical material is fairly distributed among

its sequences.

9. To what extent does the text make the structures presented easily accessible to the learner?

According to what has been said before, the grammar structures along both textbooks are

presented in a clear simple way to help the learner easily access the grammar content. The

- 41 -

sequences outline (example2 in appendices1& 2) includes MGT subheading which makes the

accessibility to grammar lectures easy; the structures are introduced in a clear and organized way

with the use of different colors and illustrations. The textbook provides also different tasks and

activities to practice the rules that have already been dealt with in both implicit and explicit ways.

Additionally, an irregular verb list appears at the end of the textbooks as a supporting tool to the

learners whenever they face problems in dealing with conjugation of the irregular verbs (example4

in appendix1 & example5 in appendix 2). As a result, it is clear that the grammar items in both

textbooks are easily accessible to the learner.

B. Exercises and Activities

1.To what extent do the exercises involve the grammar structures which build up the

learner’s repertoire and develop his/her ability to communicate increasingly independently

of text or teacher’s direction?

Both textbooks provide the learners with so many exercises to practice the grammatical

structures that have been already dealt with in order to fully understand and retain them and to

apply them while using the language to communicate easily. The instructions and the assignments

are simple and clear, they always include the pronoun “I” at the beginning, which means that the

learners have to rely on themselves to answer the task depending on their own repertoire about the

grammar rules and communicate independently from the text and the teacher’s direction.

C. Layout and Physical Makeup

1.To what extent are simple graphic devices effectively used to clarify the presentation of

grammatical structures?

The textbooks are intended for beginners; therefore, designers absolutely use the graphic

devices in different contexts in order to attract the learner’s attention. Though, their use for the

- 42 -

presentation of grammar is limited only to exercises through the use of some tables, they use the

red color and words in bold when presenting the rules to draw the learner's attention to the

important grammatical items.

2.To what extent are the illustrations clear, simple, and free of unnecessary details that may

confuse the learner?

A Chinese proverb says, “one sighted is worth a hundred words”.

The textbooks are full of illustrations because as what has been already stated, they are

intended for beginners. The illustrations are used in MPT, in MGT, and in different tasks and

activities. The presentation of grammatical structures is often supported with clear and simple

illustrations that are free of unnecessary details which in a way helps the learners to have a clear

understanding of the rules (example5 in appendix1 & example6 in appendix2).

3.4. Summary of the Main Findings

After the analysis and the assessment of the 2ndyear and the 3rd year MS English textbooks,

it has been noticed that the textbooks are designed on similar basis. Consequently, they met in

some points and differed in others. The checklist’ results show that the number of the grammatical

items presented in both textbooks is not appropriate and too much in comparison with the target

learners’ level who are still beginners. Furthermore, there is a sequencing in each and between

both textbooks concerning the grammar lectures. The 3rd year textbook provides consolidation of

previously learned knowledge in the 2nd year through reviewing and representing the preceding

level lectures. Additionally, the presented items in the 3rd year textbook have moved gradually

from the simplest to the more complex unlike in the 2nd year textbook where there is no specific

order that shows the grammar structures are moving gradually. Moreover, the grammar rules are

presented clearly with simple and concrete examples which makes the review outside the

- 43 -

classroom possible. Also, they are applied in different tasks which helps the learner to practice and

recycle the new items for a better understanding, though they are not introduced in meaningful

contexts. Most of the time grammar is presented implicitly which may provide some challenges

for the learners to understand the unfamiliar new structures. Generally, the presentation of

grammar is clear and clarified with the use of some graphic devices and simple appropriate

illustrations that help the learners in their comprehension.

To sum up, it can be said that the number of the 3rd year gramatical items are too much

though their complexity can be considered suitable to the target learners’ level. Whilst the 2nd year

grammar content is somehow complex and beyond the learner’s level and cognitive capacities.

Conclusion

Textbooks play a prominent role in the teaching-learning process as they are the primary

agents of conveying knowledge to learners. Consequently, the need of the evaluation process is

important since it helps teachers to determine and select the most suitable materials to their

teaching situations. Different methods have been suggested to be used in the evaluation process.

In this chapter the checklist method was adopted in order to collect a qualitative data concerning

the suitability of the 2nd and the 3rd year MS English textbooks to the learners’ level, more

specifically, it investigated the appropriateness of the grammar presentation to the target learners.

Finally, a summary of the main findings has been provided.

- 44 -

Chapter Three: Teachers’ Questionnaire

Introduction

4.1. The Method

4.2. Questionnaire Description

4.3. Sample of the Study

4.4. Analysis of the Questionnaire

4.4.1. Bibliographical Information

4.4.2. Textbook and Syllabus

4.4.3. Teaching Grammar

4.4.4. Grammatical Sequencing

4.5. Discussion of the Results

Conclusion

- 45 -

Introduction

The previous chapter was the first part of the field of investigation in this research. It dealt

with the evaluation of MBE of both the 2nd and the 3rd years in order to assess how grammar is

presented and sequenced and in which way they meet the learners’ needs and interests. This chapter

is supporting the previous one with the application of a quantitative method. There will be an

analysis of the questionnaire that is distributed to middle school EFL teachers in order to assess

their perspective towards both textbooks, the presentation of grammar and more specifically the

grammatical sequencing in each and between both of them.

4.1. The Method

The second tool of investigation is the questionnaire which aims to collect quantitative data

about teachers’ perspectives towards the textbooks focusing on grammar presentation and

sequencing within and between both textbooks. The answers will be treated through the Statistical

Package for Social Sciences (SPSS 20.0) where the results will be presented in tables which

include the proposed options, the participants’ number, and their answers’ percentages.

4.2. Questionnaire Description

Questionnaires as defined by Brown (2001) are “any written instruments that present

respondents with a series of questions or statements to which they have to react either by writing

out their answers or selecting from among existing answers” (p. 6). Questionnaires can enclose a

series of questions or statements, and the respondents’ task is to give answers to the asked

questions or to select from the available alternatives the one that reflects their attitudes and views.

In this study, a questionnaire was submitted to middle school English teachers in order to obtain

quantitative data in a short period of time. It is used as a supplementary tool to the checklist, it

comprises twenty-four questions which have divided between Likert scale questions, and open-

- 46 -

ended questions. A four- point Likert scale was used in which responses ranged from ‘strongly

agree’ to ‘strongly disagree’. These types of questions are divided into four sections. First, section

one deals with the bibliographical information of the teacher that includes gender, age, teaching

experience and teaching experience using MBE of the 2nd and the 3rd years. Section two is about

teacher’s perspectives towards the textbooks and the syllabus, it includes seven questions. Since

the research focuses on the evaluation of the grammar the third and the fourth sections devoted to

the grammar structures (6 questions) and the grammatical sequencing within and between both

textbooks (6 questions). Finally, the element number 24 is meant to give teachers the floor to

express themselves freely and to suggest any further comments, recommendations, and feedback

regarding the coursebooks, the presentation and the sequencing of grammar structures.

4.3. Sample of the Study

The participants in this study are EFL middle school teachers who taught the 2nd and the 3rd

years using the new generation textbooks MBE. Since the number of English teachers in each

middle school do not often exceed 3 teachers, the study took a random sample of 22 EFL teachers

collected from 8 middle schools in the district of Oum El Boughi (OEB).

4.4. Analysis of the Questionnaire

4.4.1. Bibliographical Information

Q1: Gender

Table 1

Teachers' Gendre

Options Number (N) Percentage (%)

Male 2 9.1

Female 20 90.9

- 47 -

Total 22 100.0

The first question in the bibliographical information is about teachers’ gender. Two choices

were introduced which are male and female. According to the table1 above, the participants that

took part in this research are predominantly female teachers, 20 out of 22 are females with the

percentage of 90.9% and only 2 males with the percentage of 9.1%.

Q2: Age

Table 2

Teachers' Age

Options N %

20-30 3 13.6

31-40 6 27.3

41-50 10 45.5

>50 3 13.6

Total 22 100.0

The second question aims to gather information about the teachers' ages. As it is shown in

the second table, the majority of teachers are aged between 41-50 which represents 45.5% of the

whole sample on the one hand. On the other hand, 13.6%of teachers are aged between 20-30 and

also over 50 which represents 13.6% of the respondents. Now, the left category of them are aged

between 31-40, and this takes 27.3% of the whole percentage. This reveals that the majority of the

sample are adult teachers who can give insightful answers and can determine the strengths and

weaknesses of the syllabi and textbooks used.

Q3: Teaching Experience

- 48 -

Table 3

Teaching Experience

Options N %

1-4 years 3 13.6

5-10 3 13.6

>10 16 72.7

Total 22 100

The table3 above presentsthe answers of the third question which is related to the

teachers’ teaching experience. The first two options (between 1-4 years and between 5-10 years)

were chosen by 13.6% per each, whereas the option of more than 10 years has been selected by

most of the teachers by the percentage of 72.7%. According to the presented data, it can be said

that the majority of the sample are experienced teachers and their experience in teaching will help

them to give insightful answers.

Q4: Teaching experience using My Book of English

Table 4

Teaching Experience using MBE

The 2nd year textbook The 3rd year textbook

Options N % N %

1 year 1 4.5 1 4.5

2years 5 22.7 4 18.2

3years 3 13.6 6 27.3

4years 4 18.2 1 4.5

- 49 -

5years 9 40.9 10 45.5

Total 22 100 22 100

The fourth question asks teachers about their teaching experience using MBE of the 2nd and

the 3rd years. Only two gaps are offered to be filled by the participants. Since the textbooks are

used for only past 5 years, the answers were between 1-5 years. Starting by the 2nd year textbook

users’ answers, 40.9% are using the textbook for 5 years, 18.5% said 4 years, 13.6% answered 3

years, 22.5% said for 2 years, and last 4.5% said for 1 year. Moving to the 3rd year textbook

respondents, 45.5% of them said that they are using it for 5 years, 4.5% said for 4 years, 27.3%

said for 3 years, 18.2% said for 2 years and one year was chosen by 4.5% of the sample. A closer

look at the results presented in table4 reveals that a large portion of the teachers are familiar with

the coursebooks; consequently, their answers will be more valid and reliable.

4.4.2. Textbook and Syllabus

Q5: The use of MBE in the teaching-learning process

Table 5

The Use of MBE in the Teaching Learning Process

The 2nd year textbook The 3rd year textbook

Options N % N %

always 2 9.1 2 9.1

often 15 68.2 15 68.2

rarely 4 18.2 4 18.2

never 1 4.5 1 4.5

Total 22 100 22 100

- 50 -

The textbook is an important tool which helps the teacher in designing and presenting the

lessons; however, each teacher has his own way of teaching his students, some may rely on the

textbook only, while others tend to use other materials selected by their own. Table5 shows how

often teachers use the textbook in presenting the lessons in the classroom. The participants have

similarly responded to the question concerning both textbooks. The majority are often using the

textbook in the teaching-learning process (68.2%), 18.2% are using it rarely, 9.1% are always and

4.5% of the sample never use the textbooks. Based on the results, the teachers are often using the

textbooks, but they do not completely rely on them in their lessons’ presentation, they use other

supporting selected materials.

Q6: The difficulty level of the textbook is appropriate to the learners’ level

Table 6

Textbook Suitability to the Learners' Level

The 2nd year textbook The 3rd year textbook

Options N % N %

Agree (A) 10 45.5 11 50.0

Disagree (D) 7 31.8 9 40.9

Strongly

Disagree (SD)

5 22.7 2 9.1

Total 22 100 22 100

Any textbook is designed on the basis of fitting the teaching learning situation and meeting

the learners needs and levels in order to make the objective that already stated attainable. Question

6 tends to assess teachers’ points of view about the textbooks’ difficulty level in relation to the

- 51 -

learners’ level. Four options are provided according to Likert scale which are: strongly agree (SA),

agree (A), disagree (D),and strongly disagree (SD). Table6 demonstrates teachers’ answers to the

question concerning both textbooks; according to the second-year data, teachers who responded

that the textbook is appropriate to the learners’ level are about 45.5% of the sample.

However,31.8% of the contributors have disagreed and also 22.5% have strongly disagreed with

the statement. Whereas the 3rd year data shows that the number of the respondents to the A option

(50%) are equal to those who choose the D (40.9%) and SD (9.1%) options. Something should be

pointed at is that the responses related to both textbooks are slightly different, they are oscillated

between the agreement and disagreement. Those who responded with the agreement, they see that

the textbooks suit the learners’ level because they contain a lot of illustrations and colors which

match the learners’ ages and interests, and the content is often presented in clear way based on

simple language and interesting examples from one hand. On the other hand however, the others

responded with the disagreement maybe due to the amount of the grammatical points that are

included in both textbooks which is too much for the fact that the learners are still beginners, or

maybe the reading texts and the listening scripts are not authentic and difficult where the learners

face some challenges in the comprehension. As a conclusion, it can be said that both textbooks

difficulty level is appropriate to the learners’ level in some points, and not suitable according to

some other points.

Q7: the content is organized according to the learners’ language needs

Table 7

The Organization of Content According to the Learners’ Language Needs

The 2nd year textbook The 3rd year textbook

Options N % N %

- 52 -

A 11 50.0 13 59.1

D 7 31.8 7 31.8

SD 4 18.2 2 9.1

Total 22 100 22 100

It is highly important for the textbook content to be organized according to the learners’

language needs in order to facilitate the learning process and to help them in the achievement of

the particular objectives. In this regard, 50% of the sample who have responded to the 2nd year

textbook have agreed with the sentence whereas the other 50%have disagreed. For the 3rd year, the

table shows that more than the half have responded with the agreement (59.1%), 31.8% have

selected D, and 9.1% have chosen SD. The final observation shows that the 3rd year textbook

content is organized according to the learners’ language need. However, there is controversy in

the part of the 2nd year teachers’ answers maybe some see that the organization of the content was

helping the learners in developing their competences and using the language in the target situation

appropriately, whereas the others see the opposite.

Q8: The syllabuses you are using or have used provide consolidation of previously learnt

knowledge

Table 8

Complementarity of the Textbooks

The 2nd year textbook The 3rd year textbook

Options N % N %

Strongly Agree

(SA)

2 9.1 2 9.1

- 53 -

A 12 54.5 14 63.6

D 6 27.3 5 22.7

SD 2 9.1 1 4.5

Total 22 100 22 100

From one level to another, the textbook must match the current syllabus with the already

learnt knowledge in the previous level in order to show that there is a relationship between all the

language elements, and they learn them according to the provided sequence for particular purposes.

Table8 demonstrates teachers’ answers concerning the statement which claims that there is a

consolidation between the textbooks’ syllabus and the previously learned knowledge. According

to those who responded to the 2nd year textbook questions, 54.5% have chosen A, 9.1% have

selected SA, 27.3% have picked D and 9.1% have opted SD. While 63.6% have agreed that the 3rd

year textbook syllabus is unified with the previously learned knowledge, 9.1% have strongly

agreed, 22.7% have disagreed and finally 4.5% have strongly disagreed. To sum up, the majority

of the respondents see that both textbooks’ syllabi provide a consolidation of previously learned

knowledge because some lectures presented in the previous level are represented again and

reviewed in the next level in order to refresh the learners’ repertoire and construct the new

information.

Q9: The objectives that have been stated are achievable

Table 9

The Objectives Achievements

The 2nd year textbook The 3rd year textbook

Options N % N %

- 54 -

SA 6 27.3 6 27.3

A 10 45.5 12 54.5

D 5 22.7 4 18.2

SD 1 4.5 / /

Total 22 100 22 100

The textbooks are designed to fulfil the requirements of the teaching syllabus.

Consequently, the statement number 9 seeks to see whether the stated objectives are achievable or

not. Concerning the 2nd year textbook, the majority of teachers’ answers, about 72.8% of the

sample, are between SA (27.3%) and A (45.5%); however, 27.2% their answers are D and SD.

Similarly, the majority of the respondents to the 3rd year textbook, about 81.8%, are in agreement

with the statement and the rest about 18.2% have disagreed. To conclude, it can be said that both

textbooks are meeting the stated objectives.

Q10: The textbook limits teacher’s creativity

Table 10

Textbooks Limit Teachers' Creativity

The 2nd year textbook The 3rd year textbook

Options N % N %

SA 7 31.8 6 27.3

A 4 18.2 4 18.2

D 11 50.0 12 54.5

Total 22 100 22 100

- 55 -

A textbook is a guiding tool for the teachers in their teaching situations; therefore, they must

not totally depend on it because it will kill their creativity and they may lose their important role

as teachers and become only as a medium between the textbook and their learners. According to

table10, the 2nd year results show that 50% of the sample have agreed that the textbook limits

teachers’ creativity whereas the other 50% have totally disagreed. Whilst the 3rd year results show

that 54.5% have disagreed and 45.5% of the sample are between A and SA. On the one hand, the

2nd year textbook does not limit teachers’ creativity because the presented content is maybe beyond

the learners’ level as what has been stated before, so the teachers must be creative to make some

adaptation and use other supporting materials that meet their learners’ needs and level. On the

other hand, it can be a deskiller especially for novice teachers who still do not have the experience

yet to use their own selected materials. Moreover, the 3rd year textbook kills teachers’ creativity

maybe for the reason that the content is clear and appropriate to the learners, so the teacher relies

on it as it is in the teaching process.

Q11: Your general assessment of the textbook after use

Table 11

The Textbook General Assessment

The 2nd year textbook The 3rd year textbook

Options N % N %

Good 2 9.1 3 13.6

Medium 18 81.8 18 81.8

Terrible 2 9.1 1 4.5

Total 22 100 22 100

- 56 -

Table11 presents the teachers’ general assessment about both textbooks after their use.

81.8% said that both textbooks are medium. Good and terrible have been chosen by 9.1% of the

sample concerning the use of the 2nd year textbook. While the 3rd year textbook has been assessed

by 13.6% as a good textbook and 4.5% as terrible. All in all, both textbooks are in the average

according to teachers’ responses.

4.4.3. Grammar Structures

Q12: The presentation of grammar points is clear and understandable

Table 12

The Clear Presentation of Grammar Points

The 2nd year textbook The 3rd year textbook

Options N % N %

SA 4 18.2 5 22.7

A 9 40.9 10 45.5

D 7 31.8 7 31.8

SD 2 9.1 / /

Total 22 100 22 100

Grammar is one of the most important elements to be taught in the foreign language, so it

is highly important to be presented clearly and simply especially for beginners to help them make

a better understanding. In this regard, the above statement aims to assess whether the grammar

points are presented in a clear and understandable way in both textbooks or not. Table12 presents

both the 2nd and the 3rd year teachers’ answers. According to the 2nd year answers, the selection is

as follows: 18.2% have chosen SA, 40.9% have selected A, 31.6% have selected D and last but

not least 9.1% have picked SD. Whilst the 3rd year results show that 22.7% have selected SA,

- 57 -

45.5% have chosen A and 31.8% have picked D. As a conclusion, both textbooks are presenting

the grammar points in a clear and understandable way.

Q13: Grammar points presented in the textbook are beyond the learner’s level

Table 13

Grammar Complexity

The 2nd year textbook The 3rd year textbook

Options N % N %

SA 3 13.6 / /

A 9 40.9 9 40.9

D 7 31.8 10 45.5

SD 3 13.6 3 13.6

Total 22 100 22 100

The table13 shows the results and the responses of the teachers concerning the statement

which claims that the grammar rules presented in both textbooks are beyond the learners’ level.

40.9% have agreed that the grammar presented in the 2nd year textbook is complex, 13.6% have

strongly agreed, whereas 31.8% have selected D and 13.6% have chosen SD. Concerning the 3rd

year grammar content, 40.9% said that it is complex and 59.1% of the sample see that the grammar

is not beyond the learners’ level. There is a slight difference in the teachers’ answers, those who

see that the presented grammar points in both textbooks are beyond the learners’ level maybe they

think that there are some grammar points which should be dealt with in advanced levels because

of their complexity and because the learners are still beginners and should learn the language

gradually. Though there are those who disagreed with the statement maybe they consider the

- 58 -

presented grammar points as the basics that should be taught in earlier stages of the language

learning.

Q14: The amount of grammar rules presented in the textbook is too much in comparison

with the learners’ level

Table 14

The Amount of Grammar Rules in Comparison with Learners’ Level

The 2nd year textbook The 3rd year textbook

Options N % N %

SA 10 45.5 6 27.3

A 7 31.8 9 40.9

D 5 22.7 7 31.8

Total 22 100 22 100

Since both textbooks are intended for beginners in English, the number of grammar rules

must be appropriate to their level. 77.3% said that the amount of grammar rules in the 2nd year

textbook are too much, whilst 22.7% have disagreed. Similarly,68.2% of the teachers who

responded to the 3rd year textbook said that the number of the grammatical points is not

appropriate, while 31.8% said the opposite. In simple words, the number of the grammatical items

in both textbooks is not suitable to the learners’ level.

Q15: Grammar points are presented basically from the simplest to the more complex

Table 15

The Gradual Movement of Grammar Points

The 2nd year textbook The 3rd year textbook

- 59 -

Options N % N %

SA 1 4.5 2 9.1

A 10 45.5 10 45.5

D 10 45.5 9 40.9

SD 1 4.5 1 4.5

Total 22 100 22 100

In order to teach grammar for beginners, it should be arranged according to different

principles and criteria like the communicative needs, the gradation or the difficulty level like from

the simplest to the complex …etc. Question15 tends to know in what manner the grammar points

are presented. According to teachers’ answers above, 50% have agreed that grammar moved

gradually from the simplest to the more complex in the 2nd year textbook, yet the other 50% have

disagreed. Moreover, 54.6% said that the grammar points presented in the 3rd year textbook are in

the appropriate sequence, whereas 45.4% have disagreed. The answers are slightly different while

there are some teachers who see that there is a gradual movement concerning the presentation of

grammar maybe because their pupils did not face any difficulties in grasping the new information

and mastering them, simply because the presentation matches the learners’ language level and

needs. Even though, it is not the same case concerning those who have disagreed. Generally,

grammar should be presented in relation to the learners’ communicative needs at the first place

even the grammatical points do not follow the gradual movement.

Q16: How are grammar structures presented?

Table 16

The Presentation of Grammar Structures

- 60 -

The 2nd year textbook The 3rd year textbook

Options N % N %

Deductively 8 36.4 8 36.4

Inductively 4 18.2 4 18.2

A mixture 10 45.5 10 45.5

Total 22 100 22 100

There are two major approaches in teaching grammar of the foreign language, namely the

deductive and the inductive approaches. Accordingly, this question aims to know how grammar

structures are presented in the intended textbooks. As can be observed, the results are similar

concerning both textbooks. 18.2% said that grammar is presented inductively, 36.4% have seen

that the structures are presented deductively and 45.5% claimed that there is a mixture in the use

of both methods in presenting grammar content.

Q17: Grammar structures are integrated with the other skills

Table 17

The Integration of Grammar Structures

The 2nd year textbook The 3rd year textbook

Options N % N %

SA 3 13.6 3 13.6

A 15 68.2 16 72.7

D 4 18.2 3 13.6

Total 22 100 22 100

- 61 -

For better understanding of the grammatical items that have been already learned,

structures should be contextualized and integrated with the other skills. Table17 shows clearly that

the teachers’ responses are quite positive to the statement, 68.2% have agreed, 13.6% have strongly

agreed and 18.2% have disagreed that there is an integration between grammar and the other skills

in the 2nd year textbooks. Similarly, the results concerning the 3rd year textbook are as follows:

72.7% have chosen A, SA and D were put on equal footing with 13.6%. The responses reveal that

the grammar structures in both textbooks are integrated with the other skills in order to show their

applicability in different contexts.

4.4.4. Grammatical Sequencing

Q18: The sequencing of grammar structures presented in the textbook is appropriate

Table 18

The Appropriateness of Grammar Structures Sequence

The 2nd year textbook The 3rd year textbook

Options N % N %

SA 1 4.5 1 4.5

A 11 50.0 11 50.0

D 6 27.3 6 27.3

SD 4 18.2 4 18.2

Total 22 100 22 100

It is very important to the grammatical structures to be sequenced appropriately in order to

achieve the stated objectives properly. Question18 tends to assess teachers’ points of view

regarding the sequence of the grammar structures that are presented in both textbooks to see

whether it is appropriate or not. As can be noticed, the results for both textbooks are similar, 11

- 62 -

teachers have chosen the A option besides to one who selected the SA, so the total is 54.5% who

are in agreement with the statement. However, 45.5% of the sample their answers are between D

and SD. According to the results, more than the half see that grammar has an appropriate

sequencing in both textbooks maybe because it has a relation with the communicative needs and

objectives, yet the other answers that claim the opposite cannot be ignored. They think that there

are some points that should be presented before or after some other structures maybe because of

their complexity or maybe the learner has to learn them in a particular sequencing that matches his

communicative needs.

Q19: The sequence of grammar matches the textbook’s communicative objectives

Table 19

The Grammatical Sequencing in Relation to Textbook Communicative Objectives

The 2nd year textbook The 3rd year textbook

Options N % N %

A 16 72.7 17 77.3

D 5 22.7 5 22.7

SD 1 4.5 / /

Total 22 100 22 100

The second-generation MBE is supporting the principles of the CBA; thus, the textbook

content must be designed according to the stated objectives in order to help the learners to develop

their competences. Question19 aims to investigate to what extent the sequence of grammar

matches both textbooks’ communicative objectives. Table19 demonstrates that there is a slight

diversity in the teachers’ responses to both textbooks. The majority have agreed that there is

relation between the grammar sequence and the communicative objectives in both textbooks.

- 63 -

concerning the 2nd year textbooks, 72.7% have chosen A, 22.7% have selected D, and 4.5% have

picked SD. Likewise, the 3rd year textbook answers are as follows: 77.3% have agreed and 22.7%

have disagreed.

Q20: The grammar structures sequenced on the basis of learners’ communicative needs

Table 20

The Grammatical Sequencing on the basis of the Learners’ Communicative Needs

The 2nd year textbook The 3rd year textbook

Options N % N %

A 11 50.0 13 59.1

D 9 40.9 7 31.8

SD 2 9.1 2 9.1

Total 22 100 22 100

The question20 seeks to know whether the grammar structures are sequenced based on the

learners’ communicative needs or not. On the one hand, the participants answers are divided into

50%who have agreed and 50% who have disagreed, this is concerning the 2nd year textbook. On

the other hand, 59.1% of the respondents to the 3rd year textbook see that grammar is sequenced

based on the learners’ communicative needs unlike the 40.9% who have disagreed with that claim.

Apparently, the grammatical sequencing in the third-year textbook is somehow based on the

learners’ communicative needs. The 2nd year textbook respondents are divided into two groups:

those who are in agreement with the claim and those who have disagreed. The first group see that

the learners communicate effectively in the target situation which means that the sequence of the

grammatical points is related to the communicative needs of the learners. Though, the other group

- 64 -

maybe they see that some grammar points should be taught before or after some other points

according to their difficulty level and the learners’ communicative needs.

Q21: The grammatical sequencing helps learners to develop their competences, specifically

their linguistic competence

Table 21

The Relation between the Grammatical Sequencing and the Linguistic Competence Development

The 2nd year textbook The 3rd year textbook

Options N % N %

SA 2 9.1 2 9.1

A 9 40.9 10 45.5

D 9 40.9 9 40.9

SD 2 9.1 1 4.5

Total 22 100 22 100

The development of the competences, more specifically the linguistic competence, is

highly related to the appropriate sequencing of the grammatical items and the clear presentation of

the vocabulary content. The aim of question21 is to investigate to what extent the grammatical

sequencing in both textbooks helps the learners to develop their linguistic competence from

teachers’ perspective. According to those who responded to the 2nd year textbook, 50% have

chosen the SA and A options whereas the other 50% have chosen SD and D. Concerning the 3rd

year textbook, more than the half of the sample about 54.6% see that the grammatical sequencing

is appropriate to help the learner in the development of their linguistic competence, while 45.4%

have disagreed. Actually, the answers are approximately close. On the one hand, teachers who

disagree ةthink that sequence is not appropriate where some grammar structures should be taught

- 65 -

earlier before some others, maybe because the learners face difficulties to master and use them

appropriately and correctly which affects the development of their linguistic competence. On the

other hand however, those who have agreed they think that grammar sequenced appropriately

because they have noticed that their pupils use the previously learned grammar structures correctly

whenever they use the language. All of these depends on the learners’ abilities, levels, and their

communicative needs.

Q22: There is a grammatical sequencing between the grammar lectures of the 2nd year

English textbook and the 3rd year English textbook

Table 22

The Grammatical Sequencing between both Textbooks

Options N %

SA 3 13.6

A 9 40.9

D 5 22.7

SD 5 22.7

Total 22 100

It is highly important to the grammar content to be sequenced from one level to another in

order to make the communicative objectives attainable which makes the learner able to

communicate not only inside the classroom but also in the real-life situations. Table22

demonstrates teachers’ answers regarding the grammatical sequence between both textbooks.

13.6% were answered with SA, 40.9% have chosen A, D and SD were put on equal footing with

22.7%. It is noticed, there is a slight difference in the answers. More than the half of the sample

sees that there is a grammatical sequencing between both textbooks maybe because there is a

- 66 -

consolidation of previously learned knowledge where some grammar lectures of the 2nd year

represented and reviewed again in the 3rd year textbook. Despite the fact that there are repeated

lectures from the preceding level, some teachers see that the grammar lectures in both textbooks

are separated, and they have no relation with each other.

Q23: The grammatical sequencing between both textbooks is appropriate and logical

Table 23

The Appropriateness and the Logical Sequence between both Textbooks

Options N %

A 10 45.5

D 11 50.0

SD 1 4.5

Total 22 100

This question tends to see whether the grammar sequence between both textbooks is logical

and appropriate. 45.5% have agreed while the rest 54.5% have disagreed and see that the

grammatical sequence is not suitable and illogical. Apparently, there is other similarities in the

answers to this question too. According to what has been said in the previous questions, those who

have agreed see that the 3rd year textbook grammar content is related to the 2nd year grammar

content because some lectures are represented and reviewed, also the sequence of the grammatical

points helps the learners to develop their linguistic competence where they use the previously

learned knowledge appropriately while communicating. Whereas the highest percentage of the

respondents who have disagreed with the statement they see the opposite, because the learners still

face problems in developing their competences for instance, or for another possible reason, the

- 67 -

grammar lectures that are presented in the 3rd year textbook have no relation with those in the 2nd

year program.

Q24: Further comments, recommendations, or feedback concerning the coursebooks, the

presentation and the sequence of grammar structures

The respondents provided some comments and suggestions. First, they said that pupils lose

interest in learning English in both 2nd and 3rd years because of the syllabus difficulty and the

program length concerning the grammar content which is too loaded and beyond the learners’

capacities, thus teachers are obliged to make some adaptations and bring other materials that suit

their learners’ level and interest which need extra efforts and more time. Second, the 2nd year

textbook has no relation with the 1st and the 3rd year programs especially the grammar presentation

and sequence. Third, grammar must be taught explicitly not implicitly with a clear and brief

explanation. Finally, they suggest that the learners’ ages, background, and levels have to be

investigated in order to design the coursebooks on that basis. Also, teachers must be consulted in

the designing process because they are the ones who implementing the textbooks and know about

their learners’ interests, level, and language needs.

4.5. Discussion of The Results

The aim of the questionnaire is to investigate teachers’ attitudes towards the 2nd and the 3rd

year textbooks in general, and the sequencing and the presentation of grammar in particular. The

majority of the sample are experienced teachers (17out of 22), so their answers and the results

could be considered reliable.

According to the teachers’ answers, both textbooks have matched in some points and

differed in some other points. Both textbooks are neither good nor bad after their use. They are

meeting the stated objectives and they provide consolidation of previously learned knowledge.

- 68 -

Though, concerning their suitability to the learners’ level, the 3rd year textbook is considered

somehow appropriate to the target learners’ level because its content is organized due to the

learners’ language needs. Whilst the 2nd year textbook can be considered suitable because it

matches the learners’ age and interests concerning the way of presenting the content. Though, they

can be beyond the learners’ level because of the complexity of the content.

Grammar points in both textbooks are presented in a clear and understandable way through

the use of deductive and inductive methods of teaching grammar, yet most of the time they are

presented implicitly which could be somehow difficult to the learners to get them immediately.

The number of the grammatical points presented in each textbook is too much in comparison to

the learners’ level especially for the 2nd year learners where the grammatical items are complex to

them as beginners, but for those which are included in the 3rd year syllabus are considered to be

appropriate to the learners’ language needs.

Concerning the grammatical sequencing within each textbook and between both of them,

the gradual movement of the grammatical points in both textbooks is related to the communicative

needs. Sometimes, they are moving from the simplest item to the more complex, and sometimes

they are presented randomly. Moreover, the sequence within both textbooks, on the one hand, is

considered appropriate because it matches the communicative objectives that have been stated in

both textbooks, also the grammar structures sequenced on the basis of the learners’ communicative

needs which in a way helps them to work on the development of their linguistic competence. On

the other hand, the grammatical sequencing could be inappropriate maybe because some of the

grammar structures are presented without making a reference to the learners’ communicative needs

especially in the 2nd year textbook, and that can be confirmed when the learners try to use a correct

language to communicate but they fail. There is a grammatical sequencing between both textbook

- 69 -

concerning the continuity of the grammar lectures, but it is considered somehow inappropriate and

illogical which affects the achievement of the linguistic competence at the long term.

To sum up, it can be inferred from these results that the 3rd year textbook even though it

has some shortcomings but still somehow appropriate to the target learners concerning the

sequencing and the presentation of the grammar content and its complexity. Concerning the 2nd

year textbook, even though the way of presenting the content has matched the learners’ interest,

but still the grammar content is complex and beyond the learners’ level. The sequence in both

textbooks is related to the learners’ communicative needs. In addition to that, there is a sequence

between both textbooks but still inappropriate and logical which could be considered as a standing

stone in the pupils’ way to develop their competences and their use of the foreign language

communicatively.

Conclusion

This chapter has mainly focused on the evaluation of the grammatical sequencing and the

structure presentation in the 2nd and the 3rd grades English textbooks according to the teachers’

perspectives. A questionnaire was submitted to 22 middle school English teachers in the district

of OEB. Their answers had provided an insightful evaluation which reveal their positive attitudes

towards the presentation of grammar and the grammatical sequence in the 3rd year textbook. Also,

they were not satisfied with the 2nd year textbook as whole and particularly the complexity of the

grammar content. additionally, there is a sequence between both textbooks but still not appropriate

and illogical which may affect the achievement of the linguistic competence.

General Conclusion

Among the various materials that are used for language learning and language teaching,

textbooks serve as a key component in most language programs (Richards, 2001). The textbook

- 70 -

provides the learner with the appropriate input to learn and master the FL and serves as a guiding

tool in designing the lectures’ content. Along similar lines, Sheldon (1988) claims that coursebooks

represent the “visible heart of any ELT program” (p. 237) and remain the main resources for

teaching English in many settings (Richards, 2014). Actually, the selection of the suitable

textbooks to the teaching learning situations and to the target learners’ level is so important. For

that reason, the evaluation process is needed.

In the Algerian classroom, textbooks are the most important frequent used materials.

Hence, this research study attempts to provide an evaluation of an EFL textbooks, and more

specifically, an evaluation of the grammatical sequencing through the evaluation of the presenting

grammar in the textbooks. This study is focusing on the evaluation of the textbook MBE which is

used in the Algerian MS education system for the second year and the third-year students.

Apparently, mastering any language requires from the learner to master its grammatical structures,

to enable him use the language easily and effectively. The research aims to investigate and to

examine whether there is a kind of continuity and sequencing in and between the 2nd and the 3rdMS

textbooks concerning the grammar structures. Additionally, it seeks to know how these structures

are presented and evaluate their suitability to the learners’ level.

For an effective achievement of the evaluation, two different tools were followed. An

evaluative checklist was adapted in order to fit the aims of the study as well as a teacher’s

questionnaire which was designed and distributed at the MSs’ level. The results of both procedures

have revealed that the 3rd year textbook is somehow appropriate as well as the presented grammar

to the target learners. Whereas the 2nd year textbook is considered inappropriate to the target

learners because the grammar content is somehow complex and beyond the learners’ level.

Additionally, the grammatical sequence in both textbooks is related to the learners’ communicative

- 71 -

needs. Finally, there is a grammatical sequencing between both textbooks eventhough it was

proved that it is not appropriate and illogical after the investigation and the analysis of the study

which may affect negatively on the achievement of the stated objectives.

Research Limitations

It is important to mention that this study has some limitations that should be stated. First, the

difficulty to access to some MSs and submit the teacher’s questionnaire. As it is mentioned above,

the questionnaire is the best tool to gather a large amount of data in a short period of time with less

efforts, but not the case concerning this research or in general, the majority of the studies that have

been conducted in Algeria and using the same tool have faced the same problem. Honestly, through

the use of the questionnaire, a number of data was collected but in extended period of time with

many efforts. Second, due to the spread of Covid-19 which put some constraints in many fields,

the sample that was selected is considered somehow small where the results cannot be generalized

which may affect the reliability and the validity of the work.

Suggestions for Future Research

Based on the findings and limitations of the study, suggestions for future research can be

made. As in what has been said before, the sample of the study is small where the teachers’

responses to the Likert scale questions most of the time have some controversy, whether they were

responding similarly to the agreement and the disagreement, or their answers were slightly

different which affect the final results that could not take any side. For further research, another

study could be carried out in the same topic but with a large sample in order to make the work

more valid, also an experiment could be carried out with the students maybe through a

questionnaire to assess their attitudes towards the presented grammar.

- 72 -

Another research could be conducted whichhas a relation to the authenticity and the

appropriateness of the audio tracks and texts to the target learners. Something has been noticed

during the analysis of the comments of Q24 in the questionnaire, the teachers as well as the learners

are facing problems with the listening scripts and texts which are not authentic. They do not help

them to obtain the lesson’s objectives and they are most of the time not appropriate to the learners’

level.

As a last suggestion, other researches can be carried in the evaluation of another aspect

from the textbook like the vocabulary development, or maybe conducting a macro-evaluation to

assess the suitability of MBE to the target learners.

- 73 -

References

Ahour, T., & Ahmadi, E. (2012). Retrospective evaluation of textbook “Summit 2B” for its

suitability for EFL undergraduate students. Journal of Educational and Social Research,

2(5), 195-202.

Allwright, R. L. (1981). What do we want teaching materials for? ELT Journal, 36(1), 5-13.

Andon, N. (2018). Materials development for TESOL. ELT Journal, 72(1), 112–113. Retrieved

from https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccx062

Arıkan, A. (2005). Age, gender and social class in ELT coursebooks: A critical study. Hacettepe

Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 28(28), 29–38. Retrieved from

https://dergipark.org.tr/hunefd

Aytug, R. (2007). An EFL textbook evaluation study in Anatolian high schools: “New bridge to

success for 9th grade new beginners”. Ankara: Bilkent University.

Battistella, E. L. (2005). Bad language: Are some words better than others? USA: Oxford

University Press.

Block, D. (1991). Some thoughts on DIY materials design. ELT Journal, 45(3), 211–217.

doi:10.1093/elt/45.3.211

Bowden, J. A. (2004). Competency-based learning. In S. Stein & S. Farmer (Eds.), Connotative

Learning: The Trainer’s Guide to Learning Theories and Their Practical Application to

Training Design (pp. 91-100). Dubuque, IA: Kendall Hunt Publishing.

Brinton, L. J., & Brinton, D. (2010). The linguistic structures of modern English. Philadelphia:

John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Brown, J.D. (2001). Teaching by principals: An interactive approach to language pedagogy. New

- 74 -

York: Longman.

Burns, A. (2011). Grammar and communicative language teaching: Why, when, and how to teach

it? In S. Richmond & K. Kelly (Eds), English Language Teaching Practice in Asia (p. 78).

Cambodia: Phnom Penh.

Byrd, P. (2001). Textbooks: Evaluation for selection and analysis for implementation. In M.

Celce-Murcia (Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (3rd ed., pp.

415–427). Boston, MA : Heinle & Heinle.

Celce-Murcia, M. (2001). Teaching English as a second or foreign language. (3rd ed.). Boston,

MA: Heinle & Heinle.

Chalker, S., & Weiner, E. (1994). Oxford Dictionary of English Grammar. New York: Oxford

University Press.

Chang, J. (2006). Globalization and English in chinese higher education. World Englishes, 25(3),

513-525. doi:10.1111/j.1467-971X.2006.00484.x

Cortazi, M., & Jin, L. (1999). Cultural mirrors materials and methods in the EFL classroom. In E.

Hinkel. (Eds), Culture in second language teaching and learning. (pp. 196-219).

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Crystal, D. (1997). English as a global language. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University

Press.

Crystal, D. (2004). Word and deed’ TESTeacher. Retrived from:

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/grammar

Cunningsworth, A. 1995. Choosing your coursebook. Oxford, England: Heinemann.

Davis, A. (2007). Introduction to applied linguistics: From practice to theory (2nd ed). Edinburgh:

Edinburgh University Press.

- 75 -

Dendrinos, B. (1992). The EFL Textbook and Ideology. Greece: N.C. Grivas Publication.

Depraetere, L., & Langford, C. (2012). Advanced English grammar: A linguistic approach.

London and New York: Bloomsbury.

Ellis, R. (1997). The empirical evaluation of language teaching materials. ELT Journal,

51(1), 36-42.

Emery, D., Kierzek, J., & Lindblom. (1978). English fundamentals (6th ed). New York :

Macmillan.

Ellis, R. (2006). Current issues in the teaching of grammar : An SLA perspective. TESOL

Quarterly, 40(1), 83-107.

Freemen, L. D. (1986). Techniques and Principles of Language Teaching. Oxford: Oxford

University Press.

Freemen, L. D. (2000). Techniques and Principles in Language Teaching (2nd ed). Oxford:

Oxford University Press.

Freeman, L. D. (2001). Teaching grammar. In M. Celce-Murcia (Ed.), Teaching English as a

second or foreign language (3rd ed., pp. 251-66). Boston, MA: Heinle & Heinle.

Gak, D. M. (2011). Textbook: An important element in the teaching process. Hatchaba Journal,

19(2), 78-82.

Gascoigne, C. (2002). The debate on grammar in second language acquisition: Past, present, and

future. Lewiston, NJ: Edwin Mellen Press.

Graves, K. (2000). Designing language courses: A guide for teachers. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.

Gray, J. (2000). The ELT coursebook as cultural artefact: How teachers censor and adapt. ELT

Journal, 54(3), 274–283. doi: 10.1093/elt/54.3.274

Halliday, M. A. K., McIntosh, A., & Strevens, P. (1964). The linguistic sciences and language

- 76 -

teaching. In L. D. Freeman. (Eds), A re-evaluation of grammatical structure sequencing.

(pp. 123-33). Michigan: Michigan University.

Harmer, J. (1991). Teaching and Learning Grammar (6th ed). London: Longman.

Harmer, J. (2001). The practice of English language teaching (3rd ed.). Essex, UK: Longman.

Harmer, J. (2007). The Practice of English language teaching. Edinburgh: Pearson Education Ltd.

Hartwell, P. (Eds.). (1987). Grammar, grammars and the teaching of grammar. New York:

Random House

Higa, M. (1965). The psycholinguistic concept of "difficulty" and the teaching of foreign

language vocabulary. In Freeman, L.D. (Eds), A re-evaluation of grammatical structure

sequencing. (pp. 123-33). Michigan: Michigan University.

Hutchinson, T., & Waters, A. (1987). English for specific purpose: A learning-centered approach.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hutchinson, T., & Torres, E. (1994). The textbook as agent of change. ELT Journal, 48(4), 315-

328. doi:10.1093/elt/48.4.315

Johnson, K., & Johnson, H. (Eds.). (1999). The encyclopedic dictionary of applied linguistics: A

handbook for language teaching. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.

Karamoozian, F.M., & Riazi, A. (2008). Development of a new checklist for evaluating

reading comprehension textbooks. ESP world, 3(19), 5. Retrieved from

http://www.esp-world.info

Krashen, S. (2003). Explorations in language acquisition and language use: The taipei lectures.

Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Lee, W. (1997). The Role of materials in classroom language use. In V. Berry., B. Adamson., &

W. Littlewood. (Eds), Applying linguistics: Insights into language in education (pp.69-82).

- 77 -

Hong Kong: The University of Hong Kong.

Litz, D. R. A. (2005). Textbook evaluation and ELT management: A South Korean case study.

Asian EFL Journal, 48, 1-53. Retrieved from

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/228383638

Margana, M., & Widyantoro, A. (2017). Developing English textbooks oriented to higher order

thinking skills for students of Vocational high schools in Yogyakarta. Journal of Language

Teaching and Research, 8(1), 26-38. doi:10.17507/jltr.0801.04

McGrath, I. (2002). Materials evaluation and design for language teaching. Edinburgh, UK:

Edinburgh University Press.

McGrath, I. (2013). Teaching materials and the roles of EFL/ESL teachers: Practice and theory.

London, UK: Bloomsbury.

Ming-jun, W. (2008). Principal approaches of grammar instruction.US-China Foreign Language,

6(11), 29-35.

Mohammed, A., & Jaber, H. (2008). The effects of deductive and inductive approaches of teaching

on Jordanian university students use of active and passive voice in English. College Student

Journal, 42(2), 545-553.

Montasser, M. A. (2013). Developing an English language textbook evaluative checklist. IOSR

Journal of Research & Method in Education, 1(3), 55-70.

Mukundan, J., Hajimohammadi, R., & Nimehchisalem, V. (2011). Developing an English

textbook evaluation checklist. Contemporary Issues in Education Research, 4(6), 21-28.

Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.19030/cier.v4i6.4383

Nabi, S., & Oualmi, S. (2018). Textbook evaluation: Vocabulary development in my book of

English. (Master’s thesis). DCU, Tizi-Ouzou.

- 78 -

Nordquist, R. (2015). What Is Grammar? Retrieved from

http://grammar.about.com/od/basicsentencegrammar/a/grammarintro.htm

Nickel, G. (1971). Problems of learners' difficulties in foreign language. In Freeman, L.D. (Eds),

A re-evaluation of grammatical structure sequencing. (pp. 123-33). Michigan: Michigan

University.

Oller, J. W. (1972). Contrastive analysis, difficulty, and predictability. Foreign Language

Annals, 6 (1), 95-106.

Richards, J. C. (2001). Curriculum development in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

Richards, J.C. & Rodgers, T. (2001). Approaches and methods in language teaching. A

Description and Analysis (2nd ed). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Schneck, E.A. (1978). “A Guide to Identifying High School Graduation Competencies.” In

Richards, J. and Rodgers, T. (2001). Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching. New

York: Cambridge University Press.

Sheldon, L. (1988). Evaluating ELT textbooks and materials. ELT Journal, 42(2). 237–246. doi

:10.1093/elt/42.4.237

Simenson, A.M. (1988). Teaching a foreign language: Principles and procedures. Bergen

Fagbookforlaget Vigmostad and Bjorke A/S.

Singh, M. (1998). Gender issues in children’s literature. ERIC Digest. Retrieved from

https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED424591

Skierso, A. (1991). Textbook selection and evaluation. In M. Celce-Murcia (ed). Teaching English

as a second or foreign language (2nd ed). Boston: Heinle and Heinle.

Tamrabet, L., Chenni, A., Biskri, N., Boukri, N., & Smara, A. (2016). My book of English. Middle

- 79 -

school. Year two. Algeria: CASBAH editions.

Tamrabet, L., Chenni, A., Bouazid, T., Boukri, N., & Smara, A. (2016). My book of English.

Middle school. Year three. Algeria: CASBAH editions.

Thornbury, S. (2006). How to teach grammar. Edinburg: Pearson Education

Tomlinson, B. (1998). Materials development in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press.

Tomlinson, B. (2001). Materials development. In R. Carter, & D. Nunan (Ed.), The

Cambridge guide to teaching English to speakers of other languages (pp. 66-71).

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Williams, D. (1983). Developing criteria for textbook evaluation. ELT Journal 37(3), 251-255

Ur, P. 1996. A course in language teaching: Practice & Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge

University Press

Ur, P. (2012). A course in language teaching: Practice and theory (2nd ed.). Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press.

Weaver, C., Nally, C., & Moerman, S. (2001). To grammar or not to grammar : That is not the

question. Retrieved from

www.learner.org/workshops/middlewriting/images/.../W8ReadGrammar.pdf

Widodo, H. P. (2015). Textbook analysis on college academic writing. TEFLIN Journal,

18(2), 109-122.

Appendices

Appendix 1: Examples of Grammatical Structures Presented in the 2nd Year MS English

Textbook.

Example 01:

Example 02:

Example 03:

Example 04:

Example 05:

Appendix 2: Examples of Grammatical Structures Presented in the 3rd Year MS English

Textbook.

Example 01:

Example 02:

Example 03:

Example 04:

Example 05:

Example 06:

Appendix 3: Evaluative checklist (adapted)

A. Practical Considerations

1. Are the textbooks easily accessible?

2. Is the price of textbooks reasonable?

3. Are the textbooks a recent publication?

B. Language Related Considerations

i. Grammar

1. To what extent is the number of grammatical points appropriate and how appropriate is

their sequence?

2. To what extent are the presentations clear and complete enough for the learners to have

available a concise review outside the classroom?

3. To what extent are the linguistic items (mainly grammar) introduced in meaningful

contexts?

4. To what extent does the presentation of grammar structures move gradually from the

simple to the more complex?

5. To what extent are the grammar points presented with brief, interesting and easy examples,

and explanations?

6. To what extent are new structures controlled to be presented and explained before they

appear in drills, dialogues or reading materials?

7. To what extent does the practice and recycling (production) of new grammatical items

seem to be appropriate for the level of language mastery of the learners?

8. To what extent is there an even distribution of grammatical material among the chapters

(do some chapters present too much material and others too little)?

9. To what extent does the text make the structures presented easily accessible to the learner?

ii. Exercises and Activities

1. To what extent do the exercises involve the grammar structures which build up the learner’s

repertoire and develop his/her ability to communicate increasingly independent of text or

teacher direction?

iii. Layout and Physical Makeup

1. To what extent are simple graphic devices effectively used to clarify the presentation of

grammatical structures?

2. To what extent are the illustrations clear, simple and free of unnecessary details that may

confuse the learner?

Appendix 4 : Teacher’s Questionnaire

Teachers’ Questionnaire

Dear teacher,

We are inviting you to respond to our questionnaire which takes a part in our research for

the fulfillment of master’s degree requirement. The questionnaire aims to gather information about

teachers’ perspectives towards the presentation of grammar and to examine the grammar sequence

in both 2nd and 3rd years middle school English textbooks. Please, put a tick to the appropriate

answer according to your opinion.

We will be so thankful for your contribution.

Nasri wahiba

Diar soror

Faculty of Letters and Languages

Larbi Ben L’Mhidi University

2020/2021

I. Bibliographical Information

1. Gender: Male ( ) Female ( )

2. Age: 20-30 ( ) 31-40 ( )

41-50 ( ) > 50 ( )

3. Teaching experience: 1-4 years ( ) 5-10 ( ) > 10 ( )

4. Teaching experience using “MY BOOK OF ENGLISH” of

2nd year: ………year/s

3rd year: ………year/s

II. Textbook and Syllabus

5. The use of “MY BOOK OF ENGLISH” in teaching-learning process is

2nd year textbook 3rd year textbook

Always ( ) ( )

Often ( ) ( )

Rarely ( ) ( )

Never ( ) ( )

6. The difficulty level of the textbook is appropriate to the students’ level.

2nd year textbook 3rd year textbook

Strongly agree (SA) ( ) ( )

Agree (A) ( ) ( )

Disagree (D) ( ) ( )

Undecided (U) ( ) ( )

Strongly disagree (SD) ( ) ( )

7. The content is organized according to the students’ language needs.

SA ( ) ( )

A ( ) ( )

U ( ) ( )

D ( ) ( )

SD ( ) ( )

8. The syllabuses you are using or have used provide consolidation of previously

learnt knowledge.

SA ( ) ( )

A ( ) ( )

U ( ) ( )

D ( ) ( )

SD ( ) ( )

9. The objectives that have been stated are achievable.

SA ( ) ( )

A ( ) ( )

U ( ) ( )

D ( ) ( )

SD ( ) ( )

10. The textbook limits teachers’ creativity.

SA ( ) ( )

A ( ) ( )

U ( ) ( )

D ( ) ( )

SD ( ) ( )

11. Your general assessment of the textbook after use.

Good ( ) ( )

Medium ( ) ( )

Terrible ( ) ( )

III. Grammar Structures

12. The presentation of grammar points is clear and understandable.

SA ( ) ( )

A ( ) ( )

U ( ) ( )

D ( ) ( )

SD ( ) ( )

13. Grammar points presented in the textbook are beyond the learner’s level (grammar

complexity).

SA ( ) ( )

A ( ) ( )

U ( ) ( )

D ( ) ( )

SD ( ) ( )

14. The amount of grammar rules presented in the textbook is too much in comparison with

the learners’ level.

SD ( ) ( )

A ( ) ( )

U ( ) ( )

D ( ) ( )

SD ( ) ( )

15. Grammar points are presented basically from the simplest to the more complex.

SA ( ) ( )

A ( ) ( )

U ( ) ( )

D ( ) ( )

SD ( ) ( )

16. Grammar structures are presented

Deductively ( ) ( )

Inductively ( ) ( )

A mixture ( ) ( )

17. Grammar structures are integrated with the other skills (like reading and writing).

SA ( ) ( )

A ( ) ( )

U ( ) ( )

D ( ) ( )

SD ( ) ( )

IV. Grammatical Sequencing

18. The sequencing of grammar structures presented in the textbook is appropriate

SA ( ) ( )

A ( ) ( )

U ( ) ( )

D ( ) ( )

SD ( ) ( )

19. The sequence of grammar matches the textbook’s communicative objectives

SA ( ) ( )

A ( ) ( )

U ( ) ( )

D ( ) ( )

SD ( ) ( )

20. The grammar structures sequenced on the basis of learners’ communicative needs

SA ( ) ( )

A ( ) ( )

U ( ) ( )

D ( ) ( )

SD ( ) ( )

21. The grammatical sequencing helps learners to develop their competences, specifically their

linguistic competence

SA ( ) ( )

A ( ) ( )

U ( ) ( )

D ( ) ( )

SD ( ) ( )

22. There is a grammatical sequencing between the grammar lectures of the 2nd year English

textbook and the 3rd year English textbook

SA ( ) A ( ) D ( ) U ( ) SD ( )

23. The grammatical sequencing between both textbooks is appropriate and logical

SA ( ) A ( ) D ( ) U ( ) SD ( )

24. If you have any further comments, recommendations, or feedback concerning the

coursebooks, the presentation and the sequence of grammar structures, please specify

below.

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

………………………………………………………………………………………………

Thank you.

Résumé

Les manuels sont précieux dans chaque classe de langue ; ils sont considérés comme une

composante essentielle qui joue plusieurs rôles dans le programme d'enseignement de l'anglais

(ELT). Par conséquent, leur évaluation est de la plus haute importance afin que leur contribution

pédagogique puisse être assurée au processus d'enseignement-apprentissage. Bien qu'il existe de

nombreuses études sur l'évaluation des manuels, les manuels nouvellement publiés ne reçoivent

pas l'attention nécessaire pour être examinés. L'étude suivante tente d'évaluer la nouvelle

génération des manuels d'anglais du collège algérien « My Book of English » des 2e et 3e années

où l'accent sera mis sur l'évaluation de l'enchaînement grammatical et la présentation de la

grammaire. La recherche s'efforce de découvrir s'il existe un séquençage grammatical dans

chacun et entre les deux manuels ; il cherche aussi à savoir comment la grammaire est présentée,

et à évaluer son adéquation au niveau des apprenants. Par conséquent, pour atteindre ces

objectifs, des données quantitatives et qualitatives ont été obtenues à travers une liste de contrôle

adaptée et un questionnaire de l'enseignant. De plus, une liste de contrôle a été adaptée à partir

de différentes listes de contrôle proposées pour répondre aux objectifs de la recherche, tandis que

le questionnaire a été adressé aux enseignants d'EFL du collège pour évaluer leurs points de vue

sur le contenu grammatical des manuels et le séquençage grammatical. Les résultats des

méthodes mixtes ont révélé que le contenu grammatical des manuels de 3e année est en quelque

sorte approprié aux apprenants cibles alors que les structures grammaticales de 2e année sont

complexes et au-delà des niveaux des apprenants. De plus, les structures grammaticales de

chaque manuel sont séquencées en fonction des besoins de communication de l'apprenant.

Enfin, il existe un séquençage grammatical entre les deux manuels, mais il est inapproprié et

illogique car les apprenants sont encore confrontés à des difficultés dans l'utilisation correcte de

la langue qui affectent la réalisation des objectifs énoncés.

الملخص

الإنجليزية.عدة أدوار في مناهج تدريس اللغة يلعبأساسي مكون ، فهيللغةتعتبر الكتب المدرسية ذات قيمة في كل فصل دراسي

فإن تقييمهم له أهمية قصوى بحيث يمكن ضمان مساهمتهم التربوية في عملية التعليم والتعلم. على الرغم من وجود العديد وعليه،

الكتب المدرسية المدرسية،من الدراسات حول تقييم الكتب النشر إلا أن تعمل هذهم لفحصها. لا تحظى بالاهتمام اللازحديثة

الإنجليزية" على محاولة الدراسة للغة الجزائرية "كتابي الإعدادية المدارس في الإنجليزية اللغة الجديد من كتب الجيل تقييم

تقييم التسلسل النحوي وعرض القواعد. يسعى البحث لاكتشاف ما إذا كان كل من التركيز على سيتمحيث بللسنتين الثانية والثالثة

وتقييم مدى ملاءمتها القواعد،إلى معرفة كيفية تقديم وما إذا كان مناسبا، إضافة اك تسلسل نحوي في كل وبين كلا الكتابينهن

المتعلمين. الكمية والنوعية من خلال قائمة مراجعة معدلة واستبيان ،لبلوغ هذه الاهدافلمستويات تم الحصول على البيانات

الالمعلمصمم في حين تم توجيه الاستبيان إلى مراجعة تم تعديلها وفقا لقوائم أخرى لتتماشى واهداف البحث،، حيث ان قائمة

وكذلك التسلسل النحوي اللغة معلمي اللغة الإنجليزية كلغة أجنبية في المدرسة الإعدادية لتقييم وجهات نظرهم تجاه محتوى قواعد

للمتعلمين المستهدفين في حين أن ة مناسبحد ما الىالثالث للمستوىلنحوية أن القواعد االدراسة في الكتب المدرسية. كشفت نتائج

الكتابين يتم ترتيبها الهياكل النحوية في كلاوقد تبين أيضا ان الهياكل النحوية للسنة الثانية معقدة وتتجاوز مستويات المتعلمين.

للمتعلم. التواصلية الاحتياجات أساس تسلسل نحوي أخيرًا،على الكتابين هناك ولكنه غير مناسب وغير الدراسيين،بين كلا

.منطقي مما قد يؤثر على تنمية الكفاءة اللغوية للمتعلمين