A Retrospective Evaluation of Iranian Third-Grade Junior High School English Textbook
محورهای موضوعی : Applied Linguistics
Elham TAghipour
1
(
Department of English Language Teaching, Qaemshahr Branch, Islamic Azad University, Qameshahr, Iran
)
Shaban Najafi Karimi
2
(
Department of English Language Teaching, Qaemshahr Branch, Islamic Azad University, Qameshahr, Iran
)
کلید واژه: محتوا, کتاب درسی, Textbook, Content, EFL learners, زبان آموزان زبان انگلیسی, Retrospective Evaluation, ارزیابی بازنگرانه,
چکیده مقاله :
This study evaluated the third-grade junior high school English course book in Iran which was implemented in 2017 by the ministry of education. The study was done in order to find out whether its contents match the authors' claim. To do this, the researcher used a quantitative research design to evaluate the Course Book (CB). A sample of 200 teachers participated in this study for answering the questionnaire and were chosen randomly from a different state and private schools in Mazandaran province. They participated in the online and paper and pencil survey. The survey was developed by Cunnings Worth (1995). The items of the questionnaire were based on the characteristic of a good textbook and included 14 categories as content, grammar, vocabulary, phonology, language skills, methodology, study skills, objectives, content selection, gradation and recycling, visuals, practices and testing, supplementary materials and teacher manual. In short, the results indicated that Prospect 3 was perceived as moderately adequate since the mean composite scores for each category exceeded 2, except for gradation and recycling which scored 2.10. Gradation and recycling and study skills categories were two categories that scored a mean of 2.13 and 2.10. They gained the least support by the respondents.
این پژوهش به ارزیابی کتاب زبان انگلیسی پایه سوم راهنمایی در ایران که در سال 1396 توسط وزارت آموزش و پرورش اجرا شد، پرداخته است. این تحقیق به منظور بررسی اینکه آیا محتوای کتاب با ادعای نویسندگان مطابقت دارد یا خیر انجام شد. برای انجام این کار، محقق از طرح تحقیق کمی برای ارزیابی این کتاب درسی استفاده کرد. نمونه تحقیق متشکل از 200 معلم بود که برای پاسخ به پرسشنامه در این پژوهش شرکت کردند که به صورت تصادفی از مدارس مختلف دولتی و غیردولتی استان مازندران انتخاب شدند. آنها در نظرسنجی آنلاین و کاغذی شرکت کردند. این نظرسنجی توسط Cunnings Worth سال 1995 طراحی شد. آیتم های این پرسشنامه بر اساس ویژگی یک کتاب درسی خوب و شامل 14 دسته به عنوان محتوا، دستور زبان، واژگان، واج شناسی، مهارت های زبانی، روش شناسی، مهارت های مطالعه، اهداف، انتخاب محتوا، درجه بندی و بازیافت، تصاویر، تمرین و تست، مواد تکمیلی و راهنمای معلم بود. به طور خلاصه، نتایج ارزیابی نشان داد که محتوای این کتاب نسبتاً مناسب است، زیرا میانگین نمرات ترکیبی برای هر دسته از 2 فراتر رفته است، به جز برای درجه بندی و بازیافت که امتیاز 2.10 را کسب کردند. مقوله درجه بندی و بازیافت و مهارت های مطالعه دو مقوله بودند که میانگین 13/2 و 10/2 را کسب کردند. آنها کمترین درجه را از سوی پاسخ دهندگان به دست آوردند.
Bloom, B. S. (Ed.). (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives handbook: Cognitive domain. New York: McKay.
Cunnings worth, A. (1995). Choosing your Coursebook. Macmillan Heineman.
Darali, G. (2007). Pragmatics dimension in Spectrum textbooks. Unpublished master’s thesis, Shiraz University, Iran.
Gordani, Y. (2010). A content analysis of guidance school English textbooks with regard to Bloom's levels of learning. Unpublished master’s thesis, Shiraz University, Iran.
Grant, M. (1987). Making the Most of Your Textbook. In H. Tok. TEFL textbook evaluation: from teachers’ perspectives. Educational Research and Review, 5 (9), 508-517.
Halliday, M. (1975). Learning How to Mean. London: Edward Arnold.
Hutchinson, T. & Torres, E. (1994). The textbook as agent of change. ELT Journal, 48(4), 45-62.
Iraji, A. (2007). Pragmatic features of New Interchange: How communicative and task-based it is. Unpublished master’s thesis, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran.
Jahangard, A. (2007). The evaluation of the EFL materials taught at Iranian public high schools. Karen’s Linguistics Issues. Retrieved August12,2009 from: http: //www3.telus.net/linguistics issues/bymonth.html.
Kamyabi Gol, A. (2015). Critical Analysis and Teachers’ Perspectives on Prospect One (Iranian Junior High School English Book). International Journal of Language and Applied Linguistics, 1(4), 14-25.
Kheirabadi, R., & Alavi Moghaddam, S. B. (2014). New horizons in teaching English in Iran: A transition from reading-based methods to communicative ones by English for Schools' series. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World (IJLLALW), 5 (4), 225-232.
Leech, G. N. (1983). Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman.
Littlejohn, A. (1998). The analysis of language teaching materials: Inside the Trojan horse. In B. Tomlinson (Ed.). Materials Development in language teaching (pp: 190-216). Cambridge: Cambridge University press.
Matreyek, W. (1990). Communicating In English Examples Models, And Functions. London: Prentice Hall International.
Rashidi, N., & Bahrami, M. (2012). An In-depth Evaluation of Intermediate Top Notch. Journal of Studies in Learning and Teaching English, 1 (2), 137-166.
Razmjoo, S.A. (2007). High schools or private institutes textbooks? Which fulfill communicative language teaching principles in the Iranian context? Asian EFL Journal, 9(4), 126-140.
Searle, J.R. (1976). Speech Acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Thomas, J. (1983). Cross-cultural pragmatic failure. Applied Linguistics, 4, 91-112.
Tomlinson, B. (2003). Developing Materials for Language Teaching. London, Cromwell Press.
ZareMoayedi, I. (2007). An in-depth evaluation of Interchange series (3rd Ed.). Unpublished master’s thesis, Shiraz University, Iran.
