A Comparative Evaluation Between Four Corners Series and Vision Series from a Communicative Perspective: A Mixed-Methods Study

Subject Areas : Second Language Education

Esmail Balouchi ¹ , Hamed Badpa ² , Farzad Sabeki ³

1 - دانشگاه دریانوردی و علوم دریایی چابهار
2 - English Department of English Language and Literature, Arak University, Arak, Iran
3 - دانشگاه دریانوردی و علوم دریایی چابهار، گروه زبان انگلیسی

Received: 2024-08-21 Accepted : 2024-09-22 Published : 2024-10-06

Keywords: Four Corners, Vision, Textbooks, Communicative Perspective, Evaluation ,

Abstract :

Given the fundamental importance of textbooks and their impact on the learning process in today’s globalized world, the main purpose of the current study is to compare the Four Corners series textbooks to the Vision series senior High school English textbooks from a communicative standpoint. By utilizing a mixed-method study, the evaluation consisted of two stages: a theoretical assessment based on a communicative language teaching checklist and the researcher's experience, and an empirical assessment based on data collected from 16 teachers and university professors through questionnaires. The evaluation aimed to determine if the communicative goals of the textbooks were effectively presented and to gather feedback from teachers and experts. In the Qualitative phase, the researcher utilized SPSS and T-test; on the contrary, for the qualitative phase, the researcher utilized content analysis. The results indicate that, compared to the Four Corners series, the Vision series needs to be more communicative across all language skills and vocabulary, grammar, and pronunciation. The findings help teachers in selecting appropriate textbooks. Moreover, managers, curriculum developers and Intercultural Communicative Competence experts can benefit from this study. Also, the results of the study can help teachers to utilize the best way to teach courses.

References:

Demir, Y., & Ertas, A. (2014). A suggested Eclectic Checklist for ELT Course book evaluation, The Reading Matrix, 2(1), 243-252.
Harmer, J. 2007. How to Teach English. London & New York: Longman Inc.
Hutchinson, T., Waters, A. (1987). English for specific purposes. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 96–97.
Incecay, G., & Incecay, V. (2009). Turkish university students’ perceptions of communicative and non-communicative activities in EFL classroom. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1, 618-622.
Mares, C. (2003). “Writing a course book.” In B. Tomlinson (Ed.). Material development in language teaching, (pp. 130-140). London: Continuum.
McGrath, I. (2002). Materials evaluation and design for language teaching (2nd ed., pp.1-368). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Mukundan, J., Hajimohammadi, R., & Nimehchisalem, V. (2011). Developing an English Language Textbook Evaluation Checklist. Contemporary Issues in Education Research, 4(6).
Nunan, D. (2003) Practical English Language Teaching. International Edition, McGraw-Hill, Singapore, 88
Richards, J, C. (2001). Curriculum development in language teaching. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press
Richards, J. C., & Rodgers, T. S. (2001). Approaches and Methods in Language
Richards,J.C., & Renandya, W.A. (2002). Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of current practice.New York: Cambridge University Press.
Ruben, G. (2010). Missing pages? A study of textbooks for Dutch early childhood teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education. 26(3), p371-376.
Sheldon, L.E. (1987). Evaluating English language teaching textbooks and materials.
Torki, F, & Chalak, A. (2017). An Evaluation of English Textbooks Used in Iranian High Schools: Teachers and Learners’ Attitudes. Research English Language Pedagogy, 5 (1), 52-60.
Yasemin, K. (2009). Evaluating the English textbooks for young learners of English at Turkish primary education. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 1(1), 79-83.