10.71528/

A Retrospective Evaluation of Iranian Third Grade Junior High School English Textbook: A Retrospective Evaluation of Iranian Third Grade...

PDF
  • Elham Taghipour1,
  • Shaban Najafi Karimi*1,
  1. Department of English Language Teaching, Qaemshahr Branch, Islamic Azad University, Qameshahr, Iran

Received: 2022-06-07

Revised: 2022-07-07

Accepted: 2022-08-26

Published in Issue 2022-12-01

Copyright (c) 2024 Journal of New Trends in English Language Learning (JNTELL)

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

How to Cite

Taghipour, E., & Najafi Karimi, S. (2022). A Retrospective Evaluation of Iranian Third Grade Junior High School English Textbook: A Retrospective Evaluation of Iranian Third Grade.. Journal of New Trends in English Language Learning (JNTELL), 1(4), 17-33. https://doi.org/10.71528/
Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

PDF views: 184

Abstract

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 quantitative research design to evaluate the Course Book (CB). A sample of 200
teachers participated in this study for answering the questionnaire who were chosen randomly from different state
and private schoolsin 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 category were two categories that scored a mean of 2.13 and 2.10.
They gained the least support by the respondents

Keywords

  • Textbook, Retrospective Evaluation, Content, EFL Learners
PDF

References

  1. Bloom, B. S. (Ed.). (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives handbook: Cognitive domain. New
  2. York: McKay.
  3. Cunnings worth, A. (1995). Choosing your Coursebook. Macmillan Heineman.
  4. Darali, G. (2007). Pragmatics dimension in Spectrum textbooks. Unpublished master’s thesis, Shiraz
  5. University, Iran.
  6. Gordani, Y. (2010). A content analysis of guidance school English textbooks with regard to Bloom's
  7. levels of learning. Unpublished master’s thesis, Shiraz University, Iran.
  8. Grant, M. (1987). Making the Most of Your Textbook. In H. Tok. TEFL textbook evaluation: from
  9. teachers’ perspectives. Educational Research and Review, 5 (9), 508-517.
  10. Halliday, M. (1975). Learning How to Mean. London: Edward Arnold.
  11. A Retrospective Evaluation of Iranian Third Grade Junior High …
  12. Hutchinson, T. & Torres, E. (1994). The textbook as agent of change. ELT Journal, 48(4), 45-62.
  13. Iraji, A. (2007). Pragmatic features of New Interchange: How communicative and task-based it is.
  14. Unpublished master’s thesis, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran.
  15. Jahangard, A. (2007). The evaluation of the EFL materialstaught at Iranian public high schools. Karen’s
  16. Linguistics Issues. Retrieved August12,2009 from: http: //www3.telus.net/linguistics
  17. issues/bymonth.html.
  18. Kamyabi Gol, A. (2015). Critical Analysis and Teachers’ Perspectives on Prospect One (Iranian Junior
  19. High School English Book). International Journal of Language and Applied Linguistics, 1(4),
  20. -25.
  21. Kheirabadi, R., & Alavi Moghaddam, S. B. (2014). New horizonsin teaching English in Iran: A transition
  22. from reading-based methods to communicative ones by English for Schools' series. International
  23. Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World (IJLLALW), 5 (4), 225-232.
  24. Leech, G. N. (1983). Principles of Pragmatics. London: Longman.
  25. Littlejohn, A. (1998). The analysis of language teaching materials: Inside the Trojan horse. In B.
  26. Tomlinson (Ed.). Materials Development in language teaching (pp: 190-216). Cambridge:
  27. Cambridge University press.
  28. Matreyek, W. (1990). Communicating In English Examples Models, And Functions. London: Prentice
  29. Hall International.
  30. Rashidi, N., & Bahrami, M. (2012). An In-depth Evaluation of Intermediate Top Notch. Journal of
  31. Studies in Learning and Teaching English, 1 (2), 137-166.
  32. Razmjoo, S.A. (2007). High schools or private institutes textbooks? Which fulfill communicative
  33. language teaching principles in the Iranian context? Asian EFL Journal, 9(4), 126-140.
  34. Searle, J.R. (1976). Speech Acts. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  35. Thomas, J. (1983). Cross-cultural pragmatic failure. Applied Linguistics, 4, 91-112.
  36. Tomlinson, B. (2003). Developing Materials for Language Teaching. London, Cromwell Press.
  37. ZareMoayedi, I. (2007). An in-depth evaluation of Interchange series (3rd Ed.). Unpublished master’s
  38. thesis, Shiraz University, Iran.