Volume 3, Issue 3 (September 2024)
IJER 2024, 3(3): 50-74 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Jafari S M, Curle S, Bahraman M. (2024). An Evaluation of English Textbook "Prospect 3" in Iranian Junior High Schools: A Mixed Methods Study. IJER. 3(3), 50-74. doi:10.22034/3.3.50
URL: http://ijer.hormozgan.ac.ir/article-1-211-en.html
URL: http://ijer.hormozgan.ac.ir/article-1-211-en.html
An Evaluation of English Textbook "Prospect 3" in Iranian Junior High Schools: A Mixed Methods Study
1- Assistant Professor, Department of Applied Humanities, Kashmar Higher Education Institute, Kashmar, Iran
2- Department of Education, University of Bath, UK. Department of English Language and Literature, Khazar University, Azerbaijan
3- Assistant Professor, Department of Applied Humanities, Kashmar Higher Education Institute, Kashmar, Iran ,m.bahraman@kashmar.ac.ir
2- Department of Education, University of Bath, UK. Department of English Language and Literature, Khazar University, Azerbaijan
3- Assistant Professor, Department of Applied Humanities, Kashmar Higher Education Institute, Kashmar, Iran ,
Abstract: (828 Views)
Objective: This study evaluated the “Prospect 3” English textbook used in Iranian junior high schools based on teachers’ perceptions.
Methods: A sequential explanatory mixed-methods design was employed, starting with quantitative data collection from 90 teachers (50 males, 40 females) using the Teacher Textbook Evaluation Form (TTEF) of Litz’s (2005) questionnaire. Follow-up interviews were conducted with 8 teachers actively teaching “Prospect 3” in the qualitative phase. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, including mean values, standard deviations, and percentages on a 5-point Likert scale. Thematic analysis was applied to the qualitative data.
Results: Findings indicated general dissatisfaction with the textbook, highlighting issues in practical considerations, layout and design, and integration of skills. Qualitative data revealed that the textbook inadequately addressed diverse learning needs, failed to engage students effectively, and lacked appropriate cultural content. Teachers expressed concerns about the relevance and applicability of the language tasks provided.
Conclusions: Comprehensive revisions to the “Prospect 3” textbook are necessary to better meet educational goals and enhance language learning outcomes in Iranian junior high schools.
Methods: A sequential explanatory mixed-methods design was employed, starting with quantitative data collection from 90 teachers (50 males, 40 females) using the Teacher Textbook Evaluation Form (TTEF) of Litz’s (2005) questionnaire. Follow-up interviews were conducted with 8 teachers actively teaching “Prospect 3” in the qualitative phase. Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, including mean values, standard deviations, and percentages on a 5-point Likert scale. Thematic analysis was applied to the qualitative data.
Results: Findings indicated general dissatisfaction with the textbook, highlighting issues in practical considerations, layout and design, and integration of skills. Qualitative data revealed that the textbook inadequately addressed diverse learning needs, failed to engage students effectively, and lacked appropriate cultural content. Teachers expressed concerns about the relevance and applicability of the language tasks provided.
Conclusions: Comprehensive revisions to the “Prospect 3” textbook are necessary to better meet educational goals and enhance language learning outcomes in Iranian junior high schools.
Keywords: English as a Foreign Language, Educational Material Assessment, Mixed-method Research, Prospect 3 Textbook, Teacher Evaluations
Type of Study: Original |
Subject:
Educational Studies
Received: 2024/05/18 | Accepted: 2024/07/25 | Published: 2024/09/1
Received: 2024/05/18 | Accepted: 2024/07/25 | Published: 2024/09/1
References
1. Ahmadi Safa, M., & Karampour, F. (2020). A checklist-based evaluative study of English textbook "prospect 3" from teachers' and students' perspectives. Iranian Journal of Applied Language Studies, 12(1), 1-34. http://doi.org/10.22111/IJALS.2020.5647
2. Ahmadi, A., & Derakhshan, A. (2015). An evaluation of the Iranian junior high school English textbooks "Prospect1" and its older version "Right Path to English 1" from teachers' perceptions. International Journal of English Language and Literature studies, 4(1), 37-48. [DOI:10.18488/journal.23/2015.4.1/23.1.37.48]
3. 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.
4. Ahour, T., & Omrani, P. (2019). Evaluation of The English Textbook "Prospect 2" Based on the Needs of Students and Teachers' Perceptions. Journal of Foreign Language Research, 9(3), 659-689. [DOI:10.22059/JFLR.2019.279184.617]
5. Alavi Moghaddam, S. B., Kheirabadi, R., Rahimi, M., & Alavi, S. M. (2017). Prospect 3. Tehran: Iran School Books Publication Company.
6. Alhamami, M., & Somaili, M. (2023). Perceptions of Saudi EFL Teachers on the Adequacy of Textbooks. ENGLISH FRANCA: Academic Journal of English Language and Education, 7(2). 277-290. [DOI:10.29240/ef.v7i2.8450]
7. Alqahtani, M. H. (2024). Women in Saudi secondary school EFL textbooks: a critical study of women's empowerment as enshrined in the Saudi vision 2030. Frontiers in Sociology, 9. 1-12. [DOI:10.3389/fsoc.2024.1307623]
8. Awasthi, J. R. (2006). Textbook and its evaluation. Journal of NELTA, 11(1-2), 1-10. [DOI:10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.528]
9. Azizifar, A., Koosha, M., & Lotfi, A. (2010). An Analytic Evaluation of Locally Produced Iranian Hgih School ELT Textbooks from 1970 to the Present. English Language Teaching, 3(4), 36-44. [DOI:10.1016/j.sbspro.2010.07.010]
10. Banaruee, H., Farsani, D., & Khatin-Zadeh, O. (2023). Culture in English language teaching: A curricular evaluation of English textbooks for foreign language learners. Frontiers in Education, 8, 1012786. [DOI:10.3389/feduc.2023.1012786]
11. Bhatti, N., Abdullah, N.A. (2024). Teachers' and students' perception of effectiveness of English textbook grade VIII in Public Schools in Pakistan in digital era. Discover Education, 3(19), 1-8. [DOI:10.1007/s44217-024-00094-x]
12. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. [DOI:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa]
13. Burns, A. (2019). Action Research in English Language Teaching: Contributions and Recent Developments. In X. Gao (Ed.), Second Handbook of English Language Teaching (Springer International Handbooks of Education). Springer, Cham. [DOI:10.1007/978-3-030-02899-2_52]
14. Canale, G. (2021). The language textbook: representation, interaction and learning. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 34(2), 113-118. [DOI:10.1080/07908318.2020.1797080]
15. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2011). Research Methods in Education (7th ed.). Routledge. [DOI:10.4324/9781315456539]
16. Copley, K. (2017). Neoliberalism and ELT coursebook content. Critical Inquiry in Language Studies, 15(1), 43-62. [DOI:10.1080/15427587.2017.1318664]
17. Creswell, J. (2009). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (3rd ed). Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications.
18. Cunningsworth, A. (1995). Choosing your textbook. Heinemann.
19. Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research Method in Applied Linguistic. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
20. Dos Santo, L. M. (2020). The application of a textbook evaluation checklist: A research study of English as foreign language textbook. Universal Journal of Educational Research, 8(9), 3864-3872. [DOI:10.13189/ujer.2020.080910]
21. Gholampour, S., & Mehrabi, D. (2023). Literature Review of ELT Textbook Evaluation. MEXTESOL Journal, 47(2), 1-7.
22. Ghoorchaei, B., Derakhshan, A., & Ebrahimi, A. (2021). An Evaluation of English Textbook "Prospect 2": Teachers and Teacher Educators' Perceptions in the Spotlight. Journal of Modern Research in English Language Studies, 8(2), 59-90. [DOI:10.30479/jmrels.2020.13156.1624]
23. Gillham, B. (2000). Developing a questionnaire. London: Continuum.
24. Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007). A meta-analysis of writing instruction for adolescent students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(3), 445-476. [DOI:10.1037/0022-0663.99.3.445]
25. Greco, J. (2020). The Transmission of Knowledge. Cambridge University Press. [DOI:10.1017/9781108560818]
26. Grenfell, M., & Harris, V. (1999). Modern Languages and Learning Strategies: In Theory and Practice. Routledge. [DOI:10.4324/9780203013823]
27. Hatami, S. (2012). Learning styles. ELT Journal, 67(4),488-490. [DOI:10.1093/elt/ccs083]
28. Hutchinson, T., & Torres, E. (1994). The textbook as agent of change. ELT Journal, 48(4), 315-328. [DOI:10.1093/elt/48.4.315]
29. Jafari, S. M., Shokrpour, N., & Guetterman, T. (2015). A mixed methods study of teachers' perceptions of communicative language teaching in Iranian high schools. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 5(4), 707-718. [DOI:10.17507/tpls.0504.06]
30. Kalfut, T. (2021). To whom are you writing? Examining audience in L2 textbook writing activities. English Language Teaching, 14(10), 105-129. [DOI:10.5539/elt.v14n10p105]
31. Kheirabadi, R., & Alavi Moghadam, B. (2014). Meta-analysis of the researchers on evaluating English textbooks in Iran. International Journal of Economy, Management and Social Sciences, 3(12), 894-897.
32. Khodabandeh, F., & Mombini, R. (2018). Iranian EFL teachers' and students' perceptions towards the first grade high school English textbook (Vision 1). The Journal of English Language Pedagogy and Practice, 11(22), 141-167. [DOI:10.30495/jal.2018.541070]
33. Lee, S. M (2013). The development of evaluation theories for foreign language textbooks. Journal of Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics, 17(2), 69-89.
34. Li, M. (2021). New Landscape of L2 Writing and Theoretical Frameworks. In M. Li (Ed.), Researching and Teaching Second Language Writing in the Digital Age. Palgrave Macmillan. [DOI:10.1007/978-3-030-87710-1_2]
35. Litz, D. R. (2005). Textbook evaluation and ELT management: A South Korean case study. Asian EFL journal, 48(1), 1-53.
36. Lodhi, M. A., Farman, H., Ullah, I., Gul, A., Tahira, F., & Saleem, S. (2019). Evaluation of English textbook of intermediate class from students' perspectives. English Language Teaching, 12(3), 26-36. [DOI:10.5539/elt.v12n3p26]
37. Macaro, E. (2001). Analysing Student Teachers' Codeswitching in Foreign Language Classrooms: Theories and Decision Making. The Modern Language Journal, 85(4), 531-548. [DOI:10.1111/0026-7902.00124]
38. Mackay, R. (1978). Identifying the Nature of the Learners' needs. In R. Mackay & A. Mountford (Eds.), English for Specific Purposes: A Case Study Approach. London: Longman
39. Maghsoudi, M., & Khodamoradi, A. (2023). An Evaluation of the English Language Textbooks for Iranian Junior High Schools Based on the Objectives of Fundamental Reform Document of Education (FRDE). The International Journal of Humanities, 30(2), 98-122.
40. Martínez-Adrián, M., Gallardo-del-Puerto, F., & Basterrechea, M. (2019). Cross-Linguistic Influence: From Empirical Evidence to Classroom Practice. Springer.
41. McDonough, J., Shaw, C., & Masuhara, H. (2013). Materials and methods in ELT: A teacher's guide (3rd ed.). Wiley.
42. Medlin, L. (2009). English for Specific Purposes (ESP): Nursing in the US Hospital. Unpublished MA dissertation. California State University.
43. Orfan, S. N., Noori, A. Q., & Akramy, S. A. (2021). Afghan EFL teachers' perceptions of English textbooks. Heliyon, 7(11), 1-6. [DOI:10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e08340]
44. Pan, M.X., Zhu, Y. (2022). Researching English language textbooks: A systematic review in the Chinese context (1964-2021). Asian-Pacific Journal of Second and Foreign Language Education, 7(30), 1-17. [DOI:10.1186/s40862-022-00156-3]
45. Pouranshirvani, M. (2017b). The internal evaluation of new English textbook "Vision1" for tenth-grade students in Iranian high schools from teachers' perspectives. Science Arena Publications Specialty Journal of Language Studies and Literature, 1(3), 1-14.
46. Querstret, D., & Robinson, O. C. (2012). Person, persona and personality modification: An in-depth qualitative exploration of quantitative findings. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 10(2), 140-159. [DOI:10.1080/14780887.2011.586450]
47. Rathert, S., & Cabaroğlu, N. (2022). Theorising Textbook Adaptation in English Language Teaching. Center for Educational Policy Studies Journal, 12(2), 169-188. [DOI:10.26529/cepsj.1287]
48. Reid, J. M. (1987). The learning style preferences of ESL students. TESOL Quarterly, 21(1), 87-111. [DOI:10.2307/3586356]
49. Reid, J. M. (1995). Learning styles in the ESL/EFL classroom. Heinle & Heinle.
50. Riasati, M. J., & Zare, P. (2010). EFL teachers' perspectives on "New Interchange". Studies in Literature and Language, 1(8), 54-60. https://dx.doi.org/10.3968/n
51. Richards, J. C. (2014). The ELT Textbook. In S. Garton & K. Graves (Eds.), International Perspectives on Materials in ELT. Palgrave Macmillan. [DOI:10.1057/9781137023315_2]
52. Roohani, A., Tahmineh, A., & Moafiyan, F. (2014). An Evaluation of the Pictures of English Textbooks in the Iranian High Schools from the point of view of Function and Gender Discrimination. Journal of Foreign Language Research, 3(1), 93-1115. https:/doi.org/10.22059/JFLR.2013.53765.
53. Shahmohammadi, S. (2018). Textbook Evaluation: Looking at Prospect Series through Teachers' Perspectives. Research In English Language Pedagogy, 6(2). 182-204. [DOI:10.30486/relp.2018.542578]
54. Sheldon, L. E. (1988). Evaluating ELT textbooks and materials. ELT Journal, 42(4), 237-246. [DOI:10.1093/elt/42.4.237]
55. Somaili, M. H., & Alhamami, M. (2023). Perceptions of Saudi EFL teachers on adequacy of textbooks. Academic Journal of English Language and Education, 7(2), 277-290. [DOI:10.29240/ef.v7i2.8450]
56. Sun, P. P. (2023). The influence of cognitive, affective, and sociocultural individual differences on L2 Chinese speech performance: A multiple indicators multiple causes approach. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 52, 217-239. [DOI:10.1007/s10936-022-09847-x]
57. Susiati, S., & Mufidati, E. (2020). An Indonesian National English Textbook for Secondary [DOI:10.23917/varidika.v32i1.11511]
58. Taherkhani, R., & Mottaghi, F. (2021). A Critique of the English Book for 8th Graders Entitled " Prospect 2" in Terms of its Cultural Aspects. Critical Studies in Texts & Programs of Human Sciences, 21(10), 295-321. [DOI:10.30465/crtls.2021.25761.1561]
59. Tajeddin, Z., Pakzadian, M. (2020). Representation of inner, outer and expanding circle varieties and cultures in global ELT textbooks. Asian. J. Second. Foreign. Lang. Educ. 5(10), 2-15. [DOI:10.1186/s40862-020-00089-9]
60. Victoria, M., & Sangiamchit, C. (2021). Introduction: Interculturality and the English Language Classroom. In M. Victoria & C. Sangiamchit (Eds.), Interculturality and the English Language Classroom. Palgrave Macmillan. [DOI:10.1007/978-3-030-76757-0_1]
61. Wang, H. C. (2019). The influence of creative task engagement on English L2 learners' negotiation of meaning in oral communication tasks. System,80, 83-94. [DOI:10.1016/j.system.2018.10.015]
62. Wang, Z., Hwang, G.-J., Yin, Z., & Ma, Y. (2020). A Contribution-Oriented Self-Directed Mobile Learning Ecology Approach to Improving EFL Students' Vocabulary Retention and Second Language Motivation. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 23(1), 16-29. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26915404
63. Yağızel, K., & Şehnaz Nigar Çelik, Ş.N. (2023). The evaluation of the 4th grade English coursebook in terms of teachers' views. The Universal Academic Research Journal, 5(3),153-167. [DOI:10.55236/tuara.1346947]
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons - Attribution 4.0 International. |
