VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY- HANOI
COLLEGE OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES
POST- GRADUATE DEPARTMENT
GIAP THI YEN
AN EVALUATION OF THE MATERIAL
“BASIC ENGLISH III”
FOR THE SECOND YEAR NON- ENGLISH MAJOR
STUDENTS AT BAC GIANG TEACHERS’
TRAINING COLLEGE
(Đánh giá giáo trình “Tiếng Anh Cơ Bản III” dành cho sinh viên không chuyên năm thứ hai
Trường Cao Đẳng Sư Phạm Bắc Giang)
MINOR PROGRAM THESIS
FIELD : MOTHODOLOGY
CODE : 601410

HA NOI- 2008
i
VIETNAM NATIONAL UNIVERSITY- HANOI
COLLEGE OF FOREIGN LANGUAGES
POST- GRADUATE DEPARTMENT
GIÁP THỊ YẾN
AN EVALUATION OF THE MATERIAL
“BASIC ENGLISH III”
FOR THE SECOND YEAR NON- ENGLISH MAJOR
STUDENTS AT BAC GIANG TEACHERS’
TRAINING COLLEGE
(Đánh giá giáo trình “Tiếng Anh Cơ Bản III” dành cho sinh viên không chuyên năm thứ hai
Trường Cao Đẳng Sư Phạm Bắc Giang)
MINOR PROGRAM THESIS
FIELD : METHODOLOGY
CODE : 601410

I would like to take this opportunity to express my thankfulness to all of my English staff at
Bac Giang Teachers’ Training College for their great help and kind cooperation in
completing the questionnaires for the thesis.
I wish to extend my thanks to all of my friends who have been most helpful and supportive
to me during the completion of my research.
Last but not least, my sincere thanks go to my parents whose love and encouragement have
been equally important to my educational endeavors, especially my little son who has given
me so much inspiration, energy, and support in accomplishing this challenging work.
ii
ABSTRACT
It is obvious that materials evaluation is one of the essential aspects of language teaching and
learning. Within this regard, the thesis was carried out to evaluate the material “Basic
English III” which is currently in use for the second year non- English major students at Bac
Giang Teachers’ Training College (BGTTC) since 2006 with the hope that practical
suggestions would be given for further improvements of the material in the near future to
meet the target of ensuring the effectiveness of the teaching and the learning English at
BGTTC.
The data collection instruments used in this study were questionnaires and document
analysis. In this sequence, the material in use is analyzed basing on the criteria suggested by
Hutchinson and Waters’ (1987) with an aim to determine how the material realizes the
course requirements. A survey on the teachers' opinions about the extent to which the
material meets the requirements of the course in terms of the aims, content and methodology
is conducted.
Research results have revealed some strengths and weaknesses of the material which allows
the author to conclude that the material is not very relevant to the course aims, content and
methodology.
Based on the findings, the thesis suggests some recommendations on materials adaptation
such as addition, deletion, and replacement that should be made to remedy the weaknesses of
the material so that the students can benefit more from it in future courses.
iii

Appendixes .......................................................................................................................III
Appendix 1..........................................................................................................................III
Appendix 2........................................................................................................................VII
Appendix 3.......................................................................................................................VIII
Appendix 4...........................................................................................................................X
Appendix 5........................................................................................................................XV
iv
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
CFL : College of Foreign Language
VNU : Vietnam National University
BGTTC : Bac Giang Teachers’ Training College
BEIII : Basic English III
v
LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES
Figures
Figure 1: Materials Evaluation Model of McDonough and Shaw
Figure 2: The materials evaluation model of Hutchinson & Waters
Tables
Table 2.1: Types of information in the teacher questionnaire
Table 3.1: The vocabulary list of unit 1 (Basic English III, p. 87)
Table 3.2: The content requirements for the third term
Table 3.3: The methodology requirements of the course
Table 3.4: Teachers’ opinions about the suitability of the material (Q 1- 6)
Table 3.5: Teachers’ opinions about language points and languages skills covered in this
material (Q7-8)
Table 3.6: Teachers’ opinions about effectiveness of sub-skills (Q 9)
Table 3.7: Teachers’ opinions about the topics in the material (Q10- 11)
Table 3.8: Teachers’ opinions about the text- types in the material (Q14)
Table 3.9: Teachers’ opinions about the organization and sequence of content (Q12- 13)
Table 3.10: Teachers’ opinions about time allocation in the material (Q15)

2. Aims of the thesis
This study is intended to investigate:
- How well the material has satisfied the requirements of the course in relation to aims,
content and methodology?
- What improvements should be made to the material to make it more effective in
responding to the course requirements and students’ needs?
Hopefully, the findings of the thesis will provide reliable basis for further suggestions,
which helps the teachers - material designers at BGTTC improve this in- house material.
1
3. Significance of the thesis
The findings of the thesis will be useful not only to the researcher, and the course book
designers but also to the teaching staff and the second year non- English major students at
BGTTC. Besides, the given findings will help form a foundation toward improving the
quality of the in-house material “Basic English III” which is currently used for the students
at BGTTC. Further more, it is hoped that those research results will make some contributions
to the field of materials evaluation
4. Scope of the thesis
In materials evaluation, there have been a great number of criteria that should be taken into
consideration such as: the audience, the content, the methodology, the cultural bias, the
layout, the authenticity, and so on. In this study, the researcher bases on Hutchinson and
Waters’s (1987) criteria for evaluation with focus on the three following criteria: aims of the
material, content of the material, and methodology. Due to the limited scope of a minor
thesis, research subjects are primarily confined to English teachers who have been teaching
the material for 2 years rather than to students who have learnt this material. However, to
ensure the validity and reliability of the given information, students’ feedback, which is
collected in an informal way through teachers’ observation and experience in
working/talking with students, is also taken into account.
5. Design of the thesis
There are three main parts in this thesis: introduction, development, and conclusion.
The introduction provides the rationale, the aims, the significance, the scope, and design of

Richard further explains that materials provide “basis for the content of the lesson, balance
of skills taught, and the kind of language practice students take part in” (p. 251). In other
situations, textbooks may be used to supplement the teacher's instructions. For learners,
textbooks may provide a major source of contact they have with the target language,
excluding the input provided by the teacher. In the case of novice teachers, textbooks may
also be utilized as a form of teacher training; that is, they provide the teachers with ideas on
how to plan and teach lessons as well as with formats that teachers can use. Much of the
language teaching that occurs throughout the world today could not take place without the
extensive use of commercial textbooks. Hence, learning how to use and adapt textbooks is an
important part of a teacher's professional knowledge.
Allwright (1990) supports Richard’s point of view by emphasizing that
Materials should teach students to learn, that they should be resource books for ideas
and activities for instruction, and that they should give teachers rationales for what
they do.
It is true that in many cases, teachers and students rely heavily on textbooks, and textbooks
determine the components and methods of learning, that is, they control the content,
methods, and procedures of learning. Students learn what is presented in the textbook, and
the way the textbook presents material is the way students learn it. The educational
philosophy of the textbook will influence the class and the learning process. Therefore, in
4
most situations, materials are the center of instruction and one of the most important
influences on what goes on in the classroom.
According to Nunan (1991), good teaching materials help inexperienced and poorly trained
teachers a lot, but they also help experienced teachers. Theoretically, experienced teachers
can teach English without a textbook. However, it is not easy to do it all the time, though
they may do it sometimes. Many teachers do not have enough time to design supplementary
materials, so they just follow the textbook. Textbooks, therefore, take on a very important
role in language classes. That is also the reason why the writer chooses one of the in- house
materials in use in her college for evaluation to see if it is appropriate or not to the current
teaching circumstance.

textbooks are well planned, they can be inappropriate for teachers and students. The counter-
arguments for using textbooks are also listed by Ur (1996) as follows:
- Inadequacy: In every class, every learner has his/ her own learning needs: no one
textbook can possibly supply these satisfactorily.
- Irrelevance, lack of interest: the topics dealt with in the textbook may not
necessarily be relevant or interesting for any individual class.
- Limitation: a textbook is confining that is, its set structure and sequence may inhibit
a teacher’s initiative and creativity, which leads to boredom and lack of motivation
on the part of the learners.
- Homogeneity: Textbooks have their own rationale, chosen teaching, and learning
approach. They do not usually cater for the variety of levels of ability and
knowledge, or learning styles and strategies that exist in most classes.
- Over-easiness: Teachers find it too easy to follow the textbook uncritically instead
of using their initiatives; they may find themselves functioning merely as mediators
of its content instead of as teachers in their own right.
In practice, the teacher should take into consideration the given advantages and
disadvantages when choosing a published textbook so as to enhance the strengths and
minimize the weaknesses which might incur in the course of teaching and learning.
Unlike published textbooks, in-house materials are always designed for a particular group of
learners so they correspond to learners’ need and match with the aims and objectives of the
language-learning program. According to Robinson (1991:58),
- In-house materials are likely to be more specific and appropriate than published
materials and have greater face validity in terms of the language dealt with and the
contexts it is presented in.
6
- In-house materials may be more flexible than published textbooks.
-The writers of in-house materials can make sure of the suitability of methodology
for the intended learners. However, it is noted that making in-house materials is time
consuming and expensive.
As stated above, published textbooks and in-house materials offer both good points and bad

or replace it with a better one.
At BGTTC, ‘Basic English III’, which was compiled by two English teachers at English
Department in 2005, has revealed certain advantages as well as disadvantages. All these
things call for the need to evaluate the material, which ultimately becomes the author’s
purpose in carrying out this research.
1.2.3. Types of Materials Evaluation
In materials evaluation literature different authors offer different ways of categorizing it.
Robinson (1991:59) classifies materials evaluation into three types: preliminary, summative
and formative while McGrath (2002: p.14-15) divides materials evaluation into three stages:
pre-use, in -use and post-use evaluation. Although different terms are used to indicate types
of materials evaluation, these terms are basically similar.
Preliminary or pre- use evaluation often takes place before the course starts with the aim to
select the appropriate materials most appropriate for the particular group of learners and for
the aims of the course.
Formative or in- use evaluation occurs during the learning process, the result obtained can
be used to modify what is being done or in other words, such results may suggest the
development of the material in the future.
Summative or post- use evaluation is normally carried out when the course is finished with
the aim to determine whether the program was successful and effective and the findings of
this evaluation will lead to the decision whether to repeat or use the materials again or not.
In short, there are different types of materials evaluation so when making an evaluation; the
evaluators have to determine what type of materials evaluation will be suitable with their
work. As for BGTTC situation, since the material has been in use for two years, the
researcher decided to use summative/post-use evaluation with an aim to determine whether
this material is effective or not and offer some recommendations for further improvements of
the material.
1.2.4. Materials Evaluators
Robinson (1991), Tomlinson (1998), Richards (2001), and Dudley-Evan & St. John (1998)
state that materials evaluators can be either outsiders or insiders.
8

& Waters (1987).
9
1.2.5.1. Evaluation by Ellis (1997)
This is a micro- evaluation. In this model, Ellis suggests the practice of a detailed empirical
evaluation and focuses on evaluation at the task level with reference to its actual teaching
and learning context. Following are its steps:
1. Choosing a task to follow;
2. Describing the task with specification of input, procedures, language activities,
and outcomes;
3. Planning the evaluation with reference to the dimensions above;
4. Collecting information before, while and after the task was used, and what and
how the task was performed;
5. Analyzing the information collected;
6. Reaching conclusions relating to what has been discovered, and making
recommendations for the future teaching;
7. Writing the report.
The aim of this model is to identify the match between task planned and task in use. It can be
conducted when the materials are being used in the classroom.
1.2.5.2. Evaluation by McDonough and Shaw (1993)
This is a combination of macro- and micro- evaluation. In this model, the authors suggest a
three-stage evaluation model called: external evaluation, internal evaluation, and overall
evaluation (see figure 1).
The external stage (macro- evaluation) is used to identify whether the material is potentially
appropriate, then the internal stage starts and if the findings show that the material is
inappropriate, the evaluation will be finished at the external stage.
The internal stage (micro- evaluation) requires an in-depth investigation into the materials so
we need to examine at least two or more units of the book to examine the extent to which the
factor in the external evaluation stage actually match the internal consistency and
organization of the materials staged by the author/ publisher.
The final step is the overall evaluation. It helps to determine the suitability of the materials

Which criteria will be
more important?
SUBJECTIVE ANALYSIS
What realization of the criteria do
you want in your course?
11
Figure 2: Materials Evaluation Process (Hutchinson and Waters 1987, p. 98)
As can be seen above, the first step is to define the criteria on which the evaluation is based.
In this step, the evaluator has to define what bases the materials will be judged and which
criteria the evaluator wants to include in the course. The second step is to determine the
subjective analysis, that is, to identify the requirements for materials so the evaluator should
describe in detail on what criteria the course is based. The third step is to determine the
objective analysis, that is, to evaluate whether the existing materials realize the criteria set in
the subjective analysis. The last one is the matching process, which finds out how far the
material matches the course requirements.
In summary, Hutchinson and Waters (1987) suggest a logical model for materials evaluation.
It can help the evaluators know exactly what must be done to analyze the materials in
comparison with the course requirements. Therefore, in this study, the author has chosen the
evaluation framework by Hutchinson and Waters (1987) to check whether the existing
material is suitable for the students at BGTTC. Also, it is very useful for the author to set out
both subjective analysis (i.e. analysis of BGTTC curriculum) and objective analysis (i.e.
12
analysis of the materials being evaluated). Then the findings of the two analyses are
compared to find out whether they match to each other and if not, to what extents they do not
match up. Based on the research results, good aspects as well as problematic parts of the
material can be identified, which may serve as a reliable ground for further suggestions on
material improvements.
1.2.6. Criteria for Materials Evaluation
According to Dudley- Evans and St. John (1998), in the evaluation process, evaluators must
take evaluation criteria into account before any evaluation takes place. Criteria for materials

language points, macro-skills/ micro-skills, and topics suit the learners’ needs.
- Methodology of the materials: the evaluator has to find out if techniques, aids,
guidance provided in the materials satisfy the learners and the teachers of the course.
Comparing the two sets of criteria presented above by William (1983) and by Hutchinson
and Waters (1987), it is obvious that the work of developing and choosing evaluative criteria
is rather subjective and depends on what the evaluators consider to be important. In this
evaluation research, the four criteria including audience, aims, content and methodology
suggested by Hutchinson and Waters (1987) were adopted. to see how much ‘English Basic
III’ match with the aims and the requirements of the course.
1.3 Materials Adaptation
Materials adaptation is a process of matching the teaching material with the needs, interests
of learners, and the teachers’ own capabilities. Its purpose is to maximize the appropriateness
of teaching materials in context, by changing some of the internal characteristics of a course
book to better suit the particular circumstances. McDonough and Shaw (1993: 86) state that
reasons for adaptation rely on four main aspects namely “language use; skills; classroom
organization; supplementary material.” and there are also six important ways of modifying
materials.
- Adding: the materials are supplemented simply by putting more into them. In the
quantitative way, we can add the technique of extending but the model remains
unchanged. The qualitative way, which can be termed as expanding refers to the
development of the methodology in new directions by putting in different language
skills or a new component. This can be thought of as “a change in the overall
systems.” (McDonough and Shaw, 1993: 90). Therefore, addition can be made
before, during or after the intended area.
- Deleting or omitting: deletion means cutting one or more stages within an activity
or omitting a whole activity or even a whole lesson. Therefore, addition and deletion
14
often work together. The tasks in the material may be deleted and compensated by a
more suitable one to meet the objectives of the whole unit. However, when the
techniques for adaptation are applied, it is necessary to take into account the balance

evaluation and criteria for materials evaluation. The last section also included some
theoretical discussions about materials adaptation. Therefore, this chapter can be seen as the
theoretical foundation for the applications for the study in chapter III and the improvements
that should be made to the course book “Basic English III” for non- English major students
at BG Teachers’ Training College.
Chapter 2: Research Methodology
2.1. An overview of current English Teaching and Learning at BGTTC
Bac Giang Teachers Training College is the only college in Bac Giang province responsible
for training junior teachers of English and other subjects. Recently, there has been no more
need for English teachers in the province. Consequently, 16 teachers of English department
have been assigned to teach English for non- English major students.
BGTTC is situated in a mountainous province. Thus, the teaching conditions are quite poor.
This college does not have special rooms for studying foreign language. The classrooms are
16