Step 3: A Closer Look at Individual Units Having established the needs of the learners and the methodologies of the coursebooks, open and unbiased closer analysis of the materials is now beneficial. In this stage, single units are evaluated, as how a unit presents language can indicate the strengths and weaknesses of coursebooks. However, remember that one unit may not reflect the whole coursebook (Cunningsworth, 1995: 2). Following analysis the teacher can again reflect upon which coursebook seems most appropriate.
In the case of this example, comparable units presenting the narrative tenses were selected, as an accurate and increasingly fluent use of the narrative tenses represents the transition from Threshold to Independent user, (Association of Language Teachers in Europe, 2002: 6-10). The selection of unit depends on the unique situation and should be decided by the evaluating teacher.
In the Contents section of the students’ book, Coursebook Y lists the following areas of language covered in five student book pages, plus two extra pages for vocabulary and writing, two additional photocopiable activities and three workbook pages.
Coursebook Y Main Teaching Points
Narrative tenses and past perfect continuous
Common verbs which are often confused
Pronunciation of regular and irregular past tenses
Telling an anecdote
Reading mini sagas and authentic materials in the form of newspaper articles
Writing a story (short and long)
Coursebook X Main Teaching Points
Narrative tenses and past perfect continuous
Phrasal verbs
Reading and listening to urban myths
Telling stories in the form of urban myths
In summary, the main teaching points of the units are grammatically similar although in terms of vocabulary, the units each cover different areas. Coursebook Y appears to be more suitable for the learners in this example.
Step 4: Evaluation Strengths and Weaknesses of each Unit In this stage, a subjective evaluation of the strengths and weakness of the coursebooks is made. In order to systematically evaluate strengths and weaknesses, a process of selecting and rating criteria can be used (McGrath, 2002: 56). Use of some academic evaluation techniques may require extensive experience or post graduate theoretical knowledge. In order to make the process suitable for all professionals, a more concise list of criteria was developed. Which criteria to assess depends on the individual situation. A rating system using a simple numerical score or judgement of suitable (S) or not suitable (NS) can be used depending on time constraints. The criteria selected were:
