Category 1
Communication 30%
Future work 46.70%
High result 56.70%
Personal preferences 36%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Chart 4.7 illustrates students’ evaluation of the appropriateness of the coursebook with students’ purposes. It can be clearly seen that the material can meet students’ purposes of getting high result at school the best (56.7%), then preparing for future work (46.7%), personal preferences (36%) and communication (30%) respectively. In the analysis of students’ learning purposes, students supposed that the most important purpose was to prepare for their future work, then to communicate in English, to get high scores and finally to serve their personal preferences. Although these results are not very consistent, they show that all the purposes were achieved by the coursebook.
4.3.2. Data collected from semi-structured interviews
In terms of the topics of the book, both interviewed teachers and students found that these topics were familiar and interesting. For example, students could learn more about countries and nationalities around the world, about small things around them, so they could practice and communicate about these topics in real life (teacher 2 and student A). Nevertheless, some of them found some tasks unsuitable to Vietnamese students. As teacher 5 said “some tasks failed to attract students’ attention and engagement because of the unfamiliar knowledge, for example to guess different brands of cars or tell names of some famous people in the world” that students do not now. Another example is asking about things students leave on the plane whereas most of them haven’t had flying experience (student G).
When being asked about the strengths and weaknesses or what they like or do not like about the book, a lot of teachers and students had good reviews.
Teacher 2 and student B found the grammar bank, vocabulary bank and sound bank in the book helpful with the illustrated pictures for vocabulary and sounds and clear examples and explanation for grammar. “The book is very easy to use with the vocabulary bank, grammar bank and sound bank. After each grammar
point, we can practice the exercises right in class and we also have further exercises in the Workbook to practice at home” (student B). Teacher 5 added that “the vocabulary load is quite sufficient” for most of the students, but for some good students, “the grammar and vocabulary knowledge is rather simple and not enough” (teacher 6). With regard to four skills, teacher 7 supposed that this material helped “to develop students’ four skills of speaking, listening, reading and writing”. However, not only teachers but also students thought that they needed more time to practice listening and speaking skill because they were bad at communicating (students A and B, teacher 6). Student B suggested some videos teaching how to pronounce the sounds for pronunciation part.
4.3.3. Discussion and conclusion
Overall, it can be concluded from the above analyses that the coursebook corresponds quite well to students’ needs. Most of the topics are of students’
interest, so most of them found the topics exciting and very interesting.
However, there were still some tasks in these topics inappropriate for Vietnamese students because they had no experience and interest in the information presented. Both the language elements and skills in the book were positively evaluated by both teachers and students that they were authentic, contextualized and appropriate for students’ level. The book can also meet all students’ learning purposes, but not in the priority of importance that they have attached to each purpose. Therefore, teachers should pay more attention to the purposes that students found most important like learning for future work or for better communication. For example, teachers can introduce some topics related to future work and create more opportunity for them to interact with each other in the four experience/ supplementary weeks of the course.
4.4. The suitability of the coursebook to the current teaching and learning methods
4.4.1. Data collected from questionnaires
Questions in this part are used to find out how much the coursebook is suited to the current teaching and learning methods. Things which the author based on to investigate are as follows: the effectiveness of the teaching and learning interactions used with the coursebook, the frequency of the teaching aids used with the coursebook and students’ and teachers’ evaluation on the methodology of the coursebook.
Table 4.9: Effectiveness of the teaching and learning interactions used with the coursebook
Students (%) Teachers (%)
1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5
Pair work 0 2.6 3.3 51.9 42.2 0 0 12.5 25 62.5
Group work 0 2.6 26.7 50 20.7 0 0 12.5 50 37.5
Individual
work 0 0 23.4 40.6 36 0 0 0 75 25
Student
presentation 4.7 4 50 30 11.3 0 12.5 12.5 62.5 12.5 Teacher
presentation 0 0 10.7 61.3 28 0 0 12.5 75 12.5
Whole class
work 6.7 3.3 52 33.3 4.7 0 0 25 62.5 12.5
Note: 1 = Very ineffective 2 = Ineffective 3 = Neither ineffective nor effective 4 = Effective 5 = Very effective
Table 4.9 indicates students’ and teachers’ evaluation of the effectiveness of the teaching and learning interactions used in the coursebook. Generally, most of the interactions were assessed “effective” by both teachers and
students. Pair work, group work, individual work and teacher presentation were considered to be the most effective. No teacher thought that these four patterns of interaction were “very ineffective” whereas no or just a few students (0% - 2.6%) evaluated them as “very ineffective” or “ineffective”. This result is compatible with students’ preferences of learning style as analyzed above.
Most of the students preferred verbal style, visual, aural, solitary, social and physical style respectively. This explains why they found it most effective to listen to the teacher, work on their own or work together in some class activities. For student presentation and whole class work, although quite a lot of the students (38% - 41.3%) supposed “effective” and “very effective”, more of them rated “neither ineffective nor effective” (50% - 52%) for these two types of interactions. In contrast, teachers considered both student presentation and whole class work to be equally “effective” (62.5%) and “very effective”
(12.5%), almost as efficient as the other interactions.
Table 4.10: The frequency of the teaching aids used with the coursebook
Students (%) Teachers (%)
1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5
Cassette
recorders 0 0 16.6 56.7 26.7 0 0 12.5 75 12.5
Projectors 0 0 30.6 46.1 23.3 0 0 50 25 25
Charts 63.3 36.7 0 0 0 100 0 0 0 0
Videos 0 0 27.4 67.3 5.3 0 0 62.5 25 12.5
Realia 9.4 58 32.6 0 0 12.5 50 37.5 0 0
Note: 1 = Never 2 = Rarely 3 = Sometimes 4 = Often 5 = Very often
As can be seen from table 4.10, the teaching aids most frequently used with the book was cassette recorders, projectors and videos because there are a lot of audios and videos for listening tasks in each unit. After every two units,
there is a Practical English Practice or Revise and Check which includes In- the-street videos, short films, or authentic videos about life of two main characters Jenny and Rob. Charts and regalia were almost not used with this book. 100% of the teachers and 63.3% of the students confirmed that the charts were “never” used; other students supposed they were “rarely” used. Regalia were “sometimes” (32.6% - 37.5%) or “never” (9.4% - 12.5%) used but mainly they were “rarely” used (50% - 58%). These results match with students’
learning preference of visual and aural style as analyzed above.
Table 4.11: Students’ and teachers’ evaluation on the methodology of the coursebook.
Rating Criteria
Students (%) Teachers (%)
1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5
The material provides a good balance of four-skill practice, pronunciation, vocabulary and grammar reinforcement.
4.6 9.4 26 56.
7 3.3 0 0 12.
5 62.
5 25 The material provides
tasks and activities to practice language and integrated skills in meaningful
communication.
0 24 27.
4 41.
3 7.3 0 0 0 75 25
The material includes language guidances for students and suggestions for their further self- study.
0 0 3.3 29.
4 67.
3 0 0 0 25 75
The material is flexible in orders of different units and language points. It can also be linked to other materials for references.
4 10 16.
7 68 1.3 0 0 12.
5 75 12.
5 Note: 1 = Poorly 2 = Not very well 3 = Neutrally
4 = Well 5 = Very well
According to the figures in table 4.11, almost no or very few teachers and students supposed that the criteria were met “poorly” or “not very well” by the coursebook. There was a slight difference between teachers’ and students’
opinions. Teachers were more optimistic about the appropriateness of the book with the given criteria when no one rated “poorly” or “not very well” for the criteria and only 12.5% of them rated “neutrally” for the first and fourth criteria; in the meantime, some students still thought the coursebook “poorly”
met or did not meet the criteria very well. Quite a lot of the students (3.35% – 24.7%) hold the neutral attitude for these criteria. For all criteria, the majority of both teachers and students agreed that the material can meet these requirement “well” (25% - 75%) and “very well” (3.3% - 75%). Among four criteria, that the material provides knowledge and skills taught integratedly and meaningfully, and that it provides language guidance and suggestion for further study were evaluated to be best met by the book. All teachers and from 48.6%
to 95.7% of the students thought these two criteria were “well” or “very well”
met by the book.
4.4.2. Data collected from semi-structured interviews
In general, the interviewed teacher and students agreed that the coursebook is communicative and suitable for the current teaching and learning method of teachers and students. They explained that the language elements and skills in the book were “usually linked to each other, which helps students to practice them regularly” (teacher 8). Besides, there are “Communication”
parts in the book with information gap activities in almost every unit of the book for students to interact with their friends to find out the missing information (teacher 3 and student C). When being asked, student C was very excited about it: “we have a lot of fun in the activities”, she shared. What students and teachers enjoyed about the material is the authentic videos in the
Practical English part (teacher 6). “I love to follow the episodes about Jenny and Rob in the Practical English. It’s really enjoyable when I can study and watch the film in English at the same time. The In-the-street interviews are also very interesting”, student D shared. Besides, students are satisfied to have chances to listen regularly in each unit (student F). For topics like colors, small objects or school things, teachers sometimes used real objects in the classroom such as books, notebooks, pens, etc. to illustrate the words, which is so interesting to learn (student G).
4.4.3. Discussion and conclusion
Overall, from the questionnaire and interview result, it can be evaluated that the coursebook is almost appropriate to the current teaching and learning methods of teachers and students in the school. Individual work, teacher presentation, pair work and group work were considered to be the most effective interactions in class while student presentation, and whole-class work were not very positively evaluated. Cassette recorders, videos and projectors were most frequently used with this book. These results means that this coursebook is quite suitable for students’ method because as synthesized, most of them preferred verbal, visual, aural and solitary style. The coursebook is also basically appropriate with the current teaching methods when it meets quite well most of the requirements of the communicative language teaching approach currently applied at the school.
4.5. General evaluation and suggestion for further use of the coursebook This part investigates teachers’ and students’ overall evaluation of the coursebook and asks for suggestions for better further use of the material.
4.5.1. General evaluation
Chart 4.8 below reveals the overall rating of the coursebook by students and teachers. It is obvious that no one rated the quality of the book “poor” or
“excellent”. Few of them rated it “fair’ (12.5% - 21.4%) or “very good” (14%
- 25%) whereas most of them evaluated the book of “good’’ quality (62.5 – 64.6%).