Luận văn 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

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Trang

PART I: INTRODUCTION 1

1. Rationale of the thesis 1

2. Aims of the thesis 1

3. Significance of the thesis 2

4. Scope of the thesis 2

5 Design of the thesis 2

PART 2: DEVELOPMENT 4

Chapter 1: Literature Review 4

1.1. Materials in Language Teaching and Learning 4

1.1.1. Roles of Teaching Materials in General English Courses 4

1.1. 2. Types of Materials 5

1.2. Materials Evaluation 7

1.2.1. Definitions of Materials Evaluation 7

1.2.2. Purposes of Materials Evaluation 7

1.2.3. Types of Materials Evaluation 8

1.2.4. Materials Evaluators 9

1.2.5. Models for Materials Evaluation 10

1.2.6. Criteria for Materials Evaluation 13

1.3 Materials Adaptation 14

1.4. Summary 16

Chapter 2: Research Methodology 17

2.1. An overview of current English Teaching and Learning at BGTTC 17

2.2. Research Methods 18

2.2.1. Research questions 18

2.2.2. Participants 18

2.2.3. Data collection procedures 18

2.3. Summary 21

Chapter 3: Data Analysis and Discussion 22

3.1. Document Analysis 22

3.1.1. The Suitability of the Material to the Aims of the Course 22

3.1.2. The Suitability of the Material to the Content Requirements of the Course 25

3.1.3. The Suitability of the Material to the Methodology Requirements of the Course 29

3.2. Survey Results 31

3.2.1. The Suitability of the Material to the Aims of the Course 31

3.2.2. The Suitability of the Material to the Content Requirements of the Course 32

3.2.3. The Suitability of the Material to Methodology Requirements of the Course 39

3.2.4 Teachers’ suggestions for the materials improvement 40

3.3. Summary of major findings 41

3.4. Recommendations for material improvements 43

3.5. Summary 45

PART 3: CONCLUSION 46

1. Summary of previous parts 46

2. Conclusions 46

3. Limitation and suggestions for further research 46

References I

 

 

doc76 trang | Chia sẻ: maiphuongdc | Ngày: 25/10/2013 | Lượt xem: 1721 | Lượt tải: 11download
Bạn đang xem nội dung tài liệu Luận văn 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, để tải tài liệu về máy bạn click vào nút DOWNLOAD ở trên
e insufficient. For example, with writing skill, unit 4, 6, 10, 11, 13, and 14 give students the chances to practice writing complex sentences while unit 8 is aimed at developing students’ paragraph writing skills but none of these units is devoted to essay writing. With speaking skill, in unit 11, after doing language focus about gerunds, students are asked to tell their partners what they like or dislike doing in their free time. Because of the lack of specific instructions, students have many difficulties in performing these tasks. From the facts above, it could be said that the material has partly met the course requirements in terms of writing skill and speaking skill. * Conclusion of the material evaluation From the above mentioned analysis, it can be concluded that the material has fully achieved the aims of the course in terms of grammar and reading skill, partly fulfilled the aims of the course in terms of writing skills and speaking skills, and failed to meet the requirement for pronunciation and vocabulary development. 3.1.2. The Suitability of the Material to the Content Requirements of the Course 3.1.2.1. Syllabus analysis To determine whether the material has well responded to the content requirements of the course, the author made a comparison between the content requirements of the course and the content of the material. Contents Course requirements 1. Language points - Grammatical structures Vocabulary Pronunciation 2. Macro-skills and their proportion 3. Micro-skills Reading Writing Speaking 4. Text types 5. Topics 6. Organization of content 7. Sequence of content 8. Time allocation Basic English grammatical structures such as modal verb, modals + perfect infinitive, expression of quantity, subject- verb agreement with coordinators, linking verbs, used to, too + adj/ adv + to infinitive, adj/ adv + enough + to infinitive, enough + noun + to infinitive, gerund, infinitive, adj + prep, nouns formation Words related to common topics Reduced vowels, word linking, stress and intonation. Reading, writing, speaking (with more focus on reading and writing skills) Guessing, scanning, skimming Writing complex sentences, paragraphs, and essays Asking for information, making an interview, making a description, asking for clarification Reading texts, dialogues, newspapers, invention, story, and descriptions Common, interesting topics with updated information Around the language points Recycle available Three periods per unit Table 3.2: The content requirements for Semester 3 Table 3.2 above presents the description of the course content requirements in terms of language points, macro-skills and their proportion, micro-skills, text types, topics, organization of content, sequence of content, and time allocation. 3.1.2.2. Material analysis Fourteen units in the material were analyzed with respect to language points, language skills, topics, text types, organization of content, sequence of content and time allocation to find out the suitability of the material in terms of content. * The language points - Grammar: this material provides basic English grammar structures such as modal verb, modals + perfect infinitive, expression of quantity, subject- verb agreement with coordinators, linking verbs, used to, too + adj/ adv + to infinitive, adj/ adv + enough + to infinitive, enough + noun + to infinitive, gerund, infinitive, adj + prep, nouns formation As can be seen from table 3.2 above, it is obvious that the grammar components in the material could meet the objectives as stated in the syllabus. - Vocabulary: the requirements of the course for vocabulary are words related to common, interesting topics. Analysis of the material showed that the material supplied students with much of vocabulary of various common topics such as sleep (unit 1), student’s life (unit 3), work (unit 4), food and drink (unit 5), English- speaking countries (unit 6), healthy food (unit 7), daily activities (unit 8), and so on. Therefore, the material could match well with the course requirement in terms of vocabulary. - Pronunciation: the material analysis showed that there was not any section for pronunciation practice, so students did not have the chance to improve pronunciation related elements such as stress, intonation, reduced vowels, and word linking while they were learning this material, so it can be concluded that the requirement for pronunciation improvement was not satisfied. * The macro-skills and their proportion The aims of the course are to develop students’ reading, writing and speaking skills. Among these skills, more emphasis is put on reading skills. As it was shown in table 3.2, the material mainly focuses on reading skills, which is part of course requirements. However, after analyzing fourteen units of the material, the researcher found that in most units, there were no separate sections for speaking and writing skills. The speaking and writing practices were mostly found integrated with reading activities, and grammar sections. For example, after reading the text and doing the post- reading tasks about childhood memories in unit 8, students are required to write a paragraph about childhood. Another example is the presentation part in unit 8, after reading the conversation between Tom and Mary about expressing changes, students are asked to ask and answer questions about Tom. In unit 11, they are required to tell their partners about what they like and dislike doing in free time. Examples as such have revealed that this material was primarily designed to develop students’ reading skills, not writing and speaking skills. Therefore, it could be said that the material did not fully respond to the course requirements in terms of macro-skills. * The micro- skills All of the skills work for reading, writing and speaking skills are presented in table 3.2. In order to achieve the syllabus objectives as mentioned in 3.1.1, students are trained to acquire the following micro-skills (or sub-skills): - Reading skill: guessing, scanning, and skimming. - Writing skill: writing complex sentences, paragraphs and complete essays. - Speaking skill: asking for information, making an interview, making a description, and asking for clarification. Regarding the sub-skills of guessing, scanning, and skimming in reading, students were exposed to those skills in all the reading texts and they were well developed in such a way that taught students to read through the text for extracting general information or scanning for specific information by doing a number of tasks such as answering short questions, true or false exercises, matching and so on. The skills of writing and speaking were not consistent with the course requirements. The requirements of the course for writing were writing complex sentences, paragraphs and complete essays. The material analysis showed that students only had opportunities to write a paragraph in unit 8; completing the sentences in unit 4, 6, 7, and 11; and building sentences in unit 6, 10, 11, 13, and 14, all of which indicate that throughout the course students had no opportunities to practice writing essays. For speaking, the course requirements were asking for information, making an interview, and so on. In this material, students were required to ask for information in unit 8 and unit 11 which means students had little opportunity to practice speaking skill. From the given analysis, it is apparent that only reading skill has satisfied the course requirements while writing and speaking skills were far from satisfactory as compared to the course requirements. * The text types According to the requirements of the course, the content of the material should be introduced in various forms such as reading texts, dialogues, newspapers, invention, story, and descriptions. Dialogues, and reading texts often appeared in grammar section and the others were in the reading section. From the material analysis, the researcher found that the text types used in the material were relevant to the course requirements. * The topics The treatment of topics as presented in table 3.2 deals with common and interesting topics with updated information for social communication purposes. All the topics found in the material provided students with useful background knowledge and suit students’ interest some of which are sleep (unit 1), food (unit 5), work and retirement (unit 4), expressing changes (unit 8), a healthy diet for everyone (unit 7), greenhouse effect (unit 11), expressing feelings (unit 13). In short, the topics in the material were the “fit- all” topics and they satisfied the requirements of the course. * Organization of content The content of the material was divided into three parts: Part 1 was grammar presented through texts or dialogues, language focuses and exercises. Part 2 was the reading texts, which went together with tasks. Part 3 was exercises concerning language focuses. Since the content of this material was organized around the specified language points, it is reasonable to state that the content organization has achieved the course requirements. * Sequence of content The content of the material did not go from easier to more difficult level. As can be seen from the organization of content, the material was divided into three parts: grammar, reading and exercises. These parts were repeated throughout the book. Therefore, recycling the learned knowledge was available. Accordingly, it is reasonable to state that the sequence of content completely fits the course specification. * Time allocation There were three periods allotted for each unit. The first period was for grammar and some exercises. The two remaining periods were for reading and exercises for further practice. Thus, time allocation for each unit as such seemed appropriate. * Conclusion of the material evaluation The data analysis from the institutional document and the material indicated that the contents reflected in the material matched the contents of the course requirements in terms of the grammar structures, vocabulary, reading skills, the text types, the topics, organization of content, sequence of content, and time allocation. However, writing and speaking skills, as well as pronunciation failed to meet the requirements of the course. 3.1.3. The Suitability of the Material to the Methodology Requirements of the Course 3.1.3.1. Syllabus analysis The following table presents…. Contents Methodology requirements of the course 1. Kinds of tasks and exercises A. Language points: grammar, vocabulary, and pronunciation. B. Language Skills - Reading - Writing -Speaking 2. Learning–Teaching techniques Choose the correct word/ grammar structure; correct the grammatical error; give the right tense of verbs; change the word form; gap-fill; match words with definitions; circle the best answer. Choose the correct answers; read the text and mark True (T), false (F); read the text and answer the questions; read the text and correct the mistakes in the statements; read the text and numbering the sentences or the paragraphs; read the text and find the similar words in the reading text; read the text and find the best title for the passage. Writing description, paragraphs and essays; completing the sentences; building the sentences with guided words; transforming the sentences. Role- play the dialogue; Making a description; Making an interview Working individually/ in pairs/ in small groups; role-play Table 3.3: The methodology requirements of the course As indicated above, there were two main parts in the methodology requirements of the course. They were tasks/ exercises with focus on language points and language skills, and learning–teaching techniques which stresses different forms of teaching/learning. 3.1.3.2. Material analysis As can be seen in table 3.3, the course requirements for methodology suggested the different types of tasks and exercises, and teaching/learning techniques used in the classroom. * Types of tasks/ exercises After analyzing the material, the researcher found that the material could meet some of the methodology requirements of the course in terms of types of tasks/ exercises. As for the types of tasks/ exercises for language points: grammar, vocabulary and pronunciation, there were a variety of tasks/ exercises such as: gap- fill (in unit 1, 8, 10, and 14); grammar error correction (unit 5); give the right tense of the verbs (unit 3); change the word form (unit 2, 6, 12, and 14); choose the correct word/ grammar structure (unit 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, and 14). Most of the tasks/ exercises here were for grammar and some were for vocabulary. However, the tasks/ exercises for pronunciation practice could not be found in the material. In comparison with the requirements shown in table 4.3, the material could partly meet the requirements for the types of tasks/ exercises for language points. The tasks for reading included in the material were various with different types. For example, reading the text and marking, True / False (T/F) exercise could be found in unit 3, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10 11, 12, and 13; choosing the correct answers in unit 1, 4, 5, 11, 13, and 14; reading the text and answering the questions in unit 2, 3, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, and 14; reading the text and correcting the mistakes in unit 3, and 6 and so on. In comparison with the requirements shown in table 3.3, it could be said that this material has responded successfully to the requirements for the task types. For writing and speaking, as mentioned above, there was no separate section on these skills in the material. As a result, only some tasks of writing and speaking were suggested as being integrated with other skills namely listening or reading in the material. Tasks were designed to develop students’ writing and speaking skills were found in the material, for writing such as building sentences with guided words in unit 7, 10; writing a paragraph in unit 8; transforming the sentences in unit 6, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, and 14; Task for speaking such as making an interview in unit 8, 11. However, the number of exercises on these skills found in the material was few. It only included some main types of exercises as mentioned above. Therefore, it could be said that the material has not offered suitable tasks to achieve the course objectives for the development of writing and speaking skills. * The teaching/ learning techniques In terms of teaching/ learning techniques, the researcher found no instructions for the techniques required by the course in the material such as working individually, role-play, or working in small groups, just the technique of working in pairs could be found in all pre- reading tasks. However, some of the exercises required students to talk with their partners (units 1, and 8), answer the questions (can be seen in grammar section of most units). Therefore, students have a little chance of learning by cooperating with each other. So this material failed to improve the teaching/ learning techniques. Conclusion of the material evaluation The results about the methodology of the course reflected in the material as compared to the methodology requirements of the course confirms that the reading practice activities could meet the requirements of the course perfectly. Meanwhile, grammar, vocabulary, and pronunciation practice activities in the material partly matched the course requirements. Especially, the task types of writing and speaking skills, and the learning–teaching techniques did not fulfill the course requirements. The given weaknesses will serve as a basis for further suggestion for revision and improvement of the material, which will be presented in part 3.5. 3.2. Survey Results 3.2.1. The Suitability of the Material to the Aims of the Course Results from teachers’ questionnaire (Questions 1-6) about the suitability of the material to the aims of the course are shown in table 3.4 below: Does the material provide students with opportunity to... Yes No Not sure develop basic grammatical points 100% 0% 0% widen general vocabulary of most common topics 31.3% 68.7% 0% improve pronunciation, stress, intonation, linking word, and reduced vowels 6.3% 93.7% 0% acquire and improve reading skills to complete the reading task- types 100% 0% 0% acquire and improve writing skills to write complex sentences, paragraphs, and essays 43.7% 56.3% 0% practice everyday spoken English in common situations 18.7% 75% 6.3% Table 3.4: Teachers’ opinions about the suitability of the material (Q 1- 6) The data presented in table 3.4 revealed that all the teachers accounting for 100% believed that the material successfully provided students with basic grammar points and improved reading skill which enabled them to understand reading texts and did reading exercises using reading strategies given in the material. However, for pronunciation, approximately 93.7% of the teachers disagreed that the material improved students’ pronunciation in terms of stress, intonation, reduced vowels, and word linking, because pronunciation was only presented in the outline of the syllabus and it could not be seen in any parts in the material. As for vocabulary, there was not a separate vocabulary section and there were neither example for each new word nor vocabulary exercises. As a result, only 31.3% of the teachers claimed that the material helped students to widen the general vocabulary of most common topics. Meanwhile, about two third of them accounting for 68.7% had an opposing view. As regards to writing, nearly half of the teachers (43.7%) affirmed that students could acquire and improve writing skill through practices of writing complex sentences, paragraphs, and essays while 56.3% were against that. A cause for complaint was that the material only helped improve students’ skill in writing complex sentences. For speaking skill, only 18.7% of the teachers admitted that the material offered them the opportunity to practice this skill while 75% of them strongly disagreed about this opinion. Especially, 6.3% of the teachers did not know exactly whether the material improved students’ speaking or not. In sum, as the data implied, the material could fit in with the aims of the course in terms of grammar, and reading skill. However, it failed to improve students’ vocabulary, pronunciation, writing and speaking skills. Consequently, students did not have many chances to practice pronunciation, vocabulary, writing, and speaking skills. This finding is a perfect match with the results of document and material analysis. 3.2.2. The Suitability of the Material to the Content Requirements of the Course * Language points and macro- skills Language points and language skills are main parts in the material. The researcher analyzed teachers’ opinions in questions 7, and 8 about grammar, vocabulary, pronunciation and skills work on reading, writing, speaking in order to get the conclusion about contents of the material. What do you think about the amount of language points and language skills covered in this material? Too much Adequate Not much Not at all Structures of grammar 0% 100% 0% 0% Vocabulary 43.7% 56.3% 0% 0% Pronunciation 0% 0% 12.5% 87.5% Reading 0% 100% 0% 0% Writing 0% 12.5% 87.5% 0% Speaking 0% 12.5% 87.5% 0% Table 3.5: Teachers’ opinions about language points and languages skills covered in this material (Q7-8) With regard to language points covered in the material, all of the grammatical items required by the course were introduced in the material. For macro- skills, there was a priority to reading skill. As it can be seen from table 3.5, 100% of the teachers found that grammar structures and reading in the material were adequate. More than half of them (56.3%) thought that the vocabulary in the material was satisfactory to students’ needs. However, there was 43.7% of the teachers’ thought that the number of vocabulary was a lot for students to learn in a short period. For pronunciation, 87.5% of the teachers’ opinions agreed that pronunciation was not available in the material, except for a limited amount of teachers (12.5%) found that there was pronunciation practice in this material but there was not much of it. Interestingly, 87.5% of the teachers who used this material for teaching gave the same responses about writing and speaking skills. They thought that this material did not develop students’ writing and speaking skills. The reasons were that there were some tasks/ exercises of these skills integrated in the post- reading, and grammar section. Besides, teachers themselves had to design tasks/ exercises of writing and speaking for students to practice. As a result, only some teachers agreed that the material covered these skills. The collected data and facts lead the researcher to the conclusion that grammar structures and reading skills were appropriate to the course requirements; vocabulary was partly suitable to the course requirements; but pronunciation, writing, and speaking skills proved completely unsatisfactory to the content requirements. *The micro- skills The micro- skills consist of the sub- skills of reading, writing, and speaking. Table 3.6 below will illustrate teachers’ feedback on the micro- skills (or sub-skills) coverage. What sub- skills does the material help students develop? Reading Yes No Not sure Guessing 100% 0% 0% Scanning 100% 0% 0 (0%) Skimming 100% 0% 0% Writing Brainstorming ideas 31.2% 68.8% 0% Completing sentences 50% 50% 0% Building sentences 50% 50% 0% Transforming sentences 50% 50% 0% Using appropriate structures to express ideas when writing 12.5% 87.5% 0% Using appropriate vocabulary to express ideas when writing 12.5% 87.5% 0% Using good connecting words to link sentences in writing 12.5% 87.5% 0% Organizing ideas into a paragraph, and a complete essay 31.2% 68.8% 0% Speaking Asking for information 37.5% 62.5% 0 % Making an interview 12.5% 87.5% 0 % Making a description 12.5% 87.5% 0 % Asking for clarification 12.5% 87.5% 0 % Table 3.6: Teachers’ opinions about effectiveness of the sub-skills (Q 9) When being asked to give opinions about each of the given micro- skill, all of the teachers (100%) thought that the material helped students develop reading sub-skills such as guessing, skimming, and scanning. This might be because students are at low intermediate level, so these sub- skills help them become more effective readers. However, for writing, half of the teachers shared the opinion that the material helped develop some techniques of completing sentences, building sentences, transforming sentences and 31.2% of them agreed it could teach students how to brainstorm ideas; organize ideas into a paragraph, and a complete essay. Especially, only 12.5% of the teachers’ realized that the material assisted students to use appropriate structures, vocabulary to express ideas when writing, and use good connecting words to link sentences in writing, but 87.5% of the teachers did not. As can be seen from the material result, sub-skills such as “brainstorm ideas, use appropriate structures...” did not appear in the material, but individual teachers in their teaching process might design them. For speaking, only a small percentage of the teachers (about 12.5%) found that students had opportunity to practice making an interview, a description, and asking for clarification while they were learning this material, whereas the majority of them (87.5%) thought that the material did not provide students chances to practice these sub-skills. Concerning the sub-skill of asking for information, 37.5% teachers agreed that students were required to ask for information, while 62.5% of them disagreed. This proves that students had little chance to practice speaking in the class. The reasons could derive from the lack of vocabulary and the difference in students' proficiency and interest. In conclusion, as the data suggested, the micro- skills coverage for reading satisfied the content requirements but that for writing and speaking were not up to the expectation, as there was not adequate practice for these skills. * The topics The purpose of questions 10, and 11 is to see if the topics of the material matched with the course topics. Teachers’ opinions about the topics are shown below. What do you think of the topics in the material? very interesting interesting ok boring very boring 0% 25% 75% 0% 0% Do the topics in the material provide with update information? Yes No Not sure 25% 75% 0% Table 3.7: Teachers’ opinion about the topics in the material (Q10- 11) As indicated in table 3.7, only one fourth of the teachers found the topics interesting and up to date. The majority

Các file đính kèm theo tài liệu này:

  • docLuan van danh gia giao trinh tieng anh co ban 3 Giap Thi Yen.doc