UNIVERSITAS ISLAM 1NDONESIAFAKULTAS PSIKOLOGIDAN ILMU SOSIAL BUDAYA

Progtam Studi Pseobgi 1S1), Prug.am Stl,di llmu Komunikasilsl), Program Magister Pro{esi psikotogi (S2), proglam D l Bahasa tnggds

SURAT KETERANGAN

Redaksi Journal of English and Education (JEE) program Studi Bahasa InggrisDiploma 3 Fakurtas psikorogi dan IImu sosiar Budaya universitas Isram Indonesiamene€ngkan bahwa terdapat kesalahan penulisan nama penulis Kharis SukarnoMuhammad yang seharusnya bernama sukaino untuk artiker berjudur "How to chooseSuitable English CouEebooks to be Used in the English Teaching_Learning process :Doing a Micro Evaluation" pada lournal of English and Education (JEE) Volume z Nomer1, Juni 2008.

Demikian surat keterangan jni dibuat agai dapat dipergunakan sebagaimanamestinya.

28 Juni 2010

Adam Anshori, S.S.

Kampus Universiias lslam lndonesia, Jl. Kaliurang Km. '14,5 Besi, Sleman, YOGYAKARTA55584

re9. 0274 - 898444, Exi. 211412113, Fax.0274 - 898444, Exi. 2'116; E-mailjpisb@uii.ac.id

Puhlhher:

ISSN:

English Srudy hogra]n Diploma 3

Faculty of Psychology and Socio-Cultuml ScjencesIslan]ic University of lndonesia

l9l8-:l7tx

T€rbit Scjak: Juni 2007

Chief Erecutive Olficer :

Director:

Editor-in-chief:

Editor

Honorary Editors (Mitra Bestlri)

Uarketing Staff

ContactAddress I

Cotrtact Address II

H. Fuad Nashori, S.Psi.,l\'1.Si.,Psikolog(Dean af Facutty afPsj.holosJ and Socia-CuLurulSciences, UII)

Puji Rahayu(Hedd of Enelish Study Pn)gnn Dipla a 3, UII)

Adam Anshori, S.S

Ririn Tdsnawati, S.SImla WindyAstuti.S.S

Proi Dr Siti Chamanah So€ratno, M.A. (UcM)Proi Djuhertari Iman Muhni, M.A. (UGM)Prof Dr. Suwarsih Madya, M.A. (JNY)

Ani ZaerinaR. Seno Plabowo. A.MdMugi Susetyani, A Md., S.SiDani Ukasah, S.T

Program Studi Diplonu 3 Bahasa IngsrisFakultas Psikologi dan llmu Sosial BudayaKanpus Demanean UII Jl. Demangan BaruNo.24Yogyakana 55281Telp. (0274) 540254;Fax (0274) s40251Enail: dSbahasa@uii.ac.id

Fakultas Psikologi dan llmu Sosial Budaya Ult, Unir XIIIGmpus Teeadu UII Jalan Kaliurang Km 14Sleman YogyakanaTclp. (027.1) 8984,44 psw 1112 F t.898444psi,. 1114

,r/ Edacatu r. Vol. 2 No lJnni 200R

Editorial

Greetings!!!

We would like to thank you first to all of our colleagues who have gave iheircontribution by sending their paper. We will also want to thank our readers whogaveinputs to us inthe form ofcornmcnts. suggestions andespecially critics. Thisjoumal is far fiom perfect and therefor once again w€ invit. our readen and ourprospectwdters to criticizeus sowe canbccomebetterfromtime totime.

There has bccn a lot interesting articles which we have published, butyet we stillhave difnculties in collccting them. Wc hope that thc Joumal of English andEducation (JEE) can be acknowledge not only in Indonesia but also from overseas.We are now living in an era where pcople will be recogdze ifmanypeople knowstheirwork.As an academician, it is our duq,/ to write and also publish our work sothat we willb€ rccoglize not only inlndonesiabutthroughoutthe world.

\l'e inhoduce our third cdition ofJEE. Please do explorc rhc English Education.Language amd Literaturc we have prcsented. Suggcstiolls, critics and any othcrcomments which can make this Joumal better will always be acccpted with arms

Journal ofEnglish and Education Universitas Islam Indonesia

Vol. 2 No. I Juni 2008

fable of Contents

-:donesian two-week fieldwork inAustralia: Great orno impact?lnra SanrLa Dewi

Page

:nglish lndonesian Bilingual Attitudes Toward Codeswiiching InCiassroom Communication\fargana ...................... 9

Creating A Standardized Test For The Vocational High School:oglish Final Examination: An Aliemative{sbadi ......................... 25

)roppings, Addings, And Spelling Deviations In Georgia Doyle. :ohnson's Ftederlck Dorglds And Loraine Hansberry's fl Raisinlt The Sun)\iz muddin Sadiq....... 34

Hawthome's Attitudes Toward His Ancestols' Religious BeliefAsReflected ln "Young Goodman Brown"\itenAnggraeni 45

The Role of Parentese in Fint Language Acquisition: APiycholinguistic Studyll.ik Sudartinah ....-...... 54

loni Monison's I&e Bfuest tle: When Beauty Tums Out To B€HegemonyLirin Kumia Trisnawati 6l

lIow To Choose Suitable English Coursebooks To Be Uscd In The:nglish Teaching-LeamingPrccess: Doing A Micto EraluatianK\arisSukamoMuhanrmad................................ 92

iti

i{olv To Choose Suitable Engiish C*ur;cllco&io Tc E* Us*cl{n The trngtistrr Teac}ring-X-earning }r*cesr: lloi*s,l

Misa Eva{aation

Sulial'noStdte U n ivLrr.y it), of lbg.'u kLult

-.tia r'" , :. i

,\bsfrRct

inillish coitrsebr,'oks are one ci'the nair elerr:en1s r1:ler,rii:it'rg llr !lc.cssJi' lhe ;nglish te:rchftgJearn itg pror-rt:r 1ri rrcci r.he ire-d,jt.irir)eC|hieclil's. lult,-rt11,, ih,: rcarhcr; ..ri i:.ngii:h n hConrsia iacr ;i!:il:rrp1ic:ii.d tas!: iit choosing luitilble Erl.qTilL lcachinslutcii,ls in r.iir'

l-om of llrgiish r:rrrscbr:okr. i h: nurlose ol ihe anicle i: io ditrr:s: :r:irlproprkie tal,to choose Eirglisl coLrschoaks ;.Lit3blc r','ii! thr ilirltleJlts'socio-econonric culn.rml backsiorads ic hciljtrac ;iLrderls' lcrming. lleirlandcd rvirl is lhai the tcach.r! of ingli:h rlo ar enplir:ti evahatior ofthe coulsebooks the,v are usir:g- a letrospr:clilc e'ralultiol. TLe eralLtalioncan i:e donc tlrroLrgl either n:tcro or llicrii evahLation. iihc tangible lnd,;r:icticll eviLluution ro do rs a micro cvaluation in rchich rhe telcircrs uiilgiish retrospectively lrnd $oroughL)' eralu:rie ceftain paIts o1'the EnghshcoLl1 seboEtks representilg thc llhole coltert. 'l'he cnleria lo ! a lLrate inc [uiegoa1s. sruclents' backgrounds (topics end vocabu)ary relared to itudcnts'iives). cultural acceptabiliw, lunguage skiLls ro develop. qriallt1' ofpmcticcliratertals in the classroorn (acrir,aling studen*' panicrpation). n-rles,

sequencing of rhe nateiral.s {procrdure), iirmlals, i!stluctio!s. andr r srLallzirtion. lfthe teachers ofErglish firc oL* sr.rcb English coursebooksi,'loLrgh llleir evaluelioir, ihev cat'r rLse $re coLirsebooks jt rlie foller',,il!:ci!r'rF. lt x wiFc lva-y to choose English cor$*.books to be esed to cptiiuall_.,reach lhe pre-Celermrned objcriices. lithe reachers ofEnglisir do not hndsuch s'-ritrble gngiish coursebool-s thorLgh their evaluation, $1ey lan addflaierials to or rerluce thc contert olibe corrsebooks and finally'rhey willl1x1,e teachers' edilion English ieachirg narerlals.

lieyworfu. strinble English .aursebotkt, En,tli.sh teaching-ledrnirg;rr1rf.r-i.r, /?torJrgtli\'€ {\,aluolia , tatIro e\'ulua!io , t,tj nticxt

t!,!

.IoumalofEnEnsh e"d E.lu.rtior, vol 2 No.I Juni 2003

A. Introduction

One of the main components detemining the success of the Englishteachingleaming process is English coursebooks. Theyconsistofa sctofEnglishteaching materials so called a set oftasks. Teaching materials are a key componentin most language programs, including in schools- Whether the teachers ofEnglishuse a t€xtbook or other forms ofnatcdals, insfuctional materials generally seweas the basis for much of the language input leamers receive and the languagepractice occuring in thc classroo, more prominentdran anyotkrelemcnt in thecurriculum. To reach the objcctivcs of thc English teaching-leaming process,thereforc, thc English tcacling materials must be suitable with the teachen ofEnglish, studcnts, and cnviroffnents. It is in line with the implementation ofschool-based curriculum which insists that thc natcrials be bascd on shrdents'socio-economic cultural backgrounds,

Recently, to reach the objectives ofthe English teachingJeaming process,

as othe$, the govemment of the Republic of Indoncsia tkough Ministry ofNational Education and pdvatc publishers provide the teachers of English withyarious teaching materials or rasks in the form of English coursebooks. ThoscEnglish counebooks consisting ofa set of English teaching materials have beenpredictively evaluatedby the experts onthebasis olphilosophical perspectives orhave been developed on the basis of theodes of leaming, not retrospectivelycvaluated on the basis ofempirical €vidcncc in the classroom during the teaching-leamingprocess.

The quality of those English courscbooks is theoretically good butempirically they might be suitable with the English teachcrs, students, andenvironments or might be not, because of the implementation of school-basedcuriculum. As a result, the teachers of English in Indonesia face the task ofchoosing what English teaching materials to use, whether suitablc widl theirstudents'backgounds or not. To find out teaching materials in ihe fofm ofEnglishcoursebooks suitable with the sf,rdents' backgrounds, thcrcforc, it is wise that theEnglishteachers retrospectively evaluate English coursebooks having been beingused, and possibly to be used in the followingterms.

93

B. English Coursebooks

English coursebooks consisting ofEnglish teaching matedals in the formoftasks providc the students with meaningful inputs for their comprehension ofaccrtain goal 1o achievc, as stated in thc standard ofcontent ofEnglish. Thereforc.Erglish cou$ebooks are one ofthe main elements detemining the success oftheEnglish teaching-leaming prccess. The writer's point ofview is in accordancewithRichatds al1d Renandya (2002) andNullan,s ideas (1999) as follows.

Teaching materials are a key component in most languageprograms. Wherher the teacher uses a texibook, instirutionally preparedn1aterials, or makes use of his or her own nareriats- insrructionatmaterials generally serve as the basis for nuch of the language jnputleamers receive and ihe language pracrice that occurs in the classroom.(Riohards and Renandya, 2002: 65 66)Al the classroon level, materials often seen more proninent than anyother el€ment in rhe cuniculun. Th€y are rhe tangibte manifestation oflhe cmiculum in action. They are, in faci, onnipresent in the languageclassroom and ir is difiiculr to imagine a ctass without books, pictures,fi Lnsrdps,realia, gamesandsoon. (Nu.ran, I 999: 98)

Both cxpefts above emphasize that any form ofteaching materials arc akcy component in language programs. One of them is Dresented in the fofm ofte\lbooks. or nanowly called couresebooks. \unan, tn other $ordc. state. lhalteaching materials coursebooks are the representation ofthe curriculum, currcntlyin Indoncsia it is called standard ofcontent consisting of stanrlard of competenceand ba iic competcnce (Depdiknas, 2006). Nunan (1999: 98). furthermor;. staresthal.ndlcri"l.domorcrhansimplllubricalelhe$hec'coflcdmine.Coodmdrcriatcal.o Drovide nodcl. for reachers to lollow in deveroling rhei o\ n matcrials.Richards (2001: 15) adds that the primary input leamcrs ieceivcd to the languagelcaming is the textbook.

Coursebooks are prepackaged, published books used by the students andteacher as lhc pflmary basrs for a language course. Courqebook; range i]om t_bosethat are broadly focus on developing all language skills to those th;t focus on aspecific skill such as \rriting, or specific area such as hotel management (Graves inNunan,2003: 226).

Ansary and Babaii(2002) askhownecessary atextbookis. The answer totbis question depends on the teachers, own teaching style, the rcsources available

9a

Vol 2 No. I Juni 2O0t

lo thc-n. lhe xcccpred \r]ndard. of:ca.lll,:00r r Jo).,rr*",r.rr r""",r,r,,i_'ng rn evcrr langu-gc.choor. crc. Bro$n

'n"'.nur *op,'n ro, iun;,;;; ,;;;lJ;J"' "b\.ror" and mo'r cornmon ror''. ol

'hereasr.qn,nr, n.r. ',r",i,"".',n"rji,.

cnmc' lhrougl lcrrbook. lvenrhough

luttenye 'r

ro m.le rtr. u"o i".;',^". :;:,0*'"ihcr.r"nd oerrcrt rerrhoo(,. rhir

ro. r J7). Thererore.,,;. ;,:. ;;,,;'.1'he re\rbou(s rh.) ha'e 1

g|.o',n. roo,.' ',r\coook: , '",rr : ,J;;:;.:;i.'j,nfh+

te-cnc ' cho"se 'u r"L'rc Fngr'srr

.1oce,.. d Jdrron Jlrnng lne rcarJ rng-leJ;.r g

TheFnglrsh language teacbnc IFI.' r ngtr.rr .o,,..u,^i.;,1:; i;;;: ll,; tt'*ocnc

.sr'rc nenrs abo\ e ernPr-riirc

.cc , or !:r,gri h ar pua,;,;;;,;; ,:,:"iil:;:l::i;:,::;.,;:,,..Tl,llH,lf;r?n adopr or aJapr tIe Engljsh reachinL_ m,' uncbook. rr rirer.. . ;' ;,;#, ;J;-;':'irr'

presenred in " 'erie' orr-'(\ 'n a

- o\ Hower cr. r, r,*.,. "",i,"ii..' ""J1

:Tl;" ;i:;:i,:i:l, i;:.*,,;J :;re\ tslng \r,ays to presenr the contcnt an.,,r.,,,.,s.*n.:bor r i,,lH;:;;;.:li lr. ere.cr,es or rle,c\rbook,o,he..rrbookc.rur.ebook.rh",":;;;;,;"i:,,''r"irraoJeroflhereacher.rochoosc

,.c,n larown, zoor r r?r;;,,r;';:.:'.*- "iciths but complex hsk ahead or*hcr.,rconen r-.ed,,,,;,;;;:i:;.,i"j:ill,ll ;ff1;il:lj;i.,",,1: *'

. T sine tr"chin! r"lcnaJ.. no,.ihlv ir ,.rc lnlnr courreboo\., v rJl prve. c,r'robLlhrhcrerclrerandrhe,nr,l6nl.-,r.,.6byu,;gtur.roito,,. ,,r,..$'e reach wiih. ratter than through

''.p,^'".,.a,o.p,,n,.i;";;;::,i ""'r n: b"'nL-- 'e o

"'*'" ' r: ,- 'a''e.,r'.;,i:"J ;1.":- r*'r""( I lre' rIe ea"nrrs

,, "s". ".,, . ... "".",i"i. lliLlil. 1l :lLi"ll;lii.:,I,cacrers ro be more le\ponsrre. h0rh t.,.,., *"a..* "1i "",;l " ;i il l:":l i. iil";:,",:::::,:,o,,. cJn bene, r.

" . .,,"r.,.* ," "i-..;;;;h..;;;;0nd strucrure $is alto!rs lhem {o Dulr b! ordt00):s8, on t'heir 'cJrnrnr 'w r'h In

..,,,^,,]j ,1"-"T_*":

l"tcriats facilitate tcaching and lcaming in the classroomI ).:'.* *. intended marerials

"boutci provide ,* ,rui"",,",,,i .i,*rriiilr€rursfrc rnputs. Tbe tcrm,culiural inouts,' 'ltraJ brckground en\ ,*,n'..",,."ii:itl]l

rrrers Io \tudcnr5'soc'o-economic

- o.,r Nu,,onar Fcu.,r,o^;;;;;il;.: i # r'r."Jiff J:* fftl: jr" j8ll

95

Jownal of Enplish and E hcano,, Vol. 2 No. I Juni 2003

about national standardofeducation, and Nationel Education Ministerial Rule No.22 (about standard ofcontent), 23 (abou! standard olgraduate's colnpetencies), and24. aboutthe implementationolNational Ministerial rules No. 22 and 23) (2006).

C.Tasks

English courscbooks consist ofEnglish tcaching nutcrials in thc form oftasks. ,A. lask can be described in terms of its objectires, input, conditions.prccedures, and outcomcs. Thc propefties ofthe task should simultaneously bepresenred so lhal they can give the leamcrs leaming experienccs involvinslinguistic competence and linguistic pcrfonnance. Linguistic perfonnance iscloscly relatcd io communicalivc compelence, i.e., thc ktowlcdge thatusers ofalanguage have intemalizcd to enable them to understand andproduce messages inihc languagc.It cntails linguistic competence, pragmatic competence (Ellis,2003:696), and sociolinguistic competence (Council olEuropc,2002: 108). Pragmaticcompetencc rcfcrs to thc knowledge that speaker-hcarer usc in order to cngagc incommunication (El1is, 2003: 719).

The ahJectites af the lask rcler ta tahat sklLs that the ledrners shaulddccatnplish. Tjle input of lhe lar,+ provides the strldents wilh activities andexcrclses 1o {ork on (i.c. thc vcrbal or non-verbal infomution supplied). Thecanditians oj the task reJbl lo under which the task is to be perlormed (c.g. whclhcrinlockstcp wilh thc whole class or in small group wotk).Theprocedures ofthetaskfty'ar l, r,rdl the students need to carry outto complete rhetask (c.g , whether ihesludcnls havc thc opponunity to plan prior to perfoming the task). The lastpropcrly ofthc taskis ortcomes. Outcomes refer tlr what is achieved on completionofthetask.

The outcomes takc the form oltheproduct(s) and proccsses. Prcducts rcferto what the studcnts will accomplish (e.g. dmwing a map, a written paragmph,some kind ofdccision). The processes refer to what the students will be engaged inpcrfomring ihc task (c.g. negotiating meaning when some communicationproblem adses, correcting other shrdentsr errors, asking questions to extend a

top\c) (Ellis, I 997: 38).

According to Breen in Nunan (20A4: j), pedagogically, task is aD.struclunl langwge leaming endeavour which has d particular objecti\'es,

96

,r.l Ed,cario,, vol. 2 N. I tuni2008

appropriate conlent, a specilic yrorkihg procedure, a d a range of outcomes larthose who nde ake the task. Task is thereJbre assunect to r{er to a rangi ofworkplan, which h,rve the overall purpo,es af l'a, itiranng tanguae. teamnglntnthe simple and briefexercise q,pe, ta more comple\ a d length| activities s;;h asgtoupproblen

'atvtneor 'inulaions and Jeauon naAng

The tasks used in the English teaching,learning prccess are almed atdewloping students' communi.ative competence_ Communicative pedagagictasks, therefure, aim to actiyely inwlw learners in meaningful communicaio). irerclevan!. are challengingbut teasibtc !\,ith latk naniputaion ih, rc pa,,tblq. andhaw identifable outcomet. me leaners are intolved for contriiutions to taskselection, management, and evaluation, trhich in a language leaming contet mayaften become integr(il parts oJ the tdlk: themsel\,es. Clarsro()m tasks. whetherrelecting'rcal-life' use or essentially 'pedagogic' i11 ature, are communicatire tothe extent lhat they require learners to comprehend, negotiate, and erpressmeaning in order to achiere a communicatiye goal (Council of Europe, 2002:t58).

On the basis of the ELT experts' views on tasks, the writet concludes thatlaski afe workpla s consisting of a series of actiyities and exerciset that thestudents should accomplish ta achieve communicatiye competence. meteJbre,thet haye goals, inputs, pntceilures, a d outcomes. If the stutlents are aile toaccomplish the oyerull tas&d suitabte with their socio-economic culturalbackgrounds, they witl be able to dewlop theirfoul language skills and dre able tocohmunicate intelligibU rclaant to their lives

D, Evatuation ofEnglish coursebooks (tasks)

Teachers are often faced with tlre task of choosing what teaching materialsto use (Ellis, 1997: 36). Ir also happens in Indonesia in which the sovemmentthrough Nadonal fducdlion Departnent and privale publishers f,rovide thcteachers with abundant teaching materials in the fom tasks. Howevet tle teachingmaterials provided, including English reaching materials in the form of tasksprcsented in English cousc-books, ate not always suitable with the teachers.studentq. and envLonmenrs $here the English leacbing leaming process takesplac€.

g7

Joutnal ofE,shhant Edt.ati,n. Vol 2No i Juni 2008

The facl in lndonesia above is in line with Ansary & Babaii's statcment(2002). They state that teachers, students. and adminisiers are all consumcrs oftextbooks. All thesc gloups, ofcourse, may have confliciing views about what a

good/standard textbook is. Howcvcr, the question is $here they can tum to forrcliablc ad\.ice onhow to makc aninformeddecision and select a suitabletextbook.Furrhcrmore, Murphy ( I 993 : 146) proposcs questions related to the use of tasks inthe classrcom. Hc asks, "Howdo teacherand leamcr dccide wh ich task to ptoceed

nexl? What do teacher and leamcr idcntify as a task? Ho$ does the teacher knowwhcthcr a task suited the leamer, thal is 1() say, interested lhem and was, in theirview, conlrollable? He answe$ his qucslions by himsclf. The answeris a lormativeevaluation llrough aprocess, teaching-leamingproccss in the classroom. Johnson,

Kim, and Ya-Fang et al. (200 8: I5 7) slalc that in the last several years the number of-English language teachiig matcrials on thc market bas grown exponentially,addrcssing a variety of leamer intcrcsls, skill levels, and tastes. Among otherfealulcs, these materials also vary in their linguistic design, focus, andobjectives,making the choice of a textbook an intcgml pafi of many ELT classrooms a

seemin gly formidable task.

In rclation to a number ofcourscbooks provided by the govemment and

private publishen,Ansary and Babaii (2002) state that there is no perfectte{lbook.Thcrefore, teachers should have the option ofassigning supplcmenlary malerialsbascd on their o\r,n specific nccds in their own specific teaching situation.Thcrcfore, iiis suggested that thc tcachcrs adapt the teaching mater ial s prov ided tobe suitablc with their studenis. Lvcn thcy nccd to do an empirical evaluation ofsuoh a tcaching material or task whcn thcy are using it in the teaching-leamingproccss. In short, the abundant tcaching materials, includiDg English teachingmaterials in the fonnoftasks needto be empiricallyevaluated.

The first way in which materials may b€ evaluated is in tcrms ofhow wcllthey reflect thc principles by which they have been written. Theorctically, inIndonesia they must be based on the standard of content (Education MinislcdalRule No. 22, year 2006). In the case ofclassJextbooks, the evaluation criteria willbc those used when dcciding which book is best for the teaching context (Rea-

Dickins and Germaine, 2003: 256). Byrd in Celce-Muria (2001: 416) states that

systems for evaluation oftextbooks (and other instnrctional materials) gcnerallyprovide checklists builtaround numerous aspects ofteachhg and student-teacher

98

Joutual oJ EhEIhh ahd Etlu.hior, \al 2 Na. I Jui 2AO8

Theprincipal problem is that somcaspects in the framework actually cnlailcoming to a conclusion about othd aspects in the liamework. This mcans that inbuildingup an analysis ofa sct ofmaterials. teacher-analysts will not onlyhave toexaminc dillcrcnt scctions ofthe materials but, more importantly, move throughdiflercnt 'level' ol analysis, making more and more infercnces ' and subjectivejudgments as ihey move from a consideration ol thc morc easily ideDtifiableaspects to the more abstract and complex (Littlejohn in Tomlinson, 1998: l95).Inline withthe experts' perspectives on tcaching material above, MurphvinCrookcsand Gass ( 1 993 : 145 - 1 46) states tha! thc idca ofteaohers conducting investigalionsinto what is happening in thcir classroom, like many olthe ideas about tasks, hasbeen around for somc timc, but has come into greater prominencc as educatorsrealizethatchange has totakeplacc in the school through teachers.

The wriier agrees wjth the statements above that thc English tcachingmatcrials presented in English coursebooks should bc cmpidcally evaluated. Theteache$ of English are the persons who exactly kno$ what happcns in theclassroom duringtbe English teachingleamingprocess. Therefore, the teachers ofEnglish must be a part of the research empirically evaluating the Englishcoulesebooks,

1. Prcdictivecvaluation

Aptedicliw evalutian ofcoursebooL,s is an eraluation rthich is desigledb make a decisiotr regarding what naterials to use in the dassrcom,during the teachhg-learning process (Ellis, 1997. 36). II is done on thebasis of theories an a cefiain subject mattex thearies of leaning, antltheories ofpsfchalog. Thetefore, teachi g naterish written h! erpertsure expected to be s itable with the stuclents and to Jacilitdte students'leaming.A ptedictiv eydlualian of English coursebaoks is conducted behind adesk.It i: done belote tuebooks are massively protluced. Theoretically thecoursebooks predictiwly evaluated will suit the leachers and students'eeds in learning. It is the apposile of rctraspectite ewluatio that is

conducted i thefelds, itassroom.

In Indonesia, predicttue ewluation ofEnglish coursebooks is conducted byBadan Sandar Ndsianal Pendidikan (BSNP), Boad of EducationalNational Sta dard. The instrument oJ English courseboaks ptedictiweyalualio consists ofcontent suilabilily a d delivery suilubilir. Content

99

JournaltfEnptLh ahd Edu.atior Vo! lNo lluLi2003

suitubiliq consists oJ 0) dpptupridteness heNeencontent and sta daftl oJ

competence qnd basic competence, (2) natetial acturacy, and (3)

supporting materials. Delitery suitabili, consisls oJ (1) presentdtiotltechnique, (2) presentation of leaning, a d (3) campteteness of

2. Retrospectiveevaluation

A relrospecliw erah&lion of coursebooks is designed to erami e

materfuls lhal hav aclually been used in the clatsrooht. Retraspecti,eeyaluatio s can be inpressianistic or empitical (EIis, 1997. 36). It is inli e with Harmer (2001: 301) that states thal cowsebook eraluation is djudgnent on haw vell a book has perJbrnetl in fact. It means thdtrelrospeclfue etalu.tlion cun refer to empifical evaluatio of tea&i gnarc' ial. donc duti e!hetea.hing Laryngfto.ct,.Thc necds to evaluate materials rctrospectively take on special importancc.Such an evaluation providcs the teacher with information wlich can bcused to detemine whelher it is \a'orthwhilc using thc naterials again,which activities 'work' and which do not, and how to modilythe materialsto make them more effective for futuc use. lt is what happens in tbeclassroomwhentheteachingmaterialsareusedftlis, I 997 ; 37 ).The purpose of carrying out the evaluation is lor accountabjlity anddevelopment oflhe task. Where accountability is at stake, tlre purpose ofthe evaluation is to detemine whether thc statcd goals ofthe progam havebeen met. Wlere at developmcnt, t'he purpose ol the evaluation is toimprove the cuniculum and/or to foster tcacher devclopment (Ellis, I 99 8:

Empitical eydhlation af the leaching materials can be conducled thraugheilher macra-eralualian ot micra-ewluation. It is do e during a d ajierthe teaching-learning pt'ocess. me dilference is the umbet of teachingmaler[als or tasks thal are e pirically evaluated.

a, Macro-evaluation

Empirical macro-evaluation is a kind ofevaluation which empiricallyevaluate the whole teaching matcrials or tasks used in th€ classroom,during the teachingleaming process- A macro evaluation is ane./aluation carded out for accountability and/or developmcntal

r(Xt

J.rmol of Entalish o"d Edtutk , Vol. 2 No I Juni 2003

purposes by collecting inlormation relating to various adminisirativeand curricularaspects ofthe program (Ellis, 1998:218).The empiical macro-evaluation ofcourscbooks means to evaluate thewhole conient of thc counebooks in the classroom. It is iimecolsuming bccause it scrutinizes each elements ofthe coursebooks.Therefore, il necds longer time to collectandanalyze data.It also needsmorc cnugy and a lot of operating costs. It is hard to do the wholecvaluation of the coursebooks because the teachers are moreconccmcd whethcr they are able to accomplish the goals or not, theymore locus on specific activities in a contextofa particularlesson.

b. Micro-evaluationSuch ar approach to evaluation does not accord wilh the perspectivcwhich many teachers have about what evaluatiorl involves. Teachersarc conccmed with whether they are able to accomplish dre goals ornot. They do not focus on the entire progam but they more focus onspecific activities and techniques appcaring to 'work' in the cont€xt ofapadicular lesson in thc classroom (Ellis, 1998: 218). A micro-evaluation is an cvaluation characterized by a narow-focus on somespecific aspcctolthe curriculum. Therefore, it is possiblc to scrutinizewhcther a particular task is effective or cfEcicninot (Ellis, 1998:219).In a mido-evaluation, the teacher selects one particular teaching taskin which he or she has a special interest, and submits this to a detailedcmpirical cvaluation. One way in which an empirical evaluation can bemade more manageabl€ is through micro-evaluation (Ellis, 1997: 37).

Amicrc-evaluation ofieachitg matclials is pcfiaps best carried out inrclation io 'task' @fhs, 1997: 38). A micro-evaluation of a task canscrvc several purposes, It can show to what extcnt a task works for aparticular group ofleamers.It can also reveal weaknesses in thc designof a task, and thus ways in which it might be i'J$o\ed (E is, 1997:1t ).Thc writer tends to agree the second model ofthe empirical €valuationof English coursebooks, micro-evaluation. It deeply scrutitizes theelements of a certain task or teaching maierial in the Englishcoursebooks. It means that the detail analysis can be possiblypresented because oftle length oftime available.

tot

Jow"al ofE,slishond Edu.atio,, Vol 2 No. 1Ju.i 2003

Two ways of analysing thc data are possiblc. One involvesquanlification ofthc infomaiion. which can ftcn bc presented in thefol.tn oftablcs. Thc othcr is qualitalive. Here the cvaluator prepares a

narrative description of the information, perhaps illustrated byquotations orprotocols- In par1, the method chosenwill dependonthetypes of infonnation which havebeen coilected. Thus, lestscores lendthcmselves to a quantitative analysis, whilc joumal data is pcrhaps bcsthandled qualitatively ftl lis, 1 997 : 40)

E. Crit€riaforempiricalEnglishcoursebook(t.sk)evaluation

To judge good criteia for empirical English coursebook evaluatior is ahardjob. Goodcriteria lor English coursebooks consisting of teach ing materials inthe forn of lasks will vary from a certain school to other schcJols. It happens

because each school in a certain region has its own characteristics, especially itsstudents' socio-economic backgrounds which will give impacts in other aspects.

However, a number of ELI experts give clues or guide lines lor coursebookevaluation,

Classroom activities should parallel the 'real word' as closely as possible.

Since languagc is a tool of communication, mcthods and materials shouldconcentrate on Lhc massagc, not thc mcdium (Clarke & Silberstcin in Nunan, I993:63). Rclelcd to tasks,Widdowson inNunan (1993) tasks must be problem-so1ving.

... What is wxDted is, melhodology which will ... provideconnLlnicarive competence by funclion inrestment. Such a

methodology would engage the leam€rs in probleFsolving iaskr as

purposeful acrivilies but without the rehearsal requjrement rhat theyshould be realistic or 'authentic' as natural social behavior (widdowson inNunan, l99l:63).

It means that the tasks should be authentic as natural social behaviorNatural social behavior refers to what the students do in real life. The tasks must be

suitable with the students' socio-economic cultural backgrounds.

Robinett (l978) in Brown (2001: 142), (Ellis, 1997: 39), Tucker (19?5) inAnsary and Babaii (2002), Hamer (2001: 301), Reinders and Lewis (2006: 274),

Spntt, Pulvemess, and Williams (2005: 110), Mashura (1998: 240-241), andNunan (200,{: 174) givc a plactical sct of criteria for evaluating a cousebook. It

'I 02

inc)ude, goal.. ,rLd.nl, bdr^trornds {toprc. and \ocdbulary relared lo stuJenr,i,lr\c,i). cukural a(Lertaoility. langrage skil s lo de\elop. qudlity of pr.rcrrcalmaterials inthe clas sroom (activating studcnts' partic ipation), rolcs, sequencing olthc matcrials (prccedure), formats, instructions, and visualization. Those critiriashould match the shrdcnts, clEractcristics.

Goals ofihe tasks arc relaled to language skills to develop. They refer towhat the studcnts expect to leam when they use the tasks. Studenis, bacigroundsare related to cultural acceptability. Whether thc contcnt of the ;sks orcoursebooks are suitable with thc students are conceming with thesc cdteia.Quality ofpracticat materials rcler to whethcr the tasks arc

-able to encourage thc

students to participate rhe class or not. Sequencing ol thc materials refirs towhether the students are easily able to follow the content of the tasks or norfonrarc are rcared ro r\c .rudcnr\' prcfercnce. on rfie la) our ol lhe t-.J.sInshuctions are relatcd to whethcr thc studcnts arc ablc io comprehend thei.structions ofthe tasks or not. While last onc, visualization refers 1() whethcr thetasks are athactive forthe students ornot_

, The basis for such an €valuation is that a task can only be said to haveworked if the students havc ibund it enjoyable and,ror uscful. Evaluationsconducted by mcans olshort questionnaircs or inierviews with the students are thecasiest kind to cary out. Response-based cvaluations rcquire the teacher tocxamire the actua_L outcomes (both thc products and process;s ofthe task) to se€wherhcr they matchthe predictedoutcomes ft1lrr, 1r9': Jgr.

Furthermorc, Brecn and Kumamvadivelu in Stewart (2007:265) statc thatbecause of tlte influence of leamers on lesson outcomes, task_based pedagogysuccess should be lncasured tluough the degres to which teasher intcntions a;ilcarner interprctation ofagiven task converge,. ln concjusion, \l,hethcl thc Englishcourscbooks consisting of English teaching materials in the form of taskJ aresuitablc or not with the English tcachers, students, and environments depends o;what English teachcrs and studcnts, point ofviews when the tasks are used in theclassroom during the teachingleaming process.

t03

Joztznl.f EnEIi\h ond Edu.!tir,. Vol 2No I Ju.i 2008

A Summary ofCriteria for a Courscbook Evaluation

Trc Ham Reidcrker er s&

Robi Spra , Mash NunPulvem ura

Alder

inEllis

Experts

F. Conclusion

Considcring that English teaching materials in the fonn of Englishcourscbooks arc onc ofrhc main elements determining the success ofthe Englishtcaching-lcaming prcccss, the English teachers must bc selective in using suchllnglish coursebooks. They must be suitable with the studcnts' socio-economiccultural backgrounds environments so that they can give the shrdents meaningfiilinputs and meanjngful learning experience. As aresult, the students will optimallyreach tle pre-determined objectives, having communicative and pragmatic

compctcncies.

t04

@d Edtctlion. \6\ 2 No. ! Jhi 2003

To find out suitable English coursebook giving meaningful inputs to thestudents, and tobe used in dre following terms, thc Englishteachers need {o do ancmpirical cvaluation of the English coursebooks they are using, rettospectiveevaluaiion. The evaluation ca]1 bc done thJough either macro ormjcro evaluation.A macro evaluation entirely cvaluate thc whole teaching materials in thecourscbooks whilc a micro evaluation evaluate certain parts ofthe coursebooks.Thctangible andpractical evaluation to do is micro evaluation inwhich theEnglishteachcrs only evaluate certain pal1s rcprcsenting the whole content of thecoursebooks. Doing such a micro evaluation, the English tcachers will find ouisuchsuitable English coursebooks to facilitate the studcnts' lcaming. It a wisc wayto choose English coursebooks to be used to optimally reach the pre-detcrminedobjectives. Ifthe teachers olEnglish do not find such suitableEnglish coursebooksthrough their evaluation, they can add matcrials to or r€duce the content ofthecourscbooks and finally they will have teachers' edition English teachingmaterials.

BibliographyAnsary rL & Babaii, E. (2002). Universalcharacteristics off,Fl-/trSLtextbooks: Astep

towards systematic textbook eval uatior fielnternet TESLJounal, yot. t/n,No. 2, February 2r12. Accessed 18" Oclober 2008 fromhttpf, ?iErli.orq/Arricles/Ansary-Texibooks/

Brown H. D. (2001). Tea&ing by pnnciples: An interdctye appft)dLh to Ia guagep"dasop (2" Ed.). New York:Addison Wesley Longman, tnc.

Bryd, P (2001). Textbooks: Evaluation for setection and anatysis for implem€ntation InCelce-Muria, M. (Ed.). Tedchins E slish as a secon(l arforeisn tansuase 6p.415-427) (3'hEd.). SouthMelboume: Heinle&HeinleThomsonLeaming.

Council of Europe (2002). Camma Lturcpean tah4totL of rcfe,ence .for ta guage:LeLnng. t a hne J".p,tr c. t aon h' itt]e:carrbridep Uri! elc l) pres..

Crawford, J. (2002). Th€ rcle ofmateials in the lansuase classroom: Findina the batance.ln Rcbard.. J. C. & Renar dya. w A. tF d,.t M, thodotag in tatry ;ee pa.hhRt n on holog oJ c' ent ra. lcc' pp. b0 q t I Cambridge. Cdmbridge Ur ver,ir)

Depdiknas. (2003). t/ndang-Un.tans Repubtik tndon*ia Nonat 20 rhhun 2003 tentangSi.' ten P endidikan Na s iondL From Legalitas.org.

t05

Journal ofEhdilh ukl Etlutttior, Vol.2 No. I Juni2003

Depdiknas. (2005). P€d,'rrrah Penerintah Na. l9 hhu 20Ai ktltang Standal NasionalPclrdnl,ftar. From Legahras. org.

Depdiknas. (2006). Pel?turdn Menteti Pendtlikan Nasi.ndl No. 22 Tdhun 2006 tektangS/dr./dr1si. From Legalitas.org.

Depdilnas. (2006). Peldruro Me teti Pendidikan Nasiondl No 23 tuhun 20A6 tuntangStanda/ Konpete si Ll ur.rr. From Legalitas.org.

Dcpdiknds. (2006). Pelaruru Menteti Pendidiktn Naslotl.tl No. 21 Tahtn 20A6 tutltanEPelakanaan Pernle No. 22/2406 a .l Permen Na. 23/20A6.FtanLegrliks.org.

Llllis, R. (1997). The cmpirical evaluation oflanguag€ teaching mal€rials lEledronicveBlo l.EI:l Jounul l/alu e 5l/l .Ianud

'- 1997,36-41. Accessed 18'h

Oclober 2008 nomhttp://elri.oxt-ordjournals.ore.simslad.net.ocs.mo.edu.au/cei/rep!i45!!f,1 !!axroshow:&HITS= I 0&hits= I 0&RESUrl.FORMAT=&fulltext=lhe+emliilql tevalualion+of+languase+teachins-maierials&senrchid:1&FIRSTNDEX=o&resoucetllEHlxeL

ElLis, R. (1998). The evaluation of conmunicative tasks. ID Thoniilson, B. (Ed.).Mdtetials derelathent iit language teachinE $p. 217-218). New York:Canbridge Universiry Press.

Ellis, R. (2003). 7'ne rtud-L of secand lansuaee dcquBtrto,. OxIord: Oxford Universiiy

H.rmer. J. (2001). rre?/, ctice of Enslish lansuase rea.nins (3'r Ed.). Harlow:LonCman.hti!ll{t!r{l!!p.i!da!re! cument.pb!!!1.34Accessed22""January 2008

Johnson, K., Krn1, M. & Ya-Fang, L. et a]. (2008). Astep foNard: invesiigatingexpenise in materials evaluarron lElectnaic Vetsio"l. ELT Jownul yalume

62/2 4 20A8. 157-162. Accessed l" November 2008 fton1http/ql!.a!ba!i!!!!alr.a!e.rhs!ad.nel.ocs.nq.e!U4tsilep!id,/62l2/l57?maxioshow:&HITS:l 0&hits= I 0&RESULTFORMAT:&tulhext=the+empirical+evaludtion+of+languase+teachinq+materials&searcbi d: 1 &FIRSTIN-DEX:0&resourcetvpe-S{elT

Littlejohn, A. (1998). Theanalysis of language teaching materials: Inside the trojanhorse- In Thomlinsor\ B. (Ed.). Matetials de.',elopnent in laksuase teachitts(pp. 190-216). New York Canbridge University Press.

't06

Mashula, H. (1998). W'tiar do teachers really wari ftom coursebooks? tn Thomlinson.B.(Ed) Matcrtuls devtopnent in Ia sudse teachnE bp.239_260). NewYork Cambndge University Press

MurphxD.F.(1993).fi?luatinglaguageleaninsrastu,,/iec1arrru,,,.tnC.ookes.G & cass, S. M. (Eds.). Tasks in a pedagogicat conlext: lntegraring theory andpraclice (139-161). Frost Road: Muhi Ling al Malie$ L'rD.

Nunan, D. (1993). Task-based syllabus design: Selecring, grading and sequencing hsks.In Cnokes, G & Gass, S. M. (E.ls.) Tas}'s in a pedagagicat contei:Inteqrating theary and pructice (55-63). Frost Road: Muhi Linguat MduenLTD,

r\-unan, D. (1999). Tre iedrnercentrc.l cuficutun: A studt in se.and tansuape/"a.rr,8. CambnJge: CarionJBe Uni!er..r) Press

Nunan, D. (2004). ?dst bdsed lansese teachnE. Cambridse: Cambridqe Universiw

Graves, K. (2003). Coursebook. ln Nunan, D. (Ed.). p,dt:tical En?tish lansud:.ercr'ht"g \pp. ):5-2tot \e$ york I or emporan

Rea-Dickins, P & cerrnaine, K. (2003) Purposes for evaluation. In Hall, D. R. &Hewings, A. (Eds.). lnnoratian i Engtish ta"g age teachinE. A readet (pp.253-262). N€w York: Rouledse.

Reinders, H. & Lewis, M. (2006). An evatuarive checklisr for self-jccess materialsIElectrcnic Yersionl. ELT Joumal lolune 6a/3 Juty 20A6.272 2,/8. A..essedll'Ocrob( )008 lromhttprletilxirdjoumals.ors.simslad.net.ocs.mq.erlu.au/cgi/rep4at60/3/272?naxtoshoF&HITS: I 0&hirs= I 0&RESULTFORMAT=&fulhext=rhe+enzilic4l+evalmiion r-of+lansuaqe r teachins+naterials&searchid=l &FIRSTINDEX=o&resourcelvpE:SlUilIT

tuchards, J C. (2001i. Crnic lun.leretophent i tanauaae kachins Cambrldsel(anbridge I nr\errr y tress.

Richards, J. C. & Renandya,W. A. (2002). Methodatop in taneuage teachi,lg: Ananthalog/ of.utent prucltce. Cambridger Cambridge Unive.siry press.

Stewad, T. (2007). ?aclrers d d leaners eyatuati g coune task: together. ELT Jaumat2007 61(3),256,266. Aciessed l" Novenber 2008 from

httptr?il\i-oxfordjoumals.org.simsmd.net.ocs.mo.edu.au/cqi/conrenrfull/61/3/256?maxroShOW=&HiTS= I O&hitS= I O&R€SULTFORMAT=&fu IltEXt=EVALUATINGITEACHERS%27+CUIDE&searchid=t&FIRSTINDEx=O&resoucerrpFHWCt

I

107