The Result of Tests

53 Graph 4.2 Fry Graph Readability Level of English for SMK 1 Estimated per Hundred Words Each Passage Based on the Graph 4.2 above the intersection of X and Y was in the white area of 8. It meant that readability of English for SMK 1 was at 8 grade level. As the respondents of this study were the tenth grade vocational high school students, the readability grade level was lower than their real class. It was same like the readability grade level of Get Along with English 1 which was in the white area of 7, or three levels lower than the real class of the students.

b. The Test Result of Students’ Readability towards the English

Textbooks by Using Cloze Test In this section the study tried to answer the second question whether the readability level of English textbooks Get Along with English 1 and English for SMK 1 matched to the tenth grade students’ readability at five vocational schools in Majalengka. Before matching the readability grade level which wa s drawn in the graph and the students’ readability towards the textbooks, this study should find the students’ readability towards the textbooks. It was done by conducting a test to students in five schools where the study conducted. To measure students’ readability, this study used cloze test. It was aimed to know how far students understand the textbook they used in their classrooms. To know how they understand the textbook was firstly by giving them some passages taken from the textbook to be read. Then, it was followed by having cloze tests to measure their understanding towards the textbook which was represented by the passages. The 54 textbook was customized with what they used in their schools. SMKN 1 Maja and SMKN 1 Kadipaten used Get Along with English 1. While, in SMKN 1 Majalengka, SMKN 1 Panyingkiran and SMKN 1 Palasah used English for SMK 1. The result of cloze tests, later on analysed by calculating the percentage average correct answers the three passages of each English textbook. The result of the calculation would be interpreted in Taylor’s reading levels as described on Table 3.1 of chapter III. When the result of cloze score was in between 50 —60, meant that students were at the unassisted level. If it was between 35 —50, meant that students were at the instructionalassisted level. And if the result was below 35, meant that students were at the frustration level. To calculate the percentage correct answers of both Get Along with English 1 and English for SMK 1 was started by counting how many per cent correct answers of every omitted word in each passage. After that finding the average percentage correct answer as a whole of each passage was necessary. The questions analysis could be seen on Appendices 14 —28. 1 The Cloze Test Result of Get Along with English 1 There were two vocational schools in Majalengka which used Get Along with English 1 for tenth grade, namely SMKN 1 Maja and SMKN 1 Kadipaten. To measure the students’ readability towards the Get Along with English 1 for tenth grade textbook, the test was joined by 62 students, 33 students of SMKN 1 Maja and 29 students of SMKN 1 Kadipaten. They were taken from various programs which were picked randomly. In SMKN 1 Maja the test conducted in class X ATPH 3 Agribisnis Tanaman Pangan dan Holtikultura. In SMKN 1 Kadipaten, the test conducted in class X TKJ 1 Teknik Komputer Jaringan. The result of cloze tests can be seen in the following charts. The Y axis of the charts indicated the number of students who could answer the cloze test correctly. The X axis of the charts indicated the numbers of cloze test of the passage. To simplify the codes of cloze test numbers they were naming as C1 for cloze test number 1, C2 for cloze test number two and so fort. The result of cloze test for the first passage of both schools can be seen in the Chart 4.1 below: 55 Chart 4.1 The Result of the First Cloze Test of Get Along with English 1 The first passage of Get Along with English 1 consisted of 20 deletions. The Chart 4.1 above shown that more than 20 students of both schools could answer correctly the cloze test in the initial and end part of the passage. It indicated that most of them remembered what they read only at the beginning and the last part of text, and a few of them remembered the missing words in the middle part of the text. However, pervasively the average percentage correct answer of the first passage based on the answer analysis of X TKJ 1 of SMKN 1 Kadipaten students was 53,8, and for X ATPH 3 of SMKN 1 Maja students was 54,3. It meant that half and more of the test takers of both schools could fill the deletion of the first text correctly. In entire participants it could be elaborated the classification of how many students answering the cloze test correctly. Based on the answer analysis, the classification of correct answer into Taylor’s Reading level of entire participants can be seen on the Table 4.3 below. Table 4.3 The Classification of Cloze Score of the First Passage Based on Taylor’s Reading Level Number of Students Cloze Test Percentage Score Reading Level Percentage Category 44 50 —60 Unassisted reading Above Average 12 35 —50 Instructional, Assisted reading Average 6 Below 35 Frustration level Below Average 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C1 C1 1 C1 2 C1 3 C1 4 C1 5 C 1 6 C1 7 C1 8 C1 9 C2 SMKN 1 Kadipaten SMKN 1 Maja 56 Based on the Table 4.3 above about 44 of 62 test takers or about 71 of them categorized as above average. It meant that they were at the unassisted reading level. They could understand the content of textbook they read independently even without any assistant. And about 12 of 62 test takers or 19 of them were categorized as average, it meant they were in the instructional or assisted reading level. They could understand the textbook when they were under their teachers guidance. The rest, 6 of 62 test takers or about 10 were categorized as below average. Meaning that they were at the frustration level, they could not understand the content of textbook they read, with or without any assistant from their teacher and any other things like dictionary. The result of the second cloze test can be seen in the Chart 4.2 below: Chart 4.2 The Result of the Second Cloze Test of Get Along with English 1 The second passage consisted of 10 deletions, since it was a short passage to be read. The Chart 4.2 above shown that there was no incremental alteration of the second cloze test result. Eventhough it was a shorter passage, but not a guarantee that the students could fill the deletions much more than the first passage. The line of chart descended wether the blue or the red one. It meant that students of both school could not solve the cloze test better than the previous one. It was proved by the average percentage correct answer of the second cloze test Get Along with English 1 of X TKJ 1 SMKN 1 Kadipaten with 33 students was 49,7. The average percentage correct answer of X ATPH 3 SMKN 1 Maja with 29 students was 48,6. The different between the average percentage correct answer of the first and the second passage were around 4 —6 lower. The classification of correct answer into Taylor’s Reading level of entire participants of the second passage can be seen on the Table 4.4 below. 10 20 30 40 50 60 C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 SMKN 1 Kadipaten SMKN 1 Maja 57 Table 4.4 The Classification of Cloze Score of the Second Passage Based on Taylor’s Reading Level Number of Students Cloze Test Percentage Score Reading Level Percentage Category 44 50 —60 Unassisted reading Above Average 13 35 —50 Instructional, Assisted reading Average 5 Below 35 Frustration level Below Average Based on the Table 4.4 above the result was quite same with the previous one. About 44 of 62 test takers or about 71 of them categorized as above average. It meant that they were at the unassisted reading level. They could understand the content of textbook they read independently even without any assistant. And about 13 of 62 test takers or 21 of them were categorized as average, it meant they were in the instructional or assisted reading level. They could understand the textbook when they were under their teachers guidance. The rest, 5 of 62 test takers or about 8 were categorized as below average. It meant that they were at the frustration level, they could not understand the content of textbook they read, with or without any assistant from their teacher and any other things like dictionary. Was there any different with the third pasage? The result of cloze test for the third passage can be seen on Chart 4.3 below: Chart 4.3 The Result of the Third Cloze Test of Get Along with English 1 The cloze test of the third passage consisted of 15 deletions. The result was worse than the two previous passages. Whereas, the text was quite short and only five clozes more than the previous one. The correct answers were decreased gradually from the first number to the last. The 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C1 C1 1 C1 2 C1 3 C 1 4 C1 5 SMKN 1 Kadipaten SMKN 1 Maja 58 average percentage correct answer of the third passage for the X TKJ 1 of SMKN 1 Kadipaten was 29, 8. And the average percentage correct answer for the X ATPH 3 of SMKN 1 Maja was 23, 4. Meanwhie the classification of correct answer into Taylor’s Reading level of entire participants of the second passage can be seen on the Table 4.5 below. Table 4.5 The Classification of Cloze Score of the Third Passage Based on Taylor’s Reading Level Number of Students Cloze Test Percentage Score Reading Level Percentage Category 8 50 —60 Unassisted reading Above Average 7 35 —50 Instructional, Assisted reading Average 47 Below 35 Frustration level Below Average Based on the Table 4.5 above the result was quite different with the previous one. It was only 8 of 62 test takers or about 13 of them categorized as above average. It meant that a few of them were at the unassisted reading level. They could understand the content of textbook they read independently even without any assistant. And about 7 of 62 test takers or 11 of them were categorized as average, it meant they were in the instructional or assisted reading level. They could understand the textbook when they were under their teachers guidance. The rest, 47 of 62 test takers or about 76 were categorized as below average. It meant that they were at the frustration level, they could not understand the content of textbook they read, with or without any assistant from their teacher and any other things like dictionary. To conclude the readability of Get Along with English 1 by students of both schools needed to average the result of cloze test three passages mentioned. Then, it would be known the category of students’ reading level towards the English textbook in both schools based on Taylor’s reading level stated previously. And it was indicated the students’ readability of the textbook. The Table 4.6 was drawing the percentage of students ’ correct answer towards Get Along with English 1: 59 Table 4.6 Percentage of Students Correct Answer Towards Get Along with English 1 No. Schools Percentage of Correct Answer Average 1 st passage 2 nd passage 3 rd passage 1. SMKN 1 Kadipaten 53,8 49,7 29,8 44,43 2. SMKN 1 Maja 54,3 48,6 23,4 42,10 From Table 4.6 above it was known that the average percentage of students’ correct answer of SMKN 1 Kadipaten was 44,43. And the average percentage of students’ correct answer of SMKN 1 Maja was 42,1. To interprete the students’ reading level that indicate students’ readability of the textbook, Taylor’s determined the levels as follows: Table 4.7 Taylor’s Reading Level Level Cloze Score Unassisted reading 50 —60 Instructional, Assisted reading 35 —50 Frustration level Below 35 Source: Principle of Readability. 1 Referring to Taylor’s reading level above, students’ of both schools whether the X TKJ 1 of SMKN 1 Kadipaten or the X ATPH 3 of SMKN 1 Maja were standing at the second level that is in the range 35 — 50. It meant that students of both schools were at the instructionalassisted level. On the other words, they would understand well the textbook as long as under teachers ’ guidance. Besides, when it was read by students independently they need to open the dictionary up to make sense the content of textbook. This study also would show how many students in entire participants could answer the cloze test correctly and categorize into Taylor’s reading level. The summary of the classification correct answer of English for SMK 1 based on Taylor’s Reading level can be seen on the Table 4.8 below. 1 William H. Dubay. The Principles of Readability, Costa Mesa, CA: Impact Information. 2004, p. 27. 60 Table 4.8 The Summary of Classification of Cloze Score Based on Taylor’s Reading Level Passage Average Cloze Test Percentage Score Reading Level Percentage Category 1 st 2 nd 3 rd 44 44 8 32 50 —60 Unassisted reading Above Average 12 13 7 11 35 —50 Instructional, Assisted reading Average 6 5 47 19 Below 35 Frustration level Below Average Referring to the Table 4.8 above the entire participants of two vocational schools in Majalengka namely SMKN 1 Kadipaten, and SMKN 1 Maja could be classified into Taylor’s Reading Levels. The entire participants was 62 students, about 32 students could answer for about 50 —60 and more cloze test correctly. They were in an unassisted reading level, and it was categorized as above average. Meanwhile, 11 students of the entire participants could answer about 35 —50 cloze test correctly. It was on instructional or assisted reading level, it also categorized as average. The rest, 19 students could only answer less than 35 of cloze test. They were at the frustration level and categorized as below average. However, the classification of cloze score viewed from the entire participants was only for describing the real count of percentage correct answers of them. While the determination of students’ reading level based on Taylor was taken from the previous calculation as shown on Table 4.4. 2 The Result of Cloze Test of English for SMK 1 From five vocational schools three of them used English for SMK 1. They were SMKN 1 Majalengka, SMKN 1 Panyingkiran and SMKN 1 Palasah. To measure students’ readability towards the textbook, this study was conducted in these schools by picking the class out purposively to have the cloze test. In SMKN 1 Majalengka the research was done at the tenth class of TPM-B Teknik Permesinan. The test was conducted on Wednesday October 3, 2013 and followed by 30 students. In SMKN 1 Panyingkiran the research was conducted at the tenth class of TIK 3 Teknik Informatika dan Komunkasi. The test was conducted on Monday November 11, 2013 and followed by 30 students. While, in SMKN 1 Palasah the research was conducted at the tenth class of UPW Usaha Perjalanan Wisata. The test was conducted on Wednesday 61 November 13, 2013 and followed by 42 students. The whole test participants of this textbook were 102 students. The result of the test was analysed by counting the correct answer and determine the percentage of it by dividing the correct answers with the sum of whole cloze completion multiplied a hundred per cent. The percentage of every passage was accumulated and divided by number of passages. Later on the result was interpreted as cloze score of textbook. The last step was interpreting the percentage of cloze scores to Taylor’s Reading level whether it was unassisted reading when the result between 50 —60, instructionalassisted reading when the result between 35— 50 and frustration level when the result below 35 as what has mentioned in the previous section. The answer analysis of passages in English for SMK 1 would be revealed in the following Charts. Chart 4.4 The Result of the First Cloze Test of English for SMK 1 The Chart 4.4. above revealed that the result of the first cloze test in this textbook among three schools were quite different, especially for the result of the X UPW of SMKN 1 Palasah. It was higher than two other schools, but for a few number of cloze test were lower. Overall, from 10 deletions provided, the average percentage correct answer of cloze test for the X TPM-B of SMKN Majalengka was 58. The average percentage correct answer of the X TIK 3 of SMKN 1 Panyingkiran was 53,7. While, the average percentage correct answer of the X UPW of SMKN 1 Palasah was 52,4. It meant that more than half of students in each class could answer the cloze test correctly. However, it could not be interpreted yet, since it was not a reflection of how readable the textbook, before knowing the average correct answer of the second and the third passages. 10 20 30 40 50 C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C10 SMKN 1 MAJALENGKA SMKN 1 PANYINGKIRAN SMKN 1 PALASAH 62 Based on the answer analysis, the classification of correct answer into Taylor’s Reading level of entire participants can be seen on the Table 4.9 below. Table 4.9 The Classification of Cloze Score of the First Passage Based on Taylor’s Reading Level Number of Students Cloze Test Percentage Score Reading Level Percentage Category 65 50 —60 Unassisted reading Above Average 15 35 —50 Instructional, Assisted reading Average 25 Below 35 Frustration level Below Average Based on the Table 4.9 above it was about 65 of 102 test takers or about 94 of them categorized as above average. It meant that they were at the unassisted reading level. On the other words, they could understand the content of textbook they read independently even without any assistant. And about 15 of 102 test takers or 15 of them were categorized as average, it meant they were in the instructional or assisted reading level. They could understand the textbook when they were under their teachers guidance. The rest, 25 of 102 test takers or about 25 were categorized as below average. They were at the frustration level, meaning that they could not understand the content of textbook they read, with or without any assistant from their teacher and any other things like dictionary. The result of cloze test of the second passage English for SMK 1 can be seen on Chart 4.5 below: Chart 4.5 The Result of the Second Cloze Test of English for SMK 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 C1 C3 C5 C7 C9 C11 C13 C15 C17 C19 SMKN 1 Majalengka SMKN 1 Panyingkiran 63 The second passage was consisted of 20 deletions. Same like the previous result, students of the X UPW of SMKN 1 Palasah could answer correctly more than students of two other schools. It could be seen from the chart above that the percentage correct answer of the second passage was higher that was 35,8. The average percentage correct answer of the second cloze test for the X TPM-B of SMKN Majalengka was 35,30. While, the average percentage correct answer of the X TIK 3 of SMKN 1 Panyingkiran was 27,50. The Chart 4.5 shown that the result of cloze test were not as high as the previous one. Whether it was because of the test had more items of deletion or there were any other reasons that caused the result decreased drastically, especially, for SMKN 1 Panyingkiran from 53,7 to 27,50. Based on the answer analysis, the classification of correct answer into Taylor’s Reading level of entire participants can be seen on the Table 4.10 below. Table 4.10 The Classification of Cloze Score of the Second Passage Based on Taylor’s Reading Level Number of Students Cloze Test Percentage Score Reading Level Percentage Category 21 50 —60 Unassisted reading Above Average 32 35 —50 Instructional, Assisted reading Average 49 Below 35 Frustration level Below Average Based on the Table 4.10 above it was about 21 of 102 test takers or about 20 of them categorized as above average. It meant that they were at the unassisted reading level. On the other words, they could understand the content of textbook they read independently even without any assistant. And about 32 of 102 test takers or 31 of them were categorized as average, it meant they were in the instructional or assisted reading level. They could understand the textbook when they were under their teachers guidance. It was about 49 of 102 test takers or about 48 were categorized as below average. On the other hand, they were at the frustration level. They could not understand the content of textbook they read, with or without any assistant from their teacher and any other things like dictionary. The conclusion of how readable the textbook by the students could not determined yet, before knowing the third cloze test score. The score of the third cloze test could be seen in the Chart 4.6 below. 64 Chart 4.6 The Result of the Third Cloze Test of English for SMK 1 The chart above illustrated that there was an increase in the scores procurement of the students of the three schools. From 15 deletions provided, the class X TPM-B of SMKN 1 Majalengka obtained a higher average correct answer than the other two schools. The average percentage correct answer obtained was 54, 4. It was the highest score among three cloze test followed. The average percentage correct answer of X TIK 3 SMKN 1 Panyingkiran was 49, 1. While, the average percentage correct answer of X UPW of SMKN 1 Palasah was 48, 1. Based on the answer analysis, the classification of correct answer into Taylor’s Reading level of entire participants can be seen on the Table 4.11 below. Table 4.11 The Classification of Cloze Score of the Third Passage Based o n Taylor’s Reading Level Number of Students Cloze Test Percentage Score Reading Level Percentage Category 49 50 —60 Unassisted reading Above Average 26 35 —50 Instructional, Assisted reading Average 27 Below 35 Frustration level Below Average Based on the Table 4.11 above 49 students as test takers of cloze test were categorized as below average, it was about 27 of whole respondents. they were at the frustration level. On the other words, they could not understand the content of textbook they read, with or without any assistant from their teacher or dictionary. And about 26 of 102 test takers or 26 of them were categorized as average, it meant that they 10 20 30 40 50 C1 C2 C3 C4 C5 C6 C7 C8 C9 C1 C1 1 C1 2 C1 3 C1 4 C1 5 SMKN 1 Majalengka SMKN 1 Panyingkiran SMKN 1 Palasah 65 were in the instructional or assisted reading level. They could understand the content of textbook when they were under their teachers guidance. The rest, it was about 27 of 102 test takers or about 27 of them categorized as above average. It meant that they were at the unassisted reading level. Meaning that they could understand the content of textbook they read independently even without any assistant. The summary of correct answer of every passage for each school can be seen in the Table 4.12 below. Table 4.12 Percentage of Students ’ Correct Answer Towards English for SMK 1 No. Schools Percentage of Correct Answer Average 1 st passage 2 nd passage 3 rd passage 1. SMKN 1 Majalengka 58,00 35,30 54,40 49,23 2. SMKN 1 Panyingkiran 53,70 27,50 49,10 43,43 3. SMKN 1 Palasah 52,40 35,80 48,10 45,43 Average 54,70 32,87 49,64 46,03 The Table 4.12 above described that the average of percentage correct answer of English for SMK 1 for each school was at the range 35 —50 of Taylor’s reading level. The percentage correct answer of the cloze completion of SMKN 1 Majalengka was 49,23. The percentage correct answer of the cloze completion of SMKN 1 Panyingkiran was 43,43. And the percentage correct answer of SMKN 1 Palasah was 45,43. Based on Taylor’s reading level interpretation when the result was between 35 —50 meant that students’ readability towards their English textbook was at the assisted or instructional level. It meant that whether students of SMKN 1 Majalengka, SMKN 1 Panyingkiran or students of SMKN 1 Palasah would understand the textbook if they were under the assistant or instruction of their teachers. Eventhough, this study would show how many students in entire participants could answer the cloze test correctly and categorize into Taylor’s reading level. The summary of the classification correct answer of English for SMK 1 based on Taylor’s Reading level can be seen on the Table 4.13 below. 66 Table 4.13 The Summary of Classification of Cloze Score Based on Taylor’s Reading Level Passage Average Cloze Test Percentage Score Reading Level Percentage Category 1 st 2 nd 3 rd 65 21 49 45 50 —60 Unassisted reading Above Average 15 32 26 24 35 —50 Instructional, Assisted reading Average 25 49 27 33 Below 35 Frustration level Below Average Based on the Table 4.13 above the entire participants of three vocational schools in Majalengka namely SMKN 1 Majalengka, SMKN 1 Panyingkiran and SMKN 1 Palasah could be classified into Taylor’s Reading Levels. The participants was 102 students, about 45 students could answer for about 50 —60 cloze test correctly. They were in an unassisted reading level, and it was categorized as above average. Meanwhile, 24 students of the entire participants could answer about 35 —50 cloze test correctly. It was on instructional or assisted reading level, it also categorized as average. The rest, 33 students could only answer less than 35 of cloze test. They were at the frustration level and categorized as below average. From the explanation above it can be concluded that the readability level of vocational students to English textbooks either Get Along with English 1 or English for SMK 1 in Majalengka is in the range 35 —50. Based on Taylors reading level, it meant that the students still need teachers ’ help in understanding its contents. According to Dubay the result of one readability measurement was not reliable yet until the other readability measurement pointed out the readability level of the textbooks as a comparison. Therefore, the other measurement of readability in this study was needed to determine the readability levels of English textbooks Get Along with English 1 and English for SMK 1. The determination was by using Fry Readability Graph for easy retrieval conclusion. The findings of test result as the students’ readability towards their English textbooks which were found by the result of cloze test and the result of Fry readability graphs of both Get Along with English 1 and English for SMK 1 as the quantitative data of the study. The qua;itative data would be gathered from the interview of both English teachers and students in vocational high school where the study conducted. The result of interview would be elaborated below. 67

2. The Result of Interview

After conducting the test in five vocational schools, it was needed to confirm the teachers in relation with the existence of English textbook within teaching learning activities. An interview with the English teachers of each school was held to support the data which were gathered from the test. And the followings were the result of interview with them.

a. Interview Result with the English Teachers at Five Vocational

Schools in Majalengka The result of interview with teachers who teach English in the five schools where the research was conducted concluded that 2 of the 5 schools namely SMKN 1 Kadipaten and SMKN 1 Maja used Get Along with English 1 which was written by Entin S. and friends from Erlangga. While, the other three schools namely SMKN 1 Majalengka, SMKN 1 Panyingkiran and SMKN 1 Palasah they used English for SMK 1 which was written by Maria Regina from books centre of the Ministry of Education, in their teaching learning activities. The reasons they used both English texbooks mentioned before were various for every teacher. Three English teachers who used English for SMK 1 argued that since there was no more English textbooks in their library, so they utilize it. The other reason was English for SMK 1 was suitable for vocational school students who need more practice both oral and written in which was not emphasized in the new curriculum. Eventhough, the teachers admited that besides using the English textbook their teaching learning activities were also enriched by other source books such as grammar and dictionary. Many of them also used students’ worksheet to enrich students’ experience in solving the tasks and practices of English. The other teachers used Get Along with English 1 in their classrooms by the reasons that the textbook was easy to understand since it had the simple explanation. It also contained a complete and appropriate materials for vocational students. To what extent was the students understood a textbook was actually heavily influenced by the cognitive development of the students themselves. All respondents of English teachers argued that there was a possibility that the level of understanding of students influenced by their cognitive development. They added that the influence of prior knowledge may exist, because no matter how they had learned English when they were in junior high. Even though, it sounded subjective because every student had a very different level of understanding. It was confirmed by DS that in determining which textbook would be used in the classroom, teachers also should consider their students’ cognitive development. In this respect he was very confident that the content of 68 textbook was completely consistent with the cognitive development of students. Those statements actually derived from teachers’ experience in evaluating the content of textbook itself which was in contrast with the frequency of textbook use in the classroom. Regarding the evaluation of its contents DG admitted that she had never been specifically evaluated in terms of its content. Because she assumed that by reading any fleeting glance she was able to know the students who were under her guidance cannot understand the content of the textbook. Meanwhile AM argued that evaluating a textbook was needed to know the advantages and disadvantages of textbook. Eventhough she admitted that she had never been evaluating the textbook. However that does not mean when presenting the material does not encounter any obstacles. Obstacle that she most felt was it was not supported by the listening material like cassette or CD. So for solving this problem she held dictation as listening section. Furthermore, DR stated that evaluation of a textbook to fit with what was required of students should be a consideration. However, he had never done it so far. It led teachers to encounter problems in presenting the material. But he convinced that to him there was no difficulty in presenting the material, if there was any trouble it could still be overcome. This argument was quite different with DS statement that before the textbook used in the class he had evaluated it even took a long time which almost six months. The matters that were evaluated including the content, the vocabulary, the way the writers of the textbook give an explanation and also the exercises. In which he found that the exercises were in accordance with what was presented in the National Examination. In addition, he also compared with other textbooks to know which were better and suitable for particular students who he taught. From the above explanation this study concluded that evaluating the content of textbook before the teachers using it in their classroom was necessary. It was acceded by all English teachers as respondence in this study. However, only one of five English teachers who had evaluated the English textbook before he used it in his classroom. It showed that only a few of English teachers who spent their time to analyse and evaluate the content of textbook. Understanding the content of a textbook began with understanding the sentences. DG argued that the sentences used in English for SMK 1 bit difficult to understand by students, in a percentage it was about 70 of them could understand, especially for TPM class. NS and DR stated that in delivering the material there was no 69 trouble at all. Since the sentences were fairly easy to understand, unless it used the idiomatic expressions, students were sometimes difficult to understand because they actually had to use a high enough analysis. Likewise, the reading text and vocabularies contained in the textbook he found that they were relatively easy to understand. AM and DR assumed that the easiest way to understand the content of textbooks was usually by seeing the words or sentences used by the author to convey hisher message. AM argued that the phrases used in English for SMK 1 most familiar to students in grade 10, therefore they were relatively easy to make sense the overall content of the textbook, since most sentences were in simple ones. So do the texts presented in this book according to her was not very hard to understand and yet find so much difficulty. Meanwhile, DS assumed that understanding the content of textbook can be seen from the way the students understand it, the simplest thing was to look at the sentences which were used by the author of the textbook. In this case, he thought that the sentences used were the most frequently used in everyday life, so that they would know and understand the intented sentences. In a wider term he argued that the texts contained in the book were also in accordance with the background knowledge of students, as well as most of the text using simple sentences and already known by students in advance. Almost all teachers agreed that understanding the content of textbook started from words and sentences selection which were the author’s responsibility. Words and sentences which close to students’ everyday life were more acceptable than those were not, as well as the use of simple sentences. Avoiding too many idiomatic expressions would be more understandable by students as well, since they were quite hard to grasp. Understanding the content of text also would be helpfull when it was supported by the presence of images. All English teachers agreed that the images could help to improve their students’ understanding towards the textbook. DR added that there was a close relation between students’ understanding and images. It was also useful to train students’ understanding and how they could describe the images as a practice before they face the National Final Emanination. However, it would be more interesting when the images were being coloured. Therefore, DS admitted that he would rather display images from a CD directly in the language lab because the textbook was also equipped with a CD and software in power point form than from textbook directly. Another issue that could help improving students’ understanding was an example. DR assumed that the examples given were greatly 70 helped to increase students understanding of the material presented. AM added that students will be more easily understood if the examples were made to the point, in order that students do not become confused. Further, NS assumed that with the presence of the examples in the textbook students, eventhough unaccompanied by teachers, can understand the matter well. In contrast DS acknowledged that the examples do not always help students in understanding the textbook. Since students sometimes were not so keen to read the examples, especially when doing exercises. Similarly, the instructions, they were not a good and careful reader. However in general they understand the intent of the writer delivered orders if they actually peruse. When they do not understand immediately discussed with the teacher and other students. In explaining the linguistic material DS was almost never using English for SMK 1. She assumed that if the matter was delivered directly from the main source, it would be more obvious. In addition readers should be well aware with the intention of the authors. In this case, she assumed that the commands or instructions in English for SMK 1 were rather difficult to understand. It was proved by the frequent students asked about the meaning of instruction which was submitted. Possibly, they just wanted to make sure that they understand it very well as in the intended instruction. NS added that even more to the curriculum 2013 teachers were only as facilitators. So the material did not need to explain by the teacher directly. The students must seek out and study it when they did not understand what was in the text or instructions of the textbook they allowed to assist theirselves by the other tool aids or sources like dictionary or internet. For instructions that used in the textbooks, he also argued that they were not too difficult to understand because they had a provision when they were in junior high school. It was around 85 of them understand the instructions. AM argued that the English for SMK 1 presented it clearly enough as well as the insructions of it which were easy to understand. However, when there were not awareness of the sentence order, he did not dismiss that students often ask the teacher to make it clear. Linguistic material presented in Get Along with English 1, according to DR as confirmed by DS, was quite clear, because the explanation simple so easy to understand by students. Usually if they did not understand, they would ask the teacher directly. According to him the instructions of textbook was also fairly easy, because they were made in simple way, making it easier for them to understand. However, he stated that the students were still often asked about the meaning of the 71 instructions were read, he thought that this was possible because every student had a different level of understanding. Regarding the exercises or the material presented in the textbook, some were appropriate and some were not in accordance with the purpose of learning. What was on the syllabus did not match with on the textbook. It was the reason why English for SMK 1 was rarely used in the classroom. That was why DG makes her own module which contains a summary of the material and exercises drawn from several textbooks tailored to the syllabus specified in the curriculum. Because each exercise should be adapted premises course learning objectives. For that she was sure that for more frequent exercises were using modules, because the contents of the modules had been adapted to the syllabus and lesson plans in which there were learning objectives. As well as NS, he added that the teacher did not rely on textbooks on a continuous basis, they should look at the syllabus before teaching. So he declared that the assignment or homework did not always utilize textbooks. Both DG and NS were used it when reading section, while for the exercises he was using worksheets. Therefore, he believed that teachers should provide feedback on these tasks, so they knew how far were their students’ achievements. However, it did not indicate as an assessment and benchmark that they understood the material, because to DG when teachers took a note to exercise or homework taken from modules, the students’ answer was almost the same. To evaluate the extent of students understanding of the matter was through formative test and it could continue to be repeated until they really reached the criteria of completeness defined previously. The purpose of learning was important that should be determined by the teachers before learning took place, so that the learning process would be more focus. To find out whether our learning objectives reached or not, the simplest way was usually by giving exercises to the students. It was quite different with the previous opinion, AM in her assumption stated that the exercises in this book were in line with the objectives of learning. As feedback for their hard work doing the tasks, she admitted to give praises it was enough, and vice versa if they did not do the tasks they would get a punishment to wary of it. Related to the exercises DR stated that the exercises which provided in the textbook were in conformity with the purpose of learning. He recognized that the formative test questions were often taken from the textbook. But the tasks, he often utilizes student worksheet rather than the textbook. The existence of the above tasks given to the students he deemed it necessary to make students more motivated to learn, besides that the students will know their strengths and