Book Evaluation Criteria Theoretical Description

17 predictive and retrospective evaluation. Predictive evaluation is an evaluation done in order to help the teachers select a textbook. Whereas, retrospective evaluation done in order to help the teachers identify the strength and weakness of the textbook already used. To be more specific, together with Masuhara, McDonough and Shaw examine materials of a good book in three stages, namely external, internal, and overall evaluation McDonough, Shaw, Masuhara, 2013, p. 53. The external evaluation relates to the overview of the materials from the outside. It evaluates the cover, introduction, and the table of contents. Meanwhile, internal evaluation performs “in-depth” investigation into the materials. Furthermore, the overall evaluation inspects the workbook in a general use of the materials relates to the syllabus. Byrd 2001 defines three criteria to evaluate books. The first is the suitability between the curriculum and the materials. It means that the workbooks should match with the learning objectives or goals of the learning process. The second is the suitability between the students and the needs. It means that the workbooks should fit with the students’ need. The third is the suitability between the teachers and the materials. It means that the workbooks can be used effectively by the teachers as cited in Ozdemir, 2007. Tomlinson 2003, p. 16 proposes fourteen criteria that should be measured in the material evaluation process. Those criteria are described as follows. 18 a. The appeal of the materials This relates to how the materials attract students’ attention. It is about the way the materials being packed. Since an interesting package will encourage the students to learn Tomlinson, 2003. b. The credibility of the materials to the students, teachers, and administrators This relates to whether or not the materials can be trusted. The materials will be used by teachers and students in the learning process, therefore it will give an impact for both of them. If the materials cause a bad impact, the materials cannot be trusted Tomlinson, 2003. c. The validity of the materials This relates to whether the materials are valid or not. The materials are acceptable for the learning process or not Tomlinson, 2003. d. The reliability of the materials This indicates whether the materials are reliable or not. Since the materials will give an impact to language students and teachers in the learning process Tomlinson, 2003. e. The ability of the materials to interest the students and the teachers This relates to the capability of the materials to get the attention of both the teachers and the students in the learning process. If both the teachers and the students are interested in the materials, the learning process will go well Tomlinson, 2003. 19 f. The ability of the materials to motivate the students This relates to the capability of the materials to stimulate the eagerness of the students to learn. The materials should be one of the students’ motivations to learn Tomlinson, 2003. g. The value of the materials in terms of short-term learning This relates to the effectiveness of the materials in facilitating short-term learning. The materials contribute to the learning process at the time of the materials being discussed or not Tomlinson, 2003. h. The value of the materials in terms of long-term learning This relates to the effects caused by the usage of the materials in long-term learning. A good material will last for quite a long time, even when the materials are no longer being used Tomlinson, 2003. i . The students’ perceptions of the value of the materials This is about the way the students think and feel about the materials. This is about whether or not the materials help them in the learning process Tomlinson, 2003. j . The teachers’ perception of the value of the materials This is how the teachers think about the value of the materials, whether the materials are useful or not. Furthermore, it indicates whether the materials support the learning process or not Tomlinson, 2003. k. The assistance given to the teachers in terms of preparation, delivery and assessment 20 This relates to the supporting aids which are provided that can help the teachers. Adequate assistance will support the teachers in the learning process Tomlinson, 2003. l. The flexibility of the materials This relates to how the materials can be used. This examines whether or not the materials can be used for different students with different ability. Flexible materials can be used in large scope not only in one school Tomlinson, 2003. m. The contribution made by the materials to teacher development This relates to the effect or consequences of the materials to the teachers. It indicates whether the materials can help the teachers develop their competence or not Tomlinson, 2003. n. The match with administrative requirements This relates to the arrangement which is suitable with the existing standard. This examines whether or not the materials match the administrative standard. These fourteen criteria are the elaboration of language assessment theory Tomlinson, 2003. Sheldon 1988, as cited in Awasthi, 2006 states that a textbook evaluation is “fundamentally a subjective, rule of thumb activity, and that no neat formula, grid, or system will ever provide a definitive yardstick p. 245 .” Likewise, as suggested by Cunningsworth 1984, the evaluation process involves professional judgment in every stage. Therefore, personal and professional judgments are involved in a material evaluation process. The materials are evaluated based on some principles and guidelines which will be formulated in the form of checklist 21 criteria. Moreover, Robinson 1991 lists a number of tools used to carry out evaluation, such as questionnaires, checklists, rating scales, interviews, observations, and records. However, one of the common methods to evaluate English language teaching material is using a checklist. As stated by Lodico, Spaulding, and Voegetle 2006, p. 113, even though there are pre-established and standardized checklist, researchers tend to adjust the checklist to the exact setting and participants in order to gather the data to answer the research questions. Cunningsworth 1995 as cited in Richards, 2001 suggests the use of different checklists to cover all aspects of the book. The checklist covers some aspects, such as the claims made by the book, the types of the materials evaluation and the purposes of the materials evaluation. These three aspects are covered within eight areas, namely aims and approaches, design and organization, language content, skills, topics, methodology, teacher’s books, and practical considerations. Those areas are examined in the form of a series questions which will cover all of the aspects. Another criteria propose by Supriadi 2000, he suggests four aspects to evaluate books in Indonesia. Those aspects are: content, language, physical appearance, and national security. The content aspect is about the suitability of the materials with the curriculum, complete materials --that relates to term, symbol and notation, exampleillustration--, systematic materials, attractive presentation, understandable materials, and ability to encourage the students to learn. Afterward, the language aspects are about the paragraph, grammar, diction, terminology, and spelling. The next is physical appearance or graphics aspects that include: typography, layout, printing quality, binding quality, illustration, cover, book size, 22 and the type of the paper. The last is a national security aspect which has an association with law, social and cultural context, ethics, and government policy. Littlejohn 1998, as cited in Ozdemir, 2007 offers one of the checklists that is used to examine the purpose of the current study. He makes his checklist according to the three levels of analysis of the book: a. What is there? The first level consists of items that pursue information about the physical properties of the book. The psychical properties comprise the publication and design that relate to the layout, durability, print, availability, and illustration. b. What is required of users? The second level has a detailed task sheet that enables gathering information about the tasks in the book. This level has an intention to analyze the language learning activities in the book. c. What is implied? While the third level consists of the items that enable the researchers gathering information about the approach, philosophy, and aims of the book. Furthermore, Littlejohn 1998 adds that his levels of analysis move from the objective to a more subjective evaluation. The first level is the objective evaluation while the third is the subjective evaluation. Another criteria defined by Brown 2001, he offers a checklist that consists of items about the goals and approach of the book, background, the treatment of the skills, content, quality of practice material, sequencing, vocabulary, sociolinguistic 23 factors, and format –that includes the physical properties, accompanying materials and the teacher’s guide--. Moreover, Sheldon 1998 affirms that evaluation checklists should include some criteria related to the characteristics of a textbook such as, layout, organization, methodology, aims, and the degree to which a set of materials is not only teachable, but also fits the needs of the teachers’ approaches. While, Hedges 2000 proposes a two- stage process for evaluating a book. “The first stage is to assess the content of a book in relation to its professed aims. The second is to assess the book against the needs and context of the intended learner” p. 357. She suggests a checklist that is divided into five main categories, namely the view of language, the view of language learning, the learner, the view of education and the environment of learning. In a similar study, Ali 1983 conducts an evaluation on an English language textbook that is used for the second grade boy’s intermediate level in Saudi Arabia. The evaluation is done through some checklists and questionnaires for English language teachers and English language supervisors. The categories of the questionnaire are: the introduction of the course, the course’s subject matter, aids, exercises and activities, the teacher’s manual, the course book’s layout and the physical make up. He also provides some recommendations and modifications at the end of his study: a. The importance of using more colorful and attractive teaching aids. b . The pupil’s book should present more interesting and age-appropriate topics. c . The teacher’s manual should provide teachers with alternative ways for teaching every lesson. 24 Tomlinson, Dat and Masuhara 2001 use a list of 133 course evaluation criteria to evaluate eight current adult courses published by three leading publishers in the United Kingdom as cited in Alamri, 2008, p. 35-36. The textbooks are: Language in Use and True to Life by Cambridge University Press, Cutting Edge and Wavelength by Pearson Longman, Inside Out and Reward by Macmillan Heinemann Press. The checklist used is divided into two main headings: overall criteria that relate to publisher’s claims, flexibility, syllabus, pedagogic approach, topic contents, voice, instructions and teachability and specific criteria that relates to the appearance, design, illustration and reading text. Hapsari 2011 uses a list of 51 criteria to evaluate three workbooks for seventh grade students. The first workbook is English Supplementary Materials written by English Team of Musyawarah Guru Mata Pelajaran Yogyakarta and it is used in SMP Negeri 9 Yogyakarta. The second workbook names Global written by Endang Triningsih, Tunijo, Munawir, and H. Ismanto. The second workbook is used in SMP Negeri 2 Yogyakarta. While the third workbook names Cerah Workbook by CV Teguh Karya and it is used in SMP Joanness Bosco. She offers a checklist that consists of ten criteria, namely general appearance, design and illustration, objectives, topic contents, language contents, social and cultural context, language skills, teachability, flexibility, and practice and testing. Her research shows that in general, none of the three workbooks accomplish the standard of a good workbook. The English Supplementary Materials Workbook is considered as a fair workbook and Global Workbook is considered as a sufficient workbook. Meanwhile, Cerah Workbook is considered as a fair workbook. 25 In a similar study, Kurniawati 2013 evaluates Excellent Workbook for elementary school grade one. This workbook is published by CV. Adi Nugraha. She uses a list of 49 criteria. The checklist is divided into four aspects, namely physical appearance –that includes the general appearance, design, illustration and organization--, content –that includes the objectives, skills, topics, and tasks--, language content and also instruction. As the result of this research, Excellent Workbook fulfilled criteria on topics and general appearance. Furthermore, she adds that formative evaluation can be used in order to improve the unfulfilled criteria.

B. Theoretical Framework

This research aims to evaluate the English Workbook called Pakar that is used in SMP N 2 Mlati Sleman, Yogyakarta. In order to evaluate the materials, the researcher uses in-use evaluation as stated by Tomlinson and Masuhara 2004. In- use evaluation is chosen because when the researcher conducts the research, the workbook is still being used. This research conducts an evaluation using some checklists. As stated by Lodico, Spaulding, and Voegetle 2006, researchers tend to adjust the pre-established and standardize checklist to the exact setting and participants in order to gather the data to answer the research questions. Therefore, the researcher elaborates the criteria proposed by some experts in order to conduct the workbook evaluation. However, not all of the criteria are used because some of them are not applicable to evaluate the workbook since there are some criteria which have different object with this research. This research does not use the 26 national security aspect proposed by Supriadi 2000 since this research focusing on the evaluation of the workbook itself. The criteria proposed by Cunningsworth 1995 and Lado 1964 are used to arrange the checklist. Cunningsworth 1995 proposes some aspects to be evaluated, namely aims and approaches, design and organization, language content, skills, topic, methodology, and practical considerations. Meanwhile Lado’s law of learning 1964 includes six evaluation criteria. Since this workbook is published in Indonesia, the research er also uses Supriadi’s aspects to evaluate the workbook. Those aspects are: content, language, and physical appearance. Sheldon 1998 criteria is also used to formulate the checklist. Sheldon’s criteria are layout, organization, methodology, aims, and teachability of the book. Moreover, criteria proposed by Tomlinson 2003 are also used to formulate the checklist. Evaluating the appearance, the researcher adapts the criteria propose by Cunningsworth that relates to the design and organization and Supriadi that relates to physical appearance. A workbook is one of the students’ individual learning sources, therefore the appearance and the design should not make the students confuse. Then to evaluate the content, researcher combines the criteria suggested by Cunningsworth, Supriadi and Lado. The content of the workbook is important since workbook help the students to practice their skills. Meanwhile, evaluating language content, the researcher uses Supriadi’s criteria. English language is a foreign language for the students, therefore clear and correct basic knowledge of the language is important. Furthermore, to evaluate the instruction, the researcher adapts Lado’s law of learning. The students use the workbook outside the school 27 time, thus, clear instructions are needed in the workbook. In addition, checklists by Sheldon and Tomlinson were used to formulate the teachability and flexibility aspect of the checklist. A good workbook must be able to help the teacher to deliver the material to the students with different abilities, therefore teachability and flexibility aspect is important for a workbook.