Module and Lesson Unit Templates in the Course Book English in Mind: A Content Analysis

Joseph Emmanuel Krisdian(1*), Fransiscus Xaverius Mukarto(2), Laurensius Albertus Chandra Yuniarto(3),

(1) Sanata Dharma University, Indonesia
(2) Sanata Dharma University, Indonesia
(3) Sanata Dharma University, Indonesia
(*) Corresponding Author

Abstract


Using coursebooks in language learning is a crucial means of obtaining knowledge. This study focused on Indonesia, delves into examining the first edition of Cambridge University Press's English in Mind: Student's Starter Book through content analysis. The research objective is to uncover the book's module and lesson unit templates. The analysis concentrates on two of the four modules and their accompanying lesson units. Findings indicate that the module template is consistent and includes three significant components: topics and learning outcomes, lesson units, and assessment. The template for lesson units, however, displays a certain degree of variability regarding the number of sections and the content of learning tasks. This variance arises from the necessary scaffolding processes to achieve the unit's intended learning outcomes. Examining coursebook content through content analysis is crucial in understanding the language learning process and determining the effectiveness of instructional materials. In conclusion, the results of this study contribute to the advancement of language education by highlighting the significance of coursebook analysis in evaluating the quality and consistency of language instructional materials.


Keywords


backward design, content analysis, lesson unit template, scaffolding

Full Text:

PDF

References


Ahmadi, A., & Derakhshan, A. (2016). EFL teachers' perceptions towards textbook evaluation. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 6(2), 260-266. https://doi.org/10.4304/tpls.6.2.260-266

Banathy, B. H. (1968). Instructional systems. Belmont, CA: Fearon Publishers.

Berelson, B. (1952). Content analysis in communication research. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.

Bowen, R. S. (2017). Understanding by design. Retrieved from https://cft.vanderbilt.edu/understanding-by-design/

Bruner, J. S. (1984). Vygotsky's zone of proximal development: The hidden agenda. New Directions for Child Development, 23, 93–97. https://doi.org/10.1002/cd.23219842309

Chapman, C., & King, R. (2009). Instructional strategies and activities for the differentiated writing classroom. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452219462.n5

Chen, L. (2018). Study on the current situation of heterogeneous age teaching in non-major subjects: A case study of an experimental primary school. School Administrators, 113, 119–138. https://doi.org/10.3966/160683002018010113008

Cole, M., & Cole, S. (2001). The development of children (4th ed.). New York, NY: Scientific American Books, Distributed by W.N. Freeman and Company.

Demir, Y., & Ertas, A. (2014). A suggested eclectic checklist for ELT coursebook evaluation. Reading, 14(2), 243-252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.read.2014.01.005

Dixon, F. A., Yssel, N., McConnell, J. M., & Hardin, T. (2014). Differentiated instruction, professional development, and teacher efficacy. Journal for the Education of the Gifted, 37(2), 181-199. https://doi.org/10.1177/0162353294350133

Drisko, J. W., & Maschi, T. (2016). Content analysis. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Fox, B. E., & Doherty, J. J. (2012). Design to learn, learn to design: Using backward design for information literacy instruction. Communications in Information Literacy, 5(2), 144-155. https://doi.org/10.15760/comminfolit.2012.5.2.109

Gao, K. (2021). Research on differentiated education of career planning under the background of “million enrollment expansion”. Status and Security Journal, 21(7), 65-66.

Handayani, S. (2016). The evaluation of English textbook for grade VII of junior high school in Indonesia. Proceedings of ISELT FBS Universitas Negeri Padang, 4(2), 328-339.

Hanuscin, D. L., & Lee, D. (2008). Using the learning cycle as a model for teaching the learning cycle to preservice elementary teachers. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 20, 51-66. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF03173670

Harwood, T. G., & Garry, T. (2003). An overview of content analysis. The Marketing Review, 3(4), 479-498.

Kayapinar, U. (2009). Coursebook evaluation by English teachers. İnönü Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 10(1), 69-78.

Kilickaya, O. (2018). Pre-service English teachers’ views on coursebook evaluation and designing supplementary materials. Kastamonu Education Journal, 27(2), 523-536. https://doi.org/10.24106/kefdergi.2574

Krippendorff, K. (2018). Content analysis: An introduction to its methodology. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Li, H., & Li, X. (2020). Rural and urban general education teachers’ instructional strategies in inclusive classrooms in China: A dual system perspective. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 27(1), 72-88. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603116.2020.1821796

Lin, C. (2021). Do different routes go the same way?. Tian Jin Education Journal, 21(17), 57-58.

Linnenbrink-Garcia, L., Patall, E. A., & Pekrun, R. (2016). Adaptive motivation and emotion in education: Research and principles for instructional design. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3(2), 228-236.

Mihailescu, M. (2019). Content analysis: A digital method. http://dx.doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.21296.61441

Mukundan, J., Hajimohammadi, R., & Nimehchisalem, V. (2011). Developing an English language textbook evaluation checklist. Contemporary Issues in Education Research (CIER), 4(6), 21-28.

Neuendorf, K. A. (2017). The content analysis guidebook. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Puchta, H., & Jefferies, J. (2004). English in mind: Student’s book starter. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Rhonda, B., & Akane, Z. (2018). Step 4: Shop adjustments—help. In Differentiated Instruction Made Practical (pp. 87-107). Oxfordshire: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781351248471-8

Sarem, S. N., Hamidi, H., & Mahmoudie, R. (2013). A critical look at textbook evaluation: A case study of evaluating an ESP coursebook: English for international tourism. International Research Journal of Applied and Basic Sciences, 4(2), 372-380.

Scribani, J. (2022, November 1). How to create an effective course outline (+template). Thinkific Blog. Retrieved from https://www.thinkific.com/blog/how-to-create-an-effective-course-outline/

Shvarts, A., & Bakker, A. (2019). The early history of the scaffolding metaphor: Bernstein, Luria, Vygotsky, and before. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 26(1), 4-23. https://doi.org/10.1080/10749039.2019.1574306

Stemler, S. (2000). An overview of content analysis. Practical assessment, research, and evaluation, 7(1), 1-6.

Tomlinson, B. (2010). Principles of effective materials development”. Harwood (Ed.), English language teaching materials: Theory and practice (pp. 81–108). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Tsiplakides, I. (2011). Selecting an English coursebook: Theory and practice. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 1(7), 758-764. https://doi.org/10.4304/tpls.1.7.758-764

Walker, R. (2013, October 3). What makes a good coursebook?. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://oupeltglobalblog.com/2013/10/03/what-makes-a-good-coursebook/

Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (1998). Backward design. In Understanding by design (pp. 13-34). Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Williams, D. (1983). Developing criteria for textbook evaluation. ELT journal, 37(3), 251-255.

Woodrow, L. (2018). Introducing course design in English for specific purposes (Vol. 184). London: Routledge.

Zaretskii, V. K. (2009). The zone of proximal development: What Vygotsky did not have time to write. Journal of Russian and East European Psychology, 47(6), 70–93. https://doi.org/10.2753/RPO1061-0405470604

Zohrabi. (2010). Coursebook development and evaluation for English for general purposes course. English Language Teaching, 4(2), 213-222. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v4n2p213




DOI: https://doi.org/10.24071/ijels.v8i2.5906

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


    

 

IJELS Journal Sinta 4 Certificate (S4 = Level 4)

We would like to inform you that Indonesian Journal of English Language Studies (IJELS) has been nationally accredited Sinta 4 by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Research and Technology of the Republic of Indonesia based on the decree  No. Surat Keputusan 152/E/KPT/2023. Validity for 5 years: Vol 7 No 2, 2021 till Vol 12 No 1, 2026

 

 

This work is licensed under CC BY-SA.

Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License

 

 

IJELS e-ISSN 2715-0895; IJELS p-ISSN 2442-790X

Indonesian Journal of English Language Studies (IJELS) is published twice a year, namely in March and September, by the English Language Studies (ELS) of the Graduate Program of Sanata Dharma University, Yogyakarta, Indonesia.