Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Adaptations
When it comes to coursebook adaptation, it is typical to notice such
criticisms as ignoring local needs, devaluing students culture and etc,
because commercial teaching texts are often used internationally
(McDonough and Shaw, 2003). Besides, for the cousebook as a
supplementary one as discussed above, the teacher might be unable to
cover all materials in the time allocated. Therefore, the activities in the
coursebook need to be adapted more efficiently, which requires the
teacher to select differing techniques (McDonough and Shaw, 2003) to
meet the congruence with different aspects of the materials that needs
alteration (McDonough and Shaw, 2003: 78).
Deleting
Back to Module 2, it is obvious that Exercise 1 in Vocabulary and
speaking (see Appendix 6, Page 17) acts as a warming-up activity by
discussing various kinds of things that learners are good/bad at
remembering, which followed by words learning in Exercise 2 (see
Appendix 6, Page 17). However, the discussion in Exercise 1 is too
general to elicit a more complicated English use without relevant lexical
and syntax support. Comparatively, in the following Reading (see
Appendix 6, Page 17), the pictures discussion can be better served as both
a warming-up activity and a pre-reading activity. More opportunities can
be easily created throughout the reading activity, so the validity of
Exercise 1 in Vocabulary and speaking does not exist. Furthermore,
Exercise 2 in this part appears too easy for Chinese university students,
since the vocabulary listed here should have been learnt in their junior
high school. Therefore, in regard to time limitations which should be
considered when a supplementary coursebook is applied, the part of
Vocabulary and speaking can be deleted completely.
9
Modifying
Here, modifying is defined as an internal change in the approach or
focus of an exercise or other piece of material (McDonough and Shaw,
2003: 81). In Module 2, Exercise 2 (see Appendix 6, Page 18) requires
students to read selectively for information (Grant, 1987: 90).
However, the question here is more like a test, students can easily lift
the answers straight from the text (McDonough and Shaw, 2003: 82). In
order to make this reading more communicative and offering more
chances for students to practice spoken English, rewriting as one of the
subheadings under modifying can be applied to the reading activity by
setting more purposeful, problem-solving tasks (McDonough and Shaw,
2003: 81). Therefore, Exercise 2 can be modified as an information gap
where each student, as one member of a group of six has to read each of
the six paragraphs (see Appendix 6, Page 18). After reading, they need to
tell and explain to the others in their group what he/she reads in his/her
paragraph, and other members can request clarification. Then, after
exchanging information, students in groups need to arrange these
paragraphs in order according to the coherence shown among them. To
create the gaps, the teacher can only copy one paragraph in one piece of
paper which is given to one student instead of letting all students look at
the whole text in their books (see Appendix 7.1-7.6). In tackling these
problems, more natural conversations can be created, so turn-taking and
interruption techniques can be practiced, which is exactly what teaching
materials should provide (Cunningsworth, 1987: 49).
Reordering and adding
In Module 2, Part B Task (see Appendix 6, Page 22) consists of three
parts, resulting in an Optional writhing (see Appendix 6, Page 23) as the
outcome (Willis, 1996: 23). Considering that the coursebook highlights
the task-based learning as one of its best selling points as claims in the
cover (See Appendix 2), Part B Task is certainly
10
supposed to well demonstrate this claim. However, by closing examining
this part, I find that it lacks an explicit outcome which is clearly required
in the task-based approach (Numan, 1988), because the supposed
outcome of Optional writing is downplayed in the way an explicit
connection between the previous two tasks and the final Optional
writing is missing (see Appendix 6, Page 23). This leads to the
disappearance of the original flavor of the task-based learning
(Richards, 2001: 258). Therefore, drawing upon the six-step procedure
suggested by Nunan (2004: 31), Part B Task can be adapted in the
fowling way.
Reordering
The first step of schema building to introduce the topic, set the context
for the task and introduce some of the key vocabulary and expressions
(Nunan, 2004: 31) can be omitted, because students schemas for the task
have been built, in the light of the previous study in the module. The
Task 1 a) and b) (see Appendix 6, Page 23) can actually serve as Step 2
of controlled practice and be reordered ahead of the Preparation for
task 1 and 2 which can serve as Step 3 of authentic listening practice
(the reordered version can be seen in Appendix 8). By reordering, Step 2
can work both as a review of Module 2 to provide enough scaffolding for
students and as a controlled practice to practice Useful language in Part B
(see Appendix 6, Page 22). By achieving this, Step 2 needs to be
modified a little by changing into a conversation where students work in
pairs to ask and answer brief questions such as what did happen to you
when you were a kid, when did it happen, how did it happen and etc to
help each other make a plan and a note of key words and phrases (see
Appendix 8). On the other hand, Step 3 of Preparation for task involves
an intensive listening practice which exposes students to a simulated
story-telling (Nunan, 2004: 31). Through this, students can incorporate
and extend useful language from Step 2.
Adding
11
Step 4 of Focus on linguistic elements is certainly of necessity for
students to produce a story by both speaking and writing later, although it
takes place relatively late in the sequence (Nunan, 2004). Having used
English within a communicative context, this linguistic focus can help
students to see the relationship between the meaning and the form
(Nunan, 2004) and can also raise students awareness of such relevant
grammar they need to produce a final story as Simple and Continuous
and Comparing past and present in Module 2 (see Appendix 6, Page 19
and 20). Therefore, at Step 4, relevant exercises have to be added or
expanded (McDonough and Shaw, 2003: 79).The supplemented
exercises can be seen in Appendix 9. In addition, Task 2 and Optional
writing will function as Step 5 of Provide freer practice and Step 6 of
Introduce the pedagogical task respectively.
Overall, through these adaptations, Module 2 can better fit the specific
needs of both the teacher and students in my context by presenting
materials efficiently by deleting, reasonably by modifying, clearing by
reordering and sufficiently by adding. Although there are clear areas of
overlap among these various techniques, they all serve to make
meaningful changes to content areas to make what the coursebook
actually offers better match what it claims. Finally, duo to the space limit
in the assignment, many other places in Module 2 can not be adapted. For
example, it would have been better to add another writing task of
summarizing All in the memory (see Appendix 6, Page 18) to let
students practice written skills more.
As discussed in Part B as a whole, of coursebook evaluation, adaptation
and supplementation, evaluation as an exercise can help us develop
insights into different views of language and learning especially useful
for inexperienced teachers. Designated as a supplementary coursebook
rather than a core one, it should not be expected to cover all needs of
university English teaching and learning, which means that other
materials are needed to compensate for this book. However, considering
the priority of practicing students productive skills claimed by the
coursebook, the teacher with it can make this expectation possible.
Besides, adaptation and
12
supplementation are made as stated above to make what it claims better
match what it actually offered in specific Chinese context. On the other