The value of the coursebook as an indispensable component of
the language teaching operation in educational contexts is questioned by some
scholars such as Thornbury and Meddings (2001) who contested that a learner
does not need a coursebook.
Maybe other subjects - like geography or history, or
mathematics - do need textbooks, but we're not sure that language does. For a
start, language is not a subject - it is a medium. Giving language subject
status by basing the teaching of it around books is a sure way of paralyzing
its capacity to convey messages (parag. 4).
Thus, considering language as a medium of communication,
there is no need for intervening in the process. Indeed, Thornbury and Meddings
(2001) are suggesting approaching language differently in educational
institutions by separating it from subjects taught using coursebooks as it is
not a subject but a medium. They argue that among the drawbacks of coursebooks
are their embodiment of cultural values and their distortion of preferred
learning strategies and styles effective with particular learners. They claim
also that the problem of coursebooks is that they are designed for tremendously
different users.
[Textbooks] have subtexts - the dissemination of
cultural and educational values that may have little to do with the needs of
the learner of English as an International Language - and may even
serve to "undermine the alternative styles of thinking, learning, and
interacting preferred by local communities" (Thornbury and Meddings, 2001,
parag. 5, italics in original).
Thornbury and Meddings (2001) condemn textbooks for two
reasons. First, they consider textbooks to incorporate hidden ideologies, or
what they called `subtexts', that could be irrelevant to diverse learners
around the world. Second, they contend that textbooks might impose alien
learning styles and distort locally preferred strategies effective with
particular learners.
However, every discourse is loaded with culture (Wardough,
1989) and it is impossible to learn a language without learning the culture
inherent in it (Valdes, 1991, p. 20). This issue will be focus of section
2.3.
With reference to English language textbooks, Canagarajah
(1999) contends that the situations the textbooks provide represent only
western norms of communication and, especially in role-playing, the dialogues
«confront students with certain cultural biases regarding appropriate
language use» (p. 86). Moreover, although he states that EFL coursebooks
do not overtly promote a particular ideology, Rinvolucri (1999) asserts that
«UK EFL writers' topic choice and treatment is powerfully ideological,
precisely because of its avoidance of any specific ideological statement»
(p. 7). Viney (2000) replied criticising Rinvolucri's (1999) stance by arguing
that it is an ambiguous philosophical position to say that UK EFL coursebooks
are ideological because they do not contain an ideology. It seems to be worth
noting that if every textbook is bound to contain culture and ideology
(Valdes,
1991; Rinvolucri, 1999), learners' perception of these
problematic issues are also bound to be considered in the design as well as the
selection of coursebooks.
Additionally, Thornbury and Meddings' (2001) criticism of
coursebooks covers even what coursebooks are assumed to be `good' at; that, is
activities. They argue, in fact, that these activities are nothing but
«passivities, serving merely to put words into [learners'] mouths
rather than serving as vehicles for the communication of their own
meanings» (parag. 8, italics in original). What is meant by this position
is that coursebooks deprive teachers from investing the lives of the learners
in teaching, which is highly important for effective learning, by basing the
teaching on non-interesting mechanical pre-identified drills (Swain, 1992).
Swain (1992) emphasises the importance of stimulating rather than simulating in
the sense that it is more important if the teacher starts from learners' own
experiences.
In response to the claims about the importance of coursebooks
in providing a coherent syllabus, Thornbury and Meddings' (2001) state
ironically that «[c]oursebook syllabuses have about as much relation to
learning processes as the night sky does to whether you will be healthy,
wealthy or wise» (parag. 9). This position from Thornbury and Meddings'
(2001) is labelled by Harwood (2005) a «strong view [advocating] the
abandonment of all commercial materials per se» (p. 150).
In fact, there is no clear cut evidence that learners learn
exactly in the same order and at the tempo presented in coursebooks (Thornbury
& Meddings, 2001), which weakens the idea that ELT coursebooks are
advantageous for providing a coherent syllabus that correlates with learning
processes. It is for this reason that Thornbury and Meddings' (2001) condemn
the use of coursebooks and suggest using other materials such as real books,
magazines, and newspaper.
The coursebook is sometimes considered the syllabus by
learners and teachers (Harwood, 2005, p. 152). While this misunderstanding is,
evidently, the result of learners' ignorance of ELT pedagogy, teachers consider
the coursebook as the syllabus in order to make their job easier regardless of
the limitations of coursebooks to deal with the needs of their specific
learners and regardless of the content of the material (Block, 1991; Howard
& Major, 2004). This claim is also illustrated in Apple's (1989) confession
that «in most cases [the coursebook] (...) becomes the `real
curriculum'» (p. 282).
In addition, it is argued that total reliance on the
coursebook «removes initiative and power from teachers» (Tomlinson,
2001) as a result of promoting what could be termed a `wild' understanding of
the idea of learner autonomy. In fact, promoting learner autonomy to the extent
of marginalising the teacher could hinder them from receiving a coherent and
relevant syllabus that is distinct from the coursebook. Talking about the
inconvenience of not separating the syllabus from the coursebook Toms (2004)
argues that «to allow a General English coursebook to serve as de
facto syllabus is to short change our students. It is to do them, and
ourselves, a grave disservice» (parag. 16, italics in original).
Syllabuses are expected to be designed for specific learners
while coursebooks, especially commercial ones, like the coursebook explored in
the present study, are designed to meet the needs of target audiences that are
as diverse as learners around the globe (Thornbury, 2002; Hill, 2005). As put
by Toms (2004), «A General English coursebook will not, cannot, and should
not take the place of a syllabus designed to meet the specific needs of
specific learners in a specific situation» (parag. 12).
McGrath (2006) investigated, using metaphors, views as to
coursebooks. One of the viewpoints of learners was that a coursebook is
«an angry barking dog that frightens me in a language I don't
understand». Such a view shows the inconveniency of using inauthentic
language. Exploring learners' attitudes towards the
coursebook they use is important to understand the way they perceive it. This
issue will be covered in the present study as part of answering the second
research question.
The present study has similarity with a study conducted by
Bashogh (1993) who, investigating the way language, neutrality, and ideology
are addressed in three major ELT coursebooks discourse critically, found
that
[T]extbooks idealise communication as involving social equals
with little regard for inequality or struggles faced by learners [which makes
them] a medium of market ideology with little attempt to develop critical
language awareness on the part of the textbook user (p. 3).
Such finding shows how the content of ELT global coursebooks
could be distorted as a result of trying to find compromises that fit global
audiences. An ironical, but expressive, picture about the contradiction between
the reality of the learners and the reality invested in ELT global coursebooks
is the one drawn by Canagarajah (1999). Canagarajah (1999) criticised Sri
Lankan teachers' use of the American Kernel (O'Neil, Yeadon, &
Cornelius, 1978) coursebook which reflects only western middle class life while
the Sri Lankan government aircrafts are attacking Tamil Tigers outside the
classrooms.
Canagarajah (1999) calls for making the content of ELT
materials closer to the everyday situations of particular local learners by
investing in users' own local worries and aspirations. The point seems to be
that authenticity, in the Sri Lankan context, contradicts the principles of
providing `aspirational content' and the guidelines of avoiding politics (Gray,
2002) in the content of global coursebooks.
For Nunan (1985) authenticity is the use of materials that
are not designed essentially for language teaching (qtd in Nunan, 1988, p. 99).
Martinez (2002) documents nine advantages for authentic content that are
summarised below:
· Exposure to real everyday language
· Informing learners about current events
· Diversifying tasks, materials, and topics
· Encouraging incidental learning
Martinez's (2002) advantages of content authenticity suggest
it as an indispensable principle to be taken into consideration when designing
ELT coursebooks viewing its importance in providing real input, cultivating,
and motivating learners (Kilickaya, 2004b).
However, authenticity could be considered a problematic
notion, as what is authentic for a group of learners, textbook writers, and
teachers in a particular place may not be so for other learners in regions as
diverse as five continents. This fact challenges the claims about the
«globality» of global ELT coursebooks.
Authenticity in content could be understood as the use of
topics, images, and tasks directly and purely taken from real life of a given
speech community regardless of cultural appropriacy problems (Martinez, 2002;
kilickaya, 2004b). However, authenticity could not be absolute in global
coursebooks as there are other principles to take into consideration such as
avoiding inappropriacy and preserving inclusivity, which are to be dealt with
subsequently. For example, cohabitation is authentic but its use is
inappropriate for some cultures (Phillipson, 1992; Viney, 2000). This means
that mentioning the issue of cohabitation is controversial for some cultures
although «authentic» in the sense of being part of real life in many
societies.
In order to avoid the drawbacks of `authenticity', textbook
writers eliminate problematic aspects or whatever may be considered
inappropriate (Gray, 2002). This was known as sanitisation of content, which
means publishers' attempt to produce politically correct coursebooks that are
as empty as possible of controversial references (Toms, 2004). This issue will
be dealt with in section 2.3.
As a conclusion, coursebooks are documented to be beneficial
and at the same time disadvantageous for learners and learning especially for
cultural reasons, which is the main concern of this study. For this reason the
place of culture in global coursebooks will be explored in the following
section.
