© The Author 2013. Published by Oxford University Press; all rights reserved.

Review

Teaching Materials and the Roles of EFL/ESL Teachers: Practice and Theory

I. McGrath

Bloomsbury 2013, 240 pp., £70 (hardback)

isbn 978 1 4411 9060 4

McGrath’s latest book on teaching materials is distinctive in three main ways. It is, firstly, a monograph in a field dominated by edited volumes (recent ones by principal actors in the field include Harwood 2013 (forthcoming); Tomlinson 2013). Secondly, it has a determinedly practical focus, as represented by the precedence given in the subtitle of the book ‘practice and theory’ (italics added). Thirdly, while the book ‘jigsaws’ with a lot of the other recent literature on materials development, it is unusual in taking a different angle, a multidimensional approach. It examines the practices of materials evaluation and use from the perspectives of all the stakeholders: materials ‘users’—teachers, institutional managers, and including, importantly, learners—as well as those of publishers and writers. ‘Ultimately’, McGrath writes, ‘the book is about this web of relationships’ (p. xii).

The structure of the book reflects these multiple strands and interests. The Introduction launches the book with an engaging discussion of the relationship to materials of teachers, learners, and teacher educators. The three chapters in Part 1, ‘Theory’, give us ‘external perspectives’ on the literature in materials evaluation and design, from first publishers and writers (Chapter 2), then from ‘the professional community’, including, but not exclusive to, academics (Chapter 3),and finally from teacher educators (Chapter 4). Moving into the practical in Part 2, ‘Practice’, we get teachers’ views on first evaluation (Chapter 5), then on adaptation and supplementation (Chapter 6), moving lastly to the ‘very under-represented’ (p. 166) learner perspective on materials in Chapter 7. Comparison of Parts 1 and 2 in effect reveals gaps between

theory and practice; put succinctly ‘a gap between expectations of how teachers will interact with materials […] and what typically happens’ (p. 167). In Chapter 8, therefore, we have an attempt to explain and analyse reasons for these gaps in terms of contextual and individual factors. Part 3, finally, constitutes the vital synthesis section of the book, ‘Implications’. Having exposed teachers’ attitudes to, and use of, materials in the preceding parts of the book, Chapter 9 is an attempt to ‘broker’ the relationship between materials’ producers, teachers, and decision-makers, recommending informed decisions (including further research) for future materials development. In Chapter 10, the possibility of a more integrated teacher–materials relationship from the start is suggested, in the form of a blueprint for a teacher education course in materials evaluation and design. This movement from theory to practice, together with this ‘inclusive’ approach of consulting all the stakeholders, makes for some structural complexity (see also below). This is nevertheless part of the richness of the book, for McGrath draws on an impressive theoretical and empirical research base.

One aspect of this breadth of scope, and characteristic of his balanced approach, is that McGrath is at pains to present all sides of an argument. For instance, he lets this challenge to the validity of training teachers in materials design, that it should be ‘“a last resort, when all other possibilities of providing materials have been exhausted”‘ (Hutchinson and Waters 1987, cited on p. 125), hang provocatively in Chapter 3 (p. 76), despite his conviction, emerging early as one of the key implications of the book, that teachers should be trained in materials writing. McGrath likewise addresses the thorny issue of the ‘fit’ of the global coursebook to the diversity of geographical contexts in which it is used. He presents ‘localization’ arguments (that materials and teaching approaches need to be culturally familiar to the learners) countered against those of

ELT Journal Page 1 of 4

ELT Journal Advance Access published January 29, 2014 at B

elgorod State University on February 1, 2014

http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/D

ownloaded from

language learning as an experience that necessarily expands one’s knowledge and horizons. McGrath reprises another controversial issue, the often replayed but always entertaining ‘pros and cons of the coursebook’ debate, first in the Introduction, and, more developed with reference to teacher education, in Chapter 4. This leads, inevitably, to discussion of the Dogme in ELT movement (for example Thornbury 2000), where, it would appear, McGrath cannot resist throwing his hat into the ring ‘to deliberately deprive teachers and learners of potentially helpful aids seems not only perverse but also an abuse of power’ (p. 85).

A substantial part of the book, of course, is spent on exploring how to get the best out of the ‘potentially helpful aid’ that is the coursebook, via processes of evaluation, adaptation, and supplementation. In this regard, the book is a logical development from McGrath’s (2002) publication Materials Evaluation and Design for Language Teaching, albeit taking a broader sweep. The extensive list McGrath compiles of nearly 30 evaluation checklists that can be found in the literature (p. 55) is testament to an ongoing preoccupation with evaluation in the field of materials development. The finding that this fails to be transferred to practice, particularly in the selection of material for classroom use, is probably not unexpected (for the jaded practitioner!), but no less a concern, as McGrath concludes at the close of Chapter 5.

Turning next to adaptation, this is a ‘necessary and natural’ (p. 71) part of using materials, asserts McGrath. ‘“A textbook”’, he quotes Prodromou as saying, ‘“does not teach itself […]. It is the teacher, in collaboration with the class, who brings the material to life”’ (Prodromou 2002, cited on p. 27). As stressed frequently in the book, the coursebook is not a ‘script’ (p. 128). McGrath’s conclusion, with reference to Chapters 2 to 4 of the book, that ‘textbook writers, teacher educators and other commentators are united in their view that teachers should adapt materials, both those they are given and those they source themselves’ (p. 128) none the less seems a little at odds with the accounts of the painstaking process of coursebook development described in ‘the writer’s perspective’ in Chapter 2, and elsewhere in the materials development literature (for example Tomlinson 2011), and of the dispiriting experience of compromise in the process of editing (for example Mares 2003, cited on p. 39). This apart, in Chapter 3, McGrath looks at the reasons for adaptation as argued in the professional literature:

the need to localize, modernize, individualize/personalize, and humanize published materials. He then moves to a methodical analysis in Chapter 6 of when, what, and how teachers adapt materials; by selecting/omitting, by changing (localizing, simplifying, ‘complexifying’, converting), and, of course, by supplementing. McGrath points out that ‘very little has been written about supplementation’ (p. 71). This is partly because of its overlap with materials creation (indeed, the following section is ‘developing original materials’ (p. 75)). A broad view of supplementation, McGrath notes, is to see it as ‘having the potential to bridge an affective gap’ (p. 71), which stands, I think, as an ideal principle or starting point for devising supplementary material. As for the development of original materials, the book does not purport to a particular focus on original materials creation per se, although it offers a useful précis of works which do (in Chapter 3). It briefly reruns the teacher-expertise versus materials developer-expertise debate (with reference to Allwright 1981 for instance), though the dice is firmly loaded on the side of the teacher, and (in Chapter 4) this develops quickly into the argument for integrating materials writing into teacher education programmes, the central stance of the book, of course.

The most original and fascinating chapter of the book for me, was the one that arguably goes to the heart of the matter with respect to language learning material: ‘Learner perspectives’, Chapter 7. In this, McGrath combines two of his particular research interests, learners’ (and teachers’) responses to coursebooks (for example McGrath 2002, 2006), and learner-generated materials (McGrath 2013). While the learner perspective on the materials they use has been relatively neglected, as noted above, what research there has been demonstrates that learners are discriminating; sensitive, for instance, to the ‘fake and irrelevant’ (p. 151). Authentic materials are not, according to research reported by McGrath, the only answer to this, for students’ attitudes to them can vary. While contrasting with some of the research to come out of the field (for example Mishan 2005), this shows the importance of cultivating, and taking into consideration, the views of the learner. With this in mind, McGrath reminds us of his 2006 research in which he sought learners’ (and teachers’) images of coursebooks via the prompt ‘a coursebook is …’. Ranging from the predictable ‘a coursebook is a teacher’ to the bizarre ‘a coursebook is a professional killer’, these images certainly stick in the memory, but

Page 2 of 4 Review

at Belgorod State U

niversity on February 1, 2014http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/

Dow

nloaded from

more importantly reveal how reflective learners are. What is also significant about the findings in this research is that learners are far more critical of coursebooks than teachers, which McGrath takes as being due ‘either to selection of an inappropriate coursebook or to the way in which the teacher uses the book’ (p. 155). This is further substantiation, of course, for the need for teacher training in materials use, or indeed, might be an argument for handing over materials generation to the learner; the subject of the final part of this chapter. Still quite a niche area, some studies suggest that the experience of learner-generated materials (ranging from peer correction to devising teaching materials) is enjoyable, motivating, and empowering, instilling ‘a sense of ownership’ (p. 163).However, results also reveal that learners distinguish between enjoyment and value. Some students still underrate peer feedback, etc. in preference to that of the teacher; an attitude that could be attributed, McGrath hazards, to ‘educational conditioning’ (p. 166).

The ambitious concept of the book, layering practice on to theory and integrating the perspectives of multiple stakeholders, understandably has resulted in quite a complex internal structure. The multilayered approach can seem somewhat cyclical, as themes are revisited from first the ‘theoretical’ then ‘practical’ perspectives. (Supplementation and adaptation, to give one example, are introduced in Chapter 3, and reprised in Chapter 6.) This makes for a lot of cross-referencing (admittedly, always a bugbear of academic writing) and consequently for some ‘toing’ and ‘froing’ in the book for anyone researching on a single theme. A more comprehensive index would perhaps have rendered the interconnections easier to access.

On the other hand, this structure means that the issues of central concern in the book emerge all the more strongly: the role of materials; the relationships of stakeholders—most centrally, teachers and learners—with them; the effective use of materials, in terms of interpretation, selection, evaluation, and adaptation; and the necessity of training teachers in these processes.

This last is not unexpected given the author’s involvement with teacher education, and as with other volumes in the field (for example Mishan and Chambers 2010), this is a core premise of the book:

… language learning materials are such a key element in the teaching–learning encounter that consideration of their selection, use and design

cannot be consigned to the periphery of a teacher education programme […] materials evaluation and design should be a central (core) component of both pre-service and post-experience postgraduate programmes. (p. 100)

The discipline forms part, McGrath argues, of the sort of reflective practice that is ‘a defining characteristic of teacher professionalism’ (p. 77). McGrath ultimately succeeds, as he sets out to do, in making ‘a compelling argument’ (p. xii) for putting materials design at the centre of teacher education; the strength of the case made in the book is, I would suggest, one measure of its achievement. The case is consolidated in the concluding chapter ‘Implications for teacher educators: a practice-based proposal’, which suggests a framework for a teacher training course in materials evaluation and design. The only comparable one of which I am aware is Tomlinson’s (Chapter 27 of his edited 2003 volume) and like Tomlinson’s, McGrath’s will prove extremely useful for those educators—hopefully in increasing numbers—planning such programmes.

This ‘hands-on’ concluding chapter is the exception rather than the rule in a book that principally describes practice. Indeed, it is this aspect that stimulates reflection and will make the book such a valuable resource for postgraduate students, researchers, and teacher educators in the area of TESOL. What it reveals about how coursebooks are actually used will also make it salutary reading for publishers and coursebook writers. With his measured tone and a balanced approach which takes into consideration all sectors of the language teaching community, McGrath gives us a very readable, thought-provoking, and welcome addition to the steadily growing body of literature on materials development.

ReferencesAllwright, D. 1981. ‘What do we want teaching materials for?’. ELT Journal 36/1: 5–18.Harwood, N. (ed.). 2013 (forthcoming). English Language Teaching Textbooks: Content, Consumption, Production. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.Hutchinson, T. and A. Waters. 1987. English for Specific Purposes: A Learning-Centred Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Mares, C. 2003. ‘Writing a coursebook’ in B. Tomlinson (ed.). Developing Materials for Language Teaching. London: Continuum.

Review Page 3 of 4

at Belgorod State U

niversity on February 1, 2014http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/

Dow

nloaded from

McGrath, I. 2002. Materials Evaluation and Design for Language Teaching. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.McGrath, I. 2006. ‘Teachers’ and learners’ images for coursebooks’. ELT Journal 60/2: 171–80.McGrath, I. 2013. ‘Can primary age pupils produce teaching materials?’ in O. Alexander (ed.). New Approaches to Materials Development for Language Learning. Proceedings of the 2005 Joint BALEAP/SATEFL Conference. Bern: Peter Lang.Mishan, F. 2005. Designing Authenticity into Language Learning Materials. Bristol: Intellect Books.Mishan, F. and A. Chambers (eds.). 2010. Perspectives on Language Learning Materials Development. Oxford: Peter Lang.Prodromou, L. 2002. ‘The great ELT textbook debate’. Modern English Teacher 11/4: 25–33.Thornbury, S. 2000. ‘A dogme for ELT’. IATEFL Issues 153/2: 2.Tomlinson, B. (ed.). 2003. Developing Materials for Language Teaching. London: Continuum.

Tomlinson, B. (ed.). 2011. Materials Development in Language Teaching (second edition). London: Cambridge University Press.Tomlinson, B. (ed.). 2013. Applied Linguistics and Materials Development. London: Bloomsbury.

The reviewerFreda Mishan is Course Director of the Structured PhD in TESOL at the University of Limerick, Ireland, where she also lectures on the MA in TESOL. She is editor of the MATSDA (Materials Development Association) journal Folio. Her research interests include Blended Learning, and her publications in the area of materials development include Designing Authenticity into Language Learning Materials (2005) and a forthcoming book, co-authored with Dr Ivor Timmis of Leeds Metropolitan University, Materials Development for TESOL.Email: freda.mishan@ul.iedoi:10.1093/elt/cct066

Page 4 of 4 Review

at Belgorod State U

niversity on February 1, 2014http://eltj.oxfordjournals.org/

Dow

nloaded from