A Needs Analysis Approach to the Evaluation of Iranian Third-Grade High School English Textbook

Abstract

Needs analysis as an integral part of evaluative review of English materials, mainly textbooks, requires giving sufficient attention in all English language learning contexts. This issue seems to be more demanding in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) contexts where the textbooks are the main sources of input for the learners. However, in some cases, this important factor is excluded entirely or at least limited to the ideas of major stakeholders. This article reports on the findings of a study conducted to evaluate an English textbook (the third-grade high school English book), which is being used in all state high schools in Iran by using a needs analysis framework. First, the needs analysis questionnaires were administered among 180 third-grade female high school students for whom the textbook was designed. Having investigated the students' perceived foreign language needs, the researcher then used it as the basis for evaluating the textbook. The results of the textbook evaluation revealed that although all language skills and components were almost important for the majority of the students, the textbook could not fully support all of them together. Finally, it was suggested that the textbook be revised or at least supplemented by other instructional materials, so that it could be more effective for the aforementioned learners.

Teachers’ Perceptions of Students’ Needs in University Foundation Program

“…With the widespread interest in English for Specific Purposes (ESP), NA has been ushered as a major instrument to document, analyse and respond to learners' needs through language syllabi, instructions, and teaching methods (Rashidi & Kehtarfard, 2014). In parallel with the ever-growing interest in learners' needs in various learning contexts, NA is not confined to Language for Specific Purposes (LSP) contexts only.…”

“…Instantly, the focal study that could shed light on the incorporation of learners' communicative needs in teaching programs accentuates the skill-based approach in the process of curriculum design (Munby, 1978). Yet, among its limitations are the complexity and impracticality of the approach to be implemented in a learning context, particularly as it transforms learners' needs into sub-skills and sub-functions to be translated in the curriculum (Ha, 2005;Rashidi & Kehtarfard, 2014). Progressively other approaches to NA have been elaborated toward augmenting the practicality and addressing the gaps of the former approach.…”

Untitled

“…Several studies have been conducted on the evaluation of textbooks for discovering their points of strength and weakness (see Yarmohammadi, 2002;Jahangard, 2007;Riazi & Aryashokouh, 2007;Bahrami, 2011;Gholampour, Kasmani and Talebi, 2013;Azizifar and Baleghani, 2014). In addition, some researchers have tried to investigate touchstones for a rich evaluation in the textbook studies (see Ansary & Babaii, 2002;Razmjoo, 2007;Zare Moayedi, 2007;Riasati and Zare, 2010;Alemi and Hesami, 2013;Shabani and Nejad, 2013;Ansari and Babaii, 2013;Ahour, Towhidiyan and Saeidi, 2014;Rashidi and Kehtarfard, 2014).…”

“…Accordingly, the researchers` suggestion was either to revise the current textbooks or to adopt new ones. Through an evaluation process Rashidi and Kehtarfard (2014) analyzed third grade high school English textbooks in the Iranian context. They adopted a needs analysis approach in order to examine their content related to language skills and language components.…”

Untitled

“…Textbooks provide support for acquiring different levels and categories of knowledge. Among the elements of English Language Teaching (ELT) programs, textbooks are the main resources in reaching objectives (Litz, 2001, as cited in Rashidi & Kehtarfard, 2014). According to Riazi (2003, as cited in Razmjoo, 2007, "textbooks play a very crucial role in the realm of language teaching and learning and are considered the next important factor (element) [emphasis added] in the second/ foreign language classroom after the teacher" (p. 52).…”