Luận văn an evaluation of the appropriateness of material elementary market leader for hanoi university of business and technology

1987 ‘Teachers’ Opinions of the Appropriateness of the Material to the Students’ Level of English Teachers’ Opinions on the Difficulty of Different Parts of the Material Students’ Asses

NGUYEN TIT TOU TEN

AN EVALUATION OF THE APPROPRIATENESS OF MATERIAL “ELEMENTARY MARKET-LEADER” FOR HANOL

UNIVERSITY OF BUSINESS AND TECLINOLOGY

(HÁNH GIÁ ĐỘ PHÙ HỢP CỦA GIÁO TRINH “ELEMENTARY MARKET LEADER” BOI VOL

'TRƯỜNG DẠI HỌC KINH DOANT VÀ CÔNG NGITE TTA NOT)

M.A Minor Program ‘Thesis

Field: Methodology

Code: 601410

TIANOI — JULY, 2009

NGUYEN THI THU AIEN

AN EVALUATION OF THE APPROPRIATENESS OF MATERIAL “ELEMENTARY MARKET-LEADER” FOR HANOI

UNIVERSITY OF BUSINESS AND TECHNOLOGY

(ĐÁNH GIÁ ĐỘ PHÙ HOP CUA GIAO TRINH “ELEMENTARY MARKET-LEADER" BOI VOL

"TRƯỜNG ĐẠI HỌC KINH DOANH VÀ CÔNG NGHỆ HÀ NỘI)

M.A Minor Program Thesis

1, BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY AND STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

2 AIMS OF THE THESIS

3, SIGNIFICANCE OF THE THESIS

4, THE RESEARCH QUESTIONS:

5 THE SCOPE OF THE STUDY

6, OVERVIEW OF THE THESIS

DEVELOPMENT

CHAPTER ONE: UTERATURE REVIEW

1.1 MATERIALS IN LANGUAGE TEACHING AND LEARNING

1.1.1 The Roles of Teaching Materials

1.1.2 ypes of Materials

1.1.2.1 Texthooks

1.1.2.2 In-house Materials

1.2 MATERIALS EVALUATION

1.2.1 Reasons for Materials valuation

1.2.2 Definitions of Materials Evaluation

1.2.3 Typas of Materials Evaluation

1.2.4, Models for Materlals Evaluation

1.2.5 Criteria for Materials Evaluation

1.3 MATERIALS ADAPTATION

1.3.1, The Context of Adaptation

1.3.2 Reasons tor Adaptation

1.3.3 Techniques for Adaptation

CHAPTER TWO: METHODOLOGY

2.1 THE SETTING OF THE STUDY

2.2, THE MATERIAL ELEMENTARY MARKET-LEADER USED FOR FRESHMEN AT HUBT

2.4, DATA COLLECTION METHODS

2.4, DATA COLLECTION PROCEDURE

2.4.1, Document Analysis

2.4.2, Student Questionnaire

2.4.3, The Teacher Interviews

2.8, SUBJECTS OF THE RESEARCH

3.2.1 Teaching and Learning Techniques

3.3.1 The Appropriateness of the Material to the Students’ Level of English

3.3.2 The Appropriateness of the Material to the Methadolagy Requirements of the Course

CONCLUSION

1 ADAPTATIONS

1.1 The Difficulty af the Material

1.2 The Guidance and Support fram the Material for Teachers

BL 3L

TAST OF ABBREVIATIONS,

HUBT Hanoi University of Business and Tzchnology

LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES

Slages in the L'SP Process (Qudley-E vars: and St John, 1998 121)

Materials Evaluation Process (Hutchinson & Waters 1987)

‘Teachers’ Opinions of the Appropriateness of the Material to the Students’ Level of English

Teachers’ Opinions on the Difficulty of Different Parts of the Material Students’ Assessment of the Difficult Sections in the Material

Studcnls* Opinions on the Reasons Why Some Scelions are Difficult Teaching and Learning Techniques Used and Suited to the Students Teachers” Evaluation of the Guidance and Support from the Material

This chapter is aimed at providing a theoretical base to develop an operational framework for the evaluation of the material “Lilementary Market-Leader” currently used for first-year students of business majors at Ilanoi University of Business and Technology (HUBT),

‘The first part inthis chapter relates to teaching materials with regards to their roles

in language (saching and lypes of materials The second part pressnis the review of literature concerning major issues in materials evaluation, model tor evaluation and criteria for evaluation ‘The third part disonsses some important issues about materials adaptation

1.1 MATERIALS IN LANGUAGE TEACIIENG AND LEARNING

1.1.1 The Roles of Teaching Materials

Teaching materials are a key component in most language programs According to Dudley Evans & St John (1998), materials are used in all teaching and their role in the process of language teaching and learning is of greal imporlance

Nunan (1988) also mentions the vital role of teaching materials as follows

“Materials are in fact an essential element within the curriculum, wid do auore than sitmply

lubricate the wheels of Icaming At their best they provide concrete models of desirable classroom practice, they act as curriculum models for teachers to follow in developing their

own materials.” (p.98)

‘The roles of teaching materials in language teaching in general and in ESP in

particular will be discussed in morte details in the next parl of this section

= The Role of Teaching Materials in General English Course

The important roles that teaching taterials play in Tonguage teaching are mentioned by different authors in the literature, Richards and Rodgers (cited in Nunan,

1991) view instructional materials as detailed specifications of content, and guide to

tcachers on both the intensity of coverage and the amount of attention demanded by

input that the leamers received and as the source for mmch of the language practice that ovens in the classroom, Richard further explains thal materials provide a basic for the content of the lesson, the balance of skills taught, and the kind of language practice students take part in

+ The Role of Teaching Materials in ESP Course

Dudley-vans and St John (1998) have summed up four functions of teaching materials in ESP conse: as a source of langnage, as a learning support, as a source of

tnotivation and stinmilation and as a source for reference

As a learning support:

‘Asa leaming support, materials need to be reliable, that is, to work, to be consistent and have some recognizable pattern ‘To enhance learning, materials must involve leamers

in thinking about and using the Tangnags The activitics need Lo stimmiate cognitive, nol

mechanical prog s The learners also need a st ¢ of progression

As a source for stimulation and motivation:

In order to stimulate and motivate students, malcrials need to bs “challenging yet achievable, to offar new ideas and information whilst being grounded in the learners” experience and knowledge” (Oudley-Evans & St John, 1998: 172) ‘They farther explain thal the inpul must contain concepts and/ or knowledge thal are famniliar to Ihe learners, but

it must also offer something new, a reason for the learners to communicate and to get

involved.

John (1998), the materials need to be “complete, well laid out and self-explanatory” (p172) In other words, the materials need to provide explanations, examples and practice

Obviously, icaching materials arc a key and crucial component in any language teaching contexts The teacher needs to take account of the roles as well as the requirements of teaching materials when designing and selecting materiats for his or her

own teaching situation to facilitate the most Icarning form students

1.1.2 Types of Muterials

1.1.2.1 Textbooks

Textbooks refer to the commercially published malctials, The most obvious advantage of these materials is its availability for use O’Neil (cited in Robinson, 1991) believes that no other medium is as easy to use as textbook More importantly, “a textbook

is complete nol just ir Ihe physical sc

However, textbooks also have some limitations Ewer and Boys (cited in Robinson, 1991)

present a slrong allack on published lexthooks that some really fundamental factors of textbooks such as the validity of the linguistic content, the accuracy of the explanations and examples given, the mumber and coverage of the exercises provided have been ignored

bocause the wrilers just focus on approach and methodology Morcover, as Swal

Robinson, 1991) indicates published textbooks are “less-sufficient in practice materials and

(cited in

in coverage of skill areas” (p57) so the textbooks need to be supplemented by other

to Robinson (1991), there are throo advantages of in-house matarials Firslly, inhouse materials are Hkely (a be more specific and appropriate than public textbooks and ta lave greater face validity in terms of the language dealt with and the context it is presented in, Secondly, in-house materials may be more flexible than published textbooks, Finally, the writer of in-house materials can make sure that mcthodology is suitable for the intended learners Despite advantages of in-house materials, there are some disadvantages Robinson (1991) indicates thal making in-house mmlerials is lime-oomsuming and expensive, what is worst is that many locally produced materials “show a striking resemblance to the published materials that have been rejected” (Swales, cited in

Robinsor, 1991: 58)

1.2, MATERIALS EVALUATION

1.2.1 Reasons for Materials Evaluation

Materials evaluation cannot be apart fiom a language training program ‘here are many reasons that language course organivers and teachers worldwide are cormecied with when they conduct materials evaluation

On discussing the problem, Ellis (1997) points out that the need for materials evaluation retrospectively takes on special imporlance Such an evaluation provides teachers with information which ean be used to determined whether it is worthwhile using the materials again, which activities “work” and which do not, and how to modify the materials to make them more effective for firture use”

In ESP, according to Dudley-Evans and St John (1998), matcrials evaluation is an indispensable part of the key stages in ESP process (See Figure 1)

Evaluation ——— » Need analysis

™

Xu xxx-

the classroom, teaching materials need to be evaluated to see if they have worked well for the intended siluation and audicnee

Materials should be evaluated to identify particular strengths and weaknesses; it will help to determine whether the materials are effective and efficient On that basis,

decisions can be made on whether Lo usc the materials or not and whet should be changed

so that the materials can be well suited tor the course

1.2.2, Definitions of Materials Evaluation

There is a wide range of different definitions of materials evaluation from different researchers This section is a review of the definitions fiom outstanding researchers in order to bring an overview of materials evaluation

Brown (1987) states

“Evaluation is the systenmlic collection and analysis of all relevant information nevessary to

promote the improvement of curricuinm and assess its cttcctivencss within the context of

particular situation involved” (p.223)

Dudley-Fvans & SL John believe thal evaluation is a complete process “which

begins with determining what information to gather and ends with bringing about change

in curtent activities or influencing future ones” (p.128)

Of the most prominent definitions of evaluation is the one by Hutchinson & Waters (1987)

“Evaluation is a madter of judging the Gilness of something for a particular purpose Given

certain need and in the light of resources available, which out of a number of possibilities can represent the best solution? Evabiation is, then, concerned with relative merit There is no

absolute good or bad, only degree of fitness for the required purpose” (Hutchinson & Waters,

1987)

From the general definitions of cvaluation and the definition of a specific arca of

materials evaluation, it can be inferred that materials evaluation involves the determination

of what ned lo be evalnaled, the objectives and requirements of the materials, the judgment of the value of materials being evaluated i relation to the objectives and

requirements determined.

1.2.3 Types of Materials Evaluation

Robinson (1991) suggests three types of materials evaluation: prelimiary,

summative, and farmative Il is noted that the first two types are likely ta focus on

published or at least completed materials, and the third on in-house materials Preliminary

evaluation takes place before the course begins and involves selecting the most appropriate

from the publications that sre available Formative cvaluation is conducted while the

course is ongoing, so that modifications can be made to the materials Meanwhile,

summative evaluation takes place at the end of a course and raises the question of whether

the materials have been effective

Ellis (1997) introduces two new terms related to types of materials cvaluation:

predictive and retrospective Predictive evaluation is designed to make a decision regarding what materials to use while retrospective evaluation examines the materials that

have actually been used

Recently, ‘Tomlinson (1998, p3) has referred to three notions pre-use, while-use

and post-use when classifying types of materials evaluation Pre-use evaluation predicts

whether materials will work, and whether the learners will be able to use them without too

much difficulty and will enjoy the experience of doing so While-use evaluation examines how materials really work in the classroom Moreover, post-use evaluation aims to find out how actually effective they are

Although the different terms are used to indicate the types of materials evaluation,

they are basically similar larst, preliminary, predictive and pre-use evaluations involve a

process lo scareh for good mutcrials Next, formative and while-use valuations deseribe

how materials are being exploited Certainly, stmmmative, retrospective, and post-use

evaluations are all used to determine how effectively materials have been used

As Weir & Robert (1994) suggest, it was agreed that, owing to the aims of

evaluation, a formative style or on-gomg evaluation using qualitative data would be

suitable for evaluating the materials thus, in this study, the researcher uses formative evaluation ax the main type of materials evaluation,

1.2.4 Models for Materials Evaluation

There are a mamber of different ideas on designing a reliable framework of

materials evaluation The popular frameworks are the one sugested by Hutchinson &

Waters (1987), Litsjohm (1998), Mc Donough and Shaw (1993) Caningsworth (1984) and Ellis (1997) However, in this the:

= Defining criteria

Subjective analysis (1c tho analysis of the course in torms of taalcrials requirements)

Objective analysis (i.e the analysis of materials being evaluated)

On what bases will you judge materials?

‘Which criteria will be more important?

mm

What realizations of the criteria do How docs the neiterial being

yon wanl in your course? evaluated realize the criteria?

the success of a particular activity or a whole set of materials if there is no clear objective

for it

According to the diagram above, it is very important to set out the criteria tor both

objective and subjective analysis IIutchinson & Waters (1987) shows for basic oriteria with a munber of specific poinis for evalualors to consider: intended audience, aims,

coment, and methodology

‘The first point, intended audience, is the analysis of the learners’ personal

jdenlification, such as the Icarner’s age,

specialism and their educational backgrounds

‘The next basic criterion deals with the aims of the course and the materials

x, inlerests, specialism, knowledge of English’

The third criterion, content, is (he most important point since it helps evaluators lo

have an overview of both course requirements for materials content and the content treatment of those materials When analyzing the content subjectively and objectively, researchers should focus on @ number of such sub-criteria as language description, language points, maoro-skills and their proportion, micro-skills, text types, subject matter

areas, topics, content organization, and sequence

Methodblngy, the 1x1 crilerion for both subjective and objective analysis concerns the theories of learning, the learners’ attitudes to learning English, types of tasks/ exercises, teaching-learning techmeues, learning facilities, guidance’ support for teaching, and the

ffexibitily of the materials

1.2.5, Criteria for Materials Evaluation

Criteria are what evaluators use to “reach a decision regarding what needs to be evaluated” (Tomlinson, 1998: 220), In other words, they arc the bases upon which the evaluators depend when making judgments, Defining criteria for evaluation is one of the crucial issues evaluators must take info account before any evaluation can take place

The following is the crilsria suggested hy Hutchinson and Walcrs” chevklist for

inaterials evaluation

Audience

According to Hutchinson and Waters (1993), in the leaming-centered approach to ESP, the overall aim of the ESP course is to meet the needs of a particular group of

learners I4SP materials rmmst therefare be designed or selected according to the needs of

the specific toarmers So the frst criteria in neiterials evalmlion is the audience of the materials with regard to different kinds of information such as age; sex; study or professional fields, status with respect to professional fields; knowledge of English, of area

of work or stuty and of the world, educational background; inlerest and so on

Aims

In any language course, a materials evaluation need to be carried out to find out if

the materials can satisfy the aims and objectives of the course

Content

According to Hulehinsun and Walcrs, il is really necessary lo measur: if the content of the materials is suitable to the content requirements of the course in terms of language description, language points, proportion of work, micro-skills, text-types, macro- skills and proportion In ESP, it is very important to take into consideration the learners? subject-matters in terms of level of knowledge, types of topics, and how these topics are presented Finally, these evaluations need to find out if the way the content is organized and sequenced within a unit and throughout the course is appropriate

Methodology

Many aspects in terms of malerials methodology need to be evaluated First of all, the evaluation needs to indicate whether the theories of learning on which the couse is based are in line with the one of material under evaluation Secondly, evaluators need to measure whether the Icarnors? expectations abonl, learning arc the oncs the materials are intended for, Thirdly, it is ne

Within a small-scale study, the evaluator would like to concentrate on evaluating

the appropriateness of the material to the students” level of inglish and to the requirements

of methodotogy of the course, In other words, the rescarcher examines the suitability of the material “Elementary Market-Leadex” with first-years students of HUBT on the following paints:

3 Appropriateness of the meierial lo the students” level of inglish

- The difficulty of the material

= Appropriateness of the material to the methodology requirements of the course

= The suitability

students,

of the teaching and learning tockmiques of the material ta the

- ‘The guidance and support from the material for teachers

1.3 MATERIALS ADAPTATION

According to Richard et ai (1992, p.5), “adaptation is a process of making, changes

to published texts or materials to make them more suitable or appropriate for a particular

teaching needs” Certainly, there is no perfect texthook, which can bs relevant to all teaching and learning context, thus, adaptation is a very necessary process to maximize the appropriacy of teaching materials in particular context by changing some of the intemal

characteristics of a textbook or sct of materials to better suit our situation

1.3.1 The Context af Adaptation

Mac Donough and Shaw argue that with a wider perspective in mind, and as a starting point for thinking about the process of adaptation, it will be uscful to oxtend little the criteria put forward to the heading of “external” and “internal”

External factors comprise both the over claims made about materials and more significantly for the present chapter, the characteristics of particular teaching situations Intemmal factors we concerned with content, organization and consistency, To adapl materials is to try to tring together these individual elements under each heading, or

combination of them, so that they match each other as closely as possible

Adaptation is an essential process of mmiching Tis purpose is to maximize the appropriateness for leading materials in context by changing some of the intemal characteristics of a course book to better suit our particular circumstance We will now look in mors details at possible reasons for adaptation, and some of the procedures

commonly used

1.3.2 Reasons for Adaptation

According to Mc Donongh and Shaw (1993), the followings are the possible arcas, which are often taken into account in adaptation:

1 There is not enough grammar coverage in general

2 There is not enough practice of grammar points of particular difficulty to these learners

3 Reading passages conlain too much unknown vocabulary

4, Comprchension questions are too easy because the answers cant be difted dircelly from the text with no real understanding of the text,

S Subject matters are inappropriate for learners of this age and intellectual leve

6 Photographs and other illustrative mmlerials arc not culturally acceptable

Amount of material is too much’ too little to cover in the time allocated to lessons

8 There is no guidance for teachers on handling group work and role play activities with

a large class

9 There is too much or too little variety in the activities

10 There is no vocabulary Hst or a key to exercises provided

The reasons fir adplation presented above can be grouped inlo (a) espects of language use, (b) skills, (c) classroom organization, and () supplementary materials Me Donough and Shaw states that more adaptation areas can be added to this list; however, the

arcas should he identified according to certain contexts

1.3.3 Techniques for Adaptation

Walla

(1998, p 190) introduced two following ways to adapt materials

*1, Rolain the materials basically ax Ley are, bul Leach hem im a different way (Le cilher

different trom the way yon normally teach them, or from the way recommended in the

Teacher's book

3 Change the materials in some ways, for example by devising new materials either instead of

or in addition Lo sume parts of the existing muterials.”

Mc Donough and Shaw (1993) suggest five main techniques for adaptation: modifying, simplifying, adding, deleting, and reordering,

+ Modifying

This technique can be applied to any aspect of content It is subdivided inte two specific ways: re-writing and re-structuring, Re-wiiting refers to the modification of the linguistic content, For example, if casy end-oftext comprehension questions just require the students 10 use information directly from the text to answer, they can be modified so

thal students have ta interpret whal they have read or relate different section of the text

together, Re-structuuing, unlike re-writing, applies to classroom management, specifically,

to the structuring of the class, For example, there are some role-play activities for groups

of certain size in the materials Lf students are in a large class, if is necessary to assign one

intended area

Deleting or Omitting

Addition and deletion work together in the sense that part of a text or an exercise

may be taken out and then replaced with something else of the same type Moreover, as

task may be detzied and cornpansatad by a more suitable onc lo meet Ure objzolives of the

whole unit, So it is necessary to take mto consideration the balance of the lesson as well as the time allocation when these techniques of adaption are applied

+ Reordering

This technique refers to the possibility of arranging the parts of a course book ina different order This can be the adjustment of the sequence within a unit, or even the arrangcment of difitrent units ina course book

In general, adaptation is a practical activity carried out by teachers in order to make

the teaching taleria

s more Tel mil and approprials for a particular gronp of tearners The

responsibility of the teacher is to decide which features of the material need to be changed, and choose the most suitable techniques to adapt the material in use

Tơ sum up, this chapler has discussed tha theoretical issi

CHAPTER TWO: METHODOLOGY

This chapter provides a description of the setting of the study, the subjects participating in the study, the instruments for collecting data inchiding questionnaires and

interviews, and the pracedure of data collection

2.1 THE SETTING OF THE STEDV

‘The study was conducted at Hanoi University of Business and ‘Technology (HUBT), Onc questionnaire was distribuled lo 120 firsl-yoar students and coltcoted at the University during the survey The process or semi-structure interview was also carried out

at the same time among1) teachers of HUBT

Sinoo the study was conducled at HUBT, il is uccossary for the rescarcher ta outline the current situation of teaching and leaming the material “Elementary Market- Leader” at the university as the setting for the study

The subjects of the study are first-year students at IIUBT who have passed the entrance cxam into the university, which was administered in accordance with the principles set by the Ministry of Education, ‘I'he students, however, have very different backgrounds Most of them come from the couulry while some olhers are from the cities Some have learnt English for 7 years, while some others have had three years with English Also, a number of them had qnite focused on English for they chose to take the university enlrance exara with an English lest whereas the rest took (he exarn withoul an Frgtish tes!

‘As a result, when they are grouped into the same class, they vary in not only English proficiency but also their leaning styles,

FRESHMEN AT HUBT

‘Llementary Market-Leader” is the first in the thr:

business English “Markel-Loader® by three authors (rom Londen Metropolitan Universily - David Cotton, David Falvey and Simon Kent It consists of 12 units based on the topics

and the website www miarket-leader net

“Elementary Market-Leader” is used for first-year students of business majors at

HUBT The twelve units in the book cover the whole academic year comprising of two 18-

week semesters, so in each semester, the students study 6 units In class, teachers and students not only deal with students’ books but also other components of the set like

Practice File (listening and pronunciation practice) and Text Bank (reading materials) In

each unit of the material, the language contents include starting up, vocabulary, listening,

language focus, reading, skills, and case study The topics of the units are business-related topics ranging from basic topics like introduction, work and leisure, travel, to more business-focused topics like sales, markets, companies, the Web,

2.3 DATA COLLECTION METHODS

This section focuses on the instruments used for data collection including a

discussion of strength and weaknesses of the method chosen

According to Robinson (1991), many of basic procedures for data collection are the

same as those that can be used for need analysis and evaluation process: checklist, questionnaire, discussion, rating scales, interview, observation, record, and assessment

On discussing the methods for materials evaluation, Robinson (1991) states that

tests, questionnaires, and interviews are the main techniques used for formative evaluation

Meanwhile, summative evaluation makes use of tests administered before and after

program in addition to checklists and questionnaires

In this study, questionnaires, interview, and document analysis have been chosen

as the main methods to collect data for the evaluation Questionnaires were designed to

collect the data that relate to the students’ attitudes and opinions towards the materials that

they are studying Besides, interviews were conducted to seek the collaboration of teachers

in evaluating the material and to get their attitudes towards the material that they have been using

2.4 DATA COLLECTION PROCEDURE

2.4.1 Document Analysis

For materials evaluation, document analysis is an important channel to collect data

for the thesis Although there are many documents that can be used for evaluation such as

teaching-learning techniques, and guidance and support fiom the material for teachers

2.4.2 Student Questionnaire

Beside the data collected by analyzing the material under study, the researcher made use of a questionnaire to investigate the students’ opinions and altitudes towards the inalerial concerning their opinions on the level of difficully and the relevance of the methodology of the course book The purpose of getting these data was to get more information about the material

The questionnaire is (ranstated into Vietnamese as the informumts of the study are all first-year students and also to avoid any misunderstanding, on the questions

2.4.3, The Teacher Interviews

In addition to the material analysis canied out by the researcher and the questionnaire completed by the students, another data collection instrument that was used

aacher

was interview with teachers wha tad beer using this material for yours The

participants were given the questions in advance so that they could prepare for the interviews During the interview, besides the prepared questions they were also asked some

follow-up questions to identify their viewpoints more clearly ‘Ihe researcher decided to

‘The interview questions were divided into 2 sections with 10 questions Section 1,

comprising 5 questions, doats with the teachers viewpoinls on the appropriateness of the material to the student’s level of English and on the difficulty level of the material, Section 1H, which has another five questions, focuses on investigating the teachers’ evaluation of the guidance and support that the matcrial provides them for toaching the course

2.5 SUBJECTS OF THE RESEARCH

2.5.1 The students

The informants of the stndy are first-year students majored in business They come from four different majors of THIBT: Business Administration, Finance & Tanking, Trade, and Economies They are trom diffzrent parts of Vietnam: cities, towns, and rural areas,

‘They are all hetween 17 and18 years of age At the time of the survey, all of them are in the middle of the sccond semestor with HUBT Mora specifically, thz studenls have

already finished 9 out of 12 units in “Elementary Market-Leader”,

2.5.2, The teachers

The research informants inchude 10 teachers who have been teaching English, especially Business English, at HUBY for many years comprising at least 2 years’ time dealing with the material lementary Market-Leader Vive of them have obtained Master Degree m TEFL while the rest have just acquired Bachclor Degree As Togards ther experience in teaching Business English, six of them have involved in teaching other Business English materials like International Express, Business Objectives before using

“Elementary Market-Leader”, However, most of them admit they have limited knowledge and experience in teaching Business Lnglish, which may prevent them ftom teaching

effectively Another problern is thal most of the leacher-student communication in class is

in Viemamese, which does not encourage students to use English during the lesson

In summary, this chapler has identified (he solling, instruments, and procedure of the study, The next chapter will present the figures and data collected in the student survey and teacher interviews, from which some initial conclusions about the questioned issues of the study start to take shape

CHAPTER THREE: DATA ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter is a detailed analysis of the material, a prescatation and discussion of the results from the survey with the students and the interviews with the teachers The data

is analyzed to find ont the appropriateness of the material to the students” level of English

and to the methodology requirements

3.1 THE APPROPRIATENESS OF THE MATERIAL TO THE STUDENTS’

LEVEL OF ENGLISII

3.1.1 Document Analysis

In order to determine whether the material is suitable to the student’s level of English or not, a comparison is made between the English level of the students and that of the audience for whom this material is intended

According to the Introduction in the couse book, Market-Leader is an clementary level business English course which is intended for both business people and students of business, The Course boak’s Introduction sa

slementary students of English

In comparison with the level of the fargeted students at HUBT who attend the

course, the infended level is, gensrally, quite agreeable Most of the first-year students of

s that (he course is for finished begirmers and

3.1.2, Results from the Survey

SL21 Teacher interviews