The paper not only describes what such a holistic approach to English language evaluation involves but also investigates how it is being implemented in reality in an English language program in Hanoi University.
Trang 1ĐÁNH GIÁ CHƯƠNG TRÌNH GIẢNG DẠY TIẾNG ANH
THEO CÁCH TIẾP CẬN TOÀN DIỆN, HƯỚNG TỚI CẢI THIỆN CHẤT LƯỢNG DẠY VÀ HỌC:
NGHIÊN CỨU ĐIỂN MẪU TẠI TRƯỜNG ĐẠI HỌC HÀ NỘI
Ngô Tuyt Mai
Trường Đại học Hà Nội
tiếng Anh ngày càng thu hút sự quan tâm của các nhà
quản lý chương trình, các nhà lập kế hoạch, các nhà
thiết kế chương trình và các nhà quyết sách
Việc ñánh giá này nhằm hai mục ñích chính, ñó là
(i) giải trình và (ii) cải thiện và phát triển chương trình
Trong khi việc ñánh giá theo ñịnh hướng giải trình
thường xem xét ñến những ảnh hưởng của một
chương trình giảng dạy tiếng Anh sau khi chương trình
ñó kết thúc và thường ñược tổ chức nhằm phục vụ mục
ñích của người có quyền quyết ñịnh, việc ñánh giá theo
ñịnh hướng nâng cao chất lượng thì lại nhằm mục ñích
cải thiện chất lượng của chương trình trong quá trình
thực hiện
Nhằm ñạt ñược hai mục ñích và quan trọng như
nhau ñó thì cần phải có những cách tiếp cận khác nhau
khi ñánh giá một chương trình giảng dạy tiếng Anh Bài
viết này nhấn mạnh tầm quan trọng của việc cần phải
tiến hành song song ñánh giá chương trình hướng tới
ñạt ñược cả hai mục ñích – giải trình và cải thiện phát
triển chất lượng chương trình Bài viết này trình bày
một nghiên cứu ñiển mẫu ở Trường Đại học Hà Nội,
nơi ñã thử nghiệm thành công việc ñánh giá chương
trình giảng dạy theo cách tiếp cận toàn diện Bằng
chứng từ nghiên cứu trường hợp này cho thấy ñể ñáp
ứng ñược hai mục ñích – giải trình và cải thiện chất
lượng chương trình, tiếp cận toàn diện trong việc ñánh
giá chương trình dạy tiếng Anh là một cách tiếp cận
phù hợp, thông qua việc tập trung vào ñánh giá nhiều
khía cạnh khác nhau, từ việc thiết kế chương trình, nội
dung chương trình, các quy trình dạy và học trên lớp
học, sinh viên, giáo viên, ñào tạo giáo viên, môi trường
học tập, việc ñưa ra quyết ñịnh cho ñến cơ quan giáo
dục Bài viết này không chỉ miêu tả chi tiết cách tiếp
cận toàn diện khi ñánh giá chương trình giảng dạy
tiếng Anh mà còn khai thác cách thức thực hiện
phương pháp tiếp cận này trên thực tế ở Trung tâm
Giáo dục Quốc tế, Trường Đại học Hà Nội
Abstract: Evaluation of English language programs
has become of an increasing interest to program managers, program planners, educators and policy makers Two major different purposes for English language program evaluation are (i) program accountability and (ii) program development While accountability-oriented evaluation examines the effects
of an English language program at significant end points of an educational cycle and is usually conducted for the benefit of an external audience or decision maker, development –oriented evaluation aims at improving the quality of a program as it is being implemented Toward achieving such two major different purposes, different approaches to evaluation
of an English language program are needed This paper takes both purposes of program development and program accountability into consideration and presents a case study conducted at Hanoi University where a holistic approach to evaluation has been successfully taken of an English language program towards improving its academic quality The evidence from the case study well illustrates that to fit for the dual purposes of program accountability and program development, a holistic approach to English language evaluation is recommendable by focusing on many different aspects, ranging from program design, program content, classroom processes, the students, the teachers, teacher training, the learning environment, decision making to the institution itself The paper not only describes what such a holistic approach to English language evaluation involves but also investigates how
it is being implemented in reality in an English language program in Hanoi University
Key words: evaluation, program development,
English language program, academic quality
Trang 2A HOLISTIC APPROACH TO EVALUATION
OF AN ENGLISH LANGUAGE PROGRAM TOWARDS IMPROVING ITS ACADEMIC QUALITY:
A CASE STUDY AT HANOI UNIVERSITY
1 Introduction
Evaluation of an English language program
really matters It really matters as it is concerned
with answering a wide range of questions such as
whether the program in place is responding to
learners’ expected needs, whether it is achieving
its goals, or whether students are learning
sufficiently from it, whether further teacher
training is required for teachers working in the
program, or more generally, whether those
affected by the programs (e.g., teachers,
administrators, students, employers, external
agencies) are satisfied with the program
According to Richards (2005, p 286), evaluation
of an English language program “focuses on
collecting information about different aspects of a
language program in order to understand how the
program works, and how successfully it works.”
Based on such important information collected,
concerned stakeholders will make different kinds
of important decisions about the program This
explains why evaluation of English language
programs has become of an increasing interest to
such key stakeholders as program managers,
program planners, educators and policy makers
As far as the Vietnamese public universities’
context (where many English language programs
are run) is concerned, evaluation has not
practically been paid due attention to Many
efforts have been made instead into planning and
implementing English language programs without
reflective and purposeful analysis of the practices
that are involved in planning, teaching and
implementing the programs In order to help
Vietnamese program managers, planners,
educators and policy makers to collect adequate
information, analyze reflectively practices
involved in planning and teaching/implementing a
language course, and to make wise decisions
about the English language programs, this paper
(i) reviews relevant the literature on the topic of
curriculum evaluation, (ii) explores different
purposes for English language program evaluation, and (iii) presents a case study conducted at Hanoi University where a holistic approach to evaluation has been successfully taken of an English language program towards improving its academic quality
2 Approaches to Curriculum Evaluation 2.1 The Nature of Curriculum Evaluation
There are many different aspects that evaluation may focus on Such aspects are many, ranging from the quality of program planning and organization, the syllabus and program content, classroom processes, teaching materials, the teachers, teacher training, the students, monitoring
of student progress, learner motivation, the institution, learning environment to staff development and decision making (Sanders, 1992; Weir & Roberts, 1994) It is also important to note that all such key factors represent an overall and interlinked system of elements (i.e., needs, goals, teachers, learners, syllabuses, materials and teaching) Such elements are those determining the successful design and implementation of language programs (Richards, 2005) In other words, the scope of evaluation should not be limited Rather it should be comprehensive For a language program to be successfully designed and implemented, evaluation should focus on all such key elements However, in reality, evaluators who are program managers, program planners, educators and policy makers, tend to focus on one single aspect at a time, or in some cases, focus on few aspects at a time As a consequence, judgments about one aspects or some aspects have been made without due consideration to other equally important aspects and decisions have been thus made without adequate information and evidence The author of this paper argues that an effective approach to evaluation should focus on all the key aspects well described by Sanders (1992) and Weir and Roberts (1994) because all those aspects from program planning to
Trang 3implementation are all worth being evaluated and
any lack of judgments over any of those aspects
may consequentially result in inadequately
informed decisions about the program
2.2 The Audience of Evaluation
Language teaching programs have many
different levels of involvement and thus create
different kinds of audiences for evaluation
According to Elley (1989), to conduct an
evaluation, it is important to identify who the
different audiences are and what kind of
information they are most interested in In other
words, different audiences of evaluation might be
interested in different questions For example,
students want to evaluate whether they learnt
something from the course and/or how well their
performance compared to other, or whether they
need another course Whereas teachers teaching
the materials might be primarily concerned that
the books provide sufficient material for all the
classes on the given timetable Teachers might
also be interested in knowing whether students
were satisfied with the course and how effective
the course organization was Program
administrators might be interested in knowing
whether the timeframe of the course was
appropriate or whether the program has achieved
the set objectives and the learning outcomes At
the macro level, officers in the Ministry might be
keen on knowing whether how the money
provided for the project is well spent and whether
all components of the invested language teaching
program or project are available and well
implemented according to the schedule and the set
objective The sponsors of the course were keen
on such information as whether the cost of the
course was justified, or if the course delivered what
was promised, or if the course was well managed
2.3 Purposes of Evaluation: Program
Accountability vs Program Development
Purposes of evaluation vary according to the
intention of program managers, planners, educator
and policy makers Weir and Roberts (1994)
review the literature and make a distinction
between two major purposes for language
program evaluation: (i) program accountability
and (ii) program development Accountability, in their words, “refers to the extent to which those involved in a program are answerable for the quality of their work” (Weir & Roberts, 1994, p 288) Accountability-oriented evaluation thus examines the effects of an English language program at significant end points of an educational cycle and is usually conducted for the benefit of an external audience or decision maker Whereas program development refers to the quality of the program being evaluated itself and development –oriented evaluation aims at improving the quality of a program as it is being implemented Development-oriented evaluation has a development focus and it may involve staff who are directly involved in the program, for
example, language teachers and it has a teacher – development focus
2.4 Approaches to Evaluation
In order to achieve different purposes, different approaches to evaluation are suggested Using a comprehensive typology of approaches to evaluation, Richards (2005) referred to three
approaches, namely, formative, illuminative, and summative evaluation Each of these three approaches will be discussed in details below, starting with formative evaluation
2.4.1 Formative Evaluation Approach
Formative evaluation is carried out on an on-going basis, as part of the process of program development with the aim of finding out what is successful and what is not and what challenges or issues need to be addressed This type of evaluation is generally known as formative evaluation in the evaluation literature Its focus is
on the continuous development and improvement
of the program Formative evaluation typically attempts to answer a wide range of questions in relation to, among others, whether enough time has been allocated to particular objectives, whether teachers’ used methodologies are appropriate, and whether students benefit from the teaching program Rich information is often collected during formative evaluation, ranging from students’ achievement outcomes, to teachers’ methodologies, programs’ teaching materials and
Trang 4the adequacy of the pacing of the material Such
information is often used to not only identify
issues and problems and to address the identified
ones and to improve the implementation of the
program for the sake of a better quality program
Formative evaluation, during the implementation
of any new or old programs, can be carried out
creatively in different forms or in a combination
of various forms or evaluation activities, ranging
from workshops, review meetings (with such
stakeholders as teachers and students), to teachers’
reports, peer observations and student needs
analysis surveys Such evaluation activities or a
combination of all those activities can reveal a
holistic picture of what is working well and what
is not, and what need to be addressed in the
program before specific actions are taken to
improve it
2.4.2 Illuminative Evaluation Approach
Besides formative evaluation, another common
type of evaluation, generally known as
illuminative evaluation is often carried out
Illuminative evaluation is often described as
evaluation that “seeks to find out how different
aspects of the program work or are being
implemented” (Richards, 2005, p 289) Unlike
formative evaluation which covers a wide range of
aspects of a program, illuminative evaluation
often focuses on one single aspect of a program
Rather than providing a holistic or comprehensive
picture of a program, illuminative evaluation
seeks to illuminate or provide a deeper
understanding of the processes of teaching and
learning that occur in the program without
necessarily seeking to change the course in any
way as a result Different illuminative evaluations
focus on different aspects of the program,
depending on what single aspects that evaluators
and program managers are keen on illuminating
Within a certain illuminative evaluation, certain
questions might be asked to find out how a certain
aspect of the program work or is being delivered
or implemented If error-correction strategies are
of evaluators’ interests, such questions as what
type of and how error-correction strategies are
used by teachers might be asked In case
teacher-student interaction patterns are of their interest,
the question as to what type of teacher-student interaction patterns typically occur in classes
To conduct illuminative evaluation, various evaluation activities can be of use by evaluators who are language teachers, for example, the questionnaire surveys among stakeholders including teachers and students or classroom observations with purposeful investigation, the use
of recorded videos can be of use The most popular type of illuminative evaluation is classroom action research Block (1998) highlights the importance of using classroom action research as a type of illuminative evaluation in understanding learners’ interpretations of the language courses they attend and how learners make sense of their lessons Block recommends that teachers should interview learners on a regular basis to get their perspectives regarding what is going on in the course Through classroom action research, teachers can collect evaluation information about learners and their performance over a certain period of time, normally over an academic term of fifteen weeks
or so, using classroom observation, learner journals, interviews and test/exam results In some situations, such an illuminative evaluation activity
of action research might provide some surprising findings In other situations, evaluators or action researchers might not learn anything particularly surprising from their evaluation or investigation, such information collected from action research can help confirm and make explicit some things which they knew intuitively Teachers can learn a useful strategy or technique to use in order to more effectively facilitate their students’ learning
As a result, the illuminative evaluation can provide teachers/evaluators with answers to such questions and how the teacher (in spotlight) went about doing a certain thing (e.g., group work, reading strategies, helping students understand the teacher’s intentions), and which way of doing it works best for the teacher
2.4.3 Summative Evaluation Approach
Summative evaluation is a type of evaluation seeking to determine the effectiveness, its efficiency and its acceptability of a program and
to make decisions about the worth or value of
Trang 5different aspects of the curriculum According to
Richards (2005), most teachers and program
administrators are familiar with this approach to
evaluation which takes place after the completion
of a program Shaw and Dowsett (1986, p 66)
suggest that three audiences are identifiable for all
summative evaluation of language course, namely,
other teachers in the program (the main audience)
for course design and planning purposes,
managers of the institution or program for the
purpose of determining course offerings and
placement, and the curriculum support or
development unit for the purpose of monitoring
the curriculum This approach generally seeks
answers to a wide variety of questions such as to
how effective the course was, whether it achieved
its aims, or how well the course was received by
students and teachers, or how appropriate the
teaching methods were Answers to all such
questions help reveal the effectiveness of a course
or a program
In order to decide whether a course is effective
or not, criteria for effectiveness and different
measures of a course’s effectiveness are identified
Measures of a course’s effectiveness include
mastery of objectives, performance on tests,
measures of acceptability, retention rate or
reenrollment rate, and efficiency of the course
(Weir, 1995) and each measure can be used for
different purposes (Richards, 2005) For example,
to measure the extent to which the students have
mastered a certain objective at the end of the
course, each objective set in the course is
examined and criteria for students’ successful
achievement of each objective are chosen
However, the mastery of objectives is not
sufficient and does not always provide a full
picture of the effectiveness of a course The reality
often shows that objectives can still be achieved
despite defects or shortcomings in the course Or
perhaps mastery of an objective was achieved
simply because students spent a lot of extra time
in private study to compensate for the poor
teaching performance or insufficient materials
provided during the course Therefore other more
formal ways of assessing mastery of objectives
such as formal tests (e.g., unit tests given at the
end of each unit of teaching materials, class tests
or quizzes devised by teachers and administered at various stages throughout the course) are used to measure students’ achievement
Besides measures of mastery of objectives and performance on tests, measures of acceptability can be used through assessments of teachers and students Research shows that a course might lead
to satisfactory achievement of its objectives and good levels of performance on exit tests yet still
be negatively evaluated by teachers or students In fact, reasons for a course being considered acceptable or unacceptable might relate to such factors as timetabling, class size, choice of materials, or teachers’ teaching styles
Another measure of the success of the course is concerned with the efficiency of the course or how straightforward the course was to develop and implement According to Richards (2005), the efficiency of the course can be determined through a reflection of the number of problems that occurred during the course, the time spent on planning and course development, the need for specialized materials and teacher training, and the amount of time needed for consultation and meetings
To sum up, Richard (2005) suggests three different approaches of evaluation, each of which
can achieve its own purposes While formative evaluation is conducted on the on-going basis as part of the process of program development to find out what is working well, and what is not,
illuminative evaluation provides insights into the processes of teaching and learning occurring in
the program Summative evaluation is conducted
at the end of the program to determine its effectiveness, efficiency and its acceptability As each of these three approaches to evaluation, by nature, has its own purposes, own audiences and characteristics, it is important to choose the appropriate approach to evaluation to fit its purposes and audiences If the purpose of evaluation is for program accountability examining the effects of a program at significant end point, summative evaluation should be the appropriate choice Whereas if a program is evaluated for the purpose of program development
Trang 6aiming at improving the quality of a program as it
is implemented, illuminative evaluation and/or
formative evaluation are more appropriate
approaches All the three approaches to evaluation
– namely, formative evaluation, illuminative
evaluation and summative evaluation seem to take
narrow view of evaluation While summative
evaluation has its central interest in demonstrating
the “product value” of a program or its
components (Weir & Roberts, 1994), illuminative
and formative evaluation have associated
commitments to a deeper professional
understanding of processes of teaching and
learning in the program This paper argues that
program evaluation should take into careful
consideration both the product and process of
implementation of the program It should not be
either the product or the process that is solely
examined In light of this view, a broader view of
evaluation is proposed and a holistic approach to
evaluation seems more appropriate
Also to serve the dual purposes of both
program accountability and program development,
a holistic approach to evaluation might be the
most appropriate The so-called holistic approach
is known as a type of evaluation which is
conducted to examine the effects of all key aspects
of a program both during and after its
implementation Unlike the three other approaches
proposed by Richards (2005), the holistic
approach offers a more broad view of evaluation
that, according to Weir and Roberts (1994, p 42)
is characterized by (1) the need for both insider
and outsider commitment and involvement to
ensure adequate evaluation; (2) dual interest in
both improvement and the product value of a
program or its components; (3) an associated
commitment to a deeper professional
understanding of the processes of educational
change as well as the results of that change; (4) a
systematic documentation for evaluation purposes
both during implementation and at the beginning
and end of a program or project’s life; and (4) a
willingness to embrace both qualitative and
quantitative methodology appropriate for the purpose
of evaluation and the context under review
3 A Case Study in International Education Center, Hanoi University: A Holistic Approach
to Evaluation 3.1 Context
The International Education Center (IEC) is the Center affiliated to Hanoi University It was established in 2007 and its main mission is to offer Hanoi University’s joint training programs (including both Bachelor programs and Master programs) in cooperation with international universities Since its establishment, hundreds of students have successfully completed their studies and graduated with bright career future However, the number of students enrolled into the programs offered by the Center has been dramatically reduced, partly due to the economic crisis, partly due to the fierce competition in the education market among many reputable universities and partly due to its seemingly uncompetitive performance of the center Given this context, there was an urgent need for an appropriate approach to evaluation in the Center so that all aspects of training programs offered in the Center would be under scrutiny both at the beginning, during, and at the end of its programs’ life for the purpose of both program accountability and program development in IEC A holistic approach
to evaluation is thus proposed in order to improve IEC’s program credentials, its performance, its competitiveness in the market, and ultimately to improve its reputation and its attraction of more and more students choosing to study in IEC’s Bachelor’s and Master’s programs
3.2 Implementation of the Holistic Approach to Program Evaluation in IEC, Hanoi University
To fit its context and its evaluation purposes, the holistic approach to program evaluation was implemented in IEC, Hanoi University, starting in early April 2014 right after the researcher was appointed as the Director of the Center For the implementation of this holistic approach, both qualitative and quantitative methodology was employed, targeting at various audiences for evaluation, involving various participants in the evaluation process In language program
Trang 7evaluation, according to Richards (2005, p 297),
“both quantitative and qualitative approaches to
collecting information are needed, because they
serve different purposes and can be used to
complement each other.”
For quantitative evaluation, information was
collected from a large number of people on
specific topics and can generally be analyzed
statistically so that certain patterns and tendencies
emerge Questionnaire surveys were sent to IEC’s
alumni, current students official and non-official
teachers, and administrative staff for better
understanding of the current context that IEC is
situated in Externally, quick surveys were made
in other contexts outside IEC, both those inside
Hanoi University and in other similar Centers or
Institutes in other competitive universities in
Hanoi, including FPT University, the National
Economics University, Foreign Trade University,
Vietnam National University, and Vietnam
Technology University Such quantitative
information as course statistics, the number of
students enrolled in each International Education
Center/Institute, the number of international joint
programs offered, their charged tuition fees have
provided insights into the patterns of student
admission and their competitiveness
Though quantitative data are regarded as
“rigorous” or conforming to scientific principles
of data collection, the limitations of quantitative
information are also recognized and there is the
need to complement such information with
qualitative information As soon as the researcher
became the Director of IEC, with full support of
both internal academic and non-academic staff,
the researcher made detailed schedules for
classroom observations, academic and
non-academic staff interviews, policy document
analysis, course documents, course reviews,
teacher satisfaction, observation of IEC’s student
performance in classroom tasks Externally, field
trips were made for IEC’s Board of Directors and
key staff members (including the library staff) to
visit five International Education
Centers/Institutes in other reputable universities in
Hanoi, namely those in FPT University, the
National Economics University, Foreign Trade
University, Vietnam National University, and Vietnam Technology University During such field visits, interviews with Directors and Managers of those Centers were conducted to get deeper understanding of what is going on in their Centers and how they address their challenges and fierce market competition Together with quantitative information, such qualitative information can reveal the holistic picture of not only what is going on inside but also outside IEC, highlighting IEC’s strengths and weaknesses as well as its opportunities and challenges in relation
to academic, administrative, financial and leadership matters In light of such internal and external situational/environmental analyses and evaluation, new strategies associated with new action plans for further improvement of IEC’s performance and its competitiveness are proposed
to Hanoi University’s top leaders for their consideration and final decisions
As for the audiences for evaluation, this holistic approach to evaluation identified its key audiences, including students, teachers, curriculum developers, administrators, and the curriculum support or development units For different audiences, the holistic evaluation is interested in different kinds of information for a wide variety of purposes, ranging from course design and planning purposes, to the purpose of determining course offerings and placement, or curriculum monitoring or quality control Two main types of participants were involved in the holistic evaluation conducted in IEC – insiders and outsiders Insiders are teachers, students, and anyone else (e.g., parents) closely involved in the development and implementation of training programs in IEC The involvement of such key insiders in the process of designing and carrying out evaluation is an important factor, because as a consequence, as Richards (2005, p 296) puts it,
“they will have a greater degree of commitment to acting on its results.” Outsiders who are not directly involved in the program are consultants, inspectors, and administrators whose insights can supplement the insiders’ perceptions of what happened in IEC wit independent observation and more objective views of various aspects of training programs offered in IEC
Trang 83.3 Lessons learnt from the Case Study
From this case study in IEC where the holistic
approach to evaluation was implemented at the
beginning, during and at the end of each semester
or each training program, a lot of practical lessons
have been learnt Due to the scope of this paper,
only two significant lessons were highlighted
Firstly comprehensive reports highlighting the
findings of the holistic evaluation were made for
various audiences including university leaders,
IEC’s Board of Directors, their teachers and
curriculum developers Evaluation’s findings in
the format of reports provide an overview, a
summary of all the information collected, the
strength and weaknesses of IEC itself and its
training programs, and most importantly a
systematic documentation of recommendations for
modifications in different aspects of the program
as well as more University-based support for some
aspects of the program Suggestions for teachers
and students were also made in order to promptly
adjust their methodology of teaching and learning
All such recommendations and suggestions are
basic foundation for specific actions to be taken
by all the stakeholders, including those top leaders
of Hanoi University and those directly
implementing training programs offered in IEC
The second significant lesson learnt is that the
holistic approach to evaluation, as the case study
in IEC suggests, is an appropriate approach that
fits for the purpose of promoting review,
reflection, and revision of performance and the
curriculum based on careful compilation of
information For an effective implementation of
the holistic approach to evaluation on which key
decisions can be made, the case study in IEC
places emphasis on the importance of the adequate
design and the carefully considered process of
evaluation To do this, careful consideration
should be taken into the scope (the range of
information collected that include all the
significant aspects of the program being
evaluated), the audience (the collected information
adequately serve the needs of all the intended
audiences), the reliability, objectivity,
representativeness, timeliness and ethical
considerations (whether the evaluation followed
the accepted ethical standards) as well As the holistic approach to evaluation implemented in IEC meets those acceptable standards of adequacy, most of the information obtained can be made full use of for the dual purposes of both program accountability and program development
4 Conclusion
In conclusion, this paper highlights the need for an appropriate approach to evaluation that fits the dual purposes of program accountability and program development The evidence from the case study in the International Education Center, Hanoi University well illustrates that to fit for such dual purposes, a holistic approach to English language evaluation is recommendable by focusing on many different aspects, ranging from program design, program content, classroom processes, the students, the teachers, teacher training, the learning environment, decision making to the institution itself Using the empirical research method of case study, the paper not only describes what such a holistic approach to English language evaluation involves, its quantitative and qualitative methodology of evaluation, audiences and participants in the evaluation process but also investigates how it is being implemented in reality
in a case study in Hanoi University, highlighting the two main practical lessons learnt from the case study This is an empirical research and thus has its own limitations Further research supported by sound theories is needed to provide further in-depth understandings and insights into adequacy and appropriateness of approaches to evaluation
REFERENCES
1 Block, D 1998 Tale of a language learner
Language Teaching Research 2(2): 148-176
2 Elley, W 1989 Tailoring the evaluation to fit the
context In R K Johnson (ed.), The Second Language
Curriculum New York: Cambridge University Press 270- 285
3 Richards, J C 2005 Curriculum Development in
Language Teaching. Cambridge University Press CUP
4 Sanders, J R 1992 Evaluating School Programs:
An Evaluator’s Guide Newbury Park, CA: Corwin Press
5 Weir, C and J Roberts 1994 Evaluation in ELT
Oxford: Blackwell