80 ELT Journal Volume 55/1 January 2001

Oxford University Press

SURVEY REVIEW
EFL courses for adults
Brian Tomlinson, Bao Dat, Hitomi Masuhara,
and Rani Rubdy
Introduction Our intention in this review is to evaluate eight current adult courses
published by major British publishers, and to draw attention to the trends
they have in common. As such a comprehensive review of coursebooks has
never appeared in the ELT Journal before, we have endeavoured to make
our review as rigorous as possible, in order to be informative about the
particular courses under review, and about course development in general.
The courses we have evaluated, which were submitted to us by four
leading UK publishers, are as follows:
Language in Use and True to Life (Cambridge University Press)
Cutting Edge and Wavelength (Pearson Longman)
Inside Out and Reward (Macmillan Heinemann ELT)
Clockwise and Landmark (Oxford University Press)
The components of the courses are summarized in Appendix A.
NB the edition of Language in Use submitted for review was the original
1991 edition and not the new edition published in 2000.
Our team consists of Brian Tomlinson from England, Bao Dat from
Vietnam, Rani Rubdy from India, and Hitomi Masuhara from Japan.
What we all have in common is that we have worked at the National
University of Singapore, and have experience of teaching English as a
Foreign Language, of researching approaches to the learning of foreign
languages, and of materials development.
In order to conduct this review, we rst of all agreed on a list of 133 course
evaluation criteria, which were developed from research into what
learners, teachers, and administrators want from coursebooks. This
research was carried out at the 13th National Conference for Teachers of
English, San Jose, Costa Rica (January 1997), at the 8th MATSDA
Conference in Dublin (January 1997), at the IATEFL Literature
Symposium in Dillingen, Germany ( September 1997), and on a
worldwide scale for a major British publisher in 1998.
After agreeing on our criteria, each of us independently evaluated the
eight courses. We all focused on dierent unit numbers, and started each
survey review
EFL courses for adults 81
evaluation with a detailed analysis of that unit in each of the course
components at intermediate level. We then looked at other units at the
intermediate level before repeating this procedure for the other levels of
the course. Then we graded the course on a scale of 05 for most of our
133 criteria, but on a scale of 020 for those criteria under the heading of
Publishers Claim, and of 010 for those under the heading of
Flexibility. Finally, we wrote evaluative comments for each of the
headings which the criteria were grouped under (e.g. Flexibility;
Teachability; Design). This procedure was carried out independently
and in isolation by each reviewer, so as to avoid contamination of
judgement. Here is an example of the criteria we used:
2 flexibility (Total grade = /100)
a) Would the course appeal to adult learners in any country?
(Grade = /10)
b) Would the course be useful to adult learners in any country?
(Grade = /10)
c) Does the course provide opportunities for learners to localize
activities?
(Grade = /10)
d) Does the course provide opportunities for teachers to localize
activities?
(Grade = /10)
e) Does the course facilitate a exible approach?
(Grade = /10)
f) Does the course provide opportunities for extensive reading?
(Grade = /10)
g) Does the course provide opportunities for extensive listening?
(Grade = /10)
h) Does the course provide opportunities for informal acquisition as
well as formal learning?
(Grade = /10)
i) Does the course cater for dierent preferred learning styles?
(Grade = /10)
j) Does the course prepare learners for the realities of language use in
the real world?
(Grade = /10)
Finally, we collated and then averaged our scores for each criterion for
each course, before looking for distinctive convergence and divergence in
our evaluative comments.
General review of the We have been very thorough and systematic in our evaluation
courses procedures, and have attempted to be as fair, rigorous, and objective as
possible. However, we must start this report on our evaluation by
acknowledging that, to some extent, our results are still inevitably
subjective. This is because any pre-use evaluation is subjective, both in its
selection of criteria and in the judgements made by the evaluators (Ellis
1998; Tomlinson 1999). We have attempted to compensate for this by
establishing a team of reviewers from dierent countries and
backgrounds, by evaluating the courses in isolation from each other, and
by averaging our scores. But we must accept that the same review,
conducted by a dierent team of reviewers, would almost certainly have
produced a dierent set of results. It turned out that the four of us
diered considerably in many of our prerequisites for a good coursebook,
and disagreed completely in some of our responses to the coursebooks
under review. But we all agreed that a good coursebook, whilst helping
learners to develop their procedural knowledge of grammar, should
concentrate on providing learners with engaging and purposeful
interaction with language in use. Another group of reviewers might have
considered the provision of grammatical information to be pivotal. Only
a thorough whilst-use evaluation, and a rigorous longitudinal post-use
evaluation, could reveal reliable evidence about the value of the courses
in aecting learner attitudes and behaviour, and ultimately in
contributing to the development of the communicative competence of
the learners. All that we can do in this review is to present our informed
and collective predictions as to the likely value of the courses.
Overall course criteria 1 Publishers claims
We found that publishers seem to have become more descriptive and less
extravagant recently in their claims about what their courses do. For
example, Language in Use, Wavelength, Landmark, and Inside Out, were
found to be fairly accurate in their claims about what they were providing
for the learner. However, it was felt that Reward and Cutting Edge were
more form-focusedand less communicativethan they claimed, that
True to Life just did not achieve the motivation, realism, and engagement
that it emphasized, and that Clockwise made exaggerated and unrealistic
claims to be energetic and dynamic, and to provide communicative
pay-os and stimulate personal response. Reward and Cutting Edge also
make very sensible points in the Introductions to their teachers books,
but they do not always help the teacher to achieve what they are
recommending (for example, cross-cultural awareness in Reward, and
personalization in Cutting Edge).
One consequence of the trend to avoid criticism for unsubstantiated
claims seems to be a reluctance to state the learning objectives of the
dierent levels of the courses. Instead, most of the courses seem to
restrict themselves to a description of the content of units, rather than
risk saying what they intend it to achieve. For example, True to Life lists
Key features, but does not state its objectives. Reward states task aims in
its teachers books, but they tend to be such vague procedural aims as to
practise reading for main ideas (Intermediate Teachers Book, p. 43).
Also, Clockwise lists Series aims; but they seem to be a mixture of
content, procedures, and vague aims, such as to enable students to
perform English in a more natural way (Teachers Book, p. 4).
2 Flexibility
Whether one is drawing the content of courses from message forms
which are contrived exemplications of the code, or from the message
82 Brian Tomlinson, Bao Dat, Hitomi Masuhara, and Rani Rubdy
forms which are sampled from actually occuring text, they need to be
made real for the learner. The message forms have to be made locally
appropriate to the dierent classroom contexts in which learners nd
themselves. (Widdowson 2000: 30) This is the ultimate challenge for
the global course, and it has to be said it is not one which most courses
have achieved. Some of the courses in this review focus the learners
attention on contrived exemplications of the code, and make little
attempt to make them real for particular groups of learners (e.g. the short
passage about hating Christmas in Clockwise Intermediate (p. 36), and a
text about weather in the Pre-Intermediate Personal Study Workbook for
True to Life (p. 54). Others do give attention to message forms sampled
from actually occurring text, but often manage to make them unreal by
using them in activities which have little apparent appeal or value to the
adult learner (e.g. an extract from Jane Eyre in Reward Upper Intermed-
iate Students Book (p. 38), which is followed by vocabulary and
true/false questions). However, some of the courses do succeed in
making their texts and tasks locally appropriate (especially Wavelength
and Inside Out), and all of the courses try to personalize their activities by
inviting the learners to use their own lives, views, and feelings, as content
to comment on (e.g. Interview each other about your plans and
ambitions. Make notes under the following headings. Cutting Edge
Intermediate, p. 50).
We felt that most of the courses give little opportunity or encouragement
to adapt the materials to the needs, wants, personalities, or styles of the
learners or teachers. Most of them favour analytical learners who like to
focus their conscious attention on discrete learning points, but few of
them provide activities for experiential learners, and none provide
activities for kinaesthetic learners, who prefer to learn through physical
activity. The emphasis in most courses is on explicit teaching of
declarative knowledge, followed by controlled or guided practice. In other
words, PPP (presentationpracticeproduction) still rules, but with the
emphasis now very much on the rst two Ps. A lack of extended texts and
tasks makes it very dicult for the teacher to try to cater for experiential
learners by changing the order or focus of the activities.
As the above comments suggest, we were disappointed that contem-
porary courses do not seem to have taken the advice of researchers and
methodologists, which is to cater for dierent teaching and learning
styles (e.g. Masuhara 1998; Oxford 1997) and to design books which can
be used dierently in dierent circumstances (e.g. Maley 1998). We were
particularly disappointed to nd that:
extensive reading and the use of ction is almost non-existent in many
courses;
the claims made by many courses that they follow a discovery approach
usually disguise an attempt to get learners to nd a pre-determined
answer (e.g. the discovery activities in Landmark Upper Intermediate
Students Book, p. 47, are trying to get learners to nd the answers
which are in the Language commentary on p.129);
text length is constant and brief;
choices are hardly ever given to learners;
EFL courses for adults 83
when communication activities or tasks are provided, they nearly always
have an overt language practice point (e.g. in Reward Upper Intermediate
Students Book (p. 35) a ghost story writing activity is used to practice
linking words, and on pp. 967 of Cutting Edge Intermediate Students
Book, a lottery money task is used to practise Giving and explaining
opinions, and Agreeing/disagreeing).
However, we did agree that Language in Use, Landmark, and Inside Out,
especially, do try to ensure some exibility by providing experiential
activities and opportunities for informal acquisition, and by encouraging
learners to personalize and localize their responses.
3 Syllabus
A quick glance at the course overviews at the beginning of the students
books reveals how language-focused the syllabus of courses has become.
In most of the courses grammar is signalled as the main focus of most
units, in fact, True to Life only has two columnsLanguage focus and
Topics. Although the main column in Reward is grammar and
functions, 35 out of the 40 units in the Intermediate Coursebook focus
on grammar. The exceptions are Inside Out and Landmark, which provide
ample grammar practice, but put the initial emphasis in each unit on
skills.
Most of the courses give much greater prominence to listening and
speaking than they do to reading and writing (with the exception of
Landmark), although some of them have decided to focus on speaking
and listening in the coursebook, and as in True to Life, to limit the
amount of reading material in the Class Book (but increase it in the
Personal Study Workbook) (Teachers Book p. iv ). The decision seems
to have been taken that, in most of the courses, classroom time should be
spent in listening and speaking practice, but that for those who want it,
provision should be made in workbooks for reading and writing practice.
Inside Out and Cutting Edge, for example, have a writing course syllabus
in their workbooks, and Wavelength has a reading course in its workbook.
One of the consequences of downgrading reading is that in most courses
there is no substantial content for the learners to respond to. The reading
texts which are provided are usually too short and bland to provide
anything to think or talk about. The listening texts also tend to be fairly
mundane interviews, or monologues about hobbies, jobs, journeys,
customs, routines, etc. Many of them are quite realistic (and even
interesting) but responding to them calls for very little cognitive or
aective engagement. An engaging poem or a controversial article would
not only provide opportunities for developing the skills required in
experiential reading, but could also provide meaningful content on
which to base subsequent speaking and writing activities. In our
comments when reviewing these courses, we kept using such terms as
trivial, bland, dull, and not engaging about the topic content. Also,
we felt that many adults would feel intellectually and emotionally
insulted, as a result of being constantly asked to discuss such topics as
birthdays, mobile phones, hairstyles and the most foreign place you
have been to (Clockwise Pre-Intermediate Classbook, p. 47). The one
84 Brian Tomlinson, Bao Dat, Hitomi Masuhara, and Rani Rubdy
outstanding exception is Language in Use, which stimulates the
expression of thoughts and feelings about controversial issues (e.g. Life
on Earth pp. 1069 of the Intermediate Classroom Book). Moreover, it
does so without imposing a correct attitude, and even, apparently,
without any hidden agenda.
The language content of the courses focuses typically on language for
cooperationpoliteness and harmonyand rarely includes lexis or
strategies which could empower learners in situations involving
competition or conict. Combined with the brevity and blandness of the
texts, this results in the creation of an EFL world which is bland and dull
and in which there is very little excitement or disturbance to stimulate
the emotions of the learner (Tomlinson 1998c: 20), which is safe, clean,
harmonious, benevolent, undisturbed and PG-rated (Wajnryb 1996:
291), ultimately reduces and trivializes the content and the process of
learning. For example, Clockwise Pre-Intermediate Classbook has
consecutive units on Social Life (making arrangements, invitations, and
suggestions), Meet the Family, and Nearest and Dearest, and the
nearest it gets to discord is teaching polite forms of disagreement in a
unit called Out of Touch (pp. 323). Clockwise Intermediate does,
however, have one unitTemper and Tears (pp. 445)which is full of
anger, temper, and complaints. Wavelength and True to Life are mainly
peopled by nice young men and women getting on well with each other,
but the Wavelength Pre-Intermediate Coursebook does have a sudden
outburst of Jealousy and revenge in Unit 10, and the True to Life Upper
Intermediate Class Book does include some angry people on p. 75, some
others having arguments on p. 85, and a mother and son getting irritated
with each other in a scene from Harold Pinters A Night Outa rare
inclusion of literature (p. 90).
The prominence given to grammar in most courses has led to a decrease
in the attention given to skills development, to functions, to
communication strategies, and to learning strategies. There is a token,
and often rather fragmented attempt to include these important aspects
of a language course, but in most cases not enough attention is given to
them to facilitate useful learner development. This is particularly true of
Clockwise and Cutting Edge, but less so of Landmark and Inside Out. Of
course, this does raise the crucial question of how many facets of a
language course can be covered in a principled, coherent, thorough, and
systematic way in a coursebook. In opting for the centrality of grammar,
most of these courses have inevitably marginalized aspects of learning
which researchers and methodologists would consider to be important
features of language learning.
A number of the courses include a teachers resource pack of
photocopiable materials. Most of these packs feature communication
tasks which can be used to supplement the coursebook (for a discussion
of tasks see Rubdy 1998). However, in most of these courses (e.g. Reward
and Clockwise) the activities provide guided practice of grammar and
vocabulary rather than the opportunities to use language to achieve
intended outcomes which they seem to promise. This is true also of the
tasks in Cutting Edge, which claim to be authentic, and to give students
EFL courses for adults 85
the opportunity to develop their speaking skills in real life situations, but
which in most cases simply provide practice of given language. For
example, in the Module 9 Part B Task of the Intermediate Students
Book, the learners are told to Discuss how you think the money should
be spent and agree on a budget together. Look at the phrases in the Useful
language box (p. 97).
Many of the courses include cross-cultural awareness activities, but in
most cases they are UK-centred, they describe English peoples reactions
to exotic places they have visited on holiday, they depict stereotypical and
often clichd behaviour, and they tend to portray non-Western cultures
as eccentric, and even bizarre. For example:
In the Language in Use Intermediate Classroom Book, the learners listen
to people from dierent countries comparing their countries to Britain
(p. 60).
In the Wavelength Pre-Intermediate Coursebook, Julia tells her friend
about a holiday she had in India where the immigration ocials laughed
at her, and made her get back on the plane, because she did not have a
valid visa (p. 39).
The Clockwise Pre-Intermediate Classbook includes clichs about
greetings in dierent countries (p. 47).
The Reward Pre-Intermediate Students Book states that people sit on
the oor in Japan (p. 2) and that men usually go to restaurants on their
own.
The most noticeable exclusion is extensive reading. All the way up to
Upper-Intermediate level most courses use very short reading texts on
which to base intensive reading questions. Reward claims to encourage
the learner to respond to the reading passage in a personal and genuine
way before using it for other purposes, but often the reading tasks
discourage experiential reading (e.g. Read Family life, and match the
questions with each paragraph. Reward Pre-Intermediate Students
Book, p. 21). The one noticeable exception to this focus on intensive
reading of short passages is Wavelength, which has a supplementary
extensive reading book containing four short stories.
4 Pedagogic approach
None of these courses really tries to cater for dierent learning styles or
personalities. The emphasis is on the analytical learning of discrete
features through practice and memorization (an emphasis on
vocabulary memorization at word and phrase level (Clockwise
Intermediate Classbook). There are very few activities for experiential
learners, and hardly any at all for the majority of learners who prefer
kinaesthetic learning. Learners are rarely given choices of content or
activity, and there is little scope on most courses for teacher initiative in
providing learner choice. However, Landmark does provide some learner
choice in its Speaking personally sections, and Inside Out and
Wavelength often ask learners to give extra examples for themselves (for
example, in the Wavelength Pre-Intermediate Coursebook (p. 68)
learners are asked to persuade the class to get rid of one modern
invention or gadget which really irritates them).
86 Brian Tomlinson, Bao Dat, Hitomi Masuhara, and Rani Rubdy
Not all these courses attempt to engage the learners aectively through
excitement, emotion, or fun, which often do provide a stimulating but
achievable challenge (Arnold 1999; Tomlinson 1998c). In fact, many
of them have an almost exclusively cognitive approach, and we all
agreed that most of the courses underestimate the learners, and make
most of the activities too simple (especially True to Life). The exceptions
are Wavelength and Inside Out, which often provide a stimulating
challenge, and aim at aective engagement (Inside Out, is often also
funny), while Language in Use and Landmark respect the learners as
individuals, and seek to engage them personally in many of their
activities.
The most obvious pedagogic feature of many of these courses is that they
are teaching-centred, and seem to assume that what is taught will be
learnt. There seems to be a reaction against the freer, open-ended,
learner-centred days of the Communicative Approach, and a fear that
unless language is seen to be taught, books will not be bought. This
might appeal to those administrators and teachers who blame the
Communicative Approach for causing learners to use inaccurate English
(a view which is prevalent today, for example, in Singapore), but it in no
way does it agree with what we know about learners having their own
syllabus, and only learning what they need, and when they are ready to
learn (Tomlinson 1998a: 1012). Most of these courses use the PPP
(PresentationPracticeProduction) approach, which makes it clear what
is being taught. However, it has been criticized by many methodologists
(e.g. Willis 1996) for imposing a uni-modal learning style, and for not
reecting the natural tendency to learn what you need to use rather than
what you are told to learn. This focus on teaching rather than learning is
particularly evident in True to Life, and in Clockwise, which despite its
claims to develop fluency and to provide clear communicative payoffs in
every lesson (back cover of class book) actually gives much more
attention to teaching language forms than it does to helping learners to
acquire communicative competence. Some of these courses do use
awareness approaches and task-based approaches, in addition to explicit
teaching of language, but Cutting Edge, for example, puts more emphasis
on language practice and language summary than it does on its language
awareness activities (e.g. Intermediate pp. 623), and actually pre-
teaches language items before asking learners to do tasks (e.g.
Intermediate pp. 645). Wavelength and Inside Out are exceptions to this
teaching centredness, and we all agreed that, although they provide
useful teaching of language items, their main focus is on meaning and
communication, and on encouraging learners at all levels to actually use
the language.
5 Topic content
We all agreed that the topic content of many of the units, in many of the
courses, is distinctively trivial for adult learners. Topics tend to focus on
everyday routines, such as sleeping, going to work, watching television,
and eating out, and most attention is paid to normal behaviour rather
than to interesting divergence (e.g. in the Map of the Book for Reward
Pre-Intermediate, the word typical, routine, and customs is
EFL courses for adults 87
mentioned in the content description of six of the rst 20 units). While
these safe topics have the advantage of familiarity, they are hardly likely
to engage the learners aectively or intellectually. True to Life and
Clockwise were considered to be particularly bland and conventional in
their choice of topics. Reward, Landmark, Cutting Edge, and Inside Out
include some potentially engaging topics (e.g. Social matters. Society
and the future, Rules and freedom, and Dilemmas and decisions in
Cutting Edge Intermediate). However, we often felt that the texts related
to these topics were used mainly as examples of language features, and
that the activities were often supercial, and generally failed to exploit the
aective and intellectual potential of the topics. By contrast, we thought
that Language in Use and Wavelength not only included many important
and provocative topics, but also exploited them in ways which
encouraged aective and intellectual engagement.
6 Voice
In general, the voices of the authors in these courses are neutral and
semi-formal. The learners are given instruction(s) impersonally in the
voice of an expert talking to a novice and the author rarely talks to the
adult learners as equals, or shares experiences with them. This approach
avoids the risk of learnersespecially those from authority-respecting
culturesbeing irritated or oended by a quirkily personal voice, but it
misses the opportunities for engagement and stimulation which have
been found to result from authors chatting to learners in personal ways
(Beck, McKeown, and Worthy 1995; Tomlinson 1998a: 89). True to Life
was considered to be patronising at times (e.g. p. 44, Task 2 of True to Life
Elementary Class Book), while Clockwise was thought to be sometimes
brusque and unfriendly, and Cutting Edge, Inside Out, Reward, and
Landmark were described as neutral, but not unfriendly or disrespectful.
However, we agreed that Language in Use and Wavelength managed to be
neutral, yet at the same time friendly and supportive in their authorial
voice.
7 Instructions
We were surprised at the lack of clarity and specicity in many of the
instructions. For example, Landmark and Inside Out were criticized for
their ambiguous use of pronouns, lack of clarity in reference, insucient
separation, lack of specicity about what to do and how to do it, lack of
examples, and insuciency of signalling and highlighting. Pages 423
Landmark Upper Intermediate Students Book and Unit 1 of Inside Out
Workbook Intermediate (both chosen at random), illustrate most of these
faults, and some of them can also be found on almost every page of most
of the other courses. However, whilst sharing many of the negative
features mentioned above, Reward and True to Life do at least clearly
signal and highlight their instructions, and Wavelength usually achieves
clear highlighting, separation and staging.
8 Teachability
Teachers can be said to be the central gures in materials
development, and yet their needs and wants are rarely given much
consideration in coursebook development (Masuhara 1998: 23940).
88 Brian Tomlinson, Bao Dat, Hitomi Masuhara, and Rani Rubdy
Not surprisingly, many of the courses reviewed did not satisfy all of our
criteria for teachability. Although most of them consider the obvious
need to help teachers to minimize their preparation time, very few
provide help in adapting the global course to specic situations, or cater
for dierent teaching styles or personalities, or (most important of all)
make eorts to make the courses interesting for the teachers. We found
that most of the courses (especially True to Life) impose an approach on
the teachers, and we agreed that many of them (especially True to Life,
Clockwise, and Reward) would not be very interesting to teach. However
we agreed that:
Language in Use gives some useful advice to teachers in its teachers
books;
Cutting Edge facilitates some adaptation through useful cross-referencing
and suggestions on how to use the additional material in the Resource
Bank and Workbook;
Wavelength oers the teacher a choice of interesting extra materials;
Landmark oers the teacher some scope for localization and adaptation;
Inside Out makes clear to the teacher the principles and objectives of its
activities, gives helpful suggestions, and provides some scope for teacher
adaptation.
Coursebook- 1 Appearance
specic criteria It is surprising that with the exception of Landmark and Reward, very few
of these courses have made any serious attempt to appeal to adults, and
that some of them (especially Clockwise) seem almost childish in
appearance. In fact, a teacher visiting our offices flicked through the
coursebooks and commented that they looked just like school textbooks.
We considered most of the coursebooks to have unattractive covers
(especially Landmark and Inside Out) but to be very visually attractive
throughout especially Landmark and Inside Out. We considered Language
in Use to have an attractive cover, and to be visually very attractive
throughout. Whereas Cutting Edge was thought to have a rather gaudy
cover, and not to be very attractive inside.
A distinctive feature of most of the books when we icked through them
was how European they look. Despite what seems to be a token attempt
to include a few photographs of other continents and cultures, this was
particularly true of Reward, Clockwise, Cutting Edge, Landmark, and Inside
Out.
2 Design
Some of the courses were considered to be cluttered and dense, with too
much text crammed onto each page, and not enough white space to
provide relief and clarity. Clockwise Intermediate and Upper
Intermediate, and Cutting Edge were thought to be particularly guilty of
such clutter, and also of a lack of clear separation and sequencing, so that
we found it very dicult to focus our attention on some of their pages
(e.g pp. 501 of Clockwise Intermediate Classbook, and pp. 367 of
Cutting Edge Intermediate Students Book). On the other hand, we found
that Reward, and Language in Use made good use of white space, and
EFL courses for adults 89
always made the sequence and separation of their activities clear (e.g. pp.
245 of Reward Upper Intermediate Students Book).
3 Illustrations
One distinctly positive feature of most of these courses is the use of
interesting illustrations. Language in Use, in particular, has a rich variety
of modern, attractive, and intriguing illustrations (including photo-
graphs, drawings, cartoons, and art), which give the books an aesthetic
appeal, and are often used to stimulate curiosity and engagement. This is
particularly true of the Upper Intermediate Classroom Book, which, for
example, uses intriguing modern paintings as the basis for personal
interpretation activities (pp. 20, 39, 89, 90, 94). The same is also true to
a lesser extent of Inside Out, Cutting Edge, and Landmark. However, we
found that Clockwise has only a few rather small and unattractive
illustrations (except in the Pre-Intermediate Classbook) and that the
illustrations in True to Life are neither interesting, attractive, or
functional. A number of other courses contain many illustrations which
have no apparent function other than to decorate the book. This is
particularly true of Reward Upper Intermediate Students Book (e.g. pp.
12 and 77) and Clockwise the Intermediate Classbook (e.g. pp. 44 and
623). On the other hand, some of the books use many of their
illustrations as a resource for language activities, especially Wavelength
(e.g. pp. 401 and pp. 667 of the Pre-Intermediate Coursebook) and
Inside Out (e.g. pp. 545 and pp. 93 of the Intermediate Students Book.
4 Reading texts
We all agreed that the most notable and regrettable features of the
reading texts are their brevity, and the restricted range of text types. Even
at Upper Intermediate Level the typical text is no more than half a page
long, and either describes a person, place, or routine, or narrates an
event. Rarely are the learners encouraged to read extensively for pleasure,
rarely are they invited to engage with argumentative or provocative texts,
and rarely are they given opportunity to enjoy a story or a poem are
equally scarce. Instead, most units in most courses ask them to read a
very short text intensively before answering related comprehension or
language questions. There is little attempt to help the learners to develop
reading skills and condence, and hardly any attempt at all to help them
develop the positive approach to free reading which has been shown to
facilitate language acquisition (Elley 1991; Krashen 1993; Tomlinson
1998b). The notable exceptions are Language in Use, which does provide
some provocative texts, and invites the learners to respond to them
personally (e.g. p. 68 of the Upper Intermediate Classroom Book) and
Wavelength, which provides opportunities for reading for pleasure (e.g.
p. 53 of the Pre-Intermediate Coursebook).
Cassettte/CD ROM- One of the components of global courses which has become more
specic criteria interesting and eective in the current generation of language teaching
materials is that which provides the learners with opportunities to listen
to the language being used. Many of the courses in this review have
managed to provide listening material which is realistic (if not always
authentic), varied, and sometimes engaging. This is especially true of
90 Brian Tomlinson, Bao Dat, Hitomi Masuhara, and Rani Rubdy
Language in Use, which sounds natural even at the beginners level, which
includes a variety of genres, text types, voices, and accents, and which
does provide some experience of extensive listening. The same also
applies to Inside Out and Wavelength, although these courses were
sometimes criticized for sounding obviously scripted and acted.
Unfortunately, it cannot be said that the listening material in Reward,
True to Life, or Clockwise is particularly natural, varied, or engaging. We
found Reward lacked spontaneity, variety, and aective appeal (though it
does include some non-British accents); True to Life struck us as rather
monotonous and Cambridge upper middle class, and we thought that
Clockwise was contrived, obviously acted, and not very engaging.
Teachers Book- We found that there were basically three types of teachers book:
specic criteria
Those that give very little useful information or advice to the teacher and
are uninteresting to read (i.e. True to Life and Clockwise).
Those which give clear and detailed procedures to the teacher for using
the book but do not provide many extra possibilities, or do anything to
help the teacher to adapt and localize the course (i.e. Reward, Inside Out,
and Landmark).
Those which provide useful suggestions for adaptation, as well as useful
additional activities for the teacher to choose from (Cutting Edge,
Wavelength, and, especially, Language in Use).
Unfortunately, except those for Language in Use, all of the teachers books
are unattractive in appearance and poorly designedthe almost
inevitable consequence of being a nancially unprotable component of
a global course.
Workbook- The workbook is another course component which seems to have
specic criteria improved in the current generation of global adult courses. We liked the
fact that many of the activities in many of the courses are personalized,
that the reading and writing activities are quite interesting, that there is a
variety of activity types, and that there is varied revision of what has been
taught in the coursebook. These qualities are particularly evident in
Landmark, Language in Use, and Inside Out, but not quite so evident in
Wavelength, or in Cutting Edge, which was considered to have too many
form-focused activities).
Video-specic Only two of the courses have video components. The Reward video
criteria component was considered to be boring, to use a very restricted number
of genres and text types, and to concentrate far too much on a running
story about a very corny TV company staed by a number of gross and
unconvincing character types. The True to Life video was thought to be
rather amateurish in its acting, and the script was thought to lack clear
principles and objectives. It does, however, have some potentially
interesting scenes.
We all asked the question, What is the point of including an expensive
video component when so much interesting material is available o-air
these days? Nobody could think of a convincing answer.
EFL courses for adults 91
All of us independentally agreed that Clockwise is disappointing, and that
it satises very few of our criteria.
What we all liked about Clockwise was:
The attractive and supportive design, lots of white space, clear divisions
between activities, and clear indications of sequence in the Pre-
Intermediate Classbook.
Some fairly realistic and quite interesting listenings at the Intermediate
level (e.g. in Unit 06 Change of State, and Unit 07 Taking Chances).
What we all disliked about Clockwise was:
The excessive focus on language form, and the consequent neglect of
communication.
The textbook-centredness of the approach: although it gives information
to the learners, it does not provide them with enough opportunities to
use it for communication, and does not encourage them to think or
discover for themselves.
The lack of potential for aective engagement in most of the activities.
The lack of challenge oered to the learners.
The triviality of much of the content.
The neglect of writing skills.
The consistent brevity of the reading texts, and the lack of variety of text
types and genres.
The obvious scripting of the listening texts at levels below Upper
Intermediate.
The minuteness and lack of function of many of the illustrations.
The ambiguity and lack of clarity of many of the instructions, none of
which are supported by highlighting or examples.
The exaggerated claims made about the approach and potential value of
the course.
We gave Clockwise an overall average rating of 54.1%
Cutting Edge Some of us liked Cutting Edge more than others, but none
(Pearson/Longman) of us rated it very highly. What we liked about it was:
The respect given to the learners.
The opportunities for personal response.
The attempts to engage aect.
The opportunities for choice oered to teachers and learners.
What we did not like about Cutting Edge was:
The excessive focus on language form.
The lack of real-life tasks.
The lack of opportunities to use language for communication.
The limitations imposed by the short texts and the guided activities.
The way the engagement potential of the reading and listening texts is
ignored in favour of text-based language work.
The very heavy units, which have too many unconnected activities.
The way every page is cluttered with text, and devoid of any white space.
The ambiguity and lack of clarity of the instructions.
The apparent assumption that teaching = learning, made evident by an
approach which is based on giving information about grammar and
vocabulary, and ignoring everything we know about the need to motivate
92 Brian Tomlinson, Bao Dat, Hitomi Masuhara, and Rani Rubdy
Specic evaluation
of the individual
courses
Clockwise
(Oxford University
Press)
and engage the learners, and to provide them with comprehensible input
and with opportunities to use language rather than to just practice it.
We gave Cutting Edge an overall average rating of 64%.
Inside Out In general we like Inside Out, and would be happy to teach it.
(Macmillan
Heinemann ELT)
What we liked about it was:
It stands out as being dierent from the stereotypical coursebook.
The authors excitement and enthusiasm are evident.
It makes use of current insights from learning research.
It respects the learners.
It promotes learning rather than teaching.
It includes a varied range of interesting spoken and written texts.
It attempts to engage the learners both aectively and intellectually
(especially in the listening activities).
It encourages personal response.
It encourages student initiative.
It promotes creativity and independent thinking.
It gives priority to meaning.
What we did not like about Inside Out was:
That the engagement potential of a text is often ignored in favour of text-
based language work (e.g. Pacic Heights on pp. 778 of the
Intermediate Students Book).
The lack of attention to communication skills.
The paucity of the writing tasks.
The poor quality of the instructions.
The lack of opportunity for extensive listening and reading.
The underuse of ction.
The orientation towards western culture (e.g. Intermediate Student
Book, Unit 3, p. 28. Chat up lines, and Intermediate Workbook, p. 13).
We gave Inside Out an overall average of 73.8%.
Language in Use We are very impressed by the 1991 original edition Language in Use, and
(Cambridge would recommend its use.
University Press)
N.B. We would like to emphasise that our evaluation above (and in
Appendix B) is of Language in Use (1991) and not of the New Edition of
Language in Use (2000).We have all seen a copy of the New Edition of
Language in Use Pre-Intermediate and we are all agreed that this edition
would not have been evaluated as highly as the original if we had
subjected it to a criterion referenced evaluation. We are all disappointed
that the New Edition seems to have lost the aesthetic appeal, the potential
for engagement and the encouragement of creativity of the orginal. It has
also lost nearly all the reading texts and gained lots of little bits of
language for study instead.
What we liked about it was:
It encourages creativity.
It aims at aective and intellectual engagement.
It encourages personalization.
It treats learners as individuals.
EFL courses for adults 93
94 Brian Tomlinson, Bao Dat, Hitomi Masuhara, and Rani Rubdy
It tries to cater for students of mixed backgrounds and abilities.
It aims at skills development.
It contains a rich variety of real world spoken and written texts.
It is very attractive in appearance.
Its attractive illustrations are often usefully functional.
What we did not like about Language in Use was:
It is too form-focused.
It does not contain enough communication activities.
It does not have enough experiential activities (despite its claims to do
so).
It gives little attention to extensive writing.
It neglects extensive listening and reading.
It does not use enough ction.
We gave Language in Use an overall average score of 74.5%.
Landmark We liked Landmark, and would recommend its use, especially for
(Oxford University learners who want to be stimulated to think for themselves as well as to
Press) learn language.
What we liked about Landmark is:
It respects the learners and the teacher.
It has an adult tone.
It encourages learner enquiry, and provides opportunities for self-
discovery (e.g. Upper Intermediate Students Book, p.9).
It attempts to engage aect.
It provides potentially motivating exposure to English in use through a
diverse range of realistic listening and reading texts.
It provides some opportunities to develop the skills of extensive reading.
It has a potentially useful writing component which has just the right
balance of guidance and freedom.
It helps to develop thinking skills in English.
It provides some extension activities for ambitious students.
It has an aesthetic appeal.
What we did not like about Landmark was:
The predominant focus on language forms.
The lack of attention to communication skills.
The excessive control and guidance provided in many of the activities.
The limitations imposed by the brevity of the texts.
The unrealistic harmony of the world created by the course.
The Anglo-centricity of the listening texts.
The lack of opportunities for localization.
The poor quality of the instructions.
The underuse of ction.
We gave Landmark an overall average score of 73%.
Reward We all agreed that Reward is in many ways the stereotypical middle-of-
(Macmillan the-road language course which is unlikely to disturb or delight anybody,
Heinemann ELT) and is therefore likely to sell very well.
What we liked about Reward was:
It attempts to raise cross-cultural awareness.
It attempts to engage aect by giving opportunities for personal
response.
It gives respect to the learners.
It chunks the course in a way which makes it manageable for teachers
and for learners.
Some of the listening and reading texts are potentially motivating.
What we did not like about Reward was:
The limitations imposed by the short texts and the guided activities.
The way the engagement potential of a text is often ignored in favour of
text-based language work.
The excessive focus on the the explicit teaching of grammar rules.
The de-contextualized presentation of vocabulary and grammar.
The lack of opportunities for learners to make discoveries for themselves.
The lack of attention to communication skills.
The low priority given to writing.
The cursory, rather supercial, coverage of most of the teaching points.
The underuse of ction.
We gave Reward an overall average score of 62.4%.
True to Life We were all very disappointed by True to Life, as we had had quite high
(Cambridge expectations of it when we read the title, noticed the authors, and
University Press) skimmed the coursebooks.
What we liked about True to Life was:
Some of the scenes on the video.
Some of the listening material.
The title.
What we did not like about True to Life was:
The absolute centrality of grammar.
The almost exclusive focus on language form.
The neglect of spontaneous communication and uency activities.
The discrete nature of most of the activities.
The lack of any attempt to engage aect.
The exclusive catering for analytical learners.
The lack of interesting texts.
The lack of variety of genres and text types.
The lack of imagination and creativity.
The triviality and lack of apparent transferability of many of the
activities (e.g. in Task 2, p. 29 of the Pre-Intermediate Class Book,
learners in pairs are invited to ask the teacher 15 questions about his or
her shoes).
The neglect of writing skills.
The lack of opportunities for extensive listening and reading.
The potential for boring both learners and teachers.
We gave True to Life an overall average score of 54.1%.
EFL courses for adults 95
Wavelength There are many things which we liked about Wavelength, and we would
(Pearson Longman) happily recommend it and use it ourselves.
What we liked about Wavelength was:
It attempts to engage aect by giving ample opportunities for personal
response.
The respect given to the learners.
The way that grammar is given major attention, but is not allowed to
destroy the reality of texts and tasks.
The priority given to meaning.
The realism of the world created by the course (e.g. arguments and
competition, as well as agreement and cooperation).
The use of narrative and of humour to engage interest and attention.
The many interesting and useful suggestions, and the optional material
oered to the teachers.
The scope for learner choice, initiative, and personalization.
The provision of some extensive reading activities.
What we did not like about Wavelength was:
The predominant focus on language.
The lack of attention to communication skills.
The limited range of genres and text types.
The limitations imposed by the brevity of many of the texts, and the
inadequate guidance provided for many of the activities.
The mechanical nature of many of the exercises in the workbooks.
The low priority given to writing.
The predominance of conversational English in the listening texts.
We gave Wavelength an overall average score of 70%.
After our rigorous evaluation of the eight courses, our conclusion is that
we would all be happy to teach or recommend Inside Out, Landmark,
Language in Use, and Wavelength, they are all genuinely adult courses,
and have the potential to motivate both teachers and learners.
See Appendix B for a summary of the scores which each course was
given for each criterion heading.
General trends in We all agreed that we had noticed and welcomed the following
current courses positive trends in course development:
Positive trends
An increase in attempts to personalize the learning process by getting
learners to relate topics and texts to their own lives, views, and feelings
(especially in Language in Use and Inside Out).
An attempt to gain the aective engagement of the learners by involving
them in texts and tasks which encourage the expression of feelings
(especially in Language in Use and Wavelength).
A greater attempt to create reality in the texts produced for the audio-
visual components of many of the courses.
A greater potential for engagement in the audio-visual components of
many of the courses (especially in Wavelength).
A larger range of accents, genres, and personality types in the audio-
visual components of many of the courses.
Better quality teachers books, which are easier to use (e.g. by having a
96 Brian Tomlinson, Bao Dat, Hitomi Masuhara, and Rani Rubdy
page from the students book, and a guide to using it on the same
double-page spread), more respectful to the teacher, and more useful
as a source of additional material, and ideas for alternative or extra
activities.
Better quality workbooks, as regards the engagement value of the
content, and the attractiveness of the appearance (especially Landmark
and Wavelength).
A multiple trialling of the materials, as evidenced by the lists of
acknowledgements to the institutions involved in the trialling.
All the above are welcome trends, but we all agree that most of them
need to go even further. This is particularly true of the trends towards the
personalization of activities, and the engagement of aect.
Negative trends We also agreed that we had noticed and regretted what we considered to
be the following negative trends:
The insistence on a return to the central place of grammar in the
language curriculum (Soars and Soars 1996), which seems to contradict
what many of the teachers and learners in the research referred to on p.1
said they want from a course. This goes against many of the ndings of
Second Language Acquisition Research (see Tomlinson 1998a, pp.
522), and in some of the courses reviewed often resulted in the sacrice
of the potential cognitive and aective engagement of a text or task in
order to focus on the explicit teaching of a new feature of grammar, this
is also noticeable in the new edition of Language in Use Pre-Intermediate
which is far more grammar-centred than the original 1991 edition.
The assumption that adult learners are mainly interested in listening and
speaking, and a consequent neglect at reading and writing (activities
which can be extremely valuable for facilitating language acquisition,
even if the skills developed are not the priority needs of the learners).
The assertion that authenticity of text and task is not necessarily valuable
for the learner, and that a reality which is contrived to match the level of
the learners is likely to be more benecial in terms of language learning.
The assumption that todays adult learners have short attention spans,
can only cope with very short reading and listening tasks, and will only
engage in activities for a short time.
The neglect of extensive reading and extensive listening as a means of
engaging the interest and attention of learners, and as a source of
exposure to language in use (with the conspicuous exception of
Wavelength and Inside Out).
The assumption that most adult learners do not want and would not gain
from intellectually demanding activities whilst engaged in learning the
target language.
The absence of controversial issues to stimulate thought, to provide
opportunities for exchanges of views, and to make the topic content
meaningful to adult learners (with the notable exception of the 1991
edition of Language in Use).
The lack of adult content, and especially of topics which require
intellectual and/or aective investment from the learners.
The scarcity of real tasks which have an intended outcome other than the
practice of language forms.
EFL courses for adults 97
98 Brian Tomlinson, Bao Dat, Hitomi Masuhara, and Rani Rubdy
The token attempt to make use of a discovery approach, which usually
consists of being helped to reach a pre-determined answer, and then
being asked to check the answer in a grammar summary (e.g. Cutting
Edge).
The neglect of literature as a source of potentially stimulating texts, and
as a means of engaging learners in meaningful interaction with the
target languagedespite the many claims by methodologists of the
potential value and appeal of literature (e.g. Du and Maley 1990; Lazar
1993; Tomlinson 1994 ,1998b)
The apparent abandonment of the extended project as a means of
engaging learners in motivated and meaningful encounters with the
target language in use.
The continuing predominance of analytical activities, and a neglect of
activities which could cater for learners with other preferred learning
styles (e.g. kinaesthetic activities).
The neglect of activities which could make full use of the resources of the
mind by stimulating multi-dimensional mental responses which are at
the same time sensory, cognitive, and aective (e.g. Masuhara 1997 )
The lack of activities aiming to stimulate the imagination of the learners.
The excessive increase in the number of course components (Reward, for
example, has seven components per level) with a noticeable drop in
creative energy for the multi-component courses (either from author
fatigue or from bringing in extra writers to write workbooks, etc., who
may not be initiating members of the team).
This last point prompts us to ask What is the rationale for multiple-
component courses? and What are the eects of multiple-component
courses compared to the eects of courses which have only a few
components? A number of publishers have told us that they only publish
multiple-component courses because their rivals do, and that they would
be happy to jettison many of the money-losing components (such as
videos and resource packs) and to return to the days when a course
consisted of a students book, a cassette, and a teachers book. The most
apparent eect of multiple-component courses seems to be writer,
learner, and teacher exhaustion. So perhaps we should go back to the
cheaper, simpler, and more coherent days of three component courses
especially as the courses which we liked best in this review seem to be
those with the fewest components.
Conclusion We all admitted at our nal meeting that we had been pleasantly
surprised by the qualities of many of the components of the courses we
have evaluated. We were all delighted by the move towards stimulating
more personal responses from the learners, pleased by the attempts of
many of the courses to encourage humour and fun, and impressed by the
realism of many of the audio components of the courses. However, we
would all welcome a greater provision of extended experience of the
language in use, a reduction in the attention given to explicit knowledge
of grammar, and an increase in the attention paid to helping learners not
only to achieve accuracy, uency, and appropriacy, but to achieve eect as
well. And, nally, we would all be delighted to welcome back literature and
other genres which give adults something to think, talk, and write about.
EFL courses for adults 99
References
Arnold, J. 1999. Aect in Language Learning.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Beck, I. L, M. G. McKeown, and J. Worthy. 1995.
Giving a text voice can improve students
understanding. Research Reading Quarterly 30/2.
Du, A. and A. Maley. 1990. Literature. Oxford.
Oxford University Press.
Elley, W. 1991. Acquiring literacy in a second
language: the eect of book-based programmes.
Language Learning 41: 375411.
Ellis, R. 1998. The evaluation of communicative
tasks in B. Tomlinson (ed.). Materials Development
in Language Teaching. Cambridge. Cambridge
University Press.
Krashen, S. 1993. The Power of Reading.
Englewood, Colarado: Libraries Unlimited.
Lazar,G. 1993. Literature and Language Teaching.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Maley, A. 1998. Squaring the circlereconciling
materials as constraint with materials as
empowerment in B. Tomlinson (ed.). Materials
Development in Language Teaching. Cambridge.
Cambridge University Press.
Masuhara, H. 1997. Factors Inuencing Reading
Diculties of Authentic Materials for Advanced
Learners of EFL. Unpublished PhD thesis.
University of Luton.
Masuhara, H. 1998. What do teachers really want
from coursebooks? in B. Tomlinson (ed.).
Materials Development in Language Teaching.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Oxford, R. 1997. Language Learning Strategies
Around the World: Crosscultural Perspectives.
Manoa: University of Hawaii Press.
Rubdy, R. 1998. Task. ELT Journal 52/3: 2645.
Soars, J. and L. Soars. 1996. An introduction to
New Headway Intermediate. Headway Teachers
Magazine 5: 25.
Tomlinson, B. 1994. Openings. London: Penguin.
Tomlinson, B. 1998a. Introduction in B.
Tomlinson (ed.). Materials Development in
Language Teaching. Cambridge. Cambridge
University Press.
Tomlinson, B. 1998b. And now for something not
completely dierent. Reading in a Foreign
Language. 11/2: 17789.
Tomlinson, B. 1998c. Aect and the coursebook
in IATEFL Issues 145: 201.
Tomlinson, B. 1999. Materials development for
language teachers in Modern English Teacher 8/1:
624.
Wajnryb, R. 1996. Death, taxes and jeopardy:
systematic omissions in EFL texts, or life was
never meant to be an adjacency pair. Sydney:
ELICOS Association 9th Educational Conference.
Willis, J. 1996. A Framework for Task-based
Learning. Harlow: Longman.
Widdowson, H. G. 2000. Object language and the
language subject: on the mediating role of applied
linguistics in The Annual Review of Applied
Linguistics 20: 2133.
The reviewers
Brian Tomlinson is Reader in Language Learning
and Teaching in the Centre for Language Study at
Leeds Metropolitan University, and Founder and
President of MATSDA (the Materials Development
Association). He has worked in language
education and teacher development in Indonesia,
Japan, Nigeria, Singapore, Vanuatu, and Zambia,
and has given conference presentations in over 40
countries. His numerous publications include
Discover English and Openings and Materials
Development in Language Teaching.
Boa Dat is a Fellow at the National University of
Singapore, where he teaches Vietnamese. He has
previously taught English at the National
University of Vietnam, and is currently working
for a PhD with Leeds Metropolitan University. He
has published a number of articles on speaking
skills, and given presentations in The Philippines
and the USA. He is also a well-known cartoonist in
Vietnam and Singapore.
Hitomi Masuhara is Lecturer in Lesser-Taught
Languages in the Centre for Language Study at
Leeds Metropolitan University. Previously she was
a Fellow at the National University of Singapore
where she taught Japanese and Cross-cultural
Studies. She has also taught English at Nagoya
Womens University, and on the MA in L2
Materials Development at the University of Luton.
She has published a number of articles and books
(including Use Your English and Active Japanese) and
given conference presentations in every continent.
Rani Rubdy is a Senior Lecturer in the Department
of English Language and Literature at the National
University of Singapore, where she teaches
undergraduate and postgraduate courses on
language education and the teaching of ESP. Prior
to this she taught at the Central Institute of
English and Foreign Languages in Hyderabad.
Her current research interests are classroom-
based research and curriculum innovation, and
she has published a number of articles and
reviews, including some for the ELT Journal.
100 Brian Tomlinson, Bao Dat, Hitomi Masuhara, and Rani Rubdy
C o m p o n e n t s L e v e l s
A
p
p
e
n
d
i
x

A
:

S
u
m
m
a
r
y

o
f

c
o
u
r
s
e

c
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t
s

r
e
v
i
e
w
e
d

(
f
u
r
t
h
e
r

c
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t
s

m
a
y

n
o
w

b
e

a
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
)
P
u
b
l
i
s
h
e
r
C
a
m
b
r
i
d
g
e

U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

P
r
e
s
s
M
a
c
m
i
l
l
a
n

H
e
i
n
e
m
a
n
n

E
L
T
O
x
f
o
r
d

U
n
i
v
e
r
s
i
t
y

P
r
e
s
s
P
e
a
r
s
o
n

L
o
n
g
m
a
n
C
o
u
r
s
e
L
a
n
g
u
a
g
e

i
n

T
r
u
e

t
o

L
i
f
e
I
n
s
i
d
e

O
u
t
R
e
w
a
r
d
C
l
o
c
k
w
i
s
e
L
a
n
d
m
a
r
k
C
u
t
t
i
n
g

E
d
g
e
W
a
v
e
l
e
n
g
t
h
U
s
e
P
u
b
l
i
c
a
t
i
o
n

o
f

1
9
9
1
1
9
9
5
2
0
0
0
1
9
9
5
2
0
0
0
2
0
0
0
1
9
9
8
2
0
0
0
F
i
r
s
t

L
e
v
e
l
S
t
u
d
e
n
t

D
o

,

A
.

G
a
i
r
n
s
,

R
.
K
a
y
,

S
.
G
r
e
e
n
a
l
l
,

S
.
M
c
G
o
w
e
n
,

B
.
H
a
i
n
e
s
,

S
.

C
u
n
n
i
n
g
h
a
m
,

S
.

B
u
r
k
e
,

K
.

C
o
u
r
s
e
b
o
o
k

C
.

J
o
n
e
s
S
.

R
e
d
m
a
n
;

V
.

J
o
n
e
s
V
.

R
i
c
h
a
r
d
s
o
n
;

B
.

S
t
e
w
a
r
t
.
P
.

M
o
o
r
.
J
.

B
r
o
o
k
s
.
A
u
t
h
o
r
s
J
.

C
o
l
l
i
e
,

W
.

F
o
r
s
y
t
h
.
;

S
.

H
a
i
n
e
s
.
;

J
.

N
a
u
n
t
o
n
.
S
.

S
l
a
t
e
r
.
T
a
r
g
e
t

L
e
a
r
n
e
r
s
Y
o
u
n
g

A
d
u
l
t
s
/
A
d
u
l
t
s
Y
o
u
n
g

A
d
u
l
t
s
/
Y
o
u
n
g

A
d
u
l
t
s
/
Y
o
u
n
g

A
d
u
l
t
s
/
Y
o
u
n
g

A
d
u
l
t
s
/
Y
o
u
n
g

A
d
u
l
t
s

Y
o
u
n
g

A
d
u
l
t
s
/
A
d
u
l
t
s
A
d
u
l
t
s
A
d
u
l
t
s
A
d
u
l
t
s
A
d
u
l
t
s
A
d
u
l
t
s
A
d
v
a
n
c
e
d

U
p
p
e
r
-
I
n
t
e
r
m
e
d
i
a
t
e

I
n
t
e
r
m
e
d
i
a
t
e

P
r
e
-
I
n
t
e
r
m
e
d
i
a
t
e

E
l
e
m
e
n
t
a
r
y

B
e
g
i
n
n
e
r

S
t
a
r
t
e
r

S
t
u
d
e
n
t

s

B
o
o
k

T
e
a
c
h
e
r

s

B
o
o
k

R
e
s
o
u
r
c
e

B
o
o
k

C
l
a
s
s

C
a
s
s
e
t
t
e
s

C
l
a
s
s

C
D

R
o
m

W
o
r
k
b
o
o
k

S
t
u
d
e
n
t

C
a
s
s
e
t
t
e
s

S
t
u
d
e
n
t

C
D

R
o
m

T
e
s
t
s

R
e
a
d
e
r

R
e
a
d
e
r

C
D

R
o
m

V
i
d
e
o

EFL courses for adults 101

A
p
p
e
n
d
i
x

B
:

S
u
m
m
a
r
y

o
f

e
v
a
l
u
a
t
i
o
n
C
o
u
r
s
e
C
l
o
c
k
w
i
s
e
C
u
t
t
i
n
g

E
d
g
e
I
n
s
i
d
e

O
u
t
L
a
n
d
m
a
r
k
L
a
n
g
u
a
g
e

I
n

U
s
e
R
e
w
a
r
d
T
r
u
e

t
o

L
i
f
e
W
a
v
e
l
e
n
g
t
h
T
o
t
a
l

G
r
a
d
e
5
4
%
6
4
%
7
4
%
7
3
%
7
5
%
6
2
%
5
4
%
7
0
%
O
v
e
r
a
l
l

C
o
u
r
s
e
4
4
0
5
0
%
5
7
%
6
8
%
7
1
%
7
2
%
5
7
%
4
9
%
6
6
%
1
p
u
b
l
i
s
h
e
r

s

c
l
a
i
m
s
4
0
5
7
%
6
7
%
7
9
%
8
0
%
7
8
%
6
7
%
5
1
%
7
0
%
2

e
x
i
b
i
l
i
t
y
1
0
0
3
9
%
5
1
%
6
1
%
6
2
%
6
6
%
5
1
%
3
9
%
6
1
%
3
s
y
l
l
a
b
u
s
6
5
5
6
%
6
5
%
6
6
%
7
5
%
7
0
%
5
5
%
5
2
%
7
1
%
4
p
e
d
a
g
o
g
i
c

a
p
p
r
o
a
c
h
1
1
0
4
5
%
6
2
%
6
8
%
7
3
%
7
3
%
5
3
%
4
5
%
6
5
%
5
t
o
p
i
c

c
o
n
t
e
n
t
s
3
5
6
0
%
6
6
%
7
5
%
7
4
%
8
1
%
6
2
%
5
4
%
6
9
%
6
v
o
i
c
e
1
0
6
0
%
7
0
%
8
0
%
8
3
%
7
5
%
7
5
%
6
8
%
7
3
%
7
i
n
s
t
r
u
c
t
i
o
n
s
2
0
5
9
%
5
8
%
7
0
%
6
5
%
6
5
%
7
1
%
7
0
%
7
0
%
8
t
e
a
c
h
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
4
0
4
8
%
5
8
%
6
6
%
6
4
%
7
5
%
5
8
%
5
3
%
6
2
%
9
d
u
r
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
2
0
6
4
%
3
5
%
7
6
%
7
9
%
7
4
%
6
5
%
5
9
%
6
9
%
C
o
u
r
s
e
b
o
o
k
1
3
5
5
8
%
6
5
%
7
7
%
7
2
%
7
3
%
6
7
%
5
8
%
6
6
%
1
a
p
p
e
a
r
a
n
c
e
2
5
6
3
%
6
9
%
7
4
%
6
6
%
7
6
%
6
4
%
5
4
%
7
0
%
2
d
e
s
i
g
n
4
5
5
8
%
6
0
%
7
8
%
7
3
%
7
3
%
7
2
%
7
4
%
6
5
%
3
i
l
l
u
s
t
r
a
t
i
o
n
s

3
0
5
8
%
6
8
%
7
7
%
7
5
%
7
3
%
6
6
%
5
2
%
6
7
%
4
r
e
a
d
i
n
g

t
e
x
t
s
3
5
5
3
%
6
4
%
7
9
%
7
4
%
7
1
%
6
5
%
4
6
%
6
5
%
C
a
s
s
e
t
t
e

(
&

C
D

R
o
m
)
5
5
6
3
%
6
8
%
8
0
%
6
9
%
7
6
%
6
1
%
6
0
%
6
8
%
T
e
a
c
h
e
r

s

B
o
o
k
4
5
5
3
%
6
4
%
8
1
%
7
0
%
7
2
%
6
6
%
7
0
%
6
9
%
W
o
r
k
b
o
o
k
2
5
N
.
A
.
5
8
%
6
9
%
7
5
%
7
1
%
6
3
%
6
5
%
6
6
%
V
i
d
e
o
3
0
N
.
A
.
N
.
A
.
N
.
A
.
N
.
A
.
N
.
A
.
5
3
%
4
4
%
N
.
A
.