Download and Read online, DOWNLOAD EBOOK, [PDF EBOOK EPUB ], Ebooks

download, Read Ebook EPUB/KINDE, Download Book Format PDF

Developing materials for language teaching Second

Edition Tomlinson

OR CLICK LINK
https://textbookfull.com/product/developing-
materials-for-language-teaching-second-edition-
tomlinson/

Read with Our Free App Audiobook Free Format PFD EBook, Ebooks dowload PDF
with Andible trial, Real book, online, KINDLE , Download[PDF] and Read and Read
Read book Format PDF Ebook, Dowload online, Read book Format PDF Ebook,
[PDF] and Real ONLINE Dowload [PDF] and Real ONLINE
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Developing Materials for Language Teaching Brian

Tomlinson

https://textbookfull.com/product/developing-materials-for-
language-teaching-brian-tomlinson/

Teaching and Developing Reading Skills: Cambridge

Handbooks for Language Teachers Peter Watkins

https://textbookfull.com/product/teaching-and-developing-reading-
skills-cambridge-handbooks-for-language-teachers-peter-watkins/

Teaching Arabic as a Foreign Language Techniques for

Developing Language Skills and Grammar 1st Edition
Mohammad T. Alhawary

https://textbookfull.com/product/teaching-arabic-as-a-foreign-
language-techniques-for-developing-language-skills-and-
grammar-1st-edition-mohammad-t-alhawary/

Readings for Reflective Teaching in Schools Second

Edition Pollard

https://textbookfull.com/product/readings-for-reflective-
teaching-in-schools-second-edition-pollard/
Handbook of Research in Second Language Teaching and
Learning Volume III ESL Applied Linguistics
Professional Series 1st Edition Hinkel

https://textbookfull.com/product/handbook-of-research-in-second-
language-teaching-and-learning-volume-iii-esl-applied-
linguistics-professional-series-1st-edition-hinkel/

Teaching English as a Foreign Language Carola Surkamp

https://textbookfull.com/product/teaching-english-as-a-foreign-
language-carola-surkamp/

Practical Teaching Skills for Driving Instructors

Developing Your Client Centred Learning and Coaching
Skills 11th Edition John Miller

https://textbookfull.com/product/practical-teaching-skills-for-
driving-instructors-developing-your-client-centred-learning-and-
coaching-skills-11th-edition-john-miller/

Teaching Grammar Creatively Second Edition Herbert

Puchta

https://textbookfull.com/product/teaching-grammar-creatively-
second-edition-herbert-puchta/

Understanding Formulaic Language A Second Language

Acquisition Perspective Second Language Acquisition
Research Series 1st Edition Anna Siyanova-Chanturia

https://textbookfull.com/product/understanding-formulaic-
language-a-second-language-acquisition-perspective-second-
language-acquisition-research-series-1st-edition-anna-siyanova-
Developing Materials for
Language Teaching

Chapters from the first edition

Edited by
Brian Tomlinson

LON DON • N E W DE L H I • N E W YOR K • SY DN EY

 Bloomsbury Academic
An imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc

50 Bedford Square 1385 Broadway

London New York
WC1B 3DP NY 10018
UK USA

www.bloomsbury.com

The chapters first published in Developing Materials for Language Teaching, 2003
This ebook collection first published 2014

© Brian Tomlinson and Contributors, 2014

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any
form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying,
recording, or any information storage or retrieval system, without
prior permission in writing from the publishers.

No responsibility for loss caused to any individual or organization acting on or refraining

from action as a result of the material in this publication can be accepted by
Bloomsbury Academic or the author.

British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.

eISBN: 978-1-4742-1054-6

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

A catalog record for this book is available from the Library of Congress.

Typeset by Jones Ltd, London

 Contents

All Chapter Numbers Refer to the First Edition, PB ISBN: 9780826459176 (now out of print)

2 Selection of Materials 37
Rani Rubdy
5 Adapting Classroom Materials 86
Carlos Islam and Chris Mares
12 Developing Electronic Materials for Language Teaching 199
Beverly Derewianka
13 Hyperfiction: Explorations in Texture 221
Claudia Ferradas Moi
15 Materials for Beginners 256
Carlos Islam
17 Talking like Texts and Talking about Texts: How Some Primary
School Coursebook Tasks are Realized in the Classroom 291
Irma K. Ghosn
18 Materials for Specific Purposes 306
Roger Barnard and Dorothy Zemach
25 Materials for Language Awareness 422
Rod Bolitho
26 Materials for Cultural Awareness 426
Alan Pulverness
29 Materials Development and Teacher Training 479
Christophe Canniveng and Mertxe Martinez
30 A Practical Experience of Institutional Textbook Writing:
Product/Process Implications for Materials Development 490
Patrick Lyons
31 Personal and Professional Development through Writing:
The Romanian Textbook Project 505
Ruxandra Popovici and Rod Bolitho
 CHAPTER

2
Selection of Materials
Rani Rubdy

Introduction
The coursebook has become an almost universal element of ELT, playing as it
does a vital and positive part in the everyday job of teaching and learning of
English (Hutchinson and Torres, 1994). The plethora of material that continues
to be produced unabated bears ample testimony to its perceived importance not
simply as one of the main ‘tools of the trade’ in the language classroom but as
‘the visible heart’ of any ELT programme (Sheldon, 1988: 237). As Cunnings-
worth has noted, the wealth of published material that is available on the market
today makes the selection of the right coursebook a challenging task, requiring
teachers to make informed and appropriate choices when selecting coursebooks
and supporting materials (Cunningsworth, 1995: 1).
What makes it vital to develop even more accurate and revealing ways of evalu-
ating and selecting coursebooks is that materials themselves have evolved into
more complex objects. While in the early days ELT coursebooks contained mainly
reading texts accompanied by a set of comprehension questions and a few
grammar and vocabulary exercises, materials today frequently offer ‘packages’ for
language teaching and learning which include workbooks, teachers’ guides,
audio and video support and even CALL programmes with precise indications of
the work that teachers and learners are to do together in a way that effectively
structures classroom lessons (Littlejohn, 1998: 190). Indeed, materials have more
and more come to be viewed as ‘an embodiment of the aims, values and methods
of the particular teaching learning situation’ (Hutchinson, 1987: 37) to the
extent that, as Hutchinson observes, the selection of materials probably repre-
sents the single most important decision that the language teacher has to make.
The selection of materials involves matching the given materials against the
context in which they are going to be used and the needs and interests of the
teachers and learners who work within it, to find the best possible fit between
them. This calls for major strategic decisions based on informed judgement and
professional experience, forcing teachers to identify their priorities: As Littlejohn
rightly observes, ‘We need to be able to examine the implications that use of a set
of materials may have for classroom work and thus come to grounded opinions
about whether or not the methodology and content of the materials is appro-
priate for a particular language teaching context’ (Littlejohn, 1998: 190–1).
38 Rani Rubdy

The number of variables that affect the success or failure of coursebooks in

particular contexts have made it necessary to identify appropriate criteria on
which to base these decisions. The range and multiplicity of criteria that reflect
these variables in the literature typically relate to learner goals and needs,
learning styles, proficiency levels, language teaching methods, classroom contexts
and processes, as well as the potential of materials for generating motivation,
variety and interest. Approaches that evaluate and select materials only on the
basis of such overtly observable properties that reside in the texts, tasks and
activities, however, represent to some extent a static view of materials. Since
materials are a powerful stimuli for generating learning, a more dynamic
approach would be one which selects materials for their potential not only to
engage the learners’ and teacher’s attention and effort, but also to draw sub-
stantial contributions from the teacher, the learners and the collective group as a
whole that can be transformed into worthwhile learning experiences in the
course of classroom interaction.
This chapter will review the approaches and criteria that have been employed
in the selection of instructional materials in ELT and assess the theoretical and
pedagogical assumptions underlying them. In view of the fact that the require-
ments of particular learning/teaching situations are often varied, and hence
cannot be met by any one ideal coursebook, however impressive or eminent, it
will propose a framework for selecting materials which, while incorporating cri-
teria that form part of conventional wisdom, prioritizes the potential that all good
materials have for flexibility, adaptability and relevance to the changing needs,
goals and interests of the modern-day language learner.

The Roles and Functions of Coursebooks

It might be helpful to begin by examining current thinking regarding the role
and functions of coursebooks. This should help bring clarity to the act of judging
the worth of coursebooks, particularly in the face of the broad variation found
among teachers of English across the world who use them, and the diversity in the
objectives for learning English that exists among their students.
Recent years have seen a renewed debate about the desirability of ELT course-
books in facilitating the teaching and learning of English. Some scholars object to
them in principle on grounds that published materials do not always provide the
types of texts and activities that a teacher is seeking for a given class (Block, 1991).
Others argue that they tend to have a constraining effect on the freedom of
action of the teacher, predetermining the content and procedures for learners
and pre-empting creativity and exploration on the part of teachers (Prabhu,
1988). Because coursebooks are typically produced centrally by a group of ‘spe-
cialists’ for another group to use locally in a top-down fashion (Maley, 1998: 279)
they can act as instruments of institutional control or serve a range of commercial
interests (Bell and Gower, 1998: 117) that could be disempowering for teachers.
In this view, ‘The teacher becomes little more than a cipher for a prepared text’
(Hutchinson and Torres, 1994).
 2. Selection of Materials 39

To combat this trend of over-reliance on the textbook, a strong case has been
made for the promotion of teacher-generated materials (Block, 1991; Dubin,
1988) and for greater learner involvement in materials adaptation (Clarke, 1989;
Riggenbach, 1988), more in tune with a learner-centred philosophy that char-
acterizes contemporary classrooms. Block (1991), for instance, contends that the
way core language is contextualized in many commercial materials often renders
it irrelevant and outdated. He maintains that the personal touch that the teacher
can bring to his/her materials is unparalleled by the stereotypical activities that
characterize many of them. Clark (1989) pleads for creative learner involvement
in materials adaptation and shows how giving learners a more contributory role
can serve not only to make existing materials more relevant but also more
motivating for the learner.
Notwithstanding these developments, there are those who argue that ‘course-
books provide teachers and learners with a range of professionally developed
materials within tried and tested syllabus structures’, allowing teachers to spend
their valuable time more on facilitating learning than materials production (Bell
and Gower, 1998: 116). Advocacy of coursebooks has come from scholars who
strongly believe that coursebooks should be seen as a means of ‘re-skilling’ rather
than ‘de-skilling’ teachers (O’Neil, 1982; Hutchinson and Torres, 1994; Edge and
Wharton, 1998) and that, provided they are used flexibly, they can be adapted
and supplemented to meet the needs of specific classes (Bell and Gower, 1998:
117). They state the following advantages for the use of coursebooks:

1. Coursebooks fulfil a wide range of practical needs, particularly in contexts where

English is being taught in a non-English-speaking environment and where tea-
chers either lack training or sufficient time to analyse each group’s needs.
2. The coursebook helps provide a route map for both teachers and learners,
making it possible for them to look ahead to what will be done in a lesson as
well as to look back on what has been done.
3. Coursebooks provide structure and predictability, which help give partici-
pants in social interactions like lessons a safe base, a platform for negotiation
and exploration.
4. By dealing with a certain amount of routine work for teachers, the course-
book frees them to attend to more important aspects of lesson planning
(including materials adaptation and supplementation), and to concentrate
on using their creative skills.
5. Coursebooks provide teachers, particularly those lacking in training and
experience, with a sense of self-confidence and security.
6. Most coursebooks are designed and developed by experts in the field, con-
versant with current theoretical approaches and methodological practices.
The quality of sophistication in their design, content and organization would
be difficult to match with home-grown materials.
7. Coursebooks can act as agents of change, allowing innovative ideas to be
introduced within their structured framework in a way that enables teachers
and learners to develop in harmony with these new ideas. Indeed, Edge and
40 Rani Rubdy

Wharton (1998) see the ELT coursbook functioning as a genre of mass

communication, where its authors can enter into positive dialogue with teach-
ers and students on a number of issues of current significance to ELT
professionals.

Not surprising, then, to see why the selection of materials has come to involve
‘considerable professional, financial and even political investment’ – not just by
teachers and learners – but other stakeholders as well, such as administrators,
educational advisors, education ministries and state governments, making the
task a high profile one (Sheldon, 1988: 237). Conflict of interests can arise
between commercial agencies who view ELT books as big business and use
aggressive marketing strategies to exploit the situation and those committed to
the choice of a coursebook simply for its value for effective classroom use. This
explains the current polarization of views, fluctuating between the perception
that coursebooks are valid, labour-saving tools, on the one hand, and the belief
that they are just ‘skilfully marketed’ ‘masses of rubbish’ (Brumfit, 1980: 30), on
the other.
We are reminded of Allwright’s considered view about the limited usefulness of
ELT materials, expressed some two decades ago: ‘The whole business of the
management of language learning is far too complex to be satisfactorily catered
for by a pre-packaged set of decisions embodied in teaching materials’ (Allwright,
1981). Hence the feeling that published materials can at best only represent
‘poor compromises between what is educationally desirable on the one hand and
financially viable on the other’ (Sheldon, 1988: 237), thus justifying Cunning-
sworth’s (1984) cautionary note about coursebooks being good servants but bad
masters.
The debate has raised many important questions regarding the relationship
between ready-made ELT materials and the teaching and learning process that
warrant serious consideration. Some of these have been identified by Bell and
Gower (1998: 117), as summarized below:

1. Given that creativity is to be preserved as an important pedagogical principle,

how can we ensure that coursebooks do not take away investment and
responsibility from teachers and learners?
2. How can one ensure that coursebooks reflect the dynamic and interactive
nature of the learning process while at the same time maintaining the con-
sistency of the syllabus?
3. Although it is true that no coursebook can cater for all the individual needs of
all learners all of the time, how can sufficient material be provided so as to
meet most needs most of the time and provide enough flexibility to enable
teachers to individualize it?
4. If the language provided in many coursebooks is conventional rather than
real life, how can samples of use that are as natural as possible be provided?
5. If coursebooks are frequently predictable in format and content, how can the
material be made more lively?
 2. Selection of Materials 41

These questions help refocus attention on precisely the kinds of issues that are
problematic about ready-made ELT materials for which those arguing in favour of
teacher and student-generated materials see them as providing solutions in being
able to address more effectively such aspects of classroom lessons as teacher
responsibility, creativity and investment as well as learner initiative and receptivity –
indeed, just the kind of intangible attributes that inhere in good materials, or to be
more precise, in materials that provide a ‘good fit’. Because such materials are
likely to be directly responsive and relevant to the specific needs of a particular
group of teachers and learners and the circumstances of their learning, they are
likely to optimize teacher and learner contributions to the learning process and
thereby enhance learning itself. At the same time, reduced reliance on pre-
determined content and greater control over the teaching–learning process entails
greater teacher and learner freedom, creativity and choice, thus contributing to
the desirable educational goals of independence and autonomy for both.

Materials Evaluation and Selection

Ellis speaks of the strong surge of interest in the goals, roles and methods of
evaluation in recent years (Alderson and Beretta, 1992; Rea-Dickins and Ger-
maine, 1992; Weir and Roberts, 1994), and attributes this trend primarily to the
increase in the influence of mainstream educational theory and in part to the
need to carry out large-scale programme evaluations for external funding agen-
cies like the ODA, the British Council and USAID (Ellis, 1998: 217). He goes on
to make a distinction between macroevaluations of such large-scale projects, typic-
ally carried out for accountability and/or developmental purposes and micro-
evaluations. The latter are carried out by teachers on a day-by-day and lesson-by-
lesson basis and focus less on the programme as a whole and more on what
specific activities and techniques appear to ‘work’ in the context of a particular
lesson. By this definition, materials evaluation, selection and adaptation fall
under the purview of microevaluation, as does the evaluation of teachers’ and
learners’ classroom behaviours. Ellis argues that since it is microevaluation which
is compatible with many teachers’ perspective about what evaluation involves,
encouraging teachers to adopt a micro- rather than a macroperspective to
evaluation will help them undertake evaluation that accords with their own
perspective.
At this point, another distinction that will be useful to make is that between the
evaluation of materials (see Chapter 1 (Tomlinson) in this volume) and their
selection. Evaluation, like selection, is a matter of judging the fitness of some-
thing for a particular purpose. However, while it is true that the selection of
materials inevitably involves, or subsumes, a process of evaluation, evaluation can
be undertaken for a variety of purposes and carried out in a variety of ways. In the
selection of materials, on the other hand, what assumes primary importance is the
analysis of learner needs and interests and how these are addressed. Conse-
quently, in the selection of materials usually it is the most appropriate rather than
the best that wins.
42 Rani Rubdy

Additionally, since the selection of materials necessarily takes place before

classroom use, typically its concern is with what Breen and Candlin (1987) and
Breen (1989) describe as ‘tasks-as-workplans’, i.e., the analysis of materials ‘as they
are’ in a state of pre-use. This is distinct from the evaluation of ‘materials in
action’, i.e., with what actually happens in the classroom when materials are in-use
or in what in Breen’s terminology would be ‘tasks-in-process’, the point when
teachers and learners bring their own personal contributions, and from ‘tasks-as-
outcomes’, the learning that may accrue post-use. Thus while the evaluation of
materials would involve assessing how effective and useful the materials are found
to be in actual use by a specific group of teacher and students or how effective
they may have been in promoting learning, selection of materials is concerned
with the potential that a set of materials may have in effectively and efficiently
supporting learning, as a ‘frame’ for learning and teaching opportunities.
The framework I intend to propose in this chapter will therefore be oriented
towards analysing materials ‘as they are’ – pre-use, more in line with Littlejohn’s
(1998) proposal, than concerning itself with materials in-use or post-use and will
essentially focus on criteria for measuring the potential of what teachers and stu-
dents can do with them in the classroom. Such an evaluation is motivated by the
need to choose materials that will be relevant and appropriate for a particular
group of learners and also by the need to identify specific aspects of the materials
that require adaptation. I would, however, hasten to maintain, with McDonough
and Shaw (1993: 79), that evaluation of materials in this manner is just one part of
a complex process and that materials once selected ‘can only be judged successful
after classroom implementation and feedback’.

Existing Proposals for Evaluating Materials

Numerous evaluation checklists have been designed down the years to help teach-
ers make a systematic selection of textbooks (Tucker, 1975; van Lier, 1979; Wil-
liams, 1983; Breen and Candlin, 1987; Hutchinson and Waters, 1987; Sheldon,
1988; McDonough and Shaw, 1993; Cunningsworth, 1984, 1995; Littlejohn,
1998). These vary in the extent to which they reflect the priorities and constraints
that might characterize specific contexts of ELT teaching. Tomlinson (in this
volume) has referred in greater detail to previous approaches to evaluating
materials. Hence only a brief sketch will be attempted here.
Some of the earliest attempts at developing teacher-friendly systems for rigor-
ous assessments include the elaborate questionnaires designed by Tucker (1975),
van Lier (1979) and Williams (1983). However, these checklists have not had the
currency they deserve, partly due to their lack of ready access and also because of
the ad hoc manner in which coursebook selection is most often made (Sheldon,
1988). Furthermore, priorities in language teaching have themselves undergone
considerable change accompanying the growth of research and academic enquiry
in the last two decades.
Frequently the evaluation instruments and checklists are organized into two or
more levels or stages to reflect the decision process the teachers need to go
 2. Selection of Materials 43

through (Ellis, 1998: 220). For instance, Breen and Candlin’s (1987) interactive,
step-by-step guide to coursebook evaluation envisages two phases, one addressing
the ‘overall usefulness’ of the materials and another aiming at ‘a more searching
analysis’ with a particular group of learners and classroom situation in mind.
Arguing for the need to look below surface features to discover the value system
and assumptions underlying materials design, Hutchinson (1987) likewise views
evaluation as an interactive process involving a subjective and objective analysis of
materials and the extent to which they match teacher and student needs in a
given context. More recently, McDonough and Shaw (1993) have also proposed
two complementary stages, beginning with an ‘external evaluation’ and moving
on to an in-depth ‘internal evaluation’ of two or more units in terms of pre-
sentation of skills, grading and sequencing of tasks, kinds of texts used and the
relationship between exercises and tests.
Sheldon’s very useful framework (1988) covers a range of criteria from those
relating to purely practical factors like availability and physical characteristics
such as layout and graphics to more psychological and psycholinguistic aspects
such as learner needs and learning objectives, their assumed background, target
age range, culture, conceptual and schematic development, expectations and
learning preferences. Organizational factors such as provision of linkage,
sequencing/grading, stimulus/practice/revision, recycling and internal and
external coherence as well as criteria that address appropriacy, authenticity,
cultural bias and flexibility are also given considerable importance.
To date, the most comprehensive and thorough is Cunningsworth’s (1984,
1995) proposal for materials evaluation, taking as it does the learner’s context
and learning principles as its starting point. The general guidelines identified
(1995) and the criteria they inform are presented alongside useful case studies,
illustrated with clear examples from current published materials relating to areas
of grammar, phonology and discourse as well as the language skills.
Focusing on materials as a pedagogic device, Littlejohn’s (1998) analysis contains
two main dimensions: publication, which refers to the ‘tangible’ or physical aspects
of the materials, and design, which relates to the thinking underlying its pro-
duction and use – including its aims, how the tasks, language and content in the
materials are selected and sequenced and the nature and focus of the content.
Utilizing Breen and Candlin’s (1987) notion of process competence, Littlejohn is
interested in what learners are precisely asked to do by drawing upon their
knowledge, abilities and skills and the modes of classroom participation the activities
foster. An extremely useful aspect is his ability to show how it works in practice as
one moves through the different ‘levels’ of analysis, from a consideration of the
more easily identifiable aspects to the more abstract and complex.
Finally, Tomlinson’s (1998) ‘Introduction’ to Materials Development in Language
Teaching provides an overview of many of the tenets and basic principles of second
language acquisition that are currently relevant to an understanding of what good
materials, as well as principled judgements about them, should contain. The
value of materials for Tomlinson lies in their effectiveness in encouraging learn-
ers to make discoveries for themselves through self-investment, through intel-
44 Rani Rubdy

lectual, aesthetic and emotional engagement with authentic input, through a

sensitivity to learners’ readiness to learn, supported by opportunities for genuine
interaction and purposeful communication. Although there is no general con-
sensus on how languages are learned, most teachers would agree that many of
these principles are precisely those which are widely believed to contribute to
successful learning.
A principal problem with checklists and questionnaires of the kind discussed
above is that they frequently involve making general, impressionistic judgements
about materials rather than providing an in-depth and systematic investigation of
what they contain. Secondly, as Sheldon argues, the discursive format in which
they are presented often makes it difficult to separate description, guidance and
criticism (Sheldon, 1988: 241). A useful suggestion put forward by him is to build
a compendium of reviews culled from various sources, including ‘student-
generated’ and ‘teacher-consensus’ reviews, so that teachers can access what has
been thought and said about various books over a period of time instead of
having to reinvent the wheel anew.
Then again, as coursebook criteria are emphatically local, no one is really
certain what criteria and constraints are actually operative in ELT contexts
worldwide. Any culturally restricted global list of criteria produced cannot
therefore hope to be definitive. Nor is it possible for all the criteria identified to
be deployed simultaneously. Obviously, factors that relate specifically to each
consumer’s unique situation will get selected and even these might not be
applicable in most local environments without considerable modifications. This is
true as much for any framework of evaluative criteria proposed as it is in
expecting a perfect fit for any set of materials produced for a wide market.
Sheldon says it correctly, ‘It is clear that coursebook assessment is fundamen-
tally a subjective, rule-of-thumb activity and that no neat formula, grid or system
will ever provide a definitive yardstick’ (Sheldon, 1988: 245). The survey guides
that have been proposed, although of practical use to teachers, raise many
questions relating to how the materials should be considered and, crucially, how
one aspect should be weighted in relation to another. Ellis (1998: 221) observes,
for instance, how many of the guides specifically ask whether the materials con-
tain authentic texts, ignoring the complexity of the whole question of authenticity
in language teaching as pointed out by Widdowson (1979). He also points out
how a positive rating on a criterion of authenticity (i.e., the materials contain
authentic texts) may be matched with a negative rating on the criterion of
vocabulary load (i.e., the number of new words introduced is excessive). It is not
clear how the materials evaluator is to reconcile these conflicting ratings.
Therefore, rather than impose a system of analysis in the form of a linear, static
checklist that elicits a response of plus/minus marks, the framework I intend to
propose presents evaluative parameters as a configuration containing a cluster or
complex of criteria reflecting variables which need to be examined as interacting
with each other rather than in isolation, while simultaneously bearing a rela-
tionship with the whole. Such a composite of variables, it is hoped, will help
teachers plot out a more coherent and complete picture of the potential that a set
 2. Selection of Materials 45

of materials holds for language learning and assess their suitability to the particu-
lar circumstances of a given context, without losing a sense of their complexity.

A Framework for the Selection of Coursebooks

What aspects of materials we focus on in evaluating them will largely depend

upon the purposes one has in looking at the materials. It is possible to describe
materials in terms of the quality of the paper and binding, pricing, layout, size,
typeface and so on, but a more pedagogic focus, rather than simply a pragmatic
one, would lead one to examine those aspects of materials that more directly aid
the teaching–learning process (Littlejohn, 1998), and this is what will be aimed at
here. If we consider the selection of materials as involving two stages of analysis, as
conventional wisdom suggests, the first stage would consist of assessing the con-
tent of the book in relation to its professed aims. Thus, for example, if a course-
book states as an underlying principle of its materials that students need to
engage in authentic communication in order to develop ‘real-life’ communica-
tion skills, in the light of the current refocusing of the question of authenticity,
where it is not primarily the materials themselves that have to be authentic, but
rather the response to the materials, teachers will need to ask what the learners
are required to do with these materials and whether this response is motivated by
an authentic need to communicate, involving, say, the addressing of content
rather than form, at the very least, in assessing the validity of the claims made
(Hall, 2001). This stage would also include considering whether the target age
range, culture, assumed background and entry/exit levels of students have been
clearly specified in the blurb and the extent to which they are valid and appro-
priate to the intended learners.
The second stage of analysis would involve assessing the effectiveness of
materials in terms of the specific needs and context of the intended learners as
well as how well they serve the teaching–learning process. The framework I
propose basically addresses this stage of evaluation and consists of three broad
categories, each assessing the potential validity of the materials in relation to:

1. the learners’ needs, goals and pedagogical requirements;

2. the teacher’s skills, abilities, theories and beliefs; and
3. the thinking underlying the materials writer’s presentation of the content and
approach to teaching and learning respectively.

These I will term Psychological Validity, Pedagogical Validity, and Process and
Content Validity.
A diagrammatic representation of these in Figure 2.1 places at the very centre
of the evaluation process the three main elements of the classroom: the learners,
the teacher and the materials to represent the interaction that takes place
between them. Note that the sample of criteria representing the inner concentric
circle has to do with those features that are found to reside overtly in the texts,
tasks and activities and is therefore viewed as elements that are ‘tangible’ or
46 Rani Rubdy

Figure 2.1 A static versus dynamic model of materials evaluation

amenable to a straightforward surface level mode of analysis. If we choose to stop

with an analysis of these criteria alone such an evaluation would constitute what I
call a static mode of evaluation. The criteria indicated as part of the outer con-
centric circle, however, involve a more in-depth analysis, requiring that we ‘look
beneath the surface’ (Hutchison, 1987) to discover through a series of subjective
judgements and inferences the more dynamic features of materials design. These
are features that have to do with the more abstract qualities of flexibility, creativity
 2. Selection of Materials 47

and exploration, all of which are viewed as activating the learning process
through teacher and learner-initiated contributions and hence call for a dynamic
model of evaluation.

Psychological Validity

The need for student-centredness in recent years has made it necessary to con-
duct some sort of needs analysis, whether in the construction of a syllabus or a set
of materials. It follows that a key question in choosing a coursebook would be,
‘How does the book relate to the needs of the learners?’ We know of course that
the need to communicate lies at the heart of all language learning. Since this
involves not just communicating within the classroom but, ultimately, in the real
world outside, the materials must also take into account students’ longer-term
goals. This in turn would entail not merely teaching them ‘how to learn’ within
classroom settings by raising awareness of different styles and strategies but also
enabling them to take advantage of any opportunity to learn outside the class-
room. In terms of materials, this means that the experience of working with the
activities contained in them should provide students with confidence in their
ability to communicate despite difficulties (Hall, 2001: 230–1).
Taking this aspect of student-centredness a step further, one might wish to find
out to what extent the materials have the potential to foster self-directed, inde-
pendent learning. As Tomlinson (1998) notes, the most significant role of
materials is to involve students in decision-making about their own learning. One
way of doing this is to channel their energies towards making existing materials
more relevant and motivating; another would be to involve them in generating
their own materials out of the reading and listening texts provided, as well as
other source materials, to suit their own level and interest. Integral to the plan of
a coursebook can be made this movement from teacher-defined tasks to tasks
identified by students themselves; and from there on to a stage where student
groups define areas of interest to work on and select materials from different
sources on their own to generate task outcomes. The point is, do the materials
have built into them such opportunities for student-initiated resource generation
or is everything specified in advance?
Even where claims are made about fostering learner autonomy, the question to
ask is whether learners are involved in making decisions about their own learning
or do the materials encourage learner autonomy in a conservative sense only,
which means learners do some study without teacher intervention but have no
self-directed goals and have not developed effective learning strategies. Do the
learners have sufficient control over the meanings and interactions that are
generated in the classroom using the materials? As Edge and Wharton (1998:
296) point out, ‘if learners in classrooms can initiate interaction patterns and
create the meanings they want to personally express, then there is more chance
that they will be able to make use of such learning to exploit outside sources for
learning when they find them.’ The following criteria mirror these issues:
48 Rani Rubdy

Rationale/Learner Needs
What are the aims and objectives of the materials?
Have they been clearly spelt out?
Do they cater to the needs, wants, interests and purposes of the learners?
Are the materials appropriate and are they likely to be effective in helping
learners to acquire English?
Do the materials make a positive contribution to heightening and sustaining
learner motivation?
Do the materials give the learners confidence to initiate communicative events
and persist with the attempted communication despite difficulties?
Do the materials cater for the development of language skills that would
enable them to operate effectively in their future academic or professional life?

Independence and Autonomy

Is the learner a decision-maker or just a receiver of information?
Do the materials encourage independent language learning?
Do the materials encourage learners to guess, predict, discover, take risks, try-
out several alternatives?
Do they give learners plenty of opportunities to make choices which suit their
linguistic level, their preferred learning styles, their level of involvement in the
text and the time available to them?
Do the materials involve the learner in thinking about the learning process and
in experiencing a variety of different types of learning activities?
Do they allow sufficient time to think and reflect on their learning?
Do the materials help individual learners discover their learning styles and
preferences, study habits and learning strategies?
Do the materials provide explicit instruction on various language learning
strategies and suggest ways of using and developing them?
Is a sufficient range of strategies provided?
Do they encourage learners to evaluate their strategies or the learning activities
or its content?
Do the materials allow self-monitoring and feedback?

Self-development
Do the materials/texts engage the learners both cognitively and affectively?
Do the materials credit learners with a capacity for rational thought and prob-
lem-solving?
Do they also involve the learner’s emotions in the learning process?
Do the materials allow for the development of creative and critical thinking
skills?
Do the materials allow scope for the development of a desirable set of atti-
tudes?
Do the materials allow the individual to develop his or her talents as fully as
possible?
 2. Selection of Materials 49

Do the materials involve the learners as human beings rather than just as
language learners?
Do the materials help build personality and learner voice and give learners an
understanding about themselves?

Creativity
Do the materials exploit the learners’ prior knowledge and experience and
provide opportunities for further development?
Do the materials allow sufficient opportunities for student inventiveness and
energy and encourage their participation in resource generation?
Do the materials provide additional challenging activities for highly motivated
learners?
Have opportunities been built into the materials for learners to contribute?

Cooperation
Do the materials offer opportunities for cooperative learning, through pair
and group work activities and information exchange tasks?
Are students encouraged to learn from and help one another and, more
importantly, able to work in a less stressful atmosphere in the classroom?
Do they encourage positive interdependence by giving each individual a spe-
cific role to play in the activity allowing him/her to contribute actively to the
group interaction?

Pedagogical Validity

Current trends in education, technological advances, information explosion and

the communications revolution have all come together to cause new and diver-
sified demands to be made on the teacher. So that, while tending to their learn-
er’s linguistic growth and development, teachers are themselves impelled con-
tinually to improve and develop their own skills and abilities and acquire new
ones. This requires teachers not only to reflect on their practice (Schon, 1983;
Richards, 1993) but also calls for a certain attitude of openness to new possibilites
and a desire to continue to learn. A commercial coursebook can play an
important role in teacher development if it offers teachers the opportunity to
learn more about the language and about approaches to teaching in a way that
allows them to integrate new ideas into their experiences of reflective practice to
achieve a synthesis of a wide variety of teaching-related schemata (Edge and
Wharton, 1998).
In one sense, a coursebook by itself has little operational value until the teacher
populates it with his/her own ideas and experiences and brings it to life. Yet the
potential for materials to influence the way teachers operate is considerable. This
is because coursebooks embody a whole lot of theoretical positions and prin-
ciples. By providing practical guidance on how to deal with particular texts and
activities, suggesting innovative methods and approaches and offering alternative
plans and procedures to enable teachers to maintain student motivation in class,
50 Rani Rubdy

or generate productive interaction, coursebooks can act as powerful catalysts for

consciousness-raising, particularly in the case of untrained or novice teachers.
Even for experienced teachers, seeking to excel their practice with new ideas,
course materials can hold the seeds for effecting such transformations. Not in the
conventional sense of overt preaching or prescription, but through the incor-
poration of current thinking in teacher self-development which increasingly
recognizes that teachers cannot be developed by an outside agent and that this
can best be brought about most effectively through self-initiated effort, course
materials can motivate teachers to explore possibilities for self-actualization,
restricted only if the teacher is reluctant to grow professionally. As Edge and
Wharton rightly observe, then, ‘a coursebook designed to encourage teacher
development, if it is successful, will itself be the subject of evaluation, adaptation
and critical use’ (1998: 297). An important criterion for evaluating materials
would then relate to the extent to which they engage the teacher’s constantly
evolving critical standpoint and facilitate the expanding and refining of the teach-
er’s schemata in the process.
In addition, on a more mundane level, we would want to know whether the
materials show a sufficient measure of compatibility with the teacher’s existing
skills and abilities and his/her own personal theory of teaching or beliefs about
how language is learned. Given that teachers are expected to be capable of
generating a supportive psychological climate and sustain learner motivation and
interest in class, to what extent do the texts and topics incorporated in the
coursebook help the teacher evoke learner interest and investment? To what
extent do they allow teacher (or learner) choice, including the option to select,
adapt and supplement these when required by the classroom group?
Edge and Wharton point out that the most obvious prerequisite for teachers to
take responsibility for their professional development is choice. Experienced
teachers are known not to follow the script of a coursebook inflexibly: ‘They add,
delete and change tasks at the planning stage, and they reshape their plans
during the lesson in response to the interactions that take place’ (Edge and
Wharton, 1998: 300). This prompts us to ask, to what extent the materials facil-
itate this kind of flexible use of the coursebook and foster the teacher’s capacity
for creativity and flexibility, in addition to providing practical guidance for
classroom use? Questions under this category would include:

Guidance
Are the teacher’s notes useful and explicit?
Is there enough guidance or too much of it?
Are the tapescripts, answer keys, vocabulary lists, structural/functional inven-
tories and lesson summaries provided in the teacher’s book?
Do the materials cater for different teaching styles and personalities?
Is allowance made for the perspectives, expectations, and preferences of non-
native teachers of English?
 2. Selection of Materials 51

Choice
Are teachers encouraged to present the lessons in different ways?
Do the materials offer the teacher scope for adaptation and localization?
Do they encourage the teacher to add, delete, change and improvise?
Do they foster in teachers a sense of choice and control in exploiting the
content?

Reflection/Exploration/Innovation
Do they foster teacher receptivity to innovation and experimentation?
Do they encourage teacher creativity, imagination and exploration?
Do they help to raise the teacher’s critical consciousness by facilitating
reflection about the materials themselves and the methods implicated in them?
Is the teacher encouraged to evaluate each lesson?

Process and Content Validity

The design of a coursebook and the way in which its authors intend it to be used
is an essential part of its theoretical position. This set of criteria, therefore, relates
to the overall view the coursebook writer holds, or wishes to project, about the
nature of language, the nature of language learning and his educational phil-
osophy in general. It also relates to the way in which these views are carried over
into the tasks and activities that learners are required to perform and the nature
of these activities in terms of their clarity and coherence of presentation, their
sufficiency, accessibility and appropriacy. The information gathered under this
category thus relates to the methodology, content, format, layout and design
features of the materials as well as the theoretical assumptions about language
and language learning that underpin them.

Methodology
Does the coursebook reflect the insights and findings from current theory and
research on second language acquisition?
Do learners need to know what the sentences/texts mean or simply to
manipulate forms?
Do the materials make use of what we know about the value of permitting a
silent period at the beginning stages or in the learning of a new feature?
Do the materials help develop both the declarative knowledge and procedural
knowledge of the learners as well as contribute to broader educational goals?
Is there a sufficient balance between analytical and experiential modes of
learning?
Is there an explicit and conscious focus on rules and explanations or are there
opportunities for the learners to discover the patterns in the first place?
What existing knowledge are learners expected to bring to the materials? Is
their knowledge of communication exploited?
52 Rani Rubdy

Content
Do the materials provide a rich, varied and comprehensible input in order to
facilitate informal acquisition as well as conscious attention to linguistic and
pragmatic features of the texts?
Are the topics/texts current and cognitively challenging and do they help
enrich the learners’ personal knowledge and experience and foster a positive
personality?
Are there varied activities at different levels of task difficulty?
Are the materials well contextualized?
Do the materials call for a sufficiently good mix of closed and open-ended
responses?
Are the grammatical explanations adequate?
Do the materials use complex metalanguage?
Do they suffer from terminological looseness?

Appropriacy
Is the level and the intended audience clearly spelt out?
Is it pitched at the right level of maturity and language and at the right con-
ceptual level?
Is the material interesting, varied and topical enough to hold the attention of
learners?
Is the author’s sense of humour or philosophy obvious or appropriate?
Is the authorial voice friendly and supportive or patronizing?

Authenticity
Do the materials provide extensive exposure to authentic English through
purposeful reading and/or listening activities?
Is the content realistic, reflecting topics and events and texts from real-world
situations?
Do the activities relate to pupils’ interests and ‘real-life’ tasks?
Do the tasks exploit language in a communicative or ‘real-world’ way?
If not, are the texts unacceptably simplified or artificial?
Do the texts generate ‘real-life’ communication processes?

Cultural sensitivity
What aspects of culture are in focus?
Are the materials relevant/suitable/appropriate to the learners’ cultural con-
text and sensitive to their values and beliefs?
Do the materials reflect awareness of and sensitivity to sociocultural variation?
Does the book show parallels and contrasts between the learners’ culture and
others?
Is this done in a non-patronizing way?
Does the coursebook enshrine stereotyped, inaccurate, condescending or
offensive images of gender, race, social class or nationality?
Are accurate or ‘sanitized’ views of the USA or Britain presented; e.g., are
 2. Selection of Materials 53

uncomfortable social realities (for instance, unemployment, poverty, family

breakdowns, racism) left out?

Layout/Graphics
Is there a clarity of design and layout?
Is there an optimum density and mix of text and graphical material on each
page, or is the impression one of clutter?
Are the artwork and typefaces functional? Colourful? Appealing?
Is there enough white space on each page?

Accessibility
Is the material clearly organized and easy to access?
Are there indexes, vocabulary lists, section headings and other methods of
signposting the content that allow the student to use the material easily,
especially for revision or self-study purposes?
Is the learner given clear advice about how the book and its contents could be
most effectively exploited?
Are the instructions for carrying out activities clearly and concisely but ade-
quately articulated?
Can learners navigate with ease their way through the material in order to have
a clear view of the progress made?

Linkage
Are the units and exercises well linked in terms of theme, situation, topic,
pattern of skill development or grammatical/lexical ‘progression’?
Does the textbook cohere both internally and externally (e.g., with other books
in a series)?

Selection/Grading
Is the linguistic inventory presented appropriate for the students’ purposes,
bearing in mind their L1 background?
Is the selection and grading of tasks and activities based on a clearly discernible
system (e.g., frequency counts for vocabulary, cognitive load for tasks)?
Does the introduction, practice and recycling of new linguistic items seem to
be shallow/steep enough for the intended students?

Sufficiency
Is the book complete enough to stand on its own, or must the teacher produce
a lot of ancillary bridging material to make it workable?
Can the course be taught using only the student’s books, or must all the
attendant teaching aids be deployed?

Balance/Integration/Challenge
Do the activities allow the learner to go beyond a merely superficial under-
54 Rani Rubdy

standing of the text/discourse and require interpretive and inferential skills

that call for higher-order critical thinking?
Is there a good balance between receptive and productive knowledge, skills
and abilities?
Is the focus on the product or the process of learning or both?

Stimulus/Practice/Revision
Are there sufficient opportunities for students to use and practise their con-
versational strategies and skills?
Is there sufficiently rich exposure to language data through opportunities for
extensive reading?
Do the materials provide for recycling of content, of vocabulary and structures?
Is allowance made for revision, testing and ongoing evaluation? Are self-checks
provided?

Flexibility
Do the materials allow for flexible use of tasks/texts/activities, permitting
them to be exploited or modified as required by local circumstances? Or is it
too rigid in format, structure and approach?
Do they allow for alternative sequencing/routes/paths? Or is the order of
activities in the curriculum and the pace at which they must be done quite
fixed?
Do the materials make too many demands on teachers’ preparation time?
Do the materials expect students to spend too much time on their homework?
Is there a wide range of supplementary materials and teaching aids available?

Educational Validity
Does the textbook accord with broader educational concerns (e.g., the nature
and role of learning skills, concept development in younger learners, the
function of ‘knowledge of the world’, etc.)?

For each of these criteria it is possible to grade a coursebook on a scale of 0–5, or

0–10 or even 0–20, depending on the relative weight the teacher evaluator would
like to assign to it. It is possible to assign some of the categories relatively more
weight than others. Further, evaluative comments under each subcategory,
which may be treated as forming a complex of interacting criteria, should help
provide a basis for a qualitative assessment to supplement the quantitative
analysis.

Conclusion

There has been recent awareness that coursebook evaluation is not a straight-
forward exercise and that depending on its purpose and the context of use it can
embrace different perspectives (prospective, ongoing and/or retrospective) and
can be multidimensional (external and/or internal; static and/or dynamic).
 2. Selection of Materials 55

Increasingly, there has also emerged the view that obtaining the perceptions of
users (teachers and learners) as well as the analyst (whether the researcher or
external evaluator, as the case may be) in the evaluation process is essential, that
situational and syllabus requirements have to be considered and that claims made
by materials writers have to be verified. There is also a recognition that there
could be a thin line between attempts to provide teachers with a sense of con-
fidence, security and guidance on the one hand and killing off the teachers’
instinctive search for imaginative and intelligent solutions and creativity, on the
other. These different perspectives inform the conceptualization of the multi-
dimensional evaluation model presented above.

References

Alderson, J. C. and Beretta, A. (eds) (1992) Evaluating Second Language Education.

Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Allwright, D. (1981) ‘What do we want teaching materials for?’ ELT Journal, 36
(1), 5–18.
Allwright, D. (1984) ‘The importance of interaction in classroom language
learning’. Applied Linguistics, 5, 156–71.
Bell, J. and Gower, R. (1998) ‘Writing course materials for the world: a great
compromise’, in B. Tomlinson (ed.) Materials Development in Language Teaching.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 116–29.
Block, D. (1991) ‘Some thoughts on DIY materials design’. ELT Journal, 45 (3),
211–17.
Breen, M. P. (1987) ‘Learner contributions to task design’, in C. N. Candlin and
D. F. Murphy (eds) Language Learning Tasks. London: Prentice Hall.
Breen, M. P. (1989) ‘The evaluation cycle for language learning tasks’, in
R. Johnson (ed.) The Second Language Curriculum. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, pp. 187–206.
Breen, M. P. and Candlin, C. N. (1987) ‘Which materials?: a consumer’s and
designer’s guide’, in L. E. Sheldon ELT Textbooks and Materials: Problems in
Evaluation and Development. ELT Documents 126. London: Modern English
Publications/The British Council, pp. 13–27.
Brumfit, C. J. (1980) ‘Seven last slogans’. Modern English Teacher, 7 (1), 30–1.
Clarke, D. F. (1989) ‘Materials adaptation: why leave it all to the teacher?’ ELT
Journal, 43 (2), 133–41.
Cunningsworth, A. (1984) Evaluating and Selecting ELT Materials. London: Hei-
nemann.
Cunningsworth, A. (1995) Choosing Your Coursebook. Oxford: Heinemann.
Dubin, F. (1988) ‘The roles of L2 teachers, learners, and materials developers in
the context of new technologies’, in B. K. Das Materials for Language Learning
and Teaching. Singapore: RELC Anthology Series 22, pp. 129–36.
Edge, J. and Wharton, S. (1998) ‘Autonomy and development: living in the
materials world’, in B. Tomlinson, (ed.) Materials Development in Language
Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 295–310.
56 Rani Rubdy

Ellis, R. (1998) ‘The evaluation of communicative tasks’, in B. Tomlinson (ed.)

Materials Development in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, pp. 217–38.
Greenall, S. (1992) ‘Development and change in course design and textbooks –
10 years on’, in D. A. Hill (ed.) The State of the Art. Basingstoke: Modern English
Publications/The British Council.
Hall, D. R. (2001) ‘Materials production: theory and practice’, in D. R. Hall, and
A. Hewings (eds) Innovations in Language Teaching. London: Routledge, pp.
229–39.
Hutchinson, T. (1987) ‘What’s underneath?: an interactive view of materials
evaluation’, in L. E. Sheldon (ed.) ELT Textbooks and Materials: Problems in
Evaluation and Development. ELT Documents 126. London: Modern English
Publications/The British Council.
Hutchinson, T. (1988) ‘Making materials work in the ESP classroom’, in
D. Chamberlain and R. Baumgardner (eds) ESP in the Classroom: Practice and
Evaluation. ELT Documents 128. London: Modern English Publications/The
British Council.
Hutchinson, T. and Torres, E. (1994) ‘The textbook as agent of change’. ELT
Journal, 48 (4), 315–28.
Hutchinson, T. and Waters, A. (1987) English for Specific Purposes: A Learning-
Centred Approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Littlejohn, A. (1998) ‘The analysis of language teaching materials: inside the
Trojan Horse’, in B. Tomlinson (ed.) Materials Development in Language Teach-
ing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 190–216.
McDonough, J. and Shaw, C. (1993) Materials and Methods in ELT. Oxford:
Blackwell.
Maley, A. (1998) ‘Squaring the circle – reconciling materials as constraint with
materials as empowerment’, in B. Tomlinson, (ed.) Materials Development in
Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 279–94.
O’Neil, R. (1982) ‘Why use textbooks?’ ELT Journal, 36 (2), 104–11.
Prabhu, N. S. (1988) ‘Materials as support, materials as constraint’. Paper pre-
sented at the Annual SEAMEO RELC Seminar on Materials for Language
Learning and Teaching, April 1988.
Rea-Dickins, P. and Germaine, K. (1992) Evaluation. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
Richards, J. C. (1993) ‘Beyond the textbook: the role of commercial materials in
language teaching’. RELC Journal, Singapore, 24 (1), 1–14.
Riggenbach, H. (1988) ‘Tapping a vital resource: student-generated materials’, in
B. K. Das, Materials for Language Learning and Teaching. Singapore: RELC
Anthology Series 22, pp. 117–24.
Schon, D. (1983) The Reflective Practitioner. London: Temple Smith.
Sheldon, L. E. (1987) ELT Textbooks and Materials: Problems in Evaluation and
Development. ELT Documents 126. London: Modern English Publications/The
British Council.
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
WITH NO OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS
OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR
ANY PURPOSE.

1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied

warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this
agreement violates the law of the state applicable to this
agreement, the agreement shall be interpreted to make the
maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by the applicable
state law. The invalidity or unenforceability of any provision of
this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.

1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the

Foundation, the trademark owner, any agent or employee of the
Foundation, anyone providing copies of Project Gutenberg™
electronic works in accordance with this agreement, and any
volunteers associated with the production, promotion and
distribution of Project Gutenberg™ electronic works, harmless
from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees, that
arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project
Gutenberg™ work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or
deletions to any Project Gutenberg™ work, and (c) any Defect
you cause.

Section 2. Information about the Mission of

Project Gutenberg™
Project Gutenberg™ is synonymous with the free distribution of
electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new
computers. It exists because of the efforts of hundreds of
volunteers and donations from people in all walks of life.
Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
assistance they need are critical to reaching Project
Gutenberg™’s goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg™
collection will remain freely available for generations to come. In
2001, the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was
created to provide a secure and permanent future for Project
Gutenberg™ and future generations. To learn more about the
Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and how your
efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4 and the
Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.

Section 3. Information about the Project

Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-
profit 501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the
laws of the state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by
the Internal Revenue Service. The Foundation’s EIN or federal
tax identification number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the
Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation are tax
deductible to the full extent permitted by U.S. federal laws and
your state’s laws.

The Foundation’s business office is located at 809 North 1500

West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact
links and up to date contact information can be found at the
Foundation’s website and official page at
www.gutenberg.org/contact

Section 4. Information about Donations to

the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
Foundation
Project Gutenberg™ depends upon and cannot survive without
widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission
of increasing the number of public domain and licensed works
that can be freely distributed in machine-readable form
accessible by the widest array of equipment including outdated
equipment. Many small donations ($1 to $5,000) are particularly
important to maintaining tax exempt status with the IRS.

The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws

regulating charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of
the United States. Compliance requirements are not uniform
and it takes a considerable effort, much paperwork and many
fees to meet and keep up with these requirements. We do not
solicit donations in locations where we have not received written
confirmation of compliance. To SEND DONATIONS or
determine the status of compliance for any particular state visit
www.gutenberg.org/donate.

While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states

where we have not met the solicitation requirements, we know
of no prohibition against accepting unsolicited donations from
donors in such states who approach us with offers to donate.

International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot

make any statements concerning tax treatment of donations
received from outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp
our small staff.

Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current

donation methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a
number of other ways including checks, online payments and
credit card donations. To donate, please visit:
www.gutenberg.org/donate.

Section 5. General Information About Project

Gutenberg™ electronic works
Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
Gutenberg™ concept of a library of electronic works that could
be freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
distributed Project Gutenberg™ eBooks with only a loose
network of volunteer support.

Project Gutenberg™ eBooks are often created from several

printed editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by
copyright in the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus,
we do not necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any
particular paper edition.

Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
facility: www.gutenberg.org.

This website includes information about Project Gutenberg™,

including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg
Literary Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new
eBooks, and how to subscribe to our email newsletter to hear
about new eBooks.