AN EVALUATION OF THE LEARNER’S MATERIAL USED IN ENGLISH 7 AT

TARLAC NATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL MAIN

Karen Mae B. Pagquil

ren.pagquil@gmail.com

Maria Juvelle P. Prado

majuvelleprado@gmail.com

Abstract – This research sought to evaluate the instructional module entitled “Learner’s
Material” having the teachers and students as participants of the study. The evaluation
rating sheet with four specific criteria – the content, format, presentation and organization
and accuracy and up-to-datedness of information was used for the evaluation of the
teachers. For the students, a pre-test and post-test was conducted to supplement the
information of the evaluation. From the results and comments of the respondents, the
researchers likewise determined the inadequate materials, lessons, topics, and articles
from the Learner’s Material. Since the study focuses on studying the present condition of
an instructional material, it is highly quantitative, thus uses the descriptive research
design. The evaluation rating sheet for print materials which was designed by the
Learning Resources Management and Development System (LRMDS) of the Department
of Education was adopted and distributed to five grade seven English teachers of Tarlac
National High School Main. The pre-test and post-test on the other hand prepared by the
researchers was also administered to a total of 20 grade seven students. Results of the
investigation suggest that: (1) The Learner’s Material used in English 7 has moderate
problems in terms of content, format and presentation and organization. Thus, the
material does not arouse students’ interest, is not durable and is suited to the
comprehension level of the students; (2) The pre-test and post-test administered to the
students as part of the evaluation shows that the Learner’s Material used in English 7 is
not suitable for their current level of comprehension since the number of students who
got scores that needs improvement increased from eight students to nine students
respectively; (3) The findings of this study call for a recognition of the importance of
reviewing and revising some areas of the material for quality teaching and learning
process in the classroom. From the conclusion drawn it was recommended that: (1) The
teacher must find ways to arouse the students’ interest during discussions since they find
some of the topics uninteresting; (2) The quality of the paper used in the material must be
improved to make illustrations and texts easily recognizable and clear to the students; (3)
The illustrations should be colorful since it helps the students’ in comprehending the texts
and the lessons; (4) The teacher must think of varied strategies in unlocking vocabularies
to aid student’s understanding and comprehension; (5) The instructional developers must
look into the results and suggestions of the respondents for the betterment of the material.

Keywords: Evaluation; Content; Format; Organization; Accuracy

1
Introduction

In addition to the students, another constant in the lives of most teachers is the
textbook. Few teachers enter class without a textbook – often a required textbook that
provides content and teaching/learning activities that shape much of what happens inside
the classroom. For teachers, the use of a textbook involves first the selection of a book
and then the steps taken to implement the textbook in class (Byrd, 2001).

According to Sheldon (1988) textual material plays vital role in achieving the
objectives of the curriculum. In good curriculum, components of learning materials,
including textbook, are considered important. Effective learning occurs only when there
is combination of good teachers, motivated students and appropriate and well-graded and
well-selected materials including textbooks. Although these materials function in
different ways, their basic aim is effective instruction.

However, Edge & Wharton (1998) claimed that though instructional materials
offer a lot of benefits to both the teachers and the learners, there are many issues as well
that have to be addressed. It is a known fact that a gap exists between the recent teaching-
learning principles and materials; and this gap even becomes wider when materials are
put to use in the classroom. Critics also claim that using textbooks creates a dependency
culture controlling what teachers teach and how they should teach which potentially leads
to deskilling.

Additionally, Maley (1998) stated that another major setback of using textbooks
relates to the learner’s individual differences and needs. Published materials tend to treat
learning classrooms as if they are generally the same – same needs, same learning, and
same teaching situations which is contrary to the reality that learners, teachers, learning
classrooms are unique in their own rights. Hence, evaluation of textbooks is imperative
so that its pedagogical contribution to teaching and learning process can be assured.

Relative to this Rea-Dickins & Germaine (1993) referred evaluation as an

intrinsic part of teaching and learning. In practice, it uses a range of different criteria,
taking into consideration all sorts of factors derived from varied teaching and learning
principles. It is necessary to identify more precisely the aspects of the curriculum of
potential interest to the evaluator, and the ways in which evaluation may be done.

Since textbooks are commodities, political objects, and cultural representations

there is a struggles and compromise in order to determine how and by whom they will be
produced, how and by whom their contents will be selected, how and to whom they will
be distributed, and how teachers and students will make use of them (Shannon, 2010).
With textbooks evaluation, opportunity is provided for the teachers, supervisors,
administrators, and materials developers to make judgement about the textbooks and how
to choose them for the learners.

The role of the textbook in the classroom is a difficult one to be defined perfectly
and exactly. Using only textbooks, from cover to cover, without any supplemental

2
material is not the most satisfactory method for meeting students’ needs. However, both
teacher and students need a framework on which to build and textbooks definitely
provide this. It is important that instructors strike a balance between being a slave to
their texts and providing organized, objective-based instruction (Garinger, 2002).

With this, Fradd & McGee (1994) has demonstrated that additional instructional
materials are to be prepared by teachers. Furthermore, Reiser & Dempsey (2007)
emphasized that materials should be as authentic as those from real life language
situation. Tomlinson (2004) added that materials should provide sources of language
input and exploit the said sources to maximize learning. It is important to design
instructional materials in learning that can be used to facilitate instruction and discussion
to increase learners’ knowledge and interest in learning.

Whether one believes that textbooks are too inflexible and biased to be used
directly as instructional material or that they actually help teaching and learning, there
can be no denying the fact that textbooks still maintain enormous popularity and are most
definitely here to stay. Moreover, textbooks should not necessarily determine the aims
themselves (components of teaching and learning) or become the aims but it should
always be at the service of the teachers and learners (Brown, 1995). Consequently,
educators must make every effort to establish and apply a wide variety of relevant and
contextually appropriate criteria for the evaluation of the textbooks that is being used in
the classrooms. It is of value to ensure that careful selection is made, and that the
materials selected closely reflect the needs of the learners and the aims, methods, and
values of the teaching (Cunningsworth, 1995).

In the Philippine classrooms, textbook is also an important instructional material.

It is helpful for teachers especially in providing activities for students. Pawilen & Sumida
(2005) claimed that more than half of elementary and high school teachers would use
topics and concepts shown in their textbooks. In addition, research showed that it is
extremely common to see teachers using textbooks in their daily teachings (Litz, 2005)
and that the wrong choice of textbooks would be likely to negatively affect both teaching
and learning (Mukunda, 2007). Therefore, there is a need for textbook evaluation in the
Philippines to ensure quality teaching and learning. However, at present only a few
studies were done to evaluate the textbooks used in secondary public schools in the
Philippines.

Anchored to this, the study aimed to evaluate the Learner’s Material used in
teaching English 7. Specifically, it investigated four specific criteria, the content, format,
presentation and organization, and accuracy and up-to-datedness of information. Also, a
pre-test and post-test was conducted to supplement the evaluation through the
participation of the students. Using the evaluation sheet, the researchers likewise
determined the inadequate materials, lessons, topics, and articles from the material based
on the comments of the respondents. Finally, conclusions and recommendations were
also given.

3
Objectives of the Study

This study aimed to evaluate the instructional module titled “Learner’s Material”
used in teaching English subject to the grade seven students of Tarlac National High
School Main. Specifically, this paper sought to:

1. Evaluate the instructional module used entitled “Learner’s Material” in terms of:

1.1. Content;
1.2. Format;
1.3. Presentation and Organization;
1.4. and Accuracy and Up-to-datedness of Information

2. Evaluate the Learner’s Material based on students’ scores on:

2.1 Pre-test
2.2 Post-test

3. Determine materials, lessons, topics, and articles that are inadequate and missing
from the Learner’s Material which the respondents think should be included.

Significance of the Study

This research focused on the evaluation of instructional module titled “Learner’s

Material” used in teaching English subject to the grade seven students. As such, the
findings of this research would prove significant and beneficial to the following:

To the school administrators, this evaluation will help them in making decisions
on choosing the appropriate material to be recommended for use in an English class since
the quality of the material directly impacts the quality of the teaching. This will serve as
basis to check the alignment of the material to the students’ needs, interests, skills,
abilities and learning styles. In order to produce quality students, quality instructional
materials should be used by quality teachers.

To the curriculum planners, the results of this research may guide them in
designing and developing more efficient learning materials. The findings of this endeavor
might as well be productive in inspiring revision and restructuring of the curriculum.

To the teachers, this will familiarize them with the weaknesses and strengths of
the instructional material. Since they are the ones in direct contact to the students, they
can figure out which lessons on the books are in line with the level of the students and
which activities are matched to the students’ skills, interests and abilities. They can also
decide which lessons in the module need supplemental material and which activities need
enrichment. This will enable them to make appropriate adaptations of the material in their
instruction.

4
 To the students, this study will help them learn English easier since the lessons
and the activities in the material are suited to their age, abilities, skills, interests, needs
and learning styles. Thus, the material will help them improve their knowledge and
abilities and will contribute to their overall upbringing and development.

To the researchers, this study on the evaluation of instructional materials might

benefit and can be made as a springboard for the other studies and researches that may
relate to it as it could give them pertinent data.

Conceptual Framework

The conceptual framework constitutes the flow and the specific variables the
researchers investigated in the present study.

Evaluation of Instructional Module

titled “Learner’s Material” used in
Teaching English 7

Content
Format
Evaluation in terms of: Presentation and Organization
Accuracy and Up-to-datedness
of Information

Evaluation in terms of Students’

Pre-test and Post-test

Inadequacy of the Learner’s Material

Figure 1 Conceptual Paradigm

Figure 1 demonstrates the specific variables the study aimed to investigate. The
administration of Evaluation Rating Sheet for Print Resources of the Department of
Education determined the current status of the instructional module titled “Learner’s
Material” with regards to the content, format, presentation and organization, and accuracy
and up-to-datedness of information. Also, a pre-test and a post-test was conducted to
supplement the evaluation through the participation of the students. At the final stage, the

5
four mentioned criteria, students’ scores and the comments of the respondents as stated in
the questionnaire determined the inadequate materials, lessons, topics, and articles from
the Learner’s Material.

From the results of the study, conclusions were drawn and recommendations for
the use and development of Learner’s Material were made.

Methodology

The methodology discusses the procedures and processes the researchers had
undertaken in the conduct of the study including the research design, the research locale,
the respondents, research instruments, data-gathering procedure, and statistical treatment
which were used in analyzing the data.

Research Design

This study utilized the descriptive method of research. As widely accepted, the
descriptive method of research is a fact-finding study that involves adequate and accurate
interpretation of findings as it describes a certain present condition. Furthermore, the
descriptive research methodology was selected because it is a mean to describe
systematically, factually, and accurately the characteristics of an existing phenomenon
(Isaac, 1997). Relatively, the descriptive research design was used to set the ground for
teachers' evaluation of the instructional material in terms of content, format, presentation
and organization and accuracy and up-to-datedness of information. Likewise, it also
includes students' evaluation based on their pre-test and post-test scores. Data gathered
entails quantitative data which is considered as an important point to shed light in the
phenomenon of interest or overall worth of the Learner’s Material used by the grade
seven teachers and students in public schools.

Research Instrument

A survey questionnaire was employed to gather the data and information needed
for teachers' evaluation. The evaluation rating sheet for print materials, which was
designed by the Learning Resources Management and Development System (LRMDS) of
the Department of Education, was adopted and used as a tool to evaluate the instructional
module titled “Learner’s Material” which is used in teaching grade seven students. Five
grade seven English teachers from Tarlac National High School Main who are using the
book this school year 2019 – 2020 evaluated the material.

The survey questionnaire used in data gathering is divided into two parts. Part I
contained details about the material such as its title, authors, illustrators, publishers and
copy right year. Part II included four criteria to be evaluated namely; Content, Format,
Presentation and Organization and Accuracy and Up-to-datedness of Information. A four-
point Likert type scale having the responses: Very Satisfactory, Satisfactory/Not
Applicable, Poor and Not Satisfactory was used for the answers of the respondents. Last,

6
comments and recommendations of the respondents on the material not captured in
factors one to four are also included in the questionnaire.

For each criterion, the material must score a specific point to pass. The material
must pass in all four criteria. One failed criterion means that the material should not be
recommended for use in public schools. Furthermore, the grand mean of the material in
each criterion is interpreted as follows: 1 – 1.55 (not a problem), 1.56 – 2.55 (moderate
problem) and 2.56 – 3.00 (big problem).

For student evaluation, a 50-item multiple-choice pre-test and post-test was

prepared by the researchers. The questions were taken from the four modules of the
Learner’s Material. 12 items from each of the first two modules and 13 from each of the
last two modules constituted the tests abovementioned. A total of 20 grade seven students
of the school year 2019 – 2020 from Tarlac National High School Main took the tests.

Data-Gathering Procedure

The administration of the evaluation of rating sheet to the five English teachers
was preceded by an orientation where the purpose and significance of the study, as well
as the importance of the participants’ involvement were explained. The teachers were
given 30 minutes to evaluate the Learner’s Material and to complete answering the
survey questionnaire.

For the students, they were given an hour to answer the pre-test. The results of the
pre-test were used as a basis for teaching the lessons taken from the four modules of the
material. The post-test was administered two weeks after the pre-test was conducted and
after the lessons were discussed.

After gathering all the completed survey questionnaires and test results from the
respondents, the data obtained were checked, tabulated, and analyzed according to the
research designed previously discussed in this paper. The researchers calculated the
scores with an aid of a computer software – Microsoft Excel. Using the criterion
reference for interpretation, the weighted mean and scores were computed. Finally, the
interpretation of the findings was then narrated.

Statistical Treatment

Data and information which was gathered from the research instrument was
statistically treated. Statistical treatments include frequency, percentage, rank, and mean.

To get the percentage, the following formula was used:

P = ƒ / N x 100

7
 Where: P = percentage
ƒ = frequency
N = total number of respondents

The mean was determined using the following formula:

𝑥̅ = ƒx/N

Where: 𝑥̅ = mean
ƒ = frequency
x = weight of the score
N = total number of respondents

The tables below show the summary of criteria used for teacher and student
evaluation and their interpretations.

Table 1
Criterion Reference for Interpreting Survey Results on
Teachers’ Evaluation of Learner’s Material

Mean Range Verbal Interpretation

2.56 – 3.00 Big Problem
1.56 – 2.55 Moderate Problem
1 – 1.55 Not a Problem

Table 2
Criterion Reference for Interpreting Survey Results on Scores of
Teachers’ Evaluation of Learner’s Material

Factor Score Range to Pass the Criterion

Content 21 – 28
Format 54 – 72
Presentation and Organization 15 – 20
Accuracy and Up-to-datedness of Information 24
Total 114 – 144

Table 3
Criterion Reference for Interpreting Survey Results on Students’ Evaluation of the
Learner’s Material Based on the Pre-test and Post-test Scores

Scores Verbal Interpretation

46 – 50 Outstanding
36 – 45 Very Good
26 – 35 Good
16 – 25 Poor
0 – 15 Needs Improvement

8
 Discussion of Findings

The discussion of findings presents, analyzes and interprets the data relevant in
addressing the problems posed by this research. Figures are shown in tables. Below such
are the analyses and interpretations of the data reaped through the utilization of the data-
gathering tools.

1. Teachers’ Evaluation of the Learner’s Material

1.1 Content

Content is a compilation of information, ideas, and messages that are translated

into some kind of written, visual, or audible format for others to consume. In this paper,
the first factor which the teachers evaluated is the content.

Table 4
Teachers’ Content Evaluation of the Learner’s Material

VS S/NA P NS
Criteria M R
F % F % F % F %

1. Content is suitable to the students’ level of development. 0 0.00 4 0.80 1 0.20 0 0.00 2.20 6
2. Material contributes to the achievement of specific
objectives of the subject area and grade/year level for 0 0.00 4 0.80 1 0.20 0 0.00 2.20 6
which it is intended.
3. Material provides for the development of higher
cognitive skills such as critical thinking, creativity, 1 0.20 2 0.40 2 0.40 0 0.00 2.20 6
learning by doing, inquiry, problem solving, etc.
4. Material is free of ideological, cultural, religious, racial,
1 0.20 1 0.20 3 0.60 0 0.00 2.40 3.5
and gender biases and prejudices.
5. Material enhances the development of desirable values
1 0.20 1 0.20 3 0.60 0 0.00 2.40 3.5
and traits such as:
5.1 Pride in being a Filipino 1
5.2 Scientific attitude and reasoning 0
5.3 Desire for excellence 2
5.4 Love for country 2
5.5 Helpfulness/Teamwork/Cooperation 4
5.6 Unity 3
5.7 Desire to learn new things 2
5.8 Honesty and Trustworthiness 1
5.9 Ability to know right from wrong 1
5.10 Respect 2
5.11 Critical and creative thinking 1
5.12 Productive work 3
5.13 Others: (Please specify) 0
6. Material has the potential to arouse interest of target
0 0.00 2 0.40 3 0.60 0 0.00 2.60 2
reader.
7. Adequate warning/cautionary notes are provided in
topics and activities where safety and health are of 0 0.00 2 0.40 2 0.40 1 0.20 2.80 1
concern.
GRAND MEAN 2.40

9
 VS – Very Satisfactory NS – Not Satisfactory
Legend: S – Satisfactory F – Frequency
NA – Not Applicable M – Mean
P – Poor R – Rank

Table 1 shows the results of the evaluation of the Learner’s Material in terms of
Factor 1: Content as evaluated by five English 7 teachers. Ranked first was item no.
seven, adequate warning/cautionary notes are provided in topics and activities where
safety and health are of concern with a mean of 2.80. Followed by item no. six, material
has the potential to arouse interest of target reader, which obtained a mean of 2.60. Items
no. four and five, material is free of ideological, cultural, religious, racial and gender
biases and prejudices and material enhances the development of desirable values and
traits, respectively, got a mean of 2.40 and both ranked 3.5.

In addition, for item no. five, four out of the five evaluators agreed that the
material enhances the development of the students’ helpfulness, teamwork and
evaluation. Majority of the evaluators concurred that the material enhances the unity and
the productive work of the students. These show that the material contains lessons and
activities which are intended done in groups and in which students are expected to
produce outputs.

The following traits and values were checked only by two out of the five
evaluators – desire for excellence, love for country; desire to learn new things and
respect. This means that the content of the material needs to be improved to enhance the
aforementioned traits and values. Only one of the evaluators said that the material
enhances the students’ pride in being a Filipino, honesty and trustworthiness, ability to
know right and wrong and critical and creative thinking while nobody reported that the
material enhances the students’ scientific attitude and reasoning.

Furthermore, at rank six, three items got a mean of 2.20. These are as follows:
item no. one, content is suitable to the students’ level of development, item no. two,
material contributes to the achievement of specific objectives of the subject area and
grade/year level for which it is intended and item no. three, material provides for the
development of higher cognitive skills such as critical thinking, creativity, learning by
doing, inquiry, problem solving, etc. Overall, the content of the material gained a grand
mean of 2.40 which means that in terms of content the material is a moderate problem.

1.2 Format

Formatted text is an important part of a Learner’s Material. A clear hierarchy and

readable typeface help create layout that is inviting for the readers to read the material.
The second criterion of the evaluation is the format.

10
 Table 5
Teachers’ Format Evaluation of the Learner’s Material

VS S/NA P NS
Criteria M R
F % F % F % F %
1. Prints
1.1 Size of letters is appropriate to the intended
0 0.00 5 1.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 2.00 16.5
user.
1.2 Spaces between letters and words facilitate
0 0.00 5 1.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 2.00 16.5
reading.
1.3 Font is easy to read. 0 0.00 5 1.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 2.00 16.5
1.4 Printing is of good quality (i.e., no broken
letters, even density, correct alignment, 0 0.00 5 1.00 0 0.00 0 0.00 2.00 16.5
properly placed screen registration).
2. Illustration
2.1 Simple and easily recognizable. 0 0.00 3 0.60 2 0.40 0 0.00 2.40 12.5
2.2 Clarify and supplement the text. 0 0.00 2 0.40 3 0.60 0 0.00 2.60 7
2.3 Properly labelled or captioned (if
0 0.00 2 0.40 3 0.60 0 0.00 2.60 7
applicable).
2.4 Realistic/appropriate colors. 0 0.00 2 0.40 3 0.60 0 0.00 2.60 7
2.5 Attractive and appealing. 0 0.00 2 0.40 3 0.60 0 0.00 2.60 7
2.6 Culturally relevant. 0 0.00 3 0.60 2 0.40 0 0.00 2.40 12.5
3. Design and Layout
3.1 Attractive and pleasing to look at. 0 0.00 2 0.40 3 0.60 0 0.00 2.60 7
3.2 Simple (i.e., does not distract the attention of
0 0.00 3 0.60 2 0.40 0 0.00 2.40 12.5
the reader.
3.3 Adequate illustration in relation to text. 0 0.00 2 0.40 3 0.60 0 0.00 2.60 7
3.4 Harmonious blending of elements (e.g.,
0 0.00 3 0.60 2 0.40 0 0.00 2.40 12.5
illustration and text).
4. Paper and Binding
4.1 Paper used contributes to easy reading. 0 0.00 2 0.40 3 0.60 0 0.00 2.60 7
4.2 Durable binding to withstand frequent use. 0 0.00 1 0.20 4 0.80 0 0.00 2.80 2
5. Size and Weight Resource
5.1 Easy to handle. 0 0.00 1 0.20 4 0.80 0 0.00 2.80 2
5.2 Relatively light. 0 0.00 1 0.20 4 0.80 0 0.00 2.80 2

GRAND MEAN 2.46

VS – Very Satisfactory NS – Not Satisfactory

S – Satisfactory F – Frequency
Legend:
NA – Not Applicable M – Mean
P – Poor R – Rank

Table 2 exhibits the results of the evaluation of the Learner’s Material in terms of
Factor 2: Format as evaluated by five English 7 teachers. Items number 4.2 (Paper and
Binding), durable binding to withstand frequent use; 5.1 and 5.2 (Size and Weight
Resource), easy to handle and relatively light, respectively, were all at rank second with a
mean of 2.80.

11
 These were followed by seven item numbers which are: 2.2, 2.3, 2.4 and 2.5
(Illustration), clarify and supplement the text, properly labeled or captioned,
realistic/appropriate color and attractive and appealing; 3.1and 3.3 (Design and Layout),
attractive and pleasing to look at and adequate illustration in relation to text; and 4.1
(Paper and Binding), paper used contributes to easier reading, respectively. All these
obtained a mean of 2.60 and were at rank seven.

At rank 12.5, four item numbers gained a mean of 2.40. These are as follows: 2.1
and 2.6 (Illustration) simple and easily recognizable and culturally relevant; 3.2 and 3.4
(Design and Layout) simple and harmonious blending of elements. All four items under
Prints were at rank 16.5 with a mean of 2.0. These are the following: 1.1, size of letters is
appropriate to the intended user; 1.2, spaces between letters and words facilitate reading;
1.3, font is easy to read and 1.4, printing is of good quality. In general, the format of the
material obtained a grand mean of 2.46. In general, the format of the material obtained a
grand mean of 2.46 which means that in terms of the format it is verbally interpreted as a
moderate problem.

It can be inferred from the results above that the Learner’s Material contains a lot
of lessons and activities; hence, it is big and thick. However, due to the type of paper
used in printing, the illustrations included were unattractive and were not appealing.
Some of the illustrations does not supplement the text and were not properly labeled. The
size and the weight of the material, including the quality of paper used, might have
affected the binding of the paper. Thus, it cannot withstand frequent use; pages of the
material are easily torn.

1.3 Presentation and Organization

In an instructional material it should always be an aim to give a clear, well-

structured flow of information. The third criterion which was evaluated in this paper is
the presentation and organization.

Table 6
Teachers’ Presentation and Organization Evaluation of the Learner’s Material

VS S/NA P NS
Criteria M R
F % F % F % F %
1. Presentation is engaging, interesting, and
0 0.00 4 0.80 1 0.20 0 0.00 2.20 5
understandable.
2. There is logical and smooth flow of ideas. 0 0.00 3 0.60 2 0.40 0 0.00 2.40 3.5
3. Vocabulary level is adapted to target reader’s
0 0.00 3 0.60 2 0.40 0 0.00 2.40 3.5
likely experience and level of understanding.
4. Length of sentences is suited to the
0 0.00 1 0.20 4 0.80 0 0.00 2.80 1
comprehension level of the target reader.
5. Sentences and paragraphs structures are
0 0.00 2 0.40 3 0.60 0 0.00 2.60 2
varied and interesting to the target reader.
GRAND MEAN 2.48

12
 VS – Very Satisfactory NS – Not Satisfactory
S – Satisfactory F – Frequency
Legend:
NA – Not Applicable M – Mean
P – Poor R – Rank

Table 3 displays the results of the evaluation of the Learner’s Material in terms of
Factor 3: Presentation and Organization as evaluated by five English 7 teachers. Item no.
four, length of sentences is suited to the comprehension level of the target reader ranked
first with a mean of 2.80. Then, on rank two is item no. five, sentences and paragraphs
structures are varied and interesting to the target reader, which obtained a mean of 2.60.

In addition to the results, last on the rank is item no. one, presentation is engaging,
interesting and understandable, obtained the lowest mean and ranked fifth. In total, the
presentation and organization of the material attained a grand mean of 1.20. The stated
indicators of the criterion presentation and organization were verbally interpreted as a
moderate problem.

The results imply that since the students could not comprehend the sentences from
the material, they find both the sentences and the paragraphs uninteresting. This can be
attributed to the fact that the inability to comprehend individual sentences that make up a
paragraph is a major obstacle in paragraph-level comprehension. These results concurred
to the study conducted by Scott (2009), where she revealed that sentence complexity
creates comprehension problems for readers. Thus, sentence comprehension contributes
to successful reading.

1.4 Accuracy and Up-to-datedness of Information

The information provided is the most important part of an instructional material.

When data is added correctly, the information gathered can help accomplish the
objectives set upon the beginning of a lesson. Hence, the accuracy and up-to-datedness of
the information is the fourth criterion evaluated in the study.

Table 7
Teachers’ Accuracy and Up-to-datedness of Information
Evaluation of the Learner’s Material

VS S/NA P NS
Criteria M
F % F % F % F %
1. Conceptual errors. 4 0.80 1 0.20 0 0.00 0 0.00 1.20
2. Factual errors. 4 0.80 1 0.20 0 0.00 0 0.00 1.20
3. Grammatical errors. 4 0.80 1 0.20 0 0.00 0 0.00 1.20
4. Computational errors. 4 0.80 1 0.20 0 0.00 0 0.00 1.20
5. Obsolete information. 4 0.80 1 0.20 0 0.00 0 0.00 1.20
6. Typographical and other minor errors (e.g.,
inappropriate or unclear illustrations, missing 4 0.80 1 0.20 0 0.00 0 0.00 1.20
labels, wrong captions, etc.).
GRAND MEAN 1.20

13
 VS – Very Satisfactory NS – Not Satisfactory
Legend: S – Satisfactory F – Frequency
NA – Not Applicable M – Mean
P – Poor R – Rank

Table 4 exposes the results of the evaluation of the Learner’s Material in terms of
Factor 4: Accuracy and Up-to-Datedness of Information as evaluated by five English 10
teachers. All the six items under this criterion gained a mean of 1.20. These are as
follows: conceptual errors, factual errors, grammatical errors, computational errors,
obsolete information and typographical and minor errors. This is because the material has
undergone stages such as content editing, language editing, proofreading and copy
reading.

Overall, the accuracy and up-to-datedness of the information of the material

gained a grand mean of 1.20. The stated indicators of the criterion accuracy and up-to-
datedness of information were verbally interpreted as to not a problem.

Table 8
Summary of the Teachers’ Evaluation of the Learner’s Material
Based on the Criterion Reference for Interpreting Survey Results on Scores

Criteria Teacher 1 Teacher 2 Teacher 3 Teacher 4 Teacher 5

Content 16 17 18 23 17

Format 42 54 43 50 40
Presentation and
12 10 15 14 12
Organization
Accuracy and Up-to-
24 18 24 24 24
datedness of Information

TOTAL 94 105 100 111 93

Table 5 reveals the evaluators’ scores for each of the criterion in the evaluation
rating sheet of the Learner’s Material used in English 7. For the content, format,
presentation and organization and accuracy and up-to-datedness of information, the
material must score at least 21 over 28, 54 over 72, 15 over 20 and 24 over 24 points,
respectively, to pass the criterion. In all the criteria, the material must have a total score
of at least 114 over 144 points to pass. Any material that fails in at least one of the four
criteria of the evaluation rating sheet and/or fails criterion four: accuracy and up-to-
datedness of information should not be recommended for use in the public schools.

The content, the format and the presentation and organization of the material
failed in the evaluation of four out of five teachers. However, the material passed in the
evaluation of the five teachers in terms of accuracy and up-to-datedness of information.
Overall, teachers 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 gave the material a total score of 94, 105, 100, 111 and
93 points respectively.

14
 2. Students’ Evaluation of the Learner’s Material

Pre-testing and post-testing is an assessment model designed to examine the

change in overall critical thinking skills or dispositions of group takers. In this study, a
pre-test and post-test was conducted to evaluate the instructional material of grade seven
students. The tables below reveal the students’ scores in both tests as well as their
corresponding verbal interpretations.

Table 9
Students’ Evaluation of the Learner’s Material
Based on the Pre-test and Post-test Scores

Student Pre-test Score Post-test Score

1 25 24
2 29 33
3 11 11
4 31 38
5 30 21
6 28 29
7 14 20
8 14 7
9 17 27
10 9 15
11 12 15
12 10 10
13 18 11
14 15 24
15 17 13
16 14 15
17 22 15
18 27 19
19 19 30
20 18 20

Table 6 presents the scores of the students in both pre-test and post-test. As can be
seen, out of the 20 students, only 11 students (student 2, 4, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 14, 16, 19 and
20) got higher scores during the post-test compared to their pre-test. Their score ranged
from 9 to 31 in the pre-test and 15 to 38 in the post test. Two students (student 3 and 12)
retained their scores in both tests. Their scores remained low ranging from 10 to 11.

Another interesting finding that was obtained from this study is that seven
students (student 1, 5, 8, 13, 15, 17 and 18) got lower scores in the post-test compared to
their pre-test. This is the result even though the lessons from the material has been
discussed before the post-test was administered. Their scores ranged from 14 to 30 and 7
to 24 in the pre-test and the post-test, respectively.

15
 From the results presented above, it can be inferred that the content of the
material might have been one or two-step higher than the level of the students. Thus, nine
students still got low scores in the post-test.

Table 10
Summary of the Students’ Evaluation of the Learner’s Material
Based on Pre-test and Post-test Scores

Pre-Test Post-Test
Verbal Verbal
Scores Frequency Scores Frequency
Interpretation Interpretation
46 – 50 0 Outstanding 46 – 50 0 Outstanding
36 – 45 0 Very Good 36 – 45 1 Very Good
26 – 35 5 Good 26 – 35 4 Good
16 – 25 7 Poor 16 – 25 6 Poor
Needs Needs
0 – 15 8 0 – 15 9
Improvement Improvement

Table 7 shows the summary of the students’ scores in pre-test and in post-test. As
shown above, in the pre-test, no student got outstanding and very good scores. However,
five students got good scores, seven got poor scores and eight got scores which needs
improvement. Pre-test is administered before the lessons in the material were discussed.
Hence, it is understandable that majority of the students got low scores.

In the post-test, one student obtained a score which is very good. Four students,
six students and nine students obtained scores which are good, poor and needs
improvement respectively. Even after the lessons in the material were discussed,
students’ obtained scores in the post-test are still low.

Furthermore, one interesting finding can be seen on the scores ranging from 0 –
15. The number of students who got scores that needs improvement increased from pre-
test to post-test – from eight students to nine students. This indicates that the material
failed in the students’ evaluation.

3. Inadequacy of the Learner’s Material

An instructional material is an aid in understanding a specific branch of study.

Therefore, there is a need for evaluation of these materials. In the present study, based on
the summary of the findings, the material failed and should not be recommended for
possible use in the public schools unless the corrections or revisions included in the
evaluation rating sheet are made. The following comments and recommendations were
given by the respondents as they evaluate the material:

1. Most words in the material are not easy to understand and the sentences are long
so some instructions in the tasks are not clear. I hope they make revisions
regarding the use of words and sentence construction. Also, I hope the book is

16
 smaller and lighter to carry with white quality paper, because the brown one is
easily torn.
2. Although the material in English is very well designed, I wish the colors and
illustrations in the content are colorful. The content can be challenging and
fulfilling once understood and colorful images can greatly help in doing so.
3. Some stories are not interesting. It is not in the line of interest of most of the grade
seven students. Some poems are also hard to analyze. There are also activities
which are too ideal for the students to accomplish within the given time frame.
However, according to some students, some are very fun to do and can be a
potential source of learning.
4. The material can help the students discover and hone their language skills because
of the different group activities. The activities for some students actually helped
them understand and respect the decisions of their classmates so that they can
finish the tasks.
5. Students can find the stories interesting and some grammatical lessons exciting.
There should just be improvements on factor number two which is the format.

Conclusions and Recommendations

This discusses the findings of this study in summary. From these, conclusions are
drawn, and corresponding recommendations are extracted.

Conclusions

From the findings, the following conclusions were drawn:

1. The Learner’s Material used in English 7 has moderate problems in terms of

content, format and presentation and organization. Thus, the material does not
arouse students’ interest, is not durable and is suited to the comprehension level of
the students.
2. The pre-test and post-test administered to the students as part of the evaluation
shows that the instructional material used in English 7 is not suitable for their
current level of comprehension since the number of students who got scores that
needs improvement increased from eight students to nine students respectively.
3. The findings of this study call for a recognition of the importance of reviewing
and revising some areas of the material for quality teaching and learning process
in the classroom.

Recommendations

From the findings, the following recommendations were drawn:

1. The teacher must find ways to arouse the students’ interest during discussions
since they find some of the topics uninteresting.

17
 2. The quality of the paper used in the material must be improved to make
illustrations and texts easily recognizable and clear to the students.
3. The illustrations should be colorful since it helps the students’ in comprehending
the texts and the lessons.
4. The teacher must think of varied strategies in unlocking vocabularies to aid
student’s understanding and comprehension.
5. The instructional developers must look into the results and suggestions of the
respondents for the betterment of the book.

Bibliography

Brown, H. D. (1995). Principles of language learning and teaching. Harlow: Pearson

Education Limited.

Byrd, P. (2001). Textbooks: Evaluation and selection and analysis for implementation. In
Celce-Murcia, M. (Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language, 3rd
ed. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.

Cunningsworth, A. (1995). Choosing your coursebook. Oxford: Heinemann.

Edge, J. & Wharton, S. (1998). Autonomy and development: Living in the materials
world. In B. Tomlinson (Ed.), Materials development in language teaching.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Fradd, S. & McGee, P. (1994). Instructional assessment: An integrative approach to

evaluating student performance in reading. Addison Wesley.

Garinger, D. (2002). Textbook evaluation. TEFL Web Journal. Retrieved from

www.teflweb-j.org/garinger.html.

Isaac, S. (1997). Handbook in research and evaluation for education. San Diego: Edits
Publishers.

Litz, D. R. A. (2005). Textbook evaluation and ELT management: A South Korea case
study. Asian EFL Journal. Retrieved from http://www.asian-efl-
journal.com/Litz_thesis.pdf.

Maley, A. (1998). Squaring the circle - reconciling materials as constraint with materials
as empowerment: Materials development in language teaching. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.

Mukundan, J. (2007). Evaluation of English language textbooks: Some important issues

for consideration. Journal of NELTA, 12 (1).

18
Pawilen, G. & Sumida, M. (2005). A comparative analysis of the elementary science
curriculum of Philippines and Japan. Bulletin of the Center for Education and
Educational Research the Faculty of Education Ehime University, 52 (1), 167-
180.

Rea-Dickins, P. & Germaine, K. (1993). Evaluation language teaching: A scheme for

teacher education. Oxford University Press.

Reiser, R. A. & Dempsey, J. V. (2007). Trends and issues in instructional design. Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.

Scott, C. (2009). A case for the sentence in reading comprehension. Chicago: Rush
University Medical Center.

Shannon, P. (2010). Textbook development and selection. International Encyclopedia of

Education.

Sheldon, L. (1988). Evaluating ELT textbooks and materials. ELT Oxford University
Press Journal, 37 (3).

Tomlinson, B. (2004). Materials evaluation. In B. Tomlinson (Ed.), Developing

materials for language teaching. London: Continuum.

19