Faiz Sathi Abdullah


It is generally acknowledged that the college/university foundation programme, often instituted as a one-year course of instruction, plays a crucial role in preparing students for graduation to their various academic departments, which are usually located within the same educational institution. Foundation studies programmes in Oman are delivered to cater for the disciplinary, and almost invariably the closely related academic English language needs of the academic departments in addition to the requisite basic computer literacy and mathematical skills. The present study sought to evaluate two sets of teaching-learning ELT materials at a higher education college in Oman on a post-/in-use basis by the teachers of three general to intermediate level English language courses vis-à-vis the first set of Linguaphone courses forming the core, and of an IELTS Preparation course using the second set, respectively. All the courses were instituted in the General Foundation Programme (GFP). The main research instrument was the Checklist for ELT Materials Evaluation, adapted from Mukundan et al, 2011, that comprised 55 close-ended items and two open-ended items. It was discovered that 16 evaluative items relating to the use of Linguaphone course materials in the main were rated as “Good” (as expected, in the interest of target language/speaker authenticity), 29 items as “Adequate”, and 10 items as “Weak”, cf. cultural sensitivity). On the other hand, 43 items relating to the use of the IELTS Preparation course book were evaluated “Good/Excellent”, with the remaining 12 items being evaluated as only “Adequate/Weak”. The teachers also highlighted aspects of both sets of materials that worked well with their respective classes of students, as well as areas of their use that required improvement. While it was rather tempting to follow up the respective separate evaluation of the two sets of materials with a comparative one of the corresponding merits, or demerits as the case may be, it was determined that this would not be fair given the different levels, teaching-learning objectives, and content make-up of the courses, among other factors. On the global level, however, it was concluded that both sets of materials needed supplementary materials and/or adaptation work on the part of the teachers, with the Linguaphone courses requiring more resourcefulness on the part of the teachers as they endeavoured to meet the teaching-learning outcomes of the courses of instruction concerned.


Article visualizations:

Hit counter



general foundation studies; post-use ELT materials evaluation; ESL textbook evaluation checklist; language learning materials selection and adaptation; materials and methods in ESL/EFL


Abdullah, F. S. (1998). Reading to learn from TESOL research articles: Towards a genre-based model for EAP programme development. Doctoral dissertation. Moray House Institute of Education. Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh.

Abdullah, F. S. (2009). Assessing EAP needs for the university: A genre-based approach. Saarbucken, Germany: VDM Publishing.

Abdullah, F. S. (2017). EAP needs analysis within a teaching-learning framework in higher education. International Journal of Innovative Research and Knowledge, 2(10), 45–55.

Alptekin, C. (2002). Towards intercultural communicative competence in ELT. ELT Journal, 56(1), 57-64.

Bayliss, A., & Ingram, D. E. (2006, October). IELTS as a predictor of academic language performance. In Australian International Education Conference (pp. 1-12).

Beretta, A. (1986). Program‐Fair Language Teaching Evaluation. TESOL Quarterly, 20(3), 431-444.

Brook-Hart, G., & Jakeman, V. (2012). Complete IELTS: Bands 4-5. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Brook-Hart, G., Jakeman, V., & Jay, D. (2012). Complete IELTS Bands 4-5 Teacher's Book. Cambridge University Press.

Brown, James DH. Does IELTS preparation work?: An application of the context-adaptive model of language program evaluation [online]. In: Wood, Sandra (Editor). International English Language Testing System (IELTS) Research Reports 1998: Volume 1. Canberra: IELTS Australia, 1998: 20-37. Availability: ISBN: 0864030215. [Cited 15 Oct 17].

Canagarajah, A. S. (Ed.). (2005). Reclaiming the local in language policy and practice. Routledge.

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

Dudley-Evans, T., & St John, M. J. (1998). Developments in English for specific purposes: A multi-disciplinary approach. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Ellis, R. (1997). The empirical evaluation of language teaching materials. ELT journal, 51(1), 36-42.

Gilmore, A. (2007). Authentic materials and authenticity in foreign language learning. Language teaching, 40(2), 97-118.

Gimson, A. C. (Ed.). (1988). Linguaphone: English Course. London: Linguaphone Institute Ltd.

Harmer, J. (1991). The practice of English language teaching. London/New York.

Hartmann, R. (Ed.). (1996). The English Language in Europe (Vol. 2, No. 3). London: Intellect Books.

Jenkins, A. P. (1992). Paragraphs that Communicate: Reading and Writing Paragraphs. By Hisatake Jimbo and Richard B. Murto (Tokyo, Linguaphone, 1990, 79pp. Teacher's Manual, 43pp. (1), 155-163.

Jha, S. K. (2013). English in eastern Ethiopia is learnt; not mastered. English Language Teaching, 6(4), 42.

Jha, S. K. (2014). Shall we teach English as a subject or as a language? Education Practice and Innovation, 1(1), 10-17.

Jordan, R. R. (1997). English for academic purposes: A guide and resource book for teachers. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kamagata, S. (1975). Pitch Characteristics of Questions in British and American English: an Experiment and Comparative Study. Language Laboratory, 13, 35-55.

Kilickaya, F. (2004). Guidelines to evaluate cultural content in textbooks. The Internet TESL Journal, 10(2). Available online at: http://www.lara25.com/mywebdisk/CI-P/ICCinLT/Kilickaya.html. Retrieved Feb 17, 2015.

Labed, N. (2002). Adapting and/or adopting non-authentic and genuine materials for an ERP context, towards a stereotype-free thinking English. Revue Sciences Humaines, (17), 81-87.

Lam, A. (2002). English in education in China: Policy changes and learners’ experiences. World Englishes, 21(2), 245-256.

Lin, A., Wang, W., Akamatsu, N., & Riazi, M. (2005). International TESOL professionals and teaching English for glocalized communication (TEGCOM). Reclaiming the local in language policy and practice, 197-222.

Mukundan, J., Hajimohammadi, R., & Nimehchisalem, V. (2011). Developing an English language textbook evaluation checklist. Contemporary Issues in Education Research (CIER), 4(6), 21-28.

Mukundan, J., Nimehchisalem, V., & Hajimohammadi, R. (2011). Developing an English language textbook evaluation checklist: A focus group study. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science, 1(12), 100-105.

O'Loughlin, K., & Arkoudis, S. (2009). Investigating IELTS exit score gains in higher education. International English Language Testing System (IELTS) Research Reports 2009: Volume 10. Retrieved from: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Sophie_Arkoudis/publication284397208_Investigating_IELTS_exit_score_gains_in_higher_education/links /57b2471008ae15c76cbb3e5f.pdf

Oman Academic Standards for General Foundation Programs. Oman Accreditation Council & Ministry of Higher Education, Sultanate of Oman. Retrieved from http://www.oaaa.gov.om/ Program.aspx#GeneralFoundation (January 21, 2015).

Sheldon, L. E. (1988). Evaluating ELT textbooks and materials. ELT journal, 42(4), 237-246.

Tomlinson, B. (Ed.). (2003). Developing materials for language teaching. A&C Black

Tomlinson, B. (2012). Materials development for language learning and teaching. Language Teaching, 45(2), 143-179.

Ware, D. (1988). Linguaphone: Intermediate English Course: Programmes 1-10. London: Linguaphone Institute Ltd. (Accompanied by practice exercises book, Arabic guide book, pre-recorded CDs and 1 VCD programme).

Ware, D. (1988). Linguaphone: Intermediate English Course: Programmes 11-21. London: Linguaphone Institute Ltd.

Widdowson, H. G. (1998). Context, community, and authentic language. TESOL quarterly, 32(4), 705-716.

Wren, P. C., Martin, H. (1935). High school English grammar & composition. London: Cooper Education Trust.

Wren, P. C., Martin, H., & Prasada Rao, N. D.V. (1995). High school English grammar & composition. Rev. Ed. New Delhi: S. Chand.

Yu-shi, J. (1983). The puzzling and controversial ‘unless’. ELT Journal, 37(2), 162-164.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.46827/ejes.v0i0.1219


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2018 Faiz Sathi Abdullah

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Copyright © 2015-2022. European Journal of Education Studies (ISSN 2501 - 1111) is a registered trademark of Open Access Publishing Group. All rights reserved.

This journal is a serial publication uniquely identified by an International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) serial number certificate issued by Romanian National Library (Biblioteca Nationala a Romaniei). All the research works are uniquely identified by a CrossRef DOI digital object identifier supplied by indexing and repository platforms. All authors who send their manuscripts to this journal and whose articles are published on this journal retain full copyright of their articles. All the research works published on this journal are meeting the Open Access Publishing requirements and can be freely accessed, shared, modified, distributed and used in educational, commercial and non-commercial purposes under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).