Global Content in Global Coursebooks

Introduction

This work will explore the extent to which an example of global coursebooks (i.e., coursebooks produced to be disseminated around the world) are “global” in terms of being globally inclusive, globally sensitive to the issue of inappropriacy, and globally investing in what connects people worldwide. This study will also explore the way learners using Headway Intermediate (H/I; Soars & Soars, 2003) perceive its global content. Such an attempt helps English language teaching (ELT) practitioners rethink about how the identity of the language learner shape and is shaped by the materials used and especially the coursebook.

As outlined hereinbefore, themes mentioned in previous research will be explored such as “inclusivity,” “inappropriacy” (Gray, 2002), and “connectedness” (Chang, 2003). To do so, this study will review the issues of globalization and language teaching especially as manifested in connectedness, the question of representation and the implications of inclusivity, and the issue of inappropriacy and the problematic facts related to it.

It is secret to no one that the spread of English language in the world has resulted in the promotion of an already important industry for Anglophone countries and specifically Britain (Howatt, 1984; Melliti, 2012), which is ELT (Crystal, 2003; Derbel, 2004; Graddol, 2000; Gray, 2002). Apart from the exportation of English language practitioners (Pennycook, 1994; Phillipson, 1992) to Outer and especially Expanding Circles (Kachru, 1985), Britain benefited from the exportation of English textbooks (Graddol, 2000; Gray, 2002). Being used in many teaching situations around the globe, English language textbooks have been called “global” (Graddol, 2000; Gray, 2002). Global coursebooks are characterized by their global use (Canagarajah, 1999; Graddol, 2000; Gray, 2002). Accordingly, they are worth investigating in terms of content as well as learners’ perception of their content. Analyzing the content of coursebooks, research studies could focus on the linguistic and cultural content (Michael, 1993). In addition, investigating learners’ perception of global coursebooks, the results of a questionnaire can be corroborated.

Globality in Global Coursebooks

What is meant by the term globality is the end state of the process of the globalization of a particular item (Schafer, 2007). Hence, the “globality” of ELT coursebooks is the end state of the globalization of these teaching materials not only in terms of themes but also in terms of distribution most of the time with a superficial consideration for the identity of particular learners. With reference to the “globality” that is said to be characterizing global coursebooks in terms of content (Gray, 2002; Riches, 1999) and use (Graddol, 2000; Phillipson, 1992), it is important to investigate the applicability of the generalized cultural content in these teaching materials (Gray, 2002; Kilickaya, 2004). Generalized cultural content is related to coursebook writers’ attempt to invest in general topics that take into consideration including and being sensitive to international audiences, which results in the sanitization of content (Gray, 2002). Investigating the suitability of content for world audiences is important because globalization, which is defined as the mutual social exchange of influence between remote events and ideologies (Derbel, 2007; Giddens, 1990), affects coursebooks’ production and use (Gray, 2002). Investigating this suitability is what is meant by exploring the “globality” of the global coursebook.

This study is conducted in the 21st century, where one hears a lot about globalization, which is “a fashionable term” (p. 1) according to Block and Cameron (2002) and a theme that dominates contemporary discourse and affects the teaching profession according to Derbel (2007) including the production and dissemination of ELT textbooks. In fact, globalization, being a force that is continuously shaping and reshaping human relationships and products (Giddens, 1990), affects ELT in different ways (Derbel, 2007). Kubota (2002), for example, describes the way globalization frames ELT in Japan representing the discourse of “Kokusaika” (i.e., internationalization) characterizing teaching, contributing, thus, in the promotion of the “interconnectedness” marking ELT (Derbel, 2007). The discourse of “Kokusaika” (Kubota, 2002) could be seen as an attempt toward the end state of globalization, which is “globality.” For the Japanese, the discourse of “Kokusaika” meant the use of a global medium, which is English, to transmit Japanese culture to the world (Kubota, 2002).

In addition, Cameron (2002) stresses the fact that globalization influences ELT through framing the kind of communication used by global users, which is most of the time related to the dominant’s varieties and modes of communication. Accordingly, Kramsch and Thorne (2002), defining communication as information exchange, highlight the fact that this kind of communication is manifested in Second Language Acquisition (SLA) theories, methods, and tasks. Such methods and tasks, according to Block (2002) are not sufficient to cater for the globally diverse aspects of English language learning. What is meant by this is that modes of communication are not the same all over the world while SLA theories assume they are so (Block, 2002). It is for this reason that coursebooks writers are to cater for the cultural identity of the learners to be a vehicle of learning not a cause of learner resistance. Globalization influences also the materials used in ELT (Block & Cameron, 2002). For instance, Gray (2002) attests that this influence is manifested in the claims of “globality” that the publishers of global coursebooks pretend to maximize profit. He suggests that, concerning the relationship between globalization and ELT materials, the future will be for diversity of these materials, not homogeneity. This prediction entails that the global coursebook will more and more tend to be glocalized by producing coursebooks that meet the needs of local users while preserving their connection with the world (Gray, 2002).

In this context, the notion of connectedness manifested in what the publishers that Gray (2002) interviewed call constructing bridges between what is local and what is global, is noticeable in the idea of “glocalisation, [being] a neologism which attempts to capture something of the complexity inherent in globalisation by conflating the terms global and local” (p. 166, italics in original). What Gray (2002) means by this suggestion is the inclusion of local topics, aspirations, and concerns in the content of coursebooks to motivate the users and avoid possible resistance. One might add that such possible resistance does not only concern the learners but also the teachers, as clarified by Canagarajah (1999) and Gray (2002), respectively. While Canagarajah (1999) argues that resistance can be manifested in learners’ distortion of their coursebooks, Gray (2002) provides evidence that some teachers are not satisfied with the kind of content that global coursebooks communicate. Different ELT theorists have considered coursebooks of paramount importance (Hutchinson & Torres, 1994; Tomlinson, 2001), while others have warned that coursebooks are not suitable (Allwright, 1982; Rinvolucri, 1999). Whether a coursebook is “good” or “bad” depends on the angle from which one looks at it and the kind of content existing in the coursebook. Hence, what is important is that evaluating coursebooks is a necessity (Case, Ndura, & Righettini, 2005). For example, Nunan (1991) claims that the evaluation of coursebooks is the final stage in its production. For this reason, this study explores the cultural content in an attempt to contribute to the literature on the issues related to the extent to which global coursebooks can be said to have a real “globality” in themes and in representation (Azimova & Johnston, 2012).

In fact, coursebooks have been subject to various kinds of examination. Ellis (1997) differentiates between “predictive evaluation” and “retrospective evaluation.” While predictive evaluation concerns the decision of choosing the suitable material, retrospective evaluation focuses on materials that are already in use. Rea-Dickens (1994) adds to this distinction the description of the postuse evaluation. She distinguishes between preuse evaluation, in-use evaluation, and postuse evaluation. Nunan (1991) enumerates the different perspectives and angles from which commercial coursebooks could be evaluated. He adopts the six perspectives for evaluating materials that Littlejohn and Windeatt (1989) mention:

Nunan (1991) comments that such a scheme is modest in the sense of being more realizable than calls for inviting teachers to “adopt a critical stance towards the materials’ aims, appropriateness, and utility” (p. 209), as proposed by Breen and Candlin (1987). Litz (n.d.) asserts that recent research studies on coursebook evaluation are documented to focus on many issues such as “textbook design and practicality, methodological validity, the role of textbooks in innovation, the authenticity of materials in terms of their representation of language, and the appropriateness of gender representation, subject matter, and cultural components” (p. 2). As stated by Nunan, “[e]valuating and selecting commercial materials is not an easy task” (p. 209). It is so because many decisions need to be taken concerning these two operations like “[matching] the materials with the goals and objectives of the program, and [ensuring] that they are consistent with [teachers’] beliefs about the nature of language and learning, as well as with . . . learners’ attitudes, beliefs and preferences” (Nunan, 1991, p. 209, italics added). Therefore, it is essential to evaluate teaching materials and particularly coursebooks to forecast, measure, or evaluate their suitability for learners around the globe. Numerous studies have focused on the evaluation of the cultural content in global coursebooks such as the investigation of stereotyping and gender representation starting from the 1970s (Gray, 2002; Hartman & Judd, 1978; Mineshima, 2008; Porreca, 1984).

Examples of inappropriate, or politically incorrect, cultural terms and topics are found in Gray (2002) who calls them PARSNIPs (an acronym referring, respectively, to politics, alcohol, religion, sex, narcotics, isms, and pork). The assumption behind the avoidance of these topics is that they are inappropriate for many cultures. In fact, culturally unacceptable issues vary across the world and what is perceived to be taboo or problematic in one culture may be normal, in the sense of being accepted, in other cultures (Alptekin, 1993). Interviewing the publishers of H/I (Soars & Soars, 1996), Gray (2002) finds that other examples of inappropriate issues that are to be avoided in ELT global coursebooks include “anarchy, Aids, Israel and six pointed stars, genetic engineering, terrorism, and violence” (p. 159). Gray (2002) detects a tendency that some of the above-mentioned inappropriate topics are avoided through the investigation of the content of a coursebook as well as through the guidelines imposed by publishers. The guidelines consisted in every topic that the publishers perceived as upsetting and controversial for their potential global users such as political and ethical matters.

For seemingly cultural reasons publishers impose on ELT coursebook writers a list of topics and issues to be avoided (Gray, 2002; Viney, 2000). This claim is attested by Viney (2000) who himself is a coursebook writer. In a reply to an article written by Rinvolucri (1999), in which he strongly criticized ELT coursebooks, Viney (2000) contends that publishers provide coursebook authors with guidelines to be followed. One of the guidelines in the Heinemann Guide for Authors (1991) dealing with inappropriacy is quoted in Viney (2000).

Due to the sensitivity of some of the markets for which we produce books, we have to be very careful about the topics which we cover. Obviously when producing books for the UK and Northern European markets most subjects are acceptable, but in more conservative and religious markets there are various things we must be careful with. The list below should be used as a guideline but please do discuss any topics you feel strongly about using with your editor. (para. 29)

Viney (2000) states that the list “includes abuse, aids, narcotics, terrorism, disputed borders, sex, rape, religion, pornography” (para. 30). The concurrence of this list in ELT coursebooks could show the accentuation of “globality,” by focusing on controversial and problematic issues. For the publishers and coursebook authors, the more inappropriate topics are avoided in a textbook, the more it is likely to be considered “global” (Bronner, 2002). However, trying to cater for a world audience and at the same time avoiding offending a world audience could result in what Gray (2002) calls “sanitisation of content” (p. 166) that aims at making the coursebook politically correct (Gray, 2002). Dendrinos (1992) explores this issue too and concluded similarly that sanitization of content based primarily on trivialization of topics and opting instead for advertising and comedy is an observable characteristic of ELT global coursebooks.

Hence, it can be argued the cultural diversity of the world represents a challenge to the mono-ethnic mono-cultural content issues peculiar to the target language culture invested in coursebooks. This issue will be explored in the following subsection that concerns the necessity, and at the same time the possible cultural inappropriacy of investing target language culture in global coursebooks. In his investigation of H/I (Soars & Soars, 1996), Gray (2002) detects a tendency to include people and situations from around the world. As he put it, “[a] modern coursebook like New Headway/Intermediate (1996), while still a very British book, is much less exclusively located in Britain” (p. 157, italics in original). This means that, in general, the book writers attempted to be inclusive in the sense of showing awareness of the need to include images from the entire world in global coursebooks, not only British ones. Thus, integrating images and situations from around the globe gives the coursebook a global outlook.

Using a checklist that focused on representation of women, age, and social class, Arikan (2005) investigates the visual materials representing people in H/I (Soars & Soars, 2003) and Think ahead to First Certificate (Naunton, 1993) and concludes that

the majority of the visual materials in these coursebooks represent the middle class social strata composed of the middle aged individuals in a way that the numbers of both genders represented seem to be similar. However, the critical study of the discursive practices making up these images unearth [sic] the fact that there are many imbalances in such representations. (p. 35)

Arikan (2005) claims that there are two kinds of representation in the investigated coursebooks; apparent inclusivity and hidden (or subtle) imbalance. To illustrate this point, Arikan provided data concerning the social classes of the human images in H/I (Soars & Soars, 2003) using the content analysis method. He found that the “middle” class is the class represented in 84.44% of the total number of human images in the coursebook. Such visibility of the middle class was at the expense of representing other classes such as the “lower” class, mentioned only in 2.2% of the images. As for the lower classes, Arikan (2005) claims that they are “represented through individuals from the third world except for those who are eccentric individuals living in the U.S. or the U.K” (p. 37). An example of what Arikan identified as an eccentric individual from the West is the portrait of a young man on page 83 funnily pretending to be a Hollywood star, which is the only picture of a lower-class individual not belonging to “the third world.”

It could be stated, then, that the inclusion of some groups of society in the coursebook Arikan (2005) investigated is misleading, as while minorities were represented (manifested in the inclusion of third-world people), they are represented in an inappropriate manner (only lower-class people). This is, in fact what is meant by subtle imbalance. Another illustration of what Arikan calls subtle imbalance in the representation of minorities concerns the representation of women. Arikan claims also that the number of female humans in the images of H/I (Soars & Soars, 2003) and Think Ahead to First Certificate (Naunton, 1993) represents only 29.80% of the total 302 images, which shows underrepresentation of women (Arikan, 2005).

Therefore, Gray’s (2002) assertion that “the most cursory look at a selection of modern global coursebooks produced in the UK shows that [misrepresentation of women] is no longer the case” (p. 157) seems to be incorrect. Actually, Gray does not provide evidence to illustrate his claim. Based on the findings of Arikan (2005), a possible refinement of Gray’s statement is that misrepresentation of minorities seems to have moved from being clearly visible to being subtly hidden (Arikan, 2005, p. 36).

In addition, Mineshima (2008) analyzes the content of a Japanese ELT coursebook Birdland Oral Communication I (Yoshida et al., 2007) for evidence as to the issue of gender representation. She used qualitative and quantitative analyses of the representation of language and pictures in the textbook and found that

. . . there seems to be ample evidence to suggest that the textbook examined in this study exhibits fairly egalitarian representations of the two genders. It has succeeded in maintaining a generally well-balanced proportion of females to males in text and pictures, and in describing both genders in a variety of personalities and interests, emphasizing multiformity of individuals regardless of their gender. (p. 16)

For Mineshima (2008) coursebook writers are successful in being inclusive as far as the issue of gender is concerned. However, what is interesting to note is that this claimed balance may be counter to prevailing cultural values. This could mean that besides teaching the language, coursebook writers may end up also promoting cultural values that are different from those of “native” Japanese. This could raise the issue of cultural imperialism, especially for critical readers and learners, viewing that two native speakers were among the authors of the coursebook investigated by Mineshima (2008).

As far as being culturally inclusive in English as a foreign language (EFL) materials, Renner (1997) comments that modern ELT coursebooks reflect rather than ignore native cultures. He claims that “books now produced for the international markets include a variety of realia taken from native and non-native speaking countries reflecting diversity of the native culture” (p. 2). This quote shows that publishers are sensitive to representing various images from around the world in modern coursebooks. However, it remains unclear how and to what extent different local cultures are represented in coursebooks produced in the Inner Circle (Kachru, 1985).

In conclusion, it could be said that the global coursebook is subject to diverse forces influencing its content (LaBelle, 2010). Coursebook writers need not only to concentrate on the linguistic content, but also to compromise the cultural content. The exploration of the literature on global coursebooks showed that publishers are compelled to make compromises mainly between three principles of investing in connectedness, avoiding inappropriacy, and preserving inclusivity. First, regardless of the success in doing so, coursebook writers try to pay attention to what connects people all over the globe while designing the content. Such search for common ground results in “sanitisation of content” (Gray, 2002, p. 166). Second, coursebook writers may strive, to a certain extent, to avoid what is culturally inappropriate in the coursebooks that they intend to sell internationally. Their attempt to produce a coursebook that is “appropriate” for the world, however, is bound by the need to represent “authentic” aspects of target language culture that may contain inappropriate items for world users. Third, publishers and coursebook writers attempt to be inclusive in the sense of representing people, cultures, and images from the entire world. A major problem for this attempt is establishing a compromise between inclusivity and “authenticity.”

Hence, because of the importance of the cross-culture in the global, “appropriate” compromising occupies center position. Without this quality, it seems, real “globality” will be impossible to achieve. It is interesting, then, to explore the extent to which an example of global coursebooks is actually reflective of these principles and the perception of learners as to this reflection in an attempt to explore the real “globality” of H/I (Soars & Soars, 2003).

Method

This study is composed of two phases. In Phase I, the coursebook Headway Intermediate (H/I; Soars & Soars, 2003) was analyzed and its content was discussed in terms of its treatment of the principles of preserving inclusivity, avoiding inappropriacy, and investing in connectedness. In light of the findings of the content analysis concerning these themes, a questionnaire was distributed among 251 learners at Institute Bourguiba for Living Languages (IBLV) Tunis, in Phase II. Figure 1 clarifies the research process.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Figure 1.

Research flowchart.

Phase II: The Questionnaire

The questionnaire used is composed of two main sections. The first section of the questionnaire is general in the sense of gathering background data about the participants’ gender, educational level, employment, and the kind of English they need. The second section is composed of seven questions targeting what is and what should be mentioned in the coursebook in terms of language varieties, themes, and closeness of the materials to participants’ context and expectations. These questions cover learners’ perceptions of the themes of connectedness, inappropriacy, and inclusivity (see appendix).

The target population of this study is 251 third-year adult learners of English, studying at IBLV Tunis. The participants were chosen because they used the coursebook explored, H/I, during the school year. Their familiarity with the coursebook could be valuable not only for exploring the issues related to the notion of “global coursebook,” but also for measuring the appropriateness of this kind of coursebook for them. What follows is a description of the target population as indicated from the results of the first section of the questionnaire reserved for background information.

Table 1 summarizes the background information of the participants.

OPEN IN VIEWER

Table 1.

Background Information of the Participants.

	Gender		Educational level				Employment		Need for English		Needed kind of English
Alternatives	Female	Male	B	M	L	O	Yes	No	Yes	No	GE	ET	BE	SE	O
Percentages	54	46	20	32	26	22	42	58	83	17	46	19	7	17	11

Note. B = Baccalaureate; M = Maîtrise; L = License; O = Other; GE = General English; ET = English for Tourism; BE = Business English; SE = Scientific English; O = Other.

The table reveals that 54% of the participants are women, while 46% are men. As far as the educational level of the respondents is concerned, 32% of them claimed that they are maîtrise (M) holders in comparison with 26% with licenses (L) and 20% with baccalaureate (B) degrees. The other (O) degrees that the participants claimed they hold are MA, PhD, and engineering diplomas.

Needless to mention that 42% of the respondents claimed they have a job, while 58% do not. The jobs that the learners claimed they occupy are tourist guides (9 learners), flight attendants (10), doctors (15), bank officers (7), accountants (7), receptionists (4), lawyers (5), teachers (14), university teachers (6), researchers (5), nurses (4), operators in call center (6), engineers (11), and journalists (2). Among those who affirmed having a job, 83% said that they need English in their occupations, while 17% said they do not.

After preparing the final draft of the questionnaire, 251 copies were produced and distributed by the researcher and three of his MA colleagues. The researchers collected data using two ways depending on the situation. Some participants were given copies of the questionnaires that they answered by themselves at the end of the class sessions. Others were questioned directly by the researcher in the lobbies of IBLV when the participants were entering, leaving, or having a break. The answers of the participants were written directly by the researcher on the questionnaire papers. Sometimes the researcher felt the need to paraphrase or translate certain words into Tunisian Arabic for the respondents, but this happened only on two or three occasions.

The administrative staff at IBLV and its annexes were very cooperative except for some teachers who were rushing to finish their courses and refused to assist with questionnaire administration. Besides, some learners were reluctant to answer the questions and when the researcher witnessed their lack of motivation, they were thanked and their questionnaires omitted. In addition, 22 questionnaires were missing data to reach the final number (251 participants) and therefore, fresh questionnaires were distributed another day to make up the count.

Survey data were analyzed manually by the researcher through creating four sets of tables each representing 50 questionnaires in addition to a fifth set representing 26 questionnaires and a sixth set representing 25 questionnaires. In each set of questionnaires, the answers specific to each question were counted and checked carefully if there was a mismatch between the numbers and the total number of each set. This procedure resulted in the production of six sets of tables. The six sets of tables were gathered in one set representing the total number of participants, which is 251 respondents. These tables were, then, transformed into graphs using Microsoft Excel software.

The results of the study are discussed in the following sections.

Results and Discussion of Content Analysis

Results and Discussion of the Questionnaire

Recommendations

Viewing the nonsuitability characterizing the content of H/I as an example of global coursebooks, it seems important for the administration to take at least one of the following measures:

Designing local coursebooks (i.e., investing features of local cultures of users) to be used in teaching English in Tunisia even in the private sector could help overcome the weaknesses of global ones documented in this study. Local coursebooks could be more relevant to local learners in terms of recognizing local connectedness needs, avoiding only local inappropriate issues, and being inclusive primarily of local communities for more effective learning. Such measure could be promoted by establishing various research units in the English language departments focusing on conducting studies on coursebooks evaluation and design in the direction of recognizing the importance of localization of materials.

Such measure could provide the learners with glocal coursebooks that are tailored specifically for particular learners. This glocalization process is valuable for meeting the expectations of the learners, which permits effective learning to take place.

As far as the recommendations for the teachers are concerned, it seems important for them to be aware of the controversy characterizing the issue of global coursebooks. Until the realization of the previously recommended administrative measures, teachers and teacher educators are suggested to take the following procedures.

What is meant by this is avoiding teachers’ “slavery” to coursebooks. As the results of this study revealed, chatting and corresponding electronically is perceived to be highly valued by the respondents, which presents an important opportunity to avoid the limitations of coursebooks and to be as close as possible to learners’ preferred learning topics and styles. What is meant by this is that teachers are invited to exploit any new productive opportunity to help learners learn “better” by avoiding the fossilization of topics and activities in coursebooks. Teachers can invest new phenomena, especially technological ones such as Facebook and Twitter, as a vehicle for effective learning in addition to coursebooks.

As the publishers of global coursebooks might not have a clear idea about what is appropriate content and what is not in the Tunisian context, teachers may adapt the content on the basis of their knowledge of their learners and their shared cultural values. This could help them make the content as relevant and motivating as possible to the local learners.

To sum up, teachers and coursebook writers are suggested to (g)localize coursebooks to provide learners with what they need and what they can deal with. As a phase prior to the realization of this procedure, teachers and trainers are recommended to promote teacher autonomy and to resort to appropriation techniques.

Conclusion

Learners’ expectations as far as connectedness and inappropriacy are concerned were found to be partially handled by the publishers. In fact, the topics and the language varieties used in H/I are found to be different from those stated by the participants. This is actually not a very surprising finding as literature on this issue detected the generalization characterizing the content of global coursebooks (Gray, 2002). The most important value of H/I according to the respondents was in communication skills that they report to need while surfing the Internet.

In addition, this study documented match between H/I and the claims of the participants as far as inappropriacy is concerned only in 4 out of 15 issues, which means only in 26.6% of the cases. Accordingly, it is surprising that the participants expressed tolerance as to mentioning some supposedly “inappropriate” issues like racism, alcohol, politics, and pork, which provides evidence that avoiding mentioning them is not necessary as far as the Tunisian users investigated in this study are concerned.

Besides, the participants were found to be aware of the partiality characterizing the inclusiveness of the coursebook in terms of culture and the closeness of the content to learners’ situations. In fact, this study provides evidence that it is hardly expected from a global coursebook like H/I to be inclusive of diverse local cultures and daily lives of all the peoples of the globe.

Putting into consideration all of these findings, it could be said that the notion of “the global coursebook” is a commercial expression that does not necessarily mean coursebooks’ reflection of global interests and use of global contexts in the content. The implementation of the principles of investing in connectedness, avoiding inappropriacy, and preserving inclusivity were found to be hardly practical in H/I as a supposedly “global” coursebook. It is hoped that these findings will motivate coursebook publishers to move in the direction of publishing “glocal” content to achieve true “global” characteristics.