Critical evaluation of English textbooks for

high school students in Kyrgyzstan.

A proposal for improvement of Reading
and Writing tasks by integrating the two
skills
by Elvira Ismaeva

British Council’s Master’s Dissertation Awards 2021

Commendation

www.teachingenglish.org.uk/publications/elt-masters-dissertations
Critical evaluation of English textbooks for high
school students in Kyrgyzstan.
A proposal for improvement of Reading and
Writing tasks by integrating the two skills.

Elvira Ismaeva
August 2020

Dissertation Submitted for the Award of MA in ELT and

Applied Linguistics

School of Humanities

Faculty of Arts and Humanities

The work contained within this document has been submitted by the student in
partial fulfilment of the requirement of their course and award.

Word count: 15 741 excluding tables

Acknowledgements
______________________________________________________________________

First of all, I would like to express my sincere gratitude and appreciation to my supervisor
Sheena Gardner who guided me through my work. Her feedback and insightful comments
helped me to focus on important details, understand some main issues related to the
thesis content and structure, and shape my writing.

I would also like to convey sincere gratitude to my husband Rysbek and my children
Temir, Shirin and Altynai for their never-ending love, support and patience while I was
away in the UK.

Last but not least, I would like to thank all of my tutors from whom I have learnt a lot. Each
of them has made a valuable contribution to my professional development which I very
much appreciate.

I
Abbreviations
______________________________________________________________________

CLT – Communicative Language Teaching

EFL – English as a Foreign Language
ELT – English Language Teaching
ESEL – Educational Standard for English Language
ESL – English as a Second Language
KR – Kyrgyz Republic
L1 – First Language
L2 – Second Language
NES – National Educational Standard

II
Abstract
______________________________________________________________________

English Language teaching in Kyrgyzstan is based on the Communicative Language

Teaching (CLT) approach. According to the Educational Standard for English Language
Teaching that is established by the Ministry of Education of Kyrgyzstan, the curriculum
and textbooks should follow the CLT principles. The purpose of this research is to analyse
reading and writing tasks in the two English textbooks, English 9 and English 10-11, that
are used for high school students (ages 15-17) in public schools in Kyrgyzstan. It is the
aim of this study to find out what skills and strategies the textbooks encourage the
learners to use. In order to conduct the analysis, the framework, consisting of the three
levels, offered by Littlejohn (2011) was used.

The analysis has revealed some limitations in both reading and writing tasks. It was found
that tasks do not provide enough guidance and do not help learners to develop these
skills. Reading tasks were found to be limited and, in many cases, lacking in clarity of
instruction. The textbooks also did not accord sufficient importance to writing skills in the
number and quality of writing tasks offered. Provided writing activities do not offer enough
practice and guidance for learners to help them reach the outcomes that are stated by
the Educational Standards for the English Language. Some practical suggestions on
improving reading and writing tasks by integrating the two skills are proposed.

III
Table of Contents
______________________________________________________________________

Acknowledgements ......................................................................................................... I

Abbreviations .................................................................................................................. II

Abstract ......................................................................................................................... III

Table of Contents ........................................................................................................... IV

List of Tables and Figures ........................................................................................... VIII

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................... 1

1.1 Historical Background and Context of the Study ................................................... 1

1.2 Research aims, objectives and research questions. ............................................. 2

1.3 Rationale and Motivation ....................................................................................... 4

1.4 Significance of the study........................................................................................ 5

1.5 Outline of the study ............................................................................................... 6

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................. 7

2.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................... 7

2.2. Basic principles and characteristics of CLT .............................................................. 7

2.2.1 Studies on the CLT approach and issues arising in its application ......................... 8

2.2.2 Skills integration as one of the CLT characteristics .............................................. 10

2.3 Reading and Writing Integration. Empirical studies ................................................. 11

2.4 Textbooks in English Language Teaching ............................................................... 14

2.4.1 The role of textbooks in ELT theoretical background ........................................... 14

2.4.2 Studies on textbook evaluation............................................................................. 15

2.5 Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 17

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY .................................................................................... 18

IV
3.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 18

3.2 Research Questions ................................................................................................ 18

3.3 Research Design and Approach.............................................................................. 19

3.4 Textbook Evaluation ................................................................................................ 19

3.5 Textbook evaluation approaches and criteria .......................................................... 20

3.6 Analysis framework for the textbooks in study ........................................................ 21

3.7 Learning outcomes related to the reading and writing skills according to the
Educational Standard of the English Language ............................................................ 27

3.7.1 Learning outcomes for Grade 9 ............................................................................ 28

3.7.2 Learning outcomes for Grades 10-11 ................................................................... 29

3.8 Ethical consideration and reliability ......................................................................... 30

3.9 Limitations ............................................................................................................... 30

3.10 Summary ............................................................................................................... 31

CHAPTER 4: ANALYSIS............................................................................................... 32

4.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 32

4.2 Data selection and analysis ..................................................................................... 32

4.2.1 Level 1 Objective Description: What is there? ...................................................... 33

4.2.2 Level 2 Subjective Analysis: What is required of users? ...................................... 35

4.2.3 Level 3. What is implied? Subjective inference. ................................................... 40

4.3 Summary ................................................................................................................. 46

CHAPTER 5: RESULTS ................................................................................................ 47

5.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 47

5.2 General textbook characteristics of English 9 ......................................................... 47

5.3 General textbook characteristics of English 10-11 .................................................. 48

5.4 Reading tasks characteristics .................................................................................. 48

V
5.4.1 Reading tasks in English 9 ................................................................................... 48

5.4. 2 Reading tasks in the Reader part. English 9 ....................................................... 50

5.4. 3 Reading tasks in English 10-11 ........................................................................... 51

5.5 Writing tasks characteristics .................................................................................... 53

5.5.1 Writing tasks in English 9 ..................................................................................... 53

5.5.2 Writing tasks in English 10-11 .............................................................................. 54

5.6 Integrated Reading and Writing tasks in the textbooks ........................................... 56

5.7 Comparison with the Educational Standard of English Language ........................... 56

5.8 Summary ................................................................................................................. 57

CHAPTER 6: DISCUSSION .......................................................................................... 58

6.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................. 58

6.2 Discussion of the Research Questions.................................................................... 58

6.2.1 Research Question 1. Which reading strategies do the textbook tasks encourage
students to use? ............................................................................................................ 58

6.2.2 Research Question 2. Which writing strategies do the textbook tasks encourage
students to use? ............................................................................................................ 60

6.2.3 Research Question 3. Which integrated reading and writing strategies do the
textbook tasks encourage students to use? .................................................................. 61

6.2.4 Research Question 4. How do these tasks relate to the expectations of the
Educational Standard of English Language established by the Ministry of Education? 62

6.3 Suggestions for reading and writing tasks improvements by means of integrating the
two skills as an attempt to help the learners to reach the expectations set by the
Educational Standard of English Language. ................................................................. 64

6.3. 1 Practical Suggestions .......................................................................................... 65

CHAPTER 7: CONCLUSION ........................................................................................ 69

7.1 Summary of the findings .......................................................................................... 69

VI
7.2 Strengths, limitations and further research recommendations ................................ 71

List of References ......................................................................................................... 72

Appendix N 1 Level 2 analysis of the reading tasks in English 10-11 ........................... 77

Appendix N 2. Level 2 analysis of the writing tasks in English 10-11 ............................ 79

Appendix N 3. Level 2 analysis of the reading tasks in English 9.................................. 80

Appendix N 4. Level 2 analysis of the writing tasks in English 9 ................................... 81

Appendix N 5 Level 2 analysis of the reading tasks from the Reader part in English 9 82

Appendix N 6. English 9 and English 10-11 .................................................................. 83

Appendix N 7 English 9 Reading and writing task selection. ......................................... 84

Appendix N 8 Reader part of the English 9 task selection............................................. 86

Appendix N 9 English 10-11 Reading and writing task selection. .................................. 88

Appendix N 10 Content of English 9.............................................................................. 91

Appendix N 11 Content of English 10-11 ...................................................................... 92

Appendix N 12 Educational Standard of English Language for reading and writing skills
for Grade 9 ................................................................................................................... 93

Appendix N 13 Educational Standard of English Language for reading and writing skills
for Grades 10-11 .......................................................................................................... 94

Appendix N14 The Topical Content of the course for grades 3-11 ............................... 95

Appendix N 15 Ethical Approval .................................................................................... 96

VII
List of Tables and Figures
______________________________________________________________________

Table 3. 1 Two main parts of the framework ................................................................ 21

Table 3. 2 The three levels of the analysis ................................................................... 22
Table 3. 3 Level 1 analysis sheet ................................................................................. 23
Table 3. 4 Questions of the Level 2 analysis ................................................................ 24
Table 3. 5 Level 2: Reading tasks analysis sheet: ....................................................... 25
Table 3. 6 Level 2 Writing tasks analysis sheet: ........................................................... 26

Table 4. 1 Level 1 analysis of Book N 1 English 9 ....................................................... 33

Table 4. 2 Level 1 analysis of Book N2 English 10-11 ................................................. 34
Table 4. 3 Analysis of the reading tasks from Book N 1 English 9. .............................. 35
Table 4. 4 Analysis of the Reader part from Book N1 English 9................................... 36
Table 4. 5 Analysis of the writing tasks from Book N1 English 9 .................................. 37
Table 4. 6 Analysis of the writing tasks from Book N2 English 10-11 ........................... 38
Table 4. 7 Aanalysis of the reading tasks from Book N2 English 10-11 ....................... 39
Table 4. 8 Level 3 analysis of the reading tasks of English 9 and English 10-11 ......... 40
Table 4. 9 Level 3 analysis of the writing tasks of English 9 and English 10-11 ........... 43
Table 4. 10 Level 3 analysis of the reading tasks from the Reader part of English 9 ... 45

Figure 5. 1 Reading tasks. Overall review of the reading tasks characteristics in English
9 .................................................................................................................................... 48
Figure 5. 2 Readers part. Overall review of the Reader’s tasks in English 9 ................. 50
Figure 5. 3 Reading tasks. Overall review of the reading tasks characteristics in English
10-11 ............................................................................................................................. 51
Figure 5. 4 Writing tasks. Overall review of the writing tasks characteristics in English 9
...................................................................................................................................... 53
Figure 5. 5 Writing tasks. Overall review of the writing tasks characteristics in English
10-11 ............................................................................................................................. 54

VIII
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
______________________________________________________________________

1.1 Historical Background and Context of the Study

With rapid economic growth and globalization English has become a global language.
This incited the need to learn the language all over the world and new approaches and
methods to teaching it were developed. According to Richards and Rodgers (2001), the
origins of CLT date back to 1960, when British language teaching tradition experienced
great changes. It was a time when British linguists emphasised that language learning is
not just memorising language structures but also learning the communicative and
functional characteristics of a language. This new view and the rise of numbers of adults
who needed to learn English due to the more dependent relations amongst European
countries urged the necessity to explore new approaches and methods in English
language teaching (Richards and Rodgers 2001). The CLT approach emerged in the
1970s in Europe and America concurrently (Savignon 2008) and since then has become
a predominant teaching method around the world (Richards 2006). It has emerged as a
result of dissatisfaction with the past Audio-lingual and Grammar-translation approaches
that were noticed to not develop learners’ abilities to communicate the language in real
life (Stelma 2010).

The history of English language teaching in Kyrgyzstan goes back to 1918 when the
English language was first decided to be introduced in the Educational System of
Autonomous Republic of Turkistan (Kyrgyzstan of that time) which was a part of Soviet
Union (Supataeva and Abdybekova 2017). However, at that time the implementation of
this plan was not possible since there were no teachers who could teach and materials
which could be used. Later, in 1933 the English language was conducted 2-3 hours per
week in urban schools and later was introduced to rural areas of Kyrgyzstan. In 1948,
18% of schools had English language lessons and in 1950, 40% of schools in Kyrgyzstan
conducted English language lessons (Supataeva and Abdybekova 2017: 4). Nowadays
the English language has become a mandatory subject in all educational institutions of

1
the Kyrgyz Republic (KR). English language teaching in Kyrgyzstan has gone through
many changes in approaches and methodology. Attempts to find the most appropriate
way to teach English that would take into consideration local culture and language started
to appear in the 1960s. In 1961 the first English language textbook for the 5th grade was
developed locally (Supataeva and Abdybekova 2017: 5). However, records do not provide
clear information on what kind of materials were used to teach English earlier. Regarding
methods and approaches, Kyrgyzstan at that time followed the Russian educational
system and methodologies were adapted for learners in Kyrgyzstan. The main emphasis
was put on grammar and reading. In other words, the Grammar-translation method was
followed.

It was after the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 that Kyrgyzstan experienced the main
changes in methodology and approaches in its English language teaching. The whole
Educational System of Kyrgyzstan changed then and the role of the English language in
society, methods and approaches as well as teacher education were reconsidered and
reformed. English language teaching changed from the Grammar-translation approach to
Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) approach (Supataeva and Abdybekova 2017).
CLT approach has been followed in the English language teaching in Kyrgyzstan since
then.

1.2 Research aims, objectives and research questions.

The present research analyses reading and writing tasks in the two English language
textbooks: English 9 (Yusupova, Marashogli, Shakirova 2012), English 10-11 (Yusupova,
Kaligulova, Ahmedova, Akmatova 2012) for public high schools in Kyrgyzstan (see
Appendix 6). Considering theories on the CLT approach (see Chapter 2, section 2.2), the
aim of the research is to analyse how well the reading and writing tasks encourage
learners to develop these skills and how the tasks promote and facilitate bringing the
learners to the main outcomes of the Educational Standards that are based on
Communicative Language Teaching (CLT) established by the Ministry of Education of
Kyrgyz Republic. It will also investigate the benefits of integrating the two skills and make
possible practical suggestions on task improvement.

2
To reach the aim of this study, several objectives are pursued: a) to analyse whether
reading tasks encourage and teach the students to use reading strategies; b) to analyse
whether writing tasks help the students to develop various writing skills such as
paraphrasing, summarizing, rewriting; c) to explore how the integration of the reading and
writing tasks develops the two skills and makes the teaching-learning process more
communicative; d) to analyse if the textbooks provide any integrated reading and writing
activities; e) to suggest the integration of the reading and writing tasks that may help
learners to come to the expected outcomes stated in the ESEL.

The reading and writing skills were selected to be analysed due to their complex nature
and observations reporting that foreign learners usually need a long time to acquire these
skills before they feel confident (Grabe 2008, Brown 2001).

Scholars describe reading as a complex combination of processes (Grabe 2008, Nunan

1989 and Newton et al. 2018). Different types of reading were listed by Grabe (2008: 8):

1. Reading to search for information (scanning and skimming)

2. Reading for quick understanding (skimming)

3. Reading to learn

4. Reading to integrate information

5. Reading to evaluate, critique, and use information

6. Reading for general comprehension (in many cases, reading for interest or reading for
pleasure).

Different purposes of reading and different methodologies involve different processing

(Grabe 2008). Considering the complex nature of reading, Grabe states that there is no
“one size fits all” recommendation for reading instruction and curriculum development
(Grabe 2008: 19). Depending on the goals, the instructions should be organised in a way
that will help the learners to develop certain reading abilities. Successful reading
instruction involves different cognitive processes as well as various strategies (Grabe
2008, Nunan 1989).

3
Like in reading, there is no “a universal marker of good writing because good writing is
always contextually variable” (Hyland 2003: 5). It is commonly agreed amongst scholars,
however, that writing has a communicative purpose and meaning (Ferris and Hedgcock
2013). “Writing is an extremely complex cognitive activity in which the writer is required
to demonstrate control of a number of variables simultaneously” (Bell and Burnaby 1984
cited in Nunan 1989: 36). This implies that writers should have control of letter formation,
lexis, sentence structure, spelling, and punctuation. In addition, the writer should know
how to structure the message into a coherent and cohesive text (Nunan 1989).

Studies on writing instruction (Ferris 2018, Ferris and Hedgcock 2013, Hinkel 2011) show
that it is a much more complicated area of research compared to the reading instruction
and more research on second language (L2) writing instruction in the classroom is
needed. One common conclusion of many studies is that learners of all ages and levels
of English require years of explicit training before they become effective writers. However,
“research on what L2 writers need to learn, what they should be able to do, and how L2
writing can be efficaciously taught is conspicuously lacking” (Hinkel 2011: 535).

Considering the theories on the reading and writing nature and instruction, the following
research questions were developed in accordance with the research aims and objectives:

1. Which reading strategies do the textbook tasks encourage students to use?

2. Which writing strategies do the textbook tasks encourage students to use?
3. Which integrated reading and writing strategies do the textbook tasks encourage
students to use?

4. How do these tasks relate to the expectations of the educational standard

established by the Ministry of Education?

1.3 Rationale and Motivation

The Educational Standard of English language (ESEL) for elementary (ages 7-10,
secondary (ages 11-14), and high schools (ages15-17) in KR is based on the National
Educational Standards (NES) (see Appendices 12-13). The ESEL determines the general
4
strategies for the education and development of students by means of language teaching.
The ESEL sets the goals of the English language learning which are defined by the
National Educational Standard and discloses the content of the course (see Appendix
14). The ESEL provides guidance for curriculum and material developers. It also reflects
approaches, principles, and teaching methods. Additionally, the ESEL indicates the
approximate distribution of teaching hours devoted to the study of certain sections of the
course (Ministry of Education 2018).

According to ESEL (see Appendices 12-13), the English language teaching approach is
based on Communicative Language Teaching. According to the aims and expectations
established by the Ministry of Education, students in the 9th grade should be familiar with
the following reading skills: reading for gist, skimming, scanning, and reading for specific
information. Regarding writing skills, the students should be able to write different types
of letters and short essays. Students in the 10-11th grades should be able to use the
following reading skills: reading for gist, reading for specific information, skimming, and
scanning. Apart from that, students should be able to read various types of authentic
texts, newspapers, popular science books, novels. The students should be able to write
letters, essays and short reports based on the provided texts, synthesise, and paraphrase
information (Ministry of Education 2018).

It is important to analyse how well the textbooks follow the CLT principles and how they
help the students in reaching the expectations set by the ESEL.

1.4 Significance of the study

Many studies have been conducted to explore the English language textbooks regarding
their claims and contents, some studies aimed to explore the methods and approaches
while others analysed tasks and instructions. While some studies are devoted to
analysing how CLT corresponds with the curriculum and the textbooks’ content, others
analyse difficulties with CLT implementation and report serious mismatches that could be
the reason why the teaching-learning process is not showing positive outcomes (see
Chapter 2, section 2.2.2). Therefore, my goal is to find out whether English language

5
textbooks in Kyrgyzstan go in accordance with CLT and reading and writing tasks in the
analysed textbooks facilitate the teaching and learning process.

1.5 Outline of the study

This dissertation consists of seven chapters. Chapter 1 is the Introduction that presents
the historical background and context of the study along with the research aims,
objectives, rationale and significance of the study. The outline of the study is also
presented at the end of the chapter.

Chapter 2 is the Literature Review that informs the study. It presents the relevant literature
in the following way: theories on the CLT approach and practical studies, theories on skills
integration and empirical studies on reading and writing integration, theories on textbook
evaluation and practical studies.

Chapter 3 is the Methodology which presents the theoretical framework of this study and
illustrates the analysis framework. It explains the choice of framework and provides a
detailed description of how the data will be selected and analysed according to the
framework. It also contains the ESEL expectations as well as ethical considerations,
reliability and limitations of the methodology and data.

Chapter 4 is the Analysis that demonstrates the analysis of the data according to Level
1, Level 2 and Level 3 of the framework.

Chapter 5 is the Results that provide an interpretation of the analysed data and describes
the key findings.

Chapter 6 is Discussion which discusses and provides the further interpretation of the
results supported by the relevant literature. This chapter presents practical suggestions
on reading and writing integration.

Chapter 7 is the Conclusion of the dissertation which presents the general overview of
the study and offers further research recommendations.

6
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
______________________________________________________________________

2.1 Introduction

In order to conduct the research presented in this thesis, relevant literature was explored
that informed this study. This literature review first presents theories and studies related
to the CLT approach implementation. Next, it presents literature on skills integration and
studies that promote the integration of reading and writing. Finally, literature and studies
on textbook evaluation is presented.

2.2. Basic principles and characteristics of CLT

It is important to investigate the literature of CLT for the several reasons. First, the
Educational Standard of the English language teaching of the Kyrgyz Republic states that
the teaching approach to English language teaching is based on CLT. Second, the aim
of this research is to analyse the reading and writing tasks to make them more
communicative that can help the students in achieving their learning goals.

Many language teachers and institutions define their teaching methodology as

communicative. However, it is noticed that giving a precise definition of communicative
teaching seems difficult since the concept embraces different methods and approaches
to make L2 teaching communicative (Richards 2006). Unlike the previous approaches,
CLT encourages the learners to go beyond memorization and take the risk of making
mistakes. This involves the utilization of various linguistic and non-linguistic resources in
language learning such as asking for clarification, seeking information, negotiation, and
using circumlocution (Savignon 2008). Canale and Swain (1980) claimed that the aims of
the CLT approach are to develop communicative competence which they defined as
embracing four competencies: grammatical competence, sociolinguistic competence,
discourse competence and strategic competence. CLT sets its objectives to elaborate
ways that will develop four skills (reading, writing, listening, and speaking) and recognise
the mutuality between the language and communication (Richards and Rodgers 2001,

7
Richards 2006, Nunan 1989, Littlewood, 1981, Widdowson 1978). CLT thus comprises
the following basic principles (Richards and Rodgers 2001: 161): 1. Language is a system
for the expression of meaning; 2. The primary function of language is to allow interaction
and communication; 3. The structure of language reflects its functional and
communicative uses; 4. The primary units of language are not merely its grammatical and
structural features, but categories of functional and communicative meaning as
exemplified in discourse.

2.2.1 Studies on the CLT approach and issues arising in its application

Despite being widely accepted approach, there are some misconceptions and difficulties
faced by educators with CLT implementation. Thompson (1996) describes four main
existing misconceptions about CLT that he observed through his experience. These
include the false impression that teaching grammar should be excluded altogether.
However, CLT involves teaching grammar in a less traditional way. The next widespread
misconception is that CLT is about teaching speaking only. Communication though does
not happen in a spoken form only, it can take place through reading and writing too. The
third one is the wrong assumption that CLT implies pair work that means role play. The
problem here, according to Thompson, is that pair work does not have to consist simply
in repeating or adapting a dialogue provided by a teacher. Pair work can include more
varied activities such as working together on language structures and forms, preparing
questions, and discussing opinions. The last misconception is about the role of a teacher
in the CLT approach. Many teachers reject the CLT approach thinking that it is too
demanding and that they are expected to perform too many responsibilities and too much
work in the CLT approach. It is to some extent true that the teacher’s role is special in the
CLT approach. However, this should not frighten or be the reason to not apply it in
classroom practices. On the contrary, many teachers can reconsider their own teaching
styles and the way they were taught themselves and try to embrace new ideas and
methods (Thompson 1996).

8
Perhaps because of the aforementioned misconceptions, there are also some issues
concerning the CLT approach practices in different contexts. Many empirical studies in
the area reveal various difficulties with its implementation in classrooms. For example,
Dailey (2010) and Li (1998) in their studies concerning the CLT approach in South Korea,
report on teachers’ misconceptions about the approach as well as their fear of not being
fluent enough English speakers to conduct CLT lesson, cultural resistance both from the
students and from the instructors, and a general English language teaching system that
requires “heavy” test preparation.

In addition to the challenges described above, some more were revealed in a study
conducted by Mehtab (2012) in Bangladesh. The survey of 10 English language teachers
in Bangladesh reported that besides the aforementioned challenges, other difficulties
include finding appropriate materials that can be used in a CLT classroom, lack of support
from the management, and excessively large classes that make it difficult to conduct
activities.

Haider and Chowdhury (2012) analysed how CLT, which is prescribed by the curriculum
and syllabus and required by materials used, actually works in practice in secondary
schools in Bangladesh. They found that there was a mismatch between the curriculum
requirements and classroom practices. They concluded that in order to successfully
implement the CLT approach in classrooms, several measures should be undertaken.
They include teacher training, materials improvement, and changes in the assessment
system.

Sidek (2013) investigated how the English language reading curriculum in Malaysia
corresponds to the CLT principles. The curriculum was analysed regarding theories of
second language reading, reading processing, and teacher and learner roles in CLT. The
study showed that the majority of the reading tasks do not reflect the CLT features despite
being labeled as communicative.

These studies show that it is not that easy to adopt CLT even though it is a widely
accepted and preferred approach. These studies also provide examples of how theories
and practices may not always concur with each other.

9
2.2.2 Skills integration as one of the CLT characteristics

Many studies on skills integration have made their contribution to the field. For instance,
by making a critical analysis of the segregated and integrated skill approach, Oxford
(2001) argues that the advantages of skill integration outweigh any disadvantages
significantly. Segregation of skills may be considered as a logistically easy organisation
of the courses since many teachers and administrators may believe that it is impossible
to focus on more than one instruction at a time. One of the extreme examples can be a
grammar-translation method that requires the learners to analyse grammar and make
translations. This approach restricts the language use opportunities for learners and does
not encourage the learners to look at language beyond the rules. It also does not prepare
them for everyday communication (Oxford 2001). She argues in many EFL/ESL classes
that are labeled as separate reading, writing, listening and speaking, the segregation is
in fact “partial or illusory”. For example, in a reading class, students may be asked to
discuss the text exploiting their speaking and listening skills, sometimes they may be
asked to summarise the text in a written form that involves their writing skills.
Communication in normal life involves all skills participation even though it is believed in
the traditional ESL/EFL programs that focus on one skill that may produce better results.

Selinker and Russell (1986) urge for more empirical observations before the decision on
skill integration and separation is made. They note that often there are arguments
between the theorists and practitioners because most of the time theory is based on
assumptions and practical research can produce evidence. Therefore, the rationale for
skills integration/separation should be grounded on systematic empirical observations of
the learners in certain settings. Five different cases provided demonstrate that even when
the class is supposed to concentrate on one particular skill according to curriculum and
materials, integration of other skills may happen naturally and inevitably. Very often what
is presented in materials that teach the four skills separately, which is based on the
theories about ESL/EFL approach, may not work in the classroom. Decisions that are
made by the administrators and teachers should be based more on the evidence than

10
theories. This observation concurs with Widdowson’s claim (1978) that one skill derives
from another in a real classroom.

Having these arguments in mind, this research further investigates the reasons for the
integration of reading and writing skills.

2.3 Reading and Writing Integration. Empirical studies

The connection between reading and writing has been explored in many empirical studies
(Stotsky 1983). All these studies were conducted to investigate the reading and writing
abilities of children whose mother tongue was English. In the English as a Foreign/Second
Language (EFL/ESL) context, many scholars promote the idea of an integrated approach
to teaching reading and writing (Hirvela 2004, Carson and Leki 1993 cited in Burns and
Richards 2012, Ferris and Hedgcock 2014, Grabe and Zhang 2013, Brown 2001). These
studies made a valuable contribution to the field of English language teaching and allow
educators to investigate better ways of language acquisition and reading/writing
instruction. Advocating reading and writing integration, Grabe and Zhang (2013) argue
that skills such as synthesising and summarising information from sources is not an easy
task even for native speakers of English. At the university level, students are often
required to employ the aforementioned skills, and studies show that those students who
are more proficient in reading can paraphrase and summarise better than those with poor
reading skills, who tend to use direct copying. These skills are important for students in
academic settings when they are required to use the information from texts and put it into
their own writing. Moreover, Hirvela and Du (2013) after observing novice L2 writers
conclude that paraphrasing should be explicitly taught since it is not a skill that students
are supposed to learn on their own.

Various empirical studies that have been conducted in different contexts show that there
are many reasons to integrate the two skills. For example, Ito (2011) investigated how L2
proficiency in reading can contribute to writing skills. His study involved 68 Japanese high

11
school students who attended separate reading and writing tests. Analysing the students’
test scores, he concluded that developing reading skills can help improve students’ essay
writing skills. This finding concurs with the argument that, “the best way to improve writing
skills is by improving reading and vice versa” (Hirvela 2004: 11).

Another study conducted by Shen (2009) aimed to investigate how reading-writing

connection develops literacy and personal growth in first year EFL college students in
Taiwan. Various integrated activities (story frames, reading logs, creative writing) were
conducted during one semester. The results showed that the students writing improved
in terms of vocabulary, sentence structure, grammar, and general text organisation.
Reading affected their imagination and the results of the creative writing tests showed
that the students’ writing had improved in length. Whereas before the treatment, students’
main concern was not knowing what to write about.

A study conducted by Cho and Brutt-Griffler (2015) in South Korean middle school
(grades 7-8-9) explored how reading and writing integrated instruction affects students’
performance in reading comprehension and summary writing. The needs survey which
was conducted prior to the integrated instruction on 93 students revealed that students
spent a very limited amount of time on writing and felt the need for more guidance in both
reading and writing. The students were divided into three groups according to their level
as advanced, intermediate and beginners. To determine if the three-week instruction
intervention affected the students reading and writing abilities, pre and post-test results
were analysed. The results of the writing test showed significant improvement in the
writing abilities of the advanced and intermediate students. The reading test results
showed that all three levels reached higher scores compared to the pre-test scores. This
study shows that even a short three-week reading and writing integrated session can help
the learners significantly.

12
In a similar context, a year-long study by Lee and Schallert (2016) was conducted to
investigate how the integration of reading and writing skills can improve South Korean
grade 8 students’ reading comprehension and descriptive writing performance. The
treatment was based on implementing an extensive reading and extensive writing
approach. The students were divided into three groups: extensive reading, extensive
writing and a control group. Of the four days of regular English lessons, one was devoted
to the treatment. For the extensive reading class, students were asked to read one
English book per week and write a short essay about the book in Korean. For the
extensive writing group, the students were asked to write an essay in English on the
provided topics. The control group continued receiving regular English lessons with an
extended version of vocabulary and grammar exercises and reading short texts. At the
end of the year, the test results showed that all three groups improved reading abilities,
however, only extensive reading and extensive writing groups reached high scores in
writing.

Studies conducted in academic settings also report a positive effect on reading and
writing integration. Cooney, Darcy, and Casey (2018) in their study where they develop a
lesson intended to teach students to integrate sources into their writing. The lesson was
delivered to 10 different classes for the first-year students who take Critical Skill classes
at Maynooth University in Ireland. The results showed significant improvement in
students’ abilities in finding useful and relevant sources and interpreting and synthesising
information. These are the skills that many students struggle with at the university level.
Therefore, it can be assumed that some of these skills can be taught at the high school
level in English classes so that the learners have some basic concepts.

Also, it was observed by the scholars that learners’ summary writing abilities depend on
their reading comprehension abilities. Kim (2001) analysed the summary writings of the
70 freshmen in South Korea. He found that of the two texts with different levels of
difficulties, students were able to summarise the easier one better. Baba (2009)
investigated how both English lexical proficiency and Japanese lexical proficiency

13
correlate with summary writing ability in English. The results of the study of the 68
students showed that reading comprehension and vocabulary knowledge play an
important role in the students’ summary writing abilities.

It can be concluded that from school years to the university level, L2 students face various
challenges with writing in English. As was reported by the studies described above,
integrated reading-writing instruction that was applied to foster a specific type of
development of learners’ reading/writing skills has a positive effect on the development
of various subskills related to reading and/or writing. In summary, students improved their
reading comprehension, lexical proficiency, and general text structure and developed
their summary and synthesis skills and grammar.

2.4 Textbooks in English Language Teaching

2.4.1 The role of textbooks in ELT theoretical background

Textbooks for English language learning purposes in general can be defined as published
materials aimed at helping L2 language learners in developing their communicative and
linguistic knowledge (Sheldon 1987). Textbooks vary in range depending on contexts,
purposes, and content, and often there seems to be an issue between the English
Language Teaching (ELT) textbooks and the users. It was observed by Swales (1980),
that the textbook is a 'problem' containing a range of difficulties in its development,
distribution, exploitation and evaluation. The learning process may not always concur with
what textbooks offer. Sometimes textbooks may “claim too much for themselves”
(Sheldon 1987: 2). For example, they may state that the material is suitable for all levels.
Here, the questions on how valid such statements are unavoidable. Although often
criticised for various reasons, textbooks are the main aid for learners and teachers
(O’Neill 1982, Tomlinson and Masuhara 2018). Textbooks usually are written to provide
information and instruction, to expose the learner to language practice and to contain the
activities that are needed for a particular context (Tomlinson and Masuhara 2018). O’Neil

14
(1982) supports the use of textbooks for several reasons: 1) most of the time, even
textbooks that are not designed for a specific group still can meet their needs; 2) textbooks
help the learners to go back to the previously learned materials or to look ahead that helps
the learners to be prepared for the future topics; 3) textbooks are useful in terms of self-
study when needed and are practical concerning money; 4) importantly, a good textbook
always provides a space for adaptation and improvisation for teachers and learners that
helps facilitate the learning process. Additionally, (McGrath 2016: 10) states that teachers
and learners need a textbook because it is a map that guides learning, it offers language
samples, and it provides variety.

2.4.2 Studies on textbook evaluation

“Materials evaluation is a procedure that involves attempting to predict or measure the

value of the effects of language-learning materials on their users” (Tomlinson and
Masuhara 2018: 52). Many frameworks have been offered by the scholars in order to
analyse and evaluate English textbooks. These frameworks, are mostly context-
dependent (for example, McGrath 2016, Tomlinson and Masuhara 2018, Ellis 1998,
Williams 1983) Generally, textbook evaluation embraces the learners' needs and
interests; relevance to their context, level of English and age; ability to raise interest and
motivation; flexibility; and the potential to fulfill the short-term and long-term goals.

The following studies on textbook evaluation were reviewed. Nguyen (2015) evaluated
an English textbook for upper-secondary school in Vietnam in regard to its communicative
nature and made some proposals for improvement. She found that despite having good
features and organisation, the textbooks have some limitations that interfere with the
clarity of instruction and therefore affect the teaching-learning process in a negative way.

Firiady (2018) conducted pre-use evaluation of the textbooks to analyse the types of
communicative activities offered in an English textbook used for Level 1 in Indonesia. It

15
was found that the textbook provides a variety of communicative activities that can be
categorised according to Littlewoods’ framework of CLT activities: “functional
communication and social interaction activities”. Nevetherless, it was also found that
grammar approach was dominant in many activities, therefore it was suggested that the
certain aspects of the textbooks be reconsidered and modifications made.

Assaly and Igbaria (2014) analysed reading and listening units in the textbook for the 10th
grade. The study aimed to investigate how the reading and listening develop high
(analysis, evaluation, synthesis) and low (knowledge, comprehension, application)
thinking processes. The activities were collected and analysed and categorised using
Bloom’s Taxonomy. They found that significant majority of the tasks encouraged the lower
level thinking skills. Considerably fewer tasks promoted higher level cognitive skills.
Recommendations to reconsider textbook instructions were proposed by the researchers
so that the books could be of benefit to learners.

Ander (2015) analysed English textbooks for high schools in Turkey regarding their
communicative characteristics and the CLT approach. The researcher was able to
categorise the tasks according to the skills and analyse what types of sub-skills the tasks
develop. It was also found that the there is some mismatch between the textbook
instructions and the CLT principles. Additionally, the researcher found that tasks lack
clarity and purpose and this creates problems in their application for both students and
teachers.

These studies show the importance of textbook evaluation since it reveals issues that
may not be considered by administrators or material developers. However, these flaws
can be a serious source of problems in the teaching-learning process. Analysing the
studies it can be concluded that textbooks that do not correspond with the goals and
students’ needs and that are poorly organised, cannot help students in developing their
L2 language skills.

16
2.5 Conclusion

Numerous studies have been conducted regarding textbook evaluation and CLT
approach practices. However, it was noticed that no research concerning English
textbooks in Kyrgyzstan has been conducted. Based on the theories and previously
conducted studies on reading and writing integration, I hope that this research may
contribute to the improvements of the quality of the textbooks, which are the main
resource for teachers and learners in the public high schools in Kyrgyzstan.

17
CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction

This chapter presents the methodology of the research project. Firstly, presents the
research questions. Secondly, it describes the research design and approach. Next, it
provides an overview of the textbook evaluation and an explanation for the framework
chosen for the data analysis. After that, the criteria of the Educational Standard for the
English Language teaching of reading and writing outcomes are presented. Finally, the
section on ethical considerations and limitations concludes the chapter.

3.2 Research Questions

The following research questions derived from the aims and objectives of the present
study:

Research question 1: Which reading strategies do the textbook tasks encourage

students to use?

Research question 2: Which writing strategies do the textbook tasks encourage

students to use?

Research question 3: Which integrated reading and writing strategies do the textbook
tasks encourage students to use?

Research question 4: How do these tasks relate to the expectations of the educational
standards established by the Ministry of Education?

In the process of the textbook task analysis the answers for these questions were
received. The research questions helped to better understand and explore the
relationship between the external claims (ESEL) and classroom resources in the form of
textbooks.

18
3.3 Research Design and Approach

Choosing the most appropriate method plays an important role in conducting any
research since the validity and reliability manifest through it. This research is exploratory
in its nature. It was conducted by using a qualitative method, and content analysis was
applied to examine the two English language textbooks: English 9 and English 10-11. A
qualitative data analysis involves “reading and reflecting, describing, comparing, and
relating themes in the dataset” (Riazi 2016: 255). Content analysis is a procedure that
summarises and reports written data (Cohen, Manion and Morrison 2007). A qualitative
approach used in this study allowed conducting the analysis of the textbooks’ content and
specific tasks. It also helped to compare how the textbooks correspond with the aims and
expected outcomes established by the ESEL.

3.4 Textbook Evaluation

As was mentioned in Chapter 2 (section 2.4.1), textbooks play a pivotal role in the
EFL/ESL classroom. Textbook evaluation therefore can help to determine how a
particular textbook is useful and effective in reaching the learning goal. According to
Tomlinson (2008: 3), many English textbooks, unfortunately, “make a significant
contribution to the failure” of many ESL/EFL learners or other languages. The reason that
learners may not be able to acquire even basic competence is that the books often
concentrate too much on the linguistic part instead of providing the opportunities for
acquisition and development of the skills. The problem is hidden in the fact that this is
what is expected of them by the administrators, parents, and learners themselves, and
this is the way a teacher is expected to work (Tomlinson 2008). When a textbook is
imposed on teachers and learners by the administration, and there is no opportunity to
change or modify it, it is more likely that the teaching-learning process will not be
productive (Sheldon 1987). In many schools, textbooks are determined by the higher
authority and opinions of students and teachers are not considered. However, textbook
evaluation in such cases can help teachers not only see the advantages and
disadvantages of a certain textbook but also decide which poorly organised or
19
unsatisfactory tasks can be improved (Sheldon 1987). Textbook analysis “asks questions
about what the materials contain, what they aim to achieve and what they ask learners to
do” (Tomlinson and Masuhara 2018: 54).

It is the aim of this study to look inside the textbooks and see what they contain and what
activities they ask the learners to perform.

3.5 Textbook evaluation approaches and criteria

Various evaluation approaches and checklists are suggested by scholars (McGrath 2016,
Tomlinson and Masuhara 2018, Ellis 1998, Williams 1983, Sheldon 1987). Textbooks can
be evaluated on different criteria. Tomlinson and Masuhara (2018) suggest a general list
of the characteristics that materials should have in a relevant context. Some of them
include the relevance of the materials to learners' needs, likes and wants; the value of the
materials regarding the long- and short- term goals; the degree of challenge provided; the
match of the materials with the administrative requirements. The most general
approaches to evaluate the textbooks are pre-use evaluation, whilst-use evaluation and
post-use evaluation (Tomlinson and Masuhara 2018, Ellis 1998, McGrath 2016). Each
stage carries its own purpose and importance. “Pre-use evaluation involves making
predictions about the potential value of materials for their users” (Tomlinson 2011: 30). At
this stage of evaluation teachers can gain a quick impression of what materials contain
and the usefulness of the content. Whilst-use evaluation “involves measuring the value
of materials while using them or while observing them being used” (Tomlinson 2011: 32).
This stage can produce more reliable and objective results since here teachers can
measure the value of a textbook rather than predict as in the pre-use stage. The last stage
is a post-use evaluation that can “measure the actual effects of the materials on the users”
(Tomlinson 2011: 33). This is the most valuable stage since here the effects of the
textbook on learners after its use can be measured.

20
This research involves the evaluation of how the materials match with the administrative
requirements and the whilst-use textbook evaluation will be applied. It should be noted
though that evaluation will be conducted through the detailed analysis of the tasks.
According to Tomlinson and Masuhara (2018), the two notions should not be confused
since there is a difference between them. “An evaluation makes judgments about the
effects of materials” while “analysis focuses on the materials themselves and it aims to
be objective” (Tomlinson and Masuhara 2018: 54).

3.6 Analysis framework for the textbooks in study

For this research, I decided to choose the framework proposed by Littlejohn (2011) that
suggests to analyse materials “as they are” (p. 181) and the ways they propose to work.
This framework allows conducting a deeper analysis of not only the content but also
separate tasks that are offered in a textbook. This framework is useful in that it helps to
disclose the nature of the tasks by conducting staged and detailed analysis of each task.
The results that will be reached at the end of the analysis will help to understand how
reading and writing tasks help and encourage students to develop their language skills
and what strategies the tasks encourage the learners to use. The framework consists of
the two main parts, publication and design (Littlejohn 2011: 183), and can be seen below
in Table 3.1:

Table 3. 1 presents two main parts of the framework

1. Publication
1. Place of the learner’s materials in any wider set of materials
2. Published form of the learner’s materials
3. Subdivision of the learner’s materials into sections
4. Subdivision of sections into sub-sections
5. Continuity
6. Route
7. Access
2. Design
1. Aims
2. Principles of selection
3. Principles of sequencing
4. Subject matter and focus of subject matter
5. Types of teaching/learning activities (what they require the learner to do; manner in which
they draw on the learner’s process competence (knowledge, affects, abilities, skills)).

21
 6. Participation: who does what with whom
7. Learner roles
8. Teacher roles
9. Role of the materials as a whole

The first part 'Publication' relates to an overall review of the material. This includes any
additional materials such as a student’s book, answer key, CDs, teacher’s book. Inside a
textbook, the analysis involves the examination of how it is categorised into sections and
subsections and how coherent the tasks are. The second part 'Design' involves the
analysis of the determined aims of the materials, the organisation of contents and tasks,
and the characteristics of the teaching/learning tasks and the teacher/learner roles.
Littlejohn (2011: 185) suggests three levels of the framework through which the analysis
can be realised that can be seen below in Table 3.2:

Table 3. 2 presents the three levels of the analysis

1. ‘WHAT IS THERE’ ‘objective description’

• statements of description
• physical aspects of the materials
• main steps in the instructional sections

2. ‘WHAT IS REQUIRED OF USERS’ ‘subjective analysis’

• subdivision into constituent tasks
• an analysis of tasks: what is the learner expected to do? Who with? With what content?

3. ‘WHAT IS IMPLIED’ ‘subjective inference’

• deducing aims, principles of selection and sequence
• deducing teacher and learner roles
• deducing demands on learner’s process competence

Level 1. The first level ‘What is there’ provides information on statements of description,
physical aspects of the materials, and the main steps in the instructional sections. These
may comprise the type of the materials (main course, supplementary, specific purposes,
general), how much of classroom time is required and how materials are supposed to be

22
used (self-study, in a classroom, in which order). The analysis sheet for the Level 1 can
be seen in Table 3.3.

Table 3. 3 demonstrates Level 1 analysis sheet

Title: Author:
Publisher: Year:
A Course package as a whole
1. Type:
2. Age range: School: Location:
3. Extent
a. Components
b. Total estimated time
4. Subdivision

Level 2. The second level: ‘What is required of users’ analyses the subdivision of the
tasks; what is the learner expected to do? Who with? Who determines the tasks? This is
the most detailed and important part of the analysis since here it is possible to see what
exactly the learners and teachers are expected to do. In order to conduct such an
analysis, it is important to define what the task is. According to Littlejohn, ‘task’ is any
proposal for action in the materials that learners have to take in order to perform the
activity. For example, if an activity/exercise states “Read the following text and find
answers to these questions. Write about a similar experience that you have had”
(Littlejohn 2011: 189), it will be treated as having two different tasks: 1. Read and answer,
2. Write about a similar experience. The performance of the tasks can be subdivided into
three forms: turn-take, focus and mental operation.

Since for this research only reading and writing tasks will be analysed, related tasks will
be selected and numerated accordingly, ignoring the original textbook numeration (see
Appendices 7-9)

Questions for task analysis according to Littlejohn (2011: 189) can be seen below in Table
3.4.

23
Table 3. 4 contains questions of the Level 2 analysis

1. What is the learner expected to do?

A. Turn-take
B. Focus
C. Mental operation
2. Who with?
3. With what content?
A. Input to learners
• form
• source
• nature
B. Output from learners
• form
• source
• nature

‘Turn-take' concerns with how the learners are expected to carry out the tasks. For
example, are they supposed to use the language that is provided by the textbooks
(scripted response, comprehension questions, drills), or are they to ‘initiate’ using the
language that was not provided (freewriting, hypothesise or ask their own questions)?
Learners may not be expected to take any role at all, they may be required to passively
listen to grammar explanation. The second type of performance, ‘Focus’, refers to
whether the learners are required to concentrate on the meaning of the language, its form,
or both. The last, ‘Mental operation’ implies the mental processes that are involved during
the task performance. For example, deducing language rules, hypothesising, negotiating,
etc. The second question that asks who the learner is asked to work with means learners’
participation in class. Are the learners supposed to work alone, in pairs/groups, with the
whole class? The last question concerns the characteristics of the material input and
expected output of the learners. For example, is the output written or spoken? Is it
words/sentences or a long answer in the form of an essay? Where does the input come
from? From the materials, teachers, or students themselves? Is it grammar rule
explanation, personal information, general information, and so on?

24
According to Littlejohn (2011), the analysis of the tasks in this manner reveals the nature
of the materials and allows seeing what the materials claim for themselves and what
actually happens in a classroom. For example, if materials claim that they develop
cognitive abilities but only a few tasks involve ‘mental operation’ and the majority require
the learners to just provide a scripted response or use the language provided as a
repetition, then there is a serious mismatch.

For this research, some minor modifications were made in the analysis procedure of the
Level 2 to better suit the purpose of the study. Three separate and slightly different
analysis sheets were prepared to analyse reading, writing and the reading tasks in the
Reader part of English 9 since they all have different characteristics. For example, the
section ‘Focus’ is only presented in the writing tasks analysis sheet. The analysis sheet
for the ‘Reader part’ has more sub-sections for the ‘Output’ section since the instructions
are presented differently in that part (see Chapter 4, section 4.2.2 Reader part). Table 3.5
and Table 3.6 demonstrate the analysis sheets for reading and writing tasks.

Table 3. 5 demonstrates Level 2: Reading tasks analysis sheet:

Task analysis sheet Unit No
Reading part
What is the learner expected to do?
Task number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
A. Turn take
1. Initiate
2. Scripted response
3. Not specified
B. Mental operation
1. Hypothesise
2. Negotiate
C. Who with?
1. Solo
2. Pair work
3. Group work
D. With what content?
• Input to learners
1. Teacher

25
 2. Materials
3. Learners
• Output from learners
1. Written
2. Spoken
3. Not specified

Table 3. 6 demonstrates Level 2 Writing tasks analysis sheet:

Task analysis sheet Unit No
Writing part
What is the learner expected to do?
Task number 1 2
A. Turn take
1. Initiate
2. Scripted response
3. Not required
B. Focus
1. Language system (rule, form)
2. Meaning
3. Meaning/Form relationship
C. Mental operation
1. Repetition
2. Deducing language rules
D. Who with?
1. Solo
2. Pair work
E. With what content?
• Input to learners
1. Teacher
2. Materials
3. Learners
• Output from learners
1. Individual words
2. Sentences
3. Extended discourse

26
Level 3. The third level: ‘What is implied’ is based on the first two levels. After obtaining
information from the first two levels, on this stage it is possible to come to conclusions
about the aims of the materials, the nature of tasks, the roles of the learners and teachers
(Littlejohn 2011: 200).

1. Aims and objectives

2. Principles of selection
• Types of tasks (speaking and listening tasks are excluded)
• Language
3. Principles of sequencing
• Reading Tasks
• Writing tasks
• Teacher-learner roles
4. Subject matter and focus of subject matter
5. Types of teaching/learning activities
6. Participation. Who does what with whom?
7. Classroom roles of teachers and learners
The selected framework was adopted and modified to be able to analyse reading and
writing tasks only.

3.7 Learning outcomes related to the reading and writing skills according to the
Educational Standard of the English Language

The learning outcomes regarding reading and writing tasks that are stated in the
Educational Standard of English language will be compared to the results of the analysis
of the reading and writing tasks. This will help us to see whether the tasks help to bring
students to the desired outcomes or not.

27
3.7.1 Learning outcomes for Grade 9

Reading skills development (Ministry of Education 2018)

A learner:

• reads and understands texts of different level of complexity (depending on the type
of reading)
• understands the main content (reading for the main idea)
• understands the text completely (reading for details)
• understands the necessary or interesting information (reading for specific
information)
• able to use a monolingual dictionary regardless of the type of reading
• able to use different reading techniques

A learner can:

1. Read for the main idea (350-400 words).

• identify the topic and the content of the text by title
• state the main idea
• select the main facts from the text, omitting secondary ones
• construct a logical sequence of basic facts of the text
2. Read for details (300 words)
• fully and accurately understands the content of the text on the basis of the
information processing (guessing from the context, analysis of the word formation,
use of a bilingual dictionary)
• expresses his/her opinion on what he/she read
3. Skimming
• selects information that is necessary or of interest to students

28
Writing skills development

• writes various types of letters (200 or more words) based on a sample, expresses
interest about life and business in general, shares the same information about
him/herself, expresses gratitude or requests something
• writes short texts (200 or more words) about him/herself, about famous people,
about the world, events of the present, past and future, about the country of the
language being studied

3.7.2 Learning outcomes for Grades 10-11

Reading skills development

Further development of the reading abilities is expected. The ability to read all types of
authentic texts: journalistic, popular science, fiction, as well as texts from different fields
(related to cross-curricular subjects) is expected.

A learner:

• Reads for the main idea, understands the main content of messages, reports,
extracts from fiction texts, simple publications of scientific and educational texts
• Reads for detail, fully and explicitly understands the information of pragmatic texts
(instructions, recipes, statistics)
• Reads for specific information, selects necessary/interesting information from a
text, prospectus
• Highlights the key facts from the text
• Differentiates main information from the secondary
• Makes predictions of possible events/facts
• Discloses cause and effect relationships between facts
• Understands the argumentation
• Retrieves necessary / interesting information
• Expresses attitude towards a text

29
 Writing skills development:

• Writes a personal letter, fills out questionnaires, forms

• Provides information about him/herself in the way that is required in English-
speaking countries (autobiography/resume)
• writes a plan, texts of oral/written communication, including summaries

These expectations were translated from the original document provided by the Ministry
of Education of the Kyrgyz Republic (Ministry of Education 2018). (The copy of the
original document can be found in Appendices 12-13)

3.8 Ethical consideration and reliability

In order to conduct the present research ethical clearance was obtained (see Appendix
15). The project reference number 105361 was received. The research is using
secondary data and no participants were involved. It is advised to implement an intra-
rater validity approach in order to be sure about the consistency in the qualitative research
(Riazi 2016). Therefore, the analysis of the reading and writing tasks in Level 2 was
repeated and checked after a two-week period.

3.9 Limitations

It is imperative for this study to present careful analysis of the textbooks and objective
results. The study used a qualitative method; however, it might not be sufficient enough
since it did not involve any participants. In fact, the opinions of teachers and students who
use the textbooks in the study could add valuable contributions.

The framework allowed conducting a detailed enough analysis. However, during the
process I realised that one task can have two or more characteristics. For example, the
task can encourage the learner to hypothesise and provide a scripted response using
offered language, so in some tasks, more than one option was selected to characterise

30
the task. This slightly affected the overall percentage during the calculation but not to a
significant degree.

3.10 Summary

This chapter has presented the research methodology and the analysis framework and
explained how the obtained data will be compared and interpreted. It has also presented
the limitations and reliability of the methodology.

31
CHAPTER 4: ANALYSIS
______________________________________________________________________

4.1 Introduction

This chapter presents the analysis of the data. Firstly, it presents a short analysis of the
textbooks according to Level 1 of the framework. Secondly, it presents analysis of the
reading and writing tasks according to the Level 2. Finally, analysis of the data obtained
from Level 1 and 2 is demonstrated in Level 3 analysis.

4.2 Data selection and analysis

Qualitative data analysis, according to Cohen, Manion and Morrison (2007: 461) “involves
organizing, accounting for and explaining the data”. According to Riazi (2016), the
process is usually realised through two levels: data organisation and data interrogation.
In this research the data obtained with the help of the framework is examined and
interpreted in Chapter 5 (Results section).

As was mentioned in Chapter 1, only reading and writing tasks were analysed in the
textbooks following the purpose of the research. However, the study first provides a
general overview of the textbooks through Level 1 of the framework in Table 4.1 and
Table 4.2.

32
4.2.1 Level 1 Objective Description: What is there?

The data obtained from the Level 1 analysis are further described and discussed in
Chapters 5-6.

Table 4. 1 provides Level 1 analysis of Book N 1 English 9

Author: Yusupova A.,
Title: English 9
Marashogli N., Shakirova A.
Publisher: Билим-компьютер. [Bilim-Kompyuter]
Year: 2012
Ministry of Education of Kyrgyz Republic.

A Course package as a whole

1. Type: general class use for the 9th grade

2. Age range: 15 years School: High School Location: Kyrgyzstan
3. Extent
a. Components: Class CD.
b. Total estimated time: 1 school year.

4. Subdivision: 4 Units, each unit is divided into 4 sections, each section consists of
variations of reading, writing, listening, and speaking tasks. Additionally, a ‘Reader’ part
is provided at the end of the book with various reading tasks.

5. Teaching program according to the syllabus:

• First quarter: Unit 1. Topic: Environment
• Second quarter: Unit 2. Topic: People Make History
• Third quarter: Unit 3. Topic: Traditional Holidays of the World
• Fourth quarter: Unit 4. Topic: Learn to Read newspapers

6. Distribution:
• Grammar/phonetics reference part- teacher/learner oriented
• Everyday words and expressions part- learner oriented
• Tests- learner oriented
• Answer key- learner oriented
• Reader part- learner oriented
• Syllabus overview- teacher/learner oriented
• Vocabulary list with translations- learner oriented

33
Table 4. 2 provides Level 1 analysis of Book N2 English 10-11

Title: English 10-11 Author: Yusupova A., Kaligulova

S., Ahmedova E., Akmatova A.
Publisher: Билим-компьютер. [Bilim-Kompyuter] Year: 2012
Ministry of Education of Kyrgyz Republic.

A. A course package as a whole

1. Type: general class use for 10-11 grades

2. Age range: 16-17 school: High school location: Kyrgyzstan
3. Extent:
a. Components: class CDs.
b. Total estimated time: 1 school year for each grade. The first half of the book is planned
to be used in grade 10, the second half in grade 11.
4. Subdivision: 7 Units, each unit is divided into 4 sections, each section consists of
variations of reading, writing, listening, and speaking tasks.
5. Teaching program according to the syllabus:

Grade 10:
• First quarter of the school year: Unit 1. Topic: Social Activities. Sections 1- 3.
• Second quarter: section 4 of the Unit 1 + Unit 2. Topic: Citizenship. Sections 1- 2.
• Third quarter: sections 3 - 4 of the Unit 2 + Unit 3. Topic: The USA. Sections 1- 2.
• Fourth quarter: section 3 - 4 of the Unit 3.

Grade 11:
• First quarter: Unit 4. Topic: Great Britain. Sections 1 - 3.
• Second quarter: section 4 of the Unit 4 + Unit 5. Topic: Kyrgyzstan. Sections 1 - 2.
• Third quarter: sections 3 - 4 of the Unit 5+ Unit 6. Topic: Russia. Section 1 - 2.
• Fourth quarter: sections 3 - 4 of the Unit 6 + Unit 7. Topic: Newspaper

6. Distribution:
• Supplementary unit- teacher oriented
• Grammar reference part- teacher/learner oriented
• Grammar tests part- teacher/learner oriented
• Answer key section- teacher/learner oriented
• Syllabus overview- teacher/learner oriented
• Vocabulary list with translations- learner oriented

34
4.2.2 Level 2 Subjective Analysis: What is required of users?

The second level of analysis is demonstrated in Tables 4.3-4.7. The data obtained from
the Level 2 analysis are further described and discussed in Chapters 5-6.

Table 4. 3 demonstrates analysis of the reading tasks from Book N 1 English 9.

(Only Unit 1 is presented as an example below, more examples can be seen in
Appendix 3)

Task analysis sheet Unit 1

Reading part section 1 sec. 2 sec. 3
What is the learner
expected to do?
Task number 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 1 2
A. Turn take
1. Initiate   
2. Scripted response      
3. Not specified
B. Mental operation
1. Hypothesise     
2. Negotiate
C. Who with?
1. Solo      
2. Pair work   
3. Group work
D. With what content?
Input to learners
1. Teacher
2. Materials        
3. Learners   
Output from learners
1. Written   
2. Spoken
3. Not specified      

35
Table 4. 4 demonstrates the analysis of the Reader part from Book N1 English 9.
(Only Chapters 1-2 are presented as examples below, more examples can be seen in
Appendix 5)

Task analysis sheet

Reading part /Reader
CHAPTER 1 CHAPTER 2
Chapters
Task number 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 5
What is the learner
expected to do?
A. Turn take
1. Initiate      
2. Scripted response   
3. Not specified
B. Mental operation
1. Hypothesise   
2. Negotiate
C. Who with?
1. Solo
2. Pair work
3. Group work
4. Not specified         
D. With what content?
Input to learners
1. Teacher
2. Materials    
3. Learners     
Output from learners
4. Written
a) individual words  
b) sentences   
c) extended discourse
5. Spoken
a) unspecified spoken
b) pronunciation  
c) retelling   
d) dialogue
6. Not specified 

36
Table 4. 5 demonstrates the analysis of the writing tasks from Book N1 English 9
(Only Unit 1 is presented as an example below, more examples can be found in Appendix
4)

Writing part Unit 1

Task analysis sheet section 1 sec. 2 sec. 3 sec. 4
What is the learner expected
to do?
Task number 1 2 3 1 2 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
A. Turn take
1. Initiate       
2. Scripted response         
3. Not required
B. Focus
1. Language system (rule, form)
2. Meaning           
3. Meaning/Form relationship  
C. Mental operation
1. Hypothesise     
2. Repetition       
3. Deducing language rules  
D. Who with?
1. Solo         
2. Pair work    
E. With what content?
Input to learners
1. Teacher
2. Materials       
3. Learners      
Output from learners
1. Individual words     
2. Sentences       
3. Extended discourse   

37
Table 4. 6 demonstrates the analysis of the writing tasks from Book N2 English 10-
11 (Only Unit 1 is presented as an example below, more examples can be found in
Appendix 2)

Writing part Unit 1

Task analysis sheet sec.1 sec.2 sec.3 sec.4
Task number 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 2
What is the learner
expected to do?
A. Turn take
1. Initiate  
2. Scripted response      
3. Not required
B. Focus
1. Language system (rule,
form) 
2. Meaning   
3. Meaning/Form
relationship    
C. Mental operation
1. Hypothesise   
2. Repetition     
3. Deducing language
rules
D. Who with?
1. Solo       
2. Pair work 
E. With what content?
Input to learners
1. Teacher 
2. Materials       
3. Learners 
Output from learners
1. Individual words     
2. Sentences    
3. Extended discourse

38
Table 4. 7 demonstrates the analysis of the reading tasks from Book N2 English 10-
11 (Only Unit 1 is presented as an example below, more examples can be found in
Appendix 1)

Reading part Unit 1

Task analysis
section 1 sec.2 sec.3 s. 4
sheet
Task number 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 1
What is the learner expected to
do?
A. Turn take
1. Initiate    
2. Scripted response     
3. Not specified
B. Mental operation
1. Hypothesise   
2. Negotiate
C. Who with?
1. Solo         
2. Pair work
3. Group work
D. With what content?
Input to learners
1. Teacher
2. Materials         
3. Learners 
Output from learners
1. Written 
2. Spoken    
3. Not specified    

39
4.2.3 Level 3. What is implied? Subjective inference.

Reading tasks

Reading tasks of the two textbooks English 9 and English 10-11 are presented in the
following Table 4.8, where common features are united and different features are
separated. Reading tasks of the Reader part of English 9 is presented in Table 4.10.
These tasks are further described and discussed in Chapters 5- 6.

Table 4. 8 contains Level 3 analysis of the reading tasks of English 9 and English
10-11

1. Aims and objectives of the coursebooks in general

• To develop learners’ abilities in four skills.
• To increase learners’ knowledge on various subjects.
• To develop learners’ vocabulary and communicative abilities.

2. Principles of selection of the reading tasks

English 9 English 10-11

• Types of reading tasks:
• Types of the reading tasks:
comprehension questions requiring
comprehension questions requiring
reading for details, hypothesising,
reading for details, hypothesising,
negotiation, expressing own ideas.
negotiation, expressing own ideas.
• Content: topics related to social
• Content: topics related to
activities, education, different
environment, famous people,
countries’ cultures and ways of
traditions and newspaper styles.
living, newspaper styles.
• Language: vocabulary, phrases,
• Language: vocabulary, phrases,
translations in Russian and Kyrgyz.
translations in Russian and Kyrgyz.

3. Principles of sequencing of the reading tasks.

• Tasks: tasks contain variations of pre-reading, while-reading and post-reading
tasks.

40
 • Content: no clear sequence of the content.

4. Subject matter and focus of subject matter.

English 9 English 10-11

• A combination of the non-fiction

• Fiction and non-fiction texts with and fiction texts related to the

comprehension tasks. Emphasis on content of the units. Emphasis on

new vocabulary, phrases and new vocabulary, phrases and

translation. translation, developing spoken

language as a productive output.

5. Types of teaching/learning reading activities

English 9 English 10-11

• Tasks that require ‘scripted
• Tasks that require learners to
response’: complete the chart,
‘initiate’: express own ideas based
make predictions, make up
on the text, retell the story, discuss
questions and sentences, fill in the
in pairs, in groups. Some tasks
gaps/columns, make translations,
require ‘scripted response’: read
matching. Some of the tasks
and describe, read and complete
encourage the learners to take the
sentences.
initiative role.
• L1 is used with new vocabulary and
• First language (L1) is used with new
phrases and required as a
vocabulary and phrases and
translation task.
required as a translation task.
• Reading tasks are mostly
• Some pre-reading and post-reading
integrated with speaking tasks.
tasks are integrated with listening,
Some tasks are integrated with
speaking and writing. For example,
listening and writing tasks. For
‘Listen, read and answer the
example: ‘Write down the correct
following questions’, ‘Read and
question for each paragraph’,
discuss the following questions’,
‘Read and discuss in pairs’, ‘Listen
‘Write on the following topic’.

41
• Learners are encouraged to to the text and answer the
hypothesise, however, in most of questions’.
the cases their hypothesis is limited • Predominant reading tasks require
by provided language and tasks. the learners to make hypotheses
• Skimming and scanning activities and expect spoken output.
are found in the tasks that require • Tasks that require the learners to
either scripted response or require use skimming and scanning skills
an answer in an unspecified form. are also found. The majority of
these tasks require an answer in an
unspecified form.

6. Participation: who does what with whom.

• Predominant tasks are presented as a solo activity. However, their nature is
flexible and with the guidance of a teacher can be reorganised as pair or group
work. Tasks that are specifically identified as pair and group work are also found.

7. Classroom roles of teachers and learners.

• The teacher role is largely ‘decision-making’, while the learner role is to follow
the instructions.

8. Learner roles in learning

• Follow the task instructions
• Make some contributions when it is required
• Accumulate knowledge accordingly

9. Role of the reading tasks.

• To increase learners’ knowledge on various topics
• To increase vocabulary
• To develop reading skills

42
Level 3. Writing tasks

In both textbooks English 9 and English 10-11 writing tasks were found to have similar
features with some differences in percentages which are described in Table 4.9. These
tasks are further described and discussed in Chapters 5- 6.

Table 4. 9 contains Level 3 analysis of the writing tasks of English 9 and English
10-11

1. Principles of selection of the writing tasks

• Types of the writing tasks: tasks focusing on form and meaning, repetition,
drilling.
• Content: the content is related to the topic of the unit or to the speaking, reading
or listening tasks.
• Language: new vocabulary and phrases and grammar rules. In some exercises
learner’s own language input is required (initiate, hypothesise).

2. Principles of sequencing
• Tasks: writing tasks are found at different stages of the unit sections. There is
no clear sequence of the writing tasks. Some writing tasks are part of other tasks.
• Content: no clear sequence of the content
• Language: the complexity of the language tasks varies according to tasks. There
is no clear sequence.

3. Subject matter and focus of the subject matter

• Focus on vocabulary, grammar rules and meaning depending on the task.

4. Types of teaching/learning activities

• Tasks focusing on form: gap-fill exercises requiring correct form, choosing
correct variant, putting words in the correct order, writing degrees of comparison.
Tasks focusing on meaning: sentence completion, answering questions,
completing charts, making lists, writing essays, stories.

43
• The majority of the tasks require a scripted response based on the provided
language, some of the tasks encourage the learners to adopt an ‘initiative’ role.
• L1 is required in translation tasks.

5. Participation
• Tasks mostly require solo work. However, can be reorganised as pair work too.
Some specifically defined pair work writing tasks are also found.
6. Classroom roles of teachers and learners
• Teacher role is to guide the activities
• Learner role is to follow the instructions
• Both teachers and learners are supposed to follow the materials

7. Learner roles in learning

• To learn new words, phrases, grammar rules, make own contributions where
necessary.
• To accumulate knowledge gradually according to the materials

8. Role of the writing materials as a whole

• To provide opportunities to practice and develop writing skills

44
Table 4. 10 contains Level 3 analysis of the reading tasks from the Reader part of
English 9

1. Aims and objectives

• To develop reading skills
• To increase vocabulary
2. Principles of selection
• Types of tasks: the predominant number of tasks require the learners to adopt
an ‘initiative’ role. Some comprehension questions require hypothesis,
speculation, expressing learners’ own ideas.
• Content: a novel divided into 33 chapters
• Language: new vocabulary and phrases. A mixture of simple and complex
vocabulary.
3. Principles of sequencing
• Tasks: in all chapters activities start with new lexis, followed by making up
sentences using new lexis. Next, learners are required to retell the chapter, make
questions about the chapter, translate and speak on some ideas provided. Some
grammar tasks can be found.
4. Focus of subject matter
• Developing learners’ vocabulary
• Developing speaking skills
5. Types of teaching/learning activities
• New lexis requires translation, transcription and pronunciation.
• Making up sentences/questions
• Retelling the chapters
• Speculation on some provided ideas
• Identifying some grammar
• L1 is required in translation tasks
• Emphasis on speaking
6. Participation
• No specific identification as pair, solo or group work. The tasks can be managed
by a teacher
7. Classroom roles of teachers and learners
• It is up to a teacher to use the reader chapters as additional material in a
classroom. In this case, the decision-making role belongs to the teacher. If the
chapter is assigned as homework than the decisions can be made by a student.
However, some tasks are supposed to be checked by the teacher.

45
 8. Learner roles on learning
• Learners are supposed to accumulate knowledge, follow the instructions
9. Role of material as a whole
• To serve as additional reading material
• To develop learners reading skills
• To develop vocabulary
• To develop speaking skills

4.3 Summary

This chapter presented a short general analysis of the textbooks in Level 1 to provide
general information about the textbooks and detailed analysis of the reading and writing
tasks in Level 2. Due to the space and word count limitations only one unit from each
book of all the analysed units were presented in Level 2. More information can be found
in Appendices 1-5. Analysis that is demonstrated in Level 3 unites some similar features
in reading and writing tasks and separates different features. Analysis of the Reader part
from English 9 was presented separately in Level 3 due to its different characteristics.

46
CHAPTER 5: RESULTS
______________________________________________________________________

5.1 Introduction

This chapter provides the description of the results obtained during the analysis. First, the
results of the Level 1 of the analysis are described. Second, the description of the reading
and writing tasks in each textbook according to the Level 2 of the analysis is provided.
Next, the types of the integrated reading and writing tasks found in the textbooks are
reported. Finally, comparison the reading and writing tasks from the textbooks with the
expected outcomes stated in the Educational Standard of English Language is presented

5.2 General textbook characteristics of English 9

The textbook is intended to be used throughout one school year. It consists of four main
units on various themes where each unit is divided into four subsections with different
titles and consists of several lessons (minimum 16, maximum 22 hours per unit). In total,
the book has 76 hours according to the teaching program. The book contains various
tasks that are intended to develop all four skills. New lexis is presented with L1
translations in every new subunit along with a short phonetic activity that presents a new
sound. At the end of the book, there is a Reader part that consists of the novel The Old
Man and the Sea. The novel is divided into 33 separate chapters with different tasks. This
part is planned to be used as additional reading material. Also, at the end of the book,
there are grammar reference part, phonetics part with vowels and consonants reading
explanation (see Appendix 10). However, the textbook has no statement of its aims,
learning outcomes or level of difficulty anywhere. Many tasks and activities have no
systematic order and sometimes it is hard to identify their purpose.

47
5.3 General textbook characteristics of English 10-11

English 10-11 is divided into two parts according to the syllabus (see Appendix 11). The
first half of it is planned to be used in grade 10, the second half in grade 11. The book
consists of seven units on different themes. Each unit is divided into four subsections with
specific skill titles (listening, speaking) in some sections, in other sections, there are no
titles at all. Each unit consists of minimum 20, maximum 24 hours making up 150 hours
in total for a two-year period. The book has various tasks and activities that are supposed
to develop all four skills. L1 is presented along with the new lexis and required in
translation tasks. At the end of the book, there are supplementary materials some of which
are supposed to be used by teachers. At the end of the book there are grammar
references, vocabulary lists, tests and songs. The textbook, however, does not provide
any information on its aims and learning outcomes and level of difficulty. The division of
the subsections has no systematic order. Therefore, it is difficult to follow the tasks and
identify which skills are intended to be practiced.

5.4 Reading tasks characteristics

5.4.1 Reading tasks in English 9

Figure 5. 1 Reading tasks. Overall review of the reading tasks characteristics in

English 9

48
A. Turn take [1]- initiate, [2] – scripted response, [3] – not required.
B. Mental operation: [1] – hypothesise, [2] – negotiate
C. Who with? [1] – solo, [2] – pair work, [3] -group work
D. With what content?
• Input to learners: [1] teacher [2] materials [3] learners
• Output from learners: [1] written, [2] spoken, [3] not specified

All tasks were identified according to Littlejohn’s definition of the task (see Chapter 3,
section 3.6). During the analysis, there were found 35 various reading tasks with various
instructions from the four units and 187 reading tasks from the reader part. Regarding
how the tasks are required to be carried out, the following statistics were found. From the
four units, tasks that require students to adopt an ‘initiative’ role make up 26% (see Figure
5.1). They include the following types: make predictions about a text, make up own
true/false sentences about the text, retell the text, discuss the questions about the text,
jig-saw activities, group discussions, express own ideas. Tasks that require the students
to provide a ‘scripted response’ constitute 54% of all the tasks. They include read and
translate, complete the sentences from the text, read and complete the story, read and
fill in the gaps, and matching exercises. 20% of the tasks do not specify how the tasks
should be carried out at all.

Tasks that require the students to ‘hypothesise’ make up 25% and mostly coincide with
the tasks where the students are asked ‘initiate’ a task. Tasks that encourage the students
to ‘negotiate’ make up only 6% and include pair work 11% and group discussions 6%. In
83% of the tasks, learners are required to work solo. However, these tasks can be easily
reorganised as pair or group work.

97% of the input is provided by the materials with some allowance for learners’
contributions which is 17%, mostly in ‘initiative’ parts of the tasks. Regarding the output
that tasks require, it was found that 37% of the reading tasks require written output which
concurs with the types of the ‘scripted response' described above. 11% require spoken
output, which includes pair/group work, discussions, text retelling. However, 51% of the
tasks do not specify the type of output the learners are required to provide. These types

49
of tasks mostly state ‘Read and answer the questions’, or it is difficult to decide whether
the output should be in the written or spoken form.

5.4. 2 Reading tasks in the Reader part. English 9

Figure 5. 2 Readers part. Overall review of the Reader’s tasks in English 9

A. Turn take [1]- initiate, [2] – scripted response, [3] – not required.
B. Mental operation: [1] – hypothesise, [2] – negotiate
C. Who with? [1] – solo, [2] – pair work, [3] -group work, [4] not specified
D. With what content?
• Input to learners: [1] teacher [2] materials [3] learners
• Output from learners: A. written 1) individual words, 2) sentences, 3) extended discourse.
B. spoken: 1) unspecified spoken, 2) pronunciation, 3) retelling, 4) dialogue.
E. Not specified

As was mentioned in Chapter 4 (section 4.2.1), the Reader part which comes at the end
of the book serves as an additional reading material that can be used both in class and/or
as a homework task. It is a novel divided into 33 chapters that have 5-8 tasks. The types
of tasks requiring some initiative role constitute 65% and include transcription, translation,
pronunciation and making up sentences with the new vocabulary, retelling the text,

50
making up questions about a chapter. Tasks that require students to provide a ‘scripted
response’ make up 36%. The type of written output that the learners are supposed to
provide involves writing individual words (15%), sentences (30%), extended discourse, in
form of the chapter translation and a brief summary of the chapter (7%). Students are
required to hypothesise in 26% of the tasks, largely where they are asked to make up
questions/sentences, retell and speak on some provided ideas. Almost all the tasks (99%)
do not specify who the learners are supposed to work with. Perhaps, this characteristic is
based on the nature of the Reader part that is flexible and has no ‘classroom only’
purpose. Input is largely provided by the materials (74%). However, learners are also
expected to make their contributions (54%). The types of these tasks include retelling,
making up questions/sentences, expressing attitudes/disagreements. The spoken output
expected of the students involves retelling (18%), the pronunciation of the new vocabulary
(15%), dialogue (1%) unspecified spoken output (express opinion, disagreement). The
types of tasks that do not specify what kind of output is expected make up 24%. These
tasks may be both written or/and spoken. The distribution of the tasks can be seen in
Figure 5.2.

5.4. 3 Reading tasks in English 10-11

Figure 5. 3 Reading tasks. Overall review of the reading tasks characteristics in

English 10-11

51
A. Turn take [1]- initiate, [2] – scripted response, [3] – not required.
B. Mental operation: [1] – hypothesise, [2] – negotiate
C. Who with? [1] – solo, [2] – pair work, [3] -group work
D. With what content?
• Input to learners: [1] teacher [2] materials [3] learners
• Output from learners: [1] written, [2] spoken, [3] not specified

Out of seven units, 96 various reading tasks were identified in total. These tasks were
found to have the following characteristics (see Figure 5.3). The tasks that encourage
the learners to ‘initiate’ and ‘hypothesise’ make up 40%. These tasks include the
following instructions: making predictions, expressing an opinion, retelling,
agreeing/disagreeing. The tasks that require the learners to provide ‘scripted response’
with provided information/language make up 20%. They include answering questions,
true/false questions, sentence completion, gap-fills, and translations. 10% of the
‘scripted response’ answers correspond with the written output that is required of
students. However, 40% of the tasks do not require the learner to take any role and
about 53% of the tasks do not specify the form of the outcome that the learner is
expected to provide, which leads to different assumptions. 15% of the tasks encourage
learners to ‘negotiate’ in pairs/groups. The number of pair/group work tasks make up
around 10%. About 83% of the tasks ask learners to work individually. However, in
many cases, it is possible to modify the tasks into pair or group work. The input is
largely provided by the materials and constitutes 84%. Only about 16% of the tasks
expect learners to make some contributions. These tasks include expressing opinions,
discussions, and translations.

It can be noticed that the learners are mostly expected to produce spoken output (36%)
than written (10%). Spoken production is required in tasks such as making speculations,
discussions, retellings, and exchanging opinions.

52
5.5 Writing tasks characteristics

5.5.1 Writing tasks in English 9

Figure 5. 4 Writing tasks. Overall review of the writing tasks characteristics in

English 9

A. Turn take [1]- initiate, [2] – scripted response, [3] – not required.
A. Focus: [1] – language system (rule, form), [2] – meaning, [3] – meaning/form relationship
B. Mental operation: [1] – hypothesis, [2] – repetition, [3] – deducing language rules
C. Who with? [1] – solo, [2] – pair work
D. With what content?
• Input to learners: [1] teacher [2] materials [3] learners
• Output from learners: [1] individual words, [2] sentences, [3] extended discourse

In total, 51 writing tasks were identified in English 9. The distribution of the types of
tasks can be seen in Figure 5.4. The types of writing tasks where students are asked to
‘initiate’ make up 40% and include writing essays, making up sentences/questions,
making up lists of ideas, making up stories. The number of tasks that require ‘scripted
response’ with the provided language and sometimes require students’ own contribution
constitute 59%. These tasks include sentence completion/translation, text
completion/translation, making up lists, chart completion, grammar exercises, and gap-
fills. The type of written output that is expected, involves providing individual words

53
(25%), sentences (41%), extended discourse (25%). Tasks, where the students are
required to focus on the language system, make up 12%, on meaning 39%, on meaning
and form simultaneously 41%. These tasks include translations and grammar exercises
(put the verbs in the correct form, make an interrogative sentence, fill in the gaps with
the correct form, etc.). Tasks that ask students for some mental operations include
making hypotheses (33% that involve writing essays, story completions, speculating on
something in the written form), repetition, the types of tasks that are based on the
provided language (35% include translations, sentence completions, grammar
exercises), and deducing language rules (20% include gap-fills, grammar exercises).
Most of the tasks require solo participation (67%). The expected output is mostly in the
form of sentences (41%), individual words (25%), and extended discourse (25%). The
type of extended discourse includes writing essays, story completion/make up, and text
translations. The input is largely provided by the materials (63%), but some learners’
contribution is also expected (33%). These include activities where the students
‘hypothesise’.

5.5.2 Writing tasks in English 10-11

Figure 5. 5 Writing tasks. Overall review of the writing tasks characteristics in

English 10-11

54
 A. Turn take [1]- initiate, [2] – scripted response, [3] – not required.
B. Focus: [1] – language system (rule, form), [2] – meaning, [3] – meaning/form relationship
C. Mental operation: [1] – hypothesis, [2] – repetition, [3] – deducing language rules
D. Who with? [1] – solo, [2] – pair work
E. With what content?
• Input to learners: [1] teacher [2] materials [3] learners
• Output from learners: [1] individual words, [2] sentences, [3] extended discourse

In total, 37 various writing tasks were found in seven units of the textbook. The
characteristics of the writing tasks can be described as follows (see Figure 5.5). 46% of
the tasks encourage learners to ‘initiate’ and include making up sentences, making
translations, writing an essay/composition. 54% of the tasks require the learners to
provide a ‘scripted response’ based on the provided language. The focus of these tasks
is distributed in the following way. 49% of the tasks require the learners to pay attention
to meaning and 49% ask to pay attention to both meaning and form. 2% of the tasks
explicitly require providing a grammar-related answer. Learners are encouraged to
hypothesise in 54% of the tasks. These tasks are mostly those where learners are
supposed to ‘initiate’ their roles. 32% expect the learners to just provide an answer as a
repetition of the provided language. Examples include sentence completion, grammar
exercises, and gap-fills. 10% of the tasks ask the learners to deduce language rules such
as the right verb form or tense. More than 90% of the tasks expect the learners to work
solo and only 8% promote pair work. Input is predominantly provided by the material and
makes up 80% in total. However, some learners’ contributions are also expected in tasks
such as games where the students are asked to write some ideas, writing compositions/
essays, and making up sentences/questions. Regarding the output that the learners are
expected to produce, the results are the following. 27% of the tasks ask the students to
provide individual words (gap-fills), and 40% require the answer in the form of a sentence.
39% of the tasks expect the learners to provide an extended discourse (essays,
compositions, making up dialogues, making up stories).

55
5.6 Integrated Reading and Writing tasks in the textbooks

The analysis has shown that textbooks have some integrated reading and writing tasks.
In both textbooks these tasks function either as pre-reading tasks or post-reading tasks
and include sentence completion, gap-fills, making up sentences, translations, making
predictions on texts, chart completions, writing lists, and making up questions for texts.
Regarding the number of writing tasks that require an extended answer, the following
results were found. Six essay writing tasks and one summary writing task were found as
post-reading tasks in English 10-11. Seven tasks that require learners to write an
extended discourse in the form of essay or story as a post-reading task were found in
English 9.

5.7 Comparison with the Educational Standard of English Language

1. In Chapter 3 (Methodology), section 3.7.1 and 3.7.2, a description of the

expectations according to the ESEL (Educational Standards of English Language)
for grades 9-11 was presented. The results of the analysis show that there is some
mismatch between what textbooks offer and what a learner should be able to
do/know according to the ESEL.
2. The ESEL states that learners should be able to use such techniques as reading
for the main idea, details, and skimming and scanning. However, the analysis of
the reading tasks showed that the predominant number of the comprehension
questions ask the learners to provide an answer that can be found using careful
detailed reading only or provide a general answer that is not directly related to the
text. Only a few reading tasks encourage the learner to make some predictions
about the text. Most of the reading tasks state ‘Read and answer the questions’ or
‘Read and discuss’ followed by a set of general questions. Tasks that encourage
the learners to skim or separate the main idea from the secondary were not found.
3. Using monolingual dictionaries. It was found that new vocabulary and phrases are
presented in the textbooks with L1 translations, both in Kyrgyz and Russian. Many
reading tasks require the learners to make translations into L1. It is more likely that

56
 students will not use a monolingual dictionary if a task requires the learner to
translate into L1.
4. Writing tasks. The analysis of the writing tasks showed that learners are mostly
asked to provide a response using the provided language. Tasks include making
up sentences/questions, gap-fills, and grammar exercises mainly. Comparing to
the total number of writing tasks both in English 9 and English 10-11, tasks that
encourage learners to write essays, compositions and stories are found to be
fewer. Moreover, the variety of writing tasks does not correspond with the ESEL
requirements. All the essay/composition/story writing tasks come as a section
conclusion tasks or post-reading tasks. For example, tasks that ask students to
write letters, summaries, questionnaires or forms were not found.

The results obtained during the analysis provided important information on what the
learners are asked to do while performing the activities. It was possible to make some
comparisons with what the materials provide and what is expected by the ESEL. Further
discussions will be presented to reach the aim of this study.

5.8 Summary

This chapter has presented the results of the analysis in three levels. Reading and writing
tasks in English 9 and English 10-11 were analysed through the three-levelled framework
suggested by Littlejohn (2011). The nature of the reading and writing tasks was examined
and presented. Some mismatch between what the textbooks offer and encourage
learners to do and the expectations stated in the ESEL was explained.

57
CHAPTER 6: DISCUSSION

6.1 Introduction

This chapter discusses the results of the analysed data with the support of the reviewed
literature in order to answer the research questions. Some practical suggestions that are
based on the results of the analysis and reviewed literature are presented.

6.2 Discussion of the Research Questions

6.2.1 Research Question 1. Which reading strategies do the textbook tasks encourage
students to use?

In English 9, the analysis has revealed that most of the reading tasks encourage the
students to provide a ‘written output’ that involves answering questions using provided
language. The types of tasks include sentence completion, gap-fills, and translations. In
order to complete these tasks, students should use careful, detailed reading strategies,
going back to a text and look for information. In other words, students mostly use text
‘scanning’ or ‘detailed reading’ strategies. Fewer tasks encouraging the students to adopt
an ‘initiative’ role that includes making predictions about the text or find the main idea of
the text. The types of reading strategies promoted by Grabe (2008) and Brown (2001).
Almost all texts have some follow-up activities but not all of them have pre and during-
reading tasks. Also, the number of tasks that do not specify how exactly the task is
supposed to be carried out and what type of output is expected of learners is significant.
It can be stated that these types of tasks have no clear purpose, contrary to the
recommendation in Brown (2001). In effective reading instruction, students need to know
why they are reading a text and what are the expected outcomes. In contrast, in English
10-11, the majority of the reading tasks encourage students to hypothesise, speculate,
and express opinions and thereby promote spoken output mostly. However, regarding

58
unclear reading task instructions, English 10-11 has the same characteristics as English
9.

In all the reading tasks provided in the Reader part in English 9, the first task is to
‘transcribe, pronounce and translate’ a list of the new vocabulary provided at the
beginning of the text. While some students may find it useful to translate new words before
reading the text, this task does not meet the purpose of the strategy to ‘guess the meaning
from the context’ advised by many scholars. Brown (2001) notes that translation not only
slows down reading but also confuses the reader and affects comprehension. Tasks that
require the learners to make translations can be observed in all sections of English 9 and
English 10-11. These tasks also do not encourage the learners to use monolingual
dictionaries which is expected by the ESEL.

According to Grabe (2008: 15), strategic reading encourages the reader to “anticipate text
information, select key information, organize and mentally summarize information,
monitor comprehension, repair comprehension breakdowns, and match comprehension
output to reader goals”. Brown (2001) advocates a combination of bottom-up and top-
down reading strategies for effective reading comprehension. Analysis of the reading
tasks has revealed some disbalance of strategies that reading instruction offers and poor
task organisation that may lead to ineffective outcomes. According to Sidek (2013), the
reason for “persisting flaws” in EFL reading instruction can be the misalignment between
what the curriculum claims for itself and its real instructional organisation and
implementation in classrooms. Grabe (2008) has noted that the goals set by the
institutions play a major role in reading development. These goals should be clearly set
by the curriculum developers and teachers. Learners’ inability to become good readers
stems from the mismatch between the goals and their realisations in classrooms.

59
6.2.2 Research Question 2. Which writing strategies do the textbook tasks encourage
students to use?

Generally, writing instruction for the L2 writers should involve teaching the linguistic
features (spelling, vocabulary, grammar), extralinguistic features (punctuation,
capitalization, formatting), and the knowledge of appropriateness of the content and genre
in relation to the specific audience (Ferris 2018: 75). The goal of many activities in L2
writing instruction is to create “meaningful and reasonably fluent and accurate texts and
organize ideas to meet particular communicative goals in context” (Hinkel 2011: 532).

In both English 9 and English 10-11, it was found that the types of the writing tasks that
require the students to focus on meaning and on form are presented in equal proportions.
Most of the writing tasks in English 9 are limited to grammar exercise completion or short
sentence production. Fewer tasks require the students to write an ‘extended discourse’
in the form of story completion, essay/composition writing, making up dialogues, or
sentence/ text translations. In English 10-11, the amount of students’ written output in the
form of sentences and extended discourse is found to be equal. However, considering
that English 10-11 is designed to be used in two years, it can be noticed that the number
of writing tasks is fewer than in English 9.

In both textbooks, writing tasks mostly expect some grammatical accuracy and short
answers limited to several sentences. Some writing tasks represent isolated tasks
requiring some vocabulary or grammar accuracy, and some writing tasks function as pre-
reading or post-reading tasks. Tasks that require writing an essay or a composition
generally come at the end of the section. However, these tasks have no guidance or
modeling. In general, writing tasks that the textbooks offer can be categorised as
controlled (make up a sentence, use the correct word, tense, dictation), guided (make a
list, complete a chart, complete the story) and free writing (write an essay/composition,
story) (Hyland 2003). Nevertheless, the number of writing tasks found in the textbooks as
well as the skills that these tasks develop were found to be insufficient. Also, there was
60
no attempt to offer some product-writing or process-writing approaches for essay and
composition writing tasks. The way in which these tasks are carried out and assessed in
actual practice is a matter for speculation/further investigation.

When students’ writing is limited to some grammar inputs provided by materials they may
be confused and not be able to write in different situations (Hyland 2003). Therefore,
adequate teaching L2 learners writing skills at earlier years of schooling may help them
with the writing challenges in their further studies. Ineffective delivery of the writing
lessons has been seen as a negatively influencing factor (Naghdipour 2016).

6.2.3 Research Question 3. Which integrated reading and writing strategies do the
textbook tasks encourage students to use?

In Chapter 5 (section 5.6), the types of the integrated reading and writing tasks were
presented. As it was noticed through the analysis, writing tasks are integrated with
reading functioning as post-reading task mostly. Writing as a skill is limited to short
answers mostly requiring some vocabulary check, sentence completion or grammar
assessment. However, what the ESEL expects of the learners regarding reading and
writing skills is much more than the textbooks offer (see Chapter 3, section 3.7).

Theoretical considerations as well as actual practice and implementation in the classroom

suggest that reading and writing integration has positive results on the development of
both skills (Hirvela 2004, Grabe and Zhang 2013, Brown 2001, Ito 2011, Shen 2009, Cho
and Brutt-Griffler 2015). When investigating the textbooks selected for this study, only
one exercise that required learners to summarise was found in the whole book English 9.
Similarly, no activities that encourage the learner to paraphrase and express an opinion
about a text in the written form was found in English 9-10. These types of activities could
help the learners to comprehend a text better as well as practice their writing skills. While

61
plenty of activities that ask the learners to retell and express their opinion on the text in
the spoken form were found, written response was found to be very limited.

Regarding reading skills, it has been advocated by scholars that reading can be a
foundation to the development of all skills. Burns and Richards (2012) claim that placing
reading at the core of language instruction can produce positive results in teaching all
skills. In order to make reading instruction effective, teachers can elaborate on the
development of vocabulary, grammar, writing, speaking, and listening skills around
reading. Such an approach can make reading more meaningful. Grounding their claims
in extensive research and practical experience, Ferris and Hedgcock (2013: 94)
convincingly argue that “one cannot become a proficient writer in any language without
also developing an array of literacy skills, including the ability to comprehend written text
both fluently and accurately”. They believe that for teachers of L2 writing it is important to
understand the reciprocal nature of reading and writing. A reader has to “decode,
interpret, and understand” the written text. Both readers and writers plan, draft, align,
revise, and monitor. Good reading skills promote and facilitate writing skills. Therefore, it
can be concluded that more elaboration is needed for both reading and writing tasks
organisation.

6.2.4 Research Question 4. How do these tasks relate to the expectations of the
Educational Standard of English Language established by the Ministry of Education?

It is important to remember that the Educational Standard of English Language is based

on CLT. According to the ESEL (Ministry of Education 2018: 10) the content of the
textbooks should be organised around the following topics (see Appendix 14):

1. Personality
2. Family
3. School
4. Home, place of residence

62
5. Shopping, food, clothing.
6. Sports and health
7. Everyday life
8. The world around us
9. My country
10. Countries of the target language
11. The world of science and technology
12. The world of literature, music and art

The Level 1 analysis (Chapter 4, section 4.2.1) has demonstrated that thematically the
textbooks are divided into units in accordance with the required standards. The analysis
of the reading tasks has also shown that texts topically match the ESEL requirements
and offer a wide range of topics. However, the main issue is that reading and writing tasks
do not provide enough opportunity, guidance and encouragement to develop reading and
writing skills. In comparison to reading skills, writing skills were found to be undervalued.
The outcomes expected of the learners according to the ESEL cannot be reached by only
performing the tasks and instructions provided in the textbooks.

Problems regarding the mismatch between the CLT principles and the CLT curriculum
design, and classroom practices have been investigated and analysed by many
researchers (Mehtab 2012, Haider and Chowdhury 2012, Ander 2015, Sidek 2013, Grabe
2008, Dailey 2010, Li 1998). Richards and Rodgers (2001: 172) state that one of the
principles of CLT is “the integration of different language skills”.

The analysis of English 10-11 has shown that learners are mostly encouraged to produce
the spoken language not only as a post-reading activity but also in many other tasks.
English 9 requires the learners to provide a limited written response in most of the post-
reading activities, however, the Reader part of the textbook promotes retelling as a follow-
up activity. According to Savignon (2008: 22), reading and writing tasks in CLT do not
necessarily have to mean “interpretation, expression, and negotiation of meaning”.

63
Looking at this general picture, it can be seen that the textbooks are mostly promoting
spoken output rather than written. It was noticed by Thompson (1996: 11) that one of the
widespread misconceptions about CLT is that “CLT means teaching only speaking”.
According to Thompson, this misconception generally stems from the attempt to teach
learners how to speak in a foreign language to foreign people or in a foreign country even
if they are unlikely to visit it. This misconception might be the reason why more emphasis
was put on speaking and listening skills in the textbooks. Moreover, he notes that many
teachers also think that CLT is more about speaking rather than writing or reading. In
response to this common misconception, Thompson (1996: 12) emphasises that “CLT
involves encouraging learners to take part in—and reflect on—communication in as many
different contexts as possible (and as many as necessary, not only for their future
language-using needs but also for their present language-learning needs)”. According to
Savignon (2008: 22) “CLT is properly seen as an approach, grounded in a theory of
intercultural communicative competence, that can be used to develop materials and
methods appropriate to a given context of learning”.

6.3 Suggestions for reading and writing tasks improvements by means of

integrating the two skills as an attempt to help the learners to reach the
expectations set by the Educational Standard of English Language.

The connection of the four skills (reading, writing, listening and speaking) has been
emphasised by many scholars (McDonough, Shaw, and Masuhara 2013, Richards and
Rodgers 2001). Among the various possible reading instruction approaches, Grabe and
Stoller (2018: 65) promote the use of activities that integrate reading and writing, because
in academic settings students are “typically required to read-to- learn and write-to-read”.
Widdowson (1978: 63) states, “the ability to read and the ability to write are the same and
it is neutral with regard to production and reception”.

64
6.3. 1 Practical Suggestions

Studies on connection and practical integration of reading and writing demonstrate how
the two skills are connected and influence each other (Ito 2011, Hirvella 2004, Shen 2009,
Cho and Brutt-Griffler 2015, Lee and Schallert 2016, Cooney, Darcy, and Casey 2018,
Kim 2001). The results of this study suggest that the reading tasks can be improved by
the introduction of pre, during and post-reading tasks in the written form. This can help
learners to improve reading comprehension and practice writing skills. The results of the
analysis have shown that a large number of the reading tasks do not specify what kind of
outcome is expected of learners or how the task is supposed to be carried out. Writing
tasks were found to be inadequate to develop the learners’ writing skills. To address these
gaps, some more specific and elaborated instructions can be introduced to the tasks.

CLT is considered to be an appropriate approach for teaching writing since it emphasises

learner-centered instruction, student-to-student negotiation, and strategies-based
instruction (Brown 2001: 340). Littlewood (1981) offers a variety of CLT related activities.
Some activities that can be selected for the integration of reading and writing include
“Reconstructing story sequences”. The activity works in the following way. The teacher
chooses a text in a textbook and prints it on a separate paper. He/she cuts the text into
several paragraphs/sections and distributes it to groups or pairs of students. The students
should not look at the original text in the textbook. Each pair/group should summarise
their section in the written form and read it later for others. Students can also ask
questions on the summarised sections. In the end the whole class should reconstruct the
text through discussion. Students can look at the original text and compare it to their
reconstruction. As a follow-up activity, there can be a couple of possibilities. First,
students read the text and each student writes a short summary of the text. Second,
students write a sequence of the main events in the text. This activity can be modified in
different ways. Littlewood (1981: 33) states that in these types of activities students
“share, discuss and evaluate” information.

65
The next type of activity, which Littlewood describes as “Processing information”, can be
carried out as follows. A teacher selects a text from the textbook and divides it into two
parts. Then he/she divides the students into pairs/groups and asks one pair/group to
quickly read the first part of the text, but not to read the second part. They should think
about how the story may finish and write a continuation of the story. The second
group/pair reads the second part of the text and thinks of the story’s beginning. They
should write the beginning of the story. Students then share their writings and compare
them with the original text. The role of the teacher is to monitor the writing process and
scaffold where necessary. These activities can be used as during and post-reading tasks.

Pre-reading activities help students to “ease into the passage” (Brown 2001: 315). They
motivate the students to activate schemata and make predictions. The following task can
be introduced as a pre-reading activity. A teacher asks the students to read the title of a
text and write short predictions in 2-3 sentences about the text. Some prediction questions
can be introduced. Further development of this task can be to ask the students to compare
their predictions with the text and write a short reflection on what they thought and what
they found about the text. The students can exchange their writings with the whole class
in the end.

Based on the text, students can be asked to write a letter. This task will involve guided
writing and consideration of the audience and purpose (Brown 2001: 329). Students can
be asked to write a letter to the author of the text or to a hero in the text. Various
possibilities can be suggested. This task can help develop students’ creativity and
imagination. The teacher's role here is to monitor, help where necessary and assess at
the end of the activity.

Another type of task offered by Brown, called “Intensive or controlled” (p. 344), focuses
on both form and meaning. This activity involves both reading and writing. The students
are asked to read a text and rewrite it changing its structure. For example, the students

66
can change the text’s tense from present to past or future. This may involve changing all
the time references in the text that involves grammar accuracy.

Next, task modification can be introduced to the Reader part of English 9. One of the post-
reading tasks in all reading sections of the Reader part requires the students to retell the
text. Instead of asking the students to retell the story, it can be changed to writing a
summary, or writing some thoughts about the text. Brown (2001: 344) suggests a “dialog
journal” where students can “record thoughts, feelings and reactions” to the text. A
teacher checks and gives feedback on the writings. This task can be used for any reading
text in the textbooks.

Writing an essay can be found both as a post-reading task and as a section conclusion
task in the textbooks. But there is no attempt to show some guidance on how to compose
a piece of writing and it is not clear how the students perform these tasks. Some
instructions could be added to guide the students. It is advised that process-writing should
be organised following the pre-writing, drafting and revising stages. Brown (2001: 348)
suggests the following plan of activities that can be used when teaching writing:

1. First draft.
• Choosing a topic (in this case the topic is provided by the textbook)
• Generate ideas (brainstorm ideas through extensive reading, scimming/scanning
a text, freewriting, use other reading sources, listing, clustering)
• Writing the first draft
• Peer-editing (work in pairs, groups)
• Revising
2. The second draft
• Writing the second draft and proofread
• Use the teacher’s feedback
• Keep a journal

67
Regarding the way the textbooks present the new vocabulary, some changes can also
be introduced. New vocabulary is presented with the L1 translations throughout the two
textbooks. While it may certainly look convenient for students, such an approach does
not ‘push’ them to try to guess the meaning of the word from the context (Grabe 2008,
Brown 2001). This is also not what the ESEL expects the learner to do, as the ESEL
states that the learners should be able to use a monolingual dictionary (Chapter 3, section
3.7.1). New vocabulary can be presented using synonyms instead. Some vocabulary task
activities can be introduced as a during-reading activity in which students are asked to
find the meaning of the word out of several options provided in English. Students later
can be asked to use the new words in their summary/paraphrase writings.

To summarise, integration of the writing tasks into reading tasks can serve as the best
solution to the improvement of both reading and writing tasks in the textbooks. The
suggested activities can help the learners to practice reading strategies as well as have
more opportunities to improve and practice their writing skills. Suggestions made for
essay/composition writing instructions and new vocabulary presentation in the textbooks
can also help the learners to develop their reading and writing skills.

68
CHAPTER 7: CONCLUSION
______________________________________________________________________

This research paper investigated reading and writing tasks in two English textbooks
English 9 and English 10-11 used for high school students in public schools in
Kyrgyzstan. The aim of the study was to find out what reading and writing strategies the
textbooks English 9 and English 10-11 are encouraging the learners to use and how
CLT is reflected through the reading and writing tasks in these textbooks. The following
research questions were raised:

Research question 1: Which reading strategies do the textbook tasks encourage students
to use?

Research question 2: Which writing strategies do the textbook tasks encourage students
to use?

Research question 3: Which integrated reading and writing strategies do the textbook
tasks encourage students to use?

Research question 4: How do these tasks relate to the expectations of the educational
standards established by the Ministry of Education?

7.1 Summary of the findings

This section presents the summary of the key findings of the present study related to the
research questions.

Findings on the research question 1.

The analysis of the reading tasks has revealed that in general, reading tasks in both
English 9 and English 10-11 encourage the learners to use strategies such as reading for
details and a text scanning. A large number of the tasks in both textbooks do not specify
how exactly the tasks should be performed and what kind of output is expected of the
learners. The tasks also do not teach and provide the opportunity for the learners to fully

69
exploit possible reading strategies. For example, pre and during reading activities can be
found in a few tasks in both textbooks.

Findings on the research question 2.

Regarding writing tasks, it was found that in English 9 and English 10-11 writing tasks
mostly were limited to some sentence production or requiring some grammatical
accuracy. While some of the writing tasks represent post-reading activities, another part
function as isolated grammar exercises. In both textbooks the essay/composition writing
tasks have no guidance or instructions on them. In general, provided writing tasks were
found to be insufficient in quantity and quality to be able to develop good writing skills in
the learners.

Findings on the research question 3.

Some integrated reading and writing skills were found in the textbooks. However, those
tasks mainly encourage the learners to make up questions about a text or complete given
sentences based on the text. In other words, the exercises do not ‘push’ the learners to
go beyond several sentences or words. In order to improve the tasks some practical
suggestions were proposed where writing tasks can be integrated into the reading tasks.

Findings on the research question 4.

It can be concluded that reading and writing tasks presented in the textbooks do not
provide enough guidance and help for learners to develop good reading and writing
strategies that would help them in reaching the outcomes established by the ESEL. The
tasks are also not communicative enough and very often do not follow the principles of
the CLT approach.

70
7.2 Strengths, limitations and further research recommendations

The study presented a detailed analysis of the reading and writing tasks using the three-
levelled framework offered by Littlejohn (2011) and revealed some limitations of the
textbooks.

Further investigations on listening and speaking skills can yield more results to see the
whole picture of the textbooks characteristics. The implementation of both quantitative
and qualitative approaches can produce a larger amount of data that may have stronger
implications. Participant involvements such as teachers, students, material developers
can have a valuable contribution as well. Teachers' and students’ views on the textbooks
could be the main influence on the material development and design. Also, lesson
observations could be very important in seeing how the CLT approach is practiced in
classrooms. Finally, further research can be conducted regarding textbooks used for
elementary and secondary school students.

The aim of this study was to analyse reading and writing strategies that the textbooks
English 9 and English 10 motivate students to use. The research has revealed what the
textbooks offer and what they still have to improve. The study also aimed to suggest
improvement of the reading and writing tasks by means of integrating the two skills. Some
practical suggestions on the integration of writing tasks into reading tasks were offered.
It is hoped that textbook developers in Kyrgyzstan will address these limitations in the
creation of new materials that fully integrate all language skills and better implement the
CLT approach.

71
List of References
______________________________________________________________________

Ander, T. (2015) Exploring communicative language teaching in a Grade 9 nationwide

textbook: Newbridge to Success. Unpublished thesis project. Available on
http://www.thesis.bilkent.edu.tr/0006974.pdf
Assaly, I. and Igbaria, A (2014) ‘A Content Analysis of the Reading and Listening
Activities in the EFL Textbook of Master Class’. Education Journal. 3 (2), 24-38.
Baba, K. (2009) ‘Aspects of lexical proficiency in writing summaries in a foreign
language’. Journal of Second Language Writing 18, 191–208.
Bell, J. and Burnaby, B. (1984) A handbook for ESL literacy. Toronto: OISE

Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language

pedagogy (2nd ed). NY: Pearson Education.
Burns, A. and Richards, J. (2012) The Cambridge Guide to Pedagogy and Practice in
Second Language Teaching. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press.
Canale, M., and Swain, M. (1980) ‘Theoretical bases of communicative approaches to
second language teaching and testing’. Applied Linguistics 1(1), 1–47.
Carson, J and Leki, I. (1993) Reading in the composition classroom: Second language
perspective. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Cho, H., and Brutt-Griffler, J. (2015) ‘Integrated reading and writing: A case of Korean
English language learners’. Reading in a Foreign Language 27(2), 242-261.
Cohen, L., Manion, L., and Morrison, K. (2007) Research Methods in Education. (6th
ed) Routledge/Taylor & Francis Group.
Cooney, A., Darcy, E. and Casey, D. (2018) ‘Integrating Reading and Writing: Supporting
Students' Writing from Source’. Journal of University Teaching and Learning
Practice, 15 (5) Article 3.
Dailey, A. (2010) Difficulties implementing CLT in South Korea: Mismatch between the
language policy and what is taking place in the classroom. Retrieved from
https://www.birmingham.ac.uk/Documents/college-

72
 artslaw/cels/essays/sociolinguistics/ ADaileyDifficultiesImplementingCLTinSouth
Korea2.pdf
Ellis, R. (1998) ‘The evaluation of the communicative tasks’. in Tomlinson, B.
(ed) Materials development in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press. 217-268.
Ferris, D (2018) ‘Writing in a Second Language’ in Newton, J., Ferris, D., Goh, C., Grabe,
W., Stoller, F., Vandergrift, L. (2018) Teaching English to Second Language
Learners in Academic Contexts. New York: Routledge.
Ferris, D. and Hedgcock, J. (2014) Teaching L2 composition: purpose, process, and
practice (3rd ed). New York: Routledge.
Ferris, D.R. and Hedgcock, J. (2013) Teaching L2 composition: Purpose, process, and
practice. Routledge.
Firiady, M. (2018) ‘Communicative Language Teaching through Speaking Activities
Designed in a Textbook’. Language and Language Teaching Journal 21 (1), 104-
113.
Grabe, W. (2008) Reading in a Second Language: Moving from Theory to Practice.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (Cambridge Applied Linguistics).
Grabe, W. and Stoller, F. (2018) ‘Reading Instruction and Assessment’. in Newton, J.,
Ferris, D., Goh, C., Grabe, W., Stoller, F., Vandergrift, L. (2018) Teaching English
to Second Language Learners in Academic Contexts. New York: Routledge.
Grabe, W. and Zhang, C. (2013) ‘Reading and Writing Together: A Critical Component of
English for Academic Purposes Teaching and Learning’. TESOL Journal 4 (10), 9-
24.
Haider, M. and Chowdhury, T. (2012) ‘Repositioning of CLT from Curriculum to
Classroom: A Review of the English Language Instructions at Bangladeshi
Secondary Schools’. International Journal of English Linguistics. 2(4), 12-22.
Hinkel, E. (2011) ‘What research on second language writing tells us and what it
doesn’t’. Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning. 2, 523-
538.
Hirvela, A. (2004) Connecting reading & writing in second language writing instruction.
Ann Arbor MI: The University of Michigan Press.

73
Hirvela, A. and Du, Q. (2013) ‘Why am I paraphrasing? Undergraduate ESL writers’
engagement with source-based academic writing and reading’. Journal of English
for Academic Purposes 12 (2), 87–98.
Hyland, K. (2003) Second Language Writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press
(Cambridge Language Education).
Ito, F. (2011) ‘L2 reading–writing correlation in Japanese EFL high school students’. The
Language Teacher 35(5), 23-29.
Kim, S. (2001) ‘Characteristics of EFL readers’ summary writing: A study with Korean
university students’. Foreign Language Annals 34, 569–581.
Lee, J., and Schallert, D. (2016) ‘Exploring the reading–writing connection: A yearlong
classroom-based experimental study of middle school students developing literacy
in a new language’. Reading Research Quarterly 51(2), 143-164.
Li, D. (1998) ‘It's Always More Difficult Than You Plan and Imagine: Teachers' Perceived
Difficulties in Introducing the Communicative Approach in South Korea’. TESOL
Quarterly 32(4), 677-703.
Littlejohn A. (2011) ‘The analysis of language teaching materials: Inside the Trojan
Horse’. in Tomlinson, B. (ed) Materials Development in Language Teaching. (179-
211) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Littlewood, W. (1981) Communicative Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
McDonough, J., Shaw, C., and Masuhara, H. (2013) Materials and Methods in ELT a
Teacher's Guide. 3rd ed. Chichester: Wiley-Blackwell.
McGrath, I. (2016) Materials evaluation and design for language teaching. Edinburgh:
Edinburgh University Press.
Mehtab, S. (2012) Difficulties and Challenges in Implementing CLT in
Bangladesh (Research Report for Bachelor of Arts, BRAC University,
Bangladesh) available on http://dspace.bracu.ac.bd/xmlui/handle/10361/1894
Ministry of Education and Science of Kyrgyz Republic (2018) Educational Standard of the
English Language teaching for 3-11 Grades. Available on
https://edu.gov.kg/ru/schools/standarttar/

74
Naghdipour, B. (2016) ‘English writing instruction in Iran: Implications for second
language writing curriculum and pedagogy’. Journal of Second Language
Writing 32, 81-87.
Newton, J., Ferris, D., Goh, C., Grabe, W., Stoller, F., Vandergrift, L. (2018) Teaching
English to Second Language Learners in Academic Contexts. New York:
Routledge.
Nguyen, T. (2015) Textbook evaluation: the case of English textbooks currently in use at
Vietnams upper-secondary school. Unpublished research report. Singapore:
RELC SEAMEO. 10.13140/RG.2.1.1219.2165.
Nunan, D. (1989) Designing Tasks for the Communicative Classroom. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
O’Neill, R. (1982) ‘Why use textbooks?’ ELT Journal 36 (2), 104-111.
Oxford, R. (2001). Integrated Skills in the ESL/EFL Classroom. ERIC Digest. Washington,
DC.
Riazi, A. (2016) The Routledge Encyclopedia of Research Methods in Applied
Linguistics. London: Routledge.
Richards J. (2006) Communicative Language Teaching Today. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Richards, J. and Rodgers, T. (2001) Approaches and Methods in Language
Teaching. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Savignon, S. J. (2008) Interpreting communicative language teaching: Contexts and
concerns in teacher education. Yale University Press.
Selinker L., Russell S. (1986) ‘An empirical look at the integration and separation of skills
in ELT’. ELT Journal 40 (3), 227–235.
Sheldon, L. (1987) ELT Textbook and Materials: Problems in Evaluation and
Development. Oxford: Modern English publications
Shen, M. (2009) Reading-writing connection for EFL college learners' literacy
development. Asian EFL Journal, 11(1), p87.
Sidek, H. (2013) ‘Communicative reading instructional approach: A curriculum
review’. International Journal of Interdisciplinary Educational Studies. 7. 9-20.

75
Stelma, J. (2010) ‘What is Communicative Language Teaching’? In Hunston, S., and
Oakey, D. (Eds.), Introducing Applied Linguistics: concepts and skills. Oxford:
Routledge, 53-59.
Stotsky, S (1983) ‘Research on Reading/Writing Relationships: A Synthesis and
Suggested Directions’ Language Arts 60 (5), Reading and Writing 627-642.
Supataeva, E, and Abdybekova, N. (2017) ‘From the History of English Language
Teaching in Kyrgyzstan’ in Linguistic and Extralinguistic Communicative
Problems: Theoretical and Practical aspects. Ministry of Education and Science of
Russian Federation. A Collection of Scientific Works. Available
on http://arabaev.kg/dp.kg/bak/1567067316_25.pdf
Swales, J. (1980) ‘ESP: the textbook problem’. ESP Journal, 1 (1), 11-23.
Thompson, G. (1996) ‘Some misconceptions about communicative language
teaching’ ELT Journal, 50 (1), 9–15.
Tomlinson, B, and Masuhara, H. (2018) The Complete Guide to the Theory and Practice
of Materials Development for Language Learning. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley &
Sons.
Tomlinson, B. (2008) English Language Learning Materials: A Critical Review. London:
Continuum.
Tomlinson, B. (2011) Developing materials for language teaching. (2nd ed) London:
Continuum.
Widdowson, H. G. (1978) Teaching Language as Communication. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Williams, D. (1983) ‘Developing criteria for textbook evaluation’. ELTJournal, 37(3) 251-
255.
Yusupova, A., Kaligulova, S., Ahmedova, E., Akmatova, A. (2012) English 10-11.
Bishkek: Билим- компьютер [Bilim-Kompyuter].

Yusupova, A., Marashogli, N. and Shakirova, A. (2012) English 9. Bishkek: Билим-

компьютер [Bilim-Kompyuter].

76
Appendix N 1 Level 2 analysis of the reading tasks in English 10-11
Table A. 1.1

Table A. 1.2

77
Level 2 analysis of the reading tasks in English 10-11

Table A. 1.3

78
Appendix N 2. Level 2 analysis of the writing tasks in English 10-11
Table A. 2.1

Table A. 2.2

79
Appendix N 3. Level 2 analysis of the reading tasks in English 9
Table A 3.1

Table A 3.2

80
Appendix N 4. Level 2 analysis of the writing tasks in English 9
Table A. 4.1

Table A. 4.2

81
Appendix N 5 Level 2 analysis of the reading tasks from the Reader part in
English 9 (first five and the last three chapters are demonstrated below)
Table A. 5.1

Table A. 5.2

82
Appendix N 6. English 9 and English 10-11

83
Appendix N 7 English 9 Reading and writing task selection.

84
Appendix N 7 English 9 Reading and writing task selection (continuation)

85
Appendix N 8 Reader part of the English 9 task selection.

86
87
Appendix N 9 English 10-11 Reading and writing task selection.

88
Appendix N 9 English 10-11 Reading and writing task selection (continuation)

89
Appendix N 9 English 10-11 Reading and writing task selection (continuation).

90
Appendix N 10 Content of English 9

91
Appendix N 11 Content of English 10-11

92
Appendix N 12 Educational Standard of English Language for reading and writing
skills for Grade 9 (a PDF copy)

93
Appendix N 13 Educational Standard of English Language for reading and writing
skills for Grades 10-11 (a PDF copy)

94
Appendix N14 The Topical Content of the course for grades 3-11 (taken from the
PDF copy)

95
Appendix N 15 Ethical Approval

96