Número 14 / AGOSTO, 2021 (42-56)

Eötvös Loránd University, Language

Pedagogy, Budapest, Hungary.

caalvarezllerena@gmail.com

ORCID:

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7263-2611

Associate researcher, Guayaquil, Ecuador.

pamela.guevara.torres@gmail.com

ORCID:

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7863-8678

Recibido:

(09/07/2020)

Aceptado:

(08/12/2020)

Carlos Lenin Alvarez

Llerena

Pamela Victoria Guevara

Torres

EFL TEACHERS’ PERCEPTIONS ON

USING PEDAGOGICAL MODULES

IN ECUADOR: A FOCUS GROUP

INTERVIEW

PERCEPCIONES DE LOS MAESTROS

DE INGLÉS SOBRE EL USO DE

LOS MÓDULOS PEDAGÓGICOS EN

ECUADOR: UNA ENTREVISTA DE

GRUPO FOCAL

DOI:

Artículo de Investigación

https://doi.org/10.37135/chk.002.14.03

Número 14 / AGOSTO, 2021 (42-56)

English language textbooks are widely used as one of the essential

resources in education. In Ecuador, local authorities created specic course

books for state schools and high schools called pedagogical modules.

Hence, the terms pedagogical textbook, course book, and modules

will be used interchangeably. This study aims to explore perceptions of

Ecuadorian English as a Foreign Language teachers on implementing

the pedagogical modules to state schools, which were provided by the

Ministry of Education. Besides, participants will provide perceptions on

the connection of the mentioned textbooks with the Ecuadorian National

Curriculum. The study includes an exploratory qualitative design using a

focus group interview with eight EFL teachers from primary and secondary

schools. The focus group interview ndings indicated that teachers have

both positive and negative perceptions towards using these pedagogical

textbooks. Teachers agree that these pedagogical modules promote English

learning success in a contextualized and authentic way by connecting

aspects from the curriculum and current ELT principles. Nonetheless,

all of the teachers indicated that integrating the pedagogical modules to

state schools was, in many ways, disorganized. Based on the results, this

study suggests constructive changes to specialists in charge of creating and

editing EFL pedagogical modules.

Keywords: Public education, foreign language instruction, course content,

educational publications.

Los libros de inglés son ampliamente utilizados como uno de los recursos

más esenciales en la educación. Este estudio tiene como objetivo

explorar las percepciones de los profesores ecuatorianos de inglés como

lengua extranjera sobre la integración, utilidad, y funcionalidad de los

módulos pedagógicos proporcionados por el Ministerio de Educación,

así como su conexión con el currículum nacional ecuatoriano. Se realizó

un diseño cualitativo exploratorio utilizando una entrevista de grupo

focal a ocho maestros de inglés como lengua extranjera de primaria y

secundaria. Los resultados de la entrevista del grupo focal indican que

los maestros tienen percepciones positivas y negativas sobre el uso de

estos módulos pedagógicos de inglés. Ellos están de acuerdo en que estos

módulos pedagógicos promueven el aprendizaje de inglés de una manera

contextualizada y auténtica al conectar aspectos del currículum nacional

y los nuevos paradigmas relacionados a la enseñanza de inglés. No

obstante, todos los maestros indicaron que la integración de estos nuevos

módulos pedagógicos se llevó a cabo de manera confusa y desorganizada.

Con base en los hallazgos, este estudio sugiere cambios constructivos a

los especialistas que están a cargo de crear y editar dichos módulos para

hacer que su integración, uso, y aplicación sean más ecientes.

Palabras clave: Educación pública, enseñanza de una lengua extranjera,

plan de estudios, publicación educacional(es).

Abstract

Resumen

EFL TEACHERS’

PERCEPTIONS ON

USING PEDAGOGICAL

MODULES IN

ECUADOR: A FOCUS

GROUP INTERVIEW

PERCEPCIONES DE

LOS MAESTROS DE

INGLÉS SOBRE EL USO

DE LOS MÓDULOS

PEDAGÓGICOS EN

ECUADOR: UNA

ENTREVISTA DE GRUPO

FOCAL

Número 14 / AGOSTO, 2021 (42-56)

EFL TEACHERS’ PERCEPTIONS ON USING PEDAGOGICAL MODULES IN ECUADOR: A FOCUS GROUP INTERVIEW

Número 14 / AGOSTO, 2021 (42-56)

INTRODUCTION

Textbooks “seek both to stimulate language

learning and to support language instruction”

(Hadley 2018:298). In this sense, Tomlinson

(2013:11) suggested connecting learning

and instruction’s current research in material

development. That is, in order to create a course

book that aims to foster language learning, it

might be suggested to consider the opinion of

experienced teachers (Wen-Cheng, Chien-Hung

& Chung-Chieh 2011).

Textbooks should include authentic and

pedagogical content (Burns 2012). In contrast,

Ecuadorian public course books were untting

for many students and did not meet most

learners’ needs (Espinosa & Soto 2015). In

2019, new educational textbooks were initially

implemented in Ecuadorian public schools to

comply with current EFL research.

The principles that frame the textbooks are:

1) Content and language integrated

learning (CLIL), which is “an

educational approach involving the

use of foreign/additional language as

a tool for instruction” and “creates a

space for learners to become engaged

in meaningful language use” (Nikula &

Moate 2018:21).

2) Communicative Language Teaching

(CLT) approach which focuses on real-

world contexts and engages learners in

the authentic, functional use of language

for meaningful purposes (Ministerio de

Educación 2016:6)

3) The Common European Framework

of Reference for Languages (CEFR)

establishes skills in the use of the English

language based on students’ context and

ages (Fisne, Güngör, Guerra & Gonçalves

2018). It oers guidance for teachers,

examiners, textbook writers, teacher

trainers, and educational administrators

(Ministerio de Educación 2014:6),

Moreover, the aim is to foster 21st Century skills

such as social and thinking skills, a foundation

for lifelong learning (Ministerio de Educación

2016) and focus on language use and production

(Espinosa & Soto 2015:28).

These pedagogical modules were rst used

in the highlands and Amazon regions. The set

comprised 72 modules, six modules for each

of the twelve school years of primary and

secondary education. Each module consists

of 32 pages; it complies with the National

Curriculum, the CEFR, and branches from the

communicative approach. The pedagogical

modules are distributed digitally. Likewise, it

provides listening resources uploaded on the

Ministry of Education website.

An example of the organization of a module is

shown in gure 1. In the center of the triangle,

the central theme of the pedagogical module is

displayed. On the left side of the triangle, the topic

and English skills for this unit are established. On

the right side, the unit’s connections with other

subjects such as History, Social Studies, Science,

Art, Language, Language and Literature, Art

History, and Mathematics are addressed. Finally,

at the bottom part of the triangle, the values that

will be addressed in each unit are indicated.

Agreement on the role of textbooks in both

teaching practice and learning has not occurred.

Some teachers consider textbooks are an essential

source of classroom activities; for teachers, the

resource “saves time and eort in preparing

for the lessons” for students, it gives them “an

easy access to present and future content” and

learners from dierent backgrounds have the

same information (Ulla 2019:971).

However, some may rely on teachers’ roles.

Vellenga (2004:2) reported that “most textbooks

are inadequate, but an eective teacher can

overcome the shortcomings of a text.” According

to Wen-Cheng, Chien-Hung and Chung-Chieh

(2011:94), course books work “as a supplement”

to the teaching methodology and that course

books should “provide the foundation for the

EFL TEACHERS’ PERCEPTIONS ON USING PEDAGOGICAL MODULES IN ECUADOR: A FOCUS GROUP INTERVIEW

Número 14 / AGOSTO, 2021 (42-56)

content of lessons, the balance of the skills

taught, as well as the kinds of language practice

the students engage in during class activities.”

The relation of teachers’ attitudes towards

textbooks is benecial in course book development

and may need further consideration. Kilickaya

(2019) explored how teachers’ contributions

in evaluating a course book are valuable for

teaching practice and learning experience.

Ahmadi and Derakhshan (2016:265) concluded

that developers should “pay critical attention to

the materials arrangement, the vocabulary and

grammatical points, language skills, language

teaching methods, and the appearance of the

book.”

Although teachers’ perceptions depend on their

own teaching style, “no neat formula or system

may ever provide a denite way to judge a

textbook” (Ansary & Babaii 2002:1:8). For

this reason, teachers’ opinions are important in

research in order to narrow down to criteria that

appropriately evaluate the content and usefulness

of the course book (Azadsarv & Tahriri 2014;

Jayakaran & Vahid 2012).

Studies have shown some criteria that may serve

as a starting point in course book evaluation.

Al Mamun (2019:181) stated that the quality

of editing and appropriateness for contextual

settings are two essential aspects of course

books: “specifying what is to be learned” and

“how those contents will be learned and in what

order.” Some may hinder the importance of

grammar presence and vocabulary extent, which

depends on the students’ level and attitudes

towards the language (Namaghi, Moghaddam &

Tajzad 2014).

Besides, students’ needs should be considered;

the eect of course books on students results in

adapting their own learning styles, self-regulating,

and selecting information to comprehend the

texts (Beishuizen, Stoutjesdijk & Van Putten

1994:171). English textbooks should be relevant

to the students’ needs and interests in connection

to meaningful activities (Ahour, Towhidiyan &

Saeidi 2014:156). Texts should prepare “learners

to overcome the problems they encounter in real

life” (Dahmardeh 2009:49).

Teachers highly regard the implementation

process and training of course books. Ebrahimi

and Sahragard (2017) explained that even though

current textbooks packages provide audio tracks,

teachers’ guides, and workbooks; EFL teachers

may still have negative perspectives towards

Source: Ministerio de Educación

Figure 1: Pedagogical modules organization for each unit

EFL TEACHERS’ PERCEPTIONS ON USING PEDAGOGICAL MODULES IN ECUADOR: A FOCUS GROUP INTERVIEW

Número 14 / AGOSTO, 2021 (42-56)

these new materials because of time constraints,

lack of training, uneven activities among

language skills and learner strategies, lack of

destination culture and contextualized activities.

Consequently, it is suggested that teachers are

trained before using a course book to apply them

eectively in their classrooms (Mili & Winch

2019).

Textbooks are the primary resource of Ecuadorian

teachers in their classrooms (González et al.

2015:99). However, it is suggested to implement

textbooks designed based on Ecuadorian reality

and Ecuadorian curricular guidelines; consider

cultural, social, and economic aspects; develop

oral communication skills and meaningful

knowledge (Lozano 2019:66).

In Ecuador, few pieces of research focuses

on the perceptions that EFL teachers have on

textbooks in their pedagogical practices. There is

a lack of research dealing with the implications

of integrating English language pedagogical

modules in Ecuadorian EFL classrooms.

Consequently, this study will explore the

following results:

1. How do Ecuadorian EFL teachers working

at state schools perceive the new pedagogical

textbooks?

2. Which are the changes that Ecuadorian

EFL teachers perceive in the new pedagogical

textbooks established by the Ministry of

Education compared to previous textbooks?

3. How do Ecuadorian EFL teachers working

in state schools perceive the implementation of

these new pedagogical textbooks?

This study is underpinned by previous research

that explored teachers’ perceptions of the content,

use, and implementation of the textbooks in

EFL education. The current study reports a

qualitative study’s method and results based on

three qualitative techniques: a content analysis

of the pedagogical modules, content analysis

of the Ecuadorian national curriculum, and a

focus-group interview with eight Ecuadorian

EFL teachers. Thus, it recommends practical

changes to make more ecient the integration,

use, and application of these new Ecuadorian

pedagogical modules.

METHODOLOGY

This investigation is based on qualitative

research principles. It is principally based on a

focus group interview conducted after a detailed

overview of the Ecuadorian EFL curriculum

and the Ministry of Education’s pedagogical

modules. In order to obtain data, the following

considerations were made in the process:

1) selecting the instruments,

2) identifying the items in the instruments,

3) outlining the participants’ selection, and

4) carrying out the study (Griee 2005).

After examining the curriculum and the course

books (pedagogical modules), data was collected

from the semi-structured focus group interview

participants, which was analyzed using content

analysis.

PARTICIPANTS

The participants of this study were selected

purposefully based on their understanding

of the topic (Bolderston 2012). A total of

seven Ecuadorian teachers from the Amazon,

Highland, and Coastal regions participated in

the focus group interview. All of them have

experience in teaching English as a Foreign

Language in Ecuadorian public schools. Six of

them had used the pedagogical modules before

the study; one teacher had not used them but had

explored these pedagogical modules’ content.

The background of the participants is reported in

Table 1. Five teachers had six to eleven years of

EFL teaching experience, and three teachers had

more than twenty years of experience in this eld.

Three teachers hold a bachelor’s degree in EFL

teaching, four teachers have a master’s degree in

EFL TEACHERS’ PERCEPTIONS ON USING PEDAGOGICAL MODULES IN ECUADOR: A FOCUS GROUP INTERVIEW

Número 14 / AGOSTO, 2021 (42-56)

the English teaching eld, and one teacher holds

a bachelor in Tourism. It is essential to indicate

that a professor of qualitative studies from a

Hungarian university acted as a supervisor and

consultant of this study.

INSTRUMENT

In order to obtain relevant data for this study,

a focus group interview was carried out.

According to Bolderston (2012), this type of

interview should include ve to ten participants;

for this reason, eight teachers were invited to

participate in this study. The interview included

predictive (what the interviewee considers will

happen) and retrospective evaluation (when

the interviewee has already used the textbook)

(Rahimpour 2013).

Another consideration for creating the interview

is the nature of questions. Naba’h, Samak, and

Massoud (2016) suggested categorizing teachers’

perceptions before the study; thus, this was one

of the rst steps. For this, the authors revised

previous checklists from other authors and

decided on each question’s importance based on

literature ndings. For example, López-Medina

(2016) also developed a checklist to evaluate a

course book; by using a checklist, authors would

not forget any essential criteria if interviewees

do not mention them and, thus, no time-wasting

(Abdelwahab 2013).

The questions from the interview were

adapted from and based on previous research

methodologies. The criteria for creating the

questions met specic general considerations

from Rahimpour (2013) in analyzing a course

book, such as skills appropriateness and

integration, social and cultural considerations,

and subject content. Other research is from

Ansary and Babaii (2002, p. 6), who created a

set of universal features of EFL/ESL textbooks,

in which there was also a highlight to content

and connection to current approaches.

The study also contemplated the suggestions

of Mukundan and Nimehchisalem (2012)

related to the adjustment to the learner’s needs,

the eciency of audio materials, and cultural

sensitivities (p. 1132). Furthermore, some

questions derived from Rosyida (2016) outline

who focused on the textbook’s applicability to

students’ needs, the complication of its use, and

its relation to the syllabus.

After creating the interview guide for the focus

group, it was sent to a university professor who

provided expert-judgment on this instrument.

After making the suggested changes, the

instrument was translated to create an equivalent

instrument in the participants’ L1 (Brislin

1970). The equivalence of the two versions was

checked with the use of back-translation into

English. The researcher piloted the interview

with two Ecuadorian EFL teachers; this process

Table 1: Description of the participants in the focus group

Source: Researchers

EFL TEACHERS’ PERCEPTIONS ON USING PEDAGOGICAL MODULES IN ECUADOR: A FOCUS GROUP INTERVIEW

Número 14 / AGOSTO, 2021 (42-56)

helps determine the instrument’s feasibility and

limitations to rene its content (Creswell & Poth

2016).

The interview’s implementation was a four-

part process that included a formal welcoming

to the meeting, the instructions, the questions

and participation of the interviewees, and the

closure (Mahmoud 2013). The rst part of the

focus group interview provided background

information on personal details and teaching

experience (Mukundan & Nimehchisalem

2012). The third part of the focus group interview

consisted of asking about the integration of the

new pedagogical textbooks, current teaching

methodologies, and elements of the new

textbooks.

The interview consisted of eight questions

to be covered during the interview with

follow-up questions to obtain a more in-depth

understanding of the participants’ answers

(Legard, Keegan & Ward 2003; Suri 2011). The

questions progressed from general impressions

to an in-depth examination of the topics; this

way, all essential items could be carefully

explored (Abdelwahab 2013).

Specically, participants shared their ages,

level of education, region, and levels that

they teach. The second part consisted of eight

questions regarding general perspectives on the

course book, activities’ alignment to current

methodologies, and specic perspectives on

the content. The questions also referred to the

pedagogic modules’ relation to the National

Curriculum Guidelines (Ministerio de Educación

2014).

The protocol followed other focus-group

interview guidelines (Bolderston 2012). The

author and the co-author as a co-facilitator

hosted the interview. The hosts ensured that

all participants were contributing equally, with

specic verbal signaling. The meeting was

online; the setting of the video conference via

Zoom permitted the face-to-face connection

required.

Participants were informed of the topic and

the type of questions they would need to

answer concerning the pedagogical modules.

Participants were informed that their names

would be changed to pseudonyms and not shared

with external parties to maintain condentiality.

DATA COLLECTION AND

ANALYSIS

Primary data was collected from the rst-hand-

experience of the interviewees (Kabir 2016).

The interview was recorded live through the

Zoom video conference program. During the

interview, questions arose on behalf of the hosts/

authors, and some clarications were made when

needed. Similarly, this study is underpinned by a

system for coding the interaction in focus group

interviews (Morgan & Homan 2018).

The recruitment of the interviewees was made

by phone. The authors explained the aims of the

study and the personal and candid nature of each

question. The participants were informed about

how the meeting would be held and recorded and

that the information provided would be solely

used for research intentions.

Essentially, a code has been assigned to

participants in order to maintain the citing

standards. According to ethical considerations

protocols, the interviewees were given a code and

are referred to as teacher + letter. This process

abides by condentiality agreements among the

participants and hosts of the interview, that is, in

this research, the authors.

The authors claried the anonymous aspect of

the process and received the consent of all active

participants. In other words, the teachers that

did not agree to the terms and process were not

included in the present study. In order to avoid

bias, the researchers neither commented nor

participated in the interview. Additionally, the

questions were revised by an external assessor

as well as sent to other fellow teachers. This last

procedure was permitted to verify that meanings

and phrases were correctly transmitted to the

reader.

Data were analyzed by transcribing the audio

through a voice recognizer and monitored by

EFL TEACHERS’ PERCEPTIONS ON USING PEDAGOGICAL MODULES IN ECUADOR: A FOCUS GROUP INTERVIEW

Número 14 / AGOSTO, 2021 (42-56)

the transcriber, one of the authors. The second

author revised and oversaw the transcription

in order to avoid missing information. During

the third and nal revision of the transcript, the

authors worked online to add their annotations.

In a shared online document, the data was

analyzed by building topics and codes based

on a constant comparison of data, codes, and

emerging categories (Kelle 2010). The nal

topics were classied upon each category, and

comments matched the same ideas with dierent

connotations, depending on the interlocutors’

opinion.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The present section includes the topics that

emerged during the focus group interview. It

covers an analysis of teachers’ perceptions of

the implementation, use, and integration of the

pedagogical modules provided. According to

Ansary and Babaii (2002), teachers’ criteria

may dier from one another; for this reason,

this study contrasts the patterns and aligns the

common ideas obtained from the participants’

answers.

For research question 1, How do Ecuadorian

EFL teachers working at state schools perceive

the new pedagogical textbooks? Teachers

reported limited compliance with students’ needs

in terms of length, level, and skills. Textbooks

are required to include various metacognitive

activities that foster students’ learning outcomes

(Dahmardeh 2009).

Some of the teachers indicated that the content

was too dicult for students from rural areas

with a low English level due to learners’

backgrounds and low prior knowledge. Some

of the disadvantages derived from detecting that

the activities focused on a few skills. Teachers

also described the inability of students to reach

the textbook’s level.

One of the course books’ failures is that they

ignore the integration of four language skills

in the same amount throughout content and

activities (Ahmadi & Derakhshan 2016:265).

Teachers stated that the modules aimed at

improving reading and writing but missed on

more listening and speaking activities. For

example, Teacher D (personal communication,

April 20, 2019) manifested dynamic activities

but focused only on reading comprehension.

Other teachers defended that the writing

activities in the pedagogical textbooks displayed

several types of texts, which may help students

learn the skill through varied opportunities

to perform. For instance, Teacher F (personal

communication, April 20, 2019) claimed that he

likes the tasks that the course books oer texts

like how to write e-mail or essay, for example.

On the other hand, all the participants agreed

that activities that foster the use of four skills

(listening, writing, reading, and speaking) should

be incorporated in course books, as well as that

the four skills (listening, speaking, reading, and

writing) need to be included in the same extent.

A practical course book “has just the right

amount of material for the program, it is easy

to teach, it can be used with little preparation

by inexperienced teachers, and it has an equal

coverage of grammar and the four skills”

(Richards 2001:2). Learners’ interests should be

considered in selecting reading texts for an ELT

textbook since they can aect students’ language

learning (Namaghi, Moghaddam & Tajzad

2014:125). Besides, topics and activities that

help students develop high oral communication

skills and meaningful knowledge must be

included (Lozano 2019:68).

The length aected another issue, which

is teaching time. Teacher A (personal

communication, April 20, 2019) reported that the

course books’ content is too extensive, so much

so that it cannot be covered in the school year.

Teacher C (personal communication, April 20,

2019) thinks it would be better to reduce some

of the activities because there is much content.

Similarly, Teacher F (personal communication,

April 20, 2019) expressed that information is too

EFL TEACHERS’ PERCEPTIONS ON USING PEDAGOGICAL MODULES IN ECUADOR: A FOCUS GROUP INTERVIEW

Número 14 / AGOSTO, 2021 (42-56)

extensive and broad.

For research question 2, Which are the changes

that Ecuadorian EFL teachers perceive in the

new pedagogical textbooks established by the

Ministry of Education compared to previous

textbooks?

Participants stated that there were some issues in

transitioning from previous course books to the

new modules, not only in getting the document

but also in the lack of training.

Teachers need to be informed of and familiar

with the textbooks. “prior to selecting a textbook,

educators should thoroughly examine the

program curriculum” (Wen-Cheng, Chien-Hung

& Chung-Chieh 2011:94). The previous books

were grammar-based, and suddenly, the course

books were loaded with new methodologies and

text-rich tasks that seemed too much for them.

Teacher A (personal communication, April 20,

2019) expressed that if they were going to make

this kind of transition, we, as English teachers,

should have been the rst to know.

The experience of students was dierent

at each level. For younger learners, it was

incredibly complicated; Teacher C (personal

communication, April 20, 2019) stated that her

students of the seventh year were learning the

simple present tense last year, and now the new

texts include all the past tenses, for the kids, it

would be terrible.

In high school, most teachers explained that

the material is aligned with the students’

level. However, a few teachers had a dierent

experience. For example, Teacher H (personal

communication, April 20, 2019) indicated

that some students in the Amazon region,

unfortunately, have had no English classes

before. Our ndings contrast with Nikula and

Moate (2018) advice, who claimed that using

the language should be done gradually to obtain

better improvements in the second language.

Additionally, the situation contrasts with CLIL

principles that aim for English to become “a

habitual part of the classroom environment”

(Nikula & Moate 2018:23).

Participants evaluated some of the features of the

modules positively. The main positive point was

that the document provides students opportunities

to communicate and use the language

authentically. The positive commentaries

observed communicative principles. First,

Teacher E (personal communication, April 20,

2019) stated that the way one learns is by doing,

and the positive aspect is the authenticity of the

activities; none is repeated. Teacher B (personal

communication, April 20, 2019) said that the

course books help students develop critical

thinking. In this sense, communication is the

main goal in current teaching practice, and that

the modules fulll it.

The new text book adhered to the principles

advocated in the National Curriculum (Ministerio

de Educación 2014). Participants mentioned that

there is a link to CLIL in activities and focused

on topics rather than grammar rules. These

ndings are supported by Nikula and Moate

(2018), who dened CLIL as an opportunity to

use the language and learn it to understand other

disciplines.

For research question 3, How do Ecuadorian

EFL teachers working in state schools perceive

the implementation of these new pedagogical

textbooks? On this matter of teacher training, a

few participants referred to the modules’ arrival

and application as a disaster. Teacher B (personal

communication, April 20, 2019) indicated that

the transition of these new pedagogical modules

was the most challenging aspect that teachers

have to face, and it is the reason it aects us.

As Ulla (2019) explained, teachers, in general,

have positive perceptions of using textbooks as

an essential source in their classes; however, if

teachers are not adequately trained, they will

attain negative perspectives towards new course

books (Mili & Winch 2019).

That is why it is essential to allow teachers to

control the curriculum at the classroom level to

meet students’ needs in a better way (Espinosa

& Soto 2015:40). According to the participants,

they did not receive any training before using

the modules. A few teachers were trained, but

only after nishing the school year.

EFL TEACHERS’ PERCEPTIONS ON USING PEDAGOGICAL MODULES IN ECUADOR: A FOCUS GROUP INTERVIEW

Número 14 / AGOSTO, 2021 (42-56)

We were surprised when we received

the new pedagogical modules, we did

not have any idea about these new

books, and because we did not receive

any training, we had to nd information

from other sources such as a Facebook

group of Ecuadorian English teachers

or colleagues from other institutions.

(Teacher F, personal communication,

April 20, 2019)

Regarding receiving the material, all of the

teachers had signicant delays during the school

year; while classes started in September, the

modules arrived in November. In this regard,

Teacher C (personal communication, April

20, 2019) indicated that he had been using the

previous textbooks, even after the arrival of the

new modules, because the integration of these

new modules was a signicant change, and it

was shocking.”

Likewise, Teacher E (personal communication,

April 20, 2019) explained that when the

information of the new textbook arrived at our

institution, we already planned and presented

the Annual Curriculum Plan for all the classes

we had to teach during the year, so we had to do

double work. This emerging comment provided

a general perspective of how this process was

perceived:

The integration of these modules was

a disaster for teachers since we only

obtained these modules in a digital

form, we did not have the audio

materials, and even worse, we had no

idea about what to tell the parents and

students who already had the previous

textbooks. (Teacher E, personal

communication, April 20, 2019)

It could be the case that EFL teachers have

negative perspectives because of time

constraints, lack of training, uneven activities

among language skills and learner strategies,

lack of destination culture, and contextualized

activities Ebrahimi & Sahragard (2017).

Although “textbook writers should provide

students with a variety of exercises and activities

to practice language items and skills” (Richards

2001:4), it is essential that teachers are trained

(Richards 2001:6) to use course books to apply

them as a useful guide in their classrooms (Mili

& Winch 2019).

There is a recommended strategy to using

textbooks, “teachers should be able to respond

to these new challenges and changes by altering

activities and creating the more tailored ones”

(Wen-Cheng, Chien-Hung & Chung-Chieh

2011:95). It is relevant to revise and modify

the English books, which may imply removing

or changing unsuitable material and proving

the books’ quality (Azadsarv & Tahriri 2014;

Jayakaran & Vahid 2012).

Furthermore, it is essential to understand that

“every textbook needs adapting every time it is

used because every group of learners is dierent

from every other and has dierent needs and

wants” (Tomlinson 2012:272). According to

Teacher G (personal communication, April 20,

2019), it is now up to us, teachers, to demonstrate

that we can make it with these new modules.

Teachers agreed that the lengthy content was

one of the main challenges, but they would

either edit or delete some content and activities

that they cannot cover because of the lack of

time. Participants decided to use only some of

the readings from the modules in every given

lesson, while the rest covered some of the

pages and created their own sequence. Teacher

F (personal communication, April 20, 2019)

sustained that teachers are undoubtedly forced

to make adaptations, select topics, and cover the

skills required by the syllabus.

Adapting not only implied changing the

materials but also deleting. Teacher D (personal

communication, April 20, 2019) claimed that

textbooks have good topics, but most of them

cannot be included in classes because of their

complexity. The majority of the teachers

manifested that they deleted or omitted some

content from the pedagogical modules. The

decision to adapting content is crucial, given that

“using textbooks that do not match the needs and

goals of both teacher and students could result

EFL TEACHERS’ PERCEPTIONS ON USING PEDAGOGICAL MODULES IN ECUADOR: A FOCUS GROUP INTERVIEW

Número 14 / AGOSTO, 2021 (42-56)

in failure in teaching and learning the English

language” (Ulla 2019:971).

In addition, some of them indicated that they

adapted their practice to the communicative

features of the modules. Teacher B (personal

communication, April 20, 2019) expressed that

every course book, well, it is excellent because

there will be some learning. These comments

align with the ndings of Rosyida (2016), who

claimed that teachers create tasks and materials

based on students’ needs and adapt. According

to Ansary and Babaii (2002) and Ahmadi and

Derakhshan (2016), teachers’ perspectives on

the books they apply in their everyday practice

help them gain insight into making changes

seeking a more ecient use of the materials.

In this sense, participants shared solutions and

decisions made at the core of their English

departments. Some teachers added that modules

provided an excellent opportunity to adapt and

apply current methodologies.

CONCLUSIONS

From this study, it is possible to conclude that

even though Ecuadorian EFL teachers identied

strengths and weaknesses in the pedagogical

modules, they positively evaluate them. They

indicated that the new pedagogical modules

provided teachers and students meaningful

activities and authentic materials to use in their

teaching-learning process. Besides, they stated

that the new pedagogical modules are connected

to the Ecuadorian curriculum and the current

ELT methodologies, such as project-based

learning, learner-centered approach, and CLIL.

Other positive features that teachers perceived

were contextualizing the content and integrating

current teaching topics to foster students’ English

skills.

On the other hand, teachers listed some

weaknesses in these pedagogical modules. All

of the teachers perceived that these modules

lacked sequence; they were not addressed to

the English level that students had, they mostly

focused on reading and writing skills, and they

were expected to cover them quickly.

In terms of integrating these pedagogical

modules, all of the interviewees agreed that

the transition from the old textbooks to the

pedagogical modules was a failure. They mainly

did not have any training before implementing

them in their classrooms, and they only obtained

parts of the modules digitally. Furthermore, there

are still missing pedagogical modules, such as

audios and teachers’ guidebooks.

Some teachers highlighted that the previous

textbooks had grammar-based sequences, which

contrasts with the new communicative nature

of the modules. Those who argued for the

importance of integrating skills commented on

other elements in creating these modules. There

were comments on the urge to step up in the

teaching practice.

Based on these ndings, there are a few

recommendations. For instance, experts in

charge of creating and editing EFL pedagogical

modules may consider integrating the same

amount of content to the four primary English

skills. Besides, to align and connect all

pedagogical modules’ content and provide

formal training and enough resources to integrate

these new pedagogical modules eciently in

EFL classrooms.

Another recommendation is that it is essential to

consider this aspect, given that learners “pay more

attention in class when the content is meaningful”

(Espinosa & Soto 2015:42). In a similar study,

teachers commented on interaction fostered

by the activities and reported that the course

book is practical when it “facilitates authentic

interaction” (Hadley 2018). However, the role

of the teacher aects this matter. A textbook is

often the essential resource, but “there are other

materials that teachers may use or adapt so that

students feel engaged in developing listening

and speaking skills” (Gonzalez et al. 2015:100).

To conclude, it is suggested to explore course

book evaluation further to obtain more ndings.

EFL TEACHERS’ PERCEPTIONS ON USING PEDAGOGICAL MODULES IN ECUADOR: A FOCUS GROUP INTERVIEW

Número 14 / AGOSTO, 2021 (42-56)

Research is essential through questioning the

use of textbooks, “which have been used by

experienced teachers who, after making informed

choices about the needs of their learners and the

concerns of their specic pedagogical context,

are actively engaging students in the task of

learning” (Hadley 2018:304).

CONFLICTS OF INTEREST IN

RESEARCH: The authors declare the non-

existence of conicts of interest in the present

study.

DECLARACIÓN DE CONTRIBUCIÓN DE

LOS AUTORES: Carlos Lenin Alvarez Llerena

(50%) y Pamela Victoria Guevara Torres (50%).

BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES

Abdelwahab, M. M. (2013). Developing an

English language textbook evaluative

checklist. IOSR Journal of Research

& Method in Education, 1(3), 55-70.

Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2IkFfPr

Ahmadi, A. & Derakhshan, A. (2016). EFL

teachers’ perceptions towards textbook

evaluation. Theory and Practice in

Language Studies, 6(2), 260-267.

doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.17507/

tpls.0602.06

Ahour, T., Towhidiyan, B. & Saeidi, M. (2014).

The Evaluation of “English Textbook

2” Taught in Iranian High Schools

from Teachers’ Perspectives. English

Language Teaching, 7(3), 150-158.

doi:10.5539/elt.v7n3p150

Al Mamun, A. (2019). A content analysis of the

English language development courses

in Bangladeshi university English

departments. Journal of Education and

Learning, 8(6), 180-186. doi:10.5539/

jel.v8n6p180

Ansary, H. & Babaii, E. (2002). Universal

characteristics of EFL/ESL textbooks:

A step towards systematic textbook

evaluation. The Internet TESL

Journal, 8(2), 1-9. Retrieved from

https://www.researchgate.net/

publication/285764417_Universal_

characteristics_of_EFLESL_

textbook_A_step_towards_systematic_

textbook_evaluation

Azadsarv, M. & Tahriri, A. (2014). Iranian

language teachers and students’

perspectives on Top Notch series (2nd

edition) at intermediate level. Advances

in Language and Literary Studies, 5(6),

84-104. doi: 10.7575/aiac.alls.v.5n.6p.84

Beishuizen, J., Stoutjesdijk, E. & Van Putten,

K. (1994). Studying textbooks: Eects

of learning styles, study task, and

instruction. Learning and Instruction,

4(2), 151-174. doi: 10.1016/0959-

4752(94)90009-4

Bolderston, A. (2012). Conducting a research

interview. Journal of Medical Imaging

and Radiation Sciences, 43(1), 66-76.

doi: 10.1016/j.jmir.2011.12.002

Brislin, R. W. (1970). Back-translation for cross-

cultural research. Journal of cross-cultural

psychology, 1(3), 185-216. doi:https://

doi.org/10.1177/135910457000100301

Burns, A. (2012). Text based teaching. In

A. Burns & J.C Richards (Eds.). The

Cambridge Guide to Pedagogy and

Practice in Second Language Teaching

(pp. 140-147). New York, United States

of America: Cambridge University Press.

Creswell, J. W. & Poth, C. N. (2016). Qualitative

inquiry and research design: Choosing

among ve approaches. United States of

America: Sage publications.

Dahmardeh, M. (2009). Communicative

textbooks: English language textbooks

in Iranian secondary school. Linguistik

Online, 40(4), 45-61. doi: 10.13092/

EFL TEACHERS’ PERCEPTIONS ON USING PEDAGOGICAL MODULES IN ECUADOR: A FOCUS GROUP INTERVIEW

Número 14 / AGOSTO, 2021 (42-56)

lo.40.431

Ebrahimi, F. & Sahragard, R. (2017). Teachers’

perceptions of the new English textbooks

in Iranian junior high schools. Journal

of Asia TEFL, 14(2), 355-363. doi:

10.18823/asiate.2017.14.2.12.355

Espinosa, L. & Soto, S. (2015). Curriculum

development and its impact on EFL

education in Ecuador. Machala, Ecuador:

Ediciones UTMACH. Retrieved

from https://www.researchgate.net/

profile/Ligia_Espinosa_Cevallos/

publication/312212659_Curriculum_

Development_and_Its_Impact_

on_EFL_Education_in_Ecuador/

links/587667c108ae6eb871cf621a/

Curriculum-Development-and-Its-

Impact-on-EFL-Education-in-Ecuador.

pdf

Fisne, F., Güngör, M., Guerra, L. & Gonçalves,

O. (2018). A CEFR-Based Comparison

of ELT Curriculum and Course Books

Used in Turkish and Portuguese Primary

Schools. Novitas-ROYAL (Research on

Youth and Language), 12(2), 129-151.

Retrieved from https://les.eric.ed.gov/

fulltext/EJ1195279.pdf

González, P., Ochoa, C., Cabrera, P., Castillo,

L., Quiñónez, A., Solano, …& Arias,

M. (2015). EFL teaching in the amazon

region of Ecuador: A focus on activities

and resources for teaching listening

and speaking skills. English Language

Teaching, 8(8), 94-103. doi: 10.5539/elt.

v8n8p94

Griee, D. (2005). Research tips: Interview data

collection. Journal of Developmental

Education, 28(3), 36-37. Retrieved

from https://les.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/

EJ718580.pdf

Hadley, G. (2018). Learning through textbooks.

In A. Burns & J.C Richards (Eds.), The

Cambridge Guide to Learning English

as a Second Language (pp. 298-306).

New York, United States of America:

Cambridge University Press.

Jayakaran M. & Vahid N. (2012). Evaluative

criteria of an English language textbook

evaluation checklist. Journal of Language

Teaching and Research, 3(6), 1128-1134.

doi:10.4304/jltr.3.6.1128-1134

Kabir, S. (2016). Methods of Data Collection.

In Basic Guidelines for Research: An

Introductory Approach for All Disciplines

(pp. 201-275). Chittagong, Bangladesh:

Book Zone Publication.

Kelle, U. (2010). The development of categories:

dierent approaches in grounded theory.

In A. Bryant & K. Charmaz (Eds.), The

SAGE handbook of grounded theory (pp.

191-213). doi: 10.4135/9781848607941

Kilickaya, F. (2019). Pre-service English

teachers’ views on course book evaluation

and designing supplementary materials.

Kastamonu Educational Journal, 27(2),

523-536. doi: 10.24106/kefdergi.2574

Legard, R., Keegan, J. & Ward, K. (2003). In-

depth interviews. In Richie, J. & Lewis,

J. (eds.), Qualitative research practice:

A guide for social science students and

researchers (pp.138-169). United States

of América: SAGE publications.

López-Medina, B. (2016). Developing a CLIL

textbook evaluation checklist. Latin

American Journal of Content and

Language Integrated Learning, 9(1),

159-173. doi: 10.5294/laclil.2016.9.1.7

Lozano, W. (2019). An analysis of the English

textbooks and their connection with the

curricular objectives in the Ecuadorian

curriculum for sublevel superior to get an

A2 level of English when nishing basic

education (Master Thesis, Universidad

Técnica de Ambato, Ambato, Ecuador).

Retrieved from https://repositorio.uta.

edu.ec/jspui/handle/123456789/29717

Mahmoud, M. (2013). Developing an English

language textbook evaluative checklist.

EFL TEACHERS’ PERCEPTIONS ON USING PEDAGOGICAL MODULES IN ECUADOR: A FOCUS GROUP INTERVIEW

Número 14 / AGOSTO, 2021 (42-56)

IOSR Journal of Research & Method

in Education (IOSRJRME), 1(3), 55-70.

doi: 10.9790/7388-0135570

Ministerio de Educación. (2016). English

language curriculum. Retrieved from

https://educacion.gob.ec/wp-content/

uploads/downloads/2016/03/EFL1.pdf

Ministerio de Educación. (2014). National

curriculum guidelines. Retrieved from

https://educacion.gob.ec/wp-content/

uploads/downloads/2014/09/01-

National-Curriculum-Guidelines-EFL-

Agosto-2014.pdf

Mili & Winch, C. (2019). Teaching through

textbooks: Teachers as practitioners

of a discipline? Theory and Research

in Education, 17(2), 181-201. doi:

10.1177/1477878519862547

Morgan, D. & Homan, K. (2018). A system for

coding the interaction in focus groups and

dyadic interviews. The Qualitative Report,

23(3), 519-531. Retrieved from https://

nsuworks.nova.edu/cgi/viewcontent.

cgi?article=2733&context=tqr

Mukundan, J. & Nimehchisalem, V. (2012).

Evaluative Criteria of an English

Language Textbook Evaluation

Checklist. Journal of Language

Teaching & Research, 3(6), 1128-1134.

doi:10.4304/jltr.3.6.1128-1134

Naba’h, A., Samak, Z. & Massoud, H. (2016).

Saudi EFL teachers’ perceptions of the

intermediate stage textbooks. Dirasat

Educational Sciences, 43(2), 1103-1115.

Retrieved from https://eis.hu.edu.jo/

deanshiples/pub10089100710.pdf

Namaghi, S., Moghaddam, M. & Tajzad, M.

(2014). Theorizing teachers’ perspectives

on an EFL textbook for public high

schools of Iran: A grounded theory.

English Language Teaching, 7(10), 123-

129. doi:10.5539/elt.v7n10p123

Nikula, T. & Moate, J. (2018). Integrating

everyday language with conceptual

development across the CLIL pathway.

Babylonia, The Swiss Journal of

Language Teaching and Learning,

1(2), 21-25. Retrieved from http://

babylonia.ch/fileadmin/user_upload/

documents/2018-2/Nikula___Moate.pdf

Rahimpour, S. (2013). TEFL textbook

evaluation. Proceeding of the Global

Summit on Education, (11-12), 764-772.

Richards, J. C. (2001). The Role of Textbooks in

a Language Program. Cambridge, UK:

Cambridge University Press.

Rosyida, E. (2016). Teachers’ perceptions toward

the use of English textbook. English

Education: Jurnal Tadris Bahasa, 9(1),

43-54. Retrieved from https://media.

neliti.com/media/publications/60406-

EN-teachers-perceptions-toward-the-

use-of-e.pdf

Suri, H. (2011). Purposeful sampling in qualitative

research synthesis. Qualitative research

journal, 11(2), 63. doi: 10.3316/

QRJ1102063

Tomlinson, B. (2012). Materials development.

In A. Burns & J.C. Richards (Eds.).

The Cambridge Guide to Pedagogy and

Practice in Second Language Teaching

(pp. 269-278). New York, United States

of America: Cambridge University Press.

Tomlinson, B. (2013). Second language

acquisition and materials development.

In B. Tomlinson (Ed.), Applied linguistics

and materials development (pp. 61-74).

New York, United States of America:

Bloomsbury.

Ulla, M. (2019). Western-published ELT

Textbooks: Teacher Perceptions and

Use in Thai Classrooms. Journal of Asia

TEFL, 16(3), 970-977. doi: 10.18823/

asiate.2019.16.3.13.970

Vellenga, H. (2004). Learning pragmatics from

ESL & EFL textbooks: How likely?

EFL TEACHERS’ PERCEPTIONS ON USING PEDAGOGICAL MODULES IN ECUADOR: A FOCUS GROUP INTERVIEW

Número 14 / AGOSTO, 2021 (42-56)

The Electronic Journal for English as a

Second Language, 8(2), 1-18. Retrieved

from https://les.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/

EJ1068091.pdf

Wen-Cheng, W., Chien-Hung, L. & Chung-

Chieh, L. (2011). Thinking of the

Textbook in the ESL/EFL Classroom.

English Language Teaching, 4(2), 91-96.

doi: 10.5539/elt.v4n2p91