An Discussion on Characteristics of the 2006 Edition and the 2016 Edition PEP Ju

My three years of study at Zhengzhou Experimental High School have been memorable and one of the most important periods of my life in which I achieved great progress in many aspects. I would like to express my thanks to all those who have supported me throughout.

First， I would like to express my heartfelt gratitude to my respected supervisor―Class Tutor， who gave me a lot of support， advice and encouragement during my postgraduate studies. To me， she is more than just a supervisor. I have learned much from her； I have been greatly enlightened by her profound knowledge， and deeply impressed by her noble virtue and the kindness with which she treats her students. Last but not least， I would like to express my most sincere and respectful gratitude to my loving parents. Without their financial and spiritual support， I would never have been here and experienced an important promotion in my life.

This study has both theoretical significance and practical significance. In recent ten years， there are a large number of studies on textbook analysis， which includes research on the guidelines and instructions for use of textbook compilation， research on teaching materials and teaching methods， research on textbook evaluation and standards of comparison， and research on textbook itself. There are also a lot of studies on textbook comparison. However， no one has done the research on the comparison between two sets of PEP junior middle school English textbooks before and after the 2011 Version English Curriculum Standards of Compulsory Education. Besides， there is little research on the consistency between the new curriculum standards and the current PEP junior middle school English textbooks. This study enriches textbook analysis of the latest PEP junior middle school English textbooks， contributes to the discussion the changes between two sets of textbooks， and offers an understanding of the consistency between the new curriculum standards and the textbooks. Based on various kinds of textbook analysis from different aspects and some requirements of the latest English Curriculum Standards， this chapter discusses the major findings of the current study to answer three research questions.

1. Discussion on the findings of textbook analysis

The current research analyzes two sets of PEP English textbooks in junior middle school： 2006 edition and 2016 edition. Since 2016 edition is the latest textbook after the establishment of the new English Curriculum Standards， no comparison is made between these two versions. But there are large amounts of textbook analysis from different aspects， such as language knowledge， topics and cultural contents， which belongs to the contents of textbooks， and column and illustrations， which belongs to the design of textbooks. As for textbook evaluation methods， the current study adopts the opinions of Chinese scholar Ding Chaopeng， who pointed out that textbook evaluation could do from its surface structure and deep structure. In some textbook comparison research， writers like Song Linxia and Li Xingyan try to do the surface structure analysis from compiling system， the choice of topics， the design of column and the illustrations， and do the deep structure analysis according to the requirements of language skills， language knowledge， learning strategies， emotional attitudes and cultural awareness in English Curriculum Standards. In the current study， the writer made some adjustments and did the analysis from three levels： compiling level， language level and cultural level.

The compiling level is divided into four aspects. As for the compiling system， 2006 edition is compiled according to the stipulation of Senior High School English Curriculum Standards in the Phase of Full-time Compulsory Education （Experimental Manuscript） in 2001 while 2016 edition is compiled according to the requirements of the latest English Curriculum Standards in 2011. The former aims to emphasize the communicative role of English course while the later points out that English course in compulsory education stage has both instrumentality and humanity. As for the choice of topics， these two sets of textbooks have a lot of similar ones. However， different topics between them show that though total topics in 2016 edition is less than that in 2006 edition， topics in 2016 edition involve more aspects related to life and personal development rather than those about entertainment. As for the design of column， the column design of 2016 edition pays more attention to students’ speaking and thinking ability， which aims to stimulate students’ initiative. As for the illustrations， the letters on the illustrations in 2016 edition are more significant and educational than that of 2006 edition.

Analysis on language level is done through language skills and language knowledge. Language skills can be divided into listening skill， speaking skill， reading skill and writing skill. Through comparison， the writer finds out that as for the same listening materials， listening activities in 2016 edition are more difficult than that in 2006 edition； speaking activities in 2016 edition are more various and more related to students’ daily life； reading tasks in 2016 edition are more difficult than that in 2006 edition； and writing activities in 2016 edition are more basic but more important than that in 2006 edition. All these show that 2016 edition has higher requirements for students’ four skills development. Language knowledge can be divided into pronunciation， vocabulary and grammar. As for the pronunciation， both versions have three starter units and have pronunciation teaching materials， while 2016 edition has a more detailed summary of pronunciation in the additional materials. As for the vocabulary， the amount of vocabulary in both sets of textbooks have achieved the requirements of English Curriculum Standards， while the amount of words in each textbook of 2016 edition is in balance， which is more beneficial for vocabulary learning. As for the grammar， 2016 edition provides more difficult grammar for the same unit.

Analysis on cultural level is done through the analysis of the contents involving emotional attitudes and cultural awareness. The results show that contents related to emotional attitudes are nearly the same in these two versions. However， there are some different emotional attitudes， which show that 2006 edition pays attention to students’ self-improvement like the learning of “occupations”， “opinions”， “advice”，“hobbies” and “gift giving”； it also pays attention to different countries and cultures like “countries， nationalities and languages” and “popular culture”. 2016 edition also pays attention to self-improvement like “interpersonal communication” and “school days” and different cultures like “things made in China”. As for cultural awareness， both sets of textbooks introduce food， places， animals and customs in different countries， mainly in America， England and China. However， 2016 edition chooses more contents related to China； that means the importance of Chinese culture has been emphasized in 2016 edition， which conforms to the requirements of the latest English Curriculum Standards.

2. Discussion on the findings of classroom observation and interviews

According to Van Els et al.， there are four stages for textbook evaluation： the first stage is to examine every aspect of the textbooks according to teaching syllabus or evaluation table； the second stage is to ask for teachers’ and students’ opinions for using the textbooks through questionnaires and interviews； the third stage is to do a comparative analysis of various kinds of textbooks； and the fourth stage is to do the empirical study about the effects of textbooks’ application. Nearly all the research about textbook evaluation or textbook comparison will do an investigation among teachers and students through questionnaires. However， in the current study， the writer just followed the third and forth stage of Van Els et al. and did the forth stage through classroom observation and interviews.

The result of classroom observation shows that no matter in Grade 7 or in Grade 8 in that school， grammar teaching is still the focus of English teaching in the class. Sometimes the teacher may mention something related to students’ daily life according to the topic in that unit. And through the interviews with teachers in these two classes， the writer may further confirm that the instrumentality of English course is still the focus of English teaching in that school. However， the result of interviews with students shows that from the perspective of students， they want to learn more about interesting background information in each unit， not only at the beginning of each unit but also through the whole unit.

The latest English Curriculum Standards also points out that English course in compulsory education stage have both instrumentality and humanity. This is the first time that “humanity” has been proposed. However， in the real class， it is difficult for teachers to spare a lot of time to deal with the humanistic contents in each unit because students have to pass various kinds of exams based on grammar. So the spread of humanity in China’s English teaching may has a long way to go.