A Practical Experience of Institutional Textbook Writing: Product/Process

Implications for Materials Development

Patrick Lyons

Introduction

This chapter presents an overview of the issues involved in institutional textbook writing
as reflected in the experiences that Bilkent University School of English Language
(BUSEL)1 has gone through, having produced a suite of textbooks2 in the period
between 1995 and 2000; and having recently undertaken a review and revision of its
textbooks, anticipated to cover the period 2001–2005. Specifically, this chapter will look
at the nature of the product, and the elements of the process. Process/product might
suggest a linear operation, but the processes BUSEL has undergone have constituted a
series of cycles, with its own products, change processes and learning cycles. This
notion is supported by the fact that the Textbook Development Project at BUSEL
(TBDP) is currently revising its pro- duct, and initiating a further process. It is our
experience that the writing and publishing of a textbook is only an apparent end point.
What follows is:

1. a definition of the textbook as product; and an exploration of this product as part of a

delivery system;

2. how the textbook as process fits into other institutional processes; this will explore its
impact on standards of teaching and learning, as well as the thinking time it offers an
institution, and how an in-house textbook might constitute a benchmark or threshold for
that institution.

Textbook as Product

To begin at the apparent end point – the product – it must be said at the outset that a
textbook is not simply a textbook. A textbook – student’s book, teacher’s book,
workbook, audio cassettes – aims to constitute benefits. A textbook might aim to meet
both a higher exit level for learners, and a higher teaching standard for instructors, for
example. Defining the textbook in terms of its benefits means BUSEL can keep in mind
the multidimensional character of the product.

The Multidimensionality of the Product

As a multidimensional product, the textbook may be regarded as a total product with

core and auxiliary dimensions.

To define its core or primary characteristics: an institutional textbook is the provision of

a set of materials for the efficient and effective teaching of a known student body by a
known teaching body at a given level to a prescribed standard. This is what the textbook
has to do. However, the core dimensions of the product will be defined according to its
user. The core benefit stated above would be likely to be that of the manager. From the
student’s standpoint the core characteristics will naturally be different. Its core may be
defined as a set of materials for expediting learning at a given level to assure success in
institutional assessment. From the teacher’s standpoint the core characteristics will also
be different. It may be defined as a set of flexible materials for expediting teaching at a
given level that ensures relevance to the syllabus and adequate opportunities for
presentation, practice and production without the aid of extensive supplementary
material, as well as adequate opportunities for checking learning and remedial work.

As with core dimensions, so with the auxiliary dimensions. The textbook’s auxiliary
dimensions provide supplementary benefits: for example, the book is easy to use,
enjoyable, interesting and beneficial. However, easy to use, enjoyable, interesting and
beneficial will actually describe auxiliary dimensions that for the manager, teacher and
student are quite distinct. What can be said with certainty is that, when the book is
considered, what is perceived will depend on who the prospective user is.

It should be clear, then, that in considering the benefits, institutional textbook writing
must face the fact that it is dealing with three types of user: managers,3 teachers and
students. For the moment, the chapter will focus on the student and the learner. The
managers will be dealt with in more detail in the second part of the chapter in
considering institutional textbook writing as process.

The Product from the Viewpoint of Students and Teachers

As we have seen, a textbook can be further defined as a product according to its users.
Although neither students nor teachers are strictly purchasers in the sense that they
have a choice as to whether to buy the book once it is chosen as the coursebook for a
given course, nonetheless, clear purchase-behaviour dimensions pertain.

The Students’ Viewpoint

Looking at the book from the student perspective first, and at the auxiliary dimensions
specifically, the physical nature or tangibility of the book, or books, if we include the
workbook, is significant. For the age group to which our students belong, the majority
being in their late teens, their sensitivity to the book’s portability is an issue, as they may
not wish to use satchels. Again, their age, their interests, what they find interesting and
boring have a direct bearing on the manner in which they view the content of the book’s
themes and topics. Likewise, the appearance of the book is another factor. Does the
book look like the text- books they have experienced before? Many current textbooks
show that a great deal of attention has been paid to the appearance of the product. In
this area, Headway is the genus, with very characteristic care taken in the layout and
design of the pages, the use of photographs and illustrations and attractive and agree-
able colour schemes, while countless other products comprise the species.

A likeness to textbooks previously used will undoubtedly be of some importance to the

student, conferring security and confidence thereby, though students’ response is
difficult to anticipate. Our unpublished research at BUSEL has shown that the
weightiness of our textbooks, with the Student’s Books running to over three hundred
pages each, is viewed as a positive factor by some students – its weightiness being
analogous for them with the book’s seriousness – while other students find this aspect
of the book intimidating and unwelcoming.

As its aesthetic appearance is part of the overall experience of the textbook, it cannot
be ignored. Because of the difficulties in distinguishing between what might normally be
considered trite and what serious when looking at the various aspects of the product, it
is useful to bear in mind the distinction between core and auxiliary dimensions.

For students, the textbook may be more or less a convenience product, and relatively
inexpensive, and merely one amongst other textbooks they have bought during their
education and, not being self-directed, purchased without a great deal of consideration.

The student perspective might also be looked at in terms of durability. On a mundane

level, we may note that the book will be used many times on a course and brought back
and forth to school, thus undergoing a lot of wear and tear. It has to survive such
treatment; it would be scandalous if the book were to fall apart due to routine usage.
However, the durability of the book is related to another issue and design consideration:
will the students write in the book or not? If so, what will they write? If not, where will the
record of student’s participation be located: in the student’s notebook, in the student’s
memory, in teachers’ records? If the book is designed so that an essential trace of the
learning experience is documented – through study boxes completed by the students
themselves and/or vocabulary work for example – it would be expected that the book be
used for an extended period after the course for which it was designed had finished.

Again, on a mundane level, if the book is not designed to comprise an essential

reference for the student after the course, and if the book bears no mark of students’
experience of the course, the financiers of the textbook project may find the book has
an energetic second-hand market, and sales after the initial launch will be sluggish.
This, too, is an important consideration if the sales of the book are to maintain or justify
subsequent technological development.

Durability might also be looked at in terms of the overall product. The text- book does
not exist in isolation, but is used as a component of a course. It may even become
identified with the whole course as an applied syllabus in some manner. The fusion of
the textbook (the goods) and the teaching (the service) or the delivery of the course
leads helpfully into consideration of the perspective of the other user: the teacher.

The Teachers’ Viewpoint

The teacher’s perspective may share certain features with that of the student, but differ
in important aspects. For the teacher the textbook has to perform differently. The
student’s single use of the textbook has to be compared with a teacher’s repeated use.
The teacher will use the textbook many times during an academic year. In BUSEL this
may be as many as four times. No piloting can hope to approximate the level of critical
analysis a book will undergo during that period of intensive use, and a textbook in such
conditions may become easily jaded for the teacher.

Teachers will expect a benefit from the product, and the textbook will be expected to
have identifiable differences/benefits over other textbooks for the same level. These
differences and benefits are also expected to be sustained over several applications.
However much the writers attempt to anticipate teacher reaction, these differences will
be subject to deterioration over time (the same set of materials is going to become dull
no matter what), and may also be subject to abrupt change. A textbook that in its
approach and methodology reflects say, an acquisition theory of language learning, may
be popular at some point in a school’s history for any of a variety of reasons, and then
suddenly become unpopular or out of step with other developments in the school. This
is a risk for the textbook. If the textbook is not flexible enough to adapt to developments
in the syllabus, assessment or teaching methodology, the textbook will become
irrelevant and no longer valid; it will in effect pass its sell-by date.

Looking at the book from the teacher perspective, the physical nature or tangibility, of
the book, or books (if we include the teacher’s book and workbook), is likewise
significant. Teachers are also sensitive to the book’s portability. A teacher will often take
the Student’s Book and Teacher’s Book home for material preparation along with
students’ homework. The weight may cause consternation and irritation. The Teacher’s
Book for BUSEL’s Pre-Intermediate textbook runs to approximately six hundred pages
and is published in two separate though cumbersome volumes. A cautionary tale: after
some time, teachers at BUSEL began to undo the ring-binding of the Teacher’s Book
and take home only those pages relevant to the lessons to be prepared for. As a result,
and despite care, the Teacher’s Books’ physical durability was undermined, as the
books fell apart.

Do teachers of the book find the content interesting? And, similarly, the appearance of
the book is a further consideration. Does the book look like the textbooks they have
experienced before? Can the teachers feel proud of the book? This will certainly be of
some importance to the teacher. What if the teacher is embarrassed by the textbook?
What if teachers find it looks amateurish and unattractive? They may not like the paper
quality. They may not like the book’s size.

Maybe the teacher feels no ownership, and that is the underlying problem? Perhaps the
reason for the book’s unpopularity is that it is perceived as not expediting course
delivery? Teachers have to change the way they teach, and they have no faith in this
change. Teachers find that they need to prepare many supplementaries if the course is
to run satisfactorily. The textbook’s approach is so different the students do not know
what to do with the book. The teacher feels impotent; it is too difficult to teach; the
textbook makes the teachers lose face.

As with negative feedback so with positive. It is not easy to decipher the issues
textbooks raise. Some things are easier, some more difficult to monitor. Does the lesson
fit the syllabus? Does the lesson match the aim? If not, what is the lesson doing? Does
it do what it is doing well or badly? Should we keep it and change its aims? Should we
keep it but make radical changes? Should we bin it? Is the book aligned with the level
correctly? Has the placement test worked? Maybe the book is OK after all ... The
questions that will arise are endless.

Durability of the textbook from the teacher’s perspective will be related amongst other
things to how far it can be relied upon to provide the necessary means to expedite a
high level of quality in the delivery of a course of study – qualities that relate to its vitality
and adaptability. The book not only guarantees a level of teacher performance, offering
support and guidance in delivering the service, but also a level of learning reflected as
customer satisfaction. It should be able to do this reliably for different students at
different times, without becoming rapidly exhausted.

Equally, this learning should be related to other courses. The students’ success at one
level should be accompanied with readiness for the next level. If you receive from other
teachers, or pass on to other teachers, students who are not equipped for the level of a
course of study, previous success can only be seen as specious and will be likely to
prejudice any long-term success. In the end, the textbook has to fit into the overall aim
of the course of study: in BUSEL’s context, admission to faculty, and successful study in
an English-medium university.

The Teacher’s Book has a great potential for change, and can have major
repercussions on the institutional environment. It can change the life of the teacher. By
specifying aims in detail – by clarifying aims, by placing lesson aims – in relation to
broader institutional aims it can free the teacher from reliance on the Student’s Book. It
can thus build skills and promote ownership of the course delivery.

The Textbook/Product Experience: Good/Service

The educational experience of the product needs then to be durable; that is, have a
long-term effect on teachers’ performance in the school, and on students’ performance
in the school and in the faculty. But are we in danger of asking too much of the
textbook? Perhaps the problem is related to the fact that we are looking at the textbook
in isolation? Is a textbook not merely an instrument after all? Are we not really talking
about courses of study?

To help answer these questions we will look at the textbook and the course of study as
two types of product: the product as good and the product as service, respectively.

We have looked at institutional textbook writing from the product standpoint and how its
dimensions may be viewed by the student and the teacher, as well as suggesting a
managerial perspective. In the experience of the product by the three sets of users we
are looking at the product in terms of the classroom and the service that is provided and
consumed: institutional textbook writing from the point of view of the service a school
provides.

How does the textbook product fit into BUSEL’s overall product – the service it provides
its students? It is perilous to isolate the textbook from the overall service of which it is a
component. On the continuum between product as good and product as service the
school provides both a good (the materials that have been prepared) and a service (the
delivery of those materials, as well as the teaching and the other aspects of its total
product).

Marketing provides a useful distinction between two types of service: instrumental

services and consummatory services. An instrumental service is one where a provider
performs a task without the consumer’s direct involvement or immediate gratification.
Where the consumer is directly involved in immediate gratification the service is called
consummatory. Education is a complex service product involving a synthesis of both
types: the teacher carries out an educational undertaking for the student, and the
student receives instantaneous gratification as the service is consumed.

Dimensions of the Good/Service: Intangibility, Inseparability and Heterogeneity

Marketing also provides a useful delineation of service features. Services are

characterized as intangible, inseparable and heterogeneous. Education, or a course of
study, is intangible. As the service cannot be tried in advance of purchasing,
misunderstandings may come about between the consumer and the service provider. In
any case, as evaluation and understanding of the intangible is difficult, intangibility has
to be made tangible if only symbolically. Certificates for outstanding performance,
success in important exams can achieve this. But tangible gratification might be delayed
or may ultimately be evasive. In this sense the textbook has a symbolic function as the
tangible evidence of an intangible pro- duct (the course of study). We need to consider
whether this tangible evidence has a positive effect. Does the product inspire
confidence? Does it make promises to the consumer? Does it say the right things about
the kind of service students will receive?

The members of the textbook project do not necessarily have to come into contact with
the textbook’s buyers. But the service providers – the teachers – are inseparable from
the instructional process. The provider and the consumer – at least in language
instruction – have to be in the same place for the service transaction to occur.

Unlike the production of the service product, the textbook as a good will be produced,
sold and consumed in that order. A course of study, as a service good, reverses that
order or nearly so. The lesson is sold first, and then produced and consumed
instantaneously in the classroom (so a course of study which uses textbooks makes the
classroom the meeting place of two different types of pro- duct). Instantaneous
consumption is a constraint on the writers of the textbook, and the deliverers of the
service. There are only so many lessons that can be performed in a day, and only so
much can be consumed over a course. All courses have this constraint, acknowledged
or not, witting or not.

In the provision of the product as service produced, it could be argued that there is a
distinct temptation for the service provider, the teacher, to become overly production-
oriented rather than customer-oriented. This is often characterized as ‘teaching the
lesson rather than the students’. It indicates an emphasis on technique, methodology,
approach – the delivery system – as an end in itself to the detriment of the customer.
Teacher training seems sometimes to encourage this perception, and to promote the
idea of service provider as artiste – the creative originator of a product (perhaps
effectively independent of the customer).

Materials development is subordinate finally to the teacher, and whether or not the
service is successfully delivered depends on the consumer’s perceptions in the
classroom of the teacher. The teacher is therefore the key to success – the most
important part of the product. Is the textbook then an immaterial aspect? If not, what is
its role in the product experience?

It is recognized that the personal performance of the service provider (teacher) is crucial
to the success of the service (the course of study). However, because the teacher is
human there will surely be heterogeneity. The quality of the learning and the teaching
will modulate from classroom to classroom, because of the teacher’s knowledge,
experience, skill and so forth. There are two strategies calculated to deal with
heterogeneity: standardization and customization.

Exacting quality control over learning and teaching can be accomplished through
importance given to recruitment standards, teacher training and teacher education, as
well as research into customer needs and wants. The strategy of standardization can
also take the tactical form of institutional textbook writing – with the aim of providing the
necessary information to the teacher in order to expedite delivery of the curriculum by
experienced and less experienced teachers. This information can be provided in terms
of the materials (an arbitrary – though ideally exemplary – set of materials (Student’s
Book), with information on this set of materials’ function and use (Teacher’s Book), with
information on how class work can be consolidated and supported outside the class
(Work- book)).

By taking into account unique environmental factors (prior language learning, prior
education, target language community and so forth on behalf of the stu- dents, and
likewise consideration of the features of the teaching body), and attempting to design for
a level of flexibility, this standardized product may be customized or tailored.

Flexibility in the Delivery of the Product

The question of flexibility is central to textbook design, but difficult to grasp. When a
book is described as flexible, what does flexible refer to? Does it refer to approach,
methodology, and technique? We might say that a flexible book helps students at
varying levels within a given level reach a certain standard, with no discernible effect
exercised by other variables, even experience of the teacher. So does it mean that the
book is teacher-proof? Or teaching-proof? Maybe it means that the book does not need
a teacher to interpose in the learning process. Does the book merely require an
operator someone to keep order, correct obvious errors and mistakes and reel off the
key?

Is flexibility a good or bad thing? Many commercially produced textbooks are somewhat
bland in content, as is often said, for the apparent reason that they are designed to
appeal to as broad a set of users as possible. They are, arguably, and perhaps for the
same reason, often bland in approach too; but is this a bad thing? The book’s being
amenable to different methods of assessment, method- ology and syllabus gives it
longevity and dependability and it may be integrated into existing school systems fairly
painlessly. The taxon Headway can be used as a reference on this point.

Such books are extremely permissive and, as a result, are often perceived as
unprincipled and cynical, perhaps even wanton. But what is the obverse? A textbook
that wears its pedagogics on its sleeve may not be such an attractive alternative. Highly
principled and perhaps in earnest, they may be quite magisterial in tone,
methodologically precise, if not actually coercive, and next to impossible to integrate.

Where should an institutional textbook fall on the continuum of flexibility and inflexibility?
It would seem that an institutional textbook would be more likely to be in danger of
falling into the latter category. The question follows: should an institutional textbook
project imitate a commercially produced textbook – to emulate say, its flexibility? Our
unpublished research has shown that many teach- ers found the pre-intermediate book
published by BUSEL methodologically aggressive and intolerant of adaptation. At any
given level, as all teachers know, there is a great deal of diversity, as indeed there is in
each class. The textbook of choice at BUSEL – for all its recognized faults and
limitations – is a leading commercially produced textbook.

The Role of the Teacher in the Delivery of the Product

How does an institution – with all its knowledge of its students and teachers, and all its
data – design for flexibility? The TBDP (Textbook Development Project) at BUSEL takes
the view that flexibility is something initiated by the teacher, and/or the student, and that
it is between the students and the teacher the connections are made – the teaching and
learning – whereby the textbook is somehow peripheralized or at least decentralized.
Nevertheless, the question remains: can flexibility be designed in? Can a book have a
flexible quality? A propensity for adaptation?

In the revision of the BUSEL series, stress has been placed on the clarity of lesson aims
with an exacting relevance to the syllabus document. Approach, methodology and
technique seem less important and much more arbitrary when the focal point is on the
aim of a lesson (although the distinction between skills and more overt language-
focused lessons is acknowledged). Teachers at BUSEL are encouraged to view
materials critically, and teach their own lessons when they wish to, with the proviso that
the specified lesson aims are met. If the TBDP insists on a syllabus focus, perhaps the
ultimate extreme of such an institutional text- book project would be an anti-textbook
project with the provision of no materials at all (except a Teacher’s Book and a
syllabus). That would give ultimate flexibility of approach, methodology and technique.
But perhaps flexibility does not refer to approach, methodology or technique at all, or
not importantly.

Flexibility of materials is very likely, ultimately, to be a question of teacher training, and

that the flexibility of a Student’s Book resides – if anywhere – in the teacher. The
purpose of the Teacher’s Book would then be to augment the teachers’ experience with
a knowledge of institutional aims, and the purposes and aims of the course they are
teaching, along with a knowledge of the means to meet those aims and purposes.

The Teacher’s Book and Teacher Training

The question naturally arises as to whether the Teacher’s Book can indeed provide the
teacher training to help the teacher be flexible in using the coursebook. A fuller
discussion of the role and function of the Teacher’s Book, and an exploration of its
potentials and limitations, is beyond the scope of this chapter, and is planned as a
separate article in the near future. However, BUSEL believes the answer to this
question is yes. Why yes?

In rewriting the Teacher’s Book for the pre-intermediate level we are investigating ways
of supporting the teaching of the textbook by giving – in addition to the purposes and
aims of the each lesson and the overall aims and purposes of the course – information
on the use of the various exercises by providing, alongside legitimate teaching notes, a
glossary/catalogue of amongst other things the terminology and techniques used by the
writers. The assumption here is that the user – the teacher – will have a sound basic
knowledge of teaching and learning, and that the Teacher’s Book can provide an
opportunity for increasing the teacher’s teaching capital – increasing knowledge, skills
and repertoire.

Because this has implications for the size of the Teacher’s Book, and because the
techniques and terminology of teaching are not restricted to level and will be relevant for
other books in the series, the TBDP is currently researching placing the entire Teacher’s
Book on the Internet. The opportunities provided by hypertext – the highlighted
computer-readable text which allows very far-ranging cross-referencing across the net –
is one area with enormous potential. To mention briefly further benefits: a digitized,
downloadable Teacher’s Book, using hypertext, will promote the idea of the Teacher’s
Book as interactive. It will also allow regular updating. Another benefit, directly for the
writers, is that it allows for a certain level of shorthand in the lesson notes.

If the answer is no – to the question of whether the Teacher’s Book can provide the
teacher training to help the teacher be flexible in using the coursebook – then the
Teacher’s Book would be basically a manual – an instruction book for the technology
(Student’s Book) – with the teacher in the role of operative. The extreme alternative
would be to go into the minutiae of preparation and delivery. This is a strategy that is
likely to tether the teacher to the materials rather than be a support for teacher
development. This is contrary to the nature of any rewarding and creative activity such
as teaching.

The Textbook as Process

The word process is used advisedly. The writing part of institutional textbook writing is
only one point in the process. That one point we may see as an end point, or an end
process in itself, with its own operations, processes and procedures. It is not anyway
the end point. Paradoxically, too, it might not be the most important point for the
institution. However, it is a determined point where an attempt is made to materialize
the best theory and practice as understood and adjudged by the institution at that time.
The Role of Management

The critical acts, or judgements, that the functional and administrative divisions make on
the operational, tactical and strategic orientation of the school can constitute influence-
relations that will govern decision-making concerning the design of the textbook, as it
will the writing. In order for this to happen, the management of BUSEL provides
opportunity for institutional thinking to find its way into the design criteria of the textbook.
This is not simply a case of having the functional and administrative divisions send a set
of guidelines to the directorate or textbook writers and leaving the prioritizing, and
elimination, of guidelines, to the addressees.

If we look again at the product we see that the textbook is the context where a number
of practical and theoretical considerations meet; one might argue that these
considerations could be divided into higher-order and lower-order considerations.
However, given the multidimensionality of the product and the role of affect and the
distinctness of the product’s users, these considerations are not so easily categorized.

It could be argued that the textbook could be written in reference to one particular
group’s terms. It is obvious that this would privilege any one of the user groups we have
mentioned and – given the nature of the relationship between the three different groups
of users – be detrimental to the other groups. Accepting that the product has to reflect
the needs and wants of each user group, we have arrived at the managerial role in
institutional textbook writing, which is to supervise and influence the design process so
that a composite of core and auxiliary dimensions important to each group of users is
addressed in the product itself. In the previous section, the nature of these needs and
wants was outlined.

However, it is essential that the overall aim of the course and the standards set are
given primacy and that the textbook is – as defined above – a set of materials for the
efficient and effective teaching and learning of a known student body by a known
teaching body at a given level to a prescribed standard. This principle is the Prime
Directive, the principal core dimension.

The Textbook as a Means of Reflection

The decisions that follow upon the initial decision to write a textbook are generated at
BUSEL by the interaction of the divisions within the school. This is dialectical in nature.
Forums to encourage and allow this to happen are organized regularly with
representatives or heads of all or a number of the functional and administrative divisions
in the school. This large group is further divided into smaller groups, depending on the
purpose of the meetings. Many of these forums may exist prior to the decision to write a
textbook and the idea to write a textbook may have come from these forums. The
important point is that ideas on the textbook are allowed to be aired and taken into
account. Meetings strictly related to the development of the textbook continue pre, while
and post-production.

It has been found at BUSEL that, as long as the purpose of the meetings is kept in
focus, and as long as consensus sought, they will enrich institutional thinking rather
than impoverish it. Discussions and decisions in these meetings constitute the greater
part of institutional textbook writing in terms of time, and are argu- ably the most
important part because they allow BUSEL to go back to basics, to first principles if you
like, and rethink its most fundamental beliefs and ideas about what it does.

This rethinking will not be limited in its effect to the design of the textbook but will affect
to a greater or lesser degree every part of the school. To give an example: in the
revision of the first textbook in the BUSEL series we have looked again at how the
Student’s Book was originally underpinned. This involved looking at the criteria by which
lesson aims were chosen. One dimension of this was analysis of the syllabus document
itself. Referencing lesson plans to the syllabus was done by comparing all the lesson
aims in the textbook with the syllabus objectives for the level. What was found in the
analysis referred both to the textbook being analysed and to the criteria we were using.
One of the results was a decision to restate and respecify the syllabus objectives more
clearly. To exemplify this briefly and simplistically, when tabulating the language
objectives we needed to define what the students would be able to understand
(receptively) and express (productively) and state each objective functionally with a
description of its structure/form, and the contexts in which it would be found by giving
examples of use. We also needed to state whether the form and/or meaning had been
met before. This led to an experimental revision and respecification of part of the
syllabus. The result of this experiment was favourable. Once respecified, it provided
more reliable criteria for judging the relevance of a material to a course.

Another example of rethinking came out in a dialogue between curriculum and TBDP
(Textbook Development Project) and was again related to the syllabus. It was stated in
a meeting with the directorate that the TBDP would aim for 100 per cent coverage of the
language items stated in the syllabus. The question that accompanied this decision was
how this was to be achieved given the number of language items to be taught? It
transpired, however, that dealing with the syllabus in quantitative terms was misleading
us. Language items, despite the format of the syllabus, are not stand-alone. The
syllabus by its format implied that and misled us into thinking language items are so
isolated, but this is contrary to what we know to be true. This understanding illuminated
a problem in materials production we were having, where materials writers were
producing one material to address each language item. This confusing of syllabus
format with ontological status – on the surface a purely theoretical issue – was leading
to very practical problems in course density. The language item issue was reconceived.
Although it would be impossible to use as a syllabus format, it was suggested that,
rather than see language items as democratic entities of equal weight, it would be
helpful for both curriculum and the TBDP to view language items as imprecise
hierarchies in the manner of vocabulary, which might likewise be bundled into broad
packages. In thinking of language items in this manner, the gap between syllabus and
materials could be bridged. Teaching the present perfect for, say, indefinite time
presupposed a level of knowledge and awareness about the use of the simple past
related to a recognition of certain time markers and the time or aspect being referred to.
In consequence, curriculum and TBDP were able to come up with a schematic
representation of materials design which is intended to be published as original
research in the near future.

The purpose of these examples is to show how textbook design processes aid reflection
and impact on other areas in the school. The opposite is also true. The provisions of the
different sets of users will impact on the textbook; the development of a proto-
vocabulary syllabus has changed the way in which vocabulary content of the book will
be determined, and approached. This is natural given the dialogue that will come about
between the textbook group and each functional and administrative division in the
school. The example shows this impact may be felt especially by the curriculum, but it is
equally true of teacher training, self-access and assessment.

At BUSEL, the TTU (Teacher Training Unit) oversees the production of materials and
teacher’s notes in the initial stages along with CTU (Curriculum and Testing Unit) and
the TBDP (Textbook Development Group). The aim of this liaison is to obtain initial
feedback on technical and theoretical issues as well as on the level of teaching
expertise required to teach the material. The TTU has the training and expertise plus
the extensive experience of the classroom and classroom observation to offer valuable
insights into the materials and how they might work and suggestions on how materials
might be improved. It also offers its perspective on teaching in the school, which is
helpful. In return, the TBDP offers the TTU an experience of textbook writing and the
challenges that face the writers and designers of materials outside the training usually
provided by the University of Cambridge Local Examinations Syndicate (UCLES)
courses such as the Certificate for Overseas Teachers of English (COTE), an initial in-
service training course for practising teachers, and the Cambridge Diploma in English
Language Teaching to Adults (DELTA) for more experienced, usually qualified, teachers
of adults. It also has the opportunity to view material development from a broader
institutional perspective, as the TBDP can share its attempts to balance the demands
and pressures exerted on it from the other divisions of the school.

At BUSEL, the gravitational pull between the SAU (Self-Access Unit) and TBDP is
great, and has to be prudently addressed. The reason for this is the overlap between
homework and self-study, integral parts of any course, and the provision of self-access.
How different can they be? How different should they be? To BUSEL this is formulated
as a syllabus question. In unpublished research the TBDP has discerned three
functions of extra-class activity. Firstly, if we look at a course of study and specify –
rigorously and in great detail – what will be taught and what will be assessed we run the
risk of curtailing additional effort by the student. Teachers have voiced their concerns
about this, calling it ‘spoon- feeding’. A student might be able to sail close to the wind
and do just enough to pass. How can a school address this? Unspecify the courses?

It is suggested by our research that extra-class activity can be seen as having three
relations to the syllabus: it can either be identical (more of the same); ancillary
(additional to the course but an extension of course elements); and auxiliary (non-
essential extension beyond the course proper). If we take these three classifications of
extra-class work, we may divide them between the textbook project (what goes into the
workbook) and self-access (what is provided through various media in relation to the
course outside the student’s book and work- book). Through such a division of self-
study provision we are positing a notion that any syllabus can be divided into a great
and lesser syllabus, at any given level and/or (they are not exclusive concepts) a real
and possible syllabus. If this can be effectively accounted for and executed, the term
extra-curricular can be redefined. Through discussion of the boundaries of SAU and the
TBDP, the opportunity arises for both to redefine spheres of operation and provision.

On the topic of syllabus design it is often suggested that assessment systems be set up
before material development can begin. This is fallacious, or at best a half-truth. It is
anyway misleading. At BUSEL the dialectic between assessment systems and materials
development is ongoing. It seems fairly banal to state that it is inevitable that
developments in one area will create tensions in the other and it is through the
resolution of such tensions that the areas of both assessment and materials
development can be explored, if not actually refined. In BUSEL, TBDP (Textbook
Development Project) work often finds that it requires information from Testing to
ensure the relevance of materials. This information may or may not be available, and
requires Testing to extend its specification of its tests with reference to the syllabus. It
cuts both ways: the TBDP has to make sure it works within the constraints of
assessment too. Each division pushes and bears on the other.

A final point on the effect of institutional textbook writing. BUSEL allows its textbooks to
compete with other commercially produced textbooks on the market. The decision
whether to use the textbook rests after consultation with the heads of teaching units
(HTUs). In doing this, BUSEL recognizes that its aim to provide EAP-oriented EFL
textbooks to its teachers must be evidenced in substantive product differentiation. This
tangible difference aims to provide a functional benefit over the long term. This variation
needs firstly to be there in the product, and also be seen to be important. The HTUs
constitute the group of operational/middle managers who run courses in the school. In
that function they are the final arbiters of what works and what does not work in the
classroom. Interaction with the HTUs will be on both a theoretical and practical level, but
with a pronounced practical slant. As they represent teachers and are closest to the
classroom, their opinion and ideas carry a great deal of weight among the teachers and
the other divisions of the school. If the HTUs are unconvinced of the product, the
product will simply not be used. The TBDP needs to involve HTUs in aspects of the
design and writing of the textbook, and receive their feedback. The HTUs constitute the
most influential group in the school.

The purpose of these examples – as stated above – is to show how textbook design
processes can impact on each functional and administrative division and how the
contrary is also true. Given the dialectical nature of the interaction, this is to be
expected. Through this process a better product is aimed for, one where all user
expectations are at least addressed, where a sense of ownership is shared and where
stakeholder claims are recognized. Ultimately, however, how good the product is
depends on the quality of the judgement and execution – an end process in itself, with
its own operations, processes and procedures as previously stated.

Conclusion

This chapter has attempted to offer guidance by offering an overview of the issues
involved in institutional textbook writing by reflecting on the experiences that Bilkent
University School of English Language (BUSEL) has gone through, since the beginning
of the textbook projects in 1995, and having produced a suite of textbooks which it is
now in the process of revising, looking specifically at the nature of the product, and the
elements of the process. Many of the considerations are set out as questions. Some of
these considerations it is argued admit to no solution, only a level of engagement. This
is perhaps the most important aspect of institutional textbook writing. In developing text-
books one ought not to expect evolution and progress if by those terms is meant a
steady process of improvement. Each textbook writing project will address the same
questions, and from the answers it finds most convincing endeavour to materialize the
best theory and practice as understood and adjudged by the institution at that time to
produce a textbook