For this task, our group were required to
present/analyse Cunningsworth's checklist and create a powerpoint presentation.
We encountered numerous problems analysing the checklist as we had no idea at
all that all checklist are actually different. Due to that, we gt confused. An
example of the problem or confusion was we thought the checklist was comprised
of 3 checklists, which are; Design and Content, Interactive Communications and
Style and Appropriacy but they are actually 1 checklist.
Our powerpoint presentation was confusing as we
analysed it as 3 different checklist. Thus, we were unable to show how
effective or not effective is the checklist. It was also hard to show the
points we analysed as we analysed it individually but in actual fact, it was 3
different criteria which actually complements each other to form a checklist.
As an overall, we analysed and knew that
Cunningsworth’s checklist was all about Communicative Language Teaching (CLT).
So, it was easier for us to analyse the checklist as it was specific in the
terms of CLT. We discussed and identified what we like and dislike about the
checklist. The criteria are helpful and specific enough to determine the
effectiveness of a material or taskbook based on the CLT. However, it is also
limited as it only focuses on CLT.
To me, I feel that this checklist is very good in
determining the communicative criteria of a book. This is because the criteria
are easy to understand with minimal confusion. In my opinion, this checklist is
suited to be used by teachers to evaluate a material or coursebook. This is
because a material or coursebook that is shows communicative properties provide
opportunities for learners to communicate with others which also allows them to
practice the language as in daily lives. However, it is not advisable to only
use this checklist alone as it only focuses on one aspect which is CLT.
No comments:
Post a Comment