Analysis of İzmir Yabancılar İçin Türkçe and Cambridge English as a Second Language coursebooks in terms of various variables

In this study, it was aimed to determine the similarities and differences between Cambridge English As A Second Language and Izmir Turkish for Foreigners analyzing and comparing them in terms of Textbook Review Criteria. In this study, which is a qualitative study, the data were obtained by document analysis method. The data obtained from both books were analyzed using descriptive analysis technique. In order to collect and analyze the data in the books in a systematic way, the criteria that should be in an effective textbook were listed as a result of the literature review, and the Textbook Review Criteria were created by bringing together the ones deemed appropriate by the field experts. Considering the dimensions of this list, the sub- problems of the research were determined and the coursebooks were analyzed according to the criteria in different dimensions and sub-dimensions. The organization chart dimension of the criteria list constitutes the first sub-problem of the study. In the analysis made in terms of the first dimension, it was seen that the books complied with most criteria in terms of exterior design, but could not meet most criteria in terms of interior design. The lack of dictionary, index and summary sections in the interior design of the books, the neglect of some important points in the unit designs and the poor quality of the paper used in the interior pages of the books were found to be the weaknesses of the books. In the analysis made in terms of the second sub-problem of the study, it was observed that the rule of teaching one grammar structure at a time was not taken into account in the grammar teaching approaches of the books, and the target language culture in the English coursebook and the self- assessment and repetition sections in the Turkish coursebook were neglected while the books are appropriate for the most criteria in this dimension. In the analysis made in terms of the activities dimension within the scope of the third sub-problem, it was determined that although the books were suitable for most of the criteria in this dimension, some points that were considered very important in the activities were not included. Some of the points identified were that the tasks in the books did not support the learning outcomes, the activities were not distributed in a balanced manner according to the four skill areas, and various approaches related to language teaching were not used in the activities. As a result of the analysis made in terms of methodology within the scope of the fourth sub-problem, it was seen that more diverse methods and techniques were included in speaking skills, reading skills and grammar activities in the English book, and only in writing skill activities in the Turkish book. The dimension that constitutes the fifth sub-problem is basic skills and sub-skills, and the analysis was completed in seven sub-dimensions. As a result of the analysis in terms of listening skills, it was seen that different cultures were included only in the listening texts of the English book, and the conversations and dialogues in the listening materials were designed to be made only between native English speakers and non-native speakers. It was determined that both coursebooks mostly include individual listening activities, but in the listening activities of the Turkish book, only pre-listening and post-listening tasks are included. As a result of the analysis in terms of speaking skills, it was determined that different cultures were not included in the texts prepared for speaking activities of the books. It was observed that in the speaking activities of the English book, only activities for the pre-speaking and while speaking are included, while only activities for while-speaking were included in the speaking activities of the Turkish book. As a result of the analysis in terms of reading skills, it was determined that the reading texts were selected from different genres in both coursebooks, but they were not selected from the world classics and different cultures were not included in the texts. However, individual, pair and group activities were not given equal emphasis in the reading activities of both coursebooks. When evaluated in terms of reading processes, it was seen that activities for pre, while and post reading were included in both coursebooks. At the end of the analysis in terms of writing skills, it was concluded that both coursebooks did not give equal emphasis to individual, pair and group work in writing activities. In the writing skill of the English book, activities for pre-writing, while-writing and post-writing were included, while all of the writing activities in the Turkish book were designed for while-writing. In the analysis in terms of grammar, it was concluded that in both coursebooks, grammar structures were given in different text types with short and easy examples/explanations, but these structures were not introduced in the original context. In addition, it was observed that some grammar structures only in the English coursebook were focused on communication and interaction. In terms of vocabulary teaching and pronunciation, it was observed that both coursebooks did not adopt an effective vocabulary teaching approach and did not give importance to activities to improve pronunciation. In the analysis conducted in terms of visual content within the scope of the sixth sub-problem, it was concluded that the visuals used in both coursebooks were compatible with the texts and were vivid/colorful, while the number of visuals used in the Turkish coursebook was found to be fewer. While only symbolic, informative and functional visuals were used in the English coursebook, ornamental, symbolic, informative and functional visuals were used in the Turkish coursebook. The last dimension that constitutes the seventh sub- problem is assessment and evaluation. In terms of assessment and evaluation, it was observed that both coursebooks did not include various assessment and evaluation tools in the activities of listening skills, speaking skills, reading skills, writing skills and grammar, however, some assessment and evaluation tools were used more frequently than other tools. Keywords: Turkish as a second language, English, coursebooks, review criteria.