1. NCCU Academic Hub
  2. 學術產出
  3. College of Foreign Languages and Literature
  4. Theses
  5. Item

學術產出-Theses

Article View/Open

Publication Export

Google ScholarTM

政大圖書館

Citation Infomation

  • No doi shows Citation Infomation
題名 國小英語教科書評選指標之研究
A study on criteria for elementary english textbook evaluation
作者 曾子芸
Tseng, Tzu Yun
貢獻者 許炳煌
Sheu, Ping Huang
曾子芸
Tseng, Tzu Yun
關鍵詞 教科書評選
階層程序分析法
Textbook evaluation
Analytic Hierarchy Process
日期 2011
上傳時間 12-Apr-2012 13:47:11 (UTC+8)
摘要 本研究旨在藉由探討教科書評選指標的權重，了解國小英語教師對於英語教科書評選所採用之評選指標的看法，以及其教師背景對英語教科書評選的影響。本研究方法採用階層程序分析法(AHP), 並由文獻探討將教科書評選指標分為2大層面，5大向度，以及26個指標，建構出階層程序分析法問卷，以隨機方式發放於台北市12個行政區公私立126位國小正式英語教師，並藉由Expert Choice 2000 軟體分析，計算出各層面、向度、指標之權重值，並予以排序。
      研究主要結果如下：
      1.教師重視教科書內在評選高於外在評選。
      2.教科書外在評選，教師較為重視整體編排架構；教科書內在評選，教師認
      為語言能力比語言成分重要。
      3.整體編排架構裡，教師認為最重要的指標為「使用英語文正確、自然流
      暢。」；編印設計，最重要的指標為「字體大小適宜，印刷清楚。」；
      4.教具與輔助教材，最重要的指標為「提供配合課程的電腦多媒體教材。」
      5.教科書內在評選，男性教師較重視教科書語言成分；女性教師則較重視
      語言能力。教學經驗較少的教師重視語言成分高於語言能力；教學經驗較
      豐富的教師則認為語言能力較為重要。
      6.教具與輔助教材，學士學歷教師較重視指標為「提供配合課程的電腦多媒
      體教材。」；碩士學歷教師較重視指標為「CD發音正確清晰，速度適
      宜。」
      綜合本研究結果，教師對於教科書評選指標有不同看法及重視程度，期能提供教師對於教科書評選及評選指標有進一步瞭解。
The current study aimed to understand how elementary English teachers in Taiwan prioritized criteria for textbook evaluation, and whether their various backgrounds influenced their prioritization of criteria. The research framework was constructed based on Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), including 2 objectives, 5 sub-objectives, and 25 criteria. An AHP questionnaire was randomly administered to 126 elementary English teachers in Taipei City. All the data were analyzed by means of the software Expert Choice 2000.
      The major findings in the current study are summarized below.
      1.Internal evaluation of textbooks was prioritized
      before External evaluation by a majority of the
      teachers.
      2.In external evaluation, most teachers emphasized
      General features of a textbook; in internal
      evaluation, teachers focused more on Language skills
      rather than Language components in a textbook.
      3.Concerning criteria for evaluating General features of
      textbooks, teachers considered the criterion Accuracy
      and fluency most important; as for Layout and physical
      makeup of a textbook, the criterion Typeface came out
      top; in Teaching aids, Multimedia was viewed as the
      most crucial criterion.
      4.In respect to criteria for evaluating Language
      components and Language skills in textbooks, the
      criterion Integration of components and Integration of
      skills were respectively emphasized by teachers.
      5.While male teachers focused more on Language
      components of a textbook, female teachers found
      Language skills more important.
      6.Novice teachers were more in favor of Language
      components than Language skills; however, to more
      experienced teachers, it was Language skills that they
      prioritized first.
      7.For criteria evaluating Teaching aids of a textbook,
      teachers with a Bachelor`s degree prioritized
      Multimedia as the most important criterion, while
      teachers holding a Master`s degree put much emphasis
      on the Quality of CDs.
      To conclude, it is hoped that these findings can shed light on textbook development and provide useful information for teachers when selecting and evaluating textbooks and for textbook developers when compiling textbooks for students.
參考文獻 Ariew, R. (1982). The textbook as curriculum. In T. V. Higgs (Ed.), Curriculum,
competence, and the foreign language teacher (pp. 11-33). Skokie, IL: National Textbook Company.
Best, J. W., & Kahn, J. V. (1998). Research in education (8th ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Brown, H. D. (2007). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy. (3rd ed.). NY: Longman.
Brown, J. D. (1995). The elements of language curriculum: A systematic approach to
program development. NY: Heinle and Heinle.
Byrd, P. (2001). Textbooks: Evaluation and selection and analysis for implementation. In Celce-Murcia, M. (3rd ed.) Teaching English as a second or foreign language
(pp. 415-427). Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Chao, Y. C. (2005). A Triangulated investigation of elementary teachers’ perceptions into English textbooks used by 5th, 6th graders in Taichung County, central Taiwan. Unpublished master’s thesis, Providence University, Taichung, Taiwan.
Chang, C. L. (2008). A Study on Taiwanese Junior High School English Teachers` Use of Supplementary Teaching Materials. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Changhua University of Education, Changhua, Tiawan.
Chen, C. S. (2003). Reflections of elementary school teachers on the use of English textbooks in Taipei City. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Kaohsiung Normal University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Collins English Dictionary. (1992). Collins English Dictionary and Thesaurus. Harper Collins Publishers.
Cunningsworth, A. (1995). Choosing your coursebook. Oxford, UK: Heinemann.
Decarrico, J. S. (2001). Vocabulary Learning and Teaching. In Celce-Murcia, M.
(3rd ed.) Teaching English as a second or foreign language (pp. 285-300). Boston: Heinle &Heinle.
Department of Education, Taipei City Government. (2002). Temporary English Curriculum Guidelines of Elementary Schools in Taipei City. Retrieved June, 25, 2012, from http://www.tp.edu.tw/law/doc/20040227_29.zip
Dyer, R. F. and E. H. Forman (1991). An Analytic Approach to Marketing Decisions. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Fredriksson, C. & Olsson, R.(2006). English textbook evaluation：An investigation into criteria for selecting English. Unpublished student’s thesis, Malmö University, Sweden.
Ellis, R. (1997). The empirical evaluation of language teaching materials. ELT Journal, 51(1), 36-42.
Forman, E and Selly, M. (2001). Decision by Objectives: How to Convince Others That You Are Right. New York: World Scientific Publishing Company.
Gatbonton, E., & Segalowitz, N. (2005). Rethinking communicative language teaching: A focus on access to fluency. Canadian Modern Language Review, 61, 325–353.
Gonzales, P. C. (1983). An analysis of language development materials. NABE Journal, 8(1), 5-21.
Grant, N. (1987). Making the most of your textbook. New York: Longman.
Hutchinson, T., & Torres, E. (1994). The textbook as agent of change. ELT Journal, 48(4), 315-328.
Inal, B.（2006). Coursebook selection process and some of the most important criteria to be taken into consideration in foreign language teaching. Journal of Arts and Sciences, 5, 19-29.
Jan, L. Y. (2004). English materials selection and communicative language teaching principle in Taiwan. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Kaohsiung Normal University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Johnson, K., Kim, M., Liu, Y. F., Nava, A., Perkins, D., Smith, A. M., Canela, O., & Lu, W. (2008). A step forward: Investigating expertise in materials evaluation. ELT Journal, 62(2), 157-163.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2000). Techniques and principles in language teaching. (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2001). Teaching Grammar. In Celce-Murcia, M. (3rd ed.) Teaching English as a second or foreign language (pp. 251-266). Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Li, H-C. (2003). Predictive Evaluation, Use, and Retrospective Evaluation of an EFL
Textbook by Junior High School Teachers. Unpublished master’s thesis, National
Normal University, Taipei, R.O.C.
Lin, Y. H. (2004). An analytical study on provisionary editions of junior high school English textbooks in Kaohsiung city. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Kaohsiung Normal University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Littlejohn, A. (1998). The analysis of language teaching materials: Inside the Trojan horse. In B. Tomlinson (Ed.), Materials development in language teaching (pp.191-213). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Liu, S. J. (2009). An evaluation of the current elementary English textbooks: Teachers’ perspectives. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Cheng Chi University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Lu, C.Y. (2010). Junior High School English Teachers’ Perspectives on Current English Textbooks in Hsin Chu County. Unpublished master’s thesis, Chung Yuan Christian University, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
Ishizaka, A. & Labib, A. (2009). Analytic Hierarchy Process and Expert Choice: Benefits and Limitations, ORInsight, 22(4), p. 201–220
Kuo, W. C. (2003). Assessing the English textbook for elementary school developed by Tainan city. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan.
McDonough, J., & Shaw, C. (1993). Materials and methods in ELT: A teacher’s guide. London, UK: Blackwell.
McGrath, I. (2002). Materials evaluation and design for language teaching. Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press.
Ministry of Education. (2004). General guidelines of Grade 1-9 Curriculum of elementary and junior high school education. Retrieved March, 20, 2009, from
http://english.moe.gov.tw/public/Attachment/66618445071.doc
Ministry of Education. (2006). An introduction to the Ministry of Education of the R.O.C. Retrieved March, 20, 2009, from http://english.moe.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=7039&ctNode=784&mp=2
Richards, J. C. (2001). Curriculum development in language teaching. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Rubdy, R. (2003). Selection of materials. In B. Tomlinson (Ed.), Developing materials for language teaching (pp. 37-57). London, UK: Continuum International Publishing Group.
Saaty, T.L. (1980). The Analytic Hierarchy Process. New York: McGraw Hill.
Saaty, T. L. (2005). Analytic Hierarchy Process. In P. Armitage and T. Colton (eds)
Encyclopedia of Biostatistics. (2nd ed.) (pp.190-198). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Saaty, T.L. (2008). Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Services Sciences, 1(1), 83-98.
Savignon, Sandra J. (2001). Communicative language Teaching for the Twenty-First Century. In Celce-Murcia, M. (3rd ed.) Teaching English as a second or foreign language (pp. 13-28). Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Sheldon, L. E. (1988). Evaluating ELT textbooks and materials. ELT Journal, 42(4), 237-246.
Skierso, A. (1991). Textbook selection and evaluation. In M. Celce-Murcia (Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (2nd ed.) (pp. 432-453). NY: Heinle and Heinle.
Su, Y. H. (1997). Needs survey and evaluation scheme for industrial vocational high school English Textbooks. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Chengchi University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Tandlichova, E. (1995). Coursebook evaluation in teacher training in Slovakia. Modern English Teacher, 4, 65-147.
Tomlinson, B. (1998). Materials development in language teaching. Cambridge, UK:
Cambridge University Press.
Tomlinson, B. (2001). `Materials development`, in R. Carter and D. Nunan (eds) The Cambridge Guide to Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (pp. 66-71).Cam- bridge: Cambridge University Press.
Tomlinson, B. (2003). Developing materials for language teaching. London, UK: Continuum International Publishing Group.
Tucker, C. Allen (1975). Evaluating beginning textbooks. English Teaching. Forum, 13 (3), 355-361.
Ur, P. (1996). A course in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Vargas, L.G. (1990), An overview of the analytic hierarchy process and its applications, European Journal of Operational Research, 48, pp. 2-8.
Williams D. (1983). Developing criteria for textbook evaluation. ELT Journal, 37 (3), 251-255.
Wu, S. T. (2002). An evaluation of the current set of junior high school English textbooks. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Chengchi University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Yang, C.Y. (2010).A Study on development of professional teaching competence indicator for Taipei City elementary English teachers. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Taipei University of Education, Taipei, Taiwan.
林玫玲、陳國彥 (Lin & Chen) (2003)。社會領域教科書選用規準之研究。載於中 華民國課程與教學學會（主編），教科書之選擇與評鑑，115-142。台北： 中華民國課程與教學學會。
詹餘靜 (Chan) (2000)。國小英語教育發展趨勢及三‘教’—教師、教材、與教 法—相關問題研究。國立台北師範學院學報，16, 203-238。
張玉芳 (Chang) (2002)。 國小英語教學師資，教材選用，及學童學習現況調查 研究—以苗栗縣為例。英語教學，26(4), 19-37。
戴維揚 (Dai) (1999)。九年一貫英語科新課程新趨勢。教育研究資訊，7(4),1-17。
國立編譯館 (NICT) (2012)。國民中小學100學年度教科圖書一覽表。
Retrieved March, 10, 2012, from tp://review.nict.gov.tw/Bulletin/spic/100-1.doc
施玉惠 (Shih) (2000)。國小英語教材之評審—資格審v.s.選用審。第十七屆
中華民國英語文教學研討會論文集，213-225。台北︰文鶴。
蘇復興 (Su) (2003)。英語教育的基礎建設。英語教學，28(2),1-17。
鄧鈞文(Teng) (2002)。教科書自由化及其問題分析。課程與教學季刊，6(1),27-42。
描述 碩士
國立政治大學
英國語文學研究所
96551017
100
資料來源 http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0096551017
資料類型 thesis
dc.contributor.advisor 許炳煌zh_TW
dc.contributor.advisor Sheu, Ping Huangen_US
dc.contributor.author (Authors) 曾子芸zh_TW
dc.contributor.author (Authors) Tseng, Tzu Yunen_US
dc.creator (作者) 曾子芸zh_TW
dc.creator (作者) Tseng, Tzu Yunen_US
dc.date (日期) 2011en_US
dc.date.accessioned 12-Apr-2012 13:47:11 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.available 12-Apr-2012 13:47:11 (UTC+8)-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間) 12-Apr-2012 13:47:11 (UTC+8)-
dc.identifier (Other Identifiers) G0096551017en_US
dc.identifier.uri (URI) http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/52503-
dc.description (描述) 碩士zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 國立政治大學zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 英國語文學研究所zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 96551017zh_TW
dc.description (描述) 100zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) 本研究旨在藉由探討教科書評選指標的權重，了解國小英語教師對於英語教科書評選所採用之評選指標的看法，以及其教師背景對英語教科書評選的影響。本研究方法採用階層程序分析法(AHP), 並由文獻探討將教科書評選指標分為2大層面，5大向度，以及26個指標，建構出階層程序分析法問卷，以隨機方式發放於台北市12個行政區公私立126位國小正式英語教師，並藉由Expert Choice 2000 軟體分析，計算出各層面、向度、指標之權重值，並予以排序。
      研究主要結果如下：
      1.教師重視教科書內在評選高於外在評選。
      2.教科書外在評選，教師較為重視整體編排架構；教科書內在評選，教師認
      為語言能力比語言成分重要。
      3.整體編排架構裡，教師認為最重要的指標為「使用英語文正確、自然流
      暢。」；編印設計，最重要的指標為「字體大小適宜，印刷清楚。」；
      4.教具與輔助教材，最重要的指標為「提供配合課程的電腦多媒體教材。」
      5.教科書內在評選，男性教師較重視教科書語言成分；女性教師則較重視
      語言能力。教學經驗較少的教師重視語言成分高於語言能力；教學經驗較
      豐富的教師則認為語言能力較為重要。
      6.教具與輔助教材，學士學歷教師較重視指標為「提供配合課程的電腦多媒
      體教材。」；碩士學歷教師較重視指標為「CD發音正確清晰，速度適
      宜。」
      綜合本研究結果，教師對於教科書評選指標有不同看法及重視程度，期能提供教師對於教科書評選及評選指標有進一步瞭解。		zh_TW
dc.description.abstract (摘要) The current study aimed to understand how elementary English teachers in Taiwan prioritized criteria for textbook evaluation, and whether their various backgrounds influenced their prioritization of criteria. The research framework was constructed based on Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), including 2 objectives, 5 sub-objectives, and 25 criteria. An AHP questionnaire was randomly administered to 126 elementary English teachers in Taipei City. All the data were analyzed by means of the software Expert Choice 2000.
      The major findings in the current study are summarized below.
      1.Internal evaluation of textbooks was prioritized
      before External evaluation by a majority of the
      teachers.
      2.In external evaluation, most teachers emphasized
      General features of a textbook; in internal
      evaluation, teachers focused more on Language skills
      rather than Language components in a textbook.
      3.Concerning criteria for evaluating General features of
      textbooks, teachers considered the criterion Accuracy
      and fluency most important; as for Layout and physical
      makeup of a textbook, the criterion Typeface came out
      top; in Teaching aids, Multimedia was viewed as the
      most crucial criterion.
      4.In respect to criteria for evaluating Language
      components and Language skills in textbooks, the
      criterion Integration of components and Integration of
      skills were respectively emphasized by teachers.
      5.While male teachers focused more on Language
      components of a textbook, female teachers found
      Language skills more important.
      6.Novice teachers were more in favor of Language
      components than Language skills; however, to more
      experienced teachers, it was Language skills that they
      prioritized first.
      7.For criteria evaluating Teaching aids of a textbook,
      teachers with a Bachelor`s degree prioritized
      Multimedia as the most important criterion, while
      teachers holding a Master`s degree put much emphasis
      on the Quality of CDs.
      To conclude, it is hoped that these findings can shed light on textbook development and provide useful information for teachers when selecting and evaluating textbooks and for textbook developers when compiling textbooks for students.		en_US
dc.description.tableofcontents Acknowledgement................................iii
     Table of Contents..............................iv
     List of Tables.................................ix
     List of Figures...............................xii
     Chinese Abstract..............................xiii
     English Abstract..............................xv
     Chapter
     1.Introduction.............................1
     Background and Motivation..................1
     Purpose and Research Questions of the Study...............7
     Definition of Terms..............8
     Significance of the Study.................................9
     2. Literature Review..............11
     The Grade 1-9 Curriculum..................................11
     The Importance of Textbooks......13
     The Selection and Evaluation of Textbooks................16
     Approaches of Textbook Evaluation........................18
     Pre-use, in-use, and after-use approach...................18
     The checklist model......................................19
     External and internal evaluation approach.................20
     Criteria for Textbook Evaluation.........................23
     Influences of Teachers on Textbook Evaluation.............28
     Relevant Studies on Textbook Selection and Evaluation ...30
     Teachers` Perspectives on Textbook Selection and Evaluation ..........30
     Studies on elementary English teachers...................31
     Studies on junior high English teachers.............35
     Influence of Teachers` Background on Textbook Selection and Evaluation ........................................37
     Critiques on the Previous Research.......................39
     3. Methodology...............43
     Construction of the Research Framework ...................43
     Analytic Hierarchy Process..............43
     Subjects....................46
     Instruments..........................49
     External Evaluation.................................51
     General features .........................................52
     Layout and physical makeup ..........52
     Teaching aids .............53
     Internal Evaluation..............53
     Language components ...........53
     Language skills...............54
     The Validity and Reliability of the Questionnaire.........58
     Expert Validity.........................................58
     Expert validity: Professors` Review.......................58
     Expert validity: English Teachers` Review.........60
     Research Procedure.................61
     Data Analysis........................................64
     4. Results and Discussion......................65
     Distribution of the Questionnaire...............................65
     Results of Pairwise Comparison ..................66
     Pairwise Comparison of Objectives of Textbook Evaluation....67
     Pairwise Comparison of External Evaluation......................................68
     Comparison of Criteria of General features................................69
     Comparison of Criteria of Layout and physical makeup.............72
     Comparison of Criteria of Teaching aids.....................................73
     Pairwise Comparison of Internal Evaluation.......................................74
     Comparison of Criteria of Language components.......................75
     Comparison of Criteria of Language skills..................................77
     Influence of Background of Teachers on Pairwise Comparison..................79
     Influence of Gender on Pairwise Comparison ....................................79
     Comparison of Sub-objectives of External evaluation between
     male/female ....................80
     Comparison of Sub-objectives of Internal evaluation between
     male/female .......................81
     Comparison of Criteria of General features between male/female ..................82
     Comparison of Criteria of Layout and physical makeup betweenmale/female ..................83
     Comparison of Criteria of Teaching aids between male/female .................84
     Comparison of Criteria of Language components between male/female ..................84
     Comparison of Criteria of Language skills between male/female .....................85
     Influence of Teaching Experience on Pairwise Comparison...............86
     Comparison of Sub-objectives of External evaluation among teachers with various experience ...................87
     Comparison of Sub-objectives of Internal evaluation among teachers with various experience .........................88
     Comparison of Criteria of General features among teachers with various experience ................................89
     Comparison of Criteria of Layout and physical makeup among teachers with various experience ...........90
     Comparison of Criteria of Teaching aids among teachers with various experience ...................................91
     Comparison of Criteria of Language components among teachers with various experience. ........................92
     Comparison of Criteria of Language skills among teachers withvarious experience..................................93
     Influence of Education Degree on Pairwise Comparison......94
     Comparison of Sub-objectives of External evaluation between teachers with a Bachelor`s/ Master`s degree.......95
     Comparison of Sub-objectives of Internal evaluation between teachers with a Bachelor`s/ Master`s degree..............96
     Comparison of Criteria of General features between teachers with a Bachelor`s/ Master`s degree......................96
     Comparison of Criteria of Layout and physical makeup between teachers with a Bachelor`s/ Master`s degree......97
     Comparison of Criteria of Teaching aids between teachers with a Bachelor`s/ Master`s degree.............98
     Comparison of Criteria of Language components between teachers with a Bachelor`s/ Master`s degree...............98
     Comparison of Criteria of Language skills between teachers with a Bachelor`s/ Master`s degree...................99
     Summary and Conclusion of the Results....................100
     5. Conclusion..................................107
     Summary of the Study...................................107
     Pedagogical Implications ..................................109
     Limitations of the Study ................................111
     Suggestions for Further Research ........................112
     References..........................................115
     Appendixes.............................................123
     A: Shih’s Checklist for Elementary English Material Selection and Evaluation ...........123
     B: AHP Questionnaire for Textbook Evaluation (Original) ...........125
     C: AHP questionnaire for Textbook Evaluation (Final) ....135		zh_TW
dc.language.iso en_US-
dc.source.uri (資料來源) http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0096551017en_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 教科書評選zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) 階層程序分析法zh_TW
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Textbook evaluationen_US
dc.subject (關鍵詞) Analytic Hierarchy Processen_US
dc.title (題名) 國小英語教科書評選指標之研究zh_TW
dc.title (題名) A study on criteria for elementary english textbook evaluationen_US
dc.type (資料類型) thesisen
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Ariew, R. (1982). The textbook as curriculum. In T. V. Higgs (Ed.), Curriculum,zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) competence, and the foreign language teacher (pp. 11-33). Skokie, IL: National Textbook Company.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Best, J. W., & Kahn, J. V. (1998). Research in education (8th ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Brown, H. D. (2007). Teaching by principles: An interactive approach to language pedagogy. (3rd ed.). NY: Longman.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Brown, J. D. (1995). The elements of language curriculum: A systematic approach tozh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) program development. NY: Heinle and Heinle.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Byrd, P. (2001). Textbooks: Evaluation and selection and analysis for implementation. In Celce-Murcia, M. (3rd ed.) Teaching English as a second or foreign languagezh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) (pp. 415-427). Boston: Heinle & Heinle.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Chao, Y. C. (2005). A Triangulated investigation of elementary teachers’ perceptions into English textbooks used by 5th, 6th graders in Taichung County, central Taiwan. Unpublished master’s thesis, Providence University, Taichung, Taiwan.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Chang, C. L. (2008). A Study on Taiwanese Junior High School English Teachers` Use of Supplementary Teaching Materials. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Changhua University of Education, Changhua, Tiawan.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Chen, C. S. (2003). Reflections of elementary school teachers on the use of English textbooks in Taipei City. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Kaohsiung Normal University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Collins English Dictionary. (1992). Collins English Dictionary and Thesaurus. Harper Collins Publishers.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Cunningsworth, A. (1995). Choosing your coursebook. Oxford, UK: Heinemann.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Decarrico, J. S. (2001). Vocabulary Learning and Teaching. In Celce-Murcia, M.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) (3rd ed.) Teaching English as a second or foreign language (pp. 285-300). Boston: Heinle &Heinle.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Department of Education, Taipei City Government. (2002). Temporary English Curriculum Guidelines of Elementary Schools in Taipei City. Retrieved June, 25, 2012, from http://www.tp.edu.tw/law/doc/20040227_29.zipzh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Dyer, R. F. and E. H. Forman (1991). An Analytic Approach to Marketing Decisions. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Fredriksson, C. & Olsson, R.(2006). English textbook evaluation：An investigation into criteria for selecting English. Unpublished student’s thesis, Malmö University, Sweden.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Ellis, R. (1997). The empirical evaluation of language teaching materials. ELT Journal, 51(1), 36-42.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Forman, E and Selly, M. (2001). Decision by Objectives: How to Convince Others That You Are Right. New York: World Scientific Publishing Company.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Gatbonton, E., & Segalowitz, N. (2005). Rethinking communicative language teaching: A focus on access to fluency. Canadian Modern Language Review, 61, 325–353.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Gonzales, P. C. (1983). An analysis of language development materials. NABE Journal, 8(1), 5-21.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Grant, N. (1987). Making the most of your textbook. New York: Longman.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Hutchinson, T., & Torres, E. (1994). The textbook as agent of change. ELT Journal, 48(4), 315-328.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Inal, B.（2006). Coursebook selection process and some of the most important criteria to be taken into consideration in foreign language teaching. Journal of Arts and Sciences, 5, 19-29.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Jan, L. Y. (2004). English materials selection and communicative language teaching principle in Taiwan. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Kaohsiung Normal University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Johnson, K., Kim, M., Liu, Y. F., Nava, A., Perkins, D., Smith, A. M., Canela, O., & Lu, W. (2008). A step forward: Investigating expertise in materials evaluation. ELT Journal, 62(2), 157-163.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Larsen-Freeman, D. (2000). Techniques and principles in language teaching. (2nd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Larsen-Freeman, D. (2001). Teaching Grammar. In Celce-Murcia, M. (3rd ed.) Teaching English as a second or foreign language (pp. 251-266). Boston: Heinle & Heinle.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Li, H-C. (2003). Predictive Evaluation, Use, and Retrospective Evaluation of an EFLzh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Textbook by Junior High School Teachers. Unpublished master’s thesis, Nationalzh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Normal University, Taipei, R.O.C.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Lin, Y. H. (2004). An analytical study on provisionary editions of junior high school English textbooks in Kaohsiung city. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Kaohsiung Normal University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Littlejohn, A. (1998). The analysis of language teaching materials: Inside the Trojan horse. In B. Tomlinson (Ed.), Materials development in language teaching (pp.191-213). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Liu, S. J. (2009). An evaluation of the current elementary English textbooks: Teachers’ perspectives. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Cheng Chi University, Taipei, Taiwan.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Lu, C.Y. (2010). Junior High School English Teachers’ Perspectives on Current English Textbooks in Hsin Chu County. Unpublished master’s thesis, Chung Yuan Christian University, Taoyuan, Taiwan.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Ishizaka, A. & Labib, A. (2009). Analytic Hierarchy Process and Expert Choice: Benefits and Limitations, ORInsight, 22(4), p. 201–220zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Kuo, W. C. (2003). Assessing the English textbook for elementary school developed by Tainan city. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan, Taiwan.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) McDonough, J., & Shaw, C. (1993). Materials and methods in ELT: A teacher’s guide. London, UK: Blackwell.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) McGrath, I. (2002). Materials evaluation and design for language teaching. Edinburgh, UK: Edinburgh University Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Ministry of Education. (2004). General guidelines of Grade 1-9 Curriculum of elementary and junior high school education. Retrieved March, 20, 2009, fromzh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) http://english.moe.gov.tw/public/Attachment/66618445071.doczh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Ministry of Education. (2006). An introduction to the Ministry of Education of the R.O.C. Retrieved March, 20, 2009, from http://english.moe.gov.tw/ct.asp?xItem=7039&ctNode=784&mp=2zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Richards, J. C. (2001). Curriculum development in language teaching. Cambridge:zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Cambridge University Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Rubdy, R. (2003). Selection of materials. In B. Tomlinson (Ed.), Developing materials for language teaching (pp. 37-57). London, UK: Continuum International Publishing Group.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Saaty, T.L. (1980). The Analytic Hierarchy Process. New York: McGraw Hill.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Saaty, T. L. (2005). Analytic Hierarchy Process. In P. Armitage and T. Colton (eds)zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Encyclopedia of Biostatistics. (2nd ed.) (pp.190-198). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Saaty, T.L. (2008). Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. International Journal of Services Sciences, 1(1), 83-98.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Savignon, Sandra J. (2001). Communicative language Teaching for the Twenty-First Century. In Celce-Murcia, M. (3rd ed.) Teaching English as a second or foreign language (pp. 13-28). Boston: Heinle & Heinle.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Sheldon, L. E. (1988). Evaluating ELT textbooks and materials. ELT Journal, 42(4), 237-246.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Skierso, A. (1991). Textbook selection and evaluation. In M. Celce-Murcia (Ed.), Teaching English as a second or foreign language (2nd ed.) (pp. 432-453). NY: Heinle and Heinle.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Su, Y. H. (1997). Needs survey and evaluation scheme for industrial vocational high school English Textbooks. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Chengchi University, Taipei, Taiwan.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Tandlichova, E. (1995). Coursebook evaluation in teacher training in Slovakia. Modern English Teacher, 4, 65-147.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Tomlinson, B. (1998). Materials development in language teaching. Cambridge, UK:zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Cambridge University Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Tomlinson, B. (2001). `Materials development`, in R. Carter and D. Nunan (eds) The Cambridge Guide to Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (pp. 66-71).Cam- bridge: Cambridge University Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Tomlinson, B. (2003). Developing materials for language teaching. London, UK: Continuum International Publishing Group.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Tucker, C. Allen (1975). Evaluating beginning textbooks. English Teaching. Forum, 13 (3), 355-361.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Ur, P. (1996). A course in language teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Vargas, L.G. (1990), An overview of the analytic hierarchy process and its applications, European Journal of Operational Research, 48, pp. 2-8.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Williams D. (1983). Developing criteria for textbook evaluation. ELT Journal, 37 (3), 251-255.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Wu, S. T. (2002). An evaluation of the current set of junior high school English textbooks. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Chengchi University, Taipei, Taiwan.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Yang, C.Y. (2010).A Study on development of professional teaching competence indicator for Taipei City elementary English teachers. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Taipei University of Education, Taipei, Taiwan.zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 林玫玲、陳國彥 (Lin & Chen) (2003)。社會領域教科書選用規準之研究。載於中 華民國課程與教學學會（主編），教科書之選擇與評鑑，115-142。台北： 中華民國課程與教學學會。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 詹餘靜 (Chan) (2000)。國小英語教育發展趨勢及三‘教’—教師、教材、與教 法—相關問題研究。國立台北師範學院學報，16, 203-238。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 張玉芳 (Chang) (2002)。 國小英語教學師資，教材選用，及學童學習現況調查 研究—以苗栗縣為例。英語教學，26(4), 19-37。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 戴維揚 (Dai) (1999)。九年一貫英語科新課程新趨勢。教育研究資訊，7(4),1-17。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 國立編譯館 (NICT) (2012)。國民中小學100學年度教科圖書一覽表。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) Retrieved March, 10, 2012, from tp://review.nict.gov.tw/Bulletin/spic/100-1.doczh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 施玉惠 (Shih) (2000)。國小英語教材之評審—資格審v.s.選用審。第十七屆zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 中華民國英語文教學研討會論文集，213-225。台北︰文鶴。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 蘇復興 (Su) (2003)。英語教育的基礎建設。英語教學，28(2),1-17。zh_TW
dc.relation.reference (參考文獻) 鄧鈞文(Teng) (2002)。教科書自由化及其問題分析。課程與教學季刊，6(1),27-42。zh_TW