129
LITERACY DEVELOPMENT IN EFL TEXTBOOKS IN MADRID’S PRIMARY
SCHOOLS
EL DESARROLLO DE LA ALFABETIZACIÓN EN LOS LIBROS DE TEXTO DE
INGLÉS EN LOS COLEGIOS DE PRIMARIA DE MADRID
Lyndsay R. Buckingham
Universidad Pontificia de Comillas
lrbuckingham@comillas.edu
Mary Frances Litzler
Universidad de Alcalá
mf.litz@uah.es
ABSTRACT
Research indicates that Spanish schools tend to focus on literacy in a narrow sense, as in the
mechanics of reading and writing with a focus on text at the word and sentence level. However, the
idea of literacy on an international scale includes the ability to use reading and writing skills for a
variety of activities with texts. This study seeks to examine whether four fourth grade textbooks for
English as a Foreign Language used in Madrid take the more traditional approach to literacy or a
broader one that involves the consideration of genre characteristics and work at the text level. A
questionnaire was formulated to examine the reading and writing activities of the textbooks. The
results suggest that the books present a more narrow view of the concept of literacy.
Key words: literacy, textbooks, English as a foreign language, primary education, bilingual education
RESUMEN
La literatura indica que en los colegios en España se entiende la palabra literacy como un concepto
limitado a la mecánica de la lectoescritura, con un enfoque a nivel de palabras y frases
(alfabetización), mientras a nivel internacional ese término incluye la habilidad de utilizar las
destrezas de lectura y escritura para realizar una variedad de actividades con textos (literacidad).
Esta investigación tiene como objetivo examinar si cuatro libros de texto de inglés para el cuarto
curso de primaria en Madrid mantienen la visión tradicional de alfabetización, o si la amplían para
considerar las características del género de texto y el trabajo a nivel de texto en línea con la
literacidad. Para llevarla a cabo, se confeccionó un cuestionario para examinar las actividades de
lectura y escritura de los libros. Los resultados sugieren que los libros toman una visión más reducida
del concepto de literacidad.
Palabras clave: alfabetización, libros de texto, lengua inglesa, enseñanza primaria, enseñanza bilingüe
Revista Nebrija de Lingüística Aplicada a la Enseñanza de Lenguas (RNAEL) ISSN 1699-6569
Vol. 13 Núm. 27 (2019) doi: 10.26378/rnlael327332
Recibido: 1/09/2019/ Aprobado: 14/110/2019
Publicado bajo licencia de Creative Commons Reconocimiento Sin Obra Derivada 4.0 Internacional
130
1. INTRODUCTION
The term “literacy” has received numerous definitions in a variety of fields from psychology
to linguistics to economics. It has been considered a set of skills, a situated practice, a
learning process, and the consumption of text (EFA Global Monitoring Report Team 2006).
The view taken in this article is in line with the last of these notions in that different groups
in society produce and use different genres and types of texts, which are situated within a
broader social and political context (EFA Global Monitoring Report Team 2006). Literacy in
this sense involves going beyond the mechanics of reading and writing to “the ability to use
reading and writing skills in order to produce, understand, interpret and critically evaluate
multimodal texts” (European Commission 2012: 13). This multimodality involves meaning
communicated through different formats such as images, page layout, music and body
language, among others (Cazden, Cope, Fairclough & Gee 1996). A plurality of text
formats, languages and cultures are involved (New London Group 2000, as cited in Meyer,
Coyle, Halbach, Schuck & Ting 2015), and indeed, new technologies offer a platform for
different modalities and genres to emerge.
However, this evolution of the idea of literacy is not common to all cultures, and the
development of literacy is not uniform around the world. Spain, the context of this study,
has traditionally scored lower than average on tests such as PISA, which compare reading
ability among different countries (Benítez Sastre et al. 2016). This indicator of students’
receptive skills is cause for concern and implies a need for improvement. Unfortunately,
there are no data available regarding the level of students’ writing skills or their
manipulation of multimodal texts. Nevertheless, as literacy is vital for social, economic and
personal reasons (European Commission 2012), measures must be taken to improve
citizens’ reading and writing abilities to their fullest and to consolidate pupils’ increased
performance in these areas.
When addressing this concern for improving students’ literacy skills, many questions
arise as to the reasons behind the relatively low international ranking of Spain, especially
when considering the introduction of a foreign language, English, and the teaching of
content in English. Even so, very few projects that focus on literacy development have been
identified (Halbach & Candel Bormann 2019). The present analysis is part of a larger study
on literacy development in primary schools in Madrid, Spain,1 which attempts to identify
the interpretations of literacy and related best practices in the fourth grade of primary
school in Madrid, Spain. It focuses on the view and treatment of the concept of literacy in
English as a Foreign Language (EFL) textbooks, a fundamental component of any EFL
course (Richards 2002), in order to determine the approach taken to improving pupils’
skills. The question is whether they take a narrow perspective of literacy, that is, one which
views the concept as the basic mastery of reading and writing mechanics, or one that
encompasses a wider view of literacy as an ongoing learning process to manipulate and
produce different types of texts. It is assumed here that there is no distinction in the notion
of literacy between first and second languages given the conceptualizations mentioned
above.
131
2. THE CONCEPT OF LITERACY IN SPAIN
The term “literacy” has been traditionally translated to alfabetización or lectoescritura in
Spanish (and to similar terms in Portuguese, French and German), though these terms
describe a much narrower concept, i.e. learning the alphabet and learning to read and write
letters and words (Cassany & Castellà 2010: 355). As can be deduced from the meaning of
the terms traditionally employed in Spain, the development of alfabetización has tended to
focus on the mechanics of reading and writing, and has been concentrated in the first and
second years of primary school (Fernández & Halbach 2009). More recently there has been
a push to adopt the term literacidad among Spanish speaking experts in order to avoid the
limitations of the more traditional terms (Cassany & Castellà 2010; Gamboa, Muñoz &
Vargas 2016; Iñesta Mena 2017), though this practice has not been taken up by teachers
in schools.
If we take a narrow view and consider literacy to be simply the consumption of text,
we can directly relate it to reading comprehension in either L1 or L2. As seen in PIRLS and
PISA results, Spain’s young people have repeatedly scored near or under the average for
the European Union in terms of reading comprehension ability, showing a slight decline
(Benítez Sastre, et al. 2016: 6), though this is changing thanks to above average results
on PIRLS 2016 (Mullis, O`Martin, Foy & Cooper 2017). Students are able to “read simple
texts, retrieve explicit information, or make straightforward inferences, but they are not
able to deal with longer or more complex texts and are unable to interpret what is explicitly
stated in the text” (Benítez Sastre, et al. 2016: 6). Choi and Jerrim (2016) argue that this
reading comprehension deficit already exists at the primary levels, even though it becomes
more glaring at the secondary levels.
The 2016 PIRLS report (Mullis et al. 2017: 256) informs that schools in Spain spend
an average 25% of school hours on language instruction, including reading, writing,
speaking, literature and other language skills, which is only slightly lower than the
international average (27%). Similarly, reading instruction, including reading across the
curriculum is reported to account for an average of 16% of school hours, only slightly below
the international average of 18%. Of course, it is not always the amount of time, but the
approach taken, that is the key. It has been demonstrated that teaching styles in Spain are
still based on the transmission of curricular content (language theory) rather than on
constructivist approaches leading to communication of ideas (OECD 2014). Lorenzo (2016)
argues that countries that focus learning through constructivist approaches demonstrate
better reading competences, in part because they place less importance on metalinguistic
knowledge. Indeed, Spanish EFL and CLIL (Content and Language Integrated Learning)
textbooks focus on language accuracy rather than fluency or “more creative aspects such
as reading for pleasure or creating personal texts” (Fernández & Halbach 2009: 53).
In the Spanish educational system, the processing of texts has traditionally relied on
a bottom-up focus relating to word recognition, grammar and structure. The ELINET report
claims that despite recent increases in project-based methodologies, there is a tendency to
decontextualize language use at the pre-primary levels (Benítez Sastre et al. 2016). This
has also been found to be the case in L2 in a recent analysis of textbooks used in the first
two years of primary school in CLIL and ELT classrooms in Spain. The study found that the
textbooks mainly focused on grammar and vocabulary as they were observed to work at
word and sentence levels. Lessons were focused on gaining accuracy in reading and writing
132
and the microskills involved, such as the mechanics of reading and writing, knowing the
letters and being able to produce them or blend them to read words (Fernández & Halbach
2009).
Performance gaps have also been found between Spanish children who are aware of
summarizing and efficient reading strategies, though this gap is slightly smaller than the
European average (Benítez Sastre et al. 2016). This suggests that only some pupils are
using metacognitive strategies, and that they may not be using them as efficiently as in
other countries. More recent results from PIRLS 2016 reveal that schools in Spain are
working on skills and strategies such as comparing what pupils have read to experiences
they have had and making predictions about what will happen next in a text (Mullis et al.
2017: 260).
Furthermore, the development of literacy arguably gains importance when considering
students’ learning through CLIL subjects, as is prominent in Spain. Indeed, discourse
patterns change across cultures and these variations can be appreciated in both spoken
and written genres (Gilmore 2015; Mickan 2017). Therefore, the intercultural element that
is essential to CLIL presents both a difficulty and an opportunity, depending on one’s
perspective. In fact, teachers have identified the difficulty of teaching English from a
Spanish literacy perspective, due in part to the fundamental differences between the two
languages, such as the sound-grapheme correspondence in Spanish that is more
unpredictable in English (Fernández & Halbach 2009). In this sense, they have reported a
need for further training in the teaching and practice of literacy and oracy (Durán-Martínez
& Beltrán-Llavador 2016: 83). At the same time, teachers have a clear opportunity to enrich
their approaches to literacy through the application of foreign perspectives and techniques
(Fernández & Halbach 2009). For these reasons and others, Meyer et al. (2015) suggests
a pluriliteracies approach that involves more than one language, mode of communication
and semiotic system, which is specifically useful in a CLIL environment.
The nature of literacy is fundamentally cognitive since it is based on the mental
processes that allow a command of the language system, first in basic ways like phonology
and later through more complex structures, including longer texts. Similarly, Cummins’
(2000) idea of the initial acquisition of basic interpersonal communication skills (BICS) and
the later development of cognitive academic language proficiency (CALP) is essential to the
CLIL approach. Lorenzo (2016) suggests that the Spanish system fails when developing
students’ CALP, pointing to successful results in the PIRLS exam, which is mainly focused
on narrative language, as compared to poor results on the PISA exam, which focuses on
more expository, academic language. This is supported by the lack of focus on higher-order
thinking skills such as interpreting or inferring meaning in primary level EFL and CLIL
textbooks (Fernández & Halbach 2009). In fact, the results of PIRLS 2016 revealed that
teachers ask their fourth grade pupils to determine an author’s perspective less often than
other skills and strategies for reading, such as identifying the main idea of what they have
read or locating information in the text (Mullis et al. 2017: 259-260).
If pupils in Spain are to consolidate their improvement on tests such as PIRLS, they
will need to improve their literacy skills in the broader sense of the word. The ELINET report
(Benítez Sastre et al. 2016) claims that the PIRLS 2011 exam points to a number of skills
that have been left unattended in primary levels, and that the PISA results point to a need
for instruction in reading strategies. The authors of the ELINET report recommend spending
more time on teaching reading in primary schools, and making more efficient use of the
programs that are already in place to improve literacy skills among students (Benítez Sastre
et al. 2016). Ruiz de Zarobe and Zenotz (2015) argue for metacognitive strategy training
133
to help students improve their reading comprehension skills. This is just one way to allow
space for student reflection, dialogue and improvement throughout the learning process.
Familiarity with different text types, including their organization, typical wording and
other conventions makes verbal participation possible in community social practices
(Mickan 2017). In fact, there is argument in favor of detailed analysis of text patterns to
reveal these structures and lexical use for students (Gilmore 2015; Meyer et al. 2015;
Mickan 2017). In Spain, the average percentages of Spanish learners who are exposed to
different types of both literary and informational texts once a week or more are at or above
the international averages (Mullis et al. 2017: 270). However, averages for other genres
have not been found, and exposure to a wide variety, including digital texts, would be ideal
(Gamboa, Muñoz, & Vargas 2016). A text genre map that identifies the text types necessary
for non-linguistic disciplines would aid in the planning for overall literacy development.
In other countries, such as Australia and Canada, a text-based focus for language
education requires students to analyze and reconstruct texts from different disciplines as
well as work with other techniques. The idea is moving from learning to read toward reading
to learn (Lorenzo 2016). In the same line, Meyer et al. (2015) argues that placing language
at the center of all learning is necessary to deeper learning, considering that progress in
learning requires an increasing capacity of articulating understanding.
The integration of best practices, such as the communicative methodology, in both
linguistic (native and foreign languages) and non-linguistic disciplines, would be beneficial,
perhaps with the adoption of a document that defines a common approach toward language
awareness across school subjects. The Common European Framework provides EFL
teachers with a reliable set of descriptors to aid in evaluation, and this can and should also
be used when evaluating students’ native language in order to gain clarity of the level of
linguistic competence achieved (Lorenzo 2016). There should also be a focus on formative
and authentic assessment through the use of portfolios, frequent observation, group
corrections, self-assessment and the measure of individual progress (Lorenzo 2016).
3. OBJECTIVES
Given that textbooks are a key component in most language programs (Richards
2002), this study examines literacy development as observed through four EFL textbooks
used in the fourth grade of the primary level of education in the Autonomous Community
of Madrid. It has been inspired by Fernández & Halbach (2009) in that the objective is to
explore whether the narrow sense of the concept of literacy is still taken in textbooks written
or adapted for the Spanish market ten years after that study was written. More specifically,
the present paper examines the following questions:
• What interpretation of the concept of literacy is behind each textbook?
• How is literacy developed in the EFL textbooks?
• Can any differences in the approach to literacy be observed in the textbooks used in
bilingual schools as compared to those in non-bilingual schools?
4. INSTRUMENT
As mentioned above, this study is part of a larger project to examine the development
of literacy skills in the third and fourth grades of primary school in the Autonomous
134
Community of Madrid. The larger project involves a combination of survey research
(Fernández Fernández 2018; Halbach & Candel Bormann 2019), and textbook analysis. For
the present study, two members of the research team (the authors of this paper) first
developed a series of questions for examining textbooks based on the selection of features
that are indicative of lectoescritura and literacy by Fernández and Halbach (2009) (see
Table I).
Literacy in a narrow sense
Literacy in a broad sense
Preliminary
aspects
Work focuses on letters
Work focuses on sounds
The mechanical part is important
- neat handwriting
The mechanical phase is just a
“preliminary”
Reading
Work is on pedagogical texts
Pedagogical texts are complemented
with text from various genres: poetry,
tales, etc.
Work on the text is aimed at
extracting information, normally
through closed questions
The text is worked on in relation with
the topic of the unit; it is used as a
starting point for other activities (e.g.
writing a poem)
The text is not worked on at the
level of textual comprehension,
solely on language issues
An efferent and aesthetic response is
looked for
Writing
Focus is on the text
Focus is on the student / reader
Accuracy is valued
The content of the writing is valued
Students write to answer
questions
Students write to communicate
Focus is on vocabulary (at the
word level)
The text is related to students’ own
experience
Focus is on the product
Focus is on the process
Correct models are imitated
Creativity is fostered
Beyond reading
and writing
Closely linked to “language”
Interdisciplinary character: developed
through other subjects too
Literacy is worked on in the first
years of schooling
Literacy is a skill developed throughout
life
Concept of “multiliteracies” is not
generally known
Concept of “multiliteracies” is known
and practiced
TABLE I. Comparison of literacy features adapted from Fernández & Halbach, 2009
They each then examined two randomly selected textbooks and later compared answers to
clarify the different questionnaire items and ensure consistency in their analysis. After this
process, which included consultation with other members of the research team, four
textbooks used by school teachers in the region were analyzed using the final instrument
(Table II). The entire process took approximately four months.
In Spain and in the Madrid region, a large variety of books is available, many from
international publishers and others from local companies. The particular EFL textbooks were
selected because they represent four major international publishing companies and were
mentioned by a number of the respondents to the questionnaire in Fernández Fernández
(2018). At the same time, two of the textbooks are used by bilingual schools and the other
two are used by non-bilingual schools according to the survey results, thus enabling a
135
chance to determine potential differences between the two types of schools in the area. It
should be noted that neither the authors of this study nor the research group received any
incentive or benefit from the companies for selecting their books over others. The books
examined here are the following:
1) High Five 4, Macmillan Publishers (bilingual schools)
2) Ace! 4, Oxford University Press (bilingual schools)
3) Hopscotch 4, Cengage Learning (non-bilingual schools)
4) Kid’s Box 4, Cambridge University Press (non-bilingual schools)
Question item
Reading
What genres are present in the textbook as a whole? Narrative, factual
description, recipes, biography, adverts, interviews, etc.
What is the purpose of the reading activity? Introduction/reinforcement of
grammar or vocabulary; subject content; reading as an activity to relate to one’s
life; encouragement of reading as a pleasurable activity.
Writing
At what level are students producing and analyzing language? Word level,
sentence level or beyond sentence level.
What type(s) of linguistic scaffolding is provided? Examples, selecting from
options, matching, etc.
How meaningful is the language production? Encourages creativity and
originality, relates to student experience, relates to textbook situation
What type(s) of procedural scaffolding is provided? Provision of models, explicit
analysis of models, planning, reviewing
Does the activity involve the planning of language production and/or editing to
make improvements?
Beyond reading
and writing
Do the exercises relate to the students’ other classes, and hence, their world
beyond the English language?
Do the textbook exercises and/or teacher’s book promote the idea that literacy
is a skill that is learned throughout life?
Do the textbooks encourage the pupils to practice with other formats of
expression such as Internet, dictionaries, encyclopedias, etc.?
Are students encouraged to express themselves in different formats such as
posters, collages, etc.?
Are students encouraged to work with their language skills beyond the textbook,
such as through Internet?
Table II. Questionnaire by authors used in the analysis of the textbooks
5. METHOD
The questionnaire was composed of several items meant to regard the units’ overall content
and the focus on literacy skills. First, the aspects related to reading were examined. The
genres present in each textbook and their purpose were noted. The different exercises
related to reading were then considered in order to determine whether the texts were
designed to assist pupils in learning about grammar and vocabulary or whether reading
was encouraged as an activity that involved students’ experience in the world. Second, the
activities related to writing were examined and categorized as being at the word, sentence
136
or paragraph level. They were also read to determine whether they involved rote language
practice or if they allowed for pupils to express themselves and their own life experience in
a meaningful way. In addition, the existence of scaffolding, or assistance in building up to
a larger task be it linguistic or procedural, was examined. For example, extensive writing
exercises were examined to see if the textbooks promote the notion that writing is a process
that involves planning, editing and reviewing. The last part of the questionnaire involved
examining the books to determine if the exercises foster the notions that literacy goes
beyond language work into other areas of study and that it is developed throughout life. As
such, the textbooks were examined to see if they encourage work with other written
formats such as dictionaries and digital sources.
The two researchers examined the pupil’s book, activity book and teacher’s book for
each of the four titles using the questionnaire. Particular attention was paid to the reading
and writing exercises in unit 5 of each pupil’s book because this unit was considered
representative of the others; it followed the same overall structure and was not an
introductory, project or review unit. The extra components from the publishers for the
textbooks were not examined given the large volume of material already available.
6. RESULTS
This presentation of the results first discusses the approach to literacy as described in the
teacher’s books, and then continues with the textbooks themselves.
6.1 Interpretations of literacy in teacher’s books
The introductory section to each of the teacher’s books was read to determine whether the
word literacy appeared and how the concept was described when it was mentioned. In the
absence of the word in question, the explanations for the reading and writing exercises in
this same section were examined to determine the interpretation of literacy held by the
authors. It was found that two of the teacher’s books mention the actual term, while three
of them provide descriptions related to different aspects of the concept. The teacher’s book
closest in line with the broader definition of literacy discussed above is High Five. The
textbook is reported to have a literacy spread in each unit “designed to help pupils to
understand, respond to texts and to reflect on them” (Ramsden 2014: 20). It involves the
“analysis of characteristics such as author purpose, the reader and the informative content
of a text” (Ramsden 2014: 20), which helps children to prepare for writing. The teacher’s
book for Ace! 4 also mentions the term and describes aspects suggestive of a broader
interpretation of this concept, such as students’ familiarity with stories including their
“narrative conventions”; a focus on stories in the textbook “furthers familiarity and
understanding of the functions of text” (Bilsborough & Bilsborough 2012: 6). In terms of
writing, the teacher’s book highlights the use of “clear models” (Bilsborough & Bilsborough
2012: 7) to enable children to produce their own writing samples.
The teacher’s book for Hopscotch 4 does not mention the term “literacy” but does
refer to “teaching pupils the conventions of writing” (Cook & Hill 2017: 4) as one of the
objectives in the textbook, which is focused on developing pupils’ language skills so that
they can have “both accurate and fluent communication” (Cook & Hill 2017: 4). A “Writing
Time” section on spread C of each unit provides a model for writing with an activity that
“prepares the pupils for producing their own piece of writing” that is “always guided and
137
supported” (Cook & Hill 2017: 9). Like this textbook, Kids’ Box 4 makes no reference to the
word “literacy” but language is said to be “introduced in context” with the chance for
learners to “personalize” it (Frino & Williams 2017: 6). There is also a “strong focus on
pronunciation” (Frino & Williams 2017: 11). Both of these descriptions appear to be
somewhat in line with the broader conceptualization of literacy described above. However,
further examination of the pupil’s books discussed below, reveals that this is not always
the case.
6.2 Literacy as observed in the textbooks
At this point in their education, pupils are familiar with the letters and handwriting and are
now working towards improvement of their reading and writing skills in the English
language. For this reason, the textbooks contain no work on the mechanical side of these
activities. Instead, they have exercises to increase ability in associating sounds and spelling
along with the pronunciation of English, given the fact that pupils are learning a foreign
language. They also have an abundance of audio recordings from the start of each unit;
pupils consistently read the corresponding text as they listen to the recording so that they
can associate the spoken word with the written form. At the same time, new vocabulary
items tend to be presented in a context that involves text and pictures to facilitate
comprehension.
6.2.1 Texts and reading
The texts found in all four textbooks appear to have been written specifically for the
textbooks, and have not been reproduced from other sources. Nevertheless, the teacher’s
book to High Five mentions “fun and motivating texts from the real world” (Ramsden &
Shaw 2014: 18) and the teacher’s book to Hopscotch indicates that reading passages are
“inspired by National Geographic” (Cook & Hill 2017: 8). Narratives involving children are
included in all the books and, in fact, the storylines in High Five and Kid’s Box continue
throughout the different units. The characters introduced in an initial story in Ace! and
Hopscotch appear throughout the other units even if they do not take part in the actual
stories. Songs are also present in all four textbooks. Authentic works of literature are not
found in the books except for a short extract from The Owl and the Pussycat, found in Kid’s
Box.
After literary texts, the genre found most often in these textbooks is factual
description, similar to those found in a content subject textbook, an encyclopedia or the
Internet. In fact, all four textbooks include lessons in each unit related to other subject
areas and to culture. Recipes, another type of factual text, are also found in all four books.
Finally, the High Five literacy spread mentioned above introduces pupils to a few
characteristics of a wider range of texts, including biographies and autobiographies, myths,
adverts, acrostic poems, newspaper articles and interviews, and travel brochures, in
addition to the genres already indicated.
Nevertheless, it should be noted that the texts are used for different purposes in the
books. The stories and songs that pupils read are clearly used as support for language
work. They include examples of grammatical structures and vocabulary that are introduced
before or afterwards and that pupils practice in a more focused way. In some cases, the
structure is actually highlighted in bold in the story (as in Hopscotch), or it is listed at the
bottom of the page for the teacher and pupils to see easily (Ace! and High Five), both
138
strategies that reinforce the linguistic focus of these texts. Pupils can also be asked to find
words and grammatical structures in the text or to select the correct word of two for a
sentence. After reading the stories, all four textbooks instruct the children to act them out,
a strategy to reinforce language learning but also one related to comprehension. The
activity books have exercises that involve matching sentence halves and/or fill-in-the blank
sentences and dialogues with or without a selection of words in a word bank, mainly aimed
at practicing language.
The texts used for cultural and cross-curricular topics, typically located in the second
half of the units in all four textbooks, show a shift towards vocabulary and meaning. When
comprehension questions are part of the reading exercise, they involve looking for a short
answer in the text, selecting true sentences from a list or fitting the correct word from a
word bank into a summary paragraph. Nevertheless, the questions are often very similar
to the actual wording of the original text, so there is little challenge in terms of text
comprehension. In other words, the exercises remain for the most part within the lower
order thinking skill of understanding. It should be noted, however, that these readings are
often used as the basis for more extensive writing, as explained below. The activity book
exercises corresponding to these sections tend to reinforce the learning of vocabulary, with
exercises involving matching and the reordering of sentences.
Despite these different uses of texts in the textbooks, it is worthy to note that the
purpose of reading tends to be more instrumental than pleasurable or meaningful,
particularly in the case of stories. Pupils are not given a meaningful purpose for reading,
as evidenced in the instructions listed prior to the readings throughout the four books.
Examples are “Listen and read” (Ace) and “Listen to the recording and read the story”
(Hopscotch).
Pupils are, however, sometimes encouraged to brainstorm ideas and then read texts
to confirm their answers, which creates a context for reading. This is most evident and
meaningful in High Five, which incorporates prediction questions into each literacy section
of the pupil’s book. For example, pupils are asked “What do you think Sirens are? Read and
listen to find out. What do the Sirens do?” (Ramsden & Shaw 2014: 58). The other three
pupil’s books show no evidence of this extent of prediction of content; instead, teachers
are given suggestions in the teacher’s books to have the class brainstorm ideas related to
a topic and/or have the pupils identify items in pictures which are related to the reading to
follow. Nevertheless, the prediction work in Hopscotch and Kid’s Box is mainly vocabulary
preparation to assist pupils in understanding the text, thus, reinforcing the instrumental
nature of the reading and encouraging a focus on word-level processing skills, a bottom-
up approach to handling text.
It is significant to note that High Five and Ace! have pupils respond to content in the
story for each unit in a short exercise at the end of the corresponding lesson. This involves
filling in some blanks in sentences related to their opinion about the story and their favorite
character and vignette. High Five also has them write a reason for their preferences and
discuss their own experience with regards to the situation in the story. In addition, the
culture section of High Five has pupils discuss questions that relate the ideas from the text
to their own experience once they have finished reading. After that, they are encouraged
to do a webquest on the topic. These exercises related to personalizing their experience
with texts encourage pupils to use the higher-order thinking skills of drawing connections
between ideas and taking a stand on a position.
139
6.2.2 Writing
In terms of the writing skills developed in the four textbooks, practice is often at the word
or sentence level and it is frequently used to reinforce the language work. Students fill in
letters to complete partially written words, do puzzles such as word searches, and finish
sentences or write complete ones, first using sentence frames and model sentences and
then doing so on their own. They also reorder words and write questions that go with
answers that are provided. In this sense, the focus in all four books is on developing
accurate use of the target language, as opposed to valuing the content of the ideas written.
While communication of meaning related to the pupils’ lives is not often involved, all
the books make at least some attempt to enable pupils to personalize their practice of the
language structures. For example, in Hopscotch they answer questions in one sentence
about their favorite types of food and drink in a unit review (Clark 2017: 57). In this way
the focus is slightly shifted from linguistic accuracy to the communication of ideas, bringing
the perspective of literacy to a slightly broader one.
Writing beyond the sentence level is also practiced in all four books at least once in
each unit. In the longer writing exercises, which entail up to about 60 words, pupils are
often expected to write about a topic that is pre-selected. The genres practiced are typically
factual, as when pupils write a news article (Ace!), information for a holiday brochure (High
Five) or a recipe (Hopscotch), but they can also include opinions as in writing about their
favorite sports and sports star in unit 7 of Hopscotch.
All four books provide practice that enables pupils to progress from writing at the word
level to the sentence level and then to more extensive writing of up to about 60 words.
Nevertheless, in High Five and Ace! the flow from one level to the others is clearer than in
Hopscotch and Kid’s Box. For example, in learning about recipes in Ace!, pupils identify
cooking verbs in pictures, write one-sentence instructions with the verbs, practice the
structure of “there is/there are,” write sentences to describe pictures, read descriptions of
ingredients in dishes, and other activities. At the end of the unit the learners work with
model recipes before writing one of their own. In contrast, the progression toward writing
a text in unit 5 of Hopscotch is less guided. Specifically, it jumps from practice at the word
level to longer text writing (up to 60 words) with limited work at the sentence level between
the two.
As mentioned above, the reading texts in the different units are sometimes used as
the basis for more extensive writing. In three of the textbooks, a text is used as a model
and there is planning for writing of some type (High Five, Ace! and Hopscotch) with varying
degrees of evidence of a process approach to writing. The clearest examples are found in
High Five. For instance, in preparing to write information about a travel destination, pupils
first read about Italy and Mexico and do comprehension activities. They then examine the
features of the genre, such as the presence of a map, photos and information on cities, and
are prompted to write brief guided notes about a destination of their choice before writing
their own text.
Some similar comprehension and planning activities can be found in Ace! though
without explicitly examining the aspects of the genre in question. In Hopscotch, models are
provided and students do some very basic planning of the content by answering a series of
guided questions before writing their own paragraph, but there is no explanation of the
genre or the structure of the text. The textbook Kid’s Box does not appear to work with
models for writing. In addition to encouraging pupils to plan for writing, High Five also has
140
them review their work to determine if they have included certain features of the genre
examined in the prior lesson. It is the only textbook of the four that does so.
Due to the restrictions of following a model text, there is generally little room for
creativity in these writing exercises. Pupils are able to personalize their work by adding
their own ideas and opinions in the different types of exercises that involve writing beyond
the sentence level, but creative writing per se is hardly practiced. When creative production
is fostered, it often involves another type of expression such as drawing and inventing. This
is the case of the invention of robots or super animals (Kid’s Box), minibeasts (High Five),
a town or city (Ace! extra worksheets), and a drawing of a student’s favorite thing
(Hopscotch).
6.2.3 Beyond reading and writing
The readings and writing exercises that go beyond the sentence level reveal attempts on
the part of the publishers to relate the content to other subjects in school. High Five and
Ace! promote contact with language from other subject areas including science, technology,
history, maths, and arts and crafts in a cross-cultural lesson in each unit. Kid’s Box does
the same in a special CLIL section at the end of each unit focused on “connecting the world
outside the classroom” (Frino & Williams 2017: 8). Finally, Hopscotch, which is based on
National Geographic content, focuses on people and different places in each unit, and on a
particular cross-curricular subject through the section of each unit called the Explorers’
Club. All of this is positive since “progression in discipline or subject understanding will be
limited unless it is accompanied by progression in learners’ subject-specific literacies”
(Meyer et al. 2015: 52). Nevertheless, the cross-curricular or CLIL sections tend to simplify
content and focus on lower-order thinking skills, a finding that also held true in a study of
international textbooks marketed in Argentina (Banegas 2014). A comparison of textbooks
used in other subjects in Spain is needed to determine the extent to which the contents of
the CLIL sections in English language textbooks are indeed simplified.
None of the textbooks or teacher’s books makes explicit reference to literacy’s being
a skill developed throughout life. The latter do, however, mention learner autonomy and/or
fostering an interest in learning in their introductory sections. In fact, High Five mentions
the explicit idea of “preparing children for learning throughout their lives” (Ramsden &
Shaw 2014: 21).
In terms of the development of multiliteracies, High Five has pupils do webquests for
additional information after each culture lesson and Ace! encourages them to use a
dictionary for new words, thus encouraging them to work with different sources of
information. Kid’s Box and Hopscotch, however, make no indication to pupils to look
elsewhere for information. Nevertheless, the four different textbooks do have pupils create
work in other formats than the traditional written text. Posters, comics, collages and
labelled drawings are included in project work to promote these different formats of writing
and creative expression, which is a positive step toward fostering and raising awareness of
multiliteracies.
In addition, three of the four textbooks include access to an online website with
additional activities for pupils to continue practicing outside their classes, thus facilitating
digital literacy. A new edition of the six-level High Five series will also include a pupil’s app
for use on a mobile phone and this updated textbook, as well as Kid’s Box, can be used in
paper or digital format in class. DVDs with videos are also available to reinforce classes for
all four textbooks.
141
7. DISCUSSION
The four textbooks analyzed continue to have a focus on language as they involve extensive
practice at the word and sentence levels, but they do incorporate longer readings and, to
some extent, writing at the paragraph level. While linguistic scaffolding is provided in
abundance, especially for sentence level work, varying levels of scaffolding are provided in
terms of assisting students to explicitly understand the structuring of paragraphs or the
process of writing, despite promises in the teacher’s books to foster guided assistance to
reading and writing. Models are provided but there are varying degrees of explicit
explanation regarding structure.
A more constructivist approach toward building a message in a collaborative and
creative way would be more conducive to guiding students to developing literacy, as well
as learning how to continue developing these skills throughout their lives (Fernández &
Halbach 2009; Lorenzo 2016). Continuing to add work at the text level through contact
with additional texts and genres and with the features of these genres will be crucial to
developing students’ multiple literacies (Mickan 2017). This is especially important when
considering that the CLIL approach involves different contexts and that discourse patterns
vary across cultures (Gilmore, 2015; Mickan 2017). It is interesting to note that the two
textbooks used in bilingual schools (High Five and Ace!) make the process of writing more
explicit than the other two. This finding suggests that more work on writing as a process
might be taking place in bilingual schools if their choice of textbook can indicate this
intention.
At the same time, pupils’ previous experience is not always considered despite its
importance in facilitating comprehension using a top-down approach to reading. Some
attempts at making language practice relevant to pupils, however, can be seen. There
ought to be a more meaningful, communicative approach to using writing for real-world
purposes in order to arm pupils with the tools to produce coherent texts that perform
communicative tasks (Gilmore 2015; Meyer et al. 2015; Mickan 2017).
Despite claims in the teacher’s books, there also continues to be a tendency to require
mostly lower order thinking skills of pupils, though this too seems to be changing to some
degree. While some textbooks concentrate on simple comprehension questions about texts,
others make an effort to have students apply what they have learned in some way. Higher
order thinking skills and critical thinking can mainly be appreciated in the projects and cross
curricular topics that are offered by the textbooks. Pushing students to use these skills is
important in any educational setting, but especially so in a CLIL setting, where cognition
and CALP are essential to sustainable learning (Coyle 2007; Cummins 2000), and in a
country such as Spain which has been found to fail at students’ mastery of CALP (Lorenzo
2016).
On the whole, varying degrees of all of these aspects of literacy have been found for
the different textbooks. High Five stands out as being the closest in line with the broad
interpretation of literacy discussed at the start to this article. The other textbooks approach
this broader understanding to a lesser extent. Ace!, however, does promote scaffolding to
understand the organization of texts and it encourages pupils to reflect on their opinions of
texts, both steps in this same direction. It is interesting to note that the two books used by
bilingual schools have come the furthest in working towards a more global view of literacy.
This may be related to the pupils’ need to communicate in English in different contexts and
their receiving more hours of instruction in English. The combination of exposure to
different contexts and a potentially higher level of language leads pupils to be able to work
142
more in-depth with texts, and textbook publishers appear to be responding to this situation.
Nevertheless, research involving more textbooks is needed to confirm this distinction.
8. CONCLUSION
Literacy development is necessary for students, and it is essential that they see it as a
multidisciplinary and lifelong goal. To this end, further work must be done to consider a
common literacy approach across disciplines and regard literacy as a longitudinal concept.
Through the study of text genres and their relation with school subjects, the curriculum can
be constructed so that students work with a variety of genres throughout their school years,
as in countries such as Australia and Canada. Support for subject-specific literacy
development can be given from the Spanish and English language classes if there is
coordination at all levels among stakeholders. In fact, the potential for transfer of what is
learned in the first and second languages, as detailed in Cummins’ Underlying Proficiency
model (Cummins, 1980), means that the development of literacy in either language will
benefit the learner, regardless of the language of input or output. Further, CLIL classes
provide an opportunity for students to gain flexibility in terms of varying discourse patterns
found in different cultures, and this should be maximized.
Further similar research is required in order to determine whether the findings of the
present study can be confirmed in textbooks for other subjects, including Spanish language
and CLIL classes. It would also be interesting to continue analyzing textbooks used in later
levels of primary education as well as in secondary education to determine whether there
is continuity and further development of literacy regarding more advanced genres. The
hope is that these and other similar studies will influence publishers to make further efforts
to offer materials that foster literacy in the broader sense of the word, and that teachers
will become better informed in order to make decisions about the materials with which they
choose to work. It is of paramount importance to continue training teachers in a more
encompassing definition of literacy, the necessity to support students in developing
multiliteracies, and the appropriate related tools and methodologies.
NOTE
1 This paper has been possible thanks to funding from Universidad de Alcalá for the project “Desarrollo de
destrezas de alfabetización en el segundo ciclo de educación primaria en centros de la Comunidad Autónoma
de Madrid: Estudio de la situación actual” [CCGP2017-HUM/024]. The authors would also like to indicate their
appreciation to Dr. Ana Halbach for reading and commenting on the manuscript.
REFERENCES
Banegas, D. L. (2014). An investigation into CLIL-related sections of EFL coursebooks: Issues of CLIL
inclusion in the publishing market. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism,
17(3), 345-359.
Benítez Sastre, L., D’Angelo Menéndez, E., Garbe, C., Gil Traver, F., Lafontaine, D., de Juan Sánchez
de Rojas, M. P., Villabona Garcíaet, M. (2016). Literacy in Spain: Country report, children and
143
adolescents. European Literacy Policy Network (ELINET). Retrieved from http://www.eli-
net.eu/fileadmi/ELINET/Redaktion/user_upload/
Spain_Long_Report.pdf
Bilsborough, K. & Bilsborough, S. (2012). Ace! 4 (class book, activity book, teacher’s book). Oxford
University Press.
Cassany, D. & Castellà, J. M. (2010). Aproximación a la literacidad crítica. Perspectiva Florianópolis,
28(2), 353-374. DOI: 10.5007/2175-795X.2010v28n2p353
Cazden, C., Cope, B., Fairclough, N., Gee, J., et al. (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing
social futures. Harvard Educational Review, 66(1), 60-92. Retrieved from
http://newarcproject.pbworks.com/f/Pedagogy+of+Multiliteracies_New+London+Group.pdf
Choi, A., Jerrim, J. (2016). The use (and misuse) of PISA in guiding policy reform: The case of Spain.
Comparative Education, 52(2), 230-245. DOI: 10.1080/03050068.2016.1142739
Clarke, S. (2017). Hopscotch 4: Activity book. Cengage Learning/National Geographic Learning.
Cook, J., Hill, D. A. (2017). Hopscotch 4: Teacher’s book. Cengage Learning/National Geographic
Learning.
Coyle, D. (2007). Content and Language Integrated Learning: Towards a connected research agenda
for CLIL pedagogies. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 10(5), 543-
562. DOI: 10.2167/beb459.0
Cummins, J. (1980). The cross-lingual dimensions of language proficiency: Implications for bilingual
education and the optimal age issue. TESOL Quarterly, 14(2), 175-187.
Cummins, J. (2000). Language, power and pedagogy: Bilingual children in the crossfire. Clevedon,
UK and Tonawanda, NY: Multilingual Matters.
Durán-Martínez, R., Beltrán-Llavador, F. (2016). A regional assessment of bilingual programmes in
primary and secondary schools: The teachers’ views. Porta Linguarum, 25, 79-92.
EFA Global Monitoring Report Team (2006). EFA global monitoring report 2006: Literacy for life.
Paris: UNESCO. Retrieved from https://en.unesco.org/gem-report/report/2006/literacy-life
European Commission (2012). EU high level group of experts on literacy: Final report. Luxembourg:
Publications Office of the European Union. Retrieved from
http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/education_culture/
repository/education/policy/school/doc/literacy-report_en.pdf
Fernández, R., Halbach, A. (2009). Uncovering the approach to literacy of Spanish textbooks used
in a CLIL context. In S-A. Ditze & A. Halbach (Eds.), Bilingualer sachfachunterricht (CLIL) im
kontext von sprache, kultur und multiliteralität (pp. 42-55). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
Fernández Fernández, R. (2018). “Exploring Literacy in Bilingual Contexts. CAM Primary Teachers’
Conceptualization.” Paper Presented at the 42nd AEDEAN Conference, Córdoba. November 7–
9.
Frino, L., Williams, M. (2017). Kid’s Box 4 (teacher’s book). Cambridge University Press/Cambridge
English Language Assessment.
Gamboa, A. A., Muñoz, P. A., Vargas, L. (2016). Literacidad: Nuevas posibilidades socioculturales y
pedagógicas para la escuela. Revista Latinoamericana de Estudios Educativos (Colombia),
12(1), 53-70. Retrieved from http://latinoamericana.ucaldas.edu.co/downloads/
Latinoamericana12(1)_4.pdf
Gilmore, A. (2015). Research into practice: The influence of discourse studies on language
descriptions and task design in published ELT materials. Language Teaching, 48(4), 506-530.
DOI: 10.1017/S0261444815000269
Halbach, A., Candel Bormann, D. (2019). Inching towards literacy in Madrid’s primary schools: A
survey of school-wide projects, Language and Education, 33(5), 416-430. DOI:
10.1080/09500782.2019.1622712
Heath, J., Crawford, M. (2017). Hopscotch 4: Pupil’s book. Cengage Learning/National Geographic
Learning.
144
Iñesta Mena, E. M. (2017). Revisión sobre literacidad como noción multidimensional para una
didáctica de las lenguas inclusiva. Porta Linguarum, 27, 79-92. Retrieved from
http://www.ugr.es/~portalin/articulos/PL_numero27/6_Eva%20M%20Inesta.pdf
Lorenzo, F. (2016). Competencia en comunicación lingüística: Claves para el avance de la
comprensión lectora en las pruebas PISA. Revista de Educación, 374, 142-160. DOI:
10.4438/1988-592X-RE-2016-374-329
Meyer, O., Coyle, D., Halbach, A., Schuck, K., Ting, T. (2015). A pluriliteracies approach to content
and language integrated learning – mapping learner progressions in knowledge construction
and meaning-making. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 28(1), 41-57. DOI:
10.1080/07908318.2014.1000924
Mickan, P. (2017). Text-based research and teaching from a social semiotic perspective:
Transformative research and pedagogy. In P. Mickan & E. Lopez (Eds.), Text-based research
and teaching: A social semiotic perspective on language in use (pp. 15-35). Palgrave Macmillan.
DOI: 10.1057/978-1-137-59849-2_2
Mullis, I., O’Martin, M., Foy, P., Hooper, M. (2017). PIRLS 2016: International results in reading.
Chestnut Hill, MA: TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Lynch School of Education,
Boston College and International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement
(IEA). Retrieved from http://pirls2016.org/download-center/
Nixon, C., Tomlinson, M. (2017). Kid’s Box 4 (pupil’s book, activity book). Cambridge University
Press/Cambridge English Language Assessment.
OECD (2014). New insights from TALIS 2013: Teaching and learning in primary and upper secondary
education, OECD Publishing. DOI: 10.1787/9789264226319-en
Ramsden, J., Shaw, D. (2014). High Five 4 (pupil’s book, activity book, teacher’s book). Macmillan
Publishers.
Richards, J. C. (2002). The role of textbooks in a language program. Retrieved from
https://www.professorjackrichards.com/wp-content/uploads/role-of-textbooks.pdf
Ruiz de Zarobe, Y., Zenotz, V. (2015). Reading strategies and CLIL: The effect of training in formal
instruction. The Language Learning Journal, 43(3), 319-333. DOI:
10.1080/09571736.2015.1053284
