THE INABILITY OF THE MATERIAL TO PROVIDE "REALISM"

Textbooks are a cultural disaster in terms of realism. Most of the time, they not
only neglect representation of the culture of the target language, they in fact have
established themselves into a variety of language that is distinctively independent one
which can be regarded as "textbook culture". Some teachers regard textbooks as
breaking rules of natural language use as they lack in both situational and linguistic
realism. When texts lack in real-ism of this nature, they are detached from not only the
culture of the target language but the first language as well.
Situational realism is achieved in materials if two main criteria are fulfilled; age and
interest. This would mean that texts and tasks relate to the age and interests of the target
learners. Most often then not, the culture (from the perspective of the broader sense of
the word) of target learners, while they vary across boundaries will have commonalities,
especially if one looks at the "common behavior related to developmental stages" and
associates that with the "culture of learners and learning". We are well aware of what
has been written about the predictable psychology of young adult learners from research
done extensively in the past, but unfortunately very little of that translates to realism in
materials for ELT. Textbook writers blatantly ignore the "culture" of young adult
learners by constantly falsifying culture. Texts and activities rarely account for such
behavior as teenage restlessness and rebelliousness, the end result of which our
textbooks lack in situational real-ism. Some examples of this found in Malaysian
secondary school textbooks are illustrated below in Dialogues C and D:
Dialogue C
School setting
Aminah and Slew Ling are in the school compound
Aminah : Look Siew Ling, the whole garden is full of fallen leaves. Siew Ling :
Yes. It does not look very nice.
Aminah : Our gardener, En. Ahmad is ill. He cannot come to work today. Siew Ling :
Why don't we get some more friends and do the work for him. Aminah : That's a good
idea. Let's go.
Dialogue D
School setting
Chiew Hong is with her father in the school canteen.
Chiew Hong : Father, this is our school canteen.
Father : Oh, its very nice. I am sure they have delicious food here. Chiew Hong :
Yes father, but my favorite is Penang Laksa. It only costs one ringgit.
Father : That is cheap. Lets have Penang Laksa.
Chiew Hong : Thank you father.
Father : Your school canteen is very good. It is also very clean.Dialogues such as these are common in systems where the agenda for "moral
indoctrination" is so strong that it encompasses the entire school curriculum. The sum
effect of this approach however would be a lack of interest in the dialogues which, from
the onset of the lesson would lead to low motivation levels thus raising resistance to
material. If ever there was terminology created today, the one most apt to describe texts
such as the ones above would be "pedagogical put-offs"! Excess concern with moral
issues, have led material builders to create "mirages" of life. In the two scenes above,
the young adult characters show very little sign that they are typical young adults. In
fact, they look like clones of the so far unattainable "perfect young adult"; what some
circles within society want out of young adults. In typical situations involving young
adults, the. girls in Dialogue C would not have easily volunteered to do the cleaning job,
and the young adult in Dialogue D would not be playing the "dutiful guide" to the
father. Also, striking a conversation on a school canteen is hardly ever done by fathers
and teenaged daughters!
Another way in which realism becomes detached from teaching material is when
the language of dialogues is made to look artificial. It is true that materials which are
deficient in naturalness lack in "linguistic realism". An example of a typical dialogue
lacking in linguistic realism found in school textbooks is provided below, in Dialogue
E:
Dialogue E
Telephone conversation between Ahmad and Chong
Ahmad : Hello is that Chong?
Chong Yes, this is Chong.
Ahmad : Chong, this is Ahmad.
Chong : Hi Ahmad. How are you?
Ahmad : Fine thank you. And how about you?
Chong : I am fine too.
Ahmad : I called to find about our History homework. Are you doing it now?
Chong : Yes, I am doing the homework now. There is a lot of work to do. Ahmad : I am
not sure which exercise to do. Do we have to do Exercise 2? Chong Yes.
We have to do Exercise 2.
Ahmad Do we have to do Exercise 3?
Chong : Yes, we have to do Exercise 3.
Ahmad : Do we write the answers in the textbook?
Chong : Yes, teacher wants us to write the answers in the textbook. Ahmad Do
we write in pencil?
Chong : Yes, we have to write the answers in pencil.
Some teachers and material builders would consider dialogues such as the one above
"necessary" for focused practice as the aim of these exercises would be to provide target
structures with minimum obstruction from peripheral or intruding structures that are
normally associated with authentic or near-authentic dialogues. While practice such as
this with "intensified focus" on target structures may provide practice, they may never
lead to learning as narrow intensified practice only enables these structures to be
retained in short-term memory. The biggest set back to classroom teaching that materials such as these inflict on learners is the "falseness" of language. Speakers of English,both native or non-native speakers do not "interrogate" their friends over the telephone
about homework as the dialogue above suggests. In most cases young adults do not
even bother asking each other about how they are, especially since they meet in class
everyday. While the aim of such a dialogue would be to teach the affirmative, there are
negative consequences that come about from using texts of this nature. Second language
learners are not exposed to "real" languag