SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
vol.18 issue1Analysis of institutional accreditation dependence: a comparative study of universities in ChileMeanings and ways of participation in school: the perspective of youth Argentinians author indexsubject indexarticles search
Home Pagealphabetic serial listing  

Services on Demand

Journal

Article

Indicators

Related links

  • Have no similar articlesSimilars in SciELO

Share


Actualidades Investigativas en Educación

On-line version ISSN 1409-4703Print version ISSN 1409-4703

Abstract

ARELLANO A., Rodrigo. A corpus linguistics application in the analysis of textbooks as national teaching instruments of English as a Second Language in Chile. Rev. Actual. Investig. Educ [online]. 2018, vol.18, n.1, pp.376-395. ISSN 1409-4703.  http://dx.doi.org/10.15517/aie.v18i1.31807.

The Ministry of Education (MINEDUC) bases the instruction of English in Chile in the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, Teaching, Assessment (CEFRL), however its guidelines have not been systematically considered in the practice of creating instructional material in the EFL context of this country. To analyze this issue, this article presents the comparison of the vocabulary about Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL) used in the CEFRL and the English textbooks used in Chile regarding the categories of curriculum design, language teaching methodology and language assessment.

The methodology was mixed, not experimental, cross-sectional and descriptive, including the analysis of the CEFRL document and the 8 English textbooks used in Chile in the public sector. Firstly, the data was compared quantitatively using the software Nvivo9 and later some key words (learners / students - teachers) were analyzed quantitatively in terms of frequency and qualitatively using collocations. Results suggest that similar vocabulary is used in both, the CEFRL and Chilean textbooks in terms of “language teaching methodology” (36% and 33% respectively), but it varies highly in the category of “curriculum design” (22% and 48% respectively) and mostly in “language assessment” (42% and 19% respectively) while showing different frequencies in the key words and their associated verbs between “students” (1,33%) and “teacher” (0,18%). These results show a constructivist approach in both, but with a minor behaviorist aspect especially in textbooks, indicating relevant differences in the emphasis and coherence between different areas of the instruction.

Keywords : teaching guides; CEFRL; teachers; students.

        · abstract in Spanish     · text in English     · English ( pdf )