

































English Language Teaching Educational Journal   ISSN 2621-6485 

Vol. 7, No. 1, April 2024, pp. 13-23  

       https://doi.org/10.12928/eltej.v7i1.10306          http://journal2.uad.ac.id/index.php/eltej/index        eltej@pbi.uad.ac.id  

SQRAR: A model of ELT coursebook evaluation 

Sukarno  

English Language Education, Yogyakarta State University, Jl. Colombo No. 1, Yogyakarta, 55281, Indonesia 

sukarno@uny.ac.id  

 

A R T I C L E  I N F O 

  

A B ST R ACT    

 

 

Article history 

Received 16 January 2024 

Revised 12 February 2024 

Accepted 15 March 2024 

  Coursebooks have become the most prominent English learning 
materials, especially in formal education. Therefore, recursive 
evaluation should be conducted to adjust the coursebook based on the 
current needs and learning goals. Moreover, dynamic evaluation 
brings interaction or mediation with a genuine act of teaching to make 
the evaluation more meaningful and substantial. However, limited 
resources are available, especially the ones that could help the teacher 
evaluate vivid steps dynamically. This study fulfills the need for a 
coursebook, especially ELT, evaluation method by following the 
research and development design proposed initially by Dick and Carey 
that many experts have simplified. The design was constructed from a 
sequence of steps, namely ADDIE (Analysis, Design, Development, 
Implementation, and Evaluation). Thirty participants conducted an 
evaluation phase based on the product trial design, followed by a 
Focus Group Discussion (FGD). The data were gathered using a 
questionnaire and the interview guidelines. The instruments were 
developed based on the ideal coursebook criteria. They are shaped in 
quantitative and qualitative forms and analyzed using Creswell’s data 
analysis technique. Thus, a set of evaluation methods was designed: 
SQRAR (Survey, Question, Read, Analyse, and Recommend). The 
design benefits the teachers by allowing them to evaluate the 
coursebook systematically and effectively. Survey results demonstrate 
strong consensus among English teachers, advocating for urgent 
development of such evaluation models. Implementation of the 
SQRAR model involves detailed stages emphasizing thorough 
evaluation and constructive feedback, with micro and macro 
evaluation options discussed. The model ensures comprehensive 
evaluation, consistency, and alignment with learning objectives and 
provides clear recommendations for coursebook improvement. 

 

This is an open access article under the CC–BY-SA license.    

 

 
Keywords 

Business Correspondence 

EFL Writing Anxiety 

Learning Anxiety 

Second Language Writing 

 

 

  

How to Cite: Sukarno. (2024). SQRAR: A model of coursebook evaluation. English Language Teaching 
Educational Journal, 7(1), 13-23. https://doi.org/10.12928/eltej.v7i1.10306  

1. Introduction  

 Many professionals believe that English learning materials are critical to the teaching and learning 
process. They typically serve students in English classes by providing extensive language input, 
examples, exercises, and activities (Richards & Renandya, 2002; Soviyah & Fatimah, 2021). As a 
result, coursebooks, among other learning materials, continue to be the primary source of language 
learning (Sucipto & Cahyo, 2019; Surono et al., 2022). Despite their shortcomings, coursebooks are 
needed, desired, and valued by teachers and students all over the world as a ready-to-use language 
learning resource (Mishan, 2022). They can serve as the primary foundation for language courses 
(Graves, 2003). The ideal English coursebook also serves as a model for creating English teaching 
materials (Afifah, 2019). English learning materials help students communicate with others by 
cultivating pragmatic competence, or the ability of the speaker-listener to communicate (Ellis, 2003). 
Furthermore, teaching materials serve as a source of language, a source of learning support, a source 

https://doi.org/10.12928/eltej.v7i1.10306
http://journal2.uad.ac.id/index.php/eltej/index
mailto:eltej@pbi.uad.ac.id
mailto:sukarno@uny.ac.id
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
https://doi.org/10.12928/eltej.v7i1.10306
http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.12928/eltej.v7i1.10306&domain=pdf
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
https://orcid.org/0009-0007-9708-2434


14 English Language Teaching Educational Journal   ISSN 2621-6485 

 Vol. 7, No. 1, April 2024, pp. 13-23 

 Sukarno (SQRAR: A model of coursebook …..) 

of motivation and stimulation, and a source of reference (Dorda, 2008; Rojabi, 2020). As a result, 
coursebooks play an important role in language teaching and learning. 

The utilization of coursebooks within educational institutions is contingent upon their adherence 
to established criteria. In accordance with Article 11 of the Regulation of the Minister of Education 
and Culture (Permendikbud) Number 8 of 2016, which pertains to the selection of books for use in 
State Educational Institutions, institutions are mandated to employ coursebooks that meet specified 
standards; failure to do so may result in punitive measures. As a consequence, it becomes imperative 
for the Indonesian government, in collaboration with authoritative bodies such as the Center for 
Curriculum and Books and the Ministry of Education, Culture, Research, and Technology, along with 
the expertise of scholars and English educators, to oversee the compliance of all English coursebooks 
utilized in Indonesian secondary schools with the stipulated criteria (Ansary & Babaii, 2002; Shi, 
2014). This regulatory framework underscores the government's commitment to maintaining the 
quality and appropriateness of educational materials, ensuring that they align with prescribed 
educational objectives and standards. 

Coursebooks used by institutions must be in accordance with positive social values or norms. 
Pornography, extremism, radicalism, violence, SARA (ethnicity, religion, race, and intergroup 
relations), gender bias, and other deviations from values are prohibited (Buku Yang Digunakan Oleh 
Satuan Pendidikan, 2016). The covers, front materials, contents, and back materials of a coursebook 
must all meet the requirements. The coursebook must have a front, back, and spine cover. The 
coursebook must have a title page, a publication page, an introductory page, a table of contents, a list 
of figures, a list of tables, and page numbering. The body of the coursebook must meet material, 
linguistic, material presentation, and graphical requirements. Finally, the back material of the 
coursebook must include information about the book's creator (such as the author and illustrator), a 
glossary, bibliography, index, and attachments (Standar Isi Pendidikan Dasar Dan Menengah, 2016). 
In addition, coursebooks must meet the target's needs, lacks, and wants. 

Azarnoosh and friends (2018) argue that coursebooks should be evaluated for reasons. For starters, 
it can assist program developers, syllabus designers, and language learners. It will secure the match 
between the students' needs and objectives of the learning (Tsiplakides, 2011). 

An evaluation is an organized assessment of progress toward the expected learning outcome, 
achievement of the outcome, or overall program performance (United Nations Development 
Programme, 2002). In line with that, Vedung (2017) defines evaluation as a deliberate and 
retrospective process of evaluating the quality or value of any subject of evaluation in order to improve 
it in the future. A retrospective evaluation of a coursebook includes everything from assessing the 
coursebook content to making a summative recommendation (Ellis, 1997). 

Recursive assessment and evaluation are required to meet the coursebook criteria. Teachers can 
provide constructive feedback for coursebook improvement by implementing the coursebooks in the 
field. However, most practitioners find it difficult to evaluate coursebooks due to the limited resources 
of coursebook evaluation models. It could be concluded that there is an urgent need for a coursebook 
evaluation model to serve as a guide for evaluating coursebooks (Shave, 2010). 

A coursebook evaluator should evaluate the a coursebook based on the established criteria. These 
elements are typically included in the form of an assessment rubric. The evaluator should check the 
availability or scale of each aspect so that it can be revised more easily (Zohrabi et al., 2012). The 
evaluator should also carefully read the coursebook to determine the quality level of each aspect. 

Furthermore, in a traditional assessment, people are usually asked to solve test items and then turn 
them in for a score or little feedback, or sometimes nothing at all. This assessment procedure is 
classified as static by Sternberg and Grigorenko (2002). They go on to say that static evaluation only 
considers a product in its current state. Examiners frequently grade using the existing evaluation 
system and rarely draw conclusions, so feedback is non-existent. Furthermore, in order to maintain 
neutrality or good rapport, the examiner avoids involvement to the greatest extent possible. 

In contrast, Haywood and Lidz (2007) propose dynamic assessment as a subset of interactive 
assessment. However, dynamic assessment is not appropriate in all circumstances. It may be useful in 
situations such as: (1) low standardized/normative/static test scores, (2) learning difficulties due to 
intrinsic factors in the subject, (3) a language/communication barrier, and (4) cross-cultural 
misunderstanding. The terms 'selectivity' and 'dynamism' are central to dynamic evaluation 



ISSN 2621-6485 English Language Teaching Educational Journal 15 
 Vol. 7, No. 1, April 2024, pp. 13-23 

 Sukarno (SQRAR: A model of coursebook …..) 

(Dimitropoulos, 1999). The dynamic evaluation is recognized as the selection and combination of 
appropriate methods for specific evaluation research, such as internal-external evaluation, summative-
formative assessment, and qualitative-quantitative paradigms. The concept of dynamism in dynamic 
evaluation refers to self-control and self-correction, which are enabled by supervision and feedback. 
In addition to Haywood and Lidz's (2007) concept, 'dynamism' is embodied here in the interaction or 
mediation with a genuine act of teaching in order to make the evaluation more meaningful and 
substantial. Dynamic evaluation emphasizes ongoing assessment and feedback throughout the 
learning process. One of the key advantages of coursebook dynamic evaluation is that they can create 
a more engaging and motivating learning environment. By emphasizing interaction and negotiation, 
these coursebooks can help the learners feel more invested in the learning process and more connected 
to their peers and the teacher (Milal et al., 2020; Purwanti & Hatmanto, 2019). Additionally, some 
researchers have found the effectiveness of dynamic evaluation coursebooks in improving language 
outcomes (Cheng & Zhao, 2020; Solhi et al., 2020; Yilmaz & Tugrul, 2017).   

Concerning the essential of coursebook evaluation and the static evaluation that has been carried 
out for years to evaluate the English coursebooks, an innovation in dynamic evaluation is seen as 
essential (Dahmardeh & Kim, 2021). Therefore, a method in the form of a set of steps is urgently 
needed to help the evaluators fill in the rubric easily, objectively, and directly. Furthermore, 
considering the benefits of coursebook dynamic evaluation, a dynamic evaluation method would be 
an alternative solution to the problems.  

Some previous studies have been carried out to develop methods in order to make the coursebook 
evaluation. One of the methods is SQ3R as an abbreviation of Survey-Question-Read-Recite-Review 
(Rybicki, 2002). The SQ3R was then developed into SQ4R that stands for Survey-Question-Reading-
Recording-Reciting-Reviewing. Furthermore, it was then developed into PQRST (Preview-Question-
Read-Self-Review-Test). Another method is known as THIEVES. It pays attention to some aspects in 
a text (Title, Headings, Introduction, E-first sentence of every paragraph, Visuals and vocabulary, End 
of chapter questions, and Summary). In addition, there is the QAR method that emphasizes in 
Question-Answer Relationship in a text. Those models are strategies that help the students to focus on 
particular essential aspects to have effective reading and find certain information. However, those 
strategies are mainly concerned with steps in reading. Limited specific dynamic model for coursebook 
evaluation has established. Therefore, the dynamic model proposed in the current study is identified 
as the novelty to the area. In that so, this study aims to develop a model of coursebook dynamic 
evaluation which later will be called SQRAR. The SQRAR has theoretical and practical significance 
to the educational field, especially in ELT area. It contributes to the theoretical development related 
to the coursebook evaluation in dynamic model. Moreover, it also serves benefit for related parties 
since the SQRAR model could be used by teachers and also coursebook developers to evaluate 
particular coursebook.  

2. Methodology  

This study follows a design and development procedure in Dick & Carey model that has been 
simplified by Molenda (2003). The simplified model has also been proposed by McGriff (2000), 
Peterson (2003) and Branch (2009). Therefore, the procedure is adapted into five steps called ADDIE 
(Analysis, Design, Development, Implementation, and Evaluation). In Analysis stage, the researchers 
conducted needs analysis by conducting interviews and survey in the form of Forum Group Discussion 
(FGD) with the participants. The participants were 30 English teachers of MGMP (English teachers 
forum) from Yogyakarta province. The researcher used interview guideline to collect qualitative data 
and google form questionnaire to collect the quantitative data. Those research instruments have been 
validated before. Thus, the qualitative data was validated by using triangulation while the quantitative 
data was validated using Cornbach’s Alpha, with the help of SPSS software.  From this stage, the 
researcher found the need of dynamic model of coursebook analysis. Then, the researcher Designed 
the suitable model of coursebook evaluation aligns the gathered needs analysis. After that, the 
researcher developed the designed model into a clear and practical framework namely SQRAR. The 
researcher then conducted the next stage which is Implementation stage. In the implementation stage, 
the participants tried the model out for evaluating particular coursebook used in the classrooms. The 
last stage is Evaluation stage in which the researcher and participants discussed the model being 
developed.  



16 English Language Teaching Educational Journal   ISSN 2621-6485 

 Vol. 7, No. 1, April 2024, pp. 13-23 

 Sukarno (SQRAR: A model of coursebook …..) 

The ADDIE model is considered simple and adaptable because it provides developers with a 
generic and systematic framework that can be applied to a variety of settings (Peterson, 2003). Branch 
(2009) also claims that other designs may be too didactic, limiting, passive, or singular. According to 
Branch (2009), using ADDIE in the development of learning media, online tools, or any educational 
product is more effective. In addition, Molenda and Boling (2008) argue that the five major stages are 
not only sequential but also iterative. This means that the process can be repeated until the product is 
completely satisfied. 

3. Findings and Discussion 

3.1. Findings 

The goal of a dynamic evaluation is to identify barriers to more effective learning and performance 
and then suggest solutions (Cheng & Zhao, 2020; Haywood & Lidz, 2007; Sternberg & Grigorenko, 
2002). The evaluators intervene during the dynamic evaluation by obtaining the learners' potential 
ability. Ideally, evaluators are teachers who master theories of linguistics, learning, language learning, 
psychology, communication, and other related theories. The evaluators in this study are primarily 
English teachers who use English coursebooks and understand students' needs for learning materials. 
Furthermore, material developers and ELT practitioners with a sufficient understanding of the 
student's needs as well as the situation in the teaching and learning process can participate in the 
evaluation. Dynamic evaluation is classified into two types: interventionist and interactionist. The 
second is concerned with the interaction between the examiner and the examinees. This is a 
dialectically integrated activity (Poehner, 2008). 

74.2% participants agreed that English coursebooks used in current formal education need to be 
evaluated based on criteria set by the government, experts, and current curriculum used by educational 
institutions. The participants of this study believe that the development of a model of English 
coursebook dynamic evaluation is urgently needed. 

The development of the model of English coursebook dynamic evaluation is based on the SQRAR 
as the evaluation process. SQRAR stands for Survey, Question, Read, Analyze, and Recommend. The 
model, SQRAR, is synthesized with the adaptation of dynamic assessment. In this context, it is called 
English coursebook dynamic evaluation using SQRAR.  

SQRAR is adapted in the English coursebook evaluation to search for weaknesses in English 
coursebooks and then provide recommendations to revise the evaluated English coursebooks in a 
cyclic process. The writers, publishers, or even English teachers developing their own learning 
materials learn from the recommendations and plan to revise their learning materials (English 
coursebooks). As a result, they are responsive to the evaluation results as meaningful inputs (Haywood 
& Lidz, 2007). There are connections between the coursebook evaluators and the learning materials 
writer. 

The SQRAR steps, as a set of coursebook evaluation method, is based on the needs analysis 
attached in the following Table 1.  

Table 1.  Needs Analysis on SQRAR Process 

Dimensions Question 
Result* (%) 

1 2 3 4 

Survey 
When we are going to evaluate an English coursebook, we should select 

and determine which English coursebook to evaluate. 
0 0 25.8 74.2 

Question 
Before evaluating an English coursebook, we should brainstorm/ask for 

elements and criteria of a good English coursebook. 
0 0 29 71 

Read 
In evaluating an English coursebook, we should read the whole content in 

detail. 
3.2 9.7 32.3 54.8 

Analyse 
Having read the coursebook in detail, we need to reread the coursebook 

and analyse it based on the criteria. 
3.2 3.2 32.3 61.3 

Recommend 
Having analysed the English coursebook, we should give 

recommendations for the coursebook improvement. 
0 0 25.8 74.2 

*  1: strongly disagree  3: agree  2: disagree         4: strongly agree 

Table 1 shows that everyone who fills out the questionnaire agrees with the importance of 
determining which English coursebook will be evaluated. In this case, however, English teachers 



ISSN 2621-6485 English Language Teaching Educational Journal 17 
 Vol. 7, No. 1, April 2024, pp. 13-23 

 Sukarno (SQRAR: A model of coursebook …..) 

decide which English coursebook to evaluate. Furthermore, the evaluation results can help English 
teachers and their students prepare good and appropriate English learning materials. Moreover, align 
with the theory (Surono & Hanun, 2022), all participants believe that English coursebook evaluators 
(English teachers and ELT experts) should brainstorm ideal English coursebooks based on their 
criteria. First, they should ask themselves what ideal English textbooks are. Following that, they 
develop their own specific criteria before evaluating an English coursebook using the comprehensive 
criteria provided. 

The evaluation of an English coursebook can be in the form of a macro or a micro evaluation 
(Mukundan & Ahour, 2010). In the micro evaluation of English coursebooks, evaluators can pay 
attention and then evaluate three chapters as representatives of the coursebook's entire contents 
(Muhammad, 2016). A little more than 6% of respondents are opposed to doing another reading to 
analyse the coursebook. Despite the fact that only a small number of people disagree, it is worthwhile 
to consider using micro retrospective evaluation of English coursebooks. Evaluators who use this 
method do not need to read and analyse the entire contents of the coursebooks they evaluate. Instead, 
they concentrate on specific chapters that represent the entire contents of the coursebooks. They then 
examine the chapters they have chosen. 

Furthermore, nearly three-quarters of participants agree that outlining recommendations after 
evaluating the coursebook to improve its quality is a good idea. This is the pinnacle of the evaluation; 
not only for assigning grades but also for making recommendations to improve the English 
coursebook under evaluation. The recommendations can be used by coursebook publishers to revise 
their coursebooks, or they can be used as the foundation for English teachers to develop their own 
English learning materials as English teachers' edition coursebooks. The dynamic evaluation of 
English coursebooks is a cyclic process. In addition, the illustration of the SQRAR Flow and a detailed 
elaboration of each step are provided in Fig. 1. 

 

 

Fig. 1. SQRAR Flow 

1) Survey 

As evaluators, English teachers and ELT experts search for valuable English coursebooks to 
evaluate during the Survey stage. It means that the evaluation has specific goals in mind. Aside from 
professional development in the form of research studies, English teachers accompanied by ELT 
experts have a number of goals, such as trying to cater to their students' needs with appropriate English 
coursebooks as a part of a materials selection, conducting research studies as part of teachers' jobs, 
and developing their own learning materials (Solhi et al., 2020; Tsiplakides, 2011). As a result, English 
teachers in their organisation or individually look for English coursebooks that are worth investigating. 

As a result, they select the English coursebooks to be evaluated. The targeted English coursebooks 
could be those recommended by the government, those used by MGMP members, or those owned 
privately by teachers. As a result, because the forum is involved in continuous professional 
development, this study should primarily evaluate the English coursebooks used by MGMP. The 

Survey Question Read Analyse Recommend



18 English Language Teaching Educational Journal   ISSN 2621-6485 

 Vol. 7, No. 1, April 2024, pp. 13-23 

 Sukarno (SQRAR: A model of coursebook …..) 

evaluation results will be useful to both the evaluators and the members of MGMP. Following the 
evaluation, the recommendations are useful for English teachers as well as writers and publishers. 
English teachers can use the evaluation results to create supplementary English learning materials to 
meet the needs of their students (Alkhaldi, 2010). To have a newer edition of the English coursebooks, 
writers or publishers can revise their English coursebooks based on the recommendations of the 

research study. As a result, the survey stage is critical for obtaining useful evaluation results. 

2) Question 

Before evaluating an English coursebook, evaluators, particularly teachers, must have used a 
variety of learning materials to teach students. As a result, they have a good understanding of the 
criteria for good English learning materials. The learning materials in this case are compiled in the 
form of English coursebooks. Furthermore, before evaluating an English coursebook, English teachers 
who act as evaluators will evaluate the coursebooks and even involve students in the process. They 
discuss the learning materials criteria that should be included in ideal coursebooks (Banegas & 
Tavella, 2021). 

As a result, a teacher and an ELT expert acting as a coursebook evaluator have a thorough 
understanding of an ideal English coursebook. Obviously, those criteria generally include curriculum, 
detailed materials that students should learn, teaching methods, typography, appearance, students' 
needs, and the need for English as a future means of communication, since teachers and ELT experts 
must prepare students for their future and current lives (Setiawan, 2023). That is, coursebooks should 
include futuristic criteria such as the impact of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, Society 5.0, and 21st-
century skills. Aside from those three aspects, they should receive character education based on local 
wisdom and culture. Character education is rooted in culture and local wisdom, and it is incorporated 
into learning materials and activities. All of them, however, rely on the sensitivity of English teachers 
(Drake, 2012) to cultivate the content and English learning activity to prepare students for their future 
lives. 

However, when evaluating English coursebooks, English teachers and ELT experts apply 
comprehensive criteria. The criteria they set to serve as prior knowledge are based on their actual 
experiences with English coursebooks and their ideas about an ideal English coursebook (Supriyanto, 
2019). Meanwhile, ideas about ideal English learning materials in the form of English coursebooks 
which are based on theories and extensive classroom experiences interacting with students using 

learning materials are used as inputs or suggestions for each of the aspects of the evaluated English 
coursebooks. Those aspects are matched with the items of the instrument used by the 
researcher to gather the needs analysis data. 

3)  Read 

After forming an overall picture of an ideal English coursebook based on specific criteria, the 
evaluators read and review the chosen English coursebook. The evaluators thoroughly read the 
coursebook before evaluating it. Furthermore, while reading the English coursebook, evaluators 
should pay close attention to the elements embedded in the coursebook (Banegas & Tavella, 2021; 
Mukundan & Ahour, 2010). At this stage, the evaluators may read the entire English coursebook for 
a macro evaluation or a selection of chapters for a micro evaluation. The more evaluators read the 
English coursebook being evaluated, the better their understanding of the English coursebook being 
evaluated (Renandya et al., 2015). Evaluators can read the criteria they will use in the evaluation while 
reading the English coursebook, or they can read the instrument before reading the coursebook so that 
they can focus on all aspects to be evaluated (Saputri et al., 2022). This is the first reading before 
diving into the coursebook in the online application. 

4) Analyse 

The next step after the evaluators reading the coursebook is a step in which the evaluators analyse 
it using comprehensive criteria from a model of English coursebook dynamic evaluation. At this point, 
the evaluators have read the coursebook at least twice (Banegas & Tavella, 2021; Renandya et al., 
2015). The evaluators match what is actually in the English coursebook with the criteria in this model 
(SQRAR). Based on the criteria provided, the evaluators determine the quality of the English 
coursebook: 1 for poor, 2 for fair, 3 for good, and 4 for excellent. If they choose 1 (poor), 2 (fair), or 
3 (excellent), the evaluators must provide constructive comments and/or suggestions (good) (Joshi et 
al., 2015). Meanwhile, if they select 4 (excellent), the evaluators are not required to make any 
comments or suggestions. After selecting numbers 1, 2, or 3, the evaluators make coursebook revision 



ISSN 2621-6485 English Language Teaching Educational Journal 19 
 Vol. 7, No. 1, April 2024, pp. 13-23 

 Sukarno (SQRAR: A model of coursebook …..) 

suggestions on a specific section of the English coursebook based on the criteria they refer to and are 
working on (Sato, 2013). The comments or suggestions are based on criteria for good English learning 
materials that are based on certain theories and practical experiences in classrooms when students use 
English coursebooks. 

5) Recommend 

While and after analysing the English coursebook, the evaluators make recommendations for 
English coursebook revisions and/or the creation of new learning materials in the form of teachers' 
edition English coursebooks, learning materials designed by English teachers, and supplementary 
English learning materials (Supriyanto, 2019). As a result, the revised English coursebook will be 
appropriate for the curriculum, students with various learning styles, and other criteria (Alsagoff et 
al., 2012; Skierso, 1991; Yilmaz & Tugrul, 2017). Actually, the evaluators could also provide 
comments and suggestions while evaluating the English coursebook by selecting numbers 1, 2, and 3 
(Joshi et al., 2015). Furthermore, at the end of the analysis, they provide both specific and general 
comments (Sato, 2013). 

Overall, SQRAR is a structured and systematic approach to problem-solving that can be used in 
the coursebook evaluation. Using SQRAR as a method for coursebook evaluation can help ensure that 
the coursebook is effective in meeting needs of the target audience and achieving the desired learning 
objectives. It serves comprehensive evaluation since SQRAR provides a structured approach to 
evaluating a coursebook that ensures all-important aspects of the book are considered. It also ensures 
the coursebooks’ consistency. By using a structured SQRAR framework, the evaluators can ensure 
that the evaluation is consistent across different coursebooks or different evaluators. This can help 
make evaluations more reliable and accurate. It also highlights learning objectives since SQRAR helps 
to focus the evaluation on the learning objectives of the coursebook. This ensures that the evaluation 
is aligned with the goals of the course and helps to identify whether the book is effective in achieving 
those goals. It could also propose clear recommendations. By using SQRAR to evaluate the 
coursebook, the evaluators can generate clear recommendations for improvements that can be made 
to the coursebook. This can help the instructors and curriculum developers to make informed decisions 
about how to improve the coursebook. 

3.2. Discussion  

The study addresses the critical role of English coursebooks in language teaching and learning, 
highlighting their significance in providing language input, exercises, and activities (Richards & 
Renandya, 2002; Soviyah & Fatimah, 2021). Despite their importance, there is a recognized need for 
coursebook evaluation models to ensure they meet educational standards and curriculum requirements 
as mandated by government regulations (Ansary & Babaii, 2002; Mishan, 2022). Previous research 
has primarily focused on static evaluation methods, necessitating the development of a dynamic 
evaluation approach to address the limitations of traditional assessment methods. The introduction of 
the SQRAR model, integrating dynamic assessment principles, aims to fill this gap by offering a 
structured and systematic method for evaluating English coursebooks (Azarnoosh et al., 2018; Maley, 
2016; Savova & Azarnoosh, 2022). 

The study's results underscore the urgency and importance of dynamic evaluation models, 
particularly in the context of English coursebooks used in formal education. Survey findings reveal 
strong agreement among English teachers regarding the need for dynamic evaluation based on 
established criteria (Surono et al., 2022). The development of the SQRAR model emerges from this 
need, synthesizing dynamic assessment principles with a cyclic process of identifying weaknesses and 
providing recommendations for improvement. The SQRAR model's implementation involves 
surveying, questioning, reading, analyzing, and recommending improvements, aligning with the 
purpose of the study to address the shortcomings of existing evaluation methods (Agustina & 
Mukhtaruddin, 2019; Cheng & Zhao, 2020). 

Compared with previous research, which primarily focused on static evaluation approaches such 
as SQ3R, SQ4R, THIEVES, and QAR, the introduction of the SQRAR model represents an 
advancement in coursebook evaluation methodology (Nurdiana & Junita, 2020; Rybicki, 2002; 
Tsiplakides, 2011). While traditional methods mainly emphasize reading strategies, SQRAR adopts a 
comprehensive approach, integrating dynamic assessment principles and emphasizing interaction and 
negotiation in the evaluation process. Furthermore, the results highlight the benefits of dynamic 



20 English Language Teaching Educational Journal   ISSN 2621-6485 

 Vol. 7, No. 1, April 2024, pp. 13-23 

 Sukarno (SQRAR: A model of coursebook …..) 

evaluation in providing clear recommendations for coursebook improvement, fostering engagement, 
and enhancing language outcomes (Cheng & Zhao, 2020; Solhi et al., 2020; Yilmaz & Tugrul, 2017).  

4. Conclusion  

Overall, SQRAR has become a suitable solution to evaluate coursebooks dynamically. Most 
participants saw that the SQRAR process is needed, practical, and beneficial for their coursebook 
evaluation. It is suggested that the coursebook evaluator apply SQRAR to dynamically evaluate the 
coursebook to meet the suitable component materials for the students. Furthermore, the method is not 
only limited to English coursebook users. It is also applicable for the coursebook users and 
practitioners from other disciplines. Moreover, for the further researcher, it is expected and suggested 
to conduct further research regarding SQRAR or to develop the method. In conclusion, the study 
contributes to the field of language education by introducing a dynamic evaluation model explicitly 
tailored for English coursebooks. The SQRAR model offers a practical and systematic approach to 
evaluating coursebooks, ensuring alignment with learning objectives, consistency, and clear 
recommendations for improvement. Future research directions may include further refinement and 
validation of the SQRAR model and its applicability to other disciplines beyond English language 
teaching. 

  

Acknowledgment 

We extend our heartfelt appreciation to the journal committee for their invaluable support and 
guidance throughout the publication process. Their expertise and dedication have been 
instrumental in shaping the quality of this article. We are grateful for their commitment to 
advancing scholarly research in our field. 

Declarations 

Author contribution : Sukarno is the sole author and hence responsible for all writing 

process of the manuscript. 

 

Funding statement 

 

: 

 

This study received no specific grant from any funding agency in 

the public, commercial, or non-profit sector. 

 

Conflict of interest 

 

: 

 

The author declares no potential conflicts of interest with respect to 

the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article. 

 

Ethics declaration 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Additional information                                        

 

: 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

: 

 

I as author acknowledge that this work has been written based on 

ethical research that conforms with the regulations of my university 

and that I have obtained the permission from the relevant institute(s) 

when collecting data. 

 I support English Language Teaching Educational Journal (ELTEJ) 

in maintaining high standards of personal conduct, practicing 
honesty in all our professional practices and endeavors. 

 

 No additional information is available for this paper. 

 

 

REFERENCES 

Afifah, W. A. (2019). Developing Culture-Based English Instructional Materials for Grade VII of 
Junior High School Students. English Language Teaching Educational Journal, 1(2), 76. 
https://doi.org/10.12928/eltej.v1i2.390  

https://doi.org/10.12928/eltej.v1i2.390


ISSN 2621-6485 English Language Teaching Educational Journal 21 
 Vol. 7, No. 1, April 2024, pp. 13-23 

 Sukarno (SQRAR: A model of coursebook …..) 

Agustina, N. Q., & Mukhtaruddin, F. (2019). The Cipp Model-Based Evaluation on Integrated English 
Learning (IEL) Program at Language Center. English Language Teaching Educational 
Journal, 2(1), 22. https://doi.org/10.12928/eltej.v2i1.1043  

Alkhaldi, A. A. (2010). Developing a Principled Framework for Materials Evaluation: Some 
Considerations. Advances in Language and Literary Studies, 1(2), 281–298. 
https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.alls.v.1n.2p.281  

Alsagoff, L., Lee Mckay, S., Hu, G., & Renandya, W. A. (Eds.). (2012). Principles and Practices for 
Teaching English as an International Language. Routledge. 
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203819159  

Ansary, H., & Babaii, E. (2002). Universal characteristics of EFL/ESL textbooks: A step towards 
systematic textbook evaluation. The Internet TESL Journal, 8. 

Azarnoosh, M., Zeraatpishe, M., Faravani, A., & Kargozari, R. (2018). Issues in Coursebook 
Evaluation. Brill Sense. https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004387379  

Banegas, D. L., & Tavella, G. (2021). Language-Driven CLIL in Primary Education: An Analysis 
of General English Coursebooks in Argentina (pp. 239–258). 
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70095-9_12  

Branch, R. M. (2009). Instructional Design: The ADDIE Approach. Springer. 
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-09506-6  

Buku yang Digunakan oleh Satuan Pendidikan, Pub. L. No. 8 (2016). 

Cheng, L., & Zhao, Y. (2020). Dynamic evaluation of coursebooks: An empirical study of 
Chinese college English teachers’ perceptions. Journal of English for Academic 
Purposes, 47(10), 08–78. 

Dahmardeh, M., & Kim, S.-D. (2021). An analysis of the representation of cultural content in 
English coursebooks. Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education. 
https://doi.org/10.1108/JARHE-09-2020-0290  

Dimitropoulos, E. (1999). Educational Evaluation: The evaluation of education and the 
educational project. Grigoris. 

Dorda, S. (2008). The role of materials in teaching ESP. Sumy State University. 

Ellis, R. (1997). The empirical evaluation of language teaching materials. ELT Journal, 51(1), 
36–42. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/51.1.36  

Ellis, R. (2003). The study of second language acquisition. Oxford University Press. 

Graves, K. (2003). Coursebook. In D. Nunan (Ed.), Practical English language teaching (pp. 
225–246). Contemporary. 

Haywood, H. C., & Lidz, C. S. (2007). Dynamic Assessment in Practice: Clinical and 
Educational Applications. Cambridge University Press. 
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511607516  

Joshi, A., Kale, S., Chandel, S., & Pal, D. (2015). Likert Scale: Explored and Explained. British 
Journal of Applied Science & Technology, 7(4), 396–403. 
https://doi.org/10.9734/BJAST/2015/14975  

Maley, A. (2016). Principles and procedures in materials development. In M. Azarnoosh, M. 
Zeraatpishe, A. Faravani, & H. R. Kargozari (Eds.), Issues in materials development (pp. 
11–30). Sense Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6300-432-9_2  

McGriff, S. J. (2000). Instructional System Design (ISD): Using the ADDIE Model.  Penn State 
University. 

Milal, A. D., Rohmah, Z., & Kusumajanti, W. (2020). Varying strategies to maximize the 
effectiveness of ELT: Lessons from training sessions. English Language Teaching 
Educational Journal, 3(3), 263–271. https://doi.org/10.12928/eltej.v3i3.2463  

https://doi.org/10.12928/eltej.v2i1.1043
https://doi.org/10.7575/aiac.alls.v.1n.2p.281
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203819159
https://doi.org/10.1163/9789004387379
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-70095-9_12
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-09506-6
https://doi.org/10.1108/JARHE-09-2020-0290
https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/51.1.36
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511607516
https://doi.org/10.9734/BJAST/2015/14975
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6300-432-9_2
https://doi.org/10.12928/eltej.v3i3.2463


22 English Language Teaching Educational Journal   ISSN 2621-6485 

 Vol. 7, No. 1, April 2024, pp. 13-23 

 Sukarno (SQRAR: A model of coursebook …..) 

Mishan, F. (2022). The Global ELT coursebook: A case of Cinderella’s slipper? Language 
Teaching, 55(4), 490–505. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444820000646  

Molenda, M. (2003). In Search of the Elusive ADDIE model. Performance Improvement, 42(5), 
34–36. https://doi.org/10.1002/pfi.4930420508  

Molenda, M., & Boling, E. (2008). Creating. In Educational Technology: A definition with 
commentary (pp. 81–140). Routledge. 

Muhammad, K. S. (2016). How To Choose Suitable English Coursebooks To Be Used In The 
English Teaching-Learning Process: Doing A Micro Evaluation. Journal of English and 
Education, 2(1), 92–107. https://doi.org/10.20885/jee.vol2.iss1.art8  

Mukundan, J., & Ahour, T. (2010). A Review of Textbook Evaluation Checklists across Four 
Decades (1970-2008). In B. Tomlinson & H. Masuhara (Eds.), Research for Materials 
Development (pp. 336–352). Continuum. 

Nurdiana, & Junita. (2020). Adapted criteria and a model of evaluation checklist for English 
coursebooks. Journal of Language, Literature and Teaching, 2(2), 1–16. 

Peterson, C. (2003). Bringing ADDIE to Life: Instructional Design at Its Best. Journal of 
Educational Multimedia and Hypermedia, 12(3), 227–241. 

Poehner, M. . (2008). Dynamic assessment: A vygotskian approach to understanding and 
promoting l2 development. In Educational Linguistics, 9, 1–197. 

Purwanti, E., & Hatmanto, E. D. (2019). nderstanding EFL teachers’ beliefs about lesson study 
and their knowledge development viewed from social cultural theory of Vygotsky. 
English Language Teaching Educational Journal, 2(2), 50–61. 

Renandya, W. A., Hu, W., & Xiang, Y. (2015). Extensive Reading Coursebook in China. RELC 
Journal, 46(3), 255–273. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688215609216  

Richards, J. C., & Renandya, W. A. (2002). Methodology in language teaching: an anthology of 
current practice. Cambridge University Press. 
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667190  

Rojabi, A. R. (2020). Exploring EFL Students’ Perception of Online Learning via Microsoft 
Teams: University Level in Indonesia. English Language Teaching Educational Journal, 
3(2), 163. https://doi.org/10.12928/eltej.v3i2.2349  

Rybicki, A. (2002). Developing effective study skills while studying a foreign language. Saint 
Xavier University and SkyLight. 

Saputri, N. N. A., El Khoiri, N., & Muniroh, S. (2022). Exploring the Manifestation of Critical 
Thinking in a Coursebook for Advanced Reading Class. JoLLA: Journal of Language, 
Literature, and Arts, 2(7), 944–957. https://doi.org/10.17977/um064v2i72022p944-957  

Sato, M. (2013). Beliefs about peer interaction and peer corrective feedback: Efficacy of 
classroom intervention. The Modern Language Journal, 97(3), 611–633. 
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2013.12035.x  

Savova, L., & Azarnoosh, M. (2022). Approaches to Coursebook Evaluation: Dynamic Approach 
to Coursebook Evaluation in Context. In H. Çelik & S. Çelik (Eds.), Coursebook 
Evaluation in English as a Foreign Language (EFL) Education (pp. 47–64). Vizetek. 

Setiawan, W. (2023). Evaluation of English coursebook Challenges 1 from the perspectives of 
teachers. Wiralodra English Journal, 7(2), 78–88. https://doi.org/10.31943/wej.v7i2.232  

Shave, J. (2010). A Friendly Process for Evaluating and Selecting ESL/ EFL Coursebooks. The 
Internet TESL Journal, 16(11). 

Shi, J. (2014). Criteria for teaching learning resource selection: Facilitating teachers of Chinese 
to work with English-speaking learners. University of Western Sydney. 

https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444820000646
https://doi.org/10.1002/pfi.4930420508
https://doi.org/10.20885/jee.vol2.iss1.art8
https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688215609216
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667190
https://doi.org/10.12928/eltej.v3i2.2349
https://doi.org/10.17977/um064v2i72022p944-957
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2013.12035.x
https://doi.org/10.31943/wej.v7i2.232


ISSN 2621-6485 English Language Teaching Educational Journal 23 
 Vol. 7, No. 1, April 2024, pp. 13-23 

 Sukarno (SQRAR: A model of coursebook …..) 

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). Heinle & Heinle 
Publishers. 

Solhi, M., Sak, M., Şahin, Ş., & Yilmaz, S. (2020). Evaluation of the English language 
coursebooks used at the Turkish public elementary schools. Journal of Language and 
Linguistics Studies, 16(3), 1282–1308. https://doi.org/10.17263/jlls.803714  

Soviyah, & Fatimah, N. (2021). Developing material for English for Holiday program. English 
Language Teaching Educational Journal, 4(3), 235–250. 
https://doi.org/10.12928/eltej.v4i3.5000  

Standar Isi Pendidikan Dasar dan Menengah, Pub. L. No. 21 (2016). 

Sternberg, R. J., & Grigorenko, E. L. (2002). Dynamic Testing: The Nature and Measurement of 
Learning Potential. Cambridge University Press. 

Sucipto, S., & Cahyo, S. D. (2019). A Content Analysis of the Reading Activities in “Bright 2”an 
English Textbook for Junior High School Students. English Language Teaching 
Educational Journal, 2(1), 13. https://doi.org/10.12928/eltej.v2i1.918  

Supriyanto, N. H. (2019). An evaluation of English coursebook for young learners entitled 
English Chest. Magister Scientiae, 46, 145–182. 
https://doi.org/10.33508/mgs.v2i46.2225  

Surono, P. B. W., & Hanun, L. S. (2022). Analysis of HOTS and LOTS of instructional questions 
in the English textbook “When English Rings a Bell” for grade VIII. English Language 
Teaching Educational Journal, 5(3), 240–252. 
https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.12928/eltej.v5i3.8168  

Surono, Pratolo, B. W., & Hanun, S. L. (2022). Analysis of HOTS and LOTS of instructional 
questions in the English textbook" When English Rings a Bell" for grade VIII. English 
Language Teaching …, 5(3), 240–252. 
http://www.journal2.uad.ac.id/index.php/eltej/article/view/8168%0Ahttp://www.journal
2.uad.ac.id/index.php/eltej/article/download/8168/3711  

Tsiplakides, I. (2011). Selecting an English Coursebook: Theory and Practice. Theory and 
Practice in Language Studies, 1(7). https://doi.org/10.4304/tpls.1.7.758-764 

United Nations Development Programme. (2002). Handbook on Monitoring and Evaluating for 
Results. Evaluation Office. 

Vedung, E. (2017). Public Policy and Program Evaluation. Routledge. 
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315127767  

Yilmaz, Y. E., & Tugrul, M. (2017). A dynamic coursebook evaluation approach for an EAP 
program. Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies, 13(1), 22–41. 

Zohrabi, M., Sabouri, H., & Behroozian, R. (2012). An Assessment of Strengths and Weaknesses 
of Iranian First Year High School English Coursebook Using Evaluation Checklist. 
English Language and Literature Studies, 2(2). https://doi.org/10.5539/ells.v2n2p89  

https://doi.org/10.17263/jlls.803714
https://doi.org/10.12928/eltej.v4i3.5000
https://doi.org/10.12928/eltej.v2i1.918
https://doi.org/10.33508/mgs.v2i46.2225
https://doi.org/https:/doi.org/10.12928/eltej.v5i3.8168
http://www.journal2.uad.ac.id/index.php/eltej/article/view/8168%0Ahttp:/www.journal2.uad.ac.id/index.php/eltej/article/download/8168/3711
http://www.journal2.uad.ac.id/index.php/eltej/article/view/8168%0Ahttp:/www.journal2.uad.ac.id/index.php/eltej/article/download/8168/3711
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315127767
https://doi.org/10.5539/ells.v2n2p89

	1. Introduction
	2. Methodology
	3. Findings and Discussion
	3.1. Findings
	1) Survey
	2) Question
	3)  Read
	4) Analyse
	5) Recommend

	3.2. Discussion

	4. Conclusion
	Acknowledgment
	Declarations

	REFERENCES

