‘I’m really frustrated, because I just have to plan the whole lesson from scratch’: a teacher uses a problematic textbook

Instructional materials are at the heart of language teaching and learning. Accordingly, numerous studies of TESOL textbooks have focused on their linguistic, cultural, and pragmatic content. However, studying textbooks solely in terms of their content only takes us so far in terms of understanding how/why materials are used by teachers in the way they are, since the manner in which a teacher uses their instructional materials can deviate markedly from what is on the page of the book. Hence we can distinguish between an intended and an enacted curriculum: that is, how the materials writer envisaged their materials would be used versus how they are actually used. What is needed for a more holistic understanding is a study of materials consumption rather than merely of materials content (Harwood, 2014). I therefore report on a qualitative case study investigating how and why Frank, an experienced English for Academic Purposes (EAP) teacher at a UK university, used his textbook the way he did. Data collection featured repeating observation-interview cycles, as I interviewed Frank pre-observation about his lesson plans, discussing what materials he planned to use and why, and then observed the way the materials were implemented in class. During post-observation interviews, Frank discussed the extent to which the way he had planned to use the materials aligned with what he enacted in the lesson. Although Frank described himself as a pro-textbook teacher, he was using a book he believed was badly designed, and therefore felt obliged to make wholesale changes to the way the book was operationalized in class before he deemed it fit for purpose. This research documenting Frank’s travails provides much food for thought for textbook writers, publishers, curriculum writers, and teacher educators who provide training to pre- and in-service teachers on using textbooks and instructional materials.