Tài liệu An evaluation of the esp material for the third year students of labour department at the university of labour and social affairs

MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING HANOI UNIVERSITY ____փփփ------ PH AM T H I HONG H A N H AN EVALUATION OF THE ESP MATERIAL FOR THE THIRD YEAR STUDENTS OF LABOUR DEPARTMENT AT THE UNIVERSITY OF LABOUR AND SOCIAL AFFAIRS SU BM ITTED IN P A R TIA L FU LFILLM E N T SUPERVISOR: HOANG TH I XUAN HOA, M.A. Hanoi M ay - 2009 1 ACKNOW LEDGEMENTS In the preparation and com pletion o f this study, I have received great assistance, guidance, and encouragem ent from many people. M y study m ight not have been finished without their support. I am，first o f all，particularly indebted my supervisor, Hoang Thi Xuan H oa M .A ， for her valuable advice，instructions and correction, excellent suggestions and constant encouragem ent during the research period. W ithout her guidance and help，this study w ould not have been accom plished. A lso，I w ould like to thank to Mrs Nguyen Thai Ha, M .A for her helpful advice. M y thanks and gratitude are extended to all my colleagues and students for their support，encouragem ent and active participation in this research and to many others who helped m e during m y study. Finally，I w ould like to express my thanks to my husband，my little son and m y p a re n ts fo r th e ir lo v e , great enco uragem ent and th o ro u g h u n d e rsta n d in g th a t h e lp m e to overcom e the difficulties during my study. ABSTRACT The study aims to evaluate the ESP material currently used for the third year students o f Faculty o f Labour at the University o f labour and Social A ffairs in order to find out if the material is suitable to our students，level o f English and their specialized background know ledge and whether it m eets the aims o f the course. This study is intended to find out the appropriate and inappropriate points o f the material in use in order to make some contribution to the developm ent and improvement o f this ESP material. The researcher em ployed a com bination o f three qualitative m ethods (docum ent analysis，student questionnaire and teacher interview) to guarantee the reliability and objectiveness o f the study. Based on the findings ， the researcher attempted to provide som e recom m endations and m odifications to the material in order to make it more effective in language learning and teaching process. D espite unavoidable lim itations，it is hoped that this study w ill provide a firm basis for making adjustments to the materials and som e ideas for further evaluation proj ects. TABLE OF CONTENTS A C K N O W LED G EM EN TS...................................................................................................... •I A B S T R A C T ................................................................................................................................... II TABLE O F C O N T E N T S........................................................................................................... II LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES........................................................................... V LIST OF A B B R EV IA T IO N S................................................................................................... VI CHAPTER ONE: IN TRO DUCTIO N......................................... ........................................... 1 1.1 B a c k g r o u n d t o t h e s t u d y a n d s t a t e m e n t o f t h e p r o b l e m ................................. 1 1 1 1.1.1. General information about teaching and learning English at ULSA........... 1.1.2. Statement o f the problem ............................................................................. 1.2. AIMS o f t h e s t u d y ....................................................................................................................... 1 3. R e s e a r c h q u e s t io n s ................................................................................................................... 1.4. S c o p e o f t h e s t u d y ..................................................................................................................... 1.5. T h e s i g n i f i c a n c e o f the study............................................................................................. 1.6 O v e r v ie w o f t h e t h e s is ............................................................................................................. . 2 ,2 C H A PTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW ...................................................................... ,5 2.1. E L T MATERIALS IN LANGUAGE TEACHING AND LEARNING................................... ,5 2.1.1 Roles o f materials............................................................................................ 2 .1.2. Types o f materials.......................................................................................... 5 0 : P 7 ^ Ố . • 7 P 7 7 շ ^ շ . 2.2.8 Previous materials evaluation studies ........... ................................................. 0 7 フ. 6 Snvrrpx o f thọ Data f o r Evaluation ....................................................................................................................... 2.2.7 Research Instruments Employed in Materials Evaluation............................. 8 2.2.1. Reasonsfo r materials evaluation.................................................................. 2.2.2. Definition o f materials evaluation................................................................. 2.2.3. Types o f materials evaluation....................................................................... 2.2.4 Models fo r materials evaluation.................................................................... 2.2.5 Criteria fo r materials evaluation................................................................... Ố 2 .2 . O v e r v ie w o f m a t e r ia l s e v a l u a t io n ................................................................................ 3 3 4 8 շ 3.1 D a t a c o l l e c t io n i n s t r u m e n t s ............................................................................................ շ 1 շ 3 3^ C H A PTER FOUR: RESULTS AND D ISCUSSIO N ........................................................ շ 3 .2 . S u b j e c t s o f t h e s t u d y .............................................................................................................. 3 .3 . D a t a c o l l e c t io n p r o c e d u r e s .............................................................................................. 6 8 3.1.1 Document analysis.......................................................................................... 3.1.2 Questionnaires................................................................................................ 3.1.3. Interview ........................................................................................................ 8 p / C H A PTE R THREE: M E T H O D O L O G Y ........................................................................... 3 4 ớ 5ố 5 ố5 ố5 ố5 6 / /?^2 5 4 .4 T im e a l l o c a t i o n ........................................................................................................................... - 4.3.3 The teacher interview...................................................................................... Հ 3.4 Discussion....................................................................................................... ^ 4.3.2 The students questionnaire ................................................................................................................................................................................................... 4 4.3.1 Document analysis.......................................................................................... 4 4 .3 T h e in t e r e s t o f t h e m a t e r i a l ............................................................................................... l/9^0090 4.2.1 Document analysis.......................................................................................... Գ.2.Հ Questionnaire results...................................................................................... 4.2.3 Teacher interview ............................................................................................ 4.2.4 Discussion....................................................................................................... ớ 4 .2 T h e a p p r o p r ia t e n e s s o f t h e m a t e r ia l t o t h e STUDENTS, LEVEL OF E n g l i s h . 3 4.1.1 Document analysis.......................................................................................... 4.1.2 Results from teacher interviews and student questionnaires......................... 4.1.3 Discussion....................................................................................................... 17p 4.1 T h e a p p r o p r i a t e n e s s o f t h e materials t o the a im s o f the c o u r s e ................. 6 2 6 J Ố 4.4.1 Document analysis................................................................................ 4.4.2 Results from student questionnaire and teacher interview ................. 4 .5 T h e RESPONDENTS5 SUGGESTIONS............................................................................... 3 6 4.5.1 The students’ suggestions..................................................................... 4.5.2 The teachers ’ suggestions.................................................................... J ố 5 Ố C H A PTER FIVE: SU G G ESTIO N S AND C O N C LU SIO N ................................ 5 6 6 7 9 6 2 6 R E F E R E N C E S.............................. .................................................................................. 7 5.1 S u g g e s t i o n s ....................................................................................................................... 5.2 L im it a t io n s a n d s u g g e s t io n s f o r t h e f u r t h e r s t u d y .............................. 5.3 C o n c l u s i o n ......................................................................................................................... A PPEN D IX 1 ..................................................................................................................... 6 5 APPEN D IX 2 ..................................................................................................................... 7 о A PPEN D IX 3: Q U ESTIO N N A IR E FOR E X -ST U D E N T S................................ 9 7 A PPEN D IX 4: Q U ESTIO N N A IR E FOR THE TH IRD -Y EAR STUDENTS 6 8 A PPEN D IX 5: Q U ESTIO N S FO R THE TEA C H ER IN T E R V IE W .............. 8 9 iv LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES Figure 1 The material evaluation m odel by Hutchinson and 12 Waters T ablel The description o f language focus in the material 45 Table 2 The descriptions o f the topics presented in the Units 48 Table 3 Ex-students’ opinions about vocabulary in the specialist 55 material they had learnt Table 4 Ex-students9 opinions on the grammatical difficulty o f 57 the specialist material. Table 5 Problem s ex-students have when reading the specialist 58 texts Table 6 Ex-students9 opinions on the relevance o f topics to their 60 specialist know ledge Table 7 Ex-students9 opinions on the topics and issues covered 61 by the specialist material Table 8 The third year students，opinions about the difficulty o f 62 the material Table 9 The teachers9 opinions about the appropriateness o f the 63 material to the students’ level o f English TablelO The students’ interest o f the material 66 Table 11 Teachers’ opinions about the interest o f the material 68 C hart 1 Teachers and students ， opinions about the appropriateness o f the material to the aims o f the course V 50 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ESP English for Specific Purposes GE General English EFL English as a Foreign Language ELT English Language Teaching ƯLSA M .A U niversity o f Labour and Social A ffairs M aster o f Arts C H A P T E R O N E : IN T R O D U C T IO N 1.1 Background to the study and statement o f the problem. 1.1.1. General information about teaching and learning English at ULSA The University o f Labor and Social Affairs (Ư LSA) belongs to the M inistry o f Labour Invalid and Social A ffairs. This is a new ly-established university with four departments such as Labour Accounting, Insurance and Social Work. ， There are about 3500 students every year and they have to study many subjects including both com pulsory and elective subjects. English is one o f com pulsory subjects in the curriculum for students at the ƯLSA. The English training program is divided into two stages. In the first stage, the students learn General English (GE) in 150 lesson periods. The elem entary and pre-intermediate L ife­ lines are used in this stage. The training goals o f the GE stage are to provide students with basic words and structures o f English so after this stage, the students are expected to be at the pre-interm ediate level by which it is assumed that they have covered basic grammatical points o f the English language and a certain amount o f general vocabulary. A fter the first stage，the third-year students start learning ESP in 120 lesson periods. In the second stage, ESP material is used in order to enhance the students9 reading and translating skills so that at the end o f the course they w ill be able to read and process materials related to their subject matter. Therefore，English for Labour designed by staffs o f English Department at the U LSA has been used for the third year students o f Labour department. 1.1.2. Statement of the problem It has generally been agreed that material plays an important role in the process o f language teaching and learning. Material can stim ulate learning, help learners achieve their goals and objectives and also enhance teaching. In order to have a successful language teaching program, the teaching material, after having been selected or designed, need to be carefully evaluated to check whether the material accom plishes its job o f enabling teaching and learning. In fact，the textbook “English for Labour” have been in used for three years. H owever，this material has never been evaluated to exam ine if it really m eets the defined aims o f the course and if it is suitable to the students’ level o f English and their specialized background know ledge. Furthermore, the researcher has noticed som e dissatisfaction with the material during her practical teaching experience. For exam ple， the material failed to improve the students9 pronunciation and enhance their listening and speaking skills. There-fore, it is quite reasonable for the researcher to conduct this evaluation research. H ence，the researcher hopes that the findings o f the study can help the researcher as w ell as the sta ff members find out the appropriate points as w ell as the inappropriate points in order to improve or m odify the material for filture use. E specially， the researcher believes that this study can enhance the English teaching and learning at the ULSA. 1.2. Aims o f the study. The study aim is to evaluate the specialist material for the third year students at the ƯLSA to determine whether the material is suitable to our students in term o f content and their level o f English as w ell as their specialized background know ledge and if it m eets the aims o f the course. The researcher hopes that the findings o f the thesis w ill partly help to decide whether to use the material again in the future or what changes can be made to improve the quality and the effectiveness o f the material. 1.3. Research questions. The study w ill be conducted to answer the follow ing research questions: 1. D oes the material meet the aims o f the course? 2 2. Is the material appropriate to the students’ level o f English in terms o f language aspects and their professional background knowledge? 3. What should be done to improve inappropriate points o f the material if there are any? 1.4. Scope o f the study In m aterials evaluation，w e need to take into consideration a lot o f criteria such as audience content m ethodology authenticity, physical appearance, cultural bias, ， ， ， and so on. When evaluating a set o f m aterials，various aspects o f the materials need to be taken into account such as the suitability，the effectiveness，and the teach ability o f the m aterials. H ow ever，in this study, due to the tim e constraints and scope o f the minor thesis，the researcher just focuses on evaluating the suitability o f the specialist material and three criteria for the third year students o f Labour Department at ƯLSA as follow : - A udience (in terms o f the level o f English) - A im s OÍ the material - Content o f the material (in terms o f vocabulary, grammar, sk ills text types and ， topics) The material studied is used for all o f the third year students o f Labour Department at Ư LSA how ever，the subjects o f this study are lim ited to the ， students o f course 2008 only. Therefore，their opinions about the material may not be representative for all o f the students o f Labour field at ƯLSA. 1.5. The significance o f the study The finding o f the thesis w ill be very useful for the teachers who are teaching ESP at the ULSA. The finding o f the thesis w ill provide the authorities and the teachers with scientific evidence to im prove the quality o f the current material used for the third year students at the ULSA. The results also reflect the 3 w eaknesses and strengths o f the material in use, so that the English Department w ill have sufficient evidence to make changes for the improvement o f the material for future use. 1.6 Overview o f the thesis The study is organized into five chapters as follow : Chapter one ， “Introduction ” ， introduces the background to the study and statement o f the problem ，the aims o f the study，the research questions, the scope o f the study，and the significance o f the study. Chapter tw o, “Literature review ”，presents an overview o f theoretical issues o f materials evaluation， concentrating on the issues related to ELT materials evaluation. Chapter three, “M ethodology， ， ， describes the data collection instruments，the subjects o f the study，and the data collection procedures. Chapter four. “Results and D iscussion， ， ， reports the results and gives som e discussions o f the results. Chapter fiv e ， “Suggestions and C onclusion ” ， makes suggestions for the improvement o f the material in terms o f evaluated aspects， draws out the lim itations o f the study，provides im plications for ftirther study, and makes conclusion for the thesis. 4 CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW This chapter aims to provide an overview o f the theoretical background for the evaluation o f ESP materials currently used for students o f Labour Department at the U niversity o f Labor and Social A ffairs. This chapter consists o f three sections. The first section o f this chapter relates to ELT m aterials with regard to their roles in English language teaching and learning and types o f m aterials. The second section provides the review o f literature concerning materials evaluation. The third section includes some researches previously done on materials evaluation in different context. 2.1. ELTmaterials in language teaching and learning. 2.1.1 Roles of materials Teaching materials play an important role in m ost language programs and there is hardly any class without teaching m aterials. According to Cunningswonh (1995)，leaching uiatcriab arc SOU 1 CCS o f ideas and stim ulation for classroom activities，w hich provide learners with practice in com m unicative interaction. They can also function as a reference source for learners on grammar， vocabulary and pronunciation. Furthermore， teaching m aterials stim ulate，m otivate the learners and help them study by them selves (D udley Evan and St.John ， 1998). In addition， teaching materials can be considered as a support for teachers. Both experienced and inexperienced teachers, to a certain extent, rely on materials. Good teaching materials can serve as 'a form o f teacher training’ and teacher can get ideas on how to plan and teach the lessons from the materials (Richards 2001). ， In ESP course，the roles o f teaching materials are even more important. DudleyEvans and St.John (1998) indicate four functions o f teaching materials: a source o f language, a learning support，a source o f m otivation, and a source o f reference. As a source o f language, especially in EFL situations，materials are alm ost the 5 only m eans for students to get exposed to the language, so they need to present a real language that is used in real contexts and be suitable to a w ide range o f the learners’ needs. A s a learning support, according to Dudley-Evans and St.John (1998)，materials should involve the students in thinking about and using the language so the activities need to “stim ulate cognitive not m echanical process” (p. 171). For the materials to be a source o f m otivation，materials need to be "challenging yet achievable to offer new ideas and information w hilst being grounded in the learners9 experience and know ledge” (Dudley-Evans and St.John, 1998 P.172). A s a source o f reference, materials should help the ， learners to make “efficient use o f the resources in order to facilitate selfdiscovery” (Tom linson, 1998). In other words， materials should provide explanations, exam ples，and practice activities that have answers and discussion keys so that the learners can use them for their self-study. ESP materials can also enable teaching by presenting m odels o f correct and appropriate language use for particular purposes. 2.1.2. Types of materials M aterials can be printed materials such as textbooks workbooks, worksheets or ， non-printed m aterials such as cassettes ， videotapes， and computer-based m aterials. There are different materials designed in different forms for different purposes. The materials that a teacher uses can be published textbooks or inhouse materials. 2Л.2Л. Textbooks The notion o f textbooks refers to the com m ercially published materials. These materials are often attractive， reliable and user-friendly. Textbooks are vital com ponents in m ost language programs because they are the main teaching and learning aids. Teachers can use a textbook and then use their energy and creativity in an area where it is more needed. A textbook，especially a course book，provides a framework for a course，forming in essence a syllabus that has been system atically developed and planned. Students learn what is presented in 6 the textbook and the way the textbook presents is the way the students learn it. Therefore, in som e cases, textbooks are the center o f instruction and one o f the m ost important impacts on the effectiveness o f teaching and learning activities. H ow ever，not everything in the textbooks is wonderful (Harmer, 1998). Harmer indicates that although many textbooks are w ell planned， they can be inappropriate for teachers and students. In addition，as Sw ales (cited in Robinson 1991) proposes published textbooks ， are “less self-sufficient in practice materials and in coverage o f skill areas” (p.57) so the textbooks need to be supplemented by som e other materials. Thus， once using textbooks， teachers must take these arguments into consideration. 2Л.2.2. In-house materials A s Robinson (1991) states that in-house materials are likely to be more specific and appropriate than published materials and to have greater face validity in terms o f llic language dcall w illi and Ü 1C contcxt il іъ presented ill. In addition， եւ- house m aterials may be more flexible than published textbooks. Finally, the writers o f in-house materials can make sure that the m ethodology is suitable for the intended learners. However, it takes tim e to write in-house materials. Swales observes that “the locally produced materials show a striking resem blance to the published materials that have been rejected” (Sw ales (453 p. 11)). A s w ell as ， being tim e consum ing, the production o f in-house materials is relatively expensive. A lso，the in-house materials are com m only in the form o f “showers o f single-page handouts” (Sw ales (453 p. 18)，w hich can easily get out o f order or ， lost. D espite what may have been im plied so far, Robinson (1991 p.59) indicates that ， there is no polar division between in-house and published materials. The published materials can very often becom e the in-house materials. H owever making in-house materials can be very 7 tim e-consum ing ， and expensive (R obinson ， 1991) so teachers in many situations tend to select from existing published materials to use in the classroom . The materials evaluated are in-house materials so they contain both good points and bad points o f in-house materials. They ， therefore ， need putting under an evaluation in order to find out inappropriate points and improve the quality o f the materials. 2.2. Overview o f materials evaluation 2.2.1. Reasons for materials evaluation Evaluation can be used as part o f quality control. Any or all aspects o f a program may be changed，hopefully for the better, as a result o f information obtained from the evaluation. In other cases, an evaluation may fbnction as a source o f inform ation and experience. A fiirther reason for carrying out an evaluation may be to ensure that m oney is being or has been w ell spent (R obinson，1991 (p.67)). The results o f evaluation may lead to som e suggestions o f changes o f the materials as w ell as other elem ents o f the program. According to E llis (1997)，there may be a need for materials evaluation to determine whether the chosen materials work w ell to ftilfill the intended purposes after it has been used for a period o f tim e. A lso, there is a need to choose among the materials available the m ost suitable ones to use for a particular group o f students in a particular context. In summary，evaluation acts as a key com ponent o f a language curriculum. It plays a crucial role in the im plem entation o f a program. An evaluation o f teaching materials helps to identify particular good points and bad points o f the materials in use. Thus, it w ill help to determine if the materials are effective ， efficient， and suitable or not. A s a result， the decision whether to use the materials again or not and what changes can be done to make the materials more suitable and effective. 8 2.2.2. Definition of materials evaluation There have been a number o f definitions o f evaluation as w ell as materials evaluation made by many researchers. To understand the essence o f materials evaluation，it is necessary to understand the definition o f evaluation in general. According to Brown (1987)，evaluation is the system atic collection and analysis o f all relevant information necessary to promote the improvement o f a curriculum and assess its effectiveness within the context o f the particular situation involved. Hutchinson and Waters (1993 p.96) define “Evaluation is a ， matter o f judging the fitness o f som ething for a particular purpose”. Evaluation can also be defined as “the discovery o f the value o f som ething for som e purposes” (Alderson，cited in Robinson 1991). ， Richards (1985 p.98) defines evaluation as 44he system atic gathering o f ， information for purposes o f making decisions”. But Murphy (518 p. 15) writes ， that “evaluation is concerned with describing what is there, and placing som e value judgm ent on what is found”. Tom linson (1998 p.xi) notes that m aterials evaluation is a system atic appraisal ， o f the value o f materials in relation to their objectives and the objectives o f the learner using them. From the definitions o f evaluation in general and materials evaluation in particular m entioned above，it can be concluded that m aterials evaluation is the judgm ent o f the value o f the materials to determine whether the materials in use is appropriate to the aims o f the course as w ell as the students’ level o f English. 2.2.3. Types of materials evaluation Although there are different terms used to indicate the types o f materials evaluation, they are basically similar. Thus，it can be concluded that there are three types o f materials evaluation. P relim inary evaluation 9 Preliminary evaluation normally takes place before a course begins. Its purpose is to select the m ost appropriate from the publications that are available for a particular group o f learners. A lso, it aims to identify which aspects o f the published materials need to be adapted to suit the purposes o f the course (R obinson, 1991; E llis, cited in Tom linson 1998). ， Formative evaluation This type o f evaluation is conducted w hile the course is ongoing so that m odifications can be made to the materials (Alderson，cited in Robinson, 1991). According to Brown (1987)，formative evaluation takes place during the ongoing curriculum developm ent process. The aims o f this kind o f evaluation are to collect and analyze information that w ill help in im proving the curriculum. The types o f decisions that result from form ative evaluation are usually numerous and relatively sm all in scale because such decisions are mend to result in m odification to and fine turning o f an existing curriculum. Formative evaluation can be built into the curriculum during its developm ent and im plem entation. When planners make such evaluation a regular part o f the curriculum，they are in the enviable position o f constantly being able together and analyze inform ation to be used in changing，developing and upgrading their program. Summative evaluation Summ ative evaluation takes place at the end o f a course and addresses the question o f whether the m aterials have been effective (Alderson， cited in Robinson, 1991 P.59). ， According to Brown (1995)，sum m ative evaluation is usually characterized as occurring at the end o f the program，and is therefore not capable o f im proving that particular program. The purpose for gathering information in a sum m ative evaluation is to determine the degree to which the program was su ccessali ， efficient and effective. The decisions that result from sum m ative evaluations tend to cause sw eeping changes and are fairly large in scale. Exam ples o f such 10 decisions m ight include the cancellation or continued funding o f a program, or m oving a program to a much more suitable site. This leads to the fact that these decisions or judgm ents often produce so much anxiety and defensiveness in students, teachers and curriculum markers. Sum m ative evaluation is one kind o f evaluation that is carried out to make decisions about the worth or value o f different aspects o f the curriculum. This type o f evaluation provides information to determine whether the materials in use were effective, efficient. In summary, before carrying an evaluation project ， evaluators need to determine the purpose o f the work and determine whether their evaluation w ould be preliminary, formative or summative evaluation. A s has been stated，the aims o f this study is to evaluate the current ESP materials (on-going m aterials) to determine whether the materials are suitable to our students9 level o f English and their specialized background know ledge and II they m eet the aim s o f the course so the type o f evaluation chosen for the study is form ative evaluation. From the findings o f the study, suggestions to improve the quality and the effectiven ess o f the materials for future use w ill be made. 2.2.4 Models fo r materials evaluation There have been several different m odels for materials evaluation suggested by many authors in the literature. The popular m odels are the one suggested by Hutchinson and Waters (1993)，Cunningsworth (1984)，E llis (1997). 2.2.4Л Hutchinson and Waters’ s model According to H utchinson and Waters (1993)，materials evaluation is a matter o f judging the fitness o f som ething for a particular purpose. M aterials evaluation is basically a m atching process: m atching needs to available solutions. In this view an evaluation can be divided into four major steps: 1• D efining criteria 2. Subjective analysis 3. Objective analysis 4. M atching 11 ， Defining criteria On what bases will you judge material? Which criteria will be more important? \ Subjective analysis What realizations o f the criteria do you want in your course? _____________________ Objective analysis How does the material being evaluated realize the criteria? / Matching How far does the material match your need? Figure 1: The materials evaluation model by Hutchinson and Waters (1993: Щ This m odel provides a logical procedure for materials evaluation. It aims to exam ine whether the materials are appropriate for a certain group o f learners or not. In this process, firstly, the evaluator w ill set out the criteria on which the evaluation is based. A dditionally，am ong defined criteria, he can m ention on his own preferred ones. The second step is to determine the subjective analysis. It is time to analyze the requirements o f the course in aspects related to the criteria. According to Hutchinson and Waters (19 93 )，the subjective analysis should not be considered as a fixed set o f requirement. The evaluator should use the materials evaluation process as a means o f questioning and developing his own ideas as to what is required. After a subjective analysis，an objective analysis needs to be carried out. This is the stage to analyze the materials in terms o f the selected criteria. Finally, the findings o f which are used to compare with materials requirements in the fourth step in order to evaluate and determine the 12