Franco-Pass Ders Kitabı Dizisinin Eylem Odaklı Yaklaşım Temelinde Nitel Değerlendirmesi
A Qualitative Evaluation of the Franco-Pass Textbook Series within the Framework of the Action-Based Approach

Summary/Abstract: In the 21st century, foreign language education has expanded to include intercultural communication and social engagement, beyond the acquisition of linguistic skills. This shift was formalized with the Common European Framework of Reference for Languages (CEFR, 2001), which reconceptualized the learner as a social agent capable of constructing meaning and interacting interculturally (Puren, 2006). Within this perspective, the action-oriented approach emphasizes language use in meaningful, socially embedded tasks rather than in isolated communicative exercises. This study examines the Franco-Pass (2024) textbook series, developed for French as a foreign language instruction in a tourism-specific context. The series, designed for students at the Faculty of Tourism at Anadolu University, is the first locally produced French textbook collection tailored to the professional tourism sector in Turkey. The research focuses on how the series incorporates three key components of the action oriented approach: communicative tasks, project-based learning, and intercultural communicative competence. The study addresses the following research questions: 1. How and to what extent are communicative tasks implemented across the FrancoPass series? 2. What is the role and structure of project-based learning in these textbooks? 3. How effectively do the cultural contents support the development of learners’ intercultural communicative competence? A qualitative document analysis was conducted using an intrinsic case study design (Creswell, 2021). The A1, A2, and B1 levels of the Franco-Pass series served as the primary data sources. Each level was analyzed using rubrics derived from theoretical frameworks on communicative tasks (Ellis, 2003; Nunan, 1989), project-based learning (Hougardy et al., 2001; Reverdy, 2013), and intercultural competence (Byram et al., 2002; Lange, 2011). The analysis followed a structured coding process aligned with the three dimensions of the action-oriented approach. To ensure reliability, the study applied clearly defined evaluation criteria grounded in academic literature. The dual role of the researchers, as both authors and evaluators of the textbook series, was acknowledged and addressed through transparent and self-reflective analysis. Comparative evaluations were conducted with two additional experts to strengthen inter-rater consistency. Findings indicate a progression across the three levels in terms of alignment with the action-oriented approach. At the A1 level, communicative tasks are mostly confined to basic, controlled exercises within classroom contexts, with limited integration of real-world scenarios or collaborative learning. Tasks such as personal introductions or formfilling are presented as isolated linguistic exercises rather than socially meaningful interactions. At the A2 level, the tasks display greater complexity and authenticity. Students are encouraged to perform multi-skill activities such as preparing travel itineraries, writing blog posts, or simulating hotel dialogues. While these tasks introduce real-life relevance, some remain limited in terms of social depth and reflective learning. The B1 level demonstrates the strongest alignment with the action-oriented model. Tasks require learners to produce socially contextualized outputs (e.g., ecological campaign posters, opinion essays) and promote autonomy, critical thinking, and collaboration. Reflective activities are also more prominent at this level, although their structure varies. Project-based learning is underdeveloped at A1, where activities lack clear stages or collaborative frameworks. At A2, projects become more coherent, particularly through the “À vous!” sections that involve group-based planning and output creation. However, explicit assessment tools and learner reflection are inconsistently applied. B1-level projects are well-integrated, involving problem-solving, teamwork, and tangible outcomes, though evaluation criteria could be further systematized. Cultural content at A1 and A2 is mainly descriptive. Cross-cultural comparisons and student reflection are either superficial or sporadic. In contrast, B1 offers deeper engagement with topics like stereotypes and cultural misunderstanding, fostering cultural empathy and mediation. Overall, Franco-Pass reflects growing adherence to the action-oriented approach, particularly in its upper levels. While its integration of real-world contexts and intercultural elements shows promise, further development is needed in task authenticity, reflective learning, and cultural diversity. The study also suggests the potential adaptability of these pedagogical structures to other languages and professional fields beyond French for tourism.

• Details
• Contents