Arguments against authentic materials

It should be noted that there are some conflicting views concerning the use of authentic materials in the teaching of English. Williams (1984) and Morrison (1989) maintain that using authentic materials may lower student motivation while Bacon and Finnemann (1990) investigated the attitudes, motives, and strategies of university foreign language students and their disposition to authentic oral and written input. They found that their subjects reported somewhat negative reactions to the use of authentic oral and written input. Peacock (1997) investigated the impact of authentic materials on the classroom motivation of his students. His results were mixed. On the one hand, he did find evidence in support of authentic materials, on the other hand, the results of a questionnaire revealed that, “overall, learners found authentic materials to be significantly less interesting than artificial” (p. 151).

The criticisms leveled against authentic materials are mostly based on studies which have investigated the effects of authentic materials on motivation in classroom situation. Therefore, the effects of authentic materials cannot be extended or generalized to other situations, other skills or subjects who learn English in different contexts. Based on the positive results that emerged from a study I conducted with a group of undergraduate students using authentic materials ranging from print media to electronic media, it can be stated that the  authentic materials  provided the learners with more authentic language they are likely to meet in real-world situations. Therefore, my study provides further evidence to support the notion that authentic materials are more effective and useful in foreign language courses aimed at improving students’ oral proficiency provided that they are properly selected, controlled, and designed with relevant teaching activities  taking learner variable into account.