7.2 Ways of Adapting Coursebook Materials
Key Takeaways
- Adaptation changes a published page so it better serves this aim and these learners; it is surgical, not a rewrite of the whole book.
- Nameable techniques include omission, addition, replacement, extension, reduction/chunking, reordering, rewriting/simplifying, personalising, changing interaction pattern, and changing the task rather than only the text.
- Grading the task (what learners do) is different from grading the text (simplifying the wording); gist/scan aims often keep authentic input and lower the demand.
- Worked problems such as a text that is too hard, no speaking, a dull topic, a slot that is too short, or no stretch for strong learners each map to a first-choice technique.
- Traps include rewriting everything so the book is unused, adapting with no aim, and calling "skip the page" a full plan when the aim still needs a replacement task.
7.2 Ways of Adapting Coursebook Materials
Quick Answer: Adaptation means changing a published page so it better serves this aim and these learners, without throwing the book away. Core techniques: omission, addition, replacement, extension, reduction/chunking, reordering, rewriting/simplifying, personalising, changing the interaction pattern, and changing the task (not only the text). Separate grading the task from grading the text.
OpenExamPrep teaches these as functions you can name on TKT Module 2. You are not tested on a publisher's catalogue, and you should not memorise anyone's trainer worksheet as if it were live paper content.
Adaptation has an aim or it is just fussing
Every adaptation answers: What was wrong for this class, and what will the page do after the change? If you cannot name the aim, you are decorating. TKT items often give a problem (text too hard; no speaking; dull topic; too long; no stretch) and a teacher action. You match the action to the technique name.
| Technique | What the teacher does | What it is not |
|---|---|---|
| Omission | Leaves out an exercise, box, or recording that does not serve the aim or will not fit the slot | Not a complete plan if the missing piece was the only practice of the aim |
| Addition | Brings in a short extra stage (a 4-line model, a 6-question mingle, a pronunciation drill) | Not writing a new coursebook chapter |
| Replacement | Swaps one text, recording, or task for another that keeps the same aim | Not changing the aim to match a random clip you like |
| Extension | Deepens or lengthens useful work for the same aim (extra constraint, extra output) | Not "do another identical gap-fill" |
| Reduction / chunking | Shortens a text or recording, or splits one monster task into staged pieces | Not deleting the aim |
| Reordering | Changes the sequence of exercises (speaking before the grammar box; lexis before listening) | Not random shuffling |
| Rewriting / simplifying | Changes wording, sentence length, or support on the page | Not rewriting every unit so the book is never opened |
| Personalising | Hooks tasks onto learners' lives, jobs, town, or opinions | Not forcing private family stories |
| Changing interaction pattern | Moves work from teacher–class to pairs, groups, mingle, or individual | Not "more group work" with no aim |
| Changing the task, not only the text | Keeps the published text/recording; changes what learners do with it | Not the same as simplifying the wording |
Grade the task versus grade the text
This distinction is tested constantly.
- Grading the text means changing the language of the input: shorter sentences, fewer unknown words, a slower teacher-made recording, a rewritten paragraph.
- Grading the task means changing the demand: from "infer the writer's attitude" to "tick four food words"; from "write 120 words" to "complete this 40-word frame"; from "discuss in open class" to "rehearse with a written model first."
If an A2 class faces a dense authentic-style article, you often keep the text (authenticity serves a scan aim) and grade the task. If the aim is detailed understanding of every clause, you may grade the text (simplify) or replace it. Rewriting the whole article "because it exists" is a time thief.
Worked problems (original classrooms)
Problem 1 — The text is too hard
Class: 11 A2 care-home assistants, 60-minute morning slot.
Published page: a 280-word reading on the history of public health, with 18th-century legal terms and "answer in full sentences" comprehension.
Aim: scan workplace notices for times, closed days, and who to call.
Adaptation: Reduce/chunk the published text: use only the last boxed "Staff notice" (about 80 words). Change the task: learners highlight three facts (opening time, closed day, emergency number) instead of writing full-sentence history answers. Add a 60-second pair check. Do not rewrite the historical essay for its own sake — it never served the aim.
If the notice still contains two brutal words (refurbishment, locum), rewrite/simplify those two items on the board (repairs, temporary staff) rather than redrafting 280 words. That is surgical rewriting, not a new book.
Problem 2 — There is no speaking
Class: 16 B1 teens.
Published page: ten written transformations of used to plus a 12-item gap-fill. Zero spoken output.
Aim: use used to to talk about past habits.
Adaptation: Omit transformations 6–10 (form is already clear after 1–5). Add a six-minute mingle: each learner has one prompt such as "Find someone who used to live in a different neighbourhood," using local district names. That is addition plus changing interaction pattern (individual writing → mingle). Personalising happens because the content is their city, not a remote inventor list. You have not replaced the grammar box; you have given the aim a spoken stage.
Problem 3 — The topic is dull
Class: 15-year-olds in Medellín; they will talk about football kits and street food all day.
Published page: mini-texts on famous inventors from one country, past simple/passive, then a ranking discussion nobody will start.
Aim: past simple for events; a short spoken anecdote.
Adaptation: Replace the inventor mini-texts with three 40-word local stories you type once (stadium lights repaired; a neighbourhood arepa stand opened; a bus route changed). Keep the same grammar aim and the ranking task. That is replacement of content, not a new syllabus. Alternatively, personalise the published ranking: "Rank these inventions for your bus commute," if the original texts are still usable. Do not abandon past simple because the inventors were boring.
Problem 4 — The unit is too long for the slot
Class: 40 minutes, not the 90 minutes the teacher's book pretends.
Published page: eight numbered exercises plus a project.
Adaptation: Omit exercises that repeat the same form (3, 5, 7). Reduce the listening to the first of two dialogues. Reorder so the communicative task happens before a slow optional writing that will not finish. Keep one controlled check plus one communicative task that carries the aim. Omission here is legitimate because the remaining tasks still practise the aim.
Problem 5 — Strong learners have no challenge
Class: mixed B1, four fast finishers.
Published page: another gap-fill identical to the last one.
Adaptation: Extend by changing demand, not quantity: "Write a four-line complaint that uses the target exponents and one polite refusal." Or add a constraint: in the pair discussion you must disagree once and ask a follow-up question. Replacement of the last gap-fill is better than a fifth copy of it. Extension that is "more of the same" is a trap (see 7.3).
Problem → adaptation (exam matching table)
| Classroom problem | First-choice adaptation | Why this technique |
|---|---|---|
| Page contains a useless extra (a crossword after the aim is met) | Omission | Protects time; aim already practised |
| Page never practises the aim (no speaking for a speaking aim) | Addition or replacement of a task | The aim still needs a vehicle |
| Recording is the wrong genre (shop chat versus a parcel voicemail) | Replacement of the recording | Same skill, fitter input |
| Text is long but partly useful | Reduction / chunking | Keep the useful slice |
| Learners know the form but cannot use it | Change interaction; personalise | Move from silent accuracy to use |
| Instruction order buries the lead-in after the grammar dump | Reordering | Activate, then study — or the reverse — according to the lesson shape |
| Wording is denser than the class can decode and the aim is detailed reading | Rewriting / simplifying (grade the text) | Input must be readable |
| Wording is dense but the aim is gist/scan | Change the task (grade the task) | Keep authentic input |
| Topic is remote from learners' lives | Personalising or replacement of examples | Motivation and meaning |
| Whole-class drilling fails in a group of 36 | Change interaction pattern | Pairs/groups the school can actually run |
| Exercise is useful but too short for strong learners | Extension | Same aim, higher demand |
| Exercise is useful but too long | Reduction | Same aim, smaller bite |
The bar chart is a planning picture of Problem 4 plus Problem 2, not a published official timing. The zero bar is deliberate: omitted extras consume no lesson minutes. The added mingle is the vehicle for a speaking aim the published page never supplied. If you omit the listening and you needed gist listening today, that zero would be a hole — which is Trap 3 below.
Traps TKT stems like to hide
Trap 1 — Rewrite everything so the book is unused. If you retype every paragraph, you are materials writing. TKT adaptation is surgical: change the piece that blocks the aim. A teacher who never opens the purchased book cannot claim they "adapted the coursebook"; they abandoned it.
Trap 2 — Adapt without an aim. Adding a competitive race because the class looks sleepy is not named as a technique unless you can say which aim it serves. An energiser is a stage type; it is not a substitute for "this speaking aim needed output."
Trap 3 — "Skip the page" dressed up as a full adaptation plan. Omission is a real technique. It is incomplete when the skipped page was the only work on the aim. If you omit a listening page because the audio is missing, you still owe the class a replacement listening: a teacher-read notice, or a 90-second voicemail you record on your phone about a delayed parcel. Skipping plus a vocabulary game that never practises gist listening is cancellation, not adaptation.
Trap 4 — Changing only the text when the task is the problem. Teachers simplify and simplify, then still ask A2 learners to "discuss the author's tone in groups of six." Grade the task.
Trap 5 — Changing the aim to match a cute activity. Replacement that secretly teaches a different structure is not adaptation of the planned lesson; it is a new lesson. Say so if that is what you decided — do not call it "adapting Unit 6."
A realistic mini-plan (one page, three moves)
Published page: a long reading on holidays by the sea, three comprehension questions, a vocabulary box, a writing prompt: "Describe your last beach holiday."
Class: adult night workers in an inland city; 45 minutes; aim = past simple for personal anecdotes.
Moves:
- Personalise / replace the writing prompt: "Describe your last day off" (not a beach they never visit).
- Reduce the reading to the first two paragraphs as a model anecdote; omit the question that asks for tourist-brochure language.
- Change interaction: six minutes of pair telling before writing, instead of silent writing from cold.
The book is still in use (model + lexis box). The aim is intact. That is adaptation TKT can name.
Replacement of a recording without inventing a new skill
Suppose the page's shop-chat recording does not match a class of warehouse staff whose real listening need is short workplace messages. Replace the audio with a teacher-recorded parcel voicemail (Your delivery is delayed until Thursday; please call extension 14). Learners still listen for gist and specific information. You have not changed the skill; you have changed the input so the aim is usable. That is replacement, not "a different lesson because I felt like recording."
If you keep the original shop recording but ask learners only to tick three product names instead of answering eight inference questions, you have changed the task, not the text. Both can be right; the stem's aim tells you which name to use.
A teacher omits a listening page because the audio file is missing and then starts a vocabulary game that does not practise gist listening, which was the lesson aim. Why is this a weak adaptation plan?
An A2 class must scan a dense authentic-style museum notice for opening hours. The teacher keeps the notice and asks learners only to highlight days and times, instead of rewriting the whole notice or asking for the writer's attitude. This is mainly:
A used-to page is entirely written transformations. The teacher cuts the last five items and adds a six-minute mingle using local neighbourhood names. Which pair of techniques is this?
A teacher retypes every paragraph of every unit and never opens the purchased coursebook. What trap does this illustrate?