Currently, Communicative Language Teaching has been popular around the world andhas a profound effect on second language acquisition since the 1970s. ForCommunicative Language Teaching to be successful, there is a need for appropriateteaching materials.This paper analyzes speaking tasks in Chinese and Swedish textbooks for grade 8，Gofor it and Magic. The analysis presents content analysis, providing a general overviewof speaking tasks found in both textbooks. First, task description is analyzed, whichprovides the pupils with the topics of tasks in both textbooks. It will be seen if thetopics are real-life. Second, types of speaking, text type, cognitive processes, focus,classroom organization are quantitively analyzed to see if there are differentapproaches to Communicative Language Teaching between Chinese and Swedishtextbooks.Through comparison of these six aspects in different textbooks, there are three similarapproaches to Communicative Language Teaching: First, they both have real-worldtopics under which there are many real-world speaking tasks. Second, the dialoguesplay a main role in both textbooks. Third, pair and group work have dominantposition in these two books.Also there are three different approaches to Communicative Language Teaching: First,the Chinese textbook is directed towards accuracy while the Swedish textbook isdirected towards fluency. Second, the Chinese textbook focuses on form whereas theSwedish textbook focuses on meaning. Third, there is an information-gap approach inthe Chinese textbook where tasks based on information gap are obviously labeled.However, it cannot be found in the Swedish textbook.

Textbooks still dominate teaching materials in English classes in Sweden. This paper analyzes speaking tasks in two sets (textbook and workbook) of textbooks for year nine in Swedish schools, Happy, Workbook No. 3, and What’s Up? Textbook 9 and Workbook 9. The first analysis presents a content analysis, providing a general overview of speaking tasks found in both textbooks. Here, I will quantitatively account for the qualitative items types of speaking (monologue or dialogue), text types (narration, giving information, description, instruction, discussion/argumentation), cognitive operations (open/productive, open/reproductive, closed productive or closed/reproductive speech patterns), and classroom organization (single or pair work, pair or group work, or class work) in a matrix. This shows what kinds of tasks dominate the books and are required most of the students. The second is a close analysis of four speaking tasks against a framework of seven principles: scaffolding (actually demonstrating a solution), task dependency (tasks build upon each other), recycling (introducing language items in different contexts), active learning, integration (the task shows the relationship between meaning, form, and function of language items), from reproduction to creation (the order of tasks goes from reproductive to productive), and reflection (the task offers opportunity for reflection over one’s own learning). Two tasks will meet most, and two will meet only few of these principles.The content analysis reveals a vast majority of dialogues (100 out of 124 tasks, or 80.65%). This might not be surprising, keeping the communicative approach of the syllabus in mind. But it is surprising that discussion/argumentation is the text type most frequently asked for (46 out of 124 tasks, or 31.7%), not narration or giving information. They occupy a firm second and third place with 30 (24.19%) respectively 27 (21.77%) tasks out of 124. 21 (16.94%) tasks in total ask for description. Even more surprisingly, not one task demands that students give instructions. Giving instructions may not require as much two-way communication, but it still presents an important skill.This is an analysis, not an evaluation. An analysis aims at objectively accounting for what is presented and in what proportions without making some form of judgment on what is found. This would be the objective of an evaluation. This paper aims at analyzing speaking tasks and task design in English textbooks, not to pass or fail them against the needs of students or the demands of the Swedish syllabus for English.

Speaking is an essential skill for language learning. Moreover, the communicative aspect of learning a secondary language is the major goal for many learners. Since English is a language with a substantial number of speakers and is often used as the preferred method of communicating between people with different mother tongues, the pressure on teaching materials and textbooks for learning English is substantial. Traditionally, textbooks are one of the most used tools for learning language and assisting teachers in providing materials for students in the targeted language. However, previous research showed that there are aspects where textbooks could still be lacking due to commercial interests, lack of effective speech enhancing tasks, and a divergence from current research in secondary language acquisition. Moreover, little research has been done in Swedish contexts regarding the effectiveness of speaking tasks in textbooks. Considering these issues, the current study aimed to investigate speaking tasks within textbooks used for English 5 in Sweden to see if they can be considered effective in teaching speech. The study also aimed to find out novice teachers’ views on the speaking tasks in textbooks and teaching speaking in general. The study was conducted by analysing two English textbooks, namely Blueprint A and Solid Gold 1 used for English 5 in Sweden.  The speaking tasks within both textbooks were categorised based on previous research on effective speech enhancing tasks. The results of this analysis showed that a large portion of the speaking tasks within the textbooks could not be considered effective speech enhancing tasks. Nevertheless, around half of the ineffective tasks could be made into effective speaking tasks with minor teacher intervention. The result of the following interviews also showed that the novice teachers were aware of how to supplement the tasks within the textbooks and that they had a focus on content rather than structure of the tasks. Lastly, the novice teachers’ also viewed repetition of tasks as negative and that more focus on the social factors of teaching speaking should be taught in teacher programs.