Abstract:

Background
ILI (Iran Language Institute) is the first option for language learners in Iran. This popularity is due to the Education Policy for developing materials, in Iran overcoming University Entrance Exam is the aim for majority of the students, by one scanning the ILI intermediate learners, we figure out learners’ age range from 14 to 18 years old. In other words, more than 90% of learners are high school students and 78%of them asserted that their reason for attending ILI is its usability in University Entrance exam and school exams. This policy is a kind of wash back effect. In General Exams like University Entrance Exam is limited in time and content; it can’t measure all the skills, so one would expect that a skill would be missed.
Purpose
This article does not want to seek the ILI policy for overwhelming number of students, but the policy for developing the material is the main purpose of this article. By above mentioned funding, there might be relationship among three factors :( Overall policy, ILI material developers, ILI material users). Suppose all three factors as a triangle. In this sense, policy is the head for our triangle. Both sides of triangle use policy: 1) policy is used by material users (learners). For that, they know that at University Entrance Exam only some parts are measured, these parts are Grammar, Vocabulary, Reading, not Speaking and Listening. On the other hand policy used by ILI material developers is by covering mainly Vocabulary, Grammar, and Reading plus Writing. So there should be direct relationship between learners need and material development procedure. Not only material users, but also material developers overlook the Listening skill. Learners deemphasize Listening, since it is not included in exams (University exam, school exams) so the learners don’t feel need for that skill. Consequently material developers provide materials according to the learners’ needs, wants, but not their lacks (there is no external need for Listening). Method
A questionnaire was developed and were distributed among ILI learners, who are in Intermediate level in Tabriz branch.4 classes were chosen (N=60,).two of the classes were female and two of them were male. They were asked to wear critical glasses and assert the weak points of the used materials. The questionnaire contained 4 parts: A) Material deficiency, B) Equipment deficiency C) Teacher methodology D) Policy. Material deficiency part was subcategorized to Speaking, Reading, Writing, and Listening.

Result
The result show 83% of the students expresses the material deficiency on listening part, 45% on Speaking part. No learner mentioned the material used for Reading, and Writing. 89% agree on, teacher methodology, they declare that teachers just present the Listening part. Learners mean teachers don’t follow PPP procedure. 97% agree on good presentation on Grammar and Writing.
Implication/Conclusion
Having some parts such as Pre-listening and Post-listening parts can help learners learn better, besides these parts can challenge teachers mind to introduce listening strategies to the learners. Moreover, findings can help teachers raise strategy conscious of learners for better learning of listening skill.

Keywords:

materials, listening skill, policy, university entrance exam.