Can-Do SelfEvaluation by
English Camp
Participants
Katsuhiko Muto
Sophia University

Reference Data:
Muto, K. (2014). Can-do self-evaluation by English camp participants. In N. Sonda & A. Krause (Eds.),
JALT2013 Conference Proceedings. Tokyo: JALT.

This study was an analysis of a can-do self-evaluation by children (grades 3-6) participating in a 6-day English immersion camp, Kumon English Immersion Camp. Employing the Eiken Can-Do list (STEP, 2008)
and a daily self-evaluation form, the changes in participants’ confidence in each can-do statement (CDS)
and in the activities of the camp are presented. Also, the relationship between the children’s confidence
and interest in CDSs and the language activities at the camp are discussed. Furthermore, such issues
as the importance of English camps in the English education of Japan, especially with regard to MEXT’s
proposals for foreign language education, are addressed.
本稿は、6日間の英語イマ―ジョンキャンプ（Kumon English Immersion Camp）に参加した小学3～6年生の児童による
Can-Do自己評価の分析についての研究である。英検Can-Doリスト（STEP, 2008）と毎日行う自己評価シートを用い、個々の能力記述文（can-do statement: CDS）、およびキャンプの活動における参加者の自信の変化について研究した。CDSの結果
における自信と、キャンプでの言語活動の関係について議論するのと同時に、特に文部科学省の外国語教育に関する提言に関連して、近年の日本の英語教育における英語キャンプの重要性等にも言及したい。

Largely prompted by MEXT’s (the Japan Ministry of Education’s) “Five Proposals andSpecific Measures for Developing Proficiency in English for International Communication” (The Commission on the Development of Foreign Language Proficiency, 2011),
research that examines the feasibility of the five proposals and attempts to apply the essentialsof them to the language classroom is now on the rise. Among the five proposals, Proposal 1
has been having the most definitive impact on English education throughout the country. Proposal 1 addresses the English ability required of students. Specifically, one of the practical suggestions in the proposal, “The Government shall consider establishment of national learning
attainment targets in the form of ‘Can-Do lists,’ while taking into account approaches adopted
in foreign countries” (p. 5) attracts the greatest amount of attention.
Less noticed, but nonetheless important, is the MEXT proposal concerning the effective useof English camps. Proposal 3, which discusses providing students with more opportunities to
use English, states that “Education boards and schools shall provide students with opportunities for intensive contact with practical English, such as English camps with ALTs and people
from the private sector” (p. 9). Similarly, a suggestion for English camps can be found in amore recent proposal by the government, “The Third Proposal for University Education and

JALT2013 CONFERENCE PROCEEDINGSONLINE

NEXT PAGE 

FULL SCREEN78

MUTO • CAN-DO SELF-EVALUATION BY ENGLISH CAMP PARTICIPANTS

Global Human Resource Development for the Future” (The
Education Rebuilding Implementation Council, 2013). In the
proposal, the Council advocates that “The national government
and local governments should . . . increase opportunities forstudents to come into contact with English through the holding of ‘English camps’ and so on” (p. 7). Despite the two official
proposals, it must be candidly acknowledged that research on
English camps has not been conducted sufficiently.

Previous Studies
Regarding can-do research, it is often pointed out that studies that target elementary school students are rather small in
number. This is partly because reflecting on their own learning
process on a can-do list is not an easy task for younger children.
Bearing this difficulty in mind, Naganuma (2011) conducted astudy on elementary school students, from 1st to 6th grade, byadding a comment section to a can-do list in order to elicit qualitative responses from the students. According to his analysis,
although most of the 1st graders could not write a comment,
there were some who illustrated their impressive moments withdrawings. Most of the 2nd graders wrote a comment on theirachievement or goals, and the 3rd graders as a whole were able
to analyze how they should tackle the language task such as
by recalling their past experience. There were more reflective
comments on their own learning among students in the upper
grades. The 5th graders typically made objective comments
about where and when to use the grammar that they had beentaught, and the 6th graders made self-reflective comments on
the learning process and strategies. By including a comment section in a can-do list, Naganuma argued in conclusion, children’scomments can be diversified according to their stage of development, and even students in the lower grades in elementary
school can engage in self-evaluation of their achievements.

JALT2013 CONFERENCE
PROCEEDINGSONLINE

Turning to the current state of research on the effectivenessof English camps, except for brief reports (e.g., Shiratori, 2013),
studies in light of the recent governmental proposals are scarce.
One of the few is Onaka’s (2013) research that was conducted at
a 2-day English immersion camp held in Iwate, in which 22 junior high school students participated. At the end of the program,according to Onaka, almost all the students answered on aquestionnaire that they wanted to study English more. Based on
the results, Onaka argued that even a short program is effective
in increasing intrinsic motivation.
In light of the paucity of data on this topic, the author’s
research (Muto, Shinohara, Adachi, & Kikuta, 2013) should beof particular interest. With the cooperation of program staff,
research was conducted at a 6-day English immersion campheld in Shiga. There were 86 elementary school children in the
program, ranging from 3rd to 6th graders, and the focus of theresearch was to study the change in the participants’ language
learning motivation and attitudes toward English. In a nutshell,
the findings showed that “international posture,” one of themost important language learning motivations for Japanese students (Yashima, 2002), was nurtured by international university
students acting as camp leaders.
Taking two keywords, Can-Do lists and English camps, into
account, the motivation for the present study was two-fold: theimportance of measuring the outcomes of a language program
targeted for elementary school students by means of a Can-Do
list, and the (re)evaluation of the effectiveness of English campsthat reflect recent governmental proposals.

The Study
With the background and previous studies in mind, two research questions were developed: PREVIOUS PAGE

NEXT PAGE 

FULL SCREEN

79

MUTO • CAN-DO SELF-EVALUATION BY ENGLISH CAMP PARTICIPANTS

1.
2.

Using a Can-Do list, how can the change in participants’confidence be shown?

What can be understood from their comments on daily selfevaluation forms?

After deciding not to create an original can-do list, which often
is very risky especially when the research setting is unique, anddeciding instead to employ an existing can-do list, the Eiken
Can-Do List (STEP, 2008) was chosen from among several conventional widely used can-do lists. This is because the Eiken list(a) was meticulously developed with reference to several existing
universally prevalent can-do lists (e.g., CEFR), the national courseof study, and approved textbooks; (b) was based on the responsesof over 20,000 test takers; and (c) is one of the most widely used
can-do lists in Japan. According to STEP (2008), written into its
Can-Do List is what the test takers believe they can accomplish in
English in real-life situations, and therefore the list is not customized exclusively for language activities in the classroom (Yanase,2014). Considering these characteristics, it is safe to say that thelist reflects the use of English in real life, which is essentially thesame as the English participants would use in a language campwhere they enjoy a communal life style. Out of the 7 levels of
the Eiken can-do lists, the Grade 4 Can-Do List (STEP, 2008) waschosen as a research instrument for this study, the reason beingthat before participating all the children had already passed Eiken
Grade 4 or had equivalent English abilities.

MethodData was collected using a questionnaire. Participants were instructed to fill out the same questionnaire at home twice, about
1 month before and within a month after the camps they participated in. Besides the questionnaire, participants’ comments on adaily self-evaluation form were analyzed.

JALT2013 CONFERENCE
PROCEEDINGSONLINE

Research Tools
As stated above, the Eiken Grade 4 Can-Do List was employed(see Appendix A for an outline of the English version of the list).
The list has 18 can-do statements (CDSs), including six pertaining to reading, four about listening, four about speaking, andfour about writing. For each CDS, questions were added that
asked about the participant’s previous experience and theirconfidence in the statement. Previous experience was asked bya yes/no question and confidence was to be rated on a 4-level
scale: None, Little, Some, and A lot. Comparing the Eiken Grade
4 Can-Do List and the Activity Manual and checking with camp
staff about the program, I found that 14 out of the 18 CDSs wererelated to or treated in the activities of the camp program. I
chose to keep the four seemingly irrelevant CDSs in the questionnaire to see whether or not participants’ confidence in thosefour CDSs would remain the same regardless of the impact the
program might have on them.
Along with the questionnaire, a daily can-do self-evaluation
sheet, similar to the one illustrated in CILT (2006), was used toelicit onsite responses and qualitative data from children. At theend of Day 1 to Day 5, the program spared some time before
lights-out for participants to reflect on their achievements andfill out the form simply by circling bubbles in which a CDS
was written with a Japanese translation. They were also asked
to write in either language (English or Japanese) what theywanted to try on the following day, words and phrases they hadlearned, and what they had learned on the given day (see Appendix B for a sample completed form).

Target Camps
The target camps were ones in KUMON English Immersion
Camp (EIC). EIC is a series of English immersion camps thathave been held annually in summer since 2001. As a short-term PREVIOUS PAGE

NEXT PAGE 

FULL SCREEN

80

MUTO • CAN-DO SELF-EVALUATION BY ENGLISH CAMP PARTICIPANTS

foreign language experience (FLEX) program, EIC is committed
to fostering individuals who will contribute to world peace with
their abilities to communicate in English (Deta, Muto, Kikuta,
Adachi, & Shinohara, 2012). Therefore, most activities are designed so that children, who are encouraged to use English as atool throughout the camp, can build confidence by communicating with camp leaders who are from diverse backgrounds.

In 2013 five camps, two 4-day camps intended for children
with lower English skills (Eiken Grade 5) and three 6-day camps
for children with higher skills (higher than Eiken Grade 4),
were held in and around a tourist hotel located by Lake Biwa
in Shiga. The latter three camps, labelled here Camp 1 (August
6-11), Camp 2 (August 12-17) and Camp 3 (August 19-24), were
the subjects of the present research. Shown in Figure 1 is theoutline schedule of the 6-day camps.

Participants
As indicated in Table 1, camp participants were all elementary
school students (N = 223), consisting of 3rd (n = 15), 4th (n =41), 5th (n = 79), and 6th graders (n = 88). They spent most of
the time in groups consisting of children from various school
grades.

Table 1. Participants in the English Immersion Camps,
by Grade and Sex
Grade 3

Grade 4

Grade 5

Grade 6

TotalsCamp 14 (3:1)19 (4:15)

35 (15:20)

24 (7:17)

82 (29:53)

Camp 25 (1:4)7 (3:4)21 (9:12)35 (8:27)

68 (21:47)

Camp 36 (2:4)15 (5:10)

23 (8:15)

29 (11:18)

73 (26:47)

3 camps

15 (6:9)41 (13:29)

79 (32:47)

88 (26:62)

223 (76:147)

Note. Total number (boys: girls).

Figure 1. Schedule outline of each of the 6-day English immersion camps.

JALT2013 CONFERENCE
PROCEEDINGSONLINEIn terms of language proficiency, participants were considered
to have sufficient language aptitude or input to participate inEnglish immersion camps, where they were advised to use English only. To be eligible for participation, every one of them was
required to have passed the Eiken Grade 4 test and/or finishedstudying Kumon worksheets equivalent to Eiken Grade 4. Outof the 223 participants, 45 had passed Grade 5, 105 had successfully completed Grade 4, 53 had passed Grade 3, 9 had passed
Grade Pre-2, 1 had passed Grade 2, and 10 had never taken thetest. In addition to English classes in school, all except for one
attended the Kumon classroom to study English. Considering that Eiken Grade 4 is intended for 8th graders, it should be
noted that the English skills of the EIC participants were muchhigher than those of average children of the same age.

 PREVIOUS PAGE

NEXT PAGE 

FULL SCREEN

81

MUTO • CAN-DO SELF-EVALUATION BY ENGLISH CAMP PARTICIPANTS

Camp leaders, who not only conducted camp activities but
also took care of all of the children’s needs, were all university
students from overseas (N = 62). In the five camps held in 2013,
they were all nonnative speakers of English who had learned
English as their official or second language. Thirty-two students
who were studying at Ritsumeikan Asia Pacific University(APU) attended to the children in Camp 1 and 30 students fromseveral universities located in the Kansai area took care of thechildren in Camp 3. They had received intense training in advance and therefore their skills could be considered essentiallyequal. The diversity of the backgrounds of camp leaders offeredparticipants opportunities to listen to World Englishes and use
English as an international language.

Data Analysis
Participants who had answered Yes to the question in the prequestionnaire about previous experience were subjects of theanalysis. It was determined that without any previous experience, subjects cannot even guess whether or not they “can do”
the statement. Thus, the total number of participants varies ineach CDS. Responses in each of the four columns (None, Little,
Some, A lot) were counted separately. The 18 CDSs were classified into two categories: Treated (EIC offered activities related
to the CDS) and Not Treated (EIC had no activities related to the
CDS). Labeled Treated are all CDSs except for four: Reading-6,
Speaking-4, Writing-2, and Writing-4. The Tables 2-5 show the
responses for each Can-do Statement, grouped according tolanguage skills.

JALT2013 CONFERENCE
PROCEEDINGSONLINE

Table 2. Responses to Can-Do Reading Statements
Can-do statement

B/A None

LittleSome

R-1. Can understand short lettersand emails.

B

1 (2%)

9 (19%)

27 (57%) 10 (21%)

A

2 (4%)

6 (12%)

27 (57%) 12 (25%)

B

0 (0%) 16 (14%) 59 (53%) 35 (31%)

A

0 (0%) 14 (12%) 49 (44%) 47 (42%)

B

1 (0%) 14 (12%) 57 (51%) 39 (35%)

A

0 (0%)

8 (7%)

44 (39%) 59 (53%)

B

0 (0%)

7 (6%)

40 (36%) 63 (57%)

A

0 (0%)

6 (5%)

32 (29%) 72 (65%)

B

1 (1%) 15 (21%) 27 (38%) 28 (39%)

A

1 (1%)

9 (12%)

36 (50%) 25 (35%)

B

0 (0%)

6 (13%)

27 (58%) 13 (28%)

A

0 (0%) 12 (26%) 24 (52%) 10 (21%)

R-2. Can understand simple
stories that include
illustrations orphotographs.
R-3. Can understand sentences
describing familiar
activities fromeveryday life.
R-4. Can understand simple signs
and notices inpublic facilities.
R-5. Can understand simple
English menus.

R-6. Can understand the information in an invitation
to a party, etc.

A lot

Total
47

110

111

110

71

46

Note. B / A = before and after camp experience.

 PREVIOUS PAGE

NEXT PAGE 

FULL SCREEN

82

MUTO • CAN-DO SELF-EVALUATION BY ENGLISH CAMP PARTICIPANTS

Table 3. Responses to Can-Do Listening Statements
Can-do statement B/A
L-1. Can understand theinformation in a
simple self-introduction.

L-2. Can understand thecontent of simply
constructed sentences.
L-3. Can understand the meaning of simple
instructions.

L-4. Can understand descriptions of thelocation of people
and things.

None

Little

Some

A lot

B

0 (0%)

13 (13%)46 (47%)38 (39%)A

0 (0%)

7 (7%)

36 (37%)54 (55%)B

0 (0%)

10 (8%)

43 (38%)59 (52%)A

0 (0%)

2 (1%)

34 (31%)76 (68%)B

0 (0%)

12 (10%)42 (37%)58 (51%)A

2 (1%)

4 (3%)

28 (25%)78 (69%)B

0 (0%)

8 (8%)

39 (41%)47 (50%)A

0 (0%)

3 (3%)

41 (43%)50 (52%)

Total
97

112

112

S-1. Can givea simple selfintroduction.
S-2. Can ask
simple questions.

None

Little

Some

A lot

B

1 (1%)

19 (20%)43 (46%)29 (31%)A

0 (0%)

3 (3%)

36 (39%)53 (57%)B

2 (1%)

17 (16%)39 (38%)43 (42%)A

0 (0%)

8 (7%)

39 (38%)54 (53%)

JALT2013 CONFERENCE
PROCEEDINGSONLINE

None

Little

Some

A lot

B

2 (2%)

10 (13%)33 (45%)27 (37%)S-3. Can ask
for repetition
when he/she
does not understand what
the speakersays.
S-4. Can say
dates and daysof the week.

Total

72
A

5 (6%)

18 (25%)25 (34%)24 (33%)B

6 (7%)

19 (22%)30 (35%)29 (34%)A

3 (3%)

17 (20%)29 (34%)35 (41%)84

Table 5. Responses to Can-Do Writing Statements
Can-do statement

94

Table 4. Responses to Can-Do Speaking Statements
B/A

B/A

Note. B / A = before and after camp experience.

Note. B / A = before and after camp experience.

Can-do statement

Can-do statement

Total
92

101

W-1. Can write
sentences using
English word order,
provided that thesentences are short.
W-2. Can write
short messages by
putting words andphrases together.
W-3. Can write
sentences joining
clauses with conjunctions.

W-4. Can write
dates and days of
the week.

B/A None

Little

Some

A lot

B

4 (3%) 30 (25%) 52 (43%) 34 (28%)

A

4 (3%) 24 (20%) 46 (38%) 46 (38%)

B

1 (1%) 15 (26%) 24 (42%) 17 (29%)

A

1 (1%) 15 (26%) 26 (45%) 15 (26%)

B

9 (8%) 31 (28%) 45 (42%) 22 (20%)

A

4 (3%) 15 (14%) 49 (45%) 39 (36%)

B

4 (3%) 29 (28%) 38 (37%) 30 (29%)

A

1 (0%) 25 (24%) 34 (33%) 41 (40%)

Total
120

57

107

101

Note. B / A = before and after camp experience.

 PREVIOUS PAGE

NEXT PAGE 

FULL SCREEN

83

MUTO • CAN-DO SELF-EVALUATION BY ENGLISH CAMP PARTICIPANTS

Furthermore, in order to determine whether there might bea significant change in the nominal data (i.e., the number of
responses) before and after the target camps, a McNemar’s
test (exact significance, 2-tailed) was applied after creating two
groups by combining None and Little into Negative, and Someand A lot into Positive. Table 6 shows the results of the test. As is
obvious from the table, only two statements, S-1 (p = .015) andW-3 (p = .005) were found to show a significant change (α< .05).

Table 6. Results of McNemar’s Test Comparing
Responses Before and After Camp
Reading

Listening

Speaking

Writing

R-1

.757

L-1

.430

S-1

.015

W-1

.478

R-2

.840

L-2

.316

S-2

.139

W-2

1.000

R-3

.383

L-3

.462

S-3

.080

W-3

.005

R-4

.946

L-4

.512

S-4

.488

W-4

.360

R-5

.356

R-6

.251

Discussion
As shown in Table 6, S-1 and W-3 showed significant increase.
Presumably, the growth in S-1 (Can give a simple self-introduction) is attributed to activities called Sign Game (Day 1, Day 2)
and My Hometown (Day 4). In Sign Game, while freely walking
around in the room, children introduced themselves to eachother and took notes in their camp booklets about what theylearned. Similarly, in My Hometown, each participant, withprepared notes and pictures, introduced his or her hometown toeveryone in the group.

JALT2013 CONFERENCE
PROCEEDINGSONLINEThe significant change in confidence because of these two activities is also corroborated by participants’ own Can-Do evaluation on the daily self-evaluation sheet. On Day 1, 209 children
out of 223 (93%) circled the bubble that said “I can introduce
myself (Sign Game),” and 214 out of 223 (95%) circled “I canintroduce my hometown (My Hometown)” on Day 4.

Regarding participants’ comments related to Sign Game on
Day 1, children wrote comments in Japanese in the New things
I learned today section such as “If we talk to each other, we canbe friends” (a 5th grader), “I made friends with new people andlearned interesting things” (a 5th grader), and “Through speaking English and playing Sign game, I learned about various
lifestyles” (a 6th grader).
Activities that may have triggered the rise in W-3 (Can write
sentences joining clauses with conjunctions) are activities
named Diary Writing (from Day 1 to Day 5), Writing a Postcard(Day 3), Camp Impression (Day 5) and Dream Poster (Day 4, Day5). In all four activities, though their purposes differed, children
were encouraged to write English in sentences, when possible
with conjunctions. According to daily self-evaluation sheets,
216 (96%) children circled “I can write a postcard” on Day 3,
191 (85%) circled “I can tell my dream” on Day 4, and 211 (94%)
circled “I can write impression” on Day 5. As for Diary writing,though the “I can write diary” bubble appeared only on Days
2, 3, and 4, the number of participants that circled the bubble
showed a steady increase with 204 (91%) participants circling it
on Day 2, 209 (93%) on Day 3, and 212 (95%) on Day 4.

The powerful and repetitive encouragement to write English seems to have stimulated participants’ interest. Take forexample participants’ comments in the “What I want to challenge tomorrow” section on Day 2: 44 out of 223 commented
on writing a better or long diary, with comments like “I hope I
can write a diary tomorrow” (a 3rd grader), “I want to be able
to write a diary by myself” (a 4th grader), and “I want to write PREVIOUS PAGE

NEXT PAGE 

FULL SCREEN

84

MUTO • CAN-DO SELF-EVALUATION BY ENGLISH CAMP PARTICIPANTS

long sentences in my diary by consulting a dictionary” (a 5th
grader).

In sum, what the activities targeted at S-1 and W-3 have incommon is that both CDSs refer to productive skills (i.e., speaking and writing), and the activities were done more than once ineach camp.

It should be noted, however, productive and repetitive are notalways key to confidence. In each camp, there was an activity
called Say out loud, which was intended to boost confidence in
S-3 (Can ask for repetition when he/she does not understandwhat the speaker says). In the activity, all children repeated useful expressions such as “Please say again” after a camp leader.
The activity, done over a span of 3 days, was not as effective
in terms of confidence as was expected—the number of Some
responses to CDS S-3 dropped from 33 (45%) before camp to 25(34%) after camp and A lot responses declined from 27 (37%) to24 (33%). Presumably, these results are because there were no
opportunities for children to use the phrases at any other time.
This is regrettable considering the rising number of participants
who circled the “I can say with a big voice (Say out loud)” bubble: 157 (70%) participants on Day 2, 171 (76%) on Day 3, and
187 (83%) on Day 4.

Conclusion and Implications
The camp program, measured by means of the Eiken Can-Do
List and the daily self-evaluation form, was shown to potentially be a language-learning environment for increasing confidenceof participants, most notably, CDS S-1 (Can give a simple selfintroduction) and CDS W-3 (Can write sentences joining clauses
with conjunctions). Both are statements of productive skills andare related to activities that were done repetitively during thecamps. However, analysis of the opposite results of CDS S-3
suggests that providing a productive task repeatedly does not

JALT2013 CONFERENCE
PROCEEDINGSONLINE

necessarily lead to an increase in confidence—making the activity meaningful is important. This we should keep in mind when
designing language tasks or activities.

Regrettably and admittedly, the Eiken Can-Do List may not be
sufficient to cover all EIC characteristics. An original Can-Do list
customized for the program needs to be devised to measure thedesired outcomes more precisely. In order to shed light on theeffects of the camp leaders with diverse linguistic and cultural
backgrounds, such CDSs as “Can understand a wide variety ofEnglish” or “Can talk about world problems” would need to
be included. Clearly, those CDSs are essential for the “English
for international communication” that MEXT proposes. After
creating and testing such a targeted Can-Do list, the uniquenessof EIC may be recognized and its mission may become more
highly valued in the English education of the country.

Acknowledgment
This research was commissioned by Kumon Educational Japan,
Co. Ltd. I would like to express my sincere gratitude to staff
members in the Global Network Team, especially to Tatsuji Shinohara, Mika Adachi, and Masafumi Kikuta, who helped collectand sort out data for analysis. Also, my thanks go to Lawrence
Karn, who commented on my draft, and to Tadayoshi Kaya,
who offered expert advice on data analysis.

Bio Data
Katsuhiko Muto is a PhD student in applied linguistics at Sophia University. Currently, he teaches at Rikkyo University andOtsuma Women’s University. Over the past decade, he has beeninterested in Foreign Language Exploratory Programs (FLEX)
and providing support for KUMON English Immersion Cramp
since 2001. He also chairs the Advisory Committee of the United
Nations Association’s Test of English (UNATE or Kokuren-eiken), PREVIOUS PAGE

NEXT PAGE 

FULL SCREEN

85

MUTO • CAN-DO SELF-EVALUATION BY ENGLISH CAMP PARTICIPANTS

and has published approximately 50 books including college
textbooks on learning English. <katsuhikomuto@gmail.com>

References
CILT (The National Centre for Languages). (2006). Junior European language portfolio. Retrieved from http://www.primarylanguages.org.
uk/resources/assessment_and_recording/european_languages_portfolio.aspx
The Commission on the Development of Foreign Language Proficiency.
(2011). Five proposals and specific measures for developing proficiency in English for international communication. Retrieved fromhttp://www.mext.go.jp/component/english/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2012/07/09/1319707_1.pdf

Deta, D. S., Muto, K., Kikuta, M., Adachi, M., & Shinohara, T. (2012).
Cross-cultural communication and education for international understanding through English immersion camp (EIC). In The Asian Conference on Language Learning, Conference Proceedings 2012 (pp. 222-232).
Osaka, Japan: IAFOR.

The Education Rebuilding Implementation Council. (2013). University
education and global human resource development for the future (3rdproposal). Retrieved from http://www.kantei.go.jp/jp/singi/kyouikusaisei/pdf/dai3_en.pdf
Muto, K., Shinohara, T., Adachi, M., & Kikuta, M. (2013). English immersion camp and international posture. In N. Sonda & A. Krause (Eds.),
JALT2012 Conference Proceedings (pp. 536-543). Tokyo: JALT.

Naganuma, N. (2011). Shougakkou eigo katsudou ni okeru jiritsusei todoukizuke o takameru can-do hyouka no jissen [The implementationof can-do assessment to enhance autonomy and motivation in theelementary school English activity]. Arcle Review, 5, 65-74.
Onaka, N. (2013). Guroubaru jinzai kisoryoku ikusei jigyou no ichirei[Nurturing global competence through an English immersion program]. In N. Sonda & A. Krause (Eds.), JALT2012 Conference Proceedings. Tokyo: JALT.

Shiratori, K. (2012). Ingurisshu kampu de kokunai ryuugaku [Domestic
study abroad in English camp]. English Education, 61(9), 18-19.

JALT2013 CONFERENCE
PROCEEDINGSONLINE

STEP (The Society for Testing English Proficiency). (2008). The EIKEN
can-do list (English translation). Retrieved from http://www.eiken.
or.jp/eiken/exam/cando/pdf/Eiken_CandoList_translation.pdf

Yanase, K. (2014). Kan duu e no kanshin no takamari to “Eiken Can-Do
risto” [Growing interest in can-do and the “Eiken Can-Do List”]. Eigo
Tenbou [English Outlook], 121, 32-37.
Yashima, T. (2002). Willingness to communicate in a second language:
The Japanese EFL context. The Modern Language Journal, 86(1), 54-66.

Appendix A
Questionnaire (Summary)
Direction: Circle one that matches your experience and confidence for each can-do statement.
Ever Experienced?
Yes

No

Your Confidence?
None

Little

Some

A lot

Reading• R-1. Can understand short letters and e-mails.

• R-2. Can understand simple stories that include illustrations
or photographs.
• R-3. Can understand sentences describing familiar activities
from everyday life.

• R-4. Can understand simple signs and notices in public facilities.
• R-5. Can understand simple English menus.

• R-6. Can understand the information in an invitation to a
party, etc.
Listening• L-1. Can understand the information in a simple self-intro-

 PREVIOUS PAGE

NEXT PAGE 

FULL SCREEN

86

MUTO • CAN-DO SELF-EVALUATION BY ENGLISH CAMP PARTICIPANTS

duction.

• L-2. Can understand the content of simply constructed sentences.

Completed• L-3. Can understand the meaning of simple instructions.

• L-4. Can understand descriptions of the location of people
and things.
Speaking• S-1. Can give a simple self-introduction.
• S-2. Can ask simple questions.

• S-3. Can ask for repetition when he/she does not understandwhat the speaker says.
• S-4. Can say dates and days of the week.
Writing• W-1. Can write sentences using English word order, provided
that the sentences are short.
• W-2. Can write short messages by putting words and phrases
together.
• W-3. Can write sentences joining clauses with conjunctions.
• W-4. Can write dates and days of the week.

Appendix B
Daily Can-Do Self-Evaluation Form (Day 2,
JALT2013 CONFERENCE
PROCEEDINGSONLINE PREVIOUS PAGE

NEXT PAGE 

FULL SCREEN

87